China Eats the United States for Lunch

And thank you, President Barack Obama for letting the fox (not news!) into the hen house.  Obama's General Motors has sold its Hummer SUV brand and dealer network to Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machinery Co., the first time a Chinese vehicle company has been able to offer a product made in the U. S. GM will make the vehicles until 2012, when the Chinese buyer will take over.  The price?  A nominal $150,000,000, but its sales are off 64% this year, so a turnaround will be needed.  A new HQ will be centered in Detroit or nearby.  If nothing else the long-term thinking Chinese will learn how to do it.  It probably would have been smarter to forego both the $150,000,000 and the upcoming competition.

With vast wealth and natural resources at its 60th birthday, China is stepping up and out of the shadows.  It is establishing stock markets for emerging companies, invests in private and public equity, and U. S. government securities, of which it is the largest owner.  And now it is establishing an internal marketplace to trade commodities, opposing the U. S. presently by far the most important.  Believing it can keep its costs down and gain some control, initially for the $130,000,000,000 of its imported oil.   Sometime in 2010, the Shanghai Futures Exchange may compete with the New York Mercantile Exchange, the dominant international price setter for light, sweet crude today.

And while President Barack Obama is borrowing $3,000,000,000 likely from the Chinese government to buy and destroy 700,000 useable automobiles and light trucks (that poor people could use, in the "Cash for Clunkers" fiasco) China is investing that money into raw materials, natural resources and real estate. It's buying into Kazakhstan's second largest oil producer for $1,00,000,000 for 11% of KazMunaiGasExploratioin Production.

September 29: Hong Kong Exchanges & Clearing -- the stock exchange -- is getting more and more initial public offerings (IPOs) at the expense of the U. S. UC Rusal, Russian aluminum giant is looking for a $30,000,000,000 valuation.  U. S.-based Wynn Resorts and Las Vegas Sands and others are looking.  American rules and regulations among other things turn companies off.  And on October 1, Wynn Macau Ltd. raised $1,600,000,000 selling stock at the high-end of expectations with strong demand.  Sorry, New York Stock Exchange.

The Unites States' markets for initial public offerings is open (a shadow of what it once was, but open). Taking advantage of it is...China. One-third of the U. S. initial public offerings -- 1/3! -- have been Chinese/Asian companies.

Well now even French President Nicolas Sarkozy is jumping off the dollar bandwagon saying it can't remain the world's only reserve currency. Obama's exploding debt is fingered as the threat to the American dollar.

Interesting, U. S.-based Duke Energy Corp., has signed a deal with China Huaneng Group to develop the clean coal technology that is anathema to the Obama Administration's special interest envoronmental backers. The "integrated gasification combined cycle systems" produce about 20% less carbon than conventional pulverized coal plants. Let China do it, not the arm-tied U. S.

China is the world's largest holder of foreign-exchange reserves with $2, 132,00,000,000 by June 30, 2009. The United States government is relying on China to loan it money to monetize its unprecedented deficits. To do so, China is demanding -- and getting -- from the U. S. inflation-protected securities. Huge deficits coupled with the continued easy money typically creates huge inflation as it did in the U. S. before Ronald Reagan's presidency. With inflation interest rates spike and bond prices fall. If interest rates increase on outstanding bonds, those bonds do not lose value. These are "Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities" ("TIPS"). This week Treasury will sell a record $75,000,000,000 of them. Interest payments at, say, 3% of $75,000,000,000 are $2,250,000,000 a year. Just after Reagan was inaugurated the policies of Democratic president Jimmy Carter caused interest rates to hit a high (10-year maturities) of 14.3% -- Fourteen and three-tenths per cent. The above-mentioned $75,000,000,000 of securities would force the U. S. government to fork over -- GET PREPARED TO PANIC --$10,750,00,000 a year to China, perhaps Russia, perhaps India. $10 and three-quarters billion each and every year. Think about this.

CHINA TO LAUNCH START-UPS MARKET

(The Latest Comments Are On Top)

China has adopted many free-enterprise components of its economy invented in the U. S. And China is growing, unlike most of the rest of the world. While the U. S. under Democrats in general and President Obama specifically is guiding the U. S. onto central economic command and control and nationalization of key industries, China is doing the opposite (as now is much of formerly-socialist Europe). Obama is a decade or two behind. The comments below discuss this from a variety of sources. _______________________________________________________________________________________

July 15, "I saw the end of Detroit." So Frank Zhao left as a Chrysler senior engineer and went to work for Geely Holding Group, one of China's best-selling automobile brands. Geely is in the bidding for Ford's Volvo brand. And has the U. S. in it sights for export in the next few years. Geely grew in sales in 2008 and so far in 2009.

July 13: China State Construction Engineering Corp. is on track to raise nearly $6 billion in what would be the largest sale of stock in the world so far during 2009 eclipsing Brazil's Visa-Net's $4.3 billion last month. But in actuality on July 23 it raised $7,340,000,000.

July 8, China admitted that it wants Opel for the technology it can gain from the General Motors affiliate. Question will be, will Obama let GM sell Opel to a Chinese company? GM wants it, but Opel would be a major Chinese-government-supported competitor in U.S.-government-supported GM's only growing market, China, which has become the largest market for autos in the world. Will Obama allow China to reap GM's technology and perhaps ultimately win in China to GM's losing, costing the U.S. huge monetary losses and Obama's United Auto Workers union large job losses? Important business questions for a man who knows nothing about business!
Beijing Automotive Industry Holding Co., plans to make a bid for GM's Opel and Vauxhall unit in competition to Russia's Magna International (backed by Sberbank Rossia and OAO Gaz Group). And interestingly enough GM said (July 2, 2009) its first-half 2009 sales to China rose 38%, over 800,000 cars. In January China cut the purchase tax on small cars by half (to 5%) as the Obama Administration is considering increasing its tariff on Chinese-made tires 55%.
Obama's GM is faced with choosing between China and Russia to buy its majority interest in Opel and its UK sister, Vauxhall. China wants GM's engine technology. If it wins, it'll compete in China with virtually-identical products.
China is pushing "reform" of the international currency system to make it more diversified and less reliant on the (un-named) dollar. Although apparently ignored by President Obama and his co-owners the labor union bosses, if China succeeds, and it is by far not the only nation wanting such a change, the U. S. dollar could be at risk as well as dangerous to the ability of the U. S. government to borrow the trillions needed for the Democrats' re-architecting the entire U. S. economy. And perhaps at the margin, a chance for a quasi-bankruptcy of the U. S. Government.

June 25, 2009, the China-owned oil company, Sinopec Group, agreed to acquire Canadian Addax Petroleum adding to its widespread purchasing of natural resources around the world. (This for $7,000,000,000.) While Democrats in the U. S. tie the hands of oil exploration, China is grabbing what it can at today's distressed prices.

A article May 26, 2009, indicated that the stock market in China for new-share issues described below is set to resume.

"Chinasdaq"?

If an article ever underlines the wrongheadedness of our government over the past decade and especially right now, it is this one: "China Takes Caution With Start-Ups Market" (The Wall Street Journal, Thursday, March 5, 2009, page C2 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123616846094028661.html). While our country is doing everything it can to diminish our capital markets and fill them with useless, expensive regulations (not to mention negative rhetoric), for nine years China has been researching and preparing to launch a Nasdaq-style stock market for start-up companies. Make no mistake, America, it has been the easy flow of capital from individuals and institutions to businesses that has been the building block to American dominance in innovation, entrepreneurship, creation of wealth (for the world) and freedom. Although this article discusses a delay in its launch for higher-risk companies, have no doubt: it is coming. And while we are asking, "Has Obama Buried Reagan?" (in today's The Wall Street Journal Opinion, page A15 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123621098187034487.html ) with "Reagan" being a proxy for the free-enterprise system and capitalism, China is taking great strides exactly creating what we are "burying". Clearly the leaders of China are smarter and more far-thinking than those we have elected recently. President Obama thinks the stock market is like an opinion poll and throws out embarassingly ignorant terms such as "profit and income ratios". It is ironic that an apparent Communist country is embracing the successful tenets of capitalism while an apparent capitalist country is embracing the failed tenet of Communism which is central planning. Perhaps it indicates the merit of quasi-dictatorships or oligarchies, or whatever China is, as opposed to democracy where the votes of the masses can be bought by policies that ultimately harm them. While I certainly know little about China, this article is profoundly disturbing to me, a former venture capitalist, who understands the overwhelming merits of capitalism, with all its human warts, in bringing an end to poverty and uplifting the lives of millions of people. Unfortunately, it seems apparent that embracing capitalism does not get Democrats elected and that is all they seem to want.

Oh, did I mention that China is expecting economic growth -- growth -- of about 8% this year - 2009. It is holding off on any financial stimulous after November's $585 billion, to see how that fares. Seems prudent, unlike the political "stimulous" -- essentially to elect and re-reelect Democrats n 2010 and forever beyond. Obama and the Democrats are deaf and blind to the threat of the China Government. Holder of something like $500 billion of U. S. Treasury securities -- some say as high as two-thirds of China's $1.9 trillion foreign-exchange reserves are U.S. Government debt (roughly $1.2 trillion) -- China recently (Friday the 13th of March, 2009?) expressed concern about the safety of U.S. government debt and called upon America to guarantee its safety (which of course it has be simply issuing it!). Let's see, there is publicly held around $6.6 trillion of U. S. debt and it's on a course to grow by up to $4 trillion from Obama's Elect Democrats in 2010 "stimulus" bill, not counting $5.3 trillion of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac liabilities. All this is cash from somewhere that must be loaned to the United States of America.

There is a follow-up article, "Venue for Start-Ups Begins to Jell in China" (WSJ April 1, 2009, page C2.) The creation of this potential future threat to NASDAQ, (China's Growth Enterprise Market -- GEM --) but more importantly, the threat to the United States' virtual monopoly on venture capital and early-stage entrepreneural companies doesn't seem to be understood, especially in the Obama administration which seems to view NASDAQ as a gambling parlor. The GEM could be launched as early as June 2009. America take note.

