George H W Bush

Age Vs Youth: Will The Republicans And Democrats Be Switching On Their Presidential Nominees In 2016?

Ronald 2 Comments

When one analyzes the two major political parties in the past forty years, it has been a general reality that the Republican Party has run Presidential candidates who tend to be much older than the Democratic Party nominees for President.

Witness Richard Nixon, nine years older than George McGovern in 1972; Gerald Ford eleven years older than Jimmy Carter in 1976; Ronald Reagan thirteen years older than Jimmy Carter in 1980; Reagan seventeen years older than Walter Mondale in 1984; George H. W. Bush eight years older than Michael Dukakis in 1988; Bush twenty two years older than Bill Clinton in 1992; Bob Dole twenty three years older than Clinton in 1996; John McCain twenty five years older than Barack Obama in 2008; and Mitt Romney fourteen years older than Obama in 2012. Only in 2000 and 2004 did we see George W. Bush older than Al Gore by only two years and in 2004 actually younger than John Kerry by three years.

This phenomenon is maybe just a coincidence, but it has often been said that the Democrats go for youth and the Republicans for experience in their Presidential nominees.

Well, if that is the case, it is about to be switched dramatically in 2016 if one assumes that either Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden are the likely front runners for the Democratic Presidential nomination, as Hillary will be 69 in 2016, and Joe will be 74 in 2016. Clinton would be the second oldest first time nominee, behind Ronald Reagan, and Biden would be the oldest first time nominee.

The Republicans are certain to nominate a candidate decades younger, such as Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Nikki Haley, Bobby Jindal, or Ted Cruz, all born in the early 1970s, being therefore mid 40s in 2016. If you consider Chris Christie, Scott Walker, or John Thune, they were born in the 1960s, so would be in the mid 50s. Jeb Bush, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann all were born in the 1950s, so would be in their late 50s or in the 60s. There is no candidate born in the 1940s seriously mentioned, unless one expects Newt Gingrich to try again for the Presidency, being just a year younger than Joe Biden and four years older than Hillary Clinton.

The Democrats have alternative possible candidates in Martin O’Malley and Amy Klobuchar born in the early 1960s, so either would be mid 50s in 2016, but Andrew Cuomo and Mark Warner, born in the mid 1950s would be nearing or at the age of 60 when running in 2016, and Elizabeth Warren, born in 1949, would be 67 in 2016, only about two years younger than Hillary Clinton.

So we are seeing a likely switch from an older to younger Republican nominee, and a younger to an older Democratic nominee, and the difference in years could be massive, as it was in the past forty years in most Presidential elections.

A final thought: In the nine elections between 1972 and 2012 when the GOP nominee was always older than the Democratic nominee, the Republicans won the election four times, and the Democrats five times, so basically, trying to determine whether age or youth are an advantage is clearly a pure guessing game!

The Reagan Era Is Over: Obama Agenda Makes That Perfectly Clear!

Ronald 4 Comments

The Reagan Era, which lasted from 1981-2009, is over, and will be seen as constituting those years in the history books! This would include the time of George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, as well as Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan promoted the idea of distrust of government; of greatly increased federal spending on defense and national security, while cutting domestic spending: helped to undermine labor rights and minority rights; allowed corporate dominance to grow without federal regulations; undermined the environment and consumer safety; engaged America into a major role in the Middle East, therefore promoting anti American terrorism; and caused through their taxation cuts on the upper class and their wild defense spending to cause most of the increase in the national debt from $1 trillion when Jimmy Carter left office to $10.5 trillion when George W. Bush left office.

Even Bill Clinton, the one Democratic President, accepted the idea of smaller government and less regulation, while, however, having the success of adding less to the national debt and having balanced budgets for several years, something that the Republican Presidents—Reagan and the two Bushes—were unable to accomplish during the 20 years out of 28 total in the era they were in charge.

And one must recall that Republicans controlled the Senate from 1981-1987, and from 1995-2007, except for the last half of 2001 and 2002. And they controlled the House of Representatives from 1995-2007. So they had an impact on policy making for a majority of the years of the Reagan era.

