Tuesday, June 30, 2009
The Post-American Presidency
.
Judging a new American President's national security policies after six months in office is a perilous enterprise, especially in the case of Barack Obama, where constant incantations of "change" and serial criticisms of his predecessor are the order of the day.
Nonetheless, during the 2008 primaries, Democratic candidates fiercely debated their respective abilities to handle the "3am call," and Joe Biden later warned that the inexperienced Illinois Senator would be "tested" early in his tenure. Now there is a partial record, and, more importantly, a worldview on which we can grade Obama's performance.
Obama is the first post-American President. Central to his worldview is rejecting American exceptionalism and the consequences that flow therefrom.
Since an overwhelming majority of the world's population would welcome the demise of American exceptionalism, they are delighted with Obama.
One student interviewed after an Obama town hall meeting during his first presidential trip to Europe said ecstatically,
"He sounds like a European."
Indeed he does... [snip]
Obama is daily acting out his worldview, and the prospect of more of the same should be deeply troubling to Americans and America's global allies.
Obama simply does not see America's strength as a particular asset, or its causes and interests as more than many other causes and interests competing in the world out there somewhere between Albania and Zimbabwe.
Long after global Obamamania has worn off, the geostrategic consequences of this insouciance will be sorely felt...
[Long, Bolton, Highly Recommended > ]
READ MORE
Thuggery 101
Pres. Barack Obama came into office apparently believing that his non-traditional background, charisma, and good intentions could placate dictators hostile to America and ease global tensions.
But so far the world’s thugs do not seem to appreciate that new goodwill.
Intelligence reports indicate that North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il is planning to launch a ballistic test missile in the direction of Hawaii between July 4 and July 8...
READ MORE
US will not use force to inspect NKorean ship
-- The United States will not use force to inspect a North Korean ship suspected of carrying banned goods, an American official was quoted as saying Friday."The U.N. resolution lays out a regime that has a very clear set of steps," ... "I want to be very clear ... This is not a resolution that sponsors, that authorizes use of force for interdiction."
[It wasn't long ago that the mere mention of US Navy involvement was sufficient to change behaviors. Now the world laughs as it's (mis)used - by the UN.
Another tangible consequence of the progressive campaign to castrate all aspects of this nation's character {word choice intentional}]
READ MORE
The 'Rape' of Israel
The analogy is appropriate:
A stronger power forces his will upon a weaker victim regardless of what is fair, moral, and without any concern for the trauma he inflicts. The rapist (in this analogy) does what he thinks is good for himself. He wants what he wants.
President Obama and his Jewish (and some Israeli) facilitators may believe that what they are doing is for Israel's own good. That might be acceptable if they explained how it works.
Would a second Arab Palestinian state run by terrorists enhance Israel's security, promote peace with Israel and in the region, resolve the issues of Jerusalem, and millions of "Palestinian refugees"? Would the Palestinians and Arab states recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, and acknowledge facts of Jewish and world history? Would the proposed state include Jews with full rights, as Israel includes Arabs with full rights?
Nowhere in Obama's agenda are these questions even asked to say nothing of answered. Nowhere is there a hint of how his plan will be carried out, nor concern for what might happen if things don't go according to his visions.
For those whose "wet dream" (as Landau described it to Rice) is the destruction of Jewish homes and communities "in order to advance 'the peace process,' " to reward Arab terrorists with a state of their own, the consummation of rape may satisfy them for a while; it's no consolation for those being violated.
Nor will it prevent the next savagery...
[Recommended > ]
READ MORE
U.S., EU court Hamas in bid for truce with Israel
The American government and the European Union are making efforts to include Hamas in a broader diplomatic effort that would include a long-term cease-fire with Israel, reconciliation among Palestinian factions and support for renewed negotiations with Israel on the basis of the Arab peace initiative.
According to the Saudi Arabian newspaper Al-Hayat reporting from Damascus, a U.S. official visiting Syria two weeks ago said that ''the Hamas leadership has recently made important and interesting statements.''
[Another overtly brutal terrorist organization rewarded.]
READ MORE
Hamas threats to kidnap more Israeli soldiers
Al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Islamic Hamas movement, threatened on Saturday to kidnap more Israeli soldiers to exchange for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.
[Israel's 'partner in peace']
READ MORE
Will Germany's Army Ever Be Ready for Battle?
On June 15, the German army's General Wolfgang Schneiderhan found himself in front of an audience of politicians and senior officers defending military policy - on sleeping bags... [snip]
Schneiderhan's blunt comments do a good job of portraying the German army, or Bundeswehr, as a bunch of whining softies. But there's a serious side to his exasperation. The German army as it stands today is a relatively young creation, born after a period of demilitarization following the end of World War II. A defensive army, the Bundeswehr has become increasingly engaged in international missions and is coming under pressure to step up its involvement in out-and-out warfare [Translation: actually fight].
After what Schneiderhan said last week, however, many are wondering whether it's up to the task...
[When next you hear some simple lefty point to Europe's social welfare and claim that it seems to 'work' by virtue of their not having completely bankrupted themselves (yet), remember: their quasi solvency has been achieved by mortgaging something critical - their defense. There now remains only a hand full of EU member states that could arguably repel a serious invasion, and none that can project any serious power (consider: the British Royal Navy is now comprised of 42 capital ships - 42). They've relied on the US to handle all their serious defense needs for several generations now.]
READ MORE
Barack Obama vs international law
Obama has called settlements "illegitimate." And he has said that Israel "has obligations under the road map," while referring disparagingly to "settlements that, in past agreements, have been categorized as illegal."
The problem with the Obama administration's characterization of a ban on Jewish building in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria as an Israeli legal obligation is that Israel has never taken upon itself a legal obligation to prohibit such building activities. Israel has never signed an agreement that has characterized any Jewish communities as "illegal."
It makes good political sense for the Obama administration to make its case against Israel in this fashion. According to a survey of US public opinion published in early 2006 by the Boston Review, whereas only 7 percent of Democrats support going to war to spread democracy - versus 53% of Republicans; 71% of Democrats - versus 36% of Republicans - support going to war to help the United Nations "uphold international law."
What this poll shows is that for Obama supporters, the idea that Israel should be treated poorly because it is in breach of international law resonates deeply... [And liberating suppressed states doesn't - snip]
Obama, the former law professor, never tires of invoking international law. And yet, when one considers his policies toward Israel on the one hand, and his policies toward illegal terrorist organizations on the other, it is clear that Obama's respect for international law is mere rhetoric.
