About Me

Name: Kenneth Hanson
Location: Atlanta, GA
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 
[Click to edit me]

Today's Political 'Odds & Ends'

The Senator who received the largest “bonus”, AKA campaign contribution from AIG, after Chris Dodd of course?  Answer – Barack Obama, who received $101,332 from AIG.



Still not a single deputy secretary or undersecretary or Senate confirmable position has been filled at Treasury.  But yesterdayday, Treasury announced that Lewis Alexander, chief economist at Citigroup, will become a “counselor” to Timothy Geithner.  Being a “counselor” is Obama-speak for “not confirmable” or “tax cheat”.  I mean, really, the chief economist at the worst performing major bank in America, losing a total of $37B?

In a 2007 interview on PBS, Mr. Alexander said, "I think that's not going to spill over more broadly into the economy, and so I think we're going to have a normal kind of housing cycle that's going to last through the middle of this year."

Sounds like he is one of the reasons Citigroup lost $37B.  But he is now an important cog in the Obama machine.



Vivek Kundra, Obama’s choice for the administration’s CIO was reinstated yesterday after the FBI confirmed he was not a target of their investigation.  However a bribery, billing fraud and kickback scheme was going on right under Kundra’s nose in a small IT shop of about $50 million as the CTO of the District of Columbia.  Now Kundra will go on to be the government’s Chief Information Officer, directing the federal government’s $71 billion in IT spending.  Yeah, he sounds qualified.



What does everyone think is the “over/under” on Geithner being fired?  He personally architected the AIG bailout.  He knew about the bonuses.  He was directly asked at a congressional hearing last week about the subject, and did not come clean.



Senator Chuck Schumer made a speech in support of the so-called stimulus bill saying that Americans should not care about the “porky” spending.  The Democrat’s talking points in support of the “stimulus” bill was that the mean Republicans were critical of was only a tiny percent of the bill.  That is actually not true, the GOP opposed about 80% of the bill, and offered an alternative that spent half as much but created twice as many jobs.  Regardless, let’s apply that same math to the AIG bonuses.  The bonuses represent 1/10th of one percent of the taxpayer money received, to fulfill contractual obligations.



The head of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said yesterday that she will no longer use the term “terrorists”.  Instead, she will use the term “man-caused disasters”!  This continues the Obama administration’s renaming program, recently disavowing the term “enemy combatant” who I guess are now just bad guys we will hold indefinitely somewhere not called Gitmo, as soon as there is a plan.  



Vice President Biden said yesterday that Obama’s job is harder than FDR’s.  Yes, harder than the Great Depression.  



There is a mob-mentality in Washington right now that is really scary.  I’ll bet no more than 10-15 guys at AIG are culpable for the business model that brought AIG down.  Go after them, not everybody.



In the middle of a global economic crisis, the Obama administration has triggered a trade dispute with our 2nd largest trading partner, Mexico (after Canada).  Mexico is implementing tariffs on 90 some American products.  The reason?  The Obama administration is scuttling a program that allows Mexican trucks to transport goods from Mexico to their final destinations within the U.S.  Now there are 10’s of thousands of transport trucks operating in the U.S.  We make almost all of Mexico’s trucks stop at the border and transfer their cargo to U.S. trucks.  This program was meant to open the borders to the free flow of commerce.  The offending Mexican trucks – 98.  Yes, Obama is triggering a trade war with Mexico over 98 trucks.  Obama is so beholden to the Teamster union that he will risk a trade war with our 2nd largest trading partner over 98 trucks.  It is deeply disappointing.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Urban Czar Accused of "Pay To Play" Corruption

Corruption and ethical lapses seem to be a daily topic with the Obama administration.  Today’s lowlife is Adolfo Carrion.  Until recently he was New York’s Bronx Borough President, a role in which even the New York Times reports his performance as “mixed” (I read some of the details – the NYTs is being charitable).  He was just named by President Obama as the White House’s urban czar.

