Definition: it is the flow of government funds to private industry based not on merit or efficiency but rather on influence within the gov’t itself. For the cases below, this does appear to be the case, but somehow I doubt that he has the chutzpah to execute it. I think the truth is much uglier: Team Obama is in over its head (i.e. shades of Jimmy Carter).
SOLYNDRA
This company went down, taking $535 million in taxpayer dough with it. There are some rumors about inside influence. However, someone on the inside was releasing private email, and it seems that the Presidential visit had already been set, and there was pressure to approve the DOE loan before his big PR visit.
THE BUFFETT TAX
Then there is the odd symbiosis between Mr. O and the Oracle of Omaha. OO was an adviser to the Obama presidential campaign, plus he has scheduled a fundraiser for same upcoming. OO says that he is rich and not being taxed enough, and Team Obama comes up with something being dubbed ‘the Buffett Tax’. Here, it is hard to see how OO benefits. Besides: OO is widely regarded as financial genius, but I am beginning to wonder: does he understand the income tax was designed as a tax specifically on labor, not capital? It has nothing to do with fairness or rich vs. poor. That is why taxes in investment income are much lower, and also because capital is taxed internally in the financial system before it reaches the taxpayer.
IMMELT AND GE
He was appointed by Team Obama to tackle the problem of jobs migrating overseas. He is viewed as a poor candidate, since his company is doing this international job movement as fast as any multinational company; perhaps a campaign link or that GE jumped into Team Obama’s green energy bandwagon early and often? Maybe, but GE is a unique company: it is a wide ranging company that has its fingers in many, many pies, and does bring a unique perspective on the international job market.
So, is Team Obama guilty of crony capitalism? Perhaps, but I am not convinced. I am sure that it is one of the most incompetent Presidential administrations in history.
Apparently, said uncle was at a waffle house (apparently never having listened to his niece about healthy eating), got drunk, and nearly hit a police car.
Mr. President, I have a question. I will grant that your ‘certificate of live birth’ indicates your birth on the Hawaiian Islands rather than on the ship on the way to said islands (both of my parents have roots in Hawaii). I will further grant that the ‘birth certificate’ circulated later as a response to the brouhaha is genuine.
Question: what about your uncle?
I am getting just a wee bit tired of jawboners from both sides of the political aisle distorting the truth. Truth is something that you cannot pundit your way past. So, permit me to illuminate 3 popular myths.
TAXES ARE AT AN ALL TIME LOW
These folks gleefully full point out that currently, only 15-16% of GDP is going to taxes (which is true; the exact % depends on whose numbers you believe). These pundits then go on to say that further cutting taxes are unnecessary, witness the % they claim. This is simply not true. See, if millions of previously employed people lose their jobs, they are no longer paying federal/state/local taxes, but instead, are drawing wealth transfer payments from gov’t. It is no secret that this situation decreases the % take of GDP from taxes, regardless of the tax rates.
CUTTING TAXES WILL INCREASE JOBS
The theory here is that cutting taxes will put more $$$ into the pockets of consumers, they buy more stuff, and therefore create more jobs. Nonsense. Cutting taxes will make working people a tad richer, but it will not create more jobs. It never has: W tried this with those free checks, but no jobs were created then, and none will be created now. Do not get me wrong: I think lower taxes are a good reward for hard working Americans, but it will not create more jobs. Sorry about that.
MORE GDP = MORE JOBS
This may have been true 5 decades ago when I was born, but not today. See, a company like US Steel can create more product using fewer employees. How? Automation, computers, industrial robots, and so forth. So, if we dramatically increase GDP somehow, this has nothing to do with more jobs.
WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION, SMARTY PANTS?
I do not have one. If I did, I would be a very rich and very famous economist somewhere.
OK, gentlemen, you are totally out of ammo. Set for a spell. You have both failed, and more of the same ain’t gonna do anything: perhaps you have heard the old saw that stupidity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result?
You, Mr. O, have proven once and for all that fiscal stimulus has little, if any, effect on macroeconomics. You have jacked up the federal budget and the deficit to record levels, all to no avail. Yes, I know: you are scheduled to announce to a fatigued and unemployed nation that you have a new plan to fix things. Forgive my skepticism that you will announce more of the same.
You, Helicopter Ben, have used up every tool in the Fed’s toolbox, not to mention a few I had never heard of before. Like Mr. O, you have proved the relative impotence of the effect of monetary policy on macroeconomics. Borrowing money is now around 0.25%, i.e. free money to lend, yet this has had imperceptible results.
