Tuesday News Roundup

There are several news stories that you should read today.

Victory Mosque may get public financing
Yup, you read that right. The mosque that most people think shouldn't be built where they want to build may be partially subsidized by our own government.

The Muslim center planned near the site of the World Trade Center attack could qualify for tax-free financing, a spokesman for City Comptroller John Liu said on Friday, and Liu is willing to consider approving the public subsidy.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67Q5BW20100827

Record number in anti-poverty programs
Although he CLAIMS to be trying to grow the economy, about the only things that PresBo has actually grown are the government and our dependence upon it.

Government anti-poverty programs that have grown to meet the needs of recession victims now serve a record one in six Americans and are continuing to expand. More than 50 million Americans are on Medicaid, the federal-state program aimed principally at the poor, a survey of state data by USA TODAY shows. That's up at least 17% since the recession began in December 2007.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-08-30-1Asafetynet30_ST_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

Obama wants to let thousands of illegals stay in the country
Despite overwhelming public opposition to this kind of plan, PresBo is considering allowing a ton of illegals stay in the country... "pending" processing their residency apps.

A shake-up in immigration policy may lead to deportation proceedings being dropped for thousands of aliens who entered the United States illegally but are applying to stay in the country, officials said on Friday.
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/illegal-immigration-policy-change/2010/08/27/id/368614

Reform taxes, but forget the VAT!
This op-ed is worth a read.

If Congress continually resorts to tax increases, the result will be a growth-killing cycle of spend and tax. Congress should forget the VAT, control spending and get on with the task of pro-growth tax reform.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41535.html

Democrats running from Pelosi
The fact that Democrats in trouble are running from Pelosi should be an indicator that we voters don't like what they've been doing up there.

Some of the Democratic Party’s most endangered lawmakers are taking steps to distance themselves from Speaker Nancy Pelosi in an attempt to inoculate themselves from charges that they are beholden to the unpopular House leader and supportive of the ambitious national Democratic agenda.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41608.html

I hope you found these articles and op-ed pieces informative and entertaining.

Read the rest...

Should Congress Cut Their Pay?

I was thinking about this a few weeks ago, and it would be a good thing for Congress to cut their pay until the budget is balanced and we're on track to reduce the deficit. Today, a new poll came out telling me that I'm not alone... not by a LONG shot!
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2010/75_say_congress_should_cut_its_own_pay_until_budget_is_balanced

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 75% of Likely Voters nationwide want Congress to cut its own pay until the federal budget is balanced.

Only 16% disagree with that approach and nine percent (9%) are not sure.

Not surprisingly, there is a huge gap between Mainstream voters and the Political Class on this topic. Eighty-five percent (85%) of those in the Mainstream want Congress to cut its own pay while 74% of those in the Political Class do not.

In these hard economic times, pay cuts for our rulers... excuse me, I mean our lawmakers... well, that seems reasonable.

Do you agree?






Read the rest...

The Folly Of Subsidizing Unemployment

I have argued before that endlessly extending unemployment benefits to almost two years and (maybe) beyond simply exacerbates our problems and makes unemployment worse. It discourages unemployed people from taking a less-than-ideal job. Robert Barro does a better job than I at making the same point. This is a must-read piece for the day.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703959704575454431457720188.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

I want to focus here on another dimension of the Obama administration's policies: the expansion of unemployment-insurance eligibility to as much as 99 weeks from the standard 26 weeks.

The unemployment-insurance program involves a balance between compassion—providing for persons temporarily without work—and efficiency. The loss in efficiency results partly because the program subsidizes unemployment, causing insufficient job-search, job-acceptance and levels of employment. A further inefficiency concerns the distortions from the increases in taxes required to pay for the program.

In a recession, it is more likely that individual unemployment reflects weak economic conditions, rather than individual decisions to choose leisure over work. Therefore, it is reasonable during a recession to adopt a more generous unemployment-insurance program. In the past, this change entailed extensions to perhaps 39 weeks of eligibility from 26 weeks, though sometimes a bit more and typically conditioned on the employment situation in a person's state of residence. However, we have never experienced anything close to the blanket extension of eligibility to nearly two years. We have shifted toward a welfare program that resembles those in many Western European countries.

The administration has argued that the more generous unemployment-insurance program could not have had much impact on the unemployment rate because the recession is so severe that jobs are unavailable for many people. This perspective is odd on its face because, even at the worst of the downturn, the U.S. labor market featured a tremendous amount of turnover in the form of large numbers of persons hired and separated every month.

For example, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that, near the worst of the recession in March 2009, 3.9 million people were hired and 4.7 million were separated from jobs. This net loss of 800,000 jobs in one month indicates a very weak economy—but nevertheless one in which 3.9 million people were hired. A program that reduced incentives for people to search for and accept jobs could surely matter a lot here.

And how are Obama's unemployment extensions affecting the number of long-term unemployed? From past recessions, the average unemployment duration was 21 weeks, and the average long-term unemployed percentage was 25%. In June, those numbers were 35.2 weeks duration and 46.2% long-term unemployed.

To begin with a historical perspective, in the 1982 recession the peak unemployment rate of 10.8% in November-December 1982 corresponded to a mean duration of unemployment of 17.6 weeks and a share of long-term unemployment (those unemployed more than 26 weeks) of 20.4%. Long-term unemployment peaked later, in July 1983, when the unemployment rate had fallen to 9.4%. At that point, the mean duration of unemployment reached 21.2 weeks and the share of long-term unemployment was 24.5%. These numbers are the highest observed in the post-World War II period until recently. Thus, we can think of previous recessions (including those in 2001, 1990-91 and before 1982) as featuring a mean duration of unemployment of less than 21 weeks and a share of long-term unemployment of less than 25%.

These numbers provide a stark contrast with joblessness today. The peak unemployment rate of 10.1% in October 2009 corresponded to a mean duration of unemployment of 27.2 weeks and a share of long-term unemployment of 36%. The duration of unemployment peaked (thus far) at 35.2 weeks in June 2010, when the share of long-term unemployment in the total reached a remarkable 46.2%. These numbers are way above the ceilings of 21 weeks and 25% share applicable to previous post-World War II recessions. The dramatic expansion of unemployment-insurance eligibility to 99 weeks is almost surely the culprit.

As you can see, the strategy of massively extending unemployment benefits has made our unemployment situation worse, and may be in the process of creating a European-style "dole"... an entitlement program upon which far too many people rely.

Obamanomics is failing, has failed, and will continue to fail. It's time to step back from the big-government madness and instead adopt policies that may actually help us generate true economic growth.

Read the rest...

FDA Wants More Power After Failure On Tainted Eggs

I'm sure that, by now, you have all heard of the massive egg recall that is going on because of salmonella infection. Would it surprise you to learn that the FDA is asking for more regulatory authority because of this?

If that doesn't sound strange to you, why not think about it a little more? The FDA didn't stop the infected eggs from being sold. They failed in their mission. And they want MORE power?

Does it work that way in the real world? If you fail to do your job, do you get a promotion or a raise? No, you get punished, possibly fired. Only in government can a failure mean more money and/or more power.

That's the way it works in government. Failures are often used to justify increases in power and/or funding. Think about it... What happens when test scores drop in our schools? They claim it's because of inadequate funding and they usually get more money to spend... not that this fixes the problem.


It would be nice if these government officials would admit they'd screwed up and say, "if you trust us again we'll probably screw up again." But you'll never hear that.

Are there alternatives to a stronger, more invasive FDA trying to control a food supply that is so vast that it defies exactly that kind of control? Of course their are.

If we realize that grocery stores and suppliers, such as egg farms, don't WANT people to get sick from their product, we are on the road to understanding that the free market system rewards companies who get it right and punishes those who mess up.

In other words, the free market works fairly well to correct problems. Granted, it's not perfect, but then there IS no perfect solution, no guaranteed method of verifying 100% safe food. It can't be done, not even by a monolithic government agency hell-bent on closing down every lemonade stand or charity kitchen that doesn't have the proper government documents.

The free market solution is simple. If you get sick from eating bad food, you sue the companies involved. This punishes them for their misdeeds, and they either clean up their act or go out of business from the bad publicity and all the jury awards.

It works pretty darned well, actually. Further empowering a federal agency that acquires more power and grows from its failures won't do anything but perpetuate our problems.

