 |
| Obama's Energy Plan |
In addition to examining the roots of Barack Obama's political philosophy, an evaluation of his management style, such as might be undertaken by an independent business consultant, is likewise instructive….
… MANAGEMENT STYLE
In classic management theory, BARACK OBAMA WOULD HAVE TO BE DESCRIBED AS AN ABDICATIVE MANAGER.
The abdicative manager evidences a tendency to flee from responsibility and is frequently encountered in situations where he or she never wanted the job in the first place (for instance, a son or daughter who inherits a company) or the individual who discovers that they are incapable of adequate performance…..
….TEAM BUILDING AND LEADERSHIP
…..THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN SINGULARLY INEFFECTIVE IN DEVELOPING A WORKABLE TEAM. The President's inner circle has, for the most part, consisted of Chicago machine politicians. The appointment of numerous Czars, whose functions are neither well-articulated nor understood, has led to confusion on all levels and among the public. The selection mechanism is badly dysfunctional, as illustrated by the choice of self-proclaimed Communist Van Jones as Green Jobs Czar; under-age sex advocate Kevin Jennings as School Safety Czar; and multiple other controversial appointments….
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/barack_obama_a_management_appr.html
This isn’t anything most of us don’t already know, but it is a well compiled list of how many ways this President is probably the least qualified man we’ve had in this office in the past 100 years.
Obama: Over his head?
A beleaguered President Obama has told aides IT WOULD BE SO MUCH EASIER TO BE THE PRESIDENT OF CHINA, The New York Times reports.http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/sayings_of_chairman_maobama_FSOKC0BqmCpXK1ozBxXlrM#ixzz1GZ28g3rk
There are two ways to read the remark, which is attributed to anonymous aides. One is that OBAMA RESENTS THE BURDEN OF GLOBAL LEADERSHIP THAT COMES WITH THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY. The other is that he longs for an authoritarian system, where he need tolerate no dissent.
Under either or both interpretations, his confession carries a dose of self-pity that means Obama has hit a wall.
HE IS IN OVER HIS HEAD, AND HE KNOWS IT....
Saturday Night Live had a skit when he was running for the nomination against Hillary where he dreams he is president and then calls her to complain, “This is HARD!” They may have been much more accurate than they realized.
On Libya and Budget, Obama Votes ‘Present’
IN THE ILLINOIS LEGISLATURE, STATE SENATOR BARACK OBAMA VOTED “PRESENT” 129 TIMES. Today, he seems to be voting present on two major issues — Libya and the budget.
National Security Adviser Tom Donilon told reporters Thursday that the United States and other nations have “taken a range of steps . . . to squeeze (Moammar) Qaddafi, isolate him, really turn him into a pariah.”
But the steps the United States has taken may well have bolstered Qaddafi’s determination to crush the rebellion against his regime.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/262051/libya-and-budget-obama-votes-present-michael-barone
The MSM told us not to worry about his inexperience because he would have really good people around him. So what happened?
Tax the Rich: Would it solve the deficit problem?
….Nonetheless, there aren’t that many of them. In fact, in 2006, the Census Bureau found only 2.2 million households earning more than $250,000. And most of those are closer to the Lubbock city manager than to Carlos Slim, income-wise. To jump from the 50th to the 51st percentile isn’t that tough; jumping from the 96th to the 97th takes a lot of schmundo. It’s lonely at the top.
But say we wanted to balance the budget by jacking up taxes on Club 250K. That’s a problem: The 2012 deficit is forecast to hit $1.1 trillion under Obama’s budget. (Thanks, Mr. President!) SPREAD THAT DEFICIT OVER ALL THE HOUSEHOLDS IN CLUB 250K AND YOU HAVE TO JACK UP THEIR TAXES BY AN AVERAGE OF $500,000. WHICH YOU SIMPLY CAN’T DO, SINCE A LOT OF THEM DON’T HAVE $500,000 IN INCOME TO SEIZE: Most of them are making $250,000 to $450,000 and paying about half in taxes already. You can squeeze that goose all day, but that’s not going to make it push out a golden egg….
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/262045/there-aren-t-enough-millionaires-kevin-d-williamson
Simple solutions in politics tend to be bumper stickers that won’t really work. BTW the answer to the headline question is NO.
How to solve the US Oil crisis
…DESTROYING US OIL IS NOT A NEW DEMOCRATIC AGENDA. In 1980, President Carter gave the US oil demand to the Persian Gulf region and signed the Domestic Crude Oil Windfall Profits Tax which caused the oil patch recession of the early 1980s and THE LOSS OF HALF A MILLION US OIL JOBS.
THE SOLUTION TO OUR ENERGY PROBLEM IS FOR THE DEMOCRATS TO ABANDON THEIR ANTI-US OIL AGENDA AND TO SIMPLY ALLOW AMERICANS TO DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS. US oil is always less than OPEC oil. Americans would pay an estimated $24 Billion less at the pump annually if US oil replaced foreign oil imports.
