[Intend for Friday by life intervened - apologies]
Environmentalists are leading a worldwide hour of shame and darkness on Saturday, March 28.
In response to this hour of darkness and shame, the Competitive Enterprise Institute launched a "Human Achievement Hour" - to celebrate the achievements of men, including the widespread use of energy that lifts the peoples of the world out of poverty.
Along with blog posts and press releases, CEI also created a Wikipedia page on Human Achievement Hour to let people know why it was established and how they might participate-- just as environmentalists had created a Wiki entry for Earth Hour.
However, not content with their hour of darkness, some in the environmental movement are determined to stamp out any opposition to their campaign.
Almost immediately after the Human Achievement article was published on Wikipedia, environmentalists began attacking the idea and calling for its deletion. (see previous such examples ). Eventually, the editors were convinced this week to delete the HAH article on the grounds that it did not meet "notability standards," despite the dozen or so newspaper articles, radio shows on the topic, and blog references (including Michelle Malkin).
As CEI analyst Michelle Minton explains on OpenMarket.org, the Human Achievement Hour called on people to "celebrate the achievements of humanity" The main philosophy of Human Achievement Hour is to celebrate the products of mens' minds and to oppose environmentalism that would have government prevent individuals from achieving in the future.
Update: The HAH article on Wikipedia was restored on March 27.
[But only because of our eternal vigilance against the thought police at Wiki...]
READ MORE
Monday, March 30, 2009
Enviro Wikipedia Assault on Human Achievement Hour
Name That Party: March Madness Edition
The Chicago Tribune, taking a cue from its hero Barack Obama, gave bracketeering a try. The contenders, all former Illinois and Louisiana public officials, were selected for a smackdown to determine the most disgraceful.
The rivals from Louisiana were former Governors Huey Long and Edwin Edwards, former Congressman William "Refrigerator" Jefferson, and former New Orleans City Council president Oliver Thomas (identified as Thomas Oliver by the newspaper.). Weighing in from Illinois were former Governors George Ryan and Milorad "Call Me Rod" Blagojevich, former Congressman Dan Rostenkowski, and former Chicago alderman Arenda Troutman.
The Trib gave the nod to Edwin Edwards, although I think the competition was marred by not having an Illinois Daley in the competition. Setting that aside, what was interesting is the Tribune didn't mention party affiliation in its bracketeering. Seven of the eight contenders, or 87.5 percent, were Democrats.
Gee, what a surprise.
READ MORE
California ‘Cool’ Paints Initiative Ugly, Lazy
If California regulators get their way, auto makers may soon be forced to rewrite a cliché from the Ford Model T era and start telling customers they can have any color they want as long as it isn’t black.
The problem stems from a new “cool paints” initiative from the California Air Resources Board. CARB wants to mandate the phase-in of heat-reflecting paints on vehicle exteriors beginning with the ’12 model year, with all colors meeting a 20% reflectivity requirement by the ’16 model year.
The rationale goes like this: Vehicle AC units sap engine power and hurt fuel economy. If vehicle paint and glass reflect more heat, car interiors will be cooler. That means drivers will use their AC units less, the compressors won’t have to work as hard and auto makers will be able to use smaller AC units in the future.
[The paint's on the outside, we sit on the inside - how stupid do they think we are {don't answer that}.
If they were serious about reducing AC time, they'd allow us to super-tint our windows to keep the sunlight out. But that would prevent cops from seeing who's using the commuter lane alone - and we can't have that.
When are we going to fire these idiots? {don't answer that either (sigh)}]
READ MORE
NBC Highlights Downbeat 'State of Black America' Report
Wednesday's NBC Nightly News highlighted the downbeat “State of Black America 2009” report, but failed to identify the group behind it, the National Urban League, as liberal nor note the left-wing policy prescriptions recommended in the report.
Though NBC anchor Brian Williams acknowledged Barack Obama's election “was a reminder of the great strides this nation has made in race relations,” he warned that“today there was a reminder of how much work remains to be done to heal what has long been this nation's greatest wound.” [snip]
National Urban League President Marc Morial, the former Democratic Mayor of New Orleans, then charged:“The country's in a ditch, and black Americans have lost ground over the last eight years..."
[The grivance industry: too big to fail.]
READ MORE
Kansans to vote on right to own guns
Kansans will have the chance to vote next year on a constitutional amendment guaranteeing individuals the right to own firearms. The House passed a resolution Wednesday to place the issue on the 2010 general election ballot.
The vote was 116-9, far more than the two-thirds majority needed. The Senate adopted the resolution Tuesday, 39-1.
READ MORE
Thursday, March 26, 2009
It's Time for a Greed Czar
With the recent passage of the "TARP bonus" bill, it's obvious that our politicians are finally serious about tackling the problem of greed. It's about time, too. We've long had "hate crime" laws, so one had to wonder when the next deadly sin would make it on the legislative agenda.
This bill targets people at certain companies -- most visibly the much-maligned AIG -- taxing any bonus pay pushing one's income over the $250,000 threshold to the tune of 90 percent.
Yet the popular conception of the legislation sells our enlightened overlords short, as their vision entails far more than bringing a handful of rapacious Gordon Geckos to heel.
Henry Blodget explains writing at Yahoo! Finance:If the "TARP bonus" bill the House passed yesterday becomes law, any of the hundreds of thousands of people who work for Citigroup, Bank of America, AIG, and nine other major US corporations will have to fork over 90 cents of every bonus dollar that puts their household income over $250,000.
