The Three Missteps in President Obama's Economic Turnaround Plan

U.S. President Barack Obama’s speech to the joint session of Congress late Tuesday was a beautiful performance. His language was exquisite, his delivery was superb, his rhetoric - at times - truly uplifting. It no doubt reflects a fault in my makeup that I found it not entirely convincing - but then I’m a math major and a former banker.

The speech - which took the place of the State of the Union address since it’s Obama’s first year in office - concentrated almost entirely on economics, and in particular on the financial and economic crisis currently facing the United States. President Obama’s comments were least convincing when they focused on the financial aspects of the crisis.

That’s probably why he “won overwhelming … approval” on Main Street even as he failed to “wow” Wall Street, such news agencies as the Voice of America and ABC News reported.

But according to my own analysis, President Obama made three notable missteps, including an error in strategy and goal setting serious enough to nudge the U.S. economy back into a recession, should his stimulus plan and banking-rescue program create a near-term economic recovery. Let’s look at all three of the miscues I’ve identified.

Mistake No. 1

President Obama’s first mistake was one of assessment - in that he blamed the entire current situation on Wall Street. That’s attractive, populist rhetoric, but where was the acknowledgement of the U.S. Federal Reserve’s role in the debacle, inflating the money supply 70% faster than gross domestic product (GDP) for more than 13 years, so that asset bubble after asset bubble caused the incentive structures on Wall Street to go haywire?

Where, too, was the (admittedly subsidiary, maybe No. 3 after the feckless Fed and the greedy bankers) role that Congress played over decades, messing up the housing market by creating unregulated irresponsible government guarantee monopolies in Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE), an extra excrescence that no other advanced economy has found necessary to finance housing?

Bashing bankers is good rollicking stuff for a campaign speech, but it is less appropriate here, when the problems must actually be fixed. This rhetoric actually obscures the reality of the current problem, and diverts attention from the still-dangerous presence of U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, whose role in creating the disaster is in danger of being exceeded by his role in perpetuating it. If Bernanke’s current rapid expansion of the money supply leads to violent inflation, as is likely, the crisis will indeed be prolonged for a decade, as Obama claimed was possible without government action.

Mistake No. 2

President Obama’s second inaccuracy - or misstep - on the financial side in Tuesday’s speech was in diagnosis. Lending in the U.S. economy has not seized up. It did seize up for about two months after the September crisis, but even by the end of the year loan growth had resumed, as figures from the major banks show. The commercial paper market has reopened and the investment-quality bond market has run at high volumes since the beginning of January.

Only one major source of “easy money” in past lending markets has disappeared - the securitization business: Almost nobody will now invest in securitization structures, and with good reason. However, as my investigative analysis of the nation’s Top 12 banks last week demonstrated, most of the major U.S. banks are in better shape than we believe, and are actually making money.

Their profitability has been greatly increased by the disappearance of competition from securitization - loan margins at the healthy US Bancorp (USB), for example, increased from 3.7% to 3.9% in the fourth quarter of 2008, and will have increased still further now.

Other than a few huge “zombies,” most banks are now making good money the old-fashioned way, through the interest margin between borrowing and lending rates. They will continue to do so, provided the government doesn’t (as President Obama and U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner are currently readying to) introduce artificial competition, by inventing new taxpayer-funded vehicles to make consumer loans and drive margins down.

Yes, loans need to remain available for houses, automobiles and other purchases, but there’s no reason why they should not be somewhat more expensive - to rebalance the U.S. economy, the U.S. consumer needs to save more, not borrow more.

Mistake No. 3

Given that his first mistake was in assessment, and the second was in diagnosis, it’s no surprise that his third mistake was in goal-setting: One of the central objectives he established in his speech was a promise to pursue multiple objectives - even as he slashed the deficit in a big way.

In fact, as well as appearing to be a bit shaky in his knowledge of banking, President Obama made me question both his math, and his choice of economic objectives.

Reducing the budget deficit from 10% of GDP, its level in 2009, to $500 billion, or about 3% of GDP by 2013, is a hell of a task.

And quite possibly a hell of a risk, too.

That 7% swing in the budget balance is almost double the largest four-year swing ever achieved since the end of World War II - the 3.8% swing achieved from 1996-2000. Even during the 1990s economic cycle as a whole - a period of exceptional economic good fortune and budget thriftiness - the swing in the eight years from 1992 to 2000 was only 7.1% of GDP.

The problem with trying to tighten fiscal policy so rapidly is the negative “stimulus” effect it would cause. If the U.S. economy does anything in mid-2010 but zoom like a Saturn V rocket roaring off the launch pad, sucking 7% of GDP out of government demand over so short a period is likely to abort the recovery and push the economy back into a depression. Furthermore, Obama intends to do this without raising the taxes by one penny on anybody earning less than $250,000, and while increasing the size of the armed forces, their pensions, and spending more on energy, healthcare and education.

Maybe I’m a grouchy old skeptic, but it doesn’t look to me as if the math adds up.

Look, President Obama is a wonderful speaker, he really is, and he gave quite a performance in his address to Congress Tuesday night. As a gnarled old Republican, I’m prepared to admit he’s as good as late President Ronald W. Reagan, I may even nurse a faint suspicion that he’s better than Ronald Reagan.

And don’t forget: Reagan was known as “The Great Communicator.”

But to be a great president, Barack Obama will need to pursue policies that are sufficiently middle of the road so as not to destroy the superb private sector that’s the backbone of the U.S. economy, and that are also cleverly designed to work properly. It’s the math, the economics and the finance, not the language, the arts and the humanities, where there are still doubts. 

By Martin Hutchinson
Contributing Editor
Money Morning

Here Come the Commies

A quote ascribed to Karl Marx has been popping up a lot lately:

“Owners of capital will stimulate the working class to buy more and more of expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take more and more expensive credits, until their debt becomes unbearable. The unpaid debt will lead to bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalized, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism.”

— Karl Marx, 1867, Das Kapital

That quote is almost assuredly bogus. We haven’t tormented ourselves by re-reading sections of Capital (Das Kapital). Once in college was enough. This quote, though, has been making the rounds on the Internet, as if Marx and his minions somehow knew all this was coming.

Whether the analysis is accurate is a separate question from whether Marx ever wrote it. German is a torturous language to read in translation, full of compound sentences and words. And it’s highly unlikely, writing in the late 19th century, that Marx would have referred to the working class buying houses and technology. The horseless carriage hadn’t even been invented yet, much less the iPod, the BlueRay, or the George Foreman grill.

Nope. This is a clever bit of revisionism by some unemployed Marxist student or tenured professor trying to discredit the free market while rehabilitating the Marxist playbook. Marx did indeed say capitalism would eventually evolve into socialism and finally communism. He claimed it was riddled by contradictions which made the system inherently unstable.

But his theory was evolutionary, based on his views of human nature and a rational “homo economicus.” Like Adam Smith, Marx was a materialist who defined wealth in terms of physical goods. Thus, his view of human nature is rather material too, which explains his atheism.

In any event, the Austrians (especially Rothbard) would point out that the boom-bust feature of capitalist economies is not inherent in the system, but is actually a product of the government’s manipulation of interest rates. This changes the price of money and causes risk-taking entrepreneurs to miscalculate the underlying demand for their production.

Thus, you get a massive, credit-induced production bubble, global in scale with resources devoted to supplying a fictional demand. It happened with residential real estate in the U.S. and Europe. It’s happened with commercial real estate in China. And it probably happened all along the commodity supply chain, as raw material demand increased for the production of finished goods made in China for Americans who bought on credit.

That isn’t to say you wouldn’t have normal cycles of growth and recession in an economy with natural interest rates. But in an economy with natural interest rates, the cost of capital would go up during a recession. Bankers would get more prudent with their lending as the market place sorted out which lending resulted in productive new enterprise and which businesses failed.

The bad investments would be written down and eventually new demand for capital from entrepreneurs would resume. At least, that’s how the Austrians drew it up. Today, of course, we are engaged in the great global project of trying to prop up investments gone bad, whether they be in residential American real estate or the collateralised bonds based on that real estate that currently reside like dead weight on balance sheets all over the globe.

