Progressives and Liberty

Progressive Utopia

Progressive Governance:  Say goodbye to liberty

Liberals have isolated the problem in American politics today: THERE IS JUST TOO MUCH DEMOCRACY. THE INCESSANT DEMANDS OF THE UNWASHED MASSES ARE FAR TOO DISTRACTING FOR THE PHILOSOPHER KINGS IN THE GOVERNMENT TO GET ANY WORK DONE.

North Carolina Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue now claims she was joking when she suggested that congressional elections be suspended to remove the inconvenient pressure of public opinion from the backs of harried legislators. "I THINK WE OUGHT TO SUSPEND, PERHAPS, ELECTIONS FOR CONGRESS FOR TWO YEARS AND JUST TELL THEM WE WON'T HOLD IT AGAINST THEM, WHATEVER DECISIONS THEY MAKE, TO JUST LET THEM HELP THIS COUNTRY RECOVER," she said this week. "You want people who don't worry about the next election."…

…Former White House Budget Director Peter Orszag chimed in this week with his suggestion that to solve the country's problems, "we need to minimize the harm from legislative inertia by relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions. In other words, radical as it sounds, WE NEED TO COUNTER THE GRIDLOCK OF OUR POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS BY MAKING THEM A BIT LESS DEMOCRATIC." Mr. Orszag is attempting to make a virtue out of cowardice, allowing legislators to hand off the hard questions to others while retaining their seats in Congress to hand out favors and make ceremonial proclamations. Despite Mr. Orszag's romantic pretensions, this escapism is anything but radical; it is an incumbent-protection program.

CALIFORNIANS WILL HAVE THE CHANCE TO MULL OVER A TRULY RADICAL PROGRAM COURTESY OF THE THINK LONG COMMITTEE. This group is proposing the formation of a 21-member independent body appointed to six-year terms to serve as a type of government overseer. THE COMMITTEE - WHICH WOULD BE FREE TO FOCUS ON THE BIG PICTURE RATHER THAN ENGAGING IN ENDLESS CRISIS MANAGEMENT - WOULD HAVE THE POWER TO PROPOSE LEGISLATION, PUT INITIATIVES ON THE BALLOT AND, MOST IMPORTANT, SUBPOENA AND INVESTIGATE GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE. Thus, rather than representatives having to fawn over voters, they would instead learn to fear the investigative arm of this unelected committee. You don't have to think very long to see how this type of power could be abused. Men are not angels, as James Madison reminded. If implemented, Think Long's proposal would simply hasten the spiraling decline of the Golden State…

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/28/democrats-scared-of-the-masses/print/

I wish I could say these were the ramblings of some far out left wing kooks.  But it isn’t.  These are the mainstream attitudes of the Progressive movement.  They believe in the power of expertise, and like most people who think they have the answer they don’t like to be challenged and stymied.  We separated church and state in our Constitution because history showed us what happens when political power is wedded to “moral” authority.  We designed our constitution to have checks and balances to prevent a dictatorship of any branch, person or movement.  We were designed to have gridlock, because gridlock is superior to the alternative of tyranny. 

Barney Frank, no Fed dissent will do

 “IF TWO PEOPLE ALWAYS AGREE,” SAYS BEN BERNANKE, “ONE OF THEM IS REDUNDANT.” So, imagine what the Federal Reserve chairman thinks of Rep. Barney Frank’s legislation designed to dampen dissent within the Fed.

FOND OF DIVERSITY IN EVERYTHING BUT THOUGHT, A CERTAIN KIND OF LIBERAL FAVORS MANDATORY HARMONY (e.g., campus speech codes). Such liberals, being realists at least about the strength of their arguments, discourage “too much” debate about them (e.g., restrictions on campaign spending to disseminate political advocacy). Now FRANK WANTS TO STRIP THE PRESIDENTS OF THE FED’S 12 REGIONAL BANKS OF THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE AS MEMBERS OF THE POLICYMAKING FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE.

Five presidents are permitted to vote at any one time, and Frank’s bill is partly a response to three of them voting incorrectly, in his opinion. In August, the FOMC voted 7 to 3 in favor of an indefinite extension of the very low interest rates of the past three years.

Frank says he has “long been troubled” from a “theoretical democratic standpoint” by the “anomaly” of important decisions affecting national economic policy being made by persons “selected with absolutely no public scrutiny or confirmation.” IT WAS NOT, HOWEVER, UNTIL AUGUST THAT THIS AFFRONT TO FRANK’S DEMOCRATIC SENSIBILITIES BECAME SO INTOLERABLE THAT HE PROPOSED A LEGISLATIVE REMEDY. …

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/for-barney-frank-no-fed-dissent-will-do/2011/09/27/gIQAWlne5K_story.html

Barney Frank is already the godfather of the current recession.  I think we need a legislative remedy to his being in congress.  Perhaps we should start an investigation into his relationship with Fannie and Freddie and how that influenced his stances. 







The Tea Party: the adults in the room



Democrats have effectively turned "tea party" into a pejorative, making the words conjure a rigid, uncompromising movement that is at the root of Washington's dysfunction.

YOU WON'T HEAR A DEMOCRATIC MOUTH OPEN TODAY WITHOUT A SLUR AGAINST THE TEA PARTY SPILLING OUT.

What are these Republican revolutionaries doing that Dems find so divisive and dangerous?

