Tuesday, February 24, 2009

President Obama Has Already Failed the American People

Certain talk radio personalities have been roundly criticized for stating that he hopes "President Obama fails". Well, it looks as though his hopes have been realized already.

If you look at the agenda of the Obama election team, then we can infer that he has already failed. He's not ending the War on Terror, not closing GITMO any time soon. He has nominated lobbyists, tax evaders & cheats and has been talking down the economy. Enough to sink the country into another Great Depression.

These facts are not hard to see. Obama has countered his own words with his actions, and as nearly as I can tell, he's broken every promise of hope and change that he campaigned on. These examples are some of his demonstrations of hypocrisy and how quickly he has reversed his high minded policy positions.

Obama has set himself up as a "post partisan politician" (because partisanship is really bad. NOT) and he will bring the parties together to help Americans.

But, so far he has only been able to get 3 Republicans out of 535 members of congress to support his economic "stimulus" plan. And those three Republicans are Northeastern liberals anyway.

He has accused Republicans in the US Congress of not getting it, and of trying to make his landmark legislation political. Sorry Mr. Obama, but you've already accomplished that. He then "Chastises GOP for 'tired' tax theories" according to the Washington Post, that also notes:
The president, joined elsewhere Saturday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, continued to wage a rhetorical battle against Republicans.
Is battling the opposition post partisan? I don't think so.

Mr. Obama says he will not allow evil lobbyists to influence his administration.

"I am running to tell the lobbyists in Washington that their days of setting the agenda are over. They have not funded my campaign. They won't work in my White House." -Candidate Barack Obama, December 16, 2007 (Chicago Sun Times)
This is a promise that President Obama made over and over again. OK, D-day (decision day) is here. So what did the "winner" do?

Mr. Obama nominates/hires lobbyists to work in his administration.

- William Lynn: Deputy Secretary of Defense
- William V. Corr: Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services
- Tom Daschle: Not only was he a lobbyist, it was his wife, another lobbyist, who trolled in Billions for the airline industry. (Daschle dumped due to "tax problems")
- hired lobbyists for 12 White House staff positions
- At least a dozen lobbyists worked on Obama's transition team, and at least one member of his national security team was a lobbyist.

His promises of transparency are not holding either:
Sunlight Before Signing: Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days. Read
What he actually did:

- Signs his first two bills into law within minutes of them coming out of the US Congress. They are the non-emergency Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and SCHIP. So much for that promise.

- Then, for the stimulus bill, legislation that will save America if it's passed (now, now now) he coerces Congress to approve it without reading it, let alone allowing us to look it over. Even he has not read it.

Obama goes on TV and talks like Ronald Reagan, i.e. a new era of personal responsibility, and follows it with $787 Billion in pork and payoffs outwardly designed specifically to remove responsibility and consequences from the American people.

At Mr. Obama's "change" Website, he lists keeping of states secrets as a problem.
Secrecy Dominates Government Actions: The Bush administration has ignored public disclosure rules and has invoked a legal tool known as the "state secrets" privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court.
Here we see some more of that famous "post partisan politician". He follows up by maintaining the Clinton/Bush policies for treatment of state's secrets where extraordinary rendition is involved. Read
The new president says...
A High Standard: Unlike other candidates Obama's campaign refuses to accept contributions from Washington lobbyists and political action committees.
But, as adverse to PAC/lobbyist money as Mr. Obama claims to be, he had no problems with them in the past. According to the Boston News, he accepted $6,239,000 from 1996 through 2006 and an additional $58.9 million that lobbyists and lobbying firms helped him raise in the first six months of 2007. Not to mention the fact that he has his own PAC, Hopefund for America, which now directs you to his sign-up page. He is credited with not taking PAC or lobbyist money by the legacy media during the presidential campaign, however, he did take $1570.00 from a federally registered PAC. According to the FEC, he received donations of $13,175.00 from "Other Political Committees" and "Other Authorized Committees" gave him $86,950,000.00. He will be unable to convince me that bundling campaign contributions from multiple donors does not constitute some form of a PAC or special interest groups.

