Tag: William Jefferson Clinton
I Agree with T. Friedman – A Geopolitical Earthquake Just Hit the Mideast

I Agree with T. Friedman – A Geopolitical Earthquake Just Hit the Mideast

By | | Comments 0 Comment

I rarely say good things about Thomas Friedman as he is typically too far left, in my opinion. However, I regularly read his columns (when the NYT doesn’t block me) and I think I have read all of his books because it is good to understand all sides of an argument.

This analysis of the recent deal in the Mideast is very well done. Probably the best that I have read. If you are not blocked by the NYT paywall, you should read it.

This deal is amazing. In a normal news cycle, this would be the top headline in every newspaper and every news site (but this isn’t a normal news cycle). This is a deal that no former POTUS has been able to pull off. Is it a Nobel worthy as what James E. Carter or William J. Clinton did? No. But it is a lot better than what George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, or Barack H. Obama did in the Mideast (and Obama received the Nobel prize just for giving good speeches not for actually doing anything). Trump won’t get a Nobel for this because the committee hates Trump. But even if you are a Trump-hater, you have got to give credit for getting this deal done.

Thankfully, Mr. Friedman does that and kudos to him to look past politics and focus on a great result that will make the world a better place. Friedman writes a lot about the Mideast and he knows a massive move forward when he sees it.

To allay the fears of some of you that have read this far, I am still not voting for Trump for re-election even though he accomplished one of the biggest international wins of the 21st century so far. I am still supporting Jo Jorgensen, the Libertarian Party candidate as I feel that her platform is the closest to mine and I think this nation needs a change in the political discussion of something other than Left or Right but instead a focus on personal liberty and personal responsibility. If you believe in personal liberty and personal responsibility, please give an honest look at her platform and then join me in changing the US to be a better place.

Since NYT may block you from reading the article, here are the first couple of paragraphs but will keep it under 300 words to protect NYT copyright. The following are not my words but Mr. Friedman’s:

The agreement brokered by the Trump administration for the United Arab Emirates to establish full normalization of relations with Israel, in return for the Jewish state forgoing, for now, any annexation of the West Bank, was exactly what Trump said it was in his tweet: a “HUGE breakthrough.”

It is not Anwar el-Sadat going to Jerusalem — nothing could match that first big opening between Arabs and Israelis. It is not Yasir Arafat shaking Yitzhak Rabin’s hand on the White House lawn — nothing could match that first moment of public reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians.

But it is close. Just go down the scorecard, and you see how this deal affects every major party in the region — with those in the pro-American, pro-moderate Islam, pro-ending-the-conflict-with-Israel-once-and-for-all camp benefiting the most and those in the radical pro-Iran, anti-American, pro-Islamist permanent-struggle-with-Israel camp all becoming more isolated and left behind.

It’s a geopolitical earthquake.

To fully appreciate why, you need to start with the internal dynamics of the deal. It was Trump’s peace plan drawn up by Jared Kushner, and their willingness to stick with it, that actually created the raw material for this breakthrough.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/13/opinion/israel-uae.html
Democrats want lower corporate taxes just not under Trump

Democrats want lower corporate taxes just not under Trump

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Don’t let the current partisan bickering on corporate taxes make it seem like both sides of the aisle don’t want this. It is good for America and everyone that understands economics understands this. The issue is that when the Democrats held power, they couldn’t effectively do this because their liberal wing (i.e. the people that do not understand economics) would crucify them in the election booth.

Suddenly, an idea that has been accepted by economists and by policymakers on both sides of the political aisle—that high taxes on business hurt investment, workers, and the economy—is considered “absurd.”

In 2012, President Obama and his advisers proposed lowering the corporate tax rate because it “creates good jobs with good wages for the middle-class folks who work at those businesses.” In 2013, Lawrence Summers, President Clinton’s Treasury secretary and chairman of Mr. Obama’s Economic Council, argued that the tax on corporate profits creates a burden without commensurate revenues for the government and that changing it “is as close to a free lunch as tax reformers will ever get.”

In 2015, Democrat Chuck Schumer and Republican Rob Portman co-sponsored a Senate bill to reduce the top corporate tax rate, which is the highest of any of the 35 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. “Our international tax system,” Mr. Schumer argued back then, “creates incentives to send jobs and stash profits overseas, rather than creating jobs and economic growth here in the United States.” Bill Clinton in 2016 said he regretted raising the corporate rate to its current level.

Yet President Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers is now being accused of partisanship and unscientific analysis.

This is politics for the sake of politics. Not for making America stronger or helping our citizens.

Source: A Turnabout on Corporate Taxes

It is no longer someone else’s mess

It is no longer someone else’s mess

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Every President, except for George Washington, inherited something from the previous administration. Sometimes this is good and sometimes it is bad.

President Barack Hussein Obama has been talking for quite some time about the “mess” that he inherited from George Walker Bush. He has made references to mops and other allegories to describe the challenges that he has faced. While that is all well and good for the first few days of the Presidency, at a certain point BHO needs to own the problem.

That day is today.

There is no defined time for the honeymoon period of a new candidate. Most people felt that September 11, 2001 was close enough to the inauguration of George Walker Bush (just under 9 months) that the attacks on that dreaded day were at least partially the fault of William Jefferson Clinton. The honeymoon is certainly longer than the first 100 days that are all the talk at the beginning of a term. Everyone seems to agree that it doesn’t extend beyond a year from the date the person is elected.

For the past 12 months, BHO has been the President or the President-Elect. Every day he has received security briefings. Every day he has had access to and influence over thought leaders on a wide range of issues. Every day, he could pick up the phone and call any world leader, banking leader, Senator, Governor, or Representative.

