Posts
I wish I could write this well!
Adventure at the Children's Hour
By Wesley Pruden
OPINION/ANALYSIS:
Barack Obama's excellent New York adventure was all he hoped it would be. He got to make a speech, pave the streets of Manhattan with harmless platitudes, bask in the admiration of various Third World mediocrities and hear himself nominated to be president of the United States for life. "It was an excellent day," he said as night fell, as it always must.
All in all, he did no particular harm, and we can all be grateful for that. The messiah had a rough summer, and he was entitled to the pleasure of presiding, if only for a day, over the Children's Hour.
Moammar Gadhafi, the maximum leader of Libya, floated the idea of Mr. Obama as "president for life," and why not? If "president for life" was good enough for Papa Doc and Haiti, why not for the USA? Marion Barry was once thought to be mayor of the District of Columbia for life, and he may not be done yet.
The White House, for lack of imagination, declined to endorse the Gadhafi endorsement. But Robert Gibbs, the president's press secretary, got into the spirit of the occasion: "Leaving aside the amendments to the Constitution that the president agrees with wholeheartedly, it would be an interesting concept to continue being president beyond one's natural life."
Such a precedent for extending the administrations of presidents after they're dead might suit an ever-cranky presidential constituency. Barry Goldwater once observed that Congress should repeal, not enact, a law every day. A dead president could do no harm, and a corpse would be refreshing (we've had reasonable facsimiles of the dead in the Oval Office before). Rutherford B. Hayes could live again. So, too, Chester Alan Arthur, our only president without a surname.
With President Obama presiding over "the historic session," the U.N. Security Council approved unanimously an American resolution committing all nations to work for - please sit up straight for this - a world free of nuclear weapons. Somewhere in the fine print was a clause praising small babies, little puppies and chocolate candy. The resolution was so harmless that even Russia, China and several "developing" nations (the usual euphemism for the socialist satraps) voted for the resolution.
But Col. Gadhafi over at the General Assembly was clearly the star of the day, twinkling brightly in the U.N. firmament of burned-out comets, asteroids, meteoroids and hemorrhoids. The temporary chairman of the assembly was a Libyan, who told the heads of states lined up to speak that they could have no more than 15 minutes each, or expect the dreaded hook. The diplomat, Ali Treki, having become warmly and affectionately attached to his head, was careful not to apply the rule to Col. Gadhafi, who rambled on for 96 minutes. The colonel was the most entertaining speaker of the day, declaiming against swine flu, which he said was invented in the labs of the drug companies to assure markets for their vaccines, or by "the military" as a weapon of war. He demanded that the investigation into the Kennedy assassination be reopened. The colonel was introduced as "the king of kings," and he endorsed President Obama as "the son of Africa." Whether he meant to include himself in the ranks of the "birthers," we do not know.
A good time was clearly had by all. Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain and President Nicolas Sarkozy of France did a little polished romping and refined stomping, as befit the august venue. M Sarkozy scolded North Korea and Iran for being "obstacles to a safer world," and Mr. Brown said the Security Council should impose "far tougher sanctions" than the sanctions that have not made the Iranians behave themselves. If the far tougher sanctions don't work, either, President Ahmadinejad, who was walked out on during his speech to the General Assembly, should expect to get a strong letter of protest.
Mr. Obama, pleased that the Security Council resolution reflects the eloquence of his earlier speech last April in Prague, said the United States would host a reunion of U.N. freeloaders next spring to "advance" and "assist" all the nations to embrace the vision of the Security Council. The State Department will supply an updated list of limousine services, massage parlors and four-star restaurants. The U.N. may never actually get anything done, but the faithful representatives of the nations of the world can never be accused of lacking resolution, and always in quadruplicate.
Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
We the People of the United States of America...
While a truly eloquent and effective argument, at least on it's surface, we are assuming that the People of the United States know their rights under the Constitution or even care. I'm not even sure if schools are teaching the Constitution in classrooms. The Liberal Left doesn't want us to be too informed. Besides, "His Obamaness" said it himself that the Constiution was a "dead document" and that it outlined what the government "couldn't do TO you but it doesn't say what the government should do FOR you", and that's the rub, no? The Libs assertion that they need to "do for us" and our continued acceptance of this paternal government and that it is indeed the government's job to protect us from ourselves. Thanks Rich for the forward.
The Truth About the Health Care Bills
Posted August 12, 2009
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.
To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.
However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.
For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
The Truth About the Health Care Bills
Posted August 12, 2009
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.
To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.
However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.
For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Nothing is Assured but Death and Taxes!
But yet no one can get the Swiss to give up information on the millions of dollars of property stolen from the Holocaust victims by the Nazi government and stored in their vaults and protected accounts!
WASHINGTON – Swiss banking giant UBS AG agreed Wednesday to turn over to the IRS the details of 4,450 accounts suspected of holding undeclared assets by American customers, ending an intense trans-Atlantic legal fight.
IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman said the accounts held $18 billion in assets at one time. Many have since been closed, he said.
The deal will give the Internal Revenue Service thousands of long-sought account names, and is expected to provide even more UBS clients who voluntarily disclose their financial details to the agency, Shulman said.
WASHINGTON – Swiss banking giant UBS AG agreed Wednesday to turn over to the IRS the details of 4,450 accounts suspected of holding undeclared assets by American customers, ending an intense trans-Atlantic legal fight.
IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman said the accounts held $18 billion in assets at one time. Many have since been closed, he said.
The deal will give the Internal Revenue Service thousands of long-sought account names, and is expected to provide even more UBS clients who voluntarily disclose their financial details to the agency, Shulman said.
Amen! And Pass the Ammunition!
FIRST BOOK OF GOVERNMENT ....PSALM 2009
Obama is the shepherd I did not want.
He leadeth me beside the still factories.
He restoreth my faith in the Republican party.
He guideth me in the path of unemployment for his party's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the bread line, I shall fear no hunger, for his bailouts are with me.
He has anointed my income with taxes, My expenses runneth over.
Surely, poverty and hard living will follow me all the days of my life, And I will live in a mortgaged home forever.
I am glad I am American, I am glad that I am free. But I wish I was a dog ...And Obama was a tree.
Obama is the shepherd I did not want.
He leadeth me beside the still factories.
He restoreth my faith in the Republican party.
He guideth me in the path of unemployment for his party's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the bread line, I shall fear no hunger, for his bailouts are with me.
He has anointed my income with taxes, My expenses runneth over.
Surely, poverty and hard living will follow me all the days of my life, And I will live in a mortgaged home forever.
I am glad I am American, I am glad that I am free. But I wish I was a dog ...And Obama was a tree.
Why Should I Respect Your President? You Didn't Respect Mine.
I wish I could say I wrote much of this...
I have noted that many elected officials, both Democrats and Republicans, called upon America to unite behind Obama. Well, I want to make it clear to all who will listen that I AM NOT uniting behind Obama!
I will respect the Office which he holds, and I will acknowledge his abilities as an orator and wordsmith and pray for him, BUT that is it. I have begun today to see what I can do to make sure that He is a one-term President!
Why am I doing this? It is because I do not share Obama's vision or Value system for America; I do not share his Abortion beliefs; I do not share his radical Marxist's concept of re-distributing wealth; I do not share his stated views on raising taxes on those who make $150,000+ (the ceiling has been changed three times since August); I do not share his view that America is Arrogant; I do not share his view that America is not a Christian Nation; I do not share his view that the military should be reduced by 25%; I do not share his view of amnesty and giving more to illegal's than American Citizens who need help; I do not share his views on homosexuality and his definition of marriage; I do not share his views that Radical Islam is our friend and Israel is our enemy who should give up any land; I do not share his spiritual beliefs (at least the ones he has made public); I do not share his beliefs on how to re-work the healthcare system in America; I do not share his Strategic views of the Middle East, and I certainly do not share his plan to sit down with terrorist regimes such as Iran.
Bottom line, my America is vastly different from Obama's, and I have a higher obligation to my Country and my God to do what is Right! For eight (8) years, the Liberals in our Society, led by numerous entertainers who would have no platform and no real credibility but for their celebrity status, have attacked former President Bush, his family, and his spiritual beliefs! They have not moved toward the center in their beliefs and their philosophies, and they never came together nor compromised their personal beliefs for the betterment of our Country! They have portrayed my America as a land where everything is tolerated except being intolerant! They have been a vocal and irreverent minority for years; they have mocked and attacked the very core values so important to the founding and growth of our Country! They have made every effort to remove the name of God or Jesus Christ from our Society! They have challenged capital punishment, the right to bear firearms, and the most basic principles of our criminal code; they have attacked one of the most fundamental of all Freedoms, the right of free speech! Unite behind Obama? Never!
I am sure many of you who read this think that I am going overboard, but I refuse to retreat one more inch. PRESIDENT BUSH made many mistakes during his Presidency, and I am not sure how history will judge him. However, I believe that he weighed his decisions in light of the long established Judeo-Christian principles of our Founding Fathers!!! Majority rules in America and I will honor the concept; however, I will fight with all of my power to be a voice in opposition to Obama and "his goals for America." I am going to be a thorn in the side of those who, if left unchecked, will destroy our Country!! Any more compromise is more defeat! I pray that the results of this election will wake up many who have sat on the sidelines and allowed the Socialist-Marxist anti-God crowd to slowly change so much of what has been good in America!
"Error of Opinion may be tolerated where Reason is left free to combat it." (Thomas Jefferson)
'If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.'
- Ronald Reagan
I have noted that many elected officials, both Democrats and Republicans, called upon America to unite behind Obama. Well, I want to make it clear to all who will listen that I AM NOT uniting behind Obama!
I will respect the Office which he holds, and I will acknowledge his abilities as an orator and wordsmith and pray for him, BUT that is it. I have begun today to see what I can do to make sure that He is a one-term President!
Why am I doing this? It is because I do not share Obama's vision or Value system for America; I do not share his Abortion beliefs; I do not share his radical Marxist's concept of re-distributing wealth; I do not share his stated views on raising taxes on those who make $150,000+ (the ceiling has been changed three times since August); I do not share his view that America is Arrogant; I do not share his view that America is not a Christian Nation; I do not share his view that the military should be reduced by 25%; I do not share his view of amnesty and giving more to illegal's than American Citizens who need help; I do not share his views on homosexuality and his definition of marriage; I do not share his views that Radical Islam is our friend and Israel is our enemy who should give up any land; I do not share his spiritual beliefs (at least the ones he has made public); I do not share his beliefs on how to re-work the healthcare system in America; I do not share his Strategic views of the Middle East, and I certainly do not share his plan to sit down with terrorist regimes such as Iran.
Bottom line, my America is vastly different from Obama's, and I have a higher obligation to my Country and my God to do what is Right! For eight (8) years, the Liberals in our Society, led by numerous entertainers who would have no platform and no real credibility but for their celebrity status, have attacked former President Bush, his family, and his spiritual beliefs! They have not moved toward the center in their beliefs and their philosophies, and they never came together nor compromised their personal beliefs for the betterment of our Country! They have portrayed my America as a land where everything is tolerated except being intolerant! They have been a vocal and irreverent minority for years; they have mocked and attacked the very core values so important to the founding and growth of our Country! They have made every effort to remove the name of God or Jesus Christ from our Society! They have challenged capital punishment, the right to bear firearms, and the most basic principles of our criminal code; they have attacked one of the most fundamental of all Freedoms, the right of free speech! Unite behind Obama? Never!
I am sure many of you who read this think that I am going overboard, but I refuse to retreat one more inch. PRESIDENT BUSH made many mistakes during his Presidency, and I am not sure how history will judge him. However, I believe that he weighed his decisions in light of the long established Judeo-Christian principles of our Founding Fathers!!! Majority rules in America and I will honor the concept; however, I will fight with all of my power to be a voice in opposition to Obama and "his goals for America." I am going to be a thorn in the side of those who, if left unchecked, will destroy our Country!! Any more compromise is more defeat! I pray that the results of this election will wake up many who have sat on the sidelines and allowed the Socialist-Marxist anti-God crowd to slowly change so much of what has been good in America!
"Error of Opinion may be tolerated where Reason is left free to combat it." (Thomas Jefferson)
'If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.'
- Ronald Reagan
Words from a Wise Man
It’s Not Wealth Redistribution… It’s Highway Robbery
You know we have this whole wealth redistribution all wrong. We tend to argue against Obama’s wealth redistribution with the ideas and arguments that he wants to take money from those of us that work and give it to those that don’t. That may be true in a small way but the real wealth redistribution happens on a much larger scale; money flowing to the special interests makes the money going to the “needy” and the bums look miniscule in comparison.
Consider the Environmental groups and their lobbiests pushing for all this so called renewable energy, wind turbines, solar cells, ethanol, biodoesel and others. The dollars going to these groups is astounding with little to no hope of a real solution to the problems they are supposedly targeting or for a payback from the investments. How about Acorn and their ilk? They were recipients of a large chunk of bailout money and what was that for again? Exactly what jobs were going to be created? Money flows out of Obama’s Washington to groups and social programs that will never ever return anything to the long term well being of this country except more debt and more people on the dole.
