Ready For The Car Buyer Lottery?

The Supreme Court is going to hear arguments on the Constitutionality of ObamaCare and it's ability to force you to pay for whatever level of health insurance the government deems necessary and appropriate. It matters not if you are a 27 years old guy (under 27, don't worry, you're covered under your parents policy...still, ya slacker) and should be relatively healthy, you will be covered (paying for) your contraceptive pills, abortions and Hoveround.

Once established that your action, or inaction, affects the economy, the government is free to establish any parameter of what you spend your money on. Thinking about buying a new car? Well GM hasn't sold a lot of their crap lately and Kia is selling lot, so to make sure that the wealth is spread evenly the government should set up a lottery on car sales. In order to make sure that GM gets it's “fair share” of sales, you will be assigned to which company you can buy your car from.

If you really, really want that Kia over the “comparable” GM, then all you need to do is pay a fee/penalty of the difference of price to the company you were assigned to...unless you were assigned to buy from Kia and GM's price was higher, then all penalties are waived.

Dear Mr. President

You are wasting my time.

The economy is in the tank (0 jobs created...or saved this month)and I was looking forward to your speech on creating much needed jobs...as soon as you finished your vacation.

Now that you have returned I am told that your speech will offer NO specifics, just an overview of what you think should be addressed to improve the job market.

We have heard this speech 5,632 times over the last three years and frankly it bores the hell out of me. Nothing but generalizations about "Green Jobs" ($535 million stimulus to Solyndra and still goes bankrupt), getting banks to loosen up credit to people that can't afford to repay the loan (my house lost another 1.5% in value this month due to foreclosures)and in typical Democratic logic, promising to reduce regulations that hinder companies from committing to new hires (enacting 5 job killing regs then delaying the implementation of 2 of them).

First you request to address a joint session of congress on the day the GOP debate is scheduled that includes the newest candidate that is racing up the polls (I'm sure you weren't even aware he threw his hat in the ring being you were so focused on creating jobs)which was rightly turned down, but you will accept doing it one day later...and you'll start really early so as not to interfere with the start of the premier MNF game.

If the conflict had arisen, I would have watched the debate, and if you haven't finished by kickoff, I'm switching to the game.

The Bill Just Needs To Be Tweaked

Obamacare is basically good for the people, it only needs a few corrections...they tell us.

A 2,000 page bill that no one, including the idiot congresscritters, had a chance to read and is filled with directives like "the Secretary shall decided", which means we don't know what the hell was voted on. Now they tell us it needs a few corrections. We are going to end up with a 5,000 page bill filled with "replacing Article 5, paragraph 3" and "super-ceding Article 2, unless conforming to Article 5, paragraph 9, line 15".

It's going to give the Tax Code a run for it's money before it's corrected... and it will never be completely corrected because the brilliant congresscritters know nothing about health care or insurance.

This abomination just needs to be thrown away and rewritten from the beginning with clear rules and delineations of powers.

We're in a hole with this, digging won't get us out.

Repeal the bill!

Obamacare Passed

NOTE: I wrote this two days ago, right after the vote to enact this POS and it took me two days to clean out all the really bad language.

To my son and my future grandchildren, I'm sorry.

My generation has saddled you with a bill that can never be paid.

Analysis: Health care's political lift uncertain

WASHINGTON – The initial blush of President Barack Obama's health care triumph immediately gives way to a sober political reality — he must sell the landmark legislation to an angry and unpredictable electorate, still reeling from the recession.

Voters may not buy it.

"angry and unpredictable electorate"...Hell yes we're angry. 60% of the people didn't want this bill to pass, but the congresscritters know better than us what we need. Unpredictable? I predict that us stoopids are going to wreak retribution on those that jammed this POS on us.

"We proved that this government — a government of the people and by the people — still works for the people," the president said late Sunday, beginning his sales pitch from the White House one hour after Congress passed the sweeping measure.

So sayeth "the one", they are working for the people, even though the people sayeth "NO!!"

Voters are furious. They hate Washington. They also detest incumbents. They're concerned most about the economy. And unemployment that's hovering near 10 percent. They're also split over whether Obama's health plan is good for a nation with enormous budget deficits and climbing debt.

How those variables play out is anyone's guess.

My guess/hope will be that these asshats get voted out of office at the first opportunity. With unemployment high and no new jobs (except gov't jobs, 16,000 new IRS agents to make sure you pay for Oabamacare). Oh, I get it, jobs created, but who pays the salaries of these IRS workers...the taxpayer, so we'll have to pony up more to pay for these new jobs that create nothing.

"It will end up being the smart thing to do politically because I believe that good policy is good politics," the president said Saturday at the Capitol.

The "smart thing to do politically", he said. Damn straight. Anytime you can give someone something for nothing, you've got a guaranteed vote in the next election.

Ahead of the vote, a Gallup poll showed more Americans believe the measure will make things worse rather than better for the country as a whole and for them personally. And most polls show most people don't like the plan although some surveys showed Americans giving high marks to individual elements.

