Iraq War III

Mr. Obama proclaimed the second Iraq War is over. He may be right about US military involvement, at least for now. But he and Mrs. Clinton better not get comfortable, because Iraq War III is about to start.

No sooner then the last American boot on the ground left Iraq, Mr. Nouri al – Maliki, Shia Prime Minister of Iraq, sprang into odious action and issued an arrest warrant for his Sunni Vice President, Mr. Tariq al – Hashimi. If there is any truth to Mr. Maliki’s accusations against Mr. Hashimi – it is essentially a case of ‘the pot calling the kettle black.’ Mr. Maliki’s manifest goal is to eliminate all opposition in Iraq to his rule, even if that means literally “eliminating” his opposition. Of course he waited until the American troops withdrew.

But more importantly, if you think Mr. Maliki took this action and thought this up on his own, you qualify to work for Mrs. Clinton’s State Department. It is Iran who is controlling this gambit. Mr. Maliki is simply the puppet. Iran is pulling the strings.

It should be understood, that Mr. George W. Bush and Ms. Rice allowed the Mullah’s grand plan to hatch, by insisting that Iraq is a sovereign nation. The naïveté of this foreign policy and its continuation under the Obama Administration deserves our opprobrium and contradicts ever reality. It is as if these “elites” have never read history. But they have. They went to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford. Hence, it is not for lack of intelligence, but rather the execution of knowledge and an arrogance, in which they believe they can orchestrate the lives of others deemed inferior.

For now, Mr. Hashimi rests with the Kurds, not with the fishes. Yet, all of this did not have to happen. I wrote the following essay in June 2007. I’m not prophetic, but I have read history, and I am not arrogant.

The best United States strategy for Iraq was the concentration of US forces on the part of Iraq where the US mission has succeeded - Kurdistan. Kurdistan is the right solution to this conflict. Here are the reasons why.

First, military bases in Kurdistan can be used to launch strikes (or conduct a campaign) in Iraq and if necessary throughout the Middle East. A powerful US presence would also serve as a deterrent to others in the region with expansionist intentions.

Second, it would support a new democratic republic in the Middle East. Democracy is not given to a people - the people win it. The Kurds seem to be the only group in Iraq who stand where they sit. A secure Kurdistan (Mosul Province) also would serve as a model for what success looks like.

Third, reducing our exposure and concentrating our troops in Kurdistan, will be less costly than our failed strategy of waiting for the “Iraqi Army” to bring peace and stability to a Nation in name only.

Fourth, the hell with what Turkey thinks - they have had every opportunity for partnership and constructive intervention in the region and have never failed to miss an opportunity. It’s long over due for Turkey to support its NATO partner(s). No matter what they wish to think - Kurds are not Turks and Mosul does not belong to Turkey.

And, in the last analysis, there is no compelling historic justification for modern day Iraq. The 1919 Paris Peace Conference and subsequently the San Remo Conference in April of 1920 laid the groundwork for an Iraqi nation. Before 1919 there was no Iraq. There was no Iraqi nationalism and no Iraqi identity. There was what the British called Mesopotamia - referring to the Ottoman Empire’s provinces of Mosul, Baghdad and Basra. It was not until 1922 that the League of Nations confirmed statehood on Iraq that it became a Nation and legal entity. In 1932 Iraq joined the League of Nations. Hence, the partition of Iraq between the Kurds (Mosul), Sunni (Baghdad), and Shia (Basra), is not only a pragmatic solution to help end the Iraqi conflict, it is a historical imperative to correct past indiscretions and the myth of a greater Arabia. To believe that Kurds, Sunni, and Shia can live peacefully together contradicts every realty.

Just as Bosnia became a failed state when Muslims, Serbs, and Croatians, where provided the excuse and means to choose the conditions under which they wished to live - similarly the Kurds, Sunni, and Shia, are doing so in Iraq today.

Hence, a solution to the Iraqi conflict is to let the “Iraqi people” construct a new compact to determine their own destiny based on historic and current realities.

Russia’s Response to Super Committee’s Failure

Mr. Obama and his Democratic cohorts sabotaged and killed another attempt to bring some fiscal sanity to our national debt crisis. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction's failure to reach an agreement trigged an automatic $1.2 trillion spending cuts, in which one-half will come from the nation’s defense budget. Just politics. Think again.

