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 steveegg.

February 2, 2010

How much of the deficit is Obama’s fault?

by @ 10:22. Filed under Politics - National.

The “Bush’s fault” theme has been the favorite mantra of the ObamiNation, from its head to its foot soldiers, since Teh Won burst onto the scene. With that in mind, let’s update the chart I posted yesterday, itself an update of a chart the Washington Post put together during the debate on the first Obama budget last March, with another “baseline” projection from the CBO, this one from January 8, 2009, going out to FY2019.


Click for the full-size chart

Do note that the 2009 CBO baseline includes absolutely nothing that was passed in 2009, and very specifically does not include Porkul…er, the “stimulus” pack…er, the “Grow Government Act of 2009”. It also does, like the 2010 CBO baseline, assume the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule. Let’s run some numbers:

  • In FY2009, Obama and his fellow Democrats added an additional $0.227 trillion in deficit spending (once again, I will use a single “base”) to what they “inherited” in deficit spending.
  • In FY2010, they will add an additional $0.853 trillion in deficit spending, more than what they “inherited” in deficit spending.
  • In FY2011, Obama wants to add an additional $0.769 trillion in deficit spending, close to double of the deficit spending he “inherited”.
  • In FY2012, Obama wants to add an additional $0.564 trillion in deficit spending, more than double of the deficit spending he “inherited”.
  • In his first 4 years (and hopefully, his only 4), Obama has added and wants to add $2.413 trillion in deficit spending on top of $2.651 trillion of “inherited” deficits.
  • Through 2019 (the last year the comparison can be made), Obama wants to add $6.177 trillion in deficit spending on top of the $4.321 trillion he “inherited”.

Given that, on January 20, 2009, the day that Obama assumed the office of President, the publicly-held debt (i.e. the cumulative deficit spending from the founding of the country up through the end of the George W. Bush administration) was $6.307 trillion (and that included a significant portion of the the 2009 “inherited” deficit), it is a mind-numbing number.

Bonus item – Speaking of that public debt amount, the public debt on the last business day of the Clinton administration (January 19, 2001) was $5.728 trillion. At the close of business this past Friday (1/29/2010), it was $7.759 trillion.

Revisions/extensions (3:39 pm 2/2/2010) – (H/T – Karl) Keith Hennessey provides more analysis, this time based on percentage of GDP instead of absolute dollars. Behold his more-colorful chart…

Do note that Hennessey assigns the entirety of the FY2009 deficit to Bush due to the effects of TARP. I dealt with that by using the CBO’s 2009 “baseline” from January 2009, which assigned just under $1.2 trillion of the FY2009 deficit to existing policies. Without the FY2009 budget, Bush’s deficits averaged 2.0% of GDP (that black line in the middle of Bush’s column).

However, neither that nor removing the first three years of “recovery” reduces Obama to anything near Bush deficit spending levels. The takeaway from Hennessey (emphasis in the original):

You can see that each of these comparisons, which allow you to “not count” the recovery years in the average for Obama, still result in average budget deficits that far exceed even the worst portrayal of the Bush Administration’s average.

In fact, the smallest annual deficit proposed by President Obama is 3.6% of GDP, in 2018 and 2019, the two years after his second term would end. The lowest during his hypothetical eight years would be 3.7% in 2017 and 2018. The lowest proposed budget deficits in a hypothetical “Obama decade” would exceed the Bush average budget deficit, even if we assign most of the TARP spending to Bush.

This leaves an open question: Which is the decade of profligacy?

R&E part 2 (6:23 pm 2/2/2010) – Thanks for the link love, and the treasure trove of links, go out to P-Mac. It’s all about making government bigger at the expense of everybody, but mostly the aspiring-to-be-rich.

R&E part 3 (11:50 am 2/3/2010) – Somehow I forgot to link to the January 2009 CBO report. Also, down in the comments, I explored both what keeping the third of the Bush tax cuts that Obama doesn’t want to keep and what keeping the Bush tax cuts in their entirety would have done had Obama and the Democrats not loaded up on the spending last year. Suffice it to say that the problem is not the tax cuts.

Milwaukee voucher students graduate at a higher rate than MPS students

by @ 7:29. Filed under Education.

A new report from University of Minnesota sociologist John Robert Warren shows participants in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program graduated at a 18% higher rate than students in Milwaukee Public Schools in 2008, or 77% versus 65%:

High school dropouts earn less, contribute less to the tax base, and are more likely to go to prison — sobering facts that underscore the importance of a new study showing that the graduation rate for students in Milwaukee’s 20-year-old school choice program was 18 percent higher than for students in the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS).

The findings, from a leading national expert who analyzed six years of data, estimate that 3,352 additional Milwaukee students would have received diplomas between 2003 and 2008 if public school graduation rates had matched those of low-income students using educational vouchers. Based on a separate study reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s Erin Richards, the annual impact from 3,352 more MPS graduates would include an additional $21.2 million in personal income and $3.6 million in extra tax revenue.

