Category Archives: Political polemics

RIGGED DEMONSTRATIONS

Mumia Abu-Jamal happened upon the scene where a young police officer had stopped his brother for a traffic violation. Mumia pulled a gun from his shoulder holster and killed the lone police officer in cold blood. It was 1981. He was convicted of murder and sits in a jail cell today.

Mumia is the kind of Black man Joe Biden would describe as articulate, but not refined. Born Wesley Cook his Kenyan school teacher gave him the African name Mumia and the name stuck. Before the killing he was a community organizer known only locally. The murder thrust him onto the national scene and getting him out of jail became a cause célèbre of the Left. The Pacifica Radio network took up the cause. Many “Free Mumia” demonstrations were organized by the Left.

Philadelphia residents knew the story well because that is where the crime occurred. At one of these demonstrations a local resident asked one of the demonstrators why she thought Mumia should be let out of jail. She replied she had come all the way from Ohio with some friends who told her it would be a cool demonstration and that’s all she knew.

Some people go to church to practice their religion. Others go just to be part of a community. Some demonstrators demonstrate for a cause, others demonstrate just to be part of a community. There is a third group forming, those who demonstrate for pay. We saw it on the front lawn of a bank executive. See THUGS ON THE LAWN.

Now, a bus load of paid demonstrators was organized to appear at a conservative convention in Illinois. Andrew Breitbart was there and he confronted the group. By now the video has been around, but if you haven’t seen it, please do. It begins with a lot of undecipherable shouting but don’t give up. It gets very amusing when the organizers finally surrender and begin to herd their flock back toward the bus.

Andrew was persistent and he won the day.

THE STUDENT LOAN PROGRAM

BOSTON (Associated Press) Sept 17, 2010

Citigroup Inc. is exiting the private student loan business, as the government changes the playing field by making Uncle Sam the primary lender to students.

The government’s growing role is cutting out private lenders from much of the business of financing higher education, prompting lenders to decide whether to exit the business entirely or scale back.

Citibank is just the first of the major private sector lenders who will be leaving the student loan business. It is the fruit of Obama’s plan to increase government control over colleges and universities by controlling the purse strings.

Wall St Journal, Sept 12, 2009

The Obama plan calls for the U.S. Department of Education to move from its current 20% share of the student-loan origination market to 80% on July 1, 2010, when private lenders will be barred from making government-guaranteed loans. The remaining 20% of the market that is now completely private will likely shrink further as lenders try to comply with regulations Congress created last year. Starting next summer, taxpayers will have to put up roughly $100 billion per year to lend to students.

And

If the feds are now making and owning all such loans, expect default rates to soar. When the government hires contractors to collect on its loans, it pays them for simply calling the borrower, regardless of the result. Private lenders, on the other hand, make money from a performing loan and have a greater incentive to do careful underwriting and aggressive collection.

Default rate by students of Hillsdale College, which accepts no government loan students, is under 2%. The current default rate by students in  the government loan program is over 30%.

Wall St Journal again,

[P]arents will soon have no choice beyond a Washington bureaucracy to borrow money for their college-bound children, and taxpayers will pay a fortune for the privilege.

They will have Hillsdale College and possibly no other.

You will remember how difficult it was to find out what was included in the health care bill. There was one excuse after another. The weakest was it was too long and to complex to be understood. It was said to be 3,000, 2, 000, 1,800 and 2,500 pages long. Nancy Pelosi said we will not know what is in it until it becomes law. She was right about that.

Obama had promised pending bills would be published on the Internet for public review if he were elected. He promised, no more secrecy, debates will be open and broadcast on CSPAN. But there was no timely posting of the health care bill and Obama denied CSPAN access to debates. When John McCain sought openness as promised, the President replied with a ridiculing laugh, “That was the campaign, John. The campaign is over.” The gall of the man!

What were they trying to hide? For one thing, the government’s shutting of private lenders out of the business of making student loans. I hear a question coming from some naïve soul in the corner, what do student loans have to do with health care?

