Tales of a Democratic Fabulist // Raj Kannappan // 12.06.2011

Immediately following the start of her tenure as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FLA) chose the path of deception over collected leadership. She revealed to the public the insidiousness with which she intended to further loot the long-gone confidence of citizens in their government when she claimed on national television that Republicans “want to literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws—and very transparently—block access to the polls to voters who are more likely to vote for Democratic candidates than Republican candidates.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.)

By uttering those words, Wasserman Schultz began her seemingly effortless yet painfully distressing climb to the crown of her political theatre. Her equating of state legislatures’ requiring voters to show identification with legislation that mandated segregated schools and drinking fountains raised immediate and forceful opposition, even from key Democratic players, impelling a retraction from Wasserman Schultz. In her defense, unsurprisingly, arose Democratic strategist and top Obama adviser David Axelrod, who claimed that the President and his team were pleased with Wasserman Schultz’s performance and had no second thoughts about her leadership. Such weakness from the President’s team which once preached a post-partisan command of the country—divine morality exalted—represents but the arrant failings of a Democratic leadership which knows not when to cast the throes of bickering for level-headed governance nor what demeanor to apply when faced with the specter of a debilitating political impasse.

The now-branded prevarications of Wasserman Schultz are worth remembering as a source of wayward imagination left unrestrained amidst the storm clouds of very real issues waiting to rain down on the country—not to mention the impending negativity that Obama and the DNC will employ in his 2012 campaign to compensate for his administration’s proven inability to perform over the last three years.

Wasserman Schultz’s marauding was merely one of numerous gaffes and blatantly deceitful acts of theatre, which then begs the question, what was President Obama thinking when he chose as the DNC’s leader someone who seems bent on merely embroidering claims to their extremes and inculpating those who oppose her as eager to throw America under the bus? Surely, the President could have tapped a more honest public servant for the position.

Of course, Obama’s tapping someone else for the post would have implied that he actually cared about selecting someone who would put America before his Party and personal ambitions—as he often calls on Republicans to do.

Wasserman Schultz’s paroxysms of rage, however, have allowed for her success in one aspect: hurling at Republicans every which unfounded and self-implicating accusation of immorality and political opportunism she manages to seize. She has accused Republicans of wanting to reinstate segregation and of waging “a war on women.” Even rebuking Republicans for not supporting the American auto industry while she herself makes her daily rounds in a Japanese-made Infinity FX35, Wasserman Schultz seems lost for credibility. More puzzlingly, she has chastised the GOP for wanting to make illegal immigration a crime. What a realization? Illegal immigration is, in fact, illegal.

Most egregiously feckless are her inaccurate criticisms of Republicans’ attempts to initiate Medicare reform. Her Mediscare tactics have merely contributed to the erosion of a genuine debate on an outdated social insurance program which, without a sustained intervention, will continue to undermine the financial well-being of the country. Her primary goal appears to be the constant vilification of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), seemingly one of the few public officials—from either Party—who has shown a dogged conviction to implement true entitlement reform.

Appearing on CBS’s “Face the Nation” during the summer, the Congresswoman argued that Republicans “would take the people who are younger than 55 today and tell them, ‘You know what? You’re on your own. … We’re going to throw you to the wolves and allow insurance companies to deny you coverage and drop you for pre-existing conditions.’” By conjuring up naked misrepresentations like this one, not only has Wasserman Schultz lost any credibility that she had with Americans outside the far left, but she has also failed to impact policy debates in a meaningful way.

One could argue that the most important responsibilities of the head of the DNC are fundraising and coordination of an election strategy. That would hold true in general. However, Wasserman Schultz has decided that she wants to extend her reach into the policy arena. So the least she can do while appearing on her beloved Sunday talk shows is supplement her pontifications on the failings of Republicans with a modicum of veracity.