The hell with the people and what they think. They actually bought into the idea that their elected Representatives where there to represent them. Most American's know that there are needed adjustments to health care coverage, but we also can figure out that putting more people into the system (a lot of them unemployed, be able to cover everything and we will save money, just isn't going to work out the way they are telling us.

Throughout the yearlong debate, the GOP derided the bill as "socialized medicine" and warned that it would be devastating. But Republicans may find themselves looking sheepish given that the status quo won't change for most people for years.

The only thing that changes right off is that our taxes go up. We pay for this for 5 years before the benefits kick in.

Got the word today That this is most likely force the owner of my company to implement a copay on our insurance premiums. Even with all the troubles our company has gone through, he still carried 100% of the cost, Medical, Dental and Vision, but he said this is straw that breaks the camels back. Thank you pResident Obama, you just reduced my income by $3,600 per year.

Is The Delta Smelt Saved Already?

Remember this from way, way back...8 months ago?

California's Man-Made Drought
The green war against San Joaquin Valley farmers.

California has a new endangered species on its hands in the San Joaquin Valley—farmers. Thanks to environmental regulations designed to protect the likes of the three-inch long delta smelt, one of America's premier agricultural regions is suffering in a drought made worse by federal regulations.

The state's water emergency is unfolding thanks to the latest mishandling of the Endangered Species Act. Last December, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued what is known as a "biological opinion" imposing water reductions on the San Joaquin Valley and environs to safeguard the federally protected hypomesus transpacificus, a.k.a., the delta smelt. As a result, tens of billions of gallons of water from mountains east and north of Sacramento have been channelled away from farmers and into the ocean, leaving hundreds of thousands of acres of arable land fallow or scorched.

For this, Californians can thank the usual environmental suspects, er, lawyers. Last year's government ruling was the result of a 2006 lawsuit filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council and other outfits objecting to increased water pumping in the smelt vicinity. In June, things got even dustier when the National Marine Fisheries Service concluded that local salmon and steelhead also needed to be defended from the valley's water pumps. Those additional restrictions will begin to effect pumping operations next year.

The result has already been devastating for the state's farm economy. In the inland areas affected by the court-ordered water restrictions, the jobless rate has hit 14.3%, with some farming towns like Mendota seeing unemployment numbers near 40%. Statewide, the rate reached 11.6% in July, higher than it has been in 30 years. In August, 50 mayors from the San Joaquin Valley signed a letter asking President Obama to observe the impact of the draconian water rules firsthand.

Who'da thunk that the species would be able to turn around so fast...or I guess the reality would be that the Dems are throwing the fish under the bus. Now the news is:


Buying Votes With Water

Politics: The water spigots are back on, at least temporarily, in California's Central Valley. Turned off to protect a tiny fish, they happen to be in the districts of two congressmen "undecided" on health care reform.

One could chalk it up to good fortune or just good constituent service. But in the middle of a contentious health care debate marked by Cornhusker Kickbacks and Louisiana Purchases, we may be forgiven if we find an announcement by the Department of the Interior regarding California's water supply a tad too coincidental.

On Tuesday, the Department of the Interior announced it was increasing water allocations for the Central Valley of California, a region that depends on these water allocations for local agriculture and jobs. The timing adds to our suspicions.

According to the Interior announcement, "Typically (the Bureau of) Reclamation would release the March allocation update around March 22nd, but moved up the announcement at the urging of Senators (Diane) Feinstein and (Barbara) Boxer, and Congressmen (Jim) Costa and (Dennis) Cardoza."

Blue Dog Democrats Costa, who represents California's 20th Congressional District (Fresno), and Cardoza, who represents the 18th (Stockton to Modesto), are both listed as "undecided" in the upcoming vote on health care reform, whether it be on the Senate bill itself or the "deem and pass" resolution known as the Slaughter rule, after Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter.

What a coincidence!!! Two congresscritters with districts with unemployment rates running at 40% suddenly get the water they have been begging for the last year released just before the vote on Obamacare.

The 2-inch-long delta smelt, a fish destined for the Endangered Species list, plugs the drains releasing water to the farmlands. So to protect it, environmentalists filed lawsuits and the decision was made to restrict the water flow and safeguard the smelt, even if that meant turning some of America's best farmland into the functional equivalent of Death Valley.

So, until the Department of Interior releases it's next allocation update, the Delta Smelt is off the Endangered Species List, whereas Reps Costa and Cardoza were on the list and needed a little bakshish.

"But You Did Nothing For 8 Years!!!"

