Why Can't We All Just Get Along?

In light of the looming stalemate over extending the Bush tax cuts, the mainstream media has resurrected catcalls about political polarization.  If Republicans and Democrats could just get along, the nation would be better off, goes the media's disingenuous whine.

The talking heads and their keyboarding cousins act as if the current discord is a new phenomena.  Many claim today's churlish political climate is the worst ever.  Pundits pine for the days when bipartisanship was a Washington hallmark.  

The problem with the media's hypothesis is that it's sheer nonsense.  American politics, for better or worse, have always been fractured, chaotic and emotionally charged.  Sharp divisions between the parties have existed for as long as their has been a democracy.  It is a deliberate distortion to suggest otherwise.

The dirty little secret is that the news outlets have a vested interest in creating political dissension because they believe confrontation lures viewers and sells papers.  Reporters seek out those with opposing views, the more extreme the better, to produce compelling stories dripping with controversy.

That's why the media shoulders much of the blame for Americans' frustration with the tone of political discourse.  Online, on radio, in print and over the airwaves the constant negative media drumbeat has shaped the public's view of Washington's political stew.

There is no denying the media's influence.  Most Americans depend exclusively on big media for their news about Beltway politics. Media conglomerates belch political drivel almost non-stop, 24-hours a day.  That is a relatively new development, but the politics have never been polite.   

In fact, there has always been mean-spirited edginess to American politics.  President John Adams was skewered for being toothless and senile by his opponents.  Andrew Jackson was branded a jackass so often that the donkey became the symbol for the Democratic Party.

Don't forget Thomas Jefferson's running mate Aaron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton over political skulduggery.  A trademark of the American political experience has been partisanship, name-calling and bitter personal disputes.  Like it or not, democracies are often messy like that.

Many in the media lay the blame for the current partisanship at the feet of the two parties.  Both are accused of adhering to entrenched political ideology instead of embracing compromise.  This too is a misguided notion perpetuated by the lame-stream media.

Throughout history, the two parties have more often that not embraced positions that are polar opposites. Think slavery and abolition during President Lincoln's tenure.  Or the row over big government when President Franklin Roosevelt presided over the country.  

Actually, competing ideologies are a good thing because it gives voters a clear choice.  When the two parties have been in harmony, the media and voters grumble there is not "a dime's worth of difference" between them.  You can't have it both ways.

Despite the natural tension between political parties, the nation's elected leaders have managed in the past to put aside acrimonious differences and work together.  In every case, there has been a president willing to risk political capital to negotiate the compromise.  Examples abound in recent years.

President Ronald Reagan famously collaborated with Democrat House Speaker Tip O'Neil to make changes in Social Security, despite opposition on both sides of the aisle.  President Bill Clinton and his nemesis House Republican leader Newt Gingrich joined together to pass a landmark welfare reform bill.

Even the much maligned George W. Bush reached across the party divide to Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy in passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, establishing national education standards for public schools.

Which brings us to today's political impasse in Washington.

President Barrack Obama cannot point to a single example during the last four years when his leadership was critical in reaching a middle ground on any national issue.  His signature Obama Care law was jammed down the throats of Republicans.

If the media really wants to find out why the current House and Senate are so dysfunctional, they need look no further than 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.  The truth is President Obama has no intention of trying to mediate for the grand solutions championed by the American media elite.

He is the chief reason we can't all just get along.

Why Obama Care Is Here To Stay

While the mainstream media was dissecting the Supreme Court decision, the government labyrinth inside the Beltway was quietly doling out millions of dollars to hire bureaucrats to implement Obama Care and drafting thousands of pages of new health care regulations.

Those Americans who still hold out hope for repeal of the law must come to grips with the new reality.  The high court's ruling makes repeal an unachievable dream.  If that sounds fatalistic, consider that in the long history of the United States not a single entitlement has been eliminated by Congress.

Once the bureaucrats are in place, there is no turning back.  The Health and Human Services (HHS) has hired computer programmers, technicians and managers.  The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has bulked up its payroll to enforce the new tax (penalty) on individuals and companies as part of the health care mandate.

