You can count me among the many shocked observers when I saw a headline today that proclaimed:
"Oprah confirms OWN layoffs necessary for 'long term' success".
Now, don't get me wrong - I have never been a customer of her very successful offerings, but I have always admired her as one of the greatest capitalists in the history of the United States and, to go further, even in the entire history of the world.
Here is a woman who emerged from a poor upbringing, both economic and socially, YET, she built a media empire on her keen business acumen as she figured out how to draw viewers to her programming and monetize it. It is a true Horatio Alger story. Anybody who does not admire her business success cannot be a believer in Free Market Capitalism.
Oprah is quoted in the story as stating: "It is difficult to make tough business decisions that affect people’s lives but the economics of a start-up cable network just don’t work with the cost structure that was in place." Like any CEO running a business, she understood the dynamics of the economic environment and made the tough decisions to ensure long term viability.
My shock derives from trying to reconcile her ability to navigate her personal business life and her undying support for Barack Obama. One could say that her endorsement of Obama over Hillary Clinton in 2008 was the straw that broke Hillary's back and turned Oprah into the king maker. Now, if Oprah understands that tightening the belt and restructuring is necessary when the economics call for it, how can she still support a person who continues to spend, spend, spend to try to improve his business - the United States economy.
If Oprah were to be consistent, she would have tripled her workforce, not cut it. Barack Obama has already spent in 3 years, what George W Bush spent in 8 years, while his business has only worsened. Let's be clear - this is not an endorsement of W's spending. Meanwhile, Oprah continues to support the worst CEO to ever run the United States government.
Maybe the difference for Oprah is that she had no interest in pissing away her personal wealth, whereas, Obama is only pissing away our money, our children's money, our children's children's money and their children's money. Am I really shocked? Not really. For wealthy liberals, the historic myth of Barack Obama trumps any sane and objective idea of accountability.
The rest of us can eat cake. That is, until Michelle takes that away from us too!
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Thursday, March 15, 2012
"What Do We Do Now"?
As dismayed as I can be about much of the product that comes out of Hollywood, there are still classic movies which stand the test of time. Today, we can focus on "The Candidate" from 1972 which starred Robert Redford and Peter Boyle. After running a successful "against all odds" campaign for California Senate, the surprised winner, Bill McKay (Redford), turns to his campaign manager (Boyle) and utters the last line of the movie:
"What do we do now"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myEpap3TxVs
That dialogue was from 40 years ago and is a demonstration about how slick campaigning and imaging can elect a candidate who is not prepared for the next step: governing. There exists some difference between what McKay meant and how it applies to the empty suit currently residing in the White House, but we can draw some parallels. Whereas, McKay was searching for a plan on how to govern going forward, President Obama has no intention of actually governing in 2012. The President is focused upon the same thing he was focused upon in 2008 and since - winning a campaign.
The mounting evidence that Obama has been clueless about governing has accumulated over the past 3 years where GDP growth has been anemic, unemployment has been prolonged, deficits have grown by over one-third to $16T, Obamacare is now scored to cost twice as much as was initially promised by Democrats, the Energy department has pumped over $40B into alternative energy boondoggles where money is being kicked back to the DNC/"Obama 2012" and there has been no attempt to address the biggest issue facing the viability of the country: long term entitlement reform. No objective measurement has improved even though Obama has spent an additional $6T in taxpayer money. His team has been trying the weak unproveable narrative that the country was saved from worse. The message for 3 years has been to pass blame to his predecessor while giving speeches. Unfortunately for The One, he needed the country to stay asleep at the switch for one more year, but his administration failed to run out the clock.
The Obama team is asking: "What do we do now to win re-election"? Their answer would make Richard Nixon proud - divide the people by whatever means necessary to try to win the vote: 50% +1. Let's go down our list of boogeymen created by the Obama administration: Wall Street, Big Banks, Millionaires (actually anyone above $350K), Big Oil, Car Company Bondholders, Insurance Companies, Working Class White Males, Married Christians, FoxNews, Catholics, Talk Radio, Military Personnel, The Tea Party and Conservative Women. And this all comes from the guy who was depicted as the Great Uniter.