Wall St Journal, Mar 25, 2010

This plan is hitched to ObamaCare for several reasons. For one, the student-loan takeover could never attract a filibuster-proof 60 votes if it had to pass as a stand-alone measure, and it might not even get 51. The government’s bogus accounting for student loans also creates the illusion that this bill will help save enough money in the first five years to protect the ObamaCare provisions from Republican challenges under budget rules. Remember, budget reconciliation is supposed to be about preventing deficits, so it takes a mother lode of accounting gimmicks to claim that the bill’s spending binge is a cost-saver.

Does that answer your question, sir? It is the way Washington works, and it is time we change it. Remember, vote in November.

ROTTEN TO THE CORE

Democratic Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton left the following message, which by now must be infamous, on a lobbyist’s voice mail.

I was, frankly, uh, uh, surprised to see that we don’t have a record, so far as I can tell, of your having given to me despite my uh, long and deep uh, work. In fact, it’s been my major work, uh, on the committee and sub-committee it’s been essentially in your sector.

I am, I’m simply candidly calling to ask for a contribution. As the senior member of the um, committee and a sub-committee chair, we have (chuckles) obligations to raise, uh funds. And, I think it must have been me who hasn’t, frankly, uh, done my homework to ask for a contribution earlier. So I’m trying to make up for it by asking for one now, when we particularly, uh, need, uh contributions, particularly those of us who have the seniority and chairmanships and are in a position to raise the funds.

Breitbart’s Big Government reports that Rep. Norton was just one of many Democrats making shakedown calls at the behest of Nancy Pelosi. This is exactly the type of Gangster Government the people of this nation are rising up against. It is particularly galling coming from the party that claims so loud and clear, and often too, that they are not beholden to lobbyists.

“those of us who have the seniority and chairmanships and are in a position to raise the funds” is political talk that means we are the dons who can order the goons not to break your children’s legs. Perhaps that’s going too far. Let’s just say it means we are the ones that can approve those $2,000 toilet seats you want to sell to the Pentagon.

There are a lot of honest Democrats. I’m sure of that. I just don’t think any of them hold political office.

SUBTLE BIAS IN THE PRESS

This example is from Bloomberg Financial and linked to by Yahoo Finance. Click the blue link if you want to read the entire article.

Representative Tim Ryan, an Ohio Democrat and co-sponsor of legislation letting companies seek duties on Chinese imports, said China is violating trade laws and the bill would give the U.S. tools to combat undervalued currencies.

“It’s now time for our country to have the guts to stand up and take a strong stand against China’s currency manipulation,” Ryan said today in testimony to the House Ways and Means Committee. Representative Dave Camp, top Republican on the panel, said he opposes the legislation.

This will be taken by most readers as straight unbiased news. But what does it really convey? It says China is breaking the law and manipulating the currency markets. A Democrat is trying to help farmers and corporations disadvantaged by this illegal activity. A Republican opposes helping farmers and business men for no given reason.

Bias is definitely evident, but it is subtle enough to go unseen by most readers. Such subtle bias is not unusual, it is the norm. It is as common as dirt. In fact it is dirt.

The facts: The Republican cited, Dave Camp, used the entire time allotted to him by the Carl Levin’s Ways and Means Committee urging the committee to take strong measures to combat China’s trade practices. Read his statement here.

The bill was broadly opposed by Republicans because it was loaded with earmarks. Earmarks are bribes  politicians give to their constituencies in return for their votes. That is a valid reason for opposing the bill. A better one is given in Random Thots article equating tariffs on China to the Smoot-Hawley bill passed in 1930 that precipitated the Great Stock Market Crash and launched the depression.


WHY RANGEL WON THE NOMINATION

In the midst of a corruption scandal, Sen. Charles Rangel easily wins re-nomination by Democratic voters. There are two reasons. I am not running for public office so I can be frank and truthful.