When a person inherits a farm or house or china from a parent, from that day on the item or property belongs to the heir. This is the same now for the issues within the United States. The mess no longer belongs to GWB – it is the sole ownership now of BHO and he better get to work fixing it and stop talking about mops!

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Middle East

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Middle East

By | | Comments 0 Comment

This is a great book.  Everyone should read it (or listen to it). 

I just finished the Audible version of this book.  It was excellent.  Here are some learnings:

  • James Earl Carter was more incompetent than even I thought he was.
  • William Jefferson Clinton was not as incompetent at Carter, but he was close.
  • George Walker Bush did a pretty good job with most of the Mideast, did a plausible job of getting rid of Saddam (which the book admits had to happen) and then bungled the reconstruction.  Okay, this really wasn’t a big learning but it was worth noting.
  • Ronald Wilson Reagan did an excellent job with the Middle East as did Nixon and Ford.  George Herbert Walker Bush barely gets a mention which is surprising since he put together the coalition to kick Iraq out of Kuwait.
  • Saudi Arabia has to be part of the solution, they are not part of the problem. The book correctly identifies fools like Michael Moore as screwing this up.
  • Winston Churchill made a real mess of it.
  • The Ottoman empire showed the way that the Mideast needs to be dealt with.

Great book.  Everyone should read or listen to it.

Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Politically-Incorrect-Guide-Middle-Guides/dp/1596980516

Audible: http://www.audible.com/adbl/site/products/ProductDetail.jsp?productID=BK_BLAK_002466&BV_UseBVCookie=Yes

Least qualified President in decades/century?/ever?

Least qualified President in decades/century?/ever?

By | | Comments 1 comment

The current President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, has had a very troubled start to his Presidency.  Not only did he inherit a mess in the economy, but he has had multiple mis-steps in his selection of his cabinet and advisors.  While the tax problems with Daschle and others have plagued the first few nominations, now there is even some concern about his most important advisor, his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel.  There has also been some criticism for his first international discussions, the first phone call he made to a foreign power was to President Abbas, the leader of the Palestinian Authority.

There is also a great deal of controversy about the replacement to BHO’s Senate seat although it is likely that none of this is his fault (even if it makes one wonder how he could have thrived in such a corrupt political environment as Illinois / Chicago politics).

Why is there such turmoil in the first 100 days of the BHO presidency? It is quite likely because he is so inexperienced at being in such a large stage.  He has had little experience in this area.  In fact, he is easily the least experienced President in decades and he is probably the least experienced President in over 100 years.  The table below lists all the Presidents since 1900.  It shows their previous national office as well as other significant positions that they held.  Most Americans allow a Governorship to be qualification for office and so I am lumping this in with Senate and Congress service.

A quick look takes us to Hoover before we get to someone that didn’t get elected to a major office and hold that office for a term or two.  Hoover did run a major cabinet before the election and was very prominent in world and national politics and had been a moderately successful businessman so it is arguable that he was less experienced in a national office.  He is also not a President that most people regard as being very successful!  In addition, while the election of the President was a populist effort at that time (dirty politics aside), the selection of candidate by the party was very much decided by power brokers in the parties of the day.

A little farther down the list, we see that Harding and Taft didn’t have a great resume for national office but they did have a bit of experience in running a territory or State and, like Hoover, were major players in the political machines of the day. Harding is often referenced as being among the worst President’s ever and takes specific criticism for his cabinet and appointees.

So the conclusion that we must draw is that BHO has less experience for national office than, at a minimum, the previous 12 men who held that office.  It is also reasonable to conclude that he has less experience than any President since Teddy and the leadership of the United States within the world has definitely evolved since Teddy was talking about big sticks!

The final conclusion is simple, with such an inexperienced man as POTUS, we will continue to see mistakes until he figures out how to do the job.  Let’s all hope that this is a quick learning curve since we need to dig ourselves out of the mess that Mr. Obama inherited.

List of 20th and 21st Century Presidents (data collected and confirmed from Presidential library sites and Wikipedia)

President Previous national office Other significant position
Barack Hussein Obama US Senator (didn’t finish first term) Illinois State Congressman (1 term)
George Walker Bush Texas Governor (didn’t finish 2nd term) Part – owner of a professional baseball team
William Jefferson Clinton 12 years – Governor of Arkansas Attorney General Arkansas
George Herbert Walker Bush Vice President of the United States – 2 terms US Congressman, CIA Director, Ambassador
Ronald Wilson Reagan California Governor – 2 terms President of union
James Earl Carter, Jr. Governor Georgia – 1 term Georgia Senator (2 terms)
Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr. Vice President of the United States (2 yrs) US Congressman (25 yrs)
Richard Milhous Nixon Vice President of the United States (2 terms) US Congressman (2 terms), US Senate (didn’t finish term)
Lyndon Baines Johnson Vice President of the United States (didn’t finish first term) US Senator (2 terms), US Congressman (6 terms)
John Fitzgerald Kennedy US Senator (2 terms – didn’t finish the second) US Congressman (3 terms)
Dwight David Eisenhower Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe 5 star General in the US Army
Harry S. Truman Vice President of the United States (didn’t finish first term) US Senator (2 terms)
Franklin Delano Roosevelt New York Governor State Senator, Assistant Secretary of the Navy
Herbert Clark Hoover United States Secretary of Commerce Head of the American Relief Administration
John Calvin Coolidge, Jr. Vice President of the United States (didn’t finish first term) Massachusetts Governor
Warren Gamaliel Harding US Senator (1 term) Ohio Lt. Governor
Thomas Woodrow Wilson New Jersey Governor President Princeton University
William Howard Taft United States Secretary of War Governor of Phillipines
Theodore Roosevelt Vice President of the United States Governor New York

Site info