Friday, September 30, 2011

Stagflation, Lights and Tunnels

How clearer can we get: Prices Rising, But Spending Slows as Income Posts Drop

That is stagflation my friends. You have "the Ben Bernank" to thank for the flation and Barack Obama and the ReidPelosicrats for the stag. Told you so.

And as I also told you, we ain't pulling out until the end of next year. Businesses have hunkered down and cowered for nearly three years, they can do it for one more. They see the light at the end of the tunnel, they are not going to loosen the purse strings and hire and invest until they are out of the tunnel. But the stock market will anticipate this roughly six months prior to the fact. If, come May 2012, the light at the end of the tunnel is clearly not more of the Lightworker, the stock market should start to rally, really rally.

Green Energy Is Civilizational Insanity

Must see video and must read post...right here.

Thursday, September 29, 2011

Note to Bev Perdue & Friends, Actually Elections Are Your Best Escape Route

As the great battle of the Future of Government has raged, the Democrats have constantly and repeatedly told us, with unfailing message discipline, that even the most modest cuts to the federal government's budget would result in a litany of inhumanities - starving children, dying elderly, crumbling schools, falling bridges and everything right up to the destruction of the nation. Yet, it is now being revealed that the same crowd is stuffing the pockets of their donors, friends, family, and themselves to a grotesque degree. The nation's vaults have been opened to an array of Democratic Party cronies to extract multitudes of billions - billions, which we have been incessantly told are the difference between illiterate or educated children, the difference between granny enjoying her golden years or her early, painful death.

The vomit-inducing extent of the self-serving lies, hypocrisy and abuse of power is starting to emerge, and it is frightful. Crony after crony and donor after donor, coincidentally linked to politician after politician, is daily exposed with ungodly sums flowing into their insanely speculative ventures. This is why we've had to endure the sickeningly ponderous rally-cries such as "fierce moral urgency of change" and other banners dripping with phoniness. Not for any urgency or moral calling, but for a clique's designs on the Treasury.

Pollster Pat Caddell, through his polling work, has determined that America is in a "pre-revolutionary" mood. I should say so. Incompetent politicians run wasteful program after wasteful program, rack up trillions of dollars in debt and have the audacity to hector and lecture us about doing our fair share and giving back. All the while they are raiding the Treasury for themselves and their cronies. Then as one last anti-grace note in this string of abuses, they have temerity to suggest we give up our voting franchise so that they can escape accountability and sort things out. Pre-revolutionary indeed.

Actually - take note Bev Perdue & Co. - elections are the best thing you have going for you right now. With any luck you'll be voted out, allowed to return to society to live out your days peacefully, and then fade into obscurity. Suspend elections and, on current course, you'll probably be hunted down by mobs and strung up in the town square like the elitist pillagers of old. If I were you I'd take that safe retirement via the ballot box over doors one, two or three.

Funny How That Works

Oppose the black're racist. Support the black guy...also racist.

Democrats Open the Vaults for Rich Venture Capitalists

I have been warning (to all 15 of my readers) that we ought to beware of slick venture capitalists with Democratic ties. Well, we've shoveled billions down various rat holes, Solyndra being only one that has happened to have made some headlines. Furthermore, we continue to shovel billions down more rat holes. Looks like the latest one has that never-saw-that-coming quality to it.
But that’s not the best part. As both Gateway Pundit and American Glob discover, one of SolarReserve’s “investment partners” is Pacific Corporate Group, through its Clean Energy and Technology Fund. And PCG’s executive director is Ron Pelosi — brother of Nancy Pelosi’s husband.
I said it - "grease their bets with taxpayer cash" - and man are they ever. They are cleaning up at our expense as Democrats open the country's vaults to them. Just the other day I heard Democratic pollster Pat Caddell talk about America's two party system - the corrupt party and the stupid party. I can take issue with the stupid party despite grains of truth, but the corrupt party - that one is an unassailable truth.

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Still Not Interested in European Bitching

I happen to agree with our friends across the pond that Obama's lecture to Europe regarding its debt crisis is "overbearing, arrogant and absurd." But let me remind the Europeans that they had a hand in foisting this giant jackassaurus on us.

Hey Europe. Stop Bitching. You Asked for This.
Hey Brits, you helped foist this loser on the world. You piled on heaping quantities of bile and sundry distortions about America during the George W. Bush years and fomented a caricatured version of Euro-weenie anti-Americanism that set the stage for Barack Obama to don the mantle of world-healing savior. The "redemptive" message would have been laughable had you in Europe been measured, rather than unhinged, for the past six years. So, I don't want to hear your bitching. You may have your legitimate beefs, but we here across the pond have to survive these next four years praying our liberties remain intact and our economy doesn't crater, largely because of your hyperventilating about George W. Bush and imperial America. So shut your pie holes and take it like men. We have to.

While She Had Pros Flummoxed, I Had Sarah Palin Figured

I've already made the greatest prediction ever and things are moving my way for maybe making the second greatest prediction ever. Now, it looks like I had Sarah Palin's strategy sussed months ago while the media and the professional pundits were utterly confounded.

Check out her latest signals:

"Is a campaign too shackling?" she mused. As the GOP's 2008 vice presidential nominee, Palin said she felt encumbered by "handlers." Running for office "prohibits the freedom one needs to really make a difference," said the self-described "rogue" politician.

Added Palin: "You don't need a title to make a difference."

and compare them with this analysis that I made back in May:

Sarah Palin Is Shooting for Something Bigger Than the Presidency

I think I know what Sarah Palin is up to. I also think I know why the media is totally flummoxed about her intentions. She's going to do what nobody has really ever done, she's going to defeat a sitting President...without running for President herself.

She's going to energize not just "the base", but the entire population of the country that is not an Obama-bot. She's going to tour the country, rallying people for a rebirth of liberty, a re-commitment to the constitutional framework of limited government, and the first step in that process is to put an end to the Obama presidency. She's going to tell America that the GOP field is good, and certainly "good enough" for the task at hand, which is getting back to the energetic, independent, individualistic, innovative free people that we once were and rejecting a future of dependency and government control of every aspect of our lives. She is going to rally people for this cause and make sure they don't sit at home and view another four years of Barack Obama as a fait accompli.

She will be a one woman counter-balance to the MSM, which will be in overdrive aiding and abetting Obama's re-election. She going to whip up every Tea Party chapter across the land into a frenzy of activity and grass roots momentum. She (a woman - did you notice that Debbie Wasserman Schultz?) is going to be the talisman of the Republican Party. She's going to ensure that nobody sits 2012 out, that 2012 will not just be an election, but an inflection point for America. She's going to bury Hope and Change, and clear a path for Act II of the Reagan Revolution. She's going to attempt to steer the course of American history. That's a big task. She obviously feels that it's gonna take a woman to get it done.

But she won't run, which is why the media doesn't understand the plan. The idea is creative politics, it's selfless, it's principled, it end-runs the power of the media, and it's bigger than the Presidency - all things that the MSM just can't understand.
Who knows, maybe she's just bowing out and slinking home to Alaska, but I don't think so...

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

More Authoritarian Mask Slippage from the Left

There are deeply profound arguments, both fundamental and more nuanced, and centuries of human experience with political systems and structures that can be marshaled against this proposition. And I am sure that some folks somewhere will make those arguments and recount the historical record, but I am not going to be that person. Instead, I am going to go straight to the mockery phase, the richly deserved mockery phase that this moron of an elected official has invited based on her ludicrous proposition.