There are 13,000 pages of regulations governing how doctors and hospitals are supposed to practice medicine under the new law.  And HHS is spinning out more rules every week.  More than 180 boards and commissions have been been created to oversee the new law's provisions.

Even a new Congress and administration will be hard pressed to undo it all.  Millions of Americans are already receiving benefits.  They would attain victim status if any attempt is made to alter Obama Care.  The mainstream media salivates at the notion that Republicans would tamper with health care benefits.

Imagine television cameras capturing weeping mothers with pre-existing medical conditions.  Newspaper headlines about young people dropped from the parents' insurance.  Radio interviews with uninsured migrant workers struggling with catastrophic illnesses.  It won't be pretty.

The GOP has shown it cannot withstand media pressure.  Republican leaders have blinked too often in the past two years when the media amped up its attacks.  Battles over the budget are a prime example. Every time Obama threatens to shut down the government, Republicans crayfish under the media glare.

GOP leadership lacks the spine to weather a withering media offensive.  Perhaps, a President Romney would make a difference. But history suggests otherwise.  The former Massachusetts governor was known more for comprising than confrontation during his tenure.

That's why the Supreme Court decision stings.  It was the last best hope for those who believe the law will fundamentally change health care for the worse.  

For that reason, apologists who defend Chief Justice John Roberts are dead wrong.  By siding with the liberal minority, the jurist enshrined Obama Care as the law of the land.  Forget all the legal mumbo-jumbo he sprinkled throughout his opinion.  It doesn't matter.  The law stands.

No matter how contorted the decision, it emboldened Obama Care proponents and the federal bureaucracy to move full speed ahead.

Americans are stuck with health care reform that most oppose.

It may not be popular to say so, but it is the sad reality.

What Mitt Can Learn From Trump

GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been dodging a daily blitzkrieg of mud-slinging attacks from the Obama tag team of surrogates and their accomplices in the media.  As a result, the mild-mannered Romney has spent most of his time deflecting barbs, forcing him to abandon his economic message.

With Barrack Obama's lackluster record dangling like an albatross around the president's neck, his deputies have unleashed a toxic string of vicious charges against the Republican as part of a campaign strategy aimed at tarring Romney's image.  It is the only way Democrats can win.

That explains why Democrats have smeared Romney as a filthy rich Wall Street pawn with offshore accounts, questionable tax returns and a dubious record of outsourcing jobs and shuttering unprofitable businesses while he was at Bain Capital.   New scuzzy attacks hint Romney's behavior may have involved criminal activity. Oh, and, Romney's a Mormon, too.  Does it get any scarier than that?

The barrage of half-truths and deliberate distortions has allowed Democrats to paint an unflattering picture of the GOP standard bearer.  The implication is that wealth, even if it is legally acquired, precludes Romney from occupying the White House.

President John F. Kennedy could have set fire to his cash stockpiles and still had more money than Romney. But in President Obama's America, wealth is evil.  People who have money are objects of derision. Being poor and dependent on the government is more honorable.

Romney will lose the election unless he takes a lesson from Donald Trump.

Like him or not, Trump got under Obama's skin during his short-lived, whirlwind presidential talk show tour.  Trump unmercifully attacked Obama.  The tone was civil but unrelenting.  One charge in particular exposed the thin-skinned Obama's aversion to stinging criticism.

Trump questioned Obama's birth certificate at every opportunity. Others had done the same, but not in such a high-profile manner. After years of adamantly refusing to release his birth certificate, Obama relented in April of 2011 to dampen the firestorm ignited by Trump.

It proved nothing yet underscored a fatal flaw in Obama's character. When someone turns up the political heat, the president wilts under the pressure.

Trump was the first politician to personally attack Obama.  Hillary Clinton backed off after husband Bill was branded a racist for merely suggesting Obama might be ill prepared to be president.  Timid John McCain practically swooned at the mention of Obama's name during his presidential campaign.

Mitt Romney has an opportunity to change the tenor of the race.  He needs to hold a news conference and announce that he has a message for the president.  Here's what he should say.