Best I can tell, their major offense is holding Washington accountable. Listen to them, as I did on Mackinac Island last week during the Republican Leadership Conference, and THE ONLY DEMAND YOU HEAR IS THAT POLITICIANS STOP MORTGAGING AMERICA'S FUTURE TO RECKLESS SPENDING AND SWELLING DEFICITS.

All they want is for politicians to finally do what both Democrats and Republicans always said they'd do — make the government live within its means — but never got around to doing until the tea party forced their hand.

In other words, the tea party is the adult in a roomful of overindulged children who resent the call to accountability. How much greater would the debt be today, how much larger the deficit, if the tea party hadn't shouted, "Enough!" …

http://detnews.com/article/20110929/OPINION03/109290333/Tea-party-gets-bad-rap-for-telling-truth#ixzz1ZLZoIxR5

This is the awful truth.  The people who are telling the truth and demanding sane behavior from our politicians are pilloried for doing so.





Who should voters blame?



VP Joe Biden told Florida radio station WLRN on Thursday that VOTERS SHOULD HOLD PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, NOT FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE POOR STATE OF AMERICA’S ECONOMY.

Conservative PAC American Crossroads circulated the startling statement Thursday afternoon, expecting it will take Democratic campaign strategists by surprise.

“Right now, understandably — totally legitimate — THIS IS A REFERENDUM ON OBAMA AND BIDEN AND THE NATURE OF THE STATE OF THE ECONOMY,” BIDEN SAID.

Polls indicating that more Americans blame Bush for the economy than Obama are not relevant, Biden said.

“Even though fifty-some percent of the American people think that the economy tanked because of the last administration, that’s not relevant,” Biden stressed. “What’s relevant is we’re in charge. And right now we are the ones in charge and it’s gotten better, but it hasn’t gotten good enough.”

“I don’t blame them for being mad. We’re in charge,” Biden explained….


http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/29/biden-voters-should-blame-obama-not-bush-for-economy/#ixzz1ZMy7bBk2

Something like this from Biden may indicate that Obama will drop out. By taking the blame, they would clear the way for Hillary Clinton to run free of the blame for the economy. 







Obama Scandal Update:  Fast and Furious

This just might be the smoking gun we’ve been waiting for to break the festering “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal wide open: the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives apparently ordered one of its own agents to purchase firearms with taxpayer money, and sell them directly to a Mexican drug cartel.

Let that sink in: AFTER MONTHS OF PRETENDING THAT “FAST AND FURIOUS” WAS A BOTCHED SURVEILLANCE OPERATION OF ILLEGAL GUN-RUNNING SPEARHEADED BY THE ATF AND THE US ATTORNEY’S OFFICE IN PHOENIX, IT TURNS OUT THAT THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF WAS SELLING GUNS TO THE BAD GUYS.

Agent John Dodson was ordered to buy four Draco pistols for cash and even got a letter from his supervisor, David Voth, authorizing a federally licensed gun dealer to sell him the guns without bothering about the necessary paperwork.

“Please accept this letter in lieu of completing an ATF Form 4473 for the purchase of four (4) CAI, Model Draco, 7.62x39 mm pistols, by Special Agent John Dodson,” read the June 1, 2010, letter. “THESE AFOREMENTIONED PISTOLS WILL BE USED BY SPECIAL AGENT DODSON IN FURTHERANCE OF PERFORMANCE OF HIS OFFICIAL DUTIES.”

On orders, DODSON THEN SOLD THE GUNS TO KNOWN CRIMINALS, who first stashed them away and then -- deliberately unhindered by the ATF or any other agency -- whisked them off to Mexico.

People were killed with Fast and Furious weapons, including at least two American agents and hundreds of Mexicans. And the taxpayers picked up the bill….


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/furious_revelation_OhK6TBqPlEpRglHjsSbiBI#ixzz1ZLYzQ6Ad

This scandal is getting more and more sordid.  Be sure to read the article to see what the conjecture of the author is as to why this happened. 

The darkness gathers

Obama wasn’t ready

During an appearance on Morning Joe, Tuesday, Newsweek editor Tina Brown made an off-hand remark about Barack Obama, conceding that the politician "wasn't ready" to be President. Brown has previously attacked Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives for daring to oppose the Obama

While discussing whether New Jersey Governor Chris Christie will change his mind and run for President, the former New Yorker editor blurted, "ACTUALLY, I JUST HOPE HE DOESN'T, BECAUSE IN THE END, YOU KNOW, HIS TREMENDOUS MISGIVINGS, MAYBE HE IS RIGHT. I MEAN, WE HAD THIS WITH OBAMA. HE WASN'T READY, IT TURNS OUT, REALLY."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2011/09/27/tina-brown-obama-wasnt-ready-be-president#ixzz1ZCyiPyqz

Here’s the bad news for Democrats, he never will be ready.  Obama has had the wrong kind of background to become a successful executive.  He’s not known failure and has never had to take inventory of himself and grow.  He constantly goes back to making speeches as that’s the only thing he has ever done and it’s worked for him in the past.  Obama might be able to grow if he were in his thirties and had just failed as a first line supervisor. 

Former American Express CEO:  Grandson knows more about capitalism than Obama

Laura Ingraham spoke with former American Express CEO Harvey Golub today, and he had some harsh words for President Obama on his handling of the economy.

