The Day the Dollar Died

Our Future:  If We Don’t Stop Spending and Tighten Our Belts… Everywhere!!

Video:  The Day the Dollar Died

GOP Slams 6,000 Earmarks in Trillion-Dollar Omnibus Spending Bill

By David A. Patten  -  Wednesday, 15 Dec 2010 02:14 PM

Republicans are blasting a last-ditch Democratic effort to pass a massive spending bill laden with about 6,000 earmarks as a “smack in the face to taxpayers.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell fired away at the bill from the floor of the Senate, saying it “repeats all the mistakes voters demanded that we put an end to on Election Day.”

“Americans told Democrats last month to stop what they’ve been doing: bigger government, 2,000-page bills jammed through on Christmas Eve, wasteful spending.”

Most Democrats are rallying around the bill, however, seeing it as perhaps their last opportunity to get pet spending projects passed before the 112th Congress takes office. In both the House and Senate, incoming Republicans have agreed to ban earmark requests.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada praised the 1,924-page, $1.1 trillion spending bill Tuesday as “a very good piece of legislation.” Reid hopes to bring the bill up for a vote this week. House Democrats would vote on it on Saturday.

Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, tells Newsmax that virtually no member of Congress has time to read the massive omnibus legislation. Even worse, he says, is that the joint explanatory statement that explains the specifics of the spending request has not yet been published, he says. That document will be more than 1,000 pages as well.

“That’s how you actually find out how the money have been sliced and diced across the various programs and accounts,” Ellis says. “It’s clearly not going to be made available to the public much before the Senate votes on it, and we’re all being asked to buy a $1.1 trillion pig in a poke.

“They had all year to get this thing done, and done in a manner that was at least partially intelligible to the public and to the budget watchers,” Ellis tells Newsmax. “Instead, we have this enormous sausage that they’re trying to stuff through, really virtually sight unseen.”

Republicans say they will push for a continuing resolution in place of the huge omnibus bill. But the GOP push to stop the bill may fall short because of  defections from within their own caucus.
Republican senators such as Kit Bond of Missouri and Bob Bennett of Utah don’t have to worry about running for re-election. Both sit on the Senate Appropriations Committee that crafted the omnibus.
“This is exactly the kind of secretive, pork-laden, massive spending bill that’s driven approval of Congress to an all-time low, and induced a voter rebellion last month,” Brian Riedl, lead budget analyst for the Heritage Foundation, tells Newsmax.

Legislative experts say the omnibus bill reflects the inability of Congress to fund government operations in an efficient manner.

Because the 111th Congress was unable to pass a spending bill in a timely way, Democratic strategists rolled 12 separate bills into one omnibus measure.

Keeping everything in one bill makes it more difficult to excise specific provisions that legislators find objectionable. But it also results in a mammoth piece of legislation that may go unread until months after the bill becomes law.

Unsatisfied with the simple continuing resolution the House passed that would keep the government running until the next Congress takes over in January, the Senate is proposing the earmark-laden omnibus as one last spending hurrah before legislators leave town. Grass-roots conservatives are particularly angry that the bill includes $1 billion to fund the healthcare bill that may be unconstitutional, based on a judge’s ruling in Virginia this week.

Because the authorization for government spending is expiring, Republicans could be accused of shutting down the government if they are able to block the omnibus bill. But GOP senators say they would be happy to vote for a continuing authorization such as the one already passed by the House.

Among the 6,000 earmarks the media has uncovered so far in the massive legislation the Senate is trying to push through just weeks after Democrats sustained their work landslide of the post-World War II era:

• Literal pork: Almost $350,000 is earmarked to study the management of swine waste in North Carolina.
• $235,000 for the management of invasive weeds in Nevada.
• $300,000 for the Polynesian Voyaging Society in Hawaii. Founded in 1973, the society sails a “voyaging” boat throughout the Pacific, studying how ancient Polynesian people settled far-flung lands.
• Funds are devoted to a variety of agricultural needs, including research of maple syrup in Vermont, control of potato pests in Wisconsin, the development of virus-resistant grapes in Washington state, and peanut cultivation research in Alabama.
• $80 million for states and Indian tribes to pay for preservation of Pacific salmon.
• $13 million for clean-water initiatives in rural villages in Alaska.
• $450,000 for the World Food Prize.
• $500,000 for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute.
• $200,000 to install solar panels at a food bank in Arizona.