I have an alternate proposition for Governor Dumbass. How about we suspend, perhaps, tax payments for a couple of years. Don't hold it against me, I will, after all, be focusing on the economy and helping myself to recover from the past several years. Furthermore, I will help elected officials get past all the partisan bickering in Washington DC over how to spend my money, because I'll just keep it and they can focus on less contentious matters like naming buildings and declaring holidays.

I know you weren't kidding Governor. Nor am I. No elections, no tax payments. Molon labe.

"Tax the Rich" Is a Winning Strategy...?

So says Politico's Ben White. Um, er, I guess.

While I don't consider myself rich, I am, statistically speaking, rich indeed (upholding myth #2). I consider myself fortunate and am thankful for what I have and thankful to be able to work hard to achieve greater financial reward, but I am not, much like most Americans, unshackled from basic financial concerns.

As a small businessman and entrepreneur there are good years and bad years. The good years can be quite good, but in bad years you have to tighten the belt and alot of our family's wants and desires get scratched off the list. For example, some home improvement projects. I've got a handful of things I want to do around house - bathrooms, a new patio, some not insignificant landscaping, etc. I've made the plans and talked things over with various contractors - my kitchen/bath guys, stone masons, landscaper. But I've been telling them for awhile now that we are on hold until we have people who know what the hell they are doing in Washington, especially in the White House. I don't proselytize my politics to them, I'm not trying to change my plumber's vote (unlike this guy). I'm just talking frankly as one very concerned small business owner to another. "Things are on hold, I feel like there's a big fat target on my butt and business looks so uncertain," I say. And they get it. I'm not the only one telling them this.

Perhaps my landscaper or my stone guy may not internalize what I'm saying or he may not give a rat's tookus what I think, but I gotta think these guys are at least somewhat interested as to why their customers, like me, are holding back. And they talk to other guys in the trades, they sit around the dinner table with their families, and they go to summer barbecues. So when talk turns to politics and the economy, does the tax the rich stuff really resonate positively? I've got a $20,000 patio project teed up but won't pull the trigger because of Obama and the Pelosicrats. My stone guy knows this... is he really gung ho for taxing those "millionaires" who make $200,000??? I'm not so sure.

For every "rich" guy like me there has got to be three or four small businesses run by a guy who drives a van or a pickup truck that knows they would get more business but for all this pitchfork class warfare emanating from the White House. Not that everyone is in my same boat or thinks like I do, but alot are and do. There are nearly four million Americans who make more than $200,000 based on IRS data. If we're holding back on work for three or four service providers, that's 12-16 million other people whose livelihood is affected by our fears and concerns about the class warfare and anti-business rhetoric and policy coming out of the Obamacrats. Obama's popular vote margin was just shy of ten million with unprecedented turnout among normally low turnout groups. The popular vote margin hasn't been over 10 million since Reagan killed Mondale in 1984. More typically, the margin is 5 million or less.

"Tax the rich" is fraught with risk and if only that was the message. Obama's message is closer to "eat the rich" which means the risk is higher. Ben White's analysis seems like so much wonkish DC bubble garbage to me.

More Evidence of Clintonism Burying Obamaism

A small, but telling confirmation of my "Clintonite Resorgimento" theory.

Companies like IAC keep one or two slots on their Board of Directors for people connected to the halls of political power. They need to be one or two phone calls away from a high-octane mover and shaker in government and they need to have their interests and concerns talked about over dinner regularly among a certain crowd.

So which Obama-loyalist did IAC give that slot to?

Um, er...Chelsea Clinton? Huh?

Exactly. IAC is betting (or knows) that the key players in the Democratic Party of the future will be Clintonites and not Obamabots. All part of the subtle re-establishment of Clinton hegemony within the Democratic party, which by definition involves the marginalization of Hopenchange.

Checking In On ABBO

Is ABBO becoming conventional wisdom? I sure hope so.

Monday, September 26, 2011

Giants Cruz Over Beagles!

It has been my custom to award game balls to a worthy member of Big Blue for every Giant victory by placing a picture of the honored recipient next to a talismanic politician or official making news or affecting the public debate in a positive light. Past talismans have been Sen. Tom Coburn, CBO Chairman Doug Ellmendorf, and Governor Chris Christie. I had a hard time deciding who would carry the mantle of being the game ball trophy this year, so much so that I failed to award the game ball last week for the win against the St. Louis Lambs, also partly because there was very little honor in that victory. Yesterday was a different story, as there was much honor in the win against the hated Beagles of Philadelphia. Perry Fewell's Big Blue Defense resumed its habit of debilitating opposing quarterbacks and the offense obliged by putting sufficient points on the board - half those points the sole responsibility of unknown fill-in receiver Victor Cruz, whose two amazing TD plays defied any and all conventional wisdom and expectations. Furthermore a suitable talisman has conveniently emerged as if on cue. So congratulations #80, take your spot next to The Hermanator!

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Elizabeth Warren Has Never Heard of Pittsburgh, PA

Before you read my analysis, check out some far better ones, here...

My friends at Say Anything capture this newbie lefty icon Elizabeth Warren getting it all wrong and spouting gibberish about people getting wealthy on the backs of "us" or something. Check it out.

Of course, she's completely ignorant and dead wrong, both on the details and the theory. Naturally, the foundational principle of this country is that it all - all resources - belongs to us as individuals in a society and we give over what we choose to the government, which we have instituted, to steward it for us according to how we want it stewarded and for as long as we want it stewarded until we change our minds, at which time we can make new arrangements as we see fit because the government is our servant. The government is instituted by us and serves our priorities. We don't owe the government the fruits of our toil so that it can build roads, we see the need for a road and we task government with the job and we give it some money to do so. We may just as well decided to build that road in some other fashion, with or without government involvement, it is up to us.

That said, Warren doesn't know her history. She apparently has never heard of "one company towns" or doesn't seem to know why Pittsburgh, PA exists or why we have the Ambassador Bridge. She apparently has never asked herself, which came first "the chicken or the egg?" Well, let me tell you honey, it was the chicken. Warren seems to think that America had all these paved roads, police forces and educated children before these horrible businesses descended on us to free ride off of these resources. She is wrong.

Our early businesses set up shop and built the necessary infrastructure themselves or demanded that government, funded by the taxes that it paid and its workers paid, do it for them. Pullman, Illinois, part of Chicago is an example of one of those towns built almost entirely by that factory owner that Warren talks about. Bethlehem, PA is almost entirely the product of the activity and investment of the Bethlehem Steel Company. There are tens of thousands of these towns across America that were built by private industry and their legacy has been ceded over to the public sector over time as this nation grew to say nothing of industries that built whole regions. The country was a series of unconnected economic zones until the privately funded railroads started connecting them. Roads came later, and mostly at the urging (and aggressive persuasion shall we say) of the burgeoning automobile and oil industries. Remember, the oil industry was originally built around kerosene for home illumination, the auto industry was a lucky second birth for oil, and the auto/oil partnership generated enormous growth and thus wages and taxes for beholden politicians to spend in order to help their friends and benefactors in industry.

Warren is felony clueless if she thinks that it all got started by the hand of government. Business got the ball rolling and handed things off. Government services came next because business was focused on business and didn't feel like devoting management talent on things like roads and schools. I'm sorry to burst Warren's bubble, but business handed this stuff off to government because it was mundane and felt that mundane people should do mundane things. If something was important that wasn't getting done, business would basically buy/direct their friends in government to do what they wanted. Otherwise, they just employed the folks and told them to bitch to their politicians to get what they wanted out of their taxes which were hived off from their wages.

