See Ya Next Year

See y'all after the New Year!

Best Wishes to All!

Merry Christmas

Cloture

This chart shows the history of cloture use in the United States Senate.

Cloture is defined as:

"The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster.

Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes."

On March 8, 1917, in a specially called session of the 65th Congress, the Senate agreed to a rule that essentially preserved its tradition of unlimited debate.

The rule required a two-thirds majority to end debate and permitted each member to speak for an additional hour after that before voting on final passage.

Over the next 46 years, the Senate managed to invoke cloture on only five occasions.

Long known for its emphasis on lengthy deliberation, the Senate in most circumstances allows its Members to debate issues for as long as they want.

Further, the Senate has few ways either to limit the duration of debates or to bring filibusters
(extended “talkathons”) to an end.

For instance, a Senator may offer a non-debatable motion to table (or kill) an amendment or he or she might ask unanimous consent to restrict debate on pending matters.

The Senate has one formal rule — Cloture — for imposing limits on the further consideration of an issue.

As can be seen in the chart, Cloture has been used sparingly by the Senate until this administration.

The Senate has traditionally felt that spirited debate was essential to the representative government process, and that its ability to insure prudent, just, legislation was enhanced by careful consideration.

However, Harry Reid has found new use for Cloture.

He's using it to silence opposition, eliminate disagreement, and muzzle dissenting opinion.

In short, it's become his favorite tool for enforcing his dictatorship, even against members of his own party.

He's using it to cram legislation down the throats of legislators regardless of party, and his constituents.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.

Hopefully, people will remember this picture come re-election time for His Highness Harry, and it will translate to hundreds of thousands of votes to park his ass in Searchlight instead of Washington, bringing cloture to his reign of terror.


Forcible ways make not an end of evil, but leave hatred and malice behind them. --- Thomas Browne

All legislative experiments in the way of making forcible distribution of the wealth produced in any country have failed. --- Leland Stanford

Scrooged

In the spirit of Christmas as delivered by the Obama administration, it's probably appropriate to let you know what your bailout dollars are up to.

Y'all lent Chrysler $3.7 Billion a while ago through that super slush fund called TARP that Obama and his minions said was a rush rush emergency or else deal.

Supposedly, it was to be paid back once Chrysler got healthy again.

'Course, there wasn't any real plan on how that was supposed to happen, 'cept for some vague deal where Fiat would take over the company and own it along with the UAW.

Now Fiat, that Italian giant, does have some experience with dealing with unions ... after all, almost all of Italy's businesses have confrontational dealings with the various unions that control most of that country.

But the reality is that Fiat saving and / or turning around Chrysler is about as likely as AlGore swearin' off global warming.

See, Fiat hasn't sold cars here since Haight Asbury, and has no cars or trucks currently certiied for sale here.

No vehicles with EPA fuel economy certification, no vehicles with crash bumper certification, or airbag certification, or collapsible steering column certification, or side door beam intrusion certification, or rollover certification, or.... well y'all get the idea.

Certifications that typically take American manufacturers, who have done it before, and know the process, about four years.

So, it appears that it may be four or more years before Chrysler has any new products for sale from Fiat.

And remember, Barry Obama was telling everyone less than six months ago that Chrysler was failing because they didn't build cars that anyone wanted.

That would be those cars that they have to sell now until the new Fiats get here....

So, what's going on with your bailout money?

Chrysler announced through filings last week that its pre-bankruptcy self doesn't appear to want to make good on its $3.7 billion loan from U.S. taxpayers.

Your money went to the old Chrysler (now called, officially, the "OldCar Co") through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in April of 2009 when the company announced its "fast track" Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Back in April, then-CEO Bob Nardelli told the country before the money came through:

"Our viability plan demonstrates that Chrysler will repay the U.S. government loans in full, with a premium beginning in 2012. As we have indicated all along, shared sacrifice is necessary for Chrysler's survival."

Now Nardelli is long gone, so he doesn't have to answer why Chrysler will be renegging on its obligation.

 The announcement also appears to fly in the face of TARP's provisions, which Barry Obama said counted recoupment as a major factor in its passage through Congress.

He promised that no TARP funds would ever add to the national debt.

But now that Chrysler says it won't be making repayment, that doesn't appear to be the case.

Here's what New Chrysler spokesperson Shawn Morgan said recently:

"First, the "Chrysler" you are talking about is now called "OldCar Co" and that company is still in bankruptcy. That company, "OldCar Co" made a filing last week saying they wouldn't likely be repaying the government loan. However, you'd need to speak with that company for a comment. We are now the "New Chrysler" and we really have no obligation there."

The nuances of the "old Chrysler" and "new Chrysler" as created by the bankruptcy filing are probably not really important to taxpayers, who apparently have been ripped off again.

See, what Obama and his henchmen did was essentially wipe out all the debt, shareholders, bondholders, and creditors of the Chrysler Corporation (the old one), and, transfer the valued assets to the new company along with just under $4 billion in capital (your money).

Hell, anybody ought to be able to make money in that situation, especially the New Chrysler with the UAW helping it out as owners.

But repay the $4 Billion?

$4 billion is a lot of money, especially when it's taxpayer money.

But, at least at the moment, Chrysler couldn't repay that amount if it wanted to.

Chrysler is on track to post the worst sales performance of the 10 largest automakers this year.

Sales fell 38% during the first 11 months of this year.

In November, sales fell another 25% even though Ford and General Motors largely swung back to even compared to the same month a year ago.

Underscoring its lack of product, Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep have no press conferences scheduled for the all-important January Detroit auto show where new models are typically unveiled amid lots of hoopla.

Chrysler used to hold one press conference for each brand before its bankruptcy.

Chrysler dealers are stuck selling the same tired models that have gone without updates for years now.

This flies in the face of Chrysler's last major government bailout, of course.

