Free Website Directory Politics Alabama: February 2009

Saturday, February 28, 2009

News and Opinion Roundup

News Roundup

There are many items I read that are important but either not quite right or too short for a blog post. Here are a collection of such articles from the previous week.


President’s Program would stifle economic growth


We're NOT in a depression

Spending reductions in Obama's budget are illusory

Biden lies (or is he just ignorant) about Louisiana unemployment figures

Obama is a panic-monger in order to achieve his goals


Enjoy the read.

Read the rest...

Schizophrenic Government

Is it possible for our government to take both sides of an issue AT THE SAME TIME? Yes, of course it is, and the Senate did so concerning the “Fairness Doctrine”.

A bill introduced by Senator Demint passed the Senate yesterday. The bill would ban the Fairness Doctrine. And this is good news…


…or it WOULD be good news, if Senator Durbin hadn’t tacked on an amendment that forces the FCC to:

“...take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership.”

The movement is called “localization” and it word discourage the usage of syndicated programs in favor of local programming… thus emasculating the national talk shows, mostly conservative in nature.

Michelle Malkin wrote an excellent piece on this, with links to supporting documentation.

Read the rest...

Friday, February 27, 2009

Ron Paul Lectures Bernanke

The House is having a little meeting of the House Financial Services Committee, during which they’ll be talking to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke… and Ron Paul is handling the opening statements. During these statements, he essentially lectures Bernanke on sound monetary principles… something Ron Paul excels at.

“This is the end of an era,” said Paul, “we can’t reinflate the bubble….if we think that we can reinflate this bubble by artificially creating credit out of thin air and calling it capital, believe me we don’t have a prayer of solving these problems - we have a total misunderstanding of what credit is versus capital.”


The CNBC anchors present when they went live to the committee meeting appeared flustered, and cut to commercial until “something really substantial” happened.

(Read the story.)

Children don’t like being called out when they’re doing something wrong, and neither do politicians. But then, I repeat myself.
Read the rest...

PresBo's Gun Control

Remember during the campaign (I seem to be saying that a lot) when PresBo said he was a supporter of gun rights? Remember when he said he had no gun control agenda? Well, I guess he must have misspoken, because he DOES have plans for our guns.

Don’t believe me? Just look at his own website, and scroll down to the last entry under “Crime and Law Enforcement.” And just what does he want to do?




“Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.”

When asked by reporters why PresBo wants to re-instate the so-called “assault weapons ban”, Attorney General Eric holder said:



"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum."

Beg pardon? Are we setting policy based upon another country’s desires, now?

A State Department Travel Warning was posted recently, and it might shed some light as to why PresBo wants to clamp down on semi-automatic weapons that LOOK LIKE their fully automatic counterparts.


"Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades."

Then again, maybe not. The “Assault Weapons Ban” only banned semi-automatic weapons, many of which LOOKED dangerous. Automatic weapons are already strictly regulated, and I do not believe hand grenades are legally available to US citizens, either. So would re-enactment of the “SEMI-AUTOMATIC Assault Weapon Ban” affect that situation at all?

By the way, you can read an excellent piece on this over at The Clarion Caller, and I recommend that you give it a look.

People, gun control laws do NOT make people safer. Just look at Britain’s skyrocketing rates of violent crimes. Disarming potential victims causes MORE crime, not less… because only the law-abiding will abide by the new law. See how that works, linguistically? Criminals in the process of breaking one (or more) laws don't worry about breaking another.

As far as making guns “childproof,” PLEASE! We can’t even make medicine bottles and CARS “childproof,” so why do they think there will be any success with firearms? Of course, in Polispeak “childproof” is just a politician’s way of saying “completely inaccessible for emergency use.”

On the plus side, Nancy Pelosi says she doesn't want to fool with it right now. We'll see how it plays out.


Read the rest...

Change We Can't Believe In

Here we are, smack in the middle of a brand-new administration that promises to be the most transparent and honest government in history. It fills your heart with joy, doesn’t it, to know that we now live in Nirvana? Today we learned exactly what honesty and transparency mean to PresBo. Lie about the facts until they support your view.

Well, maybe lie is a little harsh. How about “optimistically over exaggerate?”


PresBo presented a budget and forecasts that showed him cutting the deficit in half over the next four years. In this he estimated that the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the most important indicator of overall economic activity, would shrink by 1.2% this year, and then grow over the next three years by 3.2%, 4.0%, and 4.6%, respectively. (Seems like our economic crisis is a small bump, according to those projections.) Using these numbers, he is able to achieve his triple goals of out-of-control spending, punitive taxation, and halving the deficit.

The problem is that they are a fantasy. Outside economists (i.e. those not associated with or paid by the White House or any other politician), disagree. They say the recession will be deeper than Obama expects, it will last longer, and recovery will be slower.



"They used to joke during the Reagan years that the highest-ranking woman in the administration was Rosy Scenario," said Nariman Behravesh, the chief economist at IHS Global Insight, a major private forecasting firm, who called the Obama administration's forecasts ‘way too optimistic.’ “We may be seeing a return of Rosy Scenario."

It doesn’t matter how much thinking, planning, and hoping for change go into it if the figures upon which they are all based are... overly optimistic. If the forecasts by independent economists are closer to actuality, there is no way Obama’s programs can work as he hopes they will.

Wouldn’t you like to be part of PresBo’s economic team? Can’t you just hear that conversation?

“The numbers don’t work. What now?”

“Just bump everything up a point and see if they work now. These are forecasts we’re dealing with, and we can do anything we want with them.”

“Oh, yeah, that’s better. Thanks!”

So now PresBo has to HOPE that his figures are accurate, but if they’re not, he gets to HOPE we don’t find out. Such a President is a CHANGE, but not one I can BELIEVE IN.

UPDATE: And his budget doesn't balance anyway, because lawmakers are already shooting down some of his suggestions.

UPDATE: And according to this report, the economy shrunk a staggering 6.2% in 2008... and Obama thinks it'll only shrink 1.2% this and then grow 3.2% next year? Can we have some of what he's smoking?


Read the rest...

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Am I Crazy?

Here's a thumper, guys. Apparently, a conference at the Harvard Law school will explore the proposition that believing in the free market economy is a sign of a mental disorder.

What?


There are presentations with titles such as "How Thinking Like An Economist Undermines Community" and "Addicted to Incentives: How the Ideology of Self Interest Can Be Self-Fulfilling".

Believe in freedom instead of government and... you're nuts?


So, am I crazy? Yes... like a fox!

Read the rest...

Budget Nightmare

Well, Obama’s first budget has been completed and unveiled. In spite of calling for a tax increase on those who have the unmitigated gall to actually turn a profit during these economic times, he STILL manages to run almost a $2 trillion DEFICIT! So much for fiscal responsibility.


So now we understand Obama’s plan to reduce the deficit. He will increase spending to sate the Democrats' love of spending, but increase taxes MORE… thus reducing the deficit. I’m sorry, but that’s not really what we had in mind, you know? Hello?

And here’s a warning of things to come:


“The plan also contains a contentious proposal to raise hundreds of billions
of dollars by auctioning off permits to exceed carbon emissions caps, which
Obama wants to impose on users of fossil fuels to address global warming.”

The plan to legislate a response to fictitious, anthropomorphic (human-caused) global warming is so high on his agenda that he wants to sell exemptions BEFORE THE CAPS ARE EVEN ENACTED! If the caps don’t make it past Congress, do purchasers of the exemptions get a refund? If not, can Obama be sued for fraud?

And I wonder if his budget includes the $410 billion spending pork-fest that Congress is in the process of passing.

Read the rest...

The Face of the Economic Crisis

PresBo went to Fort Myers, Fla, recently, to hold a town hall meeting with regular people, because, after fewer than 30 days in office, he just had to get out for a while. During that meeting, a “homeless woman” stood up and, with tears in her eyes and a quaver in her voice, pleaded for Obama’s help. She and her family have no place to live, she said, and she just needed help.

"The housing authority has two years waiting lists, and we need something more than the vehicle and the parks to go to. We need our own kitchen and our own bathroom. Please help."

Her tale was told far and wide, including the applause-generating moment when PresBo kissed her upon the cheek as he promised aid, and the mainstream media called her “the face of the economic crisis.”

Now it appears as if she may not be homeless after all. Ooops!