He is embroiled in a prima facie case of Blagojevich-style “pay to play” corruption.  Over and over, Carrion received political contributions just before or just after approving development deals or other projects that benefited his contributors.  He also ran up an architect bill for work on a home renovation which he never paid, at least in cash.  But afterward, he approved multiple development projects benefiting the architect and in one case even funneled taxpayer money to one of the projects.  There is no way Obama’s vetting team could have looked at this guy and said, “All clear.”  But he was given the green light nevertheless.

The left-leaning Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has made a request to Eric Holder to open a Justice Department investigation.  Melanie Stone, executive director of CREW stated, “If the era of pay-to-play politics is over, Adolfo Carrion did not get the message.”

George H. W. Bush’s nomination for Secretary of Defense, John Tower, was rejected by the Senate for being a drunk and a mean man.  Clinton had a couple of embarrassing nanny issues.  I don’t remember any ethical problems with the George W. Bush’s nominations.  Democrats objected to some nominees, but only on policy grounds, not for reasons of corruption or ethics.

This Obama administration is something else.  I’ve lost count of how many Obama nominees/designees have serious ethical and corruption issues.  It is unprecedented by orders and orders of magnitude.  Even sadder, some of them still made it into the administration.

During the election a lot of us in the conservative press and blogosphere wrote about how comfortable Obama was in his associations with people the average American would refuse to even shake hands with.  The main stream media belittled our intransigence.  But when Obama continues to elevate dubious Democrat party-machine operatives with serious ethical issues, it requires all Americans to step back and ask, "Why?"

I truly don’t think Obama sees any problem with leftist politicians who have accomplished nothing but personal aggrandizement being elevated to the highest levels of the U.S. government.  They’re the same people he’s been around his whole life.  Guys like Adolfo Carrion seem normal to him - but really strange to most Americans.  It is almost as if he is surprised, wondering, “What’s the big deal?”

He has immersed himself in a world of Alinsky, Ayers, ACORN, Wright, Phlegar, Palmer, communist and “structured feminist” professors, and the like.  He thinks nothing of plucking radical and ethically challenged pols out of the Democrat party-machine and elevating them to his administration.  I’m used to seeing the likes of the Obama administration team corruptly and incompetently stumbling about in local county or city government.  But shouldn’t the White House be getting the best and brightest to serve in this consequential time?

It should be disappointing to all Americans, but also entirely predictable to those of us that paid attention during the election.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dumbing Down the Obama Administration

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19961.html

This article on the devastating effects of Obama’s lobbyist (aka, ‘experts’) ban eliminates most hope that the Obama White House will ever get its act together.

Obama has effectively banned almost everyone who is an expert in their field, who knows how Washington works and how to get things done, and has a desire to work in the Obama administration.  This is what happens when someone with the moralizing zeal of a naive community organizer becomes President.

The immediate result is an administration that cannot staff key positions, leaving gaping holes in departments like treasury in the midst of the economic crisis.  With treasury, there is the added restriction of not accepting anyone that has worked in the financial industry.  Now you’ve really shrunk the talent pool.

Ultimately, it means that the administration will be dumbed down and will have less expertise than any administration since Jimmy Carter’s.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

This Is Barack Obama's CIO For Our Country?!?

The FBI raided the office of Washington D.C. CTO Vivek Kundra today.  Mr. Kundra was named last week by President Obama to be the government’s chief information officer.  Although he was not the focus of the investigation and arrests, a bribery scheme for awarding IT contracts was apparently going on right under his nose.  The FBI was kind enough to give the White House a "heads up" before they moved in today, since I’m sure the White House’s vetting process had rendered them clueless.

The federal government spends $71B on IT.  By all accounts Mr. Kundra is a bright, energetic, innovative executive with pretty good reputation.  It is said he runs the D.C. technology office like a silicon valley start-up.  But he is also 34, and is in charge of an organization of a little more than 200 people with a budget of $50M.  How does that profile get you the CIO job for the U.S.? 

