Tag Archives: Economy

Economy, Politics

Gingrich Video On Stimulus Bill

Newt Gingrich on the so-called stimulus bill, the video. Graciously lifted from .BlogRead.

Call your Senators today at 202-224-3121 and tell them to oppose the stimulus package. And for good measure, send them an email too.

Let’s be honest, it’s not really a stimulus bill. It’s a big government, pork-laden spending bill filled with wasteful projects.

In this new video, Newt outlines in stark terms exactly why this bill, as currently written, is not worthy of our support.

H/T Dan Kotman @ American Solutions

Economy, Energy, Iran, Media, Politics, Russia, Venezuela

The Language Of Politics, Can We Talk?

Ever wondered why we haven’t already achieved energy independence? There is no one you can find in Washington, from any party, that won’t say they are for energy independence. Everyone is for energy independence. So what’s the problem?

The problem is the political language barrier. Probably first invented by President Clinton when his Lewinsky defense was, ‘it depends on what the definition of IS is.’ The political parties today are not speaking the same language and the media is speaking the dialect of the Left. It presumes that the other side is just stupid and there is no common ground to be found.

Energy Independence, the Right– The whole point of energy independence as far as conservatives and most Republicans are concerned is primarily a security issue. The fact that we are buying 70 percent of the oil what we currently use from foreign sources, most of which don’t like us very much, is a point not forgotten by those on the political right. Conservatives are reminded of the gas lines and rationing that went on here under the Carter administration after Iran started using their oil as a weapon against us. Like Russia, btw, is doing to its neighbors today and Chaves has threatened to do to us. To mitigate this concern, to become energy independent means to develop enough of our own resources to protect our own national security should the middle east one day shut off the valves. Or, if Iran blows them up.

There would be two other benefits to becoming energy independent. One would be a private sector, high paying, job creation project in states all over the country that wouldn’t increase our national debt one thin dime. It would also stop the annual flow of $700 billion to countries that would just as easily cut us off and sell to China or any other country, and keep that money right here in our own country, and putting it to work in our own economy.

Unfortunately, you will be hard pressed to find a liberal speaking to the national security aspect of oil resources in the United States.

Energy Independence, the Left– to the left it means energy replacement. That is to say, not to use fossil fuels. To be energy independent does not mean to have and use our own resources as opposed to someone else’s. It means to not use our own resources in favor of some technology of the future that has yet to be developed. The ‘green’ lobby, high on the list of political allies to Democrats, is leading the agenda to this definition of energy independence. This is fine and dandy in a perfect world. But it totally ignores the security aspect of not having enough of our own resources if, say tomorrow, OPEC or an oil producing State decides to cut production or worse, cut us off, either voluntarily or involuntarily.

A fact that can’t be ignored is the fact that fossil fuels are the fuel for the worlds’ economic engine and will stay that way unless and until some other source can be brought to market. To not exploit our own resources, as a bridge to some technology of the future and our own national security, is just as irresponsible as forcing us to limit the use of fossil fuels, no matter where they come from, to the detriment of our economy.

While developing this post, other terms and words have come to light that play a major role in inhibiting economic, social, and political progress. Here is a list of some that came out of the news in just the last 3 days. It is what we, as conservatives, are up against.

  • Spending / Investing
  • Bipartisan / the political right ignoring their principles and voting with Democrats.
  • Shovel Ready / Shovel ready in a few years
  • Economic Stimulus/ big government stimulus
  • Opening up the airways / Restricting the airways
  • Tax Cuts / Income redistribution
  • Tax Incentives / Tax Increase ($18b on Oil Companies)
  • Employee Free Choice Act / Employee No Choice Act
Economy, Politics

Obama 'Reaches Out' On 'Stimulus' Bill

President Obama deserves an academy award for this line . . .

“I’ve done extraordinary outreach to Republicans because they have some good ideas and I want to make sure those ideas are incorporated,” Obama said.

He is talking about the so-called economic stimulus plan that passed the House and goes to the Senate tomorrow. This is the very same bill that Nancy Pelosi made sure that Republicans would have no input on.