On President Obama’s understanding of business:

"HIS UNDERSTANDING OF CAPITALISM AND FREE MARKETS AND HOW FREE PEOPLE OPERATE IN FREE MARKETS IS LESS THAN MY OLDEST GRANDSON’S. IT IS EVIDENT IN ALMOST EVERYTHING HE DOES."

http://nation.foxnews.com/harvey-golub/2011/09/27/ex-amex-ceo-my-grandson-knows-more-about-capitalism-obama

I think Bo probably knows more about capitalism than does Obama. 

CEO of Coke:  America has forgotten what really works

THE UNITED STATES IS BECOMING LESS BUSINESS-FRIENDLY THAN CHINA, Coca-Cola’s CEO said Tuesday, citing what he saw as political paralysis and a flawed tax structure.

Coke CEO Muhtar Kent told the Financial Times that U.S. states don’t fight one another for investment opportunities, while Chinese provinces clamor to compete for foreign investments. “IN THE WEST, WE’RE FORGETTING WHAT REALLY WORKED 20 YEARS AGO. IN CHINA AND OTHER MARKETS AROUND THE WORLD, YOU SEE THE KIND OF ATTENTION TO DETAIL ABOUT HOW BUSINESS WORKS AND HOW BUSINESS CREATES EMPLOYMENT,” he said….

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64521.html#ixzz1ZD9Uhw4C

This administration is clueless as to how the world really works.  But they will find out how democracy works in about 13 months. 

Wall Street switching support

President Obama's rhetorical war against Wall Street "fat cats" and his efforts to enact sweeping reforms of the financial sector haven't exactly endeared him to top financial industry executives.

Now it appears the WALL STREET DONORS WHO HELPED FUND OBAMA'S SUCCESSFUL 2008 BID ARE SHIFTING THEIR CAMPAIGN CASH ELSEWHERE.

Per Bloomberg’s Johathan Salant, at least 100 donors who previously supported Obama in 2008 haven't written a check to his re-election campaign and ARE INSTEAD SUPPORTING MITT ROMNEY'S 2012 BID. The shift has helped Romney raise more than twice as much from Wall Street as Obama has so far this election cycle….

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-wall-street-donors-shift-support-romney-181657957.html

This is a blow to Obama’s goal of $1 billion campaign fund.  I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama takes federal funding this time.  I think his funding will be drying up as time goes on.

The Coming Jobs War

In his new book, The Coming Jobs War, Gallup CEO James Clifton defines what he calls an “all-out global war for good jobs.” Clifton envisions A WORLD-WIDE STRUGGLE FOR NEW, STEADY EMPLOYMENT, WITH THE LOOMING THREAT OF “SUFFERING, INSTABILITY, CHAOS AND EVENTUALLY REVOLUTION” FOR THOSE WHO FAIL TO SECURE NEW ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES….

….Not surprisingly “recession-proof” fields such as health care and education expanded some 11% over the past five years. More inexplicably, given its role in detonating the Great Recession, the financial sector expanded some 10%.

But the BIGGEST GROWTH BY FAR HAS TAKEN PLACE IN THE MINING, OIL AND NATURAL GAS INDUSTRIES, where jobs expanded by 60%, creating a total of 500,000 new jobs. While that number is not as large as those generated by health care or education, the quality of these jobs are far higher. The average job in conventional energy pays about $100,000 annually — about $20,000 more than finance or professional services pay. The wages are more than twice as high as those in either health or education.

Nor is this expansion showing signs of slowing down. Contrary to expectations pushed by “peak oil” enthusiasts, overall U.S. OIL PRODUCTION HAS GROWN BY 10% since 2008; the IMPORT SHARE OF U.S. OIL CONSUMPTION HAS DROPPED TO 47% FROM 60% IN 2005. Over the next year, according to one recent industry funded study, OIL AND GAS COULD CREATE AN ADDITIONAL 1.5 MILLION NEW JOBS….

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2011/09/27/gassing-up-why-americas-future-job-growth-lies-in-traditional-energy-industries/

We need jobs.  We need energy.  I don’t think the left can add one plus one in this case.

Obama’s jobs plan: $447 billion for one decent month of employment growth

The headline is “Obama Jobs Plan May Prevent 2012 Recession.” But the story Bloomberg published, based on its survey of economists about the president’s $447 billion proposal, is best summarized by the second paragraph:

The legislation, submitted to Congress this month, WOULD INCREASE GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT BY 0.6 PERCENT NEXT YEAR AND ADD OR KEEP 275,000 WORKERS ON PAYROLLS, THE MEDIAN ESTIMATES IN THE SURVEY OF 34 ECONOMISTS SHOWED. The program would also lower the jobless rate by 0.2 percentage point in 2012, economists said.

For those keeping score at home, that’s a “jobs plan” THAT COSTS MORE THAN $1.6 MILLION PER JOB. If the president wants to spend taxpayer dollars to provoke demand-side job creation, he would be better off holding a lottery and giving $10,000 apiece to 45 million people.

http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2011/09/28/obamas-jobs-plan-447-billion-for-one-decent-month-of-employment-growth/

Obama doesn’t have a clue on how to help the economy to create jobs.  His solutions are overpriced, under achieving, and short lived.  The best jobs bill would be for him to resign. 