For the first part of this country's history, business built America and government just filled out the paperwork. After that an experienced and emerging civil servant class used the wealth of the exploding economy to take on grander projects. It has since gotten out of control and business is now setting up shop in far flung places and building their roads and schools. People in America today can get rich because they stand on the shoulders of giants, but those giants were not government bureaucrats. People can get rich today because of they were bequeathed a legacy of infrastructure inspired and funded by the pioneering and visionary efforts of mostly private individuals.

Finding Out What's In It, Ohio Version

So the Ohio Department of Insurance commissioned a study to see how ObamaCare would effect the insured in the Buckeye state. They predict that premium costs could increase by 55% at a minimum. First, that seems like a good number seeing as my premiums, since ObamaCare was enacted, have increased by 57%. Second, they could have saved alot of time and effort by just calling me up...

Bubba Sticks the (Final?) Knife In

Have I told you that the Clintonite machine is stewarding the Obama presidency toward a one term denouement? Why yes I have. 95% of it is behind the scenes, only stuff that geeks picked up on. The other 5% is out in the open, like this. Bubba is the fixer and he's fixing things.

I know there must be a scene in some movie somewhere in which the protagonist is running through some gauntlet, like a jungle or something, and getting pelted with darts that, as they accumulate, sap his strength. Ultimately our hero emerges into a clearing only to collapse from the multiple wounds at which point a large dark figure, the mastermind, emerges from just off-stage to finish off our protagonist with a final knife plunge, ensuring and taking credit for the finality of the protagonist's demise. The doomed, dart-ridden hero here is the Lightworker himself and the dark figure is Bubba sticking the knife in once and for all. Cut to black.

UPDATE: Why is Bubba doing this? Strategy and ego. First, strategy. Check this out from a professional pollster.
"The poll shows Democratic House candidates faring worse than they did in the 2010 midterms, being dragged down by an unpopular president who would lose to both Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Mitt Romney"
Sounds alot like this, no?
"First, if Obama wins another term it'll probably be accompanied by Republican gains in Congress and incumbency for many is a worse problem to have in the future than incumbency for one. Frankly, I think the Dems would rather run congressional candidates against a President Romney or President Perry rather than in tandem with an Obama second term"
Next is ego. This was me Aug. 11, 2011.
"Obama has been told it's over. He will not be given the keys to the Democratic Party's future and be allowed to own the vast apparatus of the party's traditional assets for decades to come as an all-conquering two term President. His presidency is in caretaker mode."
Basically, my view is no way Bubba cedes the title of reigning two-term icon to this bozo. James Taranto seems to agree:
"...if the president is re-elected, Clinton not only loses that singular status but is Obama's lesser in almost every way. Clinton was re-elected in a time of prosperity, not anemic growth and 9% unemployment. Whereas Clinton failed to persuade a Democratic Congress to pass health-care "reform," Obama succeeded. Clinton moved to the center and worked constructively with House Republicans, while Obama has hewed to the left.

And if Obama is re-elected, he will likely be the first Democrat since FDR to attract a popular-vote majority twice--a feat Clinton managed not even once.

If Obama is still president on Jan. 21, 2013, Clinton will have gone from Houdini to has-been. "
Remember, I posited this theory months ago and it is all starting to look like it is coming into clear focus. The Clintonite machine has declared Hopenchange over and is preparing a transition to the next phase of the Democratic Party. So while Mitt Romney may be Presidential in a central casting kinda way and Rick Perry may just be a bad-ass, Obama's real troubles are with the Big Man...Bubba himself...and may well be his biggest downfall.

Again On Generation Y

Drudge has the big headline "Lost Generation" so I might as well reprise my thoughts to Gen Yers...

Some of these are poignant and at times incisive, but might I also remind the GenYers that they are, as a group, one of the most doctrinaire liberal/left cohorts that America has ever seen. They are reflexive believers in the canon of liberalism and big government solutions. Not that it is their fault necessarily, they've been used by progressive elites as a voting block to advance the progressive agenda for decades. From the geniuses who ran MTV ("rock the vote") to the university professors who gave them good grades in return for happily accepting an indoctrination rather than an education, GenY's elders used and abused them. (BTW, progressive elites sold GYers Barack Obama the same way they sold them music, clothes, and movies, and they lapped it up.) They should have seen it but they didn't. Chances are many of them were warned by some fuddy-duddy Republican at some point in their lives, but instead they choose to mock and look askance at those types because all their cultural influences told them to. GenY was sold down the river, but they acquiesced either happily or meekly. Your elders failed you, but you also failed yourselves. You should have seen that the progressive dream that has been sold to you all your lives is a lie - you're smarter than that. So my reaction is a mix of mild sympathy and dismissal of your plight.

Austerity Fallacy

There are many fallacies pervading the issue of fiscal austerity around the globe. The first fallacy is theoretical or semantic. Governments around the world, particularly in Europe are not faced with the "pain" of going from normal to austere - they are faced with the requirement to go from profligate to more reasonable. They are not moving towards true austerity, they are moving slightly away from profligacy.

The second fallacy relates to practice. Keynesian jugheads in the media and in government keep telling us that economies will suffer greatly if faced with so-called "austerity" policies, i.e. government spending cutbacks. This is incorrect both in theory and in practice, but small government types can hardly hope to carry the day by arguing the theory, lefties are impervious to this. So we have to show that economies can grow despite, nay because of, reductions in government spending. Even then it will be an uphill battle, but it'll be somewhat easier. So it is good news that Ireland's economy is showing resiliency and growth under its "austerity" regime.
Ireland's economy grew strongly in the second quarter despite cutbacks in government spending, boosting hopes that it can stick to the terms of its bailout program and return to the international bond markets in 2013.

The Central Statistics Office said Thursday gross domestic product in the three months to June was 1.6% higher than in the first quarter and 2.3% higher than in the same period of 2010.

That was the fastest year-on-year expansion since the last three months of 2007, after which Ireland's previously fast-growing economy was felled by the financial crisis and the collapse of a debt-fueled property boom.

While the likes of Greece and Portugal attempt to sucker their new lenders with phony austerity, Ireland is getting down to the business of truly repairing its economy with credible measures. In time we're likely to hold Ireland out as a model of reform and recovery, and as an example that disproves all the Keynesian hokum (in addition to our failed stimulus here at home), much the same way that the stagflation of the 1970s (and today) has discredited the Phillips Curvers.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Operation "Rescue Obama With the Jews"

Recent events have conspired to cause the amount and nature of idiocy regarding the issue of Israel to become especially pronounced. The true genesis of this surge in idiocy is Lightworker Obama's disastrous policy approach to Israel, but the related events are, among others, Bob Turner's win in New York's 9th congressional district and Rick Perry's presidential candidacy. I'll let John Hinderaker handle the Perry-induced idiocy and I'll tackle NY-9.

It is no secret that Jewish voters in NY-9 overturned what was one of the most ironclad rules of American politics - New York Jews vote Democrat, no matter what. See here, here, and here for my take. It's a big Bidenite f***in' deal and, as you would suspect, the Obama-infatuated media is scrambling to do damage control. There is no better example than New York Magazine's latest cover article, "The First Jewish President". First of all, savor the revival of leftism's favorite (hoary) acclamation, the bestowal of extramural ethno-racial membership status. After all, what could be more ennobling for anybody than to be considered part of an ethnic or racial group of which one is clearly not? (Lefties lap this shit up, oblivious to the fact that it makes 70% of Americans puke.)