The House vote showed bi-partisan support for not supporting the bill. It included all the Republicans and 11 Democrats. Obama doesn’t need Republicans to pass this Democrat-created bill.  What he needs to pass this bill is Democrats.

link: Obama to meet Congressional leaders again on stimulus

Economy, Media, Politics

NYT, More Than Just Economic Stimulus

Isn’t it odd that the media is not talking about what is in this so-called $825 billion economic stimulus plan? You know why. It’s because the bill contains way more pork than economic stimulus. Breaking another of his campaign promises to cut pork out of every bill he signs, the New York Times is making a feign attempt of real journalism by pointing out Obama’s real plan. But only after it already passed in the House.

As President Obama and Congress barrel toward the latest emergency program to resuscitate the American economy, one question is looming over their search for a cure: Can the government fashion a fast and efficient economic stimulus while also seizing the moment to remake America?

For now, Mr. Obama and his aides are insisting they can accomplish both goals, following their mantra of using the urgency of the economic crisis to accomplish larger – and long-delayed – reforms that never garnered sufficient votes in ordinary times.

What’s this ‘remake America’ crap? It’s simple, and it also explains why all the pork is in the bill, including support for his wacko base in the name of ACORN, which was already rejected last year when the Obama campaign first suggested the $700 billion ‘stimulus’ package.

Pushing this bill through Congress is Obama’s attempt of following Rahm Emanual’s advice. What he calls ‘rule one.’

“Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste,” Mr. Emanuel said in an interview on Sunday. “They are opportunities to do big things.”

Key point in the Times’ article regarding the plan is their analysis that much of the pork in the bill contains ‘reforms that never garnered sufficient votes in ordinary times.’ This is exactly what Rahm Emanual means in not letting our current economic crisis to ‘go to waste.’

The AP calls the stimulus plan as a ‘bill to fuel Obama’s priorities.’ It ‘makes quick work possible.’ They don’t have the courage to say that the plan is not an economic stimulus plan.

Says al-AP Jan 18, 2009:

The economic crisis that will dominate Barack Obama’s first 100 days as president, and beyond, will give him a rare chance to enact big portions of his agenda that otherwise might have languished for months or years.

Not since Franklin D. Roosevelt has a new president been poised to pack so many ambitious, costly – and, under more normal circumstances, highly contentious – projects into one fast-moving bill.

Touting this plan as an ‘economic stimulus’ is fraudulent on its face. It represents more a big government stimulus than an economic one. Write your senators and tell them not to approve this plan as it is currently written. Remove the pork and instead, put the Democrats’ wish list for America into separate bills and let Congress vote on them individually. Make them live up to their claim of openness and transparency.

link: NYT, A Stimulus Plan With Dual Goals: Reform and Recovery | Stimulus bill to fuel Obama’s priorities | Contact Your Senators

2008 Election, Economy, Media, Politics

Forget Persuasion, Attack Limbaugh Instead

1 Comment

President Obama is not having an easy time with his nearly trillion dollar so-called stimulus plan, despite getting a jump-start from President Bush. In theory, as in rhetoric, doing something to stimulate the ‘economy’ is what is needed. But if what you propose is, in reality, not an economic stimulus but rather a seismic shift from free markets and limited government, to government control of markets and industry with ‘no exit plan’ (that sounds familiar), then I would hope that he would encounter opposition from Democrats and Republicans, and everyone in between. And that includes Rush Limbaugh.

Rather than trying to persuade Republicans on Capital Hill on the efficacy of his plan, he shifts the focus to a private citizen, talk radio host Rush Limbaugh. Speaking with Republicans in Washington on his first week, Obama said . . .

You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.

Echoing chief of staff Rahm Emanual’s ‘rule one,’ he stresses the urgency for action. Never mind what kind of action. Obama said . . .

We are experiencing an unprecedented economic crisis that has to be dealt with and dealt with rapidly.

Having been brought into the discussion on Obama’s economic plan, Rush Limbaugh responds in an interview on Byron York’s blog at National Review Online.