The first reason is that, among Democrats, ideology trumps integrity. Freedom from corruption is not only not required, it doesn’t even seem to be an asset. Ex Mayor of Boston, James M. Curley campaigned for re-election from a prison cell where he was serving time for stealing from the very people from whom he was seeking re-election. He won handily.

The second reason is that Rangel represents a heavily Black district and in that community race trumps everything.

Charming Charlie knew he had nothing to lose by thumbing his nose at the investigation. He is a Democrat.

BOSTON HONORS CROOKED CURLEY WITH A STATUE

KRUGMAN CALLS FOR REPEAT OF THE SMOOT-HAWLEY ACT, THE LAW GENERALLY REGARDED AS THE CAUSE OF THE GREAT DEPRESSION

Paul Krugman has sunk to the level of complete idiocy with this latest recommendation. All through most of the 1920’s a debate was raging in Congress over the passage of a bill to put large tariffs in place, most notably on imported steel. The argument pro was to protect American industry by making imported products non-competitive. The argument con was that other nations would respond with similar tariffs on American goods and trade would cease. The law was passed, other nations retaliated by raising their tariffs on American goods, exports collapsed, the stock market crashed, the Roaring Twenties ceased, the Great Depression began.

Edited from a Wall Street publication:

So after President Herbert Hoover took office in March 1929, Congress immediately set to work on a new tariff regime. This is an important point, because you have to picture that this legislation was winding its way through committee long before eventual passage in June 1930. It is a fair statement to say that the prospects for Smoot-Hawley had something to do with the October 1929 market crash itself.

On Monday, October 28, the New York Times ran a front-page story on possible passage of Smoot-Hawley, the next day, on Tuesday the 29th, the day of the Crash, other national papers had picked up on the issue.

Now Krugman wants to do the same thing again. Of course it is not the steel industry this time. Steel was a major import in 1930, now it’s goods from China. It is forgivable for the man in the street to think this is a good idea. We’re all a bit miffed that everything seems to come from China and the world of economics is not broadly understood.

What would China do? What would American industry do? What would other nations do? We have spoken previously of the economic tenet called Rational Expectations. All players act, I should say react, in their own best interest. One rational expectation would be for China to cease funding our debt. This could cause a 200 to 300 percent increase in the currently very low rate of interest we are paying on our skyrocketing national debt.

Another expectation is China would raise its prices to recoup the tariff. U.S. manufacturers cannot produce goods as cheaply as the Chinese. If they could, they would be doing it already. The cost of everything we get from China would increase, and likely by more than the rate of the tariff itself. When Smoot-Hawley was enacted, even nations not directly affected perceived an opportunity and instituted high tariffs as well.

Einstein is usually the one credited with defining an idiot as someone who repeats the same mistake while expecting a different result. Krugman is an ideologue posing as an economist. Yes, I know he was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics. That only serves to confirm my opinion of him.

VENEZUELA ACCELERATES DOWN

Inflation is not an increase in prices.

Inflation is a decrease in the value of a currency.

Hugo Chavez, the socialist leader of Venezuela is giving the world yet another example of how central planning works. Under his leadership the Venezuelan Bolivar is experiencing rapid depreciation. As of April 2010, the Bolivar was declining in value at a 32% annual rate.

CHAVEZ AND A FAN

The Chavez government has nationalized privately owned oil companies (sixty of them), metal companies, newspaper companies, universities, banks, food supermarkets, the communications industry and general merchandise retailers. The justification, expressly stated in many cases, was to control inflation. Most recently the Venezuelan stores operated by a large retailer based in France were closed by the Chavez government, without notice, only because they raised their prices in tune with inflation.

The government is running most industries, and inflation is “still” rampant so Chavez reasons the problem must be somewhere else. Now he thinks he has found the cause. Venezuela imports most of its food. “Venezuelan businessmen buy abroad, come here and ask for more than it really costs” he said in fractured English. Translation – If businessmen are unwilling to operate at a loss the government will confiscate their businesses and do it for them.

The Financial Times reports:

Chávez seems to think he can decree low inflation. But it’s absurd,” said one local businessman who is broadly sympathetic to the government.