Our elected officials should reject the FDA's request and instead let the market handle this kind of thing. If they simply MUST do something, then strengthen liability laws so that the injured party isn't prevented from holding the companies responsible for their problems.

But I certainly wouldn't let them do anything MORE than that...

Read the rest...

PA Will Soon Focus On Local Elections

With the fall elections looming in about two months, I will soon be focusing more closely on local elections. Also, I have been contacted by the Huffington Post, and asked to cover the Martha Roby campaign as a "citizen journalist."

I double-checked, just to make sure they really want a libertarian blogger to cover her campaign, and they said they were fine with who I am. So once they finish recruiting citizen journalists, I'll start posting one or two pieces a week on the Roby campaign.

Should be fun...

And I don't know if you noticed, but I spent an entire day last week covering Bobby Bright...

http://politicsalabama.blogspot.com/2010/08/bright-agrees-with-obamas-failed.html

http://politicsalabama.blogspot.com/2010/08/bright-opposes-repeal-of-obamacare.html

http://politicsalabama.blogspot.com/2010/08/bright-jokes-pelosi-could-die.html

Have a great day!


Read the rest...

Obama Revises History

President Obama has decided to rewrite history, insisting that he and his administration were "on top of" the BP oil leak from day one.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38906337/ns/nightly_news

President Barack Obama rejected criticism of his response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill Sunday, saying in an interview airing on “NBC Nightly News” that his administration jumped on the crisis immediately and was determined to hold BP accountable.

As BP struggled for weeks to cap the well that began gushing oil into the Gulf of Mexico in April, Obama came under similar pressure from environmental activists who said the federal government should have stepped in earlier and taken greater control — leading, as Williams noted, to critics’ characterization of the oil spill as “Obama’s Katrina.”

“That is just not accurate,” Obama said, pointing to the $20 billion fund BP set up under federal supervision to compensate victims of the oil spill.

What PresBo neglects to point out is that he didn't extort that $20 billion slush fund from BP until mid-June... hardly "immediately," considering that the explosion occurred and the leak began on April 20.


Here's a video showing the timeline and Obama's response...





If the video doesn't work, try this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vVvrHPQZgs

Whether you think the government should have "taken control" or not, the fact remains that Presbo's response was hardly "immediate," and attempts on his part to characterize it that way are revisionist. And trying to revise history on a subject where virtually NOBODY thinks PresBo reacted quickly isn't going to help his approval ratings at all.

On a slightly different subject... In his appearance on Nightly News, he did make the following statement:

“It’s not surprising that somebody like a Mr. Beck is able to stir up a certain portion of the country. That's been true throughout our history,” he said. But “what I’m focused on is making sure that the decisions we’re making now are going to be be not good for the nightly news, not good even necessarily for the next election, but are good for the next generation.”

Good! When will he advocate repealing ObamaCare? That law is decidedly BAD for the next generation, and repealing it would help a great deal. Also, when will he start reining in his out-of-control spending and return us at least to budget deficit levels we last saw when George Bush was President?

Those steps will be good for the next generation, so can we expect him to do that?

Not hardly.

Read the rest...

Review: The Letter Box

Michael Howley attended our play, The Letter Box, on opening night. Today, he posted this review of the show. You can find that review here:
http://theatremontgomery.blogspot.com/2010/08/wobt-letter-box.html

If you'd like to attend the show, you can find show dates and ticket information at the following link:
http://www.prattvilleal.gov/departments/way-off-broadway-theatre.html

Come on out and watch the show... You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll have a great time! We just finished our first weekend, and we have two more weekends to go.


Read the rest...

Review for "The Letter Box"

The Prattville Progress has posted a review of the play I'm in, "The Letter Box", as well as a few pictures.

To read the review, click here:
http://progress.montgomeryadvertiser.com/article/20100828/PROGRESS02/8280316

To see pictures from the show, click here:
http://progress.montgomeryadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Avis=DS&Dato=20100827&Kategori=PROGRESS&Lopenr=8270805&Ref=PH

I invite all of you to come out and enjoy the show. Details on show dates and how to get tickets are in the article. As the old saying goes: "You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll have a great time!"


Read the rest...

One ObamaCare Lie Revealed

Do you remember back when the health care bill was being debated, and the CBO kicked out a report showing that it would reduce the deficit? This took place before a backdrop of Obama and Congressional Democrats telling us the bill MUST pass because health care is too expensive and this would reduce the costs.

One little tidbit missing from the CBO report is HOW the bill would supposedly "reduce the deficit." Now we find out that this was accomplished by INCREASING spending, but raising taxes even more to compensate. So the bill doesn't reduce health care spending at all, it increases it.
http://keithhennessey.com/2010/08/25/cbo-late/

In March, CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the net effect of PPACA and the Reconciliation Act would be to reduce federal budget deficits over the 2010-2019 period by a total of $143 billion. That estimate consisted of a net deficit reduction of $124 billion from the health care and revenue provisions in both bills.

Taking into account all of the provisions related to health care and revenues, the two pieces of legislation were estimated to increase mandatory outlays by $401 billion and raise revenues by $525 billion.

Far from controlling costs, ObamaCare INCREASES costs. Health care isn't LESS expensive, it's MORE expensive.

Gee... thanks, Democrats.


Read the rest...

Robert Bentley Is Right About College

Robert Bentley and Ron Sparks were debating over in Arab (yes, that is in Alabama), and Bentley said something that many people are treating as controversial... though for the life of me, I don't see the controversial aspect of it.

When Sparks talked about favoring a state lottery to help kids attend college, Bentley observed that it's not the job of government to send kids to college, that's the job of families.
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2010/08/robert_bentley_and_ron_sparks.html

During the 90-minute debate sponsored by the Arab Chamber of Commerce, Sparks contended the state needs a lottery to provide high school graduates with the opportunity to attend college.

He said children in nearby states, including Tennessee and Georgia, have more access to a quality education and job opportunities as a result of college scholarships offered through lottery programs in those states.

Bentley said he would not support a lottery and pointed out that the state a decade ago soundly defeated one proposed by then-Gov. Don Siegelman.

"I remind you we have a governor sentenced to jail as a result of things he did connected to that lottery. I'm personally against it. It's not the answer," said Bentley.

Sparks fired back, saying that, without a lottery, some deserving Alabama students would never be able to afford a college education.

"Since when did it become the job of the government to provide a college education to every child?" Bentley responded, looking toward Sparks.

"That's not the government's job. That's your job," Bentley said, pointing to the crowd of about 140. "Not every child can go to college, or should they."

If what Bentley said is truly controversial, then God help the idea of freedom in America.


Yes, voters have already defeated a lottery proposal once. And no, it isn't the job of state government to send kids to college or help fund their education.

I truly do not understand what is so controversial about those statements, but they cut to the heart of what role we expect our government to play. Bentley is espousing a government that stays out of peoples' lives, while Sparks clearly wants our state government to be bigger. Tack on a few more tentacles...

The two went on to spar over how to increase state revenue... And on that I think they're both wrong. Government always wants more, even when there is less to be had. But I don't think an automatic increase in spending every year is necessarily a good thing. What happened to SHRINKING the size and scope of government, not to mention the cost? Is either candidate talking about privatization of some services?

Not that I've heard. The idea isn't to fund government growth the "right" way, the idea is to find ways to REDUCE the cost of government, and to work to make it smaller and less intrusive.

So today I'll give Bentley the win on this debate, but I'll do it reluctantly because he sounds like another big-government Republican... As long as government grows in the areas HE thinks is appropriate.

Haven't we had enough of that?


Read the rest...

Government Can Track Your Every Movement

According to a recent appeals court ruling, the government can sneak onto your property, place a GPS tracking device on your car, and track your every movement... without once establishing probable cause or obtaining a warrant. Yeah, I'm sure this is what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599201315000

Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn't violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway - and no reasonable expectation that the government isn't tracking your movements.

That is the bizarre - and scary - rule that now applies in California and eight other Western states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers this vast jurisdiction, recently decided the government can monitor you in this way virtually anytime it wants - with no need for a search warrant.

This isn't the law of the land everywhere, just in the states controlled by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals... the most liberal and most overturned appeals court in the nation.

This is the Kelo decision for the Fourth Amendment. If you'll recall, the SCOTUS Kelo ruling said that the Constitutional protections of private property meant that our government could take your land and give it to somebody else. Period. This new decision means they can conduct near-total surveillance on anybody they want to, with no Constitutional limitations.


