The headlines today say that "dozens" were killed in the Syrian city of Hama when the Assad regime used tanks to put down protests. Just to be clear, the tanks were not just used to block roads; they were deployed to fire upon those in the streets. In other words, Assad in Syria is doing what Gaddafi in Libya threatened. In response to the Libyan threats, the US and NATO finally got around to using force to prevent the slaughter. In Syria, we have gotten to the point of speaking out against Assad's wholesale murder of his own people, but we are doing nothing. In the 1980's Assad's father used poison gas against his own people to put down an uprising. At that time, Syria was alligned with the USSR, so the USA was prevented from taking any action without risking war with Russia. Today, that is not the case since the Soviet Union is long gone. We can and should do more to stop Assad.
Before some of you start screaming about another war, let me hasten to add that I am not advocating armed action as of now. There are many other things that could be done, short of war. But we need someone to lead the US towards doing what is right and moral and in our national interest. Maybe Obama can take time off from campaigning or celebrating his birthday and actually do something about Syria. But don't hold your breath.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Uh Oh -- how does Piers blame Rupert for this one
For the last two months we have watched a feeding frenzy in the media about the story of phone hacking by British reporters. The big story line centered around the News Of the World, a British paper owned by News Corp. Things got so bad that the paper was closed down, the chariman of News Corp., Rupert Murdoch and his son James were called to testify before Parliament, and the Cameron government was thrown off balance since a former NOTW editor had been Cameron's press spokesman for a while. In America, the barrage against News Corp. which owns Fox News and the Wall Street Journal (among other properties) has also been fierce. Two Democrat senators have called for an investigation to see whether or not the company had hacked the phones of 9-11 survivors. The FBI, of course, complied and began to investigate. And this happened without any evidence that any 9-11 related entity had been hacked.
Now the other shoe has dropped. Paul McCartney's former wife has come forward to relate how her phone was hacked by the Mirror, another London paper. This one, however, is completely unrelated to News Corp. Indeed, it is the paper that CNN's Piers Morgan used to head as editor. Piers, of course, has denied that his paper ever hacked anything or anyone. There is for Piers, however, the annoying problem that a few years ago he made a statement that seemed to admit that he knew that there had been hacking of that sort at the paper. My guess is that Piers will now announce that he was hypnotised by Murdoch and forced to hack cell phones.
Now the other shoe has dropped. Paul McCartney's former wife has come forward to relate how her phone was hacked by the Mirror, another London paper. This one, however, is completely unrelated to News Corp. Indeed, it is the paper that CNN's Piers Morgan used to head as editor. Piers, of course, has denied that his paper ever hacked anything or anyone. There is for Piers, however, the annoying problem that a few years ago he made a statement that seemed to admit that he knew that there had been hacking of that sort at the paper. My guess is that Piers will now announce that he was hypnotised by Murdoch and forced to hack cell phones.
Unemployment news
Last week, I wrote about how weekly new claims for unemployment had finally fallen below 400,000 after holding above that level for 17 weeks in a row. Today, the government revised last week's number to 401,000 and issued the number for this week of 400,000. Despite the continuation of the over 400,000 string, this is good news. For quite some time, the figure was staying at about an average of 425,000. Two weeks in a row at 400,000 means that there has been at least a marginal improvement. Let's be clear: 400,000 new claims is very poor. If the number stays here, the unemployment rate will increase over time. Still, it is worth noting that at least there is a ray of hope in the results.
On the other hand, if we are truly entering a double dip recession, then things will get much worse and soon. Former Obama adviser Larry Summers said yesterday that there was a one third chance in his view that there would be a double dip. To me, he is an incurable optimist. I think it is more like 50-50.
On the other hand, if we are truly entering a double dip recession, then things will get much worse and soon. Former Obama adviser Larry Summers said yesterday that there was a one third chance in his view that there would be a double dip. To me, he is an incurable optimist. I think it is more like 50-50.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Obama really is in "over his head" on the economy
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said that he felt that president Obama is in over his head with regard to what to do to grow the economy. His statement seems extremely harsh given that Obama is president and has teams of advisers to help him. Nevertheless, today's news stories give great support to what Cantor is saying.
