To recess or not to recess...

What’s new Today

Our #1 story is a one minute video of Margaret Thatcher.  #2 looks at Obama’s interpretation of the Constitution and the founders.  #3 looks at the Constitutional argument between the Senate and the President regarding being in a recess.  #4 talks about how the Nebraska Senate seat is pretty much lost to the Republicans.  #5 explains the various economic systems using two cows.  I’ve added my own which I dub Crony cowism.  Finally #6 includes how incivility by the left is rapidly growing.

1.  Thatcher on Socialism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=v2Vp1moqTKs

Take a minute and watch this.

2.  Obama and the Founders

Of course President Obama is not concentrating on campaigning, White House press spokesmen assured us -- as the president headed off to Chicago for three fundraisers and a drop-in at his campaign headquarters, two days after a high-roller fundraising choked off traffic five blocks from the White House, with the assistance of a score of D.C. police cars.

No one, or at least no one who is paying attention, is fooled. It's standard presidential procedure to say you're not absorbed in campaigning even as you go out to raise money every other day. Bill Clinton, in my view, spent an undue amount of time fundraising, George W. Bush spent more, and Barack Obama makes them both look like pikers.

So Obama's scorn for the truth in this regard is only a minor matter. His scorn for the Constitution is something else.

That scorn has been expressed most recently in his "recess" appointments of members of the National Labor Relations Board and the chairmanship of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The quotation marks are appropriate because when he made the appointments the Senate was not in recess as the Constitution requires.

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution says that presidential appointments must be confirmed by the Senate unless Congress provides otherwise. But anticipating that the government may need officials when the Senate is available, the section further provides that "The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of the next session."

What constitutes a recess? Article I, Section 5 provides "Neither house, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days."

The House did not consent to the adjournment of the Senate this year, so there is no recess, and hence no constitutional authority to make recess appointments….

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/barone-obamas-1-man-rule-thumbs-nose-founders/313961

Obama basically is saying “It’s a recess when I say it’s a recess.” 

3.  Obama's Recess Appointments

[T]he Opinion places enormous weight on the fact that the Senate’s resolution providing for pro forma sessions declared that there would be “no business conducted.” There are two problems with this, as a legal matter. First, as the Opinion concedes, the important question is whether at these sessions the Senate is “capable” of exercising its constitutional functions — not whether, on any particular occasion, it has chosen not to do so. Second, in actual fact the Senate has conducted major business during these sessions, including passing the payroll tax holiday extension during a pro forma session on December 23. The Opinion weakly responds that, notwithstanding this evidence of actual practice, the President “may properly rely on the public pronouncements of the Senate that it will not conduct business.” It is hard to see why the Senate’s stated intention not to do business takes legal and constitutional precedence over its manifest ability to do so. The President is well aware the Senate is doing business on these days, because he has signed two pieces of legislation passed during them.

More fundamentally, the Opinion creates an implausible distinction between the legal efficacy of pro forma sessions for various constitutional purposes. According to the Opinion, a pro forma session is not sufficient to interrupt a recess for purposes of the Recess Appointments Clause, but it is sufficient to satisfy the constitutional command that neither branch adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other (Art. I, §cl. 4) and that Congress convene on January 3 unless a law has provided for a different day. There is longstanding precedent that pro forma sessions are sufficient to satisfy these constitutional requirements. Why a pro forma session would count for some purposes and not others is a mystery. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that OLC is simply fashioning rules to reach to the outcomes it wishes.

Finally, it bears mention that a great deal of the authority OLC cites in support of the President’s authority to make recess appointments during intrasession recesses in the first place — wholly apart from the pro forma issue — consists of prior executive branch pronouncements that are at odds with both the language and the history of the constitutional text. It would not be surprising if the judiciary were to reject these self-serving executive interpretations in favor of more straightforward ones. In particular, courts might rule that the Recess Appointments Clause applies only when a vacancy “happens” during a recess, as the text of Att. II, § 2, cl. 3, says, and that “the recess” of the Senate occurs only between sessions, and not (as here) in the midst of a session. The OLC Opinion acknowledges as much, when it says that the appointments face “some litigation risk.” But the Obama Administration cannot be faulted for following longstanding executive precedent, which has been used by past Presidents both Republican and Democrat. It is only the novel arguments that I criticize here. It seems to me that the Administration is under special obligation to provide a bullet-proof legal argument when it declares invalid a strategy devised by Majority Leader Harry Reid in 2007, supported by then-Senator Barack Obama, and successfully used by them to stymie President George W. Bush’s recess appointment power. The law cannot change just because the shoe is on the other foot.

http://www.advancingafreesociety.org/2012/01/12/olc-recess/

An interesting look at the legality of Obama’s recess appointments. 

