Recently in Election Issues 2010 Category

The President's State of the Union (SOTU) speech was realistic, mostly accurate, and proscriptive. It was not a "feel good" speech. It accurately summarized where the nation is domestically, divided and behind schedule in addressing many of its most pressing issues. His speech pragmatically stipulated that he alone cannot bring the solutions to pass (a campaign refrain); Congress and the people have to carry their share of the load, the confidence, and responsibility.

The Supreme Court, a conservative court on the belief that money is protected speech as far as elections are concerned, overturned a century of precedent and laws moving in the other direction. Republicans continue to sabotage America, even after being deposed from majority power to rule, via their Supreme Court activist judges. As usual, Republicans say one thing and do the opposite. For appearances they rail against activist judges, all the while appointing their own activist judges to the federal benches.

If folks stowed their money away in fixed rate investments during the latter part of the Bush economy, and then reallocated that money into stock investments for the Obama economy, those folks have to be pleased at having saved as much as a 50% loss at the end of the Bush economy, and approaching as much as a 50% gain during this Obama economy, starting in March of this year.

Of course, President's don't control the stock markets. Myriad factors, most knowable, some not, play roles in the direction of market investments. The trick is to acknowledge and accept the trends without prejudice, political or otherwise. As far back as 2006 and 2007, there were clear indications the Bush economy was going to implode.

Failure in Washington is not an option. America last year finished its long circular journey from 1940 to return to the precipice of national collapse. Unlike 1929, however, instead of taking that next drop off step, we sidestepped along the edge of the precipice, where we still remain today; at the edge.

The single greatest threat to America's economic future is health care costs. Without health care reform:

• more than 100 million Americans will be without health insurance over the next 10 to 20 years
• the cost of Medicare/Medicaid will bankrupt the U.S. Government by forcing borrowing to the breaking point
• consumers in 10 years will be spending so much on health care and insurance premiums that they will have little left for discretionary spending, and that will tank economic activity, deepening the government's losses in revenues.

The lines are drawn in all manner of peculiar and gerrymandered shapes around the issue of health care. Seems nearly everyone talking about it is attempting to obfuscate the core issue at hand: For Profit vs. Not-For-Profit health care insurance in America. Incumbents are getting loads of promises, threats, and campaign money for their war chests on this issue.

View image Iran appears to have an American voting problem. They can't seem to use their vote to remove politicians from office. Regardless of how the people vote, the incumbent wins. That is the claim of many in Iran.

In a democracy, is there such a thing as wise voting? And if there were, wouldn't a majority of voters vote accordingly?

The answers are, Yes and No, respectively. Here's why.

If America doesn't pursue Pres. Obama's agenda, there is no agenda to follow to meet America's crises and challenges. And if there is no agenda to follow for the next 4 years, America will fail. This is a reality of current events which critics of Obama and his administration refuse to acknowledge, rendering all their criticism irrelevant. Let's examine the veracity and logic of these statements.

A number of folks are trying to affix responsibility for this recession and financial crisis on home buying borrowers. That is illogical, and here is why.

First, for as long as there has been credit, a couple thousand years at least, it has been the lender who bore the responsibility for the quality of the loans they chose to issue. It is the lenders with the experience and mathematical expertise to assess the credit worthiness of potential borrowers. Not the sharecropper, cobbler, or Indian Chief. In a society which functions along lines of specialization of labor, it is the creditors specialized in assessing risk, not their potential borrowers.