Missing from Mr. Obama's ethics page is any sort of requirement for members of his administration to meet some standard of ethical behavior. And, as if to throw it in our faces, he nominates an income tax cheater to oversea the IRS. I wouldn't normally beg the question, but come on, is this one of John Edwards "two Americas", where the privileged class can break the law and be forgiven, but if you or I "forget" to pay our taxes, after being warned several times, then only pay it when it became public, would we be so easily forgiven? Is Mr. Geithner going to enforce IRS law and force Americans to pay their taxes and any fines that may be appropriate?

EDIT 3/3/09: Mr. Obama asks for more ethical problems. Ron Kirk, Obama’s nominee for U.S. Trade Representative, owes some $10,000 in back taxes. Fox News

The new president has his own ethical problems as well. He seems to be less than honest in his rhetoric:
"We are in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, and a lot of you I think are worried about your jobs, your pensions, your retirement accounts."
Funny, I didn't consider the Carter administration's high unemployment, 1% growth in productivity, double digit interest rates (Prime lending rate was 21.5% in December 1980), double digit inflation, and gas shortages to be "The Great Depression". But, if he wants to characterize the Carter administration that way, I'm not going to argue with him. But he should clarify.

How can we in the worst economic climate since the Carter administration, or the Great Depression, when so far, we do not have any inflation, interest rates are as low as they can get (and have been), unemployment is nowhere near Great Depression rates, and there is no shortage of gas. But, we can give President Obama a break on this. After all it was another Democratic President who mismanaged all of that.

But no breaks on this.

I expect the President of the United States to be reassuring, upbeat and positive.

President Obama ran on the the same type of upbeat and positive platform as President Reagan. He said he was "change" and that Americans and the world could have "hope" for a better life under his administration. However, as soon as the polls closed in November 08, the president- elect started in with his ongoing theme of doom and gloom and talking down the economy. I have no respect for someone who modulates their rhetoric solely for personal gain. He knew his upbeat platform would get him elected, then as some as that milestone was met, he did a complete reversal to the fear monger that he is today. He pressed to adopt his "Stimulus" package or we we fall into a catastrophe, another Great Depression. He says millions of families are suffering and it will be months, maybe years, before he can make it better.

Since then, he has his stimulus package and Hope has turned into "Hope Dollars", money that does exist, but he and congress hopes they will be able to spread around to their supporters anyway. The only change we see is the change from the Bush administration to the Obama administration.

Everything that matters in government: how politicians pretend to run the country, how they promote themselves and how they try to subordinate the opposition party, their partisanship, and exactly who they represent has remained unchanged.

Mr. President, you fail.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

You Don't Need to be A Nobel Lauret in Economics

A friend points me to Time/CNN's "25 Best Blogs 2009". The Time's choices reflect the singularity that is the thought process of liberals in America. The evidence is that the Huffington Post is number one. With our current economic climate, I thought I'd highlight one of their picks that I found to be particularly partisan and they are proud of it.

Number Nine on their list is Paul Krugman, identified by Time as a "liberal economist" who, according to Time, predicted the economic meltdown.

Well not quite.

He predicted that the housing bubble would stop bubbling and that prices would go down in his editorial named "That Hissing Sound" back in 2002. But he never says when or why with any useful detail. To me, he is a typical liberal who has just enough knowledge to keep the paychecks coming in and doing talking head guest spots on "news" shows.

But, back the Time piece...