4.  Nebraska Shows 2012 Challenge for Democrats

When Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., announced his retirement, Democrats received a quick reminder of how bleak 2012 could prove for their Senate prospects. The retirement of Democratic Sen. Kent Conrad in North Dakota gives Republicans a near-gimmee. The open Nebraska seat, for which two strong Republicans are already in contention, could be a second. And that would leave Democrats no margin for error as they seek to defend against a GOP takeover of Congress' upper chamber.

Democrats' best hope in Nebraska, many have said, would be for former Sen. Bob Kerrey, D to return and run for his old seat. Kerrey, who is slightly more liberal than Nelson, recently finished a stormy tenure as president of The New School in New York City. (He is a decorated and wounded Vietnam veteran, and the leader of a Navy SEAL team which, as he admitted in 2001, participated in a massacre of civilians. Kerrey took responsibility for his team's actions when The New York Times explored the incident over ten years ago.)

Magellan Strategies, a Republican firm of whose work I am not really a fan, has released the first poll that I am aware of testing Kerrey in head-to-head matchups against the two leading Republican candidates. In both cases, he loses and fails to pull more than 40 percent support. Attorney General Jon Bruning beats him, 51 to 40 percent. Treasurer (and Former Attorney General) Don Stenberg, who litigated the pro-life side in the landmark Stenberg v. Carhart Supreme Court case, beats Kerrey, 47 to 39 percent.

Even factoring in the Republican lean that Magellan's polls tend to carry, this is an ugly poll, considering that Kerrey is probably the best known and most revered Democrat in the state. For Republicans, this means they might not have to worry too much about who among their primary candidates is "more electable."

But for Democrats, this has a deeper strategic significance. If they begin the 2012 cycle ceding two seats, their odds of holding the Senate majority are very slim….

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/poll-confirms-dems-uphill-battle-neb/314916

2012 is likely to be a repeat of 2008 but this time the wind is at the Republicans back.

5.  Using Two Cows to Explain the Theory of Government

Socialism

You have two cows. The government takes one and give one to your neighbor.

Communism

You have two cows. The government takes them both and promises you milk but you starve.

Fascism

You have two cows. The government takes them and sells you the milk.

Bureaucracy

You have two cows. The government takes them both, shoots one, milks the other, pays you for the milk, and then pours it down the drain.

Capitalism

You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.

Redistributionism

You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point that you must sell them both in order to support someone else who already got a free cow from the government.

http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2012/01/15/using-two-cows-to-explain-the-theory-of-government/

They forgot one. 

Obamaism.  Your two cows puts you in the top 1%.  The government passes a law that says you can’t have two cows unless you get an exemption from them.  If you give them your cream, you get the exemption.  This is also known as crony cowism. 

6.  Hate Speech on the Left Increases

Last week, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D.-Fla.) linked the Tea Party to the tragic Jan. 8, 2011, shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D.-Ariz.). This is just one example, unfortunately, in a long line of slanders from the far left.

“I hesitate to place blame,” said Wasserman Schultz, Chair of the Democratic National Committee. “But I have noticed the tone take a very precipitous turn toward edginess and a lack of civility with the growth of the Tea Party movement.”

Wasserman Schultz is not alone. VP Joe Biden has compared the Tea Party to terrorists, and David Axelrod, President Obama’s political henchman, has compared Newt Gingrich to a monkey. The Washington Post quoted an Obama campaign e-mail to supporters in October of last year claiming the Republican plan for job creation is to “suffocate the economy for the sake of what they think will be a political victory. ” The President has referred to Republicans as “hostage takers.”

