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 the 'Politics – National' Category

March 21, 2009

Sunshine, Lolipops and Rainbows…

by @ 10:34. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

That’s the stuff that President Obama’s budget appears to have been made of.

The Congressional Budget Office took a “preliminary analysis” of Obama’s budget and found some, let’s just say, “challenges.”

Largely as a result of the enactment of recent legislation and the continuing turmoil in financial markets, CBO’s baseline projections of the deficit have risen by more than $400 billion in both 2009 and 2010 and by smaller amounts thereafter. Those projections assume that current laws and policies remain in place. Under that assumption, CBO now estimates that the deficit will total almost $1.7 trillion (12 percent of GDP) this year and $1.1 trillion (8 percent of GDP) next year—the largest deficits as a share of GDP since 1945. Deficits would shrink to about 2 percent of GDP by 2012 and remain in that vicinity through 2019.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg:

As estimated by CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation, the President’s proposals would add $4.8 trillion to the baseline deficits over the 2010–2019 period.

The cumulative deficit from 2010 to 2019 under the President’s proposals would total $9.3 trillion, compared with a cumulative deficit of $4.4 trillion projected under the current-law assumptions embodied in CBO’s baseline. Debt held by the public would rise, from 41 percent of GDP in 2008 to 57 percent in 2009 and then to 82 percent of GDP by 2019 (compared with 56 percent of GDP in that year under baseline assumptions).

Oh, if you’re buying the “we’ll raise the tax rate and it will bring in more revenue” canard:

Proposed changes in tax policy would reduce revenues by an estimated $2.1 trillion over the next 10 years.

Every time Obama asks for confirmation of another appointee we hear that his administration hires the “best and brightest.”  If that’s so, they must be coming from the public school systems because the CBO says they aren’t able to do some simple math:

Our estimates of deficits under the President’s budget exceed those anticipated by the Administration by $2.3 trillion over the 2010-2019 period.

Oops!

And that whole “inflation capping at 8.1%” because of the stimulus pixie dust; um, nope!

In this forecast, the unemployment rate peaks at 9.4 percent in late 2009 and early 2010 and remains above 7.0 percent through the end of 2011.

For those of you who learn visually, here is the graph that says it all.  According to the CBO, if we would leave the horrible, awful policies of George Bush in place, we would see the deficit run at about 1/4 to 1/3 the rate compared to enacting the policies of the oh so enlightened Barack Obama:

cbo

Yes, President Obama and staff appear to have as much understanding of what it takes to manage long term economics as Lesley Gore did about maintaining long term relationships.

March 20, 2009

Apology to Paul Ryan

by @ 20:56. Tags:
Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

In case you missed it, I pretty much called my Congressman, Paul Ryan, out for his vote on the 90% TARP tax. I had the fortune of running into him tonight at the Racine County Lincoln Day dinner, and he explained the plan behind it. The short version: because the House Republicans realized they couldn’t stop it in the House, they let the Dems win this round. There still is the (theoretical) stoppage in the Senate, partly because there is a different plan in the Senate, and partly because there is the (theoretical) chance of actually filibustering it.

It is also a message to companies that might otherwise want to jump on or stay on the Bailout Train – don’t trust Congress.

Since I didn’t have a chance to mention it at the dinner, I apologize to Rep. Ryan for the blasting.

I’ve got 91.45%. Do I hear 103.5%?

by @ 16:08. Tags:
Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

James Taranto ran the numbers on the 90% tax on bonuses at companies that took TARP money, and found that it isn’t exactly 90%. While that 90% rate replaces the federal income and federal alternate income tax rates, it does not replace the Medicare FICA tax of 1.45% on employee pay, which thanks to the Clinton administration applies to all income and is not capped. It also does not replace any state or local income taxes. James used New York City as an example – New York State taxes income at 6.85% and New York City taxes income at 3.648 percent. Let’s do some math:

  90.000% – Bill of Attainder/Ex Post Facto federal punishment tax
+  1.450% – Medicare FICA tax (paid by the employee)
+  6.850% – New York State income tax
+  3.648% – New York City income tax
————————————————————————–
101.948% – total tax paid by the employee
+  1.450% – Medicare FICA tax (paid by the employer)
————————————————————————–
103.498% – Grand total tax paid by both the employee and employer

Thanks a lot, Paul Ryan. Thanks a lot, Nancy Pelosi. Thanks a lot, Charlie Rangel (BTW, has Rangel paid all of his back taxes yet?).

Before I go, there’s another tidbit in that piece. While companies would be able to avoid this if they got out of TARP, the regulators are trying to keep them in. Gee, I wonder why.

Talking To Four Year Olds – Homework Edition

by @ 11:35. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

OK, admittedly, this is more like talking to 10 year olds than 4 year olds but the issue is the same.

The Shoelets, Thing 1 and Thing 2, are good students.  They like school and are good natured about taking on new challenges such as multiplication, division or sentence structure.  Part of the reason they are good students is that Mrs. Shoe and I take their education seriously.  We make sure that it is a priority for them.