As I have written about Obama, he promised us CHANGE and is delivering us CHAINS held by the Chinese Government. Is it planned to destroy capitalism or only ignorance, or perhaps a lack of experience, on his part?

And the question of the day, "Where are the three of the five most valuable (by market capitalization March 2009) companies located?"

U. S. ? No

European Union? No

Japan? No

China? Well, of course. PetroChina (#2), China Mobile (#4, but #1 Mobile Telecom company) and Commercial Bank of China (#5 and the world's biggest bank)

The other two, Exxon Mobil (#1) and U. S. union-hated Wal-Mart (#3) are U. S. based. In 1999 four of the top companies were U. S. based. Go America!

An article of June 12 ("Chinese Car-Parts Makers Expand" WSJ, page B 2) describes China's auto-parts industry as thriving while, of course, that of the United States is as bankrupt as GM and Chrysler. China is emerging as the world's number one market for light vehicles which, of course, creates a vast manufacturing market for parts. And it is selling to the world, with quality that is increasing. This year China is expected to pass Japan as the world's largest vehicle manufacturing country. President Obama, as you are protecting your unions at the expense of American tax payers, you are letting China eat our lunch in cars and parts.

Superamerican

The Whirling Dervish to Failure

Where to start. The most inexperienced president in U. S. history is acting...inexperienced. He is under the delusional assumption that activity, whirl, equates to achievement. Since before he was inaugurated, this president has been whirling around touching every corner of these United States with the aim of "change", to transform the United States of America into his vision. Change for change's sake, or maybe change for power's sake. To the four corners of the world, he delivers emotional, charasmatic words.  It is the typical activity of someone with little self-confidence.  Truly I believe Barack Obama never thought he'd get so far so fast.  And he's suffering from "rock star syndrome" by which youthful individuals rise in popularity rapidly, beyond their experience level and certainly beyond their emotional level.  I believe Mr. Obama knows he didn't earn the presidency, Nobel Peach Price notwithstanding, or perhaps withstanding!  Whirling Dervish of activity: buy a bank here, an insurance company there, a car company over there in Michigan, whirl, don't stop.  He can't stop himself.  Satisfy the extreme left wing which financed your election. Manage the information to the vast middle of America, the independents who actually cast the overwhelming votes to elect him. Set the Antitrusters on Google, IBM. Bail out the Autoworkers Union, the Steelworkers. Dismiss any thought of tort reform and push for forced unionization. Oh, save the world by a $787,000,000,000 "stimulus" that, in retrospect stimulated very little. (Except: The Transportation Department's inspector general is asking why nearly $30,000,000 of this dough is heading to Akiachak and Ouzinkie, Alaska, courtesy of the Federal Aviation Administration, which gets to blow $1,100,000,000. Let's see? Inexperience.)

Seek the chimera, the brass ring, the golden fleece (appropriate) of healthcare "reform" where others have failed.  Whirl.

Your $3,500,000,000 budget must have taken a little time, whirl.

And $33,000,000,000 annual expansion in the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), whirl.

$330,400,000,000 to rescue big banks, whirl.

Timmy, be a doll and get the debt ceiling lifted to $12,100,000,000,000, but keep Fannie and Freddie, Medicare and Medicaid off the books, whirl.

A trillion for a healthcare monopoly, whirl.

Energy? capit, tradeit, and taxit, damnit. Whirl, a trillion or two more.

Speaking of the "Stimulus" $787,000,000,000 -- not much has really been spent so far -- that is the good news -- but most has been used to finance local and state budget deficits, road repavings (FDR built dams, which of course liberals want removed, Eisenhower build the interstates, Obama is building, oops filling, potholes) little is for actual, useful infrastructure, that'd take too long, whirl. Mostly the "stimulus" is, as I wrote earlier ("Elect Democrats in 2010 Act passed" 2/12/2009) to re-elect Democrats in 2010 and 2012.

So, president Obama, what was the goal here? To see how much money you could toss into the air? Well, looks as though you couldn't even do that well with under 10% of the "stimulus" money going out to stimulate the economy before it rights itself in 2010, but no doubt your propaganda machine will take credit for all of it, whirl.

It is to generate campaign contributions from corporations threatened by your central steering of the economy? Well, here you are doing great. But this is only stimulating the re-election of the Democrats. (In the first half of 2009 AT&T and Verizon, two corporations threatened with antitrust put up nearly $20,000,000 in lobbying money. My guess? Mostly to Democrats.)

OBAMA'S INTERNATIONAL SURRENDER

President Barack Obama of the United States of America is surrendering America's free enterprise system to the vagaries of international central control.  At his initiative the so-called Group of Eight ("G-8" Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States; in addition, the European Union is represented within the G8, but cannot host or chair) "most-developed countries" will cater to those less-developed ones, becoming the Group of Twenty ("G-20" adding Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia,  Mexico, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea and Turkey) to become the permanent council of international economic cooperation.  The new entity is to reduce their dependency on the United States consumer and encourage it to reduce its debt; it wants China to increase its domestic markets; and Europe to encourage investment.  Each country would assess other countries' achievements, a "peer review" of "sustainable growth".  If recent history is any lesson, President Obama will be the first to give in and weaken the U. S.

STIMULUS SPENDING DOESN'T WORK

A Harvard University professor of economics has a working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research that shows no evidence of a Keynesian 'multiplier' effect.  Keynes' assertions from nearly 75 years ago are the foundation of Democrats' massive spending of U. S. taxpayers' monies to try to control the normal ups and downs of an economic cycle.  See the entire article in the Wall Street Journal, Thursday, October 1, 2009, page A 23. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574440723298786310.html]

As it has for years, Keynes' and the Democrats' contention that government spending helps recessions and depressions has been proven false.  But never to worry about facts and truths, President Obama spends, spends and spends money he has to borrow from China.  And, like the Cash for Clunkers, is gone with no tails of success. 

It has also been proven without a non-political doubt that tax cuts incent growth.

But no matter, Democrats will do anything, anything to get reelected and gain and retain power, raw power over others.

Finally, politicians should simply admit the truth: that they are essentially powerless to control economic cycles and that citizens should be prepared for them to occur once in a while by having some savings and manageable debt levels.

Energy? Capit, Tradeit and Taxit, Damnit.

And yes central control and command of an economy leads to...disaster.  Most of the U. S. Government-"sponsored" (through mandates, directives and subsidies paid for by U. S. Taxpayers)  Ethanol producers have gone broke.  Now a new batch of "green" (for money) entrepreneurs are getting the shuttered plants on the cheap and turning them into biobutanol, a plant-based fuel that also can be blended into gasoline (with mandates, directives and subsidies paid for by U. S. taxpayers) and used to make plastic products like water bottles.  And yes, the market is driven by bureaucrats and Congresspeople in Washington, District of Columbia.

ENERGY?  This isn't about power for energy, it's about power over others by Democrats. Cap and Trade, the Waxman Markey (That's Henry Democrat from California and Ed Democrat from Massachusetts) climate change (nee Global Warming) bill: Capit, Tradeit and Taxit, Damnit.  A new oil industry study indicates the proposed bill would reduce refining capacity in the U. S. by 17% necessitating buying another nearly 20% of oil from other countries by 2030.



Or get this.  President Obams's far-left Secretary of the Interior, Kenny Salazar (apparently an Hispanic) apparently recently announced he'd cover one thousand square miles of virgin U. S. territory with those environmentally-sensitive and attractive solar collectors.  Nevada, Arizona, California, New Mexico and Utah.  Where are the "environmentalists?"  Now let's go with bird-killing wind turbines.  Fifty stories high.  Can't you envision their beauty covering the hills and canyons of America?  Whirling and killing? Well, to start Secretary Salazar wants 186,000 of them (according to this Wall Street Journal OpEd by Lamar Alexander, September 17, 2009, page A 21,  "Energy 'Sprawl' and the Green Economy") to cover a space the size of Rhode Island.   And to get all that energy somewhere 19,000 miles of high-voltage wires will snake around, through and over the plains of America.  Teddy Roosevelt would no doubt be proud, or puking. And, yes, as with everything Obama, it's all non-emitting and free.  God Bless the President.

Michael Fry of the American Bird Conservancy estimates that the U. S. wind turbine farm industry kills 75,000 to 275,000 birds a year.  ExxonMobil killed with its pollutants 85 birds which were protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918.  $600,000.  PacifiCorp, Portland OR, paid $1.4 million for electrocuting 232 eagles.  Over Altamont pass its wind farm gets a pass, killing 80 Golden Eagles a year and possibly another 10,000 mirgrating birds.  If the U. S. can squeeze 20% of energy from wind in 20 years, it can be expected to kill 300,000 birds.  [That's one bird per megawatt of power.  Those killing megawatts are ten times then megawattage produced now.]  if the Democrats want it, it's OK, regardless of laws.

But further in this article, wake up America!   The amount of land required to produce one million megawatt-hours of energy, enough for 90,000 homes, from various sources:

Nuclear - one square mile
Geothermal - 3
Coal - 4
Solar - 6
Wind - 30
Ethanol and Biodiesel - 500

Oops, those pesky facts.

Obama sold out frugal consumers for his union bosses financiers

At almost midnight, Friday, September 11, 2009, timed while the country was sleeping, President Obama signed a prohibitive 35% tariff on low-cost Chinese tires. The result will be jobs lost, and prices greatly increased on tires. This directly punishes the middle class and those lower on the economic ladder: frugal consumers. And it rewards the union bosses who financed his election. When push came to shove, the President of the United States of America supported those few union bosses who paid for his election with workers' union dues and turned his back on the many who are financially struggling in part as a result of his policies. It shows what kind of a man the president is....And China is threatening retaliation against U. S. chickens and auto parts. Mr. Obama is continuing to make America mediocre -- the country that championed free international trade that brought millions of human beings out of abject poverty.


A Web posting somewhere by Doug Palmer, Reuters:

Obama is hampering trade with policies like his embargo on Chinese tires

Trade policies pursued by President Barack Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress since the start of the year could lead to the loss of 585,800 U.S. jobs, a study said on Tuesday (September 15,2009). The study done for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce attributed almost two-thirds of the potential job losses, or 383,400, to Congress’ failure to approve free trade agreements with Colombia and South Korea. Passing the two agreements and a third pact with Panama should be part of a national plan to double U.S. exports over the next five years, U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue told reporters in a conference call. "A major surge in exports is our best path out of a recession, out of double-digit unemployment and the exploding deficits we’re now experiencing," Donohue said.

