PoliticalTalk

The Difference Between Conservative Caring and Liberal Caring

They say Republicans are mean-spirited! But the fact is that Americans, Democrats AND Republicans, have always been compassionate. They've been willing to help their neighbors in times of need.

But unfortunately, defining caring and compassion is not always easy in today’s political environment.

See this message on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj4mB0MEHzA or continue reading below!

Starting during President Johnson’s term, our country tried spending our way to becoming a very compassionate country. Over three decades, our government invested 5.4 trillion dollars in welfare payments in our “War on Poverty.” The investment would have been worth it, if it had worked, but it didn’t eliminate poverty. 

In fact, the results of this type of government-run compassion have been devastating, creating a debilitating dependence on the very programs that were designed to help.

Ronald Reagan said it well: “Welfare’s purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence.”

Compassion should be measured by how many people no longer need government programs instead of by how many are served by them. We need a safety net, not a hammock. As our first Republican President Abraham Lincoln said, “The worst thing you can do for those you love is the thing they could and should do for themselves.”

We've gone from protecting the unfortunate to supporting the irresponsible. In fact, some politicians seem to want to keep citizens dependent on government. They hate poverty so much that they reward it!

Unfortunately, whatever you reward you get more of! So if my response to your entry-level job is to raise your minimum wage beyond its market value, you’re more likely to stay in that dead-end job. Why go to college or learn a new skill if you can get enough money settling for a job with minimum skills?

Republican support for capitalism is a form of tough love. It fosters competition because it cares enough to challenge you to better yourself. A free-market economy rewards achievement and not anything less.

That’s why Democrats say that Republicans are mean-spirited. Their claims remind me of our years as parents when our son would complain about how mean we were when we would in any way set limits or discipline him.

As parents we didn't expect his approval, but we knew that in time he'd respect us for preparing him for life. We cared enough to teach him early that in a competitive world you don’t get everything you want just because you want it. We showed him our love, but we also let him know that he would experience the consequences for his own choices. If he didn't save his money, he wouldn't have money to spend. If he got in trouble in school, he’d be held accountable not excused.

In America, all citizens are guaranteed “the pursuit of happiness,” not happiness dumped in their laps. But after listening to Democrats, you’d think every American is entitled to happiness, healthcare, welfare, high wages, and a secure retirement whether they’ve earned it or not.

And, of course, who is supposed to pay for all these entitlements, those greedy, "rich" Americans who already pay most of the taxes!

Will Rogers said it years ago, “I remember back when a liberal was someone who was generous with his own money.”

For far too long, a very expensive, intrusive government has been taking money from some Americans to do the “caring” for all of us.

Instead of reaching into our own pockets to support charities, we elect politicians who will pay for our charity by reaching into our neighbor’s pocket. That unfortunately allows too many citizens to say, `I don’t have to love my neighbor; that’s the government’s job!”

Gerald Ford summed it up well, "A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have." 

Join me in voting Republican. Care enough about all hard-working Americans to let them keep more of what they've earned and encourage people to give to charities that make a difference where it counts instead of expecting government to do that for us.

America’s Choice—Panic or Trust

Pope John XXIII once confessed what I’m sure all of our leaders in Washington are feeling, “Sometimes I awake at night and begin to think about a serious problem and decide that I must tell the Pope about it. Then I wake up completely and remember that I am the Pope!” We expect our leaders to have all the answers and label them as failures if they don’t. Fortunately, America is not built on belief in wise kings, but in belief in one another—“We the people” of this great country.

At the 1992 Republican Convention, President Ronald Reagan revealed the secret to his success, “I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears, to your confidence, rather than your doubts.” When facing tough times, this leader’s rock-solid confidence in Americans came through when he’d speak from the White House: “I’m not taking your time this evening to ask you to trust me. Instead, I ask you to trust yourself. That is what America is all about… It’s the power of millions of people like you who will determine what will make America great again.”

Today, as an American, you face important choices. Keeping one eye on the stock markets and another on our leaders in Washington, you worry about our future. Your choices will be driven by one of two basic reactions--panic or trust. By panicking and liquidating your savings or investments, you help push even more institutions to the brink. That, in turn, puts more businesses and jobs at risk.

There are no safe havens for your money if America’s financial system fails. The money isn’t in any vault; money is in motion making capital and payments available to exchange for the products and services we all need. We’ve been told by our leaders and the media that we’re on a precipice of economic calamity. In response, our leaders have begun investing billions of public dollars in addressing the problem, but there’s been no quick rally or recovery. Is a great depression the only answer?

Take time today to view on YouTube “The Bailey Building and Loan Bank Run” scene from Frank Capra’s classic film, It's A Wonderful Life. George Bailey, played by Jimmy Stewart, faces citizens who have lost faith in the financial system. In panic, they descend on the bank, demanding cash.

In response to their panic, George explains how loans work: “No, but you... you... you're thinking of this place all wrong. As if I had the money back in a safe. The money's not here. Your money's in Joe's house…(to one of the men)...right next to yours. And in the Kennedy house, and Mrs. Macklin's house, and a hundred others. Why, you're lending them the money to build, and then, they're going to pay it back to you as best they can. Now what are you going to do? Foreclose on them?”

