Fairness: Going bankrupt fairly

What’s new Today 

Stories #1and #2 relates Obama’s focus on equity trumps jobs, deficit reduction and just about anything else that logic says we should be paying attention to.  #3 in the meantime gives us five reasons to worry about the economy.  #4 and #5 give us dueling stories about Obamacare’s effect on the deficit.  The first one claims a savings of $460,000,000 per year which the second one give us a deficit of $34,000,000,000 per year.   #6 is a look at the oil boom that appears to be starting in Kansas.  #7 tries to set the record straight that America is one of the least racist countries in the world, while #8 gives us a look at the Democrats racist history.  #9 is about Barbara Walters and her claim not one can tell if the press is left or right.  #10 is a PR disaster for United Airlines. 

1.   Income Equity vs. Jobs and Opportunity

Democrats in Congress and President Obama are ratcheting up their efforts to cast Republicans as out-of-touch elitists by championing the "Buffett Rule" – a proposed bill that would require Americans making more than $1 million in income to pay a minimum 30 percent federal income tax.

Democrats will put the measure to a vote in the Senate next week in a move timed roughly to coincide with the April 15 deadline to file federal income taxes. It is intended to turn the screws not only on Senate Republicans in tight reelection contests but also on Mitt Romney, Mr. Obama’s all-but-certain GOP challenger, who earned $20.9 million in 2011 but paid federal taxes at only a 15 percent rate.

The Buffett campaign has one simple mission – “embarrass Republicans”….

…Yet polling suggests that taxing the rich might not be a winning issue for Obama in November….

Among voters without a strongly held opinion of either Mr. Romney or Obama, 80 percent said they’d be more likely to support a candidate focused on economic growth and opportunity, while 15 percent said they would choose one emphasizing income inequality, according to a poll released Monday by the centrist Democratic group Third Way….

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/0409/Buffett-Rule-Could-it-backfire-on-Democrats

I think Romney should come out and say President Obama wants to raise my taxes while I want to raise the economy for everyone. 

2.   Fairness not deficit reduction

The Obama administration is emphasizing “fairness” over deficit reduction in its renewed pitch for the “Buffett rule” ahead of next week’s scheduled Senate vote.

Introducing a minimum 30 percent income tax on millionaires “was never our plan to bring the deficit down and get the debt under control,” Jason Furman, the principal deputy director of the White House National Economic Council, told reporters on a conference call Monday afternoon. “This is not the president’s entire tax plan. We’re not trying to say this solves all our economic problems, all our budget problems.”…

…Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) slammed the bill late last month, after the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimated the rule would generate $46.7 billion in revenues over the next decade...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/74975.html#ixzz1reCPoshQ

Well 46 billion is more than 7 times the savings from Obamacare.  The Democrats and Obama are doing the equivalent of looking for change under the sofa cushions to pay the house payment coming do.  There are more productive things they should look at. 

3.  Five Reasons to worry about the Economy

…Sluggish economic growth.

The economy hasn't been growing fast enough to sustain the level of job growth the United States enjoyed from December through February -- an average of 246,000 jobs a month.

The economy is expected grow around 2.5 percent this year. Economists say that's consistent with monthly job growth of around 140,000.

Some economists fear that March's weaker numbers are just a return to the normal link between economic growth and job growth -- and that hiring won't pick up until the economy accelerates.

Higher gasoline prices.

U.S. gasoline prices have risen 65 cents this year to a national average of $3.93 gallon, according to the AAA Daily Fuel Gauge. Economists had expected consumers to keep spending at a healthy pace in the face of higher prices at the pump…

http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2012/04/09/20120409reasons-job-market-may-weakening.html#ixzz1rdW6VHeM

It’s beginning to look bad.  I think gas prices are the cause of it and it will destroy Obama’s chance to be reelected. 

4.  Sebelius: Obamacare saves 0.023%

One thing about unconstitutional laws is that they invariably fail to do what they set out to do. Homicides rose after D.C. passed its unconstitutional gun law in 1976 — and fell to their lowest level in 43 years after the Supreme Court repealed the law. And so it goes with Obamacare, which will drive health insurance prices up as it mandates near universal coverage. That is good for insurance executives like Warren Buffett, but bad for consumers. Nonetheless Kathleen Sebelius, head of DHHS, is touting all the savings Obamacare will bring — $460 million a year to the $2 trillion a year health industry.

That’s 0.023% — 23 one-thousandths of 1%.

Pardon my laughter.

As you read the press release, remember $4.6 billion over 10 years is just $460 million a year. Given the history of blue-skying savings, odds are this will increase costs, but even accepting The Man’s numbers, it is a pitifully small saving.

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/53979

When I first saw this, I thought well over 10 years it could be a lot, and then I realized over 10 years we are talking about $4.6 billion.  That’s a rounding error in the age of Obama. Read the next story for a dose of reality. 

5.   Obamacare and the Deficit: Loses $340 billion

Over the past two years, Obamacare’s champions have often claimed that the new law would actually save the government money and reduce the deficit. Early on, they argued that it would do this in part by reducing health-care costs, but no one really makes that case anymore. Rather, they argue that Obamacare offers a version of today’s preferred liberal approach to deficit reduction: it increased taxes by even more than the immense amount by which it increases spending. That’s not exactly a recipe for fiscal responsibility or a means of addressing the underlying problem of costs, but on the face of it perhaps it should allow them to claim that Obamacare reduces the deficit.

Except that it doesn’t. From the very beginning, critics of Obamacare have pointed out that, even if you accept all of the implausible claims of cost savings in the law, the CBO score of the legislation double-counted the effects of the enormous Medicare cuts scheduled to occur in the next few years… The Medicare actuary (who works for Barack Obama) has been very clear on this point, writing in 2010 that the Medicare cuts in the law were unlikely to actually occur but that even if they did: “In practice, the improved [Medicare trust fund] financing cannot be simultaneously used to finance other Federal outlays (such as the coverage expansions) and to extend the trust fund, despite the appearance of this result from the respective accounting conventions.” CBO has acknowledged that, although it is bound by those accounting conventions and so must double count the proposed cuts, it is true that doing so does not offer a true picture of the law’s effect on the deficit.

Working out exactly what the effect of avoiding this double counting would be, and more broadly what the actual effect of Obamacare on the deficit is likely to be, is no easy feat. It basically requires re-scoring the law using the data available to CBO, but avoiding the misleading conventions forced upon the agency. In an important new paper  out today from the Mercatus Center, Charles Blahous has done just that….

…Regarding the overall effect of the law on the deficit, his conclusion is clear:

Taken as a whole, the enactment of the ACA has substantially worsened a dire federal fiscal outlook. The ACA both increases a federal commitment to health care spending that was already unsustainable under prior law and would exacerbate projected federal deficits relative to prior law. This is an unambiguous conclusion, as it would result regardless of the degree of future success attained in upholding various cost-saving provisions now embedded in the law.

Blahous’s paper is both an exceptionally lucid guided tour of what is actually in Obamacare and a bracing overview of its likely effects on federal finances.

Obamacare’s worsening of the deficit is hardly its worst feature, of course. If it is not repealed, the law will be an utter disaster...

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/295626/obamacare-and-deficit-yuval-levin

Accounting gimmicks let the Democrats claim they would save money on the deficit.  Almost no one was fooled except those who wanted to be fooled. 

