It’s becoming more and more obvious that numbers not adding up doesn’t matter anymore.
In this new age of trillion-speak nobody seems to be able to do the addition anyway. And when I say nobody I am speaking of the huddled masses yearning to breathe hope and change as well as the news media that is selling the fiction regardless of the facts.
The absolute absurdity of the comments coming out of Washington DC and the placid acceptance of every duplicitous word by the supposed defenders of truth in the media, while currently increasing the false sense of jocund, will only serve to multiply the height from which those who hold this evanescent hope plummet. With almost every comment defending the non-stimulus spending package the American public is treated to even more pabulum by the dutiful liberals reporting on it.
One example of this vagary is reported out of the small town of North Manchester, Indiana, where $3.8 million of the non-stimulus money is going to be spent building a new water treatment facility. While the town will have a new facility and some temporary construction jobs, this project will create only 24 jobs in total and none of them will be from North Manchester. For that matter better than half of them won’t even be from Indiana. Democrats are pointing to the fact that these workers will be staying at hotels and eating in restaurants as providing stimulus. Nobody covering this story has bothered to question this salubrious claptrap and instead the press is descending on The Treeway Inn to interview the owner of this aged 24 room hotel. While it is true that The Treeway and the local Mr. Dave’s restaurant will indeed have some short term cash influx it will hardly be stimulus for the economy. You see these 24 workers, who will be on t he job at various times over the course of this project, would be eating in their home town if they weren’t in North Manchester. The influx of new business at Mr. Dave’s will have an exact opposite reduction in spending in the laborers home town eatery and gin mill.
Granted the job will employ 24 workers for a short period of time, but at $3.8 million it works out to almost $160,000 per job. This project is only one of a proposed dozen projects with a total price tag of $36 million. If the other projects run in the same cost factors that will mean 240 people will have a temporary job for as long as the projects last. This area in Indiana has lost more than twice that amount recently with the loss of several small manufacturing plants, and this so called stimulus is doing nothing to bring those permanent jobs back.
Instead of spending money on water treatment plants that would have had to been replaced anyway and calling it stimulus, develop a plan that attracts businesses and industry that will create real jobs that last longer than the 6 months you can actually pour concrete in Indiana.
Instead the Obama administration is punishing investment by small business owners by raising their taxes and making it less likely that they will venture into new operations.
For the time being North Manchester, Indiana will bask in the new found wealth of half a dozen ditch diggers buying Italian hoagies from the CITGO station.
You almost have to admire how Democrats can make that add up to fiscal salvation.
Almost.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Comedy And Tragedy
Is anybody keeping score?
The day after the new president worked the halls of congress like a veteran standup comedian working at the Improv, the Democrat controlled House of Representatives passed an additional earmark riddled spending bill totaling $410 billion.
This move is absolutely beyond comprehension. Having just signed away $787 billion of our great-grandchildren’s money this additional spending will bring this insane spending spree total to just shy of $1.2 trillion dollars. And they haven’t even begun looking at the regular budget yet.
The passage of this bill demonstrates the absurd insincerity of President Obama’s so called fiscal responsibility summit and the committees he has put into place to monitor spending. It also calls into question both his sincerity and sanity in alleging that he will be able to cut the federal deficit in half within his first four years, as this new spending totals more than the original deficit.
After falsely claiming that he was able to persuade lawmakers to keep earmarks out of the so called stimulus bill, Obama made no such publicity stunt on this first non-emergency spending measure of his presidency. The result was that lawmakers claimed billions in federal funds for pet projects with a total of 8,570 earmarks.
While Obama makes sure that banks and financial institutions cut the pay and benefits of their directors, and congress questions whether or not Wall Street CEO’s are using the self-service pumps to fill their American made hybrids, this new legislation provides increases of roughly 8 percent for the federal agencies it covers or about $32 billion more than last year.
Among just some of the more than 8,000 new earmarks are a quarter if a million dollars for a "tattoo removal violence outreach program". You simply can’t make stuff like that up. There are also nearly a dozen earmarks aimed at giving money to clients of the PMA Group, a lobbying company now at the center of a federal corruption investigation. Federal prosecutors are investigating PMA Group's founder and president, Paul Magliochetti, who is a former top aide to Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., and Chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that funds defense programs. The company's offices were raided earlier in February and PMA Group has announced plans to disband by the end of the month.
As the country spirals into the depths of the worst recession since World War II this new legislation is estimated to grow the size of government by 8.3 percent. The problem is that the family budget which has to pay for the federal budget only grew at 1.3 percent last year, and that was before the real depths of the recession took hold.
Once again Democrats are trying to pin the blame on Republicans for the current economic troubles, but anyone that bothers to look at reality will see that it was a Democrat controlled congress in the last two years of the Bush presidency that led the way for the times we face today. Bush can certainly be held accountable for not vetoing their spending but he can’t be blamed for causing it.
With the ever increasing debt load this country is incurring I doubt we will have to worry about foreign investors making waves in the Treasury bill market. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said yesterday that he believes this economic recession will be over by year’s end. That statement however was based on a Bush era budget deficit. With the Democrats now raising the debt ceiling by over 300% in just the first month of the administration of change I doubt Bernanke or anybody else has the slightest idea of the devastation this overspending will cause.
Republicans are beseeching the president to veto this new spending package and live up to his claim of cutting out earmarks from the congressional landscape.
When it comes to his promises let’s see if this president is a stand up guy or just a standup comedian.
The day after the new president worked the halls of congress like a veteran standup comedian working at the Improv, the Democrat controlled House of Representatives passed an additional earmark riddled spending bill totaling $410 billion.
This move is absolutely beyond comprehension. Having just signed away $787 billion of our great-grandchildren’s money this additional spending will bring this insane spending spree total to just shy of $1.2 trillion dollars. And they haven’t even begun looking at the regular budget yet.
The passage of this bill demonstrates the absurd insincerity of President Obama’s so called fiscal responsibility summit and the committees he has put into place to monitor spending. It also calls into question both his sincerity and sanity in alleging that he will be able to cut the federal deficit in half within his first four years, as this new spending totals more than the original deficit.
After falsely claiming that he was able to persuade lawmakers to keep earmarks out of the so called stimulus bill, Obama made no such publicity stunt on this first non-emergency spending measure of his presidency. The result was that lawmakers claimed billions in federal funds for pet projects with a total of 8,570 earmarks.
While Obama makes sure that banks and financial institutions cut the pay and benefits of their directors, and congress questions whether or not Wall Street CEO’s are using the self-service pumps to fill their American made hybrids, this new legislation provides increases of roughly 8 percent for the federal agencies it covers or about $32 billion more than last year.
Among just some of the more than 8,000 new earmarks are a quarter if a million dollars for a "tattoo removal violence outreach program". You simply can’t make stuff like that up. There are also nearly a dozen earmarks aimed at giving money to clients of the PMA Group, a lobbying company now at the center of a federal corruption investigation. Federal prosecutors are investigating PMA Group's founder and president, Paul Magliochetti, who is a former top aide to Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., and Chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that funds defense programs. The company's offices were raided earlier in February and PMA Group has announced plans to disband by the end of the month.
As the country spirals into the depths of the worst recession since World War II this new legislation is estimated to grow the size of government by 8.3 percent. The problem is that the family budget which has to pay for the federal budget only grew at 1.3 percent last year, and that was before the real depths of the recession took hold.
Once again Democrats are trying to pin the blame on Republicans for the current economic troubles, but anyone that bothers to look at reality will see that it was a Democrat controlled congress in the last two years of the Bush presidency that led the way for the times we face today. Bush can certainly be held accountable for not vetoing their spending but he can’t be blamed for causing it.
With the ever increasing debt load this country is incurring I doubt we will have to worry about foreign investors making waves in the Treasury bill market. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said yesterday that he believes this economic recession will be over by year’s end. That statement however was based on a Bush era budget deficit. With the Democrats now raising the debt ceiling by over 300% in just the first month of the administration of change I doubt Bernanke or anybody else has the slightest idea of the devastation this overspending will cause.
Republicans are beseeching the president to veto this new spending package and live up to his claim of cutting out earmarks from the congressional landscape.
When it comes to his promises let’s see if this president is a stand up guy or just a standup comedian.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Global Warming Where The Sun Don't Shine
I hate when the doctor puts on the glove.
Any guy over the age of about 30 with a prostate knows exactly what’s coming next. Hold your breath, grab the backside of the examination table and hope that it’s over quickly. It’s never over quick enough and at least I have never even gotten a dinner out of the deal.
It’s one of those things you just endure. I get the same feeling of dreaded anticipation every time I read another story about the immanent destruction of the planet due to manmade global warming. And boy, the news wires are jammed to hilt with one story after another of how we are all going to hell in a handbasket due to melting ice flows and rising sea levels.
With each new report more dire then the previous one and every conceivable attempt made to tie global warming to some natural disaster it has become apparent that thar’s gold in them thar carbon footprints.
Penn State University just published a report that the entire continent of Antarctica is warming at the same rate as the rest of the planet, disagreeing with all previous reports that showed otherwise. This report was dutifully covered by the journal Nature in its January 21st issue.
The key to this study is that it was funded by the National Science Foundation, a foundation that just received over $3 billion in new funding in the presidents non-stimulus spending package.
The study which was set up to prove exactly what it proved is not based on any new information or scientific data. The study simply used the existing data, which in some cases is only for the last 25 years, and redid the math so that the calculations showed warming rather than cooling. It than made assumptions on the data collected and extrapolated it out to say that it covered 50 years, which is actually twice as long as some of the data covered.
Headlines claimed that sea levels are rising faster than ever, reporting on a story from the National Center for Space Studies in France. My first thought is why does France have a National Center for Space Studies and why the hell are they studying sea levels. But regardless of my skepticism, the study claims that sea levels are rising twice as fast as was originally thought. It is only later that it is explained that the study is comparing data from only the last 15 years and comparing it to data from the 50 years prior. Once again it ignores the rules of long term data collection and also uses two completely different measuring systems and then extrapolates the data to come out this way.
The Carnegie Institute of Science, which also operates on government grants and focused corporate contributions, reported that carbon emissions have been growing by 3.5% since 2000 versus the 0.9% reported in the 1990’s. The study places the blame for this 400% increase squarely in the use of coal. It goes on to claim that because of these increased emissions no part of the world has experienced any reduction in temperature since the year 2000. The report once again uses extrapolated data to come up with a mathematical formula that proves this point. The only problem with the conclusion of the math is that it does not coincide with the actual temperature readings of thermometers.
All of these studies have one thing in common. They were all funded by either government grants or by industries that stand to benefit greatly by the results. It’s like the recent conversion of oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens who is now investing heavily in alternative energy. He claims that his research shows oil will be back over $150 per barrel from its current $35 per barrel within two years. He uses that as a reason to invest in alternative energy. My question is, if he truly believes that, why wouldn’t he invest in oil again and make a freaking killing? The answer is simple. There is more money to be made by the sham that is global warming than by the reality and uncertainty of commodity prices and option trading.
Ireland’s Environmental Minister recently put a ban on the television broadcast of the British government’s advertisements claiming global warming calling them “insidious propaganda”.
Czech President Vaclav Klaus said that “Environmentalism and global warming alarmism is challenging our very freedom” he went on to say that he didn’t see any statistical data that proved any of the claims of global warming, in fact the data showed otherwise. “I’m very sorry that some people like Al Gore are not ready to listen to the competing theories. I do listen to them.”
The global warming industry has a firm grip on the media and allows no room for dissention. Any report or data that even remotely disproves some if the mathematical profiles created to support the warming claims are banished and held in complete contempt without any chance for rebuttal.
The scientific community knows how to get its bread buttered and they will be damned if they let a few facts put them on a diet.
That’s why at the 175th annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science held in Chicago recently many of the topics were directly related to global warming and the research dollars involved.
Bud Ward from Yale University and Pallab Ghosh of the BBC discussed the increased need for scientific expertise in the growing newsroom coverage of global warming in a variety of areas including political coverage, economic coverage and even entertainment angles.
Stephen Schneider, a climatologist from Stanford University, urged scientists to be less equivocal in conversations with reporters to avoid any appearance that there is not a complete scientific consensus on the issue of global warming, regardless of the report data.
After Jeremy Jackson from the Scripps Institute of Oceanography discussed how eating tuna is immoral, Mark Serezze from the University of Colorado discussed the accelerating degree to which the polar ice caps are melting. Obviously Mr. Serezze spoke before the recent report showing that the data showing the acceleration has been proven false due to a recently discovered drifting in the satellite aiming used to collect the data, although I doubt it would have changed his dire warnings of global destruction and the need for additional funding for research.
A seminar was given on how global warming is causing us to become fat by forcing us to eat more soft food. This increases not only body fat but also amino acid production causing oddly shaped skulls. It was only later that it was revealed the study was done on Burmese pythons.
But probably the best science was saved for the ever expanding lore of Charles Darwin who was celebrating his 200th birthday.
Darwin’s research was unbelievably expanded as a means of justification for scientists that touted Darwinism in their studies on diet, agriculture, feminism, morality and Natural Security where evolutionary biology was used as a means of increased national security.
But my favorite scientific report came from Daniel Blumstein of UCLA who talked about how we as a nation can improve our national security through the study of marmots. “You can’t stay in your burrow all the time” he said.
When it comes to this absurd display of cash for results science and the fact that the cash is coming out of my pocket, my burrow sounds like the place I want to be. And if I come out and see my shadow it means another 10 years of global warming.
I have the data to back that up.
Any guy over the age of about 30 with a prostate knows exactly what’s coming next. Hold your breath, grab the backside of the examination table and hope that it’s over quickly. It’s never over quick enough and at least I have never even gotten a dinner out of the deal.
It’s one of those things you just endure. I get the same feeling of dreaded anticipation every time I read another story about the immanent destruction of the planet due to manmade global warming. And boy, the news wires are jammed to hilt with one story after another of how we are all going to hell in a handbasket due to melting ice flows and rising sea levels.
With each new report more dire then the previous one and every conceivable attempt made to tie global warming to some natural disaster it has become apparent that thar’s gold in them thar carbon footprints.
Penn State University just published a report that the entire continent of Antarctica is warming at the same rate as the rest of the planet, disagreeing with all previous reports that showed otherwise. This report was dutifully covered by the journal Nature in its January 21st issue.
The key to this study is that it was funded by the National Science Foundation, a foundation that just received over $3 billion in new funding in the presidents non-stimulus spending package.
The study which was set up to prove exactly what it proved is not based on any new information or scientific data. The study simply used the existing data, which in some cases is only for the last 25 years, and redid the math so that the calculations showed warming rather than cooling. It than made assumptions on the data collected and extrapolated it out to say that it covered 50 years, which is actually twice as long as some of the data covered.
Headlines claimed that sea levels are rising faster than ever, reporting on a story from the National Center for Space Studies in France. My first thought is why does France have a National Center for Space Studies and why the hell are they studying sea levels. But regardless of my skepticism, the study claims that sea levels are rising twice as fast as was originally thought. It is only later that it is explained that the study is comparing data from only the last 15 years and comparing it to data from the 50 years prior. Once again it ignores the rules of long term data collection and also uses two completely different measuring systems and then extrapolates the data to come out this way.
The Carnegie Institute of Science, which also operates on government grants and focused corporate contributions, reported that carbon emissions have been growing by 3.5% since 2000 versus the 0.9% reported in the 1990’s. The study places the blame for this 400% increase squarely in the use of coal. It goes on to claim that because of these increased emissions no part of the world has experienced any reduction in temperature since the year 2000. The report once again uses extrapolated data to come up with a mathematical formula that proves this point. The only problem with the conclusion of the math is that it does not coincide with the actual temperature readings of thermometers.