Dropped by an old friends site today that I've neglected to visit for far too long. He had the proper response to the above meme:


When The Better Answer Is Still The WRONG Answer…

March 13, 2010 by Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere

Instead, the correct answer for every Republican faced with the OUTRAGE!!!!111!!! of leftist plant, member of the Fourth Estate, or Dhimicratic Lawmaker who employs the “YOU were in control for 8 years and did NOTHING!!!11!!!” meme is to look them in the eye, and say calmly, but firmly “You’re right. And do you know why? *pause, to make sure you have their attention* Because it isn’t for the FEDERAL government to address. The question that YOU should be asking yourself Mr. SEIU protester/Olbermann/Congressman Grayson is why you hate the Constitution, think you know better than the men who wrote it, or the wisdom of the voters and the legislators of your own home states? You keep trying to take power that doesn’t belong to you, and despite the Civil War’s net effect of shifting the balance of power between the Federal Government and the individual states, the states still are sovereign entities, and it is up to them to address this issue if the people of their states believe there is a compelling need to do so. Massachusetts showed the way on this, and yet you still persist in a nearly delusional belief that the Tenth Amendment no longer applies, and that we are empowered to forever expand special welfare for some and continue to call it “general welfare” for all. It’s time Congress confined itself to things within the grant of power specifically made to it in the Constitution.”

The More Things Change.....

Bathroom Books - My library of magazines and books that sit in the bathroom to occupy 10 minutes that would be wasted. One of them is "Let's Be Heard" by Bob Grant. The lead page to the third section has this:

WHOSE GOVERNMENT IS THIS, ANYWAY?

The career politicians and bureaucrats, along with the pundits of the left, are currently wailing and keening over what the depict as dangerous "antigovernment" sentiment at loose in the land, but they're way off base. Most people believe strongly in our form of government. We just don't like how it has been perverted and contorted out of shape over the past few decades.

Our dissatisfaction has two main, related causes.

First, government does too many things we don't want it to do. In fact, the general drift of government activism has been to do things that help small minorities and special interests at the expense of the majority.

Second, every time the government does anything, it ends up costing us too much money. The costs nearly always outweigh the benefits.

In other words, the people who pay for government are the people whom government seems least interested in serving. You could even say that we pay government to do things that damage us. But we're not angry at government--just at some of the bozos who run it.

This was written in 1996, but sounds like it could have been penned yesterday.

OBSCENE Profits!!!!

I work in the oil industry and I hear it all the time. "They're making to much profit off the poor folk of this country!"

Bullshit!!!

The Congresscritters have been screaming this over the money Health Insurance make and how they are going to tax the hell out them to make it fair. Look at the chart to the left (click on it to make it bigger if you need), the whopping profit brought in is a staggering 3.3%. That rates them at number 86, way below Gas Utilies (#16)and Railroads (#15).

They tell you that they made X billion in profit, but what they never bother to bring up is the multiple billions invested to earn that OBSCENE 3.3% profit.

If the damn government would quit trying to regulate every facet of the industry, you would actually find a real example of a company that could charge less and provide more and probably make a bigger profit.

We're All Flakes In California

A lady who owns a bakery in California has two minutes to address her congresscritter:



And the Congresswoman ignored her and moved on to the next question.

Everything the Government Runs is Bankrupt!

(I tried to post this yesterday, but FoxNews can't get their embeds or links written correctly and it wasn't up on YouTube yet.)

Judge Napolitano explaining why government cannot be allowed to take over health care.

When government wants to save money, it shut down like Chicago's City Hall did yesterday.

When private enterprise wants to make more money, it works overtime.

That is going to be posted on the wall above my desk along with:

I have never been given a job by a poor person

Need a good sign for a rally you're going to try this one.

The Crap Just Keep Piling Up

The congresscritters from both sides of the aisle are running scared. Their August break is a time when they are able to drop by home for a couple days and tell the great unwashed what a wonderful job they are doing for us before flying off to the Bahamas to see if "Climate Change" has made it warmer down there this year.

They are going to need that junket when they hie their butts outta town. They have found themselves caught in a maelstrom of really pissed off constituents from all over the political spectrum.

Trying to explain how a bill that hasn't been written is going to save us all just ain't flying. Like every bill this Administration has come out with, there is a basic form, but no details, and after it passes, when they fill in the details, it doesn't do anything that they told us it was going to do.

The proles are starting to wake up and demand specifics BEFORE the ObamaCare bill gets through.

It has forced the Dimi's to dig deep into "Rahm's magic bag of Chicago political tricks ™" being they've thrown out the "RACIST" card too many times and everyone is just ignoring it.

Here's a cute one that they tried to pull, but it worked too well and they got caught with their pants down:

Democrats Send Out Phony Tearjerker Letters

An Oakland County [Michigan] Democratic Party official used interns to send falsified letters to Republican county commissioners in order to persuade them to vote for a health care resolution, according to a commissioner who received one of the letters.

Shelley Taub, R-Bloomfield Township, said she received a letter on July 9 from an unidentified woman from West Bloomfield Township who said she felt that she failed as a mother because she couldn't afford health care for her ill son.