Before I get to Rush’s response, which is below. Harken back to the campaign. Remember how the media virtually ignored and discounted Obama’s alliances with radicals like William Ayers? They characterized them as mere fleeting associations that were of no pertinent significance. The role the media played in Obama’s campaign and subsequent election is the reason people like you and I were not informed, and Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw didn’t know (or didn’t want to know) about just who he (Obama) is. ‘We don’t know a lot about him,’ said Brokaw. (Why didn’t you ask, Tom?)

In his response, Rush puts Obama’s so-called stimulus plan and motivation into proper perspective in the name of Saul Alinsky. In Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals, he writes  . . .

“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)

Ask yourself, is this not what we are seeing?

Rush’s response follows:

There are two things going on here. One prong of the Great Unifier’s plan is to isolate elected Republicans from their voters and supporters by making the argument about me and not about his plan. He is hoping that these Republicans will also publicly denounce me and thus marginalize me. And who knows? Are ideological and philosophical ties enough to keep the GOP loyal to their voters? Meanwhile, the effort to foist all blame for this mess on the private sector continues unabated when most of the blame for this current debacle can be laid at the feet of the Congress and a couple of former presidents. And there is a strategic reason for this.

Secondly, here is a combo quote from the meeting:

“If we don’t get this done we (the Democrats) could lose seats and I could lose re-election. But we can’t let people like Rush Limbaugh stall this. That’s how things don’t get done in this town.”

To make the argument about me instead of his plan makes sense from his perspective. Obama’s plan would buy votes for the Democrat Party, in the same way FDR’s New Deal established majority power for 50 years of Democrat rule, and it would also simultaneously seriously damage any hope of future tax cuts. It would allow a majority of American voters to guarantee no taxes for themselves going forward. It would burden the private sector and put the public sector in permanent and firm control of the economy. Put simply, I believe his stimulus is aimed at re-establishing “eternal” power for the Democrat Party rather than stimulating the economy because anyone with a brain knows this is NOT how you stimulate the economy. If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of this TRILLION dollar debacle.

Obama was angry that Merrill Lynch used $1.2 million of TARP money to remodel an executive suite. Excuse me, but didn’t Merrill have to hire a decorator and contractor? Didn’t they have to buy the new furnishings? What’s the difference in that and Merrill loaning that money to a decorator, contractor and goods supplier to remodel Warren Buffet’s office? Either way, stimulus in the private sector occurs. Are we really at the point where the bad PR of Merrill getting a redecorated office in the process is reason to smear them? How much money will the Obamas spend redecorating the White House residence? Whose money will be spent? I have no problem with the Obamas redoing the place. It is tradition. 600 private jets flown by rich Democrats flew into the Inauguration. That’s fine but the auto execs using theirs is a crime? In both instances, the people on those jets arrived in Washington wanting something from Washington, not just good will.

If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of the trillion dollar debacle.

One more thing, Byron. Your publication and website have documented Obama’s ties to the teachings of Saul Alinksy while he was community organizing in Chicago. Here is Rule 13 of Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals:

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

And here’s how the Huffington Post and Think Progress lie about what Obama, and Rush, said.

related links:

Economy, Politics

Stimulus Bill Is $825 Billion Pork Bill

Of the $825 billion of what the administration is calling an economic stimulus bill, only $275 billion of it goes towards actual economic stimulus. The rest is merely spending money on projects that generate no stimulus to the economy. Like Rahm Emanual said a short time ago, let’s not miss our chance to advance our agenda during the economic crisis.

Here is his exact quote from the Sunday CBS show Face The Nation, November 9, four days after the election . . .

“Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste,” Mr. Emanuel said in an interview on Sunday. “They are opportunities to do big things.”

And this is exactly what is happening.

No longer are they described as a stimulus. They are described as investments. Which is democrat-speak for big spending programs that advance the party agenda, NOT providing an economic stimulus.

Among those “priority investments” are:

— $650 million to help Americans upgrade to digital cable reception after the official transition to digital television transmission on Feb. 17, 2009.

