Tag: federal government

Ceiling Obama’s Fate

I don’t like Speaker Boehner or trust him.  Which just means I have a lot in common with your average conservative Republican congressman (that and skinny-dipping).  It bothers me that this is effectively the most powerful Republican in the federal government.  He’s going to compromise our best strengths away and we’re going to get screwed.   But I really have no idea what else the GOP in the House should do.

We’re talking about Obama’s legacy here.  A working and lasting deal on the debt and taxes would be the starting point for anything good or bad that happens after it.  Obama missed this chance last time through incompetence and opportunism.  He insisted on holding off on any long-term solution until after re-election and allowed the uncertainty  of the fiscal cliff and Taxmageddon  (as well as Obamacare, now not going away) to drag down the economy for another year and a half. 

This is why his first term must be considered to be a failure.  Obama roughly held unemployment in place–unless you want to get into the more complex argument about labor force participation–and that was the issue foremost on voter’s minds.  But Bill Clinton promised that nobody could have fixed the economy in four years and he wouldn’t lie to us, right?  So Obama gets his re-election and another shot at a grand bargain on the debt ceiling and taxes.

Frankly, I’d be more impressed if the federal government woud just pass a real budget in compliance with the law, but they are so fucked that this isn’t even on the table right now.   Whatever Big Fuckin’ Deal these damn fools come up with, it’s going to equally celebrated and meaningless.  They’re not doing what needs to happen, they’re postponing it.  They’re not really doing what they’re supposed to, but making it look like they are.  It’s theatre, but we had best know what the audience is expecting to see on stage: The Rich as the antagonist, who must lose at third act.

The GOP is going to lose plainly on taxes.  Incomes on those who make over $250,000 need to go up because we can’t keep defending these people for no clear reason.  Yeah, yeah, raising taxes now would throw us back into recession or worsen the one we’re already in, depending on your outlook.  The proposed tax increases won’t close the deficit either, I know.   But Obama must have that to show off.  It’s inescapable.  Don’t get me wrong, if we HAD to give Obama a trophy, I’d tell him to take Boehner’s testicles; but he doesn’t want them.  He wants to confiscate more wealth from the wealthy.

I say that the taxes on top earners have to go up because the American people don’t know dick about economics.  Let’s face it.  If they did, they would have shown a lot more curiosity about the lack of a federal budget for nearly four years now and possibly asked some questions about why the recovery was oh so weak.  Oh, yeah: They probably wouldn’t have re-elected Obama either.

My prediction is that the Democrats will get the tax increase on “the rich” while barely giving anything in return.  Don’t get mad about this though.  It’s a loser and the GOP will be better off with it resolved.  It will suck all the wind out of the “party of the rich” arguments if any other part of the deal falls through.

The GOP has the big gun in this argument.  They can always let all of the Bush tax cuts expire.   The demented extremist side of me who would like to collectively kick the electorate in the junk for last Tuesday LOVES the thought of doing this just for spite.  Shitty thing is that this would hurt my household too.  I’m a working schlub, married to a teacher, and we have two kids.   We are that middle class that everyone purports to care about so much and really doesn’t.  Hence, we hate everyone else.

Obama most assuredly does not want to be blamed for raising taxes on the middle class (except for Obamacare, because “kids with cancer” or something).   If the Democrats don’t agree to some spending cuts beyond reducing the military to menacing our enemies with rubberband-fired paper clips, then the GOP must announce that no agreement that realistically reduces the deficit could be reached and they have no choice but to allow the tax cuts to sunset.

The Democrats do not want this and will work hard to prevent it.  The problem is that even though we have the advantage in the form of the great tax increase gambit, we have the biggest disadvantage on the game board: Boehner himself.  This isn’t about him, it’s about Obama.  Both of them want to secure their own legacies and I think Boehner is the less committed of the two.   Worse, he still thinks that something can be worked out man-to-man with this president.  His greatest weapon is that which Obama most fears: tax increases on everybody.  Not beating Obama at golf.

If Boehner does not use the big gun, then he establishes Obama as a good-enough president for resolving the debt stalemate, passes an idiotic compromise that accomplishes nothing for the good of his country, and proves once again how ultimately meaningless it is to give the GOP control of any part of the federal government. 

Obama’s legacy is on the line but all eyes should be on Boehner now.