All of these studies have one thing in common. They were all funded by either government grants or by industries that stand to benefit greatly by the results. It’s like the recent conversion of oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens who is now investing heavily in alternative energy. He claims that his research shows oil will be back over $150 per barrel from its current $35 per barrel within two years. He uses that as a reason to invest in alternative energy. My question is, if he truly believes that, why wouldn’t he invest in oil again and make a freaking killing? The answer is simple. There is more money to be made by the sham that is global warming than by the reality and uncertainty of commodity prices and option trading.
Ireland’s Environmental Minister recently put a ban on the television broadcast of the British government’s advertisements claiming global warming calling them “insidious propaganda”.
Czech President Vaclav Klaus said that “Environmentalism and global warming alarmism is challenging our very freedom” he went on to say that he didn’t see any statistical data that proved any of the claims of global warming, in fact the data showed otherwise. “I’m very sorry that some people like Al Gore are not ready to listen to the competing theories. I do listen to them.”
The global warming industry has a firm grip on the media and allows no room for dissention. Any report or data that even remotely disproves some if the mathematical profiles created to support the warming claims are banished and held in complete contempt without any chance for rebuttal.
The scientific community knows how to get its bread buttered and they will be damned if they let a few facts put them on a diet.
That’s why at the 175th annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science held in Chicago recently many of the topics were directly related to global warming and the research dollars involved.
Bud Ward from Yale University and Pallab Ghosh of the BBC discussed the increased need for scientific expertise in the growing newsroom coverage of global warming in a variety of areas including political coverage, economic coverage and even entertainment angles.
Stephen Schneider, a climatologist from Stanford University, urged scientists to be less equivocal in conversations with reporters to avoid any appearance that there is not a complete scientific consensus on the issue of global warming, regardless of the report data.
After Jeremy Jackson from the Scripps Institute of Oceanography discussed how eating tuna is immoral, Mark Serezze from the University of Colorado discussed the accelerating degree to which the polar ice caps are melting. Obviously Mr. Serezze spoke before the recent report showing that the data showing the acceleration has been proven false due to a recently discovered drifting in the satellite aiming used to collect the data, although I doubt it would have changed his dire warnings of global destruction and the need for additional funding for research.
A seminar was given on how global warming is causing us to become fat by forcing us to eat more soft food. This increases not only body fat but also amino acid production causing oddly shaped skulls. It was only later that it was revealed the study was done on Burmese pythons.
But probably the best science was saved for the ever expanding lore of Charles Darwin who was celebrating his 200th birthday.
Darwin’s research was unbelievably expanded as a means of justification for scientists that touted Darwinism in their studies on diet, agriculture, feminism, morality and Natural Security where evolutionary biology was used as a means of increased national security.
But my favorite scientific report came from Daniel Blumstein of UCLA who talked about how we as a nation can improve our national security through the study of marmots. “You can’t stay in your burrow all the time” he said.
When it comes to this absurd display of cash for results science and the fact that the cash is coming out of my pocket, my burrow sounds like the place I want to be. And if I come out and see my shadow it means another 10 years of global warming.
I have the data to back that up.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Cowards Part 2
So you want to talk about race Mr. Holder?
You said we are a nation of cowards. You also said race “.. is an issue we have never been at ease with, and given our nation’s history this is in some ways understandable, and yet, if we are to make progress in this area we must feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have a frank conversation about racial matters that continue to divide us.”
OK Mr. Attorney General. Let’s talk.
Is it that we are not at ease talking about race or is it that anytime we try to have the discussion we are silenced by those that would rather make headlines than make headway?
Could it be that any condemnation of the black community is immediately met with cries of racism and intolerance from those who make their living by making allegations? Organizations like Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition, with a rainbow that covers the entire spectrum of a Tootsie Roll. Or Al Sharpton who led the charge against innocent white Duke University students that were falsely accused of rape by a drunk black stripper yet who remained completely silent about the two white coeds robbed and murdered by a black man during that same time.
Could it be that success for the black community is for those who excel in black related endeavors and not those that make the leap across that which divides us? Success amongst blacks is reserved for Snoop Dog and P Diddy, but Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and Clarence Thomas are held in disdain as lap dogs. Where is the incentive for young black kids to succeed in the real world when if they try and fail they will be ridiculed for even trying and if they persevere and succeed they are shunned for their accomplishments?
Is it wrong for me to question how slavery, which ended 147 years ago, is still cause to justify victimization? Is it wrong of me to question how we can now have a black president, a black Supreme Court justice, blacks in Congress and have several blacks amongst the wealthiest people in our country and yet hear how it is impossible for blacks to succeed because of white oppression?
Is it wrong of me to view welfare as a disaster for the black community creating a dependent society incapable and unwilling to care for themselves? Is it wrong of me to view the disaster in New Orleans and compare it to every other disaster our country has faced as validation for that belief?
Is it wrong of me to view the outrageous ranting of Jeremiah Wright as racist and divisive and question why his words are hailed as a vision of truth and righteousness in the black community and why they were supported by our new president for over 20 years? The black church has historically been a place of strength and praise. If Reverend Wright with his insane raving about aids and drugs and government plots truly is the voice of the black church is it wrong of me to believe the loss of a true faith may be one of the biggest problems?
Is it wrong of me to view affirmative action as a means of reverse discrimination and that refusing to hire a more qualified white person in favor of a less qualified black simply because of the color of their skin is as patently wrong as the discrimination against blacks?
Is it wrong of me to view the dropout rate, illiteracy, teen and unwed pregnancy, single parent homes, gangs, criminal activity and black on black violence as the leading cause for the oppression of blacks, not white racism. Is it wrong of me to question why prominent blacks like Bill Cosby, Thomas Sowell, Michael Steele, Walter Williams and Juan Williams to name but a few, who constantly beat the drum of increased personal responsibility in the black community, are summarily discounted and ridiculed by that community as being out of touch with their own blackness.
Is it wrong of me to use these incidents to draw the conclusion that it takes little or no effort to remain a victim and that the black community has in many ways become pretty comfortable in that role.
I am not a racist, I am a realist. I truly believe that every man is entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That does not mean that all will succeed but simply that all have the right to continue trying unimpeded by bigotry or intolerance. But that door swings both ways.
How’s that for a start to the conversation?
You said we are a nation of cowards. You also said race “.. is an issue we have never been at ease with, and given our nation’s history this is in some ways understandable, and yet, if we are to make progress in this area we must feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have a frank conversation about racial matters that continue to divide us.”
OK Mr. Attorney General. Let’s talk.
Is it that we are not at ease talking about race or is it that anytime we try to have the discussion we are silenced by those that would rather make headlines than make headway?
Could it be that any condemnation of the black community is immediately met with cries of racism and intolerance from those who make their living by making allegations? Organizations like Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition, with a rainbow that covers the entire spectrum of a Tootsie Roll. Or Al Sharpton who led the charge against innocent white Duke University students that were falsely accused of rape by a drunk black stripper yet who remained completely silent about the two white coeds robbed and murdered by a black man during that same time.
Could it be that success for the black community is for those who excel in black related endeavors and not those that make the leap across that which divides us? Success amongst blacks is reserved for Snoop Dog and P Diddy, but Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and Clarence Thomas are held in disdain as lap dogs. Where is the incentive for young black kids to succeed in the real world when if they try and fail they will be ridiculed for even trying and if they persevere and succeed they are shunned for their accomplishments?
Is it wrong for me to question how slavery, which ended 147 years ago, is still cause to justify victimization? Is it wrong of me to question how we can now have a black president, a black Supreme Court justice, blacks in Congress and have several blacks amongst the wealthiest people in our country and yet hear how it is impossible for blacks to succeed because of white oppression?
Is it wrong of me to view welfare as a disaster for the black community creating a dependent society incapable and unwilling to care for themselves? Is it wrong of me to view the disaster in New Orleans and compare it to every other disaster our country has faced as validation for that belief?
Is it wrong of me to view the outrageous ranting of Jeremiah Wright as racist and divisive and question why his words are hailed as a vision of truth and righteousness in the black community and why they were supported by our new president for over 20 years? The black church has historically been a place of strength and praise. If Reverend Wright with his insane raving about aids and drugs and government plots truly is the voice of the black church is it wrong of me to believe the loss of a true faith may be one of the biggest problems?
Is it wrong of me to view affirmative action as a means of reverse discrimination and that refusing to hire a more qualified white person in favor of a less qualified black simply because of the color of their skin is as patently wrong as the discrimination against blacks?
Is it wrong of me to view the dropout rate, illiteracy, teen and unwed pregnancy, single parent homes, gangs, criminal activity and black on black violence as the leading cause for the oppression of blacks, not white racism. Is it wrong of me to question why prominent blacks like Bill Cosby, Thomas Sowell, Michael Steele, Walter Williams and Juan Williams to name but a few, who constantly beat the drum of increased personal responsibility in the black community, are summarily discounted and ridiculed by that community as being out of touch with their own blackness.
Is it wrong of me to use these incidents to draw the conclusion that it takes little or no effort to remain a victim and that the black community has in many ways become pretty comfortable in that role.
I am not a racist, I am a realist. I truly believe that every man is entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That does not mean that all will succeed but simply that all have the right to continue trying unimpeded by bigotry or intolerance. But that door swings both ways.
How’s that for a start to the conversation?
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Cowards Part 1
I may be many things. But I am not a coward.
I will gladly discuss race with the new Attorney General Eric Holder or anybody else for that matter. I will also gladly discuss the history of America and how we got from where we were to where we are now. Unlike some, I actually feel pride and not shame when looking at the accomplishments in overcoming the inequities of this country and unlike some have the ability to put those inequities of the past into historical context without comparing them to today’s standards and sentiments. There are certainly things that by today’s morality seem unconscionable but you cannot judge previously held mentalities by today’s standards. When put into the context and mentality of the time in which they occurred it becomes less an issue of race and more an issue of mentality. Not desirable, not fair or reasonable but understandable.
I will gladly point out to Mr. Holder that a nation of racial cowards would not have elected a black man to be President of the United States. A nation of cowards would have made excuses for not voting for him simply because of his color rather than ignoring both his color and his qualifications and voting for the rhetoric of a remarkably gifted campaigner. I wonder if Martin Luther King would view the progress made in the relatively short time since his historic speech on the steps in Washington DC as being the acts of a nation of cowards.
Mr. Holder stated that it is understandable why we don’t want to talk about the history of this country. I will gladly discuss our history with Mr. Holder. While I have not been anointed as the spokesman for white people, I can say that at our last white people meeting we voted almost unanimously that we are against slavery. I do not feel any personal shame for slavery in America because historically slavery was a standard practice all over the world. In the blessed home land of “African Americans” slavery was completely acceptable for thousands of years and in some African cultures is still in vogue. In the majority of cases the slaves brought to America were from vanquished tribes. The African tribal victors sold or traded the defeated tribes to the white slave traders or anybody else that had something of value with which to trade. White men did not have to go into the jungles of the Dark Continent and steal slaves in the dead of night. They went to the trading posts and bought them from other Africans. It is neither an excuse nor justification, simply a historic fact.
Slaves brought to America were viewed and treated like livestock. They suffered a horrid life of hard labor and abuse. But it was no different than how slaves were viewed and treated throughout history. In Africa, Europe, Asia and the Middle East slavery was the rule not the exception. This practice lasted thousands of years, not the 60 or 70 years it was practiced in America. And just as a side note, it was whites that put an end to slavery in this country.
There is no question that this country has a history of segregation and prejudice. Outrageous acts of cruelty and murder were committed by whites on blacks simply because of the color of their skin. But that is not the standard today and it was not a nation of cowards that changed it. The greatest threat to a black today is from another black. I would ask Mr. Holder if he was alone walking down the street at night in his custom tailored suit would he rather it be in a white neighborhood or a black neighborhood.
We are not a nation of cowards but there certainly are cowards amongst us. That is actually to Mr. Holder’s and his new bosses benefit rather than to their detriment. The cowards are those who are so afraid of being called racist that they abandon reality and common sense and look for things to be offended about or ways they can claim victimization, either for themselves or as a means to claim tacit support for others.
George Bush could not say good morning without the Washington press corps claiming he had offended the good and pure nature of somebody or something. “How could he say good when he knows Americans are suffering and morning when he knows that for some it is already afternoon. He is such a thoughtless separatist.” But yet the press remains almost completely mum regarding the outrageously offensive and racist comments made by Mr. Holder to the staff serving under him at the Department of Justice. Had a white man made reference to blacks being cowards he would have been burned at the media stake.
We are not a nation of cowards, Mr. Holder. But you have spent so much time in the sheltered halls of Washington DC, where so many true cowards reside, that you do not have a clue what kind of nation we really are.
More tomorrow.
I will gladly discuss race with the new Attorney General Eric Holder or anybody else for that matter. I will also gladly discuss the history of America and how we got from where we were to where we are now. Unlike some, I actually feel pride and not shame when looking at the accomplishments in overcoming the inequities of this country and unlike some have the ability to put those inequities of the past into historical context without comparing them to today’s standards and sentiments. There are certainly things that by today’s morality seem unconscionable but you cannot judge previously held mentalities by today’s standards. When put into the context and mentality of the time in which they occurred it becomes less an issue of race and more an issue of mentality. Not desirable, not fair or reasonable but understandable.
I will gladly point out to Mr. Holder that a nation of racial cowards would not have elected a black man to be President of the United States. A nation of cowards would have made excuses for not voting for him simply because of his color rather than ignoring both his color and his qualifications and voting for the rhetoric of a remarkably gifted campaigner. I wonder if Martin Luther King would view the progress made in the relatively short time since his historic speech on the steps in Washington DC as being the acts of a nation of cowards.
Mr. Holder stated that it is understandable why we don’t want to talk about the history of this country. I will gladly discuss our history with Mr. Holder. While I have not been anointed as the spokesman for white people, I can say that at our last white people meeting we voted almost unanimously that we are against slavery. I do not feel any personal shame for slavery in America because historically slavery was a standard practice all over the world. In the blessed home land of “African Americans” slavery was completely acceptable for thousands of years and in some African cultures is still in vogue. In the majority of cases the slaves brought to America were from vanquished tribes. The African tribal victors sold or traded the defeated tribes to the white slave traders or anybody else that had something of value with which to trade. White men did not have to go into the jungles of the Dark Continent and steal slaves in the dead of night. They went to the trading posts and bought them from other Africans. It is neither an excuse nor justification, simply a historic fact.
Slaves brought to America were viewed and treated like livestock. They suffered a horrid life of hard labor and abuse. But it was no different than how slaves were viewed and treated throughout history. In Africa, Europe, Asia and the Middle East slavery was the rule not the exception. This practice lasted thousands of years, not the 60 or 70 years it was practiced in America. And just as a side note, it was whites that put an end to slavery in this country.
There is no question that this country has a history of segregation and prejudice. Outrageous acts of cruelty and murder were committed by whites on blacks simply because of the color of their skin. But that is not the standard today and it was not a nation of cowards that changed it. The greatest threat to a black today is from another black. I would ask Mr. Holder if he was alone walking down the street at night in his custom tailored suit would he rather it be in a white neighborhood or a black neighborhood.
We are not a nation of cowards but there certainly are cowards amongst us. That is actually to Mr. Holder’s and his new bosses benefit rather than to their detriment. The cowards are those who are so afraid of being called racist that they abandon reality and common sense and look for things to be offended about or ways they can claim victimization, either for themselves or as a means to claim tacit support for others.
George Bush could not say good morning without the Washington press corps claiming he had offended the good and pure nature of somebody or something. “How could he say good when he knows Americans are suffering and morning when he knows that for some it is already afternoon. He is such a thoughtless separatist.” But yet the press remains almost completely mum regarding the outrageously offensive and racist comments made by Mr. Holder to the staff serving under him at the Department of Justice. Had a white man made reference to blacks being cowards he would have been burned at the media stake.
We are not a nation of cowards, Mr. Holder. But you have spent so much time in the sheltered halls of Washington DC, where so many true cowards reside, that you do not have a clue what kind of nation we really are.
