Our Leaders Are Idiots

Home Page

Welcome to “Our Leaders Are Idiots”

If you are visiting this site, you probably already know that something is radically wrong with the leadership of our country. The major reason for the disastrous course we are on is that our leaders, though perhaps otherwise intelligent, all too often do stupid things, either to appease special interest groups or to get elected or reelected. These acts of stupidity are worthy of the “idiot’ label in order place such acts in proper perspective, i.e. they should know better. 

The purpose of this website is to inform Americans who are concerned about the direction our country is headed. It is not for entertainment. It is true, however, that some of the stupid things our politicians do are entertaining, albeit pathetically so. Also, I encourage readers/visitors to do their own research. If you differ with my views, I welcome your responses. 

Let me start by stating that throughout history, there have been good and bad leaders. There are also leaders who are highly intelligent, but who do stupid things. It is primarily this latter group that I shall l refer to as idiots, and they will be the focus of my commentary. 

This site will randomly include examples current events that are already leading to a disaster or soon will due to a decision or decisions made by one or more idiot politicians. I hope you will find my commentary interesting and enlightening. Also, I will be adding material periodically, so visit me often and tell your friends. 

An Important Historical Example 

One of the most disastrous decisions of the 20th Century was made by President Woodrow Wilson who led us into WW I. His leadership in this regard is an example of an highly intelligent person whose actions contributed either directly or indirectly to one of the most destructive events on recorded history. 

Woodrow Wilson’s decision to enter WW I on the side of France, Britain, Russia and Italy tipped the scales in their favor. By the time we entered the war, both sides were essentially exhausted and the end was near. The probable outcome would have been a settlement with Germany and Austria-Hungary, and no significant gain or loss for any of the powers. With the advent of the US entry into the war, however, Germany was decisively defeated and Austria-Hungary devolved into several remainder states. WW I was by any measure a catastrophic event. It could have been avoided if the US had simply taken heed of George Washington’s admonition in his farewell address to “stay out of foreign entanglements.”

The Versailles Treaty following WW I was grossly unfair to Germany, resulting in chaos and anarchy. These propitious conditions led to the rise of Adolf Hitler, the NAZI regime and the bloody war that followed, wherein over 50 million human beings were killed, not to mention the associated suffering of myriad peoples and the destruction of innumerable cities and historical treasures. This conflagration could also have been avoided if the allied powers had quashed the NAZI movement early on when its intentions were clear and they had the upper hand, viz. after Munich when Neville Chamberlain stated he had achieved “peace in our time.”

The lesson here is that well intended decisions, especially those guided by ideology, can often lead to unintended and largely uncontrollable consequences. Unfortunately, these consequences too often result in enormous suffering, death and destruction that have a lasting effort on countries, governments and peoples. 

Contact me at kerrmujin@ourleadersareidiots.com

Versailles on the Potomac, December 27, 2011

For those of you who are history buffs, you may recall that Louis XIV kept the nobility at Versailles in order to control them. The quid pro quo was that the nobility were granted favors great and small according to how close they were, i.e. how well connected to the king. Of course this arrangement, perpetuated by Louis XV and XVI, led to sycophantic relationships and egregious abuse of power that ultimately caused the downfall of the Bourbon dynasty, something about a guillotine!

Louis XIV would feel quite at home in Washington these days, where the governing elites routinely enrich themselves at the expense of the “the people.” Indeed, Washington DC (Despicable Corruption) has segued from the center for representative government of the people, by the people and for the people to the center for corruption of the government, by the government and for the government, and its cronies! Like Louis, Obama and his henchmen have concentrated power in DC like never before. By expanding the bureaucracy (200,000 new federal employees), appointing unaccountable Czars and issuing presidential diktats in the form of “executive orders,” he is effectively circumventing congress and governing as King and tyrant. The recent executive order to stop deportation of non-violent criminal illegal immigrants, i.e. “backdoor amnesty,” is a prime example of this imperious behavior. 

