Showing posts with label Obama Administration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama Administration. Show all posts
01 June 2010
06 April 2010
The Real Danger From Obama's Latest Mewlings...
The United States will continue to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in deterring non-nuclear attacks. To that end, the United States is now prepared to strengthen its long-standing 'negative security assurance' by declaring that the United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations. This revised assurance is intended to underscore the security benefits of adhering to and fully complying with the NPT and persuade non-nuclear weapons states party to the Treaty to work with the United States and other interested parties to adopt effective measures to strengthen the non-proliferation regime.
You goddamn idiot, Mr. President. "This revised assurance" goes farther than any statement by any past President, even ones as cojones deficient as James Earl Carter, in neutering our ability as a nation to meet the threat that comes from belligerent nations and bad actors within nations.
That we are a country with the capacity to wipe out any other country, and that we have leaders crazy enough to do it if provoked, has been a cornerstone of United States diplomacy and self defense since those two bombs we dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As the leading single economy, top military, and most prosperous state in the world, we are juicy target for any country, or group within a country, for some nasty bit of assymmetrical warfare directed at our population.
The threat that we would meet a WMD attack by a state, or state sponsored group (or even state tolerated group) with a WMD attack of our own on a biblical scale has been an integral part of our defense. That is, until we elected President Obama. Thanks a lot, the inevitable attack on a big city will be firmly and unequivocally your fault (and as a resident of likely target #2 or #3, with NYC always being target #1 for the crazies, I'd rate LA and DC neck and neck as 2nd or 3rd likely, a special personal thanks Mr. President).
The conventional wisdom regarding assymmetric warfare is that it favors the small over the big (David v Goliath), but the threat of an overwhelming and highly assymmetric response from our military given a major provocation used to be one of our big advantages over those weenies in Europe. Even while protesting us, and calling our leaders 'cowboys', Europeans knew that those 'cowboys' they derided were what kept them as safe as they were, and that our willingness to be more belligerent than the craziest of belligerents was good for democracies across the globe. Obama wants to dismantle that. Idiot, I guess it will be up to Sarkozy and the French to play the world's crazyman, now.
I can't believe we elected someone who ate up all that Soviet sponsored No Nukes crap that was being spewed across college campuses in the 70s and 80s, and thought that'd be sensible as a guiding principle for our defense posture. And just in case you think I'm making up the Soviet angle, from Time Magazine in 1983:
The question of Soviet influence becomes difficult to call when counterespionage officials try to uncover KGB links to the antinuclear movement in the U.S. and Western Europe. By CIA reckoning, the Soviets spend roughly $3 billion to $4 billion each year on overt and covert propaganda activities. According to a State Department official, as much as $600 million may have been spent so far on the peace offensive. Using national Communist parties or recognized Communist-front organizations like the World Peace Council, the Kremlin has been able to channel funds to a host of new antiwar organizations that would, in many cases, reject the financial help if they knew the source. Western intelligence experts believe that the mass movement in opposition to new NATO missiles in Europe probably was not Soviet-inspired, but they fear that the Kremlin's active measures have given the movement greater momentum.
So this latest bit of Obama-nonsense seems like it's just the 'radical' Occidental student (as pictured above) peeking out from the moderate facade that he wrapped himself in during his campaign. He's stuck in the mindset of the Vietnam-addled, USA must apologize for being mighty, late 70s, and the Reagan hating campus 'intelligentsia' with their, how dare we have a leader who is willing to defend our position in the world and recognize the Soviets as evil, mindset of the early 80s. Hard to believe that the subsequent decades haven't taught Obama the lessons that everyone else seems to understand. He's trying to undermine everything Reagan accomplished, both domestically and globally. He has a compliant media, and Democratic Party leadership willing to follow him to doom. Seems like the rank and file is starting to balk, and more importantly, voters are seeing red, but will that anger stick around till November? Depends on events.
I suspect Secretary of State Hillary Clinton must be scrambling to move up her exit from this sinking ship, and she's going to stage, as soon as possible, a very public conflict between the White House and the State Department so that she can resign as a sensible Hawk while Obama looks like the naive Dove. I don't see her sticking loyally by Obama and putting aside a lifetime of ambition to defer to this jerk, but you never know, maybe she trusts in him and took the job because she believes in the direction that Obama will lead.
(above, Obama at Occidental image, borrowed from this HuffPo piece, photo by Lisa Jack)
21 October 2009
Every Time a Blogger Links to Fox News, A Kitten Dies!!!
Good thing I hate cats... (here are today's top three links that are certain to kill kittens and piss off the Obama Administration)
Cheney: Obama's Afghan War Strategy 'Bears Striking Resemblance' to Bush's
Cheney stating the obvious. Unfortunately, the obvious sometimes needs restating, given the urge to ignore and bury the obvious that seems to persist throughout large chunks of those that are supposed to report on what's happening in the world. At least Pres. Obama got Karzai to hold a runoff, I can't say I approve of the tactics he used. Inflicting Sen. John Kerry on poor Pres. Karzai would seem to me to be a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.
