When the Cash for Clunkers plan was first announced, it appeared to be a flawed plan right from the start. There were some obvious problems with the scheme to get people into more politically correct green friendly cars. With the plan only a few days into operation, the plan has successfully seduced so many more people to trade in there bigger, safer cars to snag their share of taxpayer or Chinese money that the initial billion dollars has already swirled down the drain. The government is busy patting itself on the back and proclaiming the program a total success. But is it?

According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 54% of the voting public was against the plan while 35% favored it. Among those with a little more financial interest, 62% of investors thought it should not be done... and an even 50% of all respondents felt that if they were going to run a program like this, it should be restricted to American made cars. However, like so many programs coming out of our nations' capitol... bailouts, health care and all sorts of things we haven't even been told about, the desires of the people... as in “We the People”... have been ignored in favor of elitist programs and schemes to involve the government in more areas of our lives.

Let's look at what really took place in our country. Thousands of buyers have happily driven away from lots in their shiny new or late model cars, with salesmen and women tallying their skyrocketing commissions and dealers themselves hoping they were going to see the promised money. The scenario fits perfectly the thinking of the current administration... transferring dollars to supposedly disadvantaged or favored and adding burdens to evil business owners.

Several dynamics were at work in each transaction... let's look at them.

The most obvious action was people who may have been thinking of replacing their current mode of transportation for a new one saw the incentive of having their fellow citizens chip in to help pay for their car. Often, these were people who could already afford a car and perhaps were planning to buy one in the next year or two. This program just compressed the process. I guess it goes back to the definition of fairness promoted by many in our government for many years... that someone else pays for my benefit. It's human nature... and not the nicest side of it.

However the they are not home free with no down side. In many cases, people have traded in a functioning automobile that carried no payments for another, probably better car, with significant payments. In other cases, some who could not quite swing the deal for the car found a way, with the incentive, to squeeze it into their budget. At a time when people are trying to cut down on their debts, these buyers have been convinced to join the federal government in increasing their monthly expenses in spite of increasingly insecure employment situations. We saw what happened when easy terms and low interest rates drew more and more people into the housing market who should not have been there... to the detriment of the themselves, lenders and our country in general. One has to wonder if this is just a repeat of a foolish strategy that may drive us into even more negative circumstances.

The salesmen are loving the increase in sales at car lots that have been devoid of customers for months. Customers have been waiting in line just to talk to one of these purveys of economical transportation. Assuredly, they will see some massive checks, but at what cost? Customers may have bought their new car next month, or a few months down the road, even into the next year. So we see a spike in sales this week at the cost of many future sales that would have given them a steady income over the months to come.

The dealers are seeing cars roll off their lots in, sometimes, record numbers. They have been told to sell the car, fill out the 1040 type forms, and wait for their payments... if they are approved. Already reports are coming in that submissions are being rejected... meaning the dealer is not getting the money. With hundreds of thousands of cars on the streets through this program combined with the efficiency and effectiveness of the government in getting payments out the door... this could conceivably be responsible for closing more dealers than the auto companies themselves as, essentially, the dealers have to pay off new cars coming out of their floor plan, pay commissions to salesmen and cover a variety of costs of doing business. The more successful they are, the more they are depending on the government to keep its word in a timely manner.

The cars themselves show the desire of the administration to destroy anything they just don't like. They're not all junkers... some are decent transportation for someone without a lot of money, yet, but terms of the agreement, they must be destroyed withing a few days... long before any payments will be received from our Big Brother in Washington. They cannot even be sent to junk yards for salvage, but are destined to be crushed and melted down. So strong is their desire to remove these politically incorrect vehicles from the streets, our “benefactors” don't have any concern for the less financially well off they claim to want to help by shrinking the supply of inexpensive vehicles.

The administration, and even some Republicans who should know better, are touting the plan as a massive success, to the point of looking for an additional two billion dollars from the American people beyond the initial one billion allocated to the plan. All one can do is only look back at one of the gravely voiced Everett Dirksen's favorite quotes, “A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.” Unfortunately, the damage goes far beyond the dollars down the drain.

This past weekend, those who were watching honest reporting saw some headlines reflecting the esteem our country and our president commands throughout the world. What is interesting is that the man sitting in the oval office, along with his party, roundly criticized what they perceived to be George Bush's heavy handed approach to foreign affairs... vowing to bring about a new era of respect and respectability.