That's household income, not individual income. If you're married and filing singly, you'll have to surrender anything over $125,000.
Indefinitely.
READ MORE
image toon - 1st mny sclm bbro libs - Congress = lucky for Capitalists they don't torture
Most Americans Support Government Control of Executive Pay Only If Taxpayer Money Is Involved
American attitudes about regulating executive compensation are very clear: If taxpayers help a company stay in business, the government should regulate executive pay and bonuses. But if no taxpayer money is involved, the government should keep its hands off.
Sixty-one percent (61%) of adults say the government should regulate the level of pay and bonuses for executives of a company that receives government funding, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twenty-seven percent (27%) disagree.
At the same time, just 23% of Americans believe the government should regulate executive pay and bonuses for banks and finance companies that do not receive government funding to continue operations. Sixty-four percent (64%) say that if not taxpayer money is involved, executive compensation is none of the government’s business.
Moving beyond the bank and finance industry, just 21% say the federal government should regulate the level of pay and bonuses for all publicly traded companies in every industry. Two-thirds (66%) reject this idea.
Government workers are far more supportive of regulating executive pay and bonuses for companies that receive taxpayer monies than are those who work in the private sector. Those on the public payroll also are more sympathetic to regulation of companies that do not receive government funding than are those who work outside of government.
A SMOOT-HAWLEY MOMENT?
When does a single policy blunder herald much larger economic damage? Sometimes it's hard to know ahead of time. Few in Congress thought the Smoot-Hawley tariff -- which raised U.S. tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods to record levels -- was a disaster in 1930, but it led to retaliation and a collapse of world trade.
The question amid Washington's AIG bonus panic is whether Congress's war on private contracts and the financial system is a similarly destructive moment, says the Wall Street Journal.
In certainly one of the more amazing and senseless acts of political retribution in American history, the House saw it fit recently to slap employees of AIG's Financial Products unit with a 90 percent tax on the bonuses of anyone at every bank receiving $5 billion of TARP money who earns more than $250,000 a year:
- With such a sweeping assault on contracts and punitive taxation, Congress is introducing an element of political risk to economic decisions that is typical of Argentina or Russia.
- The sanctity of U.S. contracts has long been one of America's competitive advantages in luring capital, a counterpoint to our lottery tort system and costly regulation.
- Meanwhile, the 90 percent tax rate marks a return to the pre-Reagan era when Congress and the political class behaved as if taxes didn't matter to growth or incentives.
It is a revival of the philosophy of redistributionist "justice" of the 1930s, when capital went on strike for an entire decade...
READ MORE
US-Russia relations prompt NATO warning
Relations between the US and Russia were entering a period of ''uncertainty'' as Moscow appeared determined to sow discord within Europe and undermine US influence, the top commander of NATO has warned.
Citing Russia's military action in supporting breakaway regions in Georgia last August and disputes over gas supplies to Europe in January, he wrote that Moscow's actions"The relationship with Russia is likely to be more difficult to manage in coming years than any time since the end of the Cold War,"
The stark warning comes as the Obama Administration seeks to reduce tensions, offering Moscow possible concessions on missile defence weaponry in Central Europe in exchange for 'diplomatic' support over Iran's nuclear program.
While Washington has planned to reduce the size of US forces stationed in Europe, General Craddock recommended army brigades designated to return in coming years should remain, saying they contribute to "deterrence efforts"...
READ MORE
Defense-on-the-cheap won’t protect America
[HT:MD]
The DC Examiner has an excellent editorial today on the Administration's hacking away at defense needs in their monstrosity of a $3.6 trillion budget. It isn't the amount of cuts that is the main problem; it's where the president intends to realize his "savings:"
Gutting the Air Force and Navy is stupid, short sighted, and dangerous. Our ability to project power to the far flung corners of the earth is wholly dependent on getting our troops to the battle zone as quickly as possible. For Desert Storm, we moved the equivalent of a small city thousands of miles to the middle of the Kuwaiti desert in less than 4 months. No other nation can come close to that kind of capability.
Compromising that ability will cause the thugs of the world to breathe a little easier and our friends to get a little nervous. But it appears that regardless of the threats we face, the Obama Administration is bound and determined to slash at programs vital to the future of our military - all so that he can have more money to enact his far left agenda.
A poor trade off if you ask me.
[Recommended > ]
READ MORE
What I Learned at Duke University's 'Gaza Teach-In'
As I entered the lecture hall, I saw a stack of blank Amnesty International petitions, asking Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to support a U.N. investigation into the commission of war crimes by the Israel during the recent Gaza conflict. [snip]
The two main speakers were young pro-Palestinian activists: Laila El-Haddad, a former Al-Jazeera 'journalist', and Duke graduate student Rann Bar-On. I particularly expected Bar-On, who has been active in such organizations as the International Solidarity Movement, which used foreign college students to disrupt anti-terror activities in Israel, to make inflammatory statements.
Bar-On did not disappoint: [snip]
I have also seen Palestinian babies dressed up as suicide bombers, and schoolchildren dressed in camouflage and holding guns, performing military exercises at school. And I have seen a Mickey Mouse-like character on Al-Aqsa, the Hamas-run television station, sing songs about AK-47s and exhort children to devote their lives to holy war. I have heard children profess their desire to kill all the Jews, and to call the Jews "animals."
But none of this was taught at the teach-in.
So what I really learned at the teach-in is that universities like Duke are creating potential incubators of jihad on American soil while posturing as open-minded and morally superior centers of disinterested learning.