Obama's Appearances at Fundraisers Outpace Presidents Bush and Clinton
This is just evil spin from that evil Foxnews. While it's true that Obama seems to have remained in perpetual campaign mode as President, whether it be fundraising, making speeches better suited for the stump than for a President, or inserting himself into state political races, it's wrong to point out these facts. He's going to need that money to get re-elected in 2012, and getting re-elected is far more important to him and his administration than actually governing effectively.
President Obama, Don't Create an Enemies List
Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander chastised Pres. Obama for his apparent Nixonian habit of having an enemies list (a list, which I'm proud to say, I was on, at least as of Jan 24th, not sure where I stand now, though I suspect LGF has dropped off the list). The Administration sent out their jackals to the Sunday shows this weekend to specifically name Fox News as a non-news network, even Nixon wasn't so bold. If it hadn't already been apparent that was how he and his administration would operate from the beginning of his campaign, this would be shocking. The only shocking thing is that it has taken this many months for more people to realize how Nixonian the Obama Administration behaves.
Cheney: Obama's Afghan War Strategy 'Bears Striking Resemblance' to Bush's
Cheney stating the obvious. Unfortunately, the obvious sometimes needs restating, given the urge to ignore and bury the obvious that seems to persist throughout large chunks of those that are supposed to report on what's happening in the world. At least Pres. Obama got Karzai to hold a runoff, I can't say I approve of the tactics he used. Inflicting Sen. John Kerry on poor Pres. Karzai would seem to me to be a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.
Obama's Appearances at Fundraisers Outpace Presidents Bush and Clinton
This is just evil spin from that evil Foxnews. While it's true that Obama seems to have remained in perpetual campaign mode as President, whether it be fundraising, making speeches better suited for the stump than for a President, or inserting himself into state political races, it's wrong to point out these facts. He's going to need that money to get re-elected in 2012, and getting re-elected is far more important to him and his administration than actually governing effectively.
President Obama, Don't Create an Enemies List
Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander chastised Pres. Obama for his apparent Nixonian habit of having an enemies list (a list, which I'm proud to say, I was on, at least as of Jan 24th, not sure where I stand now, though I suspect LGF has dropped off the list). The Administration sent out their jackals to the Sunday shows this weekend to specifically name Fox News as a non-news network, even Nixon wasn't so bold. If it hadn't already been apparent that was how he and his administration would operate from the beginning of his campaign, this would be shocking. The only shocking thing is that it has taken this many months for more people to realize how Nixonian the Obama Administration behaves.
06 October 2009
Hey, Obama, and Doctors, and Nurses, and Other Medical Technicians, Lab Coats, Scrubs, and the Like, Should Be For Hospitals ONLY...
The NY Post points out (via Althouse, with her take on it here) that the Obama Adminstration in stage managing their doctor photo op prescribed the wearing of lab coats so that all the doctors assembled looked more doctorly rather than like a bunch of professionals in suits.
I guess they feared that in the minds of many, driven by folks like Michael Moore (another Althouse post at link) and his latest agitprop Кино, that in the minds of fellow progressives the following equation applies
So, they encouraged the doctors in the photo to play dress up.
This brings me to one huge pet peeve of mine. The purpose of having special garb that hospital staff wear, is to minimize the possibility of cross contamination, and the original intent was that garb stayed in the hospital. The point of the lab coat is that it stays in the lab so that if some stray virus has found its way on it, the doctor in that lab coat doesn't then bring that virus with them when he or she runs off to their favorite restaurant while they grab a bite to eat. I live surrounded by hospitals and labs, and any time I'm out during lunch break hours I see a sea of scrubs and lab coats on the street and in various eating establishments. I know many hospitals have cut out laundry service, and don't issue these clothes like they used to, but that doesn't mean staff should wear these clothes out and about in public. Rather than telling people how to sneeze into the crook of their arms, maybe they should remind health professionals that they are a primary channel by which new bugs spread.
Heckuva job on preventing the potential spread of disease, buddies and budettes.
I guess they feared that in the minds of many, driven by folks like Michael Moore (another Althouse post at link) and his latest agitprop Кино, that in the minds of fellow progressives the following equation applies
SUITS=EVIL (or at the very least, Republican)
So, they encouraged the doctors in the photo to play dress up.