“This new study deserves the attention of state and federal officials — including President Barack Obama — who seek education reforms that produce solid results,” said Jeff Monday, principal of Milwaukee’s nationally recognized Messmer High School.

The author of the new study, University of Minnesota Professor John Robert Warren, estimated a 2008 graduation rate of 77% for school choice students and 65% for public school students. The difference — twelve percentage points — translates into an 18% higher rate for voucher students. Dr. Warren found a similar average difference for the six-year period of 2003 through 2008….

The higher graduation rates for students in Milwaukee’s private school choice program are noteworthy because per pupil taxpayer support for choice students ($6,442) is less than half the $14,011 spent in the Milwaukee Public Schools.

In the new study, Professor Warren explains that eligibility for the choice program is limited to students from low-income families while “students in MPS schools come from a much broader range of social and economic backgrounds.”

Once again, it is not either the amount of money the parents have or the amount of money dumped into teachers, administrators, staff or facilities; it is motivated students, parents and teachers that make the difference in whether an education system is a success or a failure.

February 1, 2010

How’s that “freeze” working out?

by @ 16:37. Filed under Politics - National.

In last week’s SOTU speech, Barack Obama suggested a 3-year non-defense/TARP/bailout discretionary spending “freeze”. Today, he unleashed a budget that, put together with his FY2009 and FY2010 budgets, will result in, by his administration’s own admission, another deficit of over $1 trillion ($1.27 trillion to be exact) in FY2011, a historic first-term (FY2009-FY2012) $5.07 trillion deficit (with a projected 4-year “low” of $0.83 trillion in FY2012), a “minimum” deficit of $0.71 trillion (in 2014), and a ten-year projected $8.53 trillion deficit between FY2011 and FY2020. Oh yeah; this year’s budget, at a projected deficit of $1.56 trillion, will top last year’s record $1.43 trillion deficit.

Those numbers are significantly worse than the “baseline” estimates released by the Congressional Budget Office just last week. The comparable numbers from the CBO estimates are a $1.44 trillion deficit this year, a $0.980 trillion deficit in FY2011, a $0.65 trillion deficit in FY2012, a “first-term” deficit of $4.48 trillion, a ten-year $6.05 trillion deficit between FY2011 and FY2020, and a “minimum” deficit of $0.48 trillion (also in FY2014).

A couple of side notes before I continue. First, while I could have used billions for the numbers under $1 trillion, I decided to keep the numbers in the same “base”. In the chart below, since the Washington Post used billions in their original, I decided to do so in my remake as well.

Second, a word of note about the CBO “baseline” – it assumes that the only changes to current tax law are those already part of law (e.g. the Bush tax cuts expire in their entirety, and the Alternate Minimum Tax doesn’t get its annual “fix), and that spending on discretionary spending increases at “only” the rate of inflation.

I’m sure you remember the chart from the Washington Post produced near the end of March comparing the OMB estimate of deficits in Obama’s FY2010 to the CBO estimate. Since Kevin Binversie appears to be looking for an update, I’ll provide one.


Click for the full-sized chart

Revisions/extensions (6:55 pm 2/1/2010) – In one of my previous drafts, I had the 10-year minimum deficit as projected by OMB today. Somehow, I had lost it in the published version. I have put it back in.

January 31, 2010

Going to CPAC

by @ 20:45. Tags:
Filed under CPAC.

For the second year in a row, I’ll be going to CPAC. Though I’m still looking for a new laptop to replace the recently-deceased one (it suffered a broken monitor), I will be on Bloggers’ Row this year, which should mean a few more timely posts.

January 30, 2010

Weekend Hot Read – Michael V. Hayden’s “Obama administration takes several wrong paths in dealing with terrorism”

by @ 15:21. Filed under Politics - National, War on Terror.

(H/T – Stephen Hayes)

Michael Hayden, the immeidate previous director of the CIA, wrote a scathing critique of the Obama administration’s handling of terrorism. The part dealing with the administration’s handling Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Fruit of the Boom bomber, is telling:

In the 50 minutes the FBI had to question him, agents reportedly got actionable intelligence. Good. But were there any experts on al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in the room (other than Abdulmutallab)? Was there anyone intimately familiar with any National Security Agency raw traffic to, from or about the captured terrorist? Did they have a list or photos of suspected recruits?

When questioning its detainees, the CIA routinely turns the information provided over to its experts for verification and recommendations for follow-up. The responses of these experts — “Press him more on this, he knows the details” or “First time we’ve heard that” — helps set up more detailed questioning.

None of that happened in Detroit. In fact, we ensured that it wouldn’t. After the first session, the FBI Mirandized Abdulmutallab and — to preserve a potential prosecution — sent in a “clean team” of agents who could have no knowledge of what Abdulmutallab had provided before he was given his constitutional warnings. As has been widely reported, Abdulmutallab then exercised his right to remain silent.

