Showing posts with label commies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label commies. Show all posts

Friday, April 30, 2010

It's like living in a novel. An Ayn Rand novel...

Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others. --Rand Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

From InvestmentNews' "Taking it to The Street" article on 4/30:



The AFL-CIO, the 11-million-member labor federation, is urging Congress to impose a transaction tax on securities trading to help cover the $900 billion cost for a government jobs program they want lawmakers to create.
Why even bother creating the jobs? Why don't they just demand that the government redistribute the money directly to them? I mean, not via check, because they'd have to go to a BANK to get it cashed, but maybe through an envelope of cash?

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Secret identity revealed!


C'mon - the resemblance is uncanny!

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Who was that guy from Georgia, who grew peanuts and flew in Air Force One?

From "Inflation's coming V-Shaped Recovery" in Forbes:


Last week's release of the Producer Price Index should have sent shivers down the spines of those who worry about silly things like profit margins. Prices for finished goods were up 0.7% month-over-month and 6% year-over-year. Intermediate goods prices were up 7.7% year-over-year. Prices for crude goods have soared 3.2% since March and 33.4% on an annual basis. If that's not a V-shaped recovery in inflation, what would you call it?

The Consumer Price Index is up 2.4% over the past 12 months. No, that level alone does not equal intractable inflation, but it's still a big jump from last summer's 2% CPI drop. Thanks to the Fed's record-sized balance sheet ($2.32 trillion), which has grown by $20 billion since since last week alone, inflation data has become disturbing. April's import prices were up 0.7% from March and 11.4% from a year ago.

What's it called when you have high unemployment and high inflation? Oh yeah - staglfation! Malaise! Jimmy F'ng Carter fucks with our economy from beyond the grave through this administration! **update: James Carter apparently not dead.

Perfect summary from Mike Pento's article:
The losers in all this are members of the general public, who are suffering the double whammy of high unemployment and the erosion of their purchasing power.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

My local school budget

Data from http://www.middletownk12.org/finance/files/User%20Friendly%20Budget%202010-11.pdf


















































































































































































Pupils 2009 2010 Net Net %
Pupils on Roll Regular Full-Time 8540 8814 274 3.2%
Pupils on Roll Regular Shared-Time 86 84 -2 -2.3%
Pupils on Roll Reg Accr. Adult High Sch 16 22 6 37.5%
Pupils on Roll - Special Full-Time 1461 1381 -80 -5.5%
Pupils on Roll - Special Shared-Time 101 108 7 6.9%
Private School Placements 58 53 -5 -8.6%
Total 10262 10462 200 1.9%   As pupils increase…
 
Selected Items 09-10 10-11 Net Net %  
Total Operating Budget 146,208,972 140,366,709 -5,842,263 -4.0%   1. ...we spend less overall
Local Tax Levy 119,793,275 123,878,213 4,084,938 3.4%   2. but we're taxed more
Regular Instruction 51,142,450 48,884,706 -2,257,744 -4.4%   3a. even though we're spending less on teaching
School Sponsored Athletics 1,418,274 1,152,279 -265,995 -18.8%   3b. And less on sports
Personal Services - Employee Benefits 22,499,239 23,808,496 1,309,257 5.8%   4. but we are spending a million more on benefits
Total Comparative Per Pupil Cost 12,638 12,106 -532 -4.2%   5. so we spend less per kid overall
Classroom-Salaries and Benefits 7,240 7,505 265 3.7%   6. but more per kid on teachers
Employee Benefits as a % of Salaries 23.4 26.7 3 14.1%   7. and those benefit costs are rising

And apparently those benefit costs are rising even after the layoffs of 124 district staff, including 72.5 teaching positions! [http://www.app.com/article/20100420/NEWS/4210326/1283/LOCAL07/Middletown-voters-oust-school-board-incumbents-reject-budget]

Tuesday, February 02, 2010

At least the UAW is paid to work poorly


Hooray! Another victory for the glorious proletarian revolution, keeping the capitalist oppressors’ foot off our necks. All hail our brave and industrious comrades in the teachers’ unions! Look how they make all our lives better – especially our most precious resource, the future tax- and dues-payers of the great collective (what the free-thinking non-union aristocrats still condescendingly call “children”):

