Monthly Archives: October 2012

CAN YOU SPARE A DIME?

Posted on October 31, 2012 | Leave a comment

JUSTAVIDEO

Leave a comment

Posted in Uncategorized

Image

JUSTACARTOON

Leave a comment

Posted on October 29, 2012 in Uncategorized

“IT’S IRRESPONSIBLE, IT’S UNPATRIOTIC”

Posted on October 28, 2012 | Leave a comment

It’s irresponsible; it’s unpatriotic and I am doing more of it.  I am Barack Hussein Obama and I want your vote.

Leave a comment

Posted in Uncategorized

THE INCREDIBLE NEW YORK TIMES

Posted on October 28, 2012 | 1 comment

Ten days prior to election day, or more significantly, after nearly four years of Obama’s governance, the New Youk Times looks at his record and has this to say.

President Obama has shown a firm commitment to using government to help foster growth. He has formed sensible budget policies that are not dedicated to protecting the powerful, and has worked to save the social safety net to protect the powerless. Mr. Obama has impressive achievements despite the implacable wall of refusal erected by Congressional Republicans so intent on stopping him

In the Online edition a photograph of Abraham Lincoln appears beside that comment.  Subtle, isn’t it.  Those “sensible budget policies” were so outrageous that not one single Democrat voted for the his Budget Proposals.

In the poisonous atmosphere of this campaign, it may be easy to overlook Mr. Obama’s many important achievements, including carrying out the economic stimulus, saving the auto industry, improving fuel efficiency standards, and making two very fine Supreme Court appointments.

Sadly the day is past when the New York Times editors had a little class and knew enough to call their own candidate President and not Mr.

Mr. Obama prevented another Great Depression. Mr. Obama championed [programs] like the $840 billion stimulus bill. Republicans say it failed, but it created and preserved 2.5 million jobs and prevented unemployment from reaching 12 percent. Poverty would have been much worse without the billions spent on Medicaid, food stamps and jobless benefits.

Obama “prevented unemployment from reaching 12 percent.”  Isn’t that just dandy.  Give him another four years and he may do twice as well; he may prevent unemployment from reaching 24 percent.

Foreign Affairs. Mr. Obama and his administration have been resolute in attacking Al Qaeda’s leadership.

Mr. Obama deserves credit for his handling of the Arab Spring.

These statements are understandable if the only news the editors read is what’s printed in their own newspaper.

Civil Rights. The extraordinary fact of Mr. Obama’s 2008 election did not usher in a new post-racial era. In fact, the steady undercurrent of racism in national politics is truly disturbing.

Yes, it’s very disturbing.  And as the Times implies, it has worsened over the last four years, yet this is somehow Bush’s fault.  The editors must have struggled over this one to no avail if the best excuse they could come up with was to blame Bush again.

For these and many other reasons, we enthusiastically endorse President Barack Obama for a second term, and express the hope that his victory will be accompanied by a new Congress willing to work for policies that Americans need (emphasis ours).

The endorsement of the Democrat was fully expected.  The Times endorsed Lincoln and he was probably the only Republican endorsement the paper ever made.  Their star correspondent Walter Duranty did give a hearty endorsement of Joseph Stalin but I don’t think Stalin was a Republican and Duranty wasn’t an editor.

1 Comment

Posted in Opinion

Tagged , , , , ,

THE WORD “AUSTERITY” IS PROPAGANDIC

Posted on October 25, 2012 | 1 comment

Many words are chosen and brought into common use to further an agenda.  Our favorite example is “Capitalism”, a term that implies a system based on money, a system based on wealth.  Thus a system which is based on the freedom of everyman to exchange goods and services with his neighbor has become known by a name that implies something quite different.  The word “Capitalism” comes with an agenda.  Words that come with an agenda are propagandic.  Most people would look unfavorably on a system built around wealth but who could be against a system built on ‘pleasant companionship with friends or associates’?  There was a reason Karl Marx chose to identify the two systems as Capitalism and Socialism rather than as Free Markets and Government Controlled.

Now we look at “austerity.”  Say what you will about European Socialism, it does provide a comfortable life style.  Savor six week vacations, short working hours, retirement at age 55 on a government guaranteed income sufficient to live in modest comfort.  Some would argue that you give up many individual freedoms in exchange for that.  However, I ask how can you give up something you never had?