Back in 1979 the company took $1.5 billion in government-backed loans (while only $1 per year went to pay CEO Lee Iacocca's salary at the time) but was able to repay it ahead of schedule.

Which begs the question: Since the UAW are now owners of Chrysler, what obligation do they have to repay the taxpayer?

Or will they hide behind the "Old Chrysler / New Chrysler" alias as well?

Half the work that is done in the world is to make things appear what they are not.

--- E. R. Beadle

 

Politicians are masters of the art of deception. --- Martin L. Gross

George Smith Patton Jr.

You may or may not recognize the name.

But with the addition of one simple word, you surely will:

General George Patton.

Old Blood and Guts.

Born November 11, 1885.

Died on this date, December 21, 1945.

Patton is such a figure of legend and presence, it seems foolhardy to frame him in words other than his own.

So, I'll let him do it:

"Americans play to win at all times. I wouldn't give a hoot and hell for a man who lost and laughed."

"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week."

"A piece of spaghetti or a military unit can only be led from the front end."

"Always do everything you ask of those you command."

"I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom."

"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

"It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived."

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

"Prepare for the unknown by studying how others in the past have coped with the unforeseeable and the unpredictable."

"Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack."

"We herd sheep, we drive cattle, we lead people. Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way."

“Moral courage is the most valuable and usually the most absent characteristic in men.”

"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."

“A man must know his destiny… if he does not recognize it, then he is lost. By this I mean, once, twice, or at the very most, three times, fate will reach out and tap a man on the shoulder… if he has the imagination, he will turn around and fate will point out to him what fork in the road he should take, if he has the guts, he will take it.”

"Better to fight for something than live for nothing."

"I am a strong believer in prayer. There are three ways that men get what they want: by planning, by working, and by praying. I believe that prayer completes that circuit. It is power."

Any one of those comments, I feel, is worth some serious considerin'.


"He was one of those men born to be a soldier, an ideal combat leader whose gallantry and dramatic personality inspired all he commanded to great deeds of valor." --- Dwight D. Eisenhower

Why GM Will Fail

Since we all (as taxpayers) now own some of GM (properly referred to as "Government Motors"), it's appropriate to consider the potential for success of this investment.

My prognosis? Not too damned good.

Why?

1) The government is good and truly controlling the destiny of the company, putting its fingers into every part of the companys operation, including product decisions, marketing decisions, and the like.

Obama may have said he has no interest in running GM, but the same can't be said for his minions in the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Labor, and many others.

Decisions best left to seasoned auto men (and women) are instead being made by agenda driven bureaucrats.

The government is the ultimate authority for the company.

2) GM is now a private company, with no shareholders to answer to.

It answers only to the government, not to the profit motives and fiscal responsibility of investors.

3) GM no longer has to answer to financial institutions or institutional investors.

The government has guaranteed all of the risk for these institutions, so they have no reason to demand reasonable fiscal governance.

4) GM continues to institutionalize the thinking and decision making processes that got it in trouble in the first place.

Promoting from within will not solve the problem.

It will only be seen as rewarding the behavior and politics tha are the problem.

5) The unions who have contracts with GM now are also owners of the company.

When they sit down to negotiate a labor agreement, it will be a prolonged disaster as the unions try to come to grips with this new conflicting role.

6) The inter-governmental influences on the company are now vastly increased, as evidenced by the recent attempt to lose the costs of the Renaissance Center headquarters.

Trying to cut costs, the company wanted to move everyone out of their headquarters in downtown Detroit to the GM Tech Center in suburban Warren, where the company owns vast amounts of empty offices.

Doing so would have substantially cut overhead.

But, the Detroit government leaders leaned on the White House, so the company is now moving only a portion of the execs out of their rented quarters.

7) The numbers just don't make any sense.

Financial analysts have said that $83,000,000,000 is what New GM would have to be worth in order for us to break even on our investment.

But $56,000,000,000 is what GM was worth at its all time peak in 2000.

And the market for new cars is a long way away from what it was in 2000.

My bet is that once healthcare reform is pushed down our throats so that the unions don't have to assume all the unfunded healthcare costs, GM will be allowed to go bankrupt.

As it should have before the government bailed it out.

"Neither situations nor people can be altered by the interference of an outsider. If they are to be altered, that alteration must come from within.” --- Ronald Reagan

Christmas Spirit

From WTVC-TV Website:

 CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. (WTVC-TV) - A 4-year-old boy, beer in hand, clad in a dress, is accused of stealing Christmas presents from his neighbors.

It's a strange story, but also a sad one.

April Wright is 21 years old and is going through a divorce with her husband who is in jail.

She says she has no idea how her 4-year-old managed to get out of the house, open a beer, and steal the neighbors presents from under their tree.

Now she says she won't let it happen again.

The child, Hayden Wright, was found around 1:45 am Tuesday, wandering the streets of his neighborhood. In a police reports, officers said he was wearing a little girl's dress and drinking a beer.

The police report says the child had to be taken to the hospital to be treated for alcohol consumption.

Wright says she woke up that night at 1:45 am and panicked when she found Hayden was gone.

She says she put safety devices on all the doors so her kids couldn't get out, but Hayden was able to break the safety device off the doorknob and get outside.

Once out, Wright says her four year old followed his father's footsteps and was found on Blue Spruce Road, drinking.

The Hamilton County Sheriff's Office report says Hayden rang the doorbell a few houses down and the neighbor answered, finding the child holding a partially consumed 12-ounce beer.

Wright said, "He got it out of my father's cooler in the back and how he got it open I don't understand because it was one of those tab beers, and we haven't taught him those."

But it doesn't stop there.

The report said Hayden then snuck into a neighbor's house through an unlocked front door, and stole five wrapped Christmas gifts.

One was a girl's brown dress which Hayden was wearing when police found him.