It certainly seems that in a world where IT is so critically important to running the government that there is not a more qualified candidate than someone running a mid-size city’s IT shop, even if he is a smart and capably guy.  The challenges and vast needs for improvements are daunting to say the least.  Why not get someone like former IBM CEO Lou Gershner?

But I’ve given up being surprised by Obama’s personnel decisions.  I continue to suspect that Obama is someone who has a need to be the smartest guy in the room, so he surrounds himself with sub-par talent.  That is a characteristic of the worst leaders.

UPDATE (3/122009; 9:50 PM):  The White House has placed Mr. Vivek on indefinite "leave of absense" pending further information from the FBI.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Still Another Withdraws From Consideration For Treasury

H. Rodgin Cohen has withdrawn from consideration to be deputy secretary of the Treasury.

When it was reported several days ago that Mr. Cohen was under consideration, commentators like Larry Kudlow were complementary, saying that finally there would "be an adult in the room" at Treasury.  This guy is a high powered lawyer who has had most of the big dogs on Wall Street as his clients.

Reports are that the White House has so overreacted to their repeated bungling that they are now performing not a review but a full five year tax audit on all candidate requiring senate confirmation.  Why would H. Rodgin Cohen, who probably earns a multi-million dollar distribution each year, need the aggravation, and the pay cut?

Plus, the Obama administration is continuing their high and mighty routine, not wanting anyone connected with the financial services industry which of course eliminates most of the people who know anything.  They are cutting off their nose to spite their, er - our, face.

Geithner’s counterpart in Great Britain is lamenting that he cannot coordinate an economic response because when you call the U.S. Department of Treasury there is no one to answer the phone.

Meanwhile, Timothy Geithner was back in front of Congress today defending the Obama administration’s budget, looking like Doogie Hauser meets Joe Bureaucrat.  In the depths of this economic crisis, you’d think one of the considerations for Treasury Secretary should have been someone who had been in the klieg lights instead of someone who looks like a deer caught in the headlights.

Oh, and he is still working on that plan for the financial system....

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Launders 'Signing Statements' Through Geithner

OK, this is hypocrisy squared. Obama made a big deal the other day taking a shot at Bush for signing statements but in the same breath affirmed his right and intent to employ them. It was clear from the memorandum he issued on the subject that he was laying the groundwork to sign the Omnibus spending bill in conjunction with signing statements. Now he as done so, issuing 5 signing statements targeting parts of the law he will ignore on what he claims are constitutional issues. 

But that’s not the best part. This is. Harry Reid was a couple of votes short to get 60 votes for this pork-laden spending bill. Two senators, Menendez (D-NJ) and Nelson (D-FL) objected to several provisions in the bill that would relax certain financial and travel restrictions regarding Cuba. In order to win their votes, Obama had Tim Geithner, whose department the restrictions come under, write a letter to the senators saying that the administration would ignore those provisions. No constitutional issue here, just a plan to ignore the clear legislative intent of Congress.

Asked by ABC’s Jake Tapper about the Geithner’s letter stating the administration intent to violate the law, this is what Press Secretary Gibbs had to say: 

"Well, I mean, Jake, there's obviously, as you know, there's interpretations -- interpretations of what different provisions in each bill mean and those interpretations obviously are active -- it's like a presidential signing statement, except it's not the President and it's not a signing statement.

Huh? It’s like a presidential signing statement, except it’s not the President and it’s not a signing statement. What does that mean, that President Obama is laundering his signing statements intended to circumvent Congress through his department heads?