While the national press was swooning over the event, the local CBS News affiliate decided to actually do a little (gasp) investigation. It turns out that the homeless woman in question turned down free housing and other assistance that was offered by “We Care Outreach Ministry.” And help was offered and refused more than once. Bloggers have uncovered information that she has owned houses in recent years, and that she owned a house during the period SHE CLAIMED she was living in a car with her son. Further, one house was deeded to her son, and is apparently still in his name… which means she may not be homeless after all.

So is this really "the face of the economic crisis"... a woman so desparate for a handout that she'd lie on national TV for the chance of "free money" for herself and her kids?

This reminds me of the scandal concerning the Republican Presidential debates in November of 2007. During the YouTube debate, where candidates answered questions posted on YouTube, several questions were asked by people who claimed to be “undecided voters” but actually turned out to have already declared support for Democratic Presidential candidates. It’s the kind of event that encourages skepticism that high-profile Democrats have any of those pesky qualities like honor and integrity.

What is it with Democrats that they have to pretend to be something they are not so they can stage an event that either shows their guy in a good light or casts opponents in a BAD light? Can’t they like, oh, I don’t know, tell the TRUTH?

Just a thought.
Read the rest...

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Governor Judge Moore?

As you undoubtedly know, we have a gubernatorial election coming up next year. We get to elect a new Governor and a new Legislature to go with him. It is unclear exactly who is running, but how do you feel about former Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore? He is apparently winning the popularity poll at the moment.


I have nothing inherently against Roy Moore as Governor. What little I know of his politics I tend to agree with. I admit I haven't examined his positions carefully, but hey, up until now it hasn't mattered. Why learn the political beliefs of a non-politician, especially when I have to pay attention to so many politicians?
Read the rest...

And the Legislature Plods On…

Two interesting items surfaced recently, one bill concerning beer and wine in the state and the other concerning ethics reform.


A bill sponsored by an organization called “Free the Hops” passed out of committee today, and is now headed for a full House vote. The bill would allow higher-strength alcohol to be sold in the state. Currently, state law caps the strength of beer at an anemic 6% and wine at 14.9%. The bill would increase that cap to 13.9% on beer and 16.9% on wine, thus allowing the sale of higher-end (and higher-priced) gourmet beers and wines.

This has been tried before and failed, but I wish it better luck this time.

Ethics reform is back on the table, a topic that is periodically tackled by the Legislature and always bungled. This year’s ethics reform legislation has been relegated to the back burner, because of concern over the economy. My opinion on this is simple. They’ll gnash their teeth and talk a good game about stronger ethics laws and giving the Alabama Ethics Commission “teeth” to enforce those laws and punish violators, but when it comes right down to it nothing substantive will be accomplished because each and every Legislator will be concerned that HE will get caught by the new laws. When you rely on a governing body to set the powers of the agency that polices THEIR actions, you will not get anything effective enacted.

Or as I've heard it described before, if you have to write down what is right and wrong, you've already lost the battle.
Read the rest...

Just To Let You Know...

I have made a slight change to the way blog entries are posted. As you have no doubt learned by now, many of my entries tend to be a little on the lengthy side. Well, when you're dealing with complicated issues, sometimes that is unavoidable. Up until now I have been simply posting the entry and letting the length of the main blog page be... well, pretty long.

Now I have started posting only the first portion of each entry on the main page, along with a "Read the rest..." link.


There, see? You got the hang of it pretty easily. (grin)

I decided to post this just in case visitors used to my old way of posting missed the "Read the rest..." links.

Thanks, people, and happy reading.
Read the rest...

Who Are You Voting For?

The Mayoral election is scheduled for March 10. Here is your chance to specify who you would like to see elected as the next Mayor of Montgomery.






NOTE: I'm having problems getting the poll to show. Hopefully I'll get it fixed eventually. In the meantime, you can vote in the poll here.


UPDATE Feb 28, 8:00 AM: VERY interesting results so far. As of this moment, Scott Simmons and Jay King are in a virtual dead heat, 10-9. The closes other candidates (Dow and Strange) have 3 votes each. I wonder two things: will this trend continue, and how close will it reflect election day? Filmatleven.

Read the rest...

Obama’s Plan To Fix The Economy

Obama gave his speech last night, and outlined what he is planning to do in order to fix the economy. (Full text here.) As expected, he positioned government in the center of any recovery, and features tax increases and government spending as keystones of economic growth. First, though, he FINALLY started sounding optimistic!


“We will rebuild, we will recover and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before.”



He should have been doing that all along, instead of foretelling doom and destruction if his massive spending plan wasn’t approved. One of the President’s main jobs is, after all, to inspire confidence. Later in the speech, though, he reverted to type.


“Join me in doing whatever proves necessary, because we cannot consign our nation to an open-ended recession.”

I hate writing blank checks.

Regardless, his next step was to lay blame for our current situation. He blamed people who bought homes they couldn’t afford, banks making those loans, tax cuts “for the rich,” and reduced regulations to help out businesses. With that as a blame list, it’s not hard to see where he’s headed with his recovery.

He praised his Democrat colleagues for passing his $787 billion spending package, which he says will save or create 3.5 million jobs. His earlier figure was $4 million, btw.

Obama then began laying out his plan. He says he’s identified $2 trillion in spending cuts he intends to make over the next 10 years, which averages to $200 billion a year. That’s a bit of money, but not an incredibly large amount, which is probably why he expressed it over a 10-year period instead of a yearly average. He says this is enough to cut the deficit “in half” by the end of his first term. I would really like to hear a target dollar figure he’s aiming at, here.

Then we found out that we will have a new community bank in town to provide auto loans, college loans, and small business loans… it’s name will be Uncle Sam. Yes, Obama proposed that the government get involved in lending money directly to us. That’s not really a new idea, since Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were similar government-run entities. Oh wait, they didn’t do so well, did they? In fact, weren’t they MAJOR players in the current housing crisis? Well, maybe they’ll do better this time. Beyond a short statement though, he provided no further details.

Obama provided a sketchy description of a program to allow people to refinance their home loans at a lower amount, saving the “average homeowner” $2,000 a year in payments. He also said he would make sure banks had money to lend even in bad economic times… though he didn’t say how. Great, we’ll either be spending more and giving it to the banks, or PRINTING more and giving it to the banks. In either case, a further reckoning will come. Oh, yes, I almost forgot… unstable banks will be forced to make the “necessary adjustments” (probably meaning Federal mandates).

Obama called for significant increases in funding for energy, health care, and education. Two thoughts: since when did massive funding in any of these areas result in economic growth? And what happened to his pledge of fiscal discipline? He really needs to at least TRY to stick to what he just finished saying.

He also unveiled plans for conferences starting next week to “draw up a new health care system.” Oh, goodie. Hillary-Care 2.0.


“Let there be no doubt: Health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait and it will not wait another year.”

So, Obama’s plan is to:


1) Increase taxes, possibly drastically.

2) Increase spending.

3) Increase the size and scope of the Federal government.

I suggest he change his slogan to one of two things: “Change We Can Pay For” or “Change We Can Regret Later.” There is no way this plan will cause economic growth. For one thing, it ignores the fact that half of this crisis was caused by Government actions. And by ignoring that fact, it guarantees that not only will those problems not get fixed, but that past mistakes will continue to be repeated.

The plan won’t work, not in the short term and not in the long term. We’ll wind up with massive new entitlement programs that we really can’t afford and a Federal Government that exercises a huge degree of control over our private market… and I mean that last in comparison to today’s level of control.

Oh yes, and the Republicans have a predictable response to the speech. (Full text here.)

As an early indicator of the likely results of this plan, watch for the stock markets to perform poorly today.

UPDATE: I like the way that Larry Elder put it:

"The president, on Tuesday night, promised to both lower taxes and
raise taxes. He promised to both reduce spending and increase it. He promised to
expand education while simultaneously claiming that education begins in the
home. He promised to bail out homeowners – "responsible" ones – while insisting
that Americans take responsibility for living beyond our means and making bad
choices."



Read the rest...

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Government Stupidity

Government frequently takes actions that could easily be interpreted as, well… stupid. I offer three examples.

State Sending $1 Checks To Needy
Essentially, Washington State is sending out $1 checks to 250,000 people on food stamps. The State claims that by sending even $1 in an “energy bill assistance program,” the state qualifies for an additional $43 million in Federal funding. That this could make sense to ANYBODY is proof in and of itself that stupidity has free reign.