When the Shoelets come home, after greeting them, reminding them to take their shoes off and to hang up their jackets, the next thing they get hit with is “Do you have any homework?”  Homework is a priority in our house.  Homework gets done before they get to play with their friends, play video games or do anything else that is on their “fun list.”  In our house we try to instill an attitude where we take care of what we have to do before we get to do what we want to do.  Interestingly, we hear constantly from Thing 1 and Thing 2’s teachers how well prepared they are for class and how much of a challenge that issue is with many of the other kids in their classes.

In the past week, President Obama has had time to fill out his March Madness brackets and make appearances about it .  Obama has also had time to campaign in California and appear on the Tonight show.  It’s an amazing recovery for Obama.  Just 10 days ago, Obama was too tired to provide a proper reception for the British Prime Minister!

While President Obama was out doing the thing he wanted to do, the things he needed to dowere ignored.  The Treasury still has 17 lead positions unfilled.  This is the department whose head, Timothy Geithner, is still unable to deliver a promised toxic asset plan.  It is also the understaffed Treasury that not only approved of the original AIG compensation agreements, but is now unable to concoct a comprehensive string of lies that would allow them to cry “Buuuuuuuuush!”  President Obama has no plan or timeline for dealing with the Treasury vacancies.  No plan for the department that is arguably the most important given the challenges of the current economy.

In a related note, President Obama announced on the Tonight Show yesterday, that he does have a date when the First Family will be getting the First Dog.  Yup, he’ll have that task taken care of by early April!  That is, he’ll have a first dog by early April if he can get one to pass the background check and agree to have its name forever sullied by being a part of the sinking ship called the Obama administration!

Which is worse?

by @ 9:21. Filed under Politics - National.

Voting for a retroactive grab of 90% of contractually-obligated pay, or not admitting that it was done out of the hatred of the primacy of contract law? Somebody had better ask Paul Ryan and Tom Petri that.

Drip, Drip, Drip

by @ 9:21. Filed under NRE Polls, Politics - National.

approval-rating

When Will President Obama's Net Approval Ratings Become Negative?

Up to 1 answer(s) was/were allowed

  • The Teleprompter won't let it happen (68%, 59 Vote(s))
  • By the end of April, 2008 (29%, 25 Vote(s))
  • By April 3, 2008 (2%, 2 Vote(s))
  • By March 27, 2008 (1%, 1 Vote(s))

Total Voters: 87

Loading ... Loading ...

Revisons/extensions (9:33 am 3/20/2009, steveegg) – Added the “NRE Polls” category.

March 18, 2009

Hey, Heeey, Goodbye!

by @ 15:26. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

Remember this from Barack Obama’s infamous “Speech on Race?”

Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Rev. Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church?

But the truth is, that isn’t all that I know of the man. The man I met more than 20 years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother — a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These words were spoken by Barack Obama as he tried to explain his continuing loyalty to Reverend Wright after Wright’s hate filled and bigoted sermons finally received coverage by the MSM.  While the issue had been brewing for several months, Obama finally felt that he needed to address the issue directly and deflect the distaste for Wright back onto the folks who were calling him out by attempting to make them appear racist.

Of course, we all remember how Obama’s “family reunion” ended.  On April 29th, less than 6 weeks later, Obama threw Wright under the bus saying he is “outraged” by Wright’s “divisive and destructive” comments and their relationship has been permanently damaged.

Today, Barack Obama took up the defense of Secretary of Treasury, Timothy Geithner:

“He is making all the right moves in terms of playing a bad hand,” Obama told reporters at the White House before leaving on a two-day trip to Southern California. “I have complete confidence in Tim Geithner and my entire economic team.”

Like his comments on Wright, Obama feels compelled to publicly support Geithner because he has become an albatross for Obama’s plans.  Geithner’sinability to complete a toxic asset plan, even though promised repeatedly for the past six weeks, along with his involvementwith AIG, leaves him looking like the weak member, soon to be left behind, so that the rest of the herd may go on to survive.

In perhaps the greatest irony of Obama’s support for Geithner is that his comments come on the one year anniversary of his comments supporting Wright.  It looks like history is lining up to repeat itself.  The only question left is whether Obama will wait six weeks to finish Geithner.  My bet?  Timmy ought to be polishing his resume, soon!

March 17, 2009

Very-quick thoughts on the AIG bonus kerfuffle

by @ 7:58. Tags:
Filed under Business, Politics - National.

The title should give you a clue as to my thoughts on the calls for the feds to seize the $165 million in bonuses that certain AIG executives are due. Unless there’s a better reason than political expediency, those bonuses need to be paid out to preserve the sanctity of the contract, which is an underpinning of capitalism.

Now, what those executives do with the bonus is another matter. Mitt Romney made the point that they could voluntarily forego the bonuses by relating a similar situation he worked out at Bain & Co. Fausta Wertz, as part of a poll attached to a longer piece, suggested splitting the bonuses with the workers.