It's not only a bad ruling, it's a death knell for freedom.

The Fourth Amendment says:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

"Secure in their persons" against "unreasonable searches." Yeah, that language seems to control, here. We have such an absolute right that the government could right now institute a program of installing a GPS tracker on each and every car owned in the United States... without any evidence of a crime being committed by the persons being monitored.

Somehow, I don't think that's right.

Happily a different circuit court recently ruled that extended tracking WAS a violation of privacy... and these conflicting rulings mean that the issue is likely headed to the Supreme Court, where, hopefully, this bad decision can be overturned into the trash-heap where it belongs.

You know, the Ninth Circuit has a long history of delivering controversial and extreme rulings that are later overturned. I wonder if we need a new policy... If an appeals judge is overturned by Scotus a certain number of times, he is removed from the bench. Or if not that, then maybe fine them. Some consequences are necessary to convince judges to rule according to the law and the Constitution instead of some whacked-out, government-centric ideology.

Read the rest...

I'll Be On TV Today...

I don't know if you're interested or not, but I'll be on the WAKA 8 mid-day broadcast today, talking about the play that I'm in... "The Letter Box." They tell me it will be aired some time during the noon broadcast.

We opened last night, and the audience had a good time... So if you like watching plays, swing by and give ours a look-see.
http://prattvilleal.gov/departments/way-off-broadway-theatre.html


Read the rest...

You Know, God Is A Pretty Smart Feller

Picture this: A deepwater drilling rig suffers a catastrophic failure, and oil begins gushing uncontrolled into the Gulf. The flow doesn't stop for months, and the eco-nuts are telling us that we may never recover from this. They paint nightmare scenarios about how our cleanup effort will have to be equally massive if we ever want to have clean gulf water again.

And meanwhile, nature is quietly and efficiently cleaning up the mess all on its own.
http://tinyurl.com/23vdyb9

"Our findings, which provide the first data ever on microbial activity from a deepwater dispersed oil plume, suggest a great potential for bacteria to help dispose of oil plumes in the deep-sea," Hazen said in a statement.

Environmentalists have raised concerns about the giant oil spill and the underwater plume of dispersed oil, particularly its potential effects on sea life. A report just last week described a 22-mile long underwater mist of tiny oil droplets.

"Our findings show that the influx of oil profoundly altered the microbial community by significantly stimulating deep-sea" cold temperature bacteria that are closely related to known petroleum-degrading microbes, Hazen reported.

God's a pretty smart feller, don't you think?


Knowing that oil may, from time to time, leak out of the sea bed and into the ocean, God created various forms of bacteria to break that oil down so that the sea life wouldn't all die. He made bacteria that lives in shallow water and deep water, warm temperatures and cold temperatures... and that bacteria started multiplying the MOMENT that the oil leak began.

Just another example that the eco-nuts are, well, crazy. Not to mention that the ecology isn't NEARLY as fragile as they seem to think. God built in some checks and balances.

And God is generally a pretty smart feller.

Read the rest...

Bright Jokes: "Pelosi Could Die"

As most of you know, I'm not a big fan of Bobby Bright. I opposed him on numerous occasions while he was Mayor, and we don't agree any more often now that he's in Congress. But as you'll also recall from past blog posts, if he's right I'll give him credit.

In this case, Bright made a comment yesterday in response to the question as to whether or not he'd vote for Pelosi again for Speaker. He listed several things that could prevent him having to make that decision, the last of which was, "she could get sick and die."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014800-503544.html

Bright was appearing in Montgomery yesterday when he was apparently asked whether he would support Nancy Pelosi as House speaker if reelected, the Montgomery Advertiser reported.

After listing a number of things that could happen between now and that vote that could make the question moot, "he suggested, jokingly he insisted to his audience, that Pelosi could fall ill and die in coming months," according to the newspaper. The comment drew laughter from the audience.

The comment hit Drudge and has been flying around the net all day. For me, though, it's a tempest in a tea pot.


Look, he didn't WISH she would get sick and die, he mentioned it as a theoretical possibility... Which it is. Basically, that was his way of dodging the question. And it worked. Notice nobody is asking about how he'll vote anymore.

Some have theorized that it was his way of distancing himself from a deeply unpopular Pelosi... whom he voted for for Speaker. Personally, I think that's a bit far fetched. This looks to me like the usual politician's foot-in-mouth episode.

So give the guy a break, will you? Criticize him for what he does. We don't have to sensationalize things to make him out to be a villain. Okay?

Read the rest...

Bright Opposes Repeal Of ObamaCare

I don't know what other conclusion we can draw, people, except that Bobby Bright now LIKES ObamaCare and opposes repealing it.

Yes, I understand Bright voted against the law... but it passed anyway, and there is widespread speculation that Pelosi let him vote "NO" after they got the votes they needed for passage. But if Bright REALLY doesn't like ObamaCare, and if he REALLY opposes it, then why won't he sign Discharge Petition 11?
http://clerk.house.gov/111/lrc/pd/petitions/Dis11.htm

Basically what happens when the majority doesn't like a bill, as they don't like any attempt to repeal ObamaCare, they let it die in committee. A discharge petition, if signed by 218 House members, forces the committee to let it come to a vote on the House floor. This petition already has 170 signatures, and Bright has refused to sign it so far.


The petition has already been signed by Bonner, Rogers, Aderholt, Griffith, and Bachus. Missing are the two Alabama Democrats, Bobby Bright and Artur Davis. But if Bright REALLY doesn't like ObamaCare and REALLY thinks it was a costly mistake that we cannot afford, why will he not sign on to efforts to repeal it?

Is he a political coward, unwilling to engage in a probably lost cause (at this point) just because he believes it would be the right thing to do? Or does he secretly want ObamaCare to remain the law of the land?

Either way, it doesn't speak well of the man.

Read the rest...

Bright Agrees With Obama's Failed Economic Policies

Revealed in Obama's response to our economic problems is a belief that the private sector is the evil originator of all our problems. Also revealed is a touching, but misplaced, faith in the Keynesian assertion that government can spend tons of money and spark an economic recovery.

Both of those beliefs have been tested and have failed. However, our own Congressman Bobby Bright hasn't gotten that memo, I guess, and he still believes that government spending will save us all.

If you'll recall, the government's response to the drop in housing sales was to offer an $8,000 tax credit for home buyers. Yes, they took money from our children (borrowed it, making the deficit AND debt larger) and gave it to somebody who wouldn't buy a house right then without the handout. The result of this program was a modest boost in housing sales... followed by a matching slump as soon as the tax credit expired.

Most economists agree that the tax credit didn't generate any new economic activity, it simply affected the TIMING of those who were already considering buying a house.

Now Bright thinks the way to help the economy rebound is to go DEEPER into debt and re-instate the tax credit.
http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/article/20100826/NEWS01/8260308/Bright++Another+home+sales+tax+credit+needed

Those numbers reflect the first month since the tax credit of up to $8,000 expired. Bright said he pushed to extend the credit before and will renew that push now that numbers show how dependent housing was on the credit.

"We need more legislation to prompt home sales," he said.

There it is... Bright has completely bought into Obama's failed economic policies and believes that the private sector needs government help to work.


As the Democrats try Keynesian stimulus again and again, and as these efforts fail again and again, more and more economists are saying that we need to stop these kind of efforts.

Look, a temporary boost in sales is fine, and if that's all you're looking for (say, to boost your re-election chances in November), then go ahead and re-instate the tax credit. But if you want a SUSTAINABLE increase in sales, then the government can't accomplish that in any way, shape, or form. That HAS to come from the private sector.

What we NEED is for the federal government to stop passing new laws, creating sweeping new bureaucracies, and drafting massive new regulations that hurt businesses and families and impede economic growth. We also need them to stop spending this country into bankruptcy and raising taxes on everything in sight.

But apparently Bright doesn't get that. In his mind, government is the fount of all blessings and the rest of us poor schmucks can't get along without their help.

You'd think he would have learned by now...

Read the rest...