True champions of law in both Israel and the US should demand an end to his administration's contempt for the US's actual - rather than imaginary - legal obligations.
[Think you know how our government is now spending its 'international aid'? MUST READ > ]
READ MORE
Communists turn to Stalin to fight crisis
MOSCOW-Russian communists have put up giant billboards of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin in a southern city, promoting his tough methods as the best remedy for the world economic crisis.
Stalin killed millions of people during his 30 year rule until his death in 1953, but many in recession-hit Russia have grown nostalgic for his strong leadership, and he was voted the third most popular historical figure in a nationwide poll [of the survivors]...
READ MORE
Price buster Putin makes his markdown
Moscow - The Russian Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin, has paid a surprise visit to a Moscow supermarket, instructing startled managers to lower their prices.
The visit appeared to be the latest in a series of media stunts by Russia's strongman to show the public that the Government is in control of a financial crisis that shows no sign of easing...
[So, this sound like a 'new' Russia?]
READ MORE
America's Socialist Past
There seems to be a need in American society to have to relearn the same hard lessons over and over again, regardless of whether the results were seen on the other side of the planet or suffered through by our own people.
The lesson we, and the rest of the world, seems to fail to learn is how socially and economically destructive this sort of system is. The problem is, these lessons don't have to be learned from studying the histories of far off lands, for we have numerous examples of collectivist/socialist experiments here at home... [snip]
The date is January 1, 1816, and a man named Robert Owen proposed a new type of model society. In his plans, each of these communities of 2,500 individuals would "be self-governing and hold its property in the common."[vii] So popular was Owen that when he reached America from Britain, President John Quincy Adams displayed one of Owen's architectural models for this ideal community. He established his community in Indiana, christening it New Haven in 1825. In New Haven, "not only work, but also recreation and meditation were communal and regimented."[viii] Everything was collectivized, including "cooking, child care, and other domestic work."[ix]
The community lasted two years.
The term "socialism" was actually coined by Owen's followers around the time New Haven failed. [snip]
These few examples, and there are more out there, show how American culture even before the Civil War (or the War of Northern Aggression, depending on your location) tried communal living and centrally planned economic models. Despite the good intentions of the people involved, they always fail because of the inherent flaws in Socialism. Unfortunately, given the reach of the federal government and current make-up of the executive and legislative branches, we are set to learn this lesson the hard way.
Again.
[Highly Recommended > ]
READ MORE
The Fed: Our economy's protector?
There has been a curiously subdued muddle of finger pointing to the cause of the financial crisis. Apparently, after the Administration and Congress finish legislating appropriate remedies, at some point they will convene a blue-ribbon commission or some such to determine what actually caused the problem.
In the meantime, we cannot remind ourselves too frequently of the real cause of the asset price bubble and especially of the fact that the bubble itself was the cause of the current economic crisis. The bubble was the problem -- not the failure to sustain the bubble by either adding more monetary air to it or by omnisciently regulating business...
It is, thus, an amazing irony that the Obama Administration touts the Federal Reserve System as the logical choice to become a new "systemic regulator." Having recently financed the asset bubble that undermined the financial system, the Fed is the only institution that has the power to cause similar catastrophes in the future.
This will be our economy's protector?
[We must never forget that, contrary to the mantra emanating from Washington, it was the government regulatory interference in home lending rules which was the genesis (followed by other contributing components) that set the stage for our current condition. The solution isn't more regulation but less to assure market forces constantly and accurately balance risk and reward.]
READ MORE
FLASHBACKs >
GOVERNMENT POLICIES LED TO WALL STREET'S RISKY BUSINESS
Many observers blame the current financial crisis on a breakdown of private markets. A more careful look shows that government policy, step by step, led to the current crisis...
.
Gerstner Says Short-Term Gains Should Be Taxed at 80%
(Bloomberg) -- Louis Gerstner, the former International Business Machines Corp. chief executive officer, said that short-term investment gains should be taxed at 80 percent as a way to counter the culture of greed on Wall Street.
“If you buy something -- a stock or a bond -- in the morning, and you sell in the afternoon, the tax probably ought to be 80 percent,”
said Gerstner, also a former chairman of Carlyle Group, the world’s second-largest private equity firm.“If you hold it for six months, maybe it ought to be 60 percent,”
Gerstner told Bloomberg Television.
Selling an investment after five years should carry a zero rate“to try to get the incentives for investment to go back to being a true investor and not a trader”
[Here here.]
READ MORE
Administration Is Near a Financial Overhaul Plan
The Obama administration will soon propose a comprehensive plan to expand the authority of the government to seize large troubled companies, create a new regulator for companies that pose risks to the financial system and possibly establish an agency to oversee consumer debt like mortgages and credit cards...
READ MORE
Electric Cars Will Not Decrease Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Says Federal Study
The stimulus law enacted in February promoted the purchase of plug-in electric cars by the federal government and the broader market, but a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released this month says that the use of plug-in electric vehicles will not by itself decrease greenhouse gas emissions.
To do that, the report argues, the United States would have to switch from coal-burning plants to lower-emission sources to generate electricity such as nuclear power...
READ MORE
How green is my Prius?
The short answer is: nowhere near as green as Leonardo diCaprio and the eco-glitterati were led to believe when they bought it. Powered by two engines - a standard 76hp, 1.5-litre petrol engine and a battery engine (an immediate extra cost) the Toyota Synergy System sounds like the answer to an eco-dream. Well it was under the pre-2008 EPA regime of standard tests (including running the car at 8 mph) that allowed makers to make unrealistic claims for its mileage. When the EPA introduced a more realistic standard of testing in 2008 the average mileage dropped to 45 mpg, around the same as a normal [sub-compact] car .
But building a hybrid like the Prius causes far more environmental damage than producing a normal car.
All of this was put into perspective by a 2006 report ‘Dust to Dust' Automotive Energy Cost Study from CNW research. As the report points out, the Prius requires almost 50 percent more energy to build and drive than even the SUV Hummer and other non-hybrids. The battery contains nickel, one of the worst polluting metals when smelted. The batteries are shipped to Europe, then to Asia and Japan, then back to America before finally being fitted in the car. Are you getting the truer picture on the raft of hidden economic and environmental costs that make this one of the most expensive of specialist cars which mostly only eco-zealots can afford?
[More, Recommended > ]
READ MORE
Disability, Inc.
