We are seeing a lot of talk about a government shutdown as both sides of the aisle jockey to assign the blame to the other side. THE DEMOCRATS TALKING POINTS ARE THAT THE MEASURES PROPOSED BY THE GOP ARE EXTREME AND THAT THE GOP HAS BEEN HIJACKED BY AN EXTREMIST TEA PARTY.
In the meantime, the Republicans claim that they don’t want a shutdown, but if it comes it will be the Democrats fault. First THE DEMOCRATS FAILED TO PASS A BUDGET BACK LAST SEPTEMBER WHEN THEY HAD MAJORITIES IN BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS. Second with a projected deficit of $1.6 trillion the Democrats have offered up only $30 billion in cuts which equals 1.9% of the deficit. The Republicans are attempting to double that cut to $60 billion or less than 4%.
The CURRENT SPENDING IS AT A RATE THAT WILL SPEND $3.8 TRILLION DOLLARS. The Democrats seem to find cutting that by $60 billion is something we cannot afford to do. If we look at spending in Bush’s last year and increase it by 3% for each year since we find that spending should be $3.17 trillion. This means Obama has increased spending by 633 billion above that figure. THE DEMOCRATS SEEM TO BE ONLY ABLE TO FIND CUTS OF 5% OF THAT EXCESS INCREASE AND THINK THAT 10% IS EXTREME.
Yesterday CHUCK SHUMER WAS CAUGHT GIVING SOME FELLOW DEMOCRATS THE TALKING POINTS about extreme cuts and the TEA Party while HOWARD DEAN ADMITTED THAT IF HE WERE STILL THE CHAIRMAN OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HE WOULD BE SILENTLY ROOTING FOR A SHUTDOWN.
We are in full partisan mode right now, but THE REPUBLICAN PARTISAN MODE IS MUCH BETTER FOR THE COUNTRY than is the Democratic one. But a shutdown would test my viewpoint. If the public supports balancing the budget they will blame the Democrats. If they don’t, they will blame the Republicans. In either case it probably is a good idea to find out now where the public is.
Republicans jump on Shumer’s gaffe
Republican leaders wasted little time playing up reports Tuesday that New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, the third-ranking Senate Democrat, told other members of his party that the caucus had urged him TO START CALLING REPUBLICAN BUDGET CUT PROPOSALS “EXTREME” DURING PUBLIC BATTLE BETWEEN THE PARTIES OF GOVERNMENT SPENDING.
“Chuck Schumer did us a favor. He exposed their tactic,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Republican of Virginia, told reporters. “You heard his comment. HE’S BASICALLY INSTRUCTING HIS MEMBERS TO DEEM ANY SPENDING CUT UNREASONABLE. ANY SPENDING CUT. SO CLEARLY THEY’RE NOT SERIOUS.”
Are the Democrats serious? Only about getting a political advantage and not about fixing the biggest problem the country faces.
Obama tanking in the polls
AMERICAN VOTERS DISAPPROVE 48 - 42 PERCENT OF THE JOB PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA IS DOING AND SAY 50 - 41 PERCENT HE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE RE-ELECTED IN 2012, both all-time lows, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
This compares to a 46 - 46 percent job approval rating and a 45 - 47 percent split on the President's re-election in a March 3 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University. IN A HYPOTHETICAL 2012 MATCHUP, PRESIDENT OBAMA GETS 36 PERCENT OF THE VOTE TO 37 PERCENT FOR AN UNNAMED REPUBLICAN CHALLENGER.
The more you know about Obama, the more uncomfortable you feel.
Christie at this point the front runner for the Republicans
The Newsmax/IBOPE Zogby survey shows CHRISTIE TO BE THE CHOICE OF 23.6 PERCENT OF LIKELY GOP PRIMARY VOTERS. That dwarfs the 10.3 percent for second-place finisher Sarah Palin.
“Conservative voters like Chris Christie,” pollster John Zogby tells Newsmax, “because he offers AN ACTUAL GOVERNING MODEL THAT’S CONSISTENT WITH HIS AND THEIR PHILOSOPHY.