Of course, we shouldn’t lose sight of the bigger picture. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board unleashed a rather devastating broadside. Oh, where do I begin? There’s the $20 billion from the feds through AIG to European banks (somewhere north of an order of magnitude bigger than the bonuses, and no known legal obligation to pay off the Europeans), the regulatory EPIC FAIL that led to AIG’s collapse, the role Elliot “Client #9” Spitzer played, and CEO Ed Liddy’s desperate attempt to remain firmly attached to the government teat.

Revisions/extensions (8:01 am 3/17/2009) – Ed Morrissey makes the same point a lot more coherently. He includes another kicker – the Obama administration could have let AIG lapse into bankruptcy, which would have voided the contracts that specified the payouts.

The Difference A Week Makes

by @ 5:48. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

Come and hop in the “Wayback Machine” with me.  We’re going to set the dial for less than a week ago, March 12, 2009 to be exact.  Remember, all the events are exactly as they happened except “You are there!”

We’re in Washington D.C..  We’re witnessing President Barack Obama give his public address about the $410 billion omnibus spending bill.  We hear President Obama tell us that “nearly 99 percent of this legislation,” is not earmarks.

We hop back in the “Wayback Machine” and set the date for a few days earlier, March 2, 2009.  Here we’re at Robert Gibbs press briefing.  At this briefing, Gibbs tells us that Obama is not responsible for anything that started before he became President.  If it was in the works, he is obligated to allow the action to proceed to its logical conclusion:

Q . A quick follow on the omnibus. Last week it was pointed out that a couple of Cabinet secretaries, LaHood and Mrs. Solis, have earmarks in this omnibus from last year, leftover funding. Now it’s also been learned that Vice President Biden has — I think it’s $750,000 for the University of Delaware satellite station, and Rahm Emanuel $900,000 for the Chicago Planetarium.

Since the President talked so much about earmarks in the campaign, and as President, about keeping them out of the stimulus — I know this is leftover business from last year — but as something that he is either going to sign or veto, why not have earmarks that come from his administration essentially at least taken out to set — send a signal, number one? And number two, is he — is there any chance he’ll veto this bill and send it back and say, get these earmarks out; there’s over 9,000 of them?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think you saw remarks this weekend by the chief of staff and the budget director about the legislation. Obviously the President is concerned, despite the progress that has been made in this town, about the size and the scope of earmarks that we’ve seen over the past few years. I think even the most cynical among us would have to at least acknowledge that the number of overall earmarks has been cut.

I think it’s important to recognize that a piece of legislation probably twice the size of the piece of legislation that you’re asking me about was passed through Congress at the President’s direction without earmarks. This is the finishing up of last year’s appropriations legislation.

And I think what’s most important and what the President would tell you is important here is that though he doesn’t control everything that happened before he became President of the United States, that dozens and dozens and dozens of appropriations bills will go through Congress and come to his desk over the course of the next four years. (emphasis mine)

We hop back into the “Wayback Machine” and return to the present.

Over the weekend it was announced that AIG would be paying out $165 million in “bonuses:

Troubled insurer American International Group (AIG: 0.7801, 0.2986, 62.01%), which is 79.9%-owned by the federal government, will pay $165 million in retention bonuses on Sunday to those at the division that has drawn most of the heat for the company’s near-collapse.

President Obama responded to this news by saying:

“It’s hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165-million in extra pay,” Mr. Obama complained at the White House. “How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?”

Outrage to taxpayers?

Just last week, President Obama said that $8 billion was no big deal for taxpayers to bear.  Just last week, President Obama said that 2% is below the threshold for concern for taxpayers.  If I do my math correctly, $165 million is a fraction of $8 billion and it is less than one tenth of a percent of the $170 Billion dollars that AIG has been given to stay afloat.

A little more than a week ago, Robert Gibbs told the world that President Obama could not be responsible for things that began during the Bush administration.  This week Obama is indignant about bonuses, the contracts of which were crafted last May, even before Obama was PEBO.

It sends a thrill up my leg to see President Obama looking out for the plight of the American taxpayer.  Too bad he doesn’t carry that same indignation when he’s making payments to his political homies!

Ruh Ro!

by @ 5:32. Filed under Global "Warming", Politics - National.

Per President Obama:

But let’s be clear: Promoting science isn’t just about providing resources — it’s also about protecting free and open inquiry. It’s about letting scientists like those who are here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient — especially when it’s inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda — and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology. (emphasis mine)

UW-Milwaukee Study Could Realign Climate Change Theory
Scientists Claim Earth Is Undergoing Natural Climate Shift

“The research team has found the warming trend of the past 30 years has stopped and in fact global temperatures have leveled off since 2001.”

And

8 Dems oppose quick debate on global warming bill

Again I’ll ask, whose science will we be using?

