State of the Union 2013

 

by Lance Thompson

Reaction to the President’s State of the Union speech has been as predictable as the speech itself, split along the usual partisan lines.  But Obama’s next one, to be given after the 2012 election, figures to be a game-changer, and here’s an exclusive early look at what it will include:

Good evening.  And a special welcome to the many outgoing Democrat congressmen and senators.  I know you blame me for the staggering losses our party suffered in the last election.  The good news is, you and I have pensions for life.  Incidentally, that’s almost as long as the new, long-term unemployment extension we passed during the lame duck session.  The bad news is, we’ll have to borrow the money to pay for those programs from Uruguay.

I want to thank each and every American who voted for me, especially the record numbers who did so posthumously.  I only wish you had voted more often.

I want to take a moment to look back on our achievements.  We passed a national health care program.  I know the Supreme Court struck it down as unconstitutional last summer, but remember, the law was on the books almost long enough for an average American to read the entire 1300-pages of that law.

I stopped the Keystone pipeline, hobbled the domestic energy industry, and made worldwide oil reserves available to the Chinese.  I think we can all see the results in reduced traffic at the drive-through and increased sales of bicycles and skateboards.  I know a gallon of unleaded will now set you back twelve bucks, but the good news is, you can now pay for that gas with food stamps. 

The size of our military is now one tenth what is was when I took office, and we are engaged in no foreign wars.  Sure, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Maui are now colonies of the People’s Republic of China.  Yes, Mexican drug cartels have surrounded the Alamo.  And, admittedly, the number of rogue states with nuclear weapons has grown exponentially to include Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Luxembourg and Solyndra.. 

But we’re not economizing on our security.  I have doubled the number of TSA airport security officers, and authorized them to conduct strip searches on anyone who even drives past the airport.

Thanks to bailouts and takeovers during my administration, the government now owns 45% of private businesses in this nation.  We have had a 98% success rate in running those businesses into the ground.  By the way, I don’t agree with critics who say that including permanent Obama 2012 bumper stickers on all new GM cars was responsible for that auto company’s plummeting sales. 

The best news is that this nation, struggling with unsustainable debt, massive unemployment, declining international prestige and influence, and worthless currency is not my problem anymore.  Since the election, the Republicans are in charge, so we can go back to blaming them. 

(Since it is not customary for the outgoing President to deliver a State of the Union address, Mr. Obama will deliver his remarks on the ABC program “The View” immediately following the Harry Reid aerobics segment and the Nancy Pelosi cooking demonstration.)

Obama Closes the Arsenal of Democracy

by Lance Thompson

Communist China is building a naval aviation program around its new aircraft carrier and cranking out new submarines at the rate of two per year.  Iran threatens to close the Strait of Hormuz, forbids American ships from returning to the Persian Gulf, and is building an ICBM base in Venezuela.  Waves of bombings mark the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.  North Korea and Iran are on the verge of fielding nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them.  In this time of crisis, international tension and threats from every corner of the globe, President Obama naturally responds by cutting half a trillion dollars from the military budget of the United States.

The excuse Obama offered for this lunacy (and offered at the Pentagon, to add insult to inanity) is that wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are “winding down” and that there is no longer a need for the powerful military we’ve had since President Reagan rebuilt it.  Obama, whose administration has spent more than all previous administrations combined, pointed to the need to save money, and fully intends to do that at the expense of our nation’s defenses.

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said the new strategy would be to focus on Asia and the Middle East, then identified the high cost of providing health care for military personnel as a reason for the cutbacks in other areas of defense.  Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey characterized the traditional requirement that theUnited States maintain a force able to fight two major wars at the same time as outdated, and “a bit of an anchor, frankly.” 

These decisions and comments come from an administration that only recently had five conflicts cooking–Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.  Obama has shown a willingness to commit troops without congressional approval or even the slightest indication of American interests at stake.  But now he evidently believes that he can “turn the page on a decade of war” and ignore the ever-spreading threats we face around the globe. 

Panetta also said that defense cuts “must be driven by strategy and...not be driven by numbers alone.”  But it is clear that the size and capabilities of American armed forces will determine and limit the missions they can undertake.  In none of the conflicts mentioned above was the United States engaged with a nuclear power.   A few years ago, when our political leaders actually put the nation’s safety first, our military prepared to confront the major states who opposed us.  We created strategies and plans and weapons to counter a Soviet invasion of Eastern Europe, a Communist Chinese takeover of Taiwan, or nuclear strikes from any of the growing number of rogue nations eager to join the nuclear club.  Now, however, the Obama administration hopes to avoid the danger of fire by reducing the number of fire departments. 

Obama has been consistent in his three years as president.  He has followed fiscal, judicial, legislative and military policies that have weakened, constrained and threatened our nation.  So this recent decision should come as no surprise.  It only remains to be seen how this country’s enemies will exploit yet another retreat from America’s greatness by this president.

The Letter O

by Lance Thompson

In his upcoming book "Ten Letters," Eli Saslow, a reporter for the Washington Post, informs readers that President Obama has staffers select ten out of the hundreds of letters he gets each day to provide a representative sampling of American public opinion.

Saslow states that sometimes Obama feels "powerless" to help ordinary Americans, and on occasion has been known to respond in person and enclose a check to the correspondent, or make a phone call to fix a problem. Many cynical critics of the president doubt this, as Obama himself is the only source for this story. None of the many recipients of Obama checks has yet come forward.