"I got this letter and it tore my heart apart," Taub said. "When I read that this woman thought she was a failure as a mother because she couldn't provide health care, I thought, 'My God, I can do that. I know so many people (in health care). I'll get this kid help.' "

Taub and her husband searched for information about the woman, found out that she actually lived in Fraser, so Taub called the home phone number and left a message.

Taub said she received a phone call that night from the mother of the woman who sent the letter who informed Taub that her daughter was not married and is a student at the University of Michigan.

The woman who sent the letter explained to Taub that she had recently finished an internship with the Oakland County Democratic Party in Bingham Farms, Taub said. The woman said she and two other interns were given sample letters and told to modify them, change the return address and send them out, Taub said.

You think that with all the people they keep telling us that are desperate for Health insurance, they could come up with a couple of real people and give them a few bucks to write their story. I guess it's one of those "Jayson Blair" moments...we know the someone is out there with close to this type of story, but dang it, it's so much bother to go out and actually find one.

Pelousi and her gang have tried to say that we're "un-American" if we don't just shut up, sit down and inhale (deeply and hold it in) their talking point platitudes.

Of course if you don't heed their warnings about rocking the boat, well they have ways to correct that behavior too:



It's a poorly lit video, but they only come out at night...at least so far.

(Can't wait for "Card Check" to start!)

As an addendum to my post below I want to put this in:

Government Medicine Should Horrify Americans
By Deroy Murdock

Imagine that your two best friends are British and Canadian tobacco addicts. The Brit battles lung cancer. The Canadian endures emphysema and wheezes as he walks around with clanging oxygen canisters. You probably would not think: "Maybe I should pick up smoking."

The fact that America is even considering government medicine is equally wacky. The state guides health care for our two closest allies: Great Britain and Canada. Like us, these are prosperous, industrial, Anglophone democracies. Nevertheless, compared to America, they suffer higher death rates for diseases, their patients experience severe pain, and they ration medical services.

When Congress reconvenes I pray they start hammering out some detail on this crap sandwich real quick. Telling us to 'trust them", it "has" to be done "NOW" has worn way to thin.

The tar is being heated and the chickens plucked!

Going Postal

So government thinks it can take over Health Care and provide more service and reduce costs.

Lets look at a simple government entity with a simple goal. Taking a product and making it move from point "A" to point "B". The government has been doing this for over 200 years, and they use to do it for free.

In my lifetime the cost of a 1st class stamp has gone up 106% while wages have gone up about 30 some-odd percent, yet they still have an expected shortfall of 7 billion dollars this year.

This is your government at work. They do not worry about overhead or unprofitable details, they know they get bailed out even if they screw it up...year after year, after year....

When e-mail ate into the amount of units they had to handle, did they reduce staff? No, they promote unnecessary people to management because the Union says they can't unload someone just because the position isn't necessary any longer, or hell really wasn't needed to begin with.

Now the government wants to run Health Care?

It always works out so good. People whose income counts on taxing people who really produce something. In other words, they require me to make money so the taxes that I pay can pay their salary.

The two biggest employers in the world are:

1) The Chinese Army @ 2.3 million

2) Indian State Railways @ 1.5 million

Followed by the NHS of Britain @ 1.3 million people

Let me insert one of those obnoxious staticsical thingys in here:
(click to biggify)



Even though;

Cancer survival rates in Britain are among the lowest in Europe, according to the most comprehensive analysis of the issue yet produced

England is on a par with Poland despite the NHS spending three times more on health care.

Of course the fact that the U.S. is sitting there proudly at the top of the lists...there is something wrong with our system and it must be made to fall in line with the countries below us.

It's only fair.

There is no way way you can convince me that the government is here to help me as far as my personal life. It is written into the bill that computer models are going to decided what treatment is "recommended" to be most cost effective.

If this gets through and you want recourse that your provider didn't do the right thing at the proper time.....

SORRY, YOU CAN'T SUE THE GOVERNMENT, THEY MADE THEMSELVES EXEMPT.

Maybe They Should Have a Different Title

Representative just doesn't seem to fit anymore.

Doggett gets chilly reception

Back in Central Texas while Congress is on a month-long recess, U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett faced an angry audience at a town hall meeting at an Austin Randalls grocery store Saturday.

Doggett, D-Austin, spoke at the store at Brodie and Slaughter lanes. A video of the event on YouTube shows that many in the crowd had signs denouncing President Barack Obama's proposed health care plan.

Witnesses said that when Doggett was asked whether he would support the plan even if he found that his constituents opposed it, Doggett said he would. People then began chanting "just say no" and overwhelmed the congressman as he moved through the crowd and into the parking lot.

"The folks there thought their voices weren't being heard," said Kathy Acosta, a Bastrop resident who attended the meeting at Randalls and another one later that day in her hometown. "They were angry, but they were respectful. There wasn't any violence."

Calls and e-mails to Doggett's office were not returned Sunday

They don't address the concerns of their constituents, won't answer calls or e-mails and vote the way they want to regardless.