US To Pledge $900 Million To Rebuild Gaza
The details are pretty much as the headline suggests, that we’re going to spend almost $1 billion to rebuild the Gaza Strip. Excuse me, but didn’t Obama just get through saying that we need to cut overseas spending so we can slash the budget deficit in half? No sooner than the words are out of his mouth than we start committing to spending even more money! Presidential Tip #287: At least TRY to live up to what you’re promising to do!

Obama Walks Tightrope On Banks
The story says that Obama is trying to work out a plan that will nationalize some banks (that means banks will be owned and run by our highly intelligent and capable Federal Government) without scaring away private investors who remain a potential source of badly needed capital. Good luck on that magic trick, PresBo. Does he REALLY think Government can do a decent job of running the banks? I have two examples to prove him wrong: The Social Security Administration and the USSR. Enough said.

Still don’t think our Government is engaging in practices that are, to say the least, stupid? (grin) Then I bet you voted for President Barack Hussein Obama.
Read the rest...

Another Seat Empty in the Legislature!

That's right, the now former-Representative Sue Schmitz has been found guilty on seven counts of fraud and must automatically forfeit her seat in the Legislature. She was convicted of, among other things, billing time at a job and not actually doing the work.

All I can say is that it's like the old (and probably objectionable) joke: "Waddya call a million dead lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?" A good start.

Good start, prosecutors... now, who are you targeting next?



UPDATE: The Alabama GOP has issued this official statement concerning the conviction.


ALGOP CHAIRMAN’S STATEMENT ON VERDICT IN THE SUE SCHMITZ FRAUD TRIAL

Birmingham – Rep. Mike Hubbard (R – Auburn), Chairman of the Alabama Republican Party, on Tuesday issued the following statement in response to guilty verdicts on seven fraud charges in the federal trial of Rep. Sue Schmitz (D – Toney). Schmitz was found guilty on charges related to accepting more than $177,000 in salary from a federally-funded job in the two-year college system for which she did little or no documented work:

“This verdict is further evidence that the waste, fraud and abuse running rampant in our two-year college system for so long is finally being decisively addressed. The two-year college system is meant to prepare Alabama’s next generation of workers for jobs in the 21st Century economy and not as a haven of bogus jobs and suspect salary supplements for corrupt politicians.

Prosecutors should continue turning over every rock and exposing every shady deal in the two-year college probe so that taxpayers may finally rest assured the dollars they send to Montgomery are no longer being abused. As legislators continue to fall like dominoes, I am even more convinced that double-dipping by public officials breeds corruption and promotes fraud, and it must be stopped immediately.”


It's not hard to get this one right, so it's good to see the GOP did.
Read the rest...

Firearms Registration and Intrusion Act

I have long been a champion of 2nd amendment rights, and the election of Barack Obama was, in my opinion, the first blow to our rights to own and keep firearms. I’ve been waiting to see what obscenities are introduced, and I recently found HR45, titled the Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009. For those of you worried about authenticity, the link shows you the official version of the bill as recorded by the US Government Printing Office (GPO).

The bill is fully as bad as, if not worse than I had feared. The first provision requires that you possess a license to possess a gun. And it must either be a Federal license (as provided for in the Act) or a state license that has been approved as being just as strict as or more strict than the Federal license. In Alabama you do not need a license to purchase or own a gun, only to carry one concealed on your person or in a vehicle. This Federal license requirement applies not only to new purchases, but also to any guns you currently have in your possession.


In order to get a license, a citizen must include personal information (name, address, birth date, birth place, etc), a good picture, a list of any aliases you may have had in your life (including maiden name), a thumbprint, a sworn statement that you are legally permitted to own a gun, a sworn statement you will keep the firearm “safely stored” and away from minors, a certificate showing completion of a firearms safety course, and permission for the Attorney General’s office to obtain and look through your mental health records. You will also be required to pay a fee of no more than $25 when applying for the license.

Private sales and purchases of firearms are outlawed, and all sales must go through a licensed dealer or collector. Information on each firearm sale will go to the government and be stored (permanently) in a Federal “Record of Sale” system. Almost as an afterthought (Title II, section 202(c), page 16), it also removes the existing legal impediments to maintaining a national firearms registration system.

Should you be forgetful and not report the loss or theft of a licensed firearm, or if you forget to file a change of address form, you are in violation of Federal law and liable for punishment. You naughty criminal, you. Oh, and if you have children in the house, not only can you not store it loaded, but you can even be criminally charged under some circumstances if you have an unloaded gun and ammunition in the house.

If you don’t get a license, that’s two years in prison. It's 10 years for violating the “child safety” provisions. And what about all those pesky existing State laws? They’re all superseded… unless, of course, they are stricter than the new Federal laws… then they’re okay.

Do I even need to comment on this bill? It is, in all truthful simplicity, a gun CONTROL act. The level of influence and invasion into our lives the bill would allow is monstrous in its scope. It is currently sitting in a House subcommittee, and it richly deserves to die there.

How they think this bill can be Constitutional under the Supreme Court ruling that came out last year is beyond me. Or maybe they just don’t care, because Constitutional challenges can take years to work their way through the court system. The best defense is to stop it from getting passed in the first place.

Start calling, people!
Read the rest...

Mayoral Candidate Backs Sales Tax Rebate

Mayoral candidate Michael Briddell doesn’t like the ten-cents sales tax, and is proposing a “sales tax rebate” program to address the issue. His program would provide a 1.5% tax rebate in single items costing more than $500. Simply file the paperwork and get a portion of your taxes back. He thinks this will help stop people from driving to Prattville or Wetumpka to make large purchases in order to avoid the higher Montgomery sales tax.


My opinion on this is simple. In bad economic times, politicians will tell us how horrible taxes are and how they want to help “ease the burden” on us. You know, it would be really easy to do that. Simply lower the city sales tax by a penny and reduce spending to match. Problem solved. But no, they won’t do that, because they want the revenue at the same time they APPEAR to help lower your taxes. They don’t really want to lower your taxes, they just want you to think they have.

This plan sounds familiar. Companies who offer rebates count on one thing: most people don’t bother to claim them. It’s a pain in the neck to go through the process, and the reward is almost certainly too small to offer much positive feedback. On an item costing $500, for example, the amount of sales tax paid in Montgomery would be $50. And that 1.5% rebate would amount to $4.25. Wow! Don’t spend it all in one place! And since the rebate only applies to single items and not an entire shopping trip with multiple items, most people wouldn’t qualify for it, anyway.

This sounds to me more like symbolism for the sake of generating votes than it does like a serious proposal aimed at actually lowering taxes.
Read the rest...

Monday, February 23, 2009

Property Tax Increase Stalled

Oh, the legislature isn't calling it a bill to raise the property tax, though that is what it does. Instead, they are calling it a bill to remove state sales taxes from food. It does remove the state sales tax from food (food as defined by the food stamps program, not soda or candy), but jacks up the property tax to cover the loss in sales tax revenue. The fiscal analysis of the bill concludes that the property tax increase will generate $62 million more per year than did the sales tax on food.


The good news is that the Democrats do not have the votes needed to pass the bill, and won't without the help of Republicans. The Democrats are claiming this bill would reduce taxes on more than 95% of taxpayers. Hmmm, if the bill actually increases state revenue, that means it must tax the dickens out of that much-abused remaining 5% of taxpayers.

I originally recommended this bill die, and I re-iterate that position now. Republicans should stick together and refuse to support this tax increase bill.
Read the rest...

More Hypocrisy

When the stimulus bill was being formed, Republicans tried hard to get more and deeper tax cuts included in it. Democrats in general and Obama in particular objected strongly. In fact, many Democrats believe the tax cuts that DID make it into the bill weaken the entire package. Obama called tax cuts "failed policies" that got us into our current situation.

So, with his apparent hatred of tax cuts, and his conviction that tax cuts don't cause sustainable economic growth, what is the first aspect of the stimulus bill that he thinks will begin to affect the economy? Tax cuts.


The hypocrisy exhibited here is breath-taking in its audacity. He fights against tax cuts, criticizes Republicans for insisting on tax cuts, demonizes tax cuts as what caused our current problems, and then praises the tax cuts as the first part of the package to actually affect the economy! Amazing!! Mr. PresBo, of COURSE the tax cuts will positively affect the economy... that's what they do. If you'd wanted real economic stimulus, you would have pushed for more tax cuts and less spending.