But this story does not sound far-fetched to me. Examples of Obama’s largesse are many and verified. There is no reason to doubt this account. In fact, I can well imagine the conversation between Obama and his letter czar.

 

LC: "Mr. President, here is a heartbreaking letter from a major Democratic contributor and Solyndra investor."

 

O:  "Send him half a billion."

 

LC: "This one is from a member of the New Black Panthersaccused of voter intimidation in Philadelphia."

 

O:  "I’ll call Eric tomorrow."

 

LC: "This one seems to be about a hybrid car company that’s struggling to save the planet. But it’s all in Finnish."

 

O:   "Send half a billion. Dollars–not euros."

 

LC: "This one is from a Tea Party member who was beaten and run over by union reps at a right-to-work rally."

O:  "That’s enough for today. We have to draw the line somewhere."

Crisis Management

 

by Lance Thompson

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste," is the philosophy of ex-Obama chief of staff and White House arm twister Rahm Emanuel. During the reign of Obama, this tactic has been used repeatedly to justify government overspending, overreaching, and overtaxing.

Liberals are masters of applying this approach. They create a crisis, postpone any attempt to address it until the last minute, and then introduce emergency legislation contrived in secret and passed in haste. This has enabled serial transgressions such as stimulus spending, debt monetization, Obamacare, government takeover of lending institutions and auto companies, and countless smaller outrages. It’s time conservatives followed Emanuel’s example.

The current debt ceiling crisis was created by two and a half years of Democrat overspending, and is now being used as an excuse to spend even more. But as often as Democrats use a crisis to justify irresponsible behavior, conservatives have seldom used one to support responsible leadership.

If this crisis is as severe as Democrats say, then why not insist upon a long-term, permanent solution that will prevent it from recurring? The Cut, Cap and Balance plan offers such a solution, yet Republicans in Congress have been talking about compromises and half measures that promise only to postpone the hard decisions that will grow more difficult and costly in the future.

In the past, crises have led to liberal expansion, but they can be equally persuasive of conservative solutions. The response to soaring debt can be the liberal one of increasing the debt ceiling, or the conservative one of reducing spending. The response to downgrading America’s credit rating could be the liberal approach of borrowing more or the conservative choice to pass a balanced budget amendment. The response to approaching exhaustion of programs like Social Security, Medicare and unemployment compensation could be the empty liberal promise of extending benefits or the conservative solution of reducing benefits and adjusting eligibility.

A recent CNN poll (18-20 July 2011 by ORC International) indicates that two thirds of Americans, including Republicans, Democrats and independents, support the Cut, Cap and Balance plan as a solution to the debt crisis. Americans understand that this crisis is a threat to our economy, our way of life, and our position in the world. We understand that drastic action is necessary, and two thirds of us are at least receptive to a responsible solution.

It’s up to conservatives to make the argument for a responsible, long-term solution to our debt crisis, and then to pass legislation that will make that solution possible. Who knows–if we prove as adept as using crises as the other side, maybe crisis management can be permanently retired along with the debt.

Obama’s Private Sector Jobs Program

 

by Lance Thompson

Many have been critical of the Obama administration’s favoritism toward public over private jobs. Trillions have been shoveled into the insatiable maw of government service, while taxation and regulation have strangled private sector employment. However, a new edict from the Justice Department promises a significant boost to private sector workers–particularly lawyers.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice has decided not to defend various members of the previous administration–including Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld and aide Paul Wolfowitz--against repeated lawsuits by convicted al Qaeda terrorist Jose Padilla.

Padilla was arrested at Chicago’s O’hare Airport in 2002 and charged with conspiracy to set off a radioactive "dirty bomb," among other crimes. He was held as an enemy combatant by the United States Navy for 44 months, finally convicted in 2007 on evidence collected by the FBI over eight years, and received a 17-year sentence. From prison, he has filed suit against dozens of government officials, from Attorney General John Ashcroft to various unnamed prison guards. Padilla’s military incarceration was upheld by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, and his most recent lawsuit was dismissed in early 2011 by South Carolina U. S. District Judge Richard Gergel. Nevertheless, as the ACLU helps Padilla plan future lawsuits from behind bars, Obama’s Justice Department will not defend the Americans who performed their sworn duty to bring Padilla to justice.

Obma and Holder are selective in their betrayal of government officials. The DOJ will continue to zealously defend Obama Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. But members of the previous Bush administration will have to fund their own legal defenses against a convicted terrorist. This is their reward for serving and defending this country.

But there is a silver lining to this outrage. The decision to elbow out government officials from the federal legal umbrella is certain to result in a deluge of lawsuits from incarcerated terrorists. Those terrorists will have to be represented by lawyers from the private sector. No government funds will be required for this massive legal stimulus. In fact, withholding legal protection for Americans who honorably served their country will shave billions from the federal debt. And the Americans who are targeted by terrorist lawsuits will also have to hire lawyers for their own defense, providing further private sector revenue to private sector lawyers.

It seems likely that once the Obama administration realizes that the whole disgraceful program requires no government expenditure, Attorney General Holder will decide that convicted terrorists are entitled to federally-funded attorneys to process and pursue their lawsuits against the United States. This would be more in keeping with the pro-terrorist positions taken by the administration since its inception. But until then, private sector attorneys can anticipate plenty of new business, thanks to an administration that sympathizes with America’s enemies and punishes her defenders.