Hey It Could Have Been Worse

As the Obama administration finally gets the message that people are unhappy with his focus on healthcare over the economy, Robert Gibbs comes out with the message of "hey, it could have beeen worse."

I suppose, if they openly tried to make the economy as bad as it could possibly be, then yes, it could have been worse.  However, I don't think their argument that it would have been worse if they didn't act holds water.  Quite the opposite.  I'm of the mind that if the Obama administration and Congress had taken the entire year of 2009 off, we would be in a much better economic situation than we are right now.

The deficit would be much lower without the wild spending sprees.  The job situation would be better without the looming taxes of healthcare and cap and trade.  The housing market may have found a bottom and begun a recovery. 

Things can always be worse than they are.  It's a mantra that many of us tell ourselves when a situation gets bad, but in this situation they shouldn't be trying to convince us of how bad it could be when we know that it's worse that it should be.

Try another tack Gibbs.  Wait, I know, it's Bush's fault.

Obama's Selective Memory

I'm listening to Obama speak on the economy and of course he blamed the Republicans for everything saying they created the mess and then wouldn't help fix it.  Revisionist history at best and a down right lie at the worst.

The economic collapse was all driven by the problems with Fannie and Freddie and the sub-prime mortgage crisis.  So who was responsible for this? 

It was Clinton in 1995 who signed legislation which required lenders to give money to people who were a bad risk.  If they failed to give these loans which were a bad business idea, they would no longer be able to receive federal funds.  Blackmail to force them into stupid business practices.

In 2003 Bush attempted to pass legislation to undo this and stop the forcing of loans to people who wouldn't qualify under other circusmstances.  He asked the Congress to stop making the banks piss money away.  The Democrats in Congress refused to cooperate and threatened to fillibuster.  Had this been passed in 2003 the current economic crisis would have been averted, but according to Obama it is the REPBULICAN'S fault.  When Obama joined the Senate in 2005 he added his voice to the refusal to address this situation.

In 2006 Greenspan brought the urgency of the situation to the attention of Congress and said that the risky practices of Fannie and Freddie (legislated by Clinton and attempted to be fixed by Bush) would cause a collapse.  Chris Dodd and Barack Obama (yes that guy now blaming somebody else) were the top two recipients of campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie, and Chris Dodd was the chairman of the committee on banking which SHOULD have addressed this issue.  Neither did a thing.  With the Democrats taking control of Congress in January 2007 all hope of fixing this impending disaster was lost.

So here's the timeline in summary - 1995 Clinton passes legislation to start the mess.  2003 Bush attempts legislation to prevent the mess but Dems filibuster.  2006 Greenspan warns of imminent disaster and Dems refuse to address.  In 2008 economy collapses as a direct result of what Greenspan warned.  In 2009 Obama is blaming Republicans for not fixing the problem when he voted to filibuster against the fix.

The man really does have selective memory, and a total inability to accept any personal responsibility for the current situation.

Silos, Self-interest and Citizenship

I wrote a letter to leadership and posted it on my facebook page.  The letter was all about asking Congress to slow down, focus on the economy instead of personal projects and do something right instead of fast.  This is a basic request for the citizenry, something that will serve the interest of the nation as a whole, but what happened?

The first real comment was the equivalent of "but what about me?"  Then it got into debates on social issues, a justification of current actions because of what the Republicans did and a total loss of the initial message.  So because Repbulicans weren't great we should sit silently by while the situation gets worse?

A little over a year ago my family and I went through the belongings of my grandmother who had passed away.  One of the things we found were ration booklets from WWII.  I've kept them not just because they were my grandmother's, but because of what they represent about us as a nation.  The nation banded together and everybody sacrificed much in order to battle the enemy and win.

On December 7th 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and more than 3,500 people were killed or injured.  We declared war on Japan and on Germany and finally entered the great war.  The cost in lives and in money was astromical and tragic, but we banded together, set aside our individual agendas and worked together as a nation to win.

