Some Odds and Ends ...

We are having a beautiful fall season; we recently took a lunch and spent an afternoon driving country roads to Great Salt Plains, enjoying the green wheat fields and lush pastures. The countryside is in so much better shape now than it has been the last two years of drought.
Salt Plains actually has water in it, which is very good news. There were thousands of ducks on the lake, fishing and resting on their migration south. We also saw avocets, dowitchers and sandpipers. There were a few white pelicans below the dam in the weirs – though most of them seemed to be in the far western reaches of the lake, barely visible with field glasses from Cottonwood Point.
But the biggest pleasure was on our walk along the Eagle Trail in the Reserve, which goes north and south along the Sand Creek bay area; we could hear them "talking" away first, then begin to see small bunches of Sandhill cranes, one of our favorite birds, feeding and resting in the shallow water close to shore. Since we had our dogs with us – and they were curious about the sound, poking their noses through the bushes – the cranes took flight right over our heads! We must have seen three or four hundred, flying up and around, landing back in the water behind our path of travel. It is always a thrill to see them, especially when they are close to us.
It was disappointing the Refuge has not filled their ponds at this point, so the auto trail does not have any concentration of birds; they are all out on the lake, and therefore difficult to see. Perhaps this is because of the drought, but since the information and exhibit building was closed when we were there, I have no guidance from the rangers.
Still, a beautiful day to be out in the country. We also saw a large number of red-tailed hawks on the country roads. I am guessing they are in-migrants from the northern reaches of the Great Plains, coming to warmer Oklahoma for the winter, as they do each winter.
•••••••
Politics: It simply stinks these days. Our Congress is so dysfunctional it pains me to even talk about them.
"A plague on the houses of both parties!" as the time-honored curse goes.
I am ready to see one or more new parties created, ones that are not dominated by their radical fringes but clearly focused on the desires, beliefs and hopes on their majority of their memberships in the center. The radical edges of our societies have never built our country; that takes balanced and constructive thinking and action. But we have – by default – turned the process of governing the country to the Left and the Right radical elements.
The best solution seems to be that right-thinking and constructive people should abandon the traditional parties to them, and move on to new and center-oriented political groups.
I know I am ready to do so.
The guys in power right now – on both the Left and the Right – will pull the temple down on top of us if we continue to tolerate and empower them. They have proved their incompetence and lack of vision over and over.
•••••••
I love living in Oklahoma, especially right now. Once again, we run contra-trend to the country as a whole economically, and things are good! We have jobs galore in Oklahoma; anybody that wants to work can certainly find a job – a refreshing difference from the Coasts, that’s for sure! The revival in our oil and gas sector over the last decade is amazing and offers great advantages to our state and our people.
Our energy-producing companies have dumb-founded their critics once again – the peak-oil harum-scarum lobby of ecologists and leftists – by using new knowledge and new techniques, to seek, find and produce oil and gas. We have truly amazing reserves of natural gas developed in the last few years, and we are producing more and more oil month by month. It is truly a boon for the country as a whole, giving us more latitude economically and militarily than we have had in decades.
Now all we need is a national administration that appreciates the creativity of the oil and gas industry – and can use the leverage that energy-independence provides to good and constructive advantage for our country and the world. Properly employed, U.S. energy sufficiency can make a big difference in our foreign policy (among other things).
Unfortunately the Obama bunch simply doesn’t get it and continues to dissipate our influence abroad. Another good reason for political change!

American dream is fading. And that’s a damned shame.