No amount of rearranging is going to improve the quality of those debts. But that won’t keep political busy bodies from trying — and wasting even more time and capital.

Stocks in the U.S. were up overnight. Here in Australia, the blind are following where the deaf boldly lead. But is anyone listening? Or is everyone too busy hoping?

What we’re talking about are Ben Bernanke’s comments. The news headlines read that he predicted the recession will end later this year and the American economy will recover in 2010. But that’s not exactly what he said.

Here exactly is what he said, “If actions taken by the Administration, the Congress, and the Federal Reserve are successful in restoring some measure of financial stabilityand only if that is the case, in my viewthere is a reasonable prospect that the current recession will end in 2009 and that 2010 will be a year of recovery.”

If you wanted to put it another way, it might go like this: If our plan is successful to solve all the problems, then all the problems will have been successfully solved according to the plan.

How inspiring is that? Does it give you confidence that these guys have any idea what they’re doing?

What the system needs is more instability, not less. That is, prices and asset values need to fall to their real level to restore confidence. In this sense, a proper recession is the cure for uncertainty and instability.

Yes, we know this is in direct contradiction to what elected officials are telling you. But think for a moment of a man who’s done nothing but eat greasy and fatty foods for a year. He’s on his deathbed. His arteries are clogged with fat and cholesterol.

Now you couldn’t improve the man’s health by telling him to feel better about himself. “C’mon big fella. Buck up! Have another cheeseburger. With bacon. And avocado. This whole being morbidly obese and killing yourself thing is all in your head. You gotta get your mind right!”

You could tell him all that. But it would be bad medical advice. In the same way, our financial mal-practitioners have mis-diagnosed the economy. Confidence is not the problem. Bad credits and loans are the problem.

You restore confidence when you directly address the problem. Investors get out of cash and back into shares or property when they have demonstrable proof that the banks aren’t hiding/lying any longer.

Or, as Murray Rothbard puts it in America’s Great Depression, “The completion of liquidation removes the uncertainties of impending bankruptcy and ends the borrowers’ scramble for cash. A rapid unhampered fall in prices, both in general, and particularly in goods of higher orders (adjusting to the mal-investments of the boom) will speedily end the realignment processes and remove expectations of further declines.”

But instead of realigning with economic reality, our policy makers are acting as if it is possible to sustain all the bad investments made during the credit boom. They want to save homeowners, shareholders, bondholders, and pretty much anyone who stands to lose from the risks gone bad.

That is not possible. Someone has to pay for the bad bets made in subprime loans, Eastern Europe, or the developing world. That someone is probably a) the guy who took out the mortgage he can’t repay, b) the bank who made the loan to the guy who took out the mortgage he can’t repay, c) the investor who bought the bond sold by the bank who made the loan to the guy who took out the mortgage he can’t repay.

Evading responsibility for one’s actions doesn’t solve anything. Making other people pay for them doesn’t help much either. Of course we’re all going to pay for it one way or another, through more bailouts or the general contraction in credit and growth that has to come during the “realignment process.”

But those appear to be the two choices: allow failure, which allocates resources from the bad debts and losers to those who can produce real wealth. Or, try to “stabilize” any inherently unstable situation (perpetuating asset values after the credit spigot has been turned off).

Source:  Whiskey and Gunpowder

To pork, or not to pork

1,000-plus-page spending bill includes hundreds of pages of earmarks - pet spending projects inserted by lawmakers, ranging from:

$185,000 for coral reef research and preservation in Maui County, Hawaii

$55,000 in meteorological equipment for Pierce College in Woodland Hills, Calif.

$9.9 million for science enhancement at historically black colleges in South Carolina.

In addition to the basic operations of government, the new budget includes 775 pages of earmarks, funding programs that include local museums, colleges and infrastructure projects.

Among the earmarked projects in the bill are:

$764,000 for the Lake George Watershed Protection Initiative in New York, requested by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Democrat;

$9.9 million for South Carolina's historically black colleges and universities, requested by House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn, South Carolina Democrat;

$1.1 million requested by Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander and Sen. Bob Corker, both of Tennessee, for water treatment plant improvements in Tennessee's Unicoi County, as well as $300,000 for a sewer extension project in another county.

Examples of Earmarks in the Omnibus:

$713,625 Woody Biomass at SUNY-ESF. Walsh and Schumer sponsors

$951,500 Sustainable Las Vegas. Berkeley and Reid sponsors.

$24,000 A+ for Abstinence. Specter is sponsor.

$300,000 Montana World Trade Center. Rehberg sponsor.

$950,000 Myrtle Beach International Trade and Convention Center. Graham sponsor.

$200,000 Oil Region Alliance. Peterson sponsor.

$190,000 Buffalo Bill Historical Center, Cody, WY for digitizing and editing the Cody collection. Barbara Cubin is the sponsor

$143,000 Las Vegas Natural History Museum, Las Vegas, NV, to expand natural history education programs. Sponsored by Harry Reid

$238,000 for the Polynesian Voyaging Society, Honolulu, HI, for educational programs. Sen. Daniel Inouye is the sponsor.

$381,000 for Jazz at Lincoln Center, New York, NY for music education programs. Jerrold Nadler is the sponsor.

Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, the top Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, would spend $3.8 million on a Needles, Calif., highway.

Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, the top Republican on Senate Appropriations, backs earmarks including a $950,000 nature education center in Moss Point, Miss. He defends earmarks.

Source:  GlennBeck.com

Posted:  Marion's Place

Every... "Our" Country Needs A Leader Like This!

Prime Minister John Howard - Australia

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks. 

Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote:

'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on  Bali  , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.' 

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom' 

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, Learn the language!' 

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools.. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.' 

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.' 

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this.. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.'

'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.' 

Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, American citizens will find the backbone to start speaking and voicing the same truths.  I am an immigrant... and I say, "AMEN!"

Thought For The Day

An optimist is a person who sees a green light everywhere, while a pessimist sees only the red stoplight...The truly wise person is color-blind.—Albert Schweitzer

Obama's New Spending Bill Has 9,000 Earmarks

WASHINGTON — During the 2008 presidential campaign, candidates Barack Obama and John McCain fought vigorously over who would be toughest on congressional earmarks.

"We need earmark reform," Obama said in September during a presidential debate in Oxford, Miss. "And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."

President Barack Obama should prepare to carve out a lot of free time and keep the coffee hot this week as Congress prepares to unveil a $410 billion omnibus spending bill that's riddled with thousands of earmarks, despite his calls for restraint and efforts on Capitol Hill to curtail the practice.

The bill will contain about 9,000 earmarks totaling $5 billion, congressional officials say. Many of the earmarks — loosely defined as local projects inserted by members of Congress — were inserted last year as the spending bills worked their way through various committees.

So while Obama and McCain were slamming earmarks on the campaign trail, House and Senate members — Democrats and Republicans — were slapping them into spending bills.

"It will be a little embarrassing for the president if he signs a bill with that many earmarks on it," said Stan Collender , a veteran Washington budget analyst. "He'll say they're left over from the Bush years, and he as to say that next year the bill will be clean."

Experts agree that most earmarks are legitimate. Cary Leahey , senior economist with Decision Economics in New York , said the nation's economic crisis is a contributing factor to the plethora of earmarks. Lawmakers can argue that for a relatively small price they've helped boost the economy.

"One congressman's earmark is another legislative way to fix a serious problem in his district," Leahey said.

Kenneth Thomas , a lecturer in finance at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of business, agrees.

"I generally believe that the priority is getting money into the system sooner rather than later, especially if it's for projects that will use local contractors and create jobs," he said.

Still, it wasn't supposed to be this way. Earmarks have come under fire because of those that seem to provide what Maya MacGuineas , president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, calls "laugh lines," such as Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere" or North Dakota's Lawrence Welk Museum .

Obama pledged to take a hard hand on earmarks and warned lawmakers in a Feb. 3 letter from Budget Director Peter Orszag not to decorate the recently signed $787.2 billion stimulus bill with them.

Democrats declared the bill earmark-free. Republicans disagreed.

"While this bill does not include traditional earmarks, we should all understand that there are earmarks in this bill," said Sen. Mike Enzi , R- Wyo. "There is $850 million ... to bail out Amtrak , a $75 million earmark for the Smithsonian, a $1 billion earmark for the 2010 census."