Still giving in to their panic, many considered settling by taking pennies on the dollar for their deposits from a competing bank, Mary, George’s new bride, holding up their honeymoon money, shouts, “How much do you need?” The depositors turned around and, together, chose to keep their deposits in the Bailey Building and Loan taking only what they needed until stability could return. The institution and the people who invested in it survived by choosing to trust and by living out their shared commitment to the common good of the community.

Washington politicians can’t turn this alone. If Americans don’t believe in the future we can create together, it’ll keep falling. Washington can print the money, but we’re the ones who give it value by our actions and economic decisions.

No matter what the politicians and pundits warn, there’s much to value! Money is still being used to buy goods and services. Selective loans are being made by many smaller banks. People with the right skills are still being hired by companies taking advantage of market opportunities. 

Don’t panic; act with confidence instead of fear. Invest your worry in constructive action. Keep working. If out of work, instead of resting in outdated skills, refocus and retool to compete for available jobs or start your own small company. Keep spending on what is necessary. Invest in companies that you still believe will succeed. Save more of what you earn and help your neighbors where you can.

FDR words again ring true, “The only thing to fear is fear itself.” We’re a resilient people whose optimism has been earned from over 230 years of overcoming obstacles and challenges. As Dennis Prager often suggests, take a coin from your pocket or purse and look at the three core values that define America: “Liberty,” “In God We Trust” and “E Pluribus Unum” (out of many one). Today, we must affirm our free-enterprise system and the controls that hold people accountable when they abuse it. We must once again reaffirm our trust in God. Then, we must put that trust into action by resting in God’s providence by doing what we can to be part of the answer. God willing, together, we’ll be bouncing back from this like we have from past challenges. This is our time to live our trust, not panic.

View this on YouTube at  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6DW1PC5GVo and I'd love your comments!

Electing Barack Obama Is Not What America Needs

If elected, Senator Barack Obama will be my president as well. In these difficult times, I will support him where I can and challenge him where I must, but here are the reasons not to give him that opportunity.

In these perilous times, Obama’s lack of a proven record and relevant experience is a major concern. When you hire anyone to a critical job, you look to their experience. The President of the United States should not be an entry-level position! Experience matters! It’s not a sufficient qualification, but it’s certainly a necessary one.

Without a track record of impressive experience, voters look at a candidate’s judgment. That’s why Obama’s judgment in picking friends and advisors remains relevant. His close associations with the controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright, convicted influence-peddler Tony Rezko, and unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers invite more questions than trust.

At a time when a troop surge has reduced violence, damaged al Qaeda and allowed the Iraqi government to make progress on key milestones, Obama still promises to “bring the war to an end in 2009!” He wants to save $9 billion a month in Iraq and shift the focus to Afghanistan. But he also wants to cut investments in missile defense systems and slow our development of future combat systems. Obama calls for a world without nuclear weapons and promises to develop no new nuclear weapons. Such judgments project weakness as Commander in Chief. Weakness is provocative!

Obama says that he’s a “uniter,” but where’s the evidence? He voted with the Democrats 97 percent of the time. He’s a proven tax-and-spend Democrat with the most liberal voting record in the Senate. He’s only a uniter if you’ll unite with his partisan position. Unlike McCain, he’s never disappointed his own party by crossing the aisle to vote with Republicans.

Obama calls for “Change You Can Believe In,” but where is his record of championing positive reform in Cook County, in the Illinois legislature or in his short time in the US Senate. As Senator, he’s authored no important legislation and hasn’t even convened a hearing on the one subcommittee he chairs. He’s devoted his many gifts to chronicling his own life’s story and running his presidential campaign. While Alaska Governor Palin took on entrenched corruption in her own party, Obama benefitted from the equally corrupt Chicago Democratic machine. As they say—“High wind, big thunder, no rain."

His unrealistic and restrictive plan for energy independence is limited to investing in a few, new sources of energy that are not ready to carry the load for our energy independence. His partial plan does not provide for the “all of the above” reliable sources of power and jobs that industry and citizens need now.

Obama wants to raise corporate taxes, inheritance taxes, and income taxes and social security payments for the top wage earners. No reputable economist suggests raising taxes when America needs economic growth. Punishing success limits capital investment. Obama voted to raise taxes 94 times and never introduced any legislation to lower anyone’s taxes. You want Obama’s “Hope”—I hope you enjoy your change in taxes and the economic malaise it’ll create!

FDR reminded Americans, “The only thing to fear is fear itself.” Obama talks hope but sells doom and gloom. He justifies change by suggesting that we’re stuck in Iraq and reframes our economic downturn as a recession or worse. Obama blames the Bush economic policy for our current problems, but it was that same Bush plan that helped America bounce back quickly from the 2000 to 2001 downturn. Investor’s Business Daily reported IRS data that shows that the average U.S. income had increased five straight years through 2006.