The ‘Social Contract’ is a Fraud
So said a headline I recently read – and that idea resonated with me.
The concept of a "social contract" is one of the bedrock ideas of modern political science. Supposedly we the governed have consented to create a Limited Government that is supposed to serve us; fine theory, of course. We wrote a document – the Constitution – some 225 years ago that balanced the branches of government, working together to strictly limit the powers of the Federal government. But the workings of history and the layers of law, administration and bureaucracy have all worked to erode the fine-tuned balance of powers our Founders of these United States envisioned.
Government has grown to be over-bearing and increasingly oppressive on our country. And life in this country increasingly demonstrates the result: moribund economy, heavy unemployment, little business investment for the future, misguided Executive branch, dithering Congress, capricious courts.
The American dream is faltering and fading. And that’s a damned shame.
The reality of government in the 21st century is that it is off the tracks, serving less and oppressing more; it methodically grasps for more of the income pie every year; it presumes that government at the Federal level can solve problems that government at lesser levels cannot (when the reality is that power consolidated and focused at the Federal level can IMPOSE solutions on all more easily than by selling a course of action to many smaller governmental units); it institutes programs supposed to solve certain stated problems which then fail to do so, but achieve other aims deemed desirable by the ruling elite, so they are kept in place indefinitely and without any review.
It has created a group of political careerists that reaches for and achieve power, through election or through "civil service" structures – but never releases it, for its fundamental imperative is to stay in office and therefore in power. So they live from election to election, gathering influence and resources to achieve re-election rather than doing the people’s business. They grow rich in Office by voting themselves salaries and benefits far beyond what people on the "outside" can
earn or qualify for – a sure sign of imbalance between public and private zones of life.
Perhaps worst of all, they do a lousy job of what they do! Good problem-solving requires searching for all the facts, eliminating the spurious ones, thus understanding the true nature of the difficulty, then deciding which level of government is most likely to truly be able to solve the problem, finally developing a political consensus across the spectrum to support and institute a
solution – and then, and only then, actually doing something about when appropriate. It is a complex, intricate process requiring great skill; one can think of those who have done it in our history: Washington, Jefferson, Webster, Lincoln, TR Roosevelt, etc. And we can list many more who tried and failed, including almost all the current holders of federal office!
It has to be said that this sort of effort is much too big a risk for our current batch of careerists; they don’t want to do all this hard work! Rather, they want to pontificate while dressed up for 30 seconds of national TV exposure on issue after issue – then kick the can down the road a ways for someone else to deal with the real problems. So Medicare, Social Security, pension liabilities, fiscal responsibility, and, yes, even, a true federal budget, wait for solutions – while we totter toward the dangerous edge of the precipice.
In short, government no longer "serves." It dominates, manipulates and, at worst, oppresses – and does so irresponsibly. And the American Dream falters and fades.

The Insolvent Phantom Democracy

"All Together, Let’s Like Ike" declares the editorial in the bi-monthly AARP bulletin.
In the interest of full disclosure, I don’t like AARP. Perhaps it is because of their blatant efforts on behalf of their very nominal members, lobbying for increased benefits of all sorts without offering any real means of paying for them. After all, anyone older than 55 or so can belong for a few dollars a year. But like most of their millions of members, we have found affiliation useful when we travel, since members enjoy cheaper motel and hotel rates, etc., so we maintain membership. You could say we serve practicality rather than principle, I suppose!
So I greet the Bulletin in the mailbox with skepticism.
But: the current issue is an exception. Editor Jim Toedtman has an appreciation of the statesmanship and vision of President Dwight D. Eisenhower – and points out that our generation suffers badly by comparison.
Here’s a sample of Mr. Toedtman’s comments:
“… Eisenhower ...  found a way to persuade the public and Democrats in Congress that military excesses must be capped and that the nation’s civil rights, education and transportation needed urgent attention.”
So Ike began the civil rights march that would mature under LBJ; Ike built the interstate highway system, and found a fair and equitable way to finance its construction as it was built over the next 25 years or so (no massive debt). And he pushed the needs of education across the nation forward on the national agenda as well.
But there’s more, Toedtman tells us: “In his nationally televised farewell address, he shared his vision: "As we peer into society’s future, we … must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.’”
Wow! I didn’t remember Ike being that concise and well-spoken! In fact, I remember him splitting infinitives, throwing in parenthetical statements, and generally muddling about in his speeches. (I also remember one of his biographers putting forward the idea that Ike was much more intelligent than he ever let on, that his muddling way of speaking was in fact the camouflage of a very sly fox. Perhaps so …)
But we need to remember these words:
“We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the INSOLVENT PHANTOM of tomorrow.”
That thought should be engraved in bronze and placed in every prominent spot in the White House and the halls of Congress! Our current leadership is scandalous in this respect: They never face the issues squarely; they find borrowing politically expedient; they are miserable leaders with no vision! They will be chastised, even scourged, by the generation of Americans to come! Perhaps they will – like the English of old – dig up and scatter the bones of the current Congress!
For they ARE eating the nation’s seed corn!

