Obama the new FDR?

President Obama and the Democratic Party might want to be careful about any comparisons to Franklin Delano Roosevelt. FDR is certainly one of our greatest presidents. After all, he faced crises on the domestic and global fronts that no other POTUS has faced. His legacy is as solid as that of Washington or Lincoln, great men who faced severe challenges as well. But FDR did not end the Great Depression as American mythology would have us believe. The vast array of programs that made up the New Deal sought to tackle the economic downturn (understatement) that began shortly after the inauguration of President Hoover. The explosion (understatement again!) of government programs and intervention under FDR and his agreeable Congress never eliminated the Depression. Americans were going to elect anyone but Hoover in 1932, and all the Democrats had to do was run on a vague populist platform that promised change.

Sound familiar? While George W. Bush was not running in the 2008 election, the Democratic Party treated the election as if he was, shrewdly tying Republican candidates for just about any office with W. Senator Obama also promised change with a strongly populist platform. He avoided mentioning any specifics about his program. He didn't need to. The momentum was clearly in his favor. But like FDR, once in office, he had to act. Both of these presidents enjoyed the support of Congress. This was not because of a tremendous groundswell of bipartisanship. It was due to political control. There was certainly a core group of Republicans that were concerned about the growth of government. The programs surly came flying in although with good intentions. After all, millions of Americans were suffering and the U.S. had a staggering 25% unemployment rate. But despite the tremendous growth of regulatory agencies and job-creating bureaus, the unemployment rate never dropped below 15%. And to emphasize the reliance upon deficit spending, when FDR and Congress attempted to pare back some of the New Deal programs, the economy took another nose dive. War production brought on "full employment." The New Deal was really life support rather than resuscitation.

What is the point here? The Keynesian approach of spending our way out of economic problems was troublesome for FDR. He was concerned with the rising national debt! But the populist approach was keeping Democrats in office. This made it much easier to reach for greater heights. FDR suffered from a degree of hubris. Is that what our current president is succumbing to? Congress under Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are willing to give him a leg up to reach for the heights. The point we need to consider is whether "healthcare reform" is a power grab similar to the genesis of the welfare state under FDR. Who will ever have the guts to take entitlements away from the people who the Democrats have convinced are the victims of greedy corporate America? Talk about a sacred cow! But Obama, Pelosi, and Reid do not have a world war to do the REAL work of eliminating the economic crisis. If Democrats want to play the FDR way, they had better consider the cost. Americans will eventually see that this is an administration that is using the faltering economy to push through their higher agenda. That agenda is going to cost trillions of dollars and it has to come from somewhere. We Americans are not big on taxation. We are likely to see the greatest spike in taxation that has ever taken place in the U.S.A. That is, of course, if there are not significant cuts in programs. The modern progressive Democrats have made little effort to hide the intended source of that tax revenue. It will come from the rich. That sounds great to lower middle class and working class Americans. But the definition of rich is dynamic. How low will the standard for "rich" have to drop in order to secure the revenue to pay for the ambitious programs on the burner. Populist appeals and class warfare always work in an economic climate such as exists today. If prosperity returns, you can count on a strong backlash to expanding the government trough.

Reflections on D-Day

I enjoyed this weekend in a very American way. I watched my youngest daughter play in a softball tournament at the local ball fields. Popcorn and soda, cheering and grumbling, and the warmth of a late spring Saturday that gave me a touch of sunburn. That was my June 6th, 2009. And yet, as a military historian, the events of June 6th, 1944 were not far from my thinking. I wish that I could say that was true of every year on that date. There have been years in which the date arrived and maybe even passed before I realized it. Given that I have devoted a substantial amount of study to the Allied invasion of Normandy, that would seem to be unforgivable. But that was not true of this year. I remembered.

I read an editorial in the local newspaper this morning. It provoked a lot of thought on my part. It raised the question of remembrance of D-day. How different is the "memory" of that day today as opposed to during the years immediately following the war. But then those years stretch to decades and the immediacy of the event starts to fade. Annual remembrance on the part of the Allied nations moves from yearly ceremonies to more significant anniversaries. Twenty years, twenty five, forty, fifty, and sixty years. On the occasion of the 40th anniversary, Ronald Reagan gave a moving tribute to the Army Rangers who scaled Pont du Hoc on the Normandy coast. Ever the compelling orator, Reagan captured the meaning of the sacrifice that took place in France forty years previous to his momentous speech which he delivered in front of the stone dagger that stands as a monument for the Rangers. Now, 65 years since the invasion, that monument sits precariously at the edge of the the cliffs once scaled by the Rangers. Erosion of the cliff face because of the power of the sea makes the very location of the Reagan speech a dangerous place to visit; so much so that a safety perimeter has been established to keep visitors from wandering too close to the crumbling ground. (Photographs at right by David Chapman) Although Pont du Hoc has been preserved so that visitors can see the craters from naval guns and aerial bombing, the power of nature takes the hallowed ground away with each passing day. Just as the elements conspire to take the memory of D-day from us, so too does time.