March 16, 2009

Hidden Costs? What Hidden Costs?

by @ 5:51. Filed under Economy, Politics - National, Taxes.

Throughout his campaign, President Barack Obama touted his tax plan that would “cut taxes for 95% of all taxpayers.” As he announced his stimulus package, Obama reiterated his promise for the tax reductions as he pointed to the “Making work pay” initiative that will provide the average worker $13 per week.

Good thing we’ve got that break but don’t go spending it all yet.

Between FY 2009 and 2010, Obama plans to increase debt by $2.9 Trillion. With around 115 Million US households, the debt alone amounts to over $25,000 per US household. If you add interest to it and amortize it over 30 years, the amount of debt that each household is now responsible for easily offsets the $13 per week in tax reductions. The problem is that the tax story doesn’t stop here.

Obama has several initiatives in his budget that are geared to not only offset any pittance of reductions that he has provided but, when taken together, will increase government imposed burdens in a dramatic fashion.

First on the increase your increased burden parade is the cap and trade program. Cap and trade will impose significant new taxes on the utilities that use carbon based fuels to provide energy, particularly electric. Depending upon whose estimate you use, Cap and trade will increase your energy costs by about $80 billion annually. That $80 billion translates to nearly $700 per year per US household.

Next in your increased burden parade are mortgage costs.  The Obama administration is supporting the ability for judges to be able to unilaterally reduce the balances owned on mortgages.  If the procedure, known as a cram down, is approved by the Senate, this will be the first time that mortgage holders will be told that they must take a reduced principle amount and not have the option of foreclosing on the property.  The net result, if this is passed, is that it will put additional risk into mortgage loans.  The reason that mortgage loans rates have traditionally been low relative to other types of loans, has been that the mortgagor always had the value of the home to go after if the mortgagee defaulted.  With this new twist, the risk of not only not being able to foreclose but to be forced to take a write down on your loan amount, lenders will respond by increasing their rates to offset the additional risk of getting hammered in a cram down.  This will be especially true for anyone who has credit that is not a+.  What’s the cost of this?  I have no idea.  However, you can bet Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and others will be crying to high heaven about the evil mortgage lenders as they see rates that had been traditionally 1% to 1.5% above 30 year Treasuries move to 3% or better, beyond the treasuries.

Our final example today is this article from the NY Times.  According to the Times, President Obama now believes that the way to solve the high cost of our medical insurance is to make us pay more for that medical insurance.  President Obama has floated the idea of removing the non taxable status of the medical premiums that many Americans receive from their employer.  Don’t think it’s a big deal?  Think again!  The NY Times article says that as much as $246 Billion, over $2,000 per year per family!

President Obama’s claim of providing tax cuts for 95% of Americans is about as genuine as some of those low cost airfares you see advertised.  You know the ones that show you a price but add taxes, a fee for this, a fee for that…oh just watch the video and imagine Obama answering a low tax line:


Those sneaky low cost airlines @ Yahoo! Video

March 13, 2009

Joe Biden – a bleeping valuable VP (only “valuable” doesn’t really mean “valuable”)

by @ 17:51. Filed under Politics - National.

(H/T – Jim Treacher’s Twitter stream)

Jake Tapper caught Vice President Joe Biden having a microphone “malfunction”. It seems somebody left a microphone pointed at Biden on when he unleashed what Tapper calls his ‘standard reply’ (reconstituted from the family-friendly ABC News site, so those with sensitive eyes may want to depart now) – “Gimme a fucking break”.

Two things:

– Yes, the fuck does really mean fuck.
– We now know why Biden was picked to be VP; he is at heart a Chicago pol.

China now “worried” about US Treasuries

(H/T – Instapundit)

I believe that Dad29, Asian Badger, Shoebox, and I have been warning about this for a while. The AP reports that China’s Premier, Wen Jiabao, is getting a bit queasy about his country having half its $2 trillion in currency reserves be US government debt. Wen said this at a news conference after China’s annual legislative session – “We have made a huge amount of loans to the United States. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I’m a little bit worried…. I would like to call on the United States to honor its words, stay a credible nation and ensure the safety of Chinese assets.”

The Obama administration is hoping to finance its massive increases in spending through continued sale of those instruments. There’s two problems. First, the publicly-held portion of the debt is expected to double to something north of $22 trillion in the next 10 years. Given the expected anemic growth in the economy, that would put the debt over 100% of the GDP. Second, Social Security is expected to start running in the red inside of 10 years, which means all that loan paper that makes up the Social Security “Trust Fund” will start to be called to make up for the shortfalls. Meanwhile, nothing’s being done about it.

That isn’t exactly a recipe for guaranteed payback of issued debt. It’s a sad day when Communists understand the debt market better than the Gorons in DC.