If the bill passes Congress, it would be up to the president to decide whether to accept it.

Incoming House Speaker John Boehner, a longtime foe of the earmark practice, signed onto a letter last week asking Obama to veto the measure. Boehner issued a statement on Tuesday blasting the bill as a “smack in the face to taxpayers.”

There are two provisions in the bill that Obama may oppose. One would effectively block civilian trials of Guantanamo Bay prisoners in the United States, while another would allocate $450 million for development of a second engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said he will urge the president to veto any bill that contains money for a second engine, which the Pentagon says it does not want.

In what some saw as a statement suggesting the president would be reluctant to veto the bill, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Tuesday:

“Obviously one of the things that has to be done before Congress leaves is how we’re going to pay for the operation of government going forward.”
GOP Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina is threatening to mount a filibuster, and may insist that all 1,924 pages of the bill be read into the record before any vote is taken.

U.S. to have Highest Corporate Tax Rate in the World

Posted December 15th, 2010 at 5:00pm in Entitlements 6 Print This Post

Most of the time being number one is good. But when it comes to having the highest tax rate in the world, it is much better for a country to be bringing up the rear.

Currently Japan holds the inauspicious distinction of having the highest corporate income tax rate in the world (39.5 percent). The United States is a close second, only a few tenths-of-percentage points behind.

Japan will soon fall from the top spot because it has finally recognized what the rest of the industrialized world realized over a decade ago: A low corporate income tax rate is vital for economic growth in the global marketplace. As such, Japan just announced it will reduce its corporate income tax rate by 5 percentage points down to around 35 percent. This remains far above the 25 percent average rate of other industrialized countries, but for them it is a start.

Japan’s reduction will leave the U.S. in the uncomfortable position of having the highest corporate income tax rate in the industrialized world. Hopefully Congress will finally see fit to lower the rate now that we will hold that disreputable title.

The U.S. ended up at the top because it stood still while the rest of the world was cutting its rates. As the chart below shows, in 1990 the U.S. corporate tax rate was middle of the pack. In fact, it was lower than the global average. The years since have seen every other industrialized country aggressively lower its rate.

The top marginal corporate income tax rate is an important factor influencing economic growth and job creation, because it determines how much the tax will reduce the return the business earns from new investment. As a result, it is a large determinant when businesses decide where to locate their next venture—and where they will hire new employees.

The high rate in the U.S. is driving businesses and jobs to other countries. Those jobs will continue to flow to other countries if the U.S. insists on levying its self-defeating corporate income tax rate. It is long past time forCongress to lower the rate so it is equal or below the 25 percent average of our competitors. If it does not, businesses and jobs will continue their exodus to more friendly locales.

The Heritage Foundation  -  The Foundry

Ron Paul – Federal Reserve is a ‘Cartel’

We're Headed Straight Off a Cliff If Health Care Passes

By Cal Thomas - - FOXNews.com

Never has “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you” sounded more like an empty promise.

Pork is the preferred legislative meat for members of Congress, but this weekend they opted for bologna as they tried to convince the public – and themselves – that their so-called “health care” or health insurance “reform” monstrosity will be good for us. At least Castor oil was supposed to work even though it tasted awful. This bill not only tastes bad, it will curdle the best health care system in the world, which could be made a lot better, but will be made much worse with many of the provisions in this legislation.

Democrats now readily admit that Medicare is full of waste, fraud and abuse, but they want us to believe they can run an even larger venture without throwing additional money away. Amazing!

President Obama again claimed in Saturday remarks to the House Democratic caucus that the bill will reduce the deficit by $1.3 trillion. He must know that isn’t true because the money “saved” from Medicare cuts will go to pay for new spending. Only in Washington can you save money and spend money at the same time.