It took just one day for a response. On Wednesday, November 23rd, Dmitry Medvedev*, in a nationally televised appearance by the Russian president, let the world know what Russia now thinks of the United States' military capacity. In response to what Russia perceives is an active incursion and a potential act of eventual aggression on behalf of NATO countries in Eastern Europe (and hence the US), he said the following:

"First, I am instructing the Defense Ministry to immediately put the missile attack early warning radar station in Kaliningrad on combat alert. Second, protective cover of Russia's strategic nuclear weapons, will be reinforced as a priority measure under the program to develop out air and space defenses. Third, the new strategic ballistic missiles commissioned by the Strategic Missile Forces and the Navy will be equipped with advanced missile defense penetration systems and new highly effective warheads. Fourth, I have instructed the Armed Forces to draw up measures for disabling missile defense system data and guidance systems if need be... Fifth, if the above measures prove insufficient, the Russian Federation will deploy modern offensive weapon systems in the west and south of the country, ensuring our ability to take out any part of the US missile defense system, in Europe. One step in this process will be to deploy Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad Region."

Never mind that the Bear's plaint is groundless. Never mind that Russia knows it has nothing to fear from old Europe. Since 1945 Western Europe (except for Great Britain) has not commit monies to its national defense -- the European sovereign debt crisis will make this matter even worse. And, never mind that Russia speaks loudly, but carries a small stick. For example, in 1914 war against Serbia meant war against Russia as well. Yet, after Afghanistan and the break up of the Soviet Union, Russia was humiliated, and could do nothing to support its fellow Slavs in Serbia during the 1999 Kosovo War and particularly its aftermath.

Still, what is important here is Russia is immediately jumping on what they perceive to be America’s weakness and failure to commit resources to its National Defense. Concomitantly, they view Mr. Obama as a weakling. Russia understands that with Mr. Obama, politics trumps everything – including National Defense and the security of the American people.

* When Mr. Medvedev speaks, it is Mr. Putin speaking. This is the way it has always been. If anyone still believes that Mr. Medvedev’s views are his own, they are foolish. After all, Mr. Medvedev, it should not go unnoticed, bears a striking physical resemblance to a hand puppet.

His Is the Path of Destruction!

Why did Barack Obama appoint Tim Geithner Treasury Secretary? That is an important question that deserves an answer.

Here’s what Jim Cramer had to say before Mr. Geithner’s appointment in 2008 (thanks to ZeroHedge). "If Tim Geithner, the much praised and ballyhooed NY Fed Chairman gets to be Obama's Treasury secretary, and he looks like a shoo in for the job, let me just tell you something, we are done, we are kaput, we are finished, we are completely and royally hosed as a nation... Geithner should be facing a senate investigation, not a senate confirmation...I am predicting he will be a total disaster as he has been as a New York Fed Chairman. Please I am begging you: don't hire Tim Geithner, he is an academic and all he has going for him is that he is a Democrat."

Yet, Mr. Geithner was appointed by Mr. Obama and confirmed by the super majority Democratic Senate. After his sycophantic bailouts of Goldman and Morgan, et al, Mr. Obama handed him the keys to the American taxpayer’s wealth, which he along with Mr. Bernanke has destroyed.

Again, the question is why? Given Mr. Geithner’s record at the New York Fed, his total lack of experience in the private sector, and his incompetence as Treasury Secretary, why would Mr. Obama look to him to solve our financial crisis?

There is only one rational and reasonable answer. Mr. Obama does not want to solve our financial crisis. His is the path of destruction!

Finally, A Rational US Foreign Policy, Again

Caroline B. Glick’s important and insightful article, “The Jacksonian foreign policy option,” posits that both Isolationism and Neo-conservatism have failed America. Instead, a Rational, i.e., Jacksonian foreign policy is exactly what the United States and the world needs.

Ms. Glick argues, “The dominant foreign policy model in the Republican Party, and to a degree, in American society as a whole, is neither Neo-conservatism nor Isolationism.” Ms. Glick has adopted historian Walter Russell Mead’s definition of a Jacksonian foreign policy. The basic tenets are the following:

The US is different from the rest of the world, and therefore the US should not try to remake the world in its own image;

The US must ensure its honor abroad by abiding by its commitments and maintaining its standing with its allies;

The US must take action to defend its interests;

The US must fight to win or not fight at all;

And, the US should only respect those foes that fight by the same rules as the US does.
A Jacksonian model is an astute one. The basic rule of Common Sense foreign policy making is to be good to your friends and bad to your enemies; then people will want to be your friends and not your enemies. It basically accuses the Isolationists as contemporary Know Nothings, and Neo-conservatives as unbridled Interventionists.