Merriam-Webster defines austerity as “stern and cold in appearance or manner, giving little or no scope for pleasure.”  That is not at all what advocates of “austerity” in Europe are calling for.  What they want is a responsible government that does not spend what it doesn’t have.  Yet they allow themselves to be known by a word that would identify them as seeking an uncaring government that leaves little or no scope for pleasure.  Thus applied, the word austerity is propagandic.

The irony of propagandic is the acceptance and use of words by the targets against whom the term was coined.  Even Milton Friedman called the Free Market system Capitalism.

 

1 Comment

Posted in Political philosophy

Tagged , , , , , , ,

TO HIM IT’S ALL ABOUT ‘ME’, NOT ABOUT US

Posted on October 23, 2012 | 1 comment

If you watched the third Presidential debate you heard Obama say
“Americans should be proud of [*] this nation,  [pause]  ME…”

Click on the President’s nose to play the 35 second video.

And they said G.W. was arrogant because he was from Texas.

* a parenthetical reference was made that was only a distraction from the President’s main point which was that Barack Obama IS America.

1 Comment

Posted in Audio/Visual, Political polemics

REAGAN vs. OBAMA ON THE ECONOMY

Posted on October 23, 2012 | Leave a comment

President Obama often asks the voters to understand that he inherited a very bad economy, and he did. But in many ways it was not as bad as the economy Reagan inherited from Carter.

On Reagan’s Election Day in 1980, unemployment was at 7.5 percent and headed for 10.8 percent; inflation was at 12.5 percent, headed for 13.6 percent, and interest rates were at 15.5 percent, headed for 21.5 percent by Christmas, well before Reagan was sworn in.

Obama inherited an unemployment rate of 6.8 percent and no inflation problem. Inflation was only 1.1 percent in comparison to the crushing 21.5 percent left by Carter. By the time Reagan was sworn in in January business men, farmers and home buyers (if you could find one) were paying 23 to 24 percent interest rates on loans.

Reagan wasted no energy on blaming Jimmy Carter. He approached the problem by lowering marginal tax rates in gradual steps over three years. He eased the regulatory burden on businesses, making it simpler to open or expand a business. His infectious optimism reminded people “the best is yet to come.” America was still “the shining city on the hill,” and Reagan reversed the country’s mood from a Carter-induced “malaise” to a can-do spirit.

In stark contrast, Obama did just the opposite with predictable results. He increased the regulatory environment increasing the cost and difficulty of opening or expanding a business. He introduced new law burdening business with new costs that are significant and beyond measurability at the same time. He fought for a return to higher taxes before acquiescing. Obama made his belief clear that America never was a shining city on a hill; it was a country in need of complete transformation. For America’s leader to wear a flag pin on his lapel was to honor a nation that was undeserving of such respect, a country that was in no way exceptional.

Reagan’s policies worked. By the end of his first term, inflation was down, employment was up, the economy was in good shape again and the mood of the nation had gone from morose to bright and cheery. In the bid for a second term, Reagan won every state with the sole exception of Minnesota.

Today we are where we are because of the president we picked in 2008, not because of what he inherited.

This post was adapted on an article by Peter Hegseth.

Leave a comment

Posted in Economy, Opinion, Political philosophy, Regulation

Tagged , , , , , ,

SNIPPETS FROM ELSEWHERE

Posted on October 22, 2012 | Leave a comment

Closing words at the end of the second presidential debate:

I believe that the free enterprise system is the greatest engine of prosperity the world’s ever known. I believe in self-reliance and individual initiative and risk takers being rewarded.   President Barack Obama

Real Clear Politics reaction:

I have no doubt that Obama believes he believes in free enterprise — except in the case of health care policy, the auto industry, the housing market, education, banking, job creation, manufacturing, green energy and so on and so forth.

If you believed the free enterprise system is the mechanism of great prosperity, your crowning achievement might not be legislation that constricts competition in health care, layers it generously with regulations, institutes effective price controls, coerces participation and sets up a government board to mete out advice on rationing.

Put it this way: Folks who admire free enterprise seldom spend two months bashing private equity to kick off a re-election campaign for president.