Addressing critics of the bill, President Obama said no one is “going to pull the plug on grandma.” They won’t have to. Grandma will be denied treatment because she will be too much of a financial burden on government. It’s called rationing. Grandma had better start working out, eating lots of oatmeal and hope she doesn’t get sick. Why do you think the president kept mentioning sick children? It’s because children are the ones who will get the most – and best – treatment. Rahm Emanuel’s brother, Ezekiel, has said government has a right to decide how many health care dollars you are worth. And if children with a lifelong taxpaying potential are worth more than grandma who is taking more from the tax pot than she is contributing, that’s too bad for grandma.

The president also said the bill will save money by requiring only one test by the doctor “not five tests.” But what if the first test doesn’t reveal the nature of an illness? Suppose a cancer is hiding in one organ and the test is for cancer in another organ? A second (or fifth) test might reveal the location of the disease, but under Obamacare, a government bureaucrat will allow just one test. -- It’s a form of Russian roulette.

The president promised again “you can keep your doctor.” But what if the doctor quits because he or she can’t afford to accept reduced fees mandated by government to keep costs down, while paying ever-increasing premiums for malpractice insurance to protect the doctor from lawsuits, which, by the way, is another reason the doctor did so many tests.

Companies sometimes test-market new products in regions of the country to see how well they sell. Government-run health care has been test-marketed in Massachusetts and it is a disaster. The cost of the state’s insurance program has ballooned by 42 percent, or almost $600 million. According to an analysis by the Rand Corporation, “in the absence of policy change, health care spending in Massachusetts is projected to nearly double to $123 billion in 2020, increasing 8 percent faster than the state’s gross domestic product.”

The cost of insurance in Massachusetts is the highest in the nation. Double-digit rate increases are expected again this year. Yet, President Obama claimed Saturday that under the Democrats’ plan, rates will go down. How is this possible? If Massachusetts can’t run a cost-effective health program, how can the federal government? And by the way, the only reason Massachusetts has not gone broke (but is headed there) is because Washington has conducted large transfusions of cash because it has a vested interest in protecting the illusion of Massachusetts’ success.

The president said we should support the health insurance bill out of “a sense of neighborliness and community.” When I was growing up, that meant you, not government, helped your neighbor. Government was a last resort, not a first resource. Never has “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you” sounded more like an empty promise.

Remember when Democrats used to care about debt as a burden to our children and grandchildren? They claimed to care about debt when it was a “mere” $450 billion under George W. Bush. Now it’s headed toward the trillions. Where are the green eye-shade Democrats now? They’re spending us into debt as fast as the Treasury can print the money – or the Chinese will lend it to us. The interest on the national debt now exceeds the GDP of some countries.
Total U.S. debt has soared to an all-time high of 370 percent of yearly economic output. That far exceeds its peak of 300 percent during the Great Depression.

Jobs will be lost because of this bill. Already, Caterpiller Company is laying-off workers because it estimates the health care bill will cost the company $100 million.

Why should we believe the promises of politicians? While the president and Speaker Nancy Pelosi touted Medicare, what they forgot to mention was that the cost of that program (and the waste, fraud and abuse that is rampant in it) was supposed to be a fraction of today’s cost. In fact, it was sold on the basis of low cost.

There are no such things as cheap government programs. They become like the "Blob That Ate Tokyo," gobbling up everything in their path.

President Obama quoted Abraham Lincoln, who said he was “bound to be true” and suggested that he, too, was bound to be true. This legislation is so full of budget gimmicks, tricks and lies that the only thing true about is that it will make health care in America worse, not better.

Cal Thomas is America's most widely syndicated newspaper columnist and a Fox News contributor.

Pulling No Punches

John McCain is red in the face and hopping mad. I’m sitting in his office in the Senate Russell Office Building, and he’s just rushed in after delivering a speech on the Senate floor where he seethed about the earmarks in the Homeland Security Bill.

“Can you believe they are putting $6 million of pork into Homeland Security?” he asks with his trademark clenched-fists. “They promised they wouldn’t do that. Ben Nelson [the Democratic senator from Nebraska] just inserted a $200,000 museum in Omaha into the legislative branch appropriations bill. These earmarks are a creeping disease. First members condemn them, then they condone, then they embrace them.” Then Mr. McCain adds, “Eight or nine Republican appropriators routinely vote for this pork.” Shaking his head he says, “It’s killing our party.”