First, according to the AP, Obama told his cabinet today that the economy's weakness was "partly because of things we couldn't control," such as the Japanese earthquake and the debt problems in Europe. While there is some truth to this, it misses the main point. Growth in the first quarter this year was at the rate of 0.4%, a rate that is just above recession. The first quarter, of course, took place before the Japanese earthquake and tsunami. It took place before the main problems occured in Europe. In other words, it is the baseline that was in effect before those problems hit, and it was growth at an anemic 0.4% rate. Only someone who did not understand this could possibly say what Obama did.
Second, in a briefing today, the White House spokesman reported that the president's view is that he does not not "believe that there is a threat of a double-dip recession". This is astounding! Obama does not say that we will likely avoid a double dip; no, there is NO THREAT of a double dip.
This last statement leads me to wonder just how the president celebrated his birthday. Had he already had seven vodkas by the time he spoke? Was he using medicianl marijuana? No threat of a double dip! Only a fool could say that. Indeed, when the final revisions come in for the GDP growth in the second quarter we may see that the economy is already contracting.
So the president does not understand the economy. Of course, the alternative is that the president does understand but chooses to lie to the American people in the hope that it will help his re-election campaign. Either way, Obama is a loser.
Since I have not said this for a few days, it is time for a repetition: OBAMA HAS GOT TO GO!!!!!!
First, according to the AP, Obama told his cabinet today that the economy's weakness was "partly because of things we couldn't control," such as the Japanese earthquake and the debt problems in Europe. While there is some truth to this, it misses the main point. Growth in the first quarter this year was at the rate of 0.4%, a rate that is just above recession. The first quarter, of course, took place before the Japanese earthquake and tsunami. It took place before the main problems occured in Europe. In other words, it is the baseline that was in effect before those problems hit, and it was growth at an anemic 0.4% rate. Only someone who did not understand this could possibly say what Obama did.
Second, in a briefing today, the White House spokesman reported that the president's view is that he does not not "believe that there is a threat of a double-dip recession". This is astounding! Obama does not say that we will likely avoid a double dip; no, there is NO THREAT of a double dip.
This last statement leads me to wonder just how the president celebrated his birthday. Had he already had seven vodkas by the time he spoke? Was he using medicianl marijuana? No threat of a double dip! Only a fool could say that. Indeed, when the final revisions come in for the GDP growth in the second quarter we may see that the economy is already contracting.
So the president does not understand the economy. Of course, the alternative is that the president does understand but chooses to lie to the American people in the hope that it will help his re-election campaign. Either way, Obama is a loser.
Since I have not said this for a few days, it is time for a repetition: OBAMA HAS GOT TO GO!!!!!!
Hey guys it doesn't work
In a new round of angry rhetoric, the Democrats are calling the GOP "hostage takers" once more. This time the charges are the result of the shut down of part of the FAA due to the failure of the Senate to pass an authorization measure for that agency. As has been the case in repeated confrontations, the Republican controlled House has already passed a long term authorization measure which the Senate has stalled. The House has also passed a short term, temporary authorization which the Senate has again stalled. So the Democrats who control the Senate have done nothing, but they are the ones calling the Republicans "hostage takers". The Demcorats must really like that image, but it does not work. Americans are not that gullible.
So what is the real issue here? The temporary measure passed by the House ends keeps everything as is at the FAA, but it cuts off federal subsidies for twelve rural airport facilities in nine states. The truth is that the Democrats are the ones holding the entire country hostage by threatening air travel just to keep these twelve airports from losing their subsidies. But travel in these twelve markets is so low that it does not come anywhere near supporting the costs involved. The Democrats have to remember that air travel is not a right guaranteed to all by the Constitution. If it is too expensive to fly to some small town in the middle of nowhere, there is no need for the rest of America to pay to keep that service going.
Strangely, I hope that the Democrats keep the hostage charges going until next year. It makes them look crazy (which is pretty accurate).