Housing Drops, Stock Markets Slide

According to the report issued yesterday, existing home sales in July dropped by a record 27.2%. This caused the stock markets to slide. The DOW dropped briefly below 10,000, to close 134 points below opening.
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=akkTzy2cnfN4&pos=1

Stocks tumbled, the 10-year Treasury yield fell to the lowest in 17 months and the yen surged to the highest versus the dollar since 1995 as a record plunge in home sales stoked concern the economy may relapse into a recession. Oil fell below $72 a barrel.

Sales of existing homes plummeted 27.2 percent to a 3.83 million annual rate, the National Association of Realtors said in Washington, the lowest in a decade and worse than the most pessimistic forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News.

This doesn't bode well, but it is logical. As long as we keep hemorrhaging jobs, house sales will continue to drop.

“This is yet one more piece of disappointing economic news,” said Michael Holland, who oversees more than $4 billion as chairman of Holland & Co. in New York. “Irrespective of whether there’s a double dip, jobs aren’t being created. Without jobs they’re not going to get better numbers on housing.”

As Neil Irwin recognizes, all of this bad economic news is pointing in one direction... and it's not the direction we want. Our economy is getting worse. Quickly.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-economy/2010/08/the_recovery_is_losing_steam_f.html?hpid=topnews

There's a pattern here, and it's not a good one. Virtually every major economic indicator to come out in the past two months has been disappointing in one way or another. Retail sales. International trade. Weekly jobless claims. The monthly employment report. Housing starts.

In fact, of the major data releases, the only one I can think of that has been decent over the past couple of months was last week's industrial production report.

When the economic data first started turning soft earlier in the summer and it looked as though the recovery could be losing steam, I tried not to leap too far into major conclusions. Data is often uneven at economic turning points, and economic recoveries sometimes move in fits and starts.

But as the third straight month of weaker data comes to a close, the brutal reality is that all the indicators are pointing in one direction. The data are all either coming in in line with diminished expectations, or surprising in a negative direction. It's not an uneven recovery-- it's not much of a recovery at all.

In my opinion, and it's an opinion that I've shared many times before, one major stumbling block to recovery is our government. PresBo and his Congressional cronies are putting up economic roadblocks with their tax increases, new regulations, and massive new government entitlement programs.

In addition to that, they are continuing the same policies that played a major part in the original housing collapse. One major problem was that too many people got mortgages who couldn't afford them. Fannie and Freddie played a big part in this. Current government policy isn't turning away from this practice, they're doubling down on it by bailing out those who can't afford their payments and by encouraging easier lending criteria for home mortgages.

We can't improve things by repeating the same mistakes that caused our problems in the first place. But that's exactly what our government is doing.

The combination of these mistakes is squashing any hope that our economy may head into recovery, and is instead leading us downwards, possibly into another recession. Or worse.

Read the rest...

More Bad Economic Signs

Despite PresBo's proclamation that this would be a "Recovery Summer," the bad news continues to roll in. It looks like the "double-dip" part of this recession that I (and others) predicted from the beginning may, in fact, be happening soon. Meanwhile, the bad news continues to pile up.

Small investors are fleeing the stock market in droves. This shows a lack of confidence in a strong, robust stock market.

Investors withdrew a staggering $33.12 billion from domestic stock market mutual funds in the first seven months of this year, according to the Investment Company Institute, the mutual fund industry trade group. Now many are choosing investments they deem safer, like bonds.

If that pace continues, more money will be pulled out of these mutual funds in 2010 than in any year since the 1980s, with the exception of 2008, when the global financial crisis peaked.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38803088/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times

The White House has changed, yet again, how they are counting the "benefits" of the stimulus programming. First it was "jobs created," then "jobs created or saved," and now it's "lives touched"... whatever THAT means. The bottom line is that they are desperate to inflate the numbers to look as impressive as possible. They don't care what actually IS happening in the economy, they just want us to PERCEIVE that things are rosy... so that we'll re-elect the Democrats. Oh, and don't forget that the GAO found that those "jobs created or saved" came with a price tag of $195,000 per job.

Now however, the GAO report shows that the phrase ‘jobs created’ or ‘jobs saved’ is no longer the term of choice. They have decided to go with – wait for it – ‘lives touched’.

Essentially, we’ve now transitioned from the aforementioned terminology, on to ‘jobs funded’, and eventually landed on something reminiscent of an after school special, ‘lives touched’.

In other words, the administration has stumbled upon another way to inflate their job numbers. They were already reporting on those saved or created, but will now include ‘people who at some point have supported a project.’
http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/19/obamanomics-touching-lives-195000-at-a-time/

Existing house sales apparently dropped 12.9% in June, which may lead to another precipitous slide that could drag us back downwards into a deep recession.

A report tomorrow by the Chicago-based National Association of Realtors will show July sales of existing homes plummeted 12.9 percent from June, the biggest monthly loss of 2010, according to the median estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg.

New-home sales, which account for less than a 10th of housing transactions, stayed at the second-lowest level on record last month, economists predict Commerce Department data will show on Aug. 25.

Housing led the U.S. out of seven of the last eight recessions. This time, it may kill the recovery.
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=avpoiUT.LWa0

Consumer confidence is dropping again... never a good sign.

After improving slightly earlier this month, Gallup's Economic Confidence Index declined over the past two weeks to its current -33, matching the average for all of July. The July confidence numbers are the lowest of the year so far; thus, even with the slight uptick in early August, confidence remains below the levels seen during much of 2010 and below its depressed levels of a year ago.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142637/Economic-Confidence-Down-Recent-Weeks.aspx

Fully half of the participants in the government's mortgage reduction program have dropped out, calling the program a "bureaucratic nightmare."

But The Associated Press reported Friday that almost half of the more than 1.3 million homeowners who enrolled have dropped out, with many complaining "that the government program is a bureaucratic nightmare" of paperwork and red tape.

In addition, bank executives accused the Obama administration of inflating the numbers of those involved by pressuring them to sign up homeowners before verifying they met the program's income qualifications. Subsequently thinning applicants who earned too much to qualify for the taxpayer handout slowed down the time it took to process legitimate applications.

So far, just 32 percent -- a measly 421,804 home­owners -- of those who started the program have actually had their loans modified and are making payments on time. Of the $75 billion the federal government made available for "foreclosure relief," only $490 million had been spent, the AP reports.

Meanwhile the program is now "taking in fewer home­owners" and is "petering out," one economist noted, without having made but a dent in a tide of foreclosures that is expected to continue growing into next year.
http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/a-bureaucratic-nightmare-101284114.html

And this article contains a pretty good summary of the bad signs. It predicts a return to 1970's stagflation (which was a bad thing, btw).
http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/stagflation-inflation-deflation-hyperinflation-money-printing/8/23/2010/id/29730?page=full


Things are bad out there. I didn't even discuss the rising unemployment figures, flattening spending trends, or the dips in several key leading indicators. All this and more points to WORSE times ahead, not better.

With any luck, the loudly proclaimed "Recovery Summer" will be Obama's "Read My Lips" moment.

Read the rest...

Suddenly ObamaCare Won't Cut Deficit

Do you remember back before ObamaCare passed and PresBo and the Democrats were pitching it hard? Some of the major talking points were that the bill would reduce health care costs and cut the deficit... kind of the Houdini of the government finance world.

Critics of the bill warned that, no matter what they claimed and no matter what the CBO said, ObamaCare wouldn't accomplish either goal.

After the law passed, Democrats were urged to talk about all the benefits, and they have tried to do so. But suddenly, absent from their claims is that ObamaCare will reduce health care costs and cut the deficit. Hmmm...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41271.html

Key White House allies are dramatically shifting their attempts to defend health care legislation, abandoning claims that it will reduce costs and the deficit and instead stressing a promise to "improve it."

Apparently the source of this was a "confidential" teleconference held last week. A participant in the call leaked the news, along with a PowerPoint presentation, to Politico, who promptly broke the story.


If you'd like to view the PowerPoint presentation, try this link:
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM153_pp.html

Check out the very last page. At the bottom of a list of things NOT to do, you'll find these words:

DO NOT: "Say the law will reduce costs and deficits."

Democrats are finally beginning to realize what the rest of us knew all along. Too bad it's too late... now they're promising to "improve" the law. Right... You lied about the law the first time around, and we're supposed to believe your promises that you'll change it to make it BETTER? How gullible do you think we ARE?

The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House's first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed.

"Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy," says one slide.

The presentation's final page of "Don'ts" counsels against claiming "the law will reduce costs and [the] deficit."

