At one time I believed I was an expert at politics. Of late I have had serious doubts about my political intuition. Either my thinking has slipped a bit, or my current Democratic companions have gone off the chart. It appears to me that Nancy Pelosi, in her leadership role, has simply lost it.
At the end of 2008 Democrats took control of Congress and, in my estimation, had a golden opportunity to showcase the radical differences between the Democratic leadership and what the country had endured for eight years.
Unfortunately, too many of the Democrats under Pelosi's leadership started doing the same things the nation had criticized the Republican Congress for doing.
Under the new Democratic leadership Congress did not curtail wasteful spending, failed to adopt a really strict ethics code, and did not end either the war in Iraq or Afghanistan promptly.
They fiddled around trying to get Republicans on board for compromises on health care and several other major proposals. The Democratic effort resulted in delay and in watering down what would have been a decent health care bill had the Democrats had the guts to go on with their majority and pass it more closely aligned to what was originally introduced.
The final political ploy by Pelosi and her leadership, which has made me wonder what in the world they were thinking, was to delay a vote on maintaining tax cuts for middle-class Americans until after the election. It appears to me that forcing Republicans who wanted to preserve tax breaks for people making $7,000,000 a year at the expense of those making less than $250,000 a year is politically a “can’t lose” proposition.
It has been obvious for some time that Republicans have employed better political strategists and PR people than Democrats. Prior to George Bush’s first election, you would have had a hard time convincing me that the American people could be persuaded to opt for a guy who fought the Vietnam War part time in Alabama over a fellow who actually got shot while serving in Vietnam. The “Swift Boat” fraud clearly demonstrates that unlimited amounts of money can persuade gullible voters of almost anything.
The current Texas governor’s race is another good example. From the polls, it appears a guy who has had a government paycheck for over 25 years and yet has managed to become a multi-millionaire is being favored over a fellow who spent most of his life in business and earned a decent financial statement. I guess Governor Perry and his friends recognize better business opportunities and investments than Democrats.
An examination of the investigation by the Dallas Morning News as to the Texas Emerging Technology Fund reveals just how smart many Republican investors are.
- Dr. James Leininger of San Antonio invested $264,000 in Rick Perry’s campaign and was rewarded with 1.7 million to Gradalis, Inc., a firm that he controls.
- A fellow named David G. Nance, a former Perry appointee, invested $80,000 in Perry’s campaign and walked off with 4.5 million for his company, Convergen Live Sciences, Inc.
- One of Perry’s old college buddies, Phil Adams, gave Perry’s campaign $314,000 and was rewarded with 2.75 million of tax funds for his company.
All in all, Perry’s buddies invested around $2,000,000 to Perry and gleaned 16 million from the tax supported Emerging Technology Fund. What a deal! I only wish I could find such a profitable investment.
One can only dream of getting an eight-fold return on an investment. But again, what do I know about politics, public relations or investments?
To me, the real mystery is how a governor and a party so wise in all of these financial investments could allow our state to wind up 18 million dollars in the hole.