These statements are outrageous and are not part of a civil political discourse between the parties. Expect the left to use liberal hate speech as a means to distract the American people from the President’s failed big-government policies….

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=48791

It appears the call by Democrats for civility was only for the Republicans to hear.

Socialism

What’s new today

Our # 1 describes the fundamental problems with socialism. #2 relates how the unions are propping up Occupy Wall Street and are putting together an Occupy Washington to go after Republicans.  #3demonstrates governments are not simply crazy in the USA, but they are in Europe as well.  It seem it is now against the law to claim water can prevent dehydration.  My final posting today, #4 talks about how 14,000 wind turbines in the USA have been abandoned.  It seems when the subsidies run out and the turbines start to need maintenance, it cheaper to abandon them.

1.  Socialism's Fundamental Flaws

…..In the Soviet model THE STATE OWNED THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION THUS ALL WORKERS WERE EMPLOYED BY THE STATE -- essentially each working for everyone else, the collective, but not directly for themselves. This was effectively a compulsory altruism which, because not being a primary human drive, introduced a fatal systemic flaw to an economy so bereft of incentives as to engender the famous Russian quip: "WE PRETEND TO WORK AND THEY PRETEND TO PAY US."

As if one were not enough, THE SECOND FATAL FLAW WAS THE ELIMINATION OF THE FREE MARKET AND ITS REPLACEMENT BY THE PLANNED ECONOMY -- where supply and demand were in the hands of technocrats and not the invisible hand of free-market capitalism. The resultant low productivity was easily outpaced by free-market capitalism which produced guns and butter as well as social programs. Economic non-competitiveness, accompanied by suppression of human rights and political freedoms ASSURED SOVIET SOCIALISM'S ULTIMATE DISPATCH TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY, TO JOIN ITS OTHER SOCIALIST ITERATIONS, NAZISM AND FASCISM.

TODAY'S WESTERNIZED SOCIALISM CASTS OUT DOCTRINES OF CENTRALIZED PLANNING AND NATIONALIZATION OF ENTERPRISES, AND INCORPORATES DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE, RULE OF LAW, VARYING DEGREES OF PUBLIC SERVICES, SAFETY NETS AND ENTITLEMENTS, ALL EXISTING PARI PASSU WITH FREE-MARKET CAPITALISM. Yes capitalism, the most effective economic system extant because it harnesses instinctive self-interest, close cousin to man's primordial drive of self-preservation, of millions of people bustling about in pursuit of economic advantage to ultimately produce, on average, the greatest amount of wealth, for the greatest number with the least amount of pain overall. So SOCIALISTS HAVE LEARNED THAT NOT ONLY CAN THEY LIVE SIDE-BY-SIDE WITH CAPITALISM, BUT THEY ARE DEPENDENT ON IT AS THE WEALTH GENERATOR TO FUND...WELL, SOCIALISM!

However, the Western economies have recently slowed to a crawl, causing soaring national deficits which some governments have attempted to mitigate with reduced spending. In several nations this has impacted public services and threatened entitlements causing widespread public protests ranging from peaceful to violent, while world stock markets have dropped precipitously and turned volatile. We're facing an economic crisis of potentially global proportions which, THOUGH IT MAY HAVE HAD ITS GENESIS IN THE 2008 SUBPRIME MORTGAGE BUBBLE, IS NOW ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE UNDERLYING AND GROWING SOVEREIGN DEBT CRISIS, WHICH THREATENS ENTIRE ECONOMIES WITH COLLAPSE. The common denominator: The involved nations are democracies, increasingly encumbered with the unsustainable social spending of the welfare state. Unsustainability is the fundamental flaw of Westernized socialism.

The origin of this flaw resides in the all-too-common human failing -- THE DESIRE TO GET SOMETHING FOR NOTHING -- OR AT LEAST NOT AT ONE'S OWN EXPENSE. This proclivity is one to which politicians shamelessly pander. Having government offer "free" entitlements lures people into repeatedly voting for politicians who promise to deliver ever more of such. This mutually reinforcing voter-politician cycle is an example of the phenomenon of positive feedback….

