It’s 3:00 AM In America

It feels as though the dark of night is upon us. And people are waking up frightened, worried, about national security and economic security, about how to provide for their families and for the future, as our nation sinks deeper into debt, and lower in the eyes of an ever more dangerous world. We’re waking up to realize that President Obama and his Democrat enablers in Congress are taking America in the wrong direction.

Enter a household in an American neighborhood and, near the pre-school artwork hanging on a refrigerator door, you’re likely to find a mounting stack of unpaid bills on the counter top, alongside a cancellation notice for the family’s health insurance. Turn on a TV or computer screen and you’re likely to see frightening images … an angry mob rampaging in the Middle East … racial protests in Ferguson, Missouri … people in plastic suits carrying dead Ebola victims … Canada’s Parliament in lockdown following a domestic terror attack … ISIS forces on their murderous rampage through Iraq, a nation that was safe under America’s watch when Barack Obama became president … Russian tanks advancing in Eastern Europe … a jihadist with a knife beheading an American citizen … the American compound in Benghazi and the American flag in flames …

It was none other than Hillary Clinton — ironically one of Mr. Obama’s most significant enablers — who warned that such a moment might come, when our nation would face an existential threat, as an unqualified, untested President Obama would wither under the challenge. It now feels as though we are very near that time of existential threat, if not already in it. And it becomes clear that our president has never been the man Democrats held him out to be, that he has instead been the boldest of charlatans, brandishing a wisdom and competence not truly of his repertoire, but merely set pieces in a farcical tragedy played out on the world stage.

The world, however, is full of serious players who understand and appreciate the machinations of Realpolitik. Many such persons are dedicated to America’s demise, and that of western democracy. What we need are leaders in Washington who can recognize the world’s economic and political realities for what they are, and muster a wherewithal to meet and deal with them accordingly.

One of the beauties of America is that ‘We the People’ have the power to send our leaders a message, to sense a horizon beyond the day’s darkest hour, to choose a new direction, toward a new dawn, and leave this dark of night behind us.


Media Bias? … Really?

As if we need reminding, there is an item on the Internet this week noting what this column anticipated some time ago. In this sixth year of Barack Obama’s scandalous and disaster-ridden presidency, as Republicans stand poised to make considerable gains in November’s off-year elections, one would think there are the makings of a pretty big story. The major broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, NBC), however, have shown somewhere between little and no interest in covering said story, as revealed here by the Media Research Center.

Also revealed is the fact that those same broadcast networks gave ample coverage to the elections pending in 2006, which happened to be the sixth year of George W. Bush’s presidency, when it was the Democrats who stood to gain ground. This readily observable double standard is not the province of unbiased news media. It is not negligible, nor is it excusable. It is merely par for the course.

ObamaCare Remains a Predicament for Democrats

As election day 2014 approaches; as our economy continues to sputter, with full-time employment lagging and wages struggling to keep pace with inflation; as America’s standing in the world continues to decline and our multi-trillion dollar (that’s trillion with a ‘T’) national debt increases with regularity; as administration scandals abound and President Obama pursues partisan political advantage over the transparent governance he once promised would be the hallmark of his presidency; as the president’s credibility dwindles to dust … Democrats and the rest of the liberal establishment will heighten their attempts to distract America’s electorate.

There simply is no denying that the positive, meaningful change Mr. Obama and the Democrats promised back in 2008, and have dangled like a carrot ever since, has not come to pass. Under this president, it never will. At the heart of this reality is not only the president’s unsavory predilection toward political thuggery and deceit, but also the economic and political lynchpin for which he and his party put their credibility on the line: ObamaCare.

Where convenient they cleverly obfuscated, and where necessary they brazenly lied in order to get ObamaCare passed, barely, through a Democrat-controlled congress. And Democrats will do whatever they deem necessary to see their law become more fully implemented. Even now, the Obama administration hides ObamaCare’s negative consequences in an attempt to limit its impact on the upcoming elections.

The reason for the scheming and fabrications is that, much in the vein of its namesake politician, ObamaCare has never been what Democrats held it out to be. As we’ve already seen, and will continue to see, ObamaCare will not make health care more affordable, more convenient or more readily available for the vast majority of Americans. What it will do is place America’s health care system squarely under the authority and control of a dysfunctional federal bureaucracy, which will in turn leave nearly all Americans more dependent upon and subservient to their government.

For now at least, that is something most Americans do not want, and that forms the crux of the Democrats’ predicament. They’ve tied themselves to a legislative scheme that will, in all likelihood, grow increasingly unpopular as Americans grow more familiar with its ill effects. It must be noted, however, that if Democrats do manage to obfuscate those ill effects long enough, then ObamaCare’s bureaucratic regime could become so thoroughly entrenched in the sociopolitical fabric – so addictive, in fact – that it cannot be undone, no matter how harmful it may eventually become.

Just how harmful is that?

                                                                                             There is more …

Chatting About Democrats … and Strategies

There I was, starting off the year 2014 on what seemed like a good note, enjoying a latte at my favorite java joint and reading a good book by Amity Shlaes. However (I’ve found there’s always a ‘however’ qualifying the start of a new year), I sat next to my reliably hardcore liberal pal, Vilmar. Hadn’t seen him in months, but there he was, again reading from the New York Times, and I was thinking to myself, “This guy really needs to get a clue,” when he suddenly leaned over and whispered, “Just wait.” So, I took the bait.