Czar, maybe...no being used, perhaps commissar.

Death of the F-22?

I woke up early this morning (3AM) so I could IM with my son in Korea. He did have two E-mails waiting for me when I got up:

I just read that Gates is canceling the F-22 program. Really??? He said that we are just going to use the F-35 and because the 35 is based a lot off of the 22, we don't need to put that much more into the program. And other countries want to buy the 22 but Congress has put it into law and kept it that we can't sell it to other countries. A lot of other countries want to wait out for the 35 now. If we are going to export that and not the F-22... I just don't get it. But whatever.

How Chris ended up in the Army is beyond me. For as long as I can remember, he was always about aircraft. When the F-22 first came out I hated it...it was going to replace my beloved F-15, Chris just couldn't understand my attachment to "archaic" technology.

I was convinced (grudgingly) he was right when we saw the Raptor fly at Edwards Air Force Base at an Air Show with AFJROTC. In 20 years of Air Shows, I'd never seen a jet that maneuvered like that, and coupled with the stealth technology and the "super cruise", I was sold.



We knew that we had maintained air superiority for the next 20+ years. Of course the gov't doesn't see it that way. His second Email had some conflicting news articles:

Time to Scrap the F-22 Raptor

and

We Cannot Afford to Lose the F-22

To me this is the typical short sightedness the gov't usually displays, just like the kerfuffle over body armor at the start of the Iraqi war. The gov't decides we can cut the military budget by getting rid of something "not needed" right now, then screaming to high heavens that they "Shocked!, Shocked!!! I tell you!!!" that the needed equipment isn't there when required.

The Russians have 2 versions of Next Generation jets in production right now, and the WILL sell versions of it to get cash, not to mention the Chinese getting one and reverse designing it.

In about 10 years, our jets are going to be blown out of the sky, and congress and everyone who is saying we can't afford it now is going to be the first screaming about "How come someone didn't see this coming?" and this won't be just about old body armor or Humvees that aren't upgraded, this will mean major battles lost being the guys we're fighting have better planes than we do.

Air superiority is not something we can just ignore for years and then crank out a bunch of planes when we need them. In 10 years when the should have been there...the company that made them, the people that knew how to put them together, and the pilots that know how to fly them are gone.

The F-35 is a fine plane...for what it was designed to do. Land attack missions. which is fine if you're fighting the Taliban, but when we have to face the new Russian designed planes and their knockoffs, we're going to lose a lot of 35's.

How Much More Are We Going To Take?

This is just the stuff going on right now.

John Boenher Exposes Some of the Trash Crammed into Waxman-Markey Cap & Trade Climate Bill HR2454



So much (again) for the transparency of having a bill posted for at least a week before it gets voted on. This crap sandwich was released at 3 AM on the day it was to be voted on...not only that...there was 300 pages of additional junk crammed in at the last second...and...some of the pages are blank pieces of paper, to be filled in later, AFTER the bill is passed.

Think your house is yours to sell when you want? You can put it on the market and negotiate a price with a buyer as to the fair price? Nope. You will have to have the gov't's permission to sell it.

You are going to have to pay for a inspection of your property to make see if your house is "Green" enough for their standards, and if it isn't, you have to make the improvements before they will let you sell it. No negotiating with the buyer to reduce your price to offset the "lack of greenness", you pay it out first. If someone has to lay out 10 or 15 thou on upgrading windows, electrical hookups for cars,or re-insulating the place up to their standards, the price of the house has just gone up 15 to 25 thou to get your investment back.

That's going to open up the market to first time buyers and the poor.

Politicians are just that...Politicians. They've never held a job in the real world and if they did at one time, they are so insulated from it now that they don't know what it's like to live on a budget.

"Hell! If taxes eat into my lifestyle, I know I'll get a raise next year!!! I'm going to vote myself one!"

Listen to this asshat from my late great state of California:



She is correct in saying that "Living within our means" means nothing...TO HER!

She lays it out during her speech. When gov't has money during good times, they borrow even more, then when times cycle to bad...they still spend more than they have. You little guys are just going to have to suck it up and pay more so we can continue to spend more, and she'll need that raise next year so it doesn't hurt her lifestyle.

The consolidation of gov't over the last few months has scared the hell out of me. I listen to Obama and the Dimicrats tell me that this the the road our forefathers would have wanted us to take to ensure that everyone gets the benifit of living in this wonderful country, but they haven't read history.

[exerts from: Would the Founders Remake America?
by Brion McClanahan

Obama sez:

“At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebears, and true to our founding documents….Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.”

For his being a "Constitutional Scholar", methinks he slept through the classes.

William Davie of North Carolina, a Revolutionary War hero, member of the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 and proponent of the Constitution

“If there were any seeds in this Constitution which might, one day, produce a consolidation, it would, sir, with me, be an insuperable objection, I am so perfectly convinced that so extensive a country as this can never be managed by one consolidated government.”