READ MORE
EU presidency: US stimulus is 'the road to hell'
BRUSSELS -- The head of the European Union slammed President Barack Obama's plan to spend nearly $2 trillion to push the U.S. economy out of recession as "the road to hell" that EU governments must avoid.
The blunt comments by Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek to the European Parliament on Wednesday highlighted simmering European differences with Washington ahead of a key summit next week on fixing the world economy.
READ MORE
The American counter revolution
The question posed by social scientist Charles Murray at the American Enterprise Institute's annual dinner this month could hardly have been simpler: Do Americans want the United States to be like Europe?
He asked as someone who admires Europe and Europeans. He asked also because it is becoming increasingly apparent that re-structuring the United States along the lines of the European social democratic model is the change many in the new administration --perhaps including President Obama himself -- believe in.
Murray is convinced that Europeanizing America is a bad idea, and not only because the European model creates chronically "sclerotic economies." More significant, he says, is the fact that embracing the European model means discarding the Founders' revolutionary re-invention of government, and of the relationship between the state and the citizen.
Murray argues this would inevitably "enfeeble" the habits and institutions that have been singularly responsible for making America "robust and vital" -- an exceptional" nation. [snip]
Do a sufficient number of Americans still believe that? More to the point, are we willing to fight for it? There may be no questions of greater consequence asked and answered over the years ahead.
[Highly Recommended > ]
READ MORE
INCREASING NATIONAL DEBT POSITIONED TO DROWN NEXT GENERATION
We are beginning to drown in our national debt. Many people don't understand the implications of our debt, but it will drastically impact the lives of all Americans in the near future, says the Lariat (Baylor University).
- By 2012, the government will not have the tax revenue to perform 10 percent of what it is doing now.
- By 2030, the government will have only enough taxes to perform 50 percent of what it's doing now.
- In 2050, when we get ready to retire, the government will no longer be able to afford anything but paying back debt to foreign countries.
Our economy is beginning to show the early signs of a catastrophic meltdown. Our representatives in Congress need to tighten their belts and so do we.
READ MORE
THE MYTHICAL "$2 TRILLION IN SAVINGS"
The President's budget:
- Increases spending by $1 trillion over the next decade, which he attempts to offset by reclassifying as "savings" $1.4 trillion in tax increases and $1.5 trillion in reduced spending in Iraq.
- However, government savings have previously always referred to spending cuts that save taxpayer dollars - not tax increases that feed the government.
- Furthermore, the Iraq "sav ings" are measured against an implausible spending baseline that assumes a permanent $180 billion bud get for the global war on terrorism, without any troop withdrawals through 2019.
- This is the equiv alent of a family deciding to "save" $10,000 by first assuming an expensive vacation and then not taking it.
- Without these false savings, only the $1 trillion spending hike remains, and that does not account for the extra $250 billion proposed for another round of financial bailouts in the current fiscal year.
READ MORE
Geithner Remarks on IMF Roil Foreign-Exchange Market
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner sent the dollar tumbling with comments about China’s ideas for overhauling the global monetary system, only to drive it back up by affirming that it should remain the world’s reserve currency.
He said while he had not read Zhou’s proposal, he understood it as a plan“designed to increase the use of the IMF’s special drawing rights. And we’re actually quite open to that.”
[It may be prudent to have an adult explain to the kids in the White frat House that when they speak the entire world is listening. Just a thought.]
[yes I know that was snobbish - but for crying out loud...]
READ MORE
67% Say Politicians Should Give Back AIG Contributions, Political Class Disagrees
Two-out-of-three Americans (67%) believe that politicians who received campaign contributions from American International Group (AIG) should return the money. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 21% disagree and 13% are not sure.
The belief that the politicians should give back the money is shared by a solid majority of every measured demographic group except one - America’s Political Class. In that elite group, just 29% think the contributions should be returned while 63% reject that idea.
The gap between Mainstream America and the nation’s Political Class is far bigger than the divide between Republicans and Democrats within those groups. Among Mainstream Americans, 74% of Democrats believe the campaign cash should be returned. So do 78% of Republicans and 78% of those not affiliated with either major party.
Lack of logic in those who claim to be logical
Those articles focus on the political motive but only touch briefly on the philosophical context and that needs further understanding.
The dogmatism of believers in human caused climate change, despite overwhelming contradictory evidence, is religious in its fervor. It is similar to the adoption of environmentalism as a religion by many for whom climate change is simply a subset.
The question is how has this occurred? To get the answer you need to consider a series of events that at first seem unrelated...
[Recommended > ]
READ MORE
Council uses spy plane with thermal imaging camera to snoop on homes wasting energy
Local authorities are putting spy planes in the air to snoop on homeowners who are wasting too much energy.
The data is being used to create colour-coded maps which will enable council officers to identify offenders and pay them a visit to educate them about the harm to the environment and measures they can take.
A scheme is already underway in Broadland District Council in Norfolk, which has spent £30,000 hiring a plane with a thermal imaging camera.
The council's head of environmental services, Andy Jarvis, said the original plan was to target businesses but it was realised the scope could be extended to include residental properties...
[The Green religion: a mechanism to control everything.]
READ MORE
CAP-AND-TRADE IN THE WEST
[Separate from Obama's Washington efforts]
Reviewing the three cap-and-trade recommendations made by the Western Climate Initiative (WCI), the authors identified several flaws made by the seven-state consortium, consisting of Arizona, California, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and Washington. Thus, calling into question the so-called cost savings of $11.4 billion to $23.5 billion heralded by WCI.