More tomorrow.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
The Victim Syndrome
Regardless of how high they rise, some men simply remain small.
Such is the case with the new Attorney General.
It seems that regardless of the historic nature of this new administration, regardless of the remarkable racial progress made in America over the last 50 years that led up to this election, there will always be those who chose to remain a victim.
In a speech celebrating Black History Month and delivered to hundreds of Justice Department employees the new Attorney General Eric Holder called America “a nation of cowards” when it comes to racial issues. He demeaned all that has been done in removing racial barriers and all progress made in allowing the success of those who have been the target of historic segregation and repression. The irony of the content of this speech being given at a celebration commemorating Black History Month would be almost comical if it weren’t so sad.
"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards" Holder said.
Strong words for a black man who is the head of the Justice Department in the administration of a black president. Strong words for any man serving in an administration that campaigned on the mantra of hope rather than divisiveness. Strong words from a black man who has held posts in high office of government for decades and who replaces a minority Hispanic in the office he now holds. Strong words indeed.
"It is an issue we have never been at ease with, and given our nation's history this is in some ways understandable," Holder went on to say. "And yet, if we are to make progress in this area, we must feel comfortable enough with one another, and tolerant enough of each other, to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us."
If we are to make progress? If?
This speech may have seemed relevant back in the 1950’s or the 1960’s but to question progress in racial matters while serving in the administration of a black president rings as hollow and racist as the words of the Black P Stone Nation who blamed whites for their poverty while they sold drugs to their community.
Mr. Holder certainly must feel comfortable enough to show his tolerance in calling Americans cowards. The very act itself in the setting in which it was held and under the conditions in which it was given is an insult to all Americans, white, black and otherwise.
To ignore the progress, as Mr. Holder certainly did, is to continue with the stereotypical victimization of blacks which has done nothing but help to keep them trapped in a life of hopelessness and dependence. Is there more progress needed? Certainly. Will it be accomplished by setting a tone of confrontation and demeaning epithets? Certainly not.
Mr. Holder proved his ineptitude serving in the Clinton administration where he was instrumental in orchestrating the presidential pardon of murderous terrorist bombers from the FALN and the pardon of the FBI’s second most wanted fugitive Marc Rich, a Democrat contributor of note who had fled the country to avoid prosecution. He was questioned about both of these incidents in his confirmation hearing where he both denied culpability by downplaying his influence and asked for absolution for his lack of prudent judgment. Mr. Holder assured the committee members he would not make the same mistakes again if confirmed. I guess in that sense Mr. Holder is a man of his word. He is finding a whole new area in which he can be dangerously wrong.
A “nation of cowards” we are not. We are a nation of opportunity. It takes courage to reach for that which you cannot currently touch and strive for that which you know will be difficult to achieve. But we are a nation of people who make that effort and succeed every day. The cowards are the ones who prefer to place blame and hide behind the comfortable veil of victimization.
If you want see a coward Mr. Holder, get a mirror.
Such is the case with the new Attorney General.
It seems that regardless of the historic nature of this new administration, regardless of the remarkable racial progress made in America over the last 50 years that led up to this election, there will always be those who chose to remain a victim.
In a speech celebrating Black History Month and delivered to hundreds of Justice Department employees the new Attorney General Eric Holder called America “a nation of cowards” when it comes to racial issues. He demeaned all that has been done in removing racial barriers and all progress made in allowing the success of those who have been the target of historic segregation and repression. The irony of the content of this speech being given at a celebration commemorating Black History Month would be almost comical if it weren’t so sad.
"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards" Holder said.
Strong words for a black man who is the head of the Justice Department in the administration of a black president. Strong words for any man serving in an administration that campaigned on the mantra of hope rather than divisiveness. Strong words from a black man who has held posts in high office of government for decades and who replaces a minority Hispanic in the office he now holds. Strong words indeed.
"It is an issue we have never been at ease with, and given our nation's history this is in some ways understandable," Holder went on to say. "And yet, if we are to make progress in this area, we must feel comfortable enough with one another, and tolerant enough of each other, to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us."
If we are to make progress? If?
This speech may have seemed relevant back in the 1950’s or the 1960’s but to question progress in racial matters while serving in the administration of a black president rings as hollow and racist as the words of the Black P Stone Nation who blamed whites for their poverty while they sold drugs to their community.
Mr. Holder certainly must feel comfortable enough to show his tolerance in calling Americans cowards. The very act itself in the setting in which it was held and under the conditions in which it was given is an insult to all Americans, white, black and otherwise.
To ignore the progress, as Mr. Holder certainly did, is to continue with the stereotypical victimization of blacks which has done nothing but help to keep them trapped in a life of hopelessness and dependence. Is there more progress needed? Certainly. Will it be accomplished by setting a tone of confrontation and demeaning epithets? Certainly not.
Mr. Holder proved his ineptitude serving in the Clinton administration where he was instrumental in orchestrating the presidential pardon of murderous terrorist bombers from the FALN and the pardon of the FBI’s second most wanted fugitive Marc Rich, a Democrat contributor of note who had fled the country to avoid prosecution. He was questioned about both of these incidents in his confirmation hearing where he both denied culpability by downplaying his influence and asked for absolution for his lack of prudent judgment. Mr. Holder assured the committee members he would not make the same mistakes again if confirmed. I guess in that sense Mr. Holder is a man of his word. He is finding a whole new area in which he can be dangerously wrong.
A “nation of cowards” we are not. We are a nation of opportunity. It takes courage to reach for that which you cannot currently touch and strive for that which you know will be difficult to achieve. But we are a nation of people who make that effort and succeed every day. The cowards are the ones who prefer to place blame and hide behind the comfortable veil of victimization.
If you want see a coward Mr. Holder, get a mirror.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Rahm Rodded
“Walk on, walk on, with hope in your heart. And you’ll never walk alone.”
So goes the lyrics to the Rogers and Hammerstein classic. So goes the now infamouse dethroned governor of the state is Illinois. The Illinois General Assembly may have sent Big Rod Blagojevich packing but be certain that Rod will not walk alone. At least not willingly.
Big Rod’s rambling speech given to the members of the impeachment panel before they voted to oust him can only be compared in its self-serving paranoia to Humphrey Bogart’s portrayal of Captain Queeg’s court testimony regarding the stolen strawberries in the movie Caine Mutiny. But in his comments the governor tipped his hand by evoking the names of some pretty high placed officials in both state and federal government. He has since been quoted alleging the sexual exploits of some high ranking members of the Illinois General Assembly. You can bet whatever is left in your 401K that Blago will attempt to use these names and incidents if and when the Fed’s actually take him to court.
The developments currently coming to light and the reaction of high ranking Democrats regarding the recently seated Illinois Senator Roland Burris have made it fairly plain that anyone who had friendly contact with Blagojevich will be shunned and quite possibly burned at the stake. Burris, having spent his entire life as a dedicated Democrat in Illinois, will soon helplessly watch as his previously clean reputation is buried in his ornately engraved marble mausoleum long before his mortal remains are ready to join it.
But while Burris will soon feel the wrath of isolation from the political party he faithfully served, it was not his name that was repeatedly summoned during Blagojevich’s tirade. Rather it was the name of the new president’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel that received most of Blago’s kindred comments.
Like the other multimillionaires in the new administrations cabinet, Emanuel may soon be joining the stable of Obama tax delinquents as it was recently revealed that he had lived for 5 years in Washington DC rent free in the very upscale townhome of a Democrat Congresswoman and her Democratic Party employed pollster husband. Emanuel failed to report this “gift” conservatively estimated at a value of over $100,000, as congressional ethics require, but he also failed to mention it on his tax returns. It has been confirmed that his conversations regarding the replacement of his new White House bosses senate seat were recorded as part of the sting to prosecute the Illinois governor and now his name is being bandied about by Big Rod himself.
It is far more likely than not that his involvement with then Governor Blagojevich is far greater than has been reported and that fact may be one of the leading reasons the prosecutors in the Blago case needed an additional 4 months to submit their case for prosecution. But even if political pressure from the White House is able to keep Emanuel from any involvement or embarrassment in the prosecutor’s case, Rahm can be assured that Big Rod will have him front and center in his defense. I can only imagine Blago doing his best Jimmy Cagney impersonation saying “If I go I’m takin’ youze mugs wit me, see”.
The extent to which Emanuel was truly involved with Blagojevich may never be known for sure. But the charges brought and the charges not brought by federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald may give some indication as to exactly what behind the scenes negotiations have taken place with the White House. I am fairly sure any attempt by Blago to involve Emanuel during the court proceedings will be vigorously opposed by the prosecution. But due to the rules of evidence disclosure the defense may have all it needs to include him regardless of any deals the prosecutors have or the consequences to the Obama administration.
The devil may be in the details.
But he never walks alone.
So goes the lyrics to the Rogers and Hammerstein classic. So goes the now infamouse dethroned governor of the state is Illinois. The Illinois General Assembly may have sent Big Rod Blagojevich packing but be certain that Rod will not walk alone. At least not willingly.
Big Rod’s rambling speech given to the members of the impeachment panel before they voted to oust him can only be compared in its self-serving paranoia to Humphrey Bogart’s portrayal of Captain Queeg’s court testimony regarding the stolen strawberries in the movie Caine Mutiny. But in his comments the governor tipped his hand by evoking the names of some pretty high placed officials in both state and federal government. He has since been quoted alleging the sexual exploits of some high ranking members of the Illinois General Assembly. You can bet whatever is left in your 401K that Blago will attempt to use these names and incidents if and when the Fed’s actually take him to court.
The developments currently coming to light and the reaction of high ranking Democrats regarding the recently seated Illinois Senator Roland Burris have made it fairly plain that anyone who had friendly contact with Blagojevich will be shunned and quite possibly burned at the stake. Burris, having spent his entire life as a dedicated Democrat in Illinois, will soon helplessly watch as his previously clean reputation is buried in his ornately engraved marble mausoleum long before his mortal remains are ready to join it.
But while Burris will soon feel the wrath of isolation from the political party he faithfully served, it was not his name that was repeatedly summoned during Blagojevich’s tirade. Rather it was the name of the new president’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel that received most of Blago’s kindred comments.
Like the other multimillionaires in the new administrations cabinet, Emanuel may soon be joining the stable of Obama tax delinquents as it was recently revealed that he had lived for 5 years in Washington DC rent free in the very upscale townhome of a Democrat Congresswoman and her Democratic Party employed pollster husband. Emanuel failed to report this “gift” conservatively estimated at a value of over $100,000, as congressional ethics require, but he also failed to mention it on his tax returns. It has been confirmed that his conversations regarding the replacement of his new White House bosses senate seat were recorded as part of the sting to prosecute the Illinois governor and now his name is being bandied about by Big Rod himself.
It is far more likely than not that his involvement with then Governor Blagojevich is far greater than has been reported and that fact may be one of the leading reasons the prosecutors in the Blago case needed an additional 4 months to submit their case for prosecution. But even if political pressure from the White House is able to keep Emanuel from any involvement or embarrassment in the prosecutor’s case, Rahm can be assured that Big Rod will have him front and center in his defense. I can only imagine Blago doing his best Jimmy Cagney impersonation saying “If I go I’m takin’ youze mugs wit me, see”.
The extent to which Emanuel was truly involved with Blagojevich may never be known for sure. But the charges brought and the charges not brought by federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald may give some indication as to exactly what behind the scenes negotiations have taken place with the White House. I am fairly sure any attempt by Blago to involve Emanuel during the court proceedings will be vigorously opposed by the prosecution. But due to the rules of evidence disclosure the defense may have all it needs to include him regardless of any deals the prosecutors have or the consequences to the Obama administration.
The devil may be in the details.
But he never walks alone.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Conversion Aversion
Only $670 million tax dollars, plus expenses, so grandma can see how happy Bob’s wife is now that he uses male enhancement. What a deal!
With the signing of the Obama “stimu-lies” package an additional $650 million in taxpayer dollars will be granted to the digital television converter box program. The original $20 million appropriated to the FCC last September to fund this program was spent before year’s end. So far the only thing that this bureaucratic nightmare has produced was a $20 million debt and a new form of currency in the already captive welfare communities.
According to the U.S. Commerce Department an estimated 70 million televisions exist in this country that will need to be converted to receive the new digital signal from the current analog broadcast. Like most government estimates this has a margin of error of about +/- 80%. The additional money appropriated increases the total program expense to over 300 times the amount originally proposed and it is still unclear exactly what taxpayers are getting for their money.
Television broadcasters around the country not only successfully lobbied Congress to allow them to switch exclusively to the new digital broadcasting system due to the expense of running both analog and digital broadcasts, but also to have the taxpayer pick up the expense of upgrading their consumers.
With the mind numbing tripe that is being sent into American homes these days it should come as no surprise that broadcasters make their money from advertising rather than providing entertainment. The larger the target audience, the greater advertising revenue the station can garner. Broadcasters know that the old analog sets, which receive their signal through an antenna rather than cable or a satellite dish, are owned by folks that are poor or elderly or rarely watch television anyway. They are not what would be considered a target for advertising revenue. Broadcasters were willing to lose this market demographic because the cost of operating the two different broadcasting systems didn’t make financial sense as there was no money to be made off these folks with analog sets anyway. Broadcasters also understand, unlike congress, that these old analog televisions are probably not worth the $40 upgrade and that their users are probably more likely to just not watch the television than they are to get the converter box and hook it up.
The Democrat Congress however felt it was incumbent upon government to provide access to emergency information and current events to this group. Somebody probably forgot to mention to these learned scholars in Washington that this same information is available on the radio, so they decided the taxpayer should foot this bill. It was decided that the FCC would provide coupons worth $40 each to pay for the needed converter box, with a limit of two coupons per household. While the original $20 million is a lot of money, in the big budget picture it was easily passed as a service to the poor and elderly. But at over two thirds of a billion dollars and still counting, maybe congress may want to reconsider who is getting the biggest bang from this taxpayer buck.
According to the National Telecommunications and Information Agency there are currently 9.5 million coupons worth $40 each which have already been distributed. Most of them have not been used to buy a converter box. There are an additional 4 million requests for coupons which will now be honored with this latest infusion of cash. Even with my limited math skills, that totals to fewer than 15 million coupons. One needs to also take into account the fact that some households got more than one. But even if every one of these coupons is cashed the total outlay for the actual converter box is still only $120 million. That leaves over a half of a billion dollars and still counting to administer this program. And not a single penny of it coming from the industry that will benefit the most, the broadcasters themselves.
Television broadcasters may not be able to increase their revenue stream through advertising to the recipients of these converter boxes but they will in fact see a great benefit to their bottom line by shutting down their old analog equipment. As all broadcasting rights are sold and controlled by the government it would seem that a provision could be made to allow the broadcasters and their advertising partners to share in the joys of technological advancement.
It could be argued that in fact all the money appropriated for this program will not be used if the full numbers of expected coupons are not redeemed. But seeing as a government program comes in under budget far less frequently than the sighting of Haley’s Comet, I am not holding out much hope of that.
The president is scheduling his latest publicity stunt in holding what he is referring to as a “Fiscal Responsibility Summit”. He may want to invite the broadcast companies and some folks from the FCC to sit in for a special session.
Otherwise taxpayers should be invited as it seems we are then only ones responsible for climbing the fiscal summit.
With the signing of the Obama “stimu-lies” package an additional $650 million in taxpayer dollars will be granted to the digital television converter box program. The original $20 million appropriated to the FCC last September to fund this program was spent before year’s end. So far the only thing that this bureaucratic nightmare has produced was a $20 million debt and a new form of currency in the already captive welfare communities.
According to the U.S. Commerce Department an estimated 70 million televisions exist in this country that will need to be converted to receive the new digital signal from the current analog broadcast. Like most government estimates this has a margin of error of about +/- 80%. The additional money appropriated increases the total program expense to over 300 times the amount originally proposed and it is still unclear exactly what taxpayers are getting for their money.
