Folks, here are a couple of the original “Harry and Louise” ads that ran showing the problems with the original “health care reform” proposed by the Clintons. If you watch the ads, you’ll note that the issues haven’t changed. What was common sense then still holds true today:
No Runny Eggs
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.
Archive for posts by Shoebox.
July 20, 2009
July 18, 2009
Commonality
What do the Health Care Reform Act, the world’s oldest profession and this picture have in common?
A: In each case, someone is slipping someone the wiener!
H/T Olbroad
July 17, 2009
Slim, None and Nil
Between joining the climate change bandwagon with Nancy Pelosi
And now, positing that Sotomayor may be a moderate:
“The person who has testified this week is dramatically more moderate than the person who made those speeches,” he said before delivering a speech at the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council. “It will be very interesting to see how she winds up as a justice.”
Newt Gingrich has lost all credibility with me as understanding any part of the Democrat’s modus operandi.
Is Newt really so out of touch that he doesn’t understand that liberals like Obama and Sotomayor have no compunction about saying anything necessary to get themselves elevated to the role they seek? Does Newt not understand that “I didn’t say that,” “I didn’t know” and “I’m sorry if anyone felt offended” are standard phrases that have been accepted by the left as absolving all members of any responsibility, at least momentarily, of anything that they had done or said in the past?
Newt, to be clear, the likelihood of Sotomayor being moderate is the same likelihood that man is responsible for climate change. In case you can’t do the math, it is zero!
If We Don’t Learn From History…
We are doomed to repeat it…
From the 1934 Chicago Tribune. The Names have changed, the issues haven’t!
Comments Off on If We Don’t Learn From History…
I Agree With Joe Biden!
For those who have read this blog for a while, I’ll give you a moment to put your teeth back in and pick yourself up off of the floor.
Ready?
In a speech to AARP about the proposed national health care plan, Joe Biden said:
“And folks look, AARP knows and the people with me here today know, the president knows, and I know, that the status quo is simply not acceptable,” Biden said at the event on Thursday in Alexandria, Va. “It’s totally unacceptable. And it’s completely unsustainable. Even if we wanted to keep it the way we have it now. It can’t do it financially.”
For once, I absolutely agree with Joe. The current course is unsustainable. We need to make changes soon or we’re going to be in a whole heap of trouble!
Think I’m just some two bit blogging hack who’s just throwing another opinion to the ether? Don’t think my opinions is that valuable? Well, don’t trust me then, trust the head of the Congressional Budget Office.
In his testimony to Congress and in his blog, the Director of the CBO said:
the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario for current law. (emphasis mine)
That’s right, shocking isn’t it. The federal budget is on an unsustainable path. The CBO goes on to explain what the problem with the budget is….take one guess at what is causing the unsustainable problem:
Measured relative to GDP, almost all of the projected growth in federal spending other than interest payments on the debt stems from the three largest entitlement programs—Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. For decades, spending on Medicare and Medicaid has been growing faster than the economy. CBO projects that if current laws do not change, federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid combined will grow from roughly 5 percent of GDP today to almost 10 percent by 2035. By 2080, the government would be spending almost as much, as a share of the economy, on just its two major health care programs as it has spent on all of its programs and services in recent years.
And this is before putting another $1.5 Trillion minimum of additional costs into the budget for the national health care program!
Later in his speech, Joe went on to lie again telling the folks that they would be able to keep their existing health plan if they wanted:
“They’ll be a deal in there so there’s competition, so what you’ll have in there is you’ll have the ability to go in there and say, ‘Now look, this is the policy I want. This is the one,” Biden said.
Someone should get Joe a copy of the House bill or a subscription to Investors Business Daily. If he had either, he would note the following:
When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee
It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states
“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.
Joe did have one last comment that I agree with him on:
“We’re going to go bankrupt as a nation,” Biden said.
Yes, Joe. If we continue down this path and are lucky, we may only go bankrupt as a nation. My bet is that if we follow the advice of you and yours, we’ll commit national suicide!
Comments Off on I Agree With Joe Biden!
July 16, 2009
Someone Didn’t Get The Memo!
Senator Barbara Boxer attempted to use the traditional Democrat tactic of identity politics on Black Chamber of Commerce CEO, Harry Alford. Unfortunately for Babs, Harry hadn’t gotten the memo that said that all US Citizens of African heritage must think alike and that all US Citizens of African heritage must support all policies posited by the first President with African heritage. Fortunately, Mr. Alford called Babs on her racist remarks. Unfortunately, she’s either too dense
Enjoy!