At least Bush was man enough to clearly lay out each of his objections and not attempt a sleight of hand by having a cabinet member issue a letter. And you can be sure that President Bush never promised to not enforce a law just so he could buy senator’s votes.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Disingenuous Stem Cell Kerflufle

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/10/AR2009031002842.html

Ms. Parker offers quite an intelligent discussion of the stem cell kerflufle.  It is clear based on where the science has progressed that Obama’s executive order, like many of his actions so far, amounts to liberal political grandstanding more than any substance.  Regardless, there has never been a ban on embryonic stem cell research, and there is plenty of private money available from the "evil" pharmaceutical companies to pursue it without using tax dollars.

I find it sadly amusing that President Obama proclaimed that scientific decisions now will be made on facts, not ideology."  But he is hell-bent on imposing economically draconian carbon caps and taxes based on “science” that is being called into question more and more every day.  He is choosing to ignore these “facts” to support his ideology.  It is not really about science at all, but political expediency. 

The Bush administration never denied that stem cell research might be medically useful, only that the moral concern of a great many Americans made it reasonable not to spend their tax dollars on it.  Regardless, science has now rendered the embryonic stem cell issue largely moot.  Obama is moving to cap and tax due to global warming alarmism that is based on increasingly shaky science - in the midst of an economic crisis no less.  So which president is more scientifically honest, Bush or Obama?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Trickle Up Stagnation Instead Of Trickle Down Prosperity


Krauthammer nails it as usual.  Last week, perpetual campaigner Obama took to the podium in Columbus, Ohio to tout his economic recovery plan.  He spoke mostly about "stimulus" bill transfer payments to the state of Ohio that will fund police and other government employees.  In fact, whenever the question of jobs created or saved comes up the answer is almost always preventing the layoff of a few state government employees.  The problem with this is that this "stimulus" is focused on the sector of the economy where unemployment is the lowest - government.

We are losing millions of manufacturing, construction, retail, services and financial jobs.  But Obama's focus is on a few teachers and firefighters and police.  He never speaks about capital formation, or stimulating private job creation.  In fact, I doubt he has any idea what that means.  Obama also trotted out the 3.5M jobs he claims will be created by the stimulus bill over the next two years, a claim that has been thoroughly debunked by the Congressional Budget Office.

As Krauthammer points out, Obama's massive $3.6T budget (plus $410B omnibus, plus $800B "stimulus") minimizes deficit projections by using surge level spending in Iraq as a constant baseline through 2019.  But what is even scarier than this dishonesty is that even with it, Obama's budget will add more to the national debt than every president in history combined, including the last 8 years under George W. Bush!

Democrats and others on the left railed against Bush's irresponsible spending and deficits.  Obama makes Bush's deficits look like child's play.  Is it OK for Obama to burden the country with this level of debt becasue he is a Democrat, but it wasn't OK for Bush because he is a Republican?

Krauthammer rightly points out that the European socialist systems produce a standard of living that is 30% lower than the U.S.  This is the goal.  Under Obama, we will have trickle up stagnation instead of trickle down prosperity.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Treasury: No Experts Allowed!

Today the New York Times published a unabashedly supportive "article" of Treasury Secretary Geithner (not on the editorial page - not that it seems to matter at the NYTs).  He's working "really hard", says the NYTs.  

One of the reasons that Treasury, one of the "big four" cabinet departments (Defense, State, Justice, Treasury), is so behind the curve on getting any kind of team in place is that Obama doesn't want financial "industry" people to be in Treasury.  You've got to be kidding me.  This is just too much.  It's just like the Democrat cacophony of criticism of the Bush administration for having the audacity of having actual energy industry people advising the administration on energy policy!  Who should be advising the government on energy or financial policy - the hospitality and food service industry?

OK, the bankers screwed up, along with everyone else.  Mistakes were made, as the saying goes.  But is this a reason to ban every knowledgeable person from serving in the administration?  If you're a community organizer bent on revenge against the capitalist oppressors, the answer is, "YES."  Perhaps Obama should get a 'Che' tie clip to go with his American flag pin.