Time/CNN says,
You'd need a Nobel Prize in economics to figure out what went wrong with the economy and how to get it back on track. Paul Krugman has one.
They add these tidbits to ensnare your allegiance to Mr. Krugman's ideas.
Sample The Conscience of a Liberal post: The House has passed the stimulus bill with not a single Republican vote. Aren't you glad that Obama watered it down and added ineffective tax cuts, so as to win bipartisan support?
Entry you'll never see: With the gross domestic product declining at a rate not seen in half a century, our only hope in avoiding a full-blown depression lies in a return to the supply-side economics of Ronald Reagan.
This last remark is just sad for two reasons. One, it is the exact opposite of the real world's experience. And two, his expert status will make difficult to convince many that this is wrong. The watered down tax cuts mentioned are a happy circumstance for liberals in government and their admirers, but real working Americans are coming on hard times specifically because Congress is full of it's own power and are spending like witless fools. But real working Americans will be footing the bill.

We must look at a little history to sort out the linkage between tax cut and higher employment rates.

First: Tax cuts do counter the effects of recessions. It worked for Presidents John F Kennedy, William J. Clinton, Ronald W. Reagan and George W. Bush.

JFK's Revenue Act of 1964, signed by LBJ, reduced individual income tax rates and reduced the top corporate rate. Incomes top rate went from 91% to 70% and the top corporate rate from 52% to 48%. A minimum standard deduction of $300 plus $100 per exemption was created. In 1964 the unemployment rate was 5.2%. It went down to 3.8% by 1966 and was lower again to 3.6% in 1968. (Unemployment rates)

President Reagan's Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 lowered the top rate from 70% to 50% over 3 years and the bottom rate 14% to 11%. In 1982 the unemployment rate was 9.7%. It went down to 7.5% by 1984 and was lower again to 7.0% in 1986. By 1988 it was 5.5% and only went up over 6% after a small recession in 1991.

President Clinton lowered capital gains taxes with the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. The top rate fell from 28% to 20%, while the 15% bracket was brought down to 10%. The bill had $400 tax credit for children, capital gains exemptions for the sale of homes and encouraged savings with relief for education and retirement savings. The unemployment rate dropped from 4.9% in 1997 to 4.5% in 1998, 4.2% in 1999 and to 4.0% in 2000. As a bonus, President Clinton was also able to balance the budget with these lower taxes.

With a market slide in 2000, the "tech Bubble" bursting and the beginnings of a small recession in 2001, President George W. Bush pushed for lower taxes with Economic Growth and Tax Reform Reconciliation Act of 2001. While the terror attacks on 9/11 are credited with raising the jobless above 5.8%, it peaked at 6.0% in 2003. Then starting stepping down with 5.5% in 2004, 5.1% in 2005, and 4.6% in 2006 and 2007.

In contrast, President George H.W. Bush raised taxes and raised unemployment. In 1990 the unemployment rate was 5.6%. The following year it had jumped to 6.8%, then 7.5% in 1992 and tacked lower to 6.9% for 1993.

Of course there are other factors to consider when determining causes for employment rate changes, but this correlation is very clear.

Lower taxes, increase employment rates.

The President's economic stimulus package will have just the opposite effect as tax cuts. More unemployment, more debt, more lost opportunities. This recession will become a depression simply because there is no one in Washington DC that cares about the history of this great country. Mr Krugman does not have the answer and neither does Time/CNN, President Obama nor the US Congress.

Saturday, February 14, 2009

Loud Mouth Democrats Do It Again

Diane Feinstein, senior senator from the land of fruits and nuts, has revealed classified military information to the public and to our enemies around the globe. Go figure. She must be getting her talking points from the same traitors who were revealing US classified information since the the beginning of the War on Terror, or Senator "Leaky" Leahy. The Chicago Tribune tells the story here, of our CIA's actions in Pakistan in the defense of Americans.

Hasn't this country had enough of the brainless stupidity and self centered activities of the left, along with their surrogates (such as Feinstein and Leahy)?

Politics as usual must be changed.

Friday, February 13, 2009

Misery Loves Company, Hello Leon

Ya know, back when I was young man and helping a friend fix his car, I asked why he needed me out in that 15 degree f. weather. He said, "Misery loves company."

Well that truism holds even for President Obama. Obama is the emptiest suit that has ever held the Office of President of the United States. It must be really miserable knowing that everyone around you has had some training or experience in their jobs.

