Conservative Refocus

By:  Barry Secrest

Fascinating how we rarely hear the word "messiah" used anymore, isn't it?

Has the seemingly Biblical turmoil in the mideast, along with all of the dark portents swirling all around us, much like an ill wind of doom,  insulated our collective political vitriole, or is it, perhaps, something else?  A recent story at ABC News spoke to this fairly new anti-presidential phenomenon.

The story essentially admonished the President for using his own brand of  "self-specialized" media while locking out the traditional news outlets.  In fact, the reporter went on to state that "the President has narrowed access by the mainstream media to an unprecedented extent."  Ann Compton, a senior reporter at ABC News, went on to state that "access here has shriveled."

Interesting choice of verbs, shriveled, but probably not accidental when we harken back to the often breathless omni-sexual reporting done on Obama's behalf prior to the eye opening economic awakening of which the President can, at present, dutifully lay claim. Even high level members of the media appear to be enduring deficits of readership, dollars and job positions, and it appears that most have now taken a duly alarmed note.

Pac-Man Potus and The Obamaphibians

But the story went on to explain that the "current dynamic is different and dangerous," to which we would note Indeed, and in more ways than one, my awakening Liberal friends.  In fact, the President's handling of Egypt, while rarely criticized even by GOP politicians, has officially been panned by a significant number of the media as an abject failure.  Even the patently liberal Newsweek's cover brandished an ashamed looking President with the words "Egypt: How Obama Blew it."  The President's kiss and make-up response, in yet another dollar-blitzing display of Presidential Pac-Man, was to roll out a $ 3.7 Trillion dollar budget that was crafted to appease his "base" no doubt.

Unfortunately for Obama, the media wasn't buying that one either, as even the left-streamers began to doubt the President's rather stark deficit of anti-economic leadership.  But we should also pause here to note that this, possibly fleeting, anti-presidential spate has certainly not flowed to every corner of the media.

There are still those shallow swimming liberal fanatics within the media whose function belongs more to that of the simple-celled Obamaphibians, in that they know not why they swim, or even that they swim, but swim they do nonetheless.

The President's embattled response to an increasingly worried America over his budget was to disingenuously note that his plan would save an estimated $ 1.1 Trillion over 10 years, prompting us all to sarcastically exclaim "hallelujah"...that should really help... in ten years...assuming that we are still here, of course.  The President's artful attempt at grandly raising taxes, whether they be phantom fees or flights of fancy on the one hand, while measuringly cutting spending to on the other and then proclaiming it a quantifiable savings, speaks to a significant artifice to be believed soley by the duplicitously uninformed.

Conservastrology; Noun: The Act Of Conservatively Predicting future Events Based Upon Recent & Distant Historical Errors

Utilizing our skills at historically observing errors of the past, both recent and distant, and applying our findings to current mis-events allows certain of we, the conservatively  inclined, to make various stunningly accurate prognostications. To wit, the question that certain members of both the Left and the Right have been asking is, quite obviously to us, a rhetorical one at best (maybe they have not been paying complete attention to the White House for the past two years).  That question being:  "Why didn't the President use at least one of the recommendations from his blue ribbon budget panel?"

Aw, come on guys!  Don't you at least remember what the President said about panels?  We actually answered this question for you in a prediction of exactly one year ago:

The fact that Obama has, on many previous occasions, lambasted other Politicians' efforts at employing Study Commissions was not lost on us.  The comical and yet revealing truth is that the President has, in his own words, "many times" disavowed employing commissions to study various Government problems as "the oldest political trick in the book at passing the buck." from Extreme Consequences, 2/26/2009

In other words and as predicted, regardless of the findings by the Commission, the entire episode was one of nothing more nor less than complete political sophistry designed as "fire for effect" only.

