Thursday, October 27, 2011

The only Democrat solution: Spend, spend, spend

What’s new today

Our #1 talks about the actual value of Obama’s student loan program.  #2 has Ann Coulter turning her guns on Liberals (what a surprise).  #3 compares the TEA Party and OWS and specifically how the Republicans and Democrats have reacted to these movements.  #4 takes us back to reality with the Supercommittee.  It seems that the Democrats want to cut the deficit but also increase spending.  If the only tool you have is a hammer, you see every problem as a nail or in this case something you need to spend money on.   #5 has Lawrence Summers in an editorial tell us the solution to the housing bubble is…..you guessed it, more spending.  It seems like someone who wakes up with a hangover, Summers sees a need for more of the dog that bit you.  #6 talks about the State Department shelling out $70,000 of taxpayer money for books by Obama.  #7 shows us that contrary to what the OWS think, even the bottom 20% of Americans have made gains since the Presidency of Jimmy Carter.  #8 shows also that the OWS anger about college debt is misplaced.  While colleges are cutting faculty, they are adding diversity administrators.  #9 may make you feel better knowing that China has troubles of their own.  Finally #10 asks and answers what happened to global warming.  



1.   Does Obama really offer relief to Students with Loans? 

"It's entirely incoherent," Charles Krauthammer said of Obama's plan to pay down student loans. "I'm not sure if those savings are real, where are they? What he spoke about today was tweaking the student loan program, which he now controls. In a way, it's rather astonishing. The numbers were run by an economics correspondent today in THE ATLANTIC MAGAZINE. AND IT TURNS OUT WHAT HE IS OFFERING THE STUDENTS IS BETWEEN $4.50 AND $7.70 A MONTH OF RELIEF."

Now these are students that he addressed today and spoke about their carrying an average of $25,000 in loans. So what he's saying is 'I'm going to save you, I'm going to give you a quarter of a part of it back a month. This is keeping with all of the promises he has been making in the last campaign tour in which he promised relief to homeowners in a program which has already failed. And now he is doing it on student loans. IF HIS AUDIENCE HAD KNOWN HOW MINUSCULE IS THE BENEFIT, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN LAUGHED OUT OF THAT AUDITORIUM….


I’m not sure I agree with Charles on this.  I think they might have hoisted him on a pole and gotten some feathers ready for him.



2.   If Ann Coulter was a Liberal

IF I WERE A LIBERAL, I WOULD HAVE SPENT THE LAST WEEK IN SHOCK THAT A DEMOCRATIC AUDIENCE IN FLINT, MICH., CHEERED VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN'S DESCRIPTION OF A POLICEMAN BEING KILLED. (And if I were a liberal desperately striving to keep my job on MSNBC, I'd say the Democrats looked "hot and horny" for dead cops – as Chris Matthews said of a Republican audience that cheered for the death penalty.)

BIDEN'S AUDIENCE WHOOPED AND APPLAUDED LAST WEEK IN FLINT WHEN HE SAID THAT WITHOUT OBAMA'S JOBS BILL, POLICE WILL BE "OUTGUNNED AND OUTMANNED." (Wild applause!)

I suppose liberals would claim they were applauding because they believe Obama's jobs bill will prevent these murders. Which reminds me: Republicans believe the death penalty prevents murders!

Which belief bears more relationship to reality?...

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=47145

Coulter has a way with words and is a magician at turning the left’s own words on them.  You’ve got to hater her if you are a liberal, but love her if you are a conservative.







3.   The Differences Between the TEA Party and OWS



….TEA PARTIES WERE AND ARE MALIGNED BY NATIONAL DEMOCRATS AND THEIR LEFT-WING MEDIA ECHO CHAMBER. REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS APPROACHED THE GRASSROOTS WITH CAUTION, viewing them with the same suspicion with which the grassroots viewed Republican politicians. The grassroots didn't miss that the national government has grown every year since the 1960s, even during the two terms served by President Ronald Reagan.