6.    What is the Matter with Kansas? If You Like Oil, Nothing

Black gold might soon be gushing from the Kansas soil, according to AP. Drilling has only just started but the oil is attracting speculators from all over. Ancient land records are being pulled off of courthouse shelves in a frenzy; land that cost $30 an acre is now fetching $3000.

The familiar signs of an oil boom are everywhere: restaurants busier than ever, rental prices shooting up, hotels booked solid. Kansas has more undrilled acreage than most states. Each horizontal well costs about $3 million and is expected to deliver a 90 percent return on investment, paying for itself after 18 months of production. High oil prices are an extra impetus to drill, baby, drill — and to keep the new jobs sprouting from the Kansas ground. The boom “is going to change things forever in this part of the world,” says one local prospector.

Kansas’ oil boom is important for two reasons. Firstly, here we have another example of the incredible job-producing abilities of brown industry. Compare the furor over Kansas’ oil and gas explosion with the unfulfilled and overhyped “green” jobs, which have yet to materialize. And while green jobs will require subsidies for years, brown jobs don’t require federal upfront money — and will deliver taxes to the Treasury right from the start…

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/04/09/brown-jobs-gush-from-kansas-soil/

The oil boom in this country is just starting while the Obama Administration does everything it can to stop it.  High unemployment, stupid investments in green energy, huge deficits are hallmarks of progressive politics.  It’s time for a change.

7.  Racism and America

In light of the tragic killing of black teenager Trayvon Martin — and the manufactured hysteria surrounding it — one thing needs to be stated as clearly and as often as possible: The United States is the least racist and least xenophobic country in the world. Foreigners of every race, ethnicity, and religion know this. Most Americans suspect this. Most black Americans and the entire left deny this.

Black Africans know this. That is why so many seek to live in the United States. Decades ago, the number of black Africans who had immigrated to the United States had already surpassed the number of black Africans who were forcibly shipped to America as slaves.

And members of other races and nationalities know this. Even Muslim and Arab writers have noted that nowhere in the Arab or larger Muslim world does an Arab or any other Muslim have the individual rights, liberty, and dignity that a Muslim living in America has. As for Latinos and Asians, vast numbers of them from El Salvador to Korea regard America as the land of opportunity.

And when any of these people come here – from anywhere, speaking any language, looking like a member of any race — they are accepted as Americans the moment they identify as such. He or she will be regarded as fully American. This is not true elsewhere. A third-generation Turkish-German, whose German is indistinguishable from the German spoken by an indigenous German, will still be regarded by most Germans as a Turk. The same holds true elsewhere in Europe…

http://rightwingnews.com/column-2/still-the-least-racist-country-in-the-world/

America is the least racists’ country in the world despite what the race baiters try to portray.  Is there racism in America?  Of course there is.  Is it simply accepted?  No, and that is what makes us different. 

8.  Racism and the Democrats

…Democrats through Eisenhower

Wilson was a nightmare for blacks. After he took office, there were mass firings of black federal employees. The new Democrat Congress passed laws barring interracial marriages in the District of Columbia. "Whites Only" and "Blacks Only" began appearing on drinking fountains and in toilets in Washington. President Wilson broke the tradition of appointing American Negroes as consuls to Haiti and Santo Domingo. He rejected a proposal for a National Race Commission to study the status of blacks in the U.S., and he began segregating blacks and whites in the civil service.

FDR was a hero to black America, but one must ask why. He won the 1932 Democrat nomination by collecting all of the convention votes in 9 of the 11 states of the old Confederacy. Only Virginia and Texas, which had "favorite son" candidates, did not give every single delegate to FDR, although by the fourth ballot, every single delegate in all eleven states voted for FDR.

President Roosevelt appointed Hugo Black, a former Klansman, and although later this was downplayed, Black was elected to the Senate from Alabama with the backing of the Klan. Roosevelt appointed another Klansman, Tom Clark, as attorney general of the United States. Paul Robeson called the appointment of Clark as attorney general by FDR "a gratuitous and outrageous insult to my people." Black leaders despised FDR. Roy Wilkins accused FDR of "expedient cowardice."

Were Democrat leaders after FDR better? Harry Truman applied to join the Klan (but stopped when he found out that the Klan hated Catholics.) Harry Truman had said that one man is as good as another "so long as he's honest and decent and not a nigger or a Chinaman," and he referred to Martin Luther King as a "troublemaker." When asked about racial integration, he asked a reporter: "Would you want your daughter to marry one of them?"

Adlai Stevenson, the Democrat nominee in 1952 and 1956, selected as his running mate John Sparkman of Alabama, a segregationist. As a congressman, LBJ opposed civil rights legislation, opposed anti-lynching legislation, and opposed legislation to end the poll tax and end employment discrimination.

JFK, too, was a bigot. In 1960, when Time Magazine interviewed John Kennedy, he said: "It was so hot that even niggers went to the beach." During the 1960 election campaign, John Kennedy had breakfast in Alabama with the White Citizen's Council in Alabama, a fact that Jackie Robinson noted in expressing frustration at the indifference to racism in the Kennedy campaign.

It is a testament to the racism pandemic in the Democrat Party that when Hubert Humphrey courageously spoke up against "white only" primaries in the South at the 1948 Democrat Convention, that was recognized as a breakthrough for civil rights -- but Republicans, of course, had accepted blacks in their primaries and caucuses all along, and blacks from the South had been delegates at Republican conventions since the end of the Civil War. Humphrey was asking Democrats to move up to where Republicans had been since 1868….

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/race_republicans_and_democrats.html#ixzz1rdOFME7W

This is an interesting history of racism and the Democrats. 

9.  Barbara Walter’s must think Americans are idiots!

What world does she live in? According to veteran journalist Barbara Walters on Monday, the American public doesn't know whether "most" reporters are "Republicans or Democrats." The unbelievable claim came during a View segment on the passing of 60 Minutes journalist Mike Wallace.

Walters, who once recoiled at the prospect of the "scary" Sarah Palin becoming President, insisted, "But, most of us...you don't know whether we're Republicans or Democrats or exhibitionists." (Exhibitionists?) The comment came after comedienne Whoopi Goldberg insisted, "And also, the journalists today don't do what journalists did, which was keep their opinions to ourselves."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2012/04/09/barbara-walters-journalists-you-dont-know-whether-were-republicans-o#ixzz1rbTqcunJ

I’m afraid Barbara is losing it.  Not only are there studies that show us the media is overwhelmingly liberal, but reporters haven’t even tried to be unbiased for decades.   

10.                   UA PR Disaster

“Flight attendants are on this aircraft to save your rear end, not kiss it!"

That's the warm and fuzzy "Welcome aboard" with which passengers were greeted on a recent United Airlines flight from Phoenix to Houston.

A sticker with that wording was attached to a United Airlines flight attendant's bag that was placed in the overhead luggage bin near the front of the plane, according to the businessman/frequent flier who took the photo at right. The passenger assures that it was not a hoax from an angry Alec Baldwin- type….

http://houston.culturemap.com/newsdetail/04-10-12-united-airlines-flight-attendants-rear-end-sticker-reinforces-new-unfriendly-skies-reality/

I know the Flight Attendant probably thought this was clever.  It wasn’t and UA needs to take action with whoever this person is. 

