AMERICAN PIES

In Sarah McLachlan's wonderful, double-platinum 2003 album Afterglow, she has a song called "World on Fire".  It is a paean to left wing ideology, with one really standout line:

"The fortunes of one man means less for some"

This is the melodious summation of the democratic argument for reelection in 2012.  It is most often illustrated with the pie analogy the left uses ad nauseum about eeevil rich guys taking huge pieces of the economic pie and only leaving thin little slivers for the rest of the proletariat to squabble over. (by the way, how much is Ms. McLachlan worth again?  More than her sound tech, I bet)

When most world history has dictated that those in power allocate resources, it tends to be an acceptable world view.  In order to to rationalize the deprivation and need that system imposes due to its participants' inevitable gluttonous greed, the theory develops that there just aren't enough resources to give to everyone.  It makes a certain amount of sense.

But here in America, we have a different mentality.  Or at least, we used to.  In America, each and every one of us has the freedom to go out there and...well, make pies of our own.  It's not for us to wait for government to hand out the piddling little slice they deem worthy.  All government can do here is try to limit the size of your pie by, say, demanding the addition of an ingredient that doesn't exist yet or by burdening  you with so many taxes that it's just not worth it to try to make a big pie.  Instead you make a smaller one or use cheaper ingredients or, maybe, have fewer assistants in the shop.

The problem is, the Baker-in-Chief loves pie, and simply cannot resist dipping his fingers into as many as he can, effectively cornering the pastry market by forcing bakers to give more than half of their wares to him.  The cronies and donors get first crack at the best ingredients now and when they burn their pies, he's always there with a fresh one for them, courtesy of the neighborhood housewives.

I find it quite fitting that a symbol of America is apple pie.  Here in America, we don't squabble over crumbs, we make our own damn pie, thankyouverymuch.

Or at least, we used to.  At one time, Susie Jones cooling a prize-winning deep dish caramel apple streusel on her windowsill would have inspired Betsy Smith to make her own mouth-watering creation.  Nowadays, Betsy would call the town council and have Susie's pie removed, citing scent allergies, an aversion to the overt oppression of the patriotic reference to which apple pies allude and a feeling of social injustice and victimization because her oven did not  spontaneously produce a pie when she demanded one.  After rigorous investigation on the local, state and federal levels, Susie and her family are finally left alone to enjoy the forty-seven percent of the pie they are generously allowed to keep (the other fifty-three percent being redistributed to Betsy and other, hopefully more worthy, recipients) and the oven industry has strict new standards for mandatory spontaneous pie manifestation technology within the next decade.  Naturally, a stiff penalty will be incurred if said technology is not implemented within the allotted time.

The biggest problem seems to be that it's not just a matter of fighting over crumbs anymore. More than half of us are telling our government that it's okay to go ahead and help themselves an enormous chunk of someone else's pie so we don't have to be bothered taking the risk of jumping the flaming hoops required for making our own.  We've gone from "I want what you have so I'm going to go out and get it for myself" to "I want what you have so I'm going to take yours".  It's a violation along the lines of what happened to that poor, innocent apple pie in the 1999 movie "American Pie".  It is a defiling of our system, and the inevitable outcome will be stagnation and riots a la Paris and Athens.  When only one pie is allowed, deprivation is sure to follow.

Which brings us to Mitt Romney. He understands that every man is his own baker, and should be able to make whatever size - and flavor - pie he (lawfully) chooses.  He knows that there should be a few rules about baking, such as banning endangered animal meat pies, or using quality ingredients in a clean, safe environment so the consumer and the baker aren't injured.  Such common sense rules and regulations are part and parcel of a well-run workplace.  But government intrusion into every aspect of the baking process is not. 

We really need to get Chef Obama and his inexperienced sous staff out of the kitchen and let the real drivers of the economy - the neighborhood bakers like you and me - get to work.  Here's a hint, Chef - the ingredients you were left with aren't the problem, it's the recipe you insist on following.  That particular souffle will fall every time, as it has in countless state-run kitchens across the globe.

It's time for government to get out of the kitchen and let the bakers bake again.

Read more...

AMERICAN PIES

TAKING A GAMBLE

President Obama's campaign has rolled out yet another new campaign slogan on his new bus tour across the swing states of America.  Nice touch, by the way, doing a tour to illustrate Obama's focus on American jobs (as opposed to Romney's illusory outsourcing) with a tour bus made in Canada.  One can only imagine how hilarious that would be, if only it was George W. Bush at the wheel.  Anyhoo, once again the President's brain stormers fall a bit short with the new campaign slogan:

"Betting on America".

Hmmmm....Is it really a good idea to encourage a mental link between the president, his agenda and gambling?


It is, of course, meant to give a sense of optimism; a feeling that ultimately America will live up to the president's vision  The problem is, the American people are somewhat less than optimistic these days, and aren't necessarily interested in the America that is being envisioned for them. 