This is not a joke. Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision that required an Oregon public school district to pay a $5,200 monthly tuition (plus fees) for a private boarding school for a high-school senior whose psychologist had diagnosed him with ADHD, depression, math disorder and cannabis abuse.
Also not a joke: The Obama administration had urged the big bench to so rule. Thus the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which mandates that all "children with disabilities" have the right to a "free appropriate public education," is turning into a cash cow for disability lawyers... [snip]
It's one of those nice people things. The government has expanded the notion of disability to the point of absurdity. But nice people refuse to look at the impending drain on public school budgets, or how one child's boarding school tuition can mean that much less funding for all the other students' educational needs...
READ MORE
DOLLARS DON'T SPELL LEARNING
Many, including the courts, have blindly accepted the assumption that more money will improve student performance at our nation's public schools. However, almost no one has seriously examined the empirical evidence to determine its validity, say authors Eric A. Hanushek and Alfred A. Lindseth.
The authors look at four states -- Wyoming, Kentucky, New Jersey and Massachusetts -- where courts ordered the legislatures to appropriate more money for public schools on the presumption that increased spending would improve performance.
Their conclusion: Court-ordered funding does not necessarily improve test scores, and blacks, despite the increased spending, are even worse off.
In Wyoming:
- Despite unprecedented court ordered increases in school funding, the achievement of Wyoming's students has failed to keep up with the nation or even with its much lower-funded, although demographically similar, neighboring states.
- The 1989 Rose decision resulted in a court order for certain structural changes and increased funding; the structural changes were implemented, but they produced no improvements in learning levels.
- Despit a court-ordered $1.5 billion in additional education spending (per-pupil spending in New Jersey exceeded $20,000 last year), there is little evidence that the state's students have progressed much, if at all, relative to students nationwide.
[If more money did result in better education, don't you think we'd be drowned in studies showing such paid for by the public teachers' unions? So what does it mean that we aren't?]
READ MORE
Census to castrate American Caucasians
President Barack Obama’s 2010 Census Form asks if you go to work by ferryboat or trolleycar, if you are mentally challenged, if you are of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin. It asks if you use coal, gas, oil, electricity, or solar energy to heat your home or apartment. and if you speak a language other than English at home. It asks your income, your educational level, and the time you leave your home in the morning.
But infinitely more telling is what the new census form doesn’t ask.
It doesn’t ask if you are a citizen of the U.S.A.
Naturally, the questions are in English and Spanish, lest anyone think that America is an Anglo nation... [snip]
But there are problems with the Obama census beyond the intrusive nature of the comprehensive survey. To assist in the hiring of census takers, the Obama Administration has opted to partner with the following special interest groups (not one of which represents the despised race of whites who settled this country):
- ACORN
- 100 Black Men of America
- African American Women’s House of Imagene (sic) Shelter
- American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
- Arab American Institute
- Asian American Federation
- Asian American Justice Center
- Asian and Pacific Islander Coalition on HIV/AIDS
- Association of Professors and Scholars of Iranian Heritage
- Boat People SOS
- Hispanic Alliance for Prosperity Institute
- Hispanic Federation
- Fundacion Azteca
- Latino Justice PDLDEF
- Mas New Mexico
- Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund
- Minority Access
- National Alliance for Hispanic Health
- National Alliance of Black School Educators
- National American Indian Housing Council
- NAACP National Voter Fund
- NAACP (National Association of Colored People)
- National Association for Black Social Workers
- National Association of Colored Women’s Clubs
- National association of Hispanic Federal Executives
- National Association of Hispanic Publications
- National Association of Latino Elected Officials
- National Association of Negro Business and Professional Women’s Clubs
- National Black Chamber of Commerce
- National Black Child Development Institute
- National Black Justice Coalition
- National Black Leadership Forum
- National Coalition on Black Civic Participation
- National Congress of Black Women
- National Federation of Filipino American Associations
- National Hispanic Leadership Institute
- National Hispanic Business Information Clearinghouse
- National Latino Research Center
- National Minority AIDS Council
- National Puerto Rican Coalition
- National Puerto Rican Day Parade
- Rainbow Push Coalition
- U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
- Voto Latino
Get the picture? Notice a racial bias?
This racial bias inherent in the coming census has raised the concern that the results will be rigged - - a concern that has been intensified by Mr. Obama’s selection of Robert M. Groves, a sociology professor at the University of Michigan, to head the program.
Republican legislators have expressed alarm because Mr. Groves’s specialty is statistical sampling — roughly speaking, the process of extrapolating from the numbers of people actually counted to arrive at estimates of those uncounted and, presumably, arriving at a realistic total.
If minorities, immigrants, the poor and the homeless are those most likely to be missed in an actual head count, as Mr. Grove presumably believes, and if political stereotypes hold true, then the statistical sampling of the 2010 census will produce a windfall for the Democrat Party.
This result is certain since the census results as gathered by the above groups coupled with Mr. Grove’s calculation of the missed head count will determine which states gains seats in Congress and which ones lose them, as well as the allocation of federal dollars to states and cities based on population...
READ MORE
This Boomer Isn't Going to Apologize
Last weekend I attended my niece's high-school graduation from an upscale prep school in Washington, D.C. These are supposed to be events filled with joy, optimism and anticipation of great achievements. But nearly all the kids who stepped to the podium dutifully moaned about how terrified they are of America's future -- yes, even though Barack Obama, whom they all worship and adore, has brought "change they can believe in."
A federal judge gave the commencement address and proceeded to denounce the sorry state of the nation that will be handed off to them. The enemy, he said, is the collective narcissism of their parents' generation -- my generation. The judge said that we baby boomers have bequeathed to the "echo boomers," "millennials," or whatever they are to be called, a legacy of "greed, global warming, and growing income inequality."
And everyone of all age groups seemed to nod in agreement. One affluent 40-something woman with lots of jewelry told me she can barely look her teenagers in the eyes, so overcome is she with shame over the miseries we have bestowed upon our children.
The Wall Street Journal reported last week that graduation ceremonies have become collective airings of guilt and grief. It's now chic for boomers to apologize for their generation's crimes. It's the only thing conservatives and liberals seem to agree on. Mitch Daniels, the Republican governor of Indiana, told Butler University grads that our generation is "just plain selfish." At Grinnell College in Iowa, author Thomas Friedman compared boomers to "hungry locusts . . . eating through just about everything." Film maker Ken Burns told this year's Boston College grads that those born between 1946 and 1960 have "squandered the legacy handed to them by the generation from World War II."