The Bush economic plan isn’t the problem. Abuses on Wall Street and in financial institutions had been growing. Bush, McCain and many Republicans called for stronger regulations in 2005. Democrats refused to go along with proposed Freddie and Fannie reforms and helped expand the sub-prime mortgage fiasco by encouraging unwise “affordable housing” mortgages. Who are the top two recipients of PAC and individual contributions from Fannie and Freddie—Chris Dodd and Barack Obama! You want Obama in charge of reform? 

For all his talk on self-reliance, Obama treats citizens as victims incapable of rising to the challenges they face. Obama’s “hope” rests in what government can do for you, not on what you can do for yourself or our country. At a time we are struggling to pay for the entitlements we already have, Obama calls for substantial government subsidies for healthcare, college, foreclosure relief, and alternative energies. Milton Friedman said it well, “There are no free lunches.” We can’t afford an Obama presidency and more “free” entitlements!

The Democrats have chosen an intelligent, engaging but untested newcomer as their standard bearer. This seemingly neverending campaign cycle has provided Americans with a long engagement, but don’t make the mistake of giving him the ring on November 4th.

Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author and host to the PaulsonOnPolitics.com blog. Contact him at terry@terrypaulson.com. This column first appeared October 13, 2008, Ventura County Star, B-5.

Democratic Blame Machine Should Try a Mirror

Ross Perot’s plain-speaking candor fits the times: “The deficit is like the guy that finds a rattlesnake in his pants. He knows he's got to shoot it, but he doesn't want to hit anything important.” No one’s shooting yet, but they sure know how to throw more of our money around!  Money’s the talk of the town in Washington, and all that money seems to be saying is “Good-bye!”

The “final” bailout plan is yet to be dissected, but Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Fred Bernanke deserve kudos for trying to do something to get ahead of the problem! Unfortunately, ratcheting up the fear of a pending economic calamity to get action required politicians to produce some “cure” or risk creating an even greater economic panic! Whether their rescue plan will stabilize the market and provide needed loan capital, history will be the judge, but America will find a way to bounce back. But much can be learned from what helped create this crisis that should have a bearing on your presidential vote.

Democrats and liberal pundits are blaming the free market, the Fed’s easy money policy, deregulation, greed, and, of course, President Bush. Certainly, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s monetary policy that has aggressively lowered interest rates helped drive down the value of the dollar and make loans overly attractive at unheard of rates. Certainly, unscrupulous financial institutions are also to blame for creating unsound and complex investment vehicles that fueled speculation and generated excessive profits without ever questioning the investments or the loans they created.

The administration is also not blameless, but an Opinion Journal column by Charles Calomiris and Peter Wallison documents the role of Congress in creating the current credit crisis. Accounting scandals at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac surfaced as early as 2003 when Federal Reserve and Congressional Budget Office economists found that, despite their subsidized borrowing rates, Fannie and Freddie had not significantly reduced mortgage interest rates. Instead of making mortgages cheaper for borrowers, they were making excessive profits and thus creating greater risks for the taxpayers, the economy, and mortgage payment-strapped homeowners.

In response to their lapses, Fannie and Freddie used a commitment to increase financing for "affordable housing" to curry Democratic support. Rep. Barney Frank openly admitted at a committee hearing on GSE reform in 2003: "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have played a very useful role in helping to make housing more affordable . . . a mission that this Congress has given them in return for some of the arrangements which are of some benefit to them…."

Beginning in 2004, their portfolios of subprime and Alt-A loans and securities began to grow. Fannie and Freddie became their largest buyers between 2004 and 2007, with total GSE exposure eventually exceeding $1 trillion. In doing so, they stimulated the growth of the subpar mortgage market and magnified the costs of its eventual collapse.

When irregularities continued to surface, McCain and others warned of the coming mortgage crisis. In 2005, McCain spoke in favor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 from the floor of the Senate: "For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac…." McCain pointed to a $10.6 billion accounting scandal at Fannie Mae where their quarterly reports of profit growth were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management. McCain called for reform.

A recent Glenn Beck article chronicles the repeated calls for reform by President Bush and his administration since 2001. They not only warned of the systemic consequences of a Fannie and Freddie failure but suggested thoughtful plans to reduce the risk. His warnings went unheeded and his attempts to reform were blocked by Democratic legislative maneuvering.

What was our champion of change and hope doing about the problem? Nothing! Records from the Federal Election Commission reveal a possible reason for Obama’s silence. In his three complete years in the Senate, he’s the second largest recipient of Freddie-and--Fannie-connected campaign contributions. It took Sen. Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Senate banking committee, eleven years to receive $165,400 in contributions from GSE PACs and individuals. Obama received $126,349 in just three years. 

WorldNetDaily’s Jerome R. Corsi reported on Obama advisors with strong Fannie Mae connections. James Johnson, earning millions as Fannie Mae CEO from 1991 to 1998, was appointed to head Obama's vice presidential selection committee until alleged questionable real estate loans from Countrywide Financial forced him to step down. Obama housing advisor, Franklin Raines, earned $90 million as Fannie Mae CEO from 1999 to 2004. 