"Going to the neighbor's house and taking their presents, very embarrassing," said April.

She admits she was not just embarrassed, but scared, and rushed to the hospital that night with Hayden.

She said she tries to be a good mother and loves her son, but now feels like a failure.

"He runs away trying to find his father," she said. "He wants to get in trouble so he can go to jail because that's where his daddy is."

I've got nuthin. No, really. I've got nuthin'.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." --- Albert Einstein

"In each family a story is playing itself out, and each family's story embodies its hope and despair." --- Auguste Napier

Hmmmmm.......

Can somebody please tell me …


Why Obama thinks it’s necessary to import criminals from Gitmo to Illinois? Does he think there's a shortage of crooks in his home state?

Why all these "greenies" had to fly off to Copenhagen for their meetings? If they are really concerned about carbon footprints, wouldn’t GoToMeeting be a more logical way to do it (and cheaper, too!)?

If Obama started this whole healthcare fiasco because he wanted to cover the 14 million uninsured and lower the cost for insurance for the rest of us… and now that they have pitched out the public option and the early Medicare eligibility, the CBO says costs will rise and there will be 25 million uninsured… what’s the point of pursuing it?

Are all of these White House intruders a sign that the Secret Service is being overruled on procedure by Administration staff, or are they a “created” threat that signals the eventual replacement of the Secret Service guarding the President by the military?

Is there any piece of legislation that this Administration hasn’t labeled “emergency”, “essential” “because of a crisis” or “needed to be sure we don’t bankrupt the country”?

If the healthcare bill is so bad that the SEIU, Obama’s favorite union, has dropped its support, how will Harry Reid fare with the Culinary Union in his re-election campaign?

If the Fed continues to print enough money to cover all of Obama’s spending programs, does it really matter if counterfeiters devalue it further?

Why, even though 20 or so eyewitnesses saw the Fort Hood shrink shoot all those people, the media still insists on calling him the “alleged” shooter?

And, if that wacko has to be called “alleged”, why doesn’t Tiger deserve the same courtesy?

Why AlGore isn’t getting attacked and derided by the protesters in Copenhagen, based on his personal carbon footprint?

Which sport Tiger was named “Athlete of the Decade” for?

Will not having a healthcare bill done by Christmas cause Dems to back away even more after getting an earful from constituents during their Christmas break?



“If you're not confused, you're not paying attention.” --- Tom Peters


“The truth is that our finest moments are most likely to occur when we are feeling deeply uncomfortable, unhappy, or unfulfilled. For it is only in such moments, propelled by our discomfort, that we are likely to step out of our ruts and start searching for different ways or truer answers.” --- M. Scott Peck

False Valor

I’m a child of the sixties.

A time when America was doing its level best to act like a college student, desperately seeking an identity as it emerged from a frenzied youth.

Protest was the word of the decade.

Whether it was against the war, for civil rights, against bras or for women’s rights, everybody was protesting something.

The central issue in the late sixties was the Viet Nam war.

Mr. Nixon’s war they called it, although, in truth, LBJ owned most of it.

From the sixties protests came the seventies public attitude of repulsiveness toward anything Viet Nam related.

Returning veterans, previously held in high esteem by their country during other wars, now became the objects of derision and disgust.

They were assaulted, spit on, and worse, ignored.

Many came to a point where they would refuse to even admit that they had been in the conflict.

But time heals.

In today’s America, we now have people who weren’t involved in the war, pretending that they were.

On Monday, a Palm Springs pretender accused of impersonating a U.S. Marine and wearing medals for bravery he never earned pled guilty to a federal misdemeanor charge.

Steven Douglas Burton, 39, entered into a plea agreement with the U.S. Attorney's Office Dec. 4 in which the defendant admitted violating a federal statute that prohibits the unauthorized display of military medals.

He could face up to a year in federal prison and $100,000 in fines.

In May, the California Department of Veterans Affairs honored former Cpl. Eric Piotrowski in 2007, presenting him with a Silver Star for his actions years earlier during Viet Nam hostilities.

One problem: He never earned the medal, according to military documents and the FBI, which arrested and charged him May 8 with one misdemeanor count of violating the Stolen Valor Act and one felony count of lying to agents investigating the case.

Richard Strandlof epitomized American heroism.

Strandlof graduated from the Naval Academy, was at the Pentagon on 9/11, deployed to Iraq with the Marines, and survived an IED attack.

Except, he didn’t do any of those things, and on Friday the FBI arrested him  under a rare charge of “stolen valor" for falsely claiming “military decorations or medals”.

The charge can lead to up to one year of jail and a $100,000 fine.

And of course, we’ve had the lingering false heroics of John Kerry and his swift boat years.

So, over time, we’ve gone from people holding military heroes in disdain, to people pretending to be one.

False heroics supporting small people who have done nothing to distinguish themselves.

Make no mistake.

There are many true military heroes.

And, many who have a lot of problems in today’s society.

Veterans health issues, especially mental health issues, are serious problems deserving of serious solutions and serious funding commitments.

But in their efforts to use veterans as yet another pawn in the chess game of social engineering, the same liberals who so distained these soldiers in past decades are now using them as statistics to further their social agenda.

The mainstream media, and the liberal left, would have you believe that war veterans are a sickly, crippled, mentally ill group of drug using victims of the military.

That they are among the largest components of America’s homeless population.

That they can’t or won’t assimilate successfully into the “normal” population, and by extension, our military shouldn’t be considered “normal” or righteous.

An AP story last week announced:

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development announced today the final allocations of more than 10,000 vouchers to local public housing authorities across the country to provide permanent supportive housing for homeless veterans.

"Numerous men and women voluntarily leave their families and put their lives on the line to ensure that we, their fellow Americans, live safely in our homes," said HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan, who announced the $75 million in funding last month with Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric K. Shinseki. "These vouchers offer veterans a permanent home and critically needed supportive services to those who have served our nation."