Democrats jumping off the cliff

Politics

The real cause of the financial crisis

If you want to understand how government intervention screws up markets and damages an economy, there are two new publications worth reading. FIRST, PICK UP A COPY OF RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT, A NEW BOOK BY GRETCHEN MORGENSON OF THE NEW YORK TIMES, AND JOSHUA ROSNER, AN EXPERT ON HOUSING FINANCE….

… But government intervention in housing is not limited to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. A NEW REPORT FROM PEW LOOKS AT THE PANOPLY OF TAX PREFERENCES FOR THE INDUSTRY, AND ANALYZES THE IMPACT ON OVERALL ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE. There are parts of the report I don’t like, such as the term “subsidies,” which implies that tax distortions are a form of government spending, but I fully agree THAT TAX PREFERENCES HARM THE ECONOMY BY CAUSING CAPITAL TO BE MISALLOCATED…

http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2011/07/05/if-truth-in-labeling-is-important-the-housing-crisis-should-be-stamped-made-in-washington/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

You’ll not see this many places because the culprits are well connected democrats who were simply trying to do good and lining their pockets at the same time.

The original amateur hour

….This weekend, as America celebrated Independence Day, A STATUE OF PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN WAS UNVEILED IN LONDON. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and others were on hand for the dedication. The bronze statue sits in the same park as a statue dedicated to the memory of Former President Dwight D. Eisenhower, which was dedicated in 1989 by the Iron Lady herself, Margaret Thatcher. The Reagan statue is part of the world-wide celebrations celebrating the centennial of Reagan’s birth.

That night, a dinner was held in honor of Reagan. It capped a day of events that celebrated the life and extraordinary achievements of the 40th President of the United States. YET, MISSING FROM THE DINNER – CLEARLY THE BIGGEST EVENT OF THE DAY – WAS UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR LOUIS SUSMAN. While he did host a VIP breakfast that morning, Susman was absent from the grandest event, where speeches were given and the memory of Reagan was put forth – reminding everyone of his impact, and his legacy.

Once again, OBAMA AND HIS CRONIES CAN’T THINK THEIR WAY OUT OF A RIPPED-OPEN PAPER BAG.. . .

Second, WHAT COULD THE AMBASSADOR TO ENGLAND HAVE ON HIS SCHEDULE THAT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN ATTENDING A CELEBRATION AND COMMEMORATION OF A US PRESIDENT? ISN’T THIS, IN PART, PART OF THE JOB? When a foreign country goes out of its way to honor your country, doesn’t that give you a unique leverage that should be capitalized on? Doesn’t it follow that the only way to capitalize on it is to actually be there?

From all reports, Susman was not sick, stricken with illness or involved in a really intense game of Farmville. HE SIMPLY DIDN’T SHOW UP, as the representative of the United States, to an event honoring one of the greatest presidents in US history.

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/07/05/screw-reagan/

Stupidity, thy name rhymes with Osama.

Democrats jumping off the cliff?

…. But how can our Democratic friends be persuaded to jump off a cliff like a herd of buffalo? Aren't Democrats all supposed to be creative individualists doing their own thing? Ann Coulter in Demonic thinks not. She gently reminds us THAT OUR LIBERAL FRIENDS HAVE HAD A WEAKNESS FOR THE MADNESS OF CROWDS AND MOB RULE EVER SINCE THEIR FAVORITE FOREIGNERS, THE FRENCH, MADE THE PARIS MOB INTO A PLAYER IN THE FRENCH REVOLUTION. Remember how the mob eventually bayed for the blood of thug dictator Maximilien Robespierre? "There goes the dirty maximum," they jeered, WHEN MAX'S ECONOMIC POLICY OF PRICE CONTROLS HAD FAILED TO CURB PRICES OR DELIVER BADLY NEEDED STIMULUS DURING THE QUANTITATIVE EASING OF THE 1790S. Of course Democrats don't call their thuggish activists "mobs." They call them "peaceful protesters."

Maybe there is no need for Republicans to stampede the Democrats next year. In December 2012, as we view the steaming heap of sacred cows that stampeded to red ruin off the Progressive Cliffs, it need not be the work of cunning neo-Rovian political operatives. The Democrats' peaceful protesters may stampede themselves over the cliff. Look how many cliffs they have already jumped off since 2009.

First the REID-PELOSI CONGRESS STAMPEDED OFF THE STIMULUS JUMP, then REID AND PELOSI CHASED THEIR HERD OVER THE OBAMACARE CLIFFS. Then the Wisconsin State Senate Democrats stampeded off to Illinois while their supporters milled around in an angry mob in the Madison state capitol. Now, to cap it all, President Obama is trying to frighten a skittish Congress all riled up about the debt ceiling and stampede it over the Tax Jump….

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/democrats_heading_for_the_cliff.html

Never interrupt your opponents when they are digging themselves into an even deeper hole.

Big Government isn't necessarily good government

An elderly Upper East Side woman claims a sanitation agent chased her, threatened her with arrest and slapped her with a ticket for putting day-old newspapers in a city trash can.

Darbe Pitofsky, 83, said she was on her way for a cup of coffee around 6:30 a.m. on June 25 when she threw a brown bag filled with old papers in a city litter basket near her apartment on East 71st Street.
She said A SANITATION WORKER QUICKLY JUMPED OUT OF HIS VEHICLE AND DEMANDED HER INFORMATION TO WRITE A SUMMONS.

“I froze,” Pitofsky told 1010 WINS’ Carol D’Auria. “He just frightened the hell out of me, scared me to death, I was terrified.”

She said THE WORKER DEMANDED A FORM OF IDENTIFICATION AND THREATENED TO “PUT HER AWAY” IF SHE DIDN’T COMPLY.

Pitofsky said it took the worker 25 minutes to write the summons and when she complained that it would cost her $100, she said he threatened to make it $300.

A representative for the Sanitation Department said street baskets are for pedestrian use only but added Pitofsky can challenge the ticket if she thinks there has been a mistake.

Litter baskets across the city are marked with stickers that read “no household trash” or “no business trash,” along with a warning of a $100 fine for violation. The Sanitation Department has a platoon of enforcement agents tasked with enforcing litter basket laws….

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/07/05/elderly-upper-east-side-woman-says-sanitation-worker-chased-ticketed-her-for-using-city-trash-can/

Let’s see if I have this correct. A senior citizen tries to do the right thing and not litter and gets accosted and intimidated by a sanitation worker for putting trash into a trash can. And the sanitation worker demanded identification which Democrats tell me intimidates voters. The explanation is that this trash basket is NOT for household or business trash. I’m not sure what’s left but I am convinced that big government is STUPID government.



Economy

Uh oh: GM backlog looking a lot like 2008

“Is GM falling into old, bad habits?” asked one industry analyst when the backlog data for General Motors was made public yesterday. The bailed-out automaker now has a growing inventory in its truck lines of 122 days worth of sales, nearly twice that of its non-bailout domestic competitor Ford Motors for similar lines. With sales flattening in the auto market, GM has now returned to the high inventory of its pre-bailout condition…

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/05/uh-oh-gm-backlog-looking-a-lot-like-2008/

The GM bailout was more of a bailout of the UAW rather than the manufacturer. It was designed to save the union contract at the taxpayer’s expense. Crony labor relations.

When Noble economists go ideological

… NO ONE EVER SAID "REGULATION IS ALWAYS BAD," EXCEPT A FEW DEMOCRATS WHEN THEY WANT TO SLANDER CONSERVATIVES. Good regulation is part of the Rule of Law applauded by the Right. Only bad regulations are bad, and there are plenty of them.