And: China on Tuesday invoked defense of its "public morals" in appealing a World Trade Organization ruling against restrictions on distribution of Hollywood movies and other Western media, according to a copy of the appeal reviewed by The Wall Street Journal (September 22, 2009).  The move reflects escalating trade tensions between the two major trade partners ahead of the Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh this week.

And on September 24, the United Steelworkers union in conjunction with three paper companies leveraging its success with its beholden President of the United States, filed another antidumping case against China and Indonesia, this time with shiny, coated paper.  Obama is supporting the kind of trade wars that caused the Great Depression.  Have at it Mr. President you sold out frugal tire consumers, now sell out the United States, for union bosses cash.

Racism

Racism is an animosity toward other races, or a belief in racial superiority.  Prejudice is an irrational, ill-informed dislike of somebody typically with the opinion formed earlier. Discrimination: unfair treatment of one person or group, usually because of prejudice about race.  In the United States, free speech is (or) was protected by the U. S. Constitution, and I assume thought, too.  Therefore I'd argue that racism is protected under the Constitution.  I am not a constitutional lawyer, but I beleive some speech is illegal, as yelling "Fire" in a theater is.  I do not know if the word "Nigger", spoken, has been incorporated in the "Fire" exemption from free speech or not.  But thinking it shouldn't be.  Of course, certain form of thinking is indeed illegal, with thoughts inferred from action.  Beating up a white guy by a black guy might be a "hate" crime.  Certainly a black guy beat up by a white guy would be.  Both the beating and what the beater might be thinking, "hate".  Prejudice is, by that same token as racism, not illegal.  It's an animosity or a belief. 

Perhaps ex-presidents Carter and Clinton were right, along with Bill Cosby, that racism is behind the disagreements with and challenges to the Obama crusade.  But I am certain they don't know since they cannot know what is in the hearts of man.

I have argued for years that the reason African Americans haven't made it up the economic ladder, or integrated into society like the Irish, Jewish, Italian, and Chinese -- all victims of original discrimination, is that the Democratic Party has built bureaucracies, mostly Democrat voters, that rely on convincing African Americans that they are, in fact, victims of racism Ilegal) and discrimination (illegal).  While African Americans vote almost universally for Democrats, what have the Democrats done for African Americans?  Crime, Drugs, Gangs, Unwed Mothers/Fatherless Families, Substandard Education still exist rampantly even after three decades of Democrats taking their votes and spending taxpayer money.  Until African Americans analyze and measure their votes against accomplishments by Democrats in exchange (and come up empty handed), nothing will change. 

Our president is African American and he's so far siding with unions against the best for students.  Yes, teachers union bosses pay for Democrat elections and the status quo.

Our Leader Speaketh with Forked Tongue

From the Wall Street Journal, Monday, September 14, 2009: "Fact-Checking the President on Health Insurance", by Scott Harrington. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574409501904118682.html] The article describes a number of "facts" delivered by the president in one of his TV speeches that were, at best, exaggerations and, at worst, out and out lies.  But even a bigger problem is that apparently the president will demonize anyone and any company if it will expand the possibility for him to takeover the healthcare system in this country.  Go to and read the article, but if the president was interested in "reform" of healthcare, he'd dialogue with those who disagree.  They might have some good ideas, but no, he is not at all interested in anyone else's good ideas, only those that extend his power.  Our leader, I am afraid, speaketh with a forked tongue.

"OPINION SEPTEMBER 14, 2009, 9:51 A.M. ET Fact-Checking the President on Health Insurance

His tales of abuse don't stand scrutiny.
By SCOTT HARRINGTON

In his speech to Congress last week, President Barack Obama attempted to sell a reform agenda by demonizing the private health-insurance industry, which many people love to hate. He opened the attack by asserting: "More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won't pay the full cost of care. It happens every day."

Clearly, this should never happen to anyone who is in good standing with his insurance company and has abided by the terms of the policy. But the president's examples of people "dropped" by their insurance companies involve the rescission of policies based on misrepresentation or concealment of information in applications for coverage. Private health insurance cannot function if people buy insurance only after they become seriously ill, or if they knowingly conceal health conditions that might affect their policy.

Traditional practice, governed by decades of common law, statute and regulation is for insurers to rely in underwriting and pricing on the truthfulness of the information provided by applicants about their health, without conducting a costly investigation of each applicant's health history. Instead, companies engage in a certain degree of ex post auditing—conducting more detailed and costly reviews of a subset of applications following policy issue—including when expensive treatment is sought soon after a policy is issued.

This practice offers substantial cost savings and lower premiums compared to trying to verify every application before issuing a policy, or simply paying all claims, regardless of the accuracy and completeness of the applicant's disclosure. Some states restrict insurer rescission rights to instances where the misrepresented or concealed information is directly related to the illness that produced the claim. Most states do not.

To highlight abusive practices, Mr. Obama referred to an Illinois man who "lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found he hadn't reported gallstones that he didn't even know about." The president continued: "They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it."

Although the president has used this example previously, his conclusion is contradicted by the transcript of a June 16 hearing on industry practices before the Subcommittee of Oversight and Investigation of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. The deceased's sister testified that the insurer reinstated her brother's coverage following intervention by the Illinois Attorney General's Office. She testified that her brother received a prescribed stem-cell transplant within the desired three- to four-week "window of opportunity" from "one of the most renowned doctors in the whole world on the specific routine," that the procedure "was extremely successful," and that "it extended his life nearly three and a half years."

The president's second example was a Texas woman "about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne." He said that "By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer more than doubled in size."

The woman's testimony at the June 16 hearing confirms that her surgery was delayed several months. It also suggests that the dermatologist's chart may have described her skin condition as precancerous, that the insurer also took issue with an apparent failure to disclose an earlier problem with an irregular heartbeat, and that she knowingly underreported her weight on the application.

These two cases are presumably among the most egregious identified by Congressional staffers' analysis of 116,000 pages of documents from three large health insurers, which identified a total of about 20,000 rescissions from millions of policies issued by the insurers over a five-year period. Company representatives testified that less than one half of one percent of policies were rescinded (less than 0.1% for one of the companies).

If existing laws and litigation governing rescission are inadequate, there clearly are a variety of ways that the states or federal government could target abuses without adopting the president's agenda for federal control of health insurance, or the creation of a government health insurer.

Later in his speech, the president used Alabama to buttress his call for a government insurer to enhance competition in health insurance. He asserted that 90% of the Alabama health-insurance market is controlled by one insurer, and that high market concentration "makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly—by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to drop the sickest; by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage; and by jacking up rates."

In fact, the Birmingham News reported immediately following the speech that the state's largest health insurer, the nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, has about a 75% market share. A representative of the company indicated that its "profit" averaged only 0.6% of premiums the past decade, and that its administrative expense ratio is 7% of premiums, the fourth lowest among 39 Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans nationwide.

Similarly, a Dec. 31, 2007, report by the Alabama Department of Insurance indicates that the insurer's ratio of medical-claim costs to premiums for the year was 92%, with an administrative expense ratio (including claims settlement expenses) of 7.5%. Its net income, including investment income, was equivalent to 2% of premiums in that year.

In addition to these consumer friendly numbers, a survey in Consumer Reports this month reported that Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama ranked second nationally in customer satisfaction among 41 preferred provider organization health plans. The insurer's apparent efficiency may explain its dominance, as opposed to a lack of competition—especially since there are no obvious barriers to entry or expansion in Alabama faced by large national health insurers such as United Healthcare and Aetna.

Responsible reform requires careful analysis of the underlying causes of problems in health insurance and informed debate over the benefits and costs of targeted remedies. The president's continued demonization of private health insurance in pursuit of his broad agenda of government expansion is inconsistent with that objective.

Mr. Harrington is professor of health-care management and insurance and risk management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and an adjunct scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. "


The biggest lie of which President Obama and the Democrats must convince American voters is that business/commerce/companies are against and at odds with the people. This is a bold-faced lie. The people ARE business. Business creates wealth and jobs. The people and business are one, together, mutually supportive. Only those seeking to gain and retain power, raw power over others would attempt to differentiate and divide the two, people and business.

Obama's healthcare speech was filled with outright lies, half-truths, distortions. I will not go into detail, because this has been covered heavily by the, let's say, conservative media and blogesphere. In the NY Times, NBC and their ilk, nothing; it was all honest and a true attempt to be bipartisan. Notice that Fox News viewers are climbing and the rest are tumbling.




To speak with forked tongue is to make false promises or to speak in a way which is not honest. Or put another way, "forked tongue" (from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia): A forked tongue is a tongue split into two distinct ends at the tip; this is a feature common to many species of reptiles. The image has given rise to the expression "to speak with a forked tongue", meaning to say one thing and mean another or, in more general terms, to act in a duplicitous manner.

These postings will in order of latest first, present examples of the President of the United States, Barack Obama, saying one thing and either meaning or doing another, "in a deceitful and duplicitous manner".

While this doesn't yet fall under the split infinitive, it will. Espouser of free trade, President Obama must choose free trade or support for his financiers, the unions, in this case the United Steelworkers. Union bosses want tariffs to cut the supply of affordable tires from China to the United States consumer. 55% added to low-cost tires' prices. Union bosses see this as saving union jobs; estimates are that it would cost Americans betwen $300,000,000 and $600,00,000 in higher prices, affecting lower-income people mostly. American companies don't even make those tires, so American companies need time to gear up to manufacture the tires it quit making. Also estimated is that for every union job "saved" would cost 12 - 25 jobs of people distributing, selling and installing tires not immediately available. Obama can sign a Section 421 complaint filed by United Steelworkers' bosses or not. Stay tuned to mid-September.

Can lying be any worse than lying to your spouse? President Obama promised his wife, Michelle, that if she would allow him to run for the presidency, ("allow him"?) he would, promise, promise to quit smoking. Mr. Obama lied to his wife. He still smokes.