Meanwhile, the turmoil in Greece that we verifiably predicted would soon arrive here last year has been rather depressingly validated.  A large mob of Wisconsin Union members, and others, descended upon the Capital in a rage, and they were not of the very civilized Tea Party ilk either.  In an article written in May of 2010, we wrote the following:

The President then went on to suggest that "less is more" when it comes to assimiliating news content, while leaving out his obvious sentiments on controlling Government outlays, which would most obviously be "more is less"--all the while-- the following movie and broadway hit song  kept coursing around in our heads as it regards Greece, the country which we soon may be emulating: as in Greece is the word.  From Greece is The Word, May 16,2010

Here, and once again, both we and some few others correctly predicted that the events occurring in Greece would make their way here in one form or another. Here's to hoping that the US does not completely emulate the disastrous rioting in Greece.

Noting that the problems in Greece, having been temporarily mitigated by Eurozone loans was, rather expectedly, of the same exact variety that the state of Wisconsin has recently sought to correct today.  In Greece the riots were prompted by protesting Public Union workers who, despite their faltering economy, ragedly insisted upon maintaining a near-hedonistic work-life which was simply unsustainable.  When the Grecian Government insisted upon several corrections that would put their ship of state back on a near-correct course, the troubles began--in earnest.  The death toll and serious injuries which resulted from the protest riots reached into the thousands, and there could be more in the future.

Meanwhile, and in that same vein, we have yet even to note the fire-breathing inflationary trend that many knew was coming. That obaminable monster, inflation, has just now risen up out of the sea and plundered out on to our shoreline--replete with glistening fangs, devilish eyes and flinty scales--inflation-zilla is here and she's mad as hell.  The question now becomes "how bad will it be?" Are we truly headed down the trail which leads to Greece along with the economic unrest which is citing uprisings throughout the world?

Grecian Formula Number 44

If we take a close look at Wisconsin, we can see the same range of effects coming into play.  The average unionized public salary for a Wisconsin state workers is about $48,348.00, not including benefits, according to the NY times.  When one accounts for the average health benefit amount paid for each Wisconsin public employee by the state, the total comes out to about $ 20,000 for each worker according to the Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel.  This means that, so far, the average pay package reaches $ 68,348 per employee, and this does not include the state pension plan.

If we were to include the state pension plan, which is fully funded by the state of Wisconsin according to the Wisconsin employee benefits website, at a minimum of 10% of the employee's income per year, the pension plan actually costs the state, on average, a minimum of $4,834.00 per year, making the total Wisconsin benefits package a whopping $ 73,182.00 per year.  At this point many might actually be thinking of procuring a job in the state of Wisconsin after all of this blows over for a cool $ 73,182.00 per year (and you can't get fired!)

Enter the Governor of the state, Scott Walker, seeking to close a $ 3.6 billion dollar hole in the budget, who indicated a number of fixes to balance the budget, and here's where the problems came into play.  The fix was not in laying off thousands of workers nor was it in cutting either benefits or pay.  The fix was in asking employee's to pay only 12 % of the employee health costs and about 5.8% of their pension costs so that lay-offs could be averted; and the weeping and gnashing of teeth began.

Here, it should be noted that many, if not most, small business employers simply cannot afford pensions for their employees while meeting overhead, despite typically paying at least half of their employees' health costs.  The point here being, that while many Wisconsin citizens struggle to provide for their own pensions and pay far more for their own health benefit costs, they still rather generously, provide for their state workers --that-- which they often cannot afford for themselves.  But, that's just not good enough, apparently.  This while approximately 9% of all national workers remain unemployed.

When All Else Fails, There's Always Community Organizing...

When the Governor also wanted to change the collective bargaining agreement so that the Union could not dictate normal workday procedures as mandated by the employees the cries of imperial walker, Walker in the cross-hairs photos and references to Hitler began and with a vengeance.  The state union workers decended upon the capital and the Wisconsin State's Senate Democrats, who were required to be in attendance for the vote, despite their vote not actually mattering, fled the state.  At this point the workers needed a Messiah, a saviour to offer up both solace and support in what the people of the state of Wisconsin were asking the workers to sacrifice.  Enter President Barack Hussein Obama, stage left.