“Essentially, he has been fearless in terms of tackling unions, tackling budget cuts, and so on,” Zogby says. “But they also know that he’s an affable personality, that HE DOES NOT COME OFF AS THIS ANGRY RADICAL, BUT AS A CREDIBLE FELLOW.
“And at the same time,” says Zogby, “HE’S PORTLY, HE’S REAL, HE’S NOT OUT OF CENTRAL CASTING. And in many ways, for Republicans, he’s the un-Obama.”
Newsmax/Zogby Poll: Christie Leads GOP Pack
The more you know about Christie, the more comfortable you feel. I guess he is the “un-Obama.” Can you imagine Obama and Christie debating? They would look like Laurel and Hardy and we know who the smart one was with those two.
There was nothing particularly wrong about Sen. Dick Durbin holding a hearing today on anti-Muslim bigotry. It’s just that NOBODY AT THE HEARING WAS ABLE TO GIVE A PARTICULARLY COMPELLING REASON FOR IT.
Muslim Advocates Executive Director Farhana Khera testified about “A GROWING MENACE” of “RISING” BIGOTRY against Muslim Americans. Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez spoke of the “steady stream of violence” against the Islamic community. The hearing was heavy on anecdotes and light on statistics.
There’s no denying that there have been contemptible attacks against Muslims in this country. But the idea that the number of incidents are “increasing” simply hasn’t been supported by federal hate crime reports. SINCE THE SPIKE IN ANTI-MUSLIM HATE CRIMES IMMEDIATELY AFTER 9/11, THE NUMBER OF THESE CRIMES HAS ACTUALLY DECREASED.
It appears the left’s narrative is not supported by the facts. Of course this really isn’t new.
Pigford Case: Racism or Racist fraud?
It’s back to business on our investigation of the Pigford story – the ongoing fraud that needs your help and attention to make it stop. The mainstream – with a few exceptions like John Stossel – are IGNORING THE STORY OF THE ONE OF THE BIGGEST FRAUDS IN U.S. HISTORY BECAUSE IT DOESN’T FIT THEIR NARRATIVE. THE GOOD GUYS ARE THE REAL FARMERS who faced discrimination at the hands of the USDA and the people, mostly conservative at this point, trying to bring their story to light. THE BAD GUYS ARE THE TRIAL LAWYERS, POLITICIANS, RACE HUSTLERS AND THOSE INSIDE THE USDA WHO PROFIT BY LYING TO THE PUBLIC ABOUT HOW THE PIGFORD SETTLEMENT IS A ‘VICTORY’ FOR BLACK FARMERs.
This is a classic case of how the government can screw something up and then screw up even worse as they try to rectify it. It’s a story of race, fraud, and the worst of our legal and political system.
Cash for clunker part two
Ready for another cash for clunkers program? It looks like GENERAL MOTORS IS ATTEMPTING TO REPLACE IT'S OWN CONSUMER INCENTIVES WITH TAX PAYER MONEY. The car company, bailed out of bankruptcy in 2009 by the American tax payer, APPEARS TO BE TURNING THE GOVERNMENT INTO AN AUTOMATIC REBATE PROVIDER.
The Obama administration and their friends on Capitol Hill are floating around A PROPOSAL TO CHANGE THE $7500 TAX CREDIT FOR GREEN VEHICLES. This change can be found not only in President Barack Obama's budget but also a bill proposed by Senator Debbie Stabenow, Michigan Democrat.
Once again Washington wants to pick the winners and the losers by unsustainable rebates for favored projects. So a $41000 Chevy Volt will only cost $33,500 after the government’s rebate. I don’t think we will see a lot of poor or lower middle class people paying that kind of money for a car.
The Green Energy Economy Reconsidered
"Green" energy such as wind, solar and biomass presently constitute only 3.6% of fuel used to generate electricity in the U.S. But if another "I Have a Dream" speech were given at the base of the Lincoln Memorial, it would undoubtedly urge us on to a promised land where renewable energy completely replaced fossil fuels and nuclear power.