And speaking of smoking. Obama promised he will never tax anyone making under $250,000 (or was it $200,000) a year. Since slightly more than half of today's smokers (53%) earn less than $36,000 per year and Obama just spiked the federal tax on cigarettes he lied to America. Period!

Change was Obama's mantra to get elected. Clean up Washington of lobbyists and money changers. Change from President Bush's "politicization". That was the get-elected fork in his tongue. The actual fork in his tongue, proven in practice is reward those who paid for his election. Lobbyists are climbing all over his administration and Congress as is usual. "Change" was a lie. And what did his campaign-funders buy? Well certainly GM and Chrysler, but also ambassadorships. No matter experience in foreign policy, the money they brought to his campaign bought them what they wanted. ("The Ugly Ambassador" replayed.) The following nominees brought in at least $500,000 and most personally contributed the maximim legally allowed by law to the Obama Campaign, many bundled the maximum $300,000 to pay for the inauguration/coronation: Charles Rivkin bought France; Nicole Avant bought The Bahamas; Howard Gutman bought Belgium; Don Beyer bought Switzerland; Mathhew Barzun bought Sweden; Willima Eacho III bought Austria; Bruce Oreck bought Finland; Donald Gips bought South Africa; John Roos bought Japan, and Louis Susman bought the United Kingdom. Now these money changers have not been confirmed, only nominated by President "Change" Obama.

Back in the "stimulus" bill production rush, President Obama promised to "save or create" 3 million jobs if the "stimulus" was passed, along with stopping unemployment at a maximum of 8%. In the dark of night without reading it, Congress passed it for Obama's signature. The "simulus" was born. And his promise came from forked tongue. Today's unemployment, 9.5% is heading for over 10%. And today's (this is July 2009) jobs have shed 2,600,000 since passage of the "stimulus". Was it as Vice Presdient Biden said, that the administration "misread" the economy, or did he simply pick a couple numbers out of his ass that would sell stupid Congresspeople, or did he simply lie to us Americans. No matter, he was wrong, cruelly wrong.

6/17/2009: The Obama administration is declining to release documents that would identify visitors to the White House, embracing a legal position the Bush administration also took, according to a watchdog group (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) that filed a federal lawsuit over access to the records.
The group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, filed its lawsuit after being denied access to Secret Service records. Obama's refusal to release the records and his "pledge of transparency" indicate he speaketh with a forked tongue. [Newsmax.com: http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/us_white_house_secrecy/2009/06/17/225751.html?s=al&promo_code=81B4-1]

June 15 or so, 2009: In drawing a curtain over "transparency" President Obama is protecting a friend and supporter of his, Kevin Johnson, a Democrat and mayor of Sacramento, CA, who plays basketball with our president. Obama did not follow Congress' own rules in firing Inspector General official Gerald Walpin. Walpin investigated, reported and was fired personally by Obama: Johnson used to run a nonprofit academy St. Hope which improperly used AmeriCorps recruits to recruit students to his academy, for politicking, to run and perform personal duties for Johnson, such as washing his car and driving him around, and doing bookkeeping for St. Hope. Johnson apparently settled for a small amount to run for mayor. And another is the Teaching Fellows Program, run by the Research Foundation of the City University of New York. Walpin's audit[www.cncsig.gov/AuditReports.html] uncovered myriad violations including duplicate awards of $16 million and costs of over $750,000. Walpin's directives were stonewalled by AmeriCorps' parent organization, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), which is now chaired by, as a payoff to, Democratic Alan Solomont for political fund raising. AmeriCorps now is $6 billion in a bill signed by Obama in April. Obama is a political animal, Mr. Walpin is unemployed for being a "government-employed whistle-blower" and blowing the whistle on Obama's cronies.

(In an irony, the First Lady Obama ran the AmeriCorps-funded nonprofit Public Allies in Chicago from 1993-1996 and served on its national board. It, too, was investigated by the Inspector General's office and violated basic rules including a lack of internal controls over education grants and living allowances given to people not being legal citizens or permanent residents.)

June Eleventh: President Obama announces that he thinks taxpayers are stupid. He proposes to give the Congressional oxymoron, "PayGo" or "Pay-as-you-go" legal bindingness. This means other expenses need to be cut or taxes raised to pay for Congressional spending...well, except for roughly everything Congress spends. PayGo was promised and broken by Nancy Pelosi in 2006, 2007 and most egregiously in 2008 and this year. And as for Obama's current "promise" - PayGo doesn't include his $787,000,000,000 "stimulus" (Aka Relect Democrats) bill; or fiscal 2009's $3,500,000,000,000 budget with its record non-wartime deficit (13% of GNP); not Medicare (growing at 9.2% a year and being broke within less than a decade); how about discretionary spending? (Discretionary spending...isn't that, like, discretionary?) This 40% of the budget -- $1,400,00,00,00 -- doesn't count; a $2,000,000,000 subsidy to "poor people" -- aka hopefully Democratic voters -- for heating is not counted; the annual "fix" on the Democratic-passed Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) $576,000,000,00...not counted; the final insult to American tax-payers is that ObamaCare's $1,200,00,00,000 to $1,500,00,000,00 price tag isn't includable until AFTER the 2012 election. Mr. Obama still has the left-leaning media slurping at his every word and his "personal" approval is still high, because of his silver forked tongue!

(6/9/09) President Obama pushed on Congress his "Stimulus" bill, that I call the "Reelect Democrats in 2010 and Forever Bill" that would get America out of this recession. (Congress passed, but did not read, the bill.) The other side of his tongue admitted that only 5% or so of the dough would blow out in 2009 -- thus not helping much of anything except Democrats. But wait! Polls say a majority of Americans disapprove of his handling of federal spending. And since unemployment is growing, people aren't happy. (The bill was only $787,00,000,000.) And he promised he'd "create or save" 600,000 jobs his second magic hundred days in office vs. 150,000 "created or saved" the first 100. No matter that those numbers are uncountable. With those polls, he'll start writing the checks himself.

"What we are not doing, what I have no interest in doing, is running GM", President Obama said while he was taking control of GM.

During his presidental campaign, Mr. Obama vehemently opposed a healthcare mandate on individuals; and he savaged Sen. McCain for discussing taxing healthcare benefits derived from employers. Now is now and President Obama extends his "just joking" scenario to now being open to 1) "I am open to shared responsibilities" - mandates, but, of course with a
hardship waiver" however he will define that. And also on the table is taxing healthcare benefits derived from employers, but maybe only those which are "Cadillac plans" [since taken off the table it was put on, because most union-negotiated plans are, if nothing, Cadillacs.] Or maybe just the plans of "rich people".

In Cairo June 4, 2009, President Obama stated his commitment to "governments that reflect the will of the people". And "freedom to live as you choose", ummm democracy. But he's slashing Bush's support for democracy promotion. $30 million - 60% - in one program, $11 million in another. Several slots in his administration for "senior directorship for democracy" and "Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy..." among others won't be filled. And his man Robert Gates (Defense Secretary) stated that "if we set for ourselves the objective of creating some sort of Central Asian Valhalla [democratic countries] over there, we will lose." In other words, Obama continues his rhetoric instead of acts. Forked.

BABs take from you and subsidize states

Fifty billion more U. S. taxpayer dollars thrown out to control states.  Build America Bonds, ("BABs") from the Obama administration's toothless "stimulus" shuts U. S. municipalities from the tax-free bond markets, but hands them subsidies on their interest rates.  And obligates the central government and gives it more and more power.  Mandates will be coming, mark my words.  But for now capital improvements ("earmarks?") subsidize state and local governments through a 35% federal tax subsidy, transferring their interest payments in part to taxpayers all over the country.  $27 billion had been sold by the first of September, with Texas and California accounting for just under half the issuances.  Democratic-controlled California desperately needs the help.  More to come for the unexpected consequences of another wild idea from Franklin Delano Obama.

A joke about our president

So what's the difference between infomercial king Billy Mays and the Billy Mays of politics, Barack Obama?

1)  Billy Mays wasn't on TV as much.

2)  Billy Mays sold useful products.

3)  Billy Mays was exciting and interesting.

4)  Billy Mays was successful.

5)  Billy Mays worked for a living

6)  Billy Mays wouldn't lie to me.

7)  We can criticize Billy Mays without being called a racist or Nazi.

8)  Billy Mays didn't sell out the Eastern Europeans to his buddies the Russians.

9)  Billy Mays wasn't friends with domestic terrorists.

10)  Billy Mays is dead.

No Oversight on the Micromanaging Oversighters.

While Wikipedia may not be the ultimate of factual information, the following is from Wikepedia:

"The Comptroller General has the responsibility to audit the financial statements that the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget present to the Congress and the President. For every fiscal year since 1996, when consolidated financial statements began, the Comptroller General has refused to endorse the accuracy of the consolidated figures for the federal budget, citing '(1) serious financial management problems at the Department of Defense, (2) the federal government’s inability to adequately account for and reconcile intragovernmental activity and balances between federal agencies, and (3) the federal government’s ineffective process for preparing the consolidated financial statements.'"

If this were a private enterprise, Congressional Democrats would have the executives in jail. Yet, in spite of either their ignorance or hypocrisy, Congress continues to delve into and attempt to control every facet of private enterprise (not to mention humans). Some might think its activity is simply casting a net for campaign contributions to reelect them.  Some might think they should improve their own knitting.


Congress is well-paid. Too well-paid, some might argue. Let's compare Congresspeople to members of boards of directors of private-enterprise companies. (A somewhat analogic comparison also would be to compare a president and his administration to business executives.)


The currently projected budget of the United States of America (although perhaps President Obama's budget has recently changed, but no matter to this exercise) reflects revenue of $2,700,000,000,000. If that number is divided by the number of Congresspeople, 535, the revenue per Member is $5,046,728,971. There are approximately 1,800,000 employees of the federal government (as of 2007 and excluding intelligence agencies such as CIA) which yields about 3,365 federal employees per each Member of Congress.