Constitutional Wisdom

Diana West’s column in the Enid News and Eagle on June 18th gave me pause…
Listen just a moment:
“At what point does it become clear that we no longer inhabit America? When we "press 2 not 1 for English? ... When borders are no more, but the Surveillance State always knows where we are? Ours is the age of dislocation before realization: The United States of America no longer exists."
I certainly identified with her thought. We are charging pell-mell down a path that we know not where it goes! We have an elite class governing us that believe that multi-cultural societies are not only possible, but the "coming thing," the best solution to problems they don’t want to solve.
But history clearly shows that multi-cultural is a Harvard-Princeton-Internationalist illusion. Societies may include more than one cultural stream at a point in time, but within a matter of a few generations, one of those cultures becomes dominant. There may be traces of others left, but one will be dominant.
The culture created in the United States in the first 150 years of the Republic was long the wonder of the world because it offered more to the common man than any other society: more liberty, more freedom (yes, they are different), more opportunity, more autonomy, less interference from those in charge, careful and thorough restraint of government. And the U.S. and her mostly-free citizens amazed the world with their accomplishments. Immigrants flocked here from all over to enjoy our society and its benefits.
But an important distinction needs to be made between then and now: all those immigrants from dozens of other countries and cultures WANTED to be AMERICANS! Not some brand of hyphenated Americans, but mainstream, full-bore Americans. There were no programs by which they were assimilated – just the natural pressure of the boisterous, rollicking American society that was inventing itself day-by-day – based in the bedrock of our invention of the ages: the best system of self-government the world had ever seen: the United States Constitution, which guided the ship of state.
All our government officials swore oaths "to preserve, to protect and to defend" our Constitution above all other duties when assuming office. And they still swear the same oaths.
But guess what? They DON’T DO IT any more!
Here’s how Ms. West puts it: “Instead, they do whatever it takes to beat it, flout it and ignore it. Worse, we the People, let them.”
She’s absolutely right! Over the last 50-60 years, Washington has filled up with hair-splitters and evaders of the law, certain that there is "some way to get this done."
Our president has suggested he wants to "pack" certain parts of our judicial system in order to be able to bend the Constitution in the direction he wants it to lean; many of his minions in executive departments (e.g. our attorney general) do it every day!
There is little respect or appreciation for the Constitution on either side of the aisle in the Congress either – or they’d be raising h--- with the president every day about many of the initiatives of his arm of the government.
We pack in the dissident cultures, ethnic groups, and religions, even while political correctness lets them create little islands of their alien cultures within the American culture – and we call it "extending liberty." But it is not; it is illusion, it is toxicity, to the American society and culture.
If they WANT to be fully Americans, they are welcome. But if they DO NOT, we should shut the doors in their faces. It’s that simple.
We certainly are within our rights to protect our core beliefs and values from outside and alien societies that conflict with our basic beliefs. The Constitution, correctly interpreted and enforced – instead of methodically evaded and manipulated by our government officials for their short-term agendas – will protect us and correct our course that will destroy our Republic.
If ignored and trampled – as is currently the case – we will lose our Constitutional wisdom. It will fade into the background and we will lose our most precious heritage. We will no longer be the light unto the world that our forefathers intended.

Shine wearing off?

Ideas are intangible, of course, but they do have a "shine" to them. Ideas in the hands of a skillful rhetorician are bright and shiny for a long time. And our president is a skillful rhetorician. A rhetorician spins reality to read the way he wants it to. And his efforts hold up – until reality intrudes in an overwhelming way. Then his fantasy collapses, and the rhetoric loses its shine.
Recent events brought reality crashing in on the skillful fantasy structures of the Obama Administration with three great thunderclaps of news: the Benghazi hearings; the exposure
of IRS attempt to intimidate the Tea Party using audits last year; and the Justice Dept. sweeping search of months of phone records of the Associated Press in search of a source of embarrassing news in an AP story.
Each event is patently a gross abuse of executive powers by this administration. Each has been covered in detail by the media. In each case the Obama team has been exposed as the "big government" bullies that they truly are, conflicting with the "trust me" rhetoric the nation regularly hears from Mr. Obama.
Mr. Obama has long been identified as a left-wing Liberal-Progressive – one who believes that only government can accomplish good things for the country; therefore in order to do these good things one needs a bigger Federal government. He has been busy creating a bigger government with greater powers.
But the "big government is good government" bias of the administration has been handily downplayed by the national media because of its political stance favoring Mr. Obama. Or at least until the AP – certainly a bona fide member of the national media – had its ox gored!
Then in a rush of bombast all the national media closed ranks and blasted the Obama team and its transgressions.
‘It ain’t fair to track down sources! It will suppress our ability to "get the facts." People will not talk to us!" All of which is true enough. (The panicky hue-and-cry raised by the liberal talking heads was actually pretty funny to those of use with of conservative bent!)
The Administration immediately went into full crisis management mode; apologies and explanations were poured out by the bucketful. But the essential violations remain: This administration’s team over-reaches; it uses powers abusively; this is a natural impulse with them.
And the fact remains: this is one aspect of BIG Government at work! Big Government will step on any bothersome obstacle between where we are and where these guys want to be!
Thus it is a perfect case study of why conservatives love the Constitution and its check-and-balance structure which offsets the powers of government by careful delegation and limitation. Stretching Constitutional provisions and ideas is inherently risky: see the evidence.
In short: BIG Government is inherently untrustworthy. It is oppressive by nature. Cases in point: if you are a diplomat, don’t get on the wrong side of politics. If you are a reporter, don’t write anything that embarrasses us. If you are right-wing, don’t campaign too hard against this
administration.