Under a scenario in which 25 percent of greenhouse gas emission permits would be auctioned off to emitters in a cap-and-trade scheme, BHI determined that the seven states:
- Would lose between 35,177 to 165,397 private sector jobs, while the permit revenue would allow the states to hire up to 19,710 state employees.
- Would put investment by firms at serious risk by slowing investment in the region by $1.6 billion to $4.5 billion.
- Would diminish total personal income, which would fall by $10.2 billion to $47.71 billion per year.
The proposals' negative economic effects stem from the price and tax increases the states would impose on the energy and transportation sectors.
Because a cap on carbon emissions is effectively a tax on energy production that is passed to industry, businesses and consumers, the effect is likely to drive commerce and jobs to other states or countries...
READ MORE
2007 U.S. BIRTHS BREAK BABY BOOM RECORD
More babies were born in the United States in 2007 than in any other year in American history, according to preliminary data reported by the National Center for Health Statistics.
- The 4,317,000 births in 2007 just edged out the figure for 1957, at the height of the baby boom.
- The increase reflected a slight rise in childbearing by women of all ages, including those in their 30s and 40s, and a record share of births to unmarried women.
Racial and ethnic differences remain large: 28 percent of white babies were born to unmarried mothers in 2007, compared with 51 percent of Hispanic babies and 72 percent of black babies.
[*The usual subterfuge: a lengthy report I read disputes the perpetual "2.1 children" birth rate for 'American women', saying that while it's routinely reported that way, immigration, legal and non, contributes from 2 to possibly 4 tenths of that figure. I.e., American women are not reproducing at replacement rate - but good luck getting the MSM to elaborate on that statistic.]
READ MORE
The Culture of Entitlement
.... problem at the college level, noting that more college students today expect high grades for simply showing-up ...
The origins of this sense of entitlement to good grades are not difficult to trace. Students preparing for college now often find themselves in classrooms where self esteem is valued more than results. This mindset is perpetuated at the collegiate level as institutions increasingly forsake legitimate measures of scholarly merit in favor of unclear and shifting policies designed to permit social engineering, both in terms of admission to college and assessments of performance within it.
Just last month, the University of California Board of Regents voted to eliminate SAT Subject Tests as an admissions requirement, opting instead for a costly "entitled to review" system. The stated reason for dropping the tests: Some students did not know they had to take them, thus creating a "barrier" to admission.
The American economy today is under stress because of a recession. Recessions ebb and flow over time, but a failure to provide the highest caliber education and demand excellence from those who seek it poses a far larger threat. Students may receive higher grades by simply demanding them, but America will not succeed economically just because we want rewards without results. It's time to align our education priorities with economic realities.
READ MORE
Calls for Obama's FCC to Silence the Right
In today's Huffington Post is Joseph A. Palermo's "Cheney, Rove, and Fleischer and the Importance of Net Neutrality." Net neutrality, you see, is yet another way the Left hopes to silence their opposition -- and Palermo calls on Obama's Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to do exactly that.
"The Huffington Post and other progressive news and information sites, along with MoveOn.org and other Internet organizing networks, played a key role in this dramatic shift in communications technology away from the Right and toward progressive social change. We need to lock in this advantage.
"...With Democratic majorities in Congress and a liberal Democratic administration we can blunt the political influence of media conglomerates and the Right.... We have a very rare opportunity right now to lock in a progressive advantage in Internet communications, information sharing, and Netroots mobilizing."
What's so "neutral" about "lock(ing) in a progressive advantage" via regulatory fiat from Obama's FCC?
Palermo so loathes the free market and the First Amendment free speech rights of his opponents that he wants to rig the rules to establish a permanent progressive advantage in all things media.
The Censorship Doctrine isn't one particular regulatory beast, it is a state of mind. One that compels liberals -- in fact makes them feel entitled -- to silence the opposition by any means necessary.
All in the interest of "neutrality" and "fairness," of course.
['net neutrality' ... First; control the language... ]
READ MORE
Obama For America to teach 'getting paid to cause trouble'
If you log into Obama's web site, you can find a list of Organizing for America (OFA) events in your area. Curious, I signed into the site and came up with a list of over thirty events within 200 miles, in the next two weeks.
The only intriguing one is this: On April 4, at Roosevelt University's downtown Chicago campus, there will be a workshop entitled ‘Getting Paid to Cause Trouble: Careers in Organizing for Social Change (Community Service)':"Organizers from Illinois AFSCME, UNITE HERE, UFCW, Communities for an Equitable Olympics (CEO), Center for Community Change and other unions and community groups will be here to talk about jobs and internships available NOW!"
AFSCME, UNITE HERE, and UFCW are all unions. The other two groups are ‘progressive' Alinsky-model advocates for low-income people. Listed as a sponsor is the Chicago Center for Working-Class Studies, also a labor-oriented group."Come meet organizers from local community organizations and unions ‘walking the walk'," the page encourages. "Learn about careers in grassroots organizing."
Since when is training union organizers, or recruiting people into a union organizer training program, ‘community service'? [snip]
All I can say is that I expect it to expand and become more effective. The Stimulus bill contained $5.2 billion for ‘community development' and ‘neighborhood stabilization', and that money will pay salaries of new ‘community organizers' and ‘labor organizers'. The professional organizers will call on the grass-roots volunteers as needed: "Hey, we're taking a busload of folks to protest at a banker's house. Care to join us?"
[FYI: this AT article by Lola Manning casts a critical eye on the group, including its creepy similarity to past personal cults. ]
READ MORE
Gordon Gekko is a Democrat
How did Republicans get saddled with Wall Street? Obama just got the biggest campaign haul from Wall Street in world history, and Republicans still can't shake the public perception that they are tied at the hip to Wall Street bankers who hate them.
It's as if National Rifle Association members conspired with Republicans to bankrupt the country and everyone blamed the Democrats for being shills of the NRA...
READ MORE
No Party ID for Murtha, But CBS Tags Critic Flake as '(R)'
Tuesday's CBS Evening News highlighted an ethics investigation of a long-serving House Democrat, but viewers were not clued in to his party affiliation verbally or with any an on-screen notation. Yet CBS slapped a party name on screen as a Murtha critic spoke: “Rep. Jeff Flake (R) Arizona.”
READ MORE
More Tea Parties Media Are Sure To Ignore
There were more Tea Parties today that media are sure to ignore.
The picture to the right was furnished by Pious Agnostic who's all over the gathering in Orlando, Florida.
Our friend Glenn Reynolds has more here and here.
Below the fold are more pictures I'm sure readers will enjoy:
READ MORE
California's Hefty Union Dues
Organized Labor: The state that led the way in giving labor push-button power to organize against private-sector taxpayers now stands — if you can call it standing — as a cautionary tale. The public should be forewarned for what might happen far more broadly if unions get their way in Congress.
Jobs are fleeing the Golden State, where unemployment has spiked well above 10%. Taxes are soaring, and a new budget shortfall of $8 billion, following the $42 billion gap that was patched up primarily with tax increases and borrowed money.
But California is still not a bad place to be — that is, as long as you have a secure job (which most are) on the public payroll.
According to the latest salary survey by the American Federation of Teachers, California teachers are the highest paid in the nation.
California also has America's highest-paid prison guards. A state agency's study last year found that the maximum pay of California's guards was 40% higher than that of the highest-paid guards in 10 other states and the federal government.
Private-sector workers and business owners in California get the worst of all deals. They pay some of the highest taxes in the country and get no more than mediocre public services.
It's not just the unions that have pulled the state into the ditch. Voters share the blame for ill-advised decisions at the ballot box, such as approving too much debt and imposing budget rules that keep tax revenues from going where they are needed most.
But public-union muscle has undeniably led the way in tilting the balance of power toward a self-serving, unaccountable governing class...
READ MORE
Nearly One-Third of Younger Americans See Colbert, Stewart As Alternatives to Traditional News Outlets
Nearly one-third of Americans under the age of 40 say satirical news-oriented television programs like The Colbert Report and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart are taking the place of traditional news outlets.
Thirty-two percent (32%) of adults ages 30-39 believe this to be true, while 42% disagree, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
Thirty percent (30%) of those ages 18-29 say programs like the two Comedy Central shows that feature news reports with a comic twist are replacing traditional news outlets, but 35% disagree and another 35% are not sure.
Among all Americans, 24% say programs like The Colbert Report and The Daily Show are taking the place of traditional news venues, but 45% do not think so. Thirty-one percent (31%) are undecided.
[God help us all.]
READ MORE
Bill Allows Texans To Keep Guns In Cars At Work
AUSTIN, Texas — Texans would be able to keep firearms in their cars even if their employers forbid them to under a bill that passed in the state Senate. Businesses could still keep guns out of their offices or company vehicles.
[I like Texas]
READ MORE
Krugman Criticizes Obama, Hell Freezes Over 
Mark March 21, 2009, as the day pigs flew and hell froze over: the shamelessly liberal New York Times columnist Paul Krugman actually criticized the Obama administration. I kid you not.
Unfortunately, he did so at his blog at the New York Times website, which means far fewer people will see his critique than if it had been published in print.
But as it seems foolish to look a gift horse in the mouth on such an auspicious occasion, let us be thankful for small mercies (h/t Hot Air headlines):
READ MORE
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Most Americans Say Let AIG Go Out of Business, Political Class Disagrees
Fifty-nine percent (59%) of American adults say it’s better for the economy to let American International Group (AIG) go out of business rather than providing federal subsidies to keep the insurance giant afloat.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that only 18% think it’s better to provide the subsidies while 24% are not sure.
But those who align with America’s Political Class have a fundamentally different view. By a 70% to 11% margin, the Political Class beli
eves it is better to keep AIG in business through subsidies.
At the other extreme, 73% of Populists say it’s better to let AIG go out of business. Populists represent a majority of the country and it’s reasonable to consider their views as the views of Mainstream America.
Those who find themselves in the middle, between the Political Class and Mainstream America, say it’s better to let AIG go by a 44% to 22% margin.
Mob Rule In D.C.
The Law: Of all the alarming things going on in Washington these days nothing is as shocking, or disheartening, as the collapse in respect for the rule of law and the Constitution.
Like most Americans, we found ourselves angry and perplexed about the AIG bonuses. Yet, while letting AIG pay some employees retention bonuses might seem wrong or even immoral to some, it wasn't illegal.
Yet Congress, which created the problem in the first place, acted with consummate cowardice by trying to "claw back" the money through a punitive, 90% retroactive tax, one specially levied on those who work at AIG. It wants to do the same thing with recipients of TARP money, too.
Why the big change? Public anger. Welcome to mob rule... [snip]
You don't have to like or agree with the AIG bonuses to understand that Congress is doing something it shouldn't under the Constitution. Once a precedent is set, Congress will be able to go after anyone or any group, at any time, for any reason...
READ MORE
Al-Qaeda on the run?
Hard to tell how much of this is smoke and how much is true but it appears that the Predator attacks on al-Qaeda in Pakistan over the last several months is doing a lot of good - killing leaders and sowing distrust among the rank and file: [details, snip]
The information tracks with other news coming from different sources - al-Qaeda has been hit hard and they are in the process of trying to regroup. I doubt whether we worry too much about "anti-US sentiment in Pakistan" since they are perhaps the most anti-American country in the world and nothing we do will change that anytime soon.
Right now, we ar concerned about Afghanistan and as long as Pakistan keeps harboring al-Qaeda and Taliban groups in their wild, Northwest Frontier Provinces, the predadtor attacks will continue.
[One hopes.]
READ MORE
61% Support Putting More U.S. Troops In Afghanistan
Sixty-one percent (61%) of U.S. voters agree with President Obama’s decision to put more U.S. troops in Afghanistan.
Twenty-five percent (25%) are opposed to putting more troops in the war-torn country, and 14% are not sure in a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
Republicans are more supportive of the president’s action than are members of his own party. Seventy-two percent (72%) of GOP voters support the decision to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, compared to 54% of Democrats. Sixty percent (60%) of voters not affiliated with either party agree.
But 20% of voters overall say the United States should pull all of its troops out of Afghanistan as soon as possible. Sixty-nine percent (69%) disagree, and 11% are undecided.
Support for this action is highest among Democrats, 31% of whom favor the removal of all troops right away. That view is shared by 11% of Republicans and 16% of unaffiliated voters.
Obama recently announced the deployment of 17,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan, bringing the U.S. military total in the country up to 53,000.
Mr. President: War Is Not A ‘Struggle’ Or ‘Situation’
First, President Obama jettisoned the admittedly empty and useless phrase Next, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano avoided even mentioning the word “war on terror.”“terrorism” in her first congressional testimony. Now the Department of Justice has announced it is dropping the legal designation “enemy combatants.”
The aim of all this muting of the language in the War with No Name is twofold: for the Obama administration to distance itself from George W. Bush’s “politics of fear,” and to whitewash a plain fact that liberals are suicidally reluctant to acknowledge - that we are at [real, bloody, deadly] war with radical Islam... [snip]
The refusal to acknowledge the enemy isn’t just an Obama failing; it’s a congenital blind spot of the left in general. In the New Hampshire presidential debates of a year ago, all four Democratic candidates referred to Islamic terrorism by name a whopping total of zero times - by contrast, their four Republican counterparts mentioned it twenty-two times. This underscores the fact that one party in this country has at least a partial grip on the threat we face - and the other party, the one now in power, prefers either attempting to placate the enemy by “making nice,” or pretending it doesn’t exist... [snip]
And it certainly isn’t about poverty and economic opportunity, a favorite theme of Obama’s. The ranks of al Qaeda and every other Islamist group you can name are packed with moneyed, college-educated professionals; conversely, impoverished non-Muslims worldwide aren’t taking out their frustration by strapping on explosives and targeting Westerners and Jews.
Second, we’re not dealing with an enemy that thinks the way we do in the West or that wants the same things out of life. Obama intoned on al-Arabiya; “what I’ve come to understand is that. . . regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams.”
Actually, they don’t.
In the U.S. and the rest of the West, we’re generally content to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In stark contrast, our Islamist enemies love death more than life, reject freedom in favor of absolute submission to a totalitarian ideology, and won’t be happy until the world is entirely Islamic. They cannot be swayed from their goal by promises of economic prosperity and peaceful coexistence with infidels. [snip]“Our administration does not believe in a clash of civilizations,”
Vice-President Joe Biden announced at his February address in Munich, referring to the now-famous title of Samuel Huntington’s prescient 1998 book The Clash of Civilizations.
Well frankly, I don’t believe in it either; I believe instead that we’re embroiled in a clash of civilization versus barbarism, and that it is the defining conflict of our time...
[Highly Recommended > ]
READ MORE
Forget Bonus Outrage, What About 'ShariAIG?'
Sigh.
Dear American Taxpayer: If only you knew how easily you have been gulled, played like a greenhorn, a rube, a Madoff mark. This $165 million scandal may have unleashed the first genuine feeding frenzy of the Obama administration, but it is a distraction, a sideshow, a smokescreen over what is really going on: namely, the Bush-initiated, Obama-Pelosi-Reid-led incursion into the private sector designed to nationalize the workings of the economy in order to take over, capture and enslave enough of the free market to transform the fundamental character of this nation.
Remember what our 44th president said back in 1995: "In America," he told the Chicago Reader,"we have this strong bias toward individual action. You know, we idolize the John Wayne hero who comes in to correct things with both guns blazing. But individual actions, individual dreams are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations."
That is exactly what's going on behind the $165 million smokescreen -- truly, a masterpiece of misdirection. [snip]
READ MORE
Mosque Child Abuse in America
[HT:YP]
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Dave Gaubatz, the first U.S. civilian (1811) Federal Agent deployed to Iraq in 2003. He is currently the Director of the Mapping Sharia Project
Not only does Al-Farooq provide materials by convicted Islamic terrorists to their worshippers, they practice polygamy (per statements made by Al Farooq worshippers) as allowed under Sharia law, which also advocates children to be taken as ‘child brides’ married to older men...
[In America...]
READ MORE
Fall out from massive spending: China wants new reserve currency
.
This, my friends, is not George Bush's fault.
The suggestion by China to remove the dollar as the world's reserve currency and replace it with an internationally regulated system by the IMF is a direct result of the trillions spent by the Obama Administration so far and the promise of more.
Essentially, the Chinese believe that they will be repaid by the US in devalued currency - a result of what most analysts believe will be unavoidable inflation that will start up once our economy gets moving again.
By removing the dollar as the major reserve currency for governments, it will be harder to finance our debt. And, as the Chinese fear, the US would get to repay its obligations in inflated currency which would make it easier to reduce the $11 trillion national debt we will have by 2012.
Or perhaps, as has happened in other countries, we will wake up one morning and the government will announce all dollars will have to be exchanged for the "new dollar" - at 92 cents on the dollar or whatever amount is deemed necessary...
READ MORE
Obama seeks broad power to regulate risk
The administration is not only seeking power to regulate risk across the board on Wall Street but also the ability to seize [any] companies that, in the opinion of the Treasury Department, represent a risk to the American economy if they fail.
Now, I've been told that I am being hysterical when I point out that the government's ability to break contracts means simply that the "sanctity" of contracts no longer applies in America and that we are moving toward government by diktat. The fact that the government can "seize" (WaPo's word) a company heightens my concern. But don't mind me. I'm just an old fuddy-duddy who believes in stuff like "founding principles" and other outmoded, outdated concepts.
And you can bet that the whole idea of "risk-reward" on Wall Street and elsewhere will be pretty much thrown under the bus. Risky ventures will be a thing of the past. You will have to present a sure thing to venture capitalists in order to get funding - like creating a company that makes Obama dolls or framed portraits of our president. On the other hand, if you want to be the next Google, you will be SOL...
READ MORE
Yes, It Was Government Regulation That Caused Our Currrent Crisis
There has been a lot of push back against the idea that the Community Reinvestment Act nudged banks to give mortgages to people who should have not gotten them. But then here comes this fantastic story about East Bridgewater Savings in Boston.
he FDIC has turned up the heat on Petrucelli's bank, giving it an apparently rare "needs to improve rating," for not making more risky loans under the Community Reinvestment Act...
[For anyone somehow unaware or still not convinced that government is the problem > ]
READ MORE
MSNBC Blames Financial Crisis on Republican Deregulation; Ignores Overwhelming Democrat Support and History
On Friday, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow accurately blamed a bill enacted in 1999 for today's financial crisis, but in so doing exclusively pointed accusatory fingers at its Republican sponsors while totally ignoring the overwhelming Democrat support it received in both Chambers of Congress.
Maybe even more egregious, she chose not to address it being signed into law by President Bill Clinton until a guest inconveniently brought it up.
Of course, NewsBusters has been apprising readers about the significance of the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 (aka Gramm-Leach-Bliley) for many months, including articles on the subject here and here.
With this in mind, Maddow's not only extremely late to this party, but she also apparently thinks only the sponsors of a bill are responsible for its content and not those that vote for or eventually sign it into law (video part I embedded right, part II below the fold with partial transcript):
READ MORE
TIME FOR A REAL CHANGE: REPEAL THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX
The government often taxes an entrepreneur's profits twice, once at the business level and then again when the profits are distributed to individuals. This double taxation not only dampens the incentive to invest, but also obscures who actually bears the burden of these taxes. Because a corporation is made up of a group of individuals but is not actually an individual, corporate taxes are really taxes on the stakeholders in the corporation.
Repealing the corporate income tax alone, which would cost approximately $300 billion in annual tax revenue, would produce by 2012:
- 2 million more jobs than the baseline scenario.
- $280 billion more in real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP).
- $4,000 more in real disposable income for a fam ily of four.
- $707 billion more in household net wealth—the base of economic strength and stability.
According to a recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) working paper, of the three taxes (income, corporate, and consumption), corporate taxes are most harmful to economic growth. Other countries are aware of this and have steadily reduced their corporate tax rates. The United States has been the exception.
If Congress repealed the corporate income tax, investments would flow into the country. Multi national and international companies would be encouraged to operate in the United States, bringing jobs and new technology to meet today's economic challenges.
Eliminating the corporate tax would also encourage owners to hire and train people and to invest in their workforces because a more competitive tax structure would give corporations a greater incentive to domicile in the United States.
[Don't like 'off shoring'? This is the answer, and would lead to massive 'on-shoring'.]
READ MORE
Al Gore vs. 7 Climate Scientists
The dissenters against Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming (AGW) have long desired an open and honest debate with Al Gore. But Mr. Gore has never consented.
Here’s the next best thing: a video presentation of edited arguments from 7 renown climate scientists that demolish the rationalizations presented in Gore's movie “An Inconvenient Truth."
It’s good for us to remember that, as I have written before, the whole AGW climate warming theory is hinged on one argument, namely that CO2 causes global warming.
All the politics of AGW including carbon-footprinting, taxation, etc, follow from that one claim. But the supposition on which global warming advocates base their dogma is indisputably wrong, as again documented here.
[I.e., the facts on the 'killer question' alarmists avoid like the plague, and how I know that AWG is a scam: cause cannot trail effect - if you're unaware of what I mean, this 10-minute clip will tell you all you really need know - MUST SEE > ]
READ MORE
THE TAX CODE PUNISHES EFFICIENT ENERGY SOURCES
The U.S. tax code is heavily weighted in favor of renewable power sources over conventional sources such as coal and oil, Tufts University economics professor Gilbert Metcalf reports in a new study released by the Manhattan Institute.