This year, the 65th anniversary was observed on the grounds of the American Cemetary on the bluffs above Omaha Beach. Speakers included French President Nicolas Sarkozy, U.S. President Barak Obama, as well as Prince Charles of the United Kingdom and Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada. The words of these men were eloquent. Sarkozy's comments were moving, particularly those lauding the cooperation of the four nations in 1944 and the hope for a peaceful Europe in the coming years. It is my fervent hope that peace will prevail and global war such as that which took place in World War Two will never again plague this planet. War does exist and will continue to do so. No matter how idealistic individual leaders or even nations may be, it seems there will always be those who are not to be satisfied with cooperative efforts and peace. Who provokes who? Who covets the wealth of others? These are but two questions that may provide the answers to whether global war may return. Of course, what the nature of the enemies or weapons used may be will determine not only the outcome of the war but the future of mankind. Normandy should help us recall the courage that leads to the defeat of evil in the world. The Cold War and related proxy wars should remind us of the continuing menace of war.

God bless those who fought in Operation Overlord and the battles that followed. Though our memories may fade, nothing will supplant that June day, that "longest day" in the words of Corneleus Ryan, as one of the turning points of human history.

Amazing Grace

Amazing Grace
How Sweet the Sound
That Saved a Wretch Like Me

I am always moved by the words of this song of praise to our Lord, Jesus.
When I consider the substitutionary death of Jesus, I am amazed that God would do such a thing for his deeply flawed and rebellious children.

On July 17th, 1996, I received Christ as my Savior. I was baptised by immersion several years later as an act of obedience to God and an outward symbol of my faith. The Lord has been faithful to me, granting to me many blessings. When I chose teaching as my profession, I did not think of it as my calling, but through a decade of teaching, I now know that He has placed me in a position to serve as salt and light to those with whom I work.
After surviving a cardiac arrest in my classroom while teaching, I learned a lot. I learned first and foremost that He has further plans for me. I also gained a deeper understanding of the value of family. My wife and kids are so important to me. My most vivid memory of August 31st, 2005 was waking in the ER and seeing my wife. Other than our wedding day, I was never happier to see her. Of course, when I saw my two daughters the next day, I was happy to the point of tears. The outpouring of love from my family and my in-laws was special. My dad flew in to be with me, an act that just made me love him more. My father- and mother-in-law came to spend several weeks with us to help with the girls and provide moral support for myself and their daughter. I freely state that I am blessed with terrific in-laws, including both parents and siblings.
Finally, I further appreciate the witness that I can be for my students. While I am not blatant and in their faces about my faith, I do my best to live out my faith in class, demonstrating honesty, fairness, and compassion. The Lord gave me a sense of humor to use as a teaching tool. I am extremely honored that He gives my the opportunity to go to work each day and to have fun with my students who teach me as much as I do them. It is always my intent to be the same man in the classroom or in the community that I am in church. Thanks to the teaching of Brother Phillip Smith and the associate pastors at First Baptist Church in Bentonville, I have a deeper understanding of the role that I play in Gods plan for His people.

Thank you God for your Amazing Grace!

Erin Go Bragh

Try JibJab Sendables® eCards today!

A Soldier Goes Home

George Robert Names

Our beloved Grandpa George Names died Tuesday morning, February 17th. This wonderful man was a blessing to us all.

The following narrative describes his service in the United States Army during the Second World War.

George Robert Names served in the United States Army. He was attached to the 80th Infantry, Third Army in the European Theater of Operations during the Second World War. Private Names landed in Normandy, France in 1944, shortly after the main Allied invasion in June of that year. He fought his way across northern France in pursuit of German forces withdrawing from occupied Western Europe. He saw combat action in the areas of Metz and Nancy in the eastern frontier of France, spending most of his nights in foxholes as a forward observer, frequently within earshot of German troops.

As is characteristic of most who served in combat, Mr. Names’ account downplayed the dangers and brutal realities of warfare. Those experiences are only comprehensible to the few who have been through them and words have little real impact.
In the drive to cross the Moselle River, George Names experienced the common problems of the infantryman, including the malady that eventually led to his evacuation from the war; extreme frostbite to his feet. More terrifying were the sudden exchanges of fire with the enemy that was sometimes only mere yards in the distance. One such incident nearly took Names’ life.