TEA PARTIES WERE AND ARE BAD FOR POLITICAL BUSINESS AS USUAL. It was only after the grassroots reached critical mass and later influenced the 2010 wave election that Republicans began to embrace the grassroots, and then often reluctantly. IT'S FUNNY HOW FIFTY, SIXTY, OR SEVENTY ADDITIONAL HOUSE CAUCUS MEMBERS AND A FEW EXTRA SENATORS CAN FOCUS THE POLITICAL MIND. REPUBLICANS ARE EAGER TO RIDE THE GRASSROOTS PONY INTO 2012. If they don't get arrogant and mess up the nominating processes in the various national, state, and local jurisdictions, the Rs very well may.



On the other side, DEMOCRATS QUICKLY EMBRACED THE OCCUPIERS AS AN ANTIDOTE TO THE ENERGIZED GRASSROOTS VOTERS who helped to nominate many sympathetic candidates and supported other republicans in 2010 as their "least-worst" options. Democrats are also buoyed by the fact that the occupiers are demonstrating against the wrong malefactors for the wrong reasons and occupying the wrong places. THESE MISTAKES ALL DISTRACT ATTENTION FROM THE NEGATIVE OUTCOMES OF THE POLICIES AND SPENDING NATIONAL DEMOCRATS HAVE PURSUED AND IMPLEMENTED since they were awarded congressional majorities in 2006 and captured the White House in 2008.



The OCCUPIERS HAVE BEEN EMBRACED BY NATIONAL DEMOCRATS INCLUDING NANCY PELOSI, HARRY REID, AND THE VICE PRESIDENT. Numerous other Democratic members of Congress have at least attempted to embrace the Occupiers -- not always with positive results, as this simultaneously amusing and insulting video amply demonstrates. President Obama has given the Occupiers favorable nods in his public remarks.



In contrast, REPUBLICANS ARE DELIGHTED WITH THE ATTENTION A GROUP OF MISFITS ARE RECEIVING, CONFIDENT THAT THE EVENTUAL PUBLIC BACKLASH WILL BOLSTER THEIR CHANCES NEXT YEAR. Wisely, most Republicans aren't speaking out about the Occupiers.



More than one smart Democrat (yes, friends, there is such a thing) has expressed reservations about the Occupiers and the danger of prominent Democrats embracing them. Doug Schoen, a former Clinton pollster, has polled the New York protesters. He writes in the Wall Street Journal:



What binds a large majority of the protesters together-regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education-is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: OPPOSITION TO FREE-MARKET CAPITALISM AND SUPPORT FOR RADICAL REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH, INTENSE REGULATION OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR, AND PROTECTIONIST POLICIES TO KEEP AMERICAN JOBS FROM GOING OVERSEAS.



Schoen advises:



DEMOCRATS NEED TO SAY THEY ARE WITH VOTERS IN THE MIDDLE WHO WANT COOPERATION, CONCILIATION AND LOWER TAXES. And they should work particularly hard to contrast their rhetoric with the extremes advocated by the Occupy Wall Street crowd….






It’s interesting to see which way the Democrats will go.  I think the Democrats from more democratically controlled districts will throw in with the Occupiers.  I think else where they will take Schoen’s advice.





4.   Supercommittee Dems push for stimulus to be part of deficit deal

Democrats on the congressional supercommittee this week presented Republicans with a plan to cut the deficit that included billions of dollars in stimulus spending, aides told The Hill.

In a private meeting of the deficit panel Tuesday, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, presented a proposal backed by a majority of Democrats on the panel that includes more than a trillion dollars in tax increases. The revenue would partially cover stimulus spending for the economy, aides said.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/189845-supercommittee-head-hopeful-deadline-can-be-met?tmpl=component&print=1&page

The Democrats seem to be like someone who joins a 12 step program, but wants to keep on drinking.