It is finally time for both of you to surrender to the invisible hand of capitalism. I can tell by your respective actions that you have not read the Wealth of Nations recently, so I suggest that you do so now while enjoying a cocktail. As an American who cares about my country, I beg you: let the economy heal itself. If you are in a hole, stop digging. The scab will never heal if you keep picking at it. And any other stupid cliche I can think of.You have stated, recently, that you think that billionaires like yourself should pay more in taxes to Uncle Sam. Well, Mr. Oracle of
I dare you.
I DOUBLE dare you.
Put your money where your mouth is, and write a check for $1 billion to the IRS before you read the end of this sentence.
No? I didn’t think so.
A politic pundit growled that one has not the right to criticize Mr. O’s plan, smarty pants, because where is your plan? Challenge accepted. Any idiot can put out an addle-brained jobs program, and I forthwith prove my theorem by presenting my plan to increase employment in the
My plan is very flexible, sort of like eating Dim Sum or a buffet: whatever looks good, take it.
E-VERIFY AND HIB VISAS
Require all employers to run all employees, current and new, to run their SSN’s thru E-Verify, and prohibit all H1B visas. This situation will persist until the unemployment rate is below 5%. See, employers use legal/illegal immigrant workers who will work for lower and/or illegal wages. Problem: these workers often send $$$ home and their employment does not always show up on official employment stats. This choice will increase the cost of employment to business, not to mention consumer prices. You didn’t think that there was going to be a free lunch, did you?
HECK WITH THE ENVIRONMENT, LET’S ALL POLLUTE
Let oil companies drill until they are drunk:
ELIMINATE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
Well, OK, I will permit you to have 4 weeks worth. After that? Nada, my friend. Is this mean and not compassionate? Sure. Will this create suffering, hunger, and humiliation. Absolutely. Will this cause you to get your fat *ss off the stupid couch, go job hunting (we used to call this ‘pounding the pavement’) 16 hours a day, 7 days a week, and accept virtually anything? You betcha.
ELIMINATE THE MINIMUM WAGE
OK, tell me: you are faced with either an empty refrigerator or picking up dog poop and soda bottles in the park for $2 per hour, which would you rather have? With this choice, if you can convince someone to take a job at a low wage, that wage is totally legal.
MAKE DAY LABOR LEGAL
The journaleros (I am sure this is spelled wrong) have the right idea. Make it totally legal to hire someone for only one day and pay them in cash at the end of the day’s work shift. OK, put in a few requirements, but make it legal for anyone. Yeah, the IRS and the Social Security will get cheated, but this will persist only until unemployment goes down.
TELL THE NLRB AND THE EEOC TO TAKE A HIKE
All rules and regulations from these 2 folks have the net effect of preventing employers from hiring whomever under whatever conditions they please. Put all such things from these 2 agencies on legal abeyance until unemployment is below 5%.
SICK THE IRS ON ILLEGALS
Many do not know this, but it is illegal for the IRS to crack down on illegal immigrants. It is easy to identify these folks: they do not have a legitimate SSN, so the IRS assigns them a ‘TIN’ (tax payer id #) for payroll purposes. These numbers are easy to know: they have a unique numbering scheme (no, I forget what this is, something to do with ‘9’ in the first few digits). Require the IRS to cooperate with ICE in identifying and deporting illegals, opening up jobs for real citizens. These illegals are easily identified by their curious TIN.
BEG THE EVIL MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS ON HANDS AND KNEES
US companies are sitting on $trillions of cold, hard cash that they do not wish to spend. They are fearful. If they do spend, there will be mucho jobs. Let us ask them what changes we can make to get them to spend their saved up dough, and make any and all changes they wish. Yes: we will be their servants. So what?
Now that the party is over, it is time to clean up the mess and see what lies in the future. There is no definitive answer to my question, but the real loser seems to be our children and grandchildren. Not only have we mortgaged their inheritance, we will pass on to them ginormous credit card bills that will force them to declare bankruptcy.
TEA PARTY LOST
You might think that the nasty anti-Tea-Party rhetoric in the liberal media to be a sign that they won, and more so from statements that they have genuinely shifted the debate.
Hogwash.
True, there are no tax increases, but there are also no real cuts in the current fiscal budget.
OBAMA WON
He is being pilloried by the Left because he did not get a tax increase, and therefore conclude that Mr. O lost the battle. Not so. Mainly, he got such a huge debt ceiling increase, that this issue will not come up again until AFTER the 2012 elections. This is a victory of major proportions. The power the Tea Party had has been spent, and Mr. O will not have to cut a single thing: not Medicaid, not Medicare, not Social Security, nothing. If fact, the only sure cuts are Defense. The budget deficit will be $1+ trillion as far as the Excel spreadsheet can see.