Now let's compare that "responsibility" (if you can use that word with Congress) to that of a member of a board of directors of the couple of the largest American corporations. Revenues of Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.(WMT) are $400 billion to $450 billion a year. With ten to fifteen members of its board of directors, that equates to around $26 to $45 billion in revenues for which each board member is responsible. This, compared to about $5 billion per member of Congress.

XOM with about 80,000 employees and WMT, with more employees than the U. S. Government, has about 2.1 million, so the number of employees per board member is 5,333 and 210,000 versus 3,365 per Congressional Member.

Members of Congress are currently paid $174,00 plus an extraordinary amount of "perks" such as fat retirement plans, gold-plated healthcare, free parking, and, for many, cars and drivers and free flights on corporate-sized and military jets. Directors of XOM and WMT get between $220,000 and about $325,000 in cash and stock, restricted in sale. The pay is arguably roughly the same.

Interestingly, the boards of XOM and WMT have only 4 – 5 committees and a staff of perhaps a few people, plus some ad-hoc consultants. The individual members have no staff. Board members are up for election each year.

Now compare that to Congress, with 45 committees:

House of Representatives
Personnel: Each Member is alloted $748,312 to hire up to 18 staff and four additional temporary, part-time, of shared staff. Staff can not be paid more than $151,974 per year.
Official office expenses: Each Member begins with a base allowance of $187,236 to spend on office expenses. Office expenses may include travel costs, office equipment, district office rental, stationary and office supplies, telecommunications, printing, postage, computer services, and other office-related expenses. The price for travel cost is judged by a formula (explained in this document). The minimum mileage amount for a Member is $6,200.
Senate
Administrative and clerical: This allowance is allocated based on the size of the Senator's state. The amount varies from $1,685,301 for a state with a population less than 5 million to $2,833,718 for a state with a population topping 28 million.
Legislative assistance: Each Senator is alloted $450,477 to hire three Legislative Assistants to be paid no more than $150,159.


As for staff, according to C-Span (http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly35.asp):   
(Prior to the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 staff rarely topped one or two advisers.)
Personal Staff--who work for individual Members of Congress--11,692

Committee Staff--who work for either the majority or minority on congressional committees--2,492
Leadership Staff--who work for the Speaker, Majority Leader, Minority Leader, Majority Whip or Minority Whip--274
Institutional Staff-- majority or minority party floor staff, and non-partisan staff: police, legislative clerks, building, janitorial--5034
Support Agency non-partisan Staff—Congressional Research Service [747], Congressional Budget Office [232], and General Accounting Office [3,500].

FYI, this indicates that partisan staff -- those who apparently work for a Member's reelection -- number 19,592 and the non-partisan staff equals only 4,479. 

Or roughly 24,000 staff versus virtually none for the private-company boards of directors.
Members of the U. S. House of Representatives are elected every two years, Senators, four.

Congress Members do work from Tuesday to Thursdays with liberal time off (including at least a month in August), while boards of directors work less and have probably a maximum of twelve meetings a year.

Well that's about it.  Fair and balanced, to coin (or copy) a phrase.

The Rich Get Richer...Oops

The Democratic Party's power-grabbing mantra, "the rich get richer" was dealt a severe blow not found in any of the left-leaning media. New figures show the "rich" getting poorer. Today's top 1% of taxpayers -- those making $400,000 a year -- are expected to end 2010 at 15% to 19% of all income, down severely from the 23.5% in 2007. American is getting more equal or "fair" as Democrats would describe it. End of Story.

U. S. Green Jobs run by Communist

Well the below-mentioned key component in Obama's "green jobs" stuff, the communist Van Jones quit, mercilessly hounded by Fox News, but one "progressive" out means nothing to the Obama search for Utopian Power. It continues.


President Obama is committing billions and billions of taxpayers' money -- formerly yours and mine -- to a highly-risky, unproven, but politically-correct endeavor. Green Jobs. In charge? A person who has never held a job. He's a proven non-profit founder and fund raiser, anti-police activist and self-professed Communist: Van Jones.
This is proof positive that possibly President Obama doesn't have the best interests of America and the majority of its citizens in mind.
March 10, 2009, the Obama White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Chair Nancy Sutley announced that Van Jones was appointed Special Advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at CEQ, described as "a key post".
In 1993, Jones started Bay Area PoliceWatch, the region's only bar-certified hotline and lawyer-referral service for victims and survivors of police abuse. PoliceWatch began as a project of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights. From 1996-1997, Jones and PoliceWatch led a successful campaign to get officer Marc Andaya fired from the San Francisco Police Department. In 1999 and 2000, Jones was a major leader in the campaign to defeat Proposition 21, a proposition proposed and passed in 2000 that increased a variety of criminal penalties for crimes committed by youth and incorporated many youth offenders into the adult criminal justice system.
In 2001, Jones and Ella Baker Center launched the Books Not Bars campaign which led a successful campaign to block the construction of a proposed "Super-Jail for Youth" in Oakland's Alameda County.
In 2007 the Green-Collar Jobs Campaign was Jones' first concerted effort to combine his lifelong commitment to racial and economic justice with his newer commitment to solving the environmental crisis. It soon took as its mission the establishment of the nation's first "Green Jobs Corps" in Oakland. On October 20, 2008, the City of Oakland formally launched the Oakland Green Jobs Corps, a public-private partnership that will "provide local Oakland residents with job training, support, and work experience so that they can independently pursue careers in the new energy economy."
Next, his "Green For All" formally opened its doors on January 1, 2008. In its first year, Green For All organized "The Dream Reborn," the first national green conference where the majority of attendees were people of color and launched a campaign for a Clean Energy Corps initiative which would create 600,000 'green-collar' jobs while retrofitting and upgrading more than 15 million American buildings.
A racially charged activist group called "Color of Change" founded by Van Jones, a special advisor to the Obama Administration, is trying to silence popular radio and Fox News personality Glenn Beck by calling for a boycott of Beck’s TV advertisers; putting tax-payer dollars to dubious use, the not-for-profit organization has hired well-heeled Hollywood publicist Ken Sunshine to further instigate the boycott. On July 28th, Beck made a comment on the Fox & Friends morning show about Obama’s reaction to the arrest of Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr. During the discussion of "Professor-Gate," Beck connected the President’s past association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright to Obama’s comment that Cambridge police officer, Sgt. James Crowley, acted stupidly. Though Beck acknowledged most of the Obama administration is in fact white, he concluded that the President’s world experience made him a "racist." Now "Color of Change" has tried to bully at least five of Beck’s big advertisers -- SC Johnson, Progressive Insurance, Geico, Procter & Gamble and Nexus Lexis -- to pull their ads from Beck’s national cable program
Van Jones has been a strong voice for green jobs and we look forward to having him work with departments and agencies to advance the President’s agenda of creating 21st century jobs that improve energy efficiency and utilize renewable resources. Jones will also help to shape and advance the Administration’s energy and climate initiatives with a specific interest in improvements and opportunities for vulnerable communities
2008 New York Times best-seller, The Green Collar Economy.
Watch Jones’ panel at the first official meeting of the Middle Class Task Force in Philadephia chaired by Vice President Joe, and featuring major Democrat activists, fund raisers and John Podesta.

On October 7, 2008, HarperOne released Jones's first book, The Green Collar Economy. The book outlines Jones's "substantive and viable plan for solving the biggest issues facing the country--the failing economy and our devastated environment." The book has received favorable reviews from such environmental activists as Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Laurie David, Paul Hawken, Winona LaDuke and Ben Jealous. It is the first environmental book authored by an African-American to make the New York Times bestseller list.
Elizabeth Kolbert of the New Yorker profiled Jones in January:
"Your goal has to be to get the greenest solutions to the poorest people," Jones told me. "That’s the only goal that’s morally compelling enough to generate enough energy to pull this transition off. The challenge is making this an everybody movement, so your main icons are Joe Six-Pack—Joe the Plumber—becoming Joe the Solar Guy, or that kid on the street corner putting down his handgun, picking up a caulk gun."
Speaking to the East Bay Express, Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots.
"I met all these young radical people of color -- I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary. I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th. By August, I was a communist."
Jones was still a law student at Yale Law School at the time. While volunteering as a legal monitor during a protest following the Rodney King riots, Jones was arrested along with other legal monitors and some protesters. He was released after 4 hours.

Yes, he'll be in charge of "creating" "green jobs" in capitalist, free-enterprise America.

And as sort of an aside, President Obama, hater of oil and gas, apparently only hates it here in the U. S. According to a Wall Street Journal editorial (August 18, 2009, page A 16, "Obama Underwrites Offshore Drilling"). Obama is lending upwards of $2,000,000,000 to Brazil's state-owned Petrobras to finance exploration offshore of Rio de Janeiro, through the U. S. Import-Export Bank.

California (New Jersey, New York, Michigan) Here We Come

Just to prove Barack Obama is a great manager in the Democrat view of "manage" he told us back in March that the deficit over the next decade would be $7,000,000,000,000 (trillion!)over Republican charges that he was using bullish projections. Well now, August 26, 2009, the president happily announced a deficit of not 7 but $9,000,000,000,000 (still trillion). Take that California. America can go bankrupt first! And the new projections assume 1) The Liberal Congress will hold spending increases to the rate of inflation, vs. 47% in 2009 and so far 8% in 2010; 2) Liberal heartthrobs like Head Start, food stamps and child nutrition will be cut by 1/3; 3) Revenues into the federal government (taxes) will reach 20.2% by 2019 vs. a 40-year low this year of 14.9%, signalling gigantic tax increases for everyone that pays taxes; 4) Finally that the Democrats' Alternative Minumum Tax will burn 28 million middle class taxpayers, something the Democrats have promised that they will not let happen. And all this is before President Obama's monopoly stranglehold on healthcare will spend another $1,000,000,000,000!

Vote for the most corrupt state in the union. Democrat-controlled New Mexico anyone? The governor, prominent Democrat, Bill Richardson, is under federal investigation for another Democratic "pay for play" scam where state financings are awarded in exchange for campaign contributions. Well also the former 12- year Democrat Secretary of State, Rebecca Vigil-Giron was indicted for giving federal elections funds to a Democrat political consultand and two Democrat lobbyists. 50 counts. At least a couple million dollars. (See my post "Conflicts and Crooks, Obama and Democrats".) They join other convicted or indicted Democrats: two state treasurers, leader of the state senate, director of affordable housing and two utility regulators. But as I wrote in another post, Washington DC has decided to let Richardson go. True there are no Democrat crooks in the Obama Administration. He lets them all off.