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/socialisms_fundamental_flaws.html#ixzz1e9j2tRSS

A couple of things I totally agree with in this article.  First it identifies Communism, Nazism, and Fascism as all socialists programs.  Secondly, it identifies modern socialism not as owning the means of production (the classic definition), but as having gone beyond that point.  Third it describes the relationship between the capitalistic portion of today’s economies and the socialistic portion.  If you read this you will realize why cutting spending should result in a robust recovery as spending more squeezes out the capitalistic portion of the economy.  This is a good read.

2.  Occupy Congress—At Least the Republican portion of it

The 2012 election is almost a full year away and nobody knows who is running against President Obama, but that didn’t stop MARY KAY HENRY, THE D.C.-BASED NATIONAL PRESIDENT OF THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION (SEIU), FROM ANNOUNCING LAST WEEK  THAT HER ORGANIZATION ENDORSES PRESIDENT OBAMA FOR RE-ELECTION. That’s not surprising — while many unions have exhibited political independence, SEIU officials have long been among Obama’s closest and most loyal allies in Washington — but what was notable here was how brazenly Henry exploited the language of the Occupy movement to justify her endorsement of the Democratic Party leader: “We need a leader willing to fight FOR THE NEEDS OF THE 99 PERCENT . . . .Our economy and democracy HAVE BEEN TAKEN OVER BY THE WEALTHIEST ONE PERCENT.”

But now SEIU’s effort to convert and degrade the Occupy movement into what SEIU’s national leadership is — a loyal arm of the DNC and the Obama White House — has become even more overt, as Greg Sargent reports today:

One of the enduring questions about Occupy Wall Street has been this: Can the energy unleashed by the movement be leveraged behind a concrete political agenda and push for change that will constitute a meaningful challenge to the inequality and excessive Wall Street influence highlighted by the protests?

A COALITION OF LABOR AND PROGRESSIVE GROUPS IS ABOUT TO UNVEIL ITS ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. GET READY FOR “OCCUPY CONGRESS.”..

http://www.salon.com/2011/11/19/heres_what_attempted_co_option_of_ows_looks_like/singleton/

Occupy Wall Street is dying, but the left is trying to get a little more mileage out of it before it totally collapses. 

3.   EU bans claim that water can prevent dehydration

EU officials concluded that, following a three-year investigation, THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE PREVIOUSLY UNDISPUTED FACT.

Producers of bottled water are now forbidden by law from making the claim and will face a two-year jail sentence if they defy the edict, which comes into force in the UK next month.

Last night, critics claimed the EU was at odds with both science and common sense. Conservative MEP Roger Helmer said: “THIS IS STUPIDITY WRIT LARGE.

“The euro is burning, the EU is falling apart and yet here they are: highly-paid, highly-pensioned officials worrying about the obvious qualities of water and trying to deny us the right to say what is patently true.

“If ever there were an episode which demonstrates the folly of the great European project then this is it.”…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8897662/EU-bans-claim-that-water-can-prevent-dehydration.html

If you are simply stupid in the private sector, people laugh at you.  If you are stupid in the public sector, people are tied up in knots by you. 

4.   Wind Runs Out of Power

Minnesotans for Global Warming report that in the last 30 years, the United States has had 14,000 wind turbines abandoned. Apparently, once the subsidies and the wind run out, these 20-story high Cuisinarts are de-bladed and retired. This means more bats and migratory birds will live.

From Minnesotans for Global Warming: “The symbol of Green renewable energy, our savior from the non existent problem of Global Warming, abandoned wind farms are starting to litter the planet as globally governments cut the subsidies taxes that consumers pay for the privilege of having a very expensive power source that does not work every day for various reasons like it’s too cold or the wind speed is too high.”…

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/46519

Green energy dies when the green subsidies run out.  We should be researching wind and solar power, but we should not be forcing people to buy the power and subsidizing it as we currently are. 

