Notice no one said how big the steps were. I can’t find the whole quote, but many years ago, I read it, not in the title of the book by V.I. Lenin, but the entire text that had “the rest of the story” about step size. Meaning: Take a large step, if resistance is encountered, promise to back up two. It looks, to the resister, like you are actually moving backwards by your words, further back that your start point, but you merely make two small steps in reverse, leaving you with “conquered” ground. It’s all about manipulating the perceptions.

Note the choice of words: “Punitive Legislation.” Somebody gets it.

Consider: The full power of the Federal Legislative and Executive branches “punishing” people for running a private firm. Yes, they have been given taxpayer dollars, so the overall system wouldn’t suffer, then the Government punishes them for taking the bonuses that the Treasury Department and Senator Dodd made sure they were in the bailout legislation.

What kind of America have we become?

Financial-industry officials launched a campaign Friday to fight back but are finding their hands tied: Anti-Wall Street sentiment following the American International Group Inc. bonus payouts is making it difficult to reach once-friendly lawmakers to make their case. Key senators and their staffers, nervous about appearing to support the industry, are refusing all meetings, and, in some cases, turning away phone calls. “Unless you have a pitchfork and a noose nobody’s listening to you” on Capitol Hill, said one financial lobbyist.

Who has the best paid lawyers on their side? You know, why would a top notch law school graduate go to work for the Govt, when they can make lots and lots more money as a private one? Sorta like why so few military academy sports players end up in the big leagues….not a snipe, just a fact. It’s about you life priorities.

Oh, call it the “Full Employment Act for Trial Lawyers Bill (FEA4TL)” just for fun.

The White House has yet to publicly criticize the bonus tax proposals. But administration officials say privately they are concerned the House and Senate bills could lead to an exodus of employees or whole companies from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, known as TARP, as well as other government-sponsored financial rescue efforts.

Hallmark of this administration: It’s merely a act/poll/react mentality. They don’t can’t think about the consequences of any action. They are to focused on “The Agenda!,” to have actually developed the political equivalent of a business plan.

Consider all of this derision from the government, calling bankers the equivalent of “suicide bombers.” It’s a cultural thing. When the President tells the world one profession is good (lawyers) and another is bad (bankers, investment bankers, Wall Street companies, etc….), it leaches into the psyche of those considering their upcoming, either first or subsequent, career choices.

Speaking of that, the President is showing himself to be the “Offender-in-Chief.” Besides calling his fellow citizens suicide bombers, the also disses those in the Special Olympics. He’s “sensitive” about his big ears, he’s sensitive about it being pointed out his close associates in recent years want to see the Government and officials destroyed, and that America is one big bigoted nation, and then he has the gall to use those words?

Back on topic: He has the power to influence where the talent goes. He may not know it, but he’s going to chase away the very people who may just be able find a way out of the current darkness in the economic arena.

If these are the “smart” people, I don’t want no more smart ones telling me they know the answers. They ain’t got ‘em! They don’t or they just are pushing to see what they can achieve, and pull back if they find resistance.

It is also a vestige of “real world” business experience. If they had it, they’d certainly understand marketing a whole lot better. However, it seems they are a bunch of lawyers, who think written text is always right, unless they find a loophole that compliments their desires to avoid the specifics, and certainly the intent, if they disagree.

Just a closing thought: What industry is next to be publicly called out? Which corporation will next have to hire private security and tell their employees to not go out alone, for their fellow citizens may want to cause them physical harm?

The President using his bully pulpit to send the citizens after one another is immoral, and unjust. He is the one who calls for justice for the “enemy combatants,” who are no longer are enemies, despite their own statements, yet cannot see it worthy of our own neighbors.

Paranoia? Yes, another hallmark of communism. Ask any who have lived under it.

It used to be conservative talk show hosts, and MSM financial reporters. Now it’s just your average finance industry worker…yoou know, the “greedy capitalists.” Who’s next?