Comments Off on Someone Didn’t Get The Memo!
Soon, at a Medical Provider Near You!
Massachusetts is the state whose health care model that is being used for much of the Democrat’s plan. When Massachusetts plan was proposed, it was supposed to cost the State a few hundred thousand dollars each year. It is now costing more than twice what it was proposed to cost.
BOSTON — A hospital that serves thousands of indigent Massachusetts residents sued the state on Wednesday, charging that its costly universal health care law is forcing the hospital to cover too much of the expense of caring for the poor.
The central charge in the suit is that the state has siphoned money away from Boston Medical to help pay the considerable cost of insuring all but a small percentage of residents. Three years after the law’s passage, Massachusetts has the country’s lowest percentage of uninsured residents: 2.6 percent, compared with a national average of 15 percent.
Sound Familiar?
One of the state’s reimbursement rates to Boston Medical, dropped from $12, 476 in 2008 to $9,323 by 2009, the suit says.
Folks, this is one way that government rations. By reducing their payments to providers, for no reason other than they can, providers begin reducing the number of patients they will see or reduce the care the patients get. Is it lost on the D.C. crowd how many providers no longer accept Medicaid patients?
State officials have suggested that Boston Medical could reduce costs by operating more efficiently. The state has also pointed out that the hospital has reserves of about $190 million, but Tom Traylor, the hospital’s vice president of federal and state programs, said the reserves could only sustain the hospital for about a year.
Translation: You have money, therefore you can afford to get paid less or pay more to be a part of the program.
If the State is so good at identifying where cost reductions can be attained, why is it that they have a budget shortfall of $5 Billion? Can’t they state turn their own folks inward to find the waste and inefficiency in the State’s budget?
Comments Off on Soon, at a Medical Provider Near You!
Deja Vu All Over Again
President Obama along with many Democrats, are trying to push a health care overhaul before the August recess. Amidst arguments of the cost ($1.6 Trillion to over $4 trillion), how to pay for it (taxes, taxes, taxes) and who it would provide political payback for (planned parenthood amongst others), most folks, including those in Congress, have no idea how this plan (at 3,000 pages) would actually work. To help show the complexity of what is being proposed the Republicans have released a chart that shows all of the bureaucratic snarling that would occur if the proposed plan is passed. Can you make sense of it?
It’s hard to believe that this mess can possibly provide better health care than what we have today. The funny thing is that I seem to remember seeing a similar plan to this as a kid. As a kid I remember seeing a plan that had fewer bureaucratic involvement yet had the same exact end result.
While almost 40 years old, I believe this chart would have just as much success as the one the Democrats are proposing:
Either way, we end up trapped at the end!
Comments Off on Deja Vu All Over Again
July 14, 2009
Let’s Call It “Employment Change”
It always seems that liberals use words or phrases until the words don’t support their view of the world any longer. When that happens liberals typically change the definition of the words or come up with description changes that fit their new view of the situation.
Do you remember how “Climate Change” used to be called “Global Warming?” Yeah, global warming up until it became clear that all the claims being made about increasing global temperatures….made by man….we’re blown up by nearly 10 straight years of global temperature flattening or even cooling. Voila, “Global Warming” was changed to “Climate Change.” It really didn’t matter that the world wasn’t warming any more, the fact that something is changing that is not in line with the liberals desire is what the true catastrophic issue is.
When President Obama proposed the Stimulus plan he had his economic experts sell the plan by saying that without it, unemployment would go to nearly 10%. In contrast, by implementing the stimulus plan, Obama argued that unemployment would cap at 8%.
Over the past weekend President Obama told us that the stimulus plan was working swimmingly and that while unemployment was a “lagging indicator”, all would be well if we were just patient:
“We’re moving in the right direction,” Obama said. “We must let it work the way it’s supposed to, with the understanding that in any recession, unemployment tends to recover more slowly than other measures of economic activity.”
While in Michigan today, President Obama said that he really doesn’t have a clue what is happening with unemployment:
“How employment numbers are going to respond is not year clear. My expectation is that we will probably continue to see unemployment tick up for several months.”