"Effective today, every specious charge from President Obama, his surrogates and his allies in the media will be met with a swift and immediate counter attack of my own.  I am not going to stand still while the president makes a mockery of our political system by trashing my character with lies.

"Therefore, I plan to thoroughly vet my opponent so the American people can finally hear the truth about Barrack Obama.  Voters need to know about his relationships with hate-mongering Rev. Jeremiah Wright, terrorist William "Bill" Ayers, convicted swindler Antoin "Tony" Rezko and the shadowy George Soros.

"Since the media has no interest in exposing the truth about the president, I will.  I would prefer to talk about issues, but the president has made it clear he would rather wallow around in the mud.  I am happy to oblige, if that's what it takes to get him to abandon his scorched earth campaign and return to a serious discussion of his handling of the economy."

Mitt Romney has the credentials to be the next president of the United States.  Now we will find out if he has the political gumption to take off the gloves and fight back against the Obama-sanctioned campaign to destroy Romney with character assassinations.

If he ducks the fight, Romney will have only himself to blame when he takes it on the chin in November's election.

Ben Bernanke: Send In The Clowns

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is starting to sound like a circus barker.  Listen.  "Step right up and watch me create money out of thin air.  See the nation's daring central bank gobble up trillions of dollars in government bonds.  You'll be amazed as interest rates plunge to death-defying levels."

The bearded money magician with the Federal Reserve System has an array of dazzling tricks up his sleeve.  Quantitative Easing.  QE II. Operation Twist.  Son of Operation Twist.  His economic wonk jargon is enough to pull the wool over the eyes of an insomniac.

Most Americans have long ago tuned out Bernanke.  The Fed's actions seem incomprehensible because the media has made only a superficial attempt to explain the policy.  For the most part, reporters parrot the Fed's mind-numbing policy gibberish without adding an ounce of perspective.

Here is what every American needs to know about the Federal Reserve's efforts to boost economic recovery by flooding the country with easy money.

What is the Fed doing?  Since 2009, the Fed has shelled out nearly $3 trillion to purchase financial assets, primarily government bonds.  In most cases, the Fed acquires the securities from banks and other private sector businesses.  The Fed's action drives down interest rates by putting more money in circulation.  More dollars means credit is easier to get and its cheaper.  At least that's the theory.

What's the difference between Quantitative Easing and Operation Twist?  With QE, the Fed purchased mostly long-term bonds in hopes of lowering long-term interest rates.  Under Operation Twist, the Fed unloaded short-term bonds it owned and used the proceeds to purchase long-term bonds.

Where does the Fed get all that money?  The Obama Administration bristles when Republicans charge the Fed is printing money. Technically, they are correct.  There are no printing presses churning out greenbacks to fund the Fed's purchases.  It is more accurate to say money is created electronically with the click of a computer mouse. The Fed "credits" banks and other sellers with trillions of dollars as if real money had changed hands.  The Fed just invents money.  They are the only ones who can do that.

All that money floating around must be a good thing?  It depends. Wall Street loves it because when interest rates nosedive it makes stocks more attractive to investors.  The big banks are giddy because they have more money to lend to businesses and individuals. However, it hasn't proven a boon to small businesses and ordinary citizens. Banks have become stingy in lending to anyone except big businesses. The small fry borrowers are considered too risky.  Many banks also are parking the funds in their reserves to shore up their financial health instead of lending the money.  No one benefits from that except the banks.  Because many banks have hoarded the money, the economy remains lethargic despite the trillions injected into the financial system.

Who has been hurt by the Fed's buying binge?  Primarily, seniors and retired folks on fixed incomes.  When the supply of money increases, banks and other financial institutions pay lower rates on Certificates of Deposit, Money Market Accounts and passbook savings. Typically, seniors and retirees prefer these relative safe investments over the riskier stock market.  The returns today are minuscule because the Fed has intentionally driven down interest rates.  As a result, more seniors and retirees are being forced to take part-time or full-time jobs to supplement their income.