Call to Action: I’d recommend you contact your representatives and let them know how you feel about the President vilifying citizens.

Update 3/21/2009: And then an ACORN derived group shows up at AIG Executive’s homes. You remember ACORN? The “community organizing” group President Obama worked for, and trained for? The one accused of voter fraud in at least TWELVE states, the group that is receiving $2B in Stimulus Fund dollars. The same group that entered bank lobbies and demanded CRA loans be issued to those who couldn’t actually afford them?

Yes. A group bent on destroying us financially, for their own political gain, one President Obama actually worked for.

Now they are at the doors of private citizens.

It’s a multi-pronged attack on citizens. With the Executive and Legislative branches, blatantly violating the basics of the 14th Amendment, supported and abetted by known socialist groups.

My God, what have we done?

See Fox News story.

No matter what you think about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, President Bush gave up golf until the wars end. He said that it was unseemly for the President to be seen playing while our troops are fighting and dying in far off places.

As President Obama supposedly understands the power of symbolism, it is an interesting choice to have weekly parties, during a time of war and economic duress.

See fox News story.

This  statement is by itself alarming. Is the Speaker saying that it is never appropriate to enter “private” property to arrest a malefactor. What if the illegal alien is a felon? Are we now drawing a bright line where it is permissible to arrest a U.S. citizen criminal, whether or not a parent, but not illegal aliens. Is the Speaker suggesting that it is never permissible to enter private property to execute an arrest warrant? Just what is the logical conclusion of this policy?

We have reached a critical time in this nation’s history.  The federal government, run by lawyers and Constitutional scholars, does not understand that the primary function of government is to secure the borders. Instead, we embrace a philosophy of wealth redistribution. We embrace a policy that rewards lawbreakers, over people who lawfully petition and wait to enter this country. We call illegal aliens “patriotic”. Our President wants the illegal aliens to have a pathway to citizenship and join labor unions.

Further, let us not forget that these comments were made by the Speaker of the House. Speaker Pelosi is third in line for the Presidency. She is one of the most powerful legislators in the country. Perhaps the Speaker could better serve the illegal aliens, whose plight is so dire, by crafting legislation and bringing it to the floor. Surely, with the Democratic majority in Congress, she should have no problem getting this legislation passed. In fact, I think it unlikely that President Obama would veto the bill.

Ostensibly, all of this is because these people are doing jobs that Americans will not. Is that really true? Millions of jobs have been lost. Not one of these unemployed people would wait tables, work construction, garden. It is estimated that 15% of the stimulus money will go to illegal aliens.

All of this while preaching the virtues of personal responsibility.

I   am encouraged. If you look at the priorities of the government, we have nothing to worry about. (I determine priorities by looking at what people do, not what they say.)

As per the Wall Street Journal, $20,000,000,000 of our money went to European banks to bail them out.  If we have the resources to bailout foreign banks, clearly our own house is in order. Oh, wait.

And while we are on the topic of bailouts, and stimulus, and bloated spending bills, and TARP and TALF ad nauseum, I have a question. When I was in school, they taught us to adjust one variable, watch for a result and then draw a conclusion. I used this same method when I was fixing cars and restoring airplanes. We have now thrown everything, including the kitchen sink, at the economy. How could we possibly tell what is working and what is causing damage? Certainly, we can not rely on the media to tell us the truth.

Does any thinking being have to wonder why, when Porkulus 1 money hasn’t even been barely distributed, they are already calling for Son of Porkulus?

Here’s the deal: Unaccountable bureaucrats will tell you how you will handle everything in your life, or the money will stop flowing.

All under the guise of making sure the taxpayers money isn’t being mis-appropriated…like for that fat laden Big Mac, the soda with sugar and caffeine, the “nasty” second hand smoke producing cigar, or…how much you drive your car (oh, and what kind it is) instead of taking light rail and the bus and where you send your children to school.