Clearly, this is what Obama and his team expected to see. Clearly they had expected that by doing the man made adjustments all would become right with unemployment. Clearly they are now frustrated that things are not going along the path they prescribed in February. What should they do now? I know, let’s not call it “unemployment” anymore, let’s call it “employment change.” There, they were never wrong. Problem solved!
Comments Off on Let’s Call It “Employment Change”
Past Performance is not Indicative of Future Results
Newsmax.com is reporting that President Obama is shattering all previous presidential travel records.
In the first 171 days of his presidency, Obama spent 22 days — the equivalent of one full month of working days — out of the country. That means 13 percent of Obama’s time in office has been spent abroad.
The amount of time that Obama is spending abroad may be a bit suprising when you consider that Obama is dealing with significant domestic issues including “… the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression,” cap and trade legislation and a health care agenda. In addition, Obama still has those nagging little issues in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Together, one would think that Obama has more than enough things to keep his attention at home rather than grand standing across the globe. For someone who campaigned on bringing efficiency to government, Obama’s travels would seem to be counter intuitive. Well, now that I think about it, maybe not so counter intuitive. Remember, Obama has a history of avoiding focus on the things he ought to be focused on:
From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That’s how many days the Senate was actually in session and working.
And before that:
In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted “present,” effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.
Every commercial for every investment fund or firm has a disclaimer that reads:
Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Unfortunately for President Obama, past performance, or the lack of focus on it, is exactly what we should expect in future results!
Comments Off on Past Performance is not Indicative of Future Results
July 13, 2009
Made For Media Theatre
One of the main headlines through the weekend was that the CIA had held secrets from Congress and that Vice President, Dick Cheney was responsible for the “cover up.” After 3 or 4 days of hyperventilating about “another Cheney cover up,” we now get information about what was “covered up:”
The Central Intelligence Agency had a secret plan to capture or kill Al-Qaeda operatives
Oh my gosh noooooooo! Tell me it isn’t sooooooooo! We were actually planning to kill or capture Al-Qaeda and Dick Cheney made sure the CIA didn’t tell anyone?
Leon Panetta was so outraged by the program that he immediately terminated the program.
Leon, have you covered this program with President Obama?
President Obama ‘orders Pakistan drone attacks’
If not, you may want to think about doing so:
US drone attack kills 45 militants in Pakistan, officials say
A suspected US drone killed at least 45 Pakistani Taliban militants on Tuesday when it struck after a funeral of an insurgent commander killed earlier in the day, Pakistani intelligence officials said.
‘Cause someone ain’t getting the message!
Just What Is The Story?
From the Boston Globe:
Governor Deval Patrick yesterday accused Zoo New England officials of creating a false and inflammatory scare with their warning that state budget cuts may force them to close two Greater Boston zoos and euthanize some animals.
“As a supporter of the zoo and a parent who has visited often, the governor is disappointed to learn that Zoo New England has responded to this difficult but unavoidable budget cut by spreading inaccurate and incendiary information,’’ Kyle Sullivan, a spokesman for the governor, said in a statement.
emphasis mine
Deval Patrick is concerned about a taxpayer supported entity portraying catastrophic options as solutions that would blackmail additional funding from those same taxpayers. Really? This is news?
How many school district funding increase requests have been bow tied with the threat of larger class room sizes if the request is turned down?
How many municipality funding increase requests have been bowtied with the threat of fewer police or fire staff if the request is turned down?
TARP and the Stimulus package were sold with Presidents and politicians telling us that the US economy would melt down without their passage.
“Inaccurate and incendiary information” is not a news story. When working to get more taxpayers dollars for some beuraucrat to spend, “inaccurate and incendiary information” is not only normal, it’s action item number one!
Comments Off on Just What Is The Story?
All Communication All The Time
One of the major difficulties of the Bush administration is that it seemed that they wouldn’t talk to anyone. Oh, I don’t mean the innocuous daily press briefings or the occasional sound bite as President Bush dashed off to a helicopter or another meeting of some sort. What I’m referring to is that regardless of the topic, the Bush administration never seemed to expound on or explain themselves. Time after time we would see the Democrats, the press or even the Republican members of Congress question, challenge or press an administration strategy and invariably, the administration would respond with something akin to “no comment” or “trust us.”
Enter Obama.