Anyway, on to the substance of this mission to rescue Obama with the Jews. The article is dense with bile, blindness and howlers of the first order, but the basic argument is akin to consoling a battered wife with the fact that at least her abusive husband won't leave her (and then telling all her girlfriends to lay off the husband, because he professes to love her despite the beatings). Let's skip over the opening ad hominem on Bibi Netanyahu, who harbors the apparent delusion that the 1967 borders are "indefensible," and who, we are reliably told by an "administration official" (real courage there), is a "small-minded, craven politician." But let's get straight to the chestnuts. Heilemann says:
"...Abbas could credibly claim that 126 of the 193 U.N. member states support his statehood initiative. Yet despite the damage thwarting that bid might do to America’s standing in the region, the Obamans have never wavered in going balls-out for Israel."
Huh? The Obamans are scrambling, not going "balls-out" reflective of their unwavering commitment to Israel. They are trying to put a beast back in a box, a beast they unleashed with their absolutely dreadful treatment of Israel and overt encouragement of Israel's enemies. I have highlighted just some of terrible approach to Israel before:
He has thoroughly trashed the alliance between the US and Israel and abandoned them to their own fate, which has emboldened Israels enemies. Obama has signaled to the world that he and Netanyahu cannot work together and he will not be coming to Bibi's aid. Thus, aggression against Israel has ramped up at a shocking pace because Israel's enemies know that the alliance between the US and Israel is at an all-time low point and they will probably never again get an opportunity like this again to damage the Jewish state. Rocket attacks have resumed from Gaza, Assad is sending waves of rabble-rousers over the border with Israel, terrorist attacks are being launched from Egypt, and, out of the blue, Turkey is talking war over the deliberately provocative and stupid Gaza aid flotilla. All the while, Obama eggs this on with sote voce and overt rebukes and demands that Israel return to the 1967 borders, again a crazy, out of the blue, development with no basis in policy reality or recent precedent.
Chestnut number two:
"In a way, history has been cruel to Obama, forcing him to succeed the wrong Bush—the one whose support for Israel, unlike that of his father, was uncritical to the point of blindness."
Ah yes, Obama is just a victim of circumstances, Bushian circumstances to be specific (aside: more of that liberal contradiction that Bush was an idiot but somehow has such power over circumstances as to shackle greatness into impotence). It's Bush's fault that he wasn't critical, because, you know, it is necessary to be critical of Israel - they deserve it. Um, Bush wasn't blindly solicitous of Israel, but he also understood that Israel is an ally, and an ally operating in particularly desperate conditions with aggressive and unreasonable enemies all around it. Bush had the good sense to support this ally by not making a show of any disagreements the US might have with it.

Next, Heilemann kicks the self-loathing liberal Jew + Obama-love into high gear:
"In attempting to apply tough love to Israel, Obama is trying to make a stalwart ally see that undertaking the painful and risky compromises necessary for peace with the Palestinians is the only way to preserve the Zionist dream—which is to say a future as a state both Jewish and democratic. His role here is not that of the callous assailant but of the caring and sober brother slapping his drunken sibling: The point is not to hurt the guy but to get him to sober up."
Yes, Turkey has, literally, as of two months ago gone from Israeli ally to threatening war, but Israel is the drunk in need of sobering? The mind boggles.

Channeling Walken, I'm thinking more cowbell:
"The suspicions regarding the bone-deepness of Obama’s bond with Israel were present from the start, and always rooted in a reading of his background that was as superficial as it was misguided. Yes, he was black. Yes, his middle name was Hussein. And yes, in his time in Hyde Park, his friends included Palestinian scholars and activists, notably the historian Rashid Khalidi. But far more crucial to Obama’s makeup and rise to prominence were his ties to Chicago’s Jewish milieu, whose players, from real-estate powerhouse Penny Pritzker to billionaire investor Lester Crown, were among his chief supporters and financial patrons. "
Translation: ignore Obama's choices and voluntary associations, this is all trumped by the fact that wealthy liberal Jews gave him money for the specific purpose of defeating John McCain.

More cowbell:
"This background meant that, although Obama was hardly an old hand on Israel when he became president, he was well attuned to the Jewish community and its views. “With the kind of exposure he had to Jewish backers, Jewish thinkers, in Illinois,” says deputy national-security adviser Ben Rhodes, “he came into office with a deeper understanding of Jewish culture and Jewish thought than, I would argue, any president in recent memory.”
Maybe, but a stretch on the face of it. Say what you will about George Bush, but last I checked, his dad was actually in the business of foreign relations with Israel. ChimpyHitler, as a practical matter alone, could have picked up more about Israel and its relationship with the US over Thanksgiving dinner than Obama could have absorbed with all his hobnobbing with "thinkers".

Heilemann goes on to morph what can only be deemed as bad chess on a global scale into some sort of airy academic notion of out-of-box thinking, what we in the real world call delusion.
"In combination with its policy of engagement with Iran, this fostered the impression that Obama’s stance amounted to punishing America’s truest friend in the region while rewarding its—and Israel’s—most lethal foe.

Obama’s advisers rightly point out that engagement with Iran was never any kind of reward; it was a way of reframing the issue, of putting the focus on Iran’s bad behavior and rallying international support for taking action against the rogue state—which, of course, later occurred with the imposition of U.N. sanctions."

If you believe that Obama's approach was not in a way rewarding or reassuring to the Iranian regime, that meaningful focus was placed on Iran's bad behavior, and that sanctions have had any effect on Iran's intentions and capabilities, well, then I cannot help you.

Yet more cowbell:

"Equally important, Obama’s advisers argue, is that the idea that the administration demanded little of the Palestinians is simply false. “I called it synchronized swimming,” recalls Prince. “The Israelis would do settlements, the Palestinians would do some stuff on incitement [of violence against Israel] and security, and other Arab states would undertake a variety of measures that would be steps to normalization. It could be reopening trade offices. It could be allowing overflights. It could be opening direct cell-phone connections. All stuff the Israelis said they really wanted. We spent many more hours in meetings with Arabs about Arab steps than we did with the Israelis. We had equally tough conversations with Arabs; the president had some hard meetings. But that didn’t get reported.”

Trade offices? Cell phone connections? "Some stuff on incitement of violence"?!?!?! Cogitate on that one - not cease to fire rockets that kill people into Israeli territory but "do some stuff on incitement of violence."
"Another blunder, and not a minor one, made by the administration revolved around Obama’s vaunted speech to the Muslim world in Cairo that June—which more than a few Jews perceived as coming at the expense of Israel, especially when Obama failed to visit Jerusalem on the same trip (or at any time thereafter). “We made a mistake,” admits one senior administration foreign-policy adviser. “Nobody thought of it as a big deal at the time, but, I mean, you’re in the neighborhood, you’re right down the street, and you don’t stop by for coffee?”
"Jews perceived"? I've got to stop here because I think you get the point about Heilemann's approach and from all this we can make some conclusions. Heilemann's central argument is so steeped in bias for Obama and against Netanyahu that he can't reasonably present Israel's concerns, and thus Netanyahu's defense of those concerns, and can't reasonably view Obama's behavior as detrimental to those concerns, which most American Jews clearly see. The article is of a typical liberal elitist ilk - "others" cannot see, either through misguided passion or cognitive incapacity, what I, enlightened and clear-thinking, can plainly see. To Heilemann, the world (or least the Jewish electorate of NY-9) is wrong and Heilemann is right, full stop, and it is a travesty that it is thus. A pretty typical, and tired, formula.