AIN’T GONNA BE NO SPENDING CUTS
The true cuts to the current year fiscal budget is teeny-tiny and pretty much a rounding error in a $3.5 trillion budget. Current year legislation cannot obligate future Legislatures to spending cuts, and the Dems and Mr. O are fully cognizant of this.
BOEHNER AND McCONNELL SURRENDER
They could have exacted their pound of flesh: they would have had the hearty support of the entire Republican party. They chose not to, because they truly do not wish to reduce Federal spending, power, or influence.
TAXES WILL GO UP
The 600# canary in the room is the expiration of the Bush Jr. tax cuts. The agreement blithely ignores this, because the plan of everyone (including Mr. B and Mr. C) is to let it expire and increase taxes.
WHERE ARE THE CUTS TO MEDICAID AND SSI?
I examined the final legislation. If the mystical-magical budget-cutting-commission does not come up with cuts that pass Congress and get signed by the Prez, automatic cuts appear: $1.0 trillion over 9 years. Problem: 52% comes from DOD, and 48% from everything else, excluding Social Security and Medicaid. Interestingly, Medicare CAN be cut. Why? Because they went back to the old Gramm-Rudman-Hollings bill from 1985 for the language of budget cuts.
A COMMISSION? REALLY?
Well, we tried that before: ever heard of Simpson-Bowles? Hmm?
LET IT BLOW UP, WHO CARES?
Well, really: rather than reach for a deal, they should just let the Federal Gov’t go bankrupt. Stop the SSI checks and military pay; so what? It will all the chaos would have been on Mr. O’s head.
I have been amused, and not in the good sense, at the continued inability of Republicans to properly use their power and correctly play their trump cards. Ain’t fur nuthin’ that declarer’s partner is called ‘dummy’.
AIN’T GONNA BE NO TREASURY PAPER DEFAULT
Treasury announced yesterday that redeeming Treasury paper will go to the front of the line and that there will be no default. Well: surprise, surprise, surprise. This task takes up $20 billion, SSI is another $60 billion, and there is $120 billion leftover for all the other stuff. True, Uncle Sam will have to choose which bills he will pay and those which he will not, kinda like a regular family that is having trouble making ends meet. With a few accounting tricks with the Fed, this situation can persist for many, many months.
THE TEA PARTY HAS WON
Senate Pro Tem Reid has taken a tax increase off of the table. Time for the Tea Party to do an end zone dance, take a Sharpie out their left tube sock, and sign a football from a fan in the front row of the stands.
BOEHNER PLAN BE HEAP BAD MEDICINE
(forgive my astonishingly accurate use of the Kwakiutl language). His plan is a $3.1 trillion cut in federal spending (I hasted to point out that even if every nickel of this comes to pass, it is still way short of the $4 trillion that S&P/Moody’s/Fitch says is necessary to avoid a downgrade of Treasury paper). $1.3 trillion of specified cuts (most of which is in the ‘out years’ and hence will never happen anyway); problem: CBO scored it and is only $800 billion. The remaining $1.8 trillion comes from a commission to be created later: kicking the f*cking can down the road yet again (remember his actions and statements during the CR brouhaha?). Has he not noticed that Mr. O has already tried this, Simpson-Bowles as has Ryan? Both plans have been completely ignored, and the one B anticipates (which can easily include a big, whopping, punitive tax increase) will suffer the same fate: total budget reduction = $0.00
NEVER THE TWAIN SHALL MEET
Some boneheads have suggested that Reid’s taking tax increases off the table is the result of the Speaker standing firm, and that we must therefore, in consequence, support his flaccid spending reduction plan. Guh? Reid’s action is probably the result of a private conversation with the House Minority Whip and his most recent head count that a tax increase will simply not happen, and totally irrelevant to anything the Speaker has or has not done.
THE DEBT CEILING MUST BE INCREASED
The Tea Party stance, that they will simply not vote for this, is totally nonsensical. Yes, it makes a mighty nice talking point, but really? Yes, we can still run the Federal Gov’t and not increase the debt ceiling and balance the budget: any idiot who can run spreadsheet can come up with a budget. Problem: this will require an immediate, across-the-board cut of 33%. Unless the Tea Party is going to announce this afternoon that they support a 33% cut in Social Security checks that will go out in August and forever after, their stance is not logical. Of course: in the process of allowing an increase in the debt ceiling, the Tea Party is certainly entitled to exact their pound of flesh from the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
I WANT A TAX INCREASE
No, no: put down the pitchforks and torches. Sit down. Relax. Breathe. I am referring to a Gipper tax increase, not a Marxist-Leninist-soak-millionaires-and-billionaires-and-the-rich-and-ain’t-it-unfair one (and since when is an employed married couple earning $250,000 a year ‘millionaires’?). You young whipper-snappers weren’t alive at the time, so permit me to illuminate the former. Yes, RWR took the top income tax rate of 70% down to less than half that. To do that, however, he did something that would be considered a tax increase by the Tea Party. You could, at the time, fully deduct charitable contributions directly off of your Gross Income from your 1040 right off of the top even if you did not itemize; if you did itemize, you could also deduct the interest you paid on your credit card bills. These and many other popular tax dodges were simply eliminated. I think that Simpson-Bowles got it right: let us eliminate the tax deductions for home mortgage interest and state/local taxes. In fact, let us eliminate 1040 Schedule A altogether and all those tax deductions; in return, the top income tax rate will be reduced to 25%. In this case, the tax code will become flatter, fairer, and simpler. Even better, we will no longer be obligated to spend $100s billion on tax preparation services and accountants.