I could go on, but you get the point. We partied like it was 1999, paid for it with Ponzi schemes and left the mess for our kids and grandkids to clean up. We're sorry -- so sorry.
Well, I'm not.
I have two teenagers and an 8-year-old, and I can say firsthand that if boomer parents have anything for which to be sorry it's for rearing a generation of pampered kids who've been chauffeured around to soccer leagues since they were 6.
This is a generation that has come to regard rising affluence as a basic human right, because that is all it has ever known -- until now. Today's high-school and college students think of iPods, designer cellphones and $599 lap tops as entitlements. They think their future should be as mapped out as unambiguously as the GPS system in their cars.
CBS News reported recently that echo boomers spend $170 billion a year -- more than most nations' GDPs -- and nearly every penny of that comes from the wallets of the very parents they now resent. My parents' generation lived in fear of getting polio; many boomers lived in fear of getting sent to the Vietnam War; this generation's notion of hardship is TiVo breaking down.
How bad can the legacy of the baby boomers really be? Let's see: We're the generation that spawned Microsoft, Intel, Apple, Google, ATMs and Gatorade. We defeated the evils of communism and delivered the world from the brink of global thermonuclear war. Now youngsters are telling pollsters that they think socialism may be better than capitalism after all. Do they expect us to apologize for winning the Cold War next?
College students gripe about the price of tuition, and it does cost way too much. But who do these 22-year-old scholars think has been footing the bill for their courses in transgender studies and Che Guevara? The echo boomers complain, rightly, that we have left them holding the federal government's $8 trillion national IOU. But try to cut government aid to colleges or raise tuitions and they act as if they have been forced to actually work for a living.
Yes, the members of this generation will inherit a lot of debts, but a much bigger storehouse of wealth will be theirs in the coming years. When I graduated from college in 1982, the net worth of America -- all our nation's assets minus all our liabilities -- was $16 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve. Today, even after the meltdown in housing and stocks, the net worth of the country is $45 trillion -- a doubling after inflation. The boomers' children and their children will inherit more wealth and assets than any other in the history of the planet -- that is, unless Mr. Obama taxes it all away. So how about a little gratitude from these trust-fund babies for our multitrillion-dollar going-away gifts?
My generation is accused of being environmental criminals -- of having polluted the water and air and ruined the climate. But no generation in history has done more to clean the environment than mine. Since 1970 pollutants in the air and water have fallen sharply. Since 1960, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles and Pittsburgh have cut in half the number of days with unsafe levels of smog. The number of Americans who get sick or die from contaminants in our drinking water has plunged for 50 years straight.
Whenever kids ask me why we didn't do more to combat global warming, I explain that when I was young the "scientific consensus" warned of global cooling. Today's teenagers drive around in cars more than any previous generation. My kids have never once handed back the car keys because of some moral problem with their carbon footprint -- and I think they are fairly typical.
The most absurd complaint of all is that the health-care system has been ruined by our generation. Oh, really? Thanks to massive medical progress in the past 30 years, the chances of dying from heart disease and many types of cancer have been cut in half. We found effective treatments for AIDS within a decade. Life expectancy has risen and infant mortality fallen. That doesn't sound so "selfish" to me.
Yes, we are in a deep economic crisis today -- but it's no worse than what we boomers faced in the late 1970s after years of hyperinflation, sky-high tax rates and runaway government spending. We cursed our parents, too. But then we grew up and produced the largest leap forward in health, wealth and scientific progress the world has ever seen.
Let's see what this next generation of over-educated ingrates can do.
Source
Monday, June 29, 2009
House Passes Climate Bill
.
Legislation to tax U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions was approved by the House of Representatives in a close vote late Friday, securing an initial victory for a cornerstone of President Barack Obama's agenda.
The 1,200 page bill [the last 300 pages added at 3:00 am the day of the vote] -- formally known as the "American Clean Energy and Security Act" -- will reach into almost every corner of the U.S. economy. By putting a price on emissions of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, the bill would affect the way electricity is generated, how homes and offices are designed, how foreign trade is conducted and how much Americans pay to drive cars or to heat their homes.
The House climate bill, approved by a 219-212 [it needed 218, and received 217 in yesterday's 'test vote', so two folks were bought off] vote Friday evening, would mandate that 15% of the nation's electricity come from expensive and unproven sources such as wind and solar power by 2020, expanding the market and profit potential for companies in those sectors.
The legislation has a provision that would impose tariffs on goods imported from countries that don't match U.S. carbon dioxide restrictions -- a slap at China and India that some business interests fear could provoke a trade war. [i.e., Smoot-Hawley, and the depression it caused, all over again. Lesson are repeated until learned.]
The Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned utilities, backed it, as did those with big investments in 'alternative' [to economically viable] energy investors.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers lobbied against passage.
"It will affect every aspect of the American economy, harming our ability to compete in the world and provide secure and affordable energy to American consumers and businesses,"
READ MORE
(Green) DOTS...
.
If Cap And Trade Passes It Will Kill Off Domestic Fuel Production
And what happens when fuel supplies go down? Say hello to $6.00/gallon gas. Which would be perfect, because it just so happens that the federal government owns a couple of car manufacturers that will be producing [glorified golf carts] cars that get very high gas mileage in the coming years.Oh, and guess what? Cap and trade would put domestic fuel producers at a competitive disadvantage with foreign fuel producers.
READ MORE
GM: Michigan plant will make new small car
Detroit - General Motors Corp. confirmed Friday it will use an assembly plant in Orion Township, Mich., and a parts stamping facility in Pontiac, Mich., to build small and compact cars, a move claimed to 'save' 1,400 jobs. The decision is dependent on the outcome of negotiations between the company and the state on incentives...
READ MORE
.
Boehner: Climate bill a 'pile of s--t'
.
"Old words are best. Old words, when short, are best of all."- Winston Churchill
Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had a few choice words about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) landmark climate-change bill after its passage Friday. When asked why he read portions of the cap-and-trade bill on the floor Friday night, Boehner told The Hill,
"Hey, people deserve to know what's in this pile of s--t."
READ MORE
Night Before Key Vote, Networks Remain Silent on Cap-and-Trade
.
A House vote on Waxman-Markey’s American Clean Energy & Security Act to cap-and-trade emissions was imminent June 26. Some Republicans have called the bill “the largest tax increase in American history,” but despite the enormous burden to taxpayers the three major networks failed to cover the bill the night before.