Television broadcasters around the country not only successfully lobbied Congress to allow them to switch exclusively to the new digital broadcasting system due to the expense of running both analog and digital broadcasts, but also to have the taxpayer pick up the expense of upgrading their consumers.
With the mind numbing tripe that is being sent into American homes these days it should come as no surprise that broadcasters make their money from advertising rather than providing entertainment. The larger the target audience, the greater advertising revenue the station can garner. Broadcasters know that the old analog sets, which receive their signal through an antenna rather than cable or a satellite dish, are owned by folks that are poor or elderly or rarely watch television anyway. They are not what would be considered a target for advertising revenue. Broadcasters were willing to lose this market demographic because the cost of operating the two different broadcasting systems didn’t make financial sense as there was no money to be made off these folks with analog sets anyway. Broadcasters also understand, unlike congress, that these old analog televisions are probably not worth the $40 upgrade and that their users are probably more likely to just not watch the television than they are to get the converter box and hook it up.
The Democrat Congress however felt it was incumbent upon government to provide access to emergency information and current events to this group. Somebody probably forgot to mention to these learned scholars in Washington that this same information is available on the radio, so they decided the taxpayer should foot this bill. It was decided that the FCC would provide coupons worth $40 each to pay for the needed converter box, with a limit of two coupons per household. While the original $20 million is a lot of money, in the big budget picture it was easily passed as a service to the poor and elderly. But at over two thirds of a billion dollars and still counting, maybe congress may want to reconsider who is getting the biggest bang from this taxpayer buck.
According to the National Telecommunications and Information Agency there are currently 9.5 million coupons worth $40 each which have already been distributed. Most of them have not been used to buy a converter box. There are an additional 4 million requests for coupons which will now be honored with this latest infusion of cash. Even with my limited math skills, that totals to fewer than 15 million coupons. One needs to also take into account the fact that some households got more than one. But even if every one of these coupons is cashed the total outlay for the actual converter box is still only $120 million. That leaves over a half of a billion dollars and still counting to administer this program. And not a single penny of it coming from the industry that will benefit the most, the broadcasters themselves.
Television broadcasters may not be able to increase their revenue stream through advertising to the recipients of these converter boxes but they will in fact see a great benefit to their bottom line by shutting down their old analog equipment. As all broadcasting rights are sold and controlled by the government it would seem that a provision could be made to allow the broadcasters and their advertising partners to share in the joys of technological advancement.
It could be argued that in fact all the money appropriated for this program will not be used if the full numbers of expected coupons are not redeemed. But seeing as a government program comes in under budget far less frequently than the sighting of Haley’s Comet, I am not holding out much hope of that.
The president is scheduling his latest publicity stunt in holding what he is referring to as a “Fiscal Responsibility Summit”. He may want to invite the broadcast companies and some folks from the FCC to sit in for a special session.
Otherwise taxpayers should be invited as it seems we are then only ones responsible for climbing the fiscal summit.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Epic Hypocrisy
Ok kids, it’s time for a pop quiz! No looking at your neighbor’s paper.
Question: After successfully wrangling a debt laden, pork bloated $780 billion spending package through congress, with literally tens of billions of dollars worth of pet projects and ear marks, how do you switch the focus of the American taxpayer who will foot the bill for it all from outrageous government spending to something else?
Answer: Have the unmitigated stones to schedule a “fiscal responsibility summit”.
Before even putting his name on the bottom line to sign into law the largest government boondoggle in the county’s history, that is exactly what the new president is doing.
The president actively lobbied both houses of congress and the American people for support to get this near one trillion dollar spending package approved. This will bring the country’s annual budget deficit to $2 trillion. Having just completed his campaign to approve the only plan that could actually make ethanol look like a good idea, he is now informing congress of his concerns about unnecessary spending. Perhaps the president’s next book could be titled “The Audacity of Audacity”.
This level of hypocrisy is like Tom Daschle giving tax advice to Tim 1040 Geithner.
The public relations plan seems clear. The new president and Democrat controlled House and Senate have included all their pet pork projects into the non-budgeted “stimulus” package. The president can now make a public appeal for budgetary restraint and will claim to be making progress by balancing a budget stripped of all the items that will be paid for anyway by this near one trillion dollar spending spree.
The president’s call for bipartisan input on his new push for fiscal responsibility is as transparent as was his praise for John McCann while he scratched his nose with his middle finger. This move is calculated to allow Democrats and centrists to claim the president is truly looking for a middle of the road, all inclusive, economic policy. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even an abbreviated look at this president’s past voting record, as slim as it is, will make clear that this is the most liberal president in the nation’s history. If you’re going to be a liberal at least have the honesty to claim your affiliation and the courage to defend it.
But predictably the tactic is working so far, at least at home. Already many in his adoring media cabal are calling for Republicans to abandon all that they stand in for economic restraint and jump head first into the new “New Deal”.
Reams are being written and reported on how Republicans are making a futile attempt at partisan resistance without ever once considering that this spending package is truly a bad deal for taxpayers and will prove to be totally ineffective at stimulating anything but heart strings of the Democratic faithful.
With this new fiscal responsibility summit Obama is trying to maintain his “everyman” image by deceiving some Americans into believing that he truly understands and feels their pain. But in the worst economic meltdown since World War II a spending package that contains tens of billions of dollars for such items as new space shuttles, global warming research and habitat reclamation for the Southern California titmouse it is hard to convince conservatives that he understands how to act when economic times are tight.
The collapse of the credit markets was ignited by a Democrat effort to include welfare into the mortgage market. When those folks who should have never been given credit in the first place defaulted on their home loans it caused home prices to plummet and brought the entire global credit market to its knees. Banks around the world that invested in the American debt bonds suddenly found their investments worthless and their clients panicked and outraged. Are we now to believe that we can overcome this misguided attempt to make home ownership a constitutional right by spending more on welfare and meaningless projects while allowing the national debt to surpass $2 trillion?
This president and his band of merry tax delinquents can put on all the dog and pony shows they want. While the American voter, who was looking for hope, may be temporarily buffaloed the rest of the world will not. In order for America to entice foreign investment with that level of outrageous debt, interest rates on Treasury bonds will need to be increased causing even greater harm to an already wounded economy.
If the president truly wants fiscal restraint and bipartisan support he will need to follow a long held principle of economic truth.
It may take money to make money, but you can’t spend your way out of being broke.
Question: After successfully wrangling a debt laden, pork bloated $780 billion spending package through congress, with literally tens of billions of dollars worth of pet projects and ear marks, how do you switch the focus of the American taxpayer who will foot the bill for it all from outrageous government spending to something else?
Answer: Have the unmitigated stones to schedule a “fiscal responsibility summit”.
Before even putting his name on the bottom line to sign into law the largest government boondoggle in the county’s history, that is exactly what the new president is doing.
The president actively lobbied both houses of congress and the American people for support to get this near one trillion dollar spending package approved. This will bring the country’s annual budget deficit to $2 trillion. Having just completed his campaign to approve the only plan that could actually make ethanol look like a good idea, he is now informing congress of his concerns about unnecessary spending. Perhaps the president’s next book could be titled “The Audacity of Audacity”.
This level of hypocrisy is like Tom Daschle giving tax advice to Tim 1040 Geithner.
The public relations plan seems clear. The new president and Democrat controlled House and Senate have included all their pet pork projects into the non-budgeted “stimulus” package. The president can now make a public appeal for budgetary restraint and will claim to be making progress by balancing a budget stripped of all the items that will be paid for anyway by this near one trillion dollar spending spree.
The president’s call for bipartisan input on his new push for fiscal responsibility is as transparent as was his praise for John McCann while he scratched his nose with his middle finger. This move is calculated to allow Democrats and centrists to claim the president is truly looking for a middle of the road, all inclusive, economic policy. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even an abbreviated look at this president’s past voting record, as slim as it is, will make clear that this is the most liberal president in the nation’s history. If you’re going to be a liberal at least have the honesty to claim your affiliation and the courage to defend it.
But predictably the tactic is working so far, at least at home. Already many in his adoring media cabal are calling for Republicans to abandon all that they stand in for economic restraint and jump head first into the new “New Deal”.
Reams are being written and reported on how Republicans are making a futile attempt at partisan resistance without ever once considering that this spending package is truly a bad deal for taxpayers and will prove to be totally ineffective at stimulating anything but heart strings of the Democratic faithful.
With this new fiscal responsibility summit Obama is trying to maintain his “everyman” image by deceiving some Americans into believing that he truly understands and feels their pain. But in the worst economic meltdown since World War II a spending package that contains tens of billions of dollars for such items as new space shuttles, global warming research and habitat reclamation for the Southern California titmouse it is hard to convince conservatives that he understands how to act when economic times are tight.
The collapse of the credit markets was ignited by a Democrat effort to include welfare into the mortgage market. When those folks who should have never been given credit in the first place defaulted on their home loans it caused home prices to plummet and brought the entire global credit market to its knees. Banks around the world that invested in the American debt bonds suddenly found their investments worthless and their clients panicked and outraged. Are we now to believe that we can overcome this misguided attempt to make home ownership a constitutional right by spending more on welfare and meaningless projects while allowing the national debt to surpass $2 trillion?
This president and his band of merry tax delinquents can put on all the dog and pony shows they want. While the American voter, who was looking for hope, may be temporarily buffaloed the rest of the world will not. In order for America to entice foreign investment with that level of outrageous debt, interest rates on Treasury bonds will need to be increased causing even greater harm to an already wounded economy.
If the president truly wants fiscal restraint and bipartisan support he will need to follow a long held principle of economic truth.
It may take money to make money, but you can’t spend your way out of being broke.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Stimu - Lies
If this is a stimulus package, Popeye is a sissy.
Even though I have taken only a summary look at the line item details of the $787 billion bill which Congressional Democrats and the President are falsely avowing to be stimulus, I can honestly say that the Monumental Plaza in Mexico City, the world’s largest bullfighting arena, has never seen this much bullshit.
What this debt burden to our great grandchildren appears to be is a spending package with more earmarks than Dumbo’s pillow and American taxpayers should be outrages to the point of recalling these drunken sailors. This is far more an historic welfare and Democrat wish list spending bill than anything else.
To be sure, there are a few items that could be twisted to look like stimulus to the currently receding economy or aid to the unemployed and their families. It makes no sense to argue at this point anything that could reasonably be construed as stimulating the economy within the next 18 months. But these line items are but a few of the non-stimulating expenses or items that will not have any impact for at least 2 years. They are described here exactly as listed:
$24 Million – Repairs, security improvements & rental payments at the Dept. of Agriculture
$176 Million – Repairs & security improvements at the Agricultural Research Service
$130 Million – Guaranteed loans for rural community facility
$2.5 Billion - Broadband grants to rural communities
$25 Million – Oversight of department of Agriculture spending
$749 Million – Crop insurance reinstatement for farmers who failed to keep up with premiums
$1 Billion – Extra money for the Census
$350 Million – Salary and expenses for program to create national broadband inventory map
$6 Million – Oversight of Commerce Department spending
$230 Million – Extra money for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research
$600 Million – Extra money for NOAA satellite development and climate data sensors
$225 Million – Grants for violence against women prevention programs
$10 Million – Cost of administering extra grant money
$400 Million – NASA shuttle
$400 Million – NASA climate research
$150 Million – NASA aeronautics research
$2 Million – NASA spending oversight
$100 Million – NSF education activities
$2 Million – NSF spending oversight
$15 Million – Department of Defense spending oversight
$300 Million – Funding for Energy Star program
$84 Million – Funding for Recovery and Accountability Transparency Board
$7 Million – Oversight into General Services Administration spending
$20 Million – EPA spending oversight
$50 Million – Grants to fund art projects in non-profit sector
$500 Million – Training of nurses, doctors and dentists to practice in underserved communities
$9.5 Billion – National Institute of Health biomedical research
$1.1 Billion – To research comparing effectiveness of Medicare and Medicaid treatment
$1 Billion – Head Start program for preschoolers
$1.1 Billion – Early Head Start for low income infants
$50 Million – Grants to faith based and community organizations
$100 Million – Grants for elderly Meals on Wheels program
$2 Billion – Extra money for Office of National Coordination for Health Information Technology
$1 Billion – Community health programs and vaccinations
$13 Billion – Funding for Title 1 programs for low income children
$12 Billion - -Grants for special education programs
$17 Billion – Increase Pell grants to low income students
$60 Million – To increase college’s student aid funds
$200 Million – For colleges works study programs
$250 Million – Funding for states to create systems to track individual student data
$14 Million – Department of Education spending oversight
$160 Million – Extra money for AmeriCorps volunteer program
$40 Million – Extra Money for National Trust volunteer program
$90 Million – Passport and training funding for State Department
$290 Million – Creation of information management backup facility for State Department
$2.5 Billion – Energy efficiency retrogrades for low income families
This is only an incomplete short list of all the non-stimulus spending included in this near 1200 page spending bill. It’s not that all these items are not worthy; it’s that they are not stimulus for an economy on the brink of disaster. It is a congressional folly of unprecedented proportions.
You don’t paint the porch when the house is on fire.
Even though I have taken only a summary look at the line item details of the $787 billion bill which Congressional Democrats and the President are falsely avowing to be stimulus, I can honestly say that the Monumental Plaza in Mexico City, the world’s largest bullfighting arena, has never seen this much bullshit.
What this debt burden to our great grandchildren appears to be is a spending package with more earmarks than Dumbo’s pillow and American taxpayers should be outrages to the point of recalling these drunken sailors. This is far more an historic welfare and Democrat wish list spending bill than anything else.
To be sure, there are a few items that could be twisted to look like stimulus to the currently receding economy or aid to the unemployed and their families. It makes no sense to argue at this point anything that could reasonably be construed as stimulating the economy within the next 18 months. But these line items are but a few of the non-stimulating expenses or items that will not have any impact for at least 2 years. They are described here exactly as listed:
$24 Million – Repairs, security improvements & rental payments at the Dept. of Agriculture
$176 Million – Repairs & security improvements at the Agricultural Research Service
$130 Million – Guaranteed loans for rural community facility
$2.5 Billion - Broadband grants to rural communities
$25 Million – Oversight of department of Agriculture spending
$749 Million – Crop insurance reinstatement for farmers who failed to keep up with premiums
$1 Billion – Extra money for the Census
$350 Million – Salary and expenses for program to create national broadband inventory map
$6 Million – Oversight of Commerce Department spending
$230 Million – Extra money for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research
$600 Million – Extra money for NOAA satellite development and climate data sensors
$225 Million – Grants for violence against women prevention programs
$10 Million – Cost of administering extra grant money
$400 Million – NASA shuttle
$400 Million – NASA climate research
$150 Million – NASA aeronautics research
$2 Million – NASA spending oversight
$100 Million – NSF education activities
$2 Million – NSF spending oversight
$15 Million – Department of Defense spending oversight
$300 Million – Funding for Energy Star program
$84 Million – Funding for Recovery and Accountability Transparency Board
$7 Million – Oversight into General Services Administration spending
$20 Million – EPA spending oversight
$50 Million – Grants to fund art projects in non-profit sector
$500 Million – Training of nurses, doctors and dentists to practice in underserved communities
$9.5 Billion – National Institute of Health biomedical research
$1.1 Billion – To research comparing effectiveness of Medicare and Medicaid treatment
$1 Billion – Head Start program for preschoolers
$1.1 Billion – Early Head Start for low income infants
$50 Million – Grants to faith based and community organizations
$100 Million – Grants for elderly Meals on Wheels program
$2 Billion – Extra money for Office of National Coordination for Health Information Technology
$1 Billion – Community health programs and vaccinations
$13 Billion – Funding for Title 1 programs for low income children
$12 Billion - -Grants for special education programs
$17 Billion – Increase Pell grants to low income students
$60 Million – To increase college’s student aid funds
$200 Million – For colleges works study programs
$250 Million – Funding for states to create systems to track individual student data
$14 Million – Department of Education spending oversight
$160 Million – Extra money for AmeriCorps volunteer program
$40 Million – Extra Money for National Trust volunteer program
$90 Million – Passport and training funding for State Department
$290 Million – Creation of information management backup facility for State Department
$2.5 Billion – Energy efficiency retrogrades for low income families
This is only an incomplete short list of all the non-stimulus spending included in this near 1200 page spending bill. It’s not that all these items are not worthy; it’s that they are not stimulus for an economy on the brink of disaster. It is a congressional folly of unprecedented proportions.