Best argument…

About why what the left has been doing to us for the last century, whether you think it was meant to do good or not, is wrong, was made by Glenn H. Reynolds, he of Instapundit fame, here:

The Constitution of the United States was supposed to create a federal government limited to the comparatively few powers specifically enumerated therein, mostly in Article I, Section 8. The idea was that the federal government would address subjects that really needed to be handled on a national level. The states would do the rest, or people would take care of matters on their own.

As James Madison wrote in the Federalist No. 45, “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”

To underscore this arrangement, the Tenth Amendment provided that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

This division of powers was intended to protect freedom by limiting the scope of the powerful national government. It was also intended to reduce the extent of corruption in the federal government. The powers most likely to encourage corruption were left to the states.

Our forefathers understood that the bane of every system of government was the abrogation of power at the highest/ federal level that would encourage the type of corruption that turned Europe into freedom lacking the shit hole it was then and to many extents in far worse ways, is today. Obamacare is just the latest step on the road to full blown government control of everything.

Yeah, the cultists that love Marx’s dumb idea will vehemently disown marxism, but the end goal, even if many amongst the masses aren’t bright enough to see that yet, and the politicians that push it deny that’s the intent, is full blown state control of everything and everyone. Maybe not direct control of all aspects of life like we saw in the USSR, but then again, when you have a government with not just the power to pick winners and losers, but a justification to do it all that is seen as noble – social justice – that it hides behind, and a justice system that enforces that power and agenda, you pretty much get the same with the veneer of legitimacy and democracy.

Obamacare was just another step in that direction. One that was set up to allow the political class to basically define healthcare to be whatever government decided it was whenever it wanted, by basically completely destroying the limitations the constitution placed on the federal government. The bonus plan I believe is that even if it were to fail this dastardly constitutional challenge, they hoped it would it would come too late and with such pain that it all but set up the system to allow them to achieve the real goal: a single payer system.

Look, I do not for a second believe that the left hasn’t spent the last half century passed law after law to increase the power & control of the federal government on healthcare system to make it better. Sure, that’s what they told us, but the intent has always been a government controlled system. But as long as the one we had worked well, they where never going to sell the public on this idiotic notion we all could see fail everywhere. Hence the massive and idiotic mountain of regulations and mandates, coupled with the bull about healthcare being a ‘right”, which have brought the existing system to the brink of implosion. And like they did when their regulations caused the recent economic disaster – they chose double down on even more meaningless regulation, while not just keeping the fundamental underlying problem that they want to use the lending industry to social engineer, but expanding on it – this is just more of the same.

The game is to overload the system till it brakes and people HAVE to accept the government controlled single payer system they want. Obamacare took the next step, and as Reynolds put it, basically decided to make the case that there should be no limits on what the federal government wants to do if they claim it is for the welfare of people and to regulate commerce or some such nonsense. Have no doubt that next step was the plan:

There are always arguments about the precise scope of delegated powers, and such arguments have regularly come before the Supreme Court. But it is one thing to argue about the precise extent of limits to enumerated power, and it is another thing entirely to deny their existence.

And there you have it in a nutshell. The left doesn’t care right now: they hold the reigns of power, and their guy is pretty blatantly willing to do whatever to push their power to new heights. What can go wrong? After all, this is about doing a good, nay great, thing. Healthcare is a right, and we should all get it for free! Never mind that there is nothing that’s free, ever. So here we get the left, perplexed that even some of the leftists on the SCOTUS is weary of this dangerous usurpation of power, but the problem is a simple one with dire consequences.

Will the court be willing to remove the “almost” and let Congress do anything it wants under the commerce power? I don’t know, but if it doesn’t go along with Obamacare, don’t blame Donald Verrilli. Instead, blame — or, rather, credit — the Constitution.

Be afraid. Our media is doing us a disservice not pointing this out too. But what’s new? Obamacare isn’t even about healthcare: it is about removing any limitations from the feds. While you might have no problem with that today because your team has the reins of power, think about what it means when they don’t. Of course, the left has figure that once they take power they won’t ever lose it again, but then again, even the Supreme Soviets learned that lesson eventually.

Any way you spin it..

I am sure that the usual suspects in the LSM have to be heart broken by the results of this USA Today poll about whom Americans blame for the depressed economy. Here is how the USA Today writer tries to salvage the day:

Most Americans blame Wall Street for the nation’s economic predicament — but they blame Washington more.