Another indication of his hypocrisy is that, after pushing for so much extra spending, sending the yearly deficit rocketing into the uncharted territory of more than a TRILLION dollars, he is calling for Congress to exercise fiscal responsibility. Is he KIDDING? The first step down the road to fiscal responsibility would have been to nix the stimulus bill THAT HE CHAMPIONED!

PresBo says he wants to reduce deficits by half within four years. Well, keeping in mind how much he spiked the deficit with his pork spending... excuse me, I mean stimulus package, that means in four years the deficit could be back down about where it was when he took office. Wow, WHAT an accomplishment!

"It will require doing all we can to get exploding deficits under control as our economy begins to recover."

That's a nice thought, PresBo, but the deficit only exploded because of YOUR SPENDING BILL! If you want to control spending deficits, Mr. President, you could try repealing the stimulus spending bill. That would accomplish your goal of halving the deficit almost immediately.

He will be holding a special "fiscal responsibility summit" today to deal with ways of controlling the spiraling deficit. Okay, there are only three ways to reduce the deficit: spend less, tax more, or print more money. Spending less would offset the stimulus bill spending, leaving a net gain of $0 spending... which means there is no extra spending to stimulate the economy. Raising taxes will not only offset the tax cuts, they will drag the economy further down into the bog in which we're currently sinking. And printing more money will cause hyper-inflation once the economy starts recovering, because of the classic problem of too many dollars chasing too few resources.

I wonder how long PresBo can get away with this, trying to adopt both sides of an issue as his own? With any luck at all, no longer than four years...
Read the rest...

Stimulus News

The Governor of Alabama, Republican Bob Riley, has indicated that he MAY not accept some $66 million of stimulus money intended to expand unemployment benefits in the state. The reason is that the extra money comes attached to a series of federal regulations that would override state laws, and Riley thinks that is an unconstitutional infringement on states' rights.

This sounds like a stand on principle to keep Alabama’s laws on unemployment benefits as our own representatives have passed them. It seems to be a good, logical position to take, and I applaud him for taking it.



“I will never support something that takes away our state's ability to set our own rules and regulations for unemployment."




"To come out and offer us twice as much if we agree to the federal philosophy, that really is like a bribe. We're not going to give up Alabama's responsibility and authority to determine what our own business interests and employee benefits are going to be."

Democrats in the Legislature do not agree, and have already pledged to fight him over it.


“If governors don't step up to the plate to help people who are hurting in our states, then the Legislatures have a right to apply for the money and I can assure you we're going to get every dollar we can to help Alabamians," State Senator Roger Bedford (D-Russellville) said Sunday.

Remember that the stimulus bill also stipulated that, should a Governor refuse the money, the state legislature could override him and apply for the money directly. Whether or not that effort is successful will depend on united Republican opposition, and probably on getting the agreement of a few Democrats, as well.

Although I agree with Riley’s position on this, I think it will hurt him politically. You can be sure his Democrat opponents will grab hold of it with both hands and beat him over the head with it. And any Republicans who oppose the Democrats legislative attempt to override the Governor will be treated likewise.

There are times when a losing battle must be fought, regardless of the consequences, and I think this may be just such an occasion.

UPDATE Feb 24: Governor Riley gives more details as to his intent. He said he does not want to accept any Federal aid that would require Alabama to rewrite our laws or that would require tax increases to fund the mandates once the limited-time Federal money runs out.
Read the rest...

Crybaby Poole At It Again

If you will recall, Senator Poole shut down the third meeting day of the legislative session. It appears that the Senator intends to continue acting like a spoiled third grader who wants things exactly his way or else he'll spoil it for everybody. For the second time this session, Poole has shut down the Senate.

His method of accomplishing this is to essentially stage a one-man filibuster. He will get the floor to speak and then never relinquish it. He reads rumors and slights concerning his Republican opponents, managing to both stop Senate activity and attack political opponents.


Legislators are supposed to be adults, and they're certainly supposed to ACT like adults, whether they really are or not. Rep Poole's activities, those of a petulant child denied the cookies he wants, should disgust his constituents... and hopefully they will elect somebody else next time.
Read the rest...

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Sovereignty Arguments

I have blogged more than once about declaring Alabama’s sovereignty, and have even written a resolution and am in the process of trying to find a Legislator to introduce it. I recently stumbled upon this article, an essay explaining why Georgia should pass such a resolution. Many of its arguments are applicable to Alabama, and I present this essay to you for your perusal and your comments.

A Call For State Sovereignty


Read the rest...

Simmons and Taxes

The Montgomery Advertiser wrote an article on Saturday about mayoral candidate Scott Simmons paying property taxes late. They took an accusatory tone, and basically painted Simmons as a tax cheat. As a campaign issue, it’s a blow to Simmons’ political aspirations.

But I was thinking about it, and I’m not so sure he’s done anything worth this sort of slap. Let’s think about this a bit.

Simmons manages rental properties around the city, which means he’ll have a much higher property tax bill than any of the other candidates, as well as a much more complicated scenario for getting the money to pay those taxes. The other five candidates get that money from their salary, but Simmons has to wait until his tenants pay him the money, in the form of rent. And if they don’t pay their rent? What then?


When Simmons' tenants stop paying rent, he has three options. First, he could borrow money to make his property tax payments. Interest on such loans will be significant. Second, he could evict the tenants who aren't paying their rent. Keeping people in a home if possible is a good idea, and Simmons said they mostly catch up on back rent at income tax refund time. Third, he could do as he does and pay his property taxes when he gets the money from his tenants. Penalties for late payment are cheaper than interest on loans taken in order to pay on time.

Those who don't like Simmons will jump on this as an indication of character, but a reasonable look at alternatives shows that Simmons' activities are plausible and logical.

Also, note two things. First, he doesn't AVOID paying taxes, he's just late. Second, how did the Advertiser find out about this? They asked him, AND HE ANSWERED TRUTHFULLY. He wasn't hiding anything and he didn't lie about it.

So on this issue, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. His actions seem above-board (he didn't try to hide anything) and reasonable from a business perspective.
Read the rest...

Saturday, February 21, 2009

State's Online Checkbook

Governor Riley has signed an Executive Order that puts the state's checkbook online. If implemented as ordered, every time a check is issued, it would appear on a website for citizens to review.

I'm skeptical they will actually do this, but if they do then I will post the web address in a link under "Permanent Features" in the bar on the left side of the page. I will also check it frequently and, over time, look to see if there are any exceptions or expenditures which don't make the website.

(Read the story.)


Read the rest...

State Sovereignty Update

To date, more than a dozen state Legislators have received requests to introduce my Sovereignty Resolution. So far, it has not been introduced, and I do not know of any Legislators intending to introduce it.

However, I discovered that we already have a sovereignty-related resolution that was introduced by Rep Cam Ward (R-49). The resolution in question is HJR130, and it is a resolution "OPPOSING FURTHER IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FEDERAL REAL ID ACT OF 2005 AND URGING PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE ALABAMA LEGISLATURE BEFORE FINAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ACT OR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY FUTURE SIMILAR ACT."


It does not site the 10th amendment in any of the "Whereas" sections, but it does in the first "Be It Resolved" section:

"BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF ALABAMA, BOTH HOUSES THEREOF CONCURRING, That the Legislature finds that the enactment into law by the U.S. Congress of the REAL ID Act of 2005, as part of Public Law 109-13, which was adopted by the U.S. Congress in violation of the principles of federalism contained in the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, is unfavorable to the security and well-being of the people of Alabama;"

The complete text of HJR130 can be found here.

HJR130 was introduced on Feb 12, and is is still pending approval in the House Rules Committee. If you support this resolution, contact your representatives now and tell them so. You can find your Legislators here, and the membership of the House Rules Committe here.
Read the rest...

Mayoral Questionnaires - Follow up

Well, the questionnaires went out a week ago, and so far the only candidate to respond is Jay King. Several of the others have promised responses: Simmons, Strange, Dow, and Briddell. Cook indicated he wanted to read the questions first, and has not committed to answering them.