Democrats have been trying to revamp the earmark process for about two years. In 2007, they instituted a system that required members to explain the contents of each earmark, as well as a justification for why it was included in the legislation that way. They claimed this led to a reduction in earmarks by as much as 43 percent.

But critics contended the system still had problems. Simply making information more available, they said, didn't address the major criticism: That such projects should go through the regular legislative process, subject to detailed hearings and bipartisan votes.

Not only does this mean the public has no chance to challenge questionable spending, but too often powerful interests who know how to work the system get favorite measures inserted.

For instance, Congressional Quarterly reported recently that more than 100 House members got earmarks for clients of the PMA Group , a lobbying firm with close ties to Rep. John Murtha , D- Pa. , who heads the powerful defense spending subcommittee. The CQ Politics analysis said that in the 2009 defense spending bill, which Congress approved last year, PMA clients got about $300 million .

The CQ study came after reports that the FBI is investigating the possibility of illegal campaign contributions by PMA to Murtha and other lawmakers. A Murtha spokesman said earlier this month that the FBI probe has nothing to do with Murtha. A PMA spokesman declined to comment on the probe.

Appropriations committee chairmen say they are on track to reform the earmark process beginning in fiscal 2010 by requiring members to make public their requests early, so the public can scrutinize them and presumably contact lawmakers.

The change, though, doesn't apply to the 2009 funding that Congress will consider next week.

Several experts believe that dramatically reducing the number of earmarks, while a laudable goal, is almost impossible. But others contend that earmarks aren't that big of a problem.

"Earmarks get more attention than they deserve," said MacGuineas. "The problem is that they cause a loss of confidence in the whole budget process."

By: William Douglas and David Lightman, McClatchy Newspapers

Source:  DailyThoughtPad

Mike Huckabee: Obama’s Performance ‘Cause for Alarm’

Former GOP presidential candidate Gov. Mike Huckabee in an exclusive Newsmax interview says President Obama’s early job performance is “cause for alarm,” and warns his penchant for talking down the economy is “the worst possible direction he could take.”

Obama’s dark portrayal of the U.S. economy -- apparently intended to lower the high expectations stoked by his rhetoric during the campaign -- is on the verge of becoming a “self-fulfilling prophecy,” Huckabee adds.

The former Arkansas governor’s criticism followed a week that saw the Dow Jones Industrial Average hit a six-year low. The S & P 500, the index that most trading professionals rely on as a market barometer, closed the week at its lowest level in 12 years.

“He can no longer talk about the fact that this is all Bush’s fault,” Huckabee tells Newsmax. “First of all there, there was a Democratic Congress that Bush had to deal with, that would not let Bush deal with Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

“Now, I think there’s plenty of culpability within the Bush administration, particularly for the TARP [financial bailout] program, which is a dismal failure,” Huckabee concedes. “But Obama ran for president knowing full well what he faced, and as soon as he took command of the ship, it’s his ship to sail or sink.”

Noting that Obama has lost several high Cabinet appointees due to tax and other issues, Huckabee says early indications regarding the quality of the president’s judgment don’t look promising.

“I think it’s cause for alarm,” Huckabee tells Newsmax. “He seems to be tone deaf to his own music. I was very, very disappointed to see him abandon his own rhetoric, as it relates to transparency, ethics, about a new way of doing things in Washington.

“I mean, on and on he talked about how he wasn’t going to have a Washington run by a bunch of lobbyists, then about every appointment he makes is given the exception clause, [he’s] appointing people and then insisting they get confirmed who didn’t pay their taxes.

“Those are not the kinds of things that inspire confidence in the lives of people out there in the middle of America who aren’t given a free ride to wait years and years until they’re appointed to some federal job before they pay up,” he adds.

Huckabee, author of “Do the Right Thing: Inside the Movement That’s Bringing Common Sense Back to America,” reserved his toughest criticism for Obama’s disparaging remarks about the nation’s economy.

“He is in essence giving us what’s becoming self-fulfilling prophecy,” Huckabee tells Newsmax.

Obama, for example, warned Congress of an economic “catastrophe” if it didn’t support his plans to fix the economy. When Obama signed the $787 billion economic stimulus bill on Feb. 17, Wall Street reacted with a 3.8 percent decline in the Dow – a slide that continued through the end of the week.

“If a leader stands up and repeats over and over how bad it is and how it is in fact the worst ever, then what we’re going to do at some point is believe him,” Huckabee warns. “The people who supported him and voted for him did so because they trusted him. They did so because they believed what he said on the campaign trail.

“So now if he’s out there every day telling us it’s the worst it has ever been, there are going to be a significant number of Americans who are going to say: ‘Well, I guess the same guy who told me ‘Yes we can’ is now telling me ‘No we can’t.’”

Huckabee adds: “It’s the worst possible direction he could take. I think about how polar opposite it is from sort of the classic FDR message, ‘We have nothing to fear but fear itself.’

“With Obama, it’s ‘We have nothing but fear.’”

By: David A. Patten © 2009 Newsmax

Related Articles:  

• Michael Farris - United Nation’s Convention on Rights of a Child Material
  

Help Chuck DeVore Defeat Barbara Boxer in 2010

Last week the only man standing between Californians and $70 billion in new taxes was Chuck DeVore.

In a principled stand, Chuck decried massive tax hikes on hard-working families in the Golden State, resigned his leadership position in protest, and blasted the Assembly's deal:  "This proposed agreement strikes at the heart of our longtime opposition to tax increases. Excessive taxation both harms the economy and robs hardworking Californians of a portion of their liberty. Placing our Caucus squarely in line with tax increases also demoralizes our supporters - people who were counting on us to hold the line.

"For these reasons, I believe it is appropriate for me to resign as Chief Republican Whip, effective immediately. I can no longer participate as a leader on a team that is preparing to make a fundamental mistake of colossal proportions. For the sake of California I hope I am wrong - however, I fear I am right and that this tax increase and budget deal will result in more harm to the Golden State than good."

Chuck DeVore showed his true colors, as a Republican who places principle above position. He marked himself as one of the emerging bright lights of the next conservative ascendancy. In stepping down, he stepped up -- and it won't be the last time.

This past week President Obama signed into law a massive "stimulus" package, passed by partisan liberals in Washington, that jeopardizes our fiscal future and squanders our children's inheritance. We can't afford to take a chance on tepid and untried leaders.  We need real conservatives with resolve who will represent us in Washington.  We need Chuck DeVore in the United States Senate.

Please consider making a donation to the Chuck DeVore campaign today and help unseat Barbara Boxer.

Thank you,
The Chuck DeVore Campaign

Source:  Human Events

Thought For The Day

"No one lives long enough to learn everything they need to learn 

starting from scratch. To be successful, we absolutely, 

positively have to find people who have already 

paid the price to learn the things that we

need to learn to achieve our goals."

…Brian Tracy: Personal and business training author, speaker, and consultant

The Fairness Doctrine

Obama makes it clear: No ‘Fairness Doctrine’

12:44 pm February 19, 2009, by Jay

From Fox News:

“President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.

The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes the doctrine — a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.

“As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated,” White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com….

Fueling discussion, a report in the American Spectator this week said aides to Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman, Calif., met last week with staff for the Federal Communications Commission to discuss ways to enact Fairness Doctrine policies. The report said Waxman was also interested in applying those standards to the Internet, which drew ridicule from supporters and opponents of the doctrine.

Both the FCC and Waxman’s office denied the report.”

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

White House: Obama Opposes 'Fairness Doctrine' Revival

A White House spokesman tells FOXNews.com President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine.

President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday. 

The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes the doctrine -- a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues. 

"As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com. 

That was after both senior adviser David Axelrod and White House press secretary Robert Gibbs left open the door on whether Obama would support reinstating the doctrine. 

"I'm going to leave that issue to Julius Genachowski, our new head of the FCC ... and the president to discuss. So I don't have an answer for you now," Axelrod told FOX News Sunday over the weekend when asked about the president's position.  

The debate over the so-called Fairness Doctrine has heated up in recent days as prominent Democratic senators have called for the policies to be reinstated. Conservative talk show hosts, who see the doctrine as an attempt to impose liberal viewpoints on their shows, largely oppose any move to bring it back. 