It is reported that Israeli ambassador Michael Oren was summoned to the State Department.* He was told that a building project being developed by an American investor in east Jerusalem must not go forward as it interfered with their plans for regional peace. The State Department sought to forbid any Jewish development on captured lands in an attempt to draw boundaries more satisfactory to the Palestinians.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the attempted land use demand by commenting, "I can only imagine what would happen if someone suggested Jews could not live in certain neighborhoods in New York, London, Paris or Rome. There would certainly be a major international outcry." This new construction is part of his plan for a unified Jerusalem. It is surprising that he took no public offense at the treatment of his ambassador as some lackey from a client state... however, it appears that he is focused on what is best for his country and not on petty one upsmanship.

Meanwhile, former first lady and current Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was hearing from India’s environment minister, Jairam Ramesh,** that his country had no interest in signing on to environmental demands of the Obama administration and Europeans who have bought into the man-made climate change hysteria. Even though she dangled technical partnerships in front of him, Ramesh did not bite.

Mrs. Clinton was not able to convince him that the fate of the world hung on their decision and that only by working together can we overcome all the evil, planet warming pollution that the reprobate western corporations have been spewing for years. Not only did she apologize for the west, and US in particular, for gunking up the planet but she offered to help them fix our errors. The minister was not impressed. India, along with China as well, have chosen not to, lemming like, follow the US and our slick lipped shyster down the path to economic suicide.

It appears that foreign leaders do not fall under the same teleprompter induced spell that hypnotizes many in the slack jawed segment of our electorate. They seem to be more able to see through the soaring rhetoric to the harsh economic realities that underlie the awesomely proposed plans of our fearless leader. They see the destruction that lies down the path we, as a nation, have chosen. The man has made his pitch, but they are not buying.

Perhaps they are understanding that there is more form than substance to this administration, it's rhetoric and it's plans. On the other hand, they just may not have the emotional attachment to the president who wants to solve all our problems by sticking it to the rich... or they may not have given any thought at all to the President of the United States.

It is possible that they just looked at the plans in both cases and rejected them because the simply were bad ideas. I had a friend who, when he was training to be a camp counselor for middle age children, was told that for them to follow and respect him, he not only had to be right, but he had to appear to be right. Unfortunately Barack Hussein Obama has neither of these going for him.

* Israel Rejects US Call to Halt Jerusalem Project http://tinyurl.com/ljbhz3
** India Rebuffs US Carbon Demands http://tinyurl.com/nugzw2

Bono-Mack, Castle, Kirk, McHugh, Reichert, Smith, LoBiondo, Lance – names of Republicans who voted with the Democrats to pass the abomination called cap and trade. The sad thing about this is that we have come to expect the party of Barack Hussein Obama to sell out their countrymen in the quest of power and control. We used to expect more of Republicans, but recent events have shaken our belief that the Republican Party was really the party of smaller government and free enterprise. These eight could have helped put some luster back on that image. They chose not to do so. The

y chose, instead, to accept the unproven and highly suspect global warming theories and take an action guaranteed to ruin the economy of our once and future great nation. These house members, chose to leave their fellow party members to follow a fantasy. Some will say they showed courage and followed their consciences... doing the right thing and all that. That is what they often said about the party's eminently successful presidential candidate last November.

There are areas where we can have differing view points, and there are issues that go the heart of who we are, as a party and as a nation. It's like Jim Croce once wrote “After all it's what we've done that makes us what we are.” What they've done is turned their backs on those who were supposed to be their allies and gave the victory to those who would rule over us. I will leave it to the reader to decide what that makes them.

In some ways, it may not have made much difference in the ultimate outcome. However by sticking their thumbs in the eyes of all their constituents who called, wrote, faxed and emailed them objecting to this form of madness, they gave several Democrats a free pass. It is apparent that Speaker Pelosi let some of her minions vote against the bill as their votes were not necessary for passage. So, not only did they make their own re-election more difficult, which is not a bad thing, but they gave cover to several other would be socialists who did not have to annoy their constituents with an unpopular position.