A serious plan to replace Obamacare

…THE BIG PROBLEM AFFLICTING OUR HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IS SKYROCKETING COSTS. The Kaiser Family Foundation reported this week that in 2011, premiums for employer-based health insurance shot up 8 percent for individuals and 9 percent for families over 2010. As Ryan noted in his speech, "IF YOU LOOK AT OUR DEBT-AND-DEFICITS PROBLEM, IT REALLY IS A HEALTH CARE SPENDING PROBLEM." Health care spending accounts for 25 percent of the U.S. budget (excluding interest payments), and within decades that number will grow to 45 percent.

OBAMACARE STANDS TO MAKE THINGS WORSE BY IMPOSING A NEW LAYER OF SUBSIDIES AND REGULATIONS ON TOP OF AN ALREADY BROKEN SYSTEM. Obama's solution to the problem of costs rests with 15 bureaucrats (his Independent Payment Advisory Board) charged with rationing care.

Ryan wants to change the government policies that insulate the health care consumer from nearly all costs, thus distorting incentives for doctors and patients alike. Price signals, a staple of any functioning free market, have been muffled in health care, where third parties (insurers and the government) PAY ROUGHLY 88 PERCENT OF HEALTH CARE COSTS, UP FROM 52 PERCENT IN 1960. Because patients don't pay the bills, most of them have no idea how much services cost, let alone what they are worth. This leaves doctors and hospitals in a competitive vacuum where price and value bear little relation to one another.

"Instead of top-down price controls imposed by 15 bureaucrats at IPAB," Ryan said, "let's try bottom-up competition driven by 300 million consumers." RYAN CALLS FOR A UNIFORM TAX CREDIT FOR EVERYONE TO PURCHASE HEALTH INSURANCE. THIS WOULD IMMEDIATELY END SEVERAL PROBLEMS CREATED BY THE PREVAILING EMPLOYER-BASED INSURANCE SYSTEM, which offers fewer options, traps many Americans in jobs they would rather leave and causes many to over-insure themselves. For government health care programs, Ryan expanded on the plan he outlined in his House-passed budget, which promotes greater freedom and flexibility than Medicare or Medicaid currently offer….

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2011/09/serious-plan-replace-obamacare#ixzz1ZF2Mq7RM

A serious conversation sans the political name calling is what we need now.  Would it be possible for us to have this discussion?  We have to. 

Hugo Chavez:  Mr. Goldfinger

Over the past decade, Hugo Chávez has radically altered Venezuela's economic landscape. Executing a pernicious, politically driven nationalization program, THE GOVERNMENT HAS SYSTEMATICALLY TAKEN OVER KEY SECTORS. In doing so, Chávez stripped private industry and its investors -- not to mention political opponents -- of infrastructure, private property, and profits. SINCE 2002, ALMOST A THOUSAND COMPANIES HAVE BEEN SEIZED. For socialists and statists the world over, this is something of a guide, a graduate seminar in confiscation and class warfare. But for the rest of us, it remains a lesson in economic decay and failed leadership.

The takeover of gold mining operations should surprise no one. With gold commanding upwards of $1,600 dollars an ounce, the industry is highly profitable. And it is the profit of private enterprise which Chávez endeavors to exploit for his ends. As the dictator himself once said, "WE CAN'T HAVE SOCIALISM IF THE STATE DOESN'T HAVE CONTROL OVER ITS RESOURCES!"…

….Under state control, oil activity is well off 1998 levels -- the year before Chávez took office. In 1998, oil output was 3.3 million barrels per day; now it is 2.25 million. As the Economist noted earlier this year, the dictator plundered PDVSA, "packed it with loyalists, starved it of investment, and used it for social spending." Under these corrupt conditions, further decline in the oil sector seems certain. In need of a new source of revenue, gold nationalization, then, is just another warped Marxist scheme to raise money. BUT STATE CONTROL OF MORE OF THE ECONOMY WILL MAKE MATTERS WORSE.

Venezuelans live under a socialist system that is, as Foreign Policy reminds us, "replete with widespread inefficiencies, declining production and rampant shortages." THE DISMANTLING OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE AND A DECADE OF ANTI-BUSINESS POLICIES HAVE MADE FOR AN EVER-WEAKENING CORE AND DIMMING PROSPECTS. And more of the same will just bring more misery.

As usual, the people who suffer the most under socialism are the poor. They account for 60%  of all Venezuelan households. For them, prospects are bleak. HOUSING AND FOOD SHORTAGES ARE EVER-PRESENT WHILE ELECTRICAL BLACKOUTS ARE ROUTINE. The minimum wage, in real terms, is falling also, at its lowest point under Chávez. It has declined more than 35% since 1980.

Worse still, INFLATION IS NEARLY 30% AND CLIMBING. The government's latest round of currency devaluation hasn't improved matters, either. The devaluation triggered immediate upward pressure on the cost of basic goods, placing further strain on the populace, but particularly on the 28% who currently live in poverty.

THIS IS A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS FOR A COUNTRY AWASH IN OIL AND MINERAL WEALTH. But as long as confiscation, corruption, and class warfare continue under the banner of "permanent revolution," the condition of the poor will only deteriorate as corrosive policies drive out capital and destroy business.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/hugos_gold_finger.html

Venezuela was once a prosperous and free country. Socialism came and now it isn’t anymore.

Harry Reid and Charlie Sheen: Birds of a feather

Harry Reid, the Political Charlie Sheen

Once again Harry Reid has tried to shut down the government or at least use that threat as a bargaining tool in dealing with the Republicans.  He reminds me of Charlie Sheen who for a long time while he was completely out of control thought that he was “Winnnnniiiing!”  Charlie when asked when what made him change his mind responded to Jay Leno, “It was when I realized I was Loooosssing. 