The presentation advises, instead, sales pitches that play on personal narratives and promises to change the legislation.

So, when the facts aren't on your side, play on people's emotions.

The only problem with that strategy is that real and pressing problems don't get FIXED that way, they just get perpetuated.

So, now that the cat is out of the bag and even DEMOCRATS realize that ObamaCare won't cut costs and reduce the deficit, will they agree to repeal the monstrosity? I doubt it, because that's one of their TRIUMPHS!

Well, if ObamaCare is their idea of a success, I'd hate to see a FAILURE!

Read the rest...

Apologies For Absence

I want to apologize for not blogging this weekend... on Friday I wasn't feeling very well, and then we had rehearsals all weekend long for "The Letterbox," which opens Thursday night.

If you'd like to come see the show, you can call for tickets at 334-358-0297.






Read the rest...

Powdered Alcohol

A long time ago there was a Doris Day movie (with Rock Hudson), in which they invented and tried to market a powdered alcohol made into mint candies. The movie was called "Lover Come Back" and was a hit... but the bit I'm interested in is VIP, the powdered alcohol made into candies.

You see, somebody has actually managed to produce alcohol in a powdered form. At least, he CLAIMS he can.
http://news.discovery.com/human/vodka-in-a-pill.html

Russian professor Evgeny Moskalev of Saint Petersburg Technological University has evolved a technique that allows turning alcohol into powder and packing it in pills. The new technique can solidify any kind of alcohol, including whiskey, cognac, wine and beer.

Apparently, the good Russian believes this can help drinkers by letting them accurately control the dosages consumed. I doubt it would work out that way, but this got me thinking about other ways that this stuff might ACTUALLY be used.


Most powders can be absorbed through the nasal passages, so I'd look for people to snort the stuff like some do with cocaine.

And speaking of cocaine, would drug-makers cut their cocaine with alcohol powder? For that extra ZING, you know...

And forget date-rape drugs, this stuff opens up a WORLD of possibilities. I wonder if the powder has a detectable flavor when mixed with food? If not, then just get her (or him) crocked on a lasagna or chicken with gravy dish that has been sprinkled liberally with the powder.

Clubs could dump the stuff into their AC system, supplying that "continual high" in the air.

There are MANY other ways this powder could be used, and few of them are good. And the one "beneficial" use the discoverer announced is dubious at best. Human beings don't really work that way.


Read the rest...

Congressional Report Cites Obama Crimes

US Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, has issued a report that details alleged crimes committed by the President of the United States. You can find the report here:
http://www.wnd.com/files/100815issapropagandareport.pdf

A report from World Net Daily summarizes the contents of the report. (Unfortunately, I do not have a link for this article.)

An advance pre-publication copy of the report, shared by Issa's Washington office with WND, accuses the White House of nothing short of criminal activity. It charges the Obama administration with violating federal laws to advance what the Government Accounting Office has characterized as an unlawful "covert campaign," using federal resources "to activate a sophisticated propaganda and lobbying campaign."

Pulling no punches, the Oversight Republican Report accuses the Obama White House of "violating federal law prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes."

"The White house has failed to transition from campaign mode to leadership mode and is now inappropriately leveraging those campaign-trail relationships to unlawfully generate support for the president's agenda," the report concludes.

Read in its entirety, the Oversight Republican Report charges the Obama administration with the type of callous, unethical and possibly criminal manipulation of public opinion that is reminiscent of Watergate and the illegal campaign activities engineered by Donald Segretti on behalf of the Committee to Re-Elect the President during Richard Nixon's presidential election campaign of 1972.

In 1974, Donald Segretti pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor counts of distributing illegal campaign materials, for which he served in federal prison four months of a six-month term.

The Obama administration's abuses alleged in the Oversight Republican Report can be summed up under the term "astro-turfing," a fraudulent public relations activity in which "the White House and the agency whose resources it is co-opting attempt to create the impression that grassroots support for a particular policy exists when in fact it has been fabricated using taxpayer dollars."

Federal law prohibits using taxpayer dollars to try and influence voters to have a more favorable opinion on the government and the laws they pass. To violate that is a crime. Okay, on to a few specifics...


I'll highlight a few that I find most likely to violate the law.

Covert Propaganda

In October 2008, the Justice Department's Office of Public Affairs added Tracy Russo, the chief blogger and deputy director for online communications for Sen. John Edwards' presidential campaign, to direct the Department's "new media efforts."

The Oversight Republican Report documents that Russo covertly attempted to shape public opinion by posting comments on the Internet anonymously, or through the use of a pseudonym, attacking authors or contents viewed as critical of the president, in an effort to shape debate online.

The report concludes, "The deployment of Justice Department resources to generate clandestine comments on message boards and blogs is a highly improper use of the Department's resources."

The report cites GAO rulings stating that covert propaganda violates Title 5 U.S.C. Section 3107 of federal law, which prohibits the use of publicity experts unless specifically appropriated for that purpose.

Unlawful Influence

The Oversight Republican Report charges that in March 2010, White House Office for Health Reform Director Nancy-Ann DeParle sent "overtly partisan, unsolicited health-reform e-mails to career civil servants in executive branch offices, suggesting to recipients that they were being officially instructed by the White House to support the president's health-care reform proposals."

Again, the report charges the Obama White House with illegal activity: "Criminal statutes prohibit executive branch officials from using appropriated funds to influence the legislative process. Title 18 of the United States Code, section 1913, prohibits federal employees from engaging in the very activities DeParle urges."

More Covert Propaganda

The Oversight Republican Report charges that the Department of Health and Human Resources contracted with Jonathan Gruber, a health-care economist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, to provide "technical assistance" to support President Obama's health care reform proposals.

For this, Gruber was paid $297,600, plus another $95,000 for a second HHS job.

The Obama administration then relied upon and distributed Gruber's commentary and views to publications including Time, The Washington Post, the New York Times and the New Republic without revealing that Gruber was a paid HHS consultant.

"Using HHS appropriations to contract a highly visible health-care expert to advocate on behalf of administration policies under the guise of providing 'technical assistance' is inappropriate," the Oversight Republican Report concludes, while further alleging that the administration's failure to disclose Gruber's status while touting his work violates GAO's policy prohibiting covert propaganda.

On HealthCare Reform

Among the additional abuses, the Oversight Republican Report cites a cable television ad featuring 84-year-old Andy Griffith promoting Medicare and the Obama administration's health-care reform bill.

The Department of Health and Human Services paid $700,000 to make the cable television ad buy, and the report alleges the commercial – run in July 2010 – gave the appearance that it was "designed to affect general elections by convincing seniors to support one of the Democrat's major legislative initiatives."

Propaganda and the NEA

On Aug. 6, 2009, on behalf of the White House Office of Public Engagement, NEA Director Yosi Sergent invited a group of artists, producers, promoters, organizers, marketers and other influencers of the arts to participate in a conference call designed to encourage involvement in President Obama's United We Serve program.

Nell Abernathy, director of outreach for United We Serve and Buffy Wicks, deputy director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, identified the goal of the NEA program was to recruit artists to create art to support the president's agenda "with the same enthusiasm and with the same energy that we all saw in each other during the campaign."

The Oversight Republican Report, however, contends the initiative was illegal.

"The use of taxpayer dollars and federal employees to create an alliance whereby the NEA becomes the de facto strategic communications arm of the White House is unlawful," the report alleges. "Using a government e-mail account and government personnel and resources to host a call using artists and arts group to support the president's agenda is a clear violation of federal law."

The report stresses that it was inappropriate for representatives of the White House and the NEA to formally ask artists and entertainers to use their talents to support the president's agenda "because many of these people rely on NEA grants to subsidize their livelihoods."

And there are many more allegations in the report. One which I find particularly offensive, is stimulus money being spent to erect signs across the nation saying that this or that project was paid for by stimulus funds. Money wasted. And if THAT isn't propaganda, then what is?

Whether you agree with the report or not, Issa does make his case fairly well. The Obama administration has a pattern of using the government and taxpayer dollars to engage in propaganda efforts designed to sway public opinion in their favor. And, in many cases, that is illegal.

Now, the interesting thing to watch is what, if anything, will be done about this report. Oh, I don't expect Congress to do anything right now, not with the Democrats in charge. Democrats, target a DEMOCRAT President? God forbid. But after the GOP shakes things up in November (we hope), I fully expect them to do SOMETHING with it.