Economic deficits are caused by taxpayer-supported energy schemes to replace oil, but these chimeras can never do so. Ethanol is the worst scheme. Taxpayers subsidize ethanol, starting with a $0.45 per gallon tax credit, amounting to $6 Billion annually. Taxpayer funded grants and studies make ethanol much more expensive to taxpayers.
Using ethanol in a vehicle emits more total carbon dioxide into the air than using gasoline. Last year, an additional 4 million tons of carbon dioxide went into the air because ethanol was used instead of gasoline…
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/solving_us_energy_problems.html
He is correct about the CO2 but it really doesn’t matter because the global warming scam is just that—a scam.
Why Is It So Easy for Lila Rose and James O’Keefe?
Lila Rose and James O’Keefe are young. Very young. So young that they probably have no memory of the glories of the hair-band era, never looked to Alex P. Keaton as young conservative role model, and never saw the greatest science-fiction movie in history on the big screen. But take a look at what they’ve accomplished in their few, short adult years. With creativity, initiative, a serious dose of moxie, and minimal investment in cheap technology, they’ve been instrumental in — among other things — SHAMING PLANNED PARENTHOOD AND PROVIDING A HUGE BOOST TO THE EFFORT TO DEFUND AMERICA’S PRIMARY ABORTION MILL (LILA), DEFUNDING ACORN (JAMES AND HANNAH GILES), AND NOW SHAMING NPR AND CLAIMING THE JOBS OF ITS SENIOR EXECUTIVES (JAMES).
And it hasn’t even been that difficult. Indeed, as Lila has noted before, she obtained horrifying footage in the first two Planned Parenthood clinics she visited. She didn’t visit dozens and then find the one or two willing to violate the law. The LEGAL VIOLATIONS WERE THE RULE RATHER THAN THE EXCEPTION. The same thing applied to James and Hannah’s ACORN sting…..
….. Why has this been so easy? Because until now PLANNED PARENTHOOD, ACORN, AND NPR HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED REAL MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY OR REAL JOURNALISTIC SCRUTINY — at least not to the extent that conservative politicians and organizations do…..
http://www.nationalreview.com/phi-beta-cons/261860/why-it-so-easy-lila-rose-and-james-okeefe-david-french
The conjecture here seems very likely. It’s been so easy because liberal groups normally get a pass from scrutiny.
Why Is PBS Linking to Fake Biographies of Conservatives?
Politicians and pundits are again debating the wisdom and necessity of American taxpayer support for public radio and television. Both Juan Williams’s firing and alleged comments by National Public Radio’s executive Ron Schiller have raised real questions about political bias.
It seems that the PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERVICE (PBS) HAS A SIMILAR PROBLEM. Someone at its Frontline website HAS BEEN SUBSTITUTING FAKE BIOGRAPHIES OF CONSERVATIVES WRITTEN BY AN ORGANIZATION CALLED RIGHT WEB FOR LEGITIMATE INSTITUTIONAL BIOGRAPHIES. Right Web is a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), a think tank whose scholars’ positions range from left wing to Marxist. When challenged about inaccuracies on the dossiers he compiles of “right wing militarists,” the editor of Right Web e-mailed THAT EVEN WHEN NO EVIDENCE SUPPORTS HIS ALLEGATIONS, CORRECTIONS OF HIS SLANDERS WOULD REQUIRE PROVING HIS ALLEGATIONS WRONG, an impossible standard that is also embraced by conspiracy theorists like the LaRouchies, 9/11 revisionists, and Birthers. Right Web is also among the worst Google manipulators in the political realm.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/03/13/why-is-pbs-linking-to-fake-biographies-of-conservatives/
Sometimes I wonder if the left actually knows the difference between the truth and what they want to believe?
US Tax Rate on Corporations: Now second highest in the world
There is increasing recognition in Washington that the U.S. corporate tax rate is out of step with the lower tax rates of most industrialized and emerging nations. Indeed, 2011 marks the 20th year in which the U.S. statutory tax rate has been above the simple average of non-U.S. countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
It is now well known that with A COMBINED FEDERAL AND STATE CORPORATE TAX RATE OF 39.2%, THE U.S. HAS THE SECOND-HIGHEST OVERALL RATE AMONG OECD NATIONS. Only Japan, with a combined rate of 39.5%, levies a higher rate.
As Figure 1 indicates, the simple AVERAGE OF NON-U.S. OECD NATIONS HAS FALLEN FROM 38% IN 1992 (THE FIRST YEAR IN WHICH IT FELL BELOW THE U.S. RATE) TO 25.5% TODAY. Similarly, the weighted average—which accounts for country size—has fallen from 42.5% in 1992 to 30.1% today. The weighted average rate of non-U.S. countries fell below the U.S. rate in 1998. Thus, 2011 MARKS THE TWELFTH STRAIGHT YEAR IN WHICH THE U.S. HAS BEEN ABOVE THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE RATE….
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2011/03/tax-foundation-us.html
Those on the left keep telling us U.S. Corporations don’t pay their fair share. Yet we have the second highest tax rate in the world. Add this to the article about taxing the rich and you can see that even though the democrats deny it, the only way to balance the budget without making major spending cuts is to tax the bulk of the American public.
No comments:
Post a Comment