Barack Obama represents a diametrically opposite viewpoint on all of the characteristics of the Reagan era. While he will not be able to accomplish all of his goals in the second term, with the GOP control of the House, and the ability to use the Senate filibuster in the upper chamber, the Obama era can now be seen as a path breaking event, similar to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan representing fundamental change in their times!

The Vice Presidency NOT Fertile Hunting Ground For Future Presidents

Ronald 1 Comment

Much of the history of the Vice Presidency, whoever has been chosen to be in that office has failed to have much impact, and has seldom been seen as a potential President.

When one looks at those who have held the office, one realizes that in most cases, even those who succeeded to the Presidency during the term, a total of nine times, would be highly unlikely ever to have become President, if it had not been for the death or resignation of the President during that term.

Would John Tyler and Andrew Johnson, picked as Democratic running mates of a Whig (William Henry Harrison) and Republican (Abraham Lincoln) Presidential nominee have ever had the likelihood of being a Presidential nominee on their own, if their Presidents had finished their terms of office?

Would Millard Fillmore, who succeeded Zachary Taylor, or Chester Alan Arthur, who succeeded James A. Garfield, have been likely Presidential nominees, if their Presidents had not died in office?

Would Theodore Roosevelt, who succeeded William McKinley, but was despised by Mark Hanna and conservatives in the Republican Party, and was put into the Vice Presidency to take him out of the Governorship of New York State, have been likely to be the GOP nominee in 1904?

Would Calvin Coolidge, who succeeded Warren G. Harding, have been likely to be the GOP nominee in either 1924 or 1928, after Herbert Hoover had made such a good impression as Secretary of Commerce during a prosperous seeming 1920s?

Would Harry Truman, who as a non controversial Senator, hardly thought about by many before he was selected to run with Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1944, and never having any real ambition for the Presidency, have been likely to be the next nominee of a party that had passed by John Nance Garner and Henry A. Wallace?

Would Lyndon B. Johnson, as a Southerner, after not being allowed much of a role as Vice President under John F. Kennedy, and with an ambitious brother, Robert Kennedy, waiting in the wings to run for President in the future, been able to be the Democratic Presidential nominee in 1968?

Would Gerald Ford, who had absolutely no ambitions to be President, had remained in the Vice Presidency and Richard Nixon had not resigned or been removed from office by impeachment, would he have been the GOP Presidential nominee in 1976?

The answer in all cases clearly is NO, and when one considers that ONLY George H. W. Bush actually succeeded his boss, Ronald Reagan, the only time since Martin Van Buren succeeded Andrew Jackson 152 years earlier, it is clear that had none of the eight Presidents who had died or been assassinated in office, nor the one who resigned (Nixon) would have been succeeded in the Presidency by their Vice Presidents.

And when one considers that Richard Nixon, Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale (four years after), and Al Gore also failed to hold the office of the Presidency, one has to come to the conclusion that the likelihood, in reality, of a President Joe Biden being elected to follow President Barack Obama, is quite unlikely, less than 50 percent, as indicated in the previous blog entry today!

Stock Market Hits Five Year High As Obama Is To Be Inaugurated For Second Term As President!

Ronald 2 Comments

After four tough years for the economy, Barack Obama is about to be inaugurated for his second term as President, and the stock market Dow Jones Industrial Average and S & P 500 have hit their highest point since December 2007, when the Great Recession was beginning.

Housing starts are up, and unemployment is staying below 8 percent, and many economists predict a good recovery becoming clear during 2013, as long as budget deals and debt ceilings controversies are resolved. But the debt ceiling issue is a troublesome one.

Obama has asked for a lifting of the debt ceiling only three times, while George W. Bush asked for it seven times, Bill Clinton a total of four times, George H. W. Bush four times, and Ronald Reagan a grand total of SEVENTEEN times!

In percentages, Obama has had the debt limit go up only 26 percent; Bush II 90 percent, Clinton 44 percent, Bush I 48 percent, and Reagan nearly 300 percent!