This Is The Group That “Cares” and “Bombs”

Earlier this week, President Obama said that the United States should open discussions with the Taliban.  You know, the folks who find honor killings and the mutilation of women fun sport.  Today, Vice President Joe Biden attempted to explain the Administration’s new view on the Taliban:

Biden makes his insight sound as if it’s new, unique, somehow profound. However, we know Joe is a consummate plagiarist, prone to taking other people’s ideas and stating them as his own. His Taliban position is just another such plagiarized thought. Note here how way back in 1977, John Landis and David Zucker first submitted the idea of segmenting your opponents into identifiable groups:

I wonder if Joe Biden will be able to get the Taliban sorted into the right groups? My bet is that he’ll find some that “care” and “bomb” sorted into the wrong group, at least on his first try.

March 12, 2009

…And a Senate Hearing Broke Out

by @ 5:02. Filed under Politics - National.

Yesterday, the first committee hearing was held in the Senate.   You can watch the video and see how the deck was stacked in favor of FOCA.  

As a bit of an aside, why is it that the left demands choice when it comes to the killing of infants, removing oppressive dictators and spending taxpayer money but not when it comes to the thugery of unions?

I’ve always had an afinity for one of Rodney Dangerfield, maybe because like him, I “get no respect”.   After watching the video, I was reminded of one of Rodney’s most memorable lines:

I went to a  union rally  the other night, and a Senate hearing broke out.

March 11, 2009

Senate Republican “leadership” – FAIL

by @ 19:00. Filed under Politics - National.

Shoebox wrote back in the immediate wake of the November election that there was no difference between 57 Democrats in the Senate and 60. Something that John Hawkins tweeted today reminded me of that: “The GOP’s leadership in the Senate is utterly failing. They haven’t stopped ANYTHING yet and Lamar Alexander voted for the Omnibus bill.”

I have decided to run with that and see just how big a failure that has been. The Senate has taken 96 votes in this session of Congress. There were 14 votes on items supported by the Democratic leadership (majority leader Harry Reid, majority whip Dick Durbin, vice chair Chuck Schumer and secretary Patty Murray) that required a 3/5ths majority, and thus could theoretically been stopped by the Republicans. Depending on the day, they needed not only their entire caucus that was present, but also between 2 and 8 “Republicans”. Let’s review the record:

  • Floor vote #1 and floor vote #2 on the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, which among other things proposed locking up 8.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 331 million barrels of recoverable oil in Wyoming) – John Barrasso (WY), Michael Bennett (CO), Thad Cochran (MS), Susan Collins (ME), Mike Crapo (ID), Michael Enzi (WY), Orrin Hatch (UT), Richard Lugar (IN), Lisa Murkowski (AK), James Risch (ID), Olympia Snowe (ME) and Roger Wicker (MS) joined all the present Dems (excepting the absent Joe Biden, Sherrod Brown and Ted Kennedy) on the vote to exceed the 59 votes necessary to proceed to that as the Senate’s top priority (vote #1), while Kit Bond (MO) and Lindsey Graham (SC) joined the aforementioned “Republicans” and all the present Dems (Biden, Brown, Kennedy, Kent Conrad and Debbie Stabenow weren’t present) to exceed the 59 votes necessary to invoke cloture (vote #2). While it did pass the Senate, it is languishing in the House.
  • Floor vote #4 and floor vote #14 (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which allows the perpetually-aggrieved to wait until 6 months after they leave a job instead of waiting 6 months after “discrimination” to sue) – Lamar Alexander (TN), Bennett, Bond, Richard Burr (NC), Collins, Bob Corker (TN), Chuck Grassley (IA), Judd Gregg (NH), Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX), Mel Martinez (FL), John McCain (AZ), Mitch McConnell (KY), Murkowski, Snowe, Arlen Specter (PA) and Wicker joined all the present Dems (Brown and Kennedy were absent) to exceed the 59 votes necessary to proceed (vote #4), while Collins, Hutchison, Murkowski, Snowe and Specter joined all the present Dems (Kennedy was absent) to exceed the 59 votes necessary to pass the bill (vote #14), which is now law.
  • Floor vote #33 (an attempt to waive the Budget Act with respect to an attempt by Murray to acquire some pork in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, aka Porkulus) – Bond and Specter joined all the present Dems (again, Kennedy was absent) except Mary Landrieu in a failed attempt to make that happen; they fell 2 votes short of the 60 votes necessary. Of note, this was the only victory against the Dem machine, but only because Kennedy was absent and Reid suffered a rare defection from his caucus.
  • Floor vote #35 (an attempt to waive the Budget Act with respect to a Barbara Mikulski/Sam Brownback amendment to Porkulus that allows the deduction of interest, state sales tax and state excise tax paid by certain taxpayers on the purchase of a car/light truck bought between November 13, 2008 and December 31, 2009) – Most of the Republicans joined most of the Democrats on this 60-vote-majority one; the amendment was subsequently agreed to by a voice vote. Of note, more Democrats than Republicans opposed it (17-9); that and the nature of the amendment means that I am not counting this against the Republicans. The interest portion was subsequently stripped out, but the taxes deductions survived.
  • Floor vote #55 (an attempt to waive the Budget Act with respect to an amendment to Porkulus to greatly expand the tax deductibility of plug-in electric vehicles) – Alexander, Bennett, Bond, Sam Brownback (KS), Burr, Saxby Chambliss (GA), Collins, Corker, Crapo, John Ensign (NV), Graham, Hatch, Johnny Isakson (GA), Lugar, Martinez, McCain, Murkowski, Risch, Pat Roberts (KS), Snowe, Specter, John Thune (SD) and George Voinovich (OH) joined all present Democrats (Kennedy absent) to exceed the 60 votes required to waive the Budget Act; the amendment was subsequently agreed to by a voice vote. It appears most of this was subsequently scaled back.
  • Floor vote #59 and floor vote #60 (an attempt to substitute the Collins/Nelson/Reid rewrite of Porkulus) – Collins, Snowe and Specter joined all the Dems (yes, they even brought in Kennedy this time) to exceed the 60 votes required to invoke cloture on (vote #59) and waive the rules for (vote #60) that particular version of Porkulus for the one already on the floor. The subsequent vote to pass was a simple majority, and that was modified in conference.
  • Floor vote #63 and floor vote #64 (final adoption of Porkulus) – Collins, Snowe and Specter joined all the Dems (Kennedy was back to being absent) to get to the 60 votes required to waive the rules (vote #63) and pass (vote #64) the final version of Porkulus. Had just one of the three not bolted, we wouldn’t have had Porkulus.
  • Floor vote #65 and floor vote #73 (the DC House Voting Rights Act of 2009) – Cochran, Collins, Hatch, Lugar, Murkowski, Snowe, Specter and Voinovich joined all the Dems present (Kennedy and Tom Harkin were absent) except Max Baucus and Robert Byrd to exceed the 60 votes required to proceed (vote #65), while Collins, Hatch, Lugar, Snowe, Specter and Voinovich joined all the Dems present (Kennedy was again not present) except Baucus and Byrd to exceed the 60 votes required to pass the bill (vote #73). The bill is currently stalled in the House.
  • Floor vote #96 (passage of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009) – Alexander, Bond, Cochran, Murkowski, Richard Shelby (AL), Snowe, Specter and Wicker joined all the Dems present (Kennedy absent again) except Evan Bayh, Russ Feingold and Claire McCaskill to exceed the 60 votes required to pass the pork-laden Omnibus bill signed in secret by Obama.