This brings me to one huge pet peeve of mine. The purpose of having special garb that hospital staff wear, is to minimize the possibility of cross contamination, and the original intent was that garb stayed in the hospital. The point of the lab coat is that it stays in the lab so that if some stray virus has found its way on it, the doctor in that lab coat doesn't then bring that virus with them when he or she runs off to their favorite restaurant while they grab a bite to eat. I live surrounded by hospitals and labs, and any time I'm out during lunch break hours I see a sea of scrubs and lab coats on the street and in various eating establishments. I know many hospitals have cut out laundry service, and don't issue these clothes like they used to, but that doesn't mean staff should wear these clothes out and about in public. Rather than telling people how to sneeze into the crook of their arms, maybe they should remind health professionals that they are a primary channel by which new bugs spread.
Heckuva job on preventing the potential spread of disease, buddies and budettes.
08 August 2009
It Came From the Comments . . .
In response to the Reading is Fundamental daily photo, Bill commented:
wtf is a libnany?
My lengthy reply:
According to the Obama Administration Newspeak Dictionary:
Libnany (pronounced lib-na-NEE) --- Any one of a number of different officials drawn from various governmental departments that oversee the proper education (or re-education in the case of those previously misled) of the masses to think in ways consistent with Hope and Change. Shortened from "Liberal Nanny", to become a "Libnany" is an exulted and well compensated position, one generally reserved for those who have paid their dues as a long time community organizer, or public sector union leader. Not to be confused with a "Libforcer" whose primary job is to prevent wrongthink with more physical forms of persuasion, the "Libnany" is the ears, eyes, and soothingly didactic mouthpiece for the Administration, ready to report and correct wrongthinking whenever it crops up.
I forgot to add that the term Libnany may also be applied to the place where Libnanys meet, coordinate and maintain educational literature as well as Hope and Change approved computers that are blocked from visiting non-approved websites. Most Libnany buildings were converted from existing libraries, as it was deemed inconsistent with Hope and Change to allow citizens unmonitored access to non-approved media, so it was an easy and natural transition and most librarians (now may also be referred to as libnanians) thrilled at purging the shelves of wrongthinking books.
07 April 2009
As Far as Penns Go, Obama Could Have Done Worse . . .
He'll be working in the public liaison office, or some such, he'll be Obama's "connection" in the White House (and by 'connection', I mean connection to the common man, of course, not any other possible implication or meaning of the use of the word 'connection', especially as pertaining to the distribution of controlled substances)
Instead of a really bad fake Bush in the next Harold in Kumar picture, maybe they'll get an actual sitting President for a cameo.
24 March 2009
Meh, The President Speaks, and Speaks, and Speaks, and It's Not HIS Fault!!!!
Live Press Conference blogged lively...
Since when do press conferences begin with 8 minutes of teleprompter copy?
First thing he says, "Not my fault, it was like that when I got here".
Don't think I can blog too much of the blather, unlikely that he says anything interesting as long as he's reading from his trusty prompter.
To paraphrase, individuals borrowing and spending money they don't have has ruined our economy, but to fix that, the government must borrow massively more in the aggregate than all those individuals did on their own.
Gah!
To paraphrase, don't blame me, and yeah, those bonuses were soooooo awful, we need to de-capitalize capitalism. Only the government can dole out capital, free markets can't do it on their own. But, I guess we need entrepreneurs, or else there will be nobody to tax, so let me say that we shouldn't demonize them, even though that seems to be all I ever do.
Jennifer Loven AP, first up.
Regulation, you want it, why will it be better this time?
Obama: no, no, no, it was under-regulation that caused this mess, AIG wasn't under the FDIC, so that's why we need to create all sorts of new red tape to counter future risk taking. We need to centralize everything, cause DC knows better about everything, and central planning always works well. Quick follow up, 'why should we trust DC', Obama" 'because I said so'.
Chuck Todd (NBC), next
Wars require sacrifice, this is a war, what sacrifices must we make?
Umm, ahh, uummmm, ahhhhh, I'm stalling, I've asked for sacrifices, it's just all that awful stuff that existed before I can to office, that was the problem, in other words, I'm going to ignore your question, but ummm, ahhh, voters are already sacrificing, and if I say what I'm going to do to them over the next 3.5 years, they may not re-elect me, so I'm just going to pretend that everything is the GOP's fault and say that if you trust me, and elect even more DEMs in 2010, then everything will be hunky dory. Chuck Todd follow up, 'You said this was huge, how could you not ask for sacrifice', Obama: 'Did I say that?', nevermind, everything will be fine as long as you trust me.
Jake Tapper (ABC), next
Senate Dems, no middle class tax cut, no cap and trade, what's up with that?
Ummm, ahhh, ummmm, ahhh, we need health care reform, we gotta have energy policy, we gotta have even more federal spending on education, we gotta fix the deficit, we know things may change through the legislative process, and we already got the middle class their tax cut, so don't worry about that, and cap and trade is part of a 'broader principle' so don't worry about that. I still believe in cap and trade, even though it has been a costly, bureaucratic nightmare when tried in Europe, but we'll do it better somehow. Jack Tapper follow up, will you sign it if it doesn't meet your priorities? Obama: Ehh, whatever.