Corzine, ACORN, and October Numbers--three things that don't bode well for Obama

What’s new today

Our # 1 tells us about Jon Corzine’s resignation from MF Global.  He won’t see a severance package.  #2 explains what Corzine was trying to do.  #3 relates how ACORN in New York is trying to insulate itself from further leaks showing that they are involved in OWS.  #4 talks about social justice and how it’s worked in the past.  #5 explains how socialism has simply failed even why capitalism has succeeded.  #6 talks about jobs gained in October.  #7 shows Vanderbilt University requiring conformity in its diversity.  Finally story #8 talks about how regulations are strangling small business. 

1.   Corzine Resigns

MF GLOBAL’S CHIEF EXECUTIVE JON CORZINE HAS RESIGNED as head of the brokerage firm which filed for bankruptcy on Monday after a series of bets on European government debt soured.

CORZINE, A FORMER NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR WHO ONCE RAN GOLDMAN SACHS, is under a cloud for allegedly failing to protect clients' investments by cordoning off their funds from the firm's money. THE FIRM IS BEING PROBED BY THE FBI AND BY REGULATORS because it has not accounted for hundreds of millions of dollars worth of clients' money.

MF's board announced Friday in a brief statement that CORZINE HAD RESIGNED FROM ALL POSTS AND CONFIRMED THAT HE WILL NOT SEEK ANY SEVERANCE PAYMENTS, which The Associated Press reported could have amounted to $12.1 million including cash and benefits.

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/04/8631533-mf-global-says-corzine-has-resigned-will-not-seek-severance



The tragedy here is that Corzine not seeking any severance payments seems to be a step up from what we are used to.  The President of Solyndra got $500,000 in severance two months before the company declared bankruptcy (who do you think paid for that?) and recently the top officers in Fannie and Freddie were given million dollar bonuses right before they came to congress asking for a $6 billion bailout. 

2.   What Was Corzine Thinking???

What attracted him to such basket cases -- with huge welfare states, large deficits, little if any economic growth and unproductive workforces?

Their price. THEY WERE TRADING RELATIVELY CHEAPLY, thanks to fears that the euro crisis could lead both nations to default on their debt. But CORZINE WAS SURE BOTH COUNTRIES WOULD EVENTUALLY BE BAILED OUT.

The Europeans, he figured, had learned from the Americans that government can “save” the financial system and prevent banks from dying. If you can bail out a massive bank like Citigroup, with nearly $1 trillion in customer deposits, why can’t you bail out a country like Italy?

THAT WAS CORZINE’S INVESTMENT STRATEGY -- AND, MUCH LIKE HIS STRATEGY FOR GROWING NEW JERSEY’S ECONOMY, IT DIDN’T WORK SO WELL. As most people are now well aware, the US bank bailouts didn’t accomplish one of their main goals, namely to repair the banking system so small business could get loans and capital. Who in their right mind would say Bank of America, the nation’s largest and most troubled bank, has put the financial crisis behind it?

Plus, bailing out banks isn’t quite like bailing out countries -- as the about-to-fall-apart bailout of Greece proves.

As the latest Greek deal began collapsing, traders started looking for which firms were most exposed. Not long after that, Jon Corzine’s MF GLOBAL BECAME THE WALL STREET EQUIVALENT OF GREECE.

Corzine isn’t saying much now that the messy details of MF Global’s final days have become front-page news. The FBI  is looking into the matter. and there’s a civil inquiry into the firm’s demise, so his lawyers are keeping him out of public view.


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/faith_in_government_doomed_corzine_y9pk8VLfhQRyrH0fQkguVP#ixzz1ckhLAVeb

3.   Acorn in Serious Damage Control over OWS

Officials with the revamped ACORN office in New York -- operating as New York Communities for Change -- HAVE FIRED STAFF, SHREDDED REAMS OF DOCUMENTS AND TOLD WORKERS TO BLAME DISGRUNTLED EX-EMPLOYEES FOR LEAKING INFORMATION IN AN EFFORT TO EXPLAIN AWAY A FOXNEWS.COM REPORT LAST WEEK ON THE GROUP’S INVOLVEMENT IN OCCUPY WALL STREET PROTESTS, according to sources.

NYCC also is installing surveillance cameras and recording devices at its Brooklyn offices, removing or packing away supplies bearing the name ACORN and handing out photos of Fox News staff with a stern warning not to talk to the media, the sources said.