The most glaring problem is that references to betting tend to bring to mind things like, say, the money gambled on Solyndra, Abound Solar, and many other "green" companies the Speculator-in-Chief bet taxpayer money on and lost.  Instead of seeing the obvious - that the technology is not fully developed and (or should I say, because) the market isn't ready yet - he instead presses for further "investment" in green companies.  After all, it's not like he's gambling with his own money, right? (and when he runs out of taxpayer chips, surely pit boss Hu will be happy to loan him another stack)

On a side note, that popular talking point about oil companies getting subsidies, so it's only "fair" (how I've come to hate that word) that green companies should too is complete bull.  Oil companies do not receive taxpayer subsidies.  They receive tax deductions, and that is a different animal entirely.  The former requires the government to pay large (sometimes downright enormous) sums of taxpayer money to companies in order to fuel research and development.  The latter allows companies to write off some of their costs, such as R&D, so they can retain more of their earnings to reinvest in the company and it's workforce, forking over less to Uncle Sam.  Big difference.

References to placing bets may also make one think of the doubling down that has been done over the past few years by the gamblin' man with the keynesian plan.  From the contraception "compromise" that is merely a one-year extension before the church must put aside their fundamental principles and join the collective to the repeated demands for more stimulus, it's been all about ignoring the critics, ignoring the people, ignoring the constitution, even ignoring common sense and sticking with his favorite theories.   Freedom OF religion has become freedom FROM religion, so any infringement upon the church is now perversely perceived as a win for individual liberty. Granting a one-year waiver is not a compromise, it's a demand for compliance - just at a later date.  As for the new calls for stimulus, he can call it a jobs bill all he wants, but it sure as heck sounds like a smaller version of Porkulus - the original "jobs" bill that has resulted in 8.2% unemployment two years after it was passed.  And here we are again, with Mr. Bigstuff looking to buy friends and peddle influence with another hand-out to help profligate states pay for teachers, police and firefighters.  But hey, we'll win next time, honest - our luck's just got to change!  The problem isn't the policy, we just didn't bet enough! 

That word, "Betting", might even bring to mind the shady numbers racket the media has been trying to swindle the American public with - from bogus polls to deceptive editing - in order to make the case for another term for the First Bookie.  Speaking of working the numbers, did the president really think that the American public would buy that ridiculous, obscure left-wing blog post about Obama being the most frugal president since Eisenhower?  Yeah, right.  The largest deficit under Bush was $458 billion, the smallest under Obama has been $1.2 trillion.  But he's frugal, whereas Bush was irresponsible and unpatriotic.  Uh-huh.

It seems the overarching plea of the Obama campaign is for people to take a chance on him, once again.  Let it ride, America, our luck will turn!

Perhaps on some deeper level, even Team Obama knows their failed and yet unaltered agenda is, at best, a crap shoot.

Read more...

TAKING A GAMBLE

FOUR REASONS Updated

There has been a lot of talk in both the media and the republican establishment about Mitt Romney being the only truly electable GOP candidate.  It is common opinion amongst the pundits that Romney is the best person to go up against President Obama and win and polling seems to support this theory.  The problem is, many conservative voters just aren't buying what they are selling.  His inability to garner more than twenty-five percent support, spun in the press as consistent front-runner status, was more about the other seventy-five percent looking for someone else.  He ran in 2008; we know who he is and what he's done and we see some major problems with his candidacy.  The pundits are happy to write it off as tea partiers being too stupid to know what's good for them, but when you look at the facts, their spin just doesn't add up.

As a little reminder, these are the same group of people who sold us Sen. John McCain as the only reasonable, electable, moderate candidate, blah, blah, blah.  The problem isn't that the Tea Party is too conservative.  The problem is that the country has been dragged so far to the left by the rise of Obama, Pelosi and their radical progressive ilk that anything not progressive or borderline socialist seems excessively conservative by comparison.  Let's not forget, too, that Romney's electability is a bit of a myth in that the man has run for senate, governor and president in the past with only one resulting win, his single term of office as Governor of Massachusetts.  If being 1-3 is a winning record, then my Eagles aren't doing nearly as bad as I thought!
That aside, there are four main reasons why Tea Party conservatives tend to want anyone but Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee:

1) Romneycare.  This is a no brainer, and the biggest hurdle he faces.  Romneycare knocks out one of the biggest political bones of contention - Obamacare - thus neutralizing that line of attack.  Mitt can talk about the difference between state mandates and federal mandates until he's blue in the face, but for many in the electorate, a mandate is a mandate.  If he felt able to mandate once before, who's to say he won't mandate again?  After all, even Obama himself on the campaign trail in 2008 reassured Americans that he would not sign any bill that had an individual mandate.