No one ever said "WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE BANKER'S IS GOOD FOR AMERICA." Here Krugman seems to be making a play on a famous comment Charlie Wilson's made in 1955 when he was president of General Motors. Wilson is said to have said -- What's good for General Motors is good for America. But there's one problem. WILSON NEVER SAID THAT. WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID WAS QUITE THE OPPOSITE -- WHAT'S GOOD FOR AMERICA IS GOOD FOR GENERAL MOTORS. It was a statement of acquiescence that the Left twisted to look like one of arrogance. ARE WE TO BELIEVE THAT THE NOBEL PRIZE WINNING ECONOMIST DIDN'T KNOW THAT?

NO ONE EVER SAID TAX CUTS, OR THE LACK THEREOF, HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE 2008 FINANCIAL CRISIS. Very few voices have called for tax cuts since 2008. What the Right argues is that raising taxes during periods of recession can be disastrous. IF THE BUSH TAX RATES HAD NOT BEEN EXTENDED, TAX RATES WOULD BE HIGHER IN 2011 THAN IN 2010. ONLY A DEMOCRAT COULD CALL THAT A TAX CUT.

Why should anyone believe that handing even more money to corporations, no strings attached, would lead to faster job creation?

…."OUTRAGEOUS TAX LOOPHOLES" IS SUCH AN OFT REPEATED MANTRA OF THE LEFT THAT IT SHOULD BE HYPHENATED. A LOOPHOLE IS AN UNINTENDED PATH OF AVOIDANCE. WHAT KRUGMAN IS ALLUDING TO IS THE ACCELERATED RATE OF DEPRECIATION OFFERED AS AN INCENTIVE FOR INVESTMENT IN EQUIPMENT. IT WAS PART OF THE STIMULUS PACKAGE PROMOTED BY PRESIDENT OBAMA. IT'S NOT A LOOPHOLE; IT WAS VERY MUCH INTENDED.

That only covers the first 3 paragraphs of Krugman's article. It's enough….

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/07/krugmans_con.html

It seems to me the left gets what they want and when what they wanted goes south, they try to blame it on the right.


Obamacare

Obamacare Tragedy Primed To Further Explode the Deficit

President Obama bludgeoned Obamacare through Congress on the claim, backed by CBO, that it would not add to the deficit, even though it adopts or wildly expands three entitlement programs. As I discuss in my new book,America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb, CLOSE ANALYSIS OF THE CBO SCORE AND ADDITIONAL NEW DATA INDICATES THAT, QUITE TO THE CONTRARY, OBAMACARE WILL LIKELY ADD $4 TO $6 TRILLION TO THE DEFICIT OVER ITS FIRST 20 YEARS, AND POSSIBLY MORE….

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/06/obamacare-tragedy-primed-to-fu#

This is a must read piece. Obamacare besides demanding we buy a product, appears to be ready to slam the deficit. It must be repealed.

Climate

Abstract:

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. More importantly, greater scientific literacy and numeracy were associated with greater cultural polarization: Respondents predisposed by their values to dismiss climate change evidence became more dismissive, and those predisposed by their values to credit such evidence more concerned, as science literacy and numeracy increased. We suggest that this evidence reflects a conflict between two levels of rationality: The individual level, which is characterized by citizens’ effective use of their knowledge and reasoning capacities to form risk perceptions that express their cultural commitments; and the collective level, which is characterized by citizens’ failure to converge on the best available scientific evidence on how to promote their common welfare. Dispelling this, “tragedy of the risk-perception commons,” we argue, should be understood as the central aim of the science of science communication.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1871503

So rather than ignorance being the major obstacle for climate change alarmists, it appears knowledge is. Those in the know don’t buy what the alarmists are selling. The conclusion of the report is teaching science in a neutral way, without understanding the students’ political orientation, can backfire, in that their knowledge may make them more skeptical. In other words, we need to manipulate the way we teach science so we don’t have this problem. It seems to fall in line with those who call on the press not to print both sides of the story since it only confuses people.

The Culture

That’s racist!

….But what's the joke? We don't find out until a 14-year-old-boy says it plainly: "I THINK I OR OTHER PEOPLE JUST SORT OF DO IT AS A WAY OF MOCKING PEOPLE WHO ARE OVERLY SENSITIVE ABOUT RACE ISSUES."

Bingo!

NPR COULD HAVE DONE THE WHOLE STORY IN 30 SECONDS. But instead it spent more than five minutes trying to grapple with A WONDERFUL YET UTTERLY INCONVENIENT TRUTH FOR THE OSTENTATIOUSLY LIBERAL NETWORK: YOUNG PEOPLE JUST AREN'T AS UPTIGHT ABOUT RACE AS THEIR PARENTs, never mind their grandparents, are. And, by the way, the days of segregated swimming pools and neighborhoods haven't merely "yielded" to "more subtle forms of discrimination"; THEY'VE YIELDED TO -- WAIT FOR IT -- LESS DISCRIMINATION.

No, racism hasn't vanished. And the legacy of racism still has a long half-life.
But THE SIMPLE FACT IS "THAT'S RACIST" IS THE SORT OF THING THOSE DARN KIDS TODAY SAY TO MAKE FUN OF THEIR AGING GEN X AND BABY BOOMER PARENTS.

It's also a common joke among conservatives, precisely because we're used to being called racists for the weirdest things. If I write on Twitter something about how I don't like "Obamacare," some fellow right-winger will immediately respond with some variant of "that's racist!"

And that's the joke. And the people who've spent the last few decades screaming, "THAT'S RACIST," NOT AS A PUNCH LINE BUT AS A HEINOUSLY UNFAIR ACCUSATION OR IN AN ATTEMPT TO BULLY PEOPLE, DON'T SEEM TO GET THAT THE JOKE IS ON THEM….

http://townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/2011/07/06/thats_racist_as_a_punch_line/page/full/


The left’s most potent weapon has been downgraded to a punch line.

Friday: the real headwinds

Politics
More unexpected bad economic news

The number of Americans FILING NEW CLAIMS FOR UNEMPLOYMENT AID UNEXPECTEDLY EDGED HIGHER LAST WEEK, stoking fears of a stalled economic recovery even as a separate report showed record exports in April.

Initial claims for state jobless benefits increased 1,000 to 427,000, the Labor Department said. However, economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims dropping to 415,000 from a previously reported count of 422,000.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/New-jobless-claims-rb-888026046.html?x=0&.v=1

The odd part is that good economic news under Bush was “unexpected” by the press while bad economic news under Obama is “unexpected.” You would think they would be smart enough to start expecting it. I mean even rats in a maze learn over time.

War:  I am number four

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HAS INTENSIFIED THE AMERICAN COVERT WAR IN YEMEN, exploiting a growing power vacuum in the country to strike at militant suspects with armed drones and fighter jets, according to American officials.

The acceleration of the American campaign in recent weeks comes amid a violent conflict in Yemen that has left the government in Sana, a United States ally, struggling to cling to power. Yemeni troops that had been battling militants linked to Al Qaeda in the south have been pulled back to the capital, and American officials see the strikes as one of the few options to keep the militants from consolidating power.