If you thought that the senior senator from Arizona would ride off into the political sunset last November, inconsolable after losing his bid for the presidency, think again. He’s over it. And he’s as energized and spry as ever I’ve known him.

I interviewed John McCain for these pages four years ago when he was just launching his presidential campaign. Now I’m here to see how he is coping with defeat, and what his priorities are this year.

Many feared he’d become the Obama administration’s ambassador to the Republican Party, cutting deals to get things done. On the contrary: He’s emerged as one of the lead critics of Obamanomics.

He says he has worked to keep his relations with President Barack Obama “cordial,” but he pulls no punches criticizing the president’s economic policies. “Never. Never have I seen such a transfer from the private enterprise system to the government of such massive scale,” he says. He goes through the list: car companies, banks, insurance firms owned by government, and he especially grimaces when he mentions the $787 billion stimulus package.

Terry Shoffner

Not much has improved because of the stimulus. Mr. McCain scoffs, “And now, the answer is, according to the Obama economists, we didn’t spend enough.” He’s referring to the notion that we should have a second stimulus. This is not something the senator favors.

Asked about the deficits, his response is blunt. “I think it’s the biggest problem we’ve ever faced.”

Ever? “Yep,” he replies. “The only time where we amassed greater debt was during World War II, and that was temporary spending. We won the world war and then cut back. But now . . . the spending is permanent.”

“Look, this is a very popular, attractive, and eloquent president,” he continues. “But I think he was elected to govern in a centrist fashion. And instead,” he says, the administration is “governing from the far left.” Mr. McCain thinks this approach will capsize. “They don’t get that this is a right-of-center nation. Sooner or later, it becomes increasingly clear to the American people that he’s out of sync with the majority.” The latest polls are already showing some of this slippage: Mr. Obama’s favorable rating is now just over 50%, down from 70% his first weeks in office.

Will Mr. Obama ever move to the center as President Clinton did? “He will try to, but he’s got an overwhelmingly liberal Congress and his political instincts are to move to the left. It’s not an accident that he has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate,” he says, reciting a line from his campaign. On health-care reform, Mr. McCain calls the Pelosi bill “a fish in the sun” that smells more rotten the longer it sits. But he’s worried that this may end badly. The administration has “co-opted the hospitals, he’s co-opted the pharmacists; he’ll co-opt AMA [American Medical Association]. And by the way, if the pharmaceutical companies can save us $100 billion, why don’t they do it now? For the love of God, doesn’t this mean that they’ve been ripping us off?”

In the 2005 interview, Mr. McCain told me rather famously that “I don’t understand economics very well.” The Obama team echoed that phrase throughout the campaign. It’s still stuck in his craw, and it’s one of the first topics he brings up.

“Could I mention, Steve, that I kept hearing during the campaign the stuff about McCain being weak on economics. They obsessed about this in the media. They never said Obama is weak on economics. I came to Washington as a Reaganite limited government tax cutter.” He’s right about the media treatment. Neither candidate had a strong command of economics—certainly not Mr. Obama, as events have shown. Mr. McCain was simply being honest.

He seems perplexed that his pals in the media turned on him in 2008 after years of worshipful press treatment. “In 2000 [when he ran against George W. Bush] I used to go chat with reporters on the back of the bus, and we would have these long, pleasant conversations . . . . I was the underdog clawing my way up. But then in 2008, I noticed that it would be kind of a gotcha session with the press—a totally more hostile attitude.”

Yet conservatives had warned Mr. McCain that he would remain a media darling up until the moment he won the GOP nomination, at which time they would rip him apart. I’m only surprised that he was surprised this happened.

Mr. McCain is initially reluctant to talk about the campaign, but he provides me with snippets of what went right and wrong. He believes that he could have won the election had it not been for the market collapse in mid-September. “We were three points up on September 14. The next day the market lost 700 points and $1.2 trillion in wealth vanished, and by the end of the day we were seven points down. We lost the white college graduate voters, who became profoundly disillusioned with Republicans. And by the way, that was the way it ended up. We lost by seven points.”

He certainly was dealt a lousy hand. But I challenge him on whether he might have played that hand better. During the first days of the financial crisis, Mr. McCain looked indecisive and worse, a creature of Washington insider politics. Why did he suspend his campaign, and why did he vote for the $700 billion bank bailout plan, which was wildly unpopular with voters?