There aren’t many things I can give Obama credit for but one thing is undeniable; the man knows how to communicate. Unlike President Bush, President Obama is talking all the time about all the things he wants to do for America. Not only that but President Obama has numerous members of his administration out talking all the time about how they are doing.
As an example of the Obama administration “all communication, all the time,” look at these insights:
First, Joe Biden telling us “the economy was much worse than we expected!”
Second, We have Larry Summers telling us “the worse is not over:”
Onward, then, to the toughest economic challenge Summers faces today: the recession. Here, Summers turns sombre: “I don’t think the worst is over … It’s very likely that more jobs will be lost. It would not be surprising if GDP has not yet reached its low.
Things don’t sound so good if we listen to Biden and Summers. If we listen to these spokespeople for the Obama administration we may want to find a comfortable spot to start practicing our economic fetal position. But wait, let’s listen to President Obama:
“We’re moving in the right direction,” Obama said. “We must let it work the way it’s supposed to, with the understanding that in any recession, unemployment tends to recover more slowly than other measures of economic activity.”
Yes, Obama and his folks are talking all the time about all kinds of things. However, not only do they have a problem of conflicting with one another they even conflict with themselves:
The administration admitted it has been on a “learning curve” with the stimulus package, but that it has figured out how to spend some of the available billions more quickly.
Many tax cuts have already taken effect. But only $60.4 billion of the remaining $499 billion has been spent. Most of the money was always likely to be spent this summer, at the earliest, as departments wrestled with the increased workload and new requirements imposed by the bill.
The White House said it isn’t changing its goal of spending 70% of the funds by September 2010. But amid unemployment worries, the administration has been pressuring agencies to get some money out the door more quickly.
Huh, working as it should versus we need to spend quicker because unemployment is a problem. Well, which is it Mr. President?
Comments Off on All Communication All The Time
July 8, 2009
Learning At The Feet Of The Master
President Obama has been in Russia the past few days. You may have heard about it. That is you may have heard about it if something other than Michael Jackson’s funeral had been in the news for the past week. Anyway….President Obama ostensibly went to Russia to discuss arms agreements, trade, council the Russians on the importance of honoring contracts and other important President kinds of stuff….at least that’s what Obama wants you to believe he is there for.
The real reason Obama went to Russia is for some one on one counseling from Obama’s Sensei of controlled economies, Vladimir Putin. Please watch this previously secret, anonymously released Russian economic training video:
In the video it is plain to see how the US media marvels at the Sensei’s ability to lower pork prices with a mere question:
“‘They’re very high,’ said Putin,” Maceda explained. “‘It will be lower tomorrow,’ was the quick reply.”
Later the Sensei is able to reemploy an entire cement factory by shaming the owners into the rehiring:
“And this showdown at a cement factory near St. Petersburg,” Maceda said. “When orders dried up, managers shut the plant laying off hundreds until Putin shamed the bosses, even tossing a pen and ordering one of them to sign a promise to rehire every worker. Now other towns are hoping for some of Putin’s special attention.”
Wow! Obama really is the grasshopper.
In a commencement speech yesterday, President Obama said:
The future does not belong to those who gather armies on a field of battle or bury missiles in the ground
Apparently the future also doesn’t belong to those who pass stimulus bills, loan shark money, or take over entire industries. The future for central economy controllers like Obama, is to merely speak and make it so.
Comments Off on Learning At The Feet Of The Master
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
I don’t normally post these kinds of things. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever posted another chain email. However, this one is so good it needs to be shared:
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, and Obama supporters, et. al.:
We have stuck together since the late 1950s, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know that we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
The Separation Agreement:
Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
We don’t like redistributive taxes so you can keep them.
You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.
Since you hate guns and war, we’ll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O’Donnell. (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.)
We’ll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We’ll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO’s, and rednecks.
We’ll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood.
You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we’ll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we’ll help provide them security.
We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N., but we will no longer be paying the bill.
We’ll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.
You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right.
We’ll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute Imagine, I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya, or We Are the World.
We’ll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot.
Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our history, our name and our flag.
Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I’ll bet you ANWAR which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an AmericanP.S. Also, please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda with you.
May I add that as property settlement we would give the Liberals all of the Continental 48 states that have Pacific sea shore and all states from D.C. north that has Atlantic seashore and I’ll toss in Pennsylvania and Hawaii if you agree to this deal today!