Free market capitalism didn’t create this crisis. The Democrats’ "progressive" social policies helped stifle free market checks and limit appropriate regulatory oversight. The same politicians who today decry the lack of intervention to stop past abuses were the ones who blocked the legislative efforts that might have stopped them. While McCain is leading, Obama’s watching. Barack’s a great talker, but he’s remained inactive when he should have been part of the solution.

Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author and host to the PaulsonOnPolitics.com blog. Contact him at terry@terrypaulson.com. First appeared in Ventura County Star on Monday September 29, 2008 and on townhall.com on the same day.

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul Isn’t the American Dream

On this Labor Day it’s important to realize that capital investors need skilled labor willing to work and save; labor needs applied capital willing to take a risk on new dreams. Both need a government that will ensure that they will continue to be free to makes dreams happen and to reap the benefits of making those dreams come to life. The American Dream has always worked, and it’s still very much alive. But you wouldn’t know it by listening to the Democratic Party’s Convention.
 
Speaker after speaker talked of the values and difficult challenges that had shaped the lives of their parents, but then went on to negate those America values by promoting class envy and the same old liberal platform and policies that have failed here and around the world.
 
Michelle Obama shared with pride, “Both our parents told us that you work for what you want in life.” She acknowledged her inspiring father, Frasier, who, in spite of his MS, put two kids through Princeton and Michelle through Harvard.

Hillary Clinton thanked her mother for telling her, “In this country you can be anything you want to be!” Joe Biden added his parents’ wisdom, “You don’t measure success by whether you’ve been knocked down, but by how quickly you get back up…. I was taught the dignity of work. If you work hard long enough, you can make it.”

And in Obama’s rousing spectacle, he declared: “My grandparents weren’t complainers. They took life as it came. They knew they had to work hard.” He talked about passing on the values he inherited—the values of hard work, honesty, self-reliance, respect for other people, empathy, kindness and faith.

All of these Democrats’ parents had confidence in them, but it’s clear that these Democrats have no such confidence in you. Things are so bad in this “Bush-McCain America” that the only way 95% of Americans can succeed is if they elect “Robin Hood” politicians who will take more from the other 5% of higher-income Americans and more from profitable businesses to give tax breaks, universal healthcare, a college education and mortgage relief to those who Democrats believe can’t make it on their own!

Obama bragged, “I will cut taxes for 95% of those paying taxes.” Using 2006 IRS figures, if you have an adjusted gross income of over $153,542, you are in the top 5%. Obama wants you to pay more than the 57% of the income tax bill you already pay.

Obama's dream is an American nightmare! Like parents bent on spoiling their children, Democrats no longer believe that hard work, honesty, and self-reliance are enough. Obama complained: “They call this the ownership society. What this really means is that you are on your own…. Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, even if you don’t have boots, you are on your own…. It’s time for us to change America.”

Punishing economic success never works! That’s truly an “old idea” for such a young “change” candidate. Why are corporations taking jobs overseas? They leave because the tax system, expanded entitlements costs and the bureaucratic regulatory environment punish success. If you want more jobs to leave, enact Obama’s tax plan and fund his expanded entitlements. As humorist P.J. O'Rourke famously said, "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free."

Our sense of unlimited possibility has been one of the hallmarks of America. Our challenge is to keep it that way. Only a society that allows individuals to develop and use their unique talents will ever reap the benefits of human greatness. The greatest tragedy we face as Americans is the growing number of citizens who no longer believe that they either have those unique skills or any hope of benefiting from them. Every generation must protect and teach the dream or America will die. If the dream dies, envy and dependence are the result.

Sir Alex Fraser Tytler, Scottish jurist and historian writing over 200 years ago on the fall of the Athenian Republic, warned us: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence; from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependency back again into bondage."

Many in America worry about the gap between the rich and the poor as if the success of the rich takes money from the poor. That is not how capitalism works. The charity of the poor might best be expressed by wishing the rich well as they invest their wealth to create jobs and new opportunities. As a result, many of their aspiring and motivated employees work hard to save, then to invest and ultimately work to become entrepreneurs or owners of capital who create their own wealth. These new "capitalists" launch new entrepreneurial companies that fuel new opportunities for new workers to keep the dream alive.

Michelle Obama focused on your election decision: “I think about how one day, they (Malia and Sasha) will have families of their own. And one day, they—and your sons and daughters—will tell their children about what we did in this election.” Yes, it’s your choice—an inexperienced Barack Obama and his Washington insider or McCain/Palin, two proven maverick reformers who have a track record of making political change work!

Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author, columnist and host to the politicaltalk.org blog. This column appeared first in the Ventura County Star. Contact him at terry@terrypaulson.com.

Talking About Race Doesn’t Make Anyone Racist

Barack Obama has promised to be a uniter and to help Americans bridge their racial barriers. But by claiming that Republicans will be trying to scare voters by suggesting that he "doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills" or stressing his affirmative action experience and the racial challenges ahead, Obama keeps inserting race into his campaign.