Hayden then goes on to list a host of other missteps. The takeaway is equally shocking, unless you consider that the ObamiNation’s main class enemy is not Al Qaeda:

There’s a final oddity. In August, the government unveiled the HIG for questioning al-Qaeda and announced that the FBI would begin questioning CIA officers about the alleged abuses in the 2004 inspector general’s report. They are apparently still getting organized for the al-Qaeda interrogations. But the interrogations of CIA personnel are well underway.

January 29, 2010

Poll-a-copia, late-January WI Gov edition

by @ 14:53. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

Rasmussen Reports delivered some more bad news for Democrats today, specifically Milwaukee mayor and presumptive Democratic gubernatorial nominee Tom Barrett. In a poll of 500 likely voters conducted Tuesday (margin of error 4.5%), he trails both of the main Republican challengers. Barrett trails Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker 48%-38% (with 12% unsure), and he trails former Congressman Mark Neumann 42%-38% (with 13% unsure).

While the public Rasmussen story merely mentions that both Republicans have significant leads over Barrett among those who don’t consider themselves part of either party, the Walker campaign in their press release notes that Walker has a 2-1 lead in that category.

For those playing along at home, Walker’s lead is more than double the margin of error, while Neumann’s lead is almost the margin of error. Moreover, that 38% that Barrett got against both Walker and Neumann is what the Democrats would get if they ran “Insert Candidate Here”, which combined with Barrett’s lack of effort beyond fundraising, is precisely what is running on that side of the aisle.

The favorability ratings are not exactly favorable for either Barrett or Neumann:

  • Walker has an “Approval Index” of +14 (29% very favorable/15% very unfavorable), and an overall approval/disapproval split of 56%-27%.
  • Neumann has an “Approval Index” of -1 (10% very favorable/11% very unfavorable), and an overall approval/disapproval split of 46%-35%.
  • Barrett has an “Approval Index” of +2 (19% very favorable/17% very unfavorable), and an overall approval/disapproval split of 44%-41%.

While the September WPRI/UW-Madison poll did not address the general election, it did address the favorability of all three candidates. At that time, a majority of those surveyed either had never heard of the three (an option not in the Rasmussen poll) or did not have an opinion on approval:

  • Walker had an “Approval Index” was +5.6 (12.6% very favorable/7.0% very unfavorable), with an overall approval/disapproval split of 29.7%-15.9%, 36.3% never hearing of him, and 18.1% not knowing enough.
  • Barrett had an “Approval Index” of +8.9 (12.0% very favorable/3.1% very unfavorable), with an overall approval/disapproval split of 35.9%-12.0%, 33.3% never hearing of him, and 18.9% not knowing enough.
  • Neumann had an “Approval Index” of +1.0 (5.1% very favorable/4.1% very unfavorable), with an overall approval/disapproval split of 24.1%-12.2%, 39.0% never hearing of him, and 24.6% not knowing enough.

I guess the “conventional wisdom” that those outstate hate Milwaukee applies mostly to Milwaukee Democrats. At the same time people turned away from city of Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett, and had a very mixed reaction to Mark Neumann, they seem to have embraced Milwaukee County executive Scott Walker.

January 28, 2010

Another indicator Feingold could be in trouble

by @ 20:58. Filed under Politics - National, Politics - Wisconsin.

Rasmussen Reports came out with a new poll today that has former governor Tommy Thompson beating Senator Russ Feingold in a hypothetical matchup, 47%-43%. Indeed, that poll, despite involving somebody who has been known to tease us instead of either of the announced challengers, it got a fair amount of national attention, from The Campaign Spot to Hot Air, from Instapundit to Memeorandum, from Politico’s Scorecard to Politics Daily. Of course, that could be because Politico’s Jonathan Martin got an instant post-Brown-win “I’m not saying no” reaction from Thompson (H/T – Kevin Binversie).

This is not the first poll this political season that gave Thompson an advantage over Feingold in the hypothetical matchup. A poll done by the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute and the UW-Madison Political Science Department had Thompson up 43%-39% in the hypothetical matchup back at the end of September (see tables 33 and 34).

At the time of the first Politico story, Kevin noted the lengthy “Hamlet-Brett Favre” act that Thompson has pulled since essentially the moment he left Madison for DC and the Bush administration. Indeed, Jim Geraghty noted that most of those who have not made a campaign of this magnitude official by this point have decided not to run. Bolstering that line of thinking is the reported 4th-quarter fundraising numbers by both Feingold and the more-conventional Republican challenger, Terrence Wall (both courtesy WisPolitics) – Feingold raised $947,000 to boost his warchest to $3.65 million, while Wall took in $500,000 in the first 7 weeks of his campaign. Despite Thompson’s wide name recognition and the fact that nomination papers aren’t circulated in Wisconsin until June, it’s going to take a lot of money to overcome the messaging money can buy, and there’s not a lot of time to get that money.

However, the timing and release of this poll strongly suggests that Thompson is preparing to jump in the race and overwhelm both the still-unknown Wall and the not-fundraising-and-yet-unknown Dave Westlake. Things are too far along for a major pollster to focus on a hypothetical without a very strong indication that the hypothetical will happen.