FOCUS, PEOPLE
For the first time since the days of Newt the Speaker, Republicans are actively trying to reduce the size and spending and tax bill of Uncle Sam. Republicans and their supporters should be celebrating, enjoying, encouraging and luxuriating: it should be a wet dream come true. Instead, the House leadership is persisting in their strategy of a circular firing squad. Removing Mr. B as the speaker would not be the worst outcome imaginable in the current situation (I vote for McCarthy, Ryan, DeMint, or Cantor, if I had won in 2010, that is).
Well, he indirectly threatened that if the Federal Debt Ceiling is not raised, you might not get your SSI checks. To be sure, Mr. O has done the same thing.
What nonsense.
I thank whatever business website (I forget which one) calculated: every month, Uncle Sam receives $200 billion, but pays out $60 billion in SSI checks. In fact, this happens automatically by statute, and can be changed only by an Executive Order.
So, you see, plenty ‘o dough also for Veteran Benefits, Military Salary, etc. The shortfall is something like $100 billion a month, so we would have to shut down the Dept of Energy and Labor and Ag and Education and whatever. Big fat hairy deal.
Above politician has traded ad hominem barbs with Congressman Alan West. I know that this has riled the Right, but I have slightly different take.
For one thing, this has revealed the chairpencils long standing personal vendetta against West (fyi: they are from neighboring districts in
Second, it has made West a celebrity. Before, I would hazard to guess that virtually no one, even Republicans, had ever heard of him. Now, thanks to the goodly chairleaf, contributions from all over the country will pour into his 2012 campaign coffers. He is conservative, a war hero, and, by the way, black.
In this case, I would encourage the chairwindow to continue said behavior.
C’mon people: the Republicans, with the Tea Party as its foundation, have all of the trump cards. If anything dopey happens, it will clearly be on the head of the President. Treasury paper default or downgrade? Blame the Prez, he is the leader. Financial chaos?
But look at the behavior: the ‘Gang of Six’; McConnell’s cockamamie and unconstitutional idea, Boehner saying that of course they will compromise. Contrast this with the behavior of Dems when they were in the minority: everyone was on the same page, the morning conference call from the White House, they even used similar language in their comments to the press. They were disciplined in pursuit of a specific goal.
Are Republicans not as smart?
Yes, I know: you love eating banana splits (throwing around $trillions like Santa Claus). However, you cannot eat them for breakfast, lunch, and dinner: the frig is nearly empty. It is high time to buckle down and eat your peas (big, painful cuts in the current year budget, not promises of same in the ‘out years’).
I remind you that the bond rating agencies have stated that just increasing the debt ceiling will not do. It must also be accompanied by deep, painful, politically unpopular cuts in all areas of gov’t spending, including food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.
(For the record, I love peas: they are one of the few frozen things that I will eat; a hunk of butter, salt, pepper, pinch of sugar, and genuine Paprika, and I can eat a whole bag of the things).
There is a movement afoot to create a city council district encompassing UC students, the idea being to elect a student to the Berkeley City Council. Anyone who barely scratches the surface of city politics knows what nonsense this is, so much so that I wonder if there is an ulterior motive at work, i.e. I smell a rat.
The majority of the student body does not vote, and those that do remain registered in their home district, and do not reregister in
That is #7, currently occupied by
It would be quite easy (and has been since 1986), with a concentrated effort including a UC student voter reg drive and GOTV, to elect a student in #7. Yet, since districts were invented in
So there.
The
(I pause briefly while waiting for you to stop laughing).
Usually, this has never been a factor, since Congress routinely increased the ceiling without giving it a second thought. With a strong Tea Party wind blowing through the land, the debt ceiling is having a concrete effect on budget negotiations for the first time in my lifetime.
Yes, the current plan of ‘cut (spending), cap (put a permanent cap on the total size of the budget), and balance (the ol’ balanced budget amendment lives again)’ is of course the correct action. Still, it has little chance of surviving the Senate, much less a veto pen.