Barack’s website highlights his experience as an activist: “As a community organizer, Obama helped 150,000 African Americans register to vote. As a civil rights lawyer, Obama litigated employment discrimination, housing discrimination, and voting rights cases."

Barack Obama, in a speech at Howard University, highlighted the work yet to be done should he become our next president: “The teenagers and college students who left their homes to march in the streets of Birmingham and Montgomery; the mothers who walked instead of taking the bus after a long day of doing somebody else's laundry and cleaning somebody else's kitchen — they didn't brave fire hoses and Billy clubs so that their grandchildren and their great-grandchildren would still wonder at the beginning of the 21st century whether their vote would be counted; whether their civil rights would be protected by their government; whether justice would be equal and opportunity would be theirs. . . . We have more work to do.”

To be certain, some discrimination and racism still exist. But instead of pointing to the success of the thousands of black Americans who have worked to achieve their own “American Dreams” and using his campaign victory as the presumptive Democratic candidate for president as a sign of what Americans of any race can do, he continues to play to the victim thinking mentality. It’s that same thinking that has kept far too many black Americans enslaved to affirmative action and its premise that they can’t succeed without it.

Contrast Obama’s comments with those of our Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice: “It was my mother and father, who, despite the fact that I was growing up in Jim Crow Alabama, always had me convinced that I could be President or the United States. They always taught me to just look past the obstacles. Either blast through them, or assume they’re not in your way…. Growing up where I did in Alabama probably gave me a healthier respect for how far we’ve come. I don’t carry anger about that period of time. I think it made me, and people like me, stronger. I just refuse not to be optimistic. You only have one life. And if you spend your entire life seeing obstacles and seeing clouds and assuming everybody’s out to get you, then I think you’re just likely to waste your life, and I’m just not going to do that.”

The black, Harvard sociologist, Orlando Patterson, is quoted in Larry Elder’s The Ten Things You Can’t Say in America: “The sociological truths are that America, while still flawed in its race relations…is now the least racist white-majority society in the world; has a better record of legal protection of minorities than any other society, white or black; offers more opportunities to a greater number of black persons than any other society, including all those of Africa….”

Voting for or against someone because of the color of his skin is a form of racism that should be un-American. The first black President of the United States should earn it the old-fashioned way—by combining experience, leadership acumen with compelling policy priorities that excite the electorate. Barack Obama’s lack of proven leadership experience, his inconsistent policy stands and non-existent legislative track record leaves much to be desired as a president. One’s race and oratory eloquence may win a candidate a few standing ovations and votes, but they’re not the top qualifications needed for the most important job in our country.

Martin Luther King had a dream of a society where the color of citizen’s skin would not matter. It shouldn’t be a central focus of this or any election.

Obama has called for constructive racial dialogue. Unfortunately, he often complains when anyone reacts to any of his racial references or statements. Candidly talking about racial issues doesn’t make you a racist any more than being aware of gender differences makes you a sexist.

Dennis Miller said it well, “I could care less about the color of Barack Obama’s skin, but the thinness of it is starting to wear on me.” If Barack Obama continues to bring up race in this campaign, let’s hope for a thicker skin for all of us and a little less name calling on all sides!

Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author and host to the politicaltalk.org blog. Ths column first appeared in the Ventura County Star, August 18, 2008. Contact Dr. Paulson at terry@terrypaulson.com.

America’s Choice—Depth or Dazzle!

As a long-time professional speaker and past president of the National Speakers Association (NSA) and the International Federation for Professional Speakers, I’ve seen my share of great speakers. The best blend style with substance; they demonstrate eloquence and expertise.

The speaking skills of this year’s Democrat and Republican presidential candidates have been contrasted and identified as one of many factors impacting the election outcome. At NSA’s national convention, a colleague and I are offering a timely session, “Campaign Rhetoric 2008-What's Working and What We Can Learn About Influencing Audiences.” 

When it comes to engaging platform eloquence and connecting emotionally with audiences, it’s clearly, “Advantage Obama!” As with Reagan and Clinton, he has the gift of oratory. Barack Obama is tall, self-assured, and photogenic. He has a smooth delivery and a warm demeanor.

With Obama, the question isn’t style; it’s depth of substance. There’s an Indian saying: "High wind, big thunder, no rain." Right now, Obama is dating the public, but the tight poll numbers indicate that Americans haven’t decided whether they trust his proposal enough to marry him in November!

Like a good lawyer, Obama has taken advantage of a good opening argument calling for hope, unity and change. He’s hoping that enough of the “jury” will buy his message and sift through the campaign coverage to accept only those facts and images that support that belief.

Obama’s ability to excite huge crowds creates an obvious podium mismatch. In comparison, McCain might echo the admission of Lord Birkett: “I do not object to people looking at their watches when I am speaking--but I strongly object when they start shaking them to make certain they are still going.” 