Reid and the Democratically controlled Senate have not passed a budget since April 29, 2009 but have taken the country to the brink of a government shutdown twice and tried to do it again as October 1 approached.  Reid and Sheen, two people you wouldn’t want your kids to take a role models. 

Pass the Bill?  They can’t even get someone to introduce it in the House

Republican Rep. James Lankford of Oklahoma told The Daily Caller on Friday that NO HOUSE DEMOCRAT WANTS TO PUT HIS OR HER NAME BEHIND PRESIDENT OBAMA’S $447 BILLION JOBS PLAN, a necessary step before the legislation can be introduced for consideration.

He also claimed the bill would not lower the current 9.1 percent unemployment rate.

“The focus right now from him [Obama] is ‘pass my whole bill, pass my whole bill,’ [and] some of the struggle with that is no Democrat in the House has even taken his bill and filed it yet. SO WE CAN’T EVEN PASS THE BILL BECAUSE NO ONE WANTS TO PUT THEIR NAME ON IT AND SAY, ‘THIS IS MY BILL’ AND FILE IT IN THE HOUSE,” said Lankford in a September 23 interview at the U.S. Capitol.

The White House predicted that Obama’s $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), signed into law in February 2009, would prevent the unemployment rate from rising above 8 percent. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that AARA will ultimately cost taxpayers $821 billion….

http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/26/congressman-house-democrats-wont-touch-obamas-jobs-bill/#ixzz1Z7LRnnPM

Obama wants to run against a do nothing congress, but it appears it may be his own party that is the do nothing group. 

A Preview of Obamacare?

PATIENTS WITH TERMINAL CANCER SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN LIFE-EXTENDING DRUGS, DOCTORS SAID YESTERDAY.

The treatments give false hope and are too costly for the public purse, they warned.

The group of 37 cancer experts, including British specialist Karol Sikora, CLAIMED A 'CULTURE OF EXCESS' HAD LED DOCTORS TO 'OVERTREAT, OVERDIAGNOSE AND OVERPROMISE'….

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2042172/Dont-terminal-cancer-patients-drugs-just-prolong-lives-say-experts.html#ixzz1Z7Mah0Y9

This is happening in Great Britain, but may be a forerunner of life in the USA after Obamacare.  At some point it probably is futile to extend life, but this just seems cruel. 

Blaming a Do Nothing Congress

…THE HOUSE PASSED A BUDGET ON APRIL 15^TH OF THIS YEAR while HARRY REID AND THE DEMS HAVEN'T PRESENTED A BUDGET SINCE APRIL 29, 2009. THE SENATE DEMOCRATS STILL HAVEN'T PRESENTED A CONTINUING RESOLUTION TO PAY THE BILLS COME OCTOBER 1^ST but they were quick to vote down in unison the hard-working Legislature's proposal.

One of the few actual votes in the Senate was the 0-97 vote on Obama's budget plan this year. Looks like they could find time to get behind one piece of legislation.

SO WHERE IS OBAMA'S LATEST STIMULUS DEFICIT SPENDING PLAN, THE AMERICAN JOBS ACT? SITTING ON DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID'S DESK BECAUSE HE CAN'T EVEN GET HIS OWN DEMOCRATS TO ACCEPT IT. While Obama still continues to chime, "Pass this Bill," Reid says, "We've got to get rid of some issues first," he's not sure "exactly what I'm going to do yet with the president's jobs bill."

The Senate Democrats won't stand behind their president's plan, they're too busy doing nothing to propose a plan of their own, and they won't take the time to consider the Republican House jobs bills.

Obama can't blame Bush anymore. WHAT HE SHOULD BE BLAMING IS THE DO-NOTHING DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE….

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/09/the_do-nothing_democrats.html

If the do nothing MSM would actually write about what the real facts are, I think the Senate would fall in line and actually propose something.  One can only dream. 

Obama has angered America's silent majority

"YOU WOKE THE BEARS! WHY DID YOU DO THAT?"

That's from one of my favorite scenes in "Anchorman." In the Oscar-robbed film, Ron Burgundy (played by Will Ferrell) loudly leaps into a bear pit to rescue his girlfriend and then falsely blames her for waking them up.

Watching President Obama these days reminds me of that scene.

IN MARCH 2010, LIBERAL COLUMNIST PETER BEINART ARGUED THAT, FOR DECADES, DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS TREATED AMERICA'S INNATE CONSERVATISM LIKE A SLUMBERING BEAR: If you make no sudden moves and talk quietly, you can get a lot done. But if you wake the bear, as Democrats did in the late 1960s and early '70s, the ursine silent majority will punish you.

But OBAMA PROMISED TO CHANGE THAT. He was tired of the timid, almost apologetic talk. He was going to be an FDR, or at least a Reagan for liberalism. He was going to "fundamentally transform" the country. And to those who counseled that Democrats can't govern that way, Obama and his followers responded with shouts of "Yes, we can!"

You might think it was those shouts that woke the bear, but that's not what happened. After all, Obama enjoyed stunning popularity when he entered the Oval Office.