So what is the real issue here? The temporary measure passed by the House ends keeps everything as is at the FAA, but it cuts off federal subsidies for twelve rural airport facilities in nine states. The truth is that the Democrats are the ones holding the entire country hostage by threatening air travel just to keep these twelve airports from losing their subsidies. But travel in these twelve markets is so low that it does not come anywhere near supporting the costs involved. The Democrats have to remember that air travel is not a right guaranteed to all by the Constitution. If it is too expensive to fly to some small town in the middle of nowhere, there is no need for the rest of America to pay to keep that service going.
Strangely, I hope that the Democrats keep the hostage charges going until next year. It makes them look crazy (which is pretty accurate).
Strangely, MoDo got it partially correct
In yesterday's New York Times, columnist/dragon lady Maureen Dowd penned a screed comparing the Tea Party to movie monsters of all sorts. My guess is that her attack came, in part, to atone to her readers for writing such a scathingly negative piece about president Obama the other day. The column was unremarkable for the most part, just the usual venom from the biggest snake in the jungle. There was, however, one true glimpse into the psyche of those in the media/government liberal bubble. MoDo talked about the reaction of the people (meaning others in the bubble) to the debt negotiations. Here is her exact words: "We continue to be paranoid, gripped by fear of the unknown, shocked by our own helplessness, stunned by how swiftly one world can turn into a darker one where everything can seem familiar yet foreign."
This is quite an insight, even if it was inadvertent.
For the last fifty years, at least, the liberal "government is good, more government is better" crowd has controlled the levers of power in Washington, New York and Hollywood. This meant that government, newsmedia and the entertainment industry all worked together to push more and more government on America. There certainly have been those fighting on the other side, and there have even been ocassional successes for them like the brief interlude when Ronald Reagan was able to slow the move. Nevertheless, the liberal government and media complex have always maintained controll. Indeed, the zenith of their power came with the election in 2008 when America got an unabashed progressive president who had lopsided majorities in both houses of Congress, while the mainstream media acted as cheerleaders for that result.
Now, as MoDo mentions, it has all swiftly changed. The sleeping American people, the silent majority of Nixonian days, has awakened and taken control from the liberal poobahs who consider their control of the country to be a God given right. (OK, since many are secular, they do not consider anything God given, but they do consider control their birthright at least.) Just look what has happened. In Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy's seat has a Republican in it. In Congress, all of the liberals are sitting on the sidelines with no power. There are fewer liberals in this House than in any during my lifetime. Nancy Pelosi, that symbol of unrepentant liberalism, is now so unimportant that she has to struggle to be heard in the media. Barney Frank who used to be in charge of Wall Street now struggles to have influence without success. In the Senate, there remains a Democrat majority, but the senators up for re-election next year struggle to hide their liberal ways. And in the White House, Obama announces principled stands on one day, only to change them to something else on the next. Of course, with all the announcements, Obama includes no actual plans for anything. The philosophy of liberalism has now so totally failed as to provide essentially no ideas to Obama as to what to do next.
The media is having the same thing happen. The network news shows, which used to set the agenda for much of the country, are now watched by just a few. Scott Pelley replaces Katie Couric at CBS and no one cares (because no one watches.) All of the old style cable news channels together cannot muster an audience the size of that at Fox which is not part of the liberal cabal. Liberal press sources like the New York Times watch their circulation and their future wither away. The average age of the New York Times reader is now in the mid 60's. In 15 years, they will mostly be gone, and there are no replacements. Liberal control of the media is gone. And then of course, there is talk radio, a medium that now gets out the news without anyone having to read or listen to the old, dying liberal media. What a nightmare for those in the bubble. MoDo is right. They are helpless and things have changed our of their control.
This is quite an insight, even if it was inadvertent.
For the last fifty years, at least, the liberal "government is good, more government is better" crowd has controlled the levers of power in Washington, New York and Hollywood. This meant that government, newsmedia and the entertainment industry all worked together to push more and more government on America. There certainly have been those fighting on the other side, and there have even been ocassional successes for them like the brief interlude when Ronald Reagan was able to slow the move. Nevertheless, the liberal government and media complex have always maintained controll. Indeed, the zenith of their power came with the election in 2008 when America got an unabashed progressive president who had lopsided majorities in both houses of Congress, while the mainstream media acted as cheerleaders for that result.