But now, it is suddenly a massive issue, when Republicans assert that, somehow, Obama has been more reckless than anyone else, when in fact, he has been far more responsible than any recent President, and particularly Reagan, who ranks at the bottom on this list of the past four Presidents and Barack Obama!

So Obama has a lot to be thankful for, relating to the stock market revival, but there are still many issues and problems that he will face in the next four years!

The Truth About Presidential Executive Orders From 1893-2013

Ronald 3 Comments

New statistics have emerged regarding the use of Presidential executive orders, now being hotly contested because President Barack Obama is issuing 23 such orders on gun regulation, in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Massacre.

All Presidents from Grover Cleveland’s second term through Obama’s first term are covered in assessing how much these Presidents utilized executive orders. Thanks to New York Magazine for these statistics.

So for conservatives and Republicans, they can be excited to point out that Franklin D. Roosevelt, who they hate, issued, by far, the most executive orders. But of course, FDR presided during the Great Depression and World War II, the greatest crises since the Civil War, and, of course, FDR also served three complete terms and started a fourth before dying in office.

But after FDR, one discovers that Herbert Hoover was a close second in the four years of his term, having to deal with the Great Depression erupting in his first year in office. Of course, some conservatives think of Hoover as a progressive, but that is a major misunderstanding in fact!

Woodrow Wilson comes a close third, and this makes conservatives feel justified that it is Democrats, such as FDR and Wilson, who are the biggest “villains” on executive orders.

But then, how does one explain that below Wilson are Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, not much behind Wilson, but adored by conservatives? And next is William Howard Taft, considered a conservative when Chief Justice of the Supreme Court a decade after his Presidency. These three Presidents are Republicans, imagine that!

The list continues in order as follows:

Theodore Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Jimmy Carter
John F. Kennedy
Gerald Ford
Lyndon B. Johnson
Richard Nixon
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Ronald Reagan
Bill Clinton
George H. W. Bush
William McKinley
George W. Bush
Barack Obama
Grover Cleveland

Hey, wait a minute here! Obama is next to last of these 21 Presidents? How is that possible, after the rhetoric employed by Republicans such as Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky? Could it be that Paul does not know the facts, and does not know history very well? You know the answer!

And executive orders have become quite rare after Truman, so were most utilized by the eight Presidents from TR through Truman.

In other words, Barack Obama has NOT abused the executive orders authority, and has hardly used it, and Republicans TR, Taft, Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover all used it an amazing amount of times!

But do conservatives really care to know the truth? Again, the answer is obvious!

The Alleged “RINOS”: Colin Powell, Jon Huntsman, Chuck Hagel. Richard Lugar And Others

Ronald 1 Comment

Those who call themselves “Republicans”, but promote the Tea Party agenda domestically; the Neoconservative agenda in foreign policy; the social policies of the fundamentalist Christian right, the Radio Talk Show hosts and Fox News Channel; the fanatical gun rights advocates of the National Rifle Association; and other right wing extremists, represent the downfall of the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Gerald Ford, and George H. W. Bush.

And it is precisely these groups within the GOP who condemn Colin Powell, Jon Huntsman, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar and others as being “RINOS”–Republicans In Name Only!

But it is precisely people such as Powell, Huntsman, Hagel and Lugar who represent the moderate conservative approach to government, a mainstream viewpoint which includes understanding that negotiation and compromise is essential to the workings of American democracy.

These people above are thoughtful, rational, accomplished leaders in the party, but they are being swept aside—Powell ignored and pilloried by many; Huntsman quickly being repudiated in the Presidential primaries; Hagel now facing a massive battle to overcome opposition within his own party to be confirmed as Secretary of Defense; and Lugar defeated in a Senate primary by an extremist who then lost the Senate seat that Lugar had held for 36 years.

As Powell said yesterday on a television interview, it concerns him that his party is ignoring the demographic reality of the growth of minorities in the voting population, and they have a problem with skin color and ethnicity. Hard to believe that is is the party that ended slavery and promoted civil rights in the mid 19th century!

The Battle Between Bush I Loyalists And Bush II Loyalists Begins Over Chuck Hagel Nomination For Defense Secretary

Ronald Leave a comment

Hard to conceive, but the battle between loyalists to President George H. W. Bush and loyalists to President George W. Bush has begun over the nomination of former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel to be Barack Obama’s Secretary of Defense in his second term in the Presidency.