Given the districts these people represented... east coast, west coast and Illinois, it may be possible that they are the best the Republicans could elect. I don't know that this is the fact, but this is the party line: that we have to accept those who lean toward progressive thinking if we are to win. Then I have to ask, what is the point? Are we just going to concede these areas to the statists and be happy that some of the statists are wearing the right jersey?

This is the “big tent” thinking in operation. What it really means is that we either don't know what we believe, or we don't have the confidence in our beliefs to present them forcefully in a way that helps people catch the vision of freedom. I believe much of this comes from the professional politicians who cynically view their careers as more important that any issue. We may have been able to let that pass in the past when we were not faced with such an assault on what it means to be an American, the values our country stood for and the freedom we once had.

Today we are fighting battles on far too many fronts: the economy, health care, environmental extremism, hostility to Christians... the list could go on and on... we cannot afford to let the self-serving political types determine the direction of the opposition party or of our country. It's time to put up with more dates on our calendars and more lost sleep as we work to restore the country to what is once was and what it can be again.

The “big tent” is really not a bad idea, as long as it's filled with conservatives and libertarians. Now is the time to do it, while we can do it peacefully... before Washington controls every area of our life and treats us, not as citizens to be respected, but as pawns to be manipulated and taxed to carry out their grandiose schemes that leave us with nothing but a tax bill.

The cash for clunkers is one more plan by the Barack Hussein Obama that not only attempts to make all of us good little subjects, but actually transfers wealth to his supporters who comply. The idea of the government giving $4500 toward the purchase of a new or late model car, if it is a car approved by our beneficent government is opposed by the 54% who understand the implications of this incentive program.

Only about a third (35% according to a recent Rasmussen poll), think it's a good idea, with government employees giving it higher marks than the general population. That pretty much aligns with the number of hard core Democrats... maybe even the future number of government workers. This form of social engineering is an attempt to get people to buy cars that both foreign and domestic manufacturers have been producing, but people have not been buying in significant quantities. They are trying to get people to purchase smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient vehicles that most people understand instinctively are more cramped and hazardous to their occupants.

I am wondering how many of us are willing to put our children and, in my case, grand children, at greater risk to solve a problem that, most likely, does not even exist? For the presidents rabid environmentalist supporters who believe that man's presence is detrimental to the earth itself, the answer is simple. The earth must survive, even if I and my family do not.

These undersized and generally underpowered machines are touted to have passed the regular safety tests our big brother now imposes on all vehicles sold in the US. This is great, but they leave out the getting-run-over-by-an-SUV test and don't even think about an eighteen wheeler.

The other problem with this, besides the safety issue, is that our country has an almost ten percent unemployment rate, many people are struggling to get by. Many have learned that debt, while it lets you get nice things now, is killing them financially. They have put off buying a new, or late model, car so they can get their financial house in order. The government is, once again, enticing these people to act against their best interest and go into debt to buy another vehicle that they may not really need, but will make mother earth and the environmental extremists happy.

Perhaps the worst part of the plan is that it takes borrowed money and gives it to a favored few who can already afford a car and leaves it to future generations to pay back. It does not help the general welfare of the citizens, unless one buys the argument that everyone benefits from the marginally cleaner air and more stable climate these cars will facilitate. If one does not understand the logic of our betters, it's just more money taken from everyone and flushed down the drain into the pockets of the favored few.

Should some readers believe this is a good idea, or think it's a bad idea, but are willing to take advantage of it anyway, it's been suggested that even if you don't have a suitable junker to trade in, go out an buy a $700 clunker to trade for the $4500 credit. Apparently to prosper in this new world order, it helps to have a larcenous streak with no conscience to get in the way.

California election day, May 19, 2009, may have been the start of our country’s climb out of the financial abyss. In spite of the Governator’s dire warnings delivered with the fervor seen in Henry Paulsen and Tim Geithner as they stampeded a gullible Congress into their high priced bailout schemes, the electorate proved they were not so gullible. This time the results were different because the audience was different.

Instead of the beltway elites who have the inflated delusions that they can solve most any problem by throwing our money at it… we saw the response of the people who actually have to pay for for these machinations. They have decided that rather than bankrupt themselves, they would call the government’s bluff that rapists would be set free from prison and may even be filling in for laid off teachers in the middle schools. They took the risk that their homes may burn down because of there would be no more firemen or they would be robbed because there would be no police. For once they did not buy the story that their money was really needed to help the sea otters and illegal aliens.