The key change in the fortunes of Feingold is that he has lost the independents. In September, he had a 39%-38% lead among “independents”; now, he’s losing them to Thompson 53%-36%. That overwhelms his recapturing of self-described Democrats.

Worse, Feingold’s unfavorables have skyrocketed. In September, his Approval Index (strong approval less strong disapproval) was +9 (23% strong approval, 14% strong disapproval, with the overall at 54% approval-30% disapproval). Now, it’s at -4 (26% strong approval, 30% strong disapproval, with the overall at 47% approval-48% disapproval).

Revisions/extensions (10:39 pm 1/28/2010) – If Feingold loses the black vote,…. (H/T – Patrick)

Open Thread Thursday – hair of the dog version

by @ 7:33. Filed under Open Thread Thursday.

I hope you’re not too hung over from last night, because I’ve got the cure-all from Metallica…

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzMJhOwBLqw[/youtube]

Before I turn over the thread, there is a must-read from Erick Erickson that recognizes a state of war now exists between the federal government as headed by Teh Won and the free market.

Now, I’ve got a headache to attend to.

January 27, 2010

Drunkblogging the STF…er, SOTU address

by @ 15:57. Filed under Politics - National.

Editor’s note – This post will be at the top of the blog until the end of the STF…er, SOTU address. If there are newer posts, they’ll be below this one.

You have spoken, and my liver will be taking the abuse. If you’re expecting genteel discussion, sorry about that because I’ll have my Jules Winnfield impersonation going.

The rules are simple…

– There will be no drinking games because we will be drinking constantly and the only ones that will be gaming are the enemy.
– The language will be extra-salty.
– Paraphrases from Teh Won will be in italics (if I remember to hit the italics button).
– This show will get on the road about 7:45 pm Central.
– Depending on how many show up, not all comments will make it (that’s how Cover It Live works – I can only auto-approve so many people).
– No “Ellie Lights” allowed.

Other than that, jump on in…

Oh yeah – drunkblogging is made possible by The Man, The Legend (and no, he’s definitely not a myth) – Stephen Green, who will take his usual place with martinis in hand and in the hold.

January 25, 2010

Snap NRE Poll – Drunkblog or no drunkblog of the STF…er, SOTU speech

by @ 22:29. Filed under NRE Polls, Politics - National.

It’s been a while since I’ve done one of these, so the liver is recovered enough. The question is, has the sanity recovered? That’s where I need your help – do I break out the liquor and drunkblog Obama’s Shut The Fuc…er, State Of The Union speech or not?

Do vote quickly – the polls close at 17:00 Central (that’s 5 pm for those of you who can’t convert from a 24-hour clock).

Do I drunkblog the STF...er, SOTU speech?

Up to 1 answer(s) was/were allowed

  • Yes - load up on the drinks (73%, 8 Vote(s))
  • No - save your sanity (27%, 3 Vote(s))

Total Voters: 11

Loading ... Loading ...

Editor’s note – if you don’t get the STFU reference, see today’s Day by Day cartoon.

Video of the day – There’s a Tax for That

by @ 16:05. Filed under Politics.

Adam Andrzejewski, who is running for Illinois governor, cut a new commercial…

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5fKlnJbY_M[/youtube]

Right Wing News’ 2012 GOP straw poll

by @ 15:50. Filed under 2012 Presidential Contest.

John Hawkins conducted a straw poll of 68 of the most-influential right-of-center bloggers plus me, asking who we would vote for if the 2012 GOP Presidential primary was held today. I was tempted to take the Shoebox approach and ask for a “none of the above”, but since that wasn’t on the menu, I decided to make a selection. Let’s review what we as a group chose:

12) Mike Huckabee: 0% (0 votes)

I would have thought that the guy who finished third in the 2008 primaries, who has almost all of the social conservative values one could want, and who was the biggest advocate for the “Fair”Tax would have picked up at least a couple votes. However, the message from him that government needs to be bigger and from us that government is just too damn big is an overriding one.

11) Ron Paul: 1% (1 votes)

The fifteen minutes of fame is over.

T-9) Newt Gingrich: 3% (2 votes)

Gingrich is the poster child of a double-talking politician (see his endorsements of Gorebal “Warming” with SanFranNan and of Dede Scozzafava)

T-9) Haley Barbour: 3% (2 votes)

Barbour is proof that a blind elephant finding a nut (his response to Katrina) is not enough to overcome a love of big government.

8) Rick Perry: 4% (3 votes)

That had to be the Lonestar Sympathy Vote.

T-6) John Thune: 7% (5 votes)

The last good thing I remember out of Thune was his removal of Tom Daschle from the Senate Majority Leader’s office.

T-6) Jeb Bush: 7% (5 votes)

If there’s one thing more damaged than the GOP brand, it’s the Bush brand. It is, in this case, very unfortunate.

5) Tim Pawlenty: 9% (6 votes)

The middle of the road is a great place to get high-lowed.

4) Mitch Daniels: 10% (7 votes)

It truly is a shame that Daniels is not more well-known outside Indiana. Of note, he is the highest current executive office-holder (of course, there’s only 3 on the list).