— $44 million to repair and improve the headquarters of the Department of Agriculture in Washington, D.C.

— $276 million to upgrade and modernize information technology at the State Department.

— $3.1 billion to fund “infrastructure projects” on federal land, including $1.8 billion for the National Park Service, $650 million for the U.S. Forest Service, and $300 million for the National Fish Hatcheries.

— $600 million for NASA, including $400 million for projects such as “satellite sensors that measure solar radiation critical to understanding climate change.”

— $1.9 billion for the Department of Energy for “basic research into the physical sciences,” including nuclear physics and fusion energy.

— $209 million for maintenance work at the federal Agricultural Research Service’s research facilities across the country.

— $400 million in repairs to various “national treasures,” including $200 million for revitalizing the National Mall, $150 for maintenance at the Smithsonian Institution, and $50 million to make up for a lack of philanthropic support for the arts.

— $850 million for “wildland fire management,” including $550 million to states for “volunteer fire assistance,” “city forest enhancements” and “wood to energy” projects.

— $400 million for “habitat restoration” projects to be doled out by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.

— $2.7 billion for “rural water and waste disposal” grant programs for providing loans for digging wells or extending municipal water services in rural areas.

— $2 billion to provide day care services to 300,000 additional low-income children, ostensibly while their parents are at work.

— $1.2 billion to create an estimated 1 million summer jobs for young people.

— $2.5 billion to upgrade government-owned housing projects with new insulation, windows, and furnaces.

— $6.2 billion to weatherize the homes of low-income people to make them more energy efficient.

— $2.4 billion for projects demonstrating carbon-capture technology.

— $600 million to “prepare our country for universal healthcare” by training more doctors, dentists, and nurses.

— $1.5 billion to build new “Community Health Centers.”

— $20 billion to provide “nutrition assistance” for middle-income families and to lift restrictions on how long people can receive food stamps.

— An undisclosed amount to “provide 100 percent federal funding through 2010 for optional State Medicaid coverage of individuals (and their dependents) who are receiving unemployment benefits or have exhausted those benefits.”

related links:

Economy, Fair Tax

Fair Tax YouTube Ad

This video makes a good case for what is wrong with the current tax system. At the same time, it makes the case for the Fair Tax.

Tim Geithner, President Obama’s nominee for Secretary of the Treasury, would have already been confirmed if the Fair Tax was in place. Because under the Fair Tax, there are no tax returns to file and NOT paying your taxes becomes impossible.

Economy, Media

Newspapers Cutting Expenses, Hours, Wages

Newspapers around the country are having a tough time raising revenues for a host of reasons, not the least of which is the economy right now. Papers and Publishers are asking their employees, or I mean their ‘workers,’ to volunteer to have your hours cut as well as your salary. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

Gannett Announces One-Week, Unpaid Furloughs

Today Gannett is implementing a furlough program across all U.S. divisions and at corporate headquarters. This means that most of our U.S. employees – including myself and all other top executives – will be furloughed for the equivalent of one week in the first quarter. This furlough will be unpaid. Unions also will be asked to participate.

Emphasis added. Why is there no mention about what the union thinks of their cost cutting plans? Put a camera on the CWA’s president. Someone ask him just how the union is expected to participate? That’s where the news is. What’s up with that?

Wouldn’t you like to see the CWA try to hold up newspaper publishers? Watching that would be like an adult reprimanding a child. Only in this case, I’m having trouble determining which is the adult.

You can bet if the news was about organizing a business, we would see it.

CORRECTION 1/17/09: Gannett is not asking their employees to volunteer to take a week off without pay, they are telling them to, and within the first quarter of 2009. Mmm, wonder what’s up for the next quarter?

related link: What to say if your boss calls during your furlough

Economy, Fair Tax, Politics

Real Change, A Constitutional Convention

4 Comments

By now you’ve probably got the notion that the politicos in Washington have stopped listening to you and have settled in on the idea of keeping the power and status that goes with ‘serving’ our country. You also have learned that Washington believes that they know what is good for you, your family, your business, your livelihood, and your childrens’ education.