Now I know that anyone reading this might say; “well how is that any different than what the Republicans do when they favor business?”; in theory, none, but in results, plenty. Favors to business is often touted as evil because it puts money into the hands of money grubbing business men and we all know how evil those business men are right? I mean they take the money and use it to build factories, develop products, create jobs, and so on. I know I know they also pocket a whole bumch of it too. BUT and it’s a big but, a whole lot of it does indeed go to long term economic stability and growth because they actually produce something of value versus redistribute it to organizations and individuals that produce nothing but more load on all of us.We have to quit arguing wealth redistribution and start yelling about the highway robbery perpetrated on all of us. Think about it; why would anyone feel sorry for a guy that makes more than $250K per year? Most of the population is no where near that sort of figure so they most likely cannot even remotely feel sorry for those that are. Instead we need to argue that we are being robbed as a whole to benefit a paltry few and how those few don’t care about ANY and ALL of us that contribute. We need to call Obama out on the how his programs affect ALL of us not just the haves but also the have nots because the have nots will never have in Obama’s world.
Nick
You know we have this whole wealth redistribution all wrong. We tend to argue against Obama’s wealth redistribution with the ideas and arguments that he wants to take money from those of us that work and give it to those that don’t. That may be true in a small way but the real wealth redistribution happens on a much larger scale; money flowing to the special interests makes the money going to the “needy” and the bums look miniscule in comparison.
Consider the Environmental groups and their lobbiests pushing for all this so called renewable energy, wind turbines, solar cells, ethanol, biodoesel and others. The dollars going to these groups is astounding with little to no hope of a real solution to the problems they are supposedly targeting or for a payback from the investments. How about Acorn and their ilk? They were recipients of a large chunk of bailout money and what was that for again? Exactly what jobs were going to be created? Money flows out of Obama’s Washington to groups and social programs that will never ever return anything to the long term well being of this country except more debt and more people on the dole.
Now I know that anyone reading this might say; “well how is that any different than what the Republicans do when they favor business?”; in theory, none, but in results, plenty. Favors to business is often touted as evil because it puts money into the hands of money grubbing business men and we all know how evil those business men are right? I mean they take the money and use it to build factories, develop products, create jobs, and so on. I know I know they also pocket a whole bumch of it too. BUT and it’s a big but, a whole lot of it does indeed go to long term economic stability and growth because they actually produce something of value versus redistribute it to organizations and individuals that produce nothing but more load on all of us.We have to quit arguing wealth redistribution and start yelling about the highway robbery perpetrated on all of us. Think about it; why would anyone feel sorry for a guy that makes more than $250K per year? Most of the population is no where near that sort of figure so they most likely cannot even remotely feel sorry for those that are. Instead we need to argue that we are being robbed as a whole to benefit a paltry few and how those few don’t care about ANY and ALL of us that contribute. We need to call Obama out on the how his programs affect ALL of us not just the haves but also the have nots because the have nots will never have in Obama’s world.
Nick
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
I Love This Woman! I Don't Care Who Knows It!
Op-Ed in the Washington Post from my girl, Sarah Palin!
The 'Cap And Tax' Dead End
By Sarah Palin
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America's unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won't bring jobs. Our nation's debt is unsustainable, and the federal government's reach into the private sector is unprecedented.
Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:
I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.
American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president's cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.
There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn't lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.
Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.
In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.
The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.
The Americans hit hardest will be those already struggling to make ends meet. As the president eloquently puts it, their electricity bills will "necessarily skyrocket." So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year.
Even Warren Buffett, an ardent Obama supporter, admitted that under the cap-and-tax scheme, "poor people are going to pay a lot more for electricity."
We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today.
In Alaska, we are progressing on the largest private-sector energy project in history. Our 3,000-mile natural gas pipeline will transport hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of our clean natural gas to hungry markets across America. We can safely drill for U.S. oil offshore and in a tiny, 2,000-acre corner of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge if ever given the go-ahead by Washington bureaucrats.
Of course, Alaska is not the sole source of American energy. Many states have abundant coal, whose technology is continuously making it into a cleaner energy source. Westerners literally sit on mountains of oil and gas, and every state can consider the possibility of nuclear energy.
We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia? Make no mistake: President Obama's plan will result in the latter.
For so many reasons, we can't afford to kill responsible domestic energy production or clobber every American consumer with higher prices.
Can America produce more of its own energy through strategic investments that protect the environment, revive our economy and secure our nation?
Yes, we can. Just not with Barack Obama's energy cap-and-tax plan.
The 'Cap And Tax' Dead End
By Sarah Palin
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America's unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won't bring jobs. Our nation's debt is unsustainable, and the federal government's reach into the private sector is unprecedented.
Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:
I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.
American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president's cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.
There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn't lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.
Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.
In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.
The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.
The Americans hit hardest will be those already struggling to make ends meet. As the president eloquently puts it, their electricity bills will "necessarily skyrocket." So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year.
Even Warren Buffett, an ardent Obama supporter, admitted that under the cap-and-tax scheme, "poor people are going to pay a lot more for electricity."
We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today.
In Alaska, we are progressing on the largest private-sector energy project in history. Our 3,000-mile natural gas pipeline will transport hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of our clean natural gas to hungry markets across America. We can safely drill for U.S. oil offshore and in a tiny, 2,000-acre corner of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge if ever given the go-ahead by Washington bureaucrats.
Of course, Alaska is not the sole source of American energy. Many states have abundant coal, whose technology is continuously making it into a cleaner energy source. Westerners literally sit on mountains of oil and gas, and every state can consider the possibility of nuclear energy.
We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia? Make no mistake: President Obama's plan will result in the latter.
For so many reasons, we can't afford to kill responsible domestic energy production or clobber every American consumer with higher prices.
Can America produce more of its own energy through strategic investments that protect the environment, revive our economy and secure our nation?
Yes, we can. Just not with Barack Obama's energy cap-and-tax plan.
Not Always Good for the Gander
Forwarded by dad.
Blogs like this one will get criticized for suggesting or including articles that suggest a comparison to Hitler, Nazism or Socialism in the discussion of today's political climate. If it looks like a duck...
Pamela "Atlas" Geller began her publishing career at The New York DailyNews and subsequently took over operation of The New York Observer as Associate Publisher. She left The Observer after the birth of her fourthchild but remained involved in various projects including AmericanAssociates, Ben Gurion University and being Senior Vice-President Strategic Planning and Performance Evaluation at The Brandeis School
by Pam Geller
I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books in six languages, and have studied history all my life.I think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do notbelieve it is just a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes, these exist but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus. Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about 10 - 15years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two. We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why? We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why? We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (now violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose? Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, Social Security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am talking about.) The list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 x 10. And we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so. Now we have elected a man no one knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard himspeak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? (Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe is more important.) I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now. This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different powerstructure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again. I thought I would never be able to experience what the ordinary, moral German felt in the mid-1930s. In those times, the savior was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing.. What they did know was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory and promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and waved alot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully them into submission. And then he was duly elected to office, with a full-throttled economic crisis at hand[the Great Depression]. Slowly but surely he seized the controls of government power, department by department, person by person, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught what to think. How did he get the people on his side? He did it promising jobs to the jobless, money to the moneyless, and goodies for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - Did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .. . .. CHANGE. And the people surely got what they voted for. (Look it up if you think I am exaggerating.) Read your history books.. Many people objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and made fun of. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. Don't forget that Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. In less than six years - a shorter time span than just two terms of the U.S. presidency - it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them. Since many of you enjoy senior citizen status or will sometime in the not too distant future, I thought you might be interested in this information. IN GOD WE TRUST... Every body that is on this mailing list is either asenior citizen, is getting close or knows somebody that is. Most of you know by now that the Senate version (at least) of the"stimulus" bill includes provisions for extensive rationing of healthcare for senior citizens. The author of this part of the bill, former senator and tax evader, Tom Daschle was credited today by Bloomberg with the following statement. Bloomberg: "Daschle says health-care reform"will not be pain free." Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them."If this does not sufficiently raise your ire, just remember that Senators and Congressmen have their own healthcare plan that is first dollar or very low co-pay which they are guaranteed the remainder of their lives and are NOT subject to this new law if it passes. Please use the power of the internet to get this message out. Talk it up at the grassroots level. We have an election coming up in one year and nine months. We have the ability to address and reverse the dangerous direction the Obama administration and its allies have begun and in the interim, we can make our voices heard!
Blogs like this one will get criticized for suggesting or including articles that suggest a comparison to Hitler, Nazism or Socialism in the discussion of today's political climate. If it looks like a duck...
Pamela "Atlas" Geller began her publishing career at The New York DailyNews and subsequently took over operation of The New York Observer as Associate Publisher. She left The Observer after the birth of her fourthchild but remained involved in various projects including AmericanAssociates, Ben Gurion University and being Senior Vice-President Strategic Planning and Performance Evaluation at The Brandeis School
by Pam Geller
I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books in six languages, and have studied history all my life.I think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do notbelieve it is just a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes, these exist but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus. Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about 10 - 15years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two. We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why? We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why? We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (now violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose? Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, Social Security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am talking about.) The list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 x 10. And we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so. Now we have elected a man no one knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard himspeak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? (Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe is more important.) I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now. This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different powerstructure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again. I thought I would never be able to experience what the ordinary, moral German felt in the mid-1930s. In those times, the savior was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing.. What they did know was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory and promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and waved alot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully them into submission. And then he was duly elected to office, with a full-throttled economic crisis at hand[the Great Depression]. Slowly but surely he seized the controls of government power, department by department, person by person, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught what to think. How did he get the people on his side? He did it promising jobs to the jobless, money to the moneyless, and goodies for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - Did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .. . .. CHANGE. And the people surely got what they voted for. (Look it up if you think I am exaggerating.) Read your history books.. Many people objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and made fun of. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. Don't forget that Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. In less than six years - a shorter time span than just two terms of the U.S. presidency - it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them. Since many of you enjoy senior citizen status or will sometime in the not too distant future, I thought you might be interested in this information. IN GOD WE TRUST... Every body that is on this mailing list is either asenior citizen, is getting close or knows somebody that is. Most of you know by now that the Senate version (at least) of the"stimulus" bill includes provisions for extensive rationing of healthcare for senior citizens. The author of this part of the bill, former senator and tax evader, Tom Daschle was credited today by Bloomberg with the following statement. Bloomberg: "Daschle says health-care reform"will not be pain free." Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them."If this does not sufficiently raise your ire, just remember that Senators and Congressmen have their own healthcare plan that is first dollar or very low co-pay which they are guaranteed the remainder of their lives and are NOT subject to this new law if it passes. Please use the power of the internet to get this message out. Talk it up at the grassroots level. We have an election coming up in one year and nine months. We have the ability to address and reverse the dangerous direction the Obama administration and its allies have begun and in the interim, we can make our voices heard!
Monday, July 13, 2009
545 Vs. 300 million
Can't verify that Charley Reese wrote this, but it doesn't matter, I like the sentiment and all should read it, no matter who the author is!!
*******************************************************************
Here's some sobering thoughts - and it's not going to get any better in the near future!!
545 vs 300,000,000
EVERY CITIZEN NEEDS TO READ THIS AND THINK ABOUT WHAT THIS JOURNALIST HAS SCRIPTED IN THIS MESSAGE. READ IT AND THEN REALLY THINK ABOUT OUR CURRENT POLITICAL DEBACLE.
545 PEOPLE
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason.. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red ..
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.
Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charley Reese has been a journalist for 49 years and is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
*******************************************************************
This might be funny if it weren't so darned true.
Be sure to read all the way to the end:
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for peanuts
Anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid.
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge T ax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Ser vice FeeTax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge=2 0Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
And I still have to 'press 1' for English!?
*******************************************************************
Here's some sobering thoughts - and it's not going to get any better in the near future!!
545 vs 300,000,000
EVERY CITIZEN NEEDS TO READ THIS AND THINK ABOUT WHAT THIS JOURNALIST HAS SCRIPTED IN THIS MESSAGE. READ IT AND THEN REALLY THINK ABOUT OUR CURRENT POLITICAL DEBACLE.
545 PEOPLE
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason.. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red ..
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.
Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charley Reese has been a journalist for 49 years and is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
*******************************************************************
This might be funny if it weren't so darned true.
Be sure to read all the way to the end:
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for peanuts
Anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid.
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge T ax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Ser vice FeeTax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge=2 0Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
And I still have to 'press 1' for English!?
Thursday, July 2, 2009
O Say Can You See; By the Dawn's Early Light
Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men
who signed the Declaration of Independence?
Five signers were captured by the British as traitors,
and tortured before they died.
Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.
Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army;
another had two sons captured.
Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or
hardships of the Revolutionary War.
They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes,
and their sacred honor. What kind of men were they?
Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists.
Eleven were merchants,
nine were farmers and large plantation owners;
men of means, well educated,
but they signed the Declaration of Independence
knowing full well that the penalty would be death if
they were captured.
Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and
trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the
British Navy. He sold his home and properties to
pay his debts, and died in rags.
Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British
that he was forced to move his family almost constantly.
He served in the Congress without pay, and his family
was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him,
and poverty was his reward.
Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer,
Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton.
At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that
the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson
home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General
George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed,
and Nelson died bankrupt.
Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed.
The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months.
John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying.
Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill
were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests
and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his
children vanished.
So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and silently thank these patriots. It's not much to ask for the price they paid.
Remember: freedom is never free!
Tyranny is still tyranny even when it is wrapped up in comfort and security.
Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness] it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government... Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independence
who signed the Declaration of Independence?
Five signers were captured by the British as traitors,
and tortured before they died.
Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.
Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army;
another had two sons captured.
Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or
hardships of the Revolutionary War.
They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes,
and their sacred honor. What kind of men were they?
Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists.
Eleven were merchants,
nine were farmers and large plantation owners;
men of means, well educated,
but they signed the Declaration of Independence
knowing full well that the penalty would be death if
they were captured.
Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and
trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the
British Navy. He sold his home and properties to
pay his debts, and died in rags.
Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British
that he was forced to move his family almost constantly.
He served in the Congress without pay, and his family
was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him,
and poverty was his reward.
Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer,
Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton.
At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that
the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson
home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General
George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed,
and Nelson died bankrupt.
Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed.
The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months.
John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying.
Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill
were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests
and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his
children vanished.
So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and silently thank these patriots. It's not much to ask for the price they paid.
Remember: freedom is never free!
Tyranny is still tyranny even when it is wrapped up in comfort and security.
Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness] it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government... Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independence
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
London Bridge is Falling Down, Michelle O-Bama
On Sunday, President Obama flew back to the United States on Air Force One. His wife, two daughters and her mother did a bit of shopping in Paris before taking their own Boeing 757 (C-32) http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j191/mikesamerica/mikesamerica2/?action=view¤t64130.jpg over to London to do some sight seeing. We all remember Obama's admonishment to corporate CEO's in February: <http://www.ktnv.com/Global/story.asp?S27680> "You can't get corporate jets, you can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers dime." Apparently that doesn't apply to his wife.
The London Times <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6466571.ece> opened it's description of Michelle's visit this way: Motorcycle outriders, armoured Chevrolets and bullet-headed men in raincoats criss-crossed London yesterday as Michelle Obama and her daughters spent a second day on an unofficial visit to the capital. The Times went on to describe that when Michelle and the girls arrived at Westminster Abbey, the building was closed to tourists with people already in told to "wait against the wall." An American visiting the Abbey said "Right then I knew it was probably someone from our 'royal family'."
Michelle's motorcade shut down the London street above as the First Lady of the World and her children go for Fish and Chips at a pub in Mayfair. The entourage inside the restaurant was 15 people while dozens more wait outside. Include the dozens of Air Force personnel to fly and service the plane, embassy personnel and other staff and we are talking about a serious expenditure of tax payer dollars. Meanwhile, millions of Americans have lost their jobs and won't be able to take their family on a summer holiday. Despite their circumstances they'll still be expected to fork over the tax dollars to pay for Michelle's trip.
The London Times <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6466571.ece> opened it's description of Michelle's visit this way: Motorcycle outriders, armoured Chevrolets and bullet-headed men in raincoats criss-crossed London yesterday as Michelle Obama and her daughters spent a second day on an unofficial visit to the capital. The Times went on to describe that when Michelle and the girls arrived at Westminster Abbey, the building was closed to tourists with people already in told to "wait against the wall." An American visiting the Abbey said "Right then I knew it was probably someone from our 'royal family'."
Michelle's motorcade shut down the London street above as the First Lady of the World and her children go for Fish and Chips at a pub in Mayfair. The entourage inside the restaurant was 15 people while dozens more wait outside. Include the dozens of Air Force personnel to fly and service the plane, embassy personnel and other staff and we are talking about a serious expenditure of tax payer dollars. Meanwhile, millions of Americans have lost their jobs and won't be able to take their family on a summer holiday. Despite their circumstances they'll still be expected to fork over the tax dollars to pay for Michelle's trip.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Trying to Screw the Middle Class Again - and We Didn't Even Get Dinner First!
Don't tell me that I will be able to keep my private insurance. Struggling businesses in this country aren't going to continue to pay insurance benefits to their employees, leave alone the employee's dependents, when the government is socializing healthcare (or what will be left of healthcare). 16% of the population is without insurance; 16%. The "one payer" system the current administration is fooling us with WILL take away from the many AND still not satisfy the needs of the few. The middle class will suffer under government run healthcare.If your employer does keep insurance benefits, you will be paying your part of your health insurance AND the higher taxes required to pay for the government system! Don't tell me I can keep my private insurance. I can't afford to!
http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=92743707866&h=no4jX&u=j419j&ref=nf
http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=92743707866&h=no4jX&u=j419j&ref=nf
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
I've Had Enough of the UN Running This Country!
Wall Street Journal
OPINION MAY 22, 2009
The Climate-Industrial Complex:
Some businesses see nothing but profits in the green movement.
By BJORN LOMBORG
Some business leaders are cozying up with politicians and scientists to demand swift, drastic action on global warming. This is a new twist on a very old practice: companies using public policy to line their own pockets.
The tight relationship between the groups echoes the relationship among weapons makers, researchers and the U.S. military during the Cold War. President Dwight Eisenhower famously warned about the might of the "military-industrial complex," cautioning that "the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." He worried that "there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties."
This is certainly true of climate change. We are told that very expensive carbon regulations are the only way to respond to global warming, despite ample evidence that this approach does not pass a basic cost-benefit test. We must ask whether a "climate-industrial complex" is emerging, pressing taxpayers to fork over money to please those who stand to gain.
This phenomenon will be on display at the World Business Summit on Climate Change in Copenhagen this weekend. The organizers -- the Copenhagen Climate Council -- hope to push political leaders into more drastic promises when they negotiate the Kyoto Protocol's replacement in December.
The opening keynote address is to be delivered by Al Gore, who actually represents all three groups: He is a politician, a campaigner and the chair of a green private-equity firm invested in products that a climate-scared world would buy.
Naturally, many CEOs are genuinely concerned about global warming. But many of the most vocal stand to profit from carbon regulations. The term used by economists for their behavior is "rent-seeking."
The world's largest wind-turbine manufacturer, Copenhagen Climate Council member Vestas, urges governments to invest heavily in the wind market. It sponsors CNN's "Climate in Peril" segment, increasing support for policies that would increase Vestas's earnings. A fellow council member, Mr. Gore's green investment firm Generation Investment Management, warns of a significant risk to the U.S. economy unless a price is quickly placed on carbon.
Even companies that are not heavily engaged in green business stand to gain. European energy companies made tens of billions of euros in the first years of the European Trading System when they received free carbon emission allocations.
American electricity utility Duke Energy, a member of the Copenhagen Climate Council, has long promoted a U.S. cap-and-trade scheme. Yet the company bitterly opposed the Warner-Lieberman bill in the U.S. Senate that would have created such a scheme because it did not include European-style handouts to coal companies. The Waxman-Markey bill in the House of Representatives promises to bring back the free lunch.
U.S. companies and interest groups involved with climate change hired 2,430 lobbyists just last year, up 300% from five years ago. Fifty of the biggest U.S. electric utilities -- including Duke -- spent $51 million on lobbyists in just six months.
The massive transfer of wealth that many businesses seek is not necessarily good for the rest of the economy. Spain has been proclaimed a global example in providing financial aid to renewable energy companies to create green jobs. But research shows that each new job cost Spain 571,138 euros, with subsidies of more than one million euros required to create each new job in the uncompetitive wind industry. Moreover, the programs resulted in the destruction of nearly 110,000 jobs elsewhere in the economy, or 2.2 jobs for every job created.
The cozy corporate-climate relationship was pioneered by Enron, which bought up renewable energy companies and credit-trading outfits while boasting of its relationship with green interest groups. When the Kyoto Protocol was signed, an internal memo was sent within Enron that stated, "If implemented, [the Kyoto Protocol] will do more to promote Enron's business than almost any other regulatory business."
The World Business Summit will hear from "science and public policy leaders" seemingly selected for their scary views of global warming. They include James Lovelock, who believes that much of Europe will be Saharan and London will be underwater within 30 years; Sir Crispin Tickell, who believes that the United Kingdom's population needs to be cut by two-thirds so the country can cope with global warming; and Timothy Flannery, who warns of sea level rises as high as "an eight-story building."
Free speech is important. But these visions of catastrophe are a long way outside of mainstream scientific opinion, and they go much further than the careful findings of the United Nations panel of climate change scientists. When it comes to sea-level rise, for example, the United Nations expects a rise of between seven and 23 inches by 2100 -- considerably less than a one-story building.
There would be an outcry -- and rightfully so -- if big oil organized a climate change conference and invited only climate-change deniers.
The partnership among self-interested businesses, grandstanding politicians and alarmist campaigners truly is an unholy alliance. The climate-industrial complex does not promote discussion on how to overcome this challenge in a way that will be best for everybody. We should not be surprised or impressed that those who stand to make a profit are among the loudest calling for politicians to act. Spending a fortune on global carbon regulations will benefit a few, but dearly cost everybody else.
Mr. Lomborg is director of the Copenhagen Consensus, a think tank, and author of "Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming" (Knopf, 2007).
OPINION MAY 22, 2009
The Climate-Industrial Complex:
Some businesses see nothing but profits in the green movement.
By BJORN LOMBORG
Some business leaders are cozying up with politicians and scientists to demand swift, drastic action on global warming. This is a new twist on a very old practice: companies using public policy to line their own pockets.
The tight relationship between the groups echoes the relationship among weapons makers, researchers and the U.S. military during the Cold War. President Dwight Eisenhower famously warned about the might of the "military-industrial complex," cautioning that "the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." He worried that "there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties."
This is certainly true of climate change. We are told that very expensive carbon regulations are the only way to respond to global warming, despite ample evidence that this approach does not pass a basic cost-benefit test. We must ask whether a "climate-industrial complex" is emerging, pressing taxpayers to fork over money to please those who stand to gain.
This phenomenon will be on display at the World Business Summit on Climate Change in Copenhagen this weekend. The organizers -- the Copenhagen Climate Council -- hope to push political leaders into more drastic promises when they negotiate the Kyoto Protocol's replacement in December.
The opening keynote address is to be delivered by Al Gore, who actually represents all three groups: He is a politician, a campaigner and the chair of a green private-equity firm invested in products that a climate-scared world would buy.
Naturally, many CEOs are genuinely concerned about global warming. But many of the most vocal stand to profit from carbon regulations. The term used by economists for their behavior is "rent-seeking."
The world's largest wind-turbine manufacturer, Copenhagen Climate Council member Vestas, urges governments to invest heavily in the wind market. It sponsors CNN's "Climate in Peril" segment, increasing support for policies that would increase Vestas's earnings. A fellow council member, Mr. Gore's green investment firm Generation Investment Management, warns of a significant risk to the U.S. economy unless a price is quickly placed on carbon.
Even companies that are not heavily engaged in green business stand to gain. European energy companies made tens of billions of euros in the first years of the European Trading System when they received free carbon emission allocations.
American electricity utility Duke Energy, a member of the Copenhagen Climate Council, has long promoted a U.S. cap-and-trade scheme. Yet the company bitterly opposed the Warner-Lieberman bill in the U.S. Senate that would have created such a scheme because it did not include European-style handouts to coal companies. The Waxman-Markey bill in the House of Representatives promises to bring back the free lunch.
U.S. companies and interest groups involved with climate change hired 2,430 lobbyists just last year, up 300% from five years ago. Fifty of the biggest U.S. electric utilities -- including Duke -- spent $51 million on lobbyists in just six months.
The massive transfer of wealth that many businesses seek is not necessarily good for the rest of the economy. Spain has been proclaimed a global example in providing financial aid to renewable energy companies to create green jobs. But research shows that each new job cost Spain 571,138 euros, with subsidies of more than one million euros required to create each new job in the uncompetitive wind industry. Moreover, the programs resulted in the destruction of nearly 110,000 jobs elsewhere in the economy, or 2.2 jobs for every job created.
The cozy corporate-climate relationship was pioneered by Enron, which bought up renewable energy companies and credit-trading outfits while boasting of its relationship with green interest groups. When the Kyoto Protocol was signed, an internal memo was sent within Enron that stated, "If implemented, [the Kyoto Protocol] will do more to promote Enron's business than almost any other regulatory business."