July 7, 2009
Ya Don’t Have To Call Me The 60th Democrat!
First, for those of you who missed the ’70’s….for whatever reason, there was a comic who went by the name of Raymond J. Johnson Jr. Ray J had a shtick in which he gave you every combination of his name except simply, “Johnson.” :
Today, Al Franken met with Harry Reid and they talked to the press. During his portion of the comments, Franken brushed aside the notion that he was the 60th Democrat Senator that so many have been breathlessly awaiting. Instead, the humble, self effacing servant, Al Franken, simply wants to be known as “The second Senator from Minnesota.”
Like Ray J., you can call him the 60th Democrat Senator, you can call him the second Minnesota Senator, you can even call him Senator Al Franken (shudder). Whatever you call him, you also have to call him the tipping point for the Republican Party.
I’ve pointed out time and time and time again that from a vote on policy standpoint, it didn’t matter whether the Democrats had 58, 59 or 60 Senators. The fact is and was that there were 2 or 3 “Republican” votes up for purchase or up for a flexible interpretation of principle on nearly every major issue to face the Senate. You want proof? Show me anything of substance that has failed to pass the Senate without Democrats voting against it!
With 58 or 59 Democrats there was always the convenient yet farcicle argument that folks like Olympia Snowe had to vote for some bill, let’s say the stimulus bill, not because she believed it was good policy for her constituents but that “something had to be done.” Thus, in the spirit of “bipartisanship” Senators like Snowe would vote with the Democrats to pass legislation.
With 60 Democrats, Snowe no longer has to compromise her “principles. With 60 Democrats, the only reason for any Republican to vote with the Democrats is if that Republican believes and agrees with the principles of the particular bill.
So why is this a tipping point for Republicans? Simple. From this point forward, the veneer will be off of the excuses that “moderate” Republicans have used. Further, the veneer will be off of Republican leadership’s excuses that they provide for these “moderate” Republicans votes. If Republicans can not force the Democrats to take unilateral votes on issues like Cap and Trade, health care, potentially a second stimulus, than there is no longer any reason for the Republican party. If the Republicans can not unify against clearly bad policy for the nation when they have nothing to lose and principle to gain by voting against it than I predict that Conservatives will abandon the Republican party.
2012 is a long, long way away. If the Republicans think that over reaching by the Democrats will give them an opportunity in 2012, they had better pay attention to 2010. 2010 could be an opportunity for Republicans but only if they give us a reason to vote for them.
Update: 2:54 PM…Um , sorry, had the wrong video link in this…it’s right now!
July 6, 2009
The Obama Doctrine
In her first major interview after Sarah (we hardly knew ya) Palin was announced as John McCain’s VP pick, she had the infamous question from ABC’s Charlie Gibson in which she was asked about the “Bush Doctrine. The Left was gaga the next few weeks claiming that Palin’s inability to provide an instantaneous response for Gibson left her unable to be considered a serious political contender.
One of the rumors about Palin’s recent resignation announcement, is that she will pick up a contract to do a television interview show. If she does, I’d suggest she book Charlie Gibson as her first guest. I’d like her first question to Charlie to be, “Charlie, can you please explain the Obama doctrine?” I wonder what Charlie would say?
Would Charlie say the Obama Doctrine is one where denouncing fraudulent elections and supporting those wanting liberty and freedom would be avoided so as not to be “meddling?”
“It is not productive, given the history of US and Iranian relations to be seen as meddling in Iranian elections,” he said.
Or, would Charlie say the Obama Doctrine is one where citizens of a democracy that honor and enforce their constitution, to prevent the unilateral usurpation of the constitution, are viewed as “illegal?”
President Barack Obama on Monday declared that the United States still considers Manuel Zelaya to be the president of Honduras and assailed the coup that forced him into exile as “not legal,” deepening the chasm between the Central American nation and much of the rest of the world.
Or is it possible that Charlie would say the Obama Doctrine is one in which sovereign countries, threatened with annihilation, have the right to self defense and to do so with extreme prejudice against those who threaten them?
“Look, Israel can determine for itself — it’s a sovereign nation — what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else,” Biden replied. He added that this was the case, “whether we agree or not” with the Israeli view.
Sarah Palin may have had a difficult time putting specificity on the Bush Doctrine. After only six months, there are so many different Obama Doctrines that every Democrat Senator could have their own personalized version.