The only redeeming quality Wasserman Schultz appears to possess is her creativity—or rather, her ear-piercing penchant for manufacturing tales of Republican brinksmanship. Only if this creativity could spill over to her discussion of policy proposals, the Democratic Party and President Obama would stand on stronger ground today.

Worse still, the Congresswoman has even sold out some of her Party’s own supporters. Following Republican Bob Turner’s unforeseen victory against Democrat David Weprin in New York’s 9^th Congressional District—a 3-1 Democratic stronghold—two months ago, the Congresswoman justified the loss by arguing that the district was “a difficult district for Democrats.” Surely, she knew that the district had not had a Republican representative since 1923, and that Jews, who make up approximately one third of the electorate in the district, vote overwhelmingly Democrat in virtually every election. Apparently, for Wasserman Schultz, Party loyalty only runs one way.

However, the specter of an election massacre looms large for the chairwoman of the DNC, and if she has not begun to writhe from sleepless nights already, she would do well to ready herself for the impending fallout in November. For the 2012 elections, most polls have the Senate in a tossup as to who holds the majority and the House as still solidly remaining in Republican hands. It remains to be seen who will occupy the White House. Amidst a string of retirements—political pragmatism writ large—by prominent Democrats, topped by that of the pugnacious Barney Frank (D-MA), and a powerful dissatisfaction with the President, Republicans can conceivably seize the House and the Senate, as well as the White House.

Given Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s record of political malpractice as the head of the DNC, it is truly amazing that not a single official from the Obama administration has criticized her publicly. However, come January 2013, it is unlikely she will remain in her post—regardless of which Party comes out on top. She has simply embarrassed even the Democratic Party one too many times. Should the Republicans sweep the elections, Rep. Wasserman Schultz will surely be thrown under the bus unceremoniously—much like she did Democratic voters in NY-9.

Call Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s D.C. Office at (202) 225-7931 and let her know that America is tired of her anti-American antics.

Raj Kannappan // Cornell University // @RajKannappan

Fire or Ice // Troy Ard // 12.05.2011

From a front row seat atop a bluff, the sun bids farewell behind the majestic granite curtain of the Rocky Mountains. The snow—like roses thrown by adoring fans not ready to bid farewell—falls to the ground as the orange dusk is overtaken by night’s dark. There is no doubt that summer is long gone, killed off like a soap opera celebrity by some bizarre storyline. Winter has come. As he looks, he remembers the months gone by. Under the warm kiss of summer it seemed he was god, as one-in-all and as self-as-one. Nothing could stop him; there was nothing to fear. Leather seats sticking to bare back. Sweat beading down from dark hair needing a haircut flowing in the wind with windows open. The rhythm and words of Everclear’s chillaxed but upbeat Santa Monica overpowered the soul of a mindless driver, living in seeming autonomy with the world around him. Sam couldn’t help but think that this first snowfall defined his existence. All of his years had been something of a miracle. He was not old by any means. But at the same time, he had entered a phase of bittersweet young adulthood. Accolades and triumphs surpassed by nobody of his tender age marked every step of his life thus far. His successes were no easy glories like many of the easy-street friends with which he had always associated. His rise to this precipice was painful and earned; his family at times dysfunctional. But nothing could ever stop him. Nothing could hold him back. Until now.

Scars marred this young man’s handsome flesh. Many of his nieces and nephews had been slain on September 11th. He took this tragedy harder than most. Like many, he found his faith in the darkness. At first, he found the characteristic resilience which had personified his character to the rest of the world. But with the darkness and despair so deep and penetrating, he knew that this was mostly a show. Though young, he was both blessed and burdened as a patriarch among his kin. Years ago, in the peak of his adolescent fearlessness, Sam managed to make peace among broken and despairing factions. He still remembered, though too easily forgot, the pain and sorrow which led him to be the head of a family which never accepted him. He was strong and athletic; though not as finessed and chiseled in his figure as many, nobody could question his quickness nor his strength.