NO, IT WASN'T WORDS BUT DEEDS THAT ROUSED THE BEAST. THE POORLY CRAFTED, DEEPLY PARTISAN STIMULUS WAS LIKE A SHARP STICK TO THE BEAR'S BELLY. BUT IT WAS "OBAMACARE" THAT ENDED THE HIBERNATION….

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-goldberg-bear-20110927,0,4273751,print.column

Jonah Goldberg is a fun writer to read.  In this column he nails what happened with Obama. 

Attackwatch.com Is a Joke

This video has been around for a while and people keep changing the translation.  This is a hilarious look at Hitler views on Obama’s Attackwatch.com website.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/09/hitler-learns-that-attackwatch-com-is-a-joke.php

Wind Power's Political Payoff

Scandal: Our ever-campaigning president heads off to a fundraiser held by a politically connected businessman whose company took a $100 million stimulus tax credit. SOLYNDRA DIDN'T STOP PAY-FOR-PLAY THE "CHICAGO WAY."

Tone-deaf somehow does not seem adequate to describe President Obama's silent indifference to the Solyndra scandal of his making as he rushes off to another fundraiser, a $25,000 per person affair in Missouri on Oct. 4 organized by another beneficiary of our stimulus tax dollars.

TOM CARNAHAN, of the Missouri Carnahans, arguably that state's most prominent political family, is listed on President Obama's campaign website AS A HOST OF THE ST. LOUIS FUNDRAISING EXTRAVAGANZA AMID WIDESPREAD UNEMPLOYMENT AND TANKING MARKETS.

COINCIDENTALLY, OF COURSE, CARNAHAN'S ENERGY DEVELOPMENT FIRM, WIND CAPITAL GROUP, IS THE RECIPIENT OF A $107 MILLION FEDERAL TAX CREDIT TO DEVELOP A WIND POWER FACILITY IN HIS STATE.

We know that people support candidates who tend to share their interests and beliefs, and that an appearance of impropriety may be only that — an appearance of one. But there's a disturbing pattern here of an administration picking winners and losers, with an emphasis on losers who happen also to be donors.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/586069/201109261837/Wind-Powers-Political-Payoff.htm

There is something unseemly about politicians putting the tax payers’ money where their vested interest lies.  I guess there’s no “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion” in the Democratic quote book.

Obama Scandal Update:  Solyndra

…My company was a vendor for Solyndra from 2008 to 2010. We built machine components both directly for Solyndra and indirectly for their third party assembly machine builders. In total we did about $500,000 worth of business with them during this time. It's not a lot given the scale of their business, but WE GAINED A LOT OF INSIGHT ABOUT THEIR BUSINESS MODEL FROM THE SHOP FLOOR LEVEL DURING OUR VISITS TO INSTALL AND SERVICE EQUIPMENT.

What we saw on THE PRODUCTION FLOOR WAS TOTAL CHAOS! Nobody knew what was going on. Their assembly lines were way too ambitious and complex, difficult to setup and maintain. I PERSONALLY SPENT A DAY ON THEIR PRODUCTION FLOOR AND I DON'T THINK THEY GOT MORE THAN AN HOUR'S WORTH OF PARTS OUT OF AN 8 HOUR SHIFT. We built about $100,000 worth of components for them that never went into production because they kept changing the plan.

At least we got paid in full. And when they lost faith in the abilities of their US based machine builders they contracted with a European builder for an even more ambitious and complex machine. The last thing I heard was that the machine never worked and they were in litigation to get their down payment money back.

I distinctly remember a conversation that I had with a Solyndra engineer in 2009. He was complaining about how messed up (not his words) things were in his department. SOMEHOW THEY HAD MISPLACED $50,000 WORTH OF SENSORS, EITHER THROUGH THEFT OR INCOMPETENCE, AND THAT HE NEEDED TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE ORDER. I got the feeling that things like this were happening accross the board. That's how you spend so much money in such a short period of time. It's too bad for the employees. We worked with some very bright and dedicated people, but they got no support from the top. The investigations need to continue, both for their sake and for the sake of the taxpayers…

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/09/solyndra-was-just-a-bad-bet-from-the-beginning/245673/

I have a background in manufacturing and have seen government inspectors at work (FDA).  They never come to the manufacturing floor, but rely on reading paperwork.  We literally could have had rats running around the clean room and unless someone noted it on some report, they never would have found out. 

Obama Was Warned About Solyndra

In a detailed story overnight, The Times' Tom Hamburg, Kim Geiger and Matea Gold outline the danger signals set off in October 2010 when SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY TIM GEITHNER AND CHIEF ECONOMIC ADVISOR LAWRENCE SUMMERS WARNED THE PRESIDENT THAT ENERGY'S VETTING PROCESS WAS NOT STRINGENT ENOUGH TO WEED OUT TROUBLED APPLICANTS IN ADVANCE.

Energy Secy. STEVEN CHU, who like Obama holds a Nobel Prize, WAS EAGER TO PUSH THROUGH APPLICATIONS BY 30 COMPANIES FOR THE PROGRAM'S $17 BILLION. HE WANTED EVEN LESS OVERSIGHT FROM TREASURY.

The story has developed legs for two reasons:

One, it hints at possible HIGH-LEVEL POLITICAL FAVORITISM using taxpayer dollars in risky ventures with well-connected business people, what some have labeled "crony capitalism."