You don’t paint the porch when the house is on fire.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The Fallacy of a GOP Obit
It sounds like trouble’s brewing.
If you listen to the Washington DC bureau of the Chicago Tribune you couldn’t help but think that the conservative right was falling apart from the inside out.
Tribune writer Frank James was apparently able to pull himself away from checking Sarah Palin’s underpants receipts from Victoria’s Secret and typing his story with one hand to write a piece quoting Mort Kondracke.
James seems to relish in reporting that Kondracke recently wrote a column for Roll Call, a DC newspaper for which Kondracke is executive editor, calling for conservatives to “fire Rush Limbaugh and his ilk” as the national voice of the conservative movement.
Calling Kondracke a Republican, James goes on to state that calls for Limbaugh’s removal have happened in the past but to no avail. “Maybe this time will be different” said James.
It is apparent that Mr. James has spent too much time checking Palin’s expense report to have seen Mort Kondracke on his regular appearances on Fox News, or perhaps he doesn’t know what channel it’s on having never seen it. Anybody who has watched the discussions involving Kondracke knows that he is far from a Republican. Mort Kondracke is an avowed centrist who supports just about any fence sitter from either party. He regularly gets his fanny handed to him in the closing segment of the Fox News show because he frequently misstates actual events to support his ill-conceived hypothesis.
I don’t dislike Kondracke. As a matter of fact there are times when I actually feel sorry for him going up against such bright minds as Charles Krauthammer and looking completely foolish. The argument Kondracke uses in his column to oust Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham are equally as embarrassing.
In his article titled “First Steps to GOP Recovery” Kondracke makes it sound as if the conservative movement in America has lost its relevance and is headed for a bleak and painful death. Then again he said the same thing about the liberal wing of the Democratic Party a few years ago. That, of course, was before the Democrats were able to elect the most liberal President in the history of the country.
Kondracke notes that Republicans lost minority and Latino voters this past election without taking into consideration the fact that a minority was running as the Democrat. As I’ve said before, the Republicans could have run Abraham Lincoln against Obama and lost minority and Latino votes. The story also goes on to show just how ridiculous supposedly smart people can be when they think that by silencing the messenger they will silence the message.
If conservatives didn’t agree with the ideas of these commentators they wouldn’t support them. Limbaugh is the most listened to radio host in the country; Seam Hannity has his national radio show along with his now solo one hour show on Fox News television. Laura Ingraham has a nationally syndicated radio show and according to tracking polls is the 5th most listened to personality on the radio. Limbaugh alone makes tens of millions of dollars every year from advertisers looking to get a piece of the Limbaugh pie. These people are not paid by tax dollars. They are all paid by advertisers because they have huge audiences. Does Mort think that by pulling them off the air the audience’s viewpoints will magically change?
The whole thing would border on the preposterous if Kondracke actually believed it, but I have some serious doubts about his sincerity. I think it is far more likely that Kondracke saw an opportunity to get his share of national attention and sell more newspapers. And to that end he was probably successful.
Why would I doubt Mr. Kondracke’s veracity?
Here is a look at the headline from the piece he wrote today – “Believe It or Not, Rush Limbaugh Was Right on Stimulus”.
I’m guessing Mr. Frank James and the Washington DC bureau of the Chicago Tribune missed that one.
They’re probably busy with inspecting Panty-gate receipts again.
If you listen to the Washington DC bureau of the Chicago Tribune you couldn’t help but think that the conservative right was falling apart from the inside out.
Tribune writer Frank James was apparently able to pull himself away from checking Sarah Palin’s underpants receipts from Victoria’s Secret and typing his story with one hand to write a piece quoting Mort Kondracke.
James seems to relish in reporting that Kondracke recently wrote a column for Roll Call, a DC newspaper for which Kondracke is executive editor, calling for conservatives to “fire Rush Limbaugh and his ilk” as the national voice of the conservative movement.
Calling Kondracke a Republican, James goes on to state that calls for Limbaugh’s removal have happened in the past but to no avail. “Maybe this time will be different” said James.
It is apparent that Mr. James has spent too much time checking Palin’s expense report to have seen Mort Kondracke on his regular appearances on Fox News, or perhaps he doesn’t know what channel it’s on having never seen it. Anybody who has watched the discussions involving Kondracke knows that he is far from a Republican. Mort Kondracke is an avowed centrist who supports just about any fence sitter from either party. He regularly gets his fanny handed to him in the closing segment of the Fox News show because he frequently misstates actual events to support his ill-conceived hypothesis.
I don’t dislike Kondracke. As a matter of fact there are times when I actually feel sorry for him going up against such bright minds as Charles Krauthammer and looking completely foolish. The argument Kondracke uses in his column to oust Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham are equally as embarrassing.
In his article titled “First Steps to GOP Recovery” Kondracke makes it sound as if the conservative movement in America has lost its relevance and is headed for a bleak and painful death. Then again he said the same thing about the liberal wing of the Democratic Party a few years ago. That, of course, was before the Democrats were able to elect the most liberal President in the history of the country.
Kondracke notes that Republicans lost minority and Latino voters this past election without taking into consideration the fact that a minority was running as the Democrat. As I’ve said before, the Republicans could have run Abraham Lincoln against Obama and lost minority and Latino votes. The story also goes on to show just how ridiculous supposedly smart people can be when they think that by silencing the messenger they will silence the message.
If conservatives didn’t agree with the ideas of these commentators they wouldn’t support them. Limbaugh is the most listened to radio host in the country; Seam Hannity has his national radio show along with his now solo one hour show on Fox News television. Laura Ingraham has a nationally syndicated radio show and according to tracking polls is the 5th most listened to personality on the radio. Limbaugh alone makes tens of millions of dollars every year from advertisers looking to get a piece of the Limbaugh pie. These people are not paid by tax dollars. They are all paid by advertisers because they have huge audiences. Does Mort think that by pulling them off the air the audience’s viewpoints will magically change?
The whole thing would border on the preposterous if Kondracke actually believed it, but I have some serious doubts about his sincerity. I think it is far more likely that Kondracke saw an opportunity to get his share of national attention and sell more newspapers. And to that end he was probably successful.
Why would I doubt Mr. Kondracke’s veracity?
Here is a look at the headline from the piece he wrote today – “Believe It or Not, Rush Limbaugh Was Right on Stimulus”.
I’m guessing Mr. Frank James and the Washington DC bureau of the Chicago Tribune missed that one.
They’re probably busy with inspecting Panty-gate receipts again.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
ENOUGH !!!
ENOUGH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I would use more exclamation points if I thought it would help.
The ever campaigning promissory note that is Barack Obama is back in his most comfortable role of traveling from town to town expounding political rhetoric while never letting the facts get in the way of a good 10 second sound bite.
Back in Washington DC the Senate, thanks to the weak knees of a few Republicans, passed a nearly one trillion dollar spending package dressed up to look like economic stimulus and the new Treasury Secretary fattened the pockets of Wall Street short sellers by announcing a credit stimulus plan that was more smoke and mirrors than a David Copperfield illusion.
As the new president initiates the kick off of his 2013 reelection campaign he continues to hammer his predecessor with such untrue and unchallenged statements as "We can't afford to posture and bicker and resort to the same failed ideas that got us into this mess in the first place,'' and "After all, that's what this election was about. You rejected many of those ideas because you know they haven't worked. You didn't send us to Washington because you were hoping for more of the same ...'' At what point will people actually begin to pull their head out of the pink clouds of hope and change and begin doing the math?
In January of 2001 the Dow Jones Industrial Average stood at 9878 having already dropped from its October 1999 high of just shy of 11500. The economy was not what it had been for the previous several years when it had ridden the updraft caused by the tech bubble . It was weak and getting weaker. Later that same year came that fateful day in September that truly brought about change. Unfortunately it also proved not all change is good. The Dow continued it’s slid through July of 2002 when it bottomed out at about 7591.
Over the next 5 years the presidential predecessor Obama now blames for bad economic management saw over an economy that grew by leaps and bounds. Thanks in large part to the stimulus afforded American taxpayers through the “Bush Tax Cuts” and the Fed cuts in the prime lending rate the Dow climbed to 13895 by July of 2007 equaling about a 40% increase. The biggest economic concern was that the economy would in fact grow too fast causing inflation which forced the Fed to alter the “prime” in an effort to keep economic growth warm but not blazing.
The policies of the Bush administration were far from 8 years of failure. Considering Bush inherited a declining economy, had a major terrorist attack on American soil, began conducting a war in Afghanistan to abate the Taliban reign of terror and in Iraq which removed Saddam Hussein and his two weapons of mass destruction, Uday and Qusay from the picture, the economy did remarkably well.
The decline in the economy began to really show in August of 2007 when the mortgage backed securities markets fell into the abyss brought about by a Democrat controlled House and Senate leading the charge for Fannie May and Freddie Mac. The level of infection into those credit markets is what led to this financial crisis. Or as Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer put it “My colleges and fellow Americans we live in dangerous time. Who would have thought the lowly mortgage would bring this country’s financial system to its knees?”
The Democrats successfully thwarted any effort to install oversight into the felonious actions of Fannie and Freddie calling it a “solution if search of a problem”. Well we don’t need to search for the problem anymore.
Partisan political rhetoric is commonplace during a presidential campaign. But continuing to mislead through deceptive statements in t he midst of a crisis of this magnitude hardly is in line with the campaign of hope we heard so much about.
Instead of writing catchy one-liners someone on the Obama team should do the math. And if they don’t then the American taxpayers, that will have to bear the burden of this boondoggle, should do it for them.
I would use more exclamation points if I thought it would help.
The ever campaigning promissory note that is Barack Obama is back in his most comfortable role of traveling from town to town expounding political rhetoric while never letting the facts get in the way of a good 10 second sound bite.
Back in Washington DC the Senate, thanks to the weak knees of a few Republicans, passed a nearly one trillion dollar spending package dressed up to look like economic stimulus and the new Treasury Secretary fattened the pockets of Wall Street short sellers by announcing a credit stimulus plan that was more smoke and mirrors than a David Copperfield illusion.
As the new president initiates the kick off of his 2013 reelection campaign he continues to hammer his predecessor with such untrue and unchallenged statements as "We can't afford to posture and bicker and resort to the same failed ideas that got us into this mess in the first place,'' and "After all, that's what this election was about. You rejected many of those ideas because you know they haven't worked. You didn't send us to Washington because you were hoping for more of the same ...'' At what point will people actually begin to pull their head out of the pink clouds of hope and change and begin doing the math?
In January of 2001 the Dow Jones Industrial Average stood at 9878 having already dropped from its October 1999 high of just shy of 11500. The economy was not what it had been for the previous several years when it had ridden the updraft caused by the tech bubble . It was weak and getting weaker. Later that same year came that fateful day in September that truly brought about change. Unfortunately it also proved not all change is good. The Dow continued it’s slid through July of 2002 when it bottomed out at about 7591.
Over the next 5 years the presidential predecessor Obama now blames for bad economic management saw over an economy that grew by leaps and bounds. Thanks in large part to the stimulus afforded American taxpayers through the “Bush Tax Cuts” and the Fed cuts in the prime lending rate the Dow climbed to 13895 by July of 2007 equaling about a 40% increase. The biggest economic concern was that the economy would in fact grow too fast causing inflation which forced the Fed to alter the “prime” in an effort to keep economic growth warm but not blazing.
The policies of the Bush administration were far from 8 years of failure. Considering Bush inherited a declining economy, had a major terrorist attack on American soil, began conducting a war in Afghanistan to abate the Taliban reign of terror and in Iraq which removed Saddam Hussein and his two weapons of mass destruction, Uday and Qusay from the picture, the economy did remarkably well.
The decline in the economy began to really show in August of 2007 when the mortgage backed securities markets fell into the abyss brought about by a Democrat controlled House and Senate leading the charge for Fannie May and Freddie Mac. The level of infection into those credit markets is what led to this financial crisis. Or as Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer put it “My colleges and fellow Americans we live in dangerous time. Who would have thought the lowly mortgage would bring this country’s financial system to its knees?”
The Democrats successfully thwarted any effort to install oversight into the felonious actions of Fannie and Freddie calling it a “solution if search of a problem”. Well we don’t need to search for the problem anymore.
Partisan political rhetoric is commonplace during a presidential campaign. But continuing to mislead through deceptive statements in t he midst of a crisis of this magnitude hardly is in line with the campaign of hope we heard so much about.
Instead of writing catchy one-liners someone on the Obama team should do the math. And if they don’t then the American taxpayers, that will have to bear the burden of this boondoggle, should do it for them.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
The Scam
Step right up and test your skill. All you have to do is hit the target and you’ll win the little lady a Cupie Doll.
The barkers at the carnival always make it sound so easy. That’s how he suckers you in to try it in the first place. Then after each turn he assures you that you are getting better and before long you’ve spent $20 to win a $3 stuffed animal. It’s a scam. We know it’s a scam. We like being part of the scam. But most importantly, we think we can beat the scam.
That pretty much sums up today’s long awaited speech by Treasury Secretary Tim 1040 Geithner. The problem is that this scam isn’t going to cost us $20. It’s more along the lines of $500 billion, with an anticipated end value of $2 trillion dollars.
As President Barack Hussein Obama toured the countryside in the opening salvo of his 2013 reelection campaign Tim 1040 laid out the “new” Financial Stability Plan. This much anticipated plan left most of Wall Street feeling like they had just gotten off the Tilt-A-Whirl. In a less than enthusiastic response the markets immediately headed in a precipitous downward direction to end the day down big with the Dow, Nasdaq and S&P 500 each shedding about 4.5% of their value. If this speech was a Broadway play it would have closed on opening night.
While President Obama stated last night that his number one priority is to create jobs, the real number one priority for this administration should be to free up the credit markets. Once you do that the private sector can get back to creating real jobs versus the government’s reheated New Deal WPO.
The new plan calls for an estimated $1 trillion dollars to prop up the Fed’s Term Asset-backed Securities Loan Facility or TALF. The plan then envisions another $1 trillion in private equity to buy up the toxic debt bonds that are handcuffing bank’s balance sheets.
These toxic assets are sitting like a bad burrito in the colon of most major lending institutions making them afraid to even move much less lend. Due to the mark to market requirements of valuing these assets, and seeing as there is no current market for them to be marked against, most banks have written them down to zero making them much more of a liability than an asset. And therein lays the rub. How does the Fed begin to logically and realistically value these assets?
The Obama administration is looking for this new plan to become an instrument to facilitate the sale of these contaminated assets to the private sector. The obvious problem is that there already is an instrument to do that, it’s called the market. And because it is impossible to discern the good assets from the bad assets the market considers them to be worthless. Now because these are mortgage backed securities there is obviously some value attached to them, but trying to figure out what that could be is like trying to figure out why Tom Daschle would give up a career that paid him $5 million a year in apparently tax free income to be Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Somebody is going to have to pick a number to value these things. It won’t matter if they spin the big wheel or draw it out of a fish bowl, because no matter how they pick that number it will be a complete scam.
It’s not so much that picking the number will affect the possible sale of the assets to the private market that is the problem. The problem comes in that once the government summarily picks the value it immediately changes the assets mark to market basis value allowing banks to artificially inflate their plus column of the ledger.
It’s time to put the smoke and mirrors back in the Fun House and focus on the task at hand. It was the federal government that created this problem with the welfare infection of the mortgage markets and it must be the federal government that buys back their mistakes.