Fueling discussion, a report in the American Spectator this week said aides to Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman, Calif., met last week with staff for the Federal Communications Commission to discuss ways to enact Fairness Doctrine policies. The report said Waxman was also interested in applying those standards to the Internet, which drew ridicule from supporters and opponents of the doctrine. 

Both the FCC and Waxman's office denied the report. 

The Fairness Doctrine was adopted in 1949 and held that broadcasters were obligated to provide opposing points of views on controversial issues of national importance. It was halted under the Reagan administration.  

FOXNews.com's Judson Berger contributed to this report. 

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

DeMint to Force Vote on Fairness Doctrine

Thursday, February 19, 2009 6:49 PM

Sen. Jim DeMint announced that he will force a vote next week on a bill that prevents the Federal Communications Commission from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

The South Carolina Republican’s bill, the Broadcaster Freedom Act, is co-sponsored by John Thune, R-S.D., and 27 others and will be offered as an amendment to the D.C. Voting Rights bill.

President Barack Obama is opposed to any move to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, spokesman Ben LaBolt said Wednesday.

But as Sen. DeMint notes in a statement, some Democrats in Congress have indicated that they would support a reinstatement.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, asked in a recent interview if she favored reinstatement, said: “I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else — I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves.”

Back in June, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked by John Gizzi of Human Events if she personally supported the revival of the Fairness Doctrine, and she declared: “Yes.”

As recently as last week, Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa said in an interview: “We need the Fairness Doctrine back.”

Sen. DeMint stated: "I'm glad President Obama finally confirmed his opposition to the Fairness Doctrine, which attacks the right of free speech on talk radio, but many Democrats in Congress are still pushing it.

“With the support of the new administration, now is the time for Congress to take a stand against this kind of censorship. I intend to seek a vote on this amendment next week so every senator is on record: Do you support free speech or do you want to silence voices you disagree with?"

Originally instituted in 1949 by the FCC, the Fairness Doctrine required broadcasters using the public airwaves to give equal time to opposing political views. The FCC repealed the measure in 1987.

Since talk radio is overwhelmingly dominated by conservative hosts, and liberal talk radio draws few listeners, the “equal time” provision would likely force many radio stations to pull popular conservative hosts from the air rather than air low-rated liberal hosts.

The Broadcaster Freedom Act has also been introduced in the House and currently has 177 co-sponsors.

By: Jim Meyers © 2009 Newsmax

President Obama gets a big ata boy... for upholding our rights... the right of freedom of speech and the right freedom of the press!!  And he gets a second ata boy for standing up to the 'out of control' liberals and Republican & conservative haters in the Congress!!

Source:  The Daily Though Pad

Stimulate the Economy Not the Government

On behalf of Governor Romney and everyone else here at his Free and Strong America PAC, thank you for your email and for your continued support. I've copied our team, on my response and invite you to become part of the team.

Governor Romney's analysis of this economic situation seems to have really struck a chord with Americans around the country. We have received countless emails like yours asking if we would offer other items to enable you to help us spread his message about the need to stimulate the economy, not the government, to get things back on the right track.

We're happy to announce to you, and our other Free and Strong America PAC team members, that we're making available the following additional gifts for a limited time: Starting today, for a donation of at least $15, we'll send contributors a "stimulate the economy, not the government" bumper sticker, and for a donation of at least $50, we'll send contributors both the bumper sticker and a "stimulate the economy, not the government" t-shirt.

I hope you and others will make a contribution today toward these gifts. By doing so, not only will you give us the monetary resources we need to continue to support conservative candidates and causes, but you will also help us spread Governor Romney's message to your friends, neighbors, and co-workers by displaying your bumper sticker and wearing your t-shirt with pride.

Thanks again for your dedication to our cause, and we hope that you and others keep the great ideas coming!

Best,

Lou Tavares
Chief Operating Officer

If you are contributing at least $50, please select your t-shirt size below, and we will send you both a t-shirt and a bumper sticker.

 Or, if you are contributing $15-$49, please select the bumper sticker below. 

T-shirts and bumper stickers available for a limited time. Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. For questions about your order, please email Donate@FreeStrongAmerica.com.

Stimulus Verdict: A $3.27 Trillion Porker

The gargantuan stimulus bill Congress has rubber-stamped with virtually no Republican support contains tens of billions of the very spending projects that made the legislation a lightning rod for criticism.

And although the bill is generally described as costing $787 billion, the Congressional Budget Office reports the actual figure is now closer to $3.27 trillion.

That stems from the $744 billion it will take to pay for the additional debt the legislation will create, and $2.527 trillion in increased spending from the new and expanded programs the bill will spawn over the next decade.

To view the letter to Nancy Pelosi, go here.

The bill now spans more than 1,000 pages. While Democrats removed some provisions that fiscal conservatives objected to, most of the pork remains. Among them:

The plan has more than $3 billion in “neighborhood stabilization” and Community Development Block Grant funding, much of which may go to benefit ACORN, a low-income housing and voter registration “community” organization that is under federal investigation for its suspicious voter registration practices.

$1.3 billion to bailout AMTRAK, the perennial money-loser railroad.

$1 billion for educational programs, including courses on sexually transmitted diseases.

$30 million for restoration of wetlands to be spent in the San Francisco Bay Area – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s district. The money will go in part to protect the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse.

$200 million for a low-pollution, coal-fired power plant in President Barack Obama’s home state of Illinois.

$45 million for ATV four-wheeler trails, and government office renovations, according to RNC Chairman Michael Steele.

$200 million to provide computers to community colleges.

$50 million for the National Endowment of the Arts.

Over $650 million in coupons to help consumers buy digital TV converter-box coupons.

A reported $300 million for hybrid vehicles and electric-powered cars. According to the Washington Times, this item will include buying golf carts for federal workers.

GOP Sen. John McCain summed up his view of the bill: “This measure is not bipartisan. It contains much that is not stimulative.”

Some of the criticisms of the bill, however, center on policy rather than cost.

The Heritage Foundation, for example, reports the bill reverses the bipartisan welfare reforms achieved during the Clinton administration.

Also, opponents have slammed the bill for being “anti-religious,” because it expressly prohibits the use of stimulus funds for faith-based schools, schools of divinity, facilities used for “sectarian worship,” or places of religious worship.

Saturday, February 14, 2009 9:40 AM
By: David A. Patten © 2009 Newsmax

The Dems rushed the vote on this bill pushing the urgency button.  Then we find out that Pelosi and 7 other Dems virtually immediately headed to the airport to board military taxpayer paid planes to Italy... on a so called working trip?!?  We also see that after not allowing the members of either the House of Senate to read "the Bill" because of the "so-called" urgency, President Obama waits four days to sign "The Bill" today, Tuesday, so that the White House can make it another media event...  Sounds a bit odd... or maybe not!?!

Hmmm... are we being had?  You betcha!  $3.27 trillion that will put our children and grandchildren into debt... for a bill that nobody really knows what it contains and that experts are saying more and more will give us... Main St or the little guy, very little for the cost... and probably won't work.  And all the while after incurring a $3.27 trillion dollar debt the President has asked the military, fighting two wars, to cut their budget by 10% when they have projects stacked up and needs that would produce immediate jobs that could stimulate the economy.

"They" also don't want us to be side-tracked by the facts... like both John McCain and Mitt Romney had actual 'Stimulus Bill" options that would have cost us half the money and created double the jobs and quicker  Wow, what a concept.

No Seditious Material on President's Day...

Did you know that there is a prohibition on publishing any seditious material on President's Day...?!?

Therefore there will be little informative political news coming your way today online...

Have a Great Presidents' Day!!

Obama and the Great Game

by  Patrick J. Buchanan

The day before Richard Holbrooke arrived in Kabul, eight suicide bombers and gunmen attacked the Justice and Education ministries, killing 26 and wounding 57.

Kabul was paralyzed, as the Taliban displayed an ability to wreak havoc within a hundred yards of the presidential palace.

The assault came as President Obama is both conducting a strategic review and deciding how many additional U.S. troops to send.

Earlier, there was talk of 30,000, bringing the U.S. total to 63,000. Now, there are reports Obama may commit no more than the three brigades promised in 2008, and only one brigade now.