2) Job Growth.  I won't call it 'job creation' because, as we all know, government doesn't create private sector jobs, it only creates the environment for job creation.  Anyhoo.  Romney's record on job growth in his years as Governor of Massachussetts is pretty dismal.  Forty-seventh out of fifty isn't very good, no matter how you slice it.  In addition, the state's unemployment ranking went from twenty-ninth to seventeenth after three years of Romney's stewardship.  Considering jobs are second only to the economy at large for voters, this record can hardly be seen as a recommendation.

3) Bain Capital.  Obama and his DNC operatives have been working overtime on ginning up some good old-fashioned class warfare, and a Romney candidacy  might be at the heart of it.  This picture sure doesn't help.  It will be easy for Obama and democrats to tie Romney in with the Wall Street crowd.  Plus, Bain was all about buying failing companies and dismantling them - thus putting lots of people out of work.  Bain + Romney = Rethuglican Meaniehead.

4) The Cool Factor.  President Obama and Mitt Romney have something other than Obamneycare in common - their cool quotient.  And I don't mean 'cool' like James Dean Cool (sorry, Obots).  I mean cool like cold fish, unapproachable, chilly.  The reason conservatives haven't warmed up to Romney is because he's just not, well...warm.  Herman Cain made it to the top tier, even with his abysmal foreign policy chops, because he's a genuine, likeable guy.  He is also someone who sees life the way a majority of Americans do; not from a lifetime of privilege and politics, but as someone who worked his way to prosperity against the odds.  His enthusiasm for and love of country was also a winning combination for patriotic Americans tired of being told to be ashamed of their country.

The American people have been through a lot over the past ten years or so.  When Barack Obama was elected into office, we thought we were getting a charismatic, empathetic young dreamer who wanted to unite this country and move it forward into the new century.  Instead we got an arrogant man whose ideology is a throwback to 1933; someone who has spent most of his term of office attempting to gin up disagreements between various and sundry factions in America. 

Right now, most of us just want someone to tell us it's going to be okay, that the future will bring a return to the heights we once enjoyed; that we will some day be the shining city on the hill once more.  Instead we get an absentee president who is too busy vacationing, fundraising or trash talking us to spend any time on the myriad crises we face here at home - one of which is a crisis of confidence.  It is this crisis that many Americans have a hard time seeing Mitt Romney ease.  His aloofness and untouchable, Candidate Ken™-like quality is off-putting.   He will be easily depicted as an elite, upper crust persona, reinforcing the idea of a ruling class and an inability to empathize with average Americans.   Obama, on the other hand, the beneficent redistributer of all things welfare, will be painted as the saint of the working class in contrast by his lapdog press.

The complicit media is certainly doing their part to steer the masses towards Romney, and it's not hard to see why.  Ultimately, people aren't warming up to Mitt and probably won't. It will once again be an election where people hold their noses and vote for the lesser evil. The saving grace in the general election is the enormous enthusiasm gap between conservatives and liberals, but having to rely heavily on the electorate's dislike of Obama instead of enthusiasm for their candidate to turn out voters is a risky chance against an opponent who is as well funded and organized as the president. 

The 2012 election isn't going to be just about getting rid of Obama (although that alone would do an awful lot to restore confidence), it's also about what his successor will do when he/she take office.  If we have learned anything from the election of Barack Obama it is that a) we need to thoroughly vet candidates and b) we need more than 'hope and change' as a platform.  For many independents, there won't a lot of daylight between Obama and Romney.  Quite often, when you put people in a position where they must choose either the devil they know or the devil they don't, they will either vote for the status quo or abstain altogether.

There's a good chance that whoever the republicans nominate will win over President Obama.  After all, the man has ushered in an age of food stamps, persistently high unemployment, over-regulation and out-of-control spending.  Even the worst RINO would be hard pressed to match his record.  But the American people are tired of choosing the lesser of two evils.  We want someone who will give us a different choice, and Romney just doesn't seem to be the guy for that.  

Let's face it.  If Romney wins the nomination, tea partiers will vote for him.  To stay home would be to give their vote to Obama, and that is something no self-respecting tea partier will  do.  But nominating Romney will keep the GOP on the ropes in the general election by taking away all the major points of attack. It's bad strategy, pure and simple.  Independents who haven't been paying attention are an unknown quantity and the target of persuasion in a general election, so a strong case based on the issues must be made against Obama to combat the mud, smoke and mirrors sure to be on the offing from the DNC. 

There is far too much riding on the outcome of the 2012 elections to allow a Romney nomination to take such vital weapons out of the quiver.

UPDATE:  ABC's Jake Tapper has three reasons why Mitt Romney shouldn't be the conservative frontrunner.

Read more...