5.   The Democrat’s Solution to Most Problems?  More of the Same



….In the rag of big government known as the Washington Post, Lawrence Summers penned an editorial which pins down the cause of the housing bubble but fails miserably at offering a credible solution. Get ready for some laughs:



THE CENTRAL IRONY OF A FINANCIAL CRISIS IS THAT WHILE IT IS CAUSED BY TOO MUCH CONFIDENCE, BORROWING AND LENDING, AND SPENDING, IT CAN BE RESOLVED ONLY WITH MORE CONFIDENCE, BORROWING AND LENDING, AND SPENDING. This is true, above all, of housing policies. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) whose purpose is to mitigate cyclicality in housing and that today dominate the mortgage market, have become a textbook case of disastrous and pro-cyclical policy. [My emphasis.]



Right out of the gate, Summers comes out as fool. He diagnoses the cause of the housing crisis only to recommend the same prescription that caused the dilemma to begin with…

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/lawrence_summers_and_obamas_clueless_housing_solution.html

I positioned this right after the story about the supercommittee’s Democrats wanting more spending in their deficit reduction plan.  It seems if conservative means people don’t want to change things, this Administration is one of the most Conservative in history. 





6.   More Spending by the Obama Administration

Now we learn that out State Department will be spending $70,000 we don't have to stock "key libraries" around the world with copies of Barack Obama’s books, most notably his 1995 memoir, DREAMS FROM MY FATHER.

There are problems with this scenario beyond the fact that we will have to borrow the money from the People's Republic to pay for them. For one, OBAMA GETS A CUT OUT OF THAT ACTION. THIS HAS TO VIOLATE SOME LAW, IF NOT LOTS OF THEM….

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/10/state_spreads_obama_book_plague_worldwide.html

Not big enough to be a real scandal, this is just an example of the stupidity that permeates the Obama Administration.





7.   Income Gains since Jimmy Carter

“For the 20 percent of the population WITH THE LOWEST INCOME, AVERAGE REAL AFTER-TAX HOUSEHOLD INCOME WAS ABOUT 18 PERCENT HIGHER IN 2007 THAN IT HAD BEEN IN 1979,” said the CBO.

The revelation came in a report—“Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007”—that concluded that although American households in all income brackets had seen their after-tax incomes rise in inflation-adjusted terms between 1979 and 2007, richer households saw larger relative increases in their income than poorer households.

“For the 60 percent of the population in the middle of the income scale (the 21st through 80th percentiles), THE GROWTH IN AVERAGE REAL AFTER-TAX HOUSEHOLD INCOME WAS JUST UNDER 40 PERCENT” between 1979 and 2007, said the report.

For “the 20 percent of THE POPULATION WITH THE HIGHEST INCOME (THOSE IN THE 81ST THROUGH 99TH PERCENTILES), AVERAGE REAL AFTER-TAX HOUSEHOLD INCOME GREW BY 65 PERCENT OVER THAT PERIOD,” said CBO.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cbo-poorest-americans-18-percent-richer-under-george-w-bush-jimmy-carter

So we are all richer than we were under Jimmy Carter.  It will be interesting to see if we’ve slid back under Barack Obama. 



8.   Yes, We Are Broke, but Leave the Diversity Machine Alone

Columnist Mike Adams has some fun today with the strange decision of his college, the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, to lump together two serious academic departments (because of a shortage of funding) WHILE ONCE AGAIN EXPANDING THE CAMPUS DIVERSITY BUREAUCRACY (FOR WHICH NO FUNDING SHORTAGE EVER SEEMS TO APPEAR).

As Adams figures it, the university will save $80,000 a year; lumping the Physics and Physical Oceanographic Department with the Geography and Geology Department, while committing more funds to five diversity-multicultural offices, each apparently run by someone commanding a hefty salary.