Now you probably think that as a considered right winger, I’d support anything we can do for our veterans.

And you’d be right.

If the problem was a real problem.

Which, it’s probably not.

I say probably, because our government really has no idea if it’s a problem, or even the magnitude of it.

The Veterans Administration website has this to say:

"Although accurate numbers are impossible to come by -- no one keeps national records on homeless veterans -- the VA estimates that 131,000 veterans are homeless on any given night. And approximately twice that many experience homelessness over the course of a year."

So, by their own admission, they have no idea how many homeless veterans there really are.

But then they go on to say:

"Conservatively, one out of every three homeless men who is sleeping in a doorway, alley or box in our cities and rural communities has put on a uniform and served this country.

According to the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness and the Urban Institute, 1999), veterans account for 23 percent of all homeless people in America."

So although we have no idea how many homless veterans there really are, we now know for certain that whatever that number is, it’s 23% of all the homeless in America.

Not 20%. Not 25%. 23%.

Of some unknown total number.

That alone is a reason to question why we’re allocating $75 million to housing homeless vets.

Why not $50 Million, or $100 million, or even $200 million?

When you look at the source for that data, the "National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness and the Urban Institute, 1999)", you find out that it wasn’t done by the VA or any other veterans organization.

It was done by the Urban Institute, a liberal non-governmental policy group known best for investigative projects like “The Higher Costs of Being Gay” and “Ousting Obesity: Strategies from the Tobacco Wars” and “Can Public Housing Overcome Its History of Racial Discrimination and Segregation?”.

An “Institute” that gets a large part of its funding from the liberal social groups who use its data to generate their funding.

Cozy.

Something our homeless veterans, however many of them there are, probably aren’t.

But here’s the interesting thing.

Real veterans groups have real veterans data.

Let’s just look at the Viet Nam Veterans of America statistics.

Data they developed by actually contacting verified service veterans with real Viet Nam service records.

Here’s what they say:

"Of the 2,709,918 Americans who served in Vietnam, Less than 850,000 are estimated to be alive today, with the youngest American Vietnam veteran's age approximated to be 54 years old.

25% (648,677) of total forces in country were draftees. (66% of U.S. armed forces members were drafted during WWII).

Total Wounded: 303,704 (153,329 hospitalized + 150,375 injured requiring no hospital care.)

Severely disabled: 75,748 (100% disabled; 5,283 lost limbs; 1,081 sustained multiple amputations.)

(By comparison, amputation or crippling wounds to the lower extremities were 300% higher than in WWII and 70% higher than Korea)

88.4% of the men who actually served in Vietnam were Caucasian; 10.6% (276,121) were black; 1% belonged to other races.

86.3% of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasian; 12.5% (7,241) were black; 1.2% belonged to other races.

Overall, blacks suffered 12.5% of the deaths in Vietnam at a time when the percentage of blacks of military age was 13.5% of the total population.”

A number of those statistics might surprise you.

They surprised me.

They don’t match what the media typically tries to portray.

But then, these statistics were compiled by men who really have little left to prove.

They left most of their agendae on the battlefields of a foreign nation.

But there’s more, and this is where it gets really interesting:

“Vietnam veterans have a lower unemployment rate than the same non-vet age groups.

Vietnam veterans' personal income exceeds that of the general population non-veteran age group by more than 18 percent.

There is no difference in drug usage between Vietnam Veterans and non-Vietnam Veterans of the same age group.

Vietnam Veterans are less likely to be in prison - only one-half of one percent of Vietnam Veterans have been jailed for crimes.

85% of Vietnam Veterans made successful transitions to civilian life.”

So, the situation with Viet Nam veterans may not actually be as bad as we have been led to believe.

But here’s the topper:

“As of the current Census taken during August, 2006, the number of Americans falsely claiming to have served in-country is: 13,853,027.

By this census, FOUR OUT OF FIVE WHO CLAIM TO BE VIET NAM VETS ARE NOT. “ (Source: Viet Nam Veterans of America Study)

Remember, the Urban Institute study guess-timates that 131,000 veterans are homeless on any given night.

If extrapolate the 4 out of 5 claiming to be Viet Nam vets who aren’t to the total vet population, that means the real number of homeless veterans on any given night is only slightly over 25,000, or about 500 per state,

In San Francisco, a city with significant homeless problems from a variety of sources, Human Services Agency Director Trent Rhorer in January stated that there were vacancies each night in single adult shelters throughout the city.

The Washington, D.C. Human Services Department reported that in January 2009, there were an average of fourteen vacancies per night in each of their more than 300 single adult shelters, or over 4,200 beds available per night.

The University of California’s Fisher Institute for Real Estate and Urban Economics reported in their 2009 study that nationwide, shelter occupancy rates averaged less than 70% through the year across the country.

So, it would appear that the homelessness of our Veterans might not be the problem that some libs would like us to believe.

Rather, it’s being used as a cover for the continual expansion of welfare services to the existing, non-veteran welfare class.

Homelessnes, especially that of veterans, iss too important an issue to base solutions on guesses.

Should American homeless issued be addressed? Certainly.

Are there existing ways to do it? Absolutely.

But to wrap a social engineering agenda in the flag and the sacrifice of our Amercan military veterans is, at best, "Stolen Valor".

For more information and backup data on this subject, read Stolen Valor: How the Vietnam Generation Was Robbed of its Heroes and its History ---- by B. G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.” --- George Bernard Shaw

“The truth, of course, is that a billion falsehoods told a billion times by a billion people are still false.” --- Travis Walton

Grade Inflation

It’s being reported that today, the great investigative journalist, Oprah, asked the President to grade himself on his first year in office.