The loss of that day still seemed to hide the light which shined within his soul. When he took upon himself the mantle of protecting the greatness and glory of his brethren, he knew the costs he could incur. After the pain of that day, Sam knew he had to act. He fought long and hard, finding those responsible and exacting vengeance on the many who spilled the precious blood of his kin. He made no friends, for he knew that friendship was too easily broken by convenience. He was a man on a mission, not of mercy but of justice. It came with the territory. Nobody reveled in the burdens of leadership. As an idealist, Sam had always been able to inspire, through words, though kindness, and through mercy– and also through the luxury of wealth he had acquired through the reigns of leadership. His name alone had always been enough to make peace and help others prosper.

Sam was not a stranger to violence, but in his younger days, it was so easy to enact schoolyard justice. Glory shone in his actions. Something was different since the towers fell, however. Like the rest of the world, Sam lost his innocence. There was no glory in his fighting, and duty, though it knows no bounds but justice herself, carries no glory and no grandeur. He had become hard. The cold was fitting, as it seemed to be at parody with the feelings inside his worn yet young face.

Only after the towers fell, Sam, still the same person, exists as a fundamentally different person. He had tried to resurrect his old self a while back and hope for change, but the only outcome of his hope was a hard-learned lesson in vainglory and superficial caricatures of identity without any root in reality. When the stock market crashed, Sam lost most of his wealth. Like most people, he too had been living on credit. His mission and his responsibilities had not changed, but it seemed his name means little now, and his wealth—amassed throughout his life—seems fleeting. As he stood on the bluff he understood he had entered a dark night of the soul.

It’s a funny thing. Sometimes, even with your eyes open wide you can live a life with your eyes wide shut. Sure he had made mistakes in his past, but nothing he did seemed to deserve the crushing heft of this moment. All day long he hears the muttering of gossip from those surrounding him: ‘He’s not what he used to be,’ or even worse, ‘He is lost, poor fellow.’ But when it counted, even those who burn his ears with gossip still turn to him in moments of despair, the titular leader and identity of their collective glory.

Coming of age is not easy. But looking down at the snow, he knew he had two choices. One option seemed easy. One seemed too much to bear. Freezing cold beneath his full suit, Sam looked out at the distance surveying his claim. He looked to aging roads reminiscent of glory and prosperity as he noticed how quickly today turns to history. He saw lights still glowing, burning bright to light up the entire hill upon which the city stands, its warm orange glow diffused by the cold white snow. Looking more closely, he saw a tall building, which beneath it he knew were scores of huddled masses. Too easily Sam remembered the days when he did not know those huddled masses. They came to him searching for the ability to build a new day both for themselves, and for Sam, their kind benefactor. It caused incalculable heartbreak to know that today those masses weren’t throngs of refugees seeking his help, but those under his care, demanding assistance. He longed to help them. But with no money, and the overarching importance of keeping them safe—fed or not, clothed or not—keeping them safe was his primary objective.

Overwhelmed, he looked down as he prepared to make his jump. So many had called for it for so long in the whispers behind his back. However, Sam had never been phased by their hate, too proud to be stopped, until now. He wasn’t what he used to be. Age is nothing but a number. Though young and strong,  he seemed to be an old soul his whole life. Most saw him better suited for grey hair and an eccentric top hat, not the well-worn suit and purple tie he had grown to love and hate. “Ice,” he said as an ironic snowflake fell upon his iconic pointing finger. But as he tried to make peace with himself, he looked again to the skyline. He saw a university, growing, and full of vigor. And as he studied the difference he realized he could not leave this place behind. He had grown fond of the university. Thinking back, he grew stronger within his soul as he thought of the intellectual vigor and ivory-tower debates which filled his privileged but painful childhood. His strength, he remembered, was his confidence. Since he ascended to this power and prominence, he left much of that debate behind. His principles, and indeed his patience, were lost in recent years. But as he looked down again, he found the strength to look beyond the pitfall below where he nearly laid his life. Too much was counting on his life, and he had never seriously let anybody down. Perhaps the situation had changed, but this was no worse than anything he had seen before. In fact, he had seen much worse. He realized, questioning how he even let himself get this close, that the real chasm facing which pushed him to this place didn’t involve insurmountable odds. Sam had lost faith in himself. No words and no catch phrases could reclaim that faith. It wasn’t a matter of dress or of style, but of action. Faith is earned, and built day-by-day and person-by-person even within himself. But he knew he could and would—as he always had—reclaim that faith in himself, for night must give way to a new dawn.