“November. It’s gonna be a slaughter.”

“You talking about the elections?”

“Oh, yeah! Your guys are goin’ down!”

“You must know something I don’t know.”

“We have a theme. 2014’s all about … Inequality.”

“Inequality, eh? … Now that’s about as clear-cut as ‘Hope and Change,’ don’t you think?”

“You forget, we won with that.”

“That’s right, you did, how silly of me. But seriously, when people didn’t know what ‘Hope and Change’ meant, they just gave Obama a pass on that, because he was so cool. If they’d known he was hoping to destroy our health care system and wanted to change America into a socialist state, I doubt he’d have done so well with that theme. Just saying.”

“You want context? Fine. Income inequality.”

“Ahh, yes, well, that’s another sticky wicket. Since income inequality has actually increased since Obama became president. You knew that, right?” … silence … so I continued … “These Democrat geniuses run their polls and conduct their focus groups and then decide to build their campaign around a problem that’s actually gotten worse since their guy became president? Wow. That’s just brilliant.”

He went back to his left-wing rag of a newspaper, I to my book, and I’ve not seen old Vilmar since that day. Nor have I heard a great deal lately about ‘income inequality’ — what seems important in January can often recede into relative insignificance come November.

Grim realities of a dangerous world . . . not focus groups . . . have that effect.

Are Democrats Entitled To Power?

By David Lewis

Within the socialist model is a segment of the populace conditioned to rely on government-provided entitlements. These individuals form a political base that politicians pander to and that votes to maintain its own dependency. And the more reliant people become on government, the more distressed they become when asked to do with less of it. We’ve seen this among Europeans who, in recent years, have confronted the economic brick wall that is the dead-end of socialism … “Eventually you run out of other people’s money,” as Margaret Thatcher once famously put it.

Politicians have also been conditioned, so as to believe that once an entitlement is in place, it invariably becomes entrenched, institutionalized and virtually impossible to dislodge. While among Republicans this is disconcerting, for Democrats it is a strategic imperative. For without the voter base that entitlements generate, Democrats would be without a most significant source of their power.

Their strategy for entrenching an entitlement program is to target its benefits so that they are immediate and direct, while keeping the detrimental impact dispersed and indirect. In other words, avoid making it too noticeably painful to those who don’t feel its immediate benefit. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are examples; programs that directly subsidize targeted segments of the populace, while their immediate cost is dispersed among taxpayers and their dire impact remains conceptual and eventual — i.e. unfunded liabilities in the tens of trillions of dollars, which will become so vast they cannot be paid and, left unchecked, will bankrupt our nation.

As unsettling as the consequences may be, so long as they remain distant concepts and not palpable realities, a government program can be allowed to expand and thus become entrenched without political repercussion. Democrats are once again counting on this, hoping ObamaCare will eventually become as indelible as other government programs that preceded it. But there is more to the story, as I’ve described here.


America’s Credibility Deficit Disorder

By David Lewis

When all is politicized, all credibility is lost. That’s America’s dilemma at this stage in Barack Obama’s presidency. And it’s self-inflicted.

For too long, the Obama administration has been allowed to systematically politicize the events and entities within the President’s orbit, in order to shape and control a political narrative. Liberals have long valued exercising such control, and Mr. Obama is, if anything, a product of modern American liberalism.

From a divisively activist Justice Department with Attorney General Eric Holder at its helm, to an EPA with a left-wing agenda, to an IRS that unapologetically targets and thereby censors the President’s political opponents, to a deliberate compromising of America’s southern border and the further usurpation of its national security for reasons of political expediency – and this list is shy of exhaustive – one cannot get clarity or consistency from the Obama administration and its vast, government apparatus. Instead it’s polemics and propaganda.

For Americans and anyone else who values a steadfast America, this state of affairs has become unnerving. With the rise of the terrorist group known as ISIS, for example, a time has come for straight talk about a credible, terrorist threat, about how it was allowed to develop and how best to confront it. Yet, Americans find themselves in a dangerous and stupefying quandary, since they don’t  know, even in matters of national security, whether they can trust their president and their government to do the utmost in protecting them and, convenient or not, to be truthful about it.

Sadly enough, it’s a strong likelihood they can’t.


ObamaCare’s New Demo

By David Lewis

Something is happening that Democrats didn’t anticipate when they passed their healthcare law in 2010. It appears that, adjacent the pool of beneficiaries receiving ObamaCare subsidies, there is a larger demographic of those who have been and will continue to be harmed by the law – not allowed to keep their doctors, losing their health insurance plans, watching helplessly as premiums and deductibles skyrocket, losing their jobs or having work hours cut back by nervous employers.

Having been manipulated by Democrats in order to advance a socialist agenda is bad enough, but this growing segment of voters can also sense, directly and palpably, how they’re getting royally screwed over by the President and his party. Democrats might have considered this before passing ObamaCare in their overbearing and deceitful manner, without the political cover of a single Republican vote. But they did not. And that’s why being tied to ObamaCare still holds them in hot water.