“You have no idea the pressure I was under,” he says. “I remember being on the phone with President Bush, Vice President Cheney, the Treasury secretary and [Fed Chairman Ben] Bernanke. They assure me the world financial system is going to collapse if I don’t vote for the bill. So I do the impetuous and rash thing by saying, look, I have got to go back to Washington and see how I can help. And by the way, so did Obama—but it was McCain that was the impetuous one. Obama came back to Washington.” Mr. McCain grumbles, “He was at the White House with me. But he wasn’t impetuous.” This is the only time in our interview he shows any bitterness about the campaign.

He feels he was misled by the Bush economic team. He wanted the focus of the rescue plan to be on housing and home owners under water—not the lenders or the big banks. “Paulson and Bernanke both told me on the phone, our primary focus is going to be on the housing crisis. That’s our primary focus. And then three days later they switched their whole priorities around.” Instead, the Bush administration got a $700 billion check from Congress to save banks, investment houses and eventually car companies.

Had he been president, Mr. McCain says he would have done things differently. “Small business has been ignored in this whole bailout. You know, I hate to use the word but it seems to me that the philosophy of Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke is trickle down, you know? Save Wall Street, save these financial institutions and then maybe they’ll have enough money to loan to the small business person. Wall Street seems to be doing okay. The executive salaries are fine.”

He continues: “But I just came from driving down Central Avenue in Phoenix and saw closed up storefronts because they’re too small to save, but these giant banks are too big to fail.” This is vintage John McCain, the economic populist fighting for the little guy.

If the market crash was the low point, I ask him for his best memory from the campaign. “The high point, I think, was the convention, the selection of Sarah Palin, and the enthusiasm that was generated all over the country.” His fondness for Mrs. Palin and her family strikes me as from the heart; he believes she was a net asset for the ticket.

“Let’s face it,” he says, “she galvanized our base in a way that I couldn’t. Everywhere she went she drew enormous and enthusiastic crowds like a rock star.” He says his only regret in selecting the Alaska governor was that no one on the campaign predicted the ferocity of the assaults against her. “To the liberal left, particularly the feminists, she is their worst nightmare.”

Since Mr. McCain was the co-sponsor of the McCain-Lieberman bill last year to limit CO emissions through a cap-and-trade system, I ask him about the climate change bill that passed the House last month and he surprised me with his opposition. “I believe climate change is real . . . but this 1,400-page bill is a farce. They bought every industry off—steel mills, agriculture, utilities,” he says.

So you wouldn’t vote for the House bill? “I would not only not vote for it,” he laughs, “I am opposed to it entirely, because it does damage to those of us who believe that we need to act in a rational fashion about climate change.”

A s Mr. McCain keeps circling our discussion back to fiscal responsibility, I ask him if the trillion dollar deficits are a sign that America is an empire in decline. “I think there’s a risk of that . . . unless we change. I’m a student of history. The shift in power from the British to the United States took place when the economy and the world’s gold reserves shifted and Britain went from the world’s [creditor] to a world debtor. The same thing could be happening now. I emphasize ‘could.’”

My last question is about the possibility for a 2012 rematch against Mr. Obama. “No chance,” he says.

But the good news for those who admire this maverick is that he’s likely to stay in the Senate for years and is focusing single-mindedly on holding back Obamanomics. For now, that means trying to stop budget busters like ObamaCare, but also saving a few million dollars at a time by cancelling museums in Nebraska, turtle crossings in Florida, and the endless flow of dollars to Democratic Rep. John Murtha’s airport to nowhere in Johnstown, Pa.

And then Mr. McCain is out the door—running to vote on another anti-pork amendment.

By STEPHEN MOORE - a senior economics writer for the Wall Street Journal.

Newsmax Poll Shows Strong Support for Sarah Palin in 2012

An Internet poll sponsored by Newsmax.com reveals that nearly 4 out of 5 respondents would support Sarah Palin as the Republican nominee for president in 2012.

A slightly larger majority believe the then-Alaska governor helped John McCain in the 2008 presidential race — while only 31 percent think McCain did a good job running for president.