If you have access to power in DC, you can obtain myriad grants, privileges, contracts and favors just as the courtiers of Versailles did in the 17th and 18th centuries. The Solyndra debacle is a sort of poster child for the massive corruption that passes for governance in DC. This truly is a case of the green agenda gone mad. It is obvious that the loan guarantees to Solyndra were ill-advised, and that key people in the administration were aware of their flaws. It is also true that the warnings were ignored for political purposes. This little episode, however, is only the tip of the iceberg relative to the corruption, self-dealing and cronyism that characterizes our dysfunctional government. 

This situation creates a ruling class of overpaid bureaucrats, and lobbyists and influence peddlers that benefit financially from government handouts, i.e. contracts, consulting fees, insider trading information, etc. It is of notable interest that Washington DC is one of the wealthiest metropolitan areas in the nation. This wealth, however, is not created by innovative inventions, entrepreneurial excellence, manufacturing prowess or productive labor, but instead by taxpayers who send their hard earned money to DC. This money is then squandered on an endless parade of stupid, wasteful and duplicative programs, given to foreign countries that hate us and debased by over active printing presses. Then to add insult to injury, we and our progeny for the next 100 years, will be asked to pay for this profligacy by borrowing from China, all because the idiots that run our government prefer to babble incessantly rather than actually face the music and solve our problems. 

The most recent example of this inept leadership syndrome is the super committee, which was tasked with finding savings of $1.2 trillion in federal spending. It is now fashionable to present budget numbers in 10-year time frames in order to amplify the importance of the process. Thus; at $120 billion per year, this goal was in fact rather trivial. Due to partisan squabbling, however, even this small savings could not be realized.  

This situation will not likely change even with a Republican win in 2012. This is because the system is fundamentally flawed. While our founders were men of unrivaled perspicacity, they only vaguely foresaw the possibility of the pitfalls of a permanent ruling class. Certainly, some did, but most assumed that congressmen/women would prefer to maintain their private lives and return to them when the business of governing was completed each year. By contrast, we now have a ruling class with many of its members “serving” in excess of 30 years, who are more-or-less permanent fixtures in DC, and whose entire lives are vested in maintaining the status quo. This is a recipe for continuing chaos and the ultimate demise of our financial system as it implodes under the weight of unsustainable debt. 

Cover Up, Conspiracey? October 17, 2012

The big showdown between Romney and Obama Tuesday night had its ups, downs and memorable moments for both parties. The most interesting and troubling moment, however, was when Romney confronted Obama regarding his, and his administration’s,  continuous assertion that the Bengazi attack was a result of an anti-Muslim video rather than a terrorist attack, even though the administration knew the true nature of the event within 24 hours. Obama then curiously stated that he had referred to this event as a terrorist attack in his September 12th Rose Garden speech. When Romney challenged this surprising revelation, Obama called on Candy Crowley to refer to “the tape,” i.e. of the Rose Garden speech. Candy, a fellow traveler Liberal, dutifully responded with a somewhat garbled affirmation that indeed Obama had referred to the Bengazi event as a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden speech. She followed with an equally clumsy statement that Romney was also right about the nearly two weeks of dissembling by various members of the Obama regime.

There are two egregious problems here. First, why did Ms. Crowley have a copy of the transcript? This is troublesome on several levels. Most importantly, since the tape apparently had not been released to the media, how did she know to obtain a copy? Obviously, she had to receive a tip from an insider at the White House. Of equal concern is the unabashed and scripted cooperation between Obama and Ms. Crowley. It is abundantly clear that this eventuality was anticipated and that a strategy was developed to dupe the audience into believing Obama had indeed acknowledged the terrorist attack immediately following its occurrence. A separate issue relates to Ms. Crowley’s role as moderator. Why did she jump into the debate in support of Obama contrary to the debate rules for the Moderator?  In this regard, she confirmed Obama’s statement as though she were a member of the Obama debating team.  