I've watched Geithner testify before Congress.  I've watched him make his speech announcing his plan for the banks that was no plan.  He is a bureaucrat - a government bureaucrat.  I don't know if he is was a G-12 or 14 or 27 or whatever at the New York Federal Reserve.  He is what we call in the real business world a "plodder".  He seems to be a "hard worker", but is otherwise uninspiring.  You need a bunch of plodders to get work done.  But you don't put a plodder in charge of a division or business unit or the Treasury department.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's First Priority Is NOT the Economy

I’ve come to a conclusion.  It is clear that the economy is not Obama's primary concern.  A stimulus bill that does not stimulate, months dragging on without a plan for the banks and financial system, and a budget that pretends the economic crisis does not exist reveals someone whose priorities are elsewhere.

Supremely important to Obama is to push through a domestic policy agenda that increases direct government control of the economy from a historical 20% of GDP to 28-30%.  For Obama, it does not matter if the economy recovers this year or next year or the year after, just so long as it recovers before the next presidential campaign season.  If Obama can use this economic crisis to push through his radical social agenda, then “Mission Accomplished”.  Obama attempting to link all parts of his agenda to crisis regardless if it has anything to do with solving our current malaise, like immediately nationalizing health care, is telling. 

Even Paul Krugman, a rare trained economist who is also a committed liberal, writes today in the New York Times that Obama is not serious about the economy. 

Among people I talk to there's a growing sense of frustration, even panic, over Mr. Obama's failure to match his words with deeds.  The reality is that when it comes to dealing with the banks, the Obama administration is dithering.  Policy is stuck in a holding pattern. . . .

It is deeply troubling that President Obama, in the depth of our economic and financial system crisis, has ordered his priorities in a way where the economy does not come first.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Refuses To Make Realistic Choices On Energy

Robert Bryce, managing editor of the Energy Tribune, wrote an op-ed last week for the Wall Street Journal detailing how far we have to go to meaningfully reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.  Wind and solar power currently produce only 1.1% of our courtry's electricity.  President Obama has promised to double that - but that will still only a small contribution to our electricity consumption.  In fact, this only continues the trendline for increasing renewables under the Bush administration.  While developing economically viable alternative sources of energy needs to be a priority, Mr. Bryce makes a strong case that we will need fossil fuels for a long time to come even with the most aggressive efforts.

Obama is reversing Bush administration decisions to open up additional domestic oil and gas production.  The economic downturn has opened a rare window of opportunity to ramp up oil production before the next supply crisis - and there will be one.  I see no reason for there not to be $200-$300/barrel oil in the next 10 years.  Like with his astonishing deficits, Obama is mortgaging our energy future.

Obama offered zero dollars in his budget for Yucca mountain's nuclear storage program, signaling that nuclear energy, the only non-carbon baseline electricity alternative, won't be pursued.  The federal government has levied nuclear waste disposal fees since the '80's on the nuclear power industry.  They have now collected $30B!  Here is an amazing figure.  $10B of that money has been spent just on feasibility studies for Yucca mountain!!  How can anyone spend $10B just on feasibility studies - every one of which has validated Yucca mountain as the best solution?  Oh, yes.  It's the government.  

The federal government were required by law to begin transfering nuclear waste from the ~140 ad hoc sites around the country to Yucca by 1998.  Now they're saying 2020, which also won't happen either now that Obama/Reid are in power.  If Obama/Reid succeed in stopping Yucca mountain, then the government will have to refund the $30B+ to the nuclear power industry.

Dick Durbin's (D-IL) coal sequestration earmark project has all the hallmarks of a boondoggle of enormous proportions.  It was put on hold by the Bush administration due to costs spiraling out of control.  But it is "back on track" in Obama's era of unrestricted spending and deficits.

All Obama has to do to meet his promise on renewable energy is to continue the efforts of the Bush administration.  President Bush made more R&D investments in alternative energy than any president in history, but gets no credit for it.  As Mr. Bryce points out, that still will only be a start.