ABC, NBC, and CBS instead devoted June 25 evening news programming to recently deceased celebrities, Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett. While the deaths of such iconic figures was certainly newsworthy, failing to provide coverage over legislation that would cost every American family $1,241 a year in higher energy bills was irresponsible.
The lack of network coverage on the cap-and-trade issue isn’t new (only 13 stories between Jan. 20 and May 25) and has contributed to ignorance and confusion about the issue.
[Our professional press.]
READ MORE
How the MSM is harming Americans
.
I was saddened to hear that both Farah Fawcett and Michael Jackson died, but I am extremely maddened by the amount of coverage that MSM and even our "reliable" conservative networks are giving to them in light of the serious events which transpired this week.
One of the most serious events was the fact that Harold Koh was confirmed by the Senate on Wednesday June 24th as the State Department's Legal Advisor.
His transnationalist views promote blending international and domestic law. Indeed, this is particularly scary knowing that he believes traditional sovereignty is obsolete [see FLASHBACKSs below]. What are all those people thinking in the senate who voted for him at a 62-35 vote?
The other important event was the fact that on Friday, the United Nations adopted a 16-page document on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development. 
Not only will it require the U.S. to give .7 GDP to foreign aid, it may demand 845 billion of U.S. citizens taxpayer dollars to achieve their Millilium Development goals.
Both of these events will seriously impact America in the near future and it is journalism's duty to inform the American public what this could mean to our country. Did we hear about these events? Did you?
Talk about Nero fiddling while Rome burned. We lost many freedoms last week. The course is set to turn us into a failed nation state, and the so called news media is on 24/7 beating the "dead horse."
America is becoming like M. Jackson. Self inflicted, misguided, drugged up and out of touch with reality.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/06/enough_of_the_fluff_already_gi.html
FLASHBACKs >
Koh's Academic Hero Proposed 'Global Dictatorship'
The term “world government” is too benign for what Sohn proposed. The term “global dictatorship” would be more appropriate. But this is the direction that Koh apparently would take us.
Koh and Justice Ginsburg - Soulmates
The idea that our government should operate under any law save the Constitution is so outrageous as to place the individual arguing otherwise beyond reason.
The Fight Over Harold Koh
The heart of the concern with Koh, who is now the dean of Yale Law School, is that he believes in “transnationalism,” which is the notion that American courts should honor and apply the laws of other nations in our courts...
Obama Nominee for State Department Legal Adviser
"This is not a desk job. This guy will be the face of American international law around the world,""This is international imperialism. Under Koh's plan, the Constitution would become secondary and international law would take precedence regardless of what Americans said about the matter"...
OBAMA'S MOST PERILOUS LEGAL PICK
Koh is a key test case in the "judicial wars." If he makes it through (which he will if he gets even a single GOP vote) the message to the Obama team will be: You can pick 'em as radical as you like.
.
We Will Bury You
.
Her name was Neda, but to the thugs who rule her country, she counts for nada, London's Guardian reports: The Iranian authorities have ordered the family of Neda Agha Soltan out of their Tehran home after shocking images of her death were circulated around the world. . . .
The police did not hand the body back to her family, her funeral was cancelled, she was buried without letting her family know ...
READ MORE
If the President doesn't stand for Freedom
.
In a time of crisis, with lives in the balance, in the conflict between two powerful ideologies -- one that prizes freedom, one that would strangle its people in a totalitarian grip -- an American president spoke directly to those whose lives and liberties were most threatened and told them that the United States stood with them, that we are all Berliners.
In another time of crisis in the conflict between two powerful ideologies -- one that cherishes freedom, one that would enslave its subjects -- an American president spoke directly to those most threatened and told them that the United States stood by them, demanding, "Mister Gorbachev, tear down this wall."
Two decades later, another conflict between ideologies -- one that values freedom and one that would subjugate its people with the force of clubs and guns -- and the president tells those who are putting their freedoms, their families' well-being, their very lives at stake not that we are as ready to stand with Iranians as we were with Berliners. But that,"I think it's important for us to make sure the Iranian people know we are watching." [snip]
The men and women of this country who have fought and bled and died--and are fighting and bleeding and dying right now in places like Iraq and Afghanistan--know that freedom doesn't come cheap. Few know more about that price than Senator John McCain. To paraphrase him on Neda's death: She died with her eyes open; let us not keep our eyes closed.
If the President of the United States does not stand for freedom, the rest of us must.
READ MORE
Iran Fading From Media Attention
.
In a passionate Wall Street Journal op-ed this morning ("Silence Has Consequences for Iran"), former Spanish Prime Minister José Aznar who, in case anyone cares, serves on the board of WSJ parent News Corp., says that"It would be a shame .... if our passivity gave carte blanche to a tyrannical regime to finish off the dissidents and persist with its revolutionary plans."
Shaking off passivity requires visibility. America's media establishment almost across the board is providing very little. The Associated Press and the New York Times reports exist, but their distribution is dwarfed by the death of a pop star and a governor's infidelity...
[Our 'professional' press.]
READ MORE
The Stoning of Soraya M
.
For the few who don’t know by now, The Stoning of Soraya M. is based on French-Iranian journalist Freidoune Sahebjam’s bestselling book, which relates the true story of a woman in a remote Iranian village, in the years after the 1979 Khomeini revolution, who is falsely accused of adultery and stoned to death by a mob desperate to cleanse themselves of this affront to their collective honor and to their religion.
It’s not only a gripping story in its own right, but it shines a harsh spotlight on the almost unimaginable reality that the barbaric punishment of stoning still exists in the Iranian law code.
READ MORE
NY Times Calls 'The Stoning of Soraya M' Film 'Lurid Torture-Porn'
.
Leave it to New York Times liberal movie critic Stephen Holden to come down on "The Stoning of Soraya M," for stereotyping a couple of murderous, misogynist Islamists as...murderous misogynist Islamists.
Holden generally likes politically activist movies, especially left-wing documentaries that take aim at politically correct targets like big business and heartland hicks. By contrast, he's not fond of Israel or the Catholic Church, or evidently, movies about injustices committed against women in the Muslim world, like "The Stoning of Soraya M."
In calling it "lurid torture-porn," Holden echoes columnist Frank Rich's smear against "The Passion of the Christ" as "a joyride for sadomasochists."