Time will tell.

Read the rest...

Victory Mosque Funding And Muslim Extremists

After all this brouhaha, it seems that the Victory Mosque near ground zero may never get built. Why? Simply put, the sponsors have only raised $18,255 of the $100 million they need to complete the thing. By the way, that amount isn't even sufficient to make a down payment on the second half of the property... they already own the other half.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41238.html

The Cordoba Initiative hasn’t begun fundraising yet for its $100 million goal. The group’s latest fundraising report with the State Attorney General’s office, from 2008, shows exactly $18,255 – not enough even for a down payment on the half of the site the group has yet to purchase.

The group also lacks even the most basic real estate essentials: no blueprint, architect, lobbyist or engineer — and now operates amid crushing negative publicity. The developers didn't line up advance support for the project from other religious leaders in the city, who could have risen to their defense with the press.

So completion of the mosque isn't a gimme, by any means.


Oh, and do you remember contentions by some of us "wackos" that the terrorist factions are behind this mosque to establish a victory monument on the site of the 9-11 attacks? Turns out we might not have been wrong...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/Politics/islamic-center-backers-rule-taking-funds-saudi-arabia/story?id=11429998

The developers behind the Islamic center planned for a site near Ground Zero won't rule out accepting financing from the Mideast -- including from Saudi Arabia and Iran -- as they begin searching for $100 million needed to build the project.

If they are willing to accept money from terrorists and nations that sponsor terrorism, how are we to believe their claims that the goal of the mosque is to "build bridges?" And if those terrorists are willing to GIVE the money, what does that say about how THEY view the mosque?

The mosque is a bad idea because it celebrates the 9-11 attacks on America by Islamic terrorists. Period. If, in the face of overwhelming public opposition, they refuse to relocate the proposed mosque, then their true intentions become crystal clear. How can they "build bridges" and "promote healing" when the site of the proposed mosque INCREASES tension and animosity?

Time to give it up fellows, or at least proclaim your true intentions. Come on, man-up!

Read the rest...

Bankruptcies, Jobless Claims Climbing Again

This morning we were treated to two more pieces of bad economic news. The first thing we learned is that weekly jobless claims reached a nine-month high... meaning the last time we saw weekly jobless claims this high was November of 2009.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38768775/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy

Employers appear to be laying off workers again as the economic recovery weakens. The number of people applying for unemployment benefits reached the half-million mark last week for the first time since November.

It was the third straight week that first-time jobless claims rose. The upward trend suggests the private sector may report a net loss of jobs in August for the first time this year.

Initial claims rose by 12,000 last week to 500,000, the Labor Department said Thursday.

Homebuilders and other construction firms are laying off more workers as the housing sector slumps after the expiration of a popular homebuyers' tax credit. State and local governments are also cutting jobs to close large budget gaps.

"The rise in initial jobless claims over the past three weeks makes it difficult to maintain confidence in the recovery and suggests the labor market is backtracking more than we first expected," Ryan Sweet, an economist at Moody's Analytics, wrote in a note to clients.

So much for the "Recovery Summer" that Democrats have been trying to convince us about.


And in other news, bankruptcy filings in the US have reached a five-year high... making this the period during "the great recession" where the most people have filed bankruptcies.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/38744090

U.S. bankruptcy filings have reached the highest level since 2005, government data released on Tuesday show, as the economy slows and the unemployment rate hovers just below double digits.

There were 422,061 bankruptcy filings between April and June, according to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, up 9 percent from 388,148 in the prior three-month period, and up 11 percent from 381,073 a year earlier.

For the year ended June 30, there were 1.57 million bankruptcies, up 20 percent from 1.31 million a year earlier.

Consumer bankruptcies rose 21 percent to 1.51 million, and business bankruptcies rose 9 percent to 59,608.

Quarterly filings surpassed 400,000 for the first time since a record 667,431 bankruptcies were begun in the fourth quarter of 2005, when Congress overhauled federal bankruptcy laws and made it harder for people and businesses to file.

"We know the causes of bankruptcy are principally job losses and health care, with the overlay of the foreclosure crisis," said Deborah Thorne, an associate professor of sociology at Ohio University. "It feels very unsettled, and I'm not surprised the numbers are going up. Until we get our feet on the ground, provide decent-paying jobs, and do something with the housing crisis, bankruptcies will continue to go up."

That bankruptcy fillings are rising with the unemployment rate isn't surprising, really. There is a logical connection between employment status and the ability to pay bills. Oh, and forget the famous 9.5% unemployment rate. If we included all those unemployed people who stopped looking for work just this year, as we should, the unemployment rate would be 10.4%.

With both of these news reports hitting today, it's not surprising that the DOW is currently trading down 144 points from yesterday's closing.

Ignore the Democrats and their manic pride in this "Recovery Summer," folks. It's just not happening. What you're hearing from them is desperate hope and a severe disconnection from reality.

Read the rest...

Islam And The First Amendment

Earlier this week I wrote about Obama and the Victory Mosque that Muslims want to put up on ground zero to celebrate their great victory. You can read that piece here:
http://politicsalabama.blogspot.com/2010/08/obama-and-that-pesky-mosque.html

At the end of it, I mentioned that a topic for another day would be whether or not Islam should enjoy the "same blanket protection under the First Amendment that is enjoyed by other religions?"

That day is today.

My basic contention is that Islam cannot claim and should not be provided blanket and unquestioned protection under the First Amendment, and I'll justify that two ways.


First, let's get the terrorist angle out of the way. We know that a portion of the religion views this country as "the enemy" and is willing to take violent action against us. We know this because it has already happened. We also know that there ARE mosques in the country that preach violence against us.

Advocating violence and inciting to riot are not protected speech. Any religion that does those things forfeits its protection, I'm afraid. The Constitution isn't a suicide pact... We don't have to respect and ignore those who want to kill and destroy us.

And even ignoring the terrorists, we have a problem. You see, violent action against a declared enemy is part of their religion. They call it Jihad. And if their religious leaders, many of whom live in foreign countries not friendly to us, declare Jihad, then at least some in this country will obey. Again, we're already seeing some of that. A certain rampage on a military base comes to mind.

The threat, though mostly dormant, is always present.

But that's the lesser of my two arguments, so let's move on to the big one. Essentially, our Constitution cannot protect those who want to throw it and our system of laws out the window.

In Islam, there is only one set of laws that followers are supposed to acknowledge, and that's Sharia law. Sharia law is God's law as revealed in the Quran and in the life of their prophet Muhammad. Because it is God's law, it stands above man's law... indeed, most Imams want only Sharia law.

The Imam sponsoring the Victory Mosque, for example, supports Sharia law in the United States.

This is a religion that seeks to impose Sharia law, RELIGIOUS LAW, on this entire country. Part of Sharia law is that Muslims cannot convert to any other religion, and non-Muslims are treated in various ways. Christians and Jews are tolerated as "People of the book," but those following other religions (or none) are considered apostate... the penalty for which was traditionally death or slavery. Today, many Islamic scholars argue for that and many places practice it, but not openly in the United States.

Make no mistake, many mainstream Muslims want Sharia law in the United States. The problem with this is two-fold. First, many provisions of Sharia law are incompatible with not only our existing laws but also with various portions of the Constitution. Second, the very concept of adopting Sharia law would be establishing a state-sanctioned religion... which is anathema to the Constitution. The very heart of the First Amendment was aimed AGAINST such religions.

So we have a religion that both attacks us and seeks to implement their religious law in this nation. How can the Constitution protect the rights of Islam to overthrow the very fundamental precepts upon which that Constitution is based?

I'm sorry, but any religion with these aims cannot turn around and claim protection under the very Constitution they wish to discard. It's just not logical.

And we shouldn't allow it.

Read the rest...

This Is What's Wrong With Government

When people try to determine what is "wrong" with our government, they generally look for acts that they think most people will disagree with. But I think "the problem" with government is a mindset, a governing philosophy.

What is that mindset? Simply put, our politicians think that they are our rulers. Instead of representing us, they believe they rule over us.

Think they DON'T have that mindset? Think again.

Muslims want to build a Mosque in a building that was damaged by debris from the 9-11 attacks... continuing a long tradition of building Mosques on sites of great Muslim victories. Many people oppose the mosque on precisely those grounds. It may be legal, but it's clearly unwise and provocative.

