Let's get some experience and grown-ups in Washington

Our Nation's capital has been infiltrated by dreamy kids.  Emotions rule the day.  Pesky old-fashioned contrivances such as the Constitution are waved away with a toss of the wrist.  I'd guess that somewhat under ten percent of President Barack Obama's administration have worked in the private sector (and that might be generous).  Maybe a shade more of the Democratic congresspeople, maybe not.  They are managing our country.  This is, as I have continually stated, The American Idol -- The President.  But this idolatrousness has gone too far and most of the country, sans the far-left media of course, is waking up to that fact.

These utopianists are attempting to take over the entire private sector, if not by nationalizing, which has been only in the case of the automotive sector, but by regulations, rules, investigations, hearings.  At a time when the United Statew desperately need jobs by companies our government is incessently and vicously attacking entities in the formerly so-called private sector.  This post will be updated regularly with specific examples of the Obama Administraion and the Democratic Majority in Congress and their attempts to control American business and remake it as they know it should operate.

Let's just start by a remark from the Boss of the U. S. House of Representatives Financial Services  Committee, Barney Frank (nee Fife).  "I do not want Fannie and Freddie [these would be Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, now government-owned, then government-controlled holders of over 50% of the mortgages on U. S. homes totalling something like $5,000,000,000,000, that's trillion, all ultimately at-risk by the U. S. taxpayers courtesy of U. S. government guarantees] to be just another bank (sic).  I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness" he said in 2003.  That is a mature, grown-up comment by an experienced manager from the private sector,  NOT!

Control over car makers it doesn't own
President Obama's new rules for auto emissions will punish even green, green, green electric car makerss.  The savior of America and the world from global warming according to Obama, electric cars, will be hurt because even they will not be "zero emission" so car companies cannot use electrics to counteract his new braintwistingly-complex mileage rules of scorings of mileage and carbon dioxide.  Actually electricity has to be generated, and most in the U. S. comes from dirty-to-environmentalists coal, then scary-to-environmentalists nuclear energy.  No passes for anyone  the Left seems to want to eliminate all automobiles (not to mention all profits and possibly even money.)  But no matter: Obama wants 4-cylinder cars, low-friction electric steering, more gears and slower cars.  That man what an awesome car guy!  Freedom?  What's that?  Presdient Obama tells us "Hey America next year these smaller, slower, sometimes-electric cars will cost you aoubt $950 MORE thanks to me."  I'd vote for him.  All in all, it's not his money and come to think about it, has he EVER owned a car?  And to the industry that's bulging with profits, it'll cost it only another $52,000,000,000 over 5 years.  The most expensive set of rules in U. S. HISTORY!  (And that's Obama's current projection.  Actual numbers from the government usually turn out to be marketedly lower than projections, I think the New York Times once wrote.)   Since it takes three or four years to conceive, plan, design and establish manufacturability of new cars, these rules take effect in 2016.  But car makers, actually all businesse,s need stability of regulation to invest efficiently.  They need to know what to expect.  But not with Obama, no.  He wings it and hurts business.  (But I don't think he has a clue.)  But this charismatic, forceful leader of the free world is working like heck to create jobs.  No doubt!

Control over our health stuff
Obama's Patient's Protection and Affordable Care Act (sick) mandates 1) that chain restaurants disclose the calories on menu items; 2) working nursing mothers must be allowed breaks and a private place that's not a bathroom to suckle (paid for by companies, of course to decrease their job-growth profits); 3) companies must pay to calculate and present to the government on W-2s the value of all health benefits; 4) Health Savings Account contributions will be lowered and coverages diminished; 5) can't borrow from HSAs any longer -- even though it IS your money -- to cover emergencies, sorry you eight million citizens; 5) terminated abstinence programs for kids (this IS healthcare of course) is sort of brought back if each states matches the contribution from the federal government and 6) the federal government is paying for home visits by nurses for knocked-up kids to teach them parenting and coping (coping?) skills because obviously the abstinence programs (see above) didn't work. 

Control over coal mining
Most electrical energy in the United States comes from coal.  Coal is hated by environmentalists and their lackeys, the Democratic Pandering Party.  I suppose it's because coal is black, but I have no empirical evidence of that.  Only of the hatrid.  So the President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency will stop most new surface coal mining using a new "science".  This "science" is questioned by the National Mining Association (but any views of business is biased say the Left, unlike the unbiased environmentalists.)  This "science" is the electrical consuctivity of streams.  Whatever.  But thrilled, thrilled, thrilled is the unbiased Coal River Mountain Watch which opposes mountain-top mining.  But the EPA's new "scinece" won't only stop new mines, it'll revoke a permit already granted to Spruce No. 1 mine of Arch Coal Inc.  Retroactive revocation.  (Another aside: if permits can be arbitrarily revoked by Obama why get one?  In fact, why be in business at all if you can't count on any Rule of Law?)  But heck they're only 27,000 miners in  Appalachia and only 11% of total U. S. production comes from these surface mines.  But Obama must believe the U. S. has so many jobs, 27,000 more or less are unimportant and so much energy, 11% isn't important! Sort of an aside here, changing to Massey Energy Co''s Upper Big Branch mining tragedy, the Far-left media headlines the safety violations and, of course, Congressional Democrats will initiate hearings.  And, as usual with for-proift companies, such as Toyota, they are GUILTY! with no "until proven" one way or anther because Democrats and Left-wing media knows who is guilty and innocent and trials are such a bother.  Massey recently spent almost a billion dollars buying an underground coal mining company to diversify away from government-, environmentalist- and Democratic-hating surface mining.  Massey, you can't get away from hatred.

Control over interest-rate swaps
Obama doesn's seem to care about profits (assuming he understands what profits are), especially of the banks.  So he's taking banks' over-the-counter business in swaps from them and giving them to other companies that run exchanges.  Arbitrary?  Rule of Law?  Stability?  I don't know if the companies owning the exchanges are run by Democrats more than banks, or if they donate more to Democrats.  But I'd take a wild guess:  yes.  Cronyism is alive and healthy with President Obama.

Control over Google
Google Inc., a huge backer ("sucker") of Obamania will get it in the butt.  The Obama Federal Trade Commission looks to be getting ready to stop Google's proposed acquisition of AdMob.  President Obama is scared Google might dominate a new industry -- mobile cellphone advertising -- huh?   Let me get this right.  Google is highly successful in one industry it built from a start-up.  And the president is fraidy-cat that Google might succeed in another industry?  Well of course he doesn't need any Rule of Law, he can do what he wants because he IS the American Idol -- The President.  Arbitrary anti-trust it absolutely is.  Isn't anyone concerned?

Control over State Safety Agencies
President Obama, learning from the success of Amtrak, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, U.S.P.S., Social Security and Medicare/aid wants to get states (as in that old-fashioned term "states rights") to follow its programs that harass certain industries.  Safety activists (those unbiased guys) think the enforcement of safety laws has been wayyyy too lax under former president and scapegoat, George W. Bush.  The feds want to make the "emphasis program" mandatory and basically tell the states what to do and how to do it.