About bailouts, by Steven Haywood:

Milton Friedman liked to say, the capitalist system is a profit and loss system.  The losses are just as important as the profits because they discipline ongoing resource allocation.  Bailing out losing firms assures us of mediocre economic growth.  Haywood [edited]

When losses are made, under the present system these losses are borne by the individuals who sustained them and took the risk and judged things wrongly, whereas under State management all losses are quartered upon the taxpayers and the community as a whole.  The elimination of the profit motive and of self-interest as a practical guide in the myriad transactions of daily life will restrict, paralyze and destroy British ingenuity, thrift, contrivance and good housekeeping at every stage in our life and production, and will reduce all our industries from a profit-making to a loss-making process.  Winston Churchill 1947

If Obama is re-elected,
He will fundamentally transform America from a society that strives to eliminate class to a society of four classes: wealthy elites, government and union bureaucrats, the growing dependent poor, and a shrinking pool of working gainfully employed taxpayers supporting everyone else.

Leave a comment

Posted in Randoms

Tagged , , , ,

THE PATIENT DIED BUT THE OPERATION WAS A SUCCESS or How to Measure Success Like a Community Organizer

Posted on October 21, 2012 | Leave a comment

Thanks to The Foundry for this report:

So far, 36 green companies that received federal support from taxpayers have either gone bankrupt or are laying off workers and are heading for bankruptcy. This list includes only those companies that received federal money from the Obama Administration’s Department of Energy. The amount of money indicated does not reflect how much was actually received or spent but how much was offered. The amount also does not include other state, local, and federal tax credits and subsidies, which push the amount of money these companies have received from taxpayers even higher.

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:

  1. Evergreen Solar ($24 million)*
  2. SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
  3. Solyndra ($535 million)*
  4. Beacon Power ($69 million)*
  5. AES’s subsidiary Eastern Energy ($17.1 million)
  6. Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
  7. SunPower ($1.5 billion)
  8. First Solar ($1.46 billion)
  9. Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
  10. EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
  11. Amonix ($5.9 million)
  12. National Renewable Energy Lab ($200 million)
  13. Fisker Automotive ($528 million)
  14. Abound Solar ($374 million)*
  15. A123 Systems ($279 million)*
  16. Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($6 million)
  17. Johnson Controls ($299 million)
  18. Schneider Electric ($86 million)
  19. Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
  20. ECOtality ($126.2 million)
  21. Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
  22. Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
  23. Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
  24. Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
  25. Range Fuels ($80 million)*
  26. Thompson River Power ($6.4 million)*
  27. Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
  28. LSP Energy ($2.1 billion)*
  29. UniSolar ($100 million)*
  30. Azure Dynamics ($120 million)*
  31. GreenVolts ($500,000)
  32. Vestas ($50 million)
  33. LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($150 million)
  34. Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
  35. Navistar ($10 million)
  36. Satcon ($3 million)*

*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.

Only a government could compile such a list of economic failures.  Chalk it up to economic ignorance if you wish but that is being charitable.  Taking Solyndra and A123 as examples, considerable sums of money were legally channeled away from taxpayers, to the US Treasury, to Solyndra and A123 and their founders, to the coffers of Democratic campaign funds.  That money is not going back.

Community organizing activities are constantly in need of money to support their agenda.  We learned from the book Radical-In-Chief that community organizers consider any program that brings in money to support their activist  agenda is considered a success.  Whether or not the program accomplishes its ostensive goal, in this case green energy, is secondary.

Obama scored points for himself and all Democrats for showing moral responsibility and smart government when they heralded the financial support given these companies.  Very fewof those points were  lost when the companies and programs failed.

The Party solidified its base for at least trying to do something for the environment and raised some money for campaign funding.  It’s has been a win-win for the Party, a lose-lose for the taxpaying public.

Leave a comment

Posted in Energy, Environment, Opinion, Political polemics

Tagged , , ,

NEWS-WEEK BITES THE GLOSSY DUST

Posted on October 20, 2012 | 1 comment

After 50 years in glossy print, News-Week magazine will no longer be available in the rack at your dentist’s office.

The magazine’s publisher has decided, forced is a better word, to abandon print and go exclusively digital.  Coming this late to the Online party with no novel content to distinguish themselves I fear News Week is on the way to joining the ranks of Life and The Woman’s Home Companion.

1 Comment

Posted in News

Tagged