And what is the response of our government? I don't mean PresBo's sort of maybe approval, nor Harry Reid's opposition. At this moment I'm referring to Nancy Pelosi's reaction: use the police power of government to investigate the protesters.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41204.html

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday said she supports an investigation of groups opposing the building of a mosque near ground zero in New York.

Pelosi told San Francisco’s KCBS radio that “there is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some.”

“I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded,” she said. “How is this being ginned up?”

You can't make this stuff up, people.


She, and other Democrats, are concerned that Republicans will use this issue to hurt Democrats in the upcoming elections... and she can't let THAT happen! So she wants to use the police powers of government to investigate the protesters... a move that is clearly designed to threaten and intimidate those protesters from expressing their opposition.

Whatever happened to the first amendment? Do we not have the right to express dissent anymore? Since when did dissent become evidence of wrongdoing sufficient to start a police investigation?

That's what I mean, here. The attitude, the mindset, is that they are our rulers and can do whatever they want. One thing that rulers often do is silence dissent, silence any opinion that conflicts with the "official" opinion held by the government majority.

In this case, it's the Democrats. They are more than willing to ignore the Constitution, ignore individual freedom, ignore anything they have to in order to protect their phony-baloney jobs and the power that goes with it.

Make no mistake, this is a dictatorial mindset... Use the police to punish those pesky individuals who don't fall into line or who cause political problems for the ruling elite. And it's a mindset that is anathema to the concepts of individual freedom and representative government that our nation is SUPPOSED to be founded upon!

It's up to us how we respond to such abuses and outrages.

UPDATE: Pelosi has released an official written statement on this issue. She wants to know "who is funding the attacks against" it. I can't speak for anybody else, but nobody paid me to write this post. Why must opposition to something be "organized" and "funded?" Is it not possible that a lot of people could take a stance ALL ON THEIR OWN?

Read the rest...

Proof That Our Government Can't Track Simple Facts

I arrived home last night to find a rather intriguing message on my answering machine. The message was short... but mysterious. (Real names have been redacted from the following story.)

"Hi, this is Miss C with the Census Bureau. I just want to verify that you are the operator of the Politics Alabama blog. Please call me back when you can."

I'm sure you can understand why I was intrigued. Does the Census Bureau really try to tie websites to people in the census count? Maybe this was a back-door censorship attempt. I tried, I really tried, but I couldn't think of a SINGLE benign reason why the Census Bureau might make a call like this.

So earlier today, I called Miss C back, and I discovered the truth.


It turns out that Miss C was calling to get a snail mail address so that they could send a thank-you letter to me.

"Thank you for what?" I asked.

"For helping us promote the Census and encourage people to participate."

"But I didn't do that," I said.

"You didn't? Well, maybe you blogged about the Census?"

"Yes," I replied, "but my posts weren't really supportive, you know?"

She murmured a polite dismissal and hung up.

At that point I could contain myself no longer and I collapsed in laughter.

Do you SEE why am less than entranced by the possibility of government controlling and/or regulating every aspect of our lives? They can't even keep track of who supports and who opposes their activities!

I am assuming that nobody from the Census actually READ any of my blog posts... because if they HAD, then they'd be total IDIOTS to put me on a list of supporters. It's more comforting to assume they just made a mistake... though I don't understand how they made it.

Oh, and did you notice that this implies the Census Bureau was actively coordinating with bloggers to promote the Census? Is our government SUPPOSED to be conspiring to make us think and behave how they'd like us to think and behave?

So, we have a government actively trying to make us like what they're doing, and they can't even remember who SUPPORTS their efforts and who OPPOSES them. This isn't exactly encouraging, you know.

Read the rest...

Alabama GOP: Handshake With Alabama

The Alabama Republicans see an opportunity this election cycle to do something they have NEVER done before... control the state legislature with a majority in both houses. They think they have a chance to accomplish this in November, and have decided to do a state-level version of the "Contract with America." They call it the "Handshake with Alabama."

To read their proposed agenda if they obtain a majority in the Legislature, follow this link:
http://www.politicsalabama.org/2010_Republican_Handshake_with_Alabama_Agenda_Monday.pdf

The are promising the predictable: reduce state spending, block Obama's federal agenda whenever possible, creating jobs, ending corruption, and doing something about illegal immigration. Yes, they're really aiming to cash in on all the popular hot spots of the day.


Okay, let's look at this. The agenda looks good, though I'd really like to see a few more things in it. For example, what about pledging to reduce the ballot access and retention requirements for third-party and independent candidates? In 2006, 50% of the Legislature was elected with no opposition in the general election, so it seems to me that more candidates would be a good thing for Alabama voters.

But ignoring that, the agenda doesn't look half bad... though I have two major questions. Do they REALLY mean it, or will the "handshake" be forgotten just like most of the "Contract with America" was forgotten once the Republicans took power? The second question is, even if they DO really mean it, will they be able to hold their majority together to get these items passed?

A third concern is that the details, conspicuously absent from this agenda document, won't live up to the grandiose ideals. For example, everybody agreed that we needed to "reform" the health care system in some way, but nobody likes what Congress came up with. According to the latest polling data, 60% of likely voters think that ObamCare should be repealed.

Will the resultant legislation be like ObamaCare in that respect, or will it actually be worth considering?

The most important thing is that Republicans, assuming they manage to win majorities in both houses of the Legislature, don't get drunk with their new power and start acting like the Democrats have for all these years.

Read the rest...

Is A Stock Market Crash Coming?

This piece by Brett Arrends is something that you simply must read. He refuses to predict whether or not a crash is coming, but he does point out ten signs that one might be.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703723504575425723973560744.html

His ten reasons are:

1. The market is already expensive.
2. The Fed is getting nervous.
3. Too many people are too bullish.
4. Deflation is already here.
5. People still owe way too much money.
6. The jobs picture is much worse than they're telling you.
7. Housing remains a disaster.
8. Labor Day is approaching.
9. We're looking at gridlock in Washington. Election season has already begun. And
10. All sorts of other indicators are flashing amber.

Read the entire piece for more details, but the bottom line is that there are a LOT of indicators lining up to point to some pretty shaky times ahead.


Read the rest...

Some Polling Data You Should See

Some polls have been released that you should know about. I believe it's never a waste of time to get this kind of data. Information is important.

The first poll shows that the Republicans have pulled ahead again in the generic congressional ballot. Asked if they would vote for their Republican or Democrat candidate, 48% said Republican and 36% said Democrat. This 12-point lead is the highest they've held in a decade.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot

Republican candidates have jumped out to a record-setting 12-point lead over Democrats on the Generic Congressional Ballot for the week ending Sunday, August 15, 2010. This is the biggest lead the GOP has held in over a decade of Rasmussen Reports surveying.

Eighty-three percent (83%) of Republicans back their party's candidate, while 75% of Democrats support the candidate of their party. Voters not affiliated with either party prefer the GOP candidate by a 52% to 21% margin,

A large majority, nearly two-thirds, of Americans are angry at the policies of the Federal Government.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2010/65_of_voters_are_angry_at_federal_government_s_policies

With midterm elections less than three months away, nearly two-out-of-three U.S. voters (65%) remain at least somewhat angry at the current policies of the federal government, including 40% who are Very Angry.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters nationwide finds that just 30% are not angry at the government, with 13% who are Not At All Angry.

Would it surprise you to learn that the political elites in DC give Congress a better grade than does the rest of the country?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41036.html

While those involved in the political and policy-making process in the nation’s capital didn’t give Congress a rave review, the 24 percent who gave the body either an “A” or “B” is more than twice the percentage of all Americans who were asked the same question.

Asked to grade the “overall efforts” of the current Congress, only 11 percent of all Americans who were asked the question gave the institution an “A” or “B.” Thirty-two percent gave Congress a “C” while 23 graded out its performance as a “D.” Twenty-seven percent gave Congress an “F.”

Like other Americans, 33 percent of D.C. elites gave Congress a “C” and 23 percent gave it a “D.” But only 20 percent of Washington gave Congress a failing grade, 7 percentage points less than the rest of the country.

Finally, a new poll shows that 60% favor repealing ObamaCare, as opposed to only 36% opposing repeal. Additionally, 50% think repeal would be good for the economy.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law

Support for repeal of the health care reform bill is at its highest level in over a month, while the number of voters who believe repeal will be good for the economy has reached a new high.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 60% at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care reform law, while 36% oppose repeal.