3) Mitt Romney: 12% (8 votes)

Next In Line™ lives.

2) Mike Pence: 14% (10 votes)

Pence is proof that making the right call on TARP is a winning play (full disclosure – I voted for Pence)

1) Sarah Palin: 29% (20 votes)

I have to wonder how much was knocked off by the fact that Palin will be stumping for her former running mate in his Arizona Senate primary.

Monday Hot Read: Stephen F. Hayes takes out Gibbs’ 50-minute claim

by @ 7:45. Filed under Politics - National, War on Terror.

The Weekly Standard‘s Stephen F. Hayes skewered White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs’ claim that we learned all we could from the Fruit of the Boom bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, in a single 50-minute FBI interrogation before he was Mirandized and clammed up:

The FBI did not ask about the information in these intercepts. Wouldn’t it be helpful to do so now? The CIA dossier on Abdulmutallab has grown by orders of magnitude since his detention a month ago. Wouldn’t it be useful to ask him questions about its contents? Abdulmutallab lived in Yemen for four months. How many details about his life there did the FBI get in their 50-minute interview? He was involved with pro-jihadist groups as a student in London. Did the FBI even know to ask about this?

Perhaps more important, the FBI has lost the opportunity to ask Abdulmutallab about intelligence that U.S. government is collecting now. In the weeks leading up to the attack, the intelligence community had information on “Umar Farouk” and on “the Nigerian” and on an attack being planned in Yemen. There is, without a doubt, the same kind of raw, uncorrelated intelligence among the vast collection of NSA intercepts today. It’s entirely possible that Abdulmutallab would be in a position to give meaning to these pieces of information in a way that would at least help us understand al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and, at best, help prevent a coming attack.

This reminds me so much of the Clinton Administration’s response to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Everybody was led to believe that the FBI had rolled up the entirety of the network, while Osama bin Laden was busy plotting his reattack.

Speaking of bin Laden, there’s this gem that Stephen recalls from Attorney General Eric Holder’s confirmation hearing:

It may be worse than that. The question may not be who would interrogate him but whether we would even have that opportunity. Senator Lindsey Graham asked Attorney General Eric Holder about this at a congressional hearing in November.

“Let me ask you this. Let’s say we capture him tomorrow. When does custodial interrogation begin in his case? If we captured bin Laden tomorrow, would he be entitled to Miranda warning at the moment of capture?”

Holder responded: “Again, I’m not — that all depends.”

January 24, 2010

Roll bloat – Walking around the neighborhood

by @ 19:04. Filed under The Blog.

Or at least walking around Shoebox’s and Birdman’s neighborhood, because that’s where Mr. Dilettante’s Neighborhood is. Mr. D was one of the patrons back at The Wisconsin Sports Bar, and in addition to being the neighborhood watch captain, he’s also at True North.

Video of the day – Taxman

by @ 17:17. Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

This is self-explanatory…

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0M__0Z1pjg[/youtube]

January 20, 2010

The Brown-in of Massachusetts – the local GOP take

by @ 10:10. Filed under Politics - National, Politics - Wisconsin.

Editor’s note – Some of these are involved statements; others are quick social-media bites.

Republican Party of Wisconsin chair Reince Priebus (press release):

American voters have made themselves clear. Three months ago, voters in New Jersey and Virginia rejected the Democrats’ tax-and-spend agenda. Now, in the bluest of blue states, the people of Massachusetts sent a message to Democrats across the country: listen or you’ll be next.

From the failed stimulus, to the cap-and-trade national energy tax, to a government takeover of health care attempt shrouded with secrecy, the American people do not approve of the Democrats’ big-government policies that do nothing to create jobs. Voters are connecting with Republican candidates because of our principles of lower-taxes, smaller government, and fiscal responsibility.

Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts should serve as the latest reminder to Wisconsin Democrats that voters are watching. Instead of telling their constituents what is good for them and blindly following their Washington leadership, it’s time for Wisconsin Democrats like Russ Feingold, Steve Kagen, Ron Kind, and Dave Obey to start listening.

Gubernatorial candidate Mark Neumann (campaign blog post):

The election in Massachusetts yesterday should serve as a stunning wake-up call that we the conservatives, the small government folks, are not going to take it anymore.

The politicians in Washington have focused on health care, bailouts, stimulus, tax increases, and all sorts of other plans to expand government. Meanwhile on main streets all across Wisconsin people are struggling to keep their jobs and to keep their businesses afloat in this poor economy.

We must elect people who will get government out of the way so jobs, real long term jobs can be created in the private sector. Government does not create private sector jobs. We do!!! For us business owners to be successful, government must get out of our way and not take what sometimes seems to be more than we make in taxes.

Career politicians do not seem to understand that the vast majority of the money that small business owners make in Wisconsin is immediately reinvested in our businesses. When they take it in the form of higher taxes and fees (as if we don’t get that fees are simply another tax) we cannot grow our businesses and create more jobs. And the career politicians who understand this basic concept have been completely ineffective in doing anything about it! When push comes to shove, career politicians seem to protect their job by growing government instead of protecting the jobs of thousands of Wisconsinites by shrinking government.