Chip Reid (CBS), next
Generational Theft, close to $10T in new debt over 10 years, what's up with that?
The GOP are evil, and they did it first, so nevermind. We'll cut the deficit in half over five years, those ten year projections are wrong, growth will be higher than the CBO predicts, despite all my attempts to strangle the economy somehow growth will remain robust cause of all the magic fairy dust I'll be spreading around the country. With all the added magic fairy dust I'll be spreading around like so much manure the flowers of prosperity will bloom. And my critics won't release their own budgets so they have no standing to criticize, did I mention health care? Yeah, health care, yeah, I'll really FIX health care, and while I'm at it I'll dismantle our military to balance the budget. Follow up, what's with the out years if you are really cutting? Obama: Don't look behind the curtain!!! Pay no attention to that, those savings are going to happen once I spread the magic fairy dust, magic fairy dust will fix everything.
(the question to answer ratio remains as lopsided as the last dog and pony show, and the questions asked aren't the ones he actually answers, does he really think folks aren't going to notice this?)
Lourdes (her news outlet wasn't captioned, didn't catch it)
Mexico, sucks don't it? Does it threaten US security?
We're dealing with it, and we'll do more if we need to, and it's US guns that are the problem so we need more gun control (though that statement is ridiculous on the face of it).
Kevin (Stars and Stripes)
What can you cut from the military budget without political blowback?
We're giving more money to veterans, and we'll take care of their PTSD having asses (cause all troops come back 'wrong'), we'll save money by reforming the procurement system. (??? - That's going to save hundreds of billions?) Obama wants to say he'll gut the military, he just can't admit it, yet, instead he'll pretend that 'reform' will lead to savings. No more off the book war expenditures, that'll help, too.
Ed Henry (CNN)
Andy Cuomo's done more to hit AIG than you did, what's up with that, and aren't you leaving a bigger mess to the future than what was left you?
This isn't easy, it's hard, it's really, really hard. My solution, reduce health care costs by nationalizing health care?!?!!!???!!!????? (the particulars are all a smokescreen, he wants one payer health care like our betters in Canada and Europe, which really means he wants rationed care, which is what they get). He's not answering the question again, just claiming that outrageous amounts of government spending will lead to outrageous growth rates and everything will be just fine. Are folks really falling for this fairy tale? Follow up, you weren't angry enough about AIG? I took time cause I like to know of what I speak.
Major Garrett (FNC)
China wants an IMF currency, Europe doesn't want stimulus spending, given that you want to be a 'global' president, are you hurt by the criticisms?
We all need to row in the same direction, at the G-20 we will work on job creation collectively, avoid protectionism, and create even more red tape, cause red tape=prosperity. The dollar is strong, and we're still number one. As far as changing our image, but the world loves me more than they love Bush. Follow up, global currency? No.
Mike Allen (The Politico)
Right to cut deductions for charities and mortgages?
Yes, we need to make sacrifices cause of wage stagnation, the top 5% are going to feel some pain, but they'll enjoy it and they won't go John Galt on us so everything will be fine. This won't decimate charities, I swear, you shouldn't worry about deductions when giving to charity, so screw you rich folks! They can afford it, so bend over and take it. Follow up, charities claim this will be horrible. Obama: No, it won't be a problem, grow the economy, and charities will get paid.
Kevin Chapelle (Ebony)
1 in 50 children homeless, what are you going to do for homeless children?
That's terrible, my recovery package will solve everything, and we'll extend the safety net, and we'll throw money at the states to prevent families from being homeless.
Ann Compton (ABC Radio)
Let's talk race, are you still black enough?
The economy knows no color, the inaugural was great, but y'all are still kinda racist, but the economy is more important than reminding all of you how racist you still are.
Jon Ward (Wash Times)
Stem cells, moral, immoral, consider it at all personally?
I'm going to pretend I care about embryos, I barely think babies are people so you think I think twice about putting embryos in a blender? I'll just pretend to be thoughtful on this issue and spout platitudes. He's sure taking a long time not to answer this question, isn't he?
(I'm really tempted to switch to the Lakers game, this crap is boring, even though the Lakers are only playing the lowly Thunder, still better than this crap, I'm guessing the next question will be the last question, so I'll stick it out)
Last question, Stephen Collison (AFP)
Palestine-Israel, sucks don't it, and Netanyahu is evil?
It's going to be tough, and the status quo is unsustainable, there must be two states with peace and security. Mr. Sally Jesse Raphael glasses (aka George Mitchell) will help with bringing the sides together. We had the Orange and the Green together here on St. Pats, so we'll get the Israelis and Palestinians together, too. Persistence is what I'm all about, if at first you don't succeed, blame previous administrations for your failures, and fail, fail again.
