The Democrats finally admit they were wrong

From the AP quoting Harry Reid: "Middle class families need a boost in this economy, and that is exactly what this plan gives them.... It is not perfect, but it will create 2 million jobs, cut taxes for middle class families and small businesses, and ensure that Americans who are still looking for work will continue to have the safety net they rely on to make ends meet."

In English, this translates as follows: For the last ten years the Democrats have announced that the Bush tax cuts were just "tax cuts for the rich". We acknowledge now that this was never true. Indeed, not only will continuing the Bush tax rates provide major tax relief for the middle class and small business, but it will also promote growth of the economy and create about 2 million more jobs.

Is there any Democrat with the courage to actually admit that their endless chanting about tax cuts for the rich was a lie? is there a Democrat who will at least say that they were wrong about the Bush tax cuts? Of course not.

Swedish Meatball

A few days ago, an Al Qaeda terrorist blew himself up during a suicide attack in Stockholm. An attack on Sweden by the terrorists makes about as much sense as a progressive attacking the upper West Side of Manhattan or a conservative attacking Utah. Sweden is known for its slavish devotion to tolerance and an open society. Indeed, the attack makes clear that the goal of Al Qaeda is not to end any wrong by the Western powers against Islam. Instead, that goal is clearly the destruction of all things Western, Christian and/or free. The attack should be a wake up call to those in Europe who do not support anti-terror activity. If even Sweden is not safe, then no place is safe.

The Outrageous Obamacrats

Day after day, stories come out of Washington that people describe as outrageous. The word is used so often as to lose its real meaning. Today, however, the Democrats in the Senate have managed to restore "outrageous" as a truly appropriate description for their conduct. the subject, of course, is the enormous appropriations bill that the Democrats want to cram through the Senate in the next week of the lame duck session. In a normal year, there are about 13 appropriations bills that cover spending for the various sections of the federal government. Even with those 13 separate bills, it is difficult for most senators and congressmen to keep track of the actual spending levels on individual programs. The committee staff responsible for the bills do much of the leg work and in some instances are the only ones who truly know hwat is in the bill. Now, the Democrats want to combine all 13 bills into one two thousand page monstrosity that also includes billions of dollars of earmarks as a bonus attraction. After an election in which the winners pledged to cut spending, end earmarks and rationalize the federal budget, this bill is yet another slap in the face of the American people by the Democrats. Maybe someone needs to remind them of the former favorit saying: "Elections have consequences and we won!"

Hopefully, the Republicans in the Senate will refuse to allow consideration of this bill. The Democrats cannot move forward under reconciliation, since they failed to even pass a budget this year, a prerequisite for that procedure. The Senate Republicans should announce that they are prepared to pass a continuing resolution that will fund the government for another two months at current levels. that will give the new congress the chance to come in an begin cutting the gargantuan budget. There is no need for a government shutdown; two more months should be just about right. The Democrats made this mess by failing to carry out their duties to pass spending bills so that they could hide their true intent from the electorate. Such actions have consequences. There is no way that the GOP should allow the Democrats to push through another year of profligate spending now as a going away present.

Eastern Platinum Ltd. -- go with a winner

My latest suggestion for a stock is based upon something quite different than my usual suggestions. I am investing in Eastern Platinum Ltd. (Symbol ELR:CA or ELR.TO) because of my faith in the mangement of that company. The CEO of Eastern Platinum is David Cohen. Over the last few years, I have invested with great success in two different companies headed by Cohen. These two are Northern Orion, a Canadian copper and gold company, and Gold Wheaton Corp, a Canadian gold royalty stream company. With Northern Orion, Cohen found a project in Argentina called Agua Rica that has enormous reserves of gold, copper and molybdenum, and he bought it at a time when prices for such properties were enormously depressed. After bringing the project to the point where it was ready to go ahead, Cohen sold Northern Orion to Yamana Gold on very favorable terms. He then went to Gold Wheaton and ran a start up gold royalty company. Last week, Gold wheaton entered into a deal to merge with Franco Nevada, again on very favorable terms.

Eastern Platinum -- of which cohen is CEO -- mines platinum from South African mines. Prices for platinum have done well and supply of the metal is dwindling. These market characteristics have led to a price rise for Eastern Platinum which has doubled the price of the stock over the last six months from 90 cents to 1.80 (canadian). Even with this rise, however, Eastern Platinum is still at less than half of the price it reached in early 2008. As M&A activity among the platinum producers rise, I expect potential purchasers to look closely at Eastern. Both a rising price for platinum and an uptick in mergers and buy outs can help this small company.

Caution: In a departure from my usual methods, I am purchasing this stock strictly based upon the past success of the CEO. Anyone interested in this company should do his or her own investigation until he or she is sufficiently satisfied with the investment. I consider this a highly speculative investment, but I think it is worthy of a small purchase.

Disclosure: I invested today in 4000 shares of Eastern Platinum at 1.79 (Can). I may buy more over time.

Hurt Feelings?

According to AP, House Democrats had their feelings hurt by the way that president Obama conducted the negotiations to reach the tax compromise currently pending in Congress. The article is a scream. The first offended Democrat quoted is Alan Grayson, a scatter brained and thankfully defeated representative from Florida. Grayson is the one who called his opponent Taliban Dan and edited tapes to have his opponent saying the opposite of what was actually said. But he was offended because Obama did not take his feelings into consideration in the negotiations. Most of the rest of the comments were self-important moaning from Democrats who are no longer at the center of power. Now that they are treated in accordance with their massive loss, they think it is insulting. It is like a king who has been overthrown by a revolution but who still insists on being addressed as "your majesty" and that by those remianing in the government.

My suggestion to the Democrats is that they better get used to it. In another two weeks, all of those new Republicans will arrive and the Democrats in the House, like all parties with a minority in the House, will fade into the background.

The Decision in Virginia

The decision issued today by a federal judge in the suit brought by Virginia against the federal government to have Obamacare declared unconstitutional is remarkably straightforward. Simply put, the court determines that Congress does not have the power under the Commerce Clause of the constitution to regulate a person's choice not to engage in interstate commerce. As a result, the individual mandate that requires each person to procure health insurance is unconstitutional. The Court also says that the provision is not a tax; specifically, it relies most heavily on the words used by Congress in calling this a penalty and not a tax. Finally, the court says that only the individual mandate and those provisions that depend on the existence of the mandate will fall. the entire bill is not unconstitutional.

So what does this mean?

First, there will be an appeal and nothing really matters until the Supreme Court rules.

Second, if the individual mandate falls, the entire structure of Obamacare also falls. The basic point of the plan was that insurance companies would be barred from looking at pre-existing conditions or for charging most differential premiums, but that because the individual mandate would greatly expand the size of the market, the companies could survive. It will be interesting to see what gets left if the individual mandate is ultimately determined to be unconstitutional.

Third, this may well be the beginning of the end for Obamacare. For instance, this ruling may give Congress the reason to delay implementation of the bill. After all, if the entire structure is going to collapse, there is no point in preparing to implement it.

In any event, today's ruling is a victory for the Constitution. Let's hope it holds up on appeal.

A Short summary of Obama's Middle East Policy

The Mere Rhetoric site has a video that, in cartoon form, sums up US policy in the Middle east in under two minutes. It is well worth watching. Just click on the title of this post to get to the video.