ON FRIDAY, AMERICAN JETS KILLED ABU ALI AL-HARITHI, A MIDLEVEL QAEDA OPERATIVE, AND SEVERAL OTHER MILITANT SUSPECTS IN A STRIKE IN SOUTHERN YEMEN….

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/world/middleeast/09intel.html?_r=2&hp

We have another area of military action without any approval by the US Congress. I remember the Iran Contra scandal that occurred when congress cut off funding for the war against the Contras. It seems that this president doesn’t feel a need to even get around congress. He simply ignores the Legislature.

Wisconsin Union protesters show a lack of class

At a speech to special Olympic participants, Wisconsin Union protesters showed a lack of class in an attempt to get noticed.

http://nation.foxnews.com/union-protests/2011/06/09/union-protesters-disrupt-special-olympics-ceremony


“The whole reason we do this is to protect liberty.”

In the most important appeal of the Obamacare constitutional saga, today was the best day yet for individual freedom. THE GOVERNMENT’S LAWYER, NEAL KATYAL, SPENT MOST OF THE HEARING ON THE ROPES, WITH THE JUDICIAL PANEL EXTREMELY CAUTIOUS NOT TO EXTEND FEDERAL POWER BEYOND ITS PRESENT OUTER LIMITS of regulating economic activity that has a substantial aggregate effect on interstate commerce.

As the lawyer representing 26 states against the federal government said, “THE WHOLE REASON WE DO THIS IS TO PROTECT LIBERTY.” With those words, former solicitor general Paul Clement reached the essence of the Obamacare lawsuits. With apologies to Joe Biden, this is a big deal not because we’re dealing with a huge reorganization of the health care industry, but because our most fundamental first principle is at stake: WE LIMIT GOVERNMENT POWER SO PEOPLE CAN LIVE THEIR LIVES THE WAY THEY WANT.

This legal process is not an academic exercise to map the precise contours of the Commerce Clause or Necessary and Proper Clause — or even to vindicate our commitment to federalism or judicial review. No, all of these worthy endeavors are just means to achieve the goal of maximizing human freedom and flourishing. Indeed, that is the very reason the government exists in the first place….

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/the-obamacare-lawsuit-from-the-courtroom-in-atlanta/

Freedom needs to be defended and this is a big step in that direction. Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither.

Democrats demand spending increases to bring up trade agreements

Because government is inherently dangerous and often mischievous, the Constitution’s framers provided, and congressional rules have multiplied, mechanisms for blocking government action. THESE MECHANISMS CAN, HOWEVER, ALSO BE USED TO FORCE ACTION. One is being so used in a dispute that has two remarkable facets.

PRESIDENT OBAMA IS SACRIFICING ECONOMIC GROWTH AND JOB CREATION IN ORDER TO PLACATE ORGANIZED LABOR. And as the crisis of the welfare state deepens, he is trying to enlarge the entitlement system and exacerbate the entitlement mentality.

Forty-four Republican senators, three more than necessary to stop Senate action, have vowed to BLOCK CONFIRMATION OF JOHN BRYSON, THE PRESIDENT’S NOMINEE TO BE COMMERCE SECRETARY, UNTIL THE PRESIDENT SUBMITS FOR CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL THE ALREADY NEGOTIATED FREE-TRADE AGREEMENTS WITH SOUTH KOREA, PANAMA AND COLOMBIA. The 44 are responding to this:

On May 4, the administration announced that, at last, it was ready to proceed with congressional ratification of the agreements. ON MAY 16, HOWEVER, IT ANNOUNCED IT WOULD NOT SEND THEM UNTIL CONGRESS EXPANDS AN ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM FAVORED BY UNIONS.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-and-free-trade-appease-big-labor/2011/06/07/AGH7QXMH_story.html

Read all about this. It demonstrates how politics works in Washington and how the Democrats seem to be spend-aholics.

It’s the economy, Barack!

THE BATTLE WILL BE FOUGHT OVER ECONOMIC GROWTH AND HOW WE GET IT—Obama's way or something close to the opposite of Obama's way. On one hand is Barack Obama's government-led "investment" mix, embedded with spending raised to 24% of GDP. On the other is THE ALTERNATIVE GOP VISION, WHICH IS STARTING TO GEL.

The Washington Post this week ran a long article to prove (and lament) that the GOP's "anti-tax orthodoxy goes deep." But why stop there? Add to this the tea party's anti-spending orthodoxy. Now VIRTUALLY ALL REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES AGREE THAT THE PUBLIC SECTOR'S CONTRIBUTION TO GROWTH IS TO CUT SPENDING, while tax cuts should be used to rediscover the private sector.

This "orthodoxy" informs John Boehner's insistence that any increase in the debt ceiling be matched by real spending cuts. IT INFORMS BLACK REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE HERMAN CAIN'S WITHERING, AND INCREASINGLY EFFECTIVE, RHETORICAL ASSAULT ON MR. OBAMA'S OBLIVIOUSNESS TO THE NEEDS OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR. Like Gov. Pawlenty, Mr. Cain also would eliminate the capital gains tax and cut others to enhance business formation.

Barack Obama will have better weeks than this. On the available evidence, however, the trend lines for politics and the economy are becoming clearer every day.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304432304576371811156235004.html

I do expect for Obama to be clobbered by the economy and the calls of the Republicans to undue all that he has done. Slash government spending while we slash certain taxes and open up drilling for oil everywhere and for good measure get rid of Obamacare.

Mainstream Media and its double standard

Does the mainstream media have a double standard when it comes to scandals involving Democrats vs. Republicans? Do you really have to ask?

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/574745/201106081815/Weiners-Case-Shows-Medias-Double-Standard.htm

Medicare

Ending Medicare as we know it? If we are lucky, yes.

…No American should naively assume that there is one easy, pragmatic answer to solving the Medicare crisis. Additionally, no American should naively assume that putting the issue off until one such answer emerges is a prudent approach. THE BIGGEST DANGER TO OUR SENIORS IS NOT PAUL RYAN AND THE REPUBLICANS WHO ARE PROPOSING CHANGES TO SAVE THE SYSTEM. NOR IS IT DEMOCRATS WHO MIGHT DO THE SAME.

RIGHT NOW, THE GRAVEST THREAT MEDICARE FACES IS THE SELF-SERVING POLITICIAN WHO CHAMPIONS COMPLACENCY TOWARDS THE ISSUE WITH SHAMELESS DEMAGOGUERY CONDEMNING ANY REFORM PROPOSALS AS TOO BIG, TOO DRAMATIC, TOO RISKY, AND ENDANGERING THE STABILITY OF THE SYSTEM. Take Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who has been in re-runs in virtually every television interview she's given on the subject.

Two weeks ago, Schultz was by Harry Smith on CBS's Meet the Nation, "But the trustees said...that this thing could be insolvent in the next decade. Doesn't something really dramatic have to happen, and as the Congressman suggested, the Republicans have a plan. Do the Democrats have a plan?" SHE REFUSED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, choosing instead to read from her poll-tested cue cards: "Like I said, the Republicans have a plan to end Medicare as we know it."