If, as it seems increasingly likely, we end up with a last minute compromise comprising a tax increase, debt ceiling increase, and cuts in the Federal budget in the out-years (which, somehow, never seem to materialize), what use is the debt ceiling? If it does not, in the end, make a real difference now (other than inspiring a round of Kabuki theater), then when, if ever?
In this case, we should simply get rid of the stupid thing. Its existence might make us feel good, but c’mon, let’s get real. I vote for Gramm-Rudman-Hollings as a useful tool that actually worked.
(For those who do not know why the phrase above has quotes, Google that phrase along with “Richard Nixon”). So far, those who are opposed to Truth, Justice, and The American Way are:
(Oh, wait, scratch the last one; that one is from my list). In the World According to Obama, these are folks who have earned more enough, and have more money than they really need. Therefore, Mr. O has the right to tax away what he believes to be excess and spend it according to his own political orthodoxy.
You might think that this is populist, arrogant, envious, Marxist, or any combination of these; you would probably be correct. However, witness: perhaps these are clawings on the cliff as one slowly slips away. He knows that his tax-the-rich mantra is not gaining traction, and is adding more to the list hoping that his demagoguery will take hold (see Rules for Radicals, Alinsky, p. 129: eleventh rule; “…If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside…”).
We shall see.
First, I draw your attention to the great state of
If the limit on Uncle Sam’s credit card is not increased by Aug. 2, nothing will happen; zip, zero, zilch, nada. Most of the $$$ Uncle Sam pays out is automatic, and there is more than enough $$$ to pay off all Treasury paper being redeemed, Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid/Welfare payments, all wages for federal law enforcement and the military, and even all Federal employees will get paid.
The President and SecTreas are flat-out lying to you when they imply that you won’t get your Social Security check starting Aug. 3. What will really happen? The cash flow shortfall will come out selectively from voluntary/optional payments like foreign aid payments, agricultural subsidies, and so forth. Explain to me why this is a bad thing?
The President has the Sword of Damocles hanging over his head: unless Republicans cave, he is a whole heap ‘o trouble. Republicans must realize this, or they will miss a once-in-a-lifetime oppurtunity to truly limit the size of the Federal behemoth (this also makes an excellent opportunity to de-fund Obamacare). One can only hope that the power of the Tea Party in the House gives Country Club Republicans a spine.
As for McConnell’s cockamamie end-around the Constitution he pronounced today, sigh…not a good sign, sounds like a capitulation-in-the-making.
It is amusing, but not in a good sense, to watch the antics of the current occupant of the Guv’s mansion. OK, so who gets screwed this week? Amazon Affiliates, c’mon down!
Yes, I know: I must first explain what an affiliate is. You have a web page or blog or webfront store that might get people to buy things. So, you put a link on your webpage, but the other side of the link is an Amazon product page. Whenever anyone clicks on the link and buys something, you get a 15% commission. Pretty neat deal, huh? In
Moonbeam and his cohorts just passed a law taxing internet sales, aimed mainly at that internet retailing powerhouse Amazon. The bad guys proceed to rub their hands together in glee, anticipating all the moola they are about to receive. Did no one think to review what happened in other states that attempted, without success, to do the same thing? You guessed it: rather than agree, Amazon did what it usually does in an attempt to save money for their customers: it stops all $$$ to the state’s affiliates and gets an exemption to the internet sales tax.
Was this a wise move? You be the judge.
This has nothing to do with politics, right? Or not. I think that the same visceral, deep-in-the-gut reaction to this court case is the same elemental force that causes people to decide which political party to vote for, so let us spend a moment or two thinking about this case.
I think that Mark Levin was correct: the public outrage over the verdict of ‘not guilty’ is a reaction to the media coverage of the case rather than the merits of the DA’s case.
For those who have been living under a rock for the past couple of weeks, Ms. Anthony was accused of killing her 2 yo to continue her life as a bon vivant. The jury acquitted her on all counts. Hence, cries of outrage over a miscarriage of justice.
The jury had a choice of murder-1, murder-2, and manslaughter. Not only did the jury to not convict her of any of these, they did so like greased lightening in a mere 11 hours, even more amazing since they also had to consider 4 other charges of lying to police.
No, this does not mean that she did not commit the crime. It does mean that the DA’s case was weak and flaccid, and that he is probably not qualified to clean your toilet bowl.
In this case, it seems likely that she really did kill her baby. However, in the
However, does my opining convince you that justice was truly done? Don’t you still think that Ms. Anthony truly should have been judged guilty of murder? This is the same sort of thinking that I encountered when I ran for Congress. No matter how convincing your evidence, Joe or Jill six-pack will remain unmoved. This is the obstacle that politicians face in an election where you have the facts but not the emotion on your side.