Comments Off on The Obama Doctrine
July 3, 2009
Who’s Zoomin Who?
President Obama is headed to Russia next week. The visit is planned to allow discussions on a host of topics: trade, North Korea, missile defense etc. Amongst the laundry list of issues, I find one group’s request to be most interesting. From Reuters:
CEOs use Obama visit to press Russia on rule of law
I suppose it would make sense to talk to Russia about business relationships. Of particular interest to this group of CEOs is this:
“Stability and sanctity of contracts — this is what worries us, given what happened to some Western firms in Russia,” said an industry source with a major U.S. firm.
Come on! You’re kidding me right? President Obama is supposed to teach, coach, lecture the Russian government on the rule of law and the sanctity of contracts? Let’s see….
Automobile Industry – I don’t remember the rule of law or the sanctity of contracts being followed as bond holders were summarily removed from their preferred lender positions so that the Obama could “not run the auto industry.”
Financial Industry – I don’t remember the rule of law or the sanctity of contracts being followed as companies were told they had to take bail out funds or would be subject to audits, forced contracted compensation to be paid back or forced “healthy” institutions to absorb “toxic” institutions thereby making them a toxic institution
Credit Card Industry – I don’t remember the rule of law or the sanctity of contracts being followed as mortgage companies were forced to provide credit to a broader population without regard for their ability to repay the credit.
While never close friends, The Russians used to listen to the United States due both to our military capabilities and our financial strength. I’ve got to believe that any sentence in Russia that begins with “President Obama says…” ends with a roomful of Russian belly laughs.
July 2, 2009
Hello, Is It Me You’re Looking For?
Today’s headlines:
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden has arrived in Baghdad
Um, did someone forget to tell joltin’ Joe:
The vice president’s visit comes just two days after the United States withdrew troops from Iraqi cities.
Now that the troops have gone, Joe gets to play with Iraq:
The White House on Tuesday appointed Biden to oversee Iraq policy.
I guess even President Obama recognizes it’s not safe to let Biden play while there’s live ammunition around!
In honor of Joe:
H/T the Athletic Shoe
Comments Off on Hello, Is It Me You’re Looking For?
Hasta La Vista Baby!
As part of an attempt to balance the California budget, Governor Schwarzenegger has proposed closing to the public 220 State parks. The proposal would save approximately $143 million dollars. Mixed into the 220 parks proposed to be closed, are 6 parks which were transferred to California from the Federal Government.
According to NewsMax:
National Park Service Regional Director Jonathan Jarvis warned in a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that all six occupy former federal land that could revert to the U.S. government if the state fails to keep the parks open.
“Lands conveyed to the State under the Federal Lands to Parks Program must be open for public park and recreation use in perpetuity as a condition of the deed,” Jarvis warned in a June 8 letter to Schwarzenegger made public Wednesday.
The state could also lose future parks funding, Jarvis warned. California has received $286 million from the federal government since 1965 benefiting 67 parks on Schwarzenegger’s closure list, Jarvis said.
Um, yeah, so what? Is this really so hard to decide? Has Jarvis made a point that Schwarzenegger should care about at all? NO!
California’s budget problem is not a one year issue. California has created a situation that will take them many years to correct, if at all. It’s not like California is going to suddenly find a solution that will allow them to back to spending something that is about 1/3 more than they have today.
Oh, and the $286 million that Jarvis is threatening with…My math says that amounts to less than $7 million /year. Not much when you are looking at what is now, at $26 Billion dollar deficit!
I see California having two outcomes if they close the parks; either the National Park Service who has a significant funding shortfall of their own, quits rattling sabres and the parks stay with California or the National Park Service goes through with their threat and runs the parks themselves. Is this really a difficult choice? Is there some choice that causes the oceans to recede and temperatures to cool that I haven’t hit upon?
Governor Schwarzenegger ought to call the National Park Service’s bluff and tell them either “Be my guest” or maybe “Hasta la vista, baby!”
July 1, 2009
You Should Have Been Here Last Week
As a reasonably avid fisherman, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard, or told someone else, “You should have been here last week!” In fishing, this usually means one of two things. Either the fish were really biting the previous week or you’re trying to convince the other fisherman that you’re not completely inept. Interestingly, this phrase is also applicable in politics.