DA: NYC Teacher Had 4th-Graders Fight In Class
[Link to cbs story]

A teacher at a New York City public school has been charged with forcing his fourth graders to fight in the classroom. The allegations are startling; that a fourth grade teacher at PS 65 in Queens not only condoned, but encouraged two boys to turn his classroom into their very own private "fight club." …

Prosecutors say Gullotta [the teacher] then instructed the boys to lie to the school nurse about what happened….
Of course, the part about this being good for the children is bullshit. Thanks to the union, this guy can’t be fired, even though he was arrested. He’s still on the public payroll, as are many other non-fireable teachers. Sure, deep down, in the slimy dungeon core of the educational establishment there’s some level of normal thought where at least they pull them out of the classroom, but hey – you get to keep paying your fair share to keep them employed doing nothing! I was going to just link to the article about NYC spending $53 million to keep them plugged into the union machine, but instead why don’t you Google “paid not to teach” and see how many of these stories come up… NATIONWIDE!

Guess what? The real travesty is not just there’s a 1930s-style industrial union thieving from the taxpayers, fighting every single reform, and corrupting state and municipal politics… it’s that there are actually great teachers in the public schools, people who can change kids’ lives (for the better, not like the example above), and they’re trapped in the teamsters. They can’t be promoted or rewarded, nor can they protect our children by excelling at their jobs and having the crappy teachers wash out of the system. Or even the ones running a fight club. Such a system encourages, enforces, and engrains mediocrity. But hey, pay your dues.
Oh, and for the record I have many friends who are teachers in public schools. They of course belong to the trade unions. I don’t have any friends who are poor or mediocre teachers. If any of them read this and consider it an attack on them, or their profession, I encourage them to read this again; my beef, like almost everyone else in the private sector, is not with teachers but the unions.

Monday, January 11, 2010

It only makes sense if you don't think too hard...



Again, Comrade Kucinich should be voted out of the public eye. His comments, and this article, reflect two big logical flaws in the whole discussion over bonuses.

The first is that it's somehow "bad" that people make a lot of money; this is a ludicrous idea assuming that the money is being made honestly, not stolen. The second is that "banks" should be discouraged from taking risks; this is silly. Taking risk, in anticipation of adequate reward, is the whole point of the banking/investment industry, and any well-functioning (read:capitalist) economy in general.

Monday, November 16, 2009

ObamaCare - the prequel


You can go to the doctor and get medicine for a plethora of ailments. You can get everything from anti-fungal cream to steroids to Viagra to cancer drugs to knee replacements to lobotomies to radiation treatment to allergy shots to a baboon liver installed instead of your real one. All from doctors and free-market pharmaceutical companies that develop this stuff.

But the one thing right now controlled by the government, H1N1 Piggy Flu vaccine - just try getting that. Nope. Some of you (read:me) don't qualify. Those that do (read:wife and kid) had to wait almost three hours in line - OUTSIDE. In the COLD. Where they could GET SICK. But government-run healthcare is BETTER, you see. It's better because EVERYONE was waiting in the cold. It's unfair if only some people are stuck outside.

Oh, and they may run out of vaccine. Again.

Tuesday, November 03, 2009

No pizza. How about some "F You" instead?

It used to be that when I got accosted by panhandlers it would be someone completely derelict - the kind of hobo you'd see on the street yelling at trees or fighting with ghosts, sporting a mangy beard that was half Taliban, half pubes. But now we live in the age of Obama, and with all this hope and change burrowing its way to our collective prostate, being a beggar is far less exclusive. Today I was stopped on the street by a guy. Well-dressed, clean-shaven, and other than wearing dark glasses at night he seemed "normal", whatever that means nowadays. He even carried a briefcase. I stopped because he threw a "dude!" At me as we passed each other - and I thought he recognized me. Not "Excuse me, sir." Not "Buddy can you spare a dime?" Dude.