Clearly, the United States is checking its hole card. Can we draw to a winning hand? Or is this hand an inevitable loser -- and we must cut our losses and cede the pot? No longer, anywhere, is there talk of "victory."

Nor is the diplomatic news good.

Last week, Kyrgyzstan gave us six months to vacate Manas, the air base used to resupply U.S. forces. A week before, guerrillas blew up a bridge in the Khyber, cutting the 1,000-mile supply line from Karachi to Kabul. Before that, guerrillas bombed U.S. truck parks in Pakistan.

While in Pakistan, Holbrooke was told by all to whom he spoke that, while U.S. Predator strikes may be killing Taliban and al-Qaida, the deaths among tribal peoples are turning Pakistan against us.

What would winning Afghanistan for democracy profit us, if the price were losing a nuclear-armed Pakistan to Islamism?

The expulsion from Manas, after Kyrgyzstan received a reported $2 billion in aid from Moscow, raises a question.

Is Russia restarting "The Great Game" she played against Victoria's Empire in Central Asia, which ended in 1907 with a British-Russian entente, dividing Iran into spheres of influence, with both sides agreeing to keep hands off Afghanistan?

As Russia has as great an interest in preventing an Islamist Kabul, and has assisted NATO's resupply of its forces, why would Moscow seek to expel us from a base vital to the war effort?

Does Russia simply seek to be recognized by the United States as the hegemon of Central Asia, the sole great power that decides who can and who cannot use former Soviet bases?

For if Manas is closed and the Karachi-Khyber-Kabul supply line is compromised or cut, Obama would seem to have but three options.

First would be to go back, hat-in-hand, to Islam Karimov, the Uzbek ruler charged with grave human rights violations, and ask him to reopen the Karshi-Khanabad (K2) air base, from which we were expelled in 2005. And what would be Karimov's asking price?

Second is the Russia option. If Moscow now holds the whip hand in the old Soviet republics, what is Moscow's price to let us remain in Manas or use other Soviet bases over which it wields veto power?

The answer is obvious. Neither Georgia nor Ukraine is to be brought into NATO. The independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, won in the August war with Georgia, is not to be challenged. The U.S anti-missile missiles planned for Poland are not to be deployed.

In turn, Russia will cancel any missile deployment in Kaliningrad, recommits to the terms of all conventional forces agreements in Europe and assist in the effort in Afghanistan. Russia rejoins the West, and the West stays off Russia's front porch.

Be not surprised if the Russians come trolling before an overextended American empire an end to the Great Game in Central Asia like the one the ministers of Nicholas II offered the ministers of Edward VII.

And the third option? It is Iran.

Before 9-11, Iran was more hostile to the anti-Shia Taliban than we, and it has no desire to see them return. Indeed, Tehran was a supporter of the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as both were ruled by mortal enemies.

The long way for U.S. and NATO war materiel to reach Kabul via Iran would be through a Turkey-Kurdistan-Iran supply line. The shorter would be from Iranian ports straight into Afghanistan.

Price of an entente? An end to the 30-year U.S.-Iranian cold war and a strategic bargain whereby Iran is allowed to develop peaceful nuclear power, under supervision, the United States lifts its embargo, and regime change is left to the Iranian people.

President Ahmadinejad, no fool, and facing an uncertain election this year, is already signaling interest in negotiations with Obama.

A complication. How would "Bibi" Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman regard a U.S.-Iran rapprochement -- to prevent a Taliban triumph in Kabul?

Yet, if the Taliban's enemies in Russia, Iran, Pakistan and Central Asia will not assist us, this war cannot end well. And if they will not help, Obama should cut America's losses, come home and let their neighbors deal with a triumphant Taliban.

Welfare Poem - oh boy you will love this ...

I cross ocean,
Poor and broke,
Take bus,
see employment folk.

Nice man treat me
good in there,
Say I need to
see welfare.

Welfare say,
'You come no more,
We send cash
right to your door.'

Welfare checks,
they make you wealthy,
Medicaid it keep
you healthy!

By and by,
I get plenty money,
Thanks to you,
American dummy.

Write to friends
in motherland,
Tell them 'come
fast as you can.'

They come in turbans
and Ford trucks,
I buy big house
with welfare bucks

They come here,
we liv e together,
More welfare checks,
it gets better!

Fourteen families,
they moving in,
But neighbor's patience
wearing thin.

Finally, white guy
moves away,
Now I buy his house,
and then I say,

'Find more aliens
for house to rent.'
And in the yard
I put a tent.

Send for family
they just trash,
But they, too,
draw the welfare cash!

Everything is
very good,
And soon we
own the neighborhood.

We have hobby
it's called breeding,
Welfare pay
for baby feeding.

Kid's need dentist?
Wife's need pills?
We get free!
We got no bills!

American's crazy!
He pay all year,
To keep welfare
running here.

We think America
darn good place!
Too darn good for
the white man race.

If they no like us,
they can scram,
Got lots of room in Pakistan

It is interesting that the federal government provides a single refugee with a monthly allowance of $1,890.00 and each can also get an additional $580.00 in social assistance for a total of$2,470.00 .

This compares very well to a single pensioner who after contributing to the growth and development of America for 40 to 50 years can only receive a monthly maximum of $1,012.00 in old age pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement.

Maybe our pensioners should apply as refugees!

Share this with all Americans, so we can all be ticked off and maybe we can get the refugees cut back to $1,012.00 and the pensioners up to $2,470 00 and enjoy some of the money we were forced to submit to the Government over the last 40 or 50 years.

Expose every American to what our elected politicians have been doing to the over-taxed American public.

Stimulus Bill Passes in House of Representatives Without a Single Congressperson Having Read the Bill...

There is really nothing that can be said to that action... if you have even an ounce of common sense!!

We have just passed a trillion-dollar Stimulus Bill in the House of Representatives that 'nobody' is sure will work and most people are doubtful or flat think it can't work and will bankrupt our children and grandchildren. Yet no Congressman or Senator has read it or understands it.  The Bill grew overnight from an 800 plus page bill to almost an 1100 page bill and nobody knows what has been added in those 300 pages or what was removed.   And the entire process in the House of Representatives was hurried along instead of slowed for consideration and review by the leader of the House, Nancy Pelosi, so she can go on her European Vacation and protect the pork, both added for herself and friends like Harry Reid.  It should be noted that the Bill was passed in the House without a single Republican voting for it.

Everyday we find out more and more about how there is no record of  how the first half of the TARP money, the previous bailout bill, that has already been dispersed was spent and how what is trackable of that TARP money was used to bail out banks that should have been allowed to fail.  Not a penny of that money has trickled down to Main Street and the new partnerships have just given the National Government more and more power, putting us on the road to socialism.  And if any of you think this is the right road, perhaps you should review the "state" of Great Britain after Tony Blair. 

Now the Stimulus Bill, re-named by most as the 'Spending Bill', is in the Senate, where it is expected to pass with the votes of only three Republican Senators, whose motives and incentives are questionable.  The Obama administration is supplying a special plane to a Democratic Senator dealing with personal problems in order to guarantee their desperately needed 60 votes, hardly a bipartisan bill or even an Obama or Democratic victory.

Last week Obama promised there would be no earmarks in the Spending Bill, now we hear there are many that will not create any new jobs, plus there are many many pet projects, like the Fantasyland Express, packed into this massive un-reviewed bill that has been repackaged several times, including behind doors by the light of last night's mid-night oil, leaving no time for a review.  In this computer age bills are normally provided to the members of the House and Senate as a computer file that can be easily searched, but not this time.  They got it at the last minute, old school... 1100 printed pages.  Any flags there??  And is anyone yelling "waste of paper"  "tree killers" or what happened to "go-green"?  Certainly not your usual Dems! 

The Republican Plan... both John McCain's and Mitt Romney's would cost half of this present bill and would create double the jobs... and much more quickly, yet the Democrats would only have it their way.  If this Bill turns out to be the fiasco that it promises to be, it will destroy the United States as we know it.  Even if it were a success, in three weeks after Obama's Inauguration, we have become a socialistic Country.  And although there will be no joy is saying "I told you so..."  the responsibility for the outcome of this mis-guided and hurried through plan will fall completely on the Democratic Party and President Obama.