As it is he is the most unprepared President in history, so he will need someone even less knowledgeable about their job than he is.

Hello, Leon Panetta.

The LA Times reports Leon Panetta's Senate confirmation Thursday, so Barack will have someone close who even less training for their new job than he does at his.

I'm not fond of predictions, but I'll bet that if this country is attacked in a major way President Obama will blame poor old Leon for not catching it.

Now, please understand that I do not hate President Obama. I just believe the country would be better served if he had stayed at Harvard Law School.

Monday, February 9, 2009

An RV in Everyone's driveway

President Obama decided to deliver his latest Doom & Gloom Report in the faces of the most unemployed people in America: Elkhart, Indiana. Their unemployment rate is 15% and a big industry in Elkhart used to be manufacturing recreational vehicles (RV). They are the self-described RV Capital of the World.

What Barack is not saying is that people who would normally be in the market for an RV are waiting to see what the economy is going to do. I certainly would need to know if I were going to be able to pay for an expensive "nice to have" product or will I be unemployed and lose everything. Maybe I should concentrate my resources on my house payment, groceries, utilities, kids clothing, etc., before adding a new monthly payment or draining my savings.

Those people are smarter than Barack Obama. He does not know how the economy works or what a responsible person will do in the face of his daily doom and gloom predictions; all of which are lies. (So much for political ethics)

Recall the election year 2000 and the first months of George W. Bush's Administration, in a recession started on President Clinton's watch. George W. Bush and company said that the economy was slowing down and was accused of "talking down the economy". I guarantee you that Candidate Bush's rhetoric couldn't hold a candle to Obama's scare tactics. And the media jumped on Bush, but you haven't heard a word of it in the legacy media this year.

The most preposterous element of this rush to spend hope dollars is that the people claiming to fix the problem, the US Senate, US House of Representatives and the White House, are the very people who caused the problems. Their failed policies and obstructions over the last 2 decades are what have brought us to this point. Why would anyone believe they will get us out of it by doing the same thing they have been doing.

Call, email and write a real letter to your senators and representatives in Washington DC and tell them you aren't buying their snake oil and to stop this nonsense before they cause long term damage to you and your family. And tell the President that his advisers are leading him in the wrong direction.

Sunday, February 8, 2009

President Obama needs Franken's vote'.... Now

This title, "President Obama needs Franken's vote'.... Now", is quote from a poster at the Huffington Post named 2008CaliforniaFan. He/she seems typical of the folks who hang around Huffington to express their frustration with government and politicians, but can't see that it is them, liberal/progressives supporting mush-brained elected officiaks, who are causing the problems. They voted these guys into office and keep re-electing them based on... well I just do not know.

His post expressed his concern that Obama National Debt Expansion Plan, SR 1, couldn't become law of the Minnisota Governor did not seat Al Franken now.

I had to respond, below with minor alterations, and I will add any responses it attracts.


You want the Obama Lobbyist and Democrat Payoff/Wish-list Act of 2009 to become law? Do you understand that it will do nothing for you, your family or your community? The only people this transfer of wealth will help are the politicians, their lobbyists and their rich supporters.

Think I'm wrong? Just look at the $700 Billion TARP spending. This Congress, including Obama, are the same people who put that monstrosity together. TARP handed over all that money, money we don't have, to the people that caused this recession, and with no control over its use. Then they (Obama and friends) stand back and complain about it. Obama's new bill is the same kind of payola and wish-list implimentation.

This monster will only worsen the recession. It will not "create" jobs, but it will devalue the dollar further and cause your grocery and gas bill to skyrocket. Obama has no clue about any of this; he can only do as his advisers tell him. YI: His advisers are all lobbyists.

How do you think they can up with a trillion dollars in new spending in a few short weeks? These spending plans must have been lying around, some for decades, waiting for the right moment to put them into play.