They want everyone to sign on the dotted line now, and then, the “fine print” reading will be way too late. As pointed out in an article on banks trying to return the money, it was noted that the Government can change the conditions in the future. So, consider what that portends for anyone taking Government assistance. The basics: Unintended consequences, based on unforeseen regulations, without the benefit of a legislative process to vet them.

Tea Parties are a start. More push back will be needed, or we shall all be drones of the state, working to give to the Federal Government, so they can hand some of it back, with massive restrictions, and new restrictions they can apply at the whim of anyone in the heap of civil servants between you and the President.  Interesting how it works:  They take our money, then pay off a bunch of civil servants, hand us back some of the leftover funds and tell us we have to respect the rights of all other taxpayers for taking it.  Yep, I hope that makes your head explode, because it stupid at the core, and the thinking person knows it.  Side note:  what does that say about those who we voted into office who can’t stand up and say “This is not only stupid, it’s immoral!”

And: Just think, the news this very day is Bernie Madoff may have to serve life in prison for his $65B ponzi scheme. Think about the bailout/stimulus/America Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and all such permutations as a huge money laundering scheme. The difference is when the power of the Congress and the Executive is behind it, it is somehow legal.

The Government takes our wealth in taxes, then drafts up a mountain of conditions, then places the money on the table in front of us, with the tomes of “conditions” and a pen.  The Government representative, or their proxy by the chain of money distribution, will say “Sign here” and then put a fork in you, you’re done. You know how desperation works: If you’re hanging on by a thread, you sign without “reading the contract.”

I spent a few decades where my part of my duties required me to be a steward of taxpayers funds as an end user, not as a bean counter. Near the end of my time, I directly handled $11M and oversaw a total of $34M of federal expenditures. A portion of my time, as a department head in a large software maintenance organization was spent ensuring the funds allocated by a DC office was spent in accordance of the guidelines, which extended all the way from the Congressional Budget. There was single year money, multi-year money, all with specifics of under which projects the funds could be expended. The “rules” were that the person who last touched it was accountable for where it was spent, even if an error in the funding lines may have been altered by accident up the chain somewhere in the “accounting data.” The strings attached to this money were lengthy and very specific, including the legal outcomes if you did the wrong thing. Moral of that paragraph: No seat of the pants spending allowed.

Puppets. We shall all become puppets if we are not mindful of the serious danger of President Obama’s ingrained punishment mentality, bred into him by the radicals who were his mentors and role models.

The bottom line:  He wants to be able to tell each and every citizen how they will live their life, and he will keep telling you it’s to make sure the taxpayer’s money is spent right.

The almost final thought:  no wonder the President hasn’t had time to deal with the pressing issues of foreign affairs.  First he needs to gain a massive degree of control of the populace, using this sort of end around of The Constitution first.  With such control he’ll be much more able to control the conversations that should go on in a republic.

The final thought:  Didn’t we get here by Government mandating who got money and who didn’t and how and where it would be doled out?  How’d that work out for us so far?

Mark my words.  This theme will play out in the Consumer Safety Protection Act, gun control (think localities taking money being told that a condition is “reasonable regulation of ownership”), and a variety of other social, legal and even moral issues (can you say no protesting abortions?).  Take a moment and envision the “unintended consequences” that shall follow the money from the halls of Congress and trhe Desk in the Oval Office.  I trust you are reasonably horrified.  I trust you will let your elected officals know how you feel about this.  It is time for “feelings” to come to the forefront.

So, once more, in the light of the aftermath of the election, and gauging his words against his own deeds, “we” got so much of him wrong.

Experience isn’t necessary, if you already know how you are going to judge. Even more so, if you think your understanding of all things is superior to all around you (that’s the “intellectual” part coming into play).

If he is a quick study, all I see is a quick study in how to implement a radical agenda in the face of determined political resistance. Note the word “political” and no others in the sentence. By looking at those who he seems to have initially held up as his associates (before he tossed them under the bus when they came to light), they were pretty much all about radical political change. Yes, the names Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright come to mind.