The election date is March 10. That's about two and a half weeks away. I advise the candidates to get their responses in soon, or two things will result. First, they will miss the chance for you to read their positions. Second, as I intend to form my own analysis of their positions next weekend (Feb 28 or March 1) and to post them shortly thereafter, any candidates failing to respond will be at a disadvantage in that analysis.


So, check back later to read any other responses and to read the analysis of the candidates.

For your convenience, click here to read Jay King's answers.
Read the rest...

Friday, February 20, 2009

Learning From The Mistakes Of Others

It's always a good idea to learn from the mistakes of others... in that way, you can avoid a headache or three of your own. In reference to the recently passed "stimulus" package, which is little more than a monstrous collection of spending that will drive the national debt relentlessly upward, have any other countries had experiences from which we could learn?

Well, yes. We need look no further than Britain. Britain, too, has been hard hit by the economy, and they, too, have failing banks that desperately need bailout money. Now the warning comes that they've spent so much in bailout funds that, once the economy recovers, they will have to drastically increase taxes to cover it.


(Read the story.)

Maybe we should have paid attention to this BEFORE we started marching resolutely down the same path. Just a thought.

Another area where we should learn from the mistakes of others is in our current sprint down the path towards Socialism. Heck, even Vladimir Putin gets it.

“In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute,” Putin said during a speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.”

Wise words. Maybe we should listen to them.
Read the rest...

Stimulus Effects & Foreclosure News

I just don’t understand how Obama can get away with such blatant hypocrisy. In touting his $75 billion plan to “end the foreclosure crisis,” Obama said that “…each of us as individuals must take responsibility for their own actions. That means all of us must learn to live within our means again."

(Read the story.)

That’s a pretty amazing statement, considering that Obama is presiding over the largest expansion of deficit spending in the history of this nation. Combine his two plans and we’re pushing $900 billion in spending THAT THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE THE FUNDS TO COVER! Amazing hypocrisy.


On to the stimulus. In case you missed it, the Congressional Budget Office weighed in on the recently signed stimulus bill, saying that it will result in lower average wages for American workers. Thank you, Presbo. But what about the economy’s reaction to the passage of the stimulus bill? Well, the stock market has been dropping like a stone, and the Fed revised economic projections downwards. Wait a second, a shrinking economy and rising unemployment? I thought spending hundreds of billions of dollars was going to fix everything.

And in case you have trouble wrapping your brain around the $787 billion figure that the Democrats just decided to spend, maybe it would help to think of it this way. That $787 billion COULD pay off every student loan in the country and still have $237 billion left over, buy more than 45 million Pontiac G5’s, or buy more than 222 BILLION Big Macs. I hope that puts things into perspective for you.
Read the rest...

The Dominoes Are Falling

Have you ever noticed that troubles don’t come alone? Some claim they come in threes, others claim sevens, but what is certain is that troubles come in bunches. It never rains but it pours… and right now it's pouring on the Obama administration.

The troubles started with Obama’s nominee for Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, who apparently had forgotten to pay his income taxes. Once he was nominated, he suddenly remembered and paid the forgotten taxes… years late and without suffering any penalty or jail time, like any normal citizen would have suffered. Nice deal, if you can get it.

Despite these problems, Geithner was confirmed.


But his difficulties paved the way for more troubles. Both Tom Daschle and Nancy Killifer voluntary withdrew their nominations because of unpaid taxes. The two nominees, especially Daschle, were prime examples of Obama’s willingness to employ people who disdain the law.

Now another figure in Obama’s administration seems to have mysteriously forgotten to pay taxes in years past. This time it is his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who failed to disclose that he was living rent-free for five years, possibly amounting to $100,000 in undeclared income. At the same time, he directed work to his landlord’s husband during his tenure as Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. (Read the story.)

A little payola never hurt anybody, I guess. At least, unless this scandal grows to the point where Obama has to either vigorously defend criminal actions, again, or move to Plan B and get a new Chief of Staff.

One has to wonder how many more of Obama’s picks will be found to have ethical or legal problems.

Note to self: Don’t criticize political opponents for being corrupt, promise to run the most ethical administration in history, and then start appointing lawbreakers... AND DEFEND THEIR CRIMES!
Read the rest...

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Legislative Update - HB225

One of the bills I covered earlier was HB225, which would preclude any government in Alabama from wantonly seizing firearms or ammunition in the case of a declared state of emergency. I recommended a pass vote on that bill, and it was voted on today by the House. The House approved the bill, on a vote of 80-0, and it now goes to the Senate.

Congratulations, Rep Keahey, and thank you for introducing a good bill.


Read the rest...

Governing in Secret

Remember when Obama promised transparency? Every bill would be posted online for five days prior to his signing it, so that "We The People" could read it. Obama has since taken huge hits because he has ignored his own pledge and signed bills almost immediately upon receipt and without posting them online at all.

Now we know that isn't even half the story. In addition to that, Obama is also writing Executive Orders and taking other actions in secret. There are no notices posted on the internet, and no press release is made. The only reason we're learning about these is because EVENTUALLY his actions get written up and released in the Federal Register.


(Read the story.)

For the purposes of this discussion, let's ignore the hypocrisy of promising transparency and then taking actions in secret. It's the secret part of this that is disturbing. Our entire system, including checks and balances, works because actions must be taken in public. It is upsetting in the extreme to think PresBo is re-inventing our government in secret, trying to get away with it by saying nary a word.

So the question I'm asking is NOT "Do we have the best President ever in office right now?" but rather, "Have we elected a dictator to office?"

What do you think?



Read the rest...

What's a Few More Trillion?

Rep John Conyers (D-Michigan) has, every year since 1989, introduced a bill called the Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act. He has pushed this bill every year, and has never managed to scrounge together the votes. He has high hopes that this year will be different, and that his drive to pass a slavery reparations bill will bear fruit. If not, well, his window of opportunity is at least three more years wide.

Here is a piece to read on this:
Reparations

This kind of bill is bad for several reasons.


First, the US has NEVER paid reparations like this, and it would set a precedent large enough for our entire treasury (or what’s left of it after the stimulus bill) to disappear through without even a large sucking sound. The only reparations the US has paid were to the actual people harmed by the government (such as Japanese WWII detainees) or their immediate family: spouse and children. NEVER has this nation paid reparations to the distant descendants of groups that were legitimately harmed more than a hundred years ago. It's a bad precedent to set, because which is the NEXT group to come looking for a handout?

Second, I’ve read several such proposals, and not one has required that anyone receiving the bailout money… excuse me, I mean the welfare funds… excuse me again, I mean the reparations money... oh, geeze, I mean the stolen money... well, whatever. In any case, nobody would be required to actually prove they were harmed by slavery. Most of the proposals just relied on skin color... and King's dream is officially dead. If your skin is the right shade, you get a check. But what about potentially eligible people whose ancestors moved to this country after slavery was abolished? Doesn’t matter… they get a check!

Third, and arguably most important... for heaven’s sake look at the cost! The lowest estimate I’ve heard on this is $3 trillion! Oh, yeah, heck, why not? I mean, we’re dumping at least $6 trillion down the stimulus rat-hole, so why not dump another $3 trillion down after it? Chump change! And this way, Obama can beat the Republicans record! He’s been complaining for weeks that the Republicans managed to double the national debt (from $5 trillion to $10 trillion) in eight years. With the stimulus and reparations, he has the chance to double the national debt (from $10 trillion to $20 trillion) in ONE year! Yes, we can!!!!!

Rep Conyers’ bill has failed for the past 20 years, and it richly deserves to continue this long tradition of excellence.
Read the rest...

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Spiraling Debt

Remember when Obama criticized Bush for “doubling the national debt in eight years”? (Here is one story.)

Well it seems that Obama may be well on the road not only to matching that feat, but also surpassing it. Apparently, the Obama administration will be able to increase the national debt by $6.5 TRILLION over the next two years. That would be a 65% increase in the national debt… and he will have accomplished it in a quarter of the time it took Republicans to double it. Bush and the Republicans grew the national debt by approximately $5 trillion over eight years… and Obama will exceed that in just two years. (Read the story.)

He should change his slogan from “Change We Can Believe In” to “Debt We Can Drown In”.


Can’t you just hear that campaign speech from Obama? Picture him standing there, smile straining his face and halo gleaming over his head. “If re-elected next year,” he pronounces as young women swoon in the audience, “I promise to preside over a bionic budget. Yes, we can make budgets bigger than they were before… bigger, fatter, porkier.”