To some extent, this is all bad news for any incumbent. To a greater extent, though, the Democrats will take the blame. Why? Because they're in charge, so the blame will be heaped on them to a greater degree than on the GOP.

Read the rest...

A Stimulus Spending Quiz

So, here's the deal. Somebody decided to do a "man-on-the-street" video, giving people an example of how the stimulus money was spent and having them guess if the example is real or fake. It's interesting to watch...





If the player doesn't work, try this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gp0JuBp8xA&f

So, how'd you do?


Read the rest...

Obama And That Pesky Mosque...

Once upon a time, there was an Islamic group that wanted to build a Mosque near ground zero... the site where Islamic extremists crashed airplanes into the World Trade Center and killed thousands of people. Naturally, this generated some opposition, both in the real world and on the Internet... but it was mostly local interest. The highest officials concerned about it were the Mayor and Governor of New York.

And then Barack Obama, President of the United States, opened his mouth and made it an issue that the GOP could use across the nation in their attempt to supplant Democrats as the party in charge of Congress. Friday night, he supported the building of the Mosque.

"As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country," Mr. Obama said to applause from the audience.

"And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable."

By uttering these words, Obama took a local issue and made it national. Now Republicans will be able to quiz their Democrat opponents, asking "Do you agree with your President on this issue?" It was so obviously a mistake that the White House backtracked less than 24 hours later.

"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there," the President said after a speech in Panama City, Florida.

"I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about."

This didn't really clarify anything, though, and White House spokespeople have been further "clarifying" his remarks ever since.

Ooops.


I haven't talked about this issue, though it's been debated for months. I will take this opportunity to weigh in.

In this country, we have a host of legal rights. Quite a lot is legal that wouldn't be legal elsewhere. But adults are expected to understand the difference between legal and wise. Something can be legal without being a good idea... ask any redneck who's ever handed his beer to his friends and proceeded to perform some idiotic stunt that got him injured or embarrassed. Perfectly legal. But it still shouldn't have been done.

We have a similar situation with this mosque at Ground Zero. Is it legal to build a Mosque on private property? Sure it is. Do they have a right to worship their religion? Within the bounds of the law, sure they do. Is it wise to build a mosque on this particular site? Not at all.

To understand this, you have to understand the historical way that Muslims have acted in situations like this. They have spread their religion "by the sword" quite a lot, and they like to build mosques on the sites of their great victories. Because of this, many view this "Victory Mosque" in a very unfavorable light.

Myself included.

There is nothing, literally NOTHING, that can be done to erase the perception that the Victory Mosque is a celebration of thousands of Americans dying at the hands of Muslim terrorists. The PR people may claim that they want the mosque to "heal the wounds" and "bridge the divide" and other such pleasant sounding phrases, but the reality is that this is a celebration of victory.

Over us.

If you think Islam is unpopular NOW, go ahead and build the Victory Mosque at Ground Zero and see what THAT does to your approval indices.

Especially now that PresBo has opened his mouth and made this thing a national issue.

Topic for another day: Does Islam deserve the same blanket protection under the First Amendment that is enjoyed by other religions?

Read the rest...

TV Ad For The LetterBox

If you'll remember from last week, I am in a play being put on at the Prattville community theater. Last week we finished filming a TV ad that will begin airing next week. And for your enjoyment (and hopefully to encourage you to buy a ticket and see the show), here is the TV ad.



If the player doesn't work, try this link:
http://www.politicsalabama.org/WOBT_-_The_Letterbox.wmv

UPDATE: For some reason, the player just isn't working right. I'll keep working on it, though. Until then, you can use the link provided.


Read the rest...

Congress Bails Out... Governments

You know, the definition of "stimulus spending" sure has changed. It started off as "shovel ready projects" which would employ millions, and all the economic activity that generated would jump-start the economy. Well, that $800 billion effort failed.

Now the concept of "stimulus" has been reduced to extending unemployment benefits (Pelosi called that the "best form" of economic stimulus) and, strangely enough, paying the salaries of government employees.

That's right, in their newest, $26 billion stimulus effort, quite a large chunk of it goes to "save" the jobs of thousands of government employees. Forget the private sector, now the government is focused on stimulating the economy by growing the number of government employees... funded, by the way, with tax increases on the private sector.
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2010/08/12/congress_decides_to_help_its_own_98622.html

Although private sector employment has declined by 7.8 million since December 2007, on Tuesday President Obama signed into law the Education Jobs and Medicaid Assistance Act, a bill that would spend $10 billion on state and local government workers and $16 billion on state Medicaid payments. Not a penny for the private sector.

The $26 billion will be funded primarily by higher taxes beginning in 2011 on multinational corporations ($10 billion over the next decade) and cuts to the Food Stamps program in 2014 ($12 billion). No one seriously thinks that the Food Stamps cuts will materialize, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi specifically stated in her description of the bill, "House Democrats will work to restore this funding before cuts are implemented."

With this new law, Congress is rewarding states that have been fiscally irresponsible. It should leave states alone to make needed budget cuts and get their finances in order - and repeal the section of the health care law that expands Medicaid, further burdening states.

Well, isn't that special?


It's no surprise, but is IS more than a little disappointing. Despite multiple examples in history, liberal Democrats still think raising taxes on the private sector, borrowing record amounts of money, and having the government engage in "stimulus spending" will actually HELP the economy.

Look, the only thing that will get the economy into a REAL recovery is the private sector. And tax increases, coupled with new regulations and a skyrocketing national debt, are not going to help the private sector generate jobs and economic activity.

But rather than admitting that their Keynesian economic policies are failing (which they are), the Obama administration has decided to double down on them and stay the course. New taxes and "stimulus spending" continue to be implemented, and all this is going to RUIN the economy.

When the tax increases already in the pipeline hit in 2011 and 2012, the economy will likely respond with a sharp nosedive.

Guys, I don't know if the Republicans actually have seen the light. Maybe they're just saying what we want to hear so they can get back in power and be Kings for a while longer. I don't know. What I DO know is that the Democrats, if left in power after the 2010 elections, are going to do their dead-level best to turn our economic potential into little better than Mexico.

And the Republicans are the only viable option. I will hold my nose and vote for them in November, all the while hoping my fears are ungrounded. The Republicans CAN turn things around if put in power this November... the question is, WILL THEY?

I don't know the answer, but it's a chance that has to be taken.

Read the rest...

Problem: Federal Workers Earn Twice Private Sector

So, the entire country is plunged into a recession. Across the nation, employers and even states are trimming back as much as possible to stay within budget. Not in Washington DC.

While private sector hiring faltered, employment in DC soared. And getting a Federal job is a plum these days, since they earn TWICE AS MUCH as their private-sector counterparts.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/income/2010-08-10-1Afedpay10_ST_N.htm

At a time when workers' pay and benefits have stagnated, federal employees' average compensation has grown to more than double what private sector workers earn, a USA TODAY analysis finds.

Federal workers have been awarded bigger average pay and benefit increases than private employees for nine years in a row. The compensation gap between federal and private workers has doubled in the past decade.

Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available.

As you can see, our Federal government has almost completely ignored the recession, demanding sacrifice and suffering from all of us while living high on the hog themselves.


And it shouldn't be that way. A government that is responsive to the people SHOULD be cutting back... reducing salaries and work rosters. So far, the Federal government hasn't made one single effort to do that. While Congress fights over whether or not to increase spending and raise taxes, the rest of us are wondering if they live in an entirely different economy than the rest of us. Let us eat cake, I guess.

This is yet another example of how out of touch our current political leadership is with the rest of the country. Re-election considerations aside, they're really not worried that much about the recession because it hasn't really affected them. And it hasn't affected them because most of the DC economy is geared around Federal employees and elected officials.

If this is a time of sacrifice and cutting back, and it is exactly that for most of the country, then I'd like to see the Federal government pitch in with a little of it. Cut back on salary and benefits for Federal workers. Heck, fire a few here and there, you know.

The taxpayers of this nation are not an ever-full cookie jar, into which you can plunge your hand and come out with more and more goodies. The profligate ways of Washington politicians are pushing this country into bankruptcy, and are preventing any kind of economic recovery from developing. It's time this STOPPED... while we still have a strong nation to be proud of.

Read the rest...