In my view, America has had enough. We have had it with Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton's pathetic, not to mention apologetic, naïve, and schizophrenic, foreign policy. And, we had it with Mr. Bush and Condi's foolish and naive foreign policy, and mismanaged military campaigns restricted by absurd rules of engagement. Moreover, trying to build a nation while conducting a war is a fool's errand, and we should have no truck with it.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Dear Mr. President,

You asked the American people last night to contact their Congressional Representatives, to tell what they think about our Debit Limit crisis. Since my Representative Gwen Moore or Senator Herb Kohl, do not represent me, I am writing to you.

Well sir, I hold you responsible. You have been an obstacle to honest negotiations. You have intentionally prolonged the crisis, not once offering a written plan.

In short sir, your demagogic mendacious grandstanding has not been helpful. Today, America has a spending problem that manifests as a debt crisis. Tomorrow it will be more odious. You sir are responsible and accountable to fix it, by finding solutions with Congress.

I read John Rawls, on my own initiative in 1985, as a doctoral student in public policy at Vanderbilt University. In my view, Professor Rawls' political philosophy of redistribution of wealth is incompatible with American culture and capitalism. I bring up Rawls because I believe it is fundamental to the direction you have taken this country. It is your duty to tell the American people that that is your intention. Then the 2012 Election will tell all of us what direction the American people wish to go.

Until then, you and your Democratic cohorts own this economy and you are responsible to make it work.

McConnell’s Debt Ceiling Fiasco

‘What the hell is going on out there?’

Perhaps, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has channeled Florence’s illustrious political philosopher and strategist Niccolo Machiavelli, to concoct his latest strategy to get Mr. Obama and his Democratic cohorts to help solve America’s debt crisis.

Nevertheless, Mr. McConnell’s proposal to allow Mr. Obama to raise the debt ceiling three times between now and December 2012, unless two-thirds of Congress votes to block it, is inexplicable political strategy.

Only yesterday in a speech before the Senate, Senator McConnell spoke truth to power when he said: “After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this President (Mr. Obama) is in the Oval Office, a real solution (America’s debt crisis) is unattainable.”

Negotiations with Mr. Obama are completely pointless. Mr. Obama’s agenda isn’t to rebuild American “exceptionalism” and economic strength; it is to transform America into a debtor’s nation, and transfer the American taxpayers' wealth in accord with his Marxist-Rawlsian political philosophy.

Mr. Obama and the Democrats are not honest agents. It contradicts every realty to believe you can have a civil and constructive engagement with them. To believe that Mr. Obama truly wants to find a solution to America’s debt crisis, lower unemployment, and grow our economy, can only be validated by resolutely ignoring actual facts. It is Mr. Obama and his Democratic cohorts who own this economy. Mr. Bush has not walked through that Oval Office door in two and one-half years -- it's Mr. Obama's economy.

If Mr. Obama wants to stop making payments to our Military, Senior Citizens (Social Security and Medicare), Veterans, interest on America’s debt, and essential government programs, as he has shamelessly threaten to do, that is his choice. This demagogic grandstanding can be called to account by the House of Representatives by simply passing legislation to prioritize payments for essential groups and services, with the result that no necessary Federal government functions will be impaired. If the Democratic controlled Senate and Mr. Obama want to oppose this legislation then it is they who are responsible for the consequences.

In a search for solutions, Americans should expect no constructive role from the Mainstream Media (MSM). In American society today, the MSM speaks only for the liberal left, academic elitists, generational parasites, and special interests such as public sector unions, autoworkers' union, and Wall Street bankers. The MSM does not give voice to the majority of American citizens. Consequently, this should be fully understood: Americans don’t care what they say, and Americans don’t listen to what they report. The MSM has made themselves irrelevant.

Americans want debt relief. Americans want less government spending. Americans believe that we pay enough taxes. Americans want tax reform. And, as Florida Senator Marco Rubio insightfully stated: “America needs not higher taxes, but more taxpayers.”