He's still talking, but he ain't saying nothing. As usual, he's highlighting that ridiculous video to Iran, it's an example of his wonderful persistence, he's saying don't expect results, just listen to my rhetoric, as long as I talk a good game, you shouldn't pay attention to a lack of results, cause results require real plans, real change, and all I've got is talking and a perpetual campaign to run.
UPDATE:
President Obama went without his trusty prompter, instead relying on a really big TV in the back of the room, seen in the above YouTube clip from Fox News (via Drudge).
What do you suppose his reaction would have been had a bunch of reporters chosen to stand up in front of the display just after he started speaking? Would he have harrumphed, or would he have called over the Secret Service?
(also, what's the carbon footprint on that thing, did he pay his offsets?)
(finally, give a speech, or hold a press conference, don't do both)
Since when do press conferences begin with 8 minutes of teleprompter copy?
First thing he says, "Not my fault, it was like that when I got here".
Don't think I can blog too much of the blather, unlikely that he says anything interesting as long as he's reading from his trusty prompter.
To paraphrase, individuals borrowing and spending money they don't have has ruined our economy, but to fix that, the government must borrow massively more in the aggregate than all those individuals did on their own.
Gah!
To paraphrase, don't blame me, and yeah, those bonuses were soooooo awful, we need to de-capitalize capitalism. Only the government can dole out capital, free markets can't do it on their own. But, I guess we need entrepreneurs, or else there will be nobody to tax, so let me say that we shouldn't demonize them, even though that seems to be all I ever do.
Jennifer Loven AP, first up.
Regulation, you want it, why will it be better this time?
Obama: no, no, no, it was under-regulation that caused this mess, AIG wasn't under the FDIC, so that's why we need to create all sorts of new red tape to counter future risk taking. We need to centralize everything, cause DC knows better about everything, and central planning always works well. Quick follow up, 'why should we trust DC', Obama" 'because I said so'.
Chuck Todd (NBC), next
Wars require sacrifice, this is a war, what sacrifices must we make?
Umm, ahh, uummmm, ahhhhh, I'm stalling, I've asked for sacrifices, it's just all that awful stuff that existed before I can to office, that was the problem, in other words, I'm going to ignore your question, but ummm, ahhh, voters are already sacrificing, and if I say what I'm going to do to them over the next 3.5 years, they may not re-elect me, so I'm just going to pretend that everything is the GOP's fault and say that if you trust me, and elect even more DEMs in 2010, then everything will be hunky dory. Chuck Todd follow up, 'You said this was huge, how could you not ask for sacrifice', Obama: 'Did I say that?', nevermind, everything will be fine as long as you trust me.
Jake Tapper (ABC), next
Senate Dems, no middle class tax cut, no cap and trade, what's up with that?
Ummm, ahhh, ummmm, ahhh, we need health care reform, we gotta have energy policy, we gotta have even more federal spending on education, we gotta fix the deficit, we know things may change through the legislative process, and we already got the middle class their tax cut, so don't worry about that, and cap and trade is part of a 'broader principle' so don't worry about that. I still believe in cap and trade, even though it has been a costly, bureaucratic nightmare when tried in Europe, but we'll do it better somehow. Jack Tapper follow up, will you sign it if it doesn't meet your priorities? Obama: Ehh, whatever.
Chip Reid (CBS), next
Generational Theft, close to $10T in new debt over 10 years, what's up with that?
The GOP are evil, and they did it first, so nevermind. We'll cut the deficit in half over five years, those ten year projections are wrong, growth will be higher than the CBO predicts, despite all my attempts to strangle the economy somehow growth will remain robust cause of all the magic fairy dust I'll be spreading around the country. With all the added magic fairy dust I'll be spreading around like so much manure the flowers of prosperity will bloom. And my critics won't release their own budgets so they have no standing to criticize, did I mention health care? Yeah, health care, yeah, I'll really FIX health care, and while I'm at it I'll dismantle our military to balance the budget. Follow up, what's with the out years if you are really cutting? Obama: Don't look behind the curtain!!! Pay no attention to that, those savings are going to happen once I spread the magic fairy dust, magic fairy dust will fix everything.
(the question to answer ratio remains as lopsided as the last dog and pony show, and the questions asked aren't the ones he actually answers, does he really think folks aren't going to notice this?)
Lourdes (her news outlet wasn't captioned, didn't catch it)
Mexico, sucks don't it? Does it threaten US security?
We're dealing with it, and we'll do more if we need to, and it's US guns that are the problem so we need more gun control (though that statement is ridiculous on the face of it).
Kevin (Stars and Stripes)
What can you cut from the military budget without political blowback?
We're giving more money to veterans, and we'll take care of their PTSD having asses (cause all troops come back 'wrong'), we'll save money by reforming the procurement system. (??? - That's going to save hundreds of billions?) Obama wants to say he'll gut the military, he just can't admit it, yet, instead he'll pretend that 'reform' will lead to savings. No more off the book war expenditures, that'll help, too.