Then, he reaches out to shake my hand! "Hey man, could you help me out?" Oh shit! Stranger danger, I thought. No handshakes from random stranger in swine-flu season, thanks. "What's up?" I throw back at him briskly. Or bruskly, whichever's the right vocabulary word.

He seemed affronted. "With all due respect - with ALL DUE RESPECT - I'm trying to get a slice of pizza..." He had to repeat "with all due respect" for me, because apparently that's like a secret code word for "buy me pizza". My toddler just uses "PIZZA! PIZZA!", I should teach him this trick.

Anyway, I high-tailed it outta there. I had to hurry to vote against Corzine (which in Russian translates loosely to "basket").

How about you? Do you buy pizza for strangers?

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Wisdom from the "Velvet President"

Speaking on Iran:

"What is possible and what I would repeatedly warn against is the policy of
compromise and the notion that if we don't provoke evil, it will just go away by
itself," Havel said. "On the contrary, that would just make it stronger."

--Vaclav Havel

The rest here.

Monday, April 27, 2009

All over Oceania ... (#2)

There have been spontaneous demonstrations of party workers voicing their gratitude and joy.

From today's wsj.com's "Best of the web today":

***


Accountability Journalism

It's been more than three months, but the thrill still isn't gone for the Associated Press's Liz Sidoti:

It didn't take long for Barack Obama--for all his youth and inexperience--to get acclimated to his new role as the calming leader of a country in crisis. "I feel surprisingly comfortable in the job," the nation's 44th president said a mere two weeks after taking the helm. . . .Over nearly 100 days as president, Obama has applied the same "no drama" leadership and calculated approach to governing that he did to campaigning.

As an audacious candidate, Obama meticulously built a powerhouse organization and fundraising juggernaut to engineer his victory. As a fledgling president, he similarly has mapped out a big-risk agenda that he's methodically begun to execute, keeping to the discipline that has been a hallmark of his life.

Rookie jitters? Far from it.

Sidoti also reports that Obama is "confident almost to a fault," that he has "kept that focused attitude in the White House, while exhibiting few flashes of any off-putting, self-important tone," that he has "reached the pinnacle of his political ambition," and that he seems "has seemed extraordinarily at ease as president from the day that he took office."

Oh, also, he has "made a once skeptical electorate comfortable with the notion that a black, 47-year-old, first-term senator with limited experience could take over as the leader of the free world," he speaks in "firm, yet soothing tones," he uses "a just-folks approach to identify with economically struggling citizens" and displays "wonkish tendencies, too," all the while engaging in "witty banter" while striking "a statesmanlike stance."

OK, Liz, we'll bite: Is there anything you don't like about Obama?

Well, he "has steamed with anger" at AIG executives and "gone after lawmakers who refused to support the $787 billion economic stimulus package." He has also "shown contriteness" (which we'd think was a good quality, though we suppose it also suggests he has something to be contrite about) and "shown irritation at criticism." He "has let it be known he hasn't forgotten how politics works." And despite being "careful," he "has made a few errors."

But never fear: "So far, the public has liked what it's seen." "Most people in the U.S."--and Liz Sidoti herself is nothing if not a person in the U.S.--"consider their new president to be a strong, ethical leader who is working for change as he promised in his campaign." And "most people say he's on TV just the right amount."

"Overall," Sidoti sums up, "Obama seems unflappable."

And wouldn't lesser men wither under the kind of tough-minded coverage he's received from the likes of Liz Sidoti?

***

Friday, January 30, 2009

The solution to the financial crisis

Wow, am I relieved. After a harrowing 2008, when it seemed nobody knew how to even approach the financial crisis, relief is here! We've finally figured it out, through the combined efforts of the brightest minds in finance, government, academia, and meth production.

For months, our leaders were chasing the problem down dead ends, but now they know where to look. The global financial crisis is apparently caused by... JOHN THAIN'S RUG! That's right dear reader, you were probably fooled, as I was, as our government was, into thinking the problem was in fact the Citi corporate jet. But in hindsight it's so lucid! A jet couldn't cause banks to fail! Only an $80k rug can do that!