FOUR REASONS Updated

A BUFFETT OF MONEY

Billionaire hedge fund guru Warren Buffett was the latest progressive recently calling for higher taxes on the rich* with an op-ed in the New York Times (somebody please send him this link).   He claims he only paid seventeen percent in taxes last year; far less than others in his own company:

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

Why do they feel so compelled?  Are these "blessings" being showered upon them done out of the kindness of legislative hearts, or could there be other, more base reasons?  Could it possibly be the millions of dollars people like Buffett shower on political campaigns?  Perhaps the one-on-one exposure with certain members of government - exposure of which their own constituents (and the ones who ultimately pay the price for these dealings) can only dream?  Or maybe the odd coincidence of so many former federal employees finding themselves jobs on Wall Street or K Street with the help of crony connections?  A spotted owl is made endangered through no fault of it's own.  The same cannot be said about the 'coddled rich'.  It's called corruption, Mr. Buffett, and you are complicit.

In his op-ed, he raises good points about capital gains and other loopholes but ultimately, he isn't looking for tax reform, he's calling for tax increases. 

Big difference.

What we need is tax reform - removing loopholes and carve-outs and widening the tax base.  So why would he call for tax increases instead?  Well, it seems there is a little piece of information that Mr. Buffett and the NY Times forgot to mention (full disclosure is for suckers).   Apparently Mr. Buffett's company offers certain investment plans that, if taxes were to go up, would see a marked increase in business due to their sheltering natures, and thus a tidy profit for Mr. Buffett.  Who will then instruct his small army of tax attorneys and accountants - who surely couldn't be part of the reason he only paid seventeen percent - to find every loophole possible (conveniently provided by his pals in Congress after some vigorous lobbying) to keep from paying as little of the new taxes as possible. 

What a racket.

Lets not forget, too, that he gets to play the patriotic hero, swooping in to the rescue as well as giving his good buddy Obama a nice little talking point for the campaign trail.  Everybody wins!  Well, except the middle class, whose 'millionaires and billionaires' in the $200,000 tax bracket take one on the chin.

But wait, there's more!

Not only will Buffett profit quite tidily by the increase in business, but it turns out Omaha's favorite son's business has had a bit of a problem paying it's taxes.  It seems that Berkshire Hathaway, Buffett's influential investment firm, hasn't paid it's taxes in almost a decade - since 2002, to be exact. 

Which begs the question: Why, exactly, he is demanding taxes be raised because of 'shared sacrifice', when he isn't even paying what he owes now?

But wait, there's more!

Last week, President Obama made a little phone call to his dear friend Buffett, giving him a heads up on the situation with the floundering  Bank of America.  Buffett had a bathtub epiphany and decided to invest $5 billion (the article is really wonky but highly enlightening)  in the company. Except he really didn't.  Technically, the warrants BofA offered him equals about half the amount he invested - $2.45 billion:

So Buffett is really only injecting $2.55 billion of new capital into Bank of America and receiving $300 million per year in interest (6% * $5 billion). If you divide $300 million by $2.55 billion, you get an effective interest rate on Buffett’s investment of 11.8%. That’s pretty expensive for a bank that claims it doesn’t need any new capital!

Guess what else he got out of the deal?  A nifty little tax break.  It doesn't take an oracle to see why he jumped all over this deal.  Did I mention Buffett is throwing a big fundraiser for Obama at the end of September?  Apparently the party favors will be back scratchers.

The only problem for Buffett is that it is beginning to seem like he is using his reputation of having a nose for deals to promote the Obama agenda and people are starting to question whether his famous instincts haven't been dulled by ideology.  The cash infusion into BofA was supposed to foster confidence.  Instead, there are grumbles about how much trouble the bank is really in. 

With our paychecks shrinking and the cost of goods rising, it's getting harder and harder to pay the bills and put dinner on the table.  Getting lectured by the billionaire buddy of the Spender-in-Chief about "shared sacrifice" as his political connections help him make hundreds of millions of dollars in profits while simultaneously evading taxes is rather hard to swallow.   


*  "Rich"  being 'millionaires' and 'billionaires' making a staggering $200,000 and up.  Also known as making enough to be taxed but not enough to be able to afford the accountants and lawyers to get out of the taxes, like real millionaires and billionaires.  Bye-bye small business and middle class!

Read more...

A BUFFETT OF MONEY

THE SPENDING IS NUTS

My husband sent me this (thanks, Joe!), and I just had to post it.  It is a short film by Justin Folk called "The Spending is Nuts".  It's a charming story about a nation of squirrels gone awry.  This film is so good, you might even want to show it to your kids (via ebaums world):





Looks like it's up to us to give those squirrels a happy ending in 2012!

Read more...

THE SPENDING IS NUTS

ATTACK OF THE DEBT TERRORISTS

The best way to defang a verbal attack is to own the label being applied.  The past few weeks have shown that the newest label for Tea Partiers is "terrorist".  Perhaps it's because the accusing liberals are struck with fear every time they realize the Tea Partiers really were elected with a mandate, refuse to back down and actually gain strength by standing strong against politics as usual.  Perhaps it's just political hackery at it's most base.  But when even the Vice President is using the smear (a charge he has since denied), you know it's gone mainstream.   Go figure - the tea party movement is all about defusing the debt bomb progressives from both parties have spent decades building, but they are the terrorists.  Huh. 