Ed Henry (CNN)
Andy Cuomo's done more to hit AIG than you did, what's up with that, and aren't you leaving a bigger mess to the future than what was left you?
This isn't easy, it's hard, it's really, really hard. My solution, reduce health care costs by nationalizing health care?!?!!!???!!!????? (the particulars are all a smokescreen, he wants one payer health care like our betters in Canada and Europe, which really means he wants rationed care, which is what they get). He's not answering the question again, just claiming that outrageous amounts of government spending will lead to outrageous growth rates and everything will be just fine. Are folks really falling for this fairy tale? Follow up, you weren't angry enough about AIG? I took time cause I like to know of what I speak.
Major Garrett (FNC)
China wants an IMF currency, Europe doesn't want stimulus spending, given that you want to be a 'global' president, are you hurt by the criticisms?
We all need to row in the same direction, at the G-20 we will work on job creation collectively, avoid protectionism, and create even more red tape, cause red tape=prosperity. The dollar is strong, and we're still number one. As far as changing our image, but the world loves me more than they love Bush. Follow up, global currency? No.
Mike Allen (The Politico)
Right to cut deductions for charities and mortgages?
Yes, we need to make sacrifices cause of wage stagnation, the top 5% are going to feel some pain, but they'll enjoy it and they won't go John Galt on us so everything will be fine. This won't decimate charities, I swear, you shouldn't worry about deductions when giving to charity, so screw you rich folks! They can afford it, so bend over and take it. Follow up, charities claim this will be horrible. Obama: No, it won't be a problem, grow the economy, and charities will get paid.
Kevin Chapelle (Ebony)
1 in 50 children homeless, what are you going to do for homeless children?
That's terrible, my recovery package will solve everything, and we'll extend the safety net, and we'll throw money at the states to prevent families from being homeless.
Ann Compton (ABC Radio)
Let's talk race, are you still black enough?
The economy knows no color, the inaugural was great, but y'all are still kinda racist, but the economy is more important than reminding all of you how racist you still are.
Jon Ward (Wash Times)
Stem cells, moral, immoral, consider it at all personally?
I'm going to pretend I care about embryos, I barely think babies are people so you think I think twice about putting embryos in a blender? I'll just pretend to be thoughtful on this issue and spout platitudes. He's sure taking a long time not to answer this question, isn't he?
(I'm really tempted to switch to the Lakers game, this crap is boring, even though the Lakers are only playing the lowly Thunder, still better than this crap, I'm guessing the next question will be the last question, so I'll stick it out)
Last question, Stephen Collison (AFP)
Palestine-Israel, sucks don't it, and Netanyahu is evil?
It's going to be tough, and the status quo is unsustainable, there must be two states with peace and security. Mr. Sally Jesse Raphael glasses (aka George Mitchell) will help with bringing the sides together. We had the Orange and the Green together here on St. Pats, so we'll get the Israelis and Palestinians together, too. Persistence is what I'm all about, if at first you don't succeed, blame previous administrations for your failures, and fail, fail again.
He's still talking, but he ain't saying nothing. As usual, he's highlighting that ridiculous video to Iran, it's an example of his wonderful persistence, he's saying don't expect results, just listen to my rhetoric, as long as I talk a good game, you shouldn't pay attention to a lack of results, cause results require real plans, real change, and all I've got is talking and a perpetual campaign to run.
UPDATE:
President Obama went without his trusty prompter, instead relying on a really big TV in the back of the room, seen in the above YouTube clip from Fox News (via Drudge).
What do you suppose his reaction would have been had a bunch of reporters chosen to stand up in front of the display just after he started speaking? Would he have harrumphed, or would he have called over the Secret Service?
(also, what's the carbon footprint on that thing, did he pay his offsets?)
(finally, give a speech, or hold a press conference, don't do both)
04 March 2009
My Sentiments, Exactly . . .
(via Instapundit)
David Harsanyi speaks truth to the squawking classes
Rush Limbaugh is right, and he expressed his disdain for the policy directives issuing forth from the Obama administration in exactly the right terms. It would be horrific for our nation if they manage (despite themselves) to succeed. We are a resilient, resourceful, and productive people, and even with an Obama administration hellbent on turning us into MegaSweden, we might actually manage to pull out of this recession even with the Democratic party doing everything in their power to undermine our economy and increase the grasp of the federal government.
If the economy recovers, they'll take the credit, and that would be a disaster, cause that would mean more policy suggestions like we've seen these past few weeks, and there's only so much of this nonsense that we can handle before we're plunged into French like economic stagnation and malaise.