President Obama waded into the fray, not to offer support for the desires of the people of Wisconsin, nor to offer support to the state Government for the admirable balance that had been achieved at clearing the annual deficit.  No, indeed.  In fact, Obama came out in support of the public Union accusing the Governor's efforts on behalf of the people of the state as "unleashing an assault on Unions."  The President actually began mobilizing opposition via his political machine, with both state and national unions, to dangerously increase both the size and the scope of the protests against the state of Wisconsin, thus actually fomenting the chaos rather than controlling it.

From there the President's efforts spread to the state of Ohio, as well to mitigate efforts by Governor John Kasich to also limit collective bargaining agreements in his state in an effort to control costs.  Soon this worker's party blitzkrieg was predicted to spread to other states, as well, including Indiana, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and even Tennessee and Missouri, among others.  At some point we must pause and wonder if the President might ever actually realize that he is no longer a community organizer?  Does he understand that he is building opposition against the wishes of the majority of all peoples within these states?  Does he not also see that these public sector unions comprise a fraction of the voters of each state?

Does the President understand that he is governing against the will of the people in favor of the beneficiaries of the people's largesse?

Here it becomes very plain to see the one true fact, that has been most recently in question, emerge, and that is simply that this President has not moderated, he has not gone to the center, nor has he moved to the right even a tittle.  In fact, if anything, the President has now moved further to the Left with this particular presidential departure in favor of the worker's party, which is also closely associated with the forces of Socialism and the Communist party. This, however, does bring up yet another example of the dichotomy of the President's words with regard to controlling debt and reigning in spending.

As recently as the State of the Union Address, on January 26, 2011, the President said this:

"We have to confront the fact that our government spends more than it takes in. That is not sustainable. Every day, families sacrifice to live within their means. They deserve a government that does the same."

Even earlier, speaking on sacrifice, Obama said this:

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That's not leadership. That's not going to happen."

Except when a sovereign state is trying to balance its deficit problem?

With regard to the economy and deficits, the President said the following-- he apparently was not referring to quite everybody:

"Everybody’s going to have to give. Everybody’s going to have to have some skin in the game."

In late November of 2008, the President said this:

"It can't happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice.  So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility, where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves but each other."

Unless you belong to a Union?

On March 24th,2009 Obama said this:

"When we all work together, when each of us looks beyond our own short-term interest to the wider set of obligations we have towards each other, that's when we succeed, that's when we prosper, and that's what is needed right now."

But if you belong to one of my special interest groups...I'm here for ya?

Finally, uttered on Febrary 24th,1999 there is this:

"Our job is to govern with a sense of responsibility."

Unless it goes against one of my powerful constituencies?

Truthfully, with the recent submission of the President's deficit busting spending bill along with his reaction to the efforts by the state of Wisconsin to reign in spending, certain questions begin to arise in earnest. Has the President been totally candid with the American people with regard to his efforts at controlling an admittedly out of control spending? The only answer that would appear credible based upon the President's own words when contrasted against his actions is a clearly resounding "No."

The next question, which simply must be answered, is one which is quite troubling within the nature of Presidents and presidential authority; Does the office of the Presidency, along with its endemic duties, include the act of aiding, if not abetting to foment, a protest against a sovereign state being Wisconsin, as has been documented by news story after news story? Further, does the President have the right to utilize his or her office in organizing a form of rebellious protests against a state within its internal efforts of governing responsibly?

Finally, does the President's office allow it to use the powers of the office, in order to effect non-election political coercion, in a state that is under the office of the Presidency's Federal jurisdiction? In essence, utilizing the power of the office to effect mass political favoritism on behalf of a clearly documented special interest group with close ties to that same adminstration in power?

We already know what the answer to these questions are, but does the answer now even matter in America?