The truth is that American Jews can see clearly and reason from first principles. America needs to show and has shown, until now, extra steadfastness in its alliance with Israel based on unique circumstances. Israel used to have an unquestionably reliable friend who could, by virtue of its gravitational pull, attract other allies, at the very least allies of convenience. Israel no longer has that. The US is a somewhat reliable, hectoring friend and the lack of US gravitational pull has allowed allies, albeit of convenience, to morph quickly into antagonists. This is a diminution, an unambiguous diminution. The fact that there are at least some strands of friendship in evidence among the other, formerly strong, strands that are newly tattered is no consolation to American Jews. The Obama Media however says don't worry, the wife-beater isn't going to end the marriage.

Harsh Truth: "Economic Illiterates"

Harvey Golub, former Chairman and CEO of American Express, (who, if I am not mistaken, is a Democrat) takes President Obama to the woodshed over his "jobs plan." While the jobs plan is the direct locus of criticism, Golub's critique is much broader - this plan could only have come from a leader and a team so devoid of basic sense and understanding that, well, we are truly lost. Golub's whithering conclusion:
"From green jobs to "cash for clunkers," many of us have suspected that economic illiterates were setting the economic policy of this administration. The president's jobs plan proves the point. That the president could wail about the misfortunes of municipalities and argue that the federal government urgently needs to send cash, and then simultaneously propose a change in the tax treatment of municipal bonds that takes the cash back, reveals a depth of cluelessness that boggles the mind."
Ouch. Also, let it be noted that Golub is not just any old generic former CEO; he is the man that brought American Express back from the brink of near extinction after years of neglect and mismanagement. He saved an iconic American business and created thousands of jobs and tens of billions in wealth. He know whereof he speaks. Thus he has the stature to be able to take to the pages of the WSJ and call the President of the United States "clueless" and economically illiterate; but there are hundreds of thousands of businessmen and women that can't take such a public stand who share Golub's view. This is the voice of American business telling us what our deepest, most fundamental economic problem is right now - President Obama.

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

If We Don't Vote 'Em Out, We'll Eventually Have to String 'Em Up

The loathsome elitist petty tyrants among us - of which Tom Vilsack is just one example - will never stop usurping our freedoms and way of life, ultimately permanently altering the character of America, until we forcibly remove them to the margins of society and render them powerless.
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told members of the National Restaurant Association on Monday that Americans need to “adjust” their tastes so that they like the kind of food the government believes they should eat—and “we have to make sure that what we do is create the appropriate transition.”
Throughout history and across the globe, societies have chosen to deal with those who would treat us as slaves to their own arrogance by stringing them up on a pole in the town square. We have a more humane alternative, which is to vote them out and deny them legislative or regulatory power over our lives. So that's what we need to do. Trust me, if we don't we'll wind up having to string 'em up down the road anyway. If we cherish our freedom that is.

Boeing v. NLRB: You Won’t Believe the Diabolical Depths of the Obama Administration, OK Maybe You Will

I truly hope you appreciate this dear readers…I passed up luxury box seats at tonight’s Giants v. Rams game to go deep inside the vast right wing conspiracy in order to bring you back dispatches from the front lines of the great battle of our time. The biggest news of the night relates to the NLRB vs. Boeing issue. As you may know, Boeing built a $1 billion manufacturing facility in South Carolina to build 787 Dreamliners and the NLRB, at the behest of the Washington (state) machinists’ union, has attempted to prohibit Boeing from building planes in South Carolina. The actual remedy that the NLRB’s legal action seeks is to demand that Boeing scrap its plans in South Carolina and build a new facility in Washington state. The NLRB’s legal claim is dubious, but an ultimate remedy is years of legal wrangling off for Boeing if they fight this all the way through the legal system. Thus there is enormous business pressure on Boeing to settle.

For most of us, this much alone was enough to make the blood boil, but here is where the issue will send you through the roof. Guess what? The NLRB has a settlement in mind and, apparently, this type of settlement has already made it up to the Boardroom at Boeing. The NLRB will let it all drop, and let Boeing build planes at its $1 billion facility in South Carolina, if they submit to “card check” unionization at the Charleston facility. If they get this, the NLRB will then have the precedent of of imposing card check unionization procedures as a remedy on any employer that they deem to be a “labor law violator”. Look the wrong way at your union employees, boom, card check for you. Give too much money to Republicans, boom, card check for you.

Democrats couldn’t get card check through their House and Senate majorities an onto Obama’s desk, but they’ve figured out strategy to try and get the ability to impose it selectively. This NLRB gambit against Boeing is an attempt to impose through bullying and intimidation what they were unable to pass via legislation.

There are only three ways out of this: 1) Boeing’s Board of Directors hangs tough, refuses to settle, and fights this in the courts as far as it will go; 2) Obama loses in 2012 and a President Romney or President Perry undoes the current NLRB makeup, and; 3) an individual lawsuit brought by the National Right to Work Foundation Legal Defense Foundation on behalf of Boeing’s South Carolina’s workers succeeds. This is a massive battle over the basic level of freedoms relating economic activity, the underpinning of our prosperous economy for decades. The type of world that would prevail if the Obama administration wins this one, looks basically like France, where businesses can’t do anything without union say-so and 10% unemployment is the natural order of things as a result.

You can contact Boeing’s Board of Directors here. You can give to or learn about the NRTW’s foundation’s lawsuit here. And of course you can vote against Obama, even if freakin’ Donald Duck is the Republican nominee.

Note: cross-posted at SayAnything.

Sunny Thoughts in re Europe

Bret Stephens, the WSJ's great world affairs columnist, is actually an optimist. Thus today's column is a tad bracing.
"Greece was never going to be bailed out and will, sooner or later, default. The banks holding Greek debt will, sooner or later, be recapitalized. The recapitalization will be borne by German taxpayers, and it will bring them—sooner rather than later—to the outer limit of their forbearance. The Chinese will not ride to the rescue: They know not to throw good money after bad.

And then Italy will go Greek. Europe's crisis will lap on U.S. shores, and America's economic woes will lap on Europe's—a two-way tsunami.


What comes next is the explosion of the European project. Given what European leaders have made of that project over the past 30-odd years, it's not an altogether bad thing. But it will come at a massive cost. The riots of Athens will become those of Milan, Madrid and Marseilles. Parties of the fringe will gain greater sway. Border checkpoints will return. Currencies will be resurrected, then devalued. Countries will choose decay over reform. It's a long, likely parade of horribles."

Ouch. Can't say I disagree. My hope is that this sequence is proven wrong thusly: sometime after the Germans let/make Greece default (and go up in flames), it scares the bejesus out of the Italians and the Spaniards and they get their houses in order and Europe muddles its way, very begrudgingly, back to some semblance of the "hard facts" era of which Stephens speaks.

Here is another fine take:

Over the past 18 months, the fiction that chronically dysfunctional, spendthrift Greece could, even with massive handouts, reform its way back to economic health has cost Europe’s taxpayers billions that would have been better spent on offsetting the costs of an early and orderly write-down of the unpayable debts of a country of little importance. Worse still, the political pussyfooting over Greece has cost governments vital credibility at home and abroad and magnified the risks to the euro that they sought to avoid.