Somewhere in the chanting and search for hope and change, we have lost our common sense, our values and our principles.  Let us hope we don't lose all our rights before we come back to our senses.

By:  Marion Algier

Join Glenn Beck's WE Surround Them...

WE Surround Them

We Surround Them-The Unveiling
March 13th on FOX News 5pm ET

Share this page with your friends and family...

Do you watch the direction that America is being taken in and feel powerless to stop it?
Do you believe that your voice isn’t loud enough to be heard above the noise anymore?
Do you read the headlines everyday and feel an empty pit in your stomach…as if you’re completely alone?
If so, then you’ve fallen for the Wizard of Oz lie. While the voices you hear in the distance may sound intimidating, as if they surround us from all sides—the reality is very different. Once you pull the curtain away you realize that there are only a few people pressing the buttons, and their voices are weak. The truth is that they don’t surround us at all.
We surround them.
So, how do we show America what’s really behind the curtain? Below are nine simple principles. If you believe in at least seven of them, then we have something in common. I urge you to read the instructions at the end for how to help make your voice heard.

12 Values

• Honesty
• Reverence
• Hope
• Thrift
• Humility
• Charity
• Sincerity
• Moderation
• Hard Work
• Courage
• Personal Responsibility
• Friendship

The Nine Principles

1. America is good.
2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
You Are Not Alone

If you agree with at least seven of those principles, then you are not alone. Please send a digital version of your picture to: wesurroundthem@foxnews.comand then stay tuned to the radio and television shows over the coming weeks to see how we intend to pull back the curtain.

Picture updates...

Source: Glen Beck

Glenn Beck: Pelosi rushes vote so she can go on 8-Day European Vacation

GLENN: Representative John Culberson of Texas claims the stimulus bill must be urgently voted on today because speaker Nancy Pelosi is leaving at 6:00 p.m. for an eight-day trip to Europe. No way. Get him on the phone. Get Culberson on the phone. Pelosi is hoping to lead a delegation to Europe. There she is with the Pope getting an award from an Italian legislative group. Calls to Pelosi went unreturned. Democrats have now broken their promise to have the public see the proposed bill for 48 hours before any vote. I believe, um, this is obscene. I believe Obama said that five days, that he would make things public before they would be turned into law. Senator Frank Lautenberg, democrat from New Jersey, predicted that none of his Senate colleagues would have a chance to read the final version of the bill before it comes up for the final vote. Here it is, 1,071 pages. None of his Senate colleagues would have the chance. This is obscene. There is no emergency that is so important that we pass this without reading it. There is absolutely no excuse! You know what? You call up your congressman, you call up your senators today. I swear to you, you might want to vote for it, you can wait. Nancy Pelosi can wait. You can wait until you've had a chance to read the damn thing! Who in their right mind would do this in business? Who in their right mind would do this with your own home? Damn it, it is our country! Who are these alien life forms? How fast do they have to read it? If they're going to vote today, they have to read 640 words per minute. Now, I'm going to show you, I'm going to read a page of the stimulus package and I'm going to show you how I would have to read it. Now, I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I'm guessing there are some people a little less bright than me in congress. This is the way that I would do it. I would assemble my team, stu, we would have what, I would have my, you know, my aides around me, I guess. I got Joe, who is one of the smartest legal guys, so you can speak legalese.

STU: Right. And this is 150 words here.

GLENN: Only doing 150 words. Here we go. And I'm supposed to read 640 words per minute to be able to read this whole thing and get to the vote and have read it.

STU: And so Nancy Pelosi can catch her plane.

GLENN: There's no way, there is no way that's true. There is absolutely no way.

STU: She's getting an award, though.

GLENN: You ready? Stu, you're going to time me?

STU: Yes.

GLENN: Okay. You time me for a minute.

STU: See how long it takes you to read these 150 words.

GLENN: Okay, all right. Let me know when we hit a minute and we'll just keep going. Ready? Go. 37, watershed rehabilitation program, for an additional amount for watershed rehabilitation program, let's just assume I'm a regular person and I don't know what the watershed rehabilitation, can you find out what the watershed rehabilitation program is please? $50 million, have to count the zeros, for necessary expenses to carry out rehabilitation of structural measures. What does that mean, Joe? Necessary expenses to carry out rehabilitation of structural measures? Buildings and stuff?

JOE: That could be dams, bridges, any structure.

GLENN: Provided that section 1106 of this act shall not apply to this appropriation. Can you find out what section 1106 says?

JOE: And at this time, the congressman or senators are getting an aide to go get that section because they don't know either.

GLENN: Okay. Provided further that priority in the use of such funds shall be given such projects. [Buzzer]

STU: That's one minute.

GLENN: Provided further that the priority in the use of such funds shall be given to such projects that can be fully funded and completed with the funds appropriated in this act. So in other words, as long as it can be completed with the money that is in here, that project gets a priority. Right? Okay. And to activities that commence promptly following the enactments. Or if you can at least start it right away, correct?

STU: Or both.

GLENN: Okay. Rural development programs, rural community advancement program, including transfers of funds. For an additional amount of gross obligations for the principal amount of direct and guaranteed loans as authorized by sections 306 and 310-B, and described in sections 381 ED-1, 381 ED-2 and 381 ED-3. [Buzzer]

STU: That's two minutes.

GLENN: Of the consolidated, hang on, I don't even know, for an additional amount of gross obligations. So in other words, what is obligations? Understand how that word's being used. For an additional amount of gross obligations. Are they saying for an additional amount of money not in this act.

JOE: Right, if you can start the project and finish the project with the moneys allocated, that's fine, but there will still be long-term costs that are not operational costs.

GLENN: Okay, I see. Gross obligations for the amount of principal and direct guaranteed loans as authorized, find out what's in 306, 310, 381 ED-1, 2, and 3, of the consolidated farm and rural development act, what the hell is that? To be able from the rural community advancement program as follows, $5,838,000,000, zero, zero, zero.

STU: Right. And conveniently timed. [Buzzer] That's 3 minutes. Again, you didn't resolve any of the questions that you have.

GLENN: No, I just have questions.

STU: You just have questions like what are these act that we're spending $5 billion on. You have not allocated in your mind whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, you at least know you have to check them. That's not how you actually need to read the bill because you need to get the answers, check them, and come back and say, yes, this is good or this is bad.

Glenn Beck is seen here on the Insider Webcam, an exclusive feature available only to Glenn Beck Insiders. Learn more...

GLENN: Now, let me try to read those hundred words, how fast do I have to read those hundred words.

STU: It's 150 words. You'd have to read it in about --

GLENN: 10 seconds?

STU: 12 seconds.

GLENN: 12 seconds, okay. So I want to read before I vote, if I want to read this bill, I can't even read this in 12 seconds.

STU: You haven't tried. Just read it as fast as you can.

GLENN: Ready? Tell me when to go.

STU: Three, two, one.

GLENN: [reading fast] Provided that section 1106 of this act shall not apply to this proposeration --

STU: Stop.

GLENN: I'm two sentences in.

STU: What's the word you got to here?

GLENN: Provided further. Let me try to read it faster. I'm on line 5 of 24. You have it?

STU: Yeah, ready? Three, two, one.

GLENN: [reading fast] Provided that section 1106 of this act shall not apply to this appropriation. To begin projects... [Buzzer] There's no way. There's absolutely no way to read this. I mean there's no way to read this.

STU: The fastest you read there, I don't know, it seems like about a third as fast as you'd need to read it.

GLENN: Dan, can you take what I just did and speed it up, take what I read the act, I read it to the $5 trillion last hour and I read it quickly, but not really, really fast.

STU: Right. You did 150 words in about a minute there.

GLENN: That was the first time I read it. In fact, Dan, can you just play it at normal speed here on what I did last hour, when I just read it at normal speed? Because I was reading it cold just like somebody would, you turn the page, and here you read it cold. Here you go.

GLENN: For an additional amount of watershed rehabilitation program, $50 million for necessary expenses to carry out rehabilitation of.

STU: Stop.

GLENN: Okay. I'm not reading it slowly. Now, can you cut that, it needs to be 12 seconds, so cut that to 30 seconds. Dan: Okay.