And, Obama carefully delineated the rationale for him giving himself a B+ for his accomplishments, carefully noting that if he had his healthcare bill signed, he would give himself an A-.

Which leads this ol’ cowpoke to a coupla’ observations.

First, isn’t it amazing’ that Oprah, an entertainin’ talk show host never before suspected of being a fer real journalist, is actually askin’ Barry some reasonable questions … ones the mainstream media won’t ask fer themselves!

And second, isn’t is interesting what ol Barry’s self grading reveals?

A B+ to an A-.

After only a year in office.

Now some might feel that his grading is presumptuous or arrogant.

Maybe even a bit preposterous.

But really what it is is terribly depressing.

Because you see, Barry knows himself better than anybody.

He knows best what his aspirations and capabilities are.

He knows best what his vision, his mission, his hope for this country really is.

And what he told us in that answer is that his vision isn’t much.

When I was studying journalism at Chapel Hill, I had a professor who told us on the first day of calss that he did not believe in giving out A’s.

That the best you could expect in his class was an A-.

Not because he didn’t think some of his students wouldn’t do some exemplary work, but rather because he failed to give up on the concept of unlimited human capability to achieve.

He simply refused to believe that no matter how good someone did, someone else couldn’t at some point do better.

Which brings us back to Barry’s B+ / A-.

Most observers are now raising questions about whether much of what Obama’s programs have actually accomplished.

If the TARP funds were essential to avoid an immediate and total collapse of the financial system, why have over 1/3 of the total authorized funds, pushed through on an emergency and crisis basis, not yet spent?

If the stimulus package was essential to avoid unemployment going above 8%, why is it now at more than 10% and climbing?

If healthcare reform is so good and so beneficial for the country, why is it that Obama can’t even get his own Dems to agree on it, much less agree to be covered by it?

He has all the necessary Congressional support and majorities to push through pretty much anything he wants to do (regardless of Republican opposition), and yet, his successes have been less than stellar.

He continues to blame things on the previous administration, even though what is now happening is a direct result of what he himself has set in motion over the past twelve months.

And yet he gives himself top grades.

To true patriots, that’s not just disappointing, it’s outrageous and scary.

Scary because it provides a rare look into what Obama really believes.

See, this country has always had a “can do” attitude.

A sense that there was no challenge too great to tackle or overcome.

Take on Japanese or German threats to the free world? No problem.

Give generously of our food, resources, and people to undeveloped nations, or nations experiencing natural disasters? Certainly.

Put a man on the moon? No doubt.

Those kinds of dreams caused us to reach, to stretch the capabilities of this country and its people.

They were initiated by presidents with true qualities of leadership and vision.

They required leaders with optimism, with hope, with an understanding that we could always do better.

Much like my old J-school professor.

Obama’s self grade of a B+ to an A- tells us much more about what he thinks he is capable of than what he has accomplished.

He alone knows best how to measure what he has accomplished against what he hopes to achieve.

But then it’s hard to have vision when your eyes are focused on yourself.

“Winners compare their achievements with their goals, while losers compare their achievements with those of other people” --- Nido Qubein

“None of us will ever accomplish anything excellent or commanding except when he listens to this whisper which is heard by him alone.” --- Ralph Waldo Emerson

John Moody’s Appalled

John Moody died in 1958.

He was a self-taught reformer who had a strong entrepreneurial drive and a firm belief about the needs of the investment community -- as well as considerable journalistic talent.

It was his belief that the key to determining a company’s financial viability was to look at assets and liabilities, something that today’s FICO scores don’t even begin to address.

In 1909, Moody's “Analyses of Railroad Investments” described for readers the analytic principles that Moody used to assess a railroad's operations, management, and finance.

The new manual quickly found a place in successful investors' hands, giving them factual information they hadn’t had before.

In 1913, he expanded his base of analyzed companies, launching his evaluation of the bond market.

That same year, Moody began expanding rating coverage to bonds issued by the US federal government, cities and other municipalities. By 1924, Moody's ratings covered nearly 100 percent of the US bond market.

Moody's continued to publish and monitor ratings during the Great Depression, when bond default rates skyrocketed but few bonds highly-rated by Moody's missed payments.

I tell you this because there has been a single consistent in Moody’s bond ratings every year since the reports were initiated.

That one consistency is that since 1914, when Moody’s bond ratings were first established, until today, the bonds of the US Government have been top rated at Triple A levels.

Through World Wars, the Great Depression, recessions, presidential resignations, and even September 11th, nothing has shaken that top rating for America’s paper.

The other 18 Triple A rated countries include Austria, Australia, Britain, Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Singapore, Spain and Sweden.

None of those other countries have had a consistent Triple A rating since 1914.

The Triple-A credit rating of the United States is both a point of pride and global financial importance.

If the U.S. were to lose its credit rating, even by one notch, it would significantly increase the government's cost of borrowing at a time when Congress is just raising the debt ceiling yet again.

In addition, the U.S recorded a record $1.42 trillion annual deficit for 2009, which raised the total amount of debt held as a percentage of the nation's GDP to 53.8%, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

And because of that, the company that John Moody built, Moody’s Investor Services, is now warning the US that it may lose its vaunted Triple A rating as early as 2013 unless drastic measures are taken to reduce our debt.

The hidden factor in this announcement is that Moody’s is widely considered to be the most favorable rating company to the United States, often presenting the rosiest scenario.

Other rating agencies, including Standard & Poor and Fitch, typically present a more pessimistic picture, and are doing so now.

They have openly called for significant action by the US Government to reduce debt within the next twelve months as a means to avoid ratings downgrade.

Now it might be easy to presume that this situation was brought about by the collapse of the US economy over the past two years, but such would not be the case.

Rather, the increase in debt is largely the result of an extravagant spending spree by our apologist in chief, Obama and his overly compliant Congress of spineless legislators.