The “old guard” Establishment Conservatives around the first President Bush, including Brent Scowcroft, James Baker, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and the former President himself, have no major problems with Hagel.

On the other hand, the neoconservatives, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and conservative ideologues like Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Elliot Abrams, Frank Gaffney, John Bolton, and Charles Krauthammer all will find Hagel wanting in his foreign and defense policy views. It is not clear where President George W. Bush will come down, but in theory, he would agree with his key advisers and consultants mentioned above. Note that Powell and Rice are more linked to father Bush, and both were certainly involved in major battles with Cheney, Rumsfeld, and others during the second Bush Administration.

It will be an interesting battle, and it is likely that many Republican Senators will refuse to back Hagel, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, newly sworn in Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who has particularly gone on the attack already against Hagel.

A key person to watch will be Senator John McCain of Arizona, who still harbors resentment that Hagel backed Obama over him in the 2008 Presidential campaign, and vehemently disagrees with Hagel on issues involving Afghanistan and Iraq and Iran. McCain has been attacking Obama on every front lately, but will he concede that Obama has a right to the Defense Secretary he wants?

Stay tuned for the fireworks, particularly to wonder where Senator Marco Rubio of Florida and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky will take their stand–with the old line establishment figures, which include also many military and naval leaders; or with the neoconservatives who brought us into long, drawn out wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with very little success!

The Moronic Debate Over Presidential “Vacation” Time

Ronald 1 Comment

Here we go again! Another reason to attack President Barack Obama is to claim he is taking “vacation” time, when there are so many issues to deal with.

The facts are that Obama has taken far less vacation time than most Presidents, even though he has issues to deal with on a regular basis that match those of Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt, without a doubt the third greatest crisis period in American history after the Civil War and the Great Depression and World War II!

Obama has taken a total of 84 days in four years for “vacation”, in his home state of Hawaii.

George W. Bush took 250 days off in his first two and a half years, and spent more time at his home in Crawford, Texas than he often did in the White House.

Ronald Reagan spent an inordinate amount of time at his ranch in California during his eight years.

George H. W. Bush spent a lot of time at his home in Kennebunkport, Maine.

John F. Kennedy spent a lot of time at his home in Hyannisport, Massachusetts, or in Palm Beach, Florida.

Harry Truman spent a lot of time at his home in Independence, Missouri.

Dwight D. Eisenhower spent a lot time playing golf on regular vacations.

Franklin D. Roosevelt spent a lot of time at his Hyde Park, New York home, or in Warm Springs, Georgia during his twelve plus years Presidency.

The same goes for Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton.

But NONE of them got as much attacked for “vacation” time as Obama has suffered, even though he has spent far less time away from the White House!

But the point is that the critics fail to recognize, or choose NOT to recognize, that in reality, the President of the United States is NEVER on “vacation”, as the burdens of the office go with him wherever he is, and communications are always readily available!

Being President is a 24 hour a day, 168 hours a week, 52 weeks a year enterprise!

Meanwhile, the Congress only meets in formal session about 125 days a year, and takes long breaks during the year around holidays. And the conservative talk show hosts who criticize Obama have inordinate amounts of free time when they do not work.

So it is really outrageous that those who have far less responsibility, burdens, and stress, have the gall to attack a President who has worked harder on a regular basis than any President of recent times.

But as always, Obama ignores the ridiculous criticism, and we should all salute him for his recognition of the need to get away from DC and clear his mind, within the limits that is possible!

Vice President Joe Biden At His Most Charming And Genuine At Senate Swearing In Ceremonies!

Ronald Leave a comment

There is only one Joe Biden, our Vice President, who is the most genuine and sincere politician on the scene today!

Biden is criticized for his flubs and gaffes, but while no one is perfect, his flubs and gaffes are harmless, and at most, may invoke laughter and embarrassment over the Vice President’s sometimes, slightly inappropriate, comments!