As stated above, I consider one of the votes (vote 35) a bipartisan measure. Another 3 votes were essentially purely procedural (votes 1, 4 and 65). That leaves 10 meaningful places the “Republicans” could have stopped the Dingy One. 9 times, they failed.

So, who were the big failures? Specter and Snowe lead the pack at 9, but I give the edge to Specter for his attempt to make the total failure rate 100%. Collins isn’t too far behind at 8. Bond and Murkowski each bolted 4 times. Hatch and Lugar departed 3 times apiece. Alexander, who is supposed to be one of the “leaders”, was among the multiple offenders. In all, 29 of the 41 members caved at least once on a critical vote, and only 9 didn’t cave at all.

But, But, But…..

by @ 11:01. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

In early January, then-PEBO had his staff deliver a white paper to provide economic justification for the stimulus bill.   As you might remember, one of the key issues for putting the stimulus in place was that it was going to dramatically reduce job loss.   In fact, the argument was that the stimulus would not only reduce job loss but quickly put us into the position of lowering the unemployment rate.   PEBO’s staff put together the following chart to show how unemployment with the stimulus would compare to unemployment if we just left things alone:

job-loss

What you can see here is that in early January, PEBO believed that without the stimulus package, unemployment would peak at a bit over 9% and then recede.   However, with the humungous, pork laden, we’ll pay for it forever stimulus package, unemployment would peak around 8% and make a rapid descent.

Today, American Pravda notes that 4 states have hit double digit unemployment rates.   That’s not good.   However, that’s not the important part of the article.   Here’s the money line from the article:

Some economists now predict the U.S. unemployment rate will hit 10 percent by year-end, and peak at 11 percent or higher by the middle of 2010.

Barely two months ago, Obama and his ilk saw unemployment capping at 9% if they did nothing.   Now that they’ve done a major something, they’ve pushed unemployment to a potential of 11%!  

Obama had better hope that these economists are wrong.   If not, the growing skepticism from all sides of the political spectrum, will quickly turn into a full scale rout!

Whose Science Will It Be?

by @ 5:16. Filed under Global "Warming", Politics - National.

You may not be aware of it but there is a global warming conference going on this week.   The International Conference on Climate Change is in New York.   You probably haven’t heard about the conference because it is specifically for skeptics of global warming.   You know, the folks who also believe that the Earth is flat and at the center of the universe?