Yesterday should serve as a wake-up call to all the big-government politicians. The people in this great nation are not going to take it anymore!!! Start focusing on what you can do in government to get out of the way and to lower our taxes so we can grow our businesses and create jobs.

Gubernatorial candidate Scott Walker (Tweet):

Reason Scott Brown won was positive message about taking back government. We’ll do the same here.

Senate candidate Dave Westlake (Facebook post)

Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown! You’ve given the people of Mass. what they need: accountability…and the rest of us something to look foward to: common sense & Constitutionally-based government. We’re proud of you and wish you all the best in representing “The Peoples’ Seat.” Godspeed.

Senate candidate Terrence Wall (Tweet):

Congrats to Scott Brown and his staff on a beautifully run, issues-driven campaign. Their historic victory speaks for itself. Good night.

Shoebox tunes – The Battle of Beantown

by @ 9:41. Filed under Politics - National.

Shoebox is travelling, but he sent the following over to me to commemorate Scott Brown’s epic win in Massachusetts:

This is to be sung to “The Battle of New Orleans” (or if you’re more of a Johnny Cash fan than a Johnny Horton fan, use his version instead)!

In two oh ten just a year into his plan,
We’d had our fill of Barry and his socialism scam.
The hard right and the middles and some even from the left
Worked together to save Beantown from more democratic theft.

We said, “Hell no!”, and the Left they just kept a pushin’
They thought they were anointed, didn’t heed the public’s voice
Until Scott Brown, they thought we were a nuisance.
From now on it should be clear their plans are not the people’s choice!

We said no to health care ’cause it wouldn’t make the grade.
We didn’t want no stimulus, for sure no cap and trade.
The left said, “We don’t care, we know better just you see,”
But now with number forty one they’ll have to try “plan C”.

We said, “Hell no!”, and the Left they just kept a pushin’.
They thought they were anointed, didn’t heed the public’s voice
Until Scott Brown, they thought we were a nuisance.
From now on it should be clear their plans are not the people’s choice!

Barron, WI battle – eagle v crow

by @ 6:49. Filed under Miscellaneous.

I usually don’t pass along these types of e-mails, but I know a few of my readers (Asian Badger chief among them) will appreciate this one picked up from the Harpoon Users League List –

This tale came from a retired jet-jock who runs a 2000 acre corn farm up around Barron, WI , not far from Oshkosh.

He used to fly F-4Es and F-16s for the Air National Guard and participated in the first Gulf War.

It is submitted for your enjoyment, and as a reminder that there are other great, magnificent flyers around besides us.

————————————————-

I went out to plant corn for a bit, to finish a field before tomorrow morning; and witnessed The Great Battle.

A golden eagle – big bastard, with about a six foot wingspan – flew right in front of the tractor. It was being chased by three crows that were continually dive bombing it and pecking at it. The crows do this because the eagles rob their nests when they find them.

At any rate, the eagle banked hard right in one evasive maneuver, then landed in the field about 100 feet from the tractor. This eagle stood about 3 feet tall. The crows all landed too, and took up positions around the eagle at 120 degrees apart, but kept their distance at about 20 feet from the big bird. The eagle would take a couple steps towards one of the crows and they’d hop backwards and forward to keep their distance. Then the reinforcement showed up.

I happened to spot the eagle’s mate hurtling down out of the sky at what appeared to be approximately Mach 1.5. Just before impact the eagle on the ground took flight, (obviously a coordinated tactic; probably pre-briefed) and the three crows which were watching the grounded eagle, also took flight thinking they were going to get in some more pecking on the big bird. The first crow being targeted by the diving eagle never stood a snowball’s chance in hell. There was a mid-air explosion of black feathers and that crow was done. The diving eagle then banked hard left in what had to be a 9G climbing turn, using the energy it had accumulated in the dive, and hit crow #2 less than two seconds later. Another crow dead.

The grounded eagle, which was now airborne and had an altitude advantage on the remaining crow, which was streaking eastward in full burner, made a short dive then banked hard right when the escaping crow tried to evade the hit. It didn’t work – crow #3 bit the dust at about 20 feet AGL.

This aerial battle was better than any air show I’ve been to, including the Warbirds Show at Oshkosh. The two eagles ripped the crows apart and ate them on the ground, and as I got closer and closer working my way across the field, I passed within 20 feet of one of them as it ate its catch. It stopped and looked at me as I went by and you could see in the look of that bird that it knew who’s Boss Of The Sky. What a beautiful bird!

I loved it. Not only did they kill their enemy, they ate them.

There are no noble wars– Only noble warriors

January 19, 2010

Tuesday Hot Read – Nick Schweitzer’s “Government Sponsored Theft”

by @ 16:19. Filed under Politics - Milwaukee.