OK, last time we left our hero, he promised $100 billion+ in tax cuts in exchange for passing a budget. It turns out that the $$$ cut that he agreed to was really half, and when accountants analyzed the numbers, the actual tax cuts was in the single digits.
Happy Days Are Here Again!!! Our hero is at it again, this time trying to extract yet even more concessions and spending cuts! I wish to remind you that the House Speaker, leader of the Republicans, is an old-fashioned ‘country club Republican’. By that, I mean: he is OK with the size and power of the Federal Government, its intrusion into private and public life, and most importantly with the amount of taxes. His only problem is that the Dems have the wrong philosophy; this is at polar opposite as to what the Tea Party stands for, and he could care less. It is inevitable that he will rollover like a house pet to whatever Obama puts into his bowl.
A couple of days ago, Sen. Kyle (Az) let the cat out of the bag: current negotiations do not involve tax increases, because B et al are calling it ‘revenue enhancement’ and ‘fees’, and not a word about converting Medicaid to a block grant or Medicaid into a voucher program.
Is this anyway to craft a budget? This is supposed to include: Congressional hearings, public comment, back-and-forth between Congressional Committees, lots of media coverage and somewhat inaccurate analysis, and the Senate and the White House. Currently, the negotiations are occurring in secret behind closed doors.
Is this anyway to build a budget: ‘of the people, for the people and by the people’?
Hmmm?
This is a once in a lifetime chance to truly bring Uncle Sam’s budget under control, and to cure people of that monthly check of free $$$ at taxpayer expense. Over my lifetime, there have been many effective ways to reduce Uncle Sam’s belt notches.
Note to Obama: I will agree to as many DOD cuts as you wish, if you will agree to 50% in immediate cuts to Medicare and Medicaid.
Do we have a deal, Mr. President? Hello?
His exasperation with the Prez was certainly palpable, and it is difficult to fault him.
Witness: Obama ‘challenged’ Republicans to get the budget done, as so stated with glee by many in the mainstream media. But, what exactly is Obama doing in his daily calendar? Golfing, fund raising,
Also, witness Obama’s hypocrisy. He criticizes corporate jets, but he personally has the most expensive one of them all: a jumbo jet liner, Boeing 757 or whatever it is, not to mention Air Force 2 and the whatever that Pelosi used to have access to. Note carefully that these are NOT Jetstreams, which is what, for the most part, most corporate jets are.
I heard O’s speech today announcing the withdrawal of US troops from
No, there is nothing logical or inventible or unavoidable about O’s foreign policy. It is on his shoulders to explain, and he failed.
Do you remember 2008? An unknown newbie promised that if we spend $767B in taxpayer money, that unemployment will not go above 8%. There were triumphant headlines proudly proclaiming: ‘we are all Keynesians now!’.
Bullshit.
Not a nickel of yon fiscal spending made one dadgum bit of difference, despite the fact it was at least an order of magnitude bigger than anything Keynesians had imagined, even in their wildest wet dreams. Yet, you will read many seemingly-intelligent editorials proudly proclaiming that the problem is that it was not enough $$$: what we need is even more.
Double bullshit.
It is high-time that we realize that the
Sigh…I am getting just a wee bit tired of so-called experts say that not raising the US Federal Debt Ceiling will be disaster: we will default on Treasury paper and lose our AAA bond rating; there will be chaos and collapse of the world-wide banking system; the earth will open up and swallow the US whole into a gigantic, gaping, fiery maw.
Oh, puleez, gimme a break.
The US Federal gov’t receives bazillions of dollars each and every day, and pays out just as much every day. Uncle Sam has 2 types of payments: repayment of debt and payment on accounts payable. If the debt ceiling is not raised and we ‘run out of money’, the accounts payable will be cut back, but all people trying to redeem Treasury paper will receive 100% of their dough: there will be no default.
Permit me to illustrate. Take out $1.00 in coins and place it on the table. Take 30¢ into one pile (the house mortgage payment), and 70¢ in another (food, clothing, vacation, entertainment); no, I do not know the exact numbers: this is only an example. Now, mom walks in and says: sorry, honey, Dad’s work hours have been cut back, and next week you will have 5¢ less. OK, question: are you going to default on your debt payment and risk your house, or are going to take the nickel out of the accounts payable stack and eat cereal for dinner for a while?
So, what happens if Uncle Sam cuts back on accts payable? Those receiving agricultural subsidies, foreign subsidies, free food stamps, federal employee pension and health payments, and federal contractors will have to wait a wee while before beginning to receive regular payments again. I would be willing to bet that there will be no major consequences, besides the usual wailing and gnashing of teeth by people getting free money from Uncle Sam, until after the 2012 elections.