All the roads and bridges projects in the world won’t matter if the only people using the road to get to work are the road building crew. Forget the near $1 trillion dollar spending package the ever campaigning BHO is pushing and focus that money plus whatever other stimulus money toward the mandatory repurchase of these toxic assets. They can be valued at a number that benefits both the bank and the government, recapitalizing the banks which will allow these currently toxic assets to actually begin to accrue value. Only then should the government look to private equity to begin buying them as actual investments.
The time for the scam is over.
Now gimme my damn Cupie Doll.
The barkers at the carnival always make it sound so easy. That’s how he suckers you in to try it in the first place. Then after each turn he assures you that you are getting better and before long you’ve spent $20 to win a $3 stuffed animal. It’s a scam. We know it’s a scam. We like being part of the scam. But most importantly, we think we can beat the scam.
That pretty much sums up today’s long awaited speech by Treasury Secretary Tim 1040 Geithner. The problem is that this scam isn’t going to cost us $20. It’s more along the lines of $500 billion, with an anticipated end value of $2 trillion dollars.
As President Barack Hussein Obama toured the countryside in the opening salvo of his 2013 reelection campaign Tim 1040 laid out the “new” Financial Stability Plan. This much anticipated plan left most of Wall Street feeling like they had just gotten off the Tilt-A-Whirl. In a less than enthusiastic response the markets immediately headed in a precipitous downward direction to end the day down big with the Dow, Nasdaq and S&P 500 each shedding about 4.5% of their value. If this speech was a Broadway play it would have closed on opening night.
While President Obama stated last night that his number one priority is to create jobs, the real number one priority for this administration should be to free up the credit markets. Once you do that the private sector can get back to creating real jobs versus the government’s reheated New Deal WPO.
The new plan calls for an estimated $1 trillion dollars to prop up the Fed’s Term Asset-backed Securities Loan Facility or TALF. The plan then envisions another $1 trillion in private equity to buy up the toxic debt bonds that are handcuffing bank’s balance sheets.
These toxic assets are sitting like a bad burrito in the colon of most major lending institutions making them afraid to even move much less lend. Due to the mark to market requirements of valuing these assets, and seeing as there is no current market for them to be marked against, most banks have written them down to zero making them much more of a liability than an asset. And therein lays the rub. How does the Fed begin to logically and realistically value these assets?
The Obama administration is looking for this new plan to become an instrument to facilitate the sale of these contaminated assets to the private sector. The obvious problem is that there already is an instrument to do that, it’s called the market. And because it is impossible to discern the good assets from the bad assets the market considers them to be worthless. Now because these are mortgage backed securities there is obviously some value attached to them, but trying to figure out what that could be is like trying to figure out why Tom Daschle would give up a career that paid him $5 million a year in apparently tax free income to be Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Somebody is going to have to pick a number to value these things. It won’t matter if they spin the big wheel or draw it out of a fish bowl, because no matter how they pick that number it will be a complete scam.
It’s not so much that picking the number will affect the possible sale of the assets to the private market that is the problem. The problem comes in that once the government summarily picks the value it immediately changes the assets mark to market basis value allowing banks to artificially inflate their plus column of the ledger.
It’s time to put the smoke and mirrors back in the Fun House and focus on the task at hand. It was the federal government that created this problem with the welfare infection of the mortgage markets and it must be the federal government that buys back their mistakes.
All the roads and bridges projects in the world won’t matter if the only people using the road to get to work are the road building crew. Forget the near $1 trillion dollar spending package the ever campaigning BHO is pushing and focus that money plus whatever other stimulus money toward the mandatory repurchase of these toxic assets. They can be valued at a number that benefits both the bank and the government, recapitalizing the banks which will allow these currently toxic assets to actually begin to accrue value. Only then should the government look to private equity to begin buying them as actual investments.
The time for the scam is over.
Now gimme my damn Cupie Doll.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Lookinig In All The Wrong Places
Wanna hear a story?
Bob was walking down the street one dark night when he sees a man under the street light hunched over and desperately searching the ground for something. Bob walks over and says “Are you looking for something?” The man replies “Yea, I lost my keys.” So Bob, being the kind hearted Good Samaritan he is, begins helping the poor chap search the area for the lost keys. After about a half an hour of looking Bob says “I’m sorry pal, but I’ll be damned if I can find them. Are you sure this is where you lost them?” To which the man replies “No, actually I lost them over on the other side of the street, but the light is so much better over here.”
The moral of the story is pretty obvious. If you’re looking for something, your only chance of actually finding it is to look where it is, not where it’s most convenient. But with the news coming out of Washington DC there seems to be a lot of folks that would just continue looking under the street light and a lot more would continue helping them.
The new president has taken his leave from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and hit the road in hopes of drumming up support for his ill-conceived spending bill that he is portraying as a stimulus package. Obama’s chief political hack, Chicago’s own veteran political hit man David Axelrod, was quick to sight a recent Gallop poll which he said showed 67% of Americans supporting the Obama economic plan. But perhaps Mr. Axelrod may want to look a little closer at the data.
What the poll said is that Obama received a 67% approval rating for his handling thus far of the government passing some sort of economic stimulus plan. That number drops to 51% of those who feel that approving the plan he is currently proposing is critically important to improving the nation’s economy. But even that number is questionable in that at no time did the Gallop folks actually ask if those responding had any idea of what the plan was.
Obama has several things working in his favor right now. First, his approval rating is still sky high coming off a campaign that promised everybody everything. Second, Americans are stricken with fear of an economy that has depleted their savings and ravaged their 401k’s. They are rightfully worried about their jobs and are cutting back on expenses. They don’t know what will work but they do feel that something, anything, needs to be done. With these two factors alone Obama could institute the sacrificing of virgins on the Capital steps if he told folks it would help the economy, and if he could find a virgin in the greater Washington DC area. Although admittedly the odds of finding at least one have improved greatly over the past 8 years since Monica’s boyfriend moved his humidor to Harlem.
The third factor is that most Americans are too young to remember the Great Depression. They read about it in school, but other than the stories they have heard from parents or grandparents most really know very little about it. The only thing they know is that it ended. They are extremely unlikely to research history to learn the causes for it or what eventually brought about its end. Most Americans are completely unaware that we did not spend our way out of the depression. In fact most of the so called stimulus spending was completely ineffective at altering the economy. But they hear that this recession and the collapse of the credit markets could spur another one and that’s all they need to know.
Then there is the fourth and probably most important factor. This spending bill totals just shy of a trillion dollars. I doubt there is anybody short of Donald Trump’s bankruptcy attorney that can actually comprehend that level of spending.
Even though it appears that the necessary votes for its approval are in the Senate, if Republicans want to gain any support amongst the general population they will need to explain in the simplest possible terms what a trillion dollars worth of spending equates to for each working family and their descendents. Only after they have done that can they can begin taking issue with exactly where the money is going and when.
Once Americans begin to get some personal ownership of this massive boondoggle they will be a little more likely to question if this new administration is looking where the answer is or just under the same streetlight Democrats have always found most convenient.
Americans voted for change.
I wonder of the Democrats are up to providing it.
Bob was walking down the street one dark night when he sees a man under the street light hunched over and desperately searching the ground for something. Bob walks over and says “Are you looking for something?” The man replies “Yea, I lost my keys.” So Bob, being the kind hearted Good Samaritan he is, begins helping the poor chap search the area for the lost keys. After about a half an hour of looking Bob says “I’m sorry pal, but I’ll be damned if I can find them. Are you sure this is where you lost them?” To which the man replies “No, actually I lost them over on the other side of the street, but the light is so much better over here.”
The moral of the story is pretty obvious. If you’re looking for something, your only chance of actually finding it is to look where it is, not where it’s most convenient. But with the news coming out of Washington DC there seems to be a lot of folks that would just continue looking under the street light and a lot more would continue helping them.
The new president has taken his leave from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and hit the road in hopes of drumming up support for his ill-conceived spending bill that he is portraying as a stimulus package. Obama’s chief political hack, Chicago’s own veteran political hit man David Axelrod, was quick to sight a recent Gallop poll which he said showed 67% of Americans supporting the Obama economic plan. But perhaps Mr. Axelrod may want to look a little closer at the data.
What the poll said is that Obama received a 67% approval rating for his handling thus far of the government passing some sort of economic stimulus plan. That number drops to 51% of those who feel that approving the plan he is currently proposing is critically important to improving the nation’s economy. But even that number is questionable in that at no time did the Gallop folks actually ask if those responding had any idea of what the plan was.
Obama has several things working in his favor right now. First, his approval rating is still sky high coming off a campaign that promised everybody everything. Second, Americans are stricken with fear of an economy that has depleted their savings and ravaged their 401k’s. They are rightfully worried about their jobs and are cutting back on expenses. They don’t know what will work but they do feel that something, anything, needs to be done. With these two factors alone Obama could institute the sacrificing of virgins on the Capital steps if he told folks it would help the economy, and if he could find a virgin in the greater Washington DC area. Although admittedly the odds of finding at least one have improved greatly over the past 8 years since Monica’s boyfriend moved his humidor to Harlem.
The third factor is that most Americans are too young to remember the Great Depression. They read about it in school, but other than the stories they have heard from parents or grandparents most really know very little about it. The only thing they know is that it ended. They are extremely unlikely to research history to learn the causes for it or what eventually brought about its end. Most Americans are completely unaware that we did not spend our way out of the depression. In fact most of the so called stimulus spending was completely ineffective at altering the economy. But they hear that this recession and the collapse of the credit markets could spur another one and that’s all they need to know.
Then there is the fourth and probably most important factor. This spending bill totals just shy of a trillion dollars. I doubt there is anybody short of Donald Trump’s bankruptcy attorney that can actually comprehend that level of spending.
Even though it appears that the necessary votes for its approval are in the Senate, if Republicans want to gain any support amongst the general population they will need to explain in the simplest possible terms what a trillion dollars worth of spending equates to for each working family and their descendents. Only after they have done that can they can begin taking issue with exactly where the money is going and when.
Once Americans begin to get some personal ownership of this massive boondoggle they will be a little more likely to question if this new administration is looking where the answer is or just under the same streetlight Democrats have always found most convenient.
Americans voted for change.
I wonder of the Democrats are up to providing it.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Stupid Stuff
I’ll admit that there are some pretty smart folks doing some pretty remarkable things today.
Like the folks who designed the traffic lights at the six way intersection near my house. These lights have the ability to sense when my car is approaching and immediately switch to red allowing all other lanes of traffic to go at least once and sometimes twice before turning back to green again allowing me to proceed. How it is able to discern my car amongst all the other cars out there is a mystery to me, but it does it every single time.
Or like the telephone guy that installed the phones in my house. He was able to somehow wire my phone to the toilet seat, so that within a matter of seconds after I take a seat I can be assured that phone is going to ring. I have searched for the wires that facilitate this process, but to no avail. This leads me to believe that it is either some sort of wireless remote control or else it’s haunted.
Regardless of the reasons I appreciate bright people and what they are able to accomplish, even if it has a somewhat detrimental effect on me. But no matter how you slice it, there are plenty of things today that are just plain stupid as well.
For instance, I went to the optometrist recently to be fitted for some new contact lenses. During the fitting he reviewed the proper way to insert the contacts by looking at the cup shape versus the dish shape appearance of the lens indicating whether it is inside out or not. But he also pointed out that along with looking at the shape of this tiny plastic disc, around the edge in a font size so small that they could in fact be sub-atomic, are the numbers 123. The doctor said this was placed there to allow the user to tell if the contact is right side out. An ingenious idea, but as I told the doctor, if I could read the numbers I wouldn’t need the contacts. It’s kind of like a pill for Alzheimer’s. If you remember to take it, you don’t need it.
I saw another stupid idea on a recent visit to my bank. As part of a promotion the bank was offering a ceramic piggy bank to anyone opening a new account. Not much new there, but the stupid part was that the pig had a scarf around his neck, a knit cap and appeared to be snow skiing. While skiing is certainly an acceptable depiction of winter fun, I asked if they were sure, in this time of TARP and consequences, that they wanted their promotion to depict a bank going downhill. The look on the head cashiers face was priceless as she scurried off to mention my comment to the branch manager. Surprisingly enough the piggy banks were no longer displayed the next day. These guys probably paid a fair chunk of change to some advertising company to come up with this idea. Did no one see the irony in that image but me?
Perhaps it’s just my warped sense of humor or my firm grasp on reality that makes me shake my head at some of the absurdity that surrounds me. As Forest Gump said “stupid is as stupid does” and stupid stuff usually just amuses me. But even though these examples are stupid to the point of being humorous they are not as stupid as hiring a Treasury Secretary that can’t figure his own taxable income or earmarking almost a half a trillion dollars in a spending bill to build roads, bridges and schools which will likely begin in 2011 and beyond, calling it stimulus and expecting that to fire up the credit and housing markets today.
I guess it proves there will never be a shortage of stupid.
And sometimes stupid ain’t funny.
Like the folks who designed the traffic lights at the six way intersection near my house. These lights have the ability to sense when my car is approaching and immediately switch to red allowing all other lanes of traffic to go at least once and sometimes twice before turning back to green again allowing me to proceed. How it is able to discern my car amongst all the other cars out there is a mystery to me, but it does it every single time.
Or like the telephone guy that installed the phones in my house. He was able to somehow wire my phone to the toilet seat, so that within a matter of seconds after I take a seat I can be assured that phone is going to ring. I have searched for the wires that facilitate this process, but to no avail. This leads me to believe that it is either some sort of wireless remote control or else it’s haunted.
Regardless of the reasons I appreciate bright people and what they are able to accomplish, even if it has a somewhat detrimental effect on me. But no matter how you slice it, there are plenty of things today that are just plain stupid as well.
For instance, I went to the optometrist recently to be fitted for some new contact lenses. During the fitting he reviewed the proper way to insert the contacts by looking at the cup shape versus the dish shape appearance of the lens indicating whether it is inside out or not. But he also pointed out that along with looking at the shape of this tiny plastic disc, around the edge in a font size so small that they could in fact be sub-atomic, are the numbers 123. The doctor said this was placed there to allow the user to tell if the contact is right side out. An ingenious idea, but as I told the doctor, if I could read the numbers I wouldn’t need the contacts. It’s kind of like a pill for Alzheimer’s. If you remember to take it, you don’t need it.
I saw another stupid idea on a recent visit to my bank. As part of a promotion the bank was offering a ceramic piggy bank to anyone opening a new account. Not much new there, but the stupid part was that the pig had a scarf around his neck, a knit cap and appeared to be snow skiing. While skiing is certainly an acceptable depiction of winter fun, I asked if they were sure, in this time of TARP and consequences, that they wanted their promotion to depict a bank going downhill. The look on the head cashiers face was priceless as she scurried off to mention my comment to the branch manager. Surprisingly enough the piggy banks were no longer displayed the next day. These guys probably paid a fair chunk of change to some advertising company to come up with this idea. Did no one see the irony in that image but me?
Perhaps it’s just my warped sense of humor or my firm grasp on reality that makes me shake my head at some of the absurdity that surrounds me. As Forest Gump said “stupid is as stupid does” and stupid stuff usually just amuses me. But even though these examples are stupid to the point of being humorous they are not as stupid as hiring a Treasury Secretary that can’t figure his own taxable income or earmarking almost a half a trillion dollars in a spending bill to build roads, bridges and schools which will likely begin in 2011 and beyond, calling it stimulus and expecting that to fire up the credit and housing markets today.
I guess it proves there will never be a shortage of stupid.
And sometimes stupid ain’t funny.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Fact v. Fiction
“A lie told often enough becomes truth” – Vladimir Lenin
Even one hundred years ago Lenin knew the way to control public opinion was to lie creatively, but more importantly repeatedly. Such is the case today with the discussions regarding national security and America’s constitutional requirements regarding treatment of those whose sole mission in life is to kill us.
Time and time again we are treated to a liberal and intentional misstatement of consequences based on misguided assumptions or politically motivated conjecture.