Obama and the democrat's head in the sand approach to not making realistic and balanced energy policy choices will hurt our country badly in the long run.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dow is Down, But Obama Administration Jokes Are Up

4 months after winning the election, 2 months after the innauguration, of the 15 key Treasury positions requiring Senate confirmation only 1 is filled.  And that guy is a holdover from the Bush administration, who is responsible for terrorism and financial intelligence - not a priority to Geithner.  The most consequential area of government in this horrific economic crisis and these bunglers haven't even begun to get a team in place.  

Politico reports that it is becoming a joke around Washington, D.C.

The staff is so faceless that lobbyists have begun trading jokes about a “ghost” bureaucracy, given the many empty picture frames hanging on the department’s walls. 

Geithner was supposed to be the only person smart and capable enough to address the financial crisis.  But every day that goes by confirms the administration's cluelessness.  Saturday Night Live's "cold open" featured Geithner hosting a call in radio show offering $410B to the person(s) that could call in with a good idea on addressing the financial crisis.


Technical analysts are projecting Dow 5,300 as the next hard support level, another 20% lower from Friday's close.  Democrat pundants are saying that the market went down 30 percent under Bush over a long period of time.  But they ignore that the the Dow has plunged more than another 20 percent in just 2 months under the Obama administration, much of it coming after releasing his radical and fiscally irresponsible budget.

Obama trivialized the stock market last week, comparing it to a political daily tracking poll that doesn't really mean anything.  What Obama doesn't seem to get is that the people who hold private capital are boycotting the market.  This is what you get when a liberal community organizer and autobiographer who has never been a member of either the business or investor class gets elected president.  He is completely fixated on an ACORN social agenda instead of on leading the country in this economically consequential time.

There are actually a lot of signs that an economic bottom is forming with leading indicators pointing to recovery (copper prices are rebounding, Baltic dry index is up sharply, money supply had grown substantially, monthly job losses are very large, but have stopped getting larger, etc.)  But the controlling variable is Obama's massive push to seize greater control of the economy and private capital.  If the money managers that drive the stock market are this negative on Obama's policies, then  private capital available to invest in job creation is on strike too. Why would anyone invest in anything when Obama is out to punish every industry, to raise taxes on capital formation, to increase the cost of energy in a deep recession?  The only "industries" that appear to be winners in the era of Obama are unions and government, and you can't buy stock in either.

Polls show strong approval ratings for Obama.  But polls that ask questions such as if the government is spending too much money show deep concern about the actual policies.  Obama is thriving on a cult of personality.  The vast uninformed majority who continue to support Obama have absolutely no idea about what he is really doing, and could not have a coherent conversation on any policy topic of consequence.  But they follow him like cultists following Jim Jones to the Koolaid.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's War On Prosperity

Every administration uses a few tricks to make their budgets look more palatable, but Obama is going for a Nobel Prize in literature.  He has proposed a $3.6T budget.  But that does not include the $800B "stimulus" bill or the $410B omnibus bill with its almost 9,000 earmarks.  So the real number is actually about $4.8B.

The deficit projections are unprecedented, but are actually understated.  That is because he uses wildly optimistic projections for GDP growth (3.2% next year, 4% the following year, 4.2% thereafter).  These would be optimistic projections in the best of times.  4% might be achievable using pro-growth economic policies, but Obama is waging an all out war against capital creation, investors, Wall Street, small business, job creators and every industry I can think of except the industry of government.  

The non-partisan congressional budget office projects that the "stimulus" bill will not create or save net new jobs and will have a net negative effect on GDP, absolutely refuting the White House's claim of 3.5 million jobs.  To borrow a phrase from Governor Pawlenty, you can't be pro-job and anti-business at the same time.  It is like being pro-egg and anti-chicken.

The Obama budget also projects a current baseline for spending of $50B per year for 2011-2019, which everbody knows is nonsense - but it makes his deficit numbers look better.