The World Business Summit will hear from "science and public policy leaders" seemingly selected for their scary views of global warming. They include James Lovelock, who believes that much of Europe will be Saharan and London will be underwater within 30 years; Sir Crispin Tickell, who believes that the United Kingdom's population needs to be cut by two-thirds so the country can cope with global warming; and Timothy Flannery, who warns of sea level rises as high as "an eight-story building."
Free speech is important. But these visions of catastrophe are a long way outside of mainstream scientific opinion, and they go much further than the careful findings of the United Nations panel of climate change scientists. When it comes to sea-level rise, for example, the United Nations expects a rise of between seven and 23 inches by 2100 -- considerably less than a one-story building.
There would be an outcry -- and rightfully so -- if big oil organized a climate change conference and invited only climate-change deniers.
The partnership among self-interested businesses, grandstanding politicians and alarmist campaigners truly is an unholy alliance. The climate-industrial complex does not promote discussion on how to overcome this challenge in a way that will be best for everybody. We should not be surprised or impressed that those who stand to make a profit are among the loudest calling for politicians to act. Spending a fortune on global carbon regulations will benefit a few, but dearly cost everybody else.
Mr. Lomborg is director of the Copenhagen Consensus, a think tank, and author of "Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming" (Knopf, 2007).
Friday, May 22, 2009
It's Getting Hot in Here; Let's Take Off All Our Clothes
Why aren't I famous? Why haven't I taken my clothes off in some magazine? Or vomited out some semblance of a melody and called it popular music? Or starved myself into some mundane and pithy role in a vacuous liberal hollywood bullshit fest? Then maybe I could bleet continuously about the issue du jour of global warming. The social elite of this country stand on thier pedastals and patronizingly call out, "if you love me and want to see more of me in the Enquirer and People Magazine you will listen to me and preach my message of the catastrophe that is global warming! Oh and be sure to see me in my new movie, 'I'm Vapid and Ignorant but Look at Me Making More Money Than You for Doing None of the Work'. You may have seen me in my previous movie, 'Shillin' for a Ticket to the Inaugaration'."
For all of the sheep who are buying into the message of their favorite "Twitter Twit", do you really know all of the facts behind global warming or are you just going to let the liberal intelligentsia and career political elites of this world murder the middle class?
IPCC Too Blinkered and Corrupt to Save
Financial Post 2007
Dr. Gray is one of the 2,000 to 2,500 top scientists from around the world whom the IPCC often cites as forming the basis of its findings. But Dr. Gray, who knows as much about the IPCC's review processes as anyone, has been troubled by what he sees as an appalling absence of scientific rigour in the IPCC's review process.
"The whole process is a swindle," he states, in large part because the IPCC has a blinkered mandate that excludes natural causes of global warming.
Japan's Society of Energy and Resources Disses the IPCC
Watts Up with That 2009
Japanese scientists have made a dramatic break with the UN and Western-backed hypothesis of climate change in a new report from its Energy Commission. Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN’s IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made industrial emissions of greenhouse gases. The scientists contend that recent climate change is driven by natural cycles, not human industrial activity, as political activists argue.
IPCC Report Criticized by a Lead Author
Energy & Environment 2007
Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and one of the world's leading atmospheric scientists, says that the IPCC process is driven by politics rather than science. His paper Taking Greenhouse Warming Seriously illustrates that serious and persistent doubts remain concerning the danger of anthropogenic global warming despite the frequent claims that ‘the science is settled.’
The Sun Drives Our Climate
EIR Science 2008
Many scientists, engineers, farmers, and others around the world have sound reasons to believe that global climate change has natural causes, but there is little learned discussion. The reason is that climate change has now become a political and economic issue, and is no longer a scientifc issue.
The major driving forces causing climatic variations on Earth are the variations in the full spectrum of radiation of the Sun, the variations in the orbit of the Earth around the Sun, the varying gravitational infuence of the larger planets on the Sun, and the infuence of cosmic radiation on both the Sun and the Earth. The oceans have a major infuence in helping to regulate climate on Earth.
The recent observations of a quieter Sun, together with the much colder weather in the Northern Hemisphere Winter, suggest that it is probable that there will be continued global cooling.
No Consensus on IPCC's Level of Ignorance
BBC 2007
A view from a leading researcher into climate change tells us while most IPCC participants are scientists and bring the aura of objectivity, there are two things to note:
To some extent the IPCC reports are a result of a political process
Climate scientists are mere mortals casting their gaze on a system so complex they cannot precisely predict its future state even five days ahead
For all of the sheep who are buying into the message of their favorite "Twitter Twit", do you really know all of the facts behind global warming or are you just going to let the liberal intelligentsia and career political elites of this world murder the middle class?
IPCC Too Blinkered and Corrupt to Save
Financial Post 2007
Dr. Gray is one of the 2,000 to 2,500 top scientists from around the world whom the IPCC often cites as forming the basis of its findings. But Dr. Gray, who knows as much about the IPCC's review processes as anyone, has been troubled by what he sees as an appalling absence of scientific rigour in the IPCC's review process.
"The whole process is a swindle," he states, in large part because the IPCC has a blinkered mandate that excludes natural causes of global warming.
Japan's Society of Energy and Resources Disses the IPCC
Watts Up with That 2009
Japanese scientists have made a dramatic break with the UN and Western-backed hypothesis of climate change in a new report from its Energy Commission. Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN’s IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made industrial emissions of greenhouse gases. The scientists contend that recent climate change is driven by natural cycles, not human industrial activity, as political activists argue.
IPCC Report Criticized by a Lead Author
Energy & Environment 2007
Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and one of the world's leading atmospheric scientists, says that the IPCC process is driven by politics rather than science. His paper Taking Greenhouse Warming Seriously illustrates that serious and persistent doubts remain concerning the danger of anthropogenic global warming despite the frequent claims that ‘the science is settled.’
The Sun Drives Our Climate
EIR Science 2008
Many scientists, engineers, farmers, and others around the world have sound reasons to believe that global climate change has natural causes, but there is little learned discussion. The reason is that climate change has now become a political and economic issue, and is no longer a scientifc issue.
The major driving forces causing climatic variations on Earth are the variations in the full spectrum of radiation of the Sun, the variations in the orbit of the Earth around the Sun, the varying gravitational infuence of the larger planets on the Sun, and the infuence of cosmic radiation on both the Sun and the Earth. The oceans have a major infuence in helping to regulate climate on Earth.
The recent observations of a quieter Sun, together with the much colder weather in the Northern Hemisphere Winter, suggest that it is probable that there will be continued global cooling.
No Consensus on IPCC's Level of Ignorance
BBC 2007
A view from a leading researcher into climate change tells us while most IPCC participants are scientists and bring the aura of objectivity, there are two things to note:
To some extent the IPCC reports are a result of a political process
Climate scientists are mere mortals casting their gaze on a system so complex they cannot precisely predict its future state even five days ahead
Thursday, May 21, 2009
I Don't C.A.I.R About Your Protests
Can I just say that I loathe the Council on American Islamic Relations with a white-hot passion the depth of which overwhelms my capacity for rational speech? So I apologize to everyone who gets this and says, “Gina is normally so eloquent and logical in her arguments”…the whole lot of them are poopy faced little cry babies who can just go back to the rotten hovels that they crawled out of. If you don’t want to be thought of as murderous tyrannical women hating beheaders with complete disregard for human life, then don’t f#$&ing act like murderous tyrannical women hating beheaders with complete disregard for human life! I’ve always said this about any group that publically whines about how they are “stereotyped” and shout their impotent little mews of general discontent about everything from how the media portrays them to their need for special kid gloves and we all need to be “re-indoctrinated” into a warm fuzzy feeling about them. GET OVER YOURSELVES! Instead of pounding your little fists on the floor crying about being so misunderstood, how about doing something about those idiot members of your “culture” who propagate the stereotype? I don’t hate you ‘cause you are different; I hate you because you think your difference is more important than mine.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Those who live in the Capital Building should not throw stones!
How about Bonny Fwank’s bill to give Tim “How ‘bout them taxes” Geithner control of all salaries of all companies receiving public funds? The purpose of the legislation is to "prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards," according to the bill's language. In addition, the bill gives Geithner the authority to decide what pay is "unreasonable" or "excessive." And it directs the Treasury Department to come up with a method to evaluate "the performance of the individual executive or employee to whom the payment relates." (The Washington Examiner)
Since when has the Treasury Department known anything about money? I’m not asking a stupid question. I know that the Treasury’s job is to manage the value of the US dollar but seems to me that it’s never actually been able to do that. What is even more appalling is the sheer hypocrisy of the bill. Let me quote the bill again – “prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards” to organizations receiving public funds. Hey Bonny?! Does that mean Congress too? Members of Congress receive an obscene amount of money for job performance that in any business setting would get them beaten, leave alone fired. And they get raises! What are they, union?
I have to review Ole Timmy Boys credentials again; last time I checked I don’t think I noticed anything that included “qualified to act as Almighty King of all things relating to American business”. And not to be crass, really, does Geithner have dirt on everybody in Washington? That’s the only way I can figure ANYONE gets the kind of power Congress and the NObama admin are giving this guy. Naked pictures of Pelosi and Reid “in flagrante”? – sorry for the visual! There is no way on God’s Great Green (I hate that word!) Earth that this guy can do all the things that Congress wants him to do in a day. You know what that means? Some angry Washington bureaucrat with control issues making twice what she should is going to determine the merit of a job she couldn’t even begin to understand.
One more thing…Washington is making it harder and harder for companies to do business in America. You know it’s bad when even the French are like “holy shit; we’re not even that bad!”
I gotta ask…is Massachusetts considered the dumbest state in the Union? They keep electing idiots like Kennedy and Fwank!
Hey Bonny! Get outta my pocket!
Forward these posts to your friends! Invite them to join the blog!
Since when has the Treasury Department known anything about money? I’m not asking a stupid question. I know that the Treasury’s job is to manage the value of the US dollar but seems to me that it’s never actually been able to do that. What is even more appalling is the sheer hypocrisy of the bill. Let me quote the bill again – “prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards” to organizations receiving public funds. Hey Bonny?! Does that mean Congress too? Members of Congress receive an obscene amount of money for job performance that in any business setting would get them beaten, leave alone fired. And they get raises! What are they, union?
I have to review Ole Timmy Boys credentials again; last time I checked I don’t think I noticed anything that included “qualified to act as Almighty King of all things relating to American business”. And not to be crass, really, does Geithner have dirt on everybody in Washington? That’s the only way I can figure ANYONE gets the kind of power Congress and the NObama admin are giving this guy. Naked pictures of Pelosi and Reid “in flagrante”? – sorry for the visual! There is no way on God’s Great Green (I hate that word!) Earth that this guy can do all the things that Congress wants him to do in a day. You know what that means? Some angry Washington bureaucrat with control issues making twice what she should is going to determine the merit of a job she couldn’t even begin to understand.
One more thing…Washington is making it harder and harder for companies to do business in America. You know it’s bad when even the French are like “holy shit; we’re not even that bad!”
I gotta ask…is Massachusetts considered the dumbest state in the Union? They keep electing idiots like Kennedy and Fwank!
Hey Bonny! Get outta my pocket!
Forward these posts to your friends! Invite them to join the blog!
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
The links they will go
I know it's been awhile and this is kind of dated, but I thought it was worthwhile (Newsbusters.Org article on 3/1/2009 by Noel Sheppard):
Did you know that Rick Santelli's well-publicized rant on CNBC Feb. 19 wherein he called for a Chicago Tea Party to protest the White House's mortgage bailout plan was set up by a vast, rightwing conspiracy to bring down President Obama run by the co-founder of the John Birch Society and former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey?
You didn't?
Well, that's what Playboy magazine claimed Friday in a piece outlining a grand cabal that supposedly has been in the works since last August:
What we discovered is that Santelli's "rant" was not at all spontaneous as his alleged fans claim, but rather it was a carefully-planned trigger for the anti-Obama campaign. In PR terms, his February 19th call for a "Chicago Tea Party" was the launch event of a carefully organized and sophisticated PR campaign, one in which Santelli served as a frontman, using the CNBC airwaves for publicity, for the some of the craziest and sleaziest rightwing oligarch clans this country has ever produced. Namely, the Koch family, the multibilllionaire owners of the largest private corporation in America, and funders of scores of rightwing thinktanks and advocacy groups, from the Cato Institute and Reason Magazine to FreedomWorks. The scion of the Koch family, Fred Koch, was a co-founder of the notorious extremist-rightwing John Birch Society.
As you read this, Big Business is pouring tens of millions of dollars into their media machines in order to destroy just about every economic campaign promise Obama has made, as reported recently in the Wall Street Journal. At stake isn't the little guy's fight against big government, as Santelli and his bot-supporters claim, but rather the "upper 2 percent"'s war to protect their wealth from the Obama Adminstration's economic plans. When this Santelli "grassroots" campaign is peeled open, what's revealed is a glimpse of what is ahead and what is bound to be a hallmark of his presidency.
Pretty paranoid stuff coming from someone not named Clinton, wouldn't you agree? But there's more:
Within hours of Santelli's rant, a website called ChicagoTeaParty.com sprang to life. Essentially inactive until that day, it now featured a YouTube video of Santelli's "tea party" rant and billed itself as the official home of the Chicago Tea Party. The domain was registered in August, 2008 by Zack Christenson, a dweeby Twitter Republican and producer for a popular Chicago rightwing radio host Milt Rosenberg-a familiar name to Obama campaign people.
Readers should recall the Obama campaign last August tried to shut down Rosenberg's show on WGN 720 when his guest was Stanley Kurtz, the Hudson Institute adjunct fellow and National Review contributor who had extensive information on our current president's connections to local terrorist William Ayers. But I digress:
That Rosenberg's producer owns the "chicagoteaparty.com" site is already weird-but what's even stranger is that he first bought the domain last August, right around the time of Rosenburg's launch of the "Obama is a terrorist" campaign. It's as if they held this "Chicago tea party" campaign in reserve, like a sleeper-site. Which is exactly what it was.
ChicagoTeaParty.com was just one part of a larger network of Republican sleeper-cell-blogs set up over the course of the past few months, all of them tied to a shady rightwing advocacy group coincidentally named the "Sam Adams Alliance," whose backers have until now been kept hidden from public. Cached google records that we discovered show that the Sam Adams Alliance took pains to scrub its deep links to the Koch family money as well as the fake-grassroots "tea party" protests going on today. All of these roads ultimately lead back to a more notorious rightwing advocacy group, FreedomWorks, a powerful PR organization headed by former Republican House Majority leader Dick Armey and funded by Koch money.
After the authors elaborated on more cryptic details which included claims of multiple websites being scrubbed, they concluded:
So today's protests show that the corporate war is on, and this is how they'll fight it: hiding behind "objective" journalists and "grassroots" new media movements. Because in these times, if you want to push for policies that help the super-wealthy, you better do everything you can to make it seem like it's "the people" who are "spontaneously" fighting your fight. As a 19th century slave management manual wrote, "The master should make it his business to show his slaves, that the advancement of his individual interest, is at the same time an advancement of theirs. Once they feel this, it will require little compulsion to make them act as becomes them." (Southern Agriculturalist IX, 1836.) The question now is, will they get away with it, and will the rest of America advance the interests of Koch, Santelli, and the rest of the masters?
Getting a good picture of just how far media are willing to go to bury anyone having the gall to challenge Obama?Pretty scary, don'tcha' think?
Did you know that Rick Santelli's well-publicized rant on CNBC Feb. 19 wherein he called for a Chicago Tea Party to protest the White House's mortgage bailout plan was set up by a vast, rightwing conspiracy to bring down President Obama run by the co-founder of the John Birch Society and former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey?
You didn't?
Well, that's what Playboy magazine claimed Friday in a piece outlining a grand cabal that supposedly has been in the works since last August:
What we discovered is that Santelli's "rant" was not at all spontaneous as his alleged fans claim, but rather it was a carefully-planned trigger for the anti-Obama campaign. In PR terms, his February 19th call for a "Chicago Tea Party" was the launch event of a carefully organized and sophisticated PR campaign, one in which Santelli served as a frontman, using the CNBC airwaves for publicity, for the some of the craziest and sleaziest rightwing oligarch clans this country has ever produced. Namely, the Koch family, the multibilllionaire owners of the largest private corporation in America, and funders of scores of rightwing thinktanks and advocacy groups, from the Cato Institute and Reason Magazine to FreedomWorks. The scion of the Koch family, Fred Koch, was a co-founder of the notorious extremist-rightwing John Birch Society.
As you read this, Big Business is pouring tens of millions of dollars into their media machines in order to destroy just about every economic campaign promise Obama has made, as reported recently in the Wall Street Journal. At stake isn't the little guy's fight against big government, as Santelli and his bot-supporters claim, but rather the "upper 2 percent"'s war to protect their wealth from the Obama Adminstration's economic plans. When this Santelli "grassroots" campaign is peeled open, what's revealed is a glimpse of what is ahead and what is bound to be a hallmark of his presidency.
Pretty paranoid stuff coming from someone not named Clinton, wouldn't you agree? But there's more:
Within hours of Santelli's rant, a website called ChicagoTeaParty.com sprang to life. Essentially inactive until that day, it now featured a YouTube video of Santelli's "tea party" rant and billed itself as the official home of the Chicago Tea Party. The domain was registered in August, 2008 by Zack Christenson, a dweeby Twitter Republican and producer for a popular Chicago rightwing radio host Milt Rosenberg-a familiar name to Obama campaign people.
Readers should recall the Obama campaign last August tried to shut down Rosenberg's show on WGN 720 when his guest was Stanley Kurtz, the Hudson Institute adjunct fellow and National Review contributor who had extensive information on our current president's connections to local terrorist William Ayers. But I digress:
That Rosenberg's producer owns the "chicagoteaparty.com" site is already weird-but what's even stranger is that he first bought the domain last August, right around the time of Rosenburg's launch of the "Obama is a terrorist" campaign. It's as if they held this "Chicago tea party" campaign in reserve, like a sleeper-site. Which is exactly what it was.
ChicagoTeaParty.com was just one part of a larger network of Republican sleeper-cell-blogs set up over the course of the past few months, all of them tied to a shady rightwing advocacy group coincidentally named the "Sam Adams Alliance," whose backers have until now been kept hidden from public. Cached google records that we discovered show that the Sam Adams Alliance took pains to scrub its deep links to the Koch family money as well as the fake-grassroots "tea party" protests going on today. All of these roads ultimately lead back to a more notorious rightwing advocacy group, FreedomWorks, a powerful PR organization headed by former Republican House Majority leader Dick Armey and funded by Koch money.
After the authors elaborated on more cryptic details which included claims of multiple websites being scrubbed, they concluded:
So today's protests show that the corporate war is on, and this is how they'll fight it: hiding behind "objective" journalists and "grassroots" new media movements. Because in these times, if you want to push for policies that help the super-wealthy, you better do everything you can to make it seem like it's "the people" who are "spontaneously" fighting your fight. As a 19th century slave management manual wrote, "The master should make it his business to show his slaves, that the advancement of his individual interest, is at the same time an advancement of theirs. Once they feel this, it will require little compulsion to make them act as becomes them." (Southern Agriculturalist IX, 1836.) The question now is, will they get away with it, and will the rest of America advance the interests of Koch, Santelli, and the rest of the masters?
Getting a good picture of just how far media are willing to go to bury anyone having the gall to challenge Obama?Pretty scary, don'tcha' think?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
STEP UP! DO SOMETHING! WRITE THE RINOs!
The only thing we can do besides stew is our God-given right...Writing and calling! Every Republican/Conservative needs to step up. NOW! The ONLY way we can defeat this rediculous stimulus that only destroys our childrens future is to write or call them and tell them they WILL NOT BE RE-ELECTED if they vote for this crap on the final vote!
TWO Senators from Maine indicated a vote for this bill and Pennsylvania's own Arlen "Don't turn your back on him" Specter.
I'm writing and calling to let his office know that this is a disgrace! Only if as many of us as possible do the same do we have a chance, however slim, to try to save America as we know it for our kids. That SHOULD matter to all of you!
Here is the info you need to contact these three sell-outs:
Specter, Arlen - (R - PA)
Class III
711 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4254
Web Form: specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Co...
Collins, Susan M. - (R - ME)
Class II
413 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2523
Web Form: collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=Contact...
Snowe, Olympia J. - (R - ME)
Class I
154 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5344
Web Form: snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenat...
TWO Senators from Maine indicated a vote for this bill and Pennsylvania's own Arlen "Don't turn your back on him" Specter.
I'm writing and calling to let his office know that this is a disgrace! Only if as many of us as possible do the same do we have a chance, however slim, to try to save America as we know it for our kids. That SHOULD matter to all of you!
Here is the info you need to contact these three sell-outs:
Specter, Arlen - (R - PA)
Class III
711 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4254
Web Form: specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Co...
Collins, Susan M. - (R - ME)
Class II
413 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2523
Web Form: collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=Contact...
Snowe, Olympia J. - (R - ME)
Class I
154 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5344
Web Form: snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenat...
Sold out once again! (click for article)
Can we fire a senator from the party? I mean, they benefit from having an "R" after their name, they benefit from my party support and they continue to stab us in the back. I'm talking about RINOs. In case you don't know it, Republicans, one of your PA "Republican" Senators just said "F--- You America!" Said I am going to sell out the ideals and sacrifices of EVERYONE here or gone that have worked to keep freedom and individuality and smaller government infringement a part of our daily lives. He sold out our kids. I am sick. Sick to my stomach. Thank you Arlan Specter. Thank you for being a d---bag! (Pardon my dwindling free speech)
*********************************************************************************
In the Valley of Elephants, RINOs Are King Posted by Chuck MuthFebruary 9, 2009 at 1:25 pm
>> Printer-Friendly Version
Talk about pulling the rug out from under you. Talk about sucking the air out of your balloon. Talk about killing a rally. Talk about “Republican” U.S. Sens. Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.
Congressional Republicans got their keisters kicked at the ballot box last November. They were depressed. Lethargic. Apathetic. There wasn’t enough Xanax, Zoloft, Wellbutrin, Prozac and Paxil combined in the Capitol to service everybody. Heck, they almost had to start re-importing some from Canada just to handle the demand.
Then Obama was sworn in and the floodgates of spending on every Democrat pet program under the sun – including contraceptives and sod – were opened. Bingo! A “trillion dollar turkey” spending bill disguised as a catastrophe-avoiding “stimulus” bill.
And then suddenly…Republicans in the House of Representatives re-discovered fiscal conservatism. I mean, it was like the Grinch suddenly discovering that Christmas had nothing to do with spending money on gifts and presents and earmarks and bridges to nowhere.
“Being Republican," they thought, "doesn't come from a store. Being Republican, perhaps, means a little bit more! And what happened then? Well, in Washington they say, The GOP's small spine, Grew three sizes that day!”
House Republicans knew they didn’t have the votes to stop the Obama Spending Express. But that wasn’t their challenge. Their challenge was to see if they could all band together and vote unanimously against the “trillion dollar turkey” – the way Republicans banded together and unanimously embraced the Contract With America way back in ’94.
And they did.
I don’t know how they ever pulled it off, but it was a thing of beauty. It drove the Democrats and the mainstream media cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. How could Republicans stand united on principle and in opposition to the great and powerful Obamessiah? HOW DARE THEY?!!
But they did. Not only was it the right vote to cast from a public policy standpoint; it was the right vote politically, as well. It was a mega-shot of adrenaline in the arm of GOP grassroots activists and party leaders. I know. I was at the Republican National Committee meeting in Washington the week of that vote and it was the talk of the town. Happy days were here again!
“Can you believe the Republicans actually stood united? Maybe there’s hope for us after all!”
But then…the issue went over to the Senate.
Unlike in the House, if Senate Republicans were to stand united in opposition to this bloated, larded-up spending bill - they could actually STOP it. Because unlike in the House, the 41 Republican senators could filibuster this bill. And, oh, what a political blow that would be to Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi - in addition to doing what’s right for the country!
Alas, three “moderate” Republicans on Friday turned this lemonade into a lemon. It was like being first-and-goal from the two-yard line in the Super Bowl and throwing an interception which gets run back 100 yards for a touchdown by the opposing team – not that that would ever happen.
Specter, Collins and Snowe sold out their 38 GOP colleagues and every Republican member of the House by cutting a deal and giving the Democrats’ the 60 votes they needed for this “trillion dollar turkey” to go through. In doing so, they not only assured the socialist-Democrats now running the country a huge and expensive political and legislative victory, but they stopped dead in its tracks the momentum Republicans had been successfully building with the American people against this proposal.
Why, oh why, did we ever stop the practice of tar-and-feathering?
Folks, this was nothing short of giving aid-and-comfort to the opposition. And these three “Republicans In Name Only” (RINOs) have done this sort of thing over and over and over again for many, many years. But this was a big one. Huge. When will the party finally say “enough is enough”? Why is the GOP allowing a handful of RINOs to control the party’s direction and future?
Yes, I fully understand the political reality that majorities get to lead - and you gain majorities by addition, not subtraction. But what about all of the fiscally conservative voters the GOP is losing thanks to RINOs like Specter, Collins and Snowe undermining the party’s message and ruining the “brand”?
It’s a painful dilemma to be sure. So the question naturally arises, “What would Ronald Reagan do?” Fortunately, we have his CPAC speech from 1975 to guide us:
“A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers. . . . And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.”
If these three RINOs want to be independent, throw their Republican colleagues under the bus, and vote however they want - even on bills as contradictory to the fundamental principles of the GOP as this BS “stimulus” bill – then they should go their own way and run for election as independents, not Republicans.