So I have a suggestion. For all you tea partiers who are offended by the slur (as was I at first), rethink your offense. Let's take it and make it work for us. They want to call us terrorists?  Well, okay.  Let's take a look at the movement first, and what motivated it on it's current...well, for want of a better word, jihad.  It really has its roots in the Bush administration, specifically those who voted out republicans in 2006 due to their RINO tendency to spend like a debutant with daddy's credit card.  The grumbling grew in the summer of 2008 when the TARP scheme was hatched and ushered in the age of Obama.  The movement really exploded in 2009 in the run-up to the passage of the failed nearly trillion-dollar "stimulus" bill and has established itself as a fiscal conservative David battling the Goliath of tax and spend Washington.  They dealt the beast quite a blow last November and gained some power as a result.  The victims of the Tea Party onslaught were strewn across both sides of the aisle then; the only common thread being their profligate, politics-as-usual ways. 

It might help to swallow the bitter pill of the terrorist label to know that you are, actually, in excellent company. 

The newly minted "Debt Terrorists" should release their manifesto:

Be warned, all you big spenders on Capitol Hill, your days are numbered. The agenda is clear. There will be no stopping until these demands are met:

1) Cut spending on a deep, meaningful, long term level

2) Cap spending levels by tying them to GDP

3) Balanced Budget Amendment

4) Reform Social Security (a good place to start is means testing)

5) Reform Medicare (means test here, too)

6) Repeal of the economy killing ObamaCare legislation

7) Rein in the out of control EPA and NLRB

8) Revamp tax code - lower it, flatten it out and get rid of the loopholes

If you do not give in to these demands, you will be replaced with someone who will in the next election.  If you think we're not as good as our word, consider the sixty-three who didn't come back in 2010.  We mean business.

Please note "create jobs" is not on the list. Why?  Because government doesn't create jobs it only creates the conditions to create jobs, that's why. But if the things on that list are done, jobs will follow.

If that is what the left calls "terrorism" these days, then terrorists we are. And if part of the jihad is having to stomp on Harry, Barry and Nancy's toes to get them to open their mouths and take the medicine We the People voted for last year, well so be it. 

The debt jihad has begun.

Read more...

ATTACK OF THE DEBT TERRORISTS

CONGRESSIONAL HYSTERIA

The democrats' keening over the debt ceiling debate has reached such a fever pitch that the sound is rapidly reaching dog-whistle decibels.  It's quite amazing, really. 

First was President Obama's warning to seniors that if he doesn't get the plan he wants, Gramma doesn't get her check (baseless fear mongering, at best).  Ah, the Chicago way.  As Capone said, you can get much father with a kind word and a gun than you can with just a kind word alone.  (so whatever happened to that "lockbox", if there's no money for checks, Mr. President?) 

Then came allegations that republicans are hoping for a default, which they can then somehow blame on President Obama (I'm not really clear on how that happens considering how well he polls against republicans on this issue but, like most things liberal, it requires a certain amount of blind faith, so just go with it).  Unfortunately, there are Tea Party members who don't want to raise the ceiling because they think either it is possible to avert surpassing the ceiling with spending cuts alone or that there won't be a default even if we pass the deadline.  Both of these notions are wishful thinking.  Period.  Something must be done, and it must be something that can pass BOTH houses of Congress, including the democratic majority in the Senate.  House Tea Partiers need to hold their noses and pass the Boehner bill and put it firmly in Harry Reid's court.  Once it passes the House, it's up to Reid to either table it or vote it down, and then he can deal with the fallout.  If, by some miracle it lands on Obama's desk, keep in mind that although the spending cuts are much smaller than hoped for, the tax increases Obama demanded aren't there at all and the ceiling increase is just as low as the cuts are; that's a win.  This bill will buy Congress six more months to debate real solutions, hopefully including entitlement reform and some seriously meaty cuts. 

Attempts have been made to play the race card in the debt wars, too - surprise!  But that's not the only fun we've been having with our calmer, gentler, less reactionary members on the left side of the aisle.  The Boehner plan, with its limited increase, would require another ceiling hike over the holidays, so of course the democrats have jumped on that one, too, claiming republicans hate Christmas or something stupid like that.  Speaking of gross exaggerations, check out these charts, which rebut the liberal argument that this debt crisis lies solely at the feet of the eeeevil Bush.  Just look at those numbers - nauseating, isn't it? 

