Remember these names: Rick Perry, Sonny Perdue, Bobby Jindal, Haley Barbour and Mark Sanford

Those are the names of the five southern governors who have indicated they may not take money from the Obama stimulus package to help their states, particularly if it comes with "strings attached."


In other words, remaining ideologically pure in opposition to "anything Obama" is more important to them than actually meeting the needs of their constituents, serving the people who elected them.



They have 45 days from last Tuesday to certify their states will request and use the funds provided in the new law. That means they have until April 3, 2009 to help their states participate in a national effort to stimulate economic recovery.


So, don't forget those names: Rick Perry is Governor of Texas; Sonny Perdue is Governor of Georgia; Bobby Jindal is Governor of Louisiana; Haley Barbour is Governor of Mississippi and Mark Sanford is Governor of South Carolina.


Meanwhile, South Carolina's chairman of the Board of Economic Advisers is already complaining that the money is moving to slowly to the states. "We're on a trajectory to 14 percent unemployment" in South Carolina, and he pleads, "We need it now!" Are you listening Gov. Sanford?

Are any of you guys listening? It is a new day; the people of your state want none of your political posturing.


By the way, the Center for American Progress says some of the states that voted most heavily against the Obama candidacy will do the best in the stimulus package. Damn, this business of having a President who believes in actually being a President for all of the people is sure inconvenient for maintaining a Republican's narrow self serving ideology, isn't it?

General Motors: A day late and many dollars short

American automobile manufacturers ought to be the best in the world. At one time, they were. The Big Three gave us the first automatic transmissions, the first power brakes, the first power steering...and a long list of technological innovations the rest of the world's manufacturers were quick to copy.

But somewhere along the way, they lost their way.

A column in The Washington Post this morning by a former editor recounts the day when she actually abandoned her 1972 Chevy Vega at a service station, taking only the license plates as she made her escape. The Vega started reluctantly each morning, sometimes not at all, and overheated regularly when it did start.

I worked briefly for Ford Motor Company in the mid-1960s when the Mustang was king of the road. Fresh out of college, I was excited to be there. One day, I mistakenly told an office mate that I aspired to be head of the company...or at the very least, a regional manager. He looked at me in disbelief and said, "Unless you graduated from one of the ivy covered business colleges in the Northeast, forget it." I didn't understand. I loved cars, had an economics degree and a willingness to dedicate my best effort to a career with Ford. Later I learned the business philosophy of all the manufacturers was "make money, first and foremost." Funny, I always thought if you "made cars" the public wanted to buy, you would make money, too. But then, I didn't graduate from Wharton or Harvard or Yale or Brown. Silly me. If I had graduated from one of those schools, I would have known that Ford's Edsel and Pinto, Chevrolet's Vega and Corvair, and AMC's Pacer and Gremlin, to name a few, were beautifully designed cars that would just sell like hotcakes.

Meanwhile Toyota, Mercedes, VW, BMW, even Honda (after a rough start) and other foreign manufacturers were designing cars customers couldn't wait to put in their driveways.

Detroit finally started building cars that would operate reliably, but they did not keep pace with foreign designs or technological innovation. For example, now that Toyota and others are selling hybrid cars like crazy, GM says "We have one, too, AND it will be ready for the showroom in 2010! Sorry we're late, could we tide you over with an SUV or two?"

In recent decades they have been a day late and a dollar short regularly.

Bottom line: Detroit forgot its reason for being in business. When it needed car people in charge, it went out and hired money people. Money people are fine, of course, for what they know but most wouldn't know a Blue Flame Six from a six pack of beer, or an overhead cam from a overhead camera.

Lincoln and Obama: Steady Hands at the Nation's Helm

“It was a period of gloom….when no man could foretell the happening of the morrow, when strong men trembled at the possibility of the destruction of our Government.”

So begins the 1909 tribute to Abraham Lincoln by the elderly Adlai E. Stevenson, Sr. on the occasion of the 100^th anniversary of the birth of our 16^th President.

While I doubt there are many who believe our Government is at risk of destruction today, hardly anyone doubts we are in a “period of gloom” as we celebrate the 200th anniversary of Lincoln's birth (tomorrow).

Let's go back to Stevenson's speech of 100 years ago. Stevenson, an Illinois native, who became a congressman, and still later, Vice President, knew Lincoln, and thus, was well suited to the task of paying tribute to the beloved President.

“He came from the common walks of life,” recalled Stevenson. “His early home was one of the humblest, where he was a stranger to the luxuries and to many of the ordinary comforts of life…How inspiring to the youth of high aims every incident of the pathway from the frontier cabin to the Executive Mansion…In no other country than ours could such attainment have been possible for the boy….whose only heritage was brain, integrity, lofty ambition, and indomitable purpose."

Are there any parallels to be drawn with the lanky young lawyer from Illinois now sitting in the Oval Office?

For Barack Obama, born in 1961 to a struggling bi-racial couple, his beginnings were humble indeed. Certainly, it can be said his only heritage was “brain, integrity, lofty ambition, and indomitable purpose.”

As the 1909 tribute continued, Stevenson praised Lincoln’s judgment in handling the question of slavery, an issue, he acknowledged, that “had been the subject of repeated compromise by patriotic statesmen.” This “apple of discord,” as Stevenson described it, had “darkened our national pathway from the beginning. It was well that in such an hour, with such tremendous issues in the balance, a steady hand was at the helm.”

Stevenson concluded his centennial tribute by selecting one particular paragraph from the inaugural address to share with his audience. It was the closing paragraph:

“We are not enemies, but friends. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot’s grave to every heart and hearthstone of the broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union when touched as they will be by the better angels of our nature.”