Taking a deep sigh of both relief, and even excitement that he could now face the challenges before him he changed his answer, “Fire. It must be fire. ”

We must look to our past to have the strength to conquer our present and build our future. Greatness can never come without challenge. Our present crisis is a crisis of confidence, not in our leaders, but in ourselves. The present times, are the times which try men’s souls. We have seen the reality of this moment. Each summer soldier and every sunshine patriot has shrunk from the service of their country. If we are to prevail, indeed if we are to endure, we must find strength in the intangible elements that comprise our greatness.

As a nation which could conquer the greatest empire in the world solely by the force of an idea and win its own independence; as a nation which saved its own soul in a harrowing and devastating civil war fought against ideas—that union was malleable and that freedom was not universal; a nation which fought against tyranny and unspeakable horror in World War II even when the horrors of poverty and depression sapped the vigor of our own citizens: America has survived worse. We, The People, must stand united and strong. Our power is in our purpose. In each hard-won battle America has fought, it has been the knowledge that our enemy is not internal but external, that there is always a greater enemy outside than within which carries us to victory. Let us hope and pray, that in this present crisis, a quiet but unmistakable crisis of confidence, we as a nation may come of age and quench our thirst for greatness—not by force of might, but by the gentle force of freedom. While we endure the hazing ritual, we must find the strength of our conviction against the temptation to turn every stone to bread. We need strong, bold, and brave leadership to carry us to tomorrow. Conservatives, as the protectors and defenders of the social contract, must remember our duty is to build an America with a brighter and better tomorrow, not to lay blame to the self-imposed rubble of today. My generation comes of age in an eerily similar way as how our own nation was birthed– lost, forgotten, and dumped on by our masters. We, today’s college generation, have a choice. We can allow ourselves to be consumed and lost by the forces around us like the fat, spoiled, and ungrateful generation that marked the Woodstock generation and choose the inglorious death of ice. Or we can choose something greater. We can pull ourselves up like the greatest generations before us and fight with nobility and glory and choose the triumph of facing the possibility of fire. Many shame our youth. Many claim laziness and worthlessness. However, all those involved in this burgeoning new movement of intellect–those among us who appeal to future glory than present blight—have a very different story to tell and a calling to serve in the priesthood of freedom.

Ronald Reagan said farewell to a nation with these words:
“I’ve spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don’t know if I’ve ever quite communicated what I meant when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That’s how I saw it, and see it still.”

America is still that city. It hasn’t changed at all. It’s residents, with no reason to walk outside the walls, have simply forgotten what it looks like from afar and need someone new to remind us of our promise. We thought we had found that in Barack Obama, but he was nothing more than the other sunshine soldiers with kind words and no perspective. Hardened and harrowed, let us press on to find tomorrow.

Troy Ard // University of Colorado at Pueblo // @troy_ard

#OccupyBrains (or How You Learned to Embrace Academia and Support Young Conservatives) // Amy Miller // 12.02.2011

Young. Conservative. Academic.

One of these things is not like the other! One of these things is not the same!

Only, not.  I am all three.  Conservative, an academic, and (still quite) young, and I’m here because I think it’s time for the rest of the movement to recognize the viability of the concept.