This is an old story on our campuses. COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ENACT SEVERE BUDGET CUTS, DROPPING PROGRAMS AND LETTING TEACHERS GO, WHILE UNAPOLOGETICALLY EXPANDING THEIR ALREADY SWOLLEN DIVERSITY BUREAUCRACY. This is because diversity now has the status of an established religion on our campuses, while actual teaching deals only in mere learning….

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2011/10/yes_were_broke_but_leave_the_d.html

This was said well.  In fact, over the past 30 years we’ve gone from one administrator for every five teachers to one administrator for every teacher.  If students want to decrease their college tuition debt, they should Occupy Berkley, etc. 



9.   China’s Property Bubble

Stunned. That probably best describes the mood of China's vast pool of property owners. FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS, ANYONE WITH AS MUCH AS A TAXI DRIVER'S SALARY HAS BEEN SPECULATING IN THE REAL ESTATE MARKET, scooping up off-plan properties at terms that would make a Countrywide mortgage broker blush.

And why not? Chinese culture has almost universally adopted the attitude that property prices never go down. Minor fluctuations and corrections over the last several months have been written off as statistical error. Well, reality has now uncomfortably set in.

RECENT REPORTS FROM THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STATISTICS SHOW THAT HOME PRICES HAVE FALLEN UP TO 50% IN MANY PARTS OF THE COUNTRY IN THE PERIOD FROM JULY TO SEPTEMBER. But who gives a damn about government reports? The real evidence is on the ground.

Here in Shanghai, nearly 300 angry customers stormed a sales office of Longfor Properties Co Ltd after finding out that the developer had slashed prices on one of its projects by nearly 25%... practically overnight….


There are a lot of problems in China we don’t hear a lot about.  This is just one. 



10.What Happened to Global Warming?

So what happened to the global warming craze?



Corruption within the climate-change industry explains some of the sudden turnoff. "CLIMATEGATE" -- the unauthorized 2009 release of private emails from the Climatic Research Unit in the United Kingdom -- REVEALED THAT MANY OF THE WORLD'S TOP CLIMATE SCIENTISTS WERE KNEE-DEEP IN MANIPULATING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT PRECONCEIVED CONCLUSIONS AND PERSONAL AGENDAS. Shrill warnings about everything from melting Himalayan glaciers to shrinking polar bear populations turned out not always to be supported by scientific facts.



UNFORTUNATELY, "GREEN" DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS HAS ALSO BECOME SYNONYMOUS WITH SOLYNDRA-STYLE CRONY CAPITALISM. Common-sense ideas like more windmills, solar panels, retrofitted houses and electric cars have all been in the news lately. But the common themes were depressingly similar: few jobs created and little competitively priced energy produced, but plenty of political donors who landed hundreds of millions of dollars in low-interest loans from the government….



… While the Obama administration was subsidizing failed or inefficient green industries, RADICAL BREAKTHROUGHS IN DOMESTIC FOSSIL-FUEL EXPLORATION AND RECOVERY -- ESPECIALLY HORIZONTAL DRILLING AND FRACKING -- HAVE VASTLY INCREASED THE KNOWN AMERICAN RESERVES OF GAS AND OIL. Modern efficient engines have meant that both can be consumed with little, if any, pollution -- at a time when a struggling U.S. economy is paying nearly half a trillion dollars for imported fossil fuels. The public apparently would prefer developing more of our own gas, oil, shale, tar sands and coal as an alternative to going broke by either importing more fuels from abroad or subsidizing more inefficient windmills and solar panels at home.



We simply don't know positively whether recent human activity has caused the planet to warm up to dangerous levels. BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THOSE WHO INSIST IT DOES ARE SOMETIMES DISINGENUOUS, OFTEN PROFIT-MINDED, AND NEARLY ALWAYS IMPRACTICAL.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/10/27/global_warming_--_rip_111836.html

You folks on the left have lost.  AGW as a major concern of the public is dead. 


No comments:

Post a Comment