On September 11, 2001 Al Qaeda attacked the world trade center, the Pentagon, and another target that, due to the bravery of average citizens, they failed to hit.  Nearly 3,000 people were killed in this attack and the country banded together in a dedication to fight against Al-Qaeda and stop this from ever happening again.  In WWII we were fighting against the Nazi goal of forcing their ideology on the rest of the world, now we are doing the same against radical Islam.  In WWII we lost 418,000 military personel in the fight and we maintained the will to win.  And we did win.  In the War on Terror we have lost 5,500 and our determination to win waned as soon as the war began.

Although in WWII we stayed dedicated to winning in spite of any personal sacrifices that we had to make, the philosophy now is the opposite.  Though there are many who still believe in a shared sacrifice in order to achieve a common goal, there are many who support the sacrifice of the common goal in order to avoid any personal hardship.  The wars have cost a lot of money which is absolutely true, but should we sacrifice our battle against terror because it's too expensive?  While at the same time passing sweeping legislation that will cost the country trillions and never, ever go away.  At least the wars will end, badly written legislation on government run healthcare will be will us forever. 

This, "give me what I want or I'll take my ball and go home" philosophy is destroying us from within.  Is radical Islam getting what they want by our refusal to band together and fight?  Are they glorying in the idea that they have divided us and now we're ripe for conquering?  Do they use our obsessive need to push our own personal agenda in the face of broader, more wide sweeping issues as proof of what is wrong with western civilization?

We may all have different ideas on how to make things better, but we should all be looking at the big picture instead of focusing on our own small piece of it.  We should disagree and discuss, but we shouldn't be telling the other side, "you lost so sit down and shut the hell up."  We should look at what is happening now and analyze it based on what is happening now instead of justifying a new bad policy because we think somebody else wrote a worse one.  In other words, we need to stop behaving like bickering children and start banding together to save the country from economic collapse and bankruptcy. 

But then again, I can see why your personal issue may be far more important that the safety and economic stability of the nation as a whole.  That whole United we stand divided we fall slogan is probably just propoganda anyway.

An Angry Spinster's Letter To Leadership

I better clean the house because I expect the FBI to come knocking at my door.

I sent this letter to all of my Congressmen, Barack Obama and Joe Biden via the hand dany Congress.org.

Why, in the face of the unemployment rate finally stabilizing at the astronomical rate of 10% are the Democrats so doggedly determined to pass a bill that is guaranteed to send the unemployment rate higher? Why are they insisting on rushing something that should be analyzed, deliberated, debated and discussed until all possibilities and potential consequences are address? Why are they insisting on putting their personal agenda ahead of the best interest of this nation. Most importantly, why are they insisting on turning us into a European style of government which is what we fought a revolution to escape?

Stop turning us into Europe and go back and read the Declaration of Independence. As Congress continues on it's path to destroy everything this Constitution was designed to create and protect, you continue to skate ever closer to a specific line from that hallowed document.

We hold these truths to be self evident: That all men are created equal; that that are endowed by their creator will certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; THAT WHEN ANY GOVERNMENT BECOMES DESTRUCTIVE OF THESE ENDS IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE
PEOPLE TO ALTER OR ABOLISH IT.

Contrary to what you may believe, there are millions and millions of Americans who still believe in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution and we are appalled at how you wrap yourselves in our sacred documents while shredding everything they stand for.

Get your act together or expect to find yourselves added to that unemployment rate.

Enough With The Freaking Green Jobs Already

I was working away today with the television playing as background noise when I heard Obama at his meeting in Allentown, PA.  After cleaning up the blood from banging my head against a brick wall in anger and frustration, I went back to work; all the time my mind churning over the ridiculous statements that were made before I muted the TV in order to save both my head and the brick wall it was banging against.

He of course took the opportunity to herald what a great job he's doing with the economy now since the unemployment rate is back down to only 10%.  Oh praise the Messiah for his great work.  Then he talked about his job summit and what they are doing to increase jobs. 