Nick Schweitzer dug into the forced sale of a pair of Milwaukee parcels formerly owned by Bee Bus Line to the city of Milwaukee for the benefit of neighboring Integrated Mail Industries (emphasis in the original):

Of course, the way the article is written, it seems so wonderful. After all… jobs will be created with this new land! But let’s look at what really happened here. IMI went to Bee and asked to buy the property for a price. Bee said it wanted moren (actually they just wanted at least what they paid for it), and IMI, instead of continuing to negotiate in good faith, went to the city and demand they use eminent domain to take the property at a lower price and resell it to them. This is nothing but government sponsored theft.

If property rights meant anything, then a property owner (Bee Bus Lines) ought to be allowed to ask whatever they wanted for that property. If their price is too high, than no sale will be made and they’ll be stuck. But just because IMI didn’t want to pay a price doesn’t mean that they ought be allowed to go the city to “force a sale”. That is like suggesting that if a woman declines a man at a bar, he ought to be able to go the police and have a cop hold her down while he rapes her… to force the completion of a “transaction” he demanded of her. Having a right to something means nothing if it does not include the right to refuse sale of that item, for whatever reason. This isn’t the God Father… you have the right to refuse an offer.

I’ll force you to go to Nick’s place to catch the bombshell of the poliical leanings and donation patterns of the owners of the AB Dada Group, ISI’s parent company. I’ll just say that Milwaukee’s reputation as a “clean government” took another hit.

Political catchup – mid-January edition

by @ 13:22. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

Yes, it is cold outside, and the election is still over 10 months away, but we have some heat going on in Wisconsin:

  • Republican Mark Neumann put over $1 million of his own money into his gubernatorial campaign. That, along with a reported $974,000 cash on hand number, masks the fact that he did not reach $250,000 outside of his own pocket. Meanwhile, Democrat Tom Barrett reported raising $750,000 since he announced and along with $800,000 from his mayoral campaign, $1.5 million cash on hand, and Republican Scott Walker is expected to announce more than $900,000 raised in the second half of 2009 with around $2 million cash on hand.
  • Speaking of fundraising, Senate candidate Dave Westlake has decided to limit his fundraising efforts to sales of blaze-orange campaign shirts and no-pressure donations, prefering to meet everybody he can face-to-face. While it is admirable, it is impossible to meet more than a small portion of the electorate statewide.
  • Staying on the Senate race, Terrence Wall has officially jumped into the race after a couple months of touring the state.
  • Rebecca Kleefisch announced for lieutenant governor today, joining Dave Ross, Brett Davis, and Ben Collins in the GOP half of the race.
  • Despite the only roles of lieutenant governor being serving as a general-election running mate of the governor, being the first in line to fill a gubernatorial vacancy, and having the full authority of governor on any board the governor is entitled to sit that he chooses to fill with the lieutenant, Kleefisch, Ross and Collins have taken more stands on issues on their campaign websites than Barrett. Indeed, Barrett’s website only has donation and volunteer links on it.

January 18, 2010

Monday Hot Read – The WSJ’s “The ‘Responsibility’ Tax”

by @ 7:42. Tags:
Filed under Business, Politics - National.

The folks on The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board fired for effect on the “Subsidize Government Companies” proposal from Barack Obama on Saturday (emphasis in the original):

Mr. Obama’s new “Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee”—please don’t call it a tax—is being sold as a way to cover expected losses in the Troubled Asset Relief Program. That sounds reasonable, except that the banks designated to pay the fee aren’t those responsible for the losses. With the exception of Citigroup, those banks have repaid their TARP money with interest.

The real TARP losers—General Motors, Chrysler and delinquent mortgage borrowers—are exempt from the new tax. Why the auto companies? An Administration official told the Journal that the banks caused the crisis that doomed the auto companies, which apparently were innocent bystanders to their own bankruptcy. The fact that the auto companies remain wards of Washington no doubt has nothing to do with their free tax pass.

Also exempt are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which operate outside of TARP but also surely did more than any other company to cause the housing boom and bust. The key to understanding their free tax pass is that on Christmas Eve Treasury lifted the $400 billion cap on their potential taxpayer losses expressly so they can rewrite more underwater mortgages at a loss.

In other words, the White House wants to tax more capital away from profit-making banks to offset the intentional losses that the politicians have ordered up at Fan and Fred. The bank tax revenue will flow directly into the Treasury to be spent on whatever immediate cause Congress favors. Come the next “systemic risk” bailout, taxpayers will still be on the hook. “Responsibility” is not the word that comes to mind here.

It also notes that the $50 billion in assets floor for this new tax is not exactly a “too big to fail” threshhold.

January 17, 2010

Jack is back

by @ 12:04. Tags:
Filed under Miscellaneous.

The Jack Bauer Power Hours start at 8 pm tonight (Central, of course). Of course we of Blogs4Bauer will be live-blogging.

Dammit, Jim, we needed to be able to take more options in the poll. The top 3 vote-getters are all winners.

January 15, 2010

Social Security crater – December 2009 preliminary edition

by @ 21:14. Filed under Social Security crater.