Tip to President Obama: If you’re going to grow the national debt so quickly, you might want to lay off the rhetoric that condemns Republicans for doubling it in eight years. Once you blow their record away, your accusations will be a standard of comparison for those who think a fat government should go on a diet.
Read the rest...

Wall of Fame

Politicians talk… a LOT. And when they talk, sometimes they say something worthwhile and meaningful. I will be wallpapering this Wall of Fame with quotes, from politicians and other notables, that show intelligent thought and an understanding of reality. (If you have any suggestions, please send the quote with supporting link to me at PoliticsAlabama@Hotmail.com.)

---------------------------------------------------------


“I would not be for nationalizing. I think government's not good at making these decisions as to who gets loans and how this happens.”
Feb 2009, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY)


---------------------------------------------------------

"The will to achieve is not sufficient. Some things should not be achieved."
N.R.-Korsakov

---------------------------------------------------------


"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
The late Dr. Adrian Rogers , 1931 to 2005

---------------------------------------------------------


“In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.”
Jan 2009, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin

---------------------------------------------------------


"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."
Ayn Rand

---------------------------------------------------------

"The election was supposed to bring 'change,' but I was hoping for more than the letter after the President's name, the positivity of the media coverage, and the hypoallergenic qualities of the White House puppy. President Obama didn't get us into this situation, but so far he's doubling down on the same spending philosophy that did. Common sense tells us that new debt is not the cure for old debt. No matter what the slogans say, that won't change in 100 days or 100 years."
Glenn Beck
---------------------------------------------------------

Look for more in the future.


Read the rest...

Stock Market Woes

The stock market often reacts, upwards or downwards, to perceptions and expectations. Sometimes it is affected by things you wouldn't think would have any effect. This often has to do with confidence... think about it. If consumers aren't confident in the economy, they don't buy as much, and that affects profits, which affects the stock market. So they often react to announcements and other events.

Take, for example, the stimulus bill. On the first trading day after Congress passed the bill, the stock market dropped. As the President signed the bill, the stock market tumbled another 300 points. Since Obama was elected, the stock market has dropped 2,000 ponts.


(Read the first story.)

(Read the second story.)

It just doesn't seem like the folks on the Street have much confidence in Obama and his stimulus bill.
Read the rest...

Cook Announces Economic Stabilization Plan

Apparently, City Councilman and Mayoral candidate Willie Cook held a press conference yesterday to announce his Economic Stabilization Plan. Willie says the plan will cost $3 million and will create jobs.

Unfortunately, that's all the details I have. I searched the websites for the Montgomery Advertiser, WSFA News, and WAKA News, but found no mention of the plan. I have asked Willie to provide me with details of his plan, and will post them when I have them.


If you know of an article that I missed, please email the link to me at PoliticsAlabama@Hotmail.com, and I will take it from there.

Breaking news on this one, and I'll keep you posted.

UPDATE: Okay, I found an article in today's Advertiser. Don't know how I missed it earlier. The article is a bit sketchy and doesn't answer all the questions that I have, but it appears to say that Cook wants the city to essentially become a bank involved in making Rapid Tax Refund Loans. Mr. Cook has promised details will be published soon, so I will post my analysis after I've had a chance to look at the plan.
Read the rest...

Wall of Shame

Politicians talk… a LOT. And when they talk, sometimes they say something that is excessively stupid or offensive. I will be wallpapering this Wall of Shame with quotes, from politicians and other notables, that exemplify the old southern description, “Dumb as a post.” (If you have any suggestions, please send the quote with a link to supporting documentation to me at PoliticsAlabama@Hotmail.com.)


---------------------------------------------------------


“A little state control wouldn't hurt anybody.”
Feb 2009, California State Attorney General Jerry Brown


---------------------------------------------------------




“Guess what this liberal would be all about. This liberal will be about socializing, would be about, basically, taking over, and the government running all of your companies.”
Feb 2009, Rep Maxine Waters (D), to bank executives


---------------------------------------------------------


“I would not take off the idea of nationalizing the banks,”
Feb 2009, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)


---------------------------------------------------------


"The family planning services reduce cost. One of the elements of this package is assistance to the states. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government." – Jan 2009, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D)

---------------------------------------------------------




“We have to give up this illusion that it’s about you and me. We have to accept, sort of blindly, the notion that we have to do this for the sake of the nation. Whether you’re lucky and get aid or you already lost your home and you’re screwed, we’re all in this together.”
Alyssa Katz, author of “Our Lot: How Real Estate Came to Own Us”

---------------------------------------------------------




"Don't think we're not keeping score, brother." -- Obama to Rep. Peter DeFazio, after the Democratic congressman voted against the stimulus bill.


---------------------------------------------------------


"A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government. Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom's name."
Cass Sunstein, 2009 nominee to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs


---------------------------------------------------------


“We’re not professional educators,” he said. “We don’t really know what an educator is supposed to do.”
Doug Martinson, the president of the Huntsville City School Board

---------------------------------------------------------


Look for more in the future.

Read the rest...

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

The Politics of Fear

Does anyone but me remember the campaign? Yes, I know that’s ancient history now that Obama has been elected El-President-O and that we’ve all been born again into a world where all problems have a solution: More Government. (Book of Obama, Chapter 1, Verse 1: “In the beginning there was Government, and it was good.”) But the campaign DID happen, and what occurred during the campaign DOES matter now.

I refer to the “Politics of Fear.” I remember Democrats in general and Obama in particular talking about the Politics of Fear. Bush and the Republicans are evil, they said, and they resort to the Politics of Fear. What that meant, I think, is that Republicans were talking negatively, and using fear to advance their agenda. And yes, I heard that from the mouths of many local Republicans, how Obama would destroy the world and we JUST COULDN’T do that to ourselves. Oooooh, the boogie-man is coming! Better ANYBODY, they said, than Obama or Hillary... but they didn't even bother to nominate a conservative in whom we could have any kind of faith.


Obama, on the other hand, spoke positively and sold himself as the candidate of “hope.” The positive message won, as I think it usually does.

But now what are we hearing? Gone is the positive, hopeful Obama. Now we see an Obama who is, dare I say it, engaging in the Politics of Fear. All he did in relation to the stimulus bill was spout doom and gloom and try to make people afraid of the consequences if the bill failed. We heard that if this bill didn’t pass NOW, this recession might turn into a Catastrophe from which we might never recover. The Politics of Fear, so roundly condemned during the campaign, proved to be Obama’s FIRST resort.

He spoke often of this unrecoverable Catastrophe… which really doesn’t compare well to another President who took office in the middle of bad economic times. That President, if I remember correctly, said,


“This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.”

In contrast, Obama’s statement sounded suspiciously like scare tactics and defeatism.


"A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession, a less robust recovery, and a more uncertain future."

Obama likes to compare himself with FDR, yet his message is worlds apart from what FDR said in similar (but worse!) circumstances. In times like this, the President’s job is to inspire confidence, not to destroy it and plant fear in its place.

Shame on you, Obama, for whole-heartedly engaging in the Politics of Fear.
Read the rest...

Smoking Rights Go Up In Smoke

Well, that looks like it. A bill sponsored by Sen Vivian Figures (D-Mobile) passed out of committee today. The bill would outlaw smoking in just about every public place. So, those of us who believe that freedom means we are also free to make potentially life-threatening mistakes have been brought up short. The only actions we are free to undertake are those approved by the government. Sieg Heil!

(Read the breaking story here.)


You know, I've never understood how government can push so hard to outlaw an activity that they rely on for government revenue. For those of you who support this measure, please don't complain at all when revenue from tobacco profits falls so much that they must increase other taxes in order to compensate.

And before you ask, no, I do not smoke.
Read the rest...

Mayoral Contest Heating Up

I’ve known for a long time that people can be very passionate about politics. In some, it can take on the tenor of extreme religious fervor. In most who take their politics seriously, however, political differences are not usually the death of a friendship. Or, for that matter, anything else. So it is with great sadness that I report one of our candidates for Mayor has been receiving death threats.


I’ve known Willie Cook for several years. Back then he was, as he is now, on the City Council, and I was one of many people protesting against the City Council’s willingness to raise the sales tax by a penny. We disagree on many things, maybe even most things, but I can’t imagine anybody actually taking a political difference far enough to threaten violence.