Today, said Congressman has succeeded and is celebrating his efforts to resume regular airline service to that evil, despotic, anus-of-humanity country and Communist dictator
To whomever challenges her in the 2012 election, notate bene.
For the record: during my campaign for said Congressional district in 2010, I never once criticized my opponent or even mentioned his name. For this one instance, I make an exception. To answer your next question, no: 2012 is off of the agenda.
A brief history lesson: the congressman in question got his start as a low level staffer for Ron Dellums when he occupied CD9 a couple of decades ago, and he is an avowed Communist. You could say that the current occupant of said seat learned his lessons well, since his election victory margins are much larger than that of his mentor.
Listening to Mark Levin today, and had a story that even shocked me: a citizen behind on student loan payments, had a DOE paramilitary force invade their home. Apparently, the OIG (office of inspector general) had their own police force.
OK, since when does OIG have independent enforcement authority? OIG investigates and corrects behavior of internal, gov’t employees, not against the regulated populace.
Those who have any doubt that the Prez is an arrogant tyrant, you can now rest assured.
Listen, and listen carefully: I could care less about the Congressman’s personal/sexual life. Such things are, correctly in my view, entirely private and irrelevant.
However.
He deserves to lose his job because he told a lie. Nixon rightfully lost his elected office, not because of a third-rate burglary that was at best a misdemeanor, but because he told a lie. Ditto forToday, between frosty longnecks and undercooked cheeseburgers, take a moment to remember those Americans who gave their all protecting our country. During my campaign, the contacts from military (current and retired) made me proud to be an American.
There is an old saying: if we keep their memory, our loved ones really are not gone.
Have a happy Memorial Day.
OK, being a member of the SF/Bay Area Republican party, those who question O’s citizenship are, deservedly in my view, derisively called ‘birthers’. Is Mr. O a
Today, the President said that
A BRIEF HISTORY LESSON
You young ’uns can be forgiven for not understanding what the fuss is all about.
In 1973, the exact same thing happened, only this time the Muslim defeat was even more embarrassingly quick and complete. Here, they gained the
TRADING LAND FOR PEACE
Every Israeli government since I was child had proposed to give back said territory to the Muslim countries, in exchange for a statement that they recognize that
See, Islam does not want their land back, they want to completely destroy
SHAME ON YOU, MR PRESIDENT
That is why Obama’s proposal for
Point in fact,
QUESTION
What on earth is O up to? Surely he realizes that his proposal is unfair and unjust. No previous president, not even Carter, has been so blatantly partisan. Perhaps he thinks that outreach and friendship to Islam is more important than the continued existence of a sovereign Jewish country?
To answer your next pesky question, I echo Boehner: O said he is Christian, and I take him at his word.
MR PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE NO MANNERS
To make such a pronouncement the day before an official visit to the White House by the Israeli Prime Minister is simply in bad taste. A rapper was shown more respect. Now we know where O’s priorities lie.
There is currently a proposed municipal law in
This is clearly anti-Semitic. Circumcision is a key event in the life of a Jewish baby. Banning this act is slap in the face to Jews: it is akin to prohibiting Protestants to wear a cross around their necks, prohibiting Hindus from wearing a turban, prohibiting Muslim females from wearing a burkha, or prohibiting a Jew from wearing a yarmulke at public events (oh, wait, this is already banned in some cases).
Being a circumcised male, I sometimes wish it were not so. ALL males from my generation are ‘clippies’. Nevertheless, this is no reason to outright ban a medical procedure that is integral to a religious procedure.
If
If this were a football game and I were an official, I would throw my yellow flag and penalize the defense 15 yards for illegal facemask grabbing, automatic first down.
Just in case you have lost track, Ms. Logan is the young, pretty, blonde, white, Christian, female, reporter who, separated from her male camera crew, was stripped naked and brutally gang raped by a large group of angry, male Muslims.
So, here is my question: what the Hell kind of religion permits such treatment of females?
In my world, women are to be honored, cherished, loved, and, most of all, obeyed. They are the civilizing force that converts hairy, smelly, rude males into decent husbands qualified to take his place in polite society.
I have yet to hear of an apology from the Muslim world.
I am getting tired of Liberal media sycophants calling O’s decision to invade OBL’s luxury residence as courageous and gutsy. They could not be more wrong if they were wearing tin foil hats and Star Trek t-shirts. Permit me to correct the record.
Coward #1
By his own admission, he was presented with capture/invasion plans more than once, and said ‘NO’ each and every time, I am sure being constantly badgered by the military to give the green light. Eventually he did, but it would be interesting to find out what changed his mind: perhaps sinking poll numbers or advice from his 2012 campaign manager.