Good guys or good ol' boys?

I had spent a lot of years criticizing the "Good ol’ Boy" Oklahoma Legislature during the decades of Democratic (and southeastern Oklahoma) domination. They always were forwarding their own interests, rarely the interests of the state as a whole. Then state politics changed, shifting to the right.
Now the "other guys" have the majority in House and Senate, and it is with some trepidation that I check the news from North Lincoln Ave. to see what the Republicans are up to day by day. We saw some blatant good ol’ boy stuff roll out last year; I hope we don’t see that this year.
Of course, human nature is constant, and it functions on both sides of the aisle. And legislative work is always the same: "sausage-making," as the Prussian Bismarck famously called it, bringing together men with substantial differences on issues and hammering out compromise solutions that all can support. And most of the time interests are controlling the results, so interests consequently are served. But interests must not be allowed to dominate!
The polar star of the general welfare of the state has to be the guide.
That’s why the personal character of our legislative representatives — their values, their education and experience and their feelings toward the general welfare of the state as a whole — are so decisive in politics. Which polar star truly guides their decisions? One of integrity? Or one of interests? Yet we rarely measure these aspects of the candidates during the election cycle.
Case-in-point is one of the big things we have needed to do in Oklahoma: workers' compensation reform. No doubt our existing adversarial system, often seen as a boondoggle for the attorneys who specialized in that work, could be improved. Costs were high for employers, leading to major companies avoiding locations in our state, yet truly injured workers often had trouble getting benefits while the artful dodger with the right attorney reaped payments for years — as they rode their horses, mowed their lawns and collected benefits.
Have the Republicans actually given us a better system with their reforms? One hopes so.
Workers' compensation reform thus becomes a perfect test of the GOP; do they deserve their super-majority (both houses and the executive office)? Have they served the general welfare of the state well? Fairly balanced the needs of both workers and employers? Will the new scheme benefit those who are truly injured? Eliminate the taint of sleazy and persistent fraud the old system projected? Help the work of bringing new employment opportunity to our state?
Are the Republicans truly the "white hat" guys? Or just another good ol’ boy club?
Can we in fact trust them with other big questions? Or do we need to find some Reform Democrats to balance their power in the state Capitol?

Terrorism in Boston ...

The bombs that exploded at the finish line during the Boston Marathon dominates the news this week. Hundreds of innocent runners and observers, young and old, were killed or injured, some grievously, by unknown partie(s) who wanted to make "political statements" or to intimidate the body politic. I am confident that ultimately investigators will figure it out who did this (there is breaking news even as this is posted that a suspect in the bombings may be announced), arrests will be made, trials held and the guilty will be punished. In the process, we will discover their motive(s) as well.
They have been defined as terrorists: Other than suicide bombers, terrorists uniformly never face their victims. They had no idea who specifically they would kill and wound, nor did they care. It could have been an entire grade school class, on a field trip to watch the excitement of the marathon finish on Massachusett’s Patriot Day. Innocent children are just that: innocent, and through the ages all civilized states have attempted to exempt children from the consequences of political and military violence as much as possible. But terrorist tactics do not allow such civilized limitation as knowing ‘who’ their victims will be to rule their actions.
Thus the label of "terrorist" is a good fit in this case. But we need to know more: Is it an international and radical religious perpetrator? A domestic religious or political protester? Or who?
The label was widely and carelessly used following Nine Eleven. Those committing the acts of terror on that day were radical Islamic jihadists; they used tactical methods employed originally by Eastern European anarchists at the turn of the 19th century in Europe. Thus the classic cartoon character of the bearded black-haired man throwing the round black bomb with a sparking fuse into carriages or buildings ...
But many in our country still do not understand that radical Islamist jihadists are our clear and present enemy. They know "terrorism" was used, but not the identity of the perpetrators. That is Washington’s fault for using the labels carelessly.
Today’s use of the word is a little more disciplined. People who commit terrorist acts are terrorists, but they are always more than that: they are motivated by further scripts and ideologies: Islamist jihadism, radical leftist collectivism, radical rightist ideologists, or whatever.
We need to know our enemies! Their actions are clearly anti-civilizational.