Connecticut native and patriot Oliver Wolcott:

“Mankind may become corrupt, and give up the cause of freedom; but I believe that love of liberty which prevails among the people of this country will prevent such a direful calamity.”

Alexander Hamilton:

“Sir, can it be supposed that the state will become the oppressors of the people? Will they combine to destroy the liberties and happiness of their fellow citizens, for the sole purpose of involving themselves in ruin? God forbid! The idea, sir, is shocking. It outrages every feeling of humanity, and every dictate of common sense.”

Patrick Henry:

“Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!”

That we are so rapidly giving up our individual rights and allowing the nanny state to dictate what is ours and what is the states has made me fear that my son may only be able to tell his children what America once was and stood for.

Ding Dong< The Wicked Witch Is Dead

After decades of having to put up with this shrew "representing" ME, I think I can finally see the end of this.

Pelosi, after all these years has had her equivocating and lying pile up so deep, she can't dodge it any longer.

Pelosi: CIA misled her on waterboarding

WASHINGTON – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi bluntly accused the CIA on Thursday of misleading her and other lawmakers about its use of waterboarding during the Bush administration, escalating a controversy grown to include both political parties, the spy agency and the White House.

"It is not the policy of this agency to mislead the United States Congress," responded CIA spokesman George Little, although he refused to answer directly when asked whether Pelosi's accusation was accurate.

But the House's top Democrat, speaking at a news conference in the Capitol, was unequivocal about a CIA briefing she received in the fall of 2002.

"We were told that waterboarding was not being used," the speaker said. "That's the only mention, that they were not using it. And we now know that earlier they were." She suggested the CIA release the briefing material.

She says she was informed that waterboarding could, but wasn't, being used at the first briefing. What the hell did she think they even brought it up for if the CIA wasn't considering it's use. If she believed it to be wrong at that point, why didn't she raise the point then?

I can tell you why. One of three things:

1) She really did get briefed on it and supported it. ("Are you sure we're doing enough?")

2) She did get briefed on it, but didn't want to look like the wuss she is about protecting, or caring, the citizens of the U.S. from another attack.

3)(most likely)She was there, but just didn't hear it. She was just stuck in another of those committee meetings that look good on her resume, and wasn't listening to what was happening around her.

She has now altered what she's said so many times, she can't even remember what the truth of the moment is:



She was just informed by her aide that a briefing had taken place...nothing important...nothing you should worry your pretty little empty head about Senator.

She now is accusing the CIA of lying to her and misleading Congress.

"Yes, I am saying that they are misleading - that the CIA was misleading the Congress," Pelosi said.

She's kicked a dog that isn't going to take it lying down. If she believes the CIA is going to let this aspersion on their reputation sit, she's crazier that I thought she was. I think it shows in that last clip that she's just treading water now with no shore in sight.

Gemerational Theft Act

A very good article on the folly of the "Generational Theft Act" by Vox Day at WorldNetDaily:

Stimulus spelled out

Amidst the dire predictions of imminent catastrophe if Obama's stimulus package were not passed by the Congress, and equally dismal prophecies of how the stimulus will extend what is looking like a doozy of a depression, there has been a near-complete failure on the media's part to explain the core principles behind the fiscal stimulus to the American people. This is due to the near-complete ignorance of economics on the part of the mainstream media; one can hardly expect them to explain what they do not understand. Some readers may find it useful, then, if I attempt to rectify the situation.

Hey, they just report the news! People certainly don't expect them to do some research and find out if what they are told is true or that their may be people that disagree with what they are being fed.

In 1987, the new Federal Reserve chairman, Alan Greenspan, averted a financial meltdown in the fall when he used a variety of aggressive monetary policies to inject liquidity into the financial system, temporarily driving down the overnight repo rate from 7.5 percent to 5.5 percent in a matter of days. Interest rates, as measured by the effective federal funds rate, were slashed from 8.5 percent in late September to 5.5 percent in mid-December. The success of his actions in stabilizing the financial system gave great credence to the Monetarist school of economics, epitomized by Nobel Prize-winner Milton Friedman, who had long asserted that management of the money supply was the key to preventing the economy from contracting.

Friedman had long blamed the Federal Reserve for failing to respond aggressively enough to the stock market crash of 1929, and in collaboration with his co-author Anna Schwartz, had claimed that a more aggressive lowering of interest rates would have prevented the Great Depression. Greenspan's successful navigation of the 1987 crisis appeared to prove conclusively that the monetarist thesis was correct, and in 2002 led to current Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke making a humorous admission in his speech made in honor of Friedman's 90th birthday.

Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.

But then something odd happened:

Similar rate-cutting actions were begun in July 1990, February 1995, May 2000 and June 2006 when signs of economic contraction appeared. However, as the cuts came more often and the target rates fell lower, it began to become clear that these liquidity injections were no longer having the desired effect of propping up stock, real estate and commodity prices. Now that interest rates are effectively at zero but the economy is still in the process of shrinking, the failure of the monetarist theory has become obvious, especially given the continued failure of the Japanese economy to respond to extreme interest rate-cutting following its 1989 crash.