So, failure now for Obama's policies, even if that means more economic hardship for the American people, will sow the seeds for a rebirth of economic responsibility, adherence to the federalist nature of our constitution, and decapitation of that evil zombie known as the New Deal (and it's recent manifestation in Obama's New New Deal). When Carter failed miserably in the late 70s, it was the best thing that ever happened to us as a nation, had by some bizarre miracle the economy recovered despite his idiotic policies, then we never would have had Reagan, and we might already be MegaSweden rather than the U S of Effin A!!!
David Harsanyi speaks truth to the squawking classes
Since when is rooting for the success of an ideologically driven elected official a civic duty, you may wonder? Wonder no more. It merely depends on the politician.
Rush Limbaugh is right, and he expressed his disdain for the policy directives issuing forth from the Obama administration in exactly the right terms. It would be horrific for our nation if they manage (despite themselves) to succeed. We are a resilient, resourceful, and productive people, and even with an Obama administration hellbent on turning us into MegaSweden, we might actually manage to pull out of this recession even with the Democratic party doing everything in their power to undermine our economy and increase the grasp of the federal government.
If the economy recovers, they'll take the credit, and that would be a disaster, cause that would mean more policy suggestions like we've seen these past few weeks, and there's only so much of this nonsense that we can handle before we're plunged into French like economic stagnation and malaise.
So, failure now for Obama's policies, even if that means more economic hardship for the American people, will sow the seeds for a rebirth of economic responsibility, adherence to the federalist nature of our constitution, and decapitation of that evil zombie known as the New Deal (and it's recent manifestation in Obama's New New Deal). When Carter failed miserably in the late 70s, it was the best thing that ever happened to us as a nation, had by some bizarre miracle the economy recovered despite his idiotic policies, then we never would have had Reagan, and we might already be MegaSweden rather than the U S of Effin A!!!
06 February 2009
09 January 2009
67,000?!?!!!!!
The things you learn while half listening to confirmation hearings. Tom Daschle has been tapped to be the new Secretary of Human Health and Services. It seems that his ex-compatriots in the Senate are really looking forward to being serviced by him.
Given he used to be the top dog amongst Democratic Senators, it's no surprise really that the hearing has been convivial and breezy. That's invariably the case when Senators are getting 'grilled' by their ex-co-conspirators. They confer a great deal of respect upon each other, much of it seems totally unearned from an outsider's perspective.
But, that's not what this post is about, one of the Senators threw out there that HHS has a staff of 67,000. Much of what they do is important, but it's also duplicative of similar work being done at the state level, and it would be a breath of fresh air if we as a nation tried on for size a bit of that good old federalism for a change.
This "cabinet" is in charge of a veritable alphabet soup of organizations, many of them of dubious authority, responsibility, and necessity at the federal level.
As the various "cabinets" have seen their influence and importance within presidential administrations diminish, the number of titles and departments within each "cabinet" has flourished. I hope we'll see some change in this trend during the upcoming years of "hope and change", but I'm not holding my breath. Seems like the Obama Administration is strolling in with the goal to federalize as many responsibilities as possible, and they are going to use deficit spending and a torrent of money printing to fundamentally undermine local authority by making any responsible state or local government that doesn't gorge themselves at the federal trough disadvantaged when compared to their spendthrift and irresponsible neighbors.
This notion that we must burn tons of federal money on local and state 'shovel ready' projects to jumpstart the economy in the near term is short sighted and bound to lead to horrendous effects down the road. Many of these projects are lengthy, and will outlast the current recession, but the public debts we are planning to accrue will limit our flexibility to either shrink the federal government later, or respond to unforseen challenges that may crop up in the future.
The fact that just one of our "cabinets" has 67,000 employees is a symptom of the overall problem. The federal government is bloated at all levels, the productivity revolution that has changed the economy in every other sector has completely bypassed the government. Instead of leading us out of a recession, all that bloat is going to do is delay any potential recovery. It's what happened in the 1930s with a series of ill conceived projects back in the New Deal days, and the Obama Administration's New New Deal has the potential to be equally or even more disastrous.
Given he used to be the top dog amongst Democratic Senators, it's no surprise really that the hearing has been convivial and breezy. That's invariably the case when Senators are getting 'grilled' by their ex-co-conspirators. They confer a great deal of respect upon each other, much of it seems totally unearned from an outsider's perspective.
But, that's not what this post is about, one of the Senators threw out there that HHS has a staff of 67,000. Much of what they do is important, but it's also duplicative of similar work being done at the state level, and it would be a breath of fresh air if we as a nation tried on for size a bit of that good old federalism for a change.
This "cabinet" is in charge of a veritable alphabet soup of organizations, many of them of dubious authority, responsibility, and necessity at the federal level.