The second problem is that if Obama indeed knew it was a terrorist attack the next day, why did he and his various spokespersons continually say the video was the reason for the attack? Most pundits have concluded, and I agree, that the administration did not wish to acknowledge it as a terrorist attack since that would belie the narrative that all is peaches and cream in the Muslim world since the OBL dragon was slain by St. Obama. To admit that a terrorist attack had occurred, resulting in the murder of four brave Americans would be political suicide this close to the election. Thus, the anti-Muslim video provided a convenient ruse to maintain the fiction that the attack was in fact simply an unruly mob gone wild.  

With regard to the Rose Garden speech, a careful reading of its transcript reveals that, he did not in fact refer to the Bengazi murders as a terrorist attack, but instead, toward the end of his speech stated: “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation.” This is a generic statement that has no specific connection to the Bengazi attack. Thus, his statement at the debate was demonstrably false, i.e. a bald face lie for political gain!

The bottom line here is that Obama and Ms. Crowley deliberately conspired to deceive the American people and that Obama, in true Alinsky fashion, along with numerous people in his administration consistently lied to the public about this tragedy.

While this despicable farse is way beyond disturbing, Obama added insult to injury when he appeared on Comedy Central with Jon Phillips and stated that when four Americans get killed, “it’s not optimal. We’re going to fix it. All of it.” Setting aside for a moment the questionable judgment of our dear leader discussing this tragedy in a comedic format, what sort of idiot would use “not optimal” to describe the brazen murder of four Americans by crazed barbarians? I am at a loss for words to describe how the survivors of the deceased must feel hearing that the murder of their loved ones was “not optimal.” Should we infer from this that these deaths were acceptable? Also, what about the millions of Americans who have been lied to and now witnessed such a calloused and absurd description of these murders? The president’s craven behavior throughout this event truly boggles the mind. 

I have maintained from the beginning that Obama is an incompetent and inexperienced buffoon whose policies are destroying America. This latest affront to the American people is, or should be, the last straw. If he is re-elected, it will be a sad testimony to the collective ignorance and stupidity of the electorate.

Victory or Indictment? December 5, 1012

The recent Obama victory will doubtlessly be remembered by historians as the milestone date when America began its freefall into socialism, bankruptcy and cultural breakup. This debacle, however, is not entirely Obama’s fault. Even though he won by lies, dissembling and cheating, the real guilt lies with the young, Hispanics, Blacks and single women, all of whom voted for hand-outs and special favors. Contrary to popular wisdom, this election was not a mandate, but a tragedy for America since it reflects the astonishing ignorance and stupidity of the electorate. 

First, let’s explore the young vote, with a 60% majority for our dear leader. Ironically, these are the people who will suffer most from the ruinous policies of Obama. But, like their starry-eyed adoration of pop-culture icons, they view Obama as “cool” and it is decidedly “cool” to vote for him. Never mind his myriad transgressions on our freedoms, perversion of our constitution and pathetically inept foreign policy, the man is “cool.” 

This is all made quite easy by the simple fact that our educational system has been dumbed down and twisted by Marxist drivel for the past 30 years or so by the Liberal establishment. Consequently, our young people have no clue why the Founders were special people indeed and that they constructed a constitution and governing system that has been the envy of the world, with the notable exception of Islam, which is characterized by all things antithetical to civilized behavior. Our young can recite songs by their favorite airhead performer, but cannot explain why America is exceptional, how our government is structured or key events in our history. Their abysmal ignorance about our country is quite sad. It is more than just sad, however, since they have voted for a man who manifestly does not like America and whose policies will destroy the nation as we know/knew it!

What about Hispanics, 71% of whom voted for Obama? Is it not profoundly disturbing that a very large percentage of them champion illegal immigration, i.e. breaking our basic law of sovereignty? There is a mind set among Hispanics that views illegal immigration as a god given right and that illegals are due the manifold benefits bestowed upon them by our incredibly stupid and churlishly pandering leaders. They also view any attempt to right this egregious wrong as inhumane and, of course, racist (notwithstanding the fact that Hispanics are not a race!). 