THEY’RE DOING SERIOUS DAMAGE CONTROL RIGHT NOW,” SAID AN NYCC SOURCE

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/03/acorn-officials-scramble-firing-workers-and-shredding-documents-after-exposed/=#ixzz1cjqg0eKq

Acorn?  Isn’t the organization that folded after numerous scandals and that BHO legally represented in the 1990s? 

4.   Social Justice

Imagine someone showing up at your home and saying: “We’re from the government. We’ve determined that this dwelling has more living space than you and your family need. There are so many people who do not have enough. So we’re going to move another family in with you.” THIS ACTUALLY HAPPENED TO MANY PEOPLE FOLLOWING THE 1917 REVOLUTION IN RUSSIA. Among the legacies of the tsars was glaring economic inequality. The new leadership saw that as a serious problem. To solve it required policies designed to achieve “economic justice.” SO, OVERNIGHT, PRIVATE HOMES BECAME TENEMENTS. AND FOR MORE THAN 70 YEARS, THE SOVIET UNION SPREAD POVERTY.

Fast forward to Europe today which is suffering an acute economic crisis. What has gone wrong in Greece and several other countries may be seen as complicated, involving sovereign debt, liquidity, fiscal and monetary policies. Or it can be seen simply: For years, the Greeks have been consuming more than they produce. They have borrowed money and don’t have the means to pay it back. Now they are faced with the prospect of increasing austerity. THEY THINK THAT’S UNFAIR. THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN TO THE STREETS TO DEMAND ECONOMIC JUSTICE WHICH SEEMS TO MEAN SOMEONE ELSE PAYING THE BILLS they have run up in the past and plan to run up in the future. One might have expected Americans – self-sufficient rugged individualists that we are – to scoff at such behavior. But from sea to shining sea, THE OCCUPY WALL STREET MOVEMENT IS EMULATING THE GREEKS AND, IN MORE THAN A FEW INSTANCES, ECHOING THE SOVIETS.

http://townhall.com/columnists/cliffmay/2011/11/03/what%e2%80%99s_wrong_with_economic_justice

The problem with socialism is that it erodes the wealth of society even at it makes people feel entitled to that higher level of living.  It contains within it the seeds of its own destruction.

5.   Is Obama the President we Deserve?

…In Principles of Political Economy (1848), John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) gave three reasons to severely limit government interference in a nation's economy and markets. First, ANY INCREASE IN GOVERNMENT POWER IS A THREAT TO HUMAN INDIVIDUALITY, FREEDOM, AND ORIGINALITY, qualities necessary for the progress of the human race. Second, MARKET ECONOMIES FUNCTION MORE EFFICIENTLY AND PRODUCE MORE PROSPERITY. Third, laissez-faire economies inculcate moral virtues in citizens by making them more self-reliant, virtuous and intelligent. "A people," Mill explained, "who expect to have everything done for them ... have their faculties only half developed."

The test of any theory is experiment, but IT IS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CONDUCT LARGE-SCALE CONTROLLED EXPERIMENTS IN ECONOMICS. It is difficult to even make meaningful and unambiguous comparisons between countries. Nations differ -- not only in economic systems, but in cultures, languages, traditions, geographies, and natural resources. To test socialism versus capitalism, we would have to take one or more countries with similar social and physical characteristics and divide them in half. After assigning a different economic system to each country, we would then sit back for fifty years and observe what happens.

BUT THIS EXPERIMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN PERFORMED THROUGH AN ACCIDENT OF HISTORY. We know the answer. At the close of World War II, GERMANY AND KOREA WERE DIVIDED INTO SOCIALIST AND MARKET ECONOMIES. SOCIALISM FAILED DRAMATICALLY. East Germany had to build the Berlin Wall just to keep people from fleeing. North Korea is still in the stone age. A satellite photo taken at night shows South Korea ablaze with the light of civilization. But North Korea is dark, both literally and metaphorically.

