Obama to U.S. Military: Die for Nothing

Barack Obama's "thoughtful" review has produced the worst of all outcomes in Afghanistan: adding troops without a clear commitment to winning the war. By saying that the additional troops are temporary, with their withdrawl beginning 18 months from now, Obama sends the message to the enemy that they can wait us out.

For people we hope to keep or recruit to our side, from the Afghan and Pakistani governments to the Afghanis living with Taliban forces or sympathizers nearby, they have to worry we will abandon them later - and if so, they should abandon us today and accommodate the Taliban today.

But worse of all is the message to America's military personnel. We are sending you to fight, and some to die, but we don't have the courage or capacity to see the war through to victory. It would be more honorable to withdraw them all now, and not have a single soldier die, if we won't fight to win.

It is a despicable decision by the President.

Supporting Iranian Reformers

For years many have suggested that the best way to support reformers in Iran was for the U.S. to be silent, out of fear that American support would taint the reformers politically within Iran.

The Iranian regime's crackdown on dissidents this year in response to the rigged election has provided a test of that advice, and it has proven to be dead wrong. As reported in the Wall Street Journal, Iranian opposition leaders continue to press the Obama administration to support their cause publicly.

Tragically, Barack Obama has shown no sign of doing so. It turns out the big change Obama promised us in the 2008 presidential campaign has been to support dictators and undermine allies.

Sneak Preview

A battle between two unions in California provides a preview of what the Democrats card check legislation would produce in labor relations in this country.

The Wall Street Journal reports on the struggle between the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) to organize 10,000 healthcare workers in Fresno, CA. The SEIU won the election earlier this year but the NUHW is suing to overturn the results, claiming the SEIU intimated workers to favor them over the NUHW.

Note, this is a battle over which union gets to represent the workers; it is NOT a battle between a union and a company.

The SEIU is alleged to have visited workers up to five times per day; to threaten them with a loss of wages and benefits if they voted for NUHW; and to question their immigration status.

This shows how valuable it is to union bosses to have more members, and more members' dues filling union coffers.

And it illustrates the type of tactics used by labor to pressure workers to vote for unionization that card check legislation would only make worse. Under card check, a secret ballot would no longer be used in union-organizing elections, and instead workers could just check a card during a period of time to vote for unionization. This means workers could be pressured by union activists, at work or home, to sign the card in front of the activists.

Fortunately, card check legislation has been losing steam due to these concerns. The union battle in California reminds us why it is important card check not be passed.

The New Meaning of Going Green

The prospect of legislation to address "global warming" gives new meaning to "going green", as various businesses hope to cash in on cap-and-trade. Among the biggest beneficiaries would be operators of nuclear power plants, since their facilities don't produce carbon dioxide and would receive carbon credits that would be sold to others who produce carbon dioxide - providing a huge windfall for some businesses at the expense of others and the economy as a whole.

Tarped Again

Bank of America is finding it difficult to recruit a new CEO, made more challenging by the prospect of pay czar Kenneth Feinberg needing to review any new employment agreement.

One possible candidate turned down an approach out of fear Feinberg wouldn't approve buying out his unvested stock at his current employer, which is a common and necessary practice to induce an executive to leave his current employer.

So the Obama administration has made it harder to recruit a CEO where the government has a huge investment, making it more difficult for BoA to succeed and make that investment a success.

This is what government intervention produces in the economy. And this type of behavior is what Obama wants to inflict on our healthcare system.

Asset Bubbles

With the Federal Reserve keeping interests at near zero percent and printing money through quantitative easing, many believe asset bubbles are forming in various stock and real estate markets around the world.

The concern has become so great that shortly before Barack Obama arrived in China, the chairman of the China Banking Regulatory Commission warned that the weak dollar and low U.S. interest rates have led to "massive speculation" around the world.

At best, we are distorting investment decisions which will retard long-term economic growth. At worst, we may be sowing the seeds of the next financial crisis.

The Partisanship Canard

The Wall Street Journal reports an interesting pattern of Congressional voting that shows increasing partisanship over the decades.

The table above from the Wall Street Journal shows that 40 years ago, individual Congressional Republicans and Democrats voted with the majority of their party in 61-63% of the time. Today, they do so to a much higher degree, 85% for Republicans and 89-92% for Democrats.

But the other interesting insight from this chart is that while 40 years ago Democrats and Republicans were equally likely to vote with their party, today Democrats are much more likely to do so. This year, House Democrats voted against their party's majority only 8% of the time, while Senate Democrats did so 11% of the time. Meanwhile, Republicans voted against their party's majority 15% of the time - 88% more often than House Democrats and 36% more often than Senate Democrats.

Obama and the media like to portray Republicans as the source of partisanship in American politics. This data shows partisanship is common to both parties, but particularly so to Democrats.