According to the Washington Post, Obama’s overall budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years.

They went on to say “President's Obama's reported budget, coming in at nearly 28 percent of GDP (the highest since World War II), significantly understates the increase in federal spending on a pure cash-flow basis.”

The federal budget deficit tripled to a record $1.4 trillion for the 2009 fiscal year that ended in October, congressional analysts said Wednesday.

(Divided evenly among the U.S. population, it amounts to $38,974.34 for every man, woman and child.)

In fact, Barack Obama’s budget deficit in October alone was greater than George Bush’s budget deficit for all of 2007.

The unprecedented flood of red ink flows from several factors, including a big drop in tax revenues due to the recession, $245 billion in emergency spending on the Wall Street bailout and the takeover of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Then there is almost $200 billion in costs from President Obama’s economic stimulus bill, as well as increases in programs such as unemployment benefits and food stamps.

The Congressional Budget Office estimate is bad news for the White House and its allies in Congress as they press ahead with health care overhaul legislation that could cost $900 billion over the next decade.

It gets worse. The Congressional Budget Office (a non partisan review group) projects that by the end of the decade, the National Debt will hit $24.5 trillion -- exceeding the Gross Domestic Product projected for 2019 of $22.8 trillion.

Even Obama himself is apparently concerned about the deficit.

“It is important though to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession,” Obama told reporters recently.

"I intend to take serious steps to reduce America's long-term deficit – because debt-driven growth cannot fuel America's long-term prosperity," he said in remarks prepared for delivery to the leader's meeting last Sunday at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit.

What gall Obama has, denouncing the growing deficit he largely created, while at the same time trying to ram through his $900 billion health care fiasco.

Is it any wonder that just 36% now believe that the president is doing a good or an excellent job handling the economy while 45% rate his performance in this area as poor?

Obama has accomplished the amazing feat of convincing millions of Americans that black is white, that cold is hot, that the bad economy is the fault of George W Bush, and the only things standing between America and peace on earth are those darn Republicans and greedy capitalists.

John Moody is spinning in his grave.



“We may be entering an era where the greatest dangers to the survival of Western civilization will come from internal social deterioration. Other great civilizations have declined and collapsed. We may be the first, however, to sink slowly into the quagmire, still beaming from ear to ear in self-congratulation at how ‘innovative’ we are in our social policies.” --- Thomas Sowell

Transparency in Government

If y’all been readin’ my stuff for long, y’all know I’m no big fan of our apologist in chief, Obama.

But occasionally, even a blind hog ruttin’ ‘round in the mud finds food, and I have found one thing I can give him credit for.

We all heard him promise that he’d bring a new transparency to government, and by my figurin’, he has.

In fact, he’s managed to get both his best hands to be more transparent, too.

Honest Harry and Nefarious Nancy have really wrapped themselves around the whole idea, as shown by their recent words and actions.

Nancy of California actually came right out and said what she really meant today.

That’s uncommon with politicians, who are normally pretty good at speaking in ways designed to confuse us plain folks.

But today, she became totally transparent.

“I think we would do almost anything if it meant we would pass healthcare for all Americans before the Christmas holidays,” Pelosi told reporters at her weekly news conference.

And it looks like she means it.

She continues to arm twist and buy off her own Democrats in the house, insuring they’ll stay in the fold once whatever bill gets passed come up for reconciliation.

She even proposed a new way to subvert the will of the American people, who ain't much backin' what Congress has tried so far:

“I believe that the bill can be added to the omnibus appropriations bill and passed during the holidays, even between Christmas and New Year's Day” said the nefarious one.

She said that that would require adding an increase in the nation's debt limit, which is well on the way to happening.

“It would be more difficult for my members to vote against the spending bill, even with healthcare and more debt, because it includes funding for their pet projects and money for the military” she said, adding that "most members would be reluctant to be seen as unsupportive of the military".

Harry of Nevada is also fully on board with this new transparency.

On Monday, he told fellow Senators that he would not schedule any Senate sessions this coming weekends, in order to give Senate staffers “a well deserved break from working tirelessly and continuously for the past few months”.

Many thought to be interesting, since as recently as last week, Reid was promising to hold the Senate in non-stop session until his healthcare bill was passed.

‘Course, Nevada’s national embarrassment soon became totally transparent when it was discovered that the real reason he wanted the weekend off was that he had a major, $1,000 a plate fund raiser scheduled in Louisiana on Saturday.

Yep. Ol’ Honest Harry, that pillar of transparency, was nice enough to give all those hard workin’ staffers a weekend off jus’ so he could go to a breakfast and raise a bunch of money for his own re-election campaign (which, if you haven’t been payin’ attention, is goin’ ‘bout as well as a rodeo on a jetliner).

In fact, Honest Harry was so transparent that it shattered his glass house when a few reporters and Republican Senators called him on it.

They got to thinkin’ that maybe Honest Harry wasn’t bein’ quite straight when he claimed the weekend off was for the benefit of others.

Some of ‘em even straight out said that a G note a plate might be affectin’ Honest Harry’s truth tellin'.

So, in a totally transparent move, Harry did what he does best … divert the discussion to the people challenging him!

“I think that this debate has really come to a point that I’ve rarely seen in the Senate — in fact, I've never seen it — to have my friends on the other side of the aisle come to the floor and in some way try to embarrass or denigrate me,” Reid said, ignoring the fact that there is little anyone could do that can embarrass him more than he does to his own self.

“But they should understand, any events I had scheduled this weekend have been canceled.”

Reid went further with this charade by saying he would never admonish a fellow senator for holding a fundraiser.

“I would never, ever intentionally come to the floor and try to talk about somebody having a fundraiser and that's why they’re trying to get out of here,” he said.