Clear Thinking on the Second Amendment and Gun Control

Those who control the podiums in Washington and the national media that covers them are not objective observers on questions about the possession of guns. Neither are they people who think clearly, for both are pushing very particular agendas, trying to influence public opinion.
Their goal is to constrain gun possession and use ever more tightly – not address the real cause
of mentally-ill mass killers.
Edward J. Erler is a professor of political science at California State University and often writes on constitutional topics; he spoke recently at Hillsdale College on gun control. Listen to his wisdom:
“(Washington has directed) special animus against so-called assault rifles. These are semi-automatic, not automatic weapons ... and require a trigger pull for every round fired ... What inspires the ire of gun control advocates seems to be their menacing look – somehow they don’t appear fit for polite society. (Further, they say ...) No law-abiding citizen could possibly need such a weapon ... and we are assured that these weapons are not well-adapted for self-defense ...
“Now it’s undeniable, Senator Dianne Feinstein to the contrary notwithstanding, that semi-automatic weapons such as the AR-15 are extremely well-adapted for home defense – especially against a crime that is becoming more and more popular among criminals, the home invasion.
Over the past two decades, gun ownership has increased dramatically at the same time that crime rates have decreased ... Most gun crimes are committed with stolen or illegally obtained weapons ... The formula to decrease crime is clear: Increase the number of responsible gun owners and prosecute to the greatest extent possible under the law those who commit gun-related crimes or possess weapons illegally. (Besides, assault weapons) are rarely used by criminals, because they are neither easily portable nor easily concealed.
“The shooters in Arizona, Colorado and Newtown were mentally-ill persons who ... should have been incarcerated. Even the Los Angeles Times admits that ‘there is a connection between mental illness and mass murder.’ But the same progressives who advocate gun control also opposed the involuntary incarceration of mentally ill people who, in the case of these mass shootings, posed obvious dangers to society before they committed their horrendous acts of violence. From the point of view of the progressives who oppose involuntary incarceration of the mentally ill – you can thank the ACLU and like-minded organizations – it is better to disarm the entire population and deprive them of their constitutional freedoms, than to incarcerate a few mentally ill persons who are prone to engage in violent crimes.”
Thus we come to the nexus of the issue: the political embarrassment suffered by the
the Obama administration and its political minions, and the real reason we are subjected to their contorted rhetoric on the subject. They do not want to admit progressive doctrine released the mentally-ill from institutions onto our streets some 25 years ago! So they talk about "nasty assault weapons" instead of the real cause: which is that in the hands of a mentally-ill person feeling murderous, many devices (e.g., axe, shovel, hammer, etc) can be used to kill human beings.
It reminds me of the similar Washington word-game played in respect to the murderous radical Islamic jihadists that hate all people and things Western (especially Americans): We can’t call them "radical Islamists" because that is not politically correct in progressive-think!
So we call them "terrorists" who, seized by "terrorism," blow themselves up to murder other Muslims or to murder our diplomats and soldiers.
Clear thinking would call them what they are: radical Islamists. And then point out they are using terroristic tactics because they are weak opponents militarily.
Clear thinking and clear exposition can vastly improve the public discussion about these problems. We might even find some solutions! But instead, we get muddled and politically-correct mush from the Beltway! That’s a damned shame.

Dr. Benjamin Carson ...