German machine gun fire sprayed across the network of foxholes in which American troops kept watch over suspected enemy positions near the river. While seated in a foxhole with another soldier, Names began to rise from his position in the hole. His comrade pulled him back into the bottom of the hole. His account of the incident was that many of the men around him were wounded or killed and the action taken by his foxhole-mate saved him from the same fate. Clearly grateful, but subdued in his description, George Names told this story to few people. This underscores the nature of this citizen soldier that survived the war and lived a life of postwar peace with his wife of more than sixty years, Vetta Arlene Names.
At the time of his death, George Names left a legacy of both soldier and devoted family man. This quiet man lived to see several generations of adoring family members. He is remembered as a great yet common man who was the embodiment of his generation. One of millions who participated in the war, he would be the first to say that the true heroes of the war never came home. Nevertheless, he was and remains our hero.

President Obama, Ice Storms, Puppy and Praise

Good Morning World!
As I write, we are in the midst of a major ice storm. It is the heaviest such storm since my family moved here in 2001. We are getting at least an inch of ice and I have to tell you that the new puppy in our house is not excited about heading out into the weather. House training has been a challenge already, but I guess this is a day to throw your hands into the air and say "oh well." She's going to do what she is going to do under these circumstances. We are blessed to have her and even more so to have a home to keep us out of the elements.

President Obama has been in office for a week now and there is a lot of excitement about him and his talk of change. While I cannot say the same for my friends on the left, I proudly accept this man as my president. It is my sincere hope that Americans in general will view him as such and enthusiastically work toward the improvement of our nation. For eight years, it was as if President Bush was considered a pretender to the throne. One might think that he failed to do one positive thing. Few on the left were capable of swallowing their partisanship and vitriol to admit to ANY successes during his presidency. I find it laughable that President Carter, whose presidency was marred with economic misteps and foreign policy failures was suddenly viewed as some sort of guru from whom Bush was somehow supposed to draw invaluable advice to save the nation from "malaise," foreign adventurism, and the evil lord Cheney. Wasn't it exciting when Ronald Reagan arrived on the scene to promise change? Americans soundly rejected Carter in favor of a brighter future with a new commander at the helm.

Of course the crown prince of Hope, Arkansas could do no wrong outside of his personal life. Partisanship was alive and well during President Clinton's presidency. This time it was the Republicans who could not stomach accepting the good policies of the rival party's leader. In many ways, Clinton's eight years in office were marred by continual efforts of the right to undermine the executive branch's actions, whether they had merit or not. There were, of course, mistakes. Some were major. But these could be blamed in part on the impeachment efforts in Congress. "What if" history will ask what preventative measures might have been achieved had the president been able to work with some degree of bipartisan support.

This entry is not meant to suggest that all should be butterflies and rainbows in Washington, but there does need to be a move toward thoughtful cooperation on behalf of the citizens of the United States for whom the denizens of Washington claim to represent. Was the Bush administration haughty, hasty, and single-minded in its pursuit of the president's goals? Perhaps one could say that. But did the Republicans reap what they sowed in the Clinton years? Was the eight year assault on his character payback for the attacks upon Clinton? There would seem to be at least stong suggestions to the affirmative. Have the issues that have plagued the Bush presidency been soley of his doing? Fair-minded observers would recognize the good with the bad. History rarely makes its judgment for several decades. Enough time has passed to make educated judgments about Carter and Reagan. The truth is that insufficient facts have been uncovered or declassified to evaluate either Clinton or Bush.

So now the 44th POTUS is in office. He will without a doubt make decisions that anger the Republicans, and even some in his own party. But isn't it time to consider President Obama the leader of all of us. We can use our constitutional rights to support or oppose him on policies. But institutionalized rejection of our leader because of his party affiliation will continue to carve a divide in this land. Could civil unrest be an outcome of continued ultra-partisanship? This writer believes that to be a realistic possibility. Thomas Jefferson once remarked that sectionalism in early 19th century America would eventually lead to dire consequences. While the nation is not currently geographically divded per se, it is ideologically split. Political partisanship is not without precedent in our history, but few are the times when the stakes of national survival are so clearly in jeopardy from beyond our borders.

I wish to close this posting with praise to the Lord for bringing Harper Stamps into this world. It is always heart-wrenching to know of a couple that desires so strongly for a child only to have those hopes dashed time and again. So it is with great joy that I raise up this child's name as a gift from God to parents who continued to believe and have faith that all things are possible through Jesus. God bless the Stamps and their beautiful daughter. Although her entry into the world was not without difficulty for mother and child, one cannot question the enduring faith of Kelly and Scott Stamps and the legions of those in the blogosphere who fervently prayed for this child's survival. Glory to God in the Highest!

David