Paramount in every one’s mind today is the economy. As never before in our nation’s history and in world history, we no longer have just our economy sandwiched between two oceans living happily ever after. We are part of a global economy that is subject to the give and take, or if you will, the actions and reactions of industrialized nations around the world.

With that in mind, what we are hearing from Washington nowadays is that government spending of apocalyptic proportions is going to bring our economy around to recovery. And that couldn’t be more wrong. To think otherwise, you must assume that the government makes money and it is just spending the money it makes to help us. Fact is, the government only prints money, it doesn’t make a thin dime. The money the government uses is made by you and I. In fact, they have been spending money that we, our children, and our grandchildren haven’t yet made. The government gets it through taxation. They don’t make it, they take it. And they take it in ways that are punitive to those that create it, and in ways that hurt the most vulnerable among us. That would be the poor, and the means is the payroll tax. They take it so they can spend it in ways that will insure not only their re-election but their hold of power for power’s sake. NOT for the improvement of the economy.

As I said in the previous post, a lot of politicians will have to go into a 12-step program to wean themselves from of the old way of ‘control through taxation’ before real progressive change can take place in America. Question is, what will make them do that? Who will make them see the light? There is only one answer to this question. The people that elected them, you and I, are the ones who will proscribe it. First by electing like minded representatives. Second by pushing for a Constitutional Convention.

Georgia’s Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine has planted the seed and Neal Boortz, co-author of the Fair Tax book and Fair Tax: The Truth, Answering the Critics, has expanded on it. This is the kind of change that I’m talking about. What follows is from Boortz’s website.

We need a Constitutional Convention called for the sole purpose of adding three specific amendments to the United States Constitution. The convention would consider these three amendments … and nothing further. Two-thirds of the States need to pass a resolution calling for such a convention, and those resolutions need to be specifically worded so as to limit the purpose of the convention to these three amendments. Without that limitation we’re going to have left-wing fools trying to add amendments guarantying such things as a right to a job, a place to live and health care. Not good.

So .. what are the three amendments? (You don’t listen to me all that much, do you?) Very simple …

1. An amendment to the Constitution repealing the 16th Amendment. What is the 16th Amendment? That would be the income tax. By repealing the 16th Amendment the Congress would be forced to come up with a new way of generating the revenue needed for the legitimate functions of our government.
2. An amendment repealing the 17th Amendment. The 17th Amendment calls for the popular election of U.S. Senators. Before the 17th Amendment each state legislature would appoint that state’s two Senators. The congressmen were in Washington to represent the people, and the Senators were there to represent the states. Right now the government of Mexico has an official representative in Washington; the government of New Mexico does not. This enables the federal government to run roughshod over the states with unfounded mandates and other federal demands. Give the state governments a voice in Washington .. repeal the 17th Amendment.
3. An amendment setting term limits for members of the House of Representatives. Give them three terms, then send them home. Yes, I know, there are some people we would truly like to keep up there to pursue some worthy objectives, but in the balance we’re hurt by those who spend taxpayer money to solidify their power than we are would be by sending the few good representatives home at the end of six years.

Now .. here’s the reality here. The Congress would probably never permit this Constitutional Convention to be called. As soon as they saw state legislatures passing the resolutions to bring these things to pass we would see the members of congress trying to beat the citizens to the punch. No … they’re not going to send the choice of Senators back to the states, and they’re unlikely to set term limits for themselves. But we might actually see some movement on the repeal of the 16th Amendment and serious consideration given to the FairTax.

Dreaming? Maybe so, but maybe not. Get the right grassroots organization formed to push this idea for a Constitutional Convention and you just might rattle some cages in Washington. Who knows? Maybe the people might start counting again.

Our Representative in Northwest Florida, Jeff Miller, is a supporter of the Fair Tax as a method of tax reform and economic recovery. We have to work on the others around the country and our Senators as well. For more information about The Fair Tax see the links below. The ‘grassroots’ is you and I. In Pensacola come join us and be part of the solution. Hit the Pensacola Fair Tax Meetup Group link below.