I have thought for some period of time the GOP needed a leader who was clearly a person of integrity and principle – with real accomplishments to his credit in a non-political world where he had earned the respect of his peers.
Further, it seemed to me he needed to be a person who was not desperate to gain office, but would consent to serve if the country needed him. This was the way I felt about Mr. Reagan some 35 years ago. He had earned the respect of his peers in the entertainment labor unions, where he became a formidable leader.
So where does the country find such a person?
You see, most of those who emerge into national view are those who have set out from their college days to "do" politics as a career; they want the salary and benefits of office, and so they do whatever it takes to stay in office, hell or high water, and, frankly, principles be damned. Washington is a very seductive place in that way; that is why it is called "Potomac fever."
Experience demonstrates these guys make mediocre leaders at best.
But I have despaired the last few years about such a person emerging on the national scene.
Then somebody turns up.
Listen to this: “Let’s say somebody were (in the White House) and they wanted to destroy this nation. (How would they go about it?) I would create division among the people, encourage a culture of ridicule for basic morality and the principles that made and sustained the country, undermine the financial stability of the nation, and weaken and destroy the military. It appears coincidentally that those are the very things that are happening right now.”
The author of these views is Dr. Benjamin Carson, the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital. (In case you are not aware, this is one of the very best research hospitals in this country, clearly a meritocracy. Only the very best, most competent people are on staff.
Dr. Carson obviously has earned the respect of his peers.) And – coincidentally – Dr. Carson is African-American.
Not coincidentally, he is conservative in his political views. He obviously appreciates this country, the opportunities it has afforded him, and that he – also obviously – has worked hard to use his opportunities to good advantage, earning his place in the sun.
He spoke recently at the CPAC conference in Washington – the words I quoted above – where he pointed out that our country needs "government of and by the people," and that only such a
government can right the disastrous course that the nation is following under the current administration.
He is a man worth watching.

We are well-off in Enid; Sorry about the rest of the Nation!

Unemployment in Enid is now about 3 ½ percent. That is close to the bottom of the pool of available workers. Many of those remaining are effectively unemployable by any discerning employer – or simply don’t want to work.
Such full employment is a rare event in the U.S. right now, and it is worth commenting about. Our ag sector is healthy and busy in spite of the drouth; recent moisture makes prospects
look better as we approach spring and summer. Oil and gas exploration – or re-exploration, maybe – in the Mississippian fields all around Enid is very busy; original efforts focused to our north and west, in Grant and Alfalfa counties and into Kansas, driven by competition between Sand Ridge and Chesapeake for leases in those counties. But other players are busy, too; one significant one is in the process of moving into facilities in Enid and will be drilling horizontal wells in southern Garfield and Kingfisher counties. And our mayor recently estimated that Enid is growing, currently around 52,000+ in our city now.
This oil and gas "play" is different from that of 30 years ago in that the major leaseholders – who dictate the development pace – are medium-to-larger exploration companies rather than the smaller "go and blow" companies of the '70s and '80s. They move more methodically and carefully, but they can raise and invest the millions of dollars that it takes to drill horizontal wells. So less frenzy and craziness than before, but real economic activity and many good-paying jobs for our area. And the results achieved in the field so far are excellent, it seems, so it is real.
We need to realize that this is good fortune for Enid; it is wonderful that we have the geologic resources underlying our rich farm lands across northern Oklahoma. However, they have been there for millions of years, waiting for the right guy to come along who could figure out how to produce oil and gas from them. It took a special combination of techniques and vision to do it. And vision always comes from just one person: that guy was a Texan oilman named George Mitchell, who was so damned stubborn he would not give up, well after well, until he perfected the horizontal drilling techniques and fracking technological innovations that opened up these kind of production possibilities.
We have this play, this great economy, because of George Mitchell. Period.
Not because of the federal government. Not because of some university research. But because George Mitchell is so stubborn he wouldn’t give up until he could produce natural gas out of geological strata that nobody else had ever been able to produce (and many had tried!)!
Hooray for free enterprise! Hooray for George Mitchell!