And in the democracy that fancies itself the capital of capitalism, more than four in 10 people describe the U.S. economic system as personally unfair to them. A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken last weekend, as the Occupy Wall Street protest movement completed its first month, found that:

Oh hell! Only 4 out of ten people are good enough to believe the left’s idiotic talking points. Erm, that’s not entirely accurate either. The author is seriously embellishing. It’s a poll, and it’s a poll conducted by a member of the LSM, so I am sure the questions where seriously skewed to illicit the response they wanted, and even then, the numbers are far worse for the “Blame Wall Street” class warriors as the next statement shows:

•When asked whom they blame more for the poor economy, 64% of Americans name the federal government and 30% say big financial institutions.

So 64 out of 100 say blame government. Only 30, or 3 out of 10 – not the 4 this author would like you to believe unless you want to talk the 6% that voted “present” into the later group out of desperation – blame those evil corporations. And that’s despite the following revelation:

•Only 54% say the economic system is personally fair to them; 44% say it is not.

I will stress how funny I find it that the economic system seems to be the fairest to people that work hard and avoid the usual pitfalls, short-cuts, and bad decisions that lead to economic problems. There are exceptions of course, but they are just that: exceptions.

The last reported pair of statistics makes me wonder. This author hopes to confound people by again combining the results in such a way that it leads one to believe the opposite of what the study finds. Here you go.

•78% say Wall Street bears a great deal or a fair amount of blame for the economy; 87% say the same about Washington.

I feel that you have to interpret this obscenely weird cobbled result, which otherwise adds up to numbers over 100 as the result of 2 sets of questions. Obviously the first part deals with a question where they illicit people to lay blame on Wall Street, but it looks like they are combining two buckets, fair amount and great deal, to achieve that higher, close to 8 in 10 if you want to go there. However, if you assume they did the same and combined those 2 buckets like they did for the wanted the high answer for, when added up based on a question directed at D.C, the amount is 9 out of 10 blaming D.C. the most. No way to spin it: most Americans understand the root of the problem.

I wish they had asked people if they thought letting government write more regulation to address the problem so many see with Wall Street would put an end to the problem or just make it worse. My guess is when the problem is posed showing this relationship for what it is, all but the dumbest would think that handing government – the people that have wrecked the economy according to the majority – even more power, will not fix things. Some people seem to get it, even if you have to read through the nonsense to see it.

“You see the frustration that there’s some serious things wrong with capitalism in America, but you also see the conundrum — how do we change it?” says Terry Madonna, a political analyst and polling expert at Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, Pa. “This crisis coincides with a huge debate over the role of government.” He says some of the 64% who place primary blame on Washington fault it for too little government regulation, while others blame it for too much regulation.

First off, the problem isn’t capitalism at all, but government trying to subvert capitalism to the onerous beliefs one group of ideologues have that it’s government’s job to level the playing field, social engineer results so we all cross the finish line at the same time, and that it is an injustice that life isn’t fair to some people. I could add how obvious it is that the people life is the least fair to tend to be the ones that do the dumb things, but I expect that to be obvious.

And yes, the big problem we have is that the same ideologues that feel government should pick winners & losers, to make life fair, are never going to understand/accept that the best way to roll this problem back is to roll back the power and ability of government to rig the system, so those “evil rich” whom now have to come to the politicians to buy privileges – look at who gets excluded from travesties like Obamacare for example, and by whom – from them, can’t do that anymore, by drastically reducing government and the power of what government can do.

As we can see the usual suspects are already advocating for giving the politicians even more power over who wins and who doesn’t, and they will be the ones complaining the loudest when this has exactly the opposite effect that they are hoping for. Queue the next crisis due to social engineering followed by politicians promising to fix it all if they are given even more power.

Green jobs company that got $535 million from Obama raided by the FBI.

More than a year or so ago, Solyndra and other Green technology companies like it, where being touted by the progressive greens as the solution to both the economic wreck and employment disaster they wrongly, but quite successfully, wanted everyone to believe was caused by evil Boosh-Chimpy-McHitler instead of progressive government pressure on lending institutions and a myriad of schemes and scams to overcome the laws of economics and reality that eventually caused both the housing market collapse and the global financial crisis. Solyndra was not just our economic the future but the way to save us all from Gaia’s CO2 induced wrath! Hence the large – $535 million – stimulus check to make it so.

Skip ahead, to a few weeks ago, and we have Solyndra going belly up and laying off 1,100 employees. But oh, does it get better. Seriously, you could not make this kind of damning shit about the Keynesian Marxist and the progressive greens movement up if you tried. Today we find out that:

FREMONT, Calif.— FBI agents executed search warrants on Thursday at the headquarters of California solar firm Solyndra, which received a $535 million loan from the federal government before filing for bankruptcy last week.