Being the Old Lady of TCC, I like to think I can offer some perspective as I flail around in the deep end of the age gap. I’m one of those career academics in pursuit of a piece of paper that will allow me to put a pretentious little “Esq.” after my name on my business cards.  It’s enough, though; walking into the classroom is the 1% equivalent of stepping into the trenches. It changes who we are, how we think, and what we’re willing to do both as scholars and as conservative activists.

Thus, the point.  It’s time for the Right to carve out a home for the conservative academic.  Especially the young conservative academic.  It’s not something that’s going to be easy; academics—young, old, whatever—approach things from a completely different direction.  We evaluate things differently, ask different types of questions, and come up with different solutions; what I’m particularly interested in is the questioning/evaluation process.

I’m not the most popular kid on the conservative block; I’ve gotten into it with my conservative family more times than I can count, not because of my beliefs, but because of the questions I asked, and how I evaluated the event/scandal/penis tweet in question.  I’d be willing to bet a few pitchers that I’m not the only TCC contributor who’s had this problem.

We as young conservative academics have trained ourselves to give everything the squinty-eyed once-over. It’s not that we don’t trust your investigation skills, or your judgment; conservatives in the classroom are attacked on a daily basis. Friendly professors are rare; intellectually honest liberal professors are even more rare.  Getting caught with your pants down in a room full of hostile liberal minions who look to an equally-hostile liberal professor for the final call on an issue is a nightmare I’d never wish on any conservative—even the ones I disagree with.  So, we’re careful.  We scrutinize.  We ask questions.  We hone the issue down to the actual controversy because for the past four (or five or six or seven) years, we’ve been one misstep away from gleeful humiliation by the liberal horde.

Don’t take our caution personally.

As for me, I want to be used. Pick my brain. Learn from my experience.  Exploit my tendency to question everything. Young conservatives are a wasted resource, a fact that was glaringly evident during the 2008 (and ensuing) campaigns. When I have the opportunity to interview candidates, the first question I ask is, “How do you plan on reaching out to young conservatives?”  Most candidates don’t have an answer, which means they’re throwing away votes on account of pure laziness.

Yes, laziness.

I don’t expect everyone on the right to suddenly get down with the hot new whatevers that are constantly puked out by the machine of American pop culture.  I don’t demand that you don’t challenge me when I question your research or your tactics. I do ask, however, that you get it.  Listen.  Learn from me, like I’m constantly learning from you.

Confession: I love academia. It hasn’t always been good to me, which is another reason why the right needs to support young conservative academics: this s&*! is rough.  I’m not talking about the coursework, either.  To hell with the coursework.  The coursework is child’s play to getting harassed and marginalized simply for not identifying with Barack Obama’s Sparkling Personality Cult.  I’ve been called an idiot in front of a lecture hall full of people; I’ve been cut down by professors; I’ve had signage for events and speakers vandalized, simply because the event was sponsored by a more “conservative” organization.

Talk about #H8.

Moral of the story?  Support young conservatives just as you would your peers.  Don’t look at academia as a taint; instead, look at academia as a gauntlet…outspoken young conservatives who are willing to risk their reputations and rise above are worth listening to.

You might just learn something.

Amy Miller // Michigan State University School of Law // 12.02.2011

Hello, Massive Inflation // Sydney Phillips // 12.02.2011

Prices keep rising, but so does your paycheck.  All is well, right?  Wrong.  The experts behind Aftershock say that inflation is an “already launched missile” headed our way, threatening to pop the already sinking American economic bubbles.  Yes, your wages will increase, but not surpassing the rate of inflation or interest rates.  Inflation is derived from an increase in the money supply, and the Fed is printing money at an astronomical rate to simulate economic stimulation.  In fact, the money supply has increased approximately 300% over the past three years.  As a result, world markets are moving toward an economic disaster, and possibly even an economic collapse faster than most realize.