America's government shutting the door on returning business

Several years ago the Economist magazine pointed out costs of manufacturing in China were going up at such a rate American and British manufacturers were beginning to re-considering their "offshoring" decisions of previous years. The editors suggested a "re-shoring" movement was in the offing.
There is now evidence this is happening. In a recent issue, they talk about both outsourcing and offshoring movements over the last several decades, as globalization was charging forward, with companies closing down their own plants, moving abroad or sending work out to subcontractors. Either way, it meant a loss of jobs for many communities. Good jobs, manufacturing jobs – not burger flipping.
But now the trend lines are moving against outsourcing – it seems it actually costs more that first meets the eye. Responsive customer service and good quality control were early casualties. Offshoring is barely favorable currently, since labor costs in the Far East have soared.
Thus cheap labor costs, plus transportation, plus having massive amounts of money tied up in cargo boxes as they are transported, plus aggravation of nagging quality problems, plus having trade secrets and techniques of production ripped off by the sub-contractors ... All these problems are faced by western makers having work done in the Far East. Perhaps the unkindest cut of all: Many of their former offshore or outsource competitors have come to market with knock-off products of their own.
So companies are now bringing production home and re-establishing factories in the States.
Caterpillar has a new plant in Texas, General Electric is once again building appliances in Kentucky, Lenovo is making computers in North Carolina, and so on.
A consulting group surveyed firms of $1 billion or more in annual sales to find out their intentions and 37 percent of them said they were moving or considering moving facility from China to the U.S. That is a significant trend in the making.
One would think this would be in the front page news every day ... but, no, it isn’t there. One would think somebody in Washington would be excited about this; after all, look at our unemployment numbers ... But, no, they don’t seem to be.
I wonder why? Manufacturing jobs are very desirable, primary employment, and they are coming home. That’s very good news!
Perhaps it is because this Obama administration doesn’t like business very much! A Harvard Business School study cited by the Economist points out “ ... firms are now ready to reconsider offshoring. They realize ... they overdid it, and are discovering hidden costs in moving production a long way from home. But, the authors argue, America’s government is not making the country’s business environment attractive enough for companies to want to come back.”
Did you get that? I’ll repeat: … AMERICA’S GOVERNMENT IS NOT MAKING THE COUNTRY’S BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT ATTRACTIVE ENOUGH FOR COMPANIES TO WANT TO COME BACK.
Sheesh!! What’s wrong with them? One wonders why we did throw these bums out of office when we had the chance

For struggling businesses: Hunker down! Mark time! Try to survive!

Why doesn’t Washington Get It?
News from Washington is somber. For those who do math on the recovery, it is a very weak recovery, say 2 percent. That means it will take YEARS to get unemployment back to 6 percent. Why? No expansion = no job growth. Why is this? Washington is doing nothing that reassures the job-creating companies – but is doing much to worry them.
Businessmen are cautious; they intend to survive. So they hold still and mark time. How much time before real improvement? Maybe 2015 … or maybe longer. Maybe 3 percent growth in GDP after two more years.
And there’s more: Obamacare goes into effect soon — a huge cold shower for businesses already struggling to survive this recession. MORE cost, but no more productivity, and soft markets
will not allow health costs to be passed through to consumers. That pushes the burden back on owners. If you owned a small business — where more expense means less for you and your family — would you want to take more risk and expand? Of course not! If anything, you will hunker down and sit on your cash! You will try to survive until times are better.
And there is more: the debt ceiling mess will be a BIG deal. Prognosticators are expecting a "shut-down" of many federal government functions in 90 days or so. Ultimately a patchwork deal will be agreed upon and the ceiling raised. But will there be real reform? Recognition of the nation’s fiscal problems? Not a chance!
Rather the blame game will take over the news cycle. Obama will use the presidential bully pulpit to tell us it is the Republican’s fault, that he is blameless, ignoring the obvious truth that it takes both sides working together to negotiate a deal. But blaming the opposition provides a distraction for side-stepping any substantive public discussion about the real problem: The Obama administration is running another trillion-dollar deficit and is spend-thrift. But his rhetoric will hide this truth.
There is a high probability the nation’s credit rating – which has long been the best in the world – will be downgraded this spring. And that means more than simply lower prestige: A lower rating means it costs more to borrow money! We will pay a lot more to use other people’s money!
In short: Overall, this administration is leading the nation in the wrong direction. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to think this through!
Could it be different? Of course! Good policy could re-assure business … but we will not see reassuring policy from this administration. It is entirely clear to anyone who looks at Mr Obama’s first four years and has listened to his plans for the next four years that he actively dislikes the business sector! The man is a socialist at heart!
So it is no surprise that the watchword for business becomes: Hunker down! Mark time! Try to survive! And the nation at large suffers.