In America’s most recent history, passion and stridency have divided us – on a distant war and on a broad range of social issues at home. Such divisions weaken the Union. In Barack Obama, Americans have discerned a leader who – like Lincoln – believes our Union is stronger when we subscribe to “the better angels of our nature.”

In his memorable Philadelphia speech of March 18, 2008, Obama sounded a lot like Lincoln:

“I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together – unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction – towards a better future for our children and grandchildren.”

President-elect Obama is demonstrating already that he meant it—he really meant it – when he said he would reach across partisan lines, across ideology, across any social issue that would divide us, in order to keep us united and our collective eye steady on the goal of strengthening the republic before we hand it to the next generation.

President Lincoln is surely smiling today as President Barack Obama puts his steady hand at the helm.

Happy Birthday, Mr. Lincoln!

What's good looking...

What is six feet tall, has a beautiful complexion, and is always ready to roll?

Hint: You can’t see over it, under it, around it or through it – and it is always thirsty.

Answer: An SUV

PS: They are unsafe at any speed (for the rest of us driving a sedan).

Did you ever try to back out of a parking space with one parked on either side of your “normal” car? Good luck.

Who ever thought SUVs were a good idea?!

Go Ahead, Make His Day

There are some Republicans who can’t stand to call the President by name. “President Obama” are two words they cannot utter. They have not accepted him as their President. So, to show the degree of disrespect they have for him, they call him simply “44.” I guess some are still stinging from the Democrats referral to the Bushes as “Bush 41” and “Bush 43.” (Good grief, that's what they called themselves -- face to face.) I confess that is exactly the way I referred to them many times, but it was because both numbers are odd numbers…and weren’t their presidencies a little “odd,” too. The numbers just seemed to fit them.

So what about this “44” designation for President Obama? Well, he is certainly number 44 in the succession of Presidents we have had. But far from being offended by the Rs calling President Barack Obama, “44,” I like it. It is a powerful number, one that conjures up images of law enforcement officers brought in to clean up the city and restore peace to the neighborhoods.

I think it was a .44 Magnum that Clint Eastwood’s character, “Dirty” Harry Callahan described in the movie as “the most powerful handgun in the world.” You remember it; it’s the one Dirty Harry brandished in the face of the hoodlum and said, “Go ahead, punk, make my day.”

Now, I don’t own a handgun – never will. Enough said there. So I am not condoning the use of guns by ordinary citizens. There is a place for them with law enforcement, however, and with those who provide for the common defense.

I’m truly sorry for members of the loyal opposition who prefer to call him “44” instead of his given name or simply the title of his office, but if it conjures up images of a someone with a strong will, determination, and commitment to defend this nation, so be it. If it brings to mind those who will not tolerate troublemakers, foreign or domestic, so be it. If it reminds one of tough-minded leaders who are willing to “bite the bullet,” “tell it like it is,” and “do the right thing” for America, so be it.

I say to my Republican friends, go ahead and oppose the President if you want to, disrespect him by calling him “44” if that makes you feel better. Go ahead and make his day!

One of the Great Mysteries of Life

A local newspaper, The DC Examiner claims Republicans are in good spirits these days, despite coming off "a devastating, across-the-board electoral defeat."

The paper gets it right. This is the essence of what I've been telling my Republican friends for a long time:

"Being in opposition, after eight years of a Republican presidency and 12 years of GOP rule in Congress, suits many of them just fine. It's not that they were glad to lose. There are a lot of indignities involved in being the minority, and a pretty small minority at that. But talk to Republican lawmakers and insiders these days, and they speak as if an enormous weight has been lifted from their shoulders. Some of that weight was named George W. Bush, but in a larger sense, Republicans are relieved to be free of the burden of running things."

This is what I've been trying to tell you. Generally, Rs don't like the business of governing. They are not good at it. Most of the ones I have known the past 40 years are far more comfortable sitting on the back bench throwing rotten tomatoes at the Democratic majority. Indeed, that is what they do best. At least, that has been my experience. They just to say "no" all of the time, and return to their back row bench where they pray for the Democratic majority to pass into law the legislation they oppose. I know, it doesn't make sense, but that's their most comfortable modus operandi.

It is really unfortunate that being able to go back home and say "I opposed that one to the end" is more important that actually participating in the legislative process.

I'm not intentionally hard on my R friends, I just report the facts (as I see them). Republicans are indeed relieved to be free of the burden of "running things." Oh Newt, wherefore art thou?

"Not your run-of-the-mill recession"

The President performed last night as well as any American citizen had a right to expect. He was informed, articulate and candid with the American people…something we have not heard from recent Presidents. He was just what the country needed: someone in command of the issues and the office. In short, he did a GREAT job last night.

I thought the questions were disappointingly lame...and reflected a lack of understanding of the nation's economic condition....AND what is needed to get us out of it. And then there was that reporter from the Washington Post who, in the midst of the nation's worst economic crisis since the Depression, asked about the President's reaction to New York Yankees’ A-Rod steroid case. Good grief.

Obama’s performance was impressive and may prove to be the tipping point for achieving his first major legislative victory.

Most interesting to me today is steadfast Republican recalcitrance on the stimulus bill.

They are betting the President will fail, they expect the country to fail, and that they alone will be around to pick up the pieces in 2010 and again in 2012. Think about it. The GOP clings tightly to the belief that tax cuts and smaller government are the only answer. That’s their story and they’re sticking to it. Is there no room for anyone with rational thought on their side of the aisle?

To put it another way: The Rs are betting on a total collapse of the economy. By opposing en mass, they are saying they don’t believe the stimulus bill will work. In other words, the “NO” party has no confidence in America.