Now that we know the culprit, we can get to work. The other problems will sort themselves out; Andy Cuomo will "get back" the compensation from the financial industry, Obama will give a speech condemning greed and profits (check), Republicans will make sure everything's still ok with Jesus (who keeps a close eye on finance), and Joe Biden will keep doing...whatever it is that he does for a living.

Meanwhile, Ken Lewis will destroy the evil rug by burning it in effigy on the White House lawn. There will be spontaneous demonstrations of party workers voicing their gratitude and joy. Then POOF! Crisis solved! Oh and somehow Pelosi will work free birth control into this - I'm not sure how but it seems to be the right thing to do.

Hope is here!

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

NJ as a bad example

Great – this is how we want to be remembered, as an example to the rest of the nation of what not to do. This coming at a time when Louisiana and Illinois are still... states. Unfortunately this post in the WSJ doesn’t cover the state’s endemic corruption problem, or the terminal cancer of union power in the state government and education system.

New Jersey Is the Perfect Bad Example

Obama should look here to see what high taxes do.


When Barack Obama makes his New Year's resolutions, at the top of his list ought to be the following: "I will not allow America to become New Jersey." Think of it as our gift to the nation. Other states offer promising experiments in areas such as Medicaid, taxes, education and regulatory reform. In contrast, the People's Republic of New Jersey offers America something truly unique: the perfect bad example.

As harmful as this has been for our own prosperity, our example could be invaluable for President-elect Obama. That's especially true given that his team appears to be considering some of the same things that have long been popular in Trenton. For years, the solons in our state capital have operated on the assumption that you can have high taxes everywhere -- on income, on property, on business -- without suffering any consequences.

Well, Gov. Jon Corzine is now dealing with those consequences, and his budgets show it. Earlier this year, he pushed through a budget that was one of the few in New Jersey history to be less than the one that preceded it. With revenues now running $1.2 billion short of what was expected, the next budget will undoubtedly be tougher still.

Not all of Mr. Corzine's choices have been good ones. In fairness, however, he is dealing with huge problems that have been years in the making. In some ways, we are a mini-California. That is to say, where New Jersey was once a national leader in terms of economic growth and job creation, more recently we have become a national laggard.

It seems not to have dented the consciousness of our political class that New Jersey's dismal economic performance might be linked to the state's tax policy. According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, New Jersey is home to the most hostile tax environment for business in the nation. We also bear the nation's highest burden of state and local taxes. And on the list of the 10 counties with the highest median property tax, we claim seven of them.

During the last recession, we began to feel the full weight of these burdens. Other states responded by cutting back on spending and getting their houses in order. Not New Jersey. Then-Gov. Jim McGreevey added to the burden by borrowing and spending and raising the corporate tax -- including the imposition of an alternative minimum tax on business. And we've been paying for these bad choices ever since.

Mr. Obama might pay special attention to what these measures have meant for jobs, especially given his expressed concern for the struggling middle class. Though the state did ultimately emerge from recession in 2003, private-sector job creation since then has been a pale shadow of what we enjoyed after the recessions of the 1980s and 1990s.

Of course, there was one area where jobs did grow. From 2000 to 2007, says the New Jersey Business & Industry Association, the government added 54,800 jobs. To put that in proper perspective, that works out to 93% of all jobs created in New Jersey over those seven years.

So how do we respond to these new hard times? Beginning New Year's Day, New Jersey workers will see even more money taken from their paychecks. The money will support a new mandate offering six weeks of paid family leave to almost all New Jersey employees -- right on down to those working in very small operations. In itself, the family-leave tax will not be the ruin of the state economy. But the imposition of yet another new tax at this moment bespeaks a lack of seriousness about what both New Jersey workers and businesses can afford.

For the moment, Mr. Corzine, like Mr. Obama, is putting his faith in public-works spending. Indeed, he has even called on the president-elect to expand his own plans for an infrastructure stimulus to $1 trillion. And it would be hard to deny that our tired infrastructure could use some attention.