So here you have it: Popular president (for now), majority in both houses and several mush-brains in the US Senate, the legacy media in his pocket, throw in a recession and let the games begin. The perfect storm.

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Salary Cap: Says Who?

President Obama is calling for a salary cap on company executives who receive any TARP bailout money, claiming it is "the height of irresponsibility" to pocket taxpayer dollars.

Now don't that beat all. He's upset because he and President Bush gave the Wall Street bankers and auto makers hundreds of billions of hope dollars and did not think to put any meaningful restrictions on how the money was to be used. They all just "hoped" the bankers would do their version of the responsible thing.

So who is the irresponsible one in this mess?

He and Bush couldn't imagine that the money-makers on Wall Street would be pocketing large amounts of the hope money. If the two Presidents and US Congress had not interfered with the US economic system in October, the Wall Street executives would have received pay and bonuses equal to their performance. A company that is bankrupt cannot handout huge paydays to those who led it to that end. Well, unless it's the government we're talking about.

This just emphasizes why the government must be stopped from mortgaging the country's future with the largest pork package in US history (to be paid after those making these lousy decisions are long gone).

Additionally, this is the next step in the destruction of free market capitalist system. The very system that made it possible for this country to become the world leading country that it is. This is just one reason why the entire hoax that is TARP and the Lobbyists' Stimulus and Recovery Act of 2009 needs to be tossed and sooner rather then later.

Government officials, including the president and US Congress should not be in the business of dictating how much anyone should be paid in private industry, whether rich, poor or between. The US Congress should restrict their payroll machinations to giving themselves raises. And this President, who has no meaningful experience at anything (especially the private sector), is the last person who should be dictating salaries and wages.

By the way: Rich people getting richer is not a crime. But, stealing money from people is a crime and using the power of government to force people to pay for the failures of others is also a crime in my book. Barack Obama, Christopher Dodd, Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the George W. Bush administration are principly responsible for the current trumped up economic crisis. I can see no provable reason why these people should be permitted to meddle with the economy. US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi doesn't even have the slightest clue about how many people actually work in this country. She claims 500,000,000 will lose their jobs if the Lobbyists' Stimulus and Recovery Act of 2009 is not passed quickly.

I'll admit that I, just like any other average worker, marvel at the astronomical sums being raked in by many private sector CEOs and executives. And I marvel at the huge sums being raked in once politicians leave office. But capping wages and bonuses will only hamstring the economy further. The only way to ensure that the capitalist system is functioning properly is to allow it to work. To get out of the way as much as possible while ensuring compliance with the law. And that includes allowing companies fail. If President Bush and President Obama had gotten out of the way, the bad actors would be looking for work in other fields rather than reaping the benefits of the elected class's largess. All the money that would be lost would have belonged to those who supported such irrational investment "instruments". The real property that is blamed for the mess is still here, still available and still worth a lot more than zero,as we nhave been led to believe.

I'm positive many of our neighbors would have lost their jobs with or without this government interference. However, not it not by their own doing. But rather by the US Congress, the FTC, the SEC, the DoJ and the Presidents' doing, or lack thereof.

For our neighbors I say extend unemployment benefits, freeze owner occupied home foreclosures, create new home financing instruments that help working Americans, and force the banks to play or go away. (My conspiratorial side tells me that Wall Street, in collusion with government officials, manufactured this "credit crisis" for the express purpose of fleecing the US taxpayers.)

Capping income by government is not the way to fix anything. Government interference in the process needs to be limited to preventing the cheaters, such as the Bernard Madoffs, Enrons, Fannie Maes and Freddie Macs, from committing crimes, exacting justice on those who do, and to prevent the public from being financially injured by the process as much as possible.

To President Obama:

Keep your government bailouts and supporter payola. You do not understand the long term affects of all this government interference (or you do, which would be much, much worse). Allow the country to recover from this financial pain quicker and easier without pounding the national debt. The monstrous spending bills that have been passed in congress will only make the economy worse, much worse. You can pay back your supporters in other ways.