Americans elected conservative Republicans in 2010 because they understand that Mr. Obama and his Democratic cohorts are destroying the country they love. If Republicans want to win in 2012 – they better show the American taxpayer they mean business today!

The Reason Why: Dominique Strauss-Kahn Affair

It all just seemed so straight forward – yet, it wasn’t. The Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus Vance, Jr., we are now told got it wrong in the case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn (DSK), the former Managing Director, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and a top contender to be France’s next President. Of course Jr. wouldn't admit to that.

It turns out that the "compelling and unwavering" maid's story was bullshit (that’s French for baloney). In fact, this "hard working immigrant" had lied about everything on her asylum petition, and the circumstances of the alleged rape. So devastated after the brutal rape -- she went to clean another hotel room and went back to DSK's room to tidy up there as well. Now we are told that she contacted a friend, a day later, who is serving time in an Arizona prison for drug trafficking and money laundering. This fellow and others have made cash deposits to a bank account in her name of $100,000.00, in the past two years. There's more, but you get the point.

The real question is why Jr. brought these charges to begin with, and treated DSK as the lowest human being on the criminal food chain. Can you handle the truth?

Well, it all begins and ends with the President of the United States, Mr. Obama. Obama and the Obama Administration were enraged at DSK for statements he made on America's fiscal crisis. DSK said that America's excessive spending has not worked and is only making matters worse. First to get his pound of flesh was Timothy Geithner, US Secretary of Treasury, who came out immediately after DSK's arrest to call for him to resign from the IMF. Then the Mainstream Media (MSM) took their shots.

Junior's incompetent rush to judgment worked out quite well for Mr. Obama: humiliate DSK; get him removed from the IMF where he casts too large a shadow; and score some points with Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France, who was down in the polls to DSK and France's Socialist Party in the upcoming French Election.

Well, that's how I see it. The French were right to defend DSK, but not for all the right reasons. His behavior was despicable. Yet, he was set up -- for the truth he told about Obama's failed and demagogic fiscal policies.

C'est la vie, n'est-ce pas?

“Sneefed”

The charges against Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former managing director of the International Monetary Fund, a French Socialist panjandrum, and a top contender for France’s presidency, are serious.

Manhattan prosecutors have charged Mr. Strauss-Kahn, with seven counts stemming from allegations he sexual assaulted a hotel housekeeper.

As can be expected, Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s arrest has sent shock waves and disbelief throughout the capitals of Europe, and outrage throughout much of France. The French have long celebrated their laissez-faire attitude toward sex and moral issues. In this regard, particularly germane was the French riposte to America's disapproval of Bill Clinton's sexual scandal with Monica Lewinsky - they "sniffed."

This brings to mind the wonderful description of another French affair in Richard Holbrooke's book "To End A War." A special dinner was held at Wright - Patterson Air Force Museum, the greatest military air museum in the world, for delegates to the Dayton Peace Accords, November 1 - 21, 1995. All delegates were stopped for a security check, which included being searched by dogs trained to smell explosives. The French Representative, Jacques Blot, took extreme exception to this procedure. He whined, "This insult is to all of France." He stated emphatically, "I will not be sniffed!" He was said to pronounce it "sneefed."

"Sneefed" indeed, let's hope Monsieur Blot never has to go through Barack Obama's and Janet Napolitano's airport security checks.

Obama Speak

Mr. Obama once again tried to pull his chestnuts out of the fire, and pull the wool over everyone’s eyes, in his speech to stabilize America’s mounting debt and fiscal crisis (April, 13, 2011).

Mr. Obama, now famous for pussyfooting around on the issue, wants US to believe that he has a credible plan to deal with America’s debt and spending problems. Yet, all he offers is pie in the sky and pipe dreams.

Mr. Obama has come down from the mountain and told us that the answer to America’s debt is to raise taxes – on the rich. In America, according to Mr. Obama, you are rich if a husband and wife earn more than $250,000 a year. Mr. Obama believes that ‘raising taxes is cutting spending in the tax code.’ Say what?

Mr. Obama didn’t say that his policies of redistribution of the American taxpayers wealth to the welfare state on the one hand, and banks, hedge funds, public sector unions on the other, are responsible for the trillions in debt that are forecast to drown US in red ink. Nor did Mr. Obama say that the policies of quantitative easing, aka bailouts, to again reward the world’s Bankers and Hedge Fund Managers, by the Federal Reserve Chairman, Mr. Bernanke, who he appointed, further massacred America’s wealth.