We are constantly being assailed by so called experts that offer guidance meant only to instill fear so as to accomplish a redirection in sentiment rather than to rationally explain facts. It allows these ill-conceived assumptions to take root in the American psyche and alter what would otherwise be a clear and common sense approach to protecting ourselves.
The idea that President Bush and Vice President Cheney lied to get us involved in a war in Iraq has been told so often that it is now widely accepted as fact. The Democrats have successfully altered history by repeating this politically motivated misrepresentation of the facts to the point where many Americans either refuse to question them or refuse to believe anything else.
While the intelligence presented at the time was not without errors it was supported not only by our own intelligence agencies but by those of every intelligence gathering nation in the world. The decision to go to war was overwhelmingly supported by both houses of congress based on that same information the president used. The actions taken by President Bush in Iraq, Afghanistan and domestically were directly responsible for the fact that we have not experienced another successful terrorist attack on our shores since that fateful day in September, 2001.
The president was aware at the time that it would be impossible for Americans to equate his level of success based on the incidents that were prevented. But he wasn’t looking for credit, he was looking for safety.
The key to continuing the domestic safety this country has enjoyed for the past 7 years is to be willing to recognize that we do indeed have enemies and accepting the reality that they don’t give a damn what we do or how we do it. Their hatred toward America is so ingrained that our actions, regardless of what they are, will only reinforce their hatred toward us.
The new president and his new policies toward these enemies are guided by the misconception that we can control how our enemies perceive us. Repeatedly he has stated that our actions need to be amended so as to avoid them being used as recruiting tools for Al Qaeda. The reality is that no matter what we do it will be used as a recruiting tool by Al Qaeda. If we are forceful we will be seen as ruthless aggressors and if we are not we will be seen as weak and vulnerable. Either way we will be viewed as worthy of genocide.
The Constitution of the United States is a unique document that confines its scope to a finite group of people. Its protections and benefits do not extend beyond our borders and certainly were never intended to extend to enemies on a battlefield, regardless of where that battlefield is located. Simply stated it is not a suicide pact.
The new president seems to think his job is to extend the constitution's benefits to our enemies when in fact it is his sworn duty to protect it from them.
We are already seeing released Guantanamo Bay detainees rejoining forces to kill more Americans. In a recent interview discussing American security and post 9-11 measures, former VP Dick Cheney said “When we get people who are more concerned about…….reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do everything they can to kill Americans, then I worry.”
While Cheney’s comments are being assailed as an attack on President Obama and his new policies designed to make us feel good about ourselves, it doesn’t make them any less true or accurate.
What does it take to make me feel good about how we are handling terrorists?
7 years of safety feels pretty good to me.
Even one hundred years ago Lenin knew the way to control public opinion was to lie creatively, but more importantly repeatedly. Such is the case today with the discussions regarding national security and America’s constitutional requirements regarding treatment of those whose sole mission in life is to kill us.
Time and time again we are treated to a liberal and intentional misstatement of consequences based on misguided assumptions or politically motivated conjecture.
We are constantly being assailed by so called experts that offer guidance meant only to instill fear so as to accomplish a redirection in sentiment rather than to rationally explain facts. It allows these ill-conceived assumptions to take root in the American psyche and alter what would otherwise be a clear and common sense approach to protecting ourselves.
The idea that President Bush and Vice President Cheney lied to get us involved in a war in Iraq has been told so often that it is now widely accepted as fact. The Democrats have successfully altered history by repeating this politically motivated misrepresentation of the facts to the point where many Americans either refuse to question them or refuse to believe anything else.
While the intelligence presented at the time was not without errors it was supported not only by our own intelligence agencies but by those of every intelligence gathering nation in the world. The decision to go to war was overwhelmingly supported by both houses of congress based on that same information the president used. The actions taken by President Bush in Iraq, Afghanistan and domestically were directly responsible for the fact that we have not experienced another successful terrorist attack on our shores since that fateful day in September, 2001.
The president was aware at the time that it would be impossible for Americans to equate his level of success based on the incidents that were prevented. But he wasn’t looking for credit, he was looking for safety.
The key to continuing the domestic safety this country has enjoyed for the past 7 years is to be willing to recognize that we do indeed have enemies and accepting the reality that they don’t give a damn what we do or how we do it. Their hatred toward America is so ingrained that our actions, regardless of what they are, will only reinforce their hatred toward us.
The new president and his new policies toward these enemies are guided by the misconception that we can control how our enemies perceive us. Repeatedly he has stated that our actions need to be amended so as to avoid them being used as recruiting tools for Al Qaeda. The reality is that no matter what we do it will be used as a recruiting tool by Al Qaeda. If we are forceful we will be seen as ruthless aggressors and if we are not we will be seen as weak and vulnerable. Either way we will be viewed as worthy of genocide.
The Constitution of the United States is a unique document that confines its scope to a finite group of people. Its protections and benefits do not extend beyond our borders and certainly were never intended to extend to enemies on a battlefield, regardless of where that battlefield is located. Simply stated it is not a suicide pact.
The new president seems to think his job is to extend the constitution's benefits to our enemies when in fact it is his sworn duty to protect it from them.
We are already seeing released Guantanamo Bay detainees rejoining forces to kill more Americans. In a recent interview discussing American security and post 9-11 measures, former VP Dick Cheney said “When we get people who are more concerned about…….reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do everything they can to kill Americans, then I worry.”
While Cheney’s comments are being assailed as an attack on President Obama and his new policies designed to make us feel good about ourselves, it doesn’t make them any less true or accurate.
What does it take to make me feel good about how we are handling terrorists?
7 years of safety feels pretty good to me.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Hopefully Hoping
Ya gotta have hope! Musn’t sit around and mope. Nuthin’s half as bad as it may appear, wait’ll next year and hope.
Ok, so maybe bringing up lines from old Broadway tunes like this one from “Damn Yankees” doesn’t do much to secure my image as a macho Big Frick type, but it does seem appropriate considering the recent installation of the candidate of “hope” into the presidency. Especially after his recent Super Bowl interview in which he said he “hoped” we would see signs of an improved economy within the next year. And oh my how candidate Obama loved to peddle the individually unique concept of “hope” to the huddled masses.
Time and time again we were bombarded with the notion that Barack Hussein Obama was that bright and shining star that could restore” hope” into the weary American heart. We were further told by the adoring media that surrounded him and covered his every utterance that America had lost “hope” under the evil dictatorship of the totalitarian Bush/Cheney ticket.
All was lost. The war in Iraq was lost. The war in Afghanistan was lost. Osama bin Laden was lost. The economy was lost. The ability to earn a living wage was lost. The environment was lost. The future of the polar bear or any other creature that lives on some God forsaken frozen tundra was lost. The possibility of Middle East oil independence was lost. The likelihood that gasoline would ever be under $4.00 a gallon was lost. Alternative and renewable energy was lost. The ability to cure disease was lost. Healthcare was lost. The possibility of affordable prescription drugs was lost. Our ability to garner multinational support and even more importantly approval was lost. That warm and fuzzy feeling of just being an American was lost.
But “hope” was only a voting booth away. “Hope” for a brighter tomorrow for us Americans and our posterity, as well as for the rest of the “hope” starved world was embodied in the form of a thoughtful community activist/autobiographer. A “hope” so deep and profound that his very image inspired “hope”. His picture emblazoned on millions of posters, buttons, web sites, bumper stickers, tee shirts and on and on showing his image with just one word “HOPE”.
“Hope” was all it took for this candidate to be elected as President of the United States. Not experience, not history, not a voting record, not a plan, just “hope”. So how is it possible that after only 14 days in office, that one quality that was more important than anything else, “hope”, seems to be fading already?
Wall Street doesn’t seem to be too filled with “hope” regarding the president’s stimulus package. The credit markets aren’t showing any signs of “hope” through increased lending. Our trading partners in Europe are displaying a lot less “hope” calling attention to the new found protectionism regarding buying only American goods for projects funded by the infrastructure rebuilding component of the stimulus package. Even going so far as to compare it to the protectionism that brought about the Great Depression.
The government of India is not showing any signs of “hope” regarding the presidents approach to peace between them and their Pakistani neighbors, saying that the president is “barking up the wrong tree” by trying to reinstitute the same failed policies of the Clinton administration.
Iran is not filled with “hope” for a better relationship with the U.S. having just sent their first satellite into orbit and announcing that they now have missiles capable of carrying a payload to the shores of America.
“Hope” faded for the utopian administration that promised honesty and honor when it was revealed that three of the president’s top cabinet picks had failed to pay income taxes and two of the three were forced to abdicate before they even had their first confirmation hearings.
“Hope” took another shot in ass when it was discovered that last year the presidents pick for head of the CIA, Leon Panetta, made over $700,000 giving speeches to the now defamed banking industry, including several that are now receiving TARP funds, as well as another $400,000 plus from lobbying groups and special interests.
And now it is discovered that the very image of “HOPE”, no, not Obama, I mean the very image that graced all those millions of campaign posters and clothing items, was used without permission of the copyright holder. The image of “HOPE” is stolen. The Associated Press announced that they are suing Shepard Fairey, the designer of the “HOPE” image for copyright infringement as it was taken from one of their pictures.
Apparently Mr. Fairey, who is described as a street artist which to me says graffiti, used the AP photo as the basis of the image for his now famous “HOPE” poster. As a copyrighted photograph it is illegal to reproduce the image without expressed written permission, a small detail Mr. Fairey obviously “hoped” would slip by. The AP is now looking to the courts in “hopes” of getting compensation. If Andy Warhol was alive I’m guessing he would be suing Fairey as well for copyright infringement of his Campbell Soup can collection.
All “hope” is not yet lost, but after only 14 days it has certainly traveled down a dark and dangerous path.
Will it finds its way back?
We can only “hope”.
Ok, so maybe bringing up lines from old Broadway tunes like this one from “Damn Yankees” doesn’t do much to secure my image as a macho Big Frick type, but it does seem appropriate considering the recent installation of the candidate of “hope” into the presidency. Especially after his recent Super Bowl interview in which he said he “hoped” we would see signs of an improved economy within the next year. And oh my how candidate Obama loved to peddle the individually unique concept of “hope” to the huddled masses.
Time and time again we were bombarded with the notion that Barack Hussein Obama was that bright and shining star that could restore” hope” into the weary American heart. We were further told by the adoring media that surrounded him and covered his every utterance that America had lost “hope” under the evil dictatorship of the totalitarian Bush/Cheney ticket.
All was lost. The war in Iraq was lost. The war in Afghanistan was lost. Osama bin Laden was lost. The economy was lost. The ability to earn a living wage was lost. The environment was lost. The future of the polar bear or any other creature that lives on some God forsaken frozen tundra was lost. The possibility of Middle East oil independence was lost. The likelihood that gasoline would ever be under $4.00 a gallon was lost. Alternative and renewable energy was lost. The ability to cure disease was lost. Healthcare was lost. The possibility of affordable prescription drugs was lost. Our ability to garner multinational support and even more importantly approval was lost. That warm and fuzzy feeling of just being an American was lost.
But “hope” was only a voting booth away. “Hope” for a brighter tomorrow for us Americans and our posterity, as well as for the rest of the “hope” starved world was embodied in the form of a thoughtful community activist/autobiographer. A “hope” so deep and profound that his very image inspired “hope”. His picture emblazoned on millions of posters, buttons, web sites, bumper stickers, tee shirts and on and on showing his image with just one word “HOPE”.
“Hope” was all it took for this candidate to be elected as President of the United States. Not experience, not history, not a voting record, not a plan, just “hope”. So how is it possible that after only 14 days in office, that one quality that was more important than anything else, “hope”, seems to be fading already?
Wall Street doesn’t seem to be too filled with “hope” regarding the president’s stimulus package. The credit markets aren’t showing any signs of “hope” through increased lending. Our trading partners in Europe are displaying a lot less “hope” calling attention to the new found protectionism regarding buying only American goods for projects funded by the infrastructure rebuilding component of the stimulus package. Even going so far as to compare it to the protectionism that brought about the Great Depression.
The government of India is not showing any signs of “hope” regarding the presidents approach to peace between them and their Pakistani neighbors, saying that the president is “barking up the wrong tree” by trying to reinstitute the same failed policies of the Clinton administration.
Iran is not filled with “hope” for a better relationship with the U.S. having just sent their first satellite into orbit and announcing that they now have missiles capable of carrying a payload to the shores of America.
“Hope” faded for the utopian administration that promised honesty and honor when it was revealed that three of the president’s top cabinet picks had failed to pay income taxes and two of the three were forced to abdicate before they even had their first confirmation hearings.
“Hope” took another shot in ass when it was discovered that last year the presidents pick for head of the CIA, Leon Panetta, made over $700,000 giving speeches to the now defamed banking industry, including several that are now receiving TARP funds, as well as another $400,000 plus from lobbying groups and special interests.
And now it is discovered that the very image of “HOPE”, no, not Obama, I mean the very image that graced all those millions of campaign posters and clothing items, was used without permission of the copyright holder. The image of “HOPE” is stolen. The Associated Press announced that they are suing Shepard Fairey, the designer of the “HOPE” image for copyright infringement as it was taken from one of their pictures.
Apparently Mr. Fairey, who is described as a street artist which to me says graffiti, used the AP photo as the basis of the image for his now famous “HOPE” poster. As a copyrighted photograph it is illegal to reproduce the image without expressed written permission, a small detail Mr. Fairey obviously “hoped” would slip by. The AP is now looking to the courts in “hopes” of getting compensation. If Andy Warhol was alive I’m guessing he would be suing Fairey as well for copyright infringement of his Campbell Soup can collection.
All “hope” is not yet lost, but after only 14 days it has certainly traveled down a dark and dangerous path.
Will it finds its way back?
We can only “hope”.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Changing Change Changes
I congratulation President Obama on his dedication to the implementation of “change”.
In just a few short weeks the Obama administration has indeed begun fulfilling one of its dominant campaign promises and brought about some fairly significant “change”.
As a fiscal conservative I salute the president’s efforts to personally reduce the national deficit by enhancing the coffers of the IRS with some serious “change” through his cabinet nomination process.
Thanks to the presidents thoughtful and in depth cabinet post decisions, hundreds of thousands of dollars have “changed” from the personal bank accounts of Timothy Geithner, Tom Daschle and Nancy Killefer to the national bank account. The entire cabinet nomination process has “changed” this historic administration’s slogan from “Yes We Can’ to “Oops My Bad”.
The extended media coverage and political debate over the tax delinquencies of the now confirmed Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has brought about a “change” of heart from Tom Daschle and Nancy Killefer who both suffer from similar nonpayment of taxes issues. This will allow the president to “change” his picks for Secretary of Health and Human Services and the newly created post of Chief Performance Officer. I can only assume that the Obama administration cabinet vetting process will “change” to a more in-depth review of a potential nominee’s background beyond checking for unpaid parking tickets prior to announcing their names to the press.
This repetition of tax delinquent nominees has allowed Democrats in the House and Senate to “change” their opinion as to what is acceptable behavior for our country’s top officials. They have “changed” from a group that was outraged at a vice president who received legally owed deferred compensation from a previous employer to a party of “changing” stories and justifications regarding illegally omitted compensation owed to the government.
As one of his first acts, the new president signed an executive order on ethics that “changed” the rules as to how lobbyists could function within his administration. He stated that this order “represents a clean break from business as usual. As of today lobbyists will be subject to stricter limits than under any other administration in history. If you are a lobbyist entering my administration you will not be able to work on matters you lobbied on, or in the agencies you lobbied during that past two years.” Less than 48 hours later the president “changed” that executive order regarding a former Raytheon lobbyist and his pick for Deputy Defense Minister, William Lynn.
But the "change" doesn’t stop there. In his latest series of executive order signings, the president has “changed” the concept of the American middle class from the 91% of non-union private sector employees to the 9% of union member employees. He has also effectively “changed” the way we will deal with our global trading partners by instituting protectionism back into American trade policy. This will undoubtedly “change” the way these trading partners deal with American business and allow for significant “change” in our ability to do business with them.