Last week, he said private companies exploited their workers for economic gain, and then sold their goods for inflated prices. He particularly singled out the country’s largest food and beverage producer, Polar, and recommended that the bourgeoisie read more Karl Marx.

But then Mr Chávez was undone by his own socialist project’s contradictions when 30,000 tons of rotting food were discovered at a warehouse run by state oil company PDVSA. Mr Chávez conceded that corruption and inefficiency was involved, but remained undaunted: “This will not divert us from our route toward our main goal . . . Socialism!”

Yet my liberal friends ask what is wrong with Socialism.

COMMUNITY ORGANIZING AND ARIZONA

The job of a community organizer is not to organize for efficiency  and a smoother running society. The job is more like that of a union organizer. It is to stir up people, get them angry and then focus their anger in a direction that gives power to the organizer. The job is not to unite, but to divide; to divide and conquer.

Obama is dividing the country. He seems not to care. His poll ratings are in free fall. He seems not to care. His party is going to get thrashed in November. He seems not to care. Arizona is enforcing the law. About that, he cares. His Justice Department has just instituted another lawsuit against Arizona law enforcement.

Obama’s chances for a second term look grim. He seems not to care. He must have a plan. What could it be?  He has over 2 years to push for an amnesty program with voting rights. It is a rank speculation, but could that be part of the plan?

THE PALESTINIAN CONTRIBUTION TO THE PEACE EFFORT

Palestinians kill 4 Israelis on eve of peace talks.

By MARK LAVIE, Associated Press Tue Aug 31

JERUSALEM – Palestinian gunmen opened fire Tuesday on an Israeli car in the West Bank and killed four passengers. The Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility.

Assailants firing from a passing car riddled the vehicle with bullets as it traveled near Hebron.

One of the victims was pregnant, said police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld. Israel’s national rescue service said the victims were two men and two women, everyone in the car was killed.

About 3,000 people joined a rally in Gaza to celebrate the attack.

It was a drive by spray of bullets. A semi-random attack, any Jew will do. That’s grass roots political participation, Palestinian style.

A Google search turned it up in all the major media except the New York Times! But it may be there somewhere, perhaps on the sports page.

CONSERVATISM SPEAKS OUT AT THE NEW YORK TIMES

Bill Kristol was considered to be the only conservative columnist at the New York Times…until he was fired. Then there were none…until his replacement arrived, a man by the name of Ross Douthat. Here are some excerpts from Mr. Douthat’s Op-Ed piece on the Restoring Honor Rally.

Mr. BECK GOES TO WASHINGTON. New York Times, Published: August 29, 2010

Just as Michael Moore, amid Democratic disarray, became the unlikely face of liberal opposition to George W. Bush, the mercurial, weepy, demagogic Beck has spent the last 18 months filling the void left by the institutional collapse of the Republican Party. And just as Moore’s influence diminished as the Democrats came roaring back, it seemed plausible that Beck would matter less and less as the midterms and then the 2012 election re-empowered actual Republican politicians.

This was a tent revival crossed with a pep rally intertwined with a history lecture married to a U.S.O. telethon — and that was just in the first hour.

There was piety — endless piety, as speaker after speaker demanded that Americans rededicate themselves to God.

[It was possible] to justify almost any interpretation of the event. A Beck admirer could spin “Restoring Honor” as proof that left-wing fears about the Tea Partiers are overblown: But a suspicious liberal could retort that all the God-and-Christ talk and military tributes were proof enough that a sinister Christian nationalism lurked beneath the surface.

Similarly, one could call the rally a gross affront to the memory of King, who presumably wouldn’t have cared much for Beck’s right-wing politics. But one could also call the day a strange, unlooked-for fulfillment of King’s prophecies: 47 years after the “I Have a Dream” speech, here were tens of thousands of white conservatives roaring their approval of its author.

A weepy demagogue. the Michael Moore of the Republican Party, surrounded by white folks roaring their approval. That’s the report from the Conservative desk of the New York Times.