Obama's carbon cap and trade proposal is a huge tax increase on the U.S. economy that will retard economic growth.  I predict that a larger percent of this confiscation will be redistributed to families Obama deems deserving than will be spent on alternative energy research and solutions.  That is because it is not really about the environment, but another means to effect massive wealth redistribution from society's producers to the non-producers. 

Every single time the Obama administration makes an economic announcement, the stock market plunges.  The latest example was Friday, when the Obama budget was released.  The Obama administration's hostility to economic growth begs the question of whether Obama sees political advantage in stretching out the economic downturn.  Perhaps he sees a longer crisis as the fuel to accomplish his goals to reorder American society along socialist lines.

In today's weekly radio address Obama renewed his attack on lobbyists, saying that they would not influence his administration.  I guess he must not consider labor union or teacher union or leftist environmental groups lobbyists, since he bows to their every demand.  I guess he must mean that the only lobbyists that will not influence his administration are the ones he does not agree with.  

Certainly one group that is not influencing Obama - the overwhelming majority of learned economists, who understand that his policies represent a war on prosperity.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Will Obama Assert Executive Privilege For Karl Rove?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0209/Rove_skips_House_Judiciary_deposition.html

Mark March 4th down on your calendar.  It will be facinating to see what position the Obama White House takes on asserting executive privilege for Mr. Rove.  My prediction is that they will be a bit weasely but at the end of the day will fundamentally stand behind executive privilege, including for Karl Rove.

You simply can't have Congress hauling White House advisors in front of committees and demand to know what they told the president.  The president must be able to get candid advice without fear that that advice will become public due to some political witch hunt - and it seems the only way that can happen is if the president asserts executive privilege.

You can't even have this type of testimony behind closed doors.  Congress is incapable of keeping secrets, as senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA), a member of the senate's select committee on intelligence, regretably showed last week by divulging extremely sensitive intelligence regarding predator drones that damaged our critical relationship with Pakistan.  Joe Biden, himself a long-term member of the senate intelligence committee, infamously bragged back in the day that he had squashed top-secret covert operations during the Reagan administration by threatening to leak them.

You'd think that as a congressman from the distressed state of Michigan John Conyers would have something more productive to do than continue to flail away at this very dead horse.  

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Had A Big Day

What could Obama have been thinking?  Today he announced that Joe Biden will be in charge of the stimulus program.  Combined with a statement showcasing that there is still no clear plan for the banks, the market went down 250 points more to a 12 year low.  How "tone deaf" is it to put that bungler in charge of anything.  It'll just give Biden more opportunities to say stupid things on a topic that actually matters.  Not exactly a confidence booster.  But neither is Obama trash-talking the economy down every day.

Now that Eric Holder has his "nation of cowards" speech out of the way, he traveled to Gitmo today to give it the once over.  No press was allowed.  I'm not sure what he expects to find out there that he can't get briefed about in Washington.  Two days ago an Obama ordered assessment confirmed that Gitmo is 100% in compliance with the Geneva Convention.  All this just reinforces that Obama rushed to order Gitmo closed without having the slightest inkling of a plan for what to do with those held there.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is arguing in federal court that the 600 some prisoners being held in Bagram prison in Afghanistan do not have the right to challenge their status because they are enemy combatants that were captured in the process of a military operation and are being held outside the U.S.  Curiously, that same description applies to 99% of the evil doers being held at Gitmo.

Finally, Obama held a "fiscal responsibility" summit today where he lectured the attendees on how critical fiscal restraint is in order to bring our deficit down.  That's rich.  Obama just signed the so-called stimulus bill with almost $800B of mostly non-stimulative social spending, and has Clinton in China pleading with them to buy our debt to finance it!  Obama's non-stimulating "stimulus" plan will drive the deficit to twice as large as a percent of GDP than under Bush and 3X larger than under Reagan.

Obama and his administration is careening crazily from one extreme to another seeming to have no idea about what it is doing.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive