(H/T – Allahpundit’s Twitter stream)
Politico reports Paul Ryan now considers that TARP bonus tax unconstitutional. The bad news – he voted for it.
Had he applied the “duck” test, he would’ve saved himself some embarrassment.
The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.
(H/T – Allahpundit’s Twitter stream)
Politico reports Paul Ryan now considers that TARP bonus tax unconstitutional. The bad news – he voted for it.
Had he applied the “duck” test, he would’ve saved himself some embarrassment.
Senator Judd Gregg, says the US doesn’t have the economic where-with-all to even join the European Union:
“We won’t even be able to get into the EU if we wanted to,” Gregg said this morning on MSNBC, “because our government is so large and so huge.”
The European Union’s Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) adopted in 1997 requires a budget deficit to be less than three percent, and requires a national debt beneath 60 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
As Gregg further points out, we’re getting dressed down by the French:
“We’ve been lectured by France on the fact that we’re not fiscally responsible right now,” Gregg, the would-be commerce secretary, noted with incredulity.
We’ve also been lectured by the Russians and the Chinese about our excessive borrowing and spending.
With the size of the deficits and borrowing that President Obama is proposing, it’s obvious that we will no longer be an economic super power. The EU is saying we couldn’t even join a club that includes Western versions of Socialism. If we can’t join their club, where does it leave us? I hear Mugabe, Chavez, Castro and Kim Jong-ll are looking for members!
At least that’s what President Obama would now have you believe. Look at Obama’s comments regarding the flooding that is occurring in the Red River Valley:
“If you look at the flooding that’s going on right now in North Dakota and you say to yourself, ‘If you see an increase of 2 degrees, what does that do, in terms of the situation there?’ ” the president told the reporters. “That indicates the degree to which we have to take this seriously.”
Obama began by saying that “the science around climate change is real; it is potentially devastating.”
I’ve been a resident of the upper Midwest my entire life. I’m very familiar with the Red River Valley having most of my extended family still living in the Valley. With that background, I have to admit some confusion on President Obama’s remarks.
My recollection of the Red River area is that it gets very cold and typically receives a fair amount of snow each winter. My recollection also is that melting in the spring tends to turn snow to water. That water needs a place to run off. Given the scale of the Valley area, that can be a lot of snow becoming a lot of water running to basically, one spot. When a lot of water runs to one spot, that tends to create rising water. When the water rises too much, because too much snow turned into too much water, that creates flooding.
Maybe President Obama believes that because there is a river running through this area and it’s way up north, the river is carrying water from the melting arctic ice caps and that is causing the flooding? Nope, while most of the rivers in the US do run from north to south, the Red River is north of the Laurentian Divide. As a result, the Red River is one of the few rivers in the US that actually runs north, toward the ice caps. I’ll bet the President doesn’t know that!
OK, maybe I’m being a bit too technical for the President. Maybe a simpler view would help.
Obviously, the flooding is driven by moisture in the area. Take a look at this chart from NDSU and you will see that the Fargo area, the heart of the Valley, has received moisture that is about equal to the most moisture ever received. A ha! Global Warming! Um, nope. You see, the record to date for the most moisture recorded in the valley is the ’96 – ’97 winter. Um, no, that’s not 1996, that’s 1896! My history tells me that there weren’t a lot of carbon belching engines at that time. In fact, there weren’t even a lot of carbon belching people in this area at that time!
In a speech that he gave on the night that he was assured the Presidential nomination by the Democrats, Barack Obama said that as a result of his nomination:
this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal
Hmmm, I guess he was being literal, he only controls the oceans and not the rivers. I wonder who controls the rivers? Maybe it’s one of those spots that we haven’t been able to fill in Treasury?
My friends at the American Issues Project unleashed a new ad hitting back at the Democrats who gave AIG billions of dollars as they knew and protected the bonuses they now want to tax out of existence…
[blip.tv ?posts_id=1920374&dest=-1]
Treasury’s Top Candidate to Run TARP Drops Out .
Damn, is there anyone who wants a Treasury job?
WASHINGTON — The leading candidate to run the Treasury Department’s $700 billion bailout program has withdrawn his name from consideration, according to people familiar with the matter.
Frank Brosens, a hedge-fund manager and big Democratic donor, was considered the top contender to run the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is now considering several other candidates, including Herb Allison, who currently heads mortgage titan Fannie Mae.
Oh yeah, let’s get the Fannie Mae folks, they’ll do anything!
Mr. Brosens, who campaigned for Mr. Obama, said he withdrew his name for personal reasons, including wanting to remain at his hedge fund, Taconic Capital Advisors. “I very much wanted to find a way to serve,” he said. Among the reasons he cited for withdrawing was the need to commute between Washington and New York, where his son is in school.
Uh huh. Did he just find out that his son is in school?
Just so you know, if nominated, I will not run. If elected, I will not serve….just if you were wondering.
What would this article be without the obligatory and obvious video?
According to American Pravda:
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Wednesday that America’s “insatiable” demand for illegal drugs and its inability to stop weapons from being smuggled into Mexico are fueling an alarming spike in violence along the U.S.-Mexican border.
Yes, it’s our fault:
“Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade,” she said. “Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians.”
Let me get this right. According to Hillary, our inability to control our borders is causing people in Mexico to sell us drugs and allegedly (this one is open to dispute) buy nasty weapons from us. As a result, Hillary is suggesting that we should up our contributions to the Mexican government so that they can solve their problems. Oh yeah, that will work. It will work because of course, there’s no corruption in the Mexican government. There’s no corruption that might be involved in aiding and abetting the drugs and weapons. There’s no corruption that’s taking the money we’re already sending to Mexico and using it for any personal enrichment. No, no corruption.
I have to wonder. I wonder if Hillary would accept her logic tossed back at her. Based on Hillary’s logic, if we’re causing the problem in Mexico because we aren’t controlling our borders, would Hillary accept that the hoards of illegal aliens who are in this country after crossing the Mexican border are a result of Mexico not enforcing their borders? Can we go after the Mexican government to pay for their citizens that they allowed to live in our country?
Actually, Hillary’s message to Mexico is just a Trojan horse. Hillary has taken the role of “good soldier” and is using this opportunity to set up another opportunity for Obama to format America into the country he wants it to be. While Hillary for now, is talking about the Mexican/American relationship, this issue will soon be used as Obama’s lynch pin for removing drug enforcement and expanding gun control regulation. After all, we don’t want to cause anymore problems for the well run, highly ethical government of our 59th state!
During his press conference last evening, when question about the dramatic increases in debt and deficit that his budget shows, President Obama again lashed out with, “I inherited this mess.”
The Washington Post has put together a graph showing deficits under Bush and the proposed deficits under Obama. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words:
I think it’s fair to cut Obama some slack on ’09. The deficit in this year was started by President Bush. That said, there was not one decision on the extraordinary monies spend that Obama was not involved with either through direct consultation or via his vote as a Senator. That said, there’s no question that every dollar past ’09 is all Obama, all the time. There is also not doubt that every year of Obama’s projected budget has a higher deficit than ANYTHING President Bush had.
Before you get into “this is a true comparison” or “Bush didn’t show Iraq”, go read the Heritage.org piece. As they say in the commercial, “Prego, it’s all in there!”
[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]