It slashing interest rates stopped working, plus we had the example of Japan's economy tanking using this principle, but nobody can put two and two together.

The failure of monetary policy has caused many economists and politicians to return to the Keynesian school, which primarily concerns itself with fiscal policy. Just as the Federal Reserve's control of the price of money – the interest rate – is the primary tool of the monetarists, government spending is the primary tool of the Keynesians, or more properly, Neo-Keynesians, since even the biggest fans of John Maynard Keynes have been forced to acknowledge at least some of the fundamental flaws in his economic theories. The core of the Keynesian theory of economic contraction is a failure of demand to meet supply, or to put it more simply, people are refusing to buy enough stuff to keep the economy growing. This is why Neo-Keynesians like Nobel Prize-winner Paul Krugman worry about "the looming hole in the U.S. economy," by which he means the difference between what could be produced by the economy and what will actually be bought.

So now we go back to the "semi" discredited system that didn't work.

This next quote is long, but explains it with an easy to understand example:

Consider a hypothetical example of an economy in which there are 100 cars. Because a car lasts for 10 years, every year 10 cars wear out and are replaced. But things have been going well and people are getting wealthier, so five of them buy second cars. The three car makers each sell five cars, and there are now 105 cars in the economy. However, in the second year, there is a stock market panic due to the failure of the Madagascar cashew harvest, so the central bank gets nervous and slashes interest rates. Ten cars wear out, and 10 are replaced, but thanks to the low interest rates, the automakers can offer zero percent leases and other creative forms of payment, which encourage 20 people to buy second cars. There are now 125 cars in the economy. Interest rates stay low for the next three years, and people continue to take advantage of the new car-financing deals, until there are 185 cars in an economy that only required 100 five years before.

Then, an Icelandic bank bets heavily on the Norwegian cod harvest and goes under. The global stock markets drop, people feel less wealthy, and car drivers decide to reduce their automotive consumption. Ten cars wear out, as always, but instead of being replaced by new cars, they are replaced by cars that still have seven good years on them sold by two-car owners who decide they really don't need their second car anymore. The car economy shrinks by 10 cars to 175 cars, but even worse, the annual gap between the demand and the supply capacity is 30 cars. So, what is the solution?

The monetarists would recommend cutting interest rates, but since they are already low, that's not a viable option. (And then, there is the fact that because low interest rates caused the problem in the first place, they cannot reasonably be expected to fix it.) The Keynesians would attempt to stimulate the economy by having the government fill in the demand gap by buying 30 cars, but this will only put off the problem for a year since there will be 30 more used cars available to the 10 people who will require replacement vehicles next year. The optimal solution is the Austrian one, which is to leave the economy alone and wait for the extra cars to wear out. This may be frustrating to the would-be hero politician who wishes to solve the problem through decisive legislation, but it is the only solution that will not make things materially worse in the future.

Hey, there are going to be a lot of fancy golf carts on the market next year.

Doing nothing is admittedly difficult in times of crisis. But it is always wise to keep in mind that there is no crisis so severe that government intervention cannot make it worse.

AAAAmen!!!

P.S.: See my new Debt Clock on the sidebar to find out what you owe.

Outside Of What Would Have Been a Good Article

Admit It: The Surge Worked
By Peter Beinart

Nobody can even write a conciliatory piece saying that some things went right without that last little dig. And this one pisses me off more than any other:

Convinced that the Reagan years had forever vindicated deregulated capitalism and unfettered American might, the Bushies blithely dismissed liberals who warned about deregulation...

For Gods sake look at the records!! Bush actually pushed for regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It was the Dems that stopped it. If those regs had been put in place, this collapse wouldn't have happened.

I Want My Relief! UPDATED

Where is it?

I bought my house 23 years ago. We tried Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but we didn't qualify, so we went with an adjustable. The interest was around 7.25%, but the payments were very affordable.

A little over a year later, the interest rates took a small jump (with economic indications of more increases to come), so we refinanced with a fixed rate. Got a decent deal and knew what our payments would be and could plan.

A few years later, the tax rules were changed so that interest on auto loans and a bunch of other things you do in everyday life couldn't be written off. We needed new cars, we had a ton of equity in the house, interest rates had dropped, so over the next few years, we pulled some of the equity out got decent vehicles, added a little to the home loan (tax deductible)and moved on with life.

I'm now separated from my now minimally waged wife (income cut in half), with all the same responsibilities, plus some debts that were a...surprise. When I signed those contracts, I didn't know that these things were going to happen! It isn't fair.

I've muddled through, so far. I'm paying off what I can when I can. I just deal with it one thing at a time. Once something is gone, I move to the next. Constant stress, but I keep hoping that there are no new things popping up. It's got to stop somewhere.