Willie, you may not have my endorsement for Mayor (nobody does, at present), but you do have my sincere wishes that the guilty person is caught and that nobody gets hurt.
Read the rest...

Just a quick question...

I have a quick question, and it’s a simple one. Why are we supposed to take Obama and his administration seriously when Congress obviously doesn’t? I mean, if a supposedly serious proposal is met with laughter and derision in Congress…

Well, it doesn’t inspire much confidence, now does it?
(Read the story here.)


Read the rest...

Monday, February 16, 2009

Hurry Up... And Wait

The stimulus bill has passed. Do you remember Obama telling all of us that it was critical this legislation be passed as soon as possible, and that to delay too long could lead to a crisis so deep that we might never recover from it? Wow, things were so bad that we couldn’t afford the time to review it carefully and make sure it was as perfect as possible. We were assured that if we passed this bill quickly, then it would turn the economy around and fix everything. Ice cream and cake for EVERYBODY!!!

Well, the stimulus bill has passed, and now the story has changed. The president NOW says that even WITH the stimulus plan our economy will get worse before it gets better. The new target date when we might see results? Next year, 2010.

(Read the article.)


Ummmm… excuse me? If it’s going to take that long to see results, why couldn’t we have taken another week or two to get it right? This hurry up and wait attitude is nonsensical at best, and criminally negligent at worst.

Tell ya what, you decide not to borrow or spend ANY of that money, and I’ll guarantee that the economy will turn around. Eventually.

UPDATE, Feb 18: Things change fast in DC. NOW we are hearing that there will likely be more bailouts and stimulus packages. Sketchy details on a $50 billion bill that Obama wants to pass, for the same reasons we passed the stimulus bill. I think Obama has his open-ended spending mandate, his blank check. Look for NUMEROUS spending proposals all intended to "jump-start" the economy. In reality, this massive spending will be more like a football pile-on of the economy, an aggressive tackle that will halt it in its tracks.
Read the rest...

Fairness Doctrine: Harmless?

Here’s a quick peek inside the mind of a brainless liberal. I make that distinction because not all liberals are brainless. Unfortunately it’s the brainless ones who seem to be in charge of the country right now.

In any case, we’ve heard much debate about the Fairness Doctrine recently. Last week California Attorney General Jerry Brown was on the Michael Savage show speaking about the idea of legislating speech in the name of free speech. During the interview he made this telling statement:

“A little state control wouldn't hurt anybody.”

(Read the article here.)


This little gem applies to FAR more than the Fairness Doctrine, and pretty much illuminates the entire mind-set. With that single statement, Jerry Brown encapsulated the entire liberal ideology and excused every attempt made to impose “a little state control.”

When Savage said that the doctrine would be used to shut down conservative talk radio, Brown replied:

“I don't think that's a fair description of what's going on and it has a tinge of paranoia connected to it."

There ya go. If somebody sees the plan and accurately comments on it, we’re paranoid. That’s a tactic, as Savage quickly pointed out, that the Soviets used to use to silence their dissidents.

In closing, I’ll simply quote what Savage said:

“A country that is supposedly free must have dissent."

Amen.
Read the rest...

Stable Stream of Revenue?

This is one of my pet peeves. Watch this video of Mayoral candidate Todd Strange speaking, back in December. At about 3:45 left in the video he makes this statement:


"You really need a stable stream of revenue, and that really means trading a cent of sales tax for an equal amount of ad-valorum tax, cause that's a steady stream and you know you're gonna get it year in and year out."


Strange also indicated the same thing in a Montgomery Advertiser article. Look at the second page:

"Taxes: He said the city should reduce the sales tax rate and replace that revenue by proportionately increasing the property tax, which would be a more stable revenue source."

A lot of politicians buy this "stable stream of revenue" garbage, and it irritates me that they don't understand the implications.

Look, I understand that government wants that "stable stream of revenue," so that economic dips don't reduce their revenue by so much as a dime. From their viewpoint, that's a good thing. From the viewpoint of the taxpayers, though, it's not so good. Think about it. In order to fund that "stable stream of revenue," we have to keep paying the same amount of taxes even when economic times get bad and unemployment rises. So funding that steady stream is harder for us, and that hurts us.

Nobody likes sales taxes, but at least they depend on what we buy. We can even avoid some of them by shopping online or in neighboring communities that have lower sales taxes. The ultimate choice of not paying sales taxes is to reduce expenditures, which is what we do in bad economic times anyway.

But ad-valorem (i.e. property) taxes are paid whether you have the money, or even a job. We pay property taxes on our homes and cars, and businesses pay it on just about any property that they own and use in that business: vehicles, buildings, equipment... all of it is property and it's all taxed. And if we fail to pay our property taxes, government siezes it and sells it to pay our deliqnuent tax debt.

Property taxes are WORSE for people when bad economic times come, because we are OBLIGATED to maintain that tax outlay even if we can't afford it. Sure, government likes that, because they get their money whether we pay it or they start auctioning off our property. But the rest of us? Not so much.

I'm sorry, Mr. Strange, but you SHOULDN'T have a "stable stream of revenue." If we the taxpayers are negatively impacted by the economy, the government MUST be, as well. Otherwise we're all just serfs giving the ruling political class whatever they demand.

This is your vision for Montgomery?
Read the rest...

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Sovereignty Resolution

I received such an overwhelming response to my original question "Should Alabama Assert State Sovereignty?" that I have used the actual resolutions submitted in other states to create a sovereignty resolution for Alabama. You can find the resolution here.

I will be sending this resolution to my Legislators in the coming week. If you agree that this resolution needs to be passed, please send it to yours, as well. You may locate your Legislator and contact information by going to the Alabama Legislature's official website.


If any Legislator agrees to sponsor and introduce it this session, please send me an email or place a comment here so we'll know.

And, in order to get an idea of many people are doing it, please respond in this poll.




Read the rest...

Saturday, February 14, 2009

Mayoral Questionnaire: Jay King

I sent the following questionnaire to all six Mayoral candidates. This is the response sent to me by candidate Jay King, which I received less than 12 hours after I sent it out. Thank you for your prompt response, Mr. King.

Please feel free to post your responses to Mr. King's answers in the comments section.

1) Why do you think you are qualified to serve as Mayor of Montgomery?

Although I am the youngest candidate at 36 years of age, I have more time in Public Service for the City of Montgomery than any other candidate… 15 years with the Montgomery Police Department. I developed a detailed plan that focuses on each of the major issues facing the growth of Montgomery, which has been outlined on http://www.kingformayor.com/ from day one of my campaign. I have experience in modern Law Enforcement, City Budget and Development.


2) In view of the serious economic situation today, do you foresee having to cut back on any city spending, and if so, in which areas would you make cuts?

I can foresee needing to cut back on City Overtime, Communication Expenses, City Vehicle Fleet, overstaffing in non-critical department and redundant bureaucracy that keeps us behind the curve on the use of technology.

3) Do you see any tax increases in the future of Montgomery?

I do not believe in raising taxes. I believe that the way you increase revenue is by increasing sales. Through increased public safety, enhanced appearance of the city and proper placement of businesses, we can maintain our current businesses and recruit new businesses.

4) What is your view on Montgomery adopting any form of an occupational tax?

I hate the idea of an occupational tax. It punishes those that get out and work hard to provide for their families and sometimes work overtime to provide a few luxuries. Without an occupational tax, we can work to pay bills and then work extra, if needed, to afford luxuries. With an occupational tax we lose money before we are even able to pay our bills.

5) Are you in favor of reducing sales taxes and increasing ad-valorem (i.e. property) taxes?

Again, I would much rather increase revenue through increased jobs, sales, and tourism dollars rather than taxing the citizens of Montgomery.

6) What do you see as Montgomery’s biggest challenge?

The key issues facing Montgomery are Crime, Development (residential and commercial), Education and Tax Revenue. Out of the four (4), I would have to say Public Safety is the biggest. Without public safety, you do not have a foundation for the other issues to grow. Anyone that does not believe that crime prevents growth can look at what happened to Montgomery Mall. Montgomery Mall provided jobs, it provided a place to shop, it provided entertainment for families, and it provided a source of revenue. But when Public Safety became the key issue, Montgomery Mall failed.

7) What do you see as Montgomery’s greatest opportunity?