Agents executed multiple search warrants at the company’s headquarters in Fremont as part of an investigation with the Department of Energy’s Office of Inspector General, according to FBI spokesman Peter Lee. Lee said he could not provide details about the investigation.

This has shades of Chicago politics and Rezko-esque rip off of the tax payer written all over it. I will be surprised to find out what the FBI comes back with. I am sure it will somehow be something that tries real hard to absolve the WH from being in this mess. But spin it as they want, the choice of excuses I can see them peddling all leave the WH, the green movement, the progressive agenda, and Obama looking bad or worse. In the mean time we the tax payers are out a half a billion and we will likely throw a few hundred millions more at it before someone finally finds a way to bury this embarrassing story for the WH like they are doing with that whole Gunrunner fiasco. Priceless.

Dead on the Job

Raise your hand if you are surprised:

Federal employees’ job security is so great that workers in many agencies are more likely to die of natural causes than get laid off or fired, a USA TODAY analysis finds.

Death — rather than poor performance, misconduct or layoffs — is the primary threat to job security at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Small Business Administration, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Office of Management and Budget and a dozen other federal operations.

The federal government fired 0.55% of its workers in the budget year that ended Sept. 30 — 11,668 employees in its 2.1 million workforce. Research shows that the private sector fires about 3% of workers annually for poor performance, says John Palguta, former research chief at the federal Merit Systems Protection Board, which handles federal firing disputes.

For those with seniority and big salaries, the firing rate is pretty close to zero.

The feds, of course, are simply declaring that this is a result of the sheer awesomeness of their work force. Most of you have dealt with the government know this to be true: federal employees are always highly skilled, attentive and personable.

Right? Right?! Oh.

Keep in mind, federal employee unions are a lot weaker than the state employee unions. Congress could, quite easily, make it much easier to fire federal employees. They have chosen not to, just the way they chose to raise federal salaries much much faster over the last decade than the private sector.

Something’s gotta give.

(Addendum: speaking of government employees, guess what issues has pretty much disappeared from the Wisconsin recall elections?)

Obama’s spend crazy gets major blow when House defeats debt increase request 318-97

Let’s look at ho CNN, one of those that constantly feels things go bad for the Obama Admin unexpectedly, puts the story into perspective right here:

Washington (CNN) — In a symbolic vote to send a message to budget negotiators, the House on Tuesday defeated a measure to raise the national debt ceiling without any accompanying deficit or spending reduction provisions.

The Republican-controlled House voted 318-97 on the legislation that would have raised the federal government’s debt limit by approximately $2.4 trillion.

Under rules for the vote set by the GOP leadership, the measure needed at least two-thirds support to pass, ensuring it had no chance for approval.

Symbolic vote? Heh, if a nuke going off is symbolic I guess. And WTF is it with this attempt to pretend the GOP rigged the rules to prevent this form passing? 82 democrats, including Pelosi, Hoyer, and DNC chief Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, voted with republicans and the American people and against the WH on this, leaving the other 97 donkeys to piss on our legs and tell us not to worry because its just warm rain by voting for this, and another 7 to vote present, in honor of Obama’s past votes of the same kind, I am sure, and 6 to not even bother showing up. The bad guys here aren’t the republicans you dimwits, no, the bad guys are the morons that think we can just keep spending our kid’s future into servitude to our debt holders.

The vote was scheduled by Republican leaders to show that any attempt to divorce an increase in the debt ceiling from spending reduction efforts — a move initially favored by the Obama White House — cannot win congressional approval.

At least the reality that the collectivist money printers are not going to get to keep spending like they know an asteroid is going to wipe civilization of the planet in a few months anyway, so there isn’t any reason to worry about the long term consequences of their Keynesian bullshit, is sinking in. And Obama didn’t favor this shit “initially”. The WH has wanted this debt bump so the democrats could keep playing the games they have been playing for the last 3 or so years with the budget. Spending in ways that would make drunken sailors hitting the red district after months at sea look like fiscal conservatives. The other side?

Democrats called the move a dangerous political stunt that could rattle financial markets.

“We understand the views that are being expressed” by the vote, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters before the vote. “We share the concerns that drive those views. (But) in the end, the debt ceiling has to be raised.”

Yeah, that’s why 82 of them House donkeys went on the record for that “dangerous political stunt”. And no, the debt should not be raised. This out of control spending has to be rolled back, and rolled back drastically. We can’t afford it. That’s the facts.