Yes, they do. Anyone who seriously values and wants to save the Medicare system -- or at least who wants to preserve it for those currently relying on it -- knows that if we don't come up with a plan to do so, MEDICARE AS WE KNOW IT WILL END ITSELF WHEN IT GOES BELLY-UP IN THE NEXT TEN TO THIRTEEN YEARS. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ MAY PRETEND OTHERWISE, BUT IF YOU PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT EVEN HER ALLIES ARE SAYING, IT'S DEMONSTRABLY TRUE. …

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/both_sides_would_end_medicare_as_we_know_it.html

This is the dirty little truth that Wasserman-Shultz doesn’t want to admit.
Science

15 secrets about outer space you never knew before

http://www.onlineschools.org/blog/outer-space/

There has to be some facts you can use to win a free drink in a bar.

DLC, Foreign intelligence and other things of the past

The Demise of the Democratic Leadership Council and the Future of Liberaltarianism

A recent Politico article reports that the DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP COUNCIL IS ABOUT TO “SUSPEND OPERATIONS” FOR LACK OF FUNDS. The DLC was a group founded in 1985 to try TO MOVE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO THE CENTER. Among its founders was then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton, who became the most successful of the DLC-affiliated New Democrats. DLC-supported ideas were one of the sources of the Clinton Administration’s relatively pro-market policies on various issues, including welfare reform, free trade, and spending restraint.

TODAY, THE DLC AND ITS IDEAS ARE OUT OF FAVOR IN LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC CIRCLES. It is telling that the organization is failing for lack of funds at a time when most of the issues it used to emphasize are as important as ever. Certainly, we have a much more serious spending problem today than in the 1980s and 90s. THE POLITICO ARTICLE INDICATES THAT THE DLC’S ROLE WILL NOW BE FILLED BY THE PROGRESSIVE POLICY INSTITUTE, THE THINK THANK WHICH WAS AFFILIATED WITH THE DLC UNTIL A RECENT SPLIT. But the article also notes that PPI has only two fellows and eleven paid staff — a very small size for a major DC think tank. Evidently, there is very little donor support available for centrist Democratic organizations…..

http://volokh.com/2011/02/10/the-demise-of-the-democratic-leadership-council-and-the-future-of-liberaltarianism/


It’s no wonder the Democrats keep saying that the Republicans, the TEA Party, etc. are out of the mainstream. The Democrat Party has swayed so far left, that the center looks absolutely reactionary to them.



Why have spies when you have CNN?

…..Mr. Obama watched Mr. Mubarak’s speech on board Air Force One, returning from a trip to Michigan, the press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said. As soon as he arrived at the White House, Mr. Obama huddled with his national security aides. THE ADMINISTRATION APPEARED AS TAKEN ABACK BY MR. MUBARAK’S SPEECH AS THE CROWDS IN TAHRIR SQUARE. The director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Leon E. Panetta, testified before the House of Representatives on Thursday morning that there was a “strong likelihood” that Mr. Mubarak would step down by the end of the day.

AMERICAN OFFICIALS SAID MR. PANETTA WAS BASING HIS STATEMENT NOT ON SECRET INTELLIGENCE BUT ON MEDIA BROADCASTS, which began circulating before he sat down before the House Intelligence Committee….

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/11/world/middleeast/11diplomacy.html?_r=1


Now is this a case of Obama lied and democracy died?

Duffy: Use Unspent Stimulus to Reduce Deficit

Rep. Sean Duffy (R., Wisc.) introduced a bill today that would require unspent and unobligated stimulus funds to be used to reduce the deficit.

“I simply disagree with the governing philosophy that the stimulus represents: that we can grow our economy by growing the size of government,” said Duffy in a statement.

THE WHITE HOUSE ESTIMATES THAT $7 BILLION IN STIMULUS FUNDS HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN SPENT OR BUDGETED. THERE IS ALSO $161 BILLION THAT HAS BEEN MARKED FOR OTHER PROJECTS BUT HAS NOT YET BEEN SPENT.

“Rescinding the remaining stimulus funds and sending it back to the Treasury for deficit reduction would send an important message to the private sector that there has been a fundamental shift in the People’s House from pushing big government policies to pro-growth policies that will empower the private sector to innovate and invest,” Duffy added…..

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/259524/duffy-use-unspent-stimulus-reduce-deficit-katrina-trinko


Well not spending the remaining $168 billion would dwarf the $775 million the administration made hard choices about to cut by a factor of 216 times. This is a no brainer and should be immediately passed by congress.



The former vice president reached out to Olbermann

LESS THAN 24 HOURS AFTER KEITH OLBERMANN ANCHORED HIS LAST EDITION OF COUNTDOWN ON JAN. 21, AL GORE PLACED A CALL TO HIS FRIEND INVITING HIM TO JOIN CURRENT TV….

….A contract was quickly hammered out. But IT WAS GORE WHO CONVINCED OLBERMANN TO JOIN THE NETWORK, SAY SOURCES. The former vice president and co-founder of Current was a fan of Countdown where he had also been a guest in the past. RELATED: Tim Goodman's analysis of the move.

OLBERMANN'S CURRENT SHOW WILL LIKELY PREMIERE IN LATE MAY, WHEN THE NON-COMPETE CLAUSE IN HIS EXIT AGREEMENT WITH NBC UNIVERSAL WILL HAVE REACHED ITS CONCLUSION.

Sources tell THR that that agreement also stipulates THAT OLBERMANN CANNOT WORK FOR ANY NETWORK CONSIDERED A COMPETITOR.

"He had no choice but to go to a place like Current because his non-compete excluded just about every other place," said an MSNBC insider.

CURRENT AVERAGED 18,000 HOMES IN PRIMETIME FOR FOURTH QUARTER 2010, lower than any other network measured by Nielsen.

"Contract terms never stipulated Current TV as one of the targeted outlets," the source added.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/al-gore-offered-keith-olbermann-97680


As I said when Olbermann’s move to Current TV was announced, this is a good move by Gore and a bad move by Olbermann.



The ‘Judicial Activism’ Ploy

Now that two different federal courts have declared Obamacare unconstitutional, THE ADMINISTRATION’S ANSWER IS TO CALL THE COURTS GUILTY OF “JUDICIAL ACTIVISM.”

Barack Obama has a rhetorical solution for every problem. Remember the repeated claims of “shovel-ready” projects that needed only federal stimulus money to get started? Last year, the president quietly admitted that there were not many “shovel-ready” projects, after all…..

…. THE NEW DEFINITION OF “JUDICIAL ACTIVISM” DEFINES IT AS DECLARING LAWS UNCONSTITUTIONAL….

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259209/judicial-activism-ploy-thomas-sowell


This does seem to be the left’s definition of judicial activism and it is a win-win for them. They believe in a living Constitution where judges can change it based upon their opinion. Judicial activism to the left is something to be admired. But the right abhors it. A living Constitution is NO Constitution. So by redefining the word, the left hopes to burn the right with their own words. After all, “everyone is doing it.”



High-speed rail: Obama's gift that nobody wants

President Obama sent his vice president, "Amtrak Joe" Biden, to Philadelphia's 30th Street rail station earlier this week to announce the administration's latest gift to the American people: A six-year, $53 billion government subsidy for the mass transit industry in order to give "80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail within 25 years." And therein lies the fundamental problem - OBAMA, BIDEN AND LIBERAL DEMOCRATS IN GENERAL CAN'T RESIST GIVING THE REST OF US THINGS WE DON'T WANT. And they almost always use our money to pay for them, whether we like it or not.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2011/02/high-speed-rail-obamas-gift-nobody-wants


I have an idea that the Obama Administration might want to buy into. It would create jobs while providing progress for the country. We would set up a mail system where we have horseback riders stationed every twenty miles. They would take the mail and as fast as they could move it across the country. We would call it the Democratic Pony Express.