Why should these RINOs benefit at the ballot box by having an “R” next to their name? Why should they benefit from the volunteers and grassroots activists who slug it out in the trenches each and every day doing the grunt work of voter registration and get-out-the-vote? Why should they benefit from all the money people all over the country donate to the Republican Party?
It’ll be a rare thing for me to agree with Barack Obama on just about anything over the next four years, but I have to agree with him on this: If company executives take taxpayer bailout money to prop up their businesses, then those executives should be subjected to “strings,” such as caps on executive compensation.
If you take our money, you take our conditions. It’s that simple. It’s the Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Ditto RINOs who constantly stab the Republican Party in the back – like Specter, Collins and Snowe. If they can’t get with the party’s program, fine. But they shouldn’t expect to get the party’s support and money. They shouldn’t be allowed to have it both ways. If they want to be independent, then run as independents. Like Joe Lieberman.
But if they want the benefits of running as a Republican, then sometimes they need to suck it up and be a Republican. And if they can’t or won’t, the GOP - for its own sake and the fiscal sake of the nation - needs to cull these RINOs from the elephant herd. No money. No endorsement. No volunteers. No nothing.
Until they bring back tar-and-feathering.
*********************************************************************************
In the Valley of Elephants, RINOs Are King Posted by Chuck MuthFebruary 9, 2009 at 1:25 pm
>> Printer-Friendly Version
Talk about pulling the rug out from under you. Talk about sucking the air out of your balloon. Talk about killing a rally. Talk about “Republican” U.S. Sens. Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.
Congressional Republicans got their keisters kicked at the ballot box last November. They were depressed. Lethargic. Apathetic. There wasn’t enough Xanax, Zoloft, Wellbutrin, Prozac and Paxil combined in the Capitol to service everybody. Heck, they almost had to start re-importing some from Canada just to handle the demand.
Then Obama was sworn in and the floodgates of spending on every Democrat pet program under the sun – including contraceptives and sod – were opened. Bingo! A “trillion dollar turkey” spending bill disguised as a catastrophe-avoiding “stimulus” bill.
And then suddenly…Republicans in the House of Representatives re-discovered fiscal conservatism. I mean, it was like the Grinch suddenly discovering that Christmas had nothing to do with spending money on gifts and presents and earmarks and bridges to nowhere.
“Being Republican," they thought, "doesn't come from a store. Being Republican, perhaps, means a little bit more! And what happened then? Well, in Washington they say, The GOP's small spine, Grew three sizes that day!”
House Republicans knew they didn’t have the votes to stop the Obama Spending Express. But that wasn’t their challenge. Their challenge was to see if they could all band together and vote unanimously against the “trillion dollar turkey” – the way Republicans banded together and unanimously embraced the Contract With America way back in ’94.
And they did.
I don’t know how they ever pulled it off, but it was a thing of beauty. It drove the Democrats and the mainstream media cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. How could Republicans stand united on principle and in opposition to the great and powerful Obamessiah? HOW DARE THEY?!!
But they did. Not only was it the right vote to cast from a public policy standpoint; it was the right vote politically, as well. It was a mega-shot of adrenaline in the arm of GOP grassroots activists and party leaders. I know. I was at the Republican National Committee meeting in Washington the week of that vote and it was the talk of the town. Happy days were here again!
“Can you believe the Republicans actually stood united? Maybe there’s hope for us after all!”
But then…the issue went over to the Senate.
Unlike in the House, if Senate Republicans were to stand united in opposition to this bloated, larded-up spending bill - they could actually STOP it. Because unlike in the House, the 41 Republican senators could filibuster this bill. And, oh, what a political blow that would be to Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi - in addition to doing what’s right for the country!
Alas, three “moderate” Republicans on Friday turned this lemonade into a lemon. It was like being first-and-goal from the two-yard line in the Super Bowl and throwing an interception which gets run back 100 yards for a touchdown by the opposing team – not that that would ever happen.
Specter, Collins and Snowe sold out their 38 GOP colleagues and every Republican member of the House by cutting a deal and giving the Democrats’ the 60 votes they needed for this “trillion dollar turkey” to go through. In doing so, they not only assured the socialist-Democrats now running the country a huge and expensive political and legislative victory, but they stopped dead in its tracks the momentum Republicans had been successfully building with the American people against this proposal.
Why, oh why, did we ever stop the practice of tar-and-feathering?
Folks, this was nothing short of giving aid-and-comfort to the opposition. And these three “Republicans In Name Only” (RINOs) have done this sort of thing over and over and over again for many, many years. But this was a big one. Huge. When will the party finally say “enough is enough”? Why is the GOP allowing a handful of RINOs to control the party’s direction and future?
Yes, I fully understand the political reality that majorities get to lead - and you gain majorities by addition, not subtraction. But what about all of the fiscally conservative voters the GOP is losing thanks to RINOs like Specter, Collins and Snowe undermining the party’s message and ruining the “brand”?
It’s a painful dilemma to be sure. So the question naturally arises, “What would Ronald Reagan do?” Fortunately, we have his CPAC speech from 1975 to guide us:
“A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers. . . . And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.”
If these three RINOs want to be independent, throw their Republican colleagues under the bus, and vote however they want - even on bills as contradictory to the fundamental principles of the GOP as this BS “stimulus” bill – then they should go their own way and run for election as independents, not Republicans.
Why should these RINOs benefit at the ballot box by having an “R” next to their name? Why should they benefit from the volunteers and grassroots activists who slug it out in the trenches each and every day doing the grunt work of voter registration and get-out-the-vote? Why should they benefit from all the money people all over the country donate to the Republican Party?
It’ll be a rare thing for me to agree with Barack Obama on just about anything over the next four years, but I have to agree with him on this: If company executives take taxpayer bailout money to prop up their businesses, then those executives should be subjected to “strings,” such as caps on executive compensation.
If you take our money, you take our conditions. It’s that simple. It’s the Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Ditto RINOs who constantly stab the Republican Party in the back – like Specter, Collins and Snowe. If they can’t get with the party’s program, fine. But they shouldn’t expect to get the party’s support and money. They shouldn’t be allowed to have it both ways. If they want to be independent, then run as independents. Like Joe Lieberman.
But if they want the benefits of running as a Republican, then sometimes they need to suck it up and be a Republican. And if they can’t or won’t, the GOP - for its own sake and the fiscal sake of the nation - needs to cull these RINOs from the elephant herd. No money. No endorsement. No volunteers. No nothing.
Until they bring back tar-and-feathering.
Monday, February 9, 2009
The audacity of cynacism or We all go down together!
I couldn't have said it better myself
Obama, All at Sea
It’s the new president’s mythology that urgently needs some stimulus. By Mark Steyn (as published in The National Review Online)
In the Washington Post, E. J. Dionne tried to break it gently to us: “No occupant of the White House has ever been able to walk on water.”Yeah, sure, no previous occupant of the White House has been able to walk on water—your Eisenhowers and Roosevelts, your Chester Arthurs and Grover Clevelands and whatnot. But Barack Obama didn’t run as just another of those squaresville losers. He was gonna heal the planet, and lower the oceans. So, even if he couldn’t walk on water, he should at least be able to paddle in it. “He is a community organizer like Jesus was,” said Susan Sarandon (oh my she is so on my list!), “and now we’re a community and he can organize us.”
So how’s that going? Jesus took a handful of loaves and two fish and fed 5,000 people. Barack wants to take a trillion pieces of pork and feed it to a handful of Democratic-party interest groups. Jesus picked twelve disciples. Barack seems to have gone more for one of those Dirty Dozen, caper-movie line-ups, where the mission is so perilous and so audacious that only the scuzziest lowlifes recruited from every waterfront dive have any chance of pulling it off.
The ends justify the mean SOBs: “Indispensable” Tim Geithner, wanted in twelve jurisdictions for claiming his kid’s summer camp as a business expense, is the only guy with the savvy to crack the code of the U.S. economy.
Tom “Home, James!” Daschle is the ruthless backseat driver who can figure out how to steer the rusting gurney of U.S. health care through the corridors of power.
Charles Bronson is the hardbitten psycho ex-con who can’t go straight but knows how to turn around the Department of the Interior.
And, of course, there’s the lovable dough-faced shnook in the front office, Robert “Fall Guy” Gibbs. He didn’t do nuthin’ wrong, but, when seven nominees die in a grisly shootout with a Taxable Benefit Swat Team in the alley behind the Senate, he makes the mistake of looking sweaty and shifty while answering routine questions.
A president doesn’t have to be able to walk on water. But he does have to choose the right crew for the ship, especially if he’s planning on spending most of his time at the captain’s table schmoozing the celebrity guests with a lot of deep thoughts about “hope” and “change.” Far worse than his cabinet picks was President Obama’s decision to make the “stimulus” racket the all-but-sole priority of his first month, and then outsource the project to Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and Harry Reid. Appearing on The Rush Limbaugh Show last week, I got a little muddled over two adjoining newspaper clippings—one on the stimulus, the other on those octuplets in California—and for a brief moment the two stories converged. Everyone’s hammering that mom—she’s divorced, unemployed, living in a small house with parents who have a million bucks’ worth of debt, and she’s already got six kids. So she has in vitro fertilization to have eight more. But isn’t that exactly what the Feds have done? Last fall, they gave birth to an $850 billion bailout they couldn’t afford and didn’t have enough time to keep an eye on, and now four months later they’re going to do it all over again, but this time they want trillionuplets. Barney and Nancy represent the in vitro fertilization of the federal budget. And it’s the taxpayers who’ll get stuck with the diapers.
Those supporters who were wary of touting Obama as the walk-on-water Messiah did their best to lower expectations by hailing him merely as the new FDR. You remember the old FDR—“We have nothing to fear but fear itself.” Ha! With the new New Deal, we have everything to fear. As President Obama warned on Tuesday, “A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe.” If you’re of those moonstruck Obammysoxers still driving around with the “HOPE, NOT FEAR” bumper stickers, please note that, due to an unfortunate proofreading error at the printing plant, certain nouns in that phrase may have been accidentally transposed.
As it happens, the best way to ensure catastrophe is to “act now.” It would be nice if the world could all prance along in regimented unison like the Radio City Changettes. But, alas, the foreigners made the mistake of actually reading the “stimulus” bill, and the protectionist measures buried on page 739 sub-section XII(d) ended, instantly, the Obama honeymoon overseas. The European Union has threatened a trade war. Up in Canada, provincial premiers called it “a march to insanity.” Wait a minute: I thought the Obama era was meant to be the retreat from insanity, a blessed return to multilateral transnational harmony?As longtime readers will know, I’m all in favor of flipping the bird to the global community. But at least, when Rummy was doing his shtick about “Old Europe,” he did it intentionally. To cheese off the foreigners entirely by accident before you’ve even had your first black-tie banquet is quite an accomplishment. Protectionism is serious business to the Continentals. Oh, to be sure, if the swaggering unilateralist Yank cowboy invades some Third World basket-case they’ll seize on it as an opportunity for some cheap moral posturing. But in the end they don’t much care one way or the other. Plunging the planet into global depression, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter.
The bloated non-stimulus and the under-taxed nominees are part of the same story. I’m with Tom Daschle: I understand why he had no desire to toss another six-figure sum into the great sucking maw of the federal treasury. Who knows better than a senator who’s voted for every tax increase to cross his desk that all this dough is entirely wasted? Tom and Tim Geithner and Charlie Rangel and all the rest are right: They can do more good with the money than the United States government can. I only wish they followed the logic of their behavior and recognized that what works for them would also work for every other citizen. Instead, they insist that the sole solution to our woes is a record-setting, wasteful government-spending spree.
Maybe it’s time for President Obama to come out and give one of his big hopey-changey speeches. It’s been a few weeks now, and I kinda miss them. You know—“We are the change we’ve been waiting for.” “We have nothing to hope for but hope itself.” “Ask not what your hope can change for you, ask what you can hope for your change.” Etc.
But I wonder if the old songs from last month’s hit parade would play as well today. On Wednesday, Salon headlined a story on Obama: “The New Great Communicator . . . Isn’t.” Oh, dear. It’s early yet, but the gulf between the rhetoric and the reality, between the audacity of hope and the reality of pork, yawns ever wider. Right now, it’s the Obama mythology that urgently needs some stimulus. Some of us never expected him to walk on water. But we didn’t think he’d be all at sea taking on quite so much of it after a mere two weeks.
Obama, All at Sea
It’s the new president’s mythology that urgently needs some stimulus. By Mark Steyn (as published in The National Review Online)
In the Washington Post, E. J. Dionne tried to break it gently to us: “No occupant of the White House has ever been able to walk on water.”Yeah, sure, no previous occupant of the White House has been able to walk on water—your Eisenhowers and Roosevelts, your Chester Arthurs and Grover Clevelands and whatnot. But Barack Obama didn’t run as just another of those squaresville losers. He was gonna heal the planet, and lower the oceans. So, even if he couldn’t walk on water, he should at least be able to paddle in it. “He is a community organizer like Jesus was,” said Susan Sarandon (oh my she is so on my list!), “and now we’re a community and he can organize us.”