How exactly will inflation lead to economic collapse?  Look at the money supply as the glue that holds the market together, creates means to a product or service, and allows the forces of supply and demand to not only function, but to harmonize.  When money is printed at such a high rate, an indication that output is increasing is created.  Technically, the nominal GDP is increasing, but real GDP is not.  If we continue on the current path, the dollar will be worth almost nothing, and food, housing, and other living expenses will rise far beyond what the average American salary can afford.

You would think that with the amount of taxes collected by the federal government, they wouldn’t need to print so much money.  Rising inflation is a prime indication of a failing tax system.  The government continues to spend at a rate that won’t cover their expenses, and cannot even begin to pay back national debt.   Thus, the Federal Reserve is printing more money to create a false sense of wealth and stability, as the cost to print money is extremely low.  The American government lacks simple pattern recognition; the easy way out always has detrimental consequences.  Miscalculations are to be expected; however, making the same mistake over and over again expecting a different result is insanity.

So when will inflation get to an unbearable point?  We haven’t felt it in a big way yet, because the United States has the unusual advantage of using that freshly printed currency to pay back the interest on our debt; that 300% increase in money supply hasn’t gone directly into the economy yet.  It takes about two years for the freshly printed money explosion to impact inflation rates in an overwhelming way, so we should start to feel it even more substantially in the next couple years.  We should brace for impact; inflation is here, but massive inflation is coming. The American people should do a couple things to survive in an age where prices of basic items will become too high for most people to afford life as we know it.

Keep a substantial amount of non-perishable food on hand.  Food prices are already incredibly high and rising at an alarming rate.  Companies like Food Insurance provide emergency freeze-dried food with a shelf life of at least 25 years. While this is an investment worth perusing, intentionally buying a little more groceries with longer shelf lives works as well.  While the idea of accumulating an ample amount of canned beans seems a little extreme or crazy, it’s smart because we could see the GDP fall 15-20% in the next year if drastic changes don’t take place within financial systems worldwide.  Just to offer perspective, the GDP fell 29% over 4 years during the Great Depression, and people certainly went hungry then.

Be hesitant to invest in stocks, bonds, and mutual funds; invest in precious metals.  According to Adrian Day of Adrian Day Asset Management, “Gold is about the only thing that has done well this year… don’t trust paper money… the budget deficit in the U.S. is too out of control to put all your money in the bank.”  The point of backing your money with precious metals is to support paper money with the only asset that will always hold value.  It has retained value since the beginning of commerce, and will continue to either increase or decrease less than everything else.

Pay off as much debt as possible, and do not borrow money.  This could be the America’s greatest tragic flaw—spending money we don’t have.  The concept is simple, yet hard for Americans to live by, due to the sense of entitlement that surrounds almost every aspect of our culture and the poor example set in Washington.  Ben Franklin’s virtues of moderation and frugality come to mind, here.  Society bombards us with the “more is more” mentality, when in actuality; a simple life is a satisfied life.  I’m not saying that modern conveniences are inherently destructive, but don’t be surprised when the events of your life seem to move slightly slower than the time it takes for your microwave to pop popcorn, and life’s direction isn’t always as clear as the purified water you drink.  Keep perspective, spend less than you earn, and cut out extraneous minutia you don’t need.

The inflation problem the U.S. faces cannot be fixed if it continues in its current spending habits.  Times are bad, and I believe they will get worse.  However, challenging times generate innovation, efficiency, and hope, if the right leaders emerge.  I refuse to be the 99% who will be blindsided by an even more drastic economic crisis than the current recession.

Overall, I encourage you to seek truth, especially the kind that hurts.  Depending on the action taken, it’s that kind of truth that can either destroy or save your life.

Sydney Phillips // Lee University // 12.02.2011

The Potemkin President // Raj Kannappan // 11.30.2011

In 2007, transcending the debauched world of politics emanated his hope and promise: “I don’t want to spend the next year or the next four years refighting the same fights that we had in the 1990s. I don’t want to pit red America against blue America. I want to be the President of the United States of America.” What has transpired since then? Senator Obama eventually came face to face with the realities of the highest office in the land; hopeless and changeless circumstances grounded his Messianic rise.