READ MORE
Anti-Stoning Filmmakers Bashed for 'Inflating' of 9/11
.
The New York Times, the Washington Post really hated the new movie The Stoning of Soraya M., which depicts sexist injustice under Islamic Sharia law in Iran. Post critic Jan Stuart complained Friday:Iranian American director Cyrus Nowrasteh, co-writing with wife Betsy Giffen Nowrasteh, has amplified the basic elements of Soraya's story into the worst kind of exploitive Hollywood melodrama, presented under the virtuous guise of moral outrage.
From there, Stuart then condemned how the filmmakers had a reputation for "inflating" historical events like 9/11.
What, precisely, does that mean? How do you "inflate" historical events like 9/11?
Would the Post accuse a filmmaker of "inflating" the Holocaust for moral outrage? Or the killing of gay man Matthew Shepard, who many activists quickly compared to Jesus? The political ideology of the critic is obvious, and drowns out any aesthetic judgment they might offer.
What the Post critic seems to imply is Westeners shouldn't be "rabid" in feeling any moral superiority to Islamic justice, and that the audience should feel dirty, not morally outraged, for taking in the film.
READ MORE
Stoning of Soraya M actress spreads comforting falsehoods
.
Does stoning really have "nothing to do with Islam"?
The Stoning of Soraya M. is a great film; I attended an advance screening of it last year in Los Angeles, and strongly recommend that you see it. It is a powerfully moving indictment of the Islamic practice of stoning adulterers, and indirectly of the Sharia in general -- however, those connected with the film are doing their level best to avoid giving the impression that the film has anything to do with Islam at all.
The latest to do this, but by no means the only one, is actress Shohreh Aghdashloo, who portrays the victim's close friend. This is understandable in today's politically correct Obamoid climate, but it is unfortunate for the Muslim women who are victimized by this barbaric practice: they will never get justice as long as the world is busy making excuses for what victimizes them, instead of calling to account those who are responsible.
The film is great, and depicts the truth. It is a pity that the film's actors and producers feel compelled to deny and downplay the real cause of this crime against humanity. By doing so, they only ensure that it will keep happening.
READ MORE
.
Soldiers arrest Honduran president, seize palace
.
TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras - Honduran President Manuel Zelaya said he was the victim of "a coup" and a "brutal kidnapping" by soldiers.
President Barack Obama said he was "deeply concerned."
READ MORE
EPA QUASHES CLIMATE CHANGE SCIENCE
.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute has obtained an EPA study of the "endangerment" to human well-being ostensibly caused by carbon dioxide emissions, together with a set of EPA emails indicating that the study, which concludes that carbon dioxide is not a significant cause of climate change, was suppressed by the EPA for political reasons.
You can read the comments that the CEI submitted to the EPA on EPA's proposed endangerment finding here, along with the emails. The censored report, by Alan Carlin and John Davidson, is here.
In their report, Carlin and Davidson point out that the EPA has not done its own evaluation of the global warming theory. Rather, it has relied on analyses by others, mostly the U.N.'s IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report. That report, however, was a political document, not a scientific one. Knowing that current scientific research disproves the anthropogenic global warming theory, the U.N. ordered that no recent research be considered in the IPCC report. This is a scandal of which too few people are aware. As science, the U.N. report is a bad joke.
Carlin and Davidson go on to recite the scientific work that shows rather clearly that human activity is a minor factor, at most, in climate change--which has, of course, been occurring from the beginning of Earth's history to the present. Their report is a useful summary of the evidence for those who are not familiar with it.
If the Obama administration gets its way, Americans will not become aware of the scientific evidence: Obama's EPA suppressed the Carlin/Davidson report and tried to keep it secret for political reasons. The emails obtained by the CEI are revealing. Here, the two scientists' superior declines to make their report public because "the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment." Click to enlarge:
Here, Carlin and Davidson are ordered not to communicate to the public their conclusion that the global warming theory is bunk:
Global warming zealots are a bit like Iran's mullahs. They are fanatically devoted to a series of false propositions. Unable to win an open scientific debate, they consistently resort to bullying and brute force to suppress their opposition. Once again, we see the Obama administration taking the lead in this regard, putting political ideology above scientific truth and demanding that all others do likewise.
READ MORE
Big Oil’ s Answer to Carbon Law May Be Fuel Imports
Chicago/Houston - America’s biggest oil companies will probably cope with U.S. carbon legislation by closing fuel plants, cutting capital spending and increasing imports.
Refiners would have to buy allowances for carbon dioxide spewed from their plants and from vehicles when motorists burn their fuel. Imports would need permits only for the latter, which ConocoPhillips Chief Executive Officer Jim Mulva said would create a competitive 'imbalance'...
READ MORE
Fuzzy Green Math
.
There’s something very strange going on with Obama’s proposed global warming tax. According to Greenwire:"The climate program would generate nearly $650 billion between 2012 and 2019, according to Obama's proposal. About $80 billion of the climate revenues would go toward Obama's proposed middle-class tax cut each year beginning in 2012, the draft says, and the government would spend $15 billion per year on 'clean' energy technologies."
This is absurd on its face, of course: $650 billion taken in over 8 years, used in part to fund $640 billion over the same period to help ease the pain it causes, and the . . . er, remaining . . . $120 billion going for green pork, leaving us a balance of minus $110 billion.
Hey, look, the entire enterprise is premised upon make-believe, and computer models which now have been so debunked by observations that they seem obviously inadmissible in a court of law pursuant to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmeceuticals (that’s from Wiki; the opinion is here).
This paints a picture rather different than the one floated earlier, of raising energy prices and rebating a portion while paying down debt — instead it's simply a new vehicle to raise revenue to pay for a permanent new welfare entitlement. Er, that is until the scheme succeeds in "bankrupt[ing]" its targets, as then-candidate Obama vowed was the purpose. [coal plants]
READ MORE
Media Ignores Obama's False 'As I've Often Said' Reference to 'Exploration'
.
'It is time for us to lay a new foundation for economic growth by beginning a new era of energy exploration in America."
Gosh, that sounds positively capitalist. You would think the guy is finally going to let the oil companies do what they do best.
Not a chance. Here, from later in the speech, is (I think, because he never used any variation of "explore" anywhere else in the speech) how President 'Prompter defines "exploration":
"As I've often said, in the short term, as we transition to renewable energy, we can and should increase our domestic production of oil and natural gas. We're not going to transform our economy overnight. We still need more oil; we still need more gas. If we've got some here in the United States that we can use, we should find it, and do so in an environmentally sustainable way."