About taking the weekend off, Reid added, “I thought it would be appropriate because our party has worked pretty hard here to have a day or two off.”

So, when it comes to his two best hands, Obama has delivered what he promised.

Totally transparent words.

Followed by totally transparent actions.

Sometimes it's prudent to be careful what you wish for, Mr. President.

Tricks and treachery are the practice of fools that don't have brains enough to be honest. --- Benjamin Franklin

He who has made it a practice to lie and deceive his father, will be the most daring in deceiving others. --- Horace

And Now, Oslo

Well, America's apologist in chief, Obama, is headed off to Norway to accept his Nobel Peace Prize.

Doin' that puts him in a bit of a pickle.

See, dispatchin' 35,000 of America's military to a foreign country for warlike activities ain't exactly viewed as peaceful by many folks.

Not to mention that there are bunches of folks who feel the awarding of the prize to a president who had been in office only 12 days when the decision was made is at best, puttin' the cart before the horse.

Seems the  Nobel Prize committee has been criticised for awarding Obama the prize before he has any major accomplishments in peace (or anywhere else, for that matter).

Kinda like givin' the big rodeo buckle to a cowboy who's only just unloaded his horse from the trailer.

So his speech oughta be downright interestin'.

Now Obama's pretty good at usin' words instead of deeds to look important and effective.

But even a snakeoil pitchman like him could have a problem with this one.

It's probably a good thing that Obama will have the TOTUS (Teleprompter of the United States) along to help.

Apparently, he and the TOTUS were planning to work on the final draft of his speech on the flight from Washington to Oslo, and his acceptance speech is gonna directly address the irony of being awarded the peace prize while escalating the war.

Makes 'bout as much sense as tryin' to spend us out of a deficit.

This Oldtimer thinks we're seeing what we've seen before ... words contradictin' actions ... "all hat, no cattle" as they say.

'Member the jobs created or saved thing?

Good words, but no actual success.

'Member "if you like your current healthcare plan, you can keep it"?

Sounded good, but sure don't look like fact from here.

Now I'm not totally sure that this one hangs on Obama's bedpost.

He didn't go lookin' for the prize, and as shown by the facts, had actually done nothing to deserve it.

Fact is, a White House official said that it was not necessarily an award that Obama would have given himself.

So it falls on the Nobel Committee.

A group with judgement that is ... questionable ... at best.

These are the same blockheads what gave AlGore the same Peace Prize for his global warming farce in 2007.

At the time, they said they awarded it to him "for ... efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change ...", which when you look at what's going on with "climategate" of late, is actually pretty funny.

See, it seems like AlGore and his global warming buddies were involved with some serious book cooking on the scientific data they used to build their case.

They manipulated the facts to help "build up" their case.

That would make the Prize they won inappropriate, undeserved, and poorly judged.

A prize without substance.

Like puttin' a fancy dress on a shady lady.

Might make it look better or feel better, but really doesn't change anything.

Maybe the Nobel folks got it right with Obama after all.

“All deception in the course of life is indeed nothing else but a lie reduced to practice, and falsehood passing from words into things.”  --- Robert Southey

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time." --- Abraham Lincoln

Truth vs. Fiction

I’m not ‘zactly sure when it happened.

When the whole damn world got tipped upside down and folks stopped being sensible.

When it got to be more important to get what you wanted than it was to tell the truth.

But somehow, repetition has come to be the new veracity.

Saying what you needed to have people believe became more important that what was actually true.

It no longer matters what’s true, only what’s “said”.

Take Nevada’s own national embarrassment… Harry Reid.

Senate majority leader.

A senator since 1986, and a politician for some twenty years prior to that.

A man who rates a 70% from the ultra liberal Americans for Democratic Action.

A man who claims to have grown up with solid, western, Mormon values.

A man who you would think might recognize the difference ‘tween truth and fiction.

But you’d be thinkin’ wrong.

Yesterday, Ol’ Harry took to the Senate floor and spewed some of the vilest crap seen in many a decade, comparing Republicans who oppose health care reform to lawmakers who clung to the institution of slavery more than a century ago.

Reid argued that Republicans are using the same stalling tactics against healthcare reform employed against equal rights in the pre-Civil War era.

"Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, 'slow down, stop everything, let's start over.' If you think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right. When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said 'slow down, it's too early, things aren't bad enough.'"

"When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today" Reid said Monday.

‘Cept that it was Sen. Strom Thurmond, then a Democrat, who unsuccessfully tried to filibuster the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and it was Republicans who led the charge against slavery.

If ya know any history, it’s easy to question Harry’s curious reference to the Senate civil rights debates of the 1960s.

See, it was the Democrats who mounted an 83-day filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill.

Not the Republicans.

And when the Senate finally voted to cut off debate on that Civil Rights bill, who was in opposition?

29 Senators, 80% of them Democrats.

Not, mostly, the Republicans.

Among those voting to block the civil rights bill was West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd, who personally filibustered the bill for 14 hours.

The next year he also opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Mr. Byrd still sits in the Senate, and indeed preceded Mr. Reid as his party's majority leader until he stepped down from that role in 1989.

And as far as anyone can tell, Byrd is still a Democrat.

But here’s the real issue for Ol’ Harry: No matter how much he wants to blame them, the Republicans cannot be blocking the healthcare bill for the simple reason that they lack the votes to block anything.

If Harry’s latest favorite bill is blocked, it will be because one or more of his very own Democrats won’t go along.

If his Democrats were unified, Harry would have nothing to lose by attacking Republicans

But with the votes of some his tribe in doubt, it would seem seriously risky of Reid to alienate possible converts like Olympia Snowe by likening her party to slavers.

His statement on the Senate floor yesterday was vintage Reid… inappropriate and stupid, without regard for either history or the truth.

But then Harry always was good at doing what he needed to do instead of what was right.