I can see Montgomery growing into a major tourist destination for the residents in the area that surrounds central Alabama, instead of our families being forced to take their families to Auburn, Birmingham, Atlanta or Orlando to take advantage of entertainment venues. Major concerts year round, theme park style attractions, historical landmark promotion and the recruitment of major sporting events will allow Montgomery to be the place to visit. With increased tourism comes increased revenue.

8) Do you identify yourself with a liberal, conservative, libertarian, or some other political ideology?

I would classify myself as a conservative. I believe in smaller government that is open and accountable to the citizens. I believe that through smaller government, a city can provide more services.

9) Is there anything specific you would like to accomplish during your term in office?

I want to provide more police and fire service protection. I want to rid the city of “out-of-code” boarded-up buildings that have plagued the city for more than the fifteen (15) years that I have been with the Montgomery Police Department. I want to encourage private industry investment into our older commercial areas and neighborhoods. I want to recruit multiple entertainment venues to increase and encourage tourism. I want to establish a “MENTOR” program within the Montgomery County Public Schools and encourage youth involvement in public service related organizations.

10) Montgomery’s crime clearance rate for non-violent crimes has been consistently below the state average (see http://www.politicsalabama.org/StateFactsCrime.html for details). How will you correct this?

Through reallocation of manpower and increased manpower we will be able to address the problem from the crime prevention standpoint. Through the use of technology and education (training), we will provide our officers with the tools they need to assist in criminal case clearance. Through the sharing of techniques with agencies that have high clearance rates we can prepare our officers with additional resources with new approaches to case solving.

11) If you could tell the voters one thing about yourself or about your plans for Montgomery, what would it be?

I am not a Politician, I am a Public Servant. I am not the type of person who will say whatever it takes to get into office and then do my own thing. I do not owe anything to special interests, and my allegiance is to the citizens of Montgomery. I am not the type of person who will use rhetoric or vague ideas to explain my plans. I made my formal public announcement on January 19th, and on that date my web site was available to the citizens of Montgomery, and on each “Issues” page I provided my agenda on how I plan to address them. I did not wait half way through the campaign cycle to develop my plan.

Jay King, Mayoral Candidate
Website: http://www.kingformayor.com/
Email: jayking@KingForMayor.com
Read the rest...

Mayoral Questionnaires Sent

This morning I sent questionnaires to all six Mayoral candidates. I will post responses as I receive them, so keep an eye out here for the results.

As a reminder, you can find links to all six Mayoral campaign websites here.


Update Feb 17: I have contacted all five remaining campaigns, and at least three are working on the questionnaires at this time. The other two wanted time to examine the questions before deciding whether or not to answer them. Again, I will post them as I receive them. Read the rest...

The Law of Unintended Consequences

In politics, the law of unintended consequences frequently comes into effect. That is, lawmakers aim to “fix” one problem, but the steps they take (whether they do fix the original problem or not) cause other problems. We saw this with the whole flap on Bonuses. If we think high bonuses are evil and work hard to cut them out, then tax revenue falls because those bonuses weren’t earned and therefore no taxes were paid on them. (Read the blog entry.)

A new example has arisen. President Obama recently attacked financial institutions that took bailout money, saying:

"You can't get corporate jets, you can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayer's dime," Obama said.

In Obama-Land, stopping employee conventions and gatherings in places like Las Vegas is a no-brainer, a good thing. In reality, such comments have actual effects.

"Mr. President, I understand the enormous burden you carry in dealing with the worst economy since the Great Depression," Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman wrote in a letter to the President. "I also understand the need for accountability, but your comments are harmful to the meetings and convention industry as a whole and Las Vegas specifically."


(Read the article.)

The Mayor has a point. Each one of those trips generates revenue for the locale in question, and stopping them will have adverse economical effects for places like Las Vegas. Look, salaries (and bonuses) and spending are what makes an economy work. We earn more money, we spend more money, and that lets people expand their businesses, etc. That's Basic Economics 101. If we stop the bonuses, slap limits on earnings, and stop people from visiting vacation areas like Las Vegas, then the entire economy suffers.

The Law of Unintended Consequences will always rear its ugly head, as long as lawmakers decide that they, and ONLY they, can fix everything.

Read the rest...

Friday, February 13, 2009

Legislative Bills of Interest, Part VI

Today we’re looking at two bills that attempt to reduce the chances of going into proration.

HB509, sponsored by Rep Greg Canfield (R-48), would cap the growth of the Education Trust Fund (ETF) to no more than the average growth for the previous 15 fiscal years. In other words, if, over the past 15 fiscal years, the actual average growth in ETF revenue sources was 8% per year, then the next year’s budget could be no larger than 108% of this year’s budget. Excess revenue (if any) would go to the rainy day fund until it was full, then to a fund whose only purpose is to provide funds if proration does occur. It is currently in committee. Recommendation: PASS IT!

SB341, sponsored by Senator Steve French (R-15), appears to be a companion bill to HB509 and is similar in most (if not all) respects. It is currently in committee. Recommendation: PASS IT!

These bills both attempt to limit the amount of growth that can be experienced by the ETF. This is a good goal, and these Legislators should be commended for showing fiscal responsbility. The actual average growth rate for the ETF since 1997 is 5.98%, as can be seen here. It grew only 0.1% in the current fiscal year, but the highest growth rates were in 2006 (11.8%) and 2007 (12.2%). Such a cap will regulate growth to a more manageable rate, and is therefore a good thing. Read the rest...

2009 Montgomery Mayoral Race

There are six candidates currently running for the office of Mayor of Montgomery. Here are the six candidates and their websites, in alphabetical order.

Michael Briddell
Willie Cook
Jon Dow
J. E. King
Scott Simmons
Todd Strange

I will be sending out a questionnaire soon to each candidate, and will post their replies as they arrive. Read the rest...

Rumor Mill - Confirmed!

A while back I wrote about a rumor I had heard concerning a lawsuit that might soon be filed challenging the State's Constitution of 1901. It seems that this rumor was accurate, and you can view the court filing here. You may also download the PDF file here.

Read the Birmingham News article here.

The lawsuit claims the Constitution of 1901 was improperly ratified. I don't know if it was or wasn't, but I'm curious if the passage of time (more than 100 years) will play any part in the decision. At any rate, the lawsuit seeks to have the Court declare a future date after which the current Constitution is void. Presumably, the State would take action to draft a new Constitution and have it ratified prior to that date. Alternatively, they could put the current Constitution up for a new ratification vote.

Quotes From the Lawsuit

Plaintiffs allege:
"...that the Invalid Constitution was never passed by the people of Alabama because votes were not properly counted, due to voter fraud and other voter wrongdoing."

"It is necessary and proper for this Court to issue a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendants in their official capacity from continuing to enforce the Invalid Constitution of 1901, as of a date certain."

And what happens if a new Constitution is not ratified by the appointed date? Assuming the Court doesn't grant an extension, we would have no State Government. At all. And since city and county governments are defined and given power by the Constitution and by the Legislature, we would probably have no local government, either. That is, no LEGALLY RECOGNIZED government.

As I understand it, the plaintiffs do NOT ask the Court to retroactively invalidate the Constitution, just to set a date in the future when it is rendered invalid.

Either way, regardless of their "evidence", I believe they will have a VERY hard time winning this case. Read the rest...

Barney Frank Speaks

Congressman Barney Frank has apparently been very vocal about the whole issue of bonuses. Just the other day, he apparently said that bonuses are bribes.

“If in good times you were told you weren't going to get a bonus, what part of your job would you not do? I mean, if you weren't getting a bonus, would you like leave early on Wednesday? Or would you take longer lunches? Would you bypass a certain class of investors?” {cut} “Why do you need to be bribed to have your interests aligned with the people who are paying your salary?”

Read the article.

I wonder if Mr. Frank also believes that tips to waitresses are bribes? A tip or a bonus, Congressman, is an incentive to work harder and a reward for work well done. This is pretty basic stuff…

He also made a statement which is raising many eyebrows:

“They have to convince people that they’ve learned enough from the mistakes they’ve made so that we can work together going forward with them not in the driver’s seat, but inevitably playing a role so we can fix things.”

Read the article.

If bank executives are not “in the driver’s seat” of their companies, who would be? Government? Does this comment indicate his intention to have government run these businesses?

BTW, you DO know what it’s called when the economy is controlled by government, right? Fascism. Is that what we really want?

Not I. Read the rest...