In a 2009 interview with Steve Kroft on CBS’s 60 Minutes, President Obama unveiled his true view on unity, declaring without compunction, “I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street.” Right, he just ran to vilify a segment of the electorate working, yes, to take home lofty paychecks, but concurrently, to facilitate transactions, grant credits, and even support emerging economies, thereby oiling the wheels of commerce. The President added later on that the same banks that had been bailed out by taxpayers were “fighting tooth and nail with their lobbyists… up on Capitol Hill, fighting against financial regulatory control.” Apparently, he’d forgotten that these same banks had bought him out too.

Obama so desperately wants to appear as though he’s fighting a battle to end all battles against the wealthy on behalf of the disenfranchised—the 99%. Yet, what many liberals and now, particularly, those who occupy Wall Street—most of whom presumably voted for Obama and will vote for him the second time around, despite their claims otherwise—fail to admit is that Obama has reaped the largesse of “fat cat” bankers more than any Republican in recent history.  They fail to perceive that the Democratic Party has as much to do with fostering a corporate-government collusion as the GOP. Obama took the White House not only through the small contributions of millions of average Americans, as his campaign touts incessantly, but also through hefty donations from the upper crust of society.

In fact, Obama has amassed more money from Wall Street than any politician from either party in the last 20 years. During his 2008 presidential bid, he received approximately 20% of his total campaign donation from Wall Street. Interestingly enough, these same reprobate financiers contributed a greater total to Obama’s campaign than they did to Senator John McCain’s.

More specifically, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, in the last presidential election Obama reined in wads of cash from multiple bulge bracket firms. In total, including contributions from employees and the respective bank’s Political Action Committee, Obama collected $1,013,091 from Goldman Sachs, $808,799 from JPMorgan Chase & Co., and $736,771 from Citigroup.  Furthermore, he procured $532,674 from UBS and $512,232 from Morgan Stanley.  An examination of campaign finance records also reveals that Obama picked up a modest sum of $421,242 from Bank of America, outdoing the bank’s previous record contribution of $329,761 to President George W. Bush in 2004.

It would also surprise ardent populist supporters of the Democratic Party who claim to be waging a Manichean battle valiantly for the cause of the unprivileged that according to figures dating to 1990, Goldman Sachs—the epitome of arrogance and greed against which liberals continue to rail—has consistently contributed more money to Democratic rather than Republican candidates for federal office. In 2008, for example, three out of every four dollars contributed by Goldman Sachs bolstered Democratic coffers.

Unsurprisingly, President Obama—the patriarch of the party that seemingly claims to have monopolized representation of the impoverished—has failed to reconcile his supposed moral adherence to defending the poor at all costs with his sycophancy to “fat cat” bankers.

Perhaps the statement most indicative of Obama’s self-contradictory behavior was one from an anonymous Wall Street executive who wished to avoid blowback from the administration. Invited to, but ultimately rejecting the offer to, an exclusive meeting with Obama in the White House’s Blue Room a few weeks before the President announced his reelection bid in April, the executive remarked that it was quite ironic that the man who had railed against bankers in blanket fashion would have the nerve to invite him and his colleagues to a fundraising dinner at Daniel, the Upper East Side restaurant whose $185 six course tasting menu and opulent interior reject any notion of restraint or genuine recognition of the plight of the country’s poor.

After all the slanderous statements he has plastered to the faces of bankers and corporate employees in general over the past three years, the least the President can do is set the record straight. He needs to reveal to the American people the truth about Wall Street and give them the post-partisan message that he promised when he was running to govern the United States of America. He needs to tell them that corporate businesspeople are, in fact, a vital and necessary source of the country’s economic prosperity, and not merely parasites on society. But, alas, he won’t ever commit this sinful deed, as it would effectively blunt the momentum of OWS and siphon away precious votes.