Democrat-controlled New Jersey might be the most corrupt state in the Union. Or Democrat-controlled Illinois with its $9,200,000,000 projected budget deficit. Or Democrat-controlled Louisiana (but with a Republican governor). Or Democrat-controlled California ($53,500,000,000 deficit). But one thing is certain. They all are failing.

Why? Well for one all, adding Connecticut, Delaware, Minnesota and Oregon, not only have been controlled by Democrats, but are proposing to follow their president's lead in attempting to soak -- tax -- the rich, the top 1%, 2% or 5% depending. Well when they do, those rich people or at least many of them will simply pick up stakes and move to a lower-taxed state. Taking wealth, innovation and jobs ultimately with them. Study after study have documented this phenonomen. Over the period 2002 - 2005 when Connecticut, New Jersey, New York increased maximum txes to 5%, 8.97% and 7.7% respectively, in increases of tax filings by the wealthy dropped to the 46th, 49th and 50% among all states. In other words, max tax increased filers didn't. Hmmmm.

Add. Democratic-run, well pretty much union-boss-run, Philadelphia the country's 6th most populous city has stopped paying its bills. It has a projected city budget deficit of $1,400,000,000 over the next 5 years. Detroit. Its former mayor, black Democrat Kwame Kilpatrick, in jail for some sex/perjury scandal. Its present mayor, black Democrat former pro basketball player, dave Bing, warned that Detroit may have to declare bankruptcy, being in the hole $250,000,000, just before his re-election in November. Mr. Bing started an auto-parts company in Detroit in 1980 and is invested in Detroit. Bodes well for Detroit when he stated: "Business will bring the city back, not politics," CHEERS FOR MAYOR BING!

Other Democrat-controlled deficits: Michigan, $2,400,000,000; New York, $17,900,000,000; Ohio, $3,300,000,000; Oregon, $ $4,200,00,000; and Pennsylvania $4,800,00,000.

New Jersey with more government (measured by numbers of jurisdictions) than any other state, created 6,800 private sector jobs from 2000 - 2007. But government jobs are another story with 55,800 added, nearly 10 times the private sector. It is the worst state measured by small business survival rates, with high taxes, oppressive regulations, and deficit spending (although against the law.) For every government crony hired his or her salary must come from taxing someone else. And recently 43 arrests for mayoral and other corruption of Democrats with one token Republican arrest.

King Barack and his lobsters in Montana

The following is an email I received from a friend who doesn't want to be identified. It was unsolicited, but is followed up by another email from a relative in Bozeman who confirms, at my request, much of the first email. I deleted his identification, too.

Superamerican
Seattle
________________________________________________________________________
FYI from friend in Colorado with friend in Montana
Subject: What Really Happened Last Week in Montana
Hello All,

By now you have probably heard that President Obama came to Montana last Friday. However, there are many things that the major news has not covered. I feel that since XXX and I live here and we were at the
airport on Friday I should share some facts with you. Whatever you decide to do with the information is up to you. If you chose to share this email with others I do ask that you DELETE my email address before you forward this on.

On Wednesday, August 5th it was announced locally that the President would be coming here. There are many groups here that are against his healthcare and huge spending so those groups began talking and
deciding on what they were going to do. The White House would not release ANY details other than the date.

On about Tuesday XXX found out that they would be holding the "Town Hall" at the airport. (This is only because XXX knows EVERYONE at the airport) Our airport is actually located outside of Belgrade (tiny town) in a very remote location. Nothing is around there. They chose to use a hangar that is the most remotely located hangar. You could not pick a more remote location, and you can not get to it easily. It is totally secluded from the public.

FYI: We have many areas in Belgrade and Bozeman which could have held a large amount of folks with sufficient parking (gymnasiums/auditoriums). All of which have chairs and tables, and would not have to be SHIPPED IN!! $$$$$ During the week, cargo by the TONS was being shipped in constantly. Airport employees could not believe how it just kept coming. Though it was our President coming several expressed how excessive it was, especially during a recession. $$$$$

Late Tuesday/early Wednesday the 12th, they said that tickets would be handed out on Thursday 9am at two locations and the president would be arriving around 12:30 Friday.

Thursday morning about 600 tickets were passed out. However, 1500 were printed at a Local printing shop per White House request. Hmmmm......900 tickets just DISAPPEARED.

This same morning someone called into the radio from the local UPS branch and said that THOUSANDS of Dollars of Lobster were shipped in for Obama. Montana has some of the best beef in the nation!!! And it
would have been really wonderful to help out the local economy. Anyone heard of the Recession?? Just think...with all of the traveling the White House is doing. $$$$$ One can only imagine what else we are paying for.

On Friday XXX and I got out to the airport about 10:45am. The groups that wanted to protest Obama's spending and healthcare had gotten a permit to protest and that area was roped off. But that was not to
be. A large bus carrying SEIU (Service Employees International Union) members drove up onto the area (illegal) and unloaded right there. It was quite a commotion and there were specifically 2 SEIU men trying to make trouble and start a fight. Police did get involved and arrested the one man but they said they did not have the manpower to remove the SEIU crowd. The SEIU crowd was very organized and young. About 99% were under the age of 30 and they were not locals! They had bullhorns and PROFESSIONALLY made signs. Some even wore preprinted T-shirts. Oh, and Planned Parenthood folks were with them.....professing abortion rights with their T-shirts and preprinted signs. (BTW, all these folks did have a permit to protest in ANOTHER area)

Those against healthcare/spending moved away from the SEIU crowd to avoid confrontation. They were orderly and respectful. Even though SEIU kept coming over and walking through, continuing to be very
intimidating and aggressive at the direction of the one SEIU man.

So we had Montana folks from ALL OVER the state with their homemade signs and their DOGS with homemade signs. We had cowboys, nurses, doctors you name it. There was even a guy from Texas who had been driving through. He found out about the occasion, went to the store, made a sign, and came to protest. If you are wondering about the press.....Well, all of the major networks were over by that remote hangar I mentioned. They were conveniently parked on the other side of the buildings FAR away.
None of these crowds were even visible to them. I have my doubts that they knew anything about the crowds. We did have some local news media around us from this state and Idaho.

Speaking of the local media...they were invited. However, all questions were to be turned into the White House in advance of the event. Wouldn't want anyone to have to think off the top of their head. It was very obvious that it was meant to be totally controlled by the White House. Everything was orchestrated down to the last detail to make it appear that Montana is just crazy for Obama and government healthcare. Even those people that talked about their insurance woes........the White House called our local HRDC (Human Resource and Development Committee) and asked for names. Then the White House asked those folks to come. Smoke and mirrors...EVERYTHING was staged!!!!!!!!!!!

I am very dismayed about what I learned about our current White House. The amount of control and manipulation was unbelievable. I felt I was not living in the United States of America, more like the USSR!! I was physically nauseous. XXX and I have been around when Presidents or Heads of State visit. It has NEVER been like this. I am truly very frightened for our country. America needs your prayers and your
voices.

If you care about our country please get involved. Know the issues. And let Congress hear your voices again and again!! If they are willing to put forth so much effort to BULLY a small town one can only imagine
what is going on in Washington DC. Scary!!

Sincerely,

Bozeman, Mt
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
XXXX ,

I know several folks that attended....and YYYY and I were driving to Flathead lake when Air Force One was landing with several helicoptors protecting its airspace upon descent. The days prior there were many flights of c130 transport planes bringing in the helecoptors and suburbans and the lobsters......

As we drove on the interstate there were hundreds of cars parked with protest signs, and I heard the accounts from people on the ground regarding the SEIU hit squads.

As for me, I will cling to my guns and religion, I fear we will need them both.

Have a great day!

ZZZZ

On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 9:28 PM, XXXX wrote:
We'd like to know if any of you know anything about any of this...Thanks for any comments or anything. (It was great to meet all of you, XXXX.)
XXXX

Krauthammer speech

Charles Krauthammer (born March 13, 1950) is an American Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist and a prominent political commentator. His weekly column appears in the The Washington Post and is syndicated in more than 200 newspapers and media outlets.[1] He is a contributing editor to the Weekly Standard and The New Republic. He is a Fox News contributor, a regular panelist on Fox’s evening news program Special Report with Bret Baier and a weekly panelist on Inside Washington.[2]



Suffering a paralyzing accident in his first year of medical school, he was hospitalized for a year, during which time he continued his medical studies.[5] He graduated with his class, earning an M.D. from Harvard Medical School in 1975, and then began working as a psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital. In October 1984, he became board certified in psychiatry by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology.



From 1975–1978, Krauthammer was a Resident and then a Chief Resident in Psychiatry at the Massachusetts General Hospital. During this time he and a colleague identified a form of mania resulting from a concomitant medical illness, rather than a primary inherent disorder, which they named "secondary mania"[6] and published a second important paper on the epidemiology of manic illness.[7] The standard textbook for bipolar disease (Manic Depressive Illness by Goodwin and Jamison)[8] contains twelve references to his work.



In 1978, Krauthammer quit medical practice to direct planning in psychiatric research for the Jimmy Carter administration, and began contributing to The New Republic magazine. During the presidential campaign of 1980, Krauthammer served as a speech writer to Vice President Walter Mondale.



A good read!!!!



Last Monday was a profound evening, hearing Dr. Charles Krauthammer speak to the Center for the American Experiment. He is brilliant intellectual, seasoned & articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fear monger nor an extremist in his comments and views. He is a fiscal conservative, and has a Pulitzer Prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post. The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have shared this with many of you and several have asked me to summarize his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally. Even 2 Dems at my table agreed with everything he said! If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not drunk the Kool-Aid, feel free.



Summary of his comments:



1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a cool customer who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's behind the mask. Taking down the Clinton dynasty from a political neophyte was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.



2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton. He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!



3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can¹t be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand, and wants to level the playing field with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada .



4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, & NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada , God forbid.



5. He has surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever even run a candy store. But they are going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can¹t work in the long run. Obama is not a socialist; rather he's a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.



6. Obama doesn¹t really see himself as President of the United States , but more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate & coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in&nbs p; Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America , as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!



7. He is now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not come due until after he is reelected in 2012. He would like to blame all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Mr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.



8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. Were pining for another Reagan, but there will never be another like him. Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to be seriously boning up on facts and info if she is to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and state¹s rights.



9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We are spending trillions that we don¹t have. This could lead to hyperinflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn¹t work, nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama¹s allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.



10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed, fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of change caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was.



11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it will be a dogfight. It will all be about the economy. I hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington and Congress. There is a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, and he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but were right on most issues and can reclaim our country, before it's far too late.




Do yourself a long term favor, send this to all who will listen to an intelligent assessment of the big picture. All our futures and children's futur es depend on our good understanding of what is really going on in DC!!!! And our action pursuant to that understanding!!! It really IS up to each of us to take individual action. Start with educating your friends and neighbors!!!

Adding Bodies To Watch Over You

Everyone Should Work for the Government - Vast new patronage for Democrats to win election and re-election.

While many in the left-leaning media are indicating the the "stimulus" bill was a success, think again. With less than maybe $120,000,000,000 spent (not even 1% of GDP) for one-time, barely-boosting tax cuts, and other monies that would have been spent by states anyway, such as Medicaid, food stamps and unemployment insurance, the impact on the economy and unemployment has been not even marginal. Now on the opposite, job-killing side, Obama has nationalized the student-loan industry (loss: 35,000 jobs), gone after successful technology companies and appointed czars over each industry to keep them in line. Jobs are NOT created with highly-burdensome regulation and threatened tax hikes. NOT. Please check out my posts about Obama diminishing business.

Editorial (In The Seattle Times)
More students drawn to public-service careers
The College Class of 2009 is more interested than its predecessors in public service and government. The surge of applications at graduate schools of government and public policy is good news for a nation in economic trouble.
Seattle Times editorial
AS the college Class of 2009 heads out into the world the next few months, the career paths these bright-eyed graduates are choosing should encourage a troubled nation.
A country in financial turmoil ought to cheer the fact that more college students than before are interested in public service and government — and the idea of giving something back.
Yes, of course, students flock to fields that offer the best chance of landing a job. Government offers more opportunities in certain disciplines than the private sector.
That only explains part of what is happening. Graduate schools of government and public policy are receiving a surge of applications.
"Young people today understand that government has a powerful role to play in solving these problems," said Sandra Archibald, dean of the Evans School of Public Affairs at the University of Washington. Applications increased 26 percent this year.
College experts report fewer students seeking careers on Wall Street. The switch is obviously because of the enormous mess in the financial world.
More compelling, however, is where the students are going. Officials at universities report a trend toward government and public service. The energy and ideas of young people eager to help in social services, health care, energy and climate change will benefit communities.
The New York Times reminds us that college students flooded into civil engineering during the Great Depression seeking jobs, yes, but also to help the nation rebuild itself. They designed highways, dams and bridges. In the Sputnik era, the trend was toward sciences, and some of that is taking place today.
President Obama said during the campaign he wanted government to be cool again. Some will argue government could never be cool. High schools emphasizing community service also deserve credit for boosting interest in the public sector.
Perhaps. Yet young altruists can help chart the country's direction. Everyone benefits if an emerging generation devotes enthusiasm and bright ideas to the numerous public-policy problems vexing our nation.
Copyright © 2009 The Seattle Times Company

My response.

To the Seattle Times Editorial Board:
"The career paths these bright-eyed graduates are choosing should encourage a troubled nation". Would these exact same graduates be "bright-eyed" if they had chosen to work on Wall Street? To the "enormous mess in the financial world"? "Wall Street" which is a all-embracing term for the mechanism that raises capital from American citizens who have some to spare, institutions and foreign individuals and institutions and deploys it into American business to add to capacity, perform research and development of new products and services and create jobs. A base of lasting jobs. Yes, those jobs ebb and flow with the over-all economy. But without that "Wall Street" you so easily dismiss as a "mess", our country would not be the most prosperous country ever known to humankind.
OK, the Seattle Times Editorial Board, from where does the money to pay the salaries and expenses of these "public-service careers" come? (The answer, which you probably won't get from the University of Washington Evans School of Public Affairs, is business.) Now, for the sake of argument, if everyone in this country were young (and old) altruists working for the government, exactly who would pay for their salaries and expenses?
The answers can be emailed to:
superamerican@att.net

Early May, 2009, The House Committee on Oversight and Government "Reform" approved a bill to provide paid parental leave (four weeks) to federal workers. It should help attract more private sector workers to government, attract more Democratic voters and expand the number of children born, adopted or foster parented by government employees.

California has the highest teachers salaries in the United States. (California has the second lowest math and reading test scores in the United States.) California's unions have it spend $49,000 per year on prisoners, 50% more than average. California gets more than 50% of its income from the second highest income tax rate in the country (11% second only to NY's 12.5+%) from Kobe Bryant and the other rich 1%.

Transparency for Taxes!

This is a brilliant article. Bring transparency to taxes would open people's minds to what they are paying and for what.

OPINION (Wall Street Journal, Thursday, August 13, 2009, page A 15)

Tax Withholding Is Bad for Democracy
So is the payroll tax. End them both and voters will have a healthier understanding of the government burden.

By CHARLES MURRAY
America is supposed to be a democracy in which we're all in it together. Part of that ethos, which has been so essential to the country in times of crisis, is a common understanding that we all pay a share of the costs. Taxes are an essential ingredient in the civic glue that binds us together.
Our democracy is corrupted when some voters think that they won't have to pay for the benefits their representatives offer them. It is corrupted when some voters see themselves as victims of exploitation by their fellow citizens.

By both standards, American democracy is in trouble. We have the worst of both worlds. The rhetoric of the president tells the public that the rich are not paying their fair share, undermining the common understanding from the bottom up. Meanwhile, the IRS recently released new numbers on who pays how much taxes, and those numbers tell the people at the top that they're being exploited.

Let's start with the rich, whom I define as families in the top 1% of income among those who filed tax returns. In 2007, the year with the most recent tax data, they had family incomes of $410,000 or more. They paid 40% of all the personal income taxes collected.

Yes, you read it right: 1% of American families paid 40% of America's personal taxes.
The families in the rest of the top 5% had family incomes of $160,000 to $410,000. They paid another 20% of total personal income taxes. Now we're up to three out of every five dollars in personal taxes paid by just five out of every 100 American families.

Turn to the bottom three-quarters of the families who filed income tax returns in 2007—not just low-income families, but everybody with family incomes below $66,500. That 75% of families paid just 13% of all personal income taxes. Scott Hodge of the Tax Foundation has recast these numbers in terms of a single, stunning statistic: The top 1% of American households pay more in federal taxes than the bottom 95% combined.

My point is not that the rich are being bled dry. The taxes paid by families in the top 1% amounted to 22% of their adjusted gross income, not a confiscatory rate. The issue is that it is inherently problematic to have a democracy in which a third of filers pay no personal income tax at all (another datum from the IRS), and the entire bottom half of filers, meaning those with adjusted gross incomes below $33,000, have an average tax rate of just 3%.

This deforms the behavior of everyone—the voters who think they aren't paying for Congress's latest bright idea, the politicians who know that promising new programs will always be a winning political strategy with the majority of taxpayers who don't think they have to pay for them, and the wealthy who know that the only way to get politicians to refrain from that strategy is to buy them off.

For once, we face a problem with a solution that costs nothing. Most families who pay little or no personal income taxes are paying Social Security and Medicare taxes. All we need to do is make an accounting change, no longer pretending that payroll taxes are sequestered in trust funds.
Fold payroll taxes into the personal tax code, adjusting the rules so that everyone still pays the same total, but the tax bill shows up on the 1040. Doing so will tell everyone the truth: Their payroll taxes are being used to pay whatever bills the federal government brings upon itself, among which are the costs of Social Security and Medicare.

The finishing touch is to make sure that people understand how much they are paying, which is presently obscured by withholding at the workplace. End withholding, and require everybody to do what millions of Americans already do: write checks for estimated taxes four times a year.
Both of those simple changes scare politicians. Payroll taxes are politically useful because low-income and middle-income taxpayers don't complain about what they believe are contributions to their retirement and they think, wrongly, that they aren't paying much for anything else. Tax withholding has a wonderfully anesthetizing effect on people whose only income is a paycheck, leaving many of them actually feeling grateful for their tax refund check every year, not noticing how much the government has taken from them.

But the politicians' fear of being honest about taxes doesn't change the urgent need to be honest. The average taxpayer is wrong if he believes the affluent aren't paying their fair share—the top income earners carry an extraordinary proportion of the tax burden. High-income earners are wrong, too, about being exploited: Take account of payroll taxes, and low-income people also bear a heavy tax load.

End the payroll tax, end withholding, and these corrosive misapprehensions go away. We will once again be a democracy in which we're all in it together, we all know that we're all paying a share, and we are all aware how much that share is.

Mr. Murray is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. His most recent book, "Real Education: Four Simple Truths for Bringing America's Schools Back to Reality," will be out in paperback later this month (Three Rivers).

The Postal Service will be put in Private Hands. Free Enterprise?

The U. S. Postal Service is expected to lose billions and billions of dollars this year. The Article I read stated it would be returned to private hands. Oops. That is Socialist France. Hmmmm. Its cabinet approved the first step toward the possible privatization of La Poste into a joint-stock (private) company. Mail services will be opened to comptition in the European Union in 2011, this is France's first thrust of an initiative to compete.

Barack Obama, president of the formerly free-enterprise United States of America, are you listening?