Of course, DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz (or Debbie Downer, as I prefer) deserves a paragraph of her own for her unhinged, grossly false accusations.  How false?  Even liberal media are taking her to task on her lies.  From her accusations of Republicans hating women, seniors, and God only knows who else, to her allegations that republicans want to "literally drag us back to Jim Crow" (I'm not sure she knows what 'literally' means) or "throw us to the wolves", she's a real piece of work.  In fact, her rhetoric is so unhinged that, even as DNC chief, she isn't getting the kind of media play she was just a few short weeks ago.  My hometown newspaper, the Orlando Sentinel (hardly a conservative rag - we call it the "Slantinel"), even called her an embarrassment to her party.  Ouch!  The one thing I will say in favor of Wasserman-Shultz is that she was willing to do what no other democrat would - take ownership of the economy in the name of President Obama and the democrats.  Good on ya, Debbie.  (unfortunately, she thinks that's a good thing, because she thinks the economy is 'turning around'.  It seems high office does not necessarily denote high IQ)

But the pièce de résistance in this tour de force of hysteria comes from the one and only Queen Nan.  Ms Pelosi is sounding a bit, well.....unhinged (via Gretawire):

“What we’re trying to do is save the world from the Republican budget,” she said. “We’re trying to save life on this planet as we know it today.”

Good gracious.  Somebody needs a Xanax, stat!  Obviously clear heads are not prevailing if our Penelope Pitstop of the Hill is running around, arms flailing, shouting "Hey-elp!  Hey-elp!"  Sorry, Nanny P., Chugga-Boom and the Anthill Gang aren't members of Congress and they won't be riding to our rescue (although it does seem like Dick Dastardly has taken up residence in the White House and his good buddy Mutley is currently running the Senate).

It really seems all the democrats have to offer is demagoguery and derision.  Well okay then, guys - fair enough.  If you insist, the republican bills stink on ice and should never see the light of day.  Happy now?  Okay then, so WHERE'S YOUR PLAN????!

Quite frankly, put up or shut up.  Or better yet, both.

Read more...

CONGRESSIONAL HYSTERIA

13 AND COUNTING

Today our debt surpassed $13 trillion.

Just let that sink in for a moment.  $13 trillion.  That breaks down to $117,975 per taxpayer.

So, faced with those staggering numbers, what is the next step for our esteemed Congress?  Why, an additional $300 billion in unfunded spending, of course.

Whatever happened to Pay-Go?  Seems like it's been added to the ever longer list of legislation that is being completely ignored by this adminsitration. 

Our debt to GDP ratio is now at 90.3%. 

Break out the souvlaki and the ouzo, 'cause at this rate, we will be Greece within the next year or two, if not sooner.

Read more...

13 AND COUNTING

THE REALITY ALARM GOES CHA-CHING!

Our esteemed President and his Congressional minions have reached yet another milestone (via ABC's Jake Tapper):

The government racked up a record-high monthly budget deficit of $220.9 billion in February, the Treasury Department announced today.


The latest flood of red ink brings the total deficit for the first five months of the current fiscal year to $651 billion, far exceeding the $589 billion shortfall for the same timeframe in the last fiscal year.

The government ended the 2009 fiscal year with a record $1.4 trillion shortfall. The Obama administration has forecast a $1.56 trillion deficit for this year.

Is it any wonder the young adults of America are losing hope?
 

Fewer than half said they believe they will be better off than their parents when they reach their parents' age.

 
Is it possible that this administration is going to end up being more Nixonian than Kennedy-esque or FDR-ish?  Not to say that President Obama will have to resign or face impeachment - it's more about the effect he and his administration's actions have  had on the psyche of the country.  The generation that came of age in the 1960's and '70's had their faith in government dashed in the face of the corrupt reality, and the gradual decline in trustworthyness really hit the skids.  After Nixon, there was a sense of disillusionment and distrust of government that permeated rank and file American's views of politics.  This caused a backlash of suspicion that took a few decades to dull.  There was a small uptick in the Reagan years, but that short period of faith was put back into its downward rut in the scandal-plagued Clinton years and beyond.
 
Then, suddenly, there was an abrupt, out of the blue 180 that occured the day Obama won the primary.  Suddenly, government was the answer to a whole new generation, and all that good will was poured into the empty suit  at the top of the ticket.  He was a blank canvas on to which they painted their hopes and dreams, a beautiful, lush utopia in jewel colors, and they transferred their dependency from their parents to their government, which was embodied in one man.
 
Obama was elected on a wave of goodwill.  He was lifted up as a shining example of what government could be.  Unfortunately, as often happens, the reality just hasn't lived up to the hype.  All of those college students and 20-somethings who supported him and looked up to him and his vision of a new utopia are now waking up to a harsh reality.  He is just another politician out to spend their future just like all the rest.
 

With the country in the midst of a slow economic recovery with nearly 10 percent unemployment, the data finds a deep sense of gloom among 18-29 year olds. The grim mood could have immediate political consequences, and it could also shape that generation's long-term faith in government and in its ability to improve their daily lives.