Biden put on quite a show as he went through mock swearing in of Senators yesterday, on opening day of the new 113th Congress. He got to meet the Senators’s wives, children, grandchildren, mothers, cousins, etc, and he was absolutely charming, charismatic, and funny, drawing laughter and smiles from both Democratic and Republican Senators and their family members.

He was flattering to mothers of the Senators; attentive to young children of the Senators; able to relate to teenage and older children of the Senators; and left an overall good feeling to all who gathered for the ceremonies, and caused much laughter and chuckles for those observing the events live on C Span.

Biden is always entertaining, but at the same time, one realizes how brilliant a mind he has; how talented a speaker he is; how effective he is in getting things done for President Barack Obama; how much expertise he has on such a wide variety of subjects; and how he knows how to bridge gaps between differing sides and viewpoints.

He is a tremendous asset to Obama, and as the Atlantic Monthly Magazine and National Journal have declared, there is a case for stating that Barack Obama is the most active, involved, and influential Vice President in American history—more than Richard Nixon under Dwight D. Eisenhower; more than Nelson Rockefeller under Gerald Ford; more than Walter Mondale under Jimmy Carter; more than George H. W. Bush under Ronald Reagan; more than Al Gore under Bill Clinton; and more than Dick Cheney under George W. Bush!

We could do far worse than Joe Biden to be the 45th President of the United States, by election in 2016! Imagine 44 years of service to his country being brought to the forefront as qualifications for the nation’s highest office!

Progressive Victories In 2012

Ronald 2 Comments

As the year 2012 comes to an end in the next few days, it is worth looking back to what progressive victories there have been in 2012.

The clear cut victory of Barack Obama is an event still reverberating in the emotions of this blogger, and the strong belief that the Obama coalition is solid, and will carry beyond him and affect politics over the next one to two generations! Any Democrat who is nominated for President in 2016 would be the favorite to win the White House, as the nation becomes more “blue” in states such as Arizona, Georgia and Texas.

The likelihood of the US Senate staying Democratic is also a conclusion from the events of 2012, as it was truly miraculous that every seat was retained, three gained, and only Nebraska lost to the Republicans in 2012. While 2014 again will see more Democratic seats (21) up than Republican seats (14), the odds of the Democrats losing a net total of six seats and losing control is extremely unlikely, and the possibility of gaining more seats is also very likely with the Republican party turning ever further to the Right politically, and further alienating the rapidly changing demographics of the country.

The biggest surprise of the year was the decision of Chief Justice John Roberts, a Bush II appointee, to back ObamaCare, guaranteeing its survival and success despite many barriers past, present and future. This was the most important decision of the Supreme Court in a long time, in the sense of its long range impact on the nation!

The great progress of gay rights and gay marriage was a wonderful event, with the likelihood of gay marriage being upheld by the Supreme Court, at least in some limited fashion, by June of next year.

The rise of the prominence and numbers of women in politics was exciting, and the true star of the year in that regard was Elizabeth Warren, the newly elected Senator from Massachusetts, who could become a Presidential possibility very quickly.

The massive contributions of Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton make them the two best decisions on personnel that President Obama made four years ago, and they have had an extremely positive effect on the historical record and reputation of Barack Obama.

The power of wealthy millionaires and billionaires to control the politics of America suffered a smashing defeat, an event thought unlikely after the Citizens United decision of the Supreme Court in 2010.

The reactionary and hateful agenda of the far Right, both politically and religiously, also suffered a great repudiation, and proved once again that optimism and progress win out over fear and regression, as long as the American people become engaged and involved in the agenda, and realize the threat to the great progress made in the past 80 years by the New Deal, Great Society, and the many political, social and economic reforms brought about by forward looking Democrats and Republicans in Congress, and by the leadership of Presidents of both parties who saw the need for more government intervention and regulation–including Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Notice that Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush are not included in this list, as they both set back the concept of fairness and equity that all of the other Presidents, including some Republicans, made part of their agenda, to the dismay of the right wing forces in America!

So 2012 has been a triumph in many ways for progressivism, liberalism, and the goals of the Left in American politics to make a society of justice, equity, and compassion!