And, two, it's a classic example of the fundamental ongoing D.C. DEBATE OVER GOVERNMENT'S PROPER ROLE IN THE ECONOMY and the financial dangers to taxpayer funds inherent when officials and bureaucrats, not free market forces, pick corporate winners and losers.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-solyndra-larry-summers.html

This scandal has legs.  The more we learn, the worse the Obama Administration seems. 

Divorce Blue State or Red State Style

In August of this year, the US CENSUS BUREAU RELEASED A REPORT ON DIVORCE RATES IN THE DIFFERENT STATES OF AMERICA. IT WAS WIDELY REPORTED IN THE MEDIA THAT PEOPLE WERE MORE LIKELY TO DIVORCE IN THE BIBLE BELT STATES THAN IN THE LIBERAL NORTHEAST.

At the time I accepted the statistics. I believed that people in the northeast were less likely to marry as teenagers and more likely to have higher incomes and higher education and that this explained the difference…

… But THEN I CAME ACROSS ANOTHER STATISTIC, NAMELY THAT 28% OF THOSE DIVORCED IDENTIFIED AS CONSERVATIVE, 33% AS MODERATE AND 37% AS LIBERAL. It didn't make sense. If those in the liberal states have the lowest rate of divorce, then why do those who identify as liberal have a much higher rate of divorce?

So I went back to the original source. And to my surprise I found that the divorce statistics had been misrepresented in most of the mainstream media. IT TURNS OUT THAT WHAT WAS BEING COMPARED WAS THE NUMBER OF DIVORCES PER 1000 PEOPLE IN EACH STATE RATHER THAN THE NUMBER OF DIVORCES PER 1000 MARRIED COUPLES…

http://ozconservative.blogspot.com/2011/09/do-liberal-states-in-us-really-have.html

The article goes on to compare marriage RATES in blue states and red states and finds that red states have more marriages.  So we can honestly say that blue states singles divorce less frequently than red states married couples.

All things Obama

Time for a Regulation Time Out

Last year, the Food and Drug Administration issued a warning to a company that sells packaged walnuts. Believe it or not, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CLAIMED THE WALNUTS WERE BEING MARKETED AS A DRUG. So Washington ordered the company to stop telling consumers about the health benefits of walnuts.

Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a new rule on fossil-fuel emissions from boilers that—by the EPA's own admission—would cost the private sector billions of dollars and thousands of jobs. THE OWNER OF A SMALL BUSINESS IN MAINE TOLD ME THE PROPOSED RULE WOULD REQUIRE HIM TO SCRAP A NEW, $300,000 WOOD WASTE BOILER HE RECENTLY INSTALLED.

No wonder America's employers dread what is coming next out of Washington. Our country cannot afford regulations run amok at a time when no net new jobs are created and unemployment remains above 9%. But at least we're safe from health claims about walnuts.

America's overregulation problem is only getting worse. RIGHT NOW, FEDERAL AGENCIES ARE AT WORK ON MORE THAN 4,200 RULES, 845 OF WHICH AFFECT SMALL BUSINESSES, the engine of job creation in our country. MORE THAN 100 ARE MAJOR RULES, WITH AN ECONOMIC IMPACT OF MORE THAN $100 MILLION EACH.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904194604576583082888335542.html

When you give people jobs writing regulations, they will write regulations.  When you run out of things that should be regulated, they will find things that CAN be regulated.

Did Massive Government Spending during World War II end the Depression?

…Perhaps ironically, one of the most powerful challenges to any Keynesian diagnosis of economic ailments also focuses on inadequate investment spending, but from a wholly different perspective. That challenge is today most closely associated with the economist Robert Higgs.

Higgs' careful look at the data on the Great Depression and World War II convinced him that (1) A U.S. ECONOMY PRODUCING GENUINE PROSPERITY WASN'T RESTORED UNTIL 1946, AND (2) INVESTORS HUNKERED DOWN, ESPECIALLY FROM 1935-40, BECAUSE NEW DEAL REGULATIONS -- along with President Franklin Roosevelt's increasingly vocal hostility to enterprise and successful risk-takers -- created too much uncertainty about how government would treat profits and wealth accumulation.

The "regime uncertainty" -- described by Higgs as "a pervasive uncertainty among investors about the security of their property rights in their capital and its prospective returns" -- unleashed by actual and threatened New Deal interventions made private innovation and entrepreneurial effort simply too unattractive. So PRIVATE INVESTMENT SPENDING LARGELY GROUND TO A HALT DURING FDR'S REIGN.

The "Great" was thus put into the Great Depression.

Regime uncertainty - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/boudreaux/s_757981.html#ixzz1Z3y4Sh57

It appears that FDR’s death may have had more to do with the ending of the Depression than did the massive government spending. 

Eight Questions for Protectionists

An excellent article.  Here were my favorite four questions of the eight asked. 

1. DO YOU THINK POLITICIANS AND BUREAUCRATS SHOULD BE ABLE TO TELL YOU WHAT YOU’RE ALLOWED TO BUY?

As Walter Williams has explained, this is a simple matter of freedom and liberty. If you want to give the political elite the authority to tell you whether you can buy foreign-produced goods, you have opened the door to endless mischief.

2. IF TRADE BARRIERS BETWEEN NATIONS ARE GOOD, THEN SHOULDN’T WE HAVE TRADE BARRIERS BETWEEN STATES? OR CITIES?

This is a very straightforward challenge. If protectionism is good, then it shouldn’t be limited to national borders….

6. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT, BY CREATING THE ABILITY TO OFFER SPECIAL FAVORS TO SELECTED INDUSTRIES, PROTECTIONISM CREATES ENORMOUS OPPORTUNITIES FOR CORRUPTION?

Most protectionism in America is the result of organized interest groups and POWERFUL UNIONS trying to prop up inefficient practices. And they only achieve their goals by getting in bed with the Washington crowd in a process that is good for the CORRUPT NEXUS OF INTEREST GROUPS-LOBBYISTS-POLITICIANS-BUREAUCRATS….

8. CAN YOU POINT TO NATIONS THAT HAVE PROSPERED WITH PROTECTIONISM, PARTICULARLY WHEN COMPARED TO SIMILAR NATIONS WITH FREE TRADE?

Some people will be tempted to say that the United States was a successful economy in the 1800s when tariffs financed a significant share of the federal government. That’s largely true, BUT THE NATION’S RISING PROSPERITY SURELY WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE HAD NO INCOME TAX, A TINY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND VERY LITTLE REGULATION. And I can’t resist pointing out that the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff didn’t exactly lead to good results.

We also had internal free trade, as explained in this excellent short video on the benefits of free trade, narrated by Don Boudreaux of George Mason University and produced by the Institute for Humane Studies

http://freedomandprosperity.org/2011/blog/eight-questions-for-protectionists/

I’ve seen many of the arguments mentioned here put forth by those on the left.  These are excellent questions that will allow you to answer their charges.  FYI, here’s some information on Smoot-Hawley

Another Reason Liberal Hate Fox News

The Fox News Channel beat out local television and CNN as Americans' number one source of television news on national and international issues, according to a survey published Thursday by the Pew Research Center for The People & The Press.

In the survey, which was conducted July 20-24, Pew asked 1,501 American adults whether they got most of their television news on national and international issues from local television, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News Channel, or if television was not a main source of news for them.

FOX CAME OUT ON TOP WITH 19 PERCENT SAYING THEY GOT MOST OF THEIR TV NEWS THERE. THAT WAS FOLLOWED BY LOCAL TELEVISION AT 16 PERCENT, CNN AT 15 PERCENT, NBC AT 10 PERCENT, ABC AT 8 PERCENT, CBS AT 7 PERCENT, AND MSNBC AT 6 PERCENT….

http://nation.foxnews.com/fox-news/2011/09/23/pew-fox-news-channel-america-s-no1-source-tv-news#ixzz1Z45TWCER

The biggest problem for liberals with Fox is that they don’t like what Fox covers.

 

Michio Kaku Comments on the CERN particle experiment

…Reputations may rise and fall. But in the end, this is a victory for science. NO THEORY IS CARVED IN STONE. Science is merciless when it comes to testing all theories over and over, at any time, in any place. Unlike religion or politics, science is ultimately decided by experiments, done repeatedly in every form. There are no sacred cows. IN SCIENCE, 100 AUTHORITIES COUNT FOR NOTHING. EXPERIMENT COUNTS FOR EVERYTHING.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903703604576588662498620624.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

I’m a big fan of Dr. Kaku and this is an excellent piece.  The last statement is an important one when you want to say there is a consensus or that the science is settled. 

Global Warming Update

In a fresh challenge to claims that there is scientific "consensus" on climate change, PROF IVAR GIAEVER HAS RESIGNED FROM THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY, WHERE HIS PEERS HAD ELECTED HIM A FELLOW TO HONOUR HIS WORK.

The society, which has 48,000 members, has adopted a policy statement which states: "The evidence is incontrovertible: global warming is occurring."

But Prof Giaever, who shared the 1973 Nobel award for physics, told The Sunday Telegraph. "INCONTROVERTIBLE IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC WORD. NOTHING IS INCONTROVERTIBLE IN SCIENCE."

The US-based Norwegian physicist, who is the chief technology officer at Applied Biophysics Inc and a retired academic at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, the oldest technological university in the English-speaking world, added: "GLOBAL WARMING HAS BECOME THE NEW RELIGION."…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8786565/War-of-words-over-global-warming-as-Nobel-laureate-resigns-in-protest.html

Professor Gaiever’s resignation is a big deal as is Michio Kaku’s quote above. 

Yale Paper on Climate Change

.....Professor Dan M. Kahan and his team surveyed 1540 US adults and determined THAT PEOPLE WITH MORE EDUCATION IN NATURAL SCIENCES AND MATHEMATICS TEND TO BE MORE SKEPTICAL OF AGW CLIMATE SCIENCE. Of course this means that people will less education are more apt to be duped by it.

Surprised? Here’s an excerpt of the study’s abstract (emphasis added):

The conventional explanation for controversy over climate change emphasizes impediments to public understanding: Limited popular knowledge of science, the inability of ordinary citizens to assess technical information, and the resulting widespread use of unreliable cognitive heuristics to assess risk. A large survey of U.S. adults (N = 1540) found little support for this account. ON THE WHOLE, THE MOST SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE AND NUMERATE SUBJECTS WERE SLIGHTLY LESS LIKELY, NOT MORE, TO SEE CLIMATE CHANGE AS A SERIOUS THREAT THAN the least scientifically literate and numerate ones.....

http://notrickszone.com/2011/09/26/yale-paper-shows-that-climate-science-skeptics-are-more-scientifically-educated/

In other words, the more you know, the more likely you are to doubt that climate change is a serious threat which is the opposite what the warmist love to charge.