Right wing hatred and incivility

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TJ7OGl4CGw


Shocker: Gallup shows worries over unemployment highest since …

AND IN OTHER NEWS, WATER IS WET — but there actually is some news to this latest Gallup poll. Public concern over unemployment has peaked at the highest level since we last had a jobless rate over 9%, which should surprise no one. WHAT MAY SURPRISE SOME IS THAT THE CONCERN IS INCREASING, DESPITE ARGUMENTS FROM THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THAT THE ECONOMY HAS BEEN CREATING JOBS FOR THE LAST YEAR:

Thirty-five percent of Americans name unemployment as the most important problem facing the U.S., the highest percentage since the economic slowdown began and higher than at any point since October 1983 (41%). Unemployment is the most important problem for the second month in a row, with the economy ranking second and healthcare third.

From the beginning of the economic slowdown through 2009, mentions of “the economy” in general were consistently the top issue. In the past year, as the government’s unemployment rate has stayed in the 9% range, the economy and specific mentions of unemployment have traded the top spot several times. This month, mentions of unemployment increased to 35%, and it now leads mentions of the economy by a significant margin.

The partisan breakdowns will surprise a bit, too. The reassuring talk from the White House has failed to assuage the concerns of their own party most of all. Forty-one percent of Democrats call unemployment the most important problem with the general economic environment second at 29%. Independents split 32/27, while Republicans break 31/32, putting the general economy slightly ahead of joblessness.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/11/shocker-gallup-shows-worries-over-unemployment-highest-since/


It appears Democrats are more concerned about the economy than are Republicans or Independents.

Obama and the left: Two different responses to the shootings

NY Times doesn’t read its own findings

It seems that Jared Loughner did not even like or watch TV or the news, according to his friends:

He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.

The friends went on to describe deep seated rage: "Osler says his friend wasn’t shooting at people, "'HE WAS SHOOTING AT THE WORLD.'"


This would MAKE HIM TYPICAL OF OTHER MASS SHOOTERS according to a study 0f 102 rampage killers done by the New York Times:


The Times found, however, that the debate may have largely overlooked a critical issue: AT LEAST HALF OF THE KILLERS SHOWED SIGNS OF SERIOUS MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS. ...


It seems that A NUMBER OF THE TIMES'S COLUMNISTS OVERLOOKED THE PAPER'S OWN FINDINGS on rampage killings when first discussing the Arizona shooting. Do they even bother doing any research? For example, KRUGMAN BLAMED TALK RADIO, THE CULTURE OF RIGHT LEANING HATE AND RUSH LIMBAUGH. A NYT'S EDITORIAL MADE THE SAME POINTS. Maybe if someone there had taken the time to reflect on their own study, they would have reached a different and more even-handed conclusion.

http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2011/01/osler-says-his-friend-wasnt-shooting-at.html


The lack of facts and a propensity not to actually check to see if there are any facts seems to be a hallmark of the left.



What if Jared Loughner had be Muslim?

Shamefully and sadly, the media would have covered his horrific assassination attempt of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz) and slaying and maiming of innocent Arizonans in a more responsible manner. THEY WOULD HAVE CALLED FOR RESTRAINT AND NOT VIOLATED THE JOURNALISTIC TENET OF NOT ASSUMING ANYTHING, a tenet they purportedly (and often facetiously sanctimoniously) claim to hold dear.

But because Loughner was not a member of one of the mainstream media’s protected classes, they used Loughner’s heinous act to go on liberal crusades against conservatives and Tea Partiers, to promote gun control, amnesty, and rail against those who may oppose ethnic study programs that erroneously teach students that the Southwestern part of the United States is a part of Mexico.

Immediately after this senseless tragedy, The New York Times opined that “it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge…..

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41136


This is an interesting piece speculating on how the left wouldn’t be speculating about the right. What we’ve seen is not journalism but political opportunism played out on a national scale by the left.



What the left did wrong

By Jennifer Rubin

Why were the last four days a mini-disaster for the swampland of the left? It boils down to: facts, response and time.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2011/01/what_the_left_did_wrong.html


This is a very worthwhile read. I found this to be very insightful, “The final lesson for the left is this: for the sake of a second term, the president is willing to throw liberals under the bus.”




Why the Left Lost It

There has been a great effort this week to come to grips with the American left's reaction to the Tucson shooting. Paul Krugman of the New York Times and its editorial page, George Packer of the New Yorker, E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post, Jonathan Alter of Newsweek and others, in varying degrees, HAVE LINKED THE MURDERS TO THE INTENSITY OF OPPOSITION TO THE POLICIES AND PRESIDENCY OF BARACK OBAMA. As Mr. Krugman asked in his Monday commentary: "Were you, at some level, expecting something like this atrocity to happen?"

The "you" would be his audience, and the answer is yes, they thought that in these times "something like this" could happen in the United States. Other media commentators, without a microbe of conservatism in their bloodstreams, have rejected this suggestion.

So what was the point? Why attempt the gymnastic logic of asserting that the act of a deranged personality was linked to the tea parties and the American right? Two reasons: POLITICAL CALCULATION AND PERSONAL BELIEF.

The calculation flows from the shock of the midterm elections of November 2010. That was no ordinary election. WHAT VOTERS DID HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CHANGE THE CONTENT AND DIRECTION OF THE U.S. POLITICAL SYSTEM, POSSIBLY FOR A GENERATION.

Only 24 months after Barack Obama's own historic election and a rising Democratic tide, the country flipped. Not just control of the U.S. House, but deep in the body politic. REPUBLICANS NOW CONTROL MORE STATE LEGISLATIVE SEATS THAN ANY TIME SINCE 1928.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703791904576076373704758778.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_opinion

If you know history, you know before 1928 (read that the Great Depression), the Republicans had been the dominate party since 1860. The massive movement to the Republicans does and should concern the Democrats.

World Freest Economy

HONG KONG WAS RATED THE WORLD'S FREEST ECONOMY FOR A 17TH STRAIGHT YEAR in a ranking by the U.S.-based Heritage Foundation, above rivals Singapore and Australia for the title.


HONG KONG, WITH A SCORE OF 89.7, IS WELL ABOVE THE WORLD AVERAGE OF 59.7, the Washington-based Heritage Foundation said in its 2011 Index of Economic Freedom report released on Wednesday.


The study assesses 183 economies, out of which mainland China ranks 135th.


"Hong Kong, one of the world's most competitive financial and business centers, demonstrated a high degree of resilience during the global financial crisis," the report said.

Freedom in trade and finance was the biggest boost to Hong Kong's ranking, while investment freedom and property rights, business and monetary freedom all scored highly.

THE UNITED STATES FELL TO THE 9TH FREEST FROM 8TH LAST YEAR and United Kingdom slipped to 16 place from 11 in 2010 due to more policy responses to the global economic turmoil, it added.

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Hong+Kong+reigns+world+freest+economy+17th+straight+year/4097106/story.html#ixzz1Av4p5fJP



Arizona: Let’s start thinking about locking up lunatics

In my Washington Examiner column “Systematic assassinations not part of our politics,” I wrote of the Arizona murders:

IF ANY BLAME ATTACHES TO OTHERS, IT IS TO AUTHORITIES WHO HAD NOTICE OF HIS MADNESS AND DID NOT DO ENOUGH TO CONFINE HIM OR PREVENT HIM FROM BUYING A GUN. The Pima County sheriff, who was quick to suggest the attack was among the "consequences" of Republican rhetoric, also reported that the shooter's bizarre behavior was brought to the attention of authorities.