John McCain may never have a lucrative career as a motivational speaker, but his unique style impacts campaign audiences in a different way. His strength of character, experience and authenticity generate trust. His preference for town hall events over speeches with teleprompters allows him to demonstrate his judgment, his depth of knowledge and his flexible understanding of critical issues. McCain relishes the open give-and-take of eyeball to eyeball dialogue with citizens. 

As successful author and speaker, Tom Peters, observed, "There is only one style--yours. If you drool, drool, but do it with sincerity." John McCain won’t compete on the standing ovation scale, but when Americans start to put their focus on making their choice, he wants to sell enough Americans on the importance of picking an authentic president with experience, judgment and substantive solutions to the problems that matter most to America.

Obama’s refusal to join McCain on his extensive town hall tour of America and his reliance on controlled presentations may backfire. Today’s audiences don’t just want to listen; they want involvement. Don’t just give me platform connection; talk to me. McCain may soon adapt a famous Reagan line: “There he goes again. Great speech, but when will he get off that platform and answer your questions?”

Don't entertain me! Show me its relevance to my job, my career or, best of all, my paycheck. Once you have done that, I challenge you to bore audiences! Good campaigners make citizens aware of their headache; the rest of their campaign is convincing them that they’re the aspirin to relieve the pain.

Obama has captured the slogans of hope and change as his own. McCain’s focus on credibility and experience isn’t enough. McCain’s emphasis on “Reform, Prosperity, and Peace” hits three key issues: the economy, energy and national security. At times he’s also stressed different themes: “Country First,” “A Time for Action,” “The Straight Talk Express,” and “Secure Our Energy Future.” Whatever finally excites voters, McCain will have to stake out his own solid ground themes to win.

As we get close to election day, McCain will keep reminding voters of fears that call for experienced leadership—the war against Islamic terrorism, rising fuel costs, and our economic malaise. Faced with pending disasters and realistic fears, more voters will value experience over eloquence. As the infamous Hillary Clinton commercial asked, “It's 3 a.m., and your children are safe and asleep. Who do you want answering the phone?”

Expect McCain’s “Straight Talk Express” to wear well in the Fall Campaign. Obama talks about being a “uniter;” McCain has done it by reaching across the aisle to get things done. Obama will try to paint McCain as a continuation of George Bush, but he’s always been a maverick whose disagreed with Bush over the conduct of the Iraq war, detainee treatment, government spending and budget gimmicks.

Politicians used to be able to say one thing in one town and something else in the next. Not any more. Clinton’s “Bullets in Bosnia” story torpedoed her momentum at a critical point in her campaign. McCain would rather win a war than an election. He would rather be respected than liked.

Barack Obama appears to have a need to be liked by every audience. Because of his limited political record, any break in trust or lack of clarity in his campaign will have even more impact.

Like Thomas Dewey, the media has all but prepared the headlines for Obama’s victory. Cavett Robert, the founder of NSA, used to remind speakers, "The only reliable readings are restroom readings--go into your cubicle early and really listen to what people have to say."

To the dismay of the pundits and liberal media experts, when voters actually go into the voting booth and vote or Americans fill out their absentee ballot, don’t be surprised if John McCain pulls a Harry Truman—a man of substance and character wins over polish and eloquence. 

Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author and host to the politicaltalk.org blog. Contact him at terry@terrypaulson.com. This first appeared in the Ventura County Star, August 4, 2008.

Time for Governmentaholics Anonymous

“Hi, my name is Bill, and I’m a governmentaholic!”

After listening to Barack Obama’s economic plan, you can expect the number of addicted Americans to grow. He calls for substantial government subsidies for healthcare, college, foreclosure relief, pension plans and alternative energies. He favors tax cuts for middle-class workers and tax increases for top earners and businesses. Those tax increases will need to be very high to pay for his massive increases in spending and his proposed takeover of healthcare. But, like any addiction, the costs keep going up the more citizens are addicted.

Too many Americans have a need for a 12-step program to help break their addiction to government assistance. Unfortunately, some Americans don’t even realize that Democrats are selling a dangerous addiction that further undermines personal responsibility and freedom while creating more government dependence and out-of-control spending.

Senator McCain rightly blames both parties for the wasteful spending, “Congress and this administration have failed to meet their responsibilities…. Government has grown by 60 percent in the last eight years. That is simply inexcusable.” McCain’s economic plan doesn’t create new entitlements; it gives Americans more freedom by allowing them to manage their own lives.

In addition to promising a simplified tax code, McCain pledges to cut taxes on all and raise them on none. In addition to eliminating government waste, he wants government to shrink, not grow. He wants to cut the waste and end earmark abuse on pet programs. To McCain, Americans don’t need renegotiated trade agreements or protection from competition; they just need freedom to compete in a free-trade, global economy! His plan for healthcare takes the responsibility and choices away from the government and employers and gives it to every American adding portable policies, tax credits and saving account options. 

McCain treats citizens as adults capable of rising to the challenges they face. For all his talk on self-reliance, Barak Obama’s message of hope doesn’t depend on our citizens achieving their own American Dream. His hope resides in government’s ability to create more programs and more dependent Americans. 