GLENN: [reading fast - unintelligible]

GLENN: That's 30 seconds. Can you get it, will the computer take you down to 12 seconds?

DAN: The computer actually does not let me take it down to 12 seconds. It won't even go that far.

GLENN: It won't time compress, it will not allow, the computer will not allow this amount to be compressed into 12 seconds. What's as fast as you can get it?

DAN: The fastest it will go is 15 seconds.

GLENN: Run 15 seconds. [reading fast - unintelligible]

GLENN: Oh, okay. I got it. How about you? You ready to vote?

STU: And you only have to do that for, you know, the whole night.

GLENN: Yeah. You only have to do that from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m., straight, no potty breaks, nothing.

STU: If you kept your laptop with you, you could keep scrolling while you were going to the bathroom maybe.

GLENN: It's obscene, it's obscene. This is the change we were looking for? This is the change? Where are the damn democrats? Where are the good American democrats? You want to pass this thing, pass it! But know what's in it. Where are all the people that were screaming about the patriot act? Screaming? You people, look, democrats, I'm begging you, you know this isn't a stimulus package, fine. Fine. You want to roll back the, you want to roll back all the Clinton welfare stuff, fine, roll it back. But know what else is in it. We are just handing our sovereignty over. People say character doesn't matter. Yes, it does. This is why character matters. Because anyone can character would say, wait a minute, this is the future of our country. Anyone with character would say I don't care what my own party says, I wouldn't care what Nancy Pelosi says, I don't care. I'm reading it. I was sent here to do a job. And that is to represent the people in my district. And I can't represent them, I can't look them in the eye and say, well, okay, I just passed it, it was a hurry. You vote no! Even if it doesn't mean it stops it, you vote no! This is obscene. I tell you, I'm, I'm, George Washington would call us enemies of the state. George Washington would call us enemies of the state. He would. Here was the indispensable man, here was a man full of honor, here was a man who stepped down. Here was a man who said no. It's Mr. President. They wanted to make him king. Whose liberty are you just throwing around? Whose liberty are you just treating with such disregard? Mine, yours, our children's. These guys have a sacred responsibility to protect us. To protect the constitution of the United States. They can't even read it fast enough! The largest bill ever? The last huge stimulus bill was how much? This is, this dwarfs everything. We have found so many things in it at the last minute, all of a sudden, health care, universal health care, where we're telling our seniors that there are some things you're just going to have to get used to, universal health care czars are tucked into this thing? We've got, what was it, 20 or $30 million for the salt marsh mouse in Nancy Pelosi's district? How dare you? How can you sleep at night! Some of us, some us actually care about our country. And I will not hear, I will not accept any, no more, I will not accept hearing anyone say how dare you tell me I don't love my country. You can vote for this bill and love your country. but you can't vote for this bill if you haven't read the damn bill and love your country! You love your party over country. And I'm tired of it. I am tired of the republicans, I am tired of the democrats. George Washington told us that these two parties, he was against the two-party system. He said it would be the death of us. You got to get yourself away from these parties. That's not me. That's George Washington. Well, now we see how far ahead of his time he was. We don't need a third party. We need Americans that may disagree, that vote for the stimulus package and against the stimulus package, but agree that they need to read the damn bill first. Boy.

STU: Don't try and act like the founders read the entire Declaration of Independence before they signed it.

GLENN: These people put their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor, these people in Washington, some of these people don't even have sacred honor, wouldn't recognize it if it came up and slapped them across the face. And believe me, sacred honor would slap a lot of these clowns across the face. Their lives? They would never put their lives on the line for this constitution, they'd never put their -- you're going to put your life, you are signing this bill, you might as well be putting your life on the line for the country. You better know what the hell is in it. Because -- the CBO says it's going to make things worse. You might say it makes things better. Well, you better damn well know. Just the arrogance.

STU: Glenn, we have to stop here for a break. But just before you do, think about this for a minute. Did George Washington ever get an award from an Italian legislative group?

GLENN: No, he didn't.  But he would have probably left before the vote. I can't read this whole declaration thing. Constitution, whatever. You know what, John? Just sign big, so my name, you know, there's no room for me in there? I got to go. I'm getting an award tonight.

Last Night as of 11PM EST nobody even had a copy of this disaster to review, even if they were willing to stay up all night with a full staff and try to read it.  Now Pelosi is pushing for an immediate vote so she can go on a European vacation.  Call your Congress Representatives, Senators and the White House now!!  Stop this bill !!  Look at the Republican plan (McCain's or Romney's);  Half the cost and creates double the jobs.  Or consider doing nothing at all and let the economy right itself.  The average recession only lasts 18-months... we are halfway there and nobody thinks bankrupting our grandkids is going to help! Just look at the TARP fiasco and the same people are running and managing this…

Keep up on the latest at:

http://www.glennbeck.com/

http://dailythoughtpad.blogspot.com/

http://knowledgecreatespower.blogspot.com/

Preserve the Second Amendment

HumanEvents.com has Partnered with the NRA for this Special Offer:

Join the NRA with Full Membership Benefits for 1 Year for $25.

NRA Reduces Membership Price for Human Events Readers

Dear Human Events Reader,

The United States of America in 1791 was a new democracy, in a new land. That year 10 Amendments were added to our Constitution. Those Amendments are known today as the Bill of Rights. A formal statement that the people shall have unalienable freedoms and that congress shall make no laws against those freedoms.

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

President Obama’s Chicago, House Speaker Pelosi’s San Francisco and Attorney General Holder’s Washington, D.C. are a reflection of what they think of the 2nd Amendment. That it is just fine to infringe upon, impede and restrict your right to keep and bear arms.

Are these the officials you trust to protect your Constitutional rights?
Are these the people that will protect our 2nd Amendment?

Who will protect our Constitutional freedom? We the people. Through our strength in numbers we can send a message to those that disregard our 2nd Amendment will not be tolerated.

This is an invitation from Human Events, to you, to join the National Rifle Association. Our Founding Fathers pledged their blood, their treasure and their sacred honor. We can honor that pledge today with our membership in the organization that has protected our 2nd Amendment freedom since 1871 – the NRA.

Join, renew your membership or give the gift of membership. This is the single most important thing you can do to protect the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Join Our Fight to Preserve the 2nd Amendment Today!

Thank You,

Michael W. Piccione
Director, Special Products
Human Events

Poverty of Imagination

Venturing out each day into this land of strip malls, freeways, office parks, and McHousing pods, one can’t help but be impressed at how America looks the same as it did a few years ago, while seemingly overnight we have become another country. All the old mechanisms that enabled our way of life are broken, especially endless revolving credit, at every level, from household to business to the banks to the U.S. Treasury.

Peak energy has combined with the diminishing returns of over-investments in complexity to pull the “kill switch” on our vaunted “way of life” — the set of arrangements that we won’t apologize for or negotiate. So, the big question before the nation is: do we try to re-start the whole smoking, creaking hopeless, futureless machine? Or do we start behaving differently?

The attempted re-start of revolving debt consumerism is an exercise in futility. We’ve reached the limit of being able to create additional debt at any level without causing further damage, additional distortions, and new perversities of economy (and of society, too). We can’t raise credit card ceilings for people with no ability make monthly payments. We can’t promote more mortgages for people with no income. We can’t crank up a home-building industry with our massive inventory of unsold, and over-priced houses built in the wrong places. We can’t ramp back up the blue light special shopping fiesta. We can’t return to the heyday of Happy Motoring, no matter how many bridges we fix or how many additional ring highways we build around our already-overblown and over-sprawled metroplexes. Mostly, we can’t return to the now-complete “growth” cycle of “economic expansion.” We’re done with all that. History is done with our doing that, for now.

So far — after two weeks in office — the Obama team seems bent on a campaign to sustain the unsustainable at all costs, to attempt to do all the impossible things listed above. Mr. Obama is not the only one, of course, who is invoking the quest for renewed “growth.” This is a tragic error in collective thinking. What we really face is a comprehensive contraction in our activities, especially the scale of our activities, and the pressing need to readjust the systems of everyday life to a level of decreased complexity.