So how’s that going? Jesus took a handful of loaves and two fish and fed 5,000 people. Barack wants to take a trillion pieces of pork and feed it to a handful of Democratic-party interest groups. Jesus picked twelve disciples. Barack seems to have gone more for one of those Dirty Dozen, caper-movie line-ups, where the mission is so perilous and so audacious that only the scuzziest lowlifes recruited from every waterfront dive have any chance of pulling it off.
The ends justify the mean SOBs: “Indispensable” Tim Geithner, wanted in twelve jurisdictions for claiming his kid’s summer camp as a business expense, is the only guy with the savvy to crack the code of the U.S. economy.
Tom “Home, James!” Daschle is the ruthless backseat driver who can figure out how to steer the rusting gurney of U.S. health care through the corridors of power.
Charles Bronson is the hardbitten psycho ex-con who can’t go straight but knows how to turn around the Department of the Interior.
And, of course, there’s the lovable dough-faced shnook in the front office, Robert “Fall Guy” Gibbs. He didn’t do nuthin’ wrong, but, when seven nominees die in a grisly shootout with a Taxable Benefit Swat Team in the alley behind the Senate, he makes the mistake of looking sweaty and shifty while answering routine questions.
A president doesn’t have to be able to walk on water. But he does have to choose the right crew for the ship, especially if he’s planning on spending most of his time at the captain’s table schmoozing the celebrity guests with a lot of deep thoughts about “hope” and “change.” Far worse than his cabinet picks was President Obama’s decision to make the “stimulus” racket the all-but-sole priority of his first month, and then outsource the project to Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and Harry Reid. Appearing on The Rush Limbaugh Show last week, I got a little muddled over two adjoining newspaper clippings—one on the stimulus, the other on those octuplets in California—and for a brief moment the two stories converged. Everyone’s hammering that mom—she’s divorced, unemployed, living in a small house with parents who have a million bucks’ worth of debt, and she’s already got six kids. So she has in vitro fertilization to have eight more. But isn’t that exactly what the Feds have done? Last fall, they gave birth to an $850 billion bailout they couldn’t afford and didn’t have enough time to keep an eye on, and now four months later they’re going to do it all over again, but this time they want trillionuplets. Barney and Nancy represent the in vitro fertilization of the federal budget. And it’s the taxpayers who’ll get stuck with the diapers.
Those supporters who were wary of touting Obama as the walk-on-water Messiah did their best to lower expectations by hailing him merely as the new FDR. You remember the old FDR—“We have nothing to fear but fear itself.” Ha! With the new New Deal, we have everything to fear. As President Obama warned on Tuesday, “A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe.” If you’re of those moonstruck Obammysoxers still driving around with the “HOPE, NOT FEAR” bumper stickers, please note that, due to an unfortunate proofreading error at the printing plant, certain nouns in that phrase may have been accidentally transposed.
As it happens, the best way to ensure catastrophe is to “act now.” It would be nice if the world could all prance along in regimented unison like the Radio City Changettes. But, alas, the foreigners made the mistake of actually reading the “stimulus” bill, and the protectionist measures buried on page 739 sub-section XII(d) ended, instantly, the Obama honeymoon overseas. The European Union has threatened a trade war. Up in Canada, provincial premiers called it “a march to insanity.” Wait a minute: I thought the Obama era was meant to be the retreat from insanity, a blessed return to multilateral transnational harmony?As longtime readers will know, I’m all in favor of flipping the bird to the global community. But at least, when Rummy was doing his shtick about “Old Europe,” he did it intentionally. To cheese off the foreigners entirely by accident before you’ve even had your first black-tie banquet is quite an accomplishment. Protectionism is serious business to the Continentals. Oh, to be sure, if the swaggering unilateralist Yank cowboy invades some Third World basket-case they’ll seize on it as an opportunity for some cheap moral posturing. But in the end they don’t much care one way or the other. Plunging the planet into global depression, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter.
The bloated non-stimulus and the under-taxed nominees are part of the same story. I’m with Tom Daschle: I understand why he had no desire to toss another six-figure sum into the great sucking maw of the federal treasury. Who knows better than a senator who’s voted for every tax increase to cross his desk that all this dough is entirely wasted? Tom and Tim Geithner and Charlie Rangel and all the rest are right: They can do more good with the money than the United States government can. I only wish they followed the logic of their behavior and recognized that what works for them would also work for every other citizen. Instead, they insist that the sole solution to our woes is a record-setting, wasteful government-spending spree.
Maybe it’s time for President Obama to come out and give one of his big hopey-changey speeches. It’s been a few weeks now, and I kinda miss them. You know—“We are the change we’ve been waiting for.” “We have nothing to hope for but hope itself.” “Ask not what your hope can change for you, ask what you can hope for your change.” Etc.
But I wonder if the old songs from last month’s hit parade would play as well today. On Wednesday, Salon headlined a story on Obama: “The New Great Communicator . . . Isn’t.” Oh, dear. It’s early yet, but the gulf between the rhetoric and the reality, between the audacity of hope and the reality of pork, yawns ever wider. Right now, it’s the Obama mythology that urgently needs some stimulus. Some of us never expected him to walk on water. But we didn’t think he’d be all at sea taking on quite so much of it after a mere two weeks.
My sincere and heartfelt apologies...
I would like to extend my heartfelt apologies to my great-great-great grandchildren. I am sorry that your country's lack of foresight and refusal to learn from the past left you with a national debt the likes of which you can never never pay off. I'm sorry that the leaders of my time were too wrapped up in 0ne administration's scare tactics and bribery schemes to truly realize that we could have pulled ourselves out of this financial crisis in its infancy by lightening the tax load for businesses and the middle class; by insisting that the unions loosen the stranglehold they have on American manufacturing; by recognizing that those who make money, spend money and those who live off of programs continue to live off of programs; by understanding that consumer confidence is one of the primary influences on the economy and bribery by fear in order to pass pork and to prop up the dozens of "organizations" that support the "puppet presidency" that actually only 52% of the American people elected (don't let your history books tell you any different!), is what is driving the middle class even deeper into their wallets furthering the downward spiral.
I extend further apologies to the society and country in which you are likely being raised. I know it may seem like an impossibility but once, in the USA we had what was called a Middle Class. A population of citizens that worked for what they owned, fought for what they believed and recognized that sometimes you just don't get what you want. You may ask, what happened to this middle class? They were fed lies that the government would take care of them and supply all that they needed in healthcare, education, housing but they didn't realize that they were paying for these things in higher taxes, less money in their pockets, reduced level of care, no influence on their retirement or investment decision making and a government that worked against them and their basic beliefs. They got lazy and got a system that was designed to screw them and destroy their existence.
I’m sorry that the people of the US in my time were so caught up in the thought that someone else will make it better for us, will fix us, will take care of us that we lost our way. That we were so concerned about the few, we lost sight of the many.
I hope the history books haven’t lied to you too badly.
Take care of yourselves; now you better hurry before the milk and bread line gets too long!
I extend further apologies to the society and country in which you are likely being raised. I know it may seem like an impossibility but once, in the USA we had what was called a Middle Class. A population of citizens that worked for what they owned, fought for what they believed and recognized that sometimes you just don't get what you want. You may ask, what happened to this middle class? They were fed lies that the government would take care of them and supply all that they needed in healthcare, education, housing but they didn't realize that they were paying for these things in higher taxes, less money in their pockets, reduced level of care, no influence on their retirement or investment decision making and a government that worked against them and their basic beliefs. They got lazy and got a system that was designed to screw them and destroy their existence.
I’m sorry that the people of the US in my time were so caught up in the thought that someone else will make it better for us, will fix us, will take care of us that we lost our way. That we were so concerned about the few, we lost sight of the many.
I hope the history books haven’t lied to you too badly.
Take care of yourselves; now you better hurry before the milk and bread line gets too long!
Will Barron's be the first victim of democrat censorship act?
Picked up this blog posted by Noel Shepard on Newsbusters.org. It discusses an article publised in Barron's about the "credit crisis". I guess the fairness doctrine's first victims will be Barron's, then Rush, then Sean, then Levine, then Glen, then...
Editorial: Bush Had Nothing To Do With Financial Crisis
As the financial crisis hit last September, NewsBusters regularly informed readers of the truth behind the matter, and that media assertions the Bush administration was to blame were politically motivated falsehoods intentionally designed to get Barack Obama elected president.
On Saturday, the financial publication Barron's offered readers an editorial by Hoover Institution visiting fellow Scott S. Powell which presented facts that were routinely withheld from the public during the campaign assuring the Democrat candidate victory in November.
More importantly, Powell offered some compelling insights into the dangers of partisanship which sadly is negatively impacting today's stimulus package discussion.
But before we get there, this was Powell's case as to who was really to blame for this crisis (h/t Hot Air):
CONTRARY TO A VIEW POPULARIZED DURING THE 2008 presidential election season, the current economic crisis was not the result of deregulation.
The Bush administration made many mistakes, but deregulation was not one of them.
"Not only was there no major deregulation passed during the past eight years, but the Bush administration and a Republican Congress approved the most sweeping financial-market regulation in decades."
"The bipartisan Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted in 2002 to prevent corporate fraud and restore investor confidence after the collapse of Enron and WorldCom. It failed to prevent the accounting fraud and influence-peddling scandals at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And even after those scandals were widely understood, regulators sent Fannie and Freddie back into the market to continue buying subprime loans, lending and borrowing with implied taxpayer backing."
Across the government, the Bush administration supported new regulations that added almost 1,000 pages a year to the Federal Register, nearly a record. If this is insufficient regulation, it's hard to imagine a scope that would be effective."
Powell of course was spot on. Sarbanes-Oxley was indeed a comprehensive and encompassing piece of legislation specifically designed to prevent a repeat of the tech bubble and Enron. Yet, as the financial crisis raged last fall, media members who wanted to blame the problem on Bush and deregulation conveniently forgot this sweeping bill.
But there's more:
"Our present crisis began in the 1970s, during the Carter administration, with passage of the Community Reinvestment Act to stem bank redlining and liberalize lending in order to extend home ownership in lower-income communities. Then in the 1990s, the Department of Housing and Urban Development took a fateful step by getting the GSEs to accept subprime mortgages. With Fannie and Freddie easing credit requirements on loans they would purchase from lenders, banks could greatly increase lending to borrowers unqualified for conventional loans. In the name of extending affordable housing, this broadened the acceptability of risky loans throughout the financial system. "
"The risk lurking in the GSE portfolios was acknowledged in the Bush administration's first fiscal-year budget, released in April 2001. It stated that Fannie and Freddie were "a potential problem" because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in the financial markets, affecting federally insured entities and economic activity." Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan issued repeated warnings that the GSEs "placed the total financial system of the future at substantial risk." Such warnings went unheeded even after accounting scandals rocked Fannie and Freddie."
Yep. The Bush administration began warning of problems with Fannie and Freddie just three months into its first term, and continued doing so for years. But you wouldn't know that from how the press reported things last fall, would you?
However, what's done is done. The press wanted Obama to be president, and by dishonestly blaming Bush for the financial crisis, so-called journalists were able to paint John McCain as also being at fault thereby making it impossible for him to win.
Yet, Powell left us with a warning concerning this matter that is quite important given economic stimulus plans currently being discussed: (and this is te most important lesson kiddies! so pay attention here)
"But the lesson should be clear that socializing failed businesses -- whether in housing, health care or in Detroit -- is not a long-term solution. Expanding government's intrusion into the private sector doesn't come without great risk. The renewing and self-correcting nature of the private sector is largely lost in the public sector, where accountability is impaired by obfuscation of responsibility, and where special interests benefit even when the public good is ill-served."
"George Washington also warned against excessive partisanship, which distracts public councils and enfeebles public administration. Rather than blaming the party in power or the party formerly in power, the nation should stop living in denial of the mistakes of both parties.
Spreading failure across the entire economy risks turning a recession into a depression. Regulatory reform now must foster responsible behavior and financial accountability. Far better for our citizenry and businesses to have a strength and resourcefulness that comes from creativity, honesty and self-reliance than to have a growing dependence on a profligate government."
Powell touched on a lot of issues here that should be at the front of the current stimulus debate but sadly aren't.
In particular, the partisanship in the nation today prevents an honest assessment of the past thereby dooming us to repeat the same mistakes.
Take for example the Great Depression. For almost 80 years the left and their media minions have done everything within their power to blame all that era's ills on Herbert Hoover while crediting Franklin D. Roosevelt with the eventual economic recovery despite the former presiding over only two years of the Depression.