Maligning Wall Street employees amidst an abhorrently stagnant economy is neither presidential nor post-partisan. President Obama isn’t merely politicking, he’s governing disingenuously. The Obama 2012 campaign has begun to milk the rich, already raising $15.6 million from Wall Street donors. However, in a not-so-transparent fashion, the campaign hasn’t disclosed the identities of its wealthy bundlers. If your curiosity so piques you to, say, uncover that Jon Corzine, the former Goldman Sachs CEO-turned New Jersey Governor-turned disgraced executive of now bankrupt MF Global Holdings, raised over $500,000 for Obama or that Robert Wolf, president of UBS Investment Bank, also raised that much for our very own Robin Hood in disguise, you’ll have to dig through an endless stream of federal election records.

It seems that President Obama has cast aside his own calls for unity and moral rectitude in exchange for financial and political expediency. It’s only a matter of time before the American electorate realizes that they’re being brazenly bamboozled.

Raj Kannappan // Cornell University // @RajKannappan

Why I (Don’t) Love My Generation // Elissa Roberson // 11.30.2011

So what exactly is this whole “Occupy” protest about?  Why are people calling for the destruction of Wall Street—an ultimate symbol of our free economy?   These protesting individuals calling themselves “revolutionaries” (in the same manner as the Founding Fathers did) need to be slapped upside the head with a history book.

The term “revolutionaries” was given to the Americans by the British out of spite.  Calling someone a ‘revolutionary’ was another way of calling the Americans, who fought for the freedoms that we enjoy today, dirty rebels.  Why were they rebelling against the British crown?  They wanted to live their lives without having to deal with social classes, taxes, and being told how they must worship and acknowledge God.  When the Founding Fathers wrote the Declaration of Independence (and when Congress later constructed the United States Constitution), these men took into account Great Britain’s governmental history.  As Thomas Jefferson said during the first Inaugural Address: “A wise and frugal government shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.  This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicity.” This form of government is what our Founding Fathers created. Because of these heroic efforts that were intended to better lives for an entire nation, the King George sent troops in order to get rid of these dirty rebels.

Quite a contrast to the “revolutionaries” we see today, isn’t it?  In fact, these stinky, lazy, self-righteous, and hypocritical hippies can only be called “revolutionaries” in the very sense of the word that the British intended: dirty rebels.  The way I see it, Americans are rebels in that we live in the only country in the world to hold to free market capitalism.  “Occupiers” would love to see our government system follow that of Europe (a system like the Greeks?!  Somebody slap them with a newspaper too!).  And this is coming from the same demographic responsible for electing President Obama.  Now, after he failed to turn the economy around as he promised, they act as though the entire system is broken.

I’m proud to be from the America that doesn’t grant amnesty to terrorists or give out freebies to immigrants who haven’t earned it.  I’m proud to be part of a nation that breeds innovation and opportunity.  I’m proud to live in a country where I can exercise my right to work hard and earn what I keep.  I am thankful that I can go to sleep at night knowing our borders are secure because we have people who have given up a comfortable lifestyle to serve this country and are willing to go wherever they are needed at a moment’s notice. And I’m part of the small demographic of young Americans that stills holds to those inalienable truths the Founding Fathers wrote about in the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution.  Americans aren’t given a free ride to a comfy life simply because we live in the “Land of the Free.”

Apparently the “Occupiers” are also misinformed when it comes to statistics. They have yet to explain how they came up with the 99% ratio.  But, I guess you can say I am happily in the “1%” – the 1% of college students that truly use their brain to “think critically” and won’t apologize for the success of America.

There’s a saying that “ignorance is bliss.” If ignorance includes intolerance of research and education of historical truth, then you can count me out.

Elissa Roberson // College of the Desert // @ElissaRoberson