How much will this particular dream cost? ENERGY EXPERT VACLAV SMIL CALCULATES THAT ACHIEVING THAT GOAL IN A DECADE--FORMER VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE'S PROPOSAL--WOULD INCUR BUILDING COSTS AND WRITE-DOWNS ON THE ORDER OF $4 TRILLION. Taking a bit more time to reach this promised land would help reduce that price tag a bit, but simply building the requisite generators would cost $2.5 trillion alone.
Let's assume, however, that we could afford that. HAVE WE EVER SEEN SUCH A "GREEN ECONOMY"? YES WE HAVE; IN THE 13TH CENTURY.
Renewable energy is quite literally the energy of yesterday. Few seem to realize that WE ABANDONED "GREEN" ENERGY CENTURIES AGO FOR FIVE VERY GOOD REASONS.
First, GREEN ENERGY IS DIFFUSE, and it takes a tremendous amount of land and material to harness even a little bit of energy. Jesse Ausubel, director of the Program for the Human Environment and senior research associate at Rockefeller University, calculates, for instance, that the entire state of Connecticut (that is, if Connecticut were as windy as the southeastern Colorado plains) would need to be devoted to wind turbines to power the city of New York….
This is a good summary of why those proponents of green energy now don’t really know what they are talking about.
Book review: Why Experts Get the Future Wrong
….This is the problem Dan Gardner tackles in “FUTURE BABBLE: WHY EXPERT PREDICTIONS ARE NEXT TO WORTHLESS, AND YOU CAN DO BETTER.” Gardner, a Canadian journalist and author of “The Science of Fear,” takes as his starting point the work of Philip Tetlock, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania.
Beginning in the 1980s, TETLOCK EXAMINED 27,451 FORECASTS BY 284 ACADEMICS, PUNDITS AND OTHER PROGNOSTICATORS. The study was complex, but the conclusion can be summarized simply: THE EXPERTS BOMBED. NOT ONLY WERE THEY WORSE THAN STATISTICAL MODELS, THEY COULD BARELY EKE OUT A TIE WITH THE PROVERBIAL DART-THROWING CHIMPS.
The most generous conclusion Tetlock could draw was that SOME EXPERTS WERE LESS AWFUL THAN OTHERS. Isaiah Berlin once quoted the Greek poet Archilochus to distinguish between two types of thinkers: “The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.” Berlin admired both ways of thinking, but Tetlock borrowed the metaphor to account for why some experts fared better. THE LEAST ACCURATE FORECASTERS, HE FOUND, WERE HEDGEHOGS: “thinkers who ‘know one big thing,’ AGGRESSIVELY EXTEND THE EXPLANATORY REACH OF THAT ONE BIG THING INTO NEW DOMAINS” AND “DISPLAY BRISTLY IMPATIENCE WITH THOSE WHO ‘DO NOT GET IT,’ ” he wrote.
This is timely as the AGW hypothesis fades into the dustbin of human history. The climate hedgehogs have attributed everything under the sun that goes wrong to global warming.
Adolescent Challenges Einstein
Jacob Barnett is twelve years-old. He likes to play Halo, has favorite shows in the Disney Channel, and recently attended his first dance. HE HAS AN IQ HIGHER THAN EINSTEIN'S AT 170, can play classical masterpieces by memory on the piano, left high school by the age of 8, taught himself advanced mathematics within a two week period, and is currently getting so far ahead in university that he is likely to be given a PhD research position soon. NOW, THE BOY IS CHALLENGING EINSTEIN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY AND THE BIG BANG. By Mr. Barnett's calculations, EINSTEIN'S THEORY DOES NOT ADEQUATELY EXPLAIN HOW ALL THE CARBON THAT MAKES UP THINGS LIKE THE EARTH CAME INTO BEING, and that that Earth would have to be three times older than it is believed to be-- which he also deems improbable. As for what, if not the Big Bang, is responsible for all the carbon in the universe? "I'm still working on that," says the child prodigy. "I have an idea, but...I'm still working out the details."
This is an interesting story that is worth your time to read it. In it you will learn why Mars’ moons are potato shaped rather than round. Jacob figured it out when he was three years old.