 
This particular generation has much farther to fall, too, because at no other time in our history has there been such a pampered, coddled youth; nor has there been so many who saw the government, parent-like, as the answer to all the problems.
 
There seems to be a delicious irony in all of this. 
 
After all, it was the hippy culture of the 1960's and '70's that gave birth to the whole 'never trust the government or anyone over 30' mentality.  Now those same people are well beyond their 30's and in positions of power in our government.  They are demanding, incredibly enough, absolute trust in government.  Even more incredibly, they apparently have received it from the younger generations who have been gradually indoctrinated into acceptance of government as the answer to everything.  Our youth have been taught that the nanny state is only out to serve them and take care of them, and they believed it, these priviledged children of overindulgent parents who took care of everything - they bought it hook, line and sinker.  Until their beloved government went hog wild, pillaged their futures, and taught them the hard way that nothing in life is free.  This seems to have created a suspicion backlash against those in power.  Again. That whole "what goes around, comes around" thing is a real pain, isn't it?
 
Hopefully those kids who have had a sad wake-up call will realize that there is cause to hope, and that it resides in them.  They are the hope for the future, not some politician or government entity.
 
This is a country built on dreams, and they are the dreamers.  The people of this country got through the Great Depression and came out stronger for it.  We can get through this - hopefully stronger and wiser.  Our pampered youth are learning the hard way that nothing comes for free, and that a politician's promise of utopia comes with a hefty pricetag.  But hopefully they will also learn that hard work, dedication and determination can deliver many wonderful things to those who dare.
 
Yes, our government has been frittering away their inheritance for decades, but that doesn't mean it can't be replaced.   In order to do that, though, the first thing that needs to be replaced is those currently in power.
 
There are literally trillions of reasons why.
 

Read more...

THE REALITY ALARM GOES CHA-CHING!

HAPPY BIRTHDAY PORKULUS

Our Spendtrift-in-Chief is hitting the campaign trail again.  This time he's trying to sell us on his non-stimulating stimulus bill.  Today is the first anniversary of the signing of the bill. 

yay.

The President and VP are out talking up how great the stimulus has been working, how incredibly successful it has been so far.  There is a full media blitz going on this week (yes, a whole week) to tout the thousands, no, millions, no...wait...gazillions of jobs created by the Porkulus from Hell.

Um, I would think that if it was so successful you wouldn't have to sell it so hard.  Or do you really think I'm so stupid that I couldn't figure out whether or not it was successful?

Well, let's see....9.7% unemployment.  17.5% "real" unemployment.  More than 8 million Americans out of work.  Debt ceiling raised to 14.3 trillion.  Hmmm...smells like failure to me. 

But at least Obama assured us that there wasn't any pork at all, just job creating, targeted spending..

Oh, good.  whew.  It's not like $4.7 million is being spent on research into supersonic corporate jets or anything.  Even though poverty-ridden Lockheed Martin needs all the help they can get, poor babies.

They certainly wouldn't waste $2.2 million of our money on something like piping water to a golf course in California.  Especially if if was probably going to be closed down soon over concerns for the San Francisco garter snake and the California red-legged frog.  I mean, it's not like the pipeline would be better used in the Central Valley or anything.

And believe you me, they would never, and I mean never blow $117 million on 'green' renovations to an IRS building that was slated to be closed.

It seems to me the only people really being stimuled in this mess are the Buffalo residents who are being paid to keep diaries of their malt liquor/marijuana intake and the female college students who are having their dunken sexcapades chronicled in the name of science.

I went to my first Tea Party right around this time last year - specifically to protest this bloated, corrupt, waste of taxpayer money.  All of the reasons I protested then still hold true today.  It is not targeted, it is not timely (a year later and still only $200 billion of the original $787 billion has been spent), and it is NOT successful, no matter how The One tries to spin it.

They have to sell it, though, because they want  to hit us up for round two. 

Oh goody.  As Chris Dodd says, the stimulus isn't

"as targeted as it should've been" and "we need to go back to this and do this again. We need to do more of that."

Way to sell it, Chris - the last one was a mess, so let's make sure to do it again!

Read more...

HAPPY BIRTHDAY PORKULUS

BUDGETING REALITY

Our government is spending us into the poor house.  Not just you and me, but our children and grandchildren.  Once again we are being fed the Keynesian line that we have to spend our way out of this recession.  Well, the democrats have been in power and spending like it's Monopoly money since 2007, with the amounts really racheting up once Obama took office and they truly had free rein. 

Last year VP Joe Biden tried to sell us on spending money to keep us from going bankrupt.  My nine year old, upon hearing Biden's theory said, "That's silly!  Everyone knows you can't spend more money if you run out of money!  He's crazy!"  That's my little sunshiny ray of hope for the future!  Too bad our government can't grasp something a nine year old sees as basic common sense.