All things considered, we can only hope that Mr. Obama’s plan, like most of what he says, comes with an early expiration date.

Healthcare cost control is the medicine for what ails America

The first cut at analyzing anything is to place it in its proper perspective. Perspective structures the debate and the public’s perception of the problem. In other words, how we define the problem is how we solve it.

Most would agree that the debate on “Entitlements,” i.e., Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is a first-order imperative to deal with America’s debt problem. To take on all Entitlements together is unworkable. By “suboptimization” of America’s Entitlement programs, the problem of America’s debt can be disaggregated into a number of smaller and discrete sub problems.

Runaway spending on Entitlements will drive the debt to unsustainable levels. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid spending will soar as 78 million “baby boomers” retire. Peter Orszag, Mr. Obama’s former Budget Director, has indicated that Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will together account for 20 per cent of US GDP by 2050 (Medicare 10.0%, Medicaid 4.3%, and Social Security 5.7%). That is more than all federal taxes combined.

I would proffer that Social Security is not the immediate problem, and we should not combine it with Medicare and Medicaid expenditures when seeking solutions to America's catastrophic debt. Clearly, Social Security can be tweaked to reflect the reality of aging. But this can be accomplished to threaten no one. Moreover, most Americans have paid for this meager retirement – it is not welfare. Yet, to propose privatizing Social Security is irresponsible and a fool's errand. Do you really believe we can trust the Stock Market, and Bank and Hedge Fund managers, with our retirement? Do you really believe we can sell that to our senior citizens? The short answer is no.

What ails American is out of control healthcare costs. The need to control costs in healthcare is America's primary fiscal necessity. Healthcare expenditures are growing at an exponential rate as compared to other costs in our economy. Everyone can agree to that. We should also be able to agree that all attempts to rein in spending on healthcare have failed such as HMOs, prevention, improved use of technology, and information technology. HMO's and Insurance companies are viable and profitable because they raise their rates to their subscribers at will. Health care is not an unambiguous and efficient marketplace given the asymmetrical nature of medical knowledge. Moreover, the so-called prevention effect is a fantasy.

There is an old and true axiom in healthcare: the way you pay for healthcare is the way you practice healthcare. But in today’s world there is another: healthcare is practice to protect the provider, i.e., physician, hospital, etc., from lawsuits. By ordering more and more visits, tests, and procedures, not only do healthcare providers protect themselves from litigation, but they also make more money.


Mort Zuckerman in an insightful analysis pointed out (The Financial Times, August 2o, 2009) “cost control, not coverage, is the key to health reform.” Healthcare costs will not be controlled until the insane costs and arbitrary awards of malpractice lawsuits are reformed. Mr. Zuckerman estimates that defensive medicine adds as much as 18 per cent to the total cost of medical care. Trimming even 1 per cent would save $22 billion in healthcare spending in one year (the New England Journal of Medicine, July 2, 2009). Eighteen per cent would yield $396 billion.

This is not to say, that this is all we have to do. Other healthcare reforms are needed. For example, we need mandate reform -- we need to give people the choice to choose a basic benefit package(s), and not the expanded excessive one mandated by ObamaCare. The American taxpayer should not have to put a "scooter" in every home.

The Democratic Party has invested substantial political costs in association with America’s Trial Lawyers, and as such is reluctant to abandon them. There is no finer example of this than when Barack Obama announced definitively at the start of the healthcare debate that ‘Tort Reform is off the table.’ Apparently, the Democrats greed for large donations from trial lawyers makes providing affordable healthcare to the American people and controlling America’s ruinous debt, dead in the water. As for the Republicans, why take on America's senior citizens when you can take on America's trial lawyers?

What's it going to be -- reform or fiscal insanity? Tort and mandate reforms will be game changers. Americans need a clear understanding that any plan to reduce the deficit will be fair and responsible. The Administration has clearly failed to present a coherent plan. This is a time for leadership and not campaigning. So, what’s it going to be?

Power of public sector unions is Wisconsin issue

Published: March 15 2011 02:50 | Last updated: March 15 2011 02:50
From Mr Lawrence S. Schneiderman.

Sir, I must point out that efforts by Governor Scott Walker and the Republican state legislature of Wisconsin are to curtail the power of public employee unions, and not unions in general. Hence, Richard McGregor’s report “Republicans boosted by Wisconsin vote” (March 11) is not a full account of the issue.