When at first you don't succeed ... 2nd term's not any better

Second-term presidents often show us their true colors.
George Bush II showed us he was not a Texas ‘neo-conservative,’ which had been the story when he ran his first campaign for the presidency. He showed us he was more eastern-ish moderate Republican, and that he liked to spend money. He "blew" the biggest accomplishment of the GOP in the last years of the 20th century: the balanced budget achieved by the Congressional Republicans. Of course, Bush II had lots of help from the Republican Congress who had changed their course drastically by the early 2000’s – but as leader of the party, he could have shut down that idiocy easily. He did not. And the Republicans paid the price: The voters threw them out of office. They lost their dominance in Washington.
Given similar circumstances, there is no doubt in my mind that Ronald Reagan would have
stopped the Congressional excesses dead in their tracks.
What about the current occupant? Mr. Obama tried to convince us the first time out that he was a "unifier;" he said he could re-unite us, bring us together, left and right, and put the country back on the Right Track.
Ooops! Once in office, we found out he was, first of all, no politician. Secondly, we found out that he was a quasi-left liberal of the first order.
The operational truth that emerged after a couple of years is this: Obama had no idea how to go about building a political coalition to achieve anything! He will gladly proclaim from on high how it should be … but somebody else needs to take care of the details. No negotiation, no compromise.
Why were we surprised? After all, he had never even chaired a committee in his entire political career: one term in the U.S. Senate and several years in the Illinois Legislature. During his academic career at the University of Chicago, he developed the reputation of an "ivory tower" guy, secure in his view of the world, and un-interested in interacting with any other faculty members and their ideas. Never went to coffee with them; never sat around and chewed on ideas.
His first term is a wasteland when it comes to accomplishment. A badly faulted health insurance program that is detested by the majority of the country; lack-luster foreign policy. Horrible domestic administration (during the last four years, he and his party never produced a budget).
But they spent a trainload of money, throwing it at one thing and another. “Not enough revenue? So borrow it.”
Will the second Obama term be any better? Will he re-unite us? Will he gather the will and the means to put the country back on a sustainable and constructive course economically? Develop an equitable domestic policy? Do the work to build an effective political coalition in Congress to
address the numerous problems with which we are afflicted? Address the problems with the sacred cows called Medicare and Social Secuity?
Tain’t likely!
I am certain we will hear more of his leftish rhetoric broadcast from on high. More progressivism. More internationalism. Constant assignment of blame to the minority party in Washington.
But no constructive political work that actually can solve problems and find compromises.
Why do I think so? Because I don’t think this president and his men know how to do practical and constructive politics.
And that’s a damned shame because we need some problem solving done.

This year politically…what can we expect?

Jay Leno recently remarked the governor of New Jersey had complained about the Congressional treatment of storm victims in his state, and Congress responded by saying,
“What’s your complaint? We don’t do ANYthing for ANYbody these days!”
Funny, but true! Congress is in the deadlock business these days, and I don’t mean the lock on your front door! Democratic Senate and Republican House were virtually unchanged by the election and there is no prospect of them working together.
A tactful and politically-skillful president could make a big difference by setting a constructive example for the rest of those elected officials on Capitol Hill, eliciting the point of view of the opposition and finding middle ground when negotiating, but that is not the self-appointed task of this president (though part of his rhetoric)! He has now proclaimed exactly the opposite of that. His goals in dealing with the opposition party are those of the Chicago school of politics: “We won, therefore you shall suffer!”
That sort of policy tends to bring out the worst in everyone involved, so that is what we should expect: At-your-throat-and-in-your-face politics. (Wonderful. Just what we want from our government!)
So I predict: The messiest year in national politics since the 1880s – the year when the Democrats were first holding their heads up after their secession and subsequent defeat in the Civil War. The Republicans continued to “wave the bloody shirt” and smote them head and shoulders at every opportunity! Problems were created but not solved.
These guys on both sides of the aisle seem to think they can eliminate the other side!
See them disappear! All they have to do is be nasty, spiteful and aggressive toward them.
But there is NO realistic hope that will happen to either party! Both will endure.
So we will never see a pure ideological political force or movement rule in Washington, either left or right. Our Constitution was designed to precisely prevent exactly that; we will have political hamburger hash: No neat slices of ideological beef tenderloin inside the Beltway!
I think it is very possible Mr. Obama will overplay his hand of cards – that Congress will continue to be deadlocked on significant spending, tax and fiscal policy – and it will be a messy, muddy year in national politics.
There are whispers of election investigations in the offing that may well undercut the modest electoral edge Mr. Obama received, especially precincts in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida that reported votes totaling 120 to 150 percent of their total registration rolls! And others that cast virtually 100 percent of all votes for Obama, 0 percent for Romney! This, if true, will come out – and sully his victory and morally undercut his position.
So: The Messiest Year in more than a Century!