Hopefully, come next election, the good folks of Nevada will do what's right and send ol' Harry out to pasture... or better yet, take him out behind the woodshed and give him a good whippin' for tellin' tales.

Postmodernists believe that truth is myth, and myth, truth. This equation has its roots in pop psychology. The same people also believe that emotions are a form of reality. There used to be another name for this state of mind. It used to be called psychosis. --- Brad Holland.

On December 7th….

1941, foreign nations flew airplanes into US territory and executed an attack on an American facility that killed several thousand Americans.

On September 11th, 2001, foreign nationals flew airplanes into US territory and executed an attack on an American facility that killed several thousand Americans.

One was declared an act of war by our President, mobilizing and uniting our nation against a common enemy.

The other has been minimized and marginalized by our current President, who feels that:

“We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.”

“We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe-children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores.” (Barack Hussein Obama, September 19th, 2001)

John Brennan, former CIA Director and now President Obama’s assistant for counterterrorism and homeland security in his first speech since joining the Obama administration, annulled several key aspects of the so-called war on terrorism — starting with both the name and the idea that the United States was involved in any sort of “global war, much less a war on terror.”

Brennan also linked the rise in support for extremists to problems of global governance, economic crisis and social stratification and said the administration would make a concerted effort to address what he considers those extremist root causes:

“Any comprehensive approach has to also address the upstream factors — the conditions that help fuel violent extremism,” Brennan said. Military, intelligence or law-enforcement actions are unable to confront those conditions, which he said include the “basic needs and legitimate grievances of ordinary people” for prosperity, education, “dignity and worth,” and security. “If we fail to confront the broader political, economic, and social conditions in which extremists thrive, then there will always be another recruit in the pipeline, another attack coming downstream. The role of the United States was to …. make “substantial” increases in foreign aid to fight poverty and promote global health and food security; and to demonstrate the ability of “diplomacy, dialogue, and the democratic process” to solve “seemingly intractable problems.” Brennan said.

Compare those comments to those of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on the day after the attack at Pearl Harbor:

“The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph -- so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.”

Roosevelt understood the ultimate responsibility for placing this nation’s soldiers, sailors, and airmen in harms way, knowing the ultimate cost that would have to be borne by those brave Americans.

Obama sees no real risk or value to their service, preferring to support them with less than the field officers request, and more of what has proven not to work.

More symbolically, on this anniversary of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, Obama has held two separate media press conferences, one on jobs and one with the Prime Minister of Turkey, and never once mentioned the sacrifices made by those Americans unfortunate enough to be in Pearl Harbor during that one hour and fifty minutes on a sunny Sunday morning in 1941.

Fortunately, and most appropriately, the rest of the country’s men and women have not forgotten, and today offer their prayers of thanks and condolence to those who have fought for our freedom against all enemies.

May we never forget.

When you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, you do not wait until he has struck to crush him. --- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Victory belongs to those who believe in it the most and believe in it the longest. --- Lt. Col. Jimmy Doolittle

We are especially not going to tolerate these attacks from outlaw states run by the strangest collection of misfits, Looney Tunes and squalid criminals since the advent of the Third Reich --- Ronald Reagan

Jobs Created or Saved ???

Today, our job saver / creator–in–chief, had a big gatherin’ in Pennsylvania.

He was celebratin’ the latest unemployment figures, showin’ that the economy only lost 11,000 jobs last month (November).

And, that the level of total unemployment dropped to only 10%.

I’m thinkin’ those folks without jobs still ain’t celebratin’ much.

Those new 11,000 hands who lost their jobs in November joined 5.9 million others who had lost their jobs earlier.

Now that 5.9 million as counted by the government, are people who are seriously looking for work, people who haven’t accepted some job well below their capabilities, or as Obama once said, “below their pay grade”.

Add those folks in, and there's a lot more people not workin'.

Almost six million folks who want to work can’t find companies who want to give them jobs.

That’s more people than live in all of Cook County, Illinois, Obama’s home turf.

That’s more folks than live in Orange County, California, or Maricopa County, Arizona, or Miami Dade County, Florida, Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, or even New York County, New York.

Yep, Obama was celebratin’.

Celebratin’ that his stimulus program had created or saved all those other jobs.

'Cept it hadn’t.

The Congressional Budget Office, that non-partisan group charged with keepin’ track of these sorts of things, says that the stimulus program may have created between 600,000 and 1,200,000 jobs by the end of the year.

(Those folks are way too smart to even begin to address the concept of “jobs saved”, knowing that there ain’t no way in hell to tally those.)

But here’s the amazin' number: Those CBO folks say that each and every job created by Obama’s stimulus bill will cost $300,000 per job.

300,000 bucks!   Per job!   Each damn job!

In another recent study, that same CBO said that the real median earnings of men who worked full time, year-round in 2007 was $45,113.

For women, the corresponding wage was $35,102. (Yep, fillys make less, but that’s a conversation for another time.)

So Obama’s usin’ our tax dollars to create a small number of jobs that pay over 7 times the national median wage.

7 times.

There’s gotta be a better way. 

This oldtimer can think of a couple bunches.

How ‘bout sending a whole passel of companies a check for fifty grand with the understanding they had to use the money to hire one unemployed person and train them for a new position?

Pay for a year’s worth of retraining of a worker who could use a new skill, while at the same time adding to that company’s ability to generate revenue?

And as a side benefit, generate a bit of tax revenue from those additional company revenues?

That would put six times as many people back to work for at least a year, and maybe do some real stimulatin' to the economy.

That might just be enough to offset that 11,000 job loss for last month, and put a few more of the six million back to work.

And, that would be a real cause for celebratin’.

“It is the working man who is the happy man. It is the idle man who is the miserable man. “ – Benjamin Franklin

“Never confuse motion with action. “ – Benjamin Franklin