If the idea was that pouring money into Greece would divert attention from Portugal, Spain, or Italy, the strategy backfired: financial markets reasoned that if politicians lacked the courage to face the facts in Greece, what confidence could there be that peer pressure would compel Italy and Spain to put their appalling finances in order, starting with taking a wrecking ball to demolish their extravagant publicly funded networks of political patronage? The more Merkel and Sarkozy insist that Greece’s future lies squarely within the eurozone, the more they put the euro at risk.

Once again, you heard it here first.

Friday, September 16, 2011

Comparing My Take to That of the Pros

Two posts in the blogosphere today that echo some of my past analyses. First, Jay Cost has a lengthy analysis of the notion that Barack Obama is a popular president. It's a good read and echoes some thoughts I've penned here on NBfPB. First, Cost looks at the full approval trend from Hopeandchange Day 1 recognizes the obvious - it's been nothing but one way, down, except for two positive, but meaningless, blips. Here was my take on the blips:
The second thing that struck me was the two brief instances of inflection that Dear Leader experienced, one around the start of the year and the other after the bin Laden killing. The former was almost entirely a media conjuring. The MSM puffed up lame duck "victories" into some sort of unassailable comeback. I chronicled and debunked that mirage rather thoroughly here, here and here. I also came out fairly clearly on the "bin Laden bounce will fade" side.
and here was my take on the big picture:
My basic conclusion is this - the mega-trend, or the "big idea", is that Americans have always known deep in their bones that Obama was a gamble and they are now 90% convinced that they have lost that gamble. There is almost nothing that can stop this trend from playing out.
Cost is more non-committal on the meaning of the big picture, but he sees the macro trend for what it is - the Lightworker is not popular by standard definitions.

The other tidbit is from Politico via Hot Air - Bill Daley apparently isn't working his magic rebuilding Obama's reputation with the business community. As Capt. Ed suggests, the Daleys have never been known as political incompetents. So what's going on? What if Bill, just maybe, wasn't giving it his level best. What theory could possibly support that notion...
Jan. 12, 2011: "The Clintonite cadre will now set the conditions as best they can for Democratic success (work with Boehner, win back business) but otherwise allow Obama to blunder into a situation that enhances Hillary's profile."

Mar. 14, 2011: "...the Clintonites now own the Obama presidency lock, stock and barrel and...they would steward it as responsibly as possible for the sake of the party but ultimately phase the Obama era out"

Aug. 11, 2011: "His presidency is in caretaker mode. No, not as Peter Beinart posits in his latest nitwittery, where Obama is the caretaker of a declining America, but rather where the Clintonites are the caretakers of a declining Obama."

Ford: Don't Buy A Bailed Out Car

Here is Ford's new "anti-bailout" ad. Gee, who said that Ford would become the Tea Party car company something like two years ago? Guess I was dead on and it took Ford two years of focus groups and market research to figure it all out...

Jews Aren't Fooled, They Know Who Israel's Friends Are

Bob Turner, a Republican, is the new House Representative for New York's 9th congressional district and the first Republican to hold that office since 1923 in large part because of Jewish voters' repudiation of President Obama's policies toward Israel. A Gallup poll confirms Jewish voters eroding support for the Lightworker. Coincidentally, Rick Perry pens a vigorous defense of US support for Israel/indictment of Obama's Israel policy in today's WSJ.

I am missing something. We all know that Jews ought to fear the Christian right in America. We all know that our sophisticated urban core voting blocks are a bulwark for the preservation of American Jews' interests. I mean, we know these things! So, why is it that moronic, Christianist troglodytes always seem to come out in full throated support of Israel and cosmopolitan, enlightened intellectual types condemn Israel and support those who would wipe it from existence?? Could it be that everything we know is wrong? Nah!

No Sexy Ads On NYC Cabs

They told me that if I voted for John McCain that religious zealots would ensconce their prudishness into the rules and regulations that govern our lives and that not even our most progressive jurisdictions would be safe, and they were right!!!

With apologies to Prof. Instapundit, of course...

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Agrees With Rick Perry on Global Warming

You heard about that Nobel prize-winning physicist who quit the American Physical Society because of their aggressive support of the man-made global warming theory, right? Of course you did, it's all over the papers like the New York Times, the Washington Post and Charles Gibson is going to lead with it tonight...OK, maybe not. Anyway, you can read about it and much more here.

Hey, but nobody has seemed to make the obvious linkage...Nobel-winning physicist agrees with Rick Perry! As Democrats foam at the mouth and pop forehead veins at the prospect of a "global-warming-denying ... Republicans running my country," Rick Perry ought to calmly remind everybody that the Dr. Giaevers and Hal Lewises of world agree with him.

NY-9 and the Mind-Boggling, Rage-Inducing Arrogance of Obama

The election results from Tuesday's special election in New York's 9th congressional district exposed a major loss in loyalty from a voting block that has been among the most loyal to Democrats throughout history. Jews, and New York Jews in particular, have stood by Democrats for decades even as some Democrats have gone quite overboard pandering to the academic/progressive left's love affair with the Palestinian cause. Too often, these Democrats have made apologies for Palestinian terrorism and been openly hostile to Israeli governments, and yet Jews have stood by Democrats all these years. It is elemental for most NY Jews - yes, Israel is important, but you just don't vote for Republicans. It simply isn't done. Alas, in NY-9 the Jewish vote swung for Bob Turner, the Republican, in what is clearly viewed as a rebuke to President Obama over his policy toward Israel. This is an earthquake and I'll try to analyze it in just a bit, but first let's look at the White House's response. From the NY Times:

Tuesday’s Republican upset in New York’s Congressional election, they say, is a sign of bad things to come for Mr. Obama.

Sensing trouble, the Obama campaign and Democratic Party leaders have mobilized to solidify the president’s standing with Jewish voters. The Democratic National Committee has established a Jewish outreach program. The campaign is singling out Jewish groups, donors and other supporters with calls and e-mails to counter the Republican narrative that Mr. Obama is hostile to Israel.

Among those efforts is a multi-page set of talking points circulated last Friday with the title, “President Obama’s Stance on Israel: Myths vs. Facts.”

This is consonant with the typical reaction to recent electoral defeats for the Democrats. They got slaughtered last November and they attributed it to bad "messaging". Remember that one? They claimed that they talked over our heads, so we didn't understand them. They're always blaming the way they say things, not what they say or what they do. This stems from their intrinsic arrogance and self-assessment of superiority - they know that they are right on substance, it simply has to be a communication issue. Knowing this, "talking points" are exactly the remedy that one would expect the Obama administration to apply to this newly opened and gaping wound to his political fortune. Repackage the message.

Now, on to the why of the NY-9 Jewish vote. Democrats have dallied with Palestinian terrorists and hectored Israel for years and the Jewish vote has stayed loyal, so why now? Why did they abandon Obama now? The answer is that Obama has done more than slap Israel around and dance with Palestinian thugs. He has thoroughly trashed the alliance between the US and Israel and abandoned them to their own fate, which has emboldened Israels enemies. Obama has signaled to the world that he and Netanyahu cannot work together and he will not be coming to Bibi's aid. Thus, aggression against Israel has ramped up at a shocking pace because Israel's enemies know that the alliance between the US and Israel is at an all-time low point and they will probably never again get an opportunity like this again to damage the Jewish state. Rocket attacks have resumed from Gaza, Assad is sending waves of rabble-rousers over the border with Israel, terrorist attacks are being launched from Egypt, and, out of the blue, Turkey is talking war over the deliberately provocative and stupid Gaza aid flotilla. All the while, Obama eggs this on with sote voce and overt rebukes and demands that Israel return to the 1967 borders, again a crazy, out of the blue, development with no basis in policy reality or recent precedent. Israelis and American Jews understand that this can only be driven by pure animus and they understand there is no going back, he has unleashed the war dogs of the Middle East on Israel.