Glenn Garvin from the Miami Herald lays out the explanation of events leading to the Honduran “Coup.” Garvin doesn’t really provide any information that hasn’t been explained elsewhere, at least in terms of the events. He does however, correctly refocus the debate from what happened last week to what happened in the week(s) prior to last week:
Here’s a question for all these new-found defenders of Honduran democracy: Where were you last week? Perhaps if some of these warnings about sticking to the constitution had been addressed to President Zelaya, the Honduran army would still be in the barracks where it belongs.
Garvin correctly calls out the United Nations, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama asking why, if they are so concerned about the constitutionality of the new President of Honduras, they weren’t raising concerns about the activities, clearly unconstitutional, of President Zelaya during the previous weeks.
While Garvin doesn’t address it, I would also ask why, if President Obama doesn’t believe the US should “meddle” in other country’s affairs, he has chosen to insert himself in this situation. Let’s see, Iran, don’t meddle, Honduras, meddle. Cuba, don’t meddle, Israel, meddle. I’m beginning to wonder if Obama’s “don’t meddle” policy only applies to countries that have a current or an heir apparent dictator at the helm?
Like in fishing, “You should have been here last week” has multiple meanings in politics. It can either mean, “Things went really well last week,” or it could mean that the person you’re conveying the sentiment to is inept and should have been paying attention to and engaged in the events of the previous week.
From the people of Honduras, “Hey, President Obama, you should have been here last week!”
Comments Off on You Should Have Been Here Last Week
June 30, 2009
If Your Friend Jumps Off A Bridge….
With my apologies to Chicago…
Does anyone really know how many Senate Democrats there are?
Does anyone really care?
If so I can’t imagine why
We’ve all got time enough to cry
I wrote waaaaaaay back here, that it wasn’t going to matter how many Senators the Democrats ended up with. There were enough folks abominating the Republican banner on any particular issue that the Dems would have the effect of running the Senate as they saw fit.
Today, nearly eight months past the election, we’re still waiting to see what the final count will be in the Senate. There is a wide belief that the MN Supreme Court will issue their ruling in the Franken/Coleman race before the Fourth of July. It’s also widely believed that the Court will side with Franken. Does it matter? No.
Senator Snowe has come out to say that with something as important as health care:
It is important to get it to be a bipartisan initiative, given the dimensions of health care reform and the implications to all Americans.
Olympia, were you raised by wolves? Were you raised without any parental supervision? Did you live a childhood devoid of friends, acquaintances or any people at all? If no, how did you not, at least once, get the sage advice that if your friends were about to do a stupid thing, it didn’t make the situation better if you also decided to do the stupid thing!
While I doubt it would do any good, could someone please contact Olympia and ask her if she thinks it’s a good decision to jump off a bridge just because all of her friends are doing the same?
Update – Well, there you have it. Franken won the Supreme Court decision. Coleman has conceded and Pawlenty says he will sign the certificate. OK Dems, it’s all yours now…at least for 18 months!
June 29, 2009
But Isn’t That My Ox Being Gored?
The Republican Party claims to stand for principles. Amongst the principles they claim to stand for are limited government, personal liberty and free markets. However, too many in the Republican Party believe that principles are not absolute. They believe that principles can, shall we say, be flexible. The rationale of these Republicans is that limited government is good, if I’m not in power, personal liberty is good unless my party says otherwise and free markets are good unless our party says there’s a problem. Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota is a perfect example of one of these flexibly principled Republicans.
As a result of Governor Sanford’s confusing personal life, there have been several articles this weekend promoting Pawlenty as a rising spokesperson, perhaps even now, a strong contender for the 2012 Presidential bid…yeah, whatever. I don’t know if it’s some of that thinking or just because he’s a lame duck Governor and is working on his next meal ticket but, Pawlenty is quickly becoming to Governor’s what Michele Bachmann is for the House of Representatives; in the media all the time talking about things that they shouldn’t be talking about.
A perfect example showing Pawlenty in the media saying things he shouldn’t and showing his flexible principles, was his appearance on Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” On the show, Pawlenty argued that the recently passed cap and trade bill was bad policy. OK, I’m with him so far. It’s when he tells us why it’s bad policy that I give him my patented “Ron Paul talking about the gold standard” look. According to American Pravda’s version of the interview, here’s why Pawlenty believes Cap and Trade is bad policy:
In an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday morning, the Republican governor said he shares the goal of reducing pollution and emissions. But he says the best way to do that is through conservation, more fuel-efficient vehicles and improving base-load power with nuclear energy.