The most recent major issue about which the President is trying to appear to be doing something while twiddling his thumbs is Rising Gas Prices. This is a subject about which candidate Obama was highly critical of his predecessor, but now seems to believe that a President really has limited impact. Although the President tries to downplay his responsibility, he has proposed some great solutions: inflate your tires, tune up your car and develop pools of algae into an energy source to name a few. The importance of rising gas prices in that they amplify through the entire economy in the cost of goods which, in turn, stymies economic growth. Gas prices are a weekly reminder at the pump of the economy going in the wrong direction as voters disposable income is sapped. The President's lack of seriousness about the issue is driving his approval rating to new lows (41%).
Obama 2012 asks: "What do we do now"?
The goal for the campaign is to change the subject from gas prices to anything else. Magically, Sandra Fluke appeared on the scene to create a false narrative in front a false committee about how Republicans want to ban access to contraceptives. For those of you who are not politically savvy, this charade was orchestrated by the White House and the DNC along with their willing accomplices in the media in order to trick single women into thinking that the GOP will regulate their sex lives should they gain power. Think about the logical ridiculousness of that proposition. I realize this sounds like a sci-fi plot, but the Democrat party has been successful in targeting this part of the electorate with such ploys in the past. The Democrats know that if they lose this demo, they have no chance in November. Fortunately, for the country, the women in this country were not fooled this time. Recent polling by the Democrat friendly NY Times/CBS organizations, show that this issue backfired.
When asked "Should Health Insurance plans for all Employers be required to cover the full cost of birth control for female employees or should they be allowed to opt out for religious or moral grounds"?, women approved by 40% and disapproved 51%. When asked this same question about religious affiliated Employers, the numbers were even greater with an approval of 36% and disapproval of 57%. Clearly, women do not want insurance mandates forced upon Employers. Uh-oh!
So why did women respond this way? If we look at the poll a little deeper, when asked which issues were most important in the coming election, the respondents answered: Economy (26%), Jobs (25%), Politicians/Govt (6%) and Budget Deficit (5%). That is 62% for those issues. So where is the concern about contraception? Abortion was at 1%, so contraception must have been part of the Other (17%) category. Evidently, women, like men, are concerned about their economic futures, the economic futures of their families and the economic prospects for their children.
Although the main stream media is doing their very best to avoid showing the weakness of the Obama administration, the people out in the country are living this failure and they do not like it. There is panic in the White House as they try to determine their next demographic target of which they are running low in supply.
Make no mistake about it, unless there is some fantastic event between now and election day, Obama will be a one term President. He may still be popular in some blue states where he has worked his hardest to distribute goodies from the US Treasury, but the red and purple states are gearing up for an Anybody But Obama (ABO) election. Come November 7th, President Obama can then turn to David Axelrod and ask:
"What do we do now"?
The answer will be to continue to blame George W Bush and begin the re-writing of history in the great Democrat tradition.
The great tragedy of his tenure is that the wealth of the middle class was destroyed and distributed. The rich are still rich, more people are poor, the middle class has shrunk and the burden to pay for the sophistry of Barack Obama will fall to the next 3 or 4 generations. Normally, I would say "mission accomplished", but he would have needed another term to completely collapse the economy.
Viewing it from a more nostalgic angle, you can say that you lived through the worst Presidency in the history of the US.
"What do we do now"? Repeat after me, "ABO, ABO, ABO........"
"What do we do now"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myEpap3TxVs
That dialogue was from 40 years ago and is a demonstration about how slick campaigning and imaging can elect a candidate who is not prepared for the next step: governing. There exists some difference between what McKay meant and how it applies to the empty suit currently residing in the White House, but we can draw some parallels. Whereas, McKay was searching for a plan on how to govern going forward, President Obama has no intention of actually governing in 2012. The President is focused upon the same thing he was focused upon in 2008 and since - winning a campaign.
The mounting evidence that Obama has been clueless about governing has accumulated over the past 3 years where GDP growth has been anemic, unemployment has been prolonged, deficits have grown by over one-third to $16T, Obamacare is now scored to cost twice as much as was initially promised by Democrats, the Energy department has pumped over $40B into alternative energy boondoggles where money is being kicked back to the DNC/"Obama 2012" and there has been no attempt to address the biggest issue facing the viability of the country: long term entitlement reform. No objective measurement has improved even though Obama has spent an additional $6T in taxpayer money. His team has been trying the weak unproveable narrative that the country was saved from worse. The message for 3 years has been to pass blame to his predecessor while giving speeches. Unfortunately for The One, he needed the country to stay asleep at the switch for one more year, but his administration failed to run out the clock.