For instance, the myth that we can become “energy independent” and yet remain car-dependent is absurd. In terms of liquid fuels, we’re simply trapped. We import two-thirds of the oil we use and there is absolutely no chance that drill-drill-drilling (or any other scheme) will change that. The public and our leaders cannot face the reality of this. The great wish for “alternative” liquid fuels (bio fuels, algae excreta) will never be anything more than a wish at the scales required, and the parallel wish to keep all our cars running by other means — hydrogen fuel cells, electric motors — is equally idle and foolish. We cannot face the mandate of reality, which is to do everything possible to make our living places walkable, and connect them with public transit. The stimulus bills in congress clearly illustrate our failure to understand the situation.

The attempt to restart “consumerism” will be equally disappointing. It was a manifestation of the short peak energy decades of history, and now that we’re past peak energy, it’s over. That seventy percent of the economy is over, especially the part that allowed people to buy stuff with no money. From now on people will have to buy stuff with money they earn and save, and they will be buying a lot less stuff. For a while, a lot of stuff will circulate through the yard sales and Craigslist, and some resourceful people will get busy fixing broken stuff that still has value. But the other infrastructure of shopping is toast, especially the malls, the strip malls, the real estate investment trusts that own it all, many of the banks that lent money to the REITs, the chain-stores and chain eateries, of course, and, alas, the non-chain mom-and-pop boutiques in these highway-oriented venues.

Washington is evidently seized by panic right now. I don’t know anyone who works in the White House, but I must suppose that they have learned in two weeks that these systems are absolutely tanking, that the previous way of life that everybody was so set on not apologizing for has reached the end of the line. We seem to be learning a new and interesting lesson: that even a team that promises change is actually petrified of too much change, especially change that they can’t really control.

The argument about “change” during the election was sufficiently vague that no one was really challenged to articulate a future that wasn’t, materially, more-of-the-same. I suppose the Obama team may have thought they would only administer it differently than the Bush team — but basically life in the USA would continue being about all those trips to the mall, and the cubicle jobs to support that, and the family safaris to visit Grandma in Lansing, and the vacations at Sea World, and Skipper’s $20,000 college loan, and Dad’s yearly junket to Las Vegas, and refinancing the house, and rolling over this loan and that loan... and that has all led to a very dead end in a dark place.

If this nation wants to survive without an intense political convulsion, there’s a lot we can do, but none of it is being voiced in any corner of Washington at this time. We have to get off of petro-agriculture and grow our food locally, at a smaller scale, with more people working on it and fewer machines. This is an enormous project, which implies change in everything from property allocation to farming methods to new social relations. But if we don’t focus on it right away, a lot of Americans will end up starving, and rather soon. We have to rebuild the railroad system in the U.S., and electrify it, and make it every bit as good as the system we once had that was the envy of the world. If we don’t get started on this right away, we’re screwed. We will have tremendous trouble moving people and goods around this continent-sized nation. We have to reactivate our small towns and cities because the metroplexes are going to fail at their current scale of operation. We have to prepare for manufacturing at a much smaller (and local) scale than the scale represented by General Motors.

The political theater of the moment in Washington is not focused on any of this, but on the illusion that we can find new ways of keeping the old ways going. Many observers have noted lately how passive the American public is in the face of their dreadful accelerating losses. It’s a tragic mistake to tell them that they can have it all back again. We’ll see a striking illustration of “phase change” as the public mood goes from cow-like incomprehension to grizzly bear-like rage. Not only will they discover the impossibility of getting back to where they were, but they will see the panicked actions of Washington drive what remains of our capital resources down a rat hole.

A consensus is firming up on each side of the “stimulus” question, largely along party lines — simply those who are for it and those who are against it, mostly by degrees. Nobody in either party — including supposed independents such as Bernie Sanders or John McCain, not to mention President Obama — has a position for directing public resources and effort at any of the things I mentioned above: future food security, future travel-and-transport security, or the future security of livable, walkable dwelling places based on local networks of economic interdependency. This striking poverty of imagination may lead to change that will tear the nation to pieces.

Regards,
James Howard Kunstler

Some of you may be familiar with Neil Lori of Maverick Freedom. Neil sends these thoughts in his latest missive…

“On the domestic front I think Dmitry Orlov and Jim Kunstler are two of the clearest thinking [and] common sense writers of this time period.  The Obama Nation is about to do what I detest which is build more Roads Roads Roads when in reality we need the 3 T’s (trains, tracks and trolleys) at breakneck speed. 

“Kunstler is right on about food: we need it local and less mechanized (more hand labor).  So let us put on our work jeans, tee shirts, belts hats and gloves to do some real work.  Ditch the couch, tv and computer.  Obama’s highway construction is money down the “rat hole” (drain). 

“Geez I thought Obama had a high IQ, but his biggest failure is that he thinks inside the box and is a bit too much of a conformist who wants to keep the economy the way it has been most of his and our lives!!!!!!!!!”

He continues later…

“We need local farms, local factories and local economies.  The global village is for idiots.  No more globaloney.  Buy Amercian. Grow American.  Make it in America.”

I would venture to say that the things you eat and use will be fabricated or grown not just within the nation, but very, very near to where you live. No more trucking meat and vegetables from industrial mega-farms on the other side of the continent, and a lot fewer doodads from China.

Some of you Shooters may take issue with anyone trying to direct us toward this outcome, and I don’t blame you. I would take issue with any bureaucratic direction myself.

It’s the market, however, that will be directing these changes. Business as usual for the past couple hundred years has been a result of an energy boom and state meddling. Both are on the wane.

Regards,
Gary Gibson
Managing Editor, Whiskey & Gunpowder

Rogers: Geithner and Summers Clueless

Investment superstar Jim Rogers blasted Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s plan to overhaul the financial system bailout.

Rogers told CNBC that the plan will push the U.S. debt higher and was created by the same people who failed to see the crisis coming.

Geithner, formerly president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank and a Treasury official in the Clinton administration “has been dead wrong about everything for 15 years in a row,” Rogers says.

And the same is true of principal White House economic advisor Lawrence Summers, who was Treasury Secretary under Clinton, Rogers maintains.

“If I were on your show 15 weeks in a row and was wrong, you'd probably never invite me back,” he says.

“These guys have been wrong year after year after year consistently, and here they are making the same mistakes again. This is not going to solve the problem. It's going to make it worse.”

Rogers did sound one note of optimism. Eventually the banking system will rebound, he says.

“This is not the first time banks have gone bankrupt,” he explains.

“At the same time, there are a lot of banks that got it right and who are waiting for this.”

The financial markets didn’t like Geithner’s plan either. Markets tanked as he spoke on Tuesday, falling several hundred points.

“The lack of clarity” on a public-private investment fund “has the market upset,” Joseph Keating, chief investment officer at RBC Private Asset Management, told Bloomberg.

“Nationalization could have been a better outcome for some banks.”

By: Dan Weil © 2009 Newsmax

E-Verify Stripped from Stimulus Bill

Vote Below:

American Workers Over Illegal Aliens

or

Illegal Aliens DESERVE Stimulus Jobs

OUTRAGE?

Congress Strips E-Verify Requirement from Stimulus

Allows Illegal Aliens to Receive BENEFITS AND JOBS from Stimulus Bill!!

Is This What You Want?

The American worker has been betrayed by the Leadership in Congress and the White House, along with the Chamber of Commerce! The E-Verify program would have kept illegal aliens from receiving jobs created by the Stimulus Bill. Unfortunately it was stripped from the final bill behind closed doors!

The E-Verify program is a quick 99.6% accurate tool that keeps illegal aliens out of U.S. jobs..

The Chamber of Commerce is winning the right to hire illegal aliens at the same rate as in the past, and to use OUR TAX DOLLARS in the Stimulus to do it! Even though an overwhelming majority of U.S. citizens favor worker verification, our government continues to side with illegal aliens over legal workers!

What Is YOUR Opinion?
VOTE IN OUR INSTANT POLL

KEEP E-Verify in Stimulus Bill

or

REMOVE E-Verify from Stimulus Bill

(When you Click Your Answer above, you'll be taken to a web page
where you will see INSTANT RESULTS. You will also be able to take action if you wish.)

Join with 883,593 citizens who make their voices heard through
NumbersUSA, America's largest-member immigration-reduction organization.

We are non-profit and non-partisan.