He his long term friends and close associates do not include people who have been or became ambassadors, economic wizards, business builders, nor even historians. The close associations seem to all be those who would corrupt the system, specifically for political change.

President Obama just is going to have it his way. History be damned, and any, yes, any political opponent, regardless of party affiliation, (soon some Blue Dog Democrats, I predict, will be getting the Rush/Joe the Plumber/Rick Santelli/Jim Cramer/Sara Palin treatment) be damned, too. It’s now the time to destroy America as a leader, and the ironic thing is, it is being done by our leader.

Now, a commenter on The Anchoress nailed some of my thoughts, that hadn’t completely formed. These words became the basis for this post, and extend my thoughts along these lines well.

# Bender B. Rodriguez Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 12:00 am

You know, we were all concerned that, as inexperienced as he is, Obama would need on-the-job training. But apparently, Obama does not believe he needs to learn how to do the job. He clearly believes that he knows everything he needs to know — and the things he doesn’t know are irrelevant to his objectives.

For example, how the economy works. He doesn’t care to know that because he is not interested in making it work. He is only interested in changing it. Don’t bother him with financial facts, don’t interrupt to tell him that his pants are on fire, he has an ideological agenda to enact and the facts and/or results be damned. It doesn’t work? Who cares? The agenda is going to be enacted anyway.

Or, foreign policy. That the Iranians and Russians and Syrians and Gazans and Taliban and Al Qaeda and everyone else is ready to roll Obama is irrelevant. He doesn’t care about the facts. He has an agenda of appeasement and apologizing for America and blaming America for everything, and that’s that.

Actually learning the facts, actually learning how to do the job of president is irrelevant. Obama is going to do whatever the hell he wants to do. He won. That’s all the learning and knowledge and facts he needs.

What else have we mis-interpreted about his “campaign rhetoric?

Note in this analysis regarding these types of behaviors:

[...]
An important distinction is between cerebral and somatic narcissists. The cerebrals derive their Narcissistic Supply from their intelligence or academic achievements and the somatics derive their Narcissistic Supply from their physique, exercise, physical or sexual prowess and romantic or physical “conquests”.

Another crucial division within the ranks of patients with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is between the classic variety (those who meet five of the nine diagnostic criteria included in the DSM), and the compensatory kind (their narcissism compensates for deep-set feelings of inferiority and lack of self-worth).
Obama displays the following behaviors, which are among the hallmarks of pathological narcissism:

* Subtly misrepresents facts and expediently and opportunistically shifts positions, views, opinions, and “ideals” (e.g., about campaign finance, re-districting). These flip-flops do not cause him overt distress and are ego-syntonic (he feels justified in acting this way). Alternatively, reuses to commit to a standpoint and, in the process, evidences a lack of empathy.

Ignores data that conflict with his fantasy world, or with his inflated and grandiose self-image. This has to do with magical thinking. Obama already sees himself as president because he is firmly convinced that his dreams, thoughts, and wishes affect reality. Additionally, he denies the gap between his fantasies and his modest or limited real-life achievements (for instance, in 12 years of academic career, he hasn’t published a single scholarly paper or book).

- Feels that he is above the law, incl. and especially his own laws.

- Talks about himself in the 3rd person singluar or uses the regal “we” and craves to be the exclsuive center of attention, even adulation

- Have a messianic-cosmic vision of himself and his life and his “mission”.

- Sets ever more complex rules in a convoluted world of grandiose fantasies with its own language (jargon)

- Displays false modesty and unctuous “folksiness” but unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true Obama is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.

- Sublimates aggression and holds grudges.

- Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it).
[...]

To paraphrase a comedian, but put it in this context: That’s scary, no matter who you are.

Maybe we elected the “Punisher-in-Chief.”