As the various "cabinets" have seen their influence and importance within presidential administrations diminish, the number of titles and departments within each "cabinet" has flourished. I hope we'll see some change in this trend during the upcoming years of "hope and change", but I'm not holding my breath. Seems like the Obama Administration is strolling in with the goal to federalize as many responsibilities as possible, and they are going to use deficit spending and a torrent of money printing to fundamentally undermine local authority by making any responsible state or local government that doesn't gorge themselves at the federal trough disadvantaged when compared to their spendthrift and irresponsible neighbors.
This notion that we must burn tons of federal money on local and state 'shovel ready' projects to jumpstart the economy in the near term is short sighted and bound to lead to horrendous effects down the road. Many of these projects are lengthy, and will outlast the current recession, but the public debts we are planning to accrue will limit our flexibility to either shrink the federal government later, or respond to unforseen challenges that may crop up in the future.
The fact that just one of our "cabinets" has 67,000 employees is a symptom of the overall problem. The federal government is bloated at all levels, the productivity revolution that has changed the economy in every other sector has completely bypassed the government. Instead of leading us out of a recession, all that bloat is going to do is delay any potential recovery. It's what happened in the 1930s with a series of ill conceived projects back in the New Deal days, and the Obama Administration's New New Deal has the potential to be equally or even more disastrous.
26 December 2008
Hey, Don't Blame Me, I Voted "Hell NO!"
Michelle Malkin notices our recently approved high speed rail line. It's not just Californians who are going to pour resources into this particular money pit, looks like the Obama Administration is going to get onboard and dump some federal dollars down this hole, as well.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, suckers!!!!!!
My predictions for this boondoggle, you won't be able to get from the Bay to L.A. on this thing before 2019 (they'll fast track portions of it, but the full connection will take time), and it won't ever make the trip in less than 4 hours (it will be slowed by stops, inclines and such, but there will be a few stretches where the thing hits the promised 220mph mark so everyone can claim success, but I doubt it will ever see better than 100mph for an average speed from its farthest connecting points), and that'll be after sinking over $30B over the next decade (supposedly it'll only cost $10B, but that's as much of a dream as the sub 2 hour travel time from Oakland to Los Angeles by rail), and either they'll have to subsidize the hell out of the ticket price to get anyone to ride, or they'll tax the hell out of the air links between the areas to force people to use the 'greener' alternative.
I did what I could, I tried to point out why this would be a bad idea when I made my voting recommendations, but I guess I lack influence and for some reason California voters think all that bond money falls from the sky and doesn't add to our state budget deficit or lead to increased taxation. Life must be wonderfully simple when you are that blissfully unaware of consequences.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, suckers!!!!!!
My predictions for this boondoggle, you won't be able to get from the Bay to L.A. on this thing before 2019 (they'll fast track portions of it, but the full connection will take time), and it won't ever make the trip in less than 4 hours (it will be slowed by stops, inclines and such, but there will be a few stretches where the thing hits the promised 220mph mark so everyone can claim success, but I doubt it will ever see better than 100mph for an average speed from its farthest connecting points), and that'll be after sinking over $30B over the next decade (supposedly it'll only cost $10B, but that's as much of a dream as the sub 2 hour travel time from Oakland to Los Angeles by rail), and either they'll have to subsidize the hell out of the ticket price to get anyone to ride, or they'll tax the hell out of the air links between the areas to force people to use the 'greener' alternative.
I did what I could, I tried to point out why this would be a bad idea when I made my voting recommendations, but I guess I lack influence and for some reason California voters think all that bond money falls from the sky and doesn't add to our state budget deficit or lead to increased taxation. Life must be wonderfully simple when you are that blissfully unaware of consequences.
If Someone Is Really Demanding an Explanation . . .
From Megan McArdle
Is this really a concept that needs explanation? I think anyone who needs it explained to them that it's a very bad idea and patently unjust that the government should pick winners and losers and punish the rich, then I don't conceive of any amount of persuasion changing their minds.
I just hope that the parts of Obama's rhetoric that match the notion of picking winners and punishing the rich was just that, rhetoric, and not something he plans on putting into practice.
I am truly frightened by how many of Obama's more vocal supporters hope that his feints in that direction were more than empty rhetoric and instead part of his proposed "Hope" and "Change".
Obviously, if you think it's the government's job to pick economic winners and losers, and ensure that rich people lose as often as possible, then my stance is horrible and hypocritical. I will explain another time why I think that this is neither just, nor in the long-term interests of American society.
Is this really a concept that needs explanation? I think anyone who needs it explained to them that it's a very bad idea and patently unjust that the government should pick winners and losers and punish the rich, then I don't conceive of any amount of persuasion changing their minds.
I just hope that the parts of Obama's rhetoric that match the notion of picking winners and punishing the rich was just that, rhetoric, and not something he plans on putting into practice.
I am truly frightened by how many of Obama's more vocal supporters hope that his feints in that direction were more than empty rhetoric and instead part of his proposed "Hope" and "Change".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)