The Obama Revolution: America Down the Toilet

Since General Motors can't seem to sell cars, ditto Ford, Chrysler and others, President Obama will take tax money (borrowed from China in the short term) and bribe Americans to buy new cars. The one stupid proviso is that the gas mileage needs to be what he wants. Might be 17 mpg if you trade in one getting 15 mpg. Great green victory! $1 billion of cash spoken for in about a week. Does that end the program? Not on your life, add $2,000,000,000. This will make Obama look good the Third Quarter of 2009 and kill new car sales in the Fourth Quarter. This man is ridiculous and his thoughtless protection of union bosses is hurting America and Americans, as will be shown in the future. Central control of economies and manufacturing has never in history done anything but put dictators in power and destroy countries. USA next?

Here's the impact of Obama stimulus: states and cities spent $21 million on lobbying the Obama Administration for stimulus cash from April to June, 2009.

Here's the impact of Obama threatening healthcare takeover: the healthcare sector shot up to Number One of 10 major industries in attempting to buy influence from Congress and the Obama Administration with $133,000,000 in lobbying over the second quarter of 2009.

This week, from July 27 through July 31, the Treasury Department of the United States of America will pray. It needs to borrow $200,000,000,000 the most since 1985 -- nearly 25 years ago. Way to go Obama! You'd better get back to Rev. Wright's church. Will it be China? Will it be Russia? Will it be...just who will be buying America this week? And $200,000,000,000 is only a "down payment". With the deficit nearing $2,000,000,000,000 more will be needed.

The Obama Administration can't even get giving money away right. Its much haralded effort to reduce home foreclosures by strongarming mortgage and servicing firms is failing. It's a product of katrinazation, or excess governmental bureaucracy. Everyone involved seems to be confused so the Obama Administration has summoned 25 company executives to probably blame them for its own incompetency. (The Obama plan in essence bribes companies with taxpayer cash to reduce payments of people in trouble and others "at-risk" as they say.) The confusion and lengthy wait for final interim federal guidelines of hundreds of pages and differing messages contribute to the failure so far.

Here's the Obama philosophy. Industrial production down (13+%, lowest since the '40's), tax receipts down (23%), government spending up (18%), slower growth, jobs being shedded at record rates, non-government unemployment up, government jobs up. Regulations up, taxes up, minimum wage up. Legislate success, legislate wealth, legislate, legislate. And get the anti-trust going...who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of business?

And to that end, the Obama administration is being filled by union bosses, those verysame people who elected him. Joseph Main, 20-years in the United Mine Workers, will oversee the Mine Safety and Health Administration; Jordan Marab, advocate for Democrats and the AFL-CIO, will be #2 at OSHA.


[May 23, 2009: mortgage modifications don't work. The linchpin of Obama's recovery initiatives doesn't work. Fitch Ratings reports that between 65% and 75% of modified subprime pooled mortgages fall 60 days into delinquency within one year of modification. Ignorance reigns.]


When effective chief executive officers -- in the private-company sector -- newly take over, many generally take a few or six months to get a lay of the land before jumping in with changes. Not so the CEO of the United States, President Barack Obama; he jumped right in, yes, blindly. With no executive experience. And little knowledge of the free-enterprise system. He should read, listen and learn, but, of course he won't, being too self-absorbed to admit he doesn't know everything. America will suffer. America is suffering. Guatamala's experience resonates, see below: "Finally, a Real Revolution. California's experience managed by Democrats with similar ideological dogma also resonates, see below: "California Reckoning". With Obama's Change mantra, America is headed down the toilet.


"Finally, a Real Revolution" The Wall Street Journal, Monday, May 18, 2009, page A15.(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260191911428369.html).
"California Reckoning" The Wall Street Journal, Monday, May 18, 2009, page A16 (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124259847829628121.html) and
"Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich" The Wall Street Journal, same issue, page A 17 (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260067214828295.html)

Riddle: what do those three articles have to do with one another?

Obama and FDR created revolutions. Hitler saved America before FDR's activities could sink America. What's with Obama? Can't he read history? Who will save America this time around?

California is an analog to what America will become. Democrats' spend to get re-elected, borrow then tax. And it drives out industry. Aerospace anyone? California had 140,000 aerospace workers in 1990; now? Under 40,000. Movies anyone? Q 1 2009 saw the lowest number of feature-film days of production ever measured. And, of course, unemployment in California is one of the nation's highest at 11.4%. On Tuesday, May 19, 2009, California voters resoundly vetoed this spend, borrow and tax approach that has virtually killed its competiveness and solvency. Voters said, "no"; they are the citizens of "no". But, of course they said, "no, almost 30 years ago with the Gann Amendment which limited the growth of California government spending. But later the politicians neutered it. And neutered California's growth. And the rest is history: lousy economic growth, hugely higher taxes which force out high-net-worth investors and companies, and a $21 billion deficit. California voters did pass limits to politicians' compensation.

Remember health insurance which priced policies based on ridiculous things like someone's health? No longer. Politicians get paid by constituents (campaign contributions) to add mandates for virtually everything under the sun, then some. And prices for insurance go up. Doesn't matter someone's health or personal risky activities. Now President Obama has appointed someone who does what health insurance companies used to do. Select out those people who do health-risky things like smoke and get fat. But through government action, and more government employees, not the free markets where individuals can choose and pay. The man, Thomas Frieden, also gives out free condoms, increased colon-cancer screenings (one diagnostic tool that Medicare is reducing because of cost. Hmmm. Who will win this one?) He banned french fries that are crisp (trans fats, once the answer to butter's high cholestrol).

"Silicon Valley Girds for New Antitrust Regime" The Wall Street Journal ("WSJ"), Monday, May 18, 2009, page B 1. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260263059528447.html). Why would President Obama attack the most productive element of American society? I remember when the Clinton Administration filed an antitrust suit against poor Microsoft, which then had NO -- ZERO -- people lobbying in or not in Washington DC. I believe last year is spent nearly $30 million. That is the goal of antitrust, to grab money from companies. Could this be prima facie evidence of either 1) his ignorance and inexperience or 2) his desire to throw America down the toilet? Or what?

And while the country is an a nasty recession, what to do? Punish companies so they won't have any money to create jobs. WSJ, Monday, May 18, 2009, page A3 (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260337667928567.html). "The [Obama] administration has proposed changes that would generate a total of more than $400 billion in new tax revenue [from business]." This article discusses only one.life insurance companies.

Then Friday, May 15, 2009, WSJ Front Page: "U. S. Slates $22 Billion For Insurers From TARP" (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124234565889921705.html). Let's see the article above discusses taxing life insurance companies around $12.7 billion, while this article says Obama is going to give the same companies $22 billion. Huh? I am betting on Obama being ideologically stuck in communism ("You don't need no dang capitalism") AND stupid.

All this brought to you by goverment, owner and manager of the U. S. Postal Service which lost $1,900,000,000 for the second quarter of its fiscal year (it lost only $400,000,000 Q 1) and should run out of money by year end. So it increased prices t0 $.44 per first class mail.

Racism by president

President Obama has displayed for all to see the chip on his shoulder because he's half-black. He must be jealous of white-skinned people and want to hurt them (us). Without facts, he excoriated the police department of Cambridge, Massachusetts. Why? Because his good buddy, African American studies guru Gates (no relation to high-achiever Bill) said he was racial or is it racially? profiled. Obama's knee-jerk reaction was that his black friend was right and the white policeman was wrong ("acted stupidly").

I have been 100% right about the character (or lack thereof) of Mr. Obama. He apoligized to the world about America being a negative, power-mad, killing, unequal, greedy, polluting, war-mongering, racist country. He apologized for the way we won World War II. For Vietnam, for Iraq. But he did not apologize for his racist stand with respect to Mr. Professor Gates.

No more needs to be said.

Brilliant New Gas Tax Idea

The Wight Floating Consumer Gasoline Tax

I have conceived what I believe to be a brilliant idea. And an effective antidote to the "Cap-and-Trade-and-Tax" bill that just passed the House by a sliver.

The federal gas tax would be increased to some set number that increases the price of gasoline at the pump. The price could be set at, say, $4.00 a gallon. That price would be fixed by means of a floating federal gas tax. The tax would change periodically say, monthly, as the wholesale price fluctuates in the market, so the retail price of "regular" gasoline at the pump would be $4.00, set for some period of time, say two or three years, barring some unforeseen emergency.

The advantages would be overwhelming.

Consumers could budget based on a gasoline price they could count on staying the same. Operating businesses the same. This would relieve such incredible fluctuations we have been experiencing over the past. It is obvious no one can accurately predict gasoline prices, perhaps only the producers can impose some pricing, but even that is far from certain.

Higher prices, as has been demonstrated, will curtail miles driven and diminish the foreign oil purchased. This scheme would continue what has been started, but would stop the tendency for Americans and its politicians to devolve into our old ways. In the 1970's we all meant well with cutting driving, but when gasoline prices sunk, we began driving and driving bigger and bigger cars; SUVs were "invented" and purchased by the millions. It sometimes takes a stick along with a carrot to cause social change. This is a stick.

Now, the rest of the story.

Innovative ideas for alternative energy technologies could also count on an umbrella price to use when costing out the technologies. This could open vast market opportunities, based on a consistent market price. Inventors and innovators would come out of the woodwork. Entrepreneurs would jump at the opportunities and venture capitalists could invest based upon realistic business plans not wild guesses. The millions of jobs our politicians espouse could actually be created. Immense new wealth could be created.

Because of all these individuals creating technologies and companies, the government could concentrate on basic and applied research and let the ultimate successes be based on free-enterprise. Our government intends to use huge amounts of tax monies on alternative energy, raised, it seems from income taxes supported by both parties and candidates. With my plan, success and failure would be based on hundreds or thousands of possibilities, without politics and centralized control inserting itself to select winners. The tax money will be raised anyway, so why get it from users of energy?

To the extent the tax dollars pile up, government could more properly use motor vehicle taxes rather than income taxes for the desperately-needed infrastructure repair, update/replacement, and maintenance and rapid transit.

Would this be some burden on citizens? Yes. But it would be a more direct burden and one somewhat controllable by users. But it would point out problems to consumers and would not allow Democrats to pick and choose what companies and "alternative" energy technologies from which to extort campaign contributions. It would put power in the hands of citizens as a whole and not those who believe they should command citizens to do as they say. Political royalty. So this concept will NEVER be accepted by power-mad Democrats. End of sad story.