Ronald Bailey from Reason magazine is covering the conference and has a recap of the presentations here.   Included in yesterday’s presentations was the following scientific data:

  • According to Indur Goklany, assuming the worse case scenario for global warming, income in both developed and undeveloped countries would be higher, worldwide deaths would increase by less than 1/2% and the amount of land required for agriculture would drop by 1/2.
  • According to Paul Reiter, head of the insects and infectious disease unit at the Institut Pasteur in Paris, 150 EDEN studies have been published so far and that “none of them support the notion that disease is increasing because of climate change.”   In fact,

Reiter pointed out that many of the claims that climate change will increase disease can be attributed to an incestuous network of just nine authors who write scientific reviews and cite each other’s work. None are actual on-the-ground disease researchers and many of them write the IPCC disease analyses. “These are people who know absolutely bugger about dengue, malaria or anything else,” said Reiter.

  • Finally, Stanley Goldenberg, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Hurricane Research Division in Miami presented evidence refuting the notion that hurricanes have become more prevalent due to global warming.   Goldenberg showed evidence that hurricanes increase and decrease over decadal cycles he provided this synopsis:

Tropical North Atlantic SST [sea surface temperature] has exhibited a warming trend of [about] ) 0.3 °C over the last 100 years; whereas Atlantic hurricane activity has not exhibited trend-like variability, but rather distinct multidecadal cycles….The possibility exists that the unprecedented activity since 1995 is the result of a combination of the multidecadal-scale changes in the Atlantic SSTs (and vertical shear) along with the additional increase in SSTs resulting from the long-term warming trend. It is, however, equally possible that the current active period (1995-2000) only appears more active than the previous active period (1926-1970) due to the better observational network in place.

Goldenberg completed his remarks with:

“Not a single scientist at the hurricane center believes that global warming has had any measurable impact on hurricane numbers and strength,”

Yesterday, President Obama announced that he would be lifting the ban on Federal funding for stem cell research that had been implemented by President Bush.   In his statement describing the reason for his decision, President Obama said:

But let’s be clear: Promoting science isn’t just about providing resources — it’s also about protecting free and open inquiry. It’s about letting scientists like those who are here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient — especially when it’s inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda — and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.   (emphasis mine)

I have to say, this is the first statement I can completely get behind President Obama on.   We should allow science to operate “free from manipulation or coercion.”   We should follow the facts and findings and “listen to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient.”   That leaves me with just two questions for President Obama:

  1. Free from manipulation or coercion by whom?
  2. Even when it’s inconvenient for whom?

All animals created equally?

March 10, 2009

Heads I Win, Tails You Lose

by @ 5:44. Filed under Politics - National.

Last week President Obama ignored political decorum and basically ignored the leader of America’s greatest ally, Gordon Brown, the British Prime Minister. The reason given for Obama’s lack of interest was unique in the annals of Presidential history: he was too tired!

But Washington figures with access to Mr Obama’s inner circle explained the slight by saying that those high up in the administration have had little time to deal with international matters, let alone the diplomatic niceties of the special relationship.

This weekend,  it was announced that President Obama is now ready to open discussions with factions of the Taliban:

They are the sworn enemies of the United States – the fighters who openly support America’s enemy number one – Osama bin Laden.

And President Obama, who is now reviewing his war strategy in Afghanistan, says it may be time to talk to them.

Aboard Air Force One, he told the New York Times, we’re not winning now.

This is the same President who during the campaign last year  stated that he would be willing to meet with Iran’s leadership without any preconditions.

Weird huh?   A President who snubs his closest ally but is willing to discuss surrender with some of the vilest people on earth at the drop of a hanky?

Not really.

Chris from Racine posted on this article that makes the claim that Obama is a narcissist.   The read is fascinating.   See if any of this rings a bell?

– Have a messianic-cosmic vision of himself and his life and his “mission”.

– Sets ever more complex rules in a convoluted world of grandiose fantasies with its own language (jargon)

– Displays false modesty and unctuous “folksiness” but unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true Obama is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.

– Sublimates aggression and holds grudges.

– Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it)

I’ve worked with a couple of folks who were text book narcissists.   One of their most destructive traits was the ability to treat the same person as complete scum or tolerable, depending upon whether they needed anything from that individual.   Note this from the article:

Idealization or devaluation – The narcissist instantly idealizes or devalues his interlocutor. This depends on how the narcissist appraises the potential his converser has as a Narcissistic Supply Source. The narcissist flatters, adores, admires and applauds the “target” in an embarrassingly exaggerated and profuse manner – or sulks, abuses, and humiliates her.

A narcissist moves from complete disinterest or even humiliation of an individual that doesn’t feed their narcissist needs  to near adulation or idealization of the individual who they believe can feed those needs.   In Obama’s case, people like Gordon Brown, individuals who are already his ally, provide no feeding of Obama’s narcissistic need.     However, in the case of Iran’s leadership and the Taliban, if  Obama were able to score political points it would feed his narcissism in an immense way.   The other reason I’m convinced that this explains the difference in  how Obama has handled the varying foreign issues is this piece, the most troubling trait,  from the article:

Ignores data that conflict with his fantasy world, or with his inflated and grandiose self-image.