Now, as MoDo mentions, it has all swiftly changed. The sleeping American people, the silent majority of Nixonian days, has awakened and taken control from the liberal poobahs who consider their control of the country to be a God given right. (OK, since many are secular, they do not consider anything God given, but they do consider control their birthright at least.) Just look what has happened. In Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy's seat has a Republican in it. In Congress, all of the liberals are sitting on the sidelines with no power. There are fewer liberals in this House than in any during my lifetime. Nancy Pelosi, that symbol of unrepentant liberalism, is now so unimportant that she has to struggle to be heard in the media. Barney Frank who used to be in charge of Wall Street now struggles to have influence without success. In the Senate, there remains a Democrat majority, but the senators up for re-election next year struggle to hide their liberal ways. And in the White House, Obama announces principled stands on one day, only to change them to something else on the next. Of course, with all the announcements, Obama includes no actual plans for anything. The philosophy of liberalism has now so totally failed as to provide essentially no ideas to Obama as to what to do next.
The media is having the same thing happen. The network news shows, which used to set the agenda for much of the country, are now watched by just a few. Scott Pelley replaces Katie Couric at CBS and no one cares (because no one watches.) All of the old style cable news channels together cannot muster an audience the size of that at Fox which is not part of the liberal cabal. Liberal press sources like the New York Times watch their circulation and their future wither away. The average age of the New York Times reader is now in the mid 60's. In 15 years, they will mostly be gone, and there are no replacements. Liberal control of the media is gone. And then of course, there is talk radio, a medium that now gets out the news without anyone having to read or listen to the old, dying liberal media. What a nightmare for those in the bubble. MoDo is right. They are helpless and things have changed our of their control.
Time to look forward which strangely looks like we are repeating history
Now that the debt ceiling deal has been reached, it is a good time to look forward to see what will come up in Washington in the next month or two. Fortunately for the country, Congress is now in recess for the rest of August. So far, so good. Once Congress comes back, however, it will need to pass appropriations bills for the fiscal year that starts on October 1, 2011. If you remember the continuing resolution that was the center of major fighting last March, you should also recall that the CR runs out when the fiscal year ends. Hopefully, Congress will pass appropriations bills for the various departments (or at least some of them) so that there will not be a need for an overall CR once again. If, however, there are no appropriations bills, then there will need to be another CR or the government will shut down. Sound familiar?
My guess is that the GOP will have a new batch of budget cuts that it wants to make to the appropriations. For example, the 100 or so federal job training programs could be amalgamated into two or three. This would save about three quarters of the administrative costs spent on these programs without in any way reducing the people receiving training. In short, it would be a no pain with gain type of cut. There are literally hundreds of billions of dollars of spending that can be cut in this way. Or suppose that the GOP decideds that it is going to cut funding for the federal program that provides free cell phones to the "poor". That would mean another savings with little downside. At some time, the feds have to decide that not all entitlements have to be treated as rights. Some, in fact, are luxuries.
There will be a whole series of these items brought forward by the GOP. Hopefully, president Obama will handle these as well as he did the last and there will be a victory for fiscal sanity.
My guess is that the GOP will have a new batch of budget cuts that it wants to make to the appropriations. For example, the 100 or so federal job training programs could be amalgamated into two or three. This would save about three quarters of the administrative costs spent on these programs without in any way reducing the people receiving training. In short, it would be a no pain with gain type of cut. There are literally hundreds of billions of dollars of spending that can be cut in this way. Or suppose that the GOP decideds that it is going to cut funding for the federal program that provides free cell phones to the "poor". That would mean another savings with little downside. At some time, the feds have to decide that not all entitlements have to be treated as rights. Some, in fact, are luxuries.
There will be a whole series of these items brought forward by the GOP. Hopefully, president Obama will handle these as well as he did the last and there will be a victory for fiscal sanity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)