In the U.S., we exist in a curious state of denial. WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE INFERIORITY OF SOCIALISM BUT CONTINUE TO BECOME MORE AND MORE SOCIALISTIC. Every attempt to shrink the size of government or repeal a regulation brings about a shriek, like a bottle being pulled out of the mouth of an infant. I cannot recall a Republican president or Congress who reduced the size of the federal government. No one wants to surrender a special privilege or entitlement. We know what the best system is, but we lack the discipline to return to it….

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/does_america_deserve_obama.html#ixzz1ckCy1P4P

Even though we know socialism is a fools dream, the left continues to defend it and pretend “social justice” reforms do not mean socialism.  Of course it does, but changing the language is the tactic the left uses to obscure that reality.

6.  THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- OCTOBER 2011

NONFARM PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT CONTINUED TO TREND UP IN OCTOBER (+80,000),AND THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE WAS LITTLE CHANGED AT 9.0 PERCENT, the U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment in the private

sector rose, with modest job growth continuing in professional and businesses services, leisure and hospitality, health care, and mining.Government employment continued to trend down.

Household Survey Data

Both the number of unemployed persons (13.9 million) and the unemployment rate (9.0 percent) changed little over the month. THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE HAS REMAINED IN A NARROW RANGE FROM 9.0 TO 9.2 PERCENT SINCE APRIL. (SEE TABLE A-1.)

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Pretty neutral report.  It doesn’t hurt Obama, but it doesn’t help either. 

7.   Conformity for the sake of Diversity

Illustrating an intellectual confusion common on campuses, Vanderbilt University says: To ensure “diversity of thought and opinion” we require certain student groups, including five religious ones, to conform to the university’s policy that forbids the groups from protecting their characteristics that contribute to diversity. 

Last year, after a Christian fraternity allegedly expelled a gay undergraduate because of his sexual practice, Vanderbilt redoubled its efforts to make the more than 300 student organizations comply with its “long-standing nondiscrimination policy.” That policy, says a university official, does not allow the Christian Legal Society “to preclude someone from a leadership position based on religious beliefs” So an organization formed to express religious beliefs, Including the belief that homosexual activity is biblically forbidden  is itself effectively forbidden. …

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/conformity-for-diversitys-sake/2011/11/01/gIQAUBOmgM_story.html

This is a very good op-ed piece as are most of those written by George Will.  It appears Vanderbilt is giving us the University version of the “we had to destroy the village in order to save it.” 

8.   Blanche Lincoln turns on Obama over Overregulating Small Business

This week, former Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln (D) lead a cadre of small business owners from a number of states to Washington in an attempt to convince Congress that their commitment to over-regulating American entrepreneurs is a surefire way to destroy the American economy.

This week, former Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln (D) lead a cadre of small business owners from a number of states to Washington in an attempt to convince Congress that their commitment to over-regulating American entrepreneurs is a surefire way to destroy the American economy.

According to the Small Business Administration, regulations on American small businesses, which comprise 60 percent of all private-sector jobs and account for about two thirds of jobs created each year, deprive the American economy of $1.75 trillion annually. By reducing – or at least compromising – on current regulations and letting go of the nearly 4,200 regulations on the table right now to be passed this session, Congress could stimulate one of the fastest-growing American industries. Unfortunately for Blanche Lincoln and her team of American business owners, Congress will be hard to convince.

Lincoln is trying at a very unique time, though, when quick action could prevent a lot of further harm to the American economy. As we stated, 4,200 regulations are in the pipeline, just waiting for Congressional approval. Of those, 845 directly affect small businesses. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. There are also 330 new EPA regulations coming down the pipe, all of which are designed to specifically regulate how American small businesses do their job. Without expensive lawyers to fill out regulatory paperwork, and expensive lobbyists to fight the fight on their behalf, small businesses usually just take the regulations sitting down, devoting time and money they could spend growing their businesses and hiring more out of work Americans to doing dirty work provided to them by the US government.

Although not perfectly conservative, Lincoln and her organization are proposing a set of guidelines that would help Congress and the Obama administration curb regulations and more closely analyze the impact of their actions on small business owners.

http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2011/11/04/democrat-blanche-lincoln-turns-on-obama-over-small-business-regs/