I guess the news from DC hasn’t arrived via snail mail in Tallahassee yet. It’s only good for one party, when it’s the Democrats…

And how’s it going? Well, not “swimmingly.” Facts below, in pictures, just to warn you not to read this for the “articles:”

And you who voted for President Obama, at least we’re on a “level playing field” when it comes to our collective savings and investments being uniformly, without regard for political party alignment, being trashed by a man who things this is but a fluctuating market.

Rank amateur is what he is, domestically and on foreign policy, and now, with new and improved lack of economics knowledge!

Government “management” of credit bureaus.

Maybe not directly.  Maybe by massive regulation, or actually Federal Statute, or, as the case seems to be these days, pure, unadulterated political pressure by the crowds sent out to demonize an industry, a social class, specific demographics, or talk show hosts.

Here’s my take:  Many are getting behind on payments of all sorts:  Vehicle loans, mortgages, credit cards, utility bills, etc, etc.  Take too long to pay and the “formula” decrements your score.  I know, that’s basic knowledge.

The “afterglow” of this then cascades down through a series of other financial issues:  Can’t get the cell phone from the big companies.  Did you realize when you open a bank account, they run a credit check?  I’ve seen it.  Moving and are re-establishing a household (be it rented or owned) and need utilities, and would like to watch cable TV?  credit check.  While you may get the service, you may have to fork over over a hundred, to several hundred doallars to be connected for electricity, water, or entertainment.

Net result?  More turndowns for services and loans that used to be part of the economy that makes the system flow, as money is passed around for goods and services.  Then, the producers/suppliers see a downturn in revenue, which means they have a harder time making payroll, keeping up maintenance, and doing necessary upgrades for their customers.

Who will scream first, the consumers or various industries, to their elected officials, demanding “change” to the system business put in place to protect itself from economic losses?  I am betting someone, or some corporations will soon, and then, just like Congress setting up pseudo-private mortgage lenders, they will decide things need to be made fair again, and those who have fallen behind, shouldn’t be penalized for their choices, because (I’m sure you see this coming) “everyone is doing it!”

And what’s a favorite method of the liberals?  “Leveling the playing field.”  That translates to relativism applied to a standard, which, then shifts the systems tectonics plates, as we have and will see more of in the “Bailout” and “Stimulus” programs.

Longer term net result?  Increase of the economic risk companies will take, for they will now see higher numbers, from what ever method applied by politicians or political correctness (I can envisison ACORN playing a role here to “help” communities), removing the ability to deny access to scarce funds to those who, have delveleoped a track record of not paying.

Certainly, there will be, as always, some people who are deserving of the help, but, as Americans do, they’ll figure out how to “arrive” in the selected category, so they, too may get what is being handed to those who don’t deserve it in the first place, and, once again, cause the static analysis numbers to be overrun by reality.

So, keep your ear to the railroad track for the coming of the hewn cry to “fix” the creidt reporting system.

Responsibility? Nope. Earmarks? Yes. The beginning of a bill for the generations unlike what we’ve ever done before…and when we’re in financially hard times? Oh, yes. Borrow your way out of debt. Wasn’t that what our “keep up with the Jones,” apply for every credit card you were “pre-approved” for got us? Yep. So let’s now try it at the Federal Budget level. If we don’t expect different results are we insane or sane? If we do expect different outcomes, my question remains.

Not how the “entitlements” category goes up by $900B in one fiscal year. Why?

Note how the one who told us he will cut the deficit in half, presents a budget that increases it 9.92 times…Yes, almost quadruples (but who’s quibbling over a few billion at this point?) the deficit. Who are his advisors? Oh, yes…a man who came from A large, now crashed investment firm…Tim Gietner, and a man who helped President Clinton put the Community Reinvestment Act in place, which has destroyed the mortgage market, Larry Summers. Those are two key advisors to the President. Since the President is a lawyer, who do you think he went to to put this budget proposal together?

How much longer can we afford to have “smart” people telling us how to run the Nation?

Link to the article that contains this graphic at the New York Post is here.