The Obama team is asking: "What do we do now to win re-election"? Their answer would make Richard Nixon proud - divide the people by whatever means necessary to try to win the vote: 50% +1. Let's go down our list of boogeymen created by the Obama administration: Wall Street, Big Banks, Millionaires (actually anyone above $350K), Big Oil, Car Company Bondholders, Insurance Companies, Working Class White Males, Married Christians, FoxNews, Catholics, Talk Radio, Military Personnel, The Tea Party and Conservative Women. And this all comes from the guy who was depicted as the Great Uniter.
The most recent major issue about which the President is trying to appear to be doing something while twiddling his thumbs is Rising Gas Prices. This is a subject about which candidate Obama was highly critical of his predecessor, but now seems to believe that a President really has limited impact. Although the President tries to downplay his responsibility, he has proposed some great solutions: inflate your tires, tune up your car and develop pools of algae into an energy source to name a few. The importance of rising gas prices in that they amplify through the entire economy in the cost of goods which, in turn, stymies economic growth. Gas prices are a weekly reminder at the pump of the economy going in the wrong direction as voters disposable income is sapped. The President's lack of seriousness about the issue is driving his approval rating to new lows (41%).
Obama 2012 asks: "What do we do now"?
The goal for the campaign is to change the subject from gas prices to anything else. Magically, Sandra Fluke appeared on the scene to create a false narrative in front a false committee about how Republicans want to ban access to contraceptives. For those of you who are not politically savvy, this charade was orchestrated by the White House and the DNC along with their willing accomplices in the media in order to trick single women into thinking that the GOP will regulate their sex lives should they gain power. Think about the logical ridiculousness of that proposition. I realize this sounds like a sci-fi plot, but the Democrat party has been successful in targeting this part of the electorate with such ploys in the past. The Democrats know that if they lose this demo, they have no chance in November. Fortunately, for the country, the women in this country were not fooled this time. Recent polling by the Democrat friendly NY Times/CBS organizations, show that this issue backfired.
When asked "Should Health Insurance plans for all Employers be required to cover the full cost of birth control for female employees or should they be allowed to opt out for religious or moral grounds"?, women approved by 40% and disapproved 51%. When asked this same question about religious affiliated Employers, the numbers were even greater with an approval of 36% and disapproval of 57%. Clearly, women do not want insurance mandates forced upon Employers. Uh-oh!
So why did women respond this way? If we look at the poll a little deeper, when asked which issues were most important in the coming election, the respondents answered: Economy (26%), Jobs (25%), Politicians/Govt (6%) and Budget Deficit (5%). That is 62% for those issues. So where is the concern about contraception? Abortion was at 1%, so contraception must have been part of the Other (17%) category. Evidently, women, like men, are concerned about their economic futures, the economic futures of their families and the economic prospects for their children.
Although the main stream media is doing their very best to avoid showing the weakness of the Obama administration, the people out in the country are living this failure and they do not like it. There is panic in the White House as they try to determine their next demographic target of which they are running low in supply.
Make no mistake about it, unless there is some fantastic event between now and election day, Obama will be a one term President. He may still be popular in some blue states where he has worked his hardest to distribute goodies from the US Treasury, but the red and purple states are gearing up for an Anybody But Obama (ABO) election. Come November 7th, President Obama can then turn to David Axelrod and ask:
"What do we do now"?
The answer will be to continue to blame George W Bush and begin the re-writing of history in the great Democrat tradition.
The great tragedy of his tenure is that the wealth of the middle class was destroyed and distributed. The rich are still rich, more people are poor, the middle class has shrunk and the burden to pay for the sophistry of Barack Obama will fall to the next 3 or 4 generations. Normally, I would say "mission accomplished", but he would have needed another term to completely collapse the economy.
Viewing it from a more nostalgic angle, you can say that you lived through the worst Presidency in the history of the US.
"What do we do now"? Repeat after me, "ABO, ABO, ABO........"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)