The privilege for public sector employees to unionise is a recent phenomenon. It is not a historic birthright, as the unions would wish you to believe. It is Wisconsin’s taxpayers who employ these union members – not some fat cat, private jet, country club, cigar-chomping businessman.

Public sector workers are thriving because of the power their well-organised unions exercise. Their real bosses, aka taxpayers, have no voice other than electing public officials who represent their interests and not special interests. That was exactly what has been going on in Wisconsin. The people elected a Republican governor, state senate and assembly to put a stop to the Democrats in their special relations with the public sector unions, and their catastrophic addiction to spending.

Yet more disturbing is the picture that accompanied the article – a union protester in front of our state capitol waving the American flag upside down. According to Title 4, United States Code, Chapter 1: “The flag should never be displayed with the union down.” Apparently, democracy and the will of the people is a “bridge too far” for America’s public sector unions.

Lawrence S. Schneiderman,
Milwaukee, WI, US

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2011. Print a single copy of this article for personal use. Contact us if you wish to print more to distribute to others.

Libya

I oppose any US Military (including NATO) intervention in Libya. Simply put, intervention in Libya is not in our national interest. Moreover, we cannot afford it! Elections do have consequences -- that's about the only thing Mr. Obama got right. His disastrous policies and catastrophic addiction to spending has rendered the US impotent to engage in small wars that don't significantly affect our national interest. Best to use our depleted resources to come to the aid of our friends in the region, and in situations that directly affect our interests. Finally, to believe that our intervention will cascade into some democratic open society contradicts every reality.

Journalistic Malpractice

Today, I read incredulously the editorial comments of the Financial Times, "Time to muzzle Libya's mad dog: United Nations should impose a no-fly zone without delay," (February 25). FT wrote, "The UN should be ready to protect the oil installations if Col. Gaddafi starts to destroy them."

In what reality does the Editorial Board of the Financial Times live (in)? When has the UN conducted a successful campaign? Just ask the folks in Rwanda, Srebrenica (Bosnia), and Congo, what UN interventions did for them. Or, Kosovo Serbs being murdered and their organs removed by Bill and Hillary Clinton's "Albanian freedom fighters," under UN protection. And these are only a few examples.

While Col. Gaddafi is slaughtering his countrymen in the streets of Libya, the UN is passing yet another condemnation of Israel. As others have pointed out, 'this sanctimonious babbling mess (UN) is incapable of meaningful intervention.'

In closing, if the Financial Times was a physician, it would be sued for malpractice and have its license revoked. This is journalistic malpractice!

Public Servants Are Now Our Masters: The New Slavery

In Hal Weitzman's article, "Battle of Madison tests US stomach for longer struggle" (FT, February 23), it is important to understand that the Governor of Wisconsin's effort is to curtail the power of Public Employee Unions, and not Unions (private) in general.

Mort Zuckerman's highly instructive article in the FT, "America's public servants are now its masters" (September 10, 2010), points out that "public sector employees have become a privileged class." For example: private sector workers are nearly three (3) times more likely to be jobless than public sector workers; public sector employees are better off in every area: pay, benefits, time off and security, on top of working fewer hours; ninety per cent of government employees receive lifetime pension benefits versus 18 per cent of private employees; public sector employees are almost impossible to fire; public-sector unions are a mechanism for involuntary transfers of money from taxpayers to the Democratic Party; approximately 62 per cent of Obama and the Democratic Congress's Stimulus Program of $787 billion went to support public service employees; and, for the past two years and the first time in recent memory, Obama and his Democratic cohorts could not find “one cent” for an Annual Cost of Living increase for America’s Retired Military and Senior Citizens, but public sector employees experienced no such hardship.

It was Obama who crowed after the 2008 election, that "elections have consequences." Precisely, and the election of 2010 is no different. To my Wisconsin Democratic representatives -- go to work! The citizens of any State elect their representatives to work and represent their views -- not hide like cowards. If you disagree with a bill then you may vote against it -- but, show up, speak out, and be counted.

A New Year Aspiration 2011*

For all that is so fair and good,
For all our daughters and sons,
We give our thanks and cheer today at nights' last
hour come.

For tomorrow is another day and all will still be well,
We pray God's continued blessing,
for all that this New Year tell.


* Original poem by Lawrence S. Schneiderman