Earlier this month, I noted that the first set of December numbers for Social Security, the “investment” holdings, commonly called the “Trust Funds”, rose by a very-disappointing $24.153 billion in December. While the December Trust Fund Operations numbers are still not available from the Social Security Office of the Chief Actuary, the December Monthly Treasury Statement from the Department of the Treasury, which forms the basis of those numbers, is available. There is an interesting tidbit on the cover page – “Federal old-age and survivors insurance trust fund and Federal disability insurance trust fund benefit payments for January 3, 2010, were accelerated to December 31, 2009.”

That explanation of what I had hoped to be an anomaly is not entirely satisfying. First, I have to explain how I derived the numbers from the Trust Fund Operation time series – the “total income” and “total outgo” for a given month comes from the “income, outgo and assets” chart, while the “net interest” comes from the “income components” chart. The equivalent numbers on the Monthly Treasury Statement are, respectively, the “receipts” and “outlays” for each fund found in Table 8, and the “Interest Received by Trust Funds” for each fund found in the end of Table 5. While they are not 100% reconciled, the margin of difference is typically well under 1% (keep that statistic in mind).

Including the “accelerated” payments from Social Security, and also including the semi-annual crediting of “interest”, the “total income” was about $105.5 billion (of which about $58.5 billion was “interest”, in line with what was “credited” to the funds in December 2008), and the “total outlays” were about $87.7 billion, which should make the “net increase in assets” about $17.8 billion. Something is massively off, because that does not support the $24.2 billion increase in the “Trust Funds”. However, since I don’t have enough information to say what is off, all I can do until the Office of the Chief Actuary releases its numbers is note it and move on.

The total income estimate, which is 0.443% lower than it was in December 2008, is right in the ballpark of what is expected given the recent year-over-year history of the “Trust Funds”. In 2009, the 11-month average increase had been 0.271%, with the average year-over-year decrease over the prior 5 months being 0.446% and the average year-over-year decrease over the prior 3 months being 0.431%.

Accelerating a significant portion of the January 2010 payments to December 2009, which affects the total outgo of both months, makes apples-to-apples comparisons a bit “problematic”, with the December 2009 monthly change, the January 2010 monthly change, and the 12-month changes featuring only one of those months a challenge to estimate. However, calculating the recent average year-over-year change allows one to estimate what the outgo would have been without the acceleration. The average year-over-year increase in outgo was 9.648% in the first 11 months of 2009, increasing to an average year-over-year increase of 9.939% over the prior 5 months and an average year-over-year increase of 10.529% over the prior 3 months. Given that, my best estimate of the “December-only” version of total outgo is $58.1 billion.

Now it becomes possible to run a preliminary apples-to-apples comparison, with the caveat that at least one of these numbers may well be off. $105.5 billion in income (including “interest”) less $58.1 billion of “December-only” outgo and less $58.5 billion in “interest” leaves a primary “December-only” (or “unaccelerated”) monthly deficit of $11.1 billion, almost double the previous record of $5.9 billion last month. It also makes the “unaccelerated” Calendar Year 2009 primary surplus only about $3.5 billion.

Since I don’t have the usual numbers, I will not go further into analysis at this point. However, don’t be surprised if the panic button is pressed before April.

Friday Hot Read – John Hawkins’ “The Last Decade Of Liberalism In 40 Quotes”

by @ 9:44. Filed under Compassionate Lieberals.

This special from John Hawkins ties in so well with the NRE Dumbest Thing Said award. Just an unranked taste to whet your appetite…

“…I would further strongly urge Democrats who don’t believe marriage is between a man and a woman but who feel they ought to pretend to believe this in order to win elections (a plausible position) need to do a better job of pretending. I’ve heard a shockingly large number of politicians say things, in rooms where journalists are present, that make it perfectly clear that they think gay marriage is just fine but that the voters aren’t ready for it. That’s a sensible thing to believe, but you can’t go around saying it if you’re trying to win votes. If you’re going to lie, then lie — and lie convincingly!” — Matthew Yglesias

“Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.” — Rahm Emanuel

“It’s about time that we have an intifada in this country that changes fundamentally the political dynamics in here. And we know every — They’re gonna say some Palestinian being too radical — well, you haven’t seen radicalism yet.” — U.C. Berkeley Lecturer Hatem Bazian fires up the crowd at an anti-war rally by calling for an American intifada

Head on over to Right Wing News for where in the top 40 they rank, and for the rest of the infamous quotes.

Are you ready for some fire?

by @ 8:21. Tags:
Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

The Racine Tea Party and Americans for Prosperity – Wisconsin are teaming up for an afternoon bonfire tomorrow between 3:00 and 4:30 at 4505 Highway H in Franksville. Since there is expected to be more people than parking, they’re going to run a shuttle from the Racine Area Soccer Association field at 9509 Dunkelow Road (also in Franksville) starting at 1:30.

The full list of speakers is quite long, so I’ll send you over to the Racine Tea Party’s site for them. The weather is even supposed to cooperate, with sun and 30s expected.

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]