"If" we've got some? There's literally trillions of dollars worth of oil and natural gas within US borders and off US shores -- and hundreds of billions of dollars in royalties the cash-starved government could be collecting.
"If" we can use it?
Words fail.
[Does anyone doubt that 'environmentally sustainable' will be defined in such a way as to prevent any new drilling?]
READ MORE
Obamacare won't survive coming doctor shortage
.
President Obama's ambitious plan for radically increasing the government's role in the nation's health care system misses one critical detail: There aren't enough primary care physicians in America now and their numbers are declining.
That means government won't be able to deliver the expanded health care Obama is promising to millions of uninsured people...
[I.e., we're doing exactly the wrong thing...]
READ MORE
Socialized Healthcare is a Severe Threat to Individual Liberty
.The doctrine of the safety net, to catch those who fall, has been made meaningless by the doctrine of fair shares for those of us who are quite able to stand.
- The Economist
What if someone argues,"There are some things in life that capitalism should not be allowed to structure for profit. Human life and quality of life are two such things. How can you look someone in the eye and tell them that their bank account dictates that they aren't worth helping?"
This argument is severely flawed. One, it assumes that if you are against socialized healthcare then you are against the concept of a safety net; and two, it ignores the fact that healthcare is already provided to those threatened by poverty and old age.. [snip]
... This hypothetical example demonstrates two serious infringements on individual liberty that happen on a regular basis where socialized medicine exists. The money that Sam could have saved on taxes represents real lost-opportunity costs to Sam - he could have used it to invest in starting his own business, buy a bass boat, go on a few extra vacations, donate to charity, put it in a medical savings account to pay for his knee operation, or a million other possibilities of his choosing. In addition to lost opportunity, when Sam actually could have used coverage, he was denied and had no choice in the matter.
To be clear, the plan Obama and the Democrats are offering is not a complete socialization of our healthcare system but it might as well be. A broad-based tax increase will be necessary to pay for the new public "option" (that private insurers won't be able to compete against). While this 'public option' may benefit some it will come at the expense of others and therefore be fraught with all the same threats to individual liberty that socialized medicine has to offer.
Over the previous weeks and months, there have been many excellent reports detailing why the Administration's healthcare plan will increase total government spending on healthcare without improving overall healthcare outcomes. Unfortunately, this information alone is not enough. In Radicals for Capitalism Brian Doherty stated Ayn Rand's belief that,"people don't care if something doesn't work as long as the dominant morality of altruism tells them that it is right."
For opponents of government-run healthcare to succeed they must not only convince the public that the Administration's plan will fail to deliver on its promises but also explain how the plan will severely infringe on individual liberty, which the government of this country was designed to protect.
[Highly Recommended > ]
READ MORE
Obama Says We Shouldn't Treat Old Folks to Save Money And the Media Goes Deaf
.
I am wondering when the euthanasia folks are going to start touting this one? I mean, it sure seemed to me as if the most caring, most civil, most intelligent president ever just said that healthcare could be cheaper if we don't give old folks and the infirm the full measure of care they now get - we should just let them die or suffer because they aren't worth the effort.
Obama said during the ABC Special on Wednesday night that a way to save healthcare costs is to abandon the sort of care that "evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve" the patient's health. He went on to say that he had personal familiarity with such a situation when his grandmother broke her hip after she was diagnosed with terminal cancer:"the question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?"
But who is it that will present the "evidence" that will "show" that further care is futile? Are we to believe that Obama expects individual doctors will make that decision in his bold new government controlled healthcare future? If he is trying to make that claim it is a flat out untruth and he knows it:
Government does not work by negotiation. Government does not work from the bottom up. It works from the top down. This singular fact means that no doctor will be deciding if you are too old or infirm to get medical care. It will be a medically untrained bureaucrat that sets a national rule that everyone will have to obey. There won't be any room for your grandma to have a different outcome than anyone else's.
So, what will it be then? Who will decide when medical care is just too expensive to bother with? Who will be left to perish because they just aren't worth the lifesaving effort? Well, for sure it won't be any members of Congress or anyone that works for the federal government because they won't be expected to suffer under the nationally socialized plan. It also won't be Obama's buddies in the unions who are about to be similarly exempted from the national plan, at least if Senator Max Baucus has his way.
And what ever happened to the left's mantra that healthcare is a "right" and that money should never enter into a life or death decision? Now that it's Obama saying it's just too darn expensive to save the old and infirm, will our friends on the left now disown Obama the "murderer"?
Imagine if Bush had said something like this? The left wouldn't have hesitated to call him any manner of names.
Oddly, though, the Old Media have not had so much as a raised eyebrow over his statements on Wednesday.
The media remained mum on the possibility that the President, Doctor of life, just said that old folks are too expensive to treat? Hello, CNN, NBC, New York Times... anyone?
[Another example of the real harm our media's spin-by-omission perpetrates.]
READ MORE
Friday, June 26, 2009
.
*** SPECIAL ***
Waxman-Markey:
Man-Made Disaster
___
Waxman-Markey:
Man-Made Disaster
___
Fiscal Policy: The House of Representatives is voting TODAY on an anti-stimulus package that in the name of saving the earth will destroy the American economy.
___
___
Not since the Smoot-Hawley misguided piece of legislation imposed tariffs that turned a recession into a depression has there been a piece of legislation as bad as Waxman-Markey.
The 1,000-plus-page American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454) is being rushed to a vote by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi before anyone can seriously object to this economic suicide pact.
It's what Janet Napolitano, secretary of Homeland Security, might call a "man-caused disaster," a phrase she coined to replace the politically incorrect "terrorist attack." But no terrorist could ever dream of inflicting as much damage as this bill.
Its centerpiece is a "cap and trade" provision that has been rightfully derided as "cap and tax." It is in fact a tax on energy everywhere it is consumed on everything it is used to make or provide.
It is the largest tax increase in American history — a tax on all Americans — even the 95% that President Obama pledged would never see a tax increase.
It's a political bill that could come to a vote now that a deal was struck with farm-state legislators concerned about the taxation of even bovine flatulence.
As part of the agreement reached Tuesday night and announced by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Beverly Hills, agricultural oversight for cap-and-trade was transferred from the Environmental Protection Agency to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Farmers hope the USDA will be less intrusive. The EPA has been tasked by a Supreme Court ruling to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from your nostrils to your lawn mower. This even covers the emissions of barnyard animals, including the methane from cows.