First we had our shovel ready project pork filled stimulus bill and endless chants of how it will create green jobs.  Then we had the crap and trade discussions and how they were going to create green jobs.  Then came the cash for clunkers fiasco so we could drive greener cars, and now the jobs bill is focused on what?  You guessed it, green jobs.

It is becoming increasingly evident to me that if you don't work in construction or an industry related to replacing bad energy hogging products with shiny new green ones, then the President doesn't give a rat's ass if you're out of work.  His answer has repeatedly been to give government money to certain industries in order to create jobs in that industry.  But what about the rest of us?  What about the millions that are out of work and aren't in his pet industries?  Well, we're pretty much screwed.

I work for a large company that already does it's best to be a "green" company.  We went paperless years ago, we limit travel and hold meetings over the phone.  Nearly half of the workforce uses a home office so we don't drive our gas guzzling, air polluting cars in to work every day.  But are we benefiting in any way from any of the job creating actions this administration has forsaken taken?  Nope, not a bit.

I'm in the insurance industry (oh the shame and horror) and we supply a service to other companies.  As those companies lay off their employees we have less work to do and so need fewer employees ourself.  In an effort to save jobs, the company this year elected to not give raises and keep the people in the hopes of riding this wave out safely.  Right now the best case scenario is that the same thing will happen in 2010.  The worst case is that layoffs will be made. 

What the President refuses to acknowledge is that all the businesses that offer services or products unrelated to his precious climate change agenda are scared to death of what is coming down the pike.  They're afraid of the immense taxes and fines that will slapped on them through healthcare legislation, cap and trade, card check and a myriad of other abominable policies that this leftist Congress will attempt to pass.  As a result, they aren't hiring until they know what the situation is going to be.

The only acknowledgement I heard of this was that "Employers don't like uncertainty so we need to get healthcare passed as soon as possible."  The sheer short sighted stupidity of this comment had me floored.  So we want to let our employers know that they're definitely going bankrupt instead of just facing the looming possibility.  I can see the jobs boom now.

Out of one side of his mouth Obama says that the government can't create jobs, and out of the other side of his mouth comes the statement that the government will give certain industries money to create jobs.  That aint how it works bucko.

Wouldn't it be nice if he stopped focusing on creating green jobs and started focusing on creating REAL jobs?  I know, there I go chasing windmills and building those sand castles in the sky again.

Why Jobs Summitt Will Fall Flat

As some of you know, for my day job I am a Six Sigma Black Belt, statistical process control analyst, process improvement specialist or whatever you want to call it. What it all boils down to is that I'm a problem solver. As somebody who solves problems for a living, I can pretty much guarantee that if this summit identifies anything that actually works, it will be something the rest of us knew months ago.

There are basic rules that need to be followed if you genuinely want to solve a problem and the summitt is following only one of the three.

1. Know the size and impact of your problem. If you don't know this then what's the point.  You may not even have a problem to solve. This is the only rule the summitt is following because we know the unemployment rate.

2. Determine the root cause of your problem. This is most effectively done by listening to the voice of the customer. In this case the customer would be employers. In order to really solve unemployment, analysis must be done which determines why the employers are laying off people or not hiring more people. This information can only be gathered from the employers themselves. Guess who isn't represented at the summitt.

3. Once the root cause of the problem is identified, brainstorm ideas that will fix the cause and not just treat the symptom. Perform a risk analysis to ensure that no unintended consequences of your actions will be felt. The summitt cannot possibly do step 3 because it isn't doing step 2.

That's it, that's the basic guide to problem solving. A very simple and time testing process that works if it's used.  The most critical piece of fixing any problem is to know what's causing it -- and who does the summit have to give them that information? Labor Unions, academics and campaign contributors.

I guess we should be grateful that he's at least finally getting around to looking like he's doing something about unemployment.