How much of this backbone came from the tea party spirit and how much was natural individual frustration at the continual abuse from Sacramento, is hard to tell. In some ways, it doesn’t matter because the people have spoken. No, the people screamed at the top of their lungs, “NO MORE!” The voters finally had a say in this financial dissipation.

What is interesting is that there were not lines of people waiting to make their wishes known. Turnout was low but margins were high… almost 2 to 1 rejecting some of the proposals. It did not take massive numbers to set California on the course to fiscal sanity. Apparently most of residents were resigned to the state government squeezing more and more out of them, in much the same way the folks in DC do… or they saw the poll numbers and were willing to let others do the lifting for them. It is sad that so many took this view and didn’t make themselves part of the victory. It’s even more frightening because that is how freedoms are lost and tyranny solidifies power.

On the other hand, it shows us that a small but motivated group can actually make a difference in the world. It shows that the citizens have more sense than the professionals who are paid to make government work efficiently and effectively. As I write this, I understand I am talking about residents of the land of fruits, nuts and flakes. The system can even work there. Again I have to remind myself it was a motivated minority that got the job done… and we have to thank them for their efforts.

The denizens of Sacramento got the message. The question remains, “Did the beltway appropriators get the message?” Immediate feedback doesn’t show much of a difference in the spendthrift approach to problem solving. However we can’t be discouraged. We saw progress! We saw the people could defeat the politicians. The boys in DC may just be a tougher nut to crack but with sustained pressure and, may I say, harassment, they will hopefully get the message soon, or find a new career.

This morning I watched the news as three urban mayors sat grinning and licking their chops at the thought of even more federal dollars coming their way. The more I listen to the explanations of the various bundles of cash flowing out of Washington, the more I understand that another direction of the income redistribution is from rural to urban areas, from primarily red areas to primarily blue areas.

This should come as no surprise as the Democrats have a long and proud history of favoring their constituents. Their schemes may not lift the poor out of poverty, but they give them occasional goodies and the occasional satisfaction that those who are better off would now be less better off and experiencing some pain as well. It's payoff time in the cities. Besides, if they ever did resolve the problem of poverty, they understand that people no longer looking for a handout gravitate to the other party.

The inequity of distribution is aggravated by the fact that these cities tend to be the least efficient and most corrupt governments in the country. There is even talk about the cities getting the funds directly from Washington and not having to submit to the adult supervision of state governments.

Where is this money going? Part of it is going to maintain bloated city budgets and retention of the overpopulation of municipal workers. Union workers, I might add... dare we say more of the money flowing to Obama supporters. Another part of it is going to build infrastructure and amenities for city dwellers.

This needs to be viewed in the light of the bigger picture and makes one wonder about the overall goals and a possibly hidden agenda from the administration. Let's take a look at several pearls of Washington wisdom.

First we see this rerouting of cash to urban centers... never mind that most city governments are incapable of using it wisely. This will go for increased services and amenities. City dwellers tend to be renters as opposed to home owners. Beyond this, we see the beginning of the reduction of the home mortgage interest deduction. It is difficult to believe that this is the end as the current administration appears to have an insatiable appetite for money to pay for it's excesses.

So we see taxpayer dollars spent to make city life more tolerable and home ownership less desirable. It has long been the goal of the dirt loving tree huggers to stop suburban sprawl and move people back to the cities where we can all enjoy the wonders of public transportation and live stacked to the sky in high rise apartment buildings. When we combine this activity with other legislation coming down the pike such as cap and trade with will push energy prices, including gas, higher and higher. Then, there is even talk about adding to the tax on every gallon of gasoline.

One has to wonder if we are not witnessing the execution of the radical environmentalist agenda. Each of the elements is wrong in and of itself, but when combined, promise even further negative changes in our society. City dwellers tend to be inherently more dependent on government services and less capable of taking care of themselves. They tend to be more narcissistic and disconnected as opposed to suburban and rural residents and these changes to not bode well for our country.

Sometimes it's a good idea to stifle the outrage at each individual assault on our liberty and freedom of choice while we step back and look at the bigger picture. Each nibble at our ability to live the American dream when combined with all the others can take an even bigger bite out of what we each thought was our future. It's called synergy in action.