The American Farm Bureau warns that cap and trade would cost the average farmer $175 on every dairy cow and $80 for beef cattle. So farm-state politics trumped climate change.
We all know about farmers paid not to grow food. But now, American taxpayers apparently will be paying companies not to chop down trees. The Washington Times reports that as part of the legislation, the House will also be voting Friday on a plan [us] to pay domestic and international companies around the world not to cut down trees.
Such offsets "would be a transfer of wealth overseas," said William Kovacs, vice president for environmental affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. So if a tree falls in a Brazilian forest, does a U.S. taxpayer make a sound?
As we've said before, capping emissions is capping economic growth. An analysis of Waxman-Markey by the Heritage Foundation [next-below] projects that by 2035 it would reduce aggregate gross domestic product by $7.4 trillion. In an average year, 844,000 jobs would be destroyed, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by almost 2 million (see charts below).
Consumers would pay through the nose as electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket, as President Obama once put it, by 90% adjusted for inflation. Inflation-adjusted gasoline prices would rise 74%, residential natural gas prices by 55% and the average family's annual energy bill by $1,500.
Hit hardest by all this would be the "95% of working families" Obama keeps mentioning as being protected from increased taxation. They are protected, that is, unless they use energy. Then they'll be hit by this draconian energy tax.
And what would we get for all this pain? According to an analysis by Chip Knappenberger, administrator of the World Climate Report, the reduction of U.S. CO2 emissions to 83% below 2005 levels by 2050 — the goal of the Waxman-Markey bill — would reduce global temperature in 2050 by a mere 0.05 degree Celsius.
President Obama has called on the U.S. to "lead by example" on global warming. During the campaign, he said: "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . . and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK."
Soon we may not be able to. Other countries can just sit back and watch us destroy ourselves.
___
Waxman-Markey Global Warming Bill:
Economic Impact by Congressional District
Economic Impact by Congressional District
Karen A. Campbell, Ph.D., is Policy Analyst in Macroeconomics and David W. Kreutzer, Ph.D., is Senior Policy Analyst for Energy Economics and Climate Change.[a quite cool breakdown of what this bill will mean to each of us - keep in mind that the more energy you use the more the numbers go up...]
It has become quite clear over the past several months that placing a cap on carbon emission--via rationing, taxing, and eliminating consumer choice--will have major implications for American families and the economy.
An analysis of the Waxman-Markey bill (as reported out of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce) by The Heritage Foundation found that unemployment will increase by nearly 2 million in 2012, the first year of the program, and reach nearly 2.5 million in 2035, the last year of the analysis. Total GDP loss by 2035 would be $9.4 trillion. The national debt would balloon as the economy slowed, saddling a family of four with $114,915 of additional national debt. Families would also suffer, as the bill would slap the equivalent of a $4,609 tax on a family of four by 2035.[1]
Heritage is not alone in its assessment. The National Black Chamber of Commerce[2] and the Brookings Institution[3] also project huge job losses. Proponents of a national energy tax will quickly point to a recent Congressional Budget Office memo[4] and Environmental Protection Agency[5] analysis suggesting low per family costs. Those estimates are grossly inaccurate, as both the CBO memo and the EPA's analysis contain flaws too serious for use as measures of the economic impact of the Waxman-Markey bill.
While national numbers are startling, many Members of Congress may be tempted to assume that their congressional districts will not be affected because they "cut a deal" or they have an incomplete view of how the American economy functions. Thus, it is crucially important that the Members making decisions, and the people affected by those decisions, understand how their congressional districts will be impacted by Waxman-Markey, or any type of national energy tax.
The table below lays out six congressional district specific data points:
- Gross State Product Loss in 2012: This number is the amount of economic destruction that will occur in that district in the first year of the cap-and-trade regime.
- Average Gross State Product Loss, 2012-2035: Same as above, only it is the average economic destruction in the district for the bill's first 24 years.
- Personal Income Loss in 2012: This number represents the reduction in consumer spending power in a district in the first year of the cap-and-trade regime.
- Average Personal Income Loss, 2012-2035: Same as above, only it is the reduction in consumer spending power in the district for the bill's first 24 years.
- Non-Farm Job Loss in 2012: Jobs are jobs, and in the first year of the cap-and-trade regime, each district will have significantly less than they otherwise could.
- Average Non-Farm Job Loss, 2012-2035: This number is crucially important because it demonstrates that no district gains jobs, even in the long run; the increase in "green jobs" does not outweigh the decrease in jobs elsewhere.
A Final Note on Jobs
During the "stimulus" debate, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs lamented that "more companies [have] announced mass layoffs."[6] The Bureau of Labor Statistics defines mass layoffs as "where private sector nonfarm employers indicate that 50 or more workers were separated from their jobs for at least 31 days." Under Waxman-Markey, on average each congressional district would experience the equivalent of more than 52 mass layoffs.
Although losing several thousand jobs may not seem like a lot to some politicians who are stuck inside the beltway, the mass layoffs resulting from Waxman-Markey should make any politician--and hard working American--cringe.
Appendix: Table 1
[excerpt of my district, CA 11th/McNerney (Dublin) - open above and find yours...]
THEN {TODAY folks - NOW would be good} >>
"OPPOSE H.R. 2454 (the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009)."
House-Pelosi: http://speaker.house.gov/contact/
YOUR Congressman: https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
or: Speed Message them with your personal distribution list...
and PLEASE PASS THIS ON...
[white envelope lower-left will forward a link to this brief]
.[white envelope lower-left will forward a link to this brief]
AND >>>
CALL THE HOUSE SWITCHBOARD and tell 'them'* that you're calling to REGISTER OPPOSITION TO THE WAXMAN-MARKEY BILL...
{* You'll probably get a busy or 'all circuits busy' recording as I have several times (at both numbers) - that's ok, put your call on hold to keep them that way...}
House of Representatives switchboard:
202.225.3121 - 202.224-3121
202.225.3121 - 202.224-3121
Please take the time to do your part - despite the focus on economic costs to this bill I personally believe them secondary to the massive transfer of power to control all activity the government will acquire through this bill: if we fail to stop this bill our children will grow up in a country where the government can dictate the cost of all activity - at the cost of personal choice.
So, please forward to everyone you know and call often...
tx.
Oh, and a 'few' FLASHBACKS > ...
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