That is why Obama has lost swaths of the Jewish vote. It is a near unprecedented squandering of an asset, but not to worry, he has talking points.

Talking points. Obama has left Israel alone on the brink of war but he's gonna email out some talking points.

There there Jews, read these talking points.

The arrogance. The mind-boggling, rage-inducing arrogance.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Up 57% in Two Years. Thank You ObamaCare!

It's that time of year again, when my small business renews it's healthcare insurance plan. Last year my premiums went up 25% "to comply with provisions of the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act." This year, for the same policy coverage my premiums are only going up 19% (to almost $15,000 for two adults in their early forties and three young tykes under 10). So that's a 57% increase in premiums in two years. Gotta talk it over with the lovely Mrs. Baseball, but I'm thinking we're almost at the point where it is better to self-insure. Thank you ObamaCare.

Why Is the Stock Market Up?

Is yesterday's and today's market action part of the "One Term Rally"?
Secondarily, I think this is good for the stock market. The economy will muddle through for the remainder of this year and into next, but the further Obama slides and the lower his chances at reelection get, I think we will see an inversely proportional growth in economic optimism. The more it looks like Obama is a goner, the more American business leaders will feel like a giant weight is being lifted, the more entrepreneurs will feel like the sky is clearing. I predict a rough inverse correlation from here on in between Obama's poll numbers and the stock market - call it the "one term rally."
Hard to say with Europe such a big factor weighing on the markets. Sure, some politicians said some mildly reassuring thigns, but are we to believe that Europe's crisis is any less intractable today than it was two days ago? US politics is a distinct possibility as a driver of this market.

Self-Back Patting Post No.2

See below for part 1. Let's not forget the conventional wisdom of just 10 months ago that Obama was a lock to win re-election.

Me on Dec. 23, 2010:

"Dear Leader's problem is more fundamental - at best he is not as advertised (political moderate, world-class temperament, uniter, able to marshall the finest economic minds in the land, yadayadayada) and, at worst, he is a slick but completely overwhelmed blunderer and/or something just shy of the Manchurian candidate. Americans now understand the thinness of his resume and the shallowness of his character, and a one-sided (against us) treaty with a crumbling, two-bit power run by a bunch of lying thugs is not going to alter that fundamental calculus American voters. Voters are simply going to weigh chance to remove these deficiencies from office against what is currently an unknown alternative. The notion of these "political wins" having any bearing on Obama's re-election is missing the big picture, and missing it big."
Me on Jan. 21, 2011:
- Obama will run with unemployment at/near 10% and gas over $4. While not a lock, these are highly probable. The economy is recovering but not fast enough to add the number of jobs needed to help Obama politically. Jobs creators are justifiably cautious and the only shift has been in Obama's rhetoric; the nasty, job-killing stuff he has foisted on the economy is still fully operational down in the inner workings of the economy. Even if unemployment moderates a bit, it is a virtual certainty that it will be higher than when he took office. Not good. Gas will be over $4 and food prices will be higher and rising (either explicitly so or stealthily so). These are core pocketbook problems that Americans have historically taken out on incumbent Presidents.

- The world will look a mess, further revealling what a non-entity at best, a provocateur through his weakness at worst, Obama is on the world stage.

- ObamaCare will continue to backfire. Premiums will rise, doctors will refuse Medicare, drug prices will go up, among many other adverse developments. And we may even see the SCOTUS declare major portions of it unconstitutional. Under that scenario are we really going to re-elect the guy whose signature achievement proves to be a legally out-of-bounds, economic flop?
Me on March 18, 2011:
"The man is so appallingly, awfully, and disastrously appalling, awful and disastrous that it is hard for me to believe that he can have an easy time of it in 2012. And yes, I understand the power of incumbancy, but the evidence that has been mounting in favor of putting the Obama experiment behind us is overwhelming and growing everyday, and the arguments for the conventional wisdom are extraordinarily weak...Finally, there is the economy. No amount of carping, which I and others have amply done, can express the abysmally malign influence of the Pelosi-Reid-Obama nexus on the US economy. Although stronger than it was during the worst of the panic of 2008 and resultant recession, the economy is far from stronger, and worse, it doesn't feel strong where it counts, to average people."

I Was Early In Calling Exactly Where We Are Today

Just thought I'd reprise some of my perspicacious calls on the inevitable Obama meltdown that is now in fourth gear and headed downhill. Note these are just the greatest hits from 2009...

Oct 1, 2009:
"The die is cast on the overwhelming concern of the American people, the economy. Based on the last nine months' policy coming from Washington DC, decisions have already been made that have cemented an unexciting, jobless, recovery for at least the next 12-18 months. Stumbling on foreign policy has let loose forces that will prove intractable in the short run. Unattainable success on key issues has been over-hyped to the true believers who will almost certainly be disappointed. The loyalist media is just now starting to shine a critical light. The silent majority is no longer silent, exercised over the venality, arrogance, and buffoonery pervading our government. On present course, historians will be able to sum up the Obama presidency quite succinctly: "it seemed like a good idea at the time."
Oct. 22, 2009:
Remember you heard the precise path here:
1 - Media sheen fades
2 - Never loyal hangers-on (essentially everybody) peel off
3 - Effectiveness is gone
4 - America Moves On
Feb. 19, 2009:
"I guess what I am saying is what I have said before...if The One thinks he can shit on capital and business leaders for four years he's got another thing coming. People who hire other people will hide under their desks, the campaign money will dry up, the layoffs will accelerate, and his base will be be too fat and happy with their bailed-out mortgages and welfare checks to get off their asses to vote for him again. Your average, hard-working, tax-paying American...perhaps not. If Volcker and Buffett love this guy so much they'll do him a favor and whisper in his ear to get ahold of himself and just stand down for a spell. Otherwise, it is One Term City for the Big O...this guy's well of goodwill is a mile wide and an inch deep."
Feb. 3, 2009:
"Finally, and this is not a blunder but rather a fundamental flaw, Obama's legislative support is only as good as his public sheen. The reason he had to stack his administration with Clintonites is that he had no decent network to speak of. His limited experience in government, and life actually, has left him lacking in broad and deep connections to people who can achieve things and stand by him. His quick rise to popularity and electoral promise has attracted a cadre of government and business types to fill the ranks now, but they do so for the sake of Democratic power in and of itself. Does anyone think that previously loyal Clintonites/now Obamites will stay loyal if the bloom starts to come visibly off the rose? I truly wonder how much uphill sledding those around Obama now are prepared to endure. I guess some, but not much."

NY-9 Is Obama Waterloo

There was a congressional election in my neck of the woods last night. For non-New Yorkers, it may be difficult to understand just how Democratic this district is. You can get a taste via Drudge or some other source that helpfully points out that the Dems have held NY-9 since 1923.

That's a good start in understanding it. Let me add to the mix - up until recently it was inconceivable (look it up, b/c I mean truly inconceivable) that a Republican could win in this district. There are so many layers of Democrat/left beliefs entrenched in this district, I almost still don't believe that the Republican won. People in NY-9 believe that the government can do no wrong, that's first. They have read the NY Times everyday of their lives since the day after they learned to read and are highly skeptical of free market capitalism and couldn't conceive of any merit to limited government. Second, they are overwhelmingly Jewish. New York jews are raised to believe that Republicans are akin to Nazis. No matter how supportive Republicans and how antagonistic Democrats are to Israel respectively, New York jews just don't vote Republican, because they are taught that it would be inviting the next holocaust. Finally, NY-9 is union territory where the union/Democrat machinery is highly entrenched and active.

