Why Don't We Hang Pirates Anymore?

A few days ago, Wall Street Journal columnist, Bret Stephens, wrote an article entitled "why don't we hang pirates anymore?" - regarding the world's failed attempts to curb piracy in international waters in the 21st century.

"Year-to-date, Somalia-based pirates have attacked more than 90 ships, seized more than 35, and currently hold 17. Some 280 crew members are being held hostage, and two have been killed. Billions of dollars worth of cargo have been seized; millions have been paid in ransom. A multinational naval force has attempted to secure a corridor in the Gulf of Aden, through which 12% of the total volume of seaborne oil passes, and U.S., British and Indian naval ships have engaged the pirates by force. Yet the number of attacks keeps rising."

The underlying problem seems to be that there is no underlying legal authority over this horrible problem. United States law only refers to instances in which American vessels are attacked and International law has very confusing verbiage which has made many conflicts complicated.

"Piracy, of course, is hardly the only form of barbarism at work today...and our collective inability to deal with it says much about how far we've regressed in the pursuit of what is mistakenly thought of as a more humane policy." A society that erases the memory of how it overcame barbarism in the past inevitably loses sight of the meaning of civilization, and the means of sustaining it.

How Obama Got Elected

I consider myself a rational Republican - fiscally conservative and socially moderate. I do not scorn Democrats for our differences but instead look to build bridges and find common ground. This video however really demonstrates the problem with allowing anyone to vote. These people are so ill-informed that it disgusts me. The Founding Fathers would watch this video and vomit at the trash coming out their mouths.

"Let Detroit Go Bankrupt"

The United States is facing the most challenging economic climate in decades – the housing market is slumping, the credit market is nonexistent, and many of America’s largest businesses are suffering so much that they have asked both the American Government and Sovereign Wealth Funds for bailouts. In fact, the CEOs of General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler testified before Congress yesterday in an effort to convince U.S. Representatives to approve a $25 billion bailout of the Big Three car companies.

Yesterday morning, former Republican Presidential candidate and native Michigander Mitt Romney published an op-ed in the New York Times entitled “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.” At a time when the American people and American businesses are looking for government handouts during a time of trouble, this op-ed is one of the few instances which paint reality instead of political correctness. Governor Romney kept his Republican nomination hopes alive by winning the Michigan Primary, so why would he make such a bold statement now against the main industry of his home state? As a private equity investor, Romney sought to build great companies and fix broken ones. The government should not write a check to postpone the demise of struggling companies – it should work to fix them, soften the current tax and fuel efficiency burdens placed upon American car companies, and invest in research so we can deliver products that customers want to buy at affordable prices.

Despite the controversial title, his piece outlines the basic faults of the American business climate – lack of innovation, short sidedness, and poor business practices – and proposes that the only way to truly get them running again is through a managed bankruptcy which would enable companies to streamline excess labor as well as pension and real estate costs.

America’s greatness has been derived by resilience in the face of adversity. American car companies need more than a facelift. “Management as is must go.” New leaders should be recruited from unrelated industries. The government should not simply write a check – there should be cross-industry collaboration. New leadership should excel in marketing, innovation, creativity and labor relations.

We also need new labor agreements. Our international counterparts are able to produce cars for lower wages and are winning market share from The Big Three. The former head of the United Automobile Workers, Walter Reuther, acknowledges that “getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street.” The U.A.W. needs to set a new course – designed around profit sharing and stock grants to employees. There can no longer be resentment between workers and management. As workers accept salary cuts, executives must also make sacrifices and get rid of planes and fancy dinners. People must agree to “sanity in salaries and perks.”

One of the biggest things holding American companies back is the focus on short-term stock price instead of long term growth. Investments must be made for the future. Management should receive bonuses for growing market share, increasing product quality and customer satisfaction in addition to standard profit measures, not quarterly stock price increases.

In the 2004 movie, Man on Fire, Christopher Walken’s character notes that “a man can be an artist at anything, food or whatever if you’re good enough at it. Creasy's art is death, and he's about to paint his masterpiece!” American car companies need help and they need it quickly. Governor Romney should swallow his pride about losing the nomination for President and take the helm of one of America’s struggling companies. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check. It is time for America’s great turnaround artist to paint his masterpiece.

You Think College Applications Are Difficult...

For all of the negative comments I have made about our newly elected 44th President of the United States, no one can fault him for running an extraordinary campaign. President-elect Obama’s transition team issues a 63-question application to potential applicants for federal government positions. Their attention to detail and commitment to hiring the best, most qualified, and most ethical candidates assuages some of my concern for Obama’s lack of executive experience.

Good campaign transition teams are determined to protect their boss from the embarrassment and distraction of a bungled nomination to one of the country’s top jobs. “In this process, you're guilty until proven innocent," says Paul Light, a professor at New York University's Wagner Graduate School of Public Service. Obama's lawyers are asking candidates to dig deep and come forward with some of the most private details of their personal and professional lives — as well as those of their spouses. An e-mail that could be embarrassing? An old diary entry that makes you blush? A loan you're not proud of? A late tax payment? An arrest? These questions are all on Obama's 63-item background questionnaire, and the word to those competing for top jobs is that they better cough up the answers now because the information will surely come out later. You must ask these questions, because there should be no surprises in the White House.