Nearly 9 million Americans are asking for federal help because they made bad decisions about loans they could not afford. They risked and lost in the housing market. Are taxpayers responsible for everyone’s bad decisions? What about the people who played by the rules and waited until they could afford to buy? Are they to pay more taxes to help those who were reckless?

When politicians try to fix economies, look out! In 1929, the stock market crashed, and the politicians made it worse. In 1987, President Reagan faced a stock market crash that fell by almost the same amount. What followed was not another depression, but 20 years of prosperity, low inflation and low unemployment. What was the difference? To the dismay of the media and many politicians, Reagan did nothing. He knew that the economy goes through cycles and would recover on its own.

Recently, when asked what the President and Congress should do, Harvard Professor N. Gregory Mankiw, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, replied, “Absolutely nothing!” The economist Thomas Sowell provided needed perspective, “There is not one economist among the 535 members of Congress. But, in an election year, that is not a political handicap. Santa Claus has won far more elections than any economist.”

In the past, we’ve tried spending our way to being a very compassionate country.  Our government invested $5.4 trillion on means-tested welfare payments in the “War on Poverty.” The investment would have been worth it, if it had worked, but it did not work. In fact, the results of this type of compassion have been devastating. Under the guise of caring, we’ve ruined families, making it more profitable to be a single-parent family than to have husbands in the home. 

With the cost of Medicare, Social Security and existing entitlements skyrocketing, and federal and state governments having to cut budgets, much of America is in denial! They want more from government, and they want others to fund their addiction! As Gerald Ford said, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.” You know who pays for everything Santa Claus puts under the tree—it’s you and I!   

It’s time we measure compassion by how many people no longer need government programs instead of by how many are served by them. Outside of a necessary safety net, it’s time to cut programs, not expand them.

In November, a vote for the Republican team is not a vote to end compassion. It’s a vote for caring enough to assist without creating more dependency. Make sure a safety net doesn’t become a lifelong hammock. In fact, the push out of the hammock may be the most caring thing we can do to help more citizens gain confidence in their own ability to overcome life’s obstacles.

Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author and host to the politicaltalk.org blog. Contact him at terry@terrypaulson.com. This column first appeared in the Ventura County Star on July 21, 2008.

Good Morning!

Demand Energy Independence Action Now!

There’s no tea to dump in the Boston Harbor. Maybe, angry Americans will have to settle for dumping a bunch of irate letters on the desks of politicians who are refusing to act!  I’d send out Paul Revere to rally the citizens, but he sold his horse for a Hummer and can’t afford to pay for the gas! This “Energy Independence Day” message is short and urgent—Drill Here, Drill Now, Go Nuclear, Incentivize Carbon-free Innovation!

There are many causes for our energy crisis: a weak dollar, the economic expansion in India, China and other developing countries, speculators, inadequate refineries, prohibitions on US drilling where oil reserves are plentiful, and, of course, political posturing in a pivotal election year. No matter what the causes, the energy crisis is impacting every citizen and devastating low-income Americans. 

While politicians demand more oil from foreign suppliers, we sit on oil reserves that are the envy of the world. During the recent congressional inquiry, Democrats attacked American oil executives, but Shell CEO John Hoffmeister confronted his inquisitors: “I can promise to the American people because of the inaction of the United States Congress ever increasing prices unless demand goes down. And the $5.00 will look like a very low price in the years to come if we are prohibited from finding new reserves, new opportunities to increase supplies.”

Of course, no plan for energy independence will produce quick results, but President Bush is ready to support any balanced plan. Winston Churchill said: “I never worry about action, but only about inaction.” John McCain has called for action—Free states to allow off-shore exploration and drilling, use more clean-coal, speed processing and approval for more nuclear energy plants and refineries, and incentivize alternative energy innovation.

The Democrats keep saying drilling today will take ten years to make a difference. That’s what Democrats said twelve years ago. In 1996, President Clinton vetoed a bill that would have opened valuable domestic oil reserves. If not for that veto, recent estimates indicate that we’d have an additional one million barrels of oil per day for at least the last two years! It’s going to be 2018 anyway; let’s get started drilling now!

Environmentalists shout, “Catastrophe!” But Brazil, Britain, Norway and other countries drill safely offshore. When Hurricanes Katrina and Rita roared through the Gulf’s 3,000 offshore oil and gas platforms, no major spills were recorded. As for ANWR, herds of caribou seem to travel past the Alaskan pipeline without even a glance. France generates 80% of its energy needs through nuclear power and safely handles the waste; so can we!

Senator Barack Obama seems not overly concerned about $5 gas; it’s the price of changing our oil dependence! Obama has called for more taxes and more regulations! He wants a rerun of Jimmy Carter’s "windfall" profit taxes on our oil companies. According to the Congressional Research Service, Carter’s taxes increased the cost of gas and decreased domestic production by 3-6%. It didn’t work then and won’t work now.