Coward #2
He will not release pictures of the dead OBL. He is afraid of a negative backlash from Muslims, including the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda. He would rather make nice with radical Islam rather than give Americans closure over 9/11. He fears even one act of terrorism or a simple Arab street protest that can be traced to something he did.
Coward #3
The entire operation, along with its success, should have been kept a secret for as long as possible. Sure, the secret would have slipped out eventually, but in the mean time the US would have a powerful strategic advantage over radical Islam. The Prez must have been afraid that this action would give the US a leg-up in the War Against Terrorism, preferring to squander this advantage in favor of proudly trumpeting the success, doing a victory lap at Ground Zero, and pumping up his poll numbers.
Liar #1
In his address on Sunday night, the Prez used an awful lot of first person pronouns. I do not recall him giving credit to Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or waterboarding as being key pieces to the successful killing of OBL.
Liar #2
The stories from the administration as to what really happened changed by the hour. This is clear evidence that the White House is desperately attempting to give a positive political spin, rather than simply telling the whole and complete truth.
Liar #3
Even his own SecState is lying. A photo is circulating of same apparently shocked at something she is viewing. Her own explanation is something about allergies. I have hay fever, but that is not what I look like when I try to suppress a sneeze. Question: what is she, and the persons sitting next to her, covering up?
Now is not the time to play politics. For the nonce, let us just bask in glory. We finally nailed that SOB. Osama is dead, long-lived Osama!
No, I do not have training, either formal or informal, in political philosophy, and not really qualified to the write this article. However, after a while, one gets just a wee-bit tired of people misusing terms like: fascist, Socialism, and Communist. So, this is my attempt to untangle the mess. Yes, the descriptions are rather elementary, but this is how I think about it so I can keep them straight.
A nationalistic political system that tightly integrates foreign policy, military, culture, economy, values, religion, and citizens using corporate principles into an organic, obedient whole.
The economic policies can be left or right wing. Individuality and liberty are strongly discouraged in favor of conformity. An aggressive, militaristic foreign policy is a key aspect.
A variety of Fascism that employs the principles of racial superiority, eugenics, and anti-Semitism as a source of strength.
This political system envisions the common or public ownership, use and allocation of economic resources for the common good. It frowns upon bureaucracy, hierarchy, and power structures in favor of collective or dispersed decision making. This rather broad philosophy encompasses many different flavors, differing mainly in the relative balance of power between collective decision making and the free market; European Social Democracies lean towards the latter. The hallmarks of this flavor are workers’ rights, welfare, and social justice.
A political philosophy envisioning an endless class struggle between the rich (bourgeoisie) and the working poor (proletariat) for control over wealth, culminating in the victory, eventually, of the latter. It comes in several different flavors, including: Leninism (which adds a one party political system to catalyze the process), Stalinism (which adds central economic planning and 5 year plans), and Maoism (ah ain’t quite sure about this one, since ‘The Little Red Book’ is an incoherent mess, but has something to do with empowering peasant villages; in the end, it is hard to distinguish between this and the central party statism of Stalinism, even though Maoists hated Stalinism even more than capitalism, probably for something about betraying the cause or something).
It is a serious mistake to equate or confuse Communism with Socialism. Although Communism is a single party political system, it also a mistake to assume that all single party systems are Communist.
Absolute, total, unlimited control of all aspects of life, public and private, by either one person or a group of people.
These are not exactly the same from a historical viewpoint, but as a modern gloss they can be thought of as identical. A variety of Totalitarianism where power is exercised by a single person.
Where a small group of people exercises effective control.
An Oligarchy where the controlling group are the rich and the wealthy.
The head of state is the husband (king) and/or wife (queen) of a royal family. It is hereditary, but can also be usurped. Often, monarchs are politically weaker than the head of state of other political systems. There are several varieties of monarchy depending on the relative balance of power between the monarch and other political institutions, including Constitutional Monarchy.
Strictly speaking, the government of the
A rare political system where the religious leaders are also the political leaders that rule the country. The existence of strong influence by the Catholic Church in Medieval Spain or Sharia law are not indications of theocracy (e.g. Saudi Arabia has Sharia law, but it is a monarchy). Current example is
Those who are most capable and successful therefore accumulate political power and economic resources. Most Capitalistic countries are Meritocracies. It is not enough for a country to simply declare that the most talented and most able will have the most power and influence: this must be true in practice.
As you can tell, some of these terms overlap, and it sometimes becomes difficult to classify a nation’s governance with certainty. Is
Yes, I know, there are probably many mistakes, and I encourage you blog when find them.
Article 24.Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.Article 25.(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.Article 26.(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