Arizona reportedly gives authorities more leeway than most states to put such an individual under restraint or at least prevent him from buying a gun. Perhaps there is some good reason this was not done; but at least there are questions that need to be asked.

Or to put it more bluntly, SHOULDN’T THIS GUY HAVE BEEN LOCKED UP? I am pleased to see that William Galston, writing in his New Republic blog, has the same idea, and calls for a reconsideration of the laws that have reduced the possibility of involuntary commitment. Psychiatrist E. Fuller Torrey, writing in the Wall Street Journal, makes the same case and adds interesting detail. Jennifer Rubin, on her new Right Turn blog at the Washington Post notices that, as her headline reads, “Left gives up on guns, moves on to mental health,” and applauds the move.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/arizona-let-s-start-thinking-about-locking-lunatics#ixzz1AvFicr7D


While Michael Barone zeros in on the failure here, the anti-gun cabal is acting like a teacher who punishes the entire class for the disruption of one student. To them the answer is to deny everyone the “Legal” right to own a gun. Even Dupnik wouldn’t go along with that idea as he encouraged everyone to buy a gun as his deputies couldn’t keep them from harm.



Autism Fraud

The report that first triggered scares that a vaccine to prevent measles, mumps and rubella might cause autism in children has received another devastating blow to its credibility. The BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL HAS DECLARED THAT THE RESEARCH WAS NOT SIMPLY BAD SCIENCE, AS HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR YEARS, BUT A DELIBERATE FRAUD….

Some parents still consider Dr. Wakefield a hero, and others have moved on to other theories, equally unsupported by scientific evidence, as to how vaccines might cause autism.


THEY NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT FAILURE TO VACCINATE THEIR CHILDREN LEAVES THEM TRULY VULNERABLE TO DISEASES THAT CAN CAUSE ENORMOUS HARM.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/opinion/13thu2.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211



Surely criminal action should be taken against Dr. Wakefield. He was a pied piper who led parents to put their children at terrible risk.



Obama does well—his audience, not so much

Never before in the annals of national moments of mourning have the words spoken been so wildly mismatched by the spirit in which they were received.

THE SENTENCES AND PARAGRAPHS OF PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SPEECH LAST NIGHT WERE BEAUTIFUL AND MOVING AND POWERFUL. But for the most part they didn't quite transcend THE WILDLY INAPPROPRIATE SETTING IN WHICH HE DELIVERED THEM.

There was something about the choice of place, a college arena with the appropriate name of the McKale Memorial Center, that made the event turn literally sophomoric.

If there is one thing we expect from occasions of national mourning, it is, at the very least, A MODICUM OF GRAVITY. That gravity was present in the president's speech from first to last -- especially in the pitch-perfect response to the disgusting national political debate

 

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/prez_perfect_but_the_crowd_was_appalling_j08cf0Fajllkht0yZ4W7GM#ixzz1AvIQZIQq


Obama did make a good speech. Wild cheers from the crowd reminded me of the Paul Wellstone memorial service. Let’s give credit where it is due (President Obama) and hope that the left learns the proper way to mourn.


A Tawdry Start to the 2012 Election Campaign

Four years of a Democratically-controlled Congress, coupled with two years of the Obama administration, gave the American progressive movement more power than it had ever achieved before. Not Democrats, progressives. Democrats have had control of the White House and substantial majorities in both houses of Congress prior to 2008, but NEVER WITH A PARTY COMPRISED OF PEOPLE TILTED SO FAR TO THE PROGRESSIVE side of the ledger. Thinking they had achieved what political strategist James Carville referred to as the beginning of a “40 YEAR ASCENDANCY,” THEY BEGAN IMPLEMENTING THEIR AGENDA WITH LITTLE REGARD FOR PUBLIC CONCERN. ON NOVEMBER 2ND, A CONCERNED PUBLIC THOROUGHLY REJECTED THEM.

So what do far-left ideologues do when they have recently endured a clear-cut rejection of their ideology? Apparently A GOOD NUMBER OF THEM TAKE TO THE AIRWAVES AND TELL THE AMERICAN PUBLIC–WITH SMUG CERTAINTY, NO LESS–WHAT MOTIVATES A MADMAN. Facts, as demonstrated by progressives who have sought to tie the tragedy in Arizona to anything and everything conservative absent a shred of evidence, do not matter. Alleged shooter Jared Loughner has become the “vehicle du jour” for a progressive movement in utter denial of reality. IT IS A DENIAL SO PROFOUND that they would rather believe what happened on election day was a spasm of national insanity

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/13/a-tawdry-start-to-the-2012-election-campaign/


Are the Progressives crazy or just kidding themselves? Do they really think that their charges against the right will sway the public?



The Golden No-Vitriol Age Wasn’t So Golden

Denunciations of media vitriol in the wake of the Tucson shootings look back to an age of civil media discourse. That golden age existed in living memory: the 1960s and 1970s, when the mainstream media almost universally hewed to a belief in professional, objective, neutral journalism. The news industry could enforce this line, since it was more oligopolistic than at any time before or since. MOST CITIES HAD ONLY A FEW DOMINANT NEWSPAPERS. Television penetrated about 90 percent of American homes by the late 1950s, and the classic era of network television news began in September 1963, when the Huntley-Brinkley Report on NBC and the CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite expanded from 15 minutes to 30 minutes. THESE NEWSCASTS RAPIDLY BECAME THE PRIMARY NEWS SOURCE FOR MOST AMERICANS. NO CABLE NEWS, NO INTERNET.

The result? TWO DECADES OF ASSASSINATIONS AND ASSASSINATION ATTEMPTS against major political figures, starting with JFK ….

You could even argue that the golden-age mainstream media made violence more likely by shutting out marginal voices; but IT’S MORE LIKELY THAT THE TONE OF THE MEDIA HAS LITTLE TO DO WITH THE VIOLENT ACTIONS OF RADICALS AND CRAZIES.

http://blog.american.com/?p=24876


Well said and something to think about.




A Rising Star: Chris Christie

I happened to see this NJ Gov. Christie appearance on Morning Joe (MSNBC) yesterday morning and I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT TAKE TEN MINUTES TO SEE HOW A POLITICIAN SHOULD BOTH SEEM AND BE, how he should think aloud, how he should talk. Very impressive, and very disarming. You can tell how his interlocutors--even those who want to disagree with him--are disarmed, even persuaded. HIS CHARACTER AND PERSONALITY FOR A POLITICIAN ARE NEARLY PERFECT, in my opinion. You cannot help liking him. HONEST, CLEAR, AMUSING, LUCID--notice that there is no "uhming and ahing" at any time, no hesitation--clearly deeply thoughtful and knowledgeable, he speaks with an authority that is rare. Very persuasive. Also, he's fat, lards the lean earth as he walks along, he's thrice wider than other men. therefore worthy of our entire trust. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAT THIS MAN WILL NOT RUN FOR PRESIDENT.

http://nlt.ashbrook.org/2011/01/chris-christie.php


I’m keeping an eye on him. He is impressive.