Yet, after eight years of unprecedented federal spending under Roosevelt, the unemployment rate was still a staggering 14.6 percent in 1940, and the Gross Domestic Product was still under its pre-Depression level.
Isn't this important, especially since our federal debt is already quite high?
Unfortunately, because of the partisanship, such can't be discussed. The left have so much time and money invested in Roosevelt supposedly being the greatest president of the 20th century that an honest assessment of what did and did not work back then is verboten.
But isn't that absurd? Assuming we really are on the verge of another Depression -- an assumption I don't necessarily agree with yet, mind you -- shouldn't we be examining everything we did before and during the last one in order to chart a more effective course this time?
The fact is the last Depression began in 1931 and despite all Roosevelt's good intentions didn't end until America entered World War II in 1941. Once the war ended, we went back into a very serious recession suggesting that nothing Roosevelt implemented had a lasting positive economic impact.
Isn't this relevant, especially given the Congressional Budget Office's report last week predicting current stimulus plans will actually hurt the economy in the long run?
Sadly, the answer is "No," for the left are so protective of Roosevelt's legacy that any analysis of his economic policies is totally unacceptable even as our nation grapples with solutions to our current financial problems.
Is this the way adults should behave? Is this really the best we can get from our elected officials?
Given the known failings and wastefulness of last year's TARP, wouldn't we be well-advised to halt all current stimulus discussions until a thorough and impartial analysis of previous plans -- INCLUDING those implemented by us during the '30s and by Japan during the '90s -- was accomplished thereby increasing the likelihood of success while reducing the chance of us making exactly the same mistakes?
If the answer is "No," the only conclusion is that Party, at this critical juncture in our nation's history, is indeed more important than policy, and partisanship is asphyxiating our capital.
George Washington must be rolling over in his grave.
Editorial: Bush Had Nothing To Do With Financial Crisis
As the financial crisis hit last September, NewsBusters regularly informed readers of the truth behind the matter, and that media assertions the Bush administration was to blame were politically motivated falsehoods intentionally designed to get Barack Obama elected president.
On Saturday, the financial publication Barron's offered readers an editorial by Hoover Institution visiting fellow Scott S. Powell which presented facts that were routinely withheld from the public during the campaign assuring the Democrat candidate victory in November.
More importantly, Powell offered some compelling insights into the dangers of partisanship which sadly is negatively impacting today's stimulus package discussion.
But before we get there, this was Powell's case as to who was really to blame for this crisis (h/t Hot Air):
CONTRARY TO A VIEW POPULARIZED DURING THE 2008 presidential election season, the current economic crisis was not the result of deregulation.
The Bush administration made many mistakes, but deregulation was not one of them.
"Not only was there no major deregulation passed during the past eight years, but the Bush administration and a Republican Congress approved the most sweeping financial-market regulation in decades."
"The bipartisan Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted in 2002 to prevent corporate fraud and restore investor confidence after the collapse of Enron and WorldCom. It failed to prevent the accounting fraud and influence-peddling scandals at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And even after those scandals were widely understood, regulators sent Fannie and Freddie back into the market to continue buying subprime loans, lending and borrowing with implied taxpayer backing."
Across the government, the Bush administration supported new regulations that added almost 1,000 pages a year to the Federal Register, nearly a record. If this is insufficient regulation, it's hard to imagine a scope that would be effective."
Powell of course was spot on. Sarbanes-Oxley was indeed a comprehensive and encompassing piece of legislation specifically designed to prevent a repeat of the tech bubble and Enron. Yet, as the financial crisis raged last fall, media members who wanted to blame the problem on Bush and deregulation conveniently forgot this sweeping bill.
But there's more:
"Our present crisis began in the 1970s, during the Carter administration, with passage of the Community Reinvestment Act to stem bank redlining and liberalize lending in order to extend home ownership in lower-income communities. Then in the 1990s, the Department of Housing and Urban Development took a fateful step by getting the GSEs to accept subprime mortgages. With Fannie and Freddie easing credit requirements on loans they would purchase from lenders, banks could greatly increase lending to borrowers unqualified for conventional loans. In the name of extending affordable housing, this broadened the acceptability of risky loans throughout the financial system. "
"The risk lurking in the GSE portfolios was acknowledged in the Bush administration's first fiscal-year budget, released in April 2001. It stated that Fannie and Freddie were "a potential problem" because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in the financial markets, affecting federally insured entities and economic activity." Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan issued repeated warnings that the GSEs "placed the total financial system of the future at substantial risk." Such warnings went unheeded even after accounting scandals rocked Fannie and Freddie."
Yep. The Bush administration began warning of problems with Fannie and Freddie just three months into its first term, and continued doing so for years. But you wouldn't know that from how the press reported things last fall, would you?
However, what's done is done. The press wanted Obama to be president, and by dishonestly blaming Bush for the financial crisis, so-called journalists were able to paint John McCain as also being at fault thereby making it impossible for him to win.
Yet, Powell left us with a warning concerning this matter that is quite important given economic stimulus plans currently being discussed: (and this is te most important lesson kiddies! so pay attention here)
"But the lesson should be clear that socializing failed businesses -- whether in housing, health care or in Detroit -- is not a long-term solution. Expanding government's intrusion into the private sector doesn't come without great risk. The renewing and self-correcting nature of the private sector is largely lost in the public sector, where accountability is impaired by obfuscation of responsibility, and where special interests benefit even when the public good is ill-served."
"George Washington also warned against excessive partisanship, which distracts public councils and enfeebles public administration. Rather than blaming the party in power or the party formerly in power, the nation should stop living in denial of the mistakes of both parties.
Spreading failure across the entire economy risks turning a recession into a depression. Regulatory reform now must foster responsible behavior and financial accountability. Far better for our citizenry and businesses to have a strength and resourcefulness that comes from creativity, honesty and self-reliance than to have a growing dependence on a profligate government."
Powell touched on a lot of issues here that should be at the front of the current stimulus debate but sadly aren't.
In particular, the partisanship in the nation today prevents an honest assessment of the past thereby dooming us to repeat the same mistakes.
Take for example the Great Depression. For almost 80 years the left and their media minions have done everything within their power to blame all that era's ills on Herbert Hoover while crediting Franklin D. Roosevelt with the eventual economic recovery despite the former presiding over only two years of the Depression.
Yet, after eight years of unprecedented federal spending under Roosevelt, the unemployment rate was still a staggering 14.6 percent in 1940, and the Gross Domestic Product was still under its pre-Depression level.
Isn't this important, especially since our federal debt is already quite high?
Unfortunately, because of the partisanship, such can't be discussed. The left have so much time and money invested in Roosevelt supposedly being the greatest president of the 20th century that an honest assessment of what did and did not work back then is verboten.
But isn't that absurd? Assuming we really are on the verge of another Depression -- an assumption I don't necessarily agree with yet, mind you -- shouldn't we be examining everything we did before and during the last one in order to chart a more effective course this time?
The fact is the last Depression began in 1931 and despite all Roosevelt's good intentions didn't end until America entered World War II in 1941. Once the war ended, we went back into a very serious recession suggesting that nothing Roosevelt implemented had a lasting positive economic impact.
Isn't this relevant, especially given the Congressional Budget Office's report last week predicting current stimulus plans will actually hurt the economy in the long run?
Sadly, the answer is "No," for the left are so protective of Roosevelt's legacy that any analysis of his economic policies is totally unacceptable even as our nation grapples with solutions to our current financial problems.
Is this the way adults should behave? Is this really the best we can get from our elected officials?
Given the known failings and wastefulness of last year's TARP, wouldn't we be well-advised to halt all current stimulus discussions until a thorough and impartial analysis of previous plans -- INCLUDING those implemented by us during the '30s and by Japan during the '90s -- was accomplished thereby increasing the likelihood of success while reducing the chance of us making exactly the same mistakes?
If the answer is "No," the only conclusion is that Party, at this critical juncture in our nation's history, is indeed more important than policy, and partisanship is asphyxiating our capital.
George Washington must be rolling over in his grave.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Let Blue State Boston prisons take the Gitmo detainees
I say, since Obama wants to close Gitmo and there is a dilemma (not to Democrats who think these terrorists can just be put into the general prison population amongst criminal who already have too many rights and freedoms) as to where the detainees will go.
I say that since this is all Obama's idea and that current polls suggests that most Americans aren't against Gitmo or the treatment of the detainees there, the detainees should be sent to prisons only in blue states and specifically in counties and cities that voted specifically for Obama.
Let's put them in the communities with the liberal elitists that so blindly support this kind of B.S. and see how they like that! Let's send them to Boston, we can see if the Franks, or Kerrys or Kennedys like that plan!
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The ride of our lives
In my business (Oil and Gas) we knew the rise was over several months before the world knew it was. One of my superiors used a very good analogy: "We heard the chain stop" and we knew what would come next.
We've all ridden a roller coaster at some point in our lives and we can remember that familiar sound of the clicking chain pulling the cars up the first big hill. Clicking and clacking as we are pulled up this huge rise whether we want to go or not, it's too late, we're locked in and we are along for the ride. As we near the top we can see for miles and feel unbeatable, but we're too busy taking in the sites and revelling in our triumph that not all of us notice (but some do) that the clicking sound of the chain has stopped. For a moment most of us are weightless and euphoric as all brace for the next big thing...in this case, the fall and decline of Obama worship.
The chain has stopped clicking, we are at the top of this liberal/socialist roller coaster. There will be a lot of screaming, arms waving, lots of drama, pomp and circumstance, but it will soon be over and America will wake up and realize that Obama is not going to be able to wave his magic wand and fix everything. That he will not be able to deliver on most of his lofty campaign promises. This is his best moment. George Bush was so hated because mainstream media has spent 8 years herding people's opinions that way but more because he was faced with crisis after crisis and did what he has done better than many presidents, he made the tough decisions. Those tough decisions inevitably alienate people. The reason people love Barack Obama is because the media has done the exact opposite for him but more importantly because he has no history, he has made no major decisions, he has not had the fortune or chance to make decisions that alienated people. So, he too, will feel the sting of hatred, it will just take longer to surface.
That slim margin of people who voted him into office will begin to wonder why their lives are not suddenly better. There was no check in their mailbox, no new car in the driveway, no letter from their mortgage company telling them that their mortgage had been paid off. Their employer is still bracing for the worst, they will still see their taxes go sky high to pay for bailouts and nationalized health care, groceries and household goods will continue to cost more and more, they will see their friends, family and neighbors will lose their jobs left and right, lose their houses and disappear and know that their children and great grand children will be enslaved by this deficit and we will have gotten nothing for it.
Welcome to the roller coaster ride of your lives folks, you're strapped in and at the top of the first big hill. If you now feel like you didn't want to be on this ride, the time to act was 4 years ago while you were still in line. All we can do now is ride it out, hold on tight, pray our safety restraints do their jobs and the ride will be over and we can gather and regroup for 2012.
We've all ridden a roller coaster at some point in our lives and we can remember that familiar sound of the clicking chain pulling the cars up the first big hill. Clicking and clacking as we are pulled up this huge rise whether we want to go or not, it's too late, we're locked in and we are along for the ride. As we near the top we can see for miles and feel unbeatable, but we're too busy taking in the sites and revelling in our triumph that not all of us notice (but some do) that the clicking sound of the chain has stopped. For a moment most of us are weightless and euphoric as all brace for the next big thing...in this case, the fall and decline of Obama worship.
The chain has stopped clicking, we are at the top of this liberal/socialist roller coaster. There will be a lot of screaming, arms waving, lots of drama, pomp and circumstance, but it will soon be over and America will wake up and realize that Obama is not going to be able to wave his magic wand and fix everything. That he will not be able to deliver on most of his lofty campaign promises. This is his best moment. George Bush was so hated because mainstream media has spent 8 years herding people's opinions that way but more because he was faced with crisis after crisis and did what he has done better than many presidents, he made the tough decisions. Those tough decisions inevitably alienate people. The reason people love Barack Obama is because the media has done the exact opposite for him but more importantly because he has no history, he has made no major decisions, he has not had the fortune or chance to make decisions that alienated people. So, he too, will feel the sting of hatred, it will just take longer to surface.
That slim margin of people who voted him into office will begin to wonder why their lives are not suddenly better. There was no check in their mailbox, no new car in the driveway, no letter from their mortgage company telling them that their mortgage had been paid off. Their employer is still bracing for the worst, they will still see their taxes go sky high to pay for bailouts and nationalized health care, groceries and household goods will continue to cost more and more, they will see their friends, family and neighbors will lose their jobs left and right, lose their houses and disappear and know that their children and great grand children will be enslaved by this deficit and we will have gotten nothing for it.
Welcome to the roller coaster ride of your lives folks, you're strapped in and at the top of the first big hill. If you now feel like you didn't want to be on this ride, the time to act was 4 years ago while you were still in line. All we can do now is ride it out, hold on tight, pray our safety restraints do their jobs and the ride will be over and we can gather and regroup for 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