I had the privilege of listening to Maxine Waters today telling me that people who signed contracts saying they didn't understand them, or what could happen if interest rates go up. She informed me that due to lack of regulation, it wasn't their fault.

Let's go see what was said:
(Maxine starts at 2:00 and runs thu 3:18, but you really should watch the whole thing)




I was yelling at the TV so loud that I scared my dog.

I then got to hear a Republican(?) Rep from Michigan try to tell me that giving money to the auto companies is in my best interest.

(paraphrased)

Cavuto: Why should the taxpayer give their money to a failing company to continue?

Representative: It's not their money.

Say What?

From what I've read, about $3,000 of that 1 trillion is mine. $6,000 with my (still) wife. Either I pay it all now, or they just print more dollars that are worth 5% less...which will work out great for me trying to get out of my personal debt...what's another 5% added on?

I'm seriously considering not paying my mortgage for three months so that I can get the gov't to reduce my payments. Damn stupid of me to play by the rules of personal responsibility and to pay off any debt I incurred. I didn't understand everything in the multitude of pages I signed or initialed during refinancing...but I'm just a dumb oilfield worker, not a lawyer, so how can they hold me to it. The three biggest corporations in the world, with all their lawyers couldn't foresee signing contracts with the UAW would bankrupt them? Why do they get gov't money to correct their mistake, but not me?

I've lost faith in my country's ability to face up to missteps. When the market doesn't go they way they want, it's the fault of somebody else. Nobody told them that the economy cycles? After way too many years of an up market, nobody expected a down correction?

I bought my house at around 100K (I felt it was overpriced, but I loved and wanted to live in my home turf), and last year was it would list at around 550K...pretty good return. I didn't foresee this either. If I don't weather my current storm and have to sell my house, I'll still come out OK. I bought at a good time and survived long enough. Luck!

My Uncle gave me some of the best advice when I was around 16 and becoming aware of the stock market. He said "Never invest money that you can't afford to lose."

UPDATE:

I couldn't find the video of that asshole cogresscritter telling us "It isn't our money" at first, but ran across it at Hot Air this morning. This guy lost his reelection bid, but I bet the guy replacing him has big plans for HIS money also.

As Reality Rears It's Head

Am I surprised? Not at all. That it started so quickly did.

As I've been cruising around the web the last couple of days I've noticed a consistant theme t coming out of the Obambi camp and the Dhimmi Congresscritters..."We may not be able to deliver what we promised."

Let's start with the President-elect.

Back in June 2007:

“While we’re at it,” he said, “we’re going to close Guantanamo. And we’re going to restore habeas corpus. … We’re going to lead by example _ by not just word but by deed. That’s our vision for the future.

Now that he would be the one responsible for jihadi's running around the country the message from his team:

“You can’t be a purist and say there’s never any circumstance in which a democratic society can preventively detain someone,” said one civil liberties lawyer, David D. Cole, a Georgetown law professor who has been a critic of the Bush administration.

How about those changes in the tax codes to redistribute money to those less fortunate lazier? Our old friend Charlie Rangel, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees tax policy has a little epiphany:

New York Representative Charles Rangel said he’s revising his tax overhaul proposal to reduce U.S. corporate tax rates to 28 percent, down from the current rate of 35 percent.

Although like most of what comes out of Rangel's mouth he leaves out the details that contradict what he just said:

In July 2007, the Treasury Department said the U.S. could reduce the corporate tax rate to 25 percent by eliminating popular benefits such as a research credit and a deduction for making products domestically.

Rangel two months later also recommended repealing the deduction for domestic production, other incentives that primarily benefit multinational corporations, as well as tax benefits associated with a popular accounting method known as last-in, first-out.

So, they lower the taxes, but remove deductions for the things they want accomplished.

No deduction for research? How do they plan on getting companies to invest in developing all those new green energy systems?

No deduction for domestic production? Bye-bye domestic jobs.

And just for grins and giggles, let's not forget out esteemed Goddard Institute for Space Studies announcement that last month was the warmest October on record.

Really? Turns out they don't have, nor can they guarantee that they can get accurate figures to punch into their computers to predict the weather. What do they do, they reuse old data or just make up what they beleive it should be. Even in the face of facts that counter what they "feel".

The error was so glaring that when it was reported on the two blogs - run by the US meteorologist Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, the Canadian computer analyst who won fame for his expert debunking of the notorious “hockey stick” graph - GISS began hastily revising its figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new “hotspot” in the Arctic - in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year.

They lie, then when caught, make up a new lie, only to be caught again. Management at GISS needs to go now!

It's been two weeks since the elections and the Dems are feeling the heat from how the world works in reality. I don't think they believed any of the crap they spewed during the last two years, they knew if they could put off the collapse of the mortgage industry and confuse the populous long enough about what caused it, they could win by promising everything to everybody.

This whole thing reminds me of a little ditty from "The Best Little Whorehouse In Texas".