Obama also wants to require auto manufacturers to produce 50 mpg vehicles. If auto companies had any way to produce millions of cars with that kind of mileage, they’d be flying off their lots! Auto companies are already scrambling to create what Obama wants to require! They don’t need more regulations; they need targeted incentives to produce cost-effective, carbon-free energy options that work!

Until all-electric or hydrogen-powered cars can be mass produced at a reasonable price, most low-income Americans will need gas. Democrats claim that added US oil production won’t significantly decrease the price at the pump, but it could help stabilize future gas prices until we can make gas-powered vehicles obsolete. 

Surveys of Americans indicate overwhelming bi-partisan support for increased drilling balanced with investment in innovation. It’s time to pass a “No Excuses Energy Act” that supports outer-continental shelf exploration, drilling in ANWR, clean coal production, new refineries, wind and solar power, natural gas, new nuclear power plants and incentives for carbon-free innovation. Not only would we be making important steps towards more energy independence, we’d be creating good-paying American jobs instead of sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas to prop up countries who often support our enemies. Get those letters, e-mails and calls headed to your favorite politician!

Freed to act, American ingenuity can work for energy independence faster than Democrats predict. John McCain has taken the lead for a balanced plan by moving to the front of the charge! He’s for good conservation and environmental stewardship, but he hopes to provide the adult supervision necessary to keep environmentalists from drifting towards anti-capitalism extremes. Support his plan. If gas prices continue to rise and the Democrats refuse to act, you can expect John McCain to ride this energy crisis into the White House.

Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author and host to the politicaltalk.org blog. This column first appeared in the Ventura County Star, July 7, 2008. Contact him at terry@terrypaulson.com.

Who Do You Want as Commander in Chief?

In endorsing Barack Obama, Al Gore listed problems ending with the same mantra—“Elections matter!” Yes, elections do matter and clarity on key issues is critical.

Our Founding Fathers enshrined in our Constitution our government’s commitment to “provide for the common defense” designating the President as the “Commander in Chief.” Defending and preserving our country is a responsibility every president must fulfill. One’s fitness for that role should be a key factor in your presidential choice. 

Last October, Barack Obama provided a concise statement of his defense priorities in a video for Caucus4Priorities. Obama’s major points include:

“First, I'll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.”

“Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems. And I will institute an independent ‘Defense Priorities Board’ to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.”

“Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.”

“I don't switch positions or make promises that can't be kept.” He ended with a questionable assertion, “As president, my sole priority for defense spending will be protecting the American people.”

In a world “without nuclear weapons,” one country with nuclear weapons could control the world. Consider three small planes circling New York City, Washington and Los Angeles flown by Islamic terrorists threatening immediate destruction—“Surrender or millions will die!” Improbable? 

In George Santayana words, “Those who cannot learn from history are destined to repeat it.” Adolf Hitler used overwhelming military strength attempting to break the will of free nations.

For Hitler, Denmark was a border nation he needed to control. While attacking outmanned Danish troops at the border, the German ambassador to Denmark, dispensing with diplomatic niceties, demanded that the Danish Foreign Minister end all Danish resistance. As frantic diplomats pleaded, several formations of German bombers roared over Copenhagen dropping leaflets promising to bomb civilians. With no way to resist or fight back, the Danish government surrendered retaining political “independence” over domestic matters.

Military weakness has always been provocative. Unchecked evil advances until someone stops it. In a post World War I era, Denmark found a strong military unnecessary. It took the combined will and forces of the English-speaking Western world and Russia to put an end to Hitler’s dream of world domination.

They say that the winners write history. They do, unless they have “politically correct” schools that refuse to provide an accurate history of the positive role war has played in securing freedom! Whether Barack Obama acknowledges it or not, war is a reality of the human condition and, sometimes, is the answer!

With more rogue countries and terrorist groups capable of attacking our homeland and vital global interests, America, must be ready to defend freedom here and abroad. Secure peace comes most often through strength and diplomacy. John McCain realizes that the Iraq war is a war we must win. When victory and a secure Iraq are within our grasp, Obama’s preemptive retreat is not the answer.

As former Secretary of Defense Cap Wienberger warned, "You don’t just go out to the store and buy high-tech weapons on the day you need them." We must continue to walk softly in diplomatic circles but continue to carry a technologically-advanced stick that keeps us one step ahead of our worst enemies. Such strength requires a significant investment and committed leadership.

Our founding fathers knew the importance of military strength. When, at the Constitutional Convention, it was proposed to limit the U.S. standing army to 5,000 men, George Washington responded requesting a clause that would limit the size of the invading army to 3,000 troops. Laughter followed, and the proposal was dropped.

John McCain is the leader America needs to handle the security challenges we will face in the years ahead. He’ll work with Iraqi and Afghanistan leaders to maintain momentum, win the war and send a lasting message to our terrorist enemies.

The United States wants no empire; it wants to stand for freedom and with countries who want to secure it. When should our men and women come back—when the job is done and they want us to leave! McCain is the only candidate committed to doing just that! Elections do matter.

Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author and host to the politicaltalk.org blog. This column first appeared June 23, 2008 in the Ventura County Star. Contact him at terry@terrypaulson.com.