President Obama has signed an order to “change” Guantanamo Bay from a safe and effective place to detain some of the world’s most dangerous men to prime piece of vacant Cuban property. He did so without having a firm plan as to how to “change” the detainee’s geographic location, but unless things “change” he said he should have another executive order forthcoming regarding that “change”. He “changed” the rules of interrogation and keeping detainees in secret locations but when it came to the policy of covert abductions known as rendition, the president “changed” his mind and will allow that practice to continue. This brought about the unexpected “change” of diminished support from the far left faction of the Democrat party so the Obama administration will undoubtedly “change” the way it describes the practice or the name used to describe it.
But even with all this “change” the greatest “change” had to come from the new Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, when she thanked her husband Bill at her swearing in ceremony and expressed her gratitude by saying “"I am so grateful to him for a lifetime of……………. all kinds of experiences."
Grateful? Now that’s “change”!
In just a few short weeks the Obama administration has indeed begun fulfilling one of its dominant campaign promises and brought about some fairly significant “change”.
As a fiscal conservative I salute the president’s efforts to personally reduce the national deficit by enhancing the coffers of the IRS with some serious “change” through his cabinet nomination process.
Thanks to the presidents thoughtful and in depth cabinet post decisions, hundreds of thousands of dollars have “changed” from the personal bank accounts of Timothy Geithner, Tom Daschle and Nancy Killefer to the national bank account. The entire cabinet nomination process has “changed” this historic administration’s slogan from “Yes We Can’ to “Oops My Bad”.
The extended media coverage and political debate over the tax delinquencies of the now confirmed Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has brought about a “change” of heart from Tom Daschle and Nancy Killefer who both suffer from similar nonpayment of taxes issues. This will allow the president to “change” his picks for Secretary of Health and Human Services and the newly created post of Chief Performance Officer. I can only assume that the Obama administration cabinet vetting process will “change” to a more in-depth review of a potential nominee’s background beyond checking for unpaid parking tickets prior to announcing their names to the press.
This repetition of tax delinquent nominees has allowed Democrats in the House and Senate to “change” their opinion as to what is acceptable behavior for our country’s top officials. They have “changed” from a group that was outraged at a vice president who received legally owed deferred compensation from a previous employer to a party of “changing” stories and justifications regarding illegally omitted compensation owed to the government.
As one of his first acts, the new president signed an executive order on ethics that “changed” the rules as to how lobbyists could function within his administration. He stated that this order “represents a clean break from business as usual. As of today lobbyists will be subject to stricter limits than under any other administration in history. If you are a lobbyist entering my administration you will not be able to work on matters you lobbied on, or in the agencies you lobbied during that past two years.” Less than 48 hours later the president “changed” that executive order regarding a former Raytheon lobbyist and his pick for Deputy Defense Minister, William Lynn.
But the "change" doesn’t stop there. In his latest series of executive order signings, the president has “changed” the concept of the American middle class from the 91% of non-union private sector employees to the 9% of union member employees. He has also effectively “changed” the way we will deal with our global trading partners by instituting protectionism back into American trade policy. This will undoubtedly “change” the way these trading partners deal with American business and allow for significant “change” in our ability to do business with them.
President Obama has signed an order to “change” Guantanamo Bay from a safe and effective place to detain some of the world’s most dangerous men to prime piece of vacant Cuban property. He did so without having a firm plan as to how to “change” the detainee’s geographic location, but unless things “change” he said he should have another executive order forthcoming regarding that “change”. He “changed” the rules of interrogation and keeping detainees in secret locations but when it came to the policy of covert abductions known as rendition, the president “changed” his mind and will allow that practice to continue. This brought about the unexpected “change” of diminished support from the far left faction of the Democrat party so the Obama administration will undoubtedly “change” the way it describes the practice or the name used to describe it.
But even with all this “change” the greatest “change” had to come from the new Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, when she thanked her husband Bill at her swearing in ceremony and expressed her gratitude by saying “"I am so grateful to him for a lifetime of……………. all kinds of experiences."
Grateful? Now that’s “change”!
Monday, February 2, 2009
The One Term Proposition
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana, The Life of Reason or The Phases of Human Progress: Reason in Common Sense
In his recent interview on NBC, President Obama seemed to come to terms with the fact that for the first time in his life he will be judged by results rather than rhetoric. In discussing the gloomy economic forecast as it relates to his maintaining residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue the president stated that “I will be held accountable. I’ve got four years and ……A year from now, I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress, but there is still going to be some pain out there……If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one term proposition.”
This hardly sounds like the same self-confident campaigner who only a few months ago seemed to have all the answers, now stating “there are no silver bullets to this”.
Of course he is correct in his admission that there will still be some very trying days, weeks and months ahead as the economy continues to ebb and flow in a spastic seizure. But the disturbing insight into his grasp of economic reality came when the president went on to say that the reason banks are in the condition they are in is because they are still suffering from a “hangover” brought about by a “binge” of risk as if this binge was of their own design.
What the president failed to mention was that this “binge” of risk was sanctioned and instituted by the Democrats during the Clinton administration. In 1999 Fannie May was directed to begin a pilot program to increase mortgages held by higher risk minorities and low income consumers.
''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, then Fannie Mae's chairman and CEO. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
Even the news print media arm of the Democratic Party The New York Times reported on September 30, 1999 that “In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.”
Let us put aside the fact that it was Democrats led by Barney Frank that effectively tabled legislation that would have required oversight into the now infamous book cooking done by Mr. Raines at Fannie May, calling it a “solution in search of a problem”. But it was the congressionally directed infecting of the credit markets that has led banks into crisis and in some cases to the point of no return.
I have yet to see any economic authority that is looking at this recession lasting three years. In their recent report asserting the likely ineffectiveness of the currently proposed trillion dollar economic stimulus package, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office stated that their forecast was to see improvement prior to the 18 months, calling into question the fact that most of this package would be spent after that. Yet this president, after only 10 days in office, chooses to make his benchmark three years and blame banks for the credit crisis that we are now going to have to “dig ourselves out of”. I doubt he could have set the bar any lower.
Blaming banks for “mismanagement and huge risk taking” as he did during his interview was catchy banter for the campaign trail, but it is a very inaccurate and misguided perception to be avowing as president. Unless this administration is willing to recognize how we got here they will have very little hope of finding their way back to a sound economy, even in three years. Repeating the same mistakes will not lead to recovery. It will only increase the number of non-issues that Democrats will attempt to blame.
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” – Albert Einstein.
I couldn’t have said it better myself.
In his recent interview on NBC, President Obama seemed to come to terms with the fact that for the first time in his life he will be judged by results rather than rhetoric. In discussing the gloomy economic forecast as it relates to his maintaining residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue the president stated that “I will be held accountable. I’ve got four years and ……A year from now, I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress, but there is still going to be some pain out there……If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one term proposition.”
This hardly sounds like the same self-confident campaigner who only a few months ago seemed to have all the answers, now stating “there are no silver bullets to this”.
Of course he is correct in his admission that there will still be some very trying days, weeks and months ahead as the economy continues to ebb and flow in a spastic seizure. But the disturbing insight into his grasp of economic reality came when the president went on to say that the reason banks are in the condition they are in is because they are still suffering from a “hangover” brought about by a “binge” of risk as if this binge was of their own design.
What the president failed to mention was that this “binge” of risk was sanctioned and instituted by the Democrats during the Clinton administration. In 1999 Fannie May was directed to begin a pilot program to increase mortgages held by higher risk minorities and low income consumers.
''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, then Fannie Mae's chairman and CEO. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
Even the news print media arm of the Democratic Party The New York Times reported on September 30, 1999 that “In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.”
Let us put aside the fact that it was Democrats led by Barney Frank that effectively tabled legislation that would have required oversight into the now infamous book cooking done by Mr. Raines at Fannie May, calling it a “solution in search of a problem”. But it was the congressionally directed infecting of the credit markets that has led banks into crisis and in some cases to the point of no return.
I have yet to see any economic authority that is looking at this recession lasting three years. In their recent report asserting the likely ineffectiveness of the currently proposed trillion dollar economic stimulus package, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office stated that their forecast was to see improvement prior to the 18 months, calling into question the fact that most of this package would be spent after that. Yet this president, after only 10 days in office, chooses to make his benchmark three years and blame banks for the credit crisis that we are now going to have to “dig ourselves out of”. I doubt he could have set the bar any lower.
Blaming banks for “mismanagement and huge risk taking” as he did during his interview was catchy banter for the campaign trail, but it is a very inaccurate and misguided perception to be avowing as president. Unless this administration is willing to recognize how we got here they will have very little hope of finding their way back to a sound economy, even in three years. Repeating the same mistakes will not lead to recovery. It will only increase the number of non-issues that Democrats will attempt to blame.
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” – Albert Einstein.
I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
The Big Dance
You got to dance with the guy that brought you.
Another old expression that seems to be almost prophetic in its accuracy of the famed community activist turned leader of the free world Barack Hussein Obama.
As news wires were jammed with dismal economic statistics showing the worst quarterly economic downturn in 25 years the new president broke out his already well used pen and signed another series of executive orders strengthening organized labor at the expense of wage paying business and the 91% of private sector workers that do not belong to a union.
He also announced the formation of a task force assigned to address the problems of the American middle-class. This task force will be chaired by Vice President Joe Biden, giving him a chance to spend some time away from the talk show circuit and live microphones.
The president stated the reasoning behind his actions was to “level the playing field” for labor unions in their ongoing struggles with employers. The drawback in that reasoning is apparent to even the casual observer if one takes more than 5 minutes to review recent history. Labor unions are not looking for a level playing field. On a level playing field the union loses.
This is not to say that the mentality of reality the union’s posses can’t change. But thanks to this president and his administration of change, the unions are free to do anything but.
Using some of his old community activist rhetoric, the president said “I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem. To me it’s part of the solution. You cannot have a strong middle class without a strong labor movement.” The inability to accept or understand the role organized labor has played in the destruction of industries such as the Big Three Automotive manufacturers or the self-serving damage unrealistic union contracts have done over the years to industry as a whole is a very dangerous bliss. While this position is to be expected from a community activist it is beyond reproach for a president of all the people in the midst of a very serious recession. If you don’t understand that unrealistic union contracts are a problem, just take a ride through Detroit or any other major industrialized union metropolis.
It was back on February 20, 2008 that Teamsters Union President James Hoffa publicly made his endorsement of Barack Hussein Obama for president. He was the very first major union official to do so. Hoffa was an invited guest to this signing ceremony and said “It’s a new day for workers. We finally have a White House that is dedicated to working with us to rebuild our middle class. Hope for the American dream is being restored.”
This blatant quid pro quo by Obama is an obvious attempt to use all the governmental power necessary to continue pounding a square peg into a round hole. As Obama has already stated during his campaign he will use any means necessary to punish companies that send work out of the country, and he is now making it clear that he will also use his power to dictate the wages and benefits businesses will pay for in house work as well, effectively eliminating any possibility for these businesses to compete in a globally competitive market.
The real problem this community activist president fails to address, or possibly even understand, is that with the exception of those who work directly for the union, businesses pay wages not unions. In order for businesses to survive and continue to pay wages they must be competitive on a global scale. Historically unions have completely disregarded this simple fact and have focused solely on their own short term interest rather than the long term viability of the company that employs the workers.
One can hope that the president will gain some influence on just how unrealistic the unions will choose to be. But it is unlikely he would throw away any of the support he will undoubtedly garner by taking any action that could be construed as less than 100 percent union support.
His next executive order will likely direct some sort of protectionist legislation such as his most recent folly of insisting that all steel used in his forthcoming ill-conceived infrastructure rebuilding be made only in America. This legislation will undoubtedly bring retaliation from our global trading partners and will only further damage the valuable export business of the unionized manufacturers.
James P. Hoffa made a bold move in backing Barack H. Obama for president. But the strings attached to that endorsement are sufficient to choke any hope of a speedy economic recovery.
“Present day society is wholly based on the exploitation of the vast masses of the working class by a tiny minority of the population, the class of landowners and that of the capitalists. It is a slave society, since the “free” workers, who all their life work for the capitalists, are “entitled” only to such means of subsistence as are essential for the maintenance of slaves who produce profit, for the safeguarding and perpetuation of capitalist slavery” - Vladimir Lenin - 1905
Another old expression that seems to be almost prophetic in its accuracy of the famed community activist turned leader of the free world Barack Hussein Obama.
As news wires were jammed with dismal economic statistics showing the worst quarterly economic downturn in 25 years the new president broke out his already well used pen and signed another series of executive orders strengthening organized labor at the expense of wage paying business and the 91% of private sector workers that do not belong to a union.
He also announced the formation of a task force assigned to address the problems of the American middle-class. This task force will be chaired by Vice President Joe Biden, giving him a chance to spend some time away from the talk show circuit and live microphones.
The president stated the reasoning behind his actions was to “level the playing field” for labor unions in their ongoing struggles with employers. The drawback in that reasoning is apparent to even the casual observer if one takes more than 5 minutes to review recent history. Labor unions are not looking for a level playing field. On a level playing field the union loses.
This is not to say that the mentality of reality the union’s posses can’t change. But thanks to this president and his administration of change, the unions are free to do anything but.
Using some of his old community activist rhetoric, the president said “I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem. To me it’s part of the solution. You cannot have a strong middle class without a strong labor movement.” The inability to accept or understand the role organized labor has played in the destruction of industries such as the Big Three Automotive manufacturers or the self-serving damage unrealistic union contracts have done over the years to industry as a whole is a very dangerous bliss. While this position is to be expected from a community activist it is beyond reproach for a president of all the people in the midst of a very serious recession. If you don’t understand that unrealistic union contracts are a problem, just take a ride through Detroit or any other major industrialized union metropolis.
It was back on February 20, 2008 that Teamsters Union President James Hoffa publicly made his endorsement of Barack Hussein Obama for president. He was the very first major union official to do so. Hoffa was an invited guest to this signing ceremony and said “It’s a new day for workers. We finally have a White House that is dedicated to working with us to rebuild our middle class. Hope for the American dream is being restored.”
This blatant quid pro quo by Obama is an obvious attempt to use all the governmental power necessary to continue pounding a square peg into a round hole. As Obama has already stated during his campaign he will use any means necessary to punish companies that send work out of the country, and he is now making it clear that he will also use his power to dictate the wages and benefits businesses will pay for in house work as well, effectively eliminating any possibility for these businesses to compete in a globally competitive market.
The real problem this community activist president fails to address, or possibly even understand, is that with the exception of those who work directly for the union, businesses pay wages not unions. In order for businesses to survive and continue to pay wages they must be competitive on a global scale. Historically unions have completely disregarded this simple fact and have focused solely on their own short term interest rather than the long term viability of the company that employs the workers.
One can hope that the president will gain some influence on just how unrealistic the unions will choose to be. But it is unlikely he would throw away any of the support he will undoubtedly garner by taking any action that could be construed as less than 100 percent union support.
His next executive order will likely direct some sort of protectionist legislation such as his most recent folly of insisting that all steel used in his forthcoming ill-conceived infrastructure rebuilding be made only in America. This legislation will undoubtedly bring retaliation from our global trading partners and will only further damage the valuable export business of the unionized manufacturers.
James P. Hoffa made a bold move in backing Barack H. Obama for president. But the strings attached to that endorsement are sufficient to choke any hope of a speedy economic recovery.
“Present day society is wholly based on the exploitation of the vast masses of the working class by a tiny minority of the population, the class of landowners and that of the capitalists. It is a slave society, since the “free” workers, who all their life work for the capitalists, are “entitled” only to such means of subsistence as are essential for the maintenance of slaves who produce profit, for the safeguarding and perpetuation of capitalist slavery” - Vladimir Lenin - 1905
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