President Barack Obama is scheduled to meet with congressional Republicans on Wednesday as part of the administration’s ongoing debt-ceiling and related budget negotiations. Vice President Joe Biden has been holding similar talks with a bipartisan congressional delegation in recent weeks.

Hopefully he will get the message. Oh, and if you have a chance read the comments on that CNN article. Some of those libs make our old resident fool Moogoo look like a freaking Noble Peace Prize winner for all that is worth these days. Anyway, now, maybe the crazy spenders will finally agree to real cuts and we can start moving things in the right direction.

What’s really behind all of Obama’s problems?

Well, Jim Clyburn doesn’t believe that the Keynesian “save government jobs” project they sold as the must economic salvation of a lifetime, the stimuluspatronage bill, tapping the tax payers for $1 trillion plus by the time all is set and done, and basically doing nothing more than saving countless federal and state government jobs in democrat friendly country was a disaster. Nor is it government’s heavy handed approach to TARP, which allowed them to takeover a “too big to fail” business like GM for their union buddies, or loan money to their friends on Wall Street, all while demonizing them with a wink and a nod, that affected this. Hey, they even managed to let the architects of the greatest economic collapse of this century, Mr. Dodd and Mr. Franks, write new regulations that strangely do nothing to address the fundamental problems behind our economic implosion – the idiotic belief government should force lending to bad risks, use Freddie & Fannie to then cover up the disastrous undertaking, encourage speculation on those repackaged piles of shit, and then back these lenders up with tax payer money – but are horribly anti-private sector, but that’s not it either. It also certainly isn’t the fact that, while controlling all three branches of government, team blue jacked up government spending at a record pace, has run annual deficits at or close to $ 2 trillion, tacking over $5 trillion to the national debt in the last 4 or so years that they have controlled the purse, and has designs to keep doing so for the foreseeable future, to the tune of over $10 trillion in just the next decade, regardless of the inevitable conclusion that this kind of fiscal policy leads to. And what about the federal government’s move to take over healthcare, controlling the trillions of dollars in this segment of our private sector as well, as the precursor for a single payer system, with a plan that is so transparently idiotic – tax us for a decade then provide 5 or 6 years of service and claim it saves a few measly billions over that decade while ignoring that the plan will add a minimum of a trillion, and likely triple or more of that based on past experience with these social projects government puts together – that it baffles me anyone pretends it will do anything but hasted our economic demise. Or the energy policy, or should we say the lack of energy policy, that this WH is pursuing after it failed to pass the “Cap & Tax” scheme and push billions of dollars, in the name of the green economy, to democrat friendly (that means big donors) corporations. Let’s not forget the Obama DOJ and its selective enforcement of laws that threatens to make us all lose confidence in the legal system. Clyburn doesn’t even believe Obama adding another war and ignoring congress or the UN are bad, because Obama said it was a “kinetic engagement” or some such nonsense. Not even the constant narcissism is to blame.

Anyway, Clyburn basically believes that it’s not that Obama’s policies are dumb, no siree, its that those that the racist are behind these things in the first place!

WASHINGTON — House Assistant Democratic Leader Jim Clyburn, the highest-ranking African-American in Congress, on Wednesday blamed most of President Barack Obama’s political problems on racism.

Clyburn, who’s from South Carolina and is a close ally of the president, offered his views in response to a question about Obama’s re-election prospects next year. “I think they’re improving every day,” Clyburn said. “I think the president has been a good president, a great commander in chief.”

Clyburn, who met his wife at a 1960 court hearing after spending a night in jail for having engaged in a civil rights protest in Orangeburg, S.C., then brought up Obama’s race as the first black president.

“You know, I’m 70 years old,” he said. “And I can tell you; people don’t like to deal with it, but the fact of the matter is, the president’s problems are in large measure because of the color of his skin.”

Ah yeah. The guy isn’t an incompetent campaign organizer with delusions of grandeur and whatever the opposite of the Midas touch is, well on his way to replacing Carter as the worst president of the last 50 years, no way, he is accosted by racists that undermine everything great he does.

Hey Clyburn, about the only thing I think that could be worse for America about Obama is that somehow we get President Biden, a honkey in the parlance of race hucksters like you, and yes, I think Biden would be far more disastrous than even 4 more years of that inept tool Obama. Besides, the only color I see when I see Obama is red. The guy is a communist that’s hell bent on destroying the greatest nation on the planet. That or he is an inept, unqualified fool in a job he won because the media helped him pull an American Idol on too many people. Bite me you racist bastard Clyburn.