When President Barack Obama was in Racine the other day, he had to face some unexpected questions about the success or lack of success with the so-called Recovery Act. As we know from previous experiences, President Obama does not do well when asked questions posed with an opposing viewpoint. Apparently he has gotten used to the notion that he will come into a city, make a speech, answer a couple of questions any long-winded fashion and leave with a higher approval rating.
When President, got asked about the success of the stimulus bill, his reply seemed a bit hostile. When looking for success, he had to point out that with out the $862 billion stimulus package, the recession would've been worse. How so? How can the "things could have been worse" basis be defended? Of course it can't be. There are no statistics for how bad things could've gotten. I'm sure there are just as many economists were saying that no difference at all has been made. The economy would've been exactly the same, only the money is gone. The portions that did not get wasted went to state governments so they could plug their huge deficits.
Some days it's just plain difficult to understand what is going on in America today. One thing we do know is that the United States is on the wrong track. Unfortunately, the government seems content to not only stay on this track, but to pick up speed.
The Arizona immigration law seem to have been a situation that could and should have been handled by the state of Arizona and backed up by the federal government. Instead it has turned into an us versus them situation. Consciously choosing not to enforce the immigration laws that are on the books, the federal government is not letting Arizona worked on solving their own problem. There are either too many Republicans in Arizona or not enough unions in Arizona. During the summer of 2008, immigration was a hot issue. The many candidates for president at the time all have plans on how to handle the immigration problem on the border with Mexico. Then, the economy tanked and the priority shifted. Immigration was shelved albeit promised to be handled in the first year of the Obama presidency. We now know that a year and a half later, things are getting worse.
Arizona carefully crafted a law that would complement the federal law to give itself some power and authority to handle what it viewed as a problem. Although I know where Arizona is, I don't know firsthand the extent of their problem. However, they should be able to address the problem as they see fit. No one is coming to the rescue. Unlike the auto companies, unions, teachers unions, and all the other Democrat special interest, no one is coming to the rescue.
President Obama is looking forward to the summer. Congress will be in recess and he can make appointments without the consent and advice of the Senate. He can tour the country using Air Force One to avoid the day-to-day responsibilities of his office and do the one thing he does well-campaign. He will be putting forth his best effort to further divide the country politically and do it all on taxpayers dollars.
Having little or no success of his own in his first half of his term of office, Obama will be preaching the rhetoric of his well-worn grooves-blaming Bush for the failures of the Obama presidency. Yes, according to President Obama, George Bush screwed things up so bad that President Obama cannot do what he was elected to do; fix-it.
We've all known for years that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel panders to the liberal and Democrat candidates no matter how bad they are. That's an assumption that we'll just have to live with. They are starting to come up with some so-called news stories comparing Senator Russ Feingold to candidate Ron Johnson. If we are aware of this bias, we sometimes have to remind ourselves that it exists in order to read these columns without having to be interrupted to run to the cabinet to get the Alka Seltzer.
In one article, we are led to believe that the deciding factor on who we should send to Washington for the next six years should be based solely on if the candidate owns any type of stock in BP. Well, Ron Johnson on some outright, and Russ Feingold old and some through a mutual fund. Gosh, Wally, this doesn't make the decision crystal-clear. But, let's think this over. Who in their right mind would invest in an oil stock for a company that would at some point in the future cause an environmental disaster? The only good news is, the wealth of these two candidates has also been diminished by the decrease in the stock price. That makes us all feel good, right?
Actually, the Obama administration admits to one mistake. I'm not going to take a lot of time to discuss the Shirley Sharrod episode, because that is an actual distraction of what is really going on in America.
During the so-called summer, the Obama administration is trying to propagandize their accomplishments with the economy. And having done, we need distractions so that there is not a lot of time to examine the actual facts.
As we get closer to the election day, it's time to start paying attention to the U.S. Senate race. Do we want hope and change or do we want the status quo of the last 8+ years? It sounds like the 2008 election all over again. Only this time with the U.S. Senate.
Can Russ Feingold run on his record? Many of his votes cast in the Senate are in lockstep with the Democrat status quo. Feingold voted for the stimulus and he voted for healthcare reform. He voted along party lines in many of his votes at least the past year and a half. Now, all of a sudden he thinks he is a maverick and is bucking his party lines. He was the only Democrat to vote against the financial reform bill. Being on the losing end of this vote, that's not much consolation. Feingold said his vote against it was not because he didn't believe that he would be standing up for the freedom of Americans. No. He voted against it because it did not impose even more regulation. Feingold also voted against the patriot act. Yet, Feingold was part of a Congress that signed away more American liberties than the patriot act ever can or will.