Under current law, solar thermal and wind capital are subsidized to the greatest extent, with effective subsidy rates of 245 and 164 percent, respectively. While renewable power sources receive substantial subsidies, more efficient conventional power sources are heavily punished by the tax code. [snip]
These numbers paint a clear picture: Renewable energy receives substantial federal subsidies while generating very small amounts of energy and usable electricity. In 2007, less than 1 percent of U.S. electricity was generated by wind energy, while coal contributed over half the nation's electricity that year."The tax code is biased toward politically correct energies at the expense of the energies consumers want most -- oil, natural gas, and coal," ... "To this extent, tax policy is anti-consumer."
Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, agrees federal policy punishes the most efficient energy sources."In a time of economic crisis, it is reprehensible that politicians continue to throw good money after bad and foist high-cost, low-output energy sources on consumers,"
READ MORE
Democrats on brink of clamping down on oil and gas drilling
[HT:MS]
After nearly two years of drafting and debate, rules imposing new environmental restrictions on gas and oil exploration in Colorado passed their last key test in the state Legislature with preliminary approval Tuesday by the Senate on a party-line vote.
Sen. Bill Cadman, R-Colorado Springs, described the rules as "draconian."
"This bill means no business," said Sen. Kevin Lundberg, R-Berthoud.
"It means we're shutting down the oil and gas business."
READ MORE
Twelve NHS trusts face inquiry after report on hospital where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly
Twelve NHS trusts are being investigated following a damning report which today slammed 'appalling' care at a hospital. Hundreds of patients may have died after bosses at Staffordshire General focused on Government targets rather than safety, the Healthcare Commission said.
READ MORE
POLITICIZING CARE: OREGON CHANGES ITS PRIORITIES
After comment from interested parties [special interest groups, political and business], the state's health program for low-income people has re-ranked treatment for various diseases and conditions, currently from 1 to 680, in order of 'priority'.
The health care dollars available determine which priorities are met. As program costs have grown, the list of covered procedures has become shorter. Surprisingly, between 2002 and 2009 there was a fairly radical reordering of priorities.
A great many life-saving procedures that ranked high in 2002, such as treatment for Type 1 diabetes, have been relegated to a much lower position in 2009, while procedures that are only tangentially related to life and death have climbed to the top:
- Bariatric surgery for people with Type II diabetes and a 35 or greater Body Mass Index (BMI) number is ranked 33rd.
- This means that the rationing board thinks that stomach surgery to control obesity is more important than surgery to repair injured internal organs (88), a closed hip fracture (89), or a hernia showing symptoms of obstruction or strangulation (176).
- Abortions rank 41st, indicating that the state considers using public money for abortions more important than treating an ectopic pregnancy (43), gonococcal infections and other sexually transmitted diseases (56), or an infection or hemorrhage resulting from a miscarriage (68).
Various interest groups have spent the last seven years reordering the political* priorities embodied in the list.
[Everything government does becomes politicized. Smoke? Too bad. Ride a motorcycle? That's a problem. Eat too much - or maybe just too much red meat...? Skydive? Ski? ... You're not getting too old are you?...
We don't want government run health care.]
READ MORE
WaPo to Domestic Violence Victims: You Can't, Shouldn't Arm Yourselves with Guns
The legislation is most likely DOA in the Maryland House of Delegates -- where a similar bill was shot down in an 86-51 vote -- but the Washington Post is so frightened by a state Senate committee vote approving a measure to make it easier for domestic abuse victims to buy a gun that it thought it important to preach about how "Arming abuse victims is the wrong way to curb domestic violence."
According to a March 24 Post editorial, abused women are just too emotionally unstable to exercise their Second Amendment rights and probably
"have seen one Jodie Foster film too many"
if they think a gun can even the odds against a violent abuser.
[There's a reason they're called 'equalizers', and no one is harmed more by gun restriction laws than are women.]
READ MORE
Black Activist Jailed and Tortured Near Florida
Rude and shaggy punk rockers who sneer at their president as "a fraud and an a**hole!", who diss their national icons as "pr*cks" and "murderers!" have recently been arrested for attempting to visit a black civil rights activist who is being tortured in prison for quoting Martin Luther King in public.
"Wait a minute?!" you say. "Should'nt all hip people be outraged by this?..How come I haven't heard about this in Rolling Stone Magazine, MTV, VH1, Time, Newsweek, Entertainment Weekly, People, Vanity Fair, OK, InTouch, InStyle, ABC, CBS, CNN etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.??
It's very simple. The insulted "president" is named Fidel Castro, the dissed national icon is named Che Guevara, and the black civil rights activist was jailed and tortured for campaigning for civil rights in Cuba for Cubans.
Need I say more?
READ MORE
Name That Party: 3 Dems in FBI Probe, Party Affiliation Omitted/Buried
The Associated Press posted a story on the FBI's probe of questionable campaign donations to Senator Patty Murray and Representative Norm Dicks of Washington state. The possibly worrisome donations were from PMA Group, a lobbying firm founded by an aide of Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania.
With all these politician's names being thrown around in the AP report, though, it is curious that not a one of them were ever identified as Democrats. Not once.
READ MORE
Barbour signs law to ban red-light cameras in Mississippi
Jackson — Officials in several Mississippi cities are scrambling to re-evaluate contracts with private companies after Gov. Haley Barbour signed a new law banning the use of automatic cameras that snap pictures of vehicles running red lights. The new law says the two cities that already have the cameras, Jackson and Columbus, must take them down by Oct. 1. Other cities and counties are banned from starting to use them.
[It's not about safety, it's about revenue.]
READ MORE