This is now the longest recession since the Great Depression, which I find rather telling.  It is widely accepted now that FDR's New Deal - massive government spending and intrusion into the free markets - crippled the recovery in the 1930's.  Unfortunately, our current administration is using the New Deal as their road map through our present crisis (and oh so cleverly called it the 'New New Deal'), which is most likely why this recession is dragging on into it's third year, when most recessions last 8-12 months. 

That is the problem with Progressive revisionist history.  Their habit of changing history to suit their political ends sets us all up for disaster.  If you don't learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it.  Unfortunately, we are in for a harsh lesson if our government continues on this path - something they seem determined to the point of obsession with continuing.

President Obama offered his budget for 2011 today.  Apparently his talk about discretionary spending freezes next year was just more hot air, because his 2010 budget was for $3.6 trillion, and his 2011 budget is for $3.8 trillion.  How did he manage to put in a spending freeze and yet still increase the budget by $200 billion (while simultaniously bragging about cutting $20 billion, to boot)?   What's even more mind-boggling is that people are actually going to buy that line he's selling.  Another amazing thing is the short turnaround on this broken promise.  Usually a few months pass between the lie being sold and the reality coming to light.  This one only took a week.  The only thing transparent about this administration these days is it's dishonesty and spin.

Apparently, there is $100 billion in jobs stimulus in there somewhere - a nice little trick.  They wanted to create a whole new stimulus package, but, when the idea went over like a lead balloon with the public, they just snuck it in, as is becoming standard operating procedure with this administration.  Unfortunately, we need job growth now, not some time in 2011. Interesting timing on that one, too.  Congressional dems need to have something to bring to voters by this summer or they risk losing reelection - this plan wouldn't help them.  Which means that the 2011 job plan is solely to assure that The One can get reelected.  Every rat dem for themselves, eh?  I guess Congressional dems are betting it all on the stimulus bill creating jobs over the summer.  Good luck with that!

This budget, like most everything else this tax and spend administration has passed so far, is bloated and ridiculously expensive, with the added bonus that it will add $1.6 trillion to our already out of control deficit.  Oh, goody.  What are we up to now?  About $600,000 per household?

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty wrote an op-ed today in Politico.  I encourage you to read it.  It certainly starts out with a bang:

The U.S. attorney general recently announced that the Justice Department is beefing up its efforts to fight financial fraud such as Ponzi schemes. Good. The agency should start by reviewing the spending habits of the federal government, which is running the largest Ponzi scheme our country has ever seen.

He's absolutely right - this is a gigantic Ponzi scheme.  Except instead of taking the money of investors who volunteered their money in hopes of getting rich quick, our money is being taken from us against our will, and it isn't just our money - it is generational theft.  As yet unborn children and grandchildren will be paying for this for decades, if not longer.  If Bernie Madoff deserved to go to jail for stealing $50 billion, what should be the sentence for $1.3 trillion?   This budget will cause us to have a deficit that exceeds our GDP by October 2011. 

That is sheer insanity.

At this point, I am at a loss as to how to get them to rethink their ways.  We protest, they ignore.  We call in, they shut off the phones.  We send letters and emails and get form letters in return, reassuring us that our "representatives" will do what they feel is best, no matter what the majority of Americans want.  All we can do is continue to protest, call and write, and, of course, VOTE. 

But just voting in 2010 is not enough.  We need a Six Year Plan.  The House is up for reelection every two years, but the Senate only reelects one third of their body every two years.  It would take three election cycles to clean house, and that is exactly what we need to do - clean house.  We need to keep our eyes on the prize - we need to keep our memories sharp and vote out any incumbents who have voted to rob us and our posterity of our hard earned money.  Not just this year, but until every last one of those lying, corrupt thieves are gone. 

A revolution was fought in this country because of taxation without representation.  If our elected officials in Washington refuse to listen to the will of the majority of the people and insist on implimenting an unpopular agenda, they are no longer representatives. 

We went to war in 1776 over a penny tax imposed upon us by a tone deaf monarch and his arrogant, overreaching government who refused to hear the concerns of those being taxed.  Adding insult to injury, the tax money was to be spent back in England, so the taxpayers saw no direct benefit from the increase.  We are now being subjected to trillions in taxes, passed in bills that we are not allowed to read by "representatives" who are only interested in their own political gain and are doling out the money from their giant slush fund to donors and cronies.  Our tone deaf, arrogant government, when faced with the fears of the people, belittle, demonize and dismiss.

Thomas Jefferson had it right - When the people fear their government, there is tyranny.  When the government fears the people, there is liberty.

Our public servants have lost their fear.  It's time to remind them who is the boss.  We fired the warning shot with Scott Brown's election.  They have decided to double down and try to fool us again on the campaign trail with more false promises and spin. 

They will not reform, so they must be removed. 

It's time to remind them that this is a government of the People, by the People and FOR the People.

Read more...

BUDGETING REALITY