Some political observers say Obama’s caution with respect to recruiting new administration officials and key high-level advisers may be turning away a string of qualified candidates wary of subjecting themselves and their families to the most rigid presidential vetting process on record. David Gergen, an adviser to four past presidents describes the questionnaire as “extremely invasive.” In the age of technology and at a time when many are skeptical of our nation’s leaders, this process must be transparent both to the new administration and the American people. People who want to serve 300 million Americans and the leader of the free world must prove that they are capable of handling this responsibly and ethically.

I applaud Obama for his thorough approach to this process, but am disheartened that his apparent commitment to “change” has thus far yielded little more than Clinton administration alumni. Obama is hiring people with more Washington experience and less far-left ideology – the opposite of what his supporters thought they would get. I have written many times about my view that our national leaders should be smarter, better qualified, more experienced, and more ethical than the average citizen. I believe that the American government should stay out of people’s day-to-day lives, but the President of the United States needs to know that his team is ready to lead and will not embarrass his administration. It is an honor and a privilege to serve your country. Those who are uncomfortable taking responsibility for their actions and disclosing details of their private lives need not apply.

"...whether you like it or not"

Gay couples were not the only losers in Tuesday’s passage of Proposition 8 which now forbids gay marriage in the state of California. San Francisco Mayor, Gavin Newsom, a frontrunner for Governor in 2010 bore the brunt of the anti-gay marriage movement. Newsom is widely seen as an up-and-comer in the California Democratic Party but his climb to prominence became that much more difficult this week as the California electorate proved it disagrees with his stance on gay marriage.



“…whether you like it not.” Those five words helped shore up his support in San Francisco but may prove to be his political Waterloo. On May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court struck down a ban on gay marriage. In celebration, Newsom held a rally at which he exclaimed “as California goes, so goes the rest of the nation. It's inevitable. This door's wide open now. It's going to happen, whether you like it or not.”

Since May, he has not backed down from his steadfast support of gay rights and gay marriage but has tried fruitlessly to get out of the spotlight on this controversial issue. He presided over a lesbian wedding only to find out that school children were in attendance. And most recently and most importantly, Newsom became the punching bag for Yes on 8 campaign. They bought millions of dollars in advertisements which displayed his rally cry and used it to invigorate their supporters.

Despite California being considered a very liberal state, the vote on gay marriage was split instead on racial lines much more so than by political lines. African Americans and Hispanics voted for Barack Obama but then voted Yes on 8. In favorability polling conducted this week, Newsom has a very slim margin of favorability among Democrats and an abysmally negative favorability among Republicans. Despite his support in San Francisco and his support by the California Democratic elite, Newsom will have a very difficult time being elected. Over the next two years, the field of serious gubernatorial contenders will emerge. It will fascinating to see whether Newsom can play up his economic and healthcare revivals of San Francisco or whether people will see him as the steadfast supporter of an unfavorable issue.

Palin 2012?

Barack Obama will be elected the 44th President of the United States on Tuesday, and jockeying for inside position to become the Republican Party’s 2012 nominee will begin Wednesday morning. As a diehard Republican, I don’t understand why my party seems to be drawn to those who are common and folksy. Should we not instead be striving for greatness? Republicans talk about the horrible state of education in this country, yet vilify leaders who have achieved great things. Should we discourage parents from inspiring their children to attend Harvard or Princeton? I worry that as America faces bigger challenges and greater obstacles than at anytime in recent memory, the GOP will nominate another fruitless leader in four years.

At this time of impending difficulty, do you think that attending four colleges in five years to earn a journalism degree and being mayor of a city with the population of two average-sized California high schools prepares you to be President of the United States? I think not. Governor Sarah Palin brushes off her lack of intellect and plays up her desire to be seen as a common person and “hockey mom.” She claims that her experience as Governor of Alaska has proven her ‘instinct’ to make tough decisions. There are 300 million people in the United States. Shouldn’t we be able to elect someone who has both? I am not suggesting that the President needs a PhD, but we should elect people with gravitas. Unfortunately, Democrats know it when they see it and Republicans tend to mock it when they do.

Regardless of the outcome of Tuesday’s election, Palin will surely challenge Governors Mitt Romney and Bobby Jindal for the Republican nomination in four years. Let’s compare –Romney ran the most successful private equity firm of all time and delivered healthcare to every citizen in Massachusetts, Jindal helped lead the Department of Health and Human Services and was in charge of the Louisiana State School system, and our current Vice Presidential nominee shoots moose and spends $150,000 on wardrobe additions.

Palin is attractive, ambitious, and conservative, but completely inexperienced on the national and international stages. With President Obama running what is likely to be an enlarged government that spends more on social programs than ever, four years from now the GOP will likely turn to the most anti-government, anti-Washington candidate since Barry Goldwater. Palin is loved by talk radio and Fox News conservatives because of her pure conservative beliefs. As a former Vice Presidential nominee, she will be the best-financed candidate other than Romney and will be anointed by energy interests threatened by Obama’s green initiatives. She draws Obama-size crowds and will appeal to rural voters in the Iowa Caucuses and South Carolina Primary.

My party needs a reality check. We must strive for excellence – not mediocrity, and recognize leadership – not simply familiarity. America has some ominous years ahead, and if we are going to continue to be the last, best hope of the world, voters need to choose the smartest, most experienced, most capable, and outstanding leader they can find, not the person most like their coworker or next door neighbor. Voters may feel they can relate to Governor Palin, but would you want to elect your next door neighbor as Vice President of the United States? I surely would not.