Is the Fed program working?  Bernanke's supporters claim the Fed has saved the economy from skidding off the cliff.  But with interest rates already at zero, the economy has not responded as optimists had forecast.  Job creation and unemployment remain moribund.  Japan tried a similar easy money blueprint without any significant uptick in their economy.  Normally, the U.S. recovers faster from a recession. The economic rebound hasn't happened.  By that yardstick, the Fed's scheme has failed.

Despite the sketchy track record of bond purchases, Bernanke is already sending up trial balloons for a third round of QE after June's disappointing employment numbers.  The chairman, a Republican first appointed by President George W. Bush, seems to have an eye on the November elections and his current boss' (President Obama) political future.

Americans should understand the Fed's money spigot has a catastrophic downside.  Those rolling waves of dollars eventually will trigger an inflation tsunami once the economy improves.  The result will be spikes in prices for goods and services along with runaway interest rates.

The menace of too much money oscillating in the economy is reason enough for Bernanke bring down the tent on the Fed's failed policy that makes a mockery out of fiscal responsibility.

Fourth Should Be First Among Holidays

After 236 years of fireworks, the meaning of the Fourth of July has lost much of its sparkle.  This once sacred holiday now exists as an excuse for retail sales, backyard barbecues, baseball games and beer swilling.  Most Americans no longer remember why the day is such a cause for celebration.

That is unfortunate because July 4, 1776, was not only the most important day in United States history, but a turning point in the tide of human affairs in world history.

On that date, 56 courageous men risked their fortunes, their safety and their future to approve the Declaration of Independence. Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists.  There were 11 merchants and tradesmen and nine farmers.  The remaining minority worked in varying professions.

The declaration's approval came two days after the Second Continental Congress had voted to sever ties with Great Britain, no longer bound to English rule.  The British screamed "treason!" and vowed to rein in the unruly rabble who had ignited this revolution.

After approving the declaration on July 4, the document wasn't officially signed by the brave band of 56 until August 2, 1776.  The original draft was authored by Thomas Jefferson, who made revisions after it was scrutinized by others serving with the Virginian on a five-man committee.

Printer John Dunlap cranked out 200 copies of the 1,330-word document and distributed the broadsides throughout the thirteen colonies.  The publication sparked spontaneous public celebrations in the newly minted nation.

In succeeding years,  parades, speeches, prayers, festivals, troop reviews and fireworks marked the historic occasion.  By 1791 the celebration became known as Independence Day and was adopted as a federal holiday in 1870.   In the intervening decades, the Fourth of July's importance faded, a sad turn of events considering the document ushered in a new era of democracy.

The Declaration of Independence changed the very concept of government.  

Until that fateful date in 1776, it was generally accepted that governments and monarchs dictated what rights their citizens would enjoy.  It was the prerogative of the powerful to rule their subjects. The writers of the Declaration of Independence boldly proclaimed that notion was balderdash.

In this United States, the government derived its "just powers from the consent of the governed."  It was a novel concept untried and untested.  Furthermore, the authors made it clear that people's rights were God-given, not doled out by a benevolent government. That revolutionary idea shook the world.

Citizens of countries throughout the world took notice.  Governments were toppled.  Kings and queens were beheaded.  The whiff of freedom wafting across the oceans from this nascent country changed the course of history for people everywhere.

Over the years, the Declaration of Independence has been held up as a roadmap for democracy.  Many countries have borrowed some of its language in drafting their own constitutional documents.

Yet here in the United States most Americans take their rights for granted.   They've never known a country without freedom. Too many are just as happy to have their government curb the rights of others for their benefit.  Alarming numbers of Americans view their government as the answer to every question.

Americans need to look no further than the U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding Obama Care, the ungainly health care law that forces every person to buy government-approved insurance. Under the legislation, the government can stick its nose into every facet of an individual's health care.

Those early patriots would be horrified at the government's usurpation of individual rights under Obama Care.  They believed in limiting the role of the government because they feared what could happen if it became too big and too powerful.  The nation's highest court has ignored the wisdom of those who risked everything in the name of freedom.

Reserve time this Fourth of July to read those 1,330 eloquent words penned more than two centuries ago.  Study the truths contained in that great document.  Then insist that our nation live up to the ideals enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.