But amid all the debate over jump-starting the economy through public works, we risk losing sight of a larger truth: What governors and citizens alike need most is a growing economy that is creating jobs for the people and sending revenue to the capital. Over the long run, the only way to have a healthy and growing economy is to do exactly what New Jersey has not: Trust the people with their own money, and create an environment where initiative and enterprise are rewarded rather than penalized.

Absent a thorough-going revolution in Trenton, New Jersey may be lost for some time to come. But if Mr. Obama can learn from our bad example and do the opposite, New Jersey's loss might yet be America's gain.




Thursday, November 13, 2008

Tenure: good for teachers, bad for kids.

Could there be hope? In DC of all places, someone's standing up to the "education establishment" mafia. NYT's article re the efforts of Superintendent Michelle Rhee to reform the teaching establishment has some great ideas for reforming tenure (even though it doesn't go as far as eliminating it). If Randi Weingarten's worried, you know it's on the right track!

Thursday, November 06, 2008

The Tax System - Explained With Beer

This was emailed to me last night, and though I don't know if the attribution is correct, it's a very clear description of America's tax system. Plus it talks about beer.

The Tax System - Explained With Beer

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
  • The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
  • The fifth would pay $1.
  • The sixth would pay $3.
  • The seventh would pay $7.
  • The eighth would pay $12.
  • The ninth would pay $18.
  • The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

  • The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
  • The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
  • The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
  • The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 ( 25% savings).
  • The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).
  • The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

House Democrats contemplate abolishing 401(k) tax breaks

Here we goooooooooooooo! Down the drain that is. The socialisation of America has begun, and Obama's not even in office yet! This October 12th article in Investment News highlight a brilliant plan to replace your 401(k) tax deduction with... SURPRISE! A GOVERNMENT PROGRAM!!


House Democrats contemplate abolishing 401(k) tax breaks

Mandatory contributions from workers considered
By Sara Hansard October 12, 2008, 6:01 AM EST

Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nation's $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.


House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif., and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, are looking at redirecting those tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute.
A plan by Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic-policy analysis at The New School for Social Research in New York, contains elements that are being considered. She testified last week before Mr. Miller's Education and Labor Committee on her proposal.

At that hearing, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, Peter Orszag, testified that some $2 trillion in retirement savings has been lost over the past 15 months.
Under Ms. Ghilarducci's plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5% of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3% a year, adjusted for inflation.
The current system of providing tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated.
"I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s," Ms. Ghilarducci said in an interview. "401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won't have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break."
Under the current 401(k) system, investors are charged relatively high retail fees, Ms. Ghilarducci said.
"I want to spend our nation's dollar for retirement security better. Everybody would now be covered" if the plan were adopted, Ms. Ghilarducci said.
She has been in contact with Mr. Miller and Mr. McDermott about her plan, and they are interested in pursuing it, she said.
"This [plan] certainly is intriguing," said Mike DeCesare, press secretary for Mr. McDermott.
"That is part of the discussion," he said.
While Mr. Miller stopped short of calling for Ms. Ghilarducci's plan at the hearing last week, he was clearly against continuing tax breaks as they currently exist.
SAVINGS RATE

"The savings rate isn't going up for the investment of $80 billion," he said. "We have to start to think about ... whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that's not generating what we now say it should."
"From where I sit that's just crazy," said John Belluardo, president of Stewardship Financial Services Inc. in Tarrytown, N.Y. "A lot of people contribute to their 401(k)s because of the match of the em-ployer," he said.Mr. Belluardo's firm does not manage assets directly.
Higher-income employers provide matching funds to employee plans so that they can qualify for tax benefits for their own defined contribution plans, he said.
"If the tax deferral goes away, the employers have no reason to do the matches, which primarily help people in the lower income brackets," Mr. Belluardo said.
"This is a battle between liberalism and conservatism," said Christopher Van Slyke, a partner in the La Jolla, Calif., advisory firm Trovena LLC, which manages $400 million. "People are afraid because their accounts are seeing some volatility, so Democrats will seize on the opportunity to attack a program where investors control their own destiny," he said.
The Profit Sharing/ 401(k) Council of America in Chicago, which represents employers that sponsor defined contribution plans, is "staunchly committed to keeping the employee benefit system in American voluntary," said Ed Ferrigno, vice president in the Washington office.
"Some of the tenor [of the hearing last week] that the entire system should be based on the activities of the markets in the last 90 days is not the way to judge the system," he said.
No legislative proposals have been introduced and Congress is out of session until next year.
However, most political observers believe that Democrats are poised to gain seats in both the House and the Senate, so comments made by the mostly Democratic members who attended the hearing could be a harbinger of things to come.