This was about as difficult a district to grab as the Republicans could face. The fact that they took it is, as Prof. Reynolds notes, is a "big f--in deal". For me this is the straw that will break the camels back. I have posited that there is a level of damage beyond which the Democrat party poobahs will not accept.
"This will be gut-wrenching for Dems, they are likely facing an intra-party debate on the fundamental question of whether to go all in for Obama and resurrect his presidency or pull the plug entirely on Hopeandchange and, as they so famously put it, "move on."
I think the pressure has been building, but after the NY-9 loss, I think we are at the tipping point. The generals will abandon the hill and redeploy forces - party money for 2012 will go to congressional races, local races and tangential progressive causes, Obama will have to spend only what he can raise, and numerous Democrats will abandon the President in their campaigns. The party will soon start positioning for 2014 and 2016. We've seen soft support erode, watch now for hard support to flee the Lightworker.

UPDATE: Bad analysis on my part...turns out it was all those Warren Harding Republicans turning out...

UPPDATE: Apparently John Fund and Andrew Breitbart are offering almost identical analysis as I have offered beginning almost a year ago...

Friday, September 09, 2011

You Heard It Here First

Just now is the financial media starting to give a voice to the idea that we should let Greece default. It is a shame. I've been saying it for awhile now. We could've been past this and moving on with life by now. Everyone else would have had the crap scared out of them and would on the way to actual, real fiscal sanity.

Thursday, September 08, 2011

Can We Send Erdogan Rick Perry's Polling Numbers?

Go read my latest post over at Say Anything and then ask yourself this question, "What are the chances that a President Rick Perry wouldn't call Erdogan up and shut him down faster than you can say "dead cai-yoat"?

Obama Mockery Is More Than Justified, It's Necessary

Here is my quote of the day:

"I can’t find the link now, but somebody was criticizing this feature a while back as “juvenile.” Well, I am quite deliberately rubbing it in, as the ridiculously inflated expectations for Obama are regularly and repeatedly exposed as . . . ridiculously inflated. But what’s really juvenile is expecting that an inexperienced former community organizer could successfully execute the office of President of the United States. And if I’m peeing all over the wave of hope-and-change hype that got him into office despite his obvious unsuitability, it’s to help ensure that nothing this disastrous happens again in my lifetime. I realize that it’s painful for those who fell victim to the mass hysteria to constantly be reminded of their foolishness, but I hope it’ll be the kind of pain that results in learning. . . ."

I have said much the same thing.

Let's couch this mockery in the language of the left - it's our version of a "teaching moment."

Caption Contest

Wednesday, September 07, 2011

Sympathy for Gen Yers? Some, But Very Little.

Some of these are poignant and at times incisive, but might I also remind the GenYers that they are, as a group, one of the most doctrinaire liberal/left cohorts that America has ever seen. They are reflexive believers in the canon of liberalism and big government solutions. Not that it is their fault necessarily, they've been used by progressive elites as a voting block to advance the progressive agenda for decades. From the geniuses who ran MTV ("rock the vote") to the university professors who gave them good grades in return for happily accepting an indoctrination rather than an education, GenY's elders used and abused them. (BTW, progressive elites sold GYers Barack Obama the same way they sold them music, clothes, and movies, and they lapped it up.) They should have seen it but they didn't. Chances are many of them were warned by some fuddy-duddy Republican at some point in their lives, but instead they choose to mock and look askance at those types because all their cultural influences told them to. GenY was sold down the river, but they acquiesced either happily or meekly. Your elders failed you, but you also failed yourselves. So my reaction is a mix of mild sympathy and dismissal of your plight.

Tuesday, September 06, 2011

Romney's Economic Team

I said to keep a close eye on anything Glenn Hubbard writes/says as he stood a chance of becoming one of the most influential economists in the country. That was if Mitt Romney could pull off a win. That is still a big if, but Hubbard is officially in the on-deck circle. Of course, the media will engage in reductio ad leftydum merely dubbing Hubbard a "former Bush officials" when obviously the reality is much more sophisticated than that. Hubbard is, of course, a highly respected economist, but more importantly he is arguably more of a true free marketer than anyone associated with the Bush administration. He wrote a decidely free-market policy approach book to healthcare and I've heard him say, "I'm a Republican econmist, I wouldn't tell governors what to do." Romney needs to be bold on economic policy to separate himself from pretty much everybody - Obama, Perry and (media reductio as evidence) Bush. Hubbard is as good a choice in that regard as anybody. As for Mankiw, he's fine as far as it goes, but I'm worried that Romney will be susceptible to his misguided "Pigou Club" obsession.

P.S. While have I no hard evidence to cite, I am 100% certain that Hubbard believes demand curves slope downward, which is, ya' know, a good thing to have in an economist. Is it not President Obama?

Friday, September 02, 2011

Crappy Jobs Report Is Poetic Justice

It is poetic justice for the Obama administration that they get a devastating no-growth jobs number print on the very day the news breaks that the federal government is suing a slew of banks. This White House has demonized them, regulated them, gone after their pay, and investigated them into submission. Now it is suing them. These jerkwaters are strangling nearly every critical aspect of the economic system - small business, big business, and the financial sector. A no-job growth economy is the inevitable result. Today's number was engineered in the White House, so they can pretty much choke on it.

Thursday, September 01, 2011

Krueger to CEA, So What?

I've been a little busy cleaning 1000 gallons of sewerage out of my basement, so I've not gotten a chance to comment on anything. When I heard that the Lightworker appointed Alan Krueger to be the new head of the Council of Economic Advisors, I had two reactions: 1) Oh, you mean the guy who found that demand curves slope upward, and 2) pretty much no matter who it is, Greg Mankiw will say it was a great choice.

Score and score.

Other bloggers have been combing through Krueger's scholarly work to amass hints and clues as to what Obama's future economic policy initiatives might look like. This is dumb and a useless exercise. Obama's economic policy initiatives will be standard progressive, big government, interventionist initiatives, Krueger notwithstanding. Why would anybody assume that Krueger will be any different from Christy Romer whose scholarly writing would have led one to believe that she would not have advocated a massive "stimulus" consisting of transfer payments and infrastructure spending? The head of the CEA may advise the President, but then he/she must turn around and sell/provide gloss to whatever policy the President decides to pursue. CEA heads do this because it is a plum job that is golden on one's resume and promises membership rewards in elite circles for the rest of one's life.

Home Prices In Greedless Canada Rebounding

Keep telling yourself that the financial crisis of 2008 had nothing to do with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Community Reinvestment Act and government's "affordable housing" crusade. It was all about those greedy bankers, those greedy US bankers, because there is no greed among bankers in places like Canada.

Awesome: Even More Orwellian Bullshit!

Time to update and recap the mountain of Orwellian Bullshit that has emanated from the federal government under Obama.

Let's add "federal family" to the already too long and too distressing list:

- Individual Responsibility Provision
- Overseas Contingency Operations
- Man-Made Disasters
- Quality-Adjusted Remaining Life Years
- Net Neutrality
- "The System Worked"
- "We need to reeducate the American public over the benefits of Obamacare"
- "We Gotta Spend Money to Keep from Going Broke."
- Employee Free Choice Act
- Shovel-Ready Projects
- "Spending Reductions in the Tax Code"