In Obama’s mind there is no problem negotiating with terrorists because he has disassociated himself from the possibilityof bad guys causing bad things to happen.   In Obama’s mind he nourishes his narcissism by simply making the attempt.   To Obama its “Heads I win, Tails you lose!”

March 9, 2009

It’s all about the Green(backs, that is)

Conn Carroll of The Heritage Foundation runs the numbers on the cap-and-trade -tax scam that the Obama administration and the Spendocrats are pushing:

– $650 billion from carbon credit fees this year
– $150 billion of that going to “alternative energy production”
– $500 billion of that going to the return of welfare

Conn goes on to point out that it’s a low-ball figure. Under the less-expensive Lieberman-Warner scheme, the 8-year cost would be somewhere north of $1,622,848,000,000.

Don’t forget that both Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel have admitted that cap-and-trade -tax is meant to cripple the energy market to the tune of $700-$1,400 per family per year.

Warren Buffet on Card Check

by @ 13:44. Filed under Business, Politics - National.

I don’t know what happened to Shoebox’s post on this, so I best fix that…

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFpU5KSI3TU[/youtube]
(via House Republican Leader John Boehner’s YouTube channel)

It’s important to note that the secret ballot for unionization elections was put in place to protect the union organizers from retaliation by business owners. If it weren’t so serious, it would be funny that it is now the anti-union forces are the ones that need the protection of the secret ballot.

Finally, A Plan from Geithner

by @ 5:28. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

Geithner is finally going after the plan I suggested here. With the time stamp, perhaps I could get the $420 Billion?

H/T Greg Mankiw

Confluence

by @ 5:08. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

First, from Rasmussen Reports:

Thirty-one percent (31%) Strongly Disapprove to give Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of +8.

That’s the lowest approval rating yet for President Obama.   Also noteworthy is that on the day of his inauguration, 40% of the population was “in the middle.”   Today, that number has dropped to 30%.   I can tell you that folks aren’t moving to the “Strongly Approve” category!

Then, there’s this, also from Rasmussen Reports:

Investor confidence has fallen to a new all-time low as expectations of future economic performance continue to decline.

while:

The assessment of current economic conditions fell 28 points between the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the inauguration (from 89.6 to 61.7). It has fallen another nine points since then to 52.3.

Seventy-five percent (75%) of investors now say the economy is getting worse. That’s an increase from 58% since Lehman Brothers collapsed last September to begin the financial industry meltdown. On the day that President Obama was inaugurated, 63% of investors thought the economy was getting worse.

So the current assessment has dropped by 9 points but the despondency over the look into the future has increased 12%.   Somebody want to argue again how at least in investors eyes, President Obama isn’t making matters worse?

And finally,  you know it’s bad when  American Pravda begins to question who owns what part of the problem:

Although the administration likes to say it “inherited” the recession and trillion-dollar deficits, the economic wreckage has worsened on Obama’s still-young watch.

Every day, the economy is becoming more and more an Obama economy.

Yes, yes it is.  

As Allan Sinai, chief global economist for Decision Economics, a Boston-area consulting firm notes in the AP article, we clearly have the right President and administration to handle our economic challenges:

At this stage, there is no easy answer, no easy way out. It’s a question of how we fumble through.

It would be hard to identify a single action the Obama administration has taken that has improved the lives of the people they were elected to serve.   However, if excellence in fumbling will determine how we will come through the economic turmoil than I for one, will rest easy.   Nobody knows how to run the fumblerooski better than Obama!

Update 9:08 AM – Hmmmm, I won’t take one day as a given however, President Obama’s approval rating acheived a new low in this mornings Rasmussen daily tracking poll. Any one day is subject to a myriad of issues. A high one day could be a low the next and vice versa. However, the trend is not PEBO’s friend at this time.

March 7, 2009

All Animals Are Created Equal

by @ 15:31. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

At a graduation ceremony for police recruits in Columbus Ohio, President Obama reinforced his commitment to creating or saving jobs with his stimulus bill.   The 25 graduates are the first, and only jobs that Obama has connected to his stimulus spending.

In the midst of continuing, dramatic job losses there is a ray of hope.   Take a look at this information pulled from the Bureau of Labor Statistics site:

 labor-stats

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yup, that’s right.   While  jobs across the spectrum continue to shrink,  there are two groups that continue to break the trend.   Government employment along with Education and Health Services have increased their ranks in each and every month of the past 6.

While President Obama argued that less than 20% of his “job creation and saving” would occur in government, the 25 he has identified so far are all in government.   25 out of 25 looks like 100% to me.   The BLS statistics look to support that analysis.

All animals are created equal but some animals are more equal than others!

4-Blocking Lincoln and Obama

by @ 6:55. Filed under Politics - National.

Tom McMahon has yet another instant classic 4-Block World up…

As per the usual when I borrow Tom’s stuff, I’ve turned off the comments here.

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]