ADVICE AT ISSUE
In addition to tax breaks for 401(k)s, the issue of allowing investment advisers to provide advice for 401(k) plans was also addressed at the hearing.
Rep. Robert Andrews, D-N.J., was critical of Department of Labor proposals made in August that would allow advisers to give individual advice if the advice was generated using a computer model.
Mr. Andrews characterized the proposals as "loopholes" and said that investment advice should not be given by advisers who have a direct interest in the sale of financial products.
The Pension Protection Act of 2006 contains provisions making it easier for investment advisers to give individualized counseling to 401(k) holders.
"In retrospect that doesn't seem like such a good idea to me," Mr. Andrews said. "This is an issue I think we have to revisit. I frankly think that the compromise we struck in 2006 is not terribly workable or wise," he said.
Last Thursday, the Department of Labor hastily scheduled a public hearing on the issue in Washington for Oct. 21.
The agency does not frequently hold public hearings on its proposals.
E-mail Sara Hansard at shansard@investmentnews.com.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Obama and the Tax Tipping Point

How long before taxpayers are pushed too far?

Another great articulation of why the Obama tax programs (in fact the Democrats' tax programs since the 1940s) lead exclusively to ruin.

This opinion piece - "Obama and the Tax Tipping Point" - is in today's WSJ. Today in OpinionJournal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122463231048556587.html?mod=rss_opinion_main


The biggest problem with Obama is of course McCain. The guy has no economic or tax plan to counter Obama's nonsense. Where's Steve Forbes with his flat tax proposal? Hell even hillbilly Huckabee figured out that fairtax.org had a point. McCain's not FOR anything, just against Obama.

Monday, October 20, 2008

Unions lie again

With alarming regularity I get factcheck items in my inbox about how the unions distort, manipulate, and flat-out lie to advance their socialist looter agenda.

This one is about two of my favorite unions, the UAW (determined to destroy the american auto industry) and the SEIU (the folks who instead of going to work get drunk and bang on drums, pots & pans, and passersby in front of the giant rat in NY).

They're both running false ads against McCain's proposed health "plan". Link: http://www.factcheck.org/mobile/article.php?id=811&page=3. There's enough wrong with his plan that it can be criticized with truth, they don't have to make shit up.

Friday, October 03, 2008

The origins of the problem

This post (http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/easescredit.asp) from snopes.com has links to the NYT stories it quotes. Hmmmm lesseee now... Bush was *for* oversight, Barney Frank and the Democrats of course opposed it, and BTW the Clinton administration started the subprime mess to placate their voting blocs... that doesn't seem to jive with the current rhetoric.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Wtf?? Bailout the UAW?

Bush approves a $25B loan package to BAIL OUT auto makers today! I guess that's ok since GM is Main Street not Wall Street. Why reward big auto for mismanagement and lack of innovation? Why reward the greedy bloodsucking unions that devoured these companies the way maggots devour a corpse? Is it because the socialist unions control enough weak, corrupt politicians and the Democratic machines in the midwest? I wonder.

Monday, September 29, 2008

Don't be greedy; share the blame!

Well, looks like the Democrats are again poised to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Here we are with America blaming Bush and the Republicans for the stock market slide and something nebulously called "bailouts for Wall Street" - and all the Dems had to do to convince voters they were helping is just SHUT UP and pass the bailout plan. Then, Nancy decides to wing it while giving her speech. Why? Was open mic night canceled? Why use the occasion to sound like a petty vindictive crank on the junior prom committee? She could of just shut up and not given the gaggle of stupids the knife with which to cut off their noses from our collective spited face! Or maybe she's been a partisan hack so long that she in fact couldn't have.