You might ask why is it so important to deny amnesty to these poor down-trodden folks who “just want to provide for their families.” There are three basic reasons. First, to reward illegal immigrants is to make a mockery of the legal process. Second, due to their propensity to work for below market wages, illegals depress wages for legal workers. The third and most important reason, is the fact that amnesty for the 12 million illegals will not stop there. Instead, it will embolden more illegal immigrants to take the plunge; thus, adding further fuel to the fire. It is instructive here to remember that Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to three million illegals with the understanding that our borders would forthwith be secured and that our immigration laws would be enforced. The end result of this naïvely flawed act is 12 million illegals eagerly awaiting the gift of amnesty! Given high birth rates and chain migration, amnesty for the 12 million will quickly multiply to 50 million or more. 

At present, about 50 million Hispanics populate our country. Already, they lobby for bilingual education and special treatment as a group, such as affirmative action in education and hiring. Also, there is an Hispanic Caucus in the House of Representatives. One might ask: precisely for what are they caucusing, perhaps special treatment? Do you believe that another 50 million Hispanics will mitigate this effort? If so, you are hopelessly naïve. The trend is clear. Hispanics want and believe they deserve special treatment since they have been “oppressed” by “Whitey” for centuries. As they multiply and are given special treatment, their appetite will certainly increase. The end result will be the emergence of a distinct and separate culture and polity, i.e. a state within a state. This is already dangerously close to reality in Los Angeles.

It is important to understand that when a minority group lives within a greater culture, it must adapt and adopt to survive. When a minority becomes a significant share of the greater culture, however, it no longer needs to adapt and adopt, but instead it becomes essentially an equal, but separate political and social entity. The model for this is found in the nineteenth century with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, when in 1867 the Empire was divided into German and Hungarian spheres of interest. This division was at best a shaky compromise that ultimately collapsed into ethno-linguistic blocks with the chaos and defeat of WW I.   

For the US, Hispanics will soon comprise a majority in the Southwest, an area referred to as Aztlan by Hispanic irredentists and other liberal quacks. In their view, Aztlan was wrongfully taken from Mexico in the Mexican-American War, and rightfully should be returned to the Hispanics. As an aside, it is of more than passing interest to note that the Mexicans started the war and ceded Aztlan to the US in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848. Further, they conveniently ignore the fact that they took Aztlan from the indigenous populations in the 17th and 18th centuries. Details, details; facts are so annoying to Liberals! The bottom line is that fairly soon Hispanics will have established a de facto Latino state within a state without firing a shot! Thus, the unity of our population will devolve into endless ethnic conflict and separatism.

The Black vote is, of course, easy to understand. Sadly, the near monolithic vote (93%) for Obama, reflects a knee-jerk reaction rather than rational comprehension of the issues at stake and recognition of the ruinous policies of the Obama regime. Blacks have suffered most from high unemployment under Obama, and doubtlessly will continue to suffer under his renewed tenure. While the young voted for Obama because he is cool, and Hispanics supported him for his pro-amnesty policies, Blacks favored him due to his skin color! This is truly pathetic. One would have hoped that Blacks would be more concerned with the critically important issues facing our country. 

A 67% plurality of single women voted for Obama largely due to the fictitious “war on women” narrative spun by the Democrat Party machine. There was, in fact, no war on women or any other demographic. Romney’s platform simply stated that birth control and abortion are not the proper provence of the federal government. Single women, however, like Sandra Fluke the poster girl for the nanny state, opted for free birth control and unfettered access to abortion paid for by the government, i.e. tax-payers. This reflects the ruinous trend for large numbers of the electorate to support policies that benefit them, but are paid for by others, i.e. Socialism. A trend that ultimately fails due to an ever- dwindling percentage of “others.”

No folks, the election of Obama in 2012 was not a victory or mandate for Obama, but instead a tragic testimony to the abject ignorance and stupidity of an electorate that cherishes government largesse above personal responsibility, freedom and economic prosperity. I fear greatly for the generations that will inherit the disaster created by Obama. 

Website Builder