They add:
Pawlenty says the cap and trade emissions regime in the bill would send U.S. jobs to other countries.
Funny, in 2007 the Minnesota Legislature passed a renewable energy bill. That bill requires that energy producers in the state generate specific and increasing percentages of their energy through things like wind, solar or hydrogen. The mandates are high enough that it will make Minnesota the state with the most renewable generated energy in the nation. An amendment to remove Minnesota’s restriction on nuclear plants, the only State one of a few, with Wisconsin being another, to have such a restriction, failed. Likewise, an amendment to waive the renewable requirements if they cost more than 10% more than existing methods also failed. Finally, the bill contained a provision that allows utilities that exceed their required amounts of renewable energy to sell credits to other utilities. Sounds a bit like the sale of carbon credits doesn’t it?
Governor Pawlenty signed this bill and in many corners, was seen as a cheer leader for the bill. Today, he decries a national version of what he gladly burdened Minnesotans with just two years ago.
To too many Republicans like Pawlenty, principles only matter when it’s not their ox being gored.
Revisions/extensions (8:37 am 6/29/2009, steveegg) – Made a correction, as Wisconsin also has a complete moratorium on new nuclear power plants.
June 19, 2009
Pawlenty – Just Boring Enough to be President
At least that’s what the author of this article believes. Somehow the author concludes that the US voters swing from one extreme of personal characteristics to the other:
This has happened several times in the last 20 years. George H.W. Bush was seen as non-empathetic. Bill Clinton was full of empathy, and could capitalize on the contrast. Clinton came to be seen as lacking moral rectitude. George W. Bush seemed upright, and could again capitalize. Finally, the younger Bush came to be seen as overly certain. Obama took advantage by emphasizing his ability to see shades of gray.
If Obama utterly fails the author believes that the next President to be elected will be the opposite of Obama i.e. the blandest of bland:
In other words, when incumbent presidents lose their luster, those with qualities opposite theirs can stand to gain. If the public sours on Obama, his pizzazz and speechifying abilities could be rebranded as a negative – “all sizzle and no steak.” In that situation, the GOP might do well to have somebody who can’t make a political rally look like a Beatles concert. Boring could be pitched as competent, sensible, and able to get the job done.
The conclusion…TPaw:
Of course, it’s still very early. My point is simply that the contrast between Obama and Pawlenty might be a beneficial one for the GOP to offer if the public has soured on the incumbent. If it hasn’t – it really does not matter what the party does. Popular incumbents never lose.
And that’s where this author, along with many others lose all credibility. Once again we have an author who believes that running as the anti Democrats is somehow an answer. It’s not. If we learned nothing from watching McCain’s debacle it is that running as Democrat lite or “I’m not him” or any other flavor that doesn’t run for something is a losing proposition. On top of that, if Obama does crash and burn, running as anything other than having a positive, solution oriented candidate will be a complete failure.
Maybe TPaw has a shot. I’m from Minnesota and can say I’m not convinced. He’s done a number of good things in restraining reckless Democrat spending. However, he has far too many tendencies to flop around in the mushy middle i.e. ethanol, global warming and the like. For TPaw to have a shot, including getting support from his home state, he’s going to need to shore up his conservative bona fides. We’ve tried milquetoast and it’s failed. Hopefully we’ll learn from our mistakes…then again, maybe not.
June 18, 2009
Just Keep Those Lies and Donations Coming!
“ABCNEWS prides itself on covering all sides of important issues and asking direct questions of all newsmakers — of all political persuasions — even when others have taken a more partisan approach and even in the face of criticism from extremes on both ends of the political spectrum. ABCNEWS is looking for the most thoughtful and diverse voices on this issue.”
Ah, yup!
ABC Employees Contributed Overwhelmingly to Obama
By CPR Staff on June 18, 2009 10:41 AM
Interesting to Note…
An analysis of contributions to the Obama and McCain campaign shows that ABC employees contributed more than $160,000 to the Obama campaign versus less than $5,000 to the McCain campaign.
Guess we won’t be expecting to see ABC running under the moniker of “Fair and Balanced” anytime soon!
Comments Off on Just Keep Those Lies and Donations Coming!
[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]