The poll drew more than 600,000 responses, and Newsmax will provide the results to major media and share them with radio talk-show hosts across the country.

Here are the poll questions and results:

1) What is your opinion of Sarah Palin? Favorable: 83 percent Unfavorable: 17 percent

2) Do you believe Sarah Palin as a running mate helped or hurt John McCain? Helped: 80 percent Hurt: 20 percent

3) In the election between McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden, who did you vote for? McCain-Palin: 81 percent Obama-Biden: 16 percent
Other: 3 percent

4) Would you support Sarah Palin as the Republican nominee for president in 2012? Yes: 78 percent No: 22 percent

5) Do you believe McCain did a good job running for president? Good Job: 31 percent Bad Job: 69 percent

6) Do you believe Barack Obama "bought" the White House by outspending McCain? Yes: 72 percent No: 28 percent

Posted: Knowledge Creates Power

Related Resources:

• We Figured Him Out - Ben Stein
• Obama Told Us This Was Coming… America Wasn’t Listening

The 100-Day Assault on America

Has it really been 100 days?

Aided by an eagerly compliant Democratic-controlled Congress, a sycophantic media, and a bunch of squishy Republicans, President Obama has taken the country on a radical, mind-boggling leap into collectivism.

Obama -- to use one of his favorite expressions -- doubled down, no, tripled and quadrupled down on Bush's "stimulus" and "rescue" packages, spending trillions of dollars to "bail out" financial institutions, too-big-to-fail businesses, and even deficit-running states. Obama promises to use taxpayer money to rescue "responsible homeowners" -- whatever that means -- from foreclosure, thus artificially propping up prices that shut out renters who would love to buy now-much-cheaper houses.

Obama proposes spending billions (or trillions?) more on "creating or saving" -- whatever that means -- 4 million, 3.5 million or 2.5 million jobs. Pick a number. Given the government's vast business expertise, Obama proposes spending gobs of money to "invest" in green jobs. And he's just warming up. He wants taxpayers to guarantee, presumably to all who request it, a "world-class education" -- whatever that means.

Firmly in charge of much of the domestic car industry, Obama effectively fired the CEO of General Motors. He threatens to fire still more executives in the parts of the financial services industry currently under the management, direction or control of Uncle Sam -- that eminent, well-regarded banker.

Obama blames the financial crisis on "greed" and the "lack of regulatory oversight." Funny thing about greed. Celebrated investor-turned-Obama-supporter/adviser Warren Buffett says, "Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful." Apparently, some practice good greed, while others engage in greedy greed.

As for regulation, the SEC already heavily regulates most of the troubled financial institutions. The world's largest insurer, AIG, operated under heavy regulation. The government-sponsored entities Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae -- blamed for irresponsibly buying, packaging and selling bad mortgages -- are regulated by a government agency, called the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. Its sole responsibility is to oversee those two agencies. OFHEO, shortly before the government takeover of Freddie and Fannie, gave them two thumbs up.

Did the President, after campaigning against pork and earmarks, really sign bills that include both? Yes. Will the President's new budget really triple and quadruple the annual deficit? Yes. Will the President's budget really double the national debt within a few years and then increase still more beyond that? Yes. Do the President and members of Congress, many of whom never operated so much as a T-shirt concession booth, really believe that they can "modernize" health care, thus "saving" taxpayers buckets of money? Yes.

America traditionally represents the greatest possibility of someone's going from nothing to something. Why? In theory, if not practice, the government stays out of the way and lets individuals take risks and reap rewards or accept the consequences of failure. We call this capitalism -- or, at least, we used to.

Today's global downturn reflects too much borrowing and too much lending. But would borrowers and lenders -- at least in America -- have engaged in the same kind of behavior but for artificially low interest rates under the Federal Reserve System? Would borrowers and lenders have acted as precipitously but for the existence of Fannie and Freddie, which bought up their mortgages? Would banks have so readily lent money to those who clearly could not repay it but for the Community Reinvestment Act? That law pressured banks into relaxing their normal lending standards to help low-income borrowers.

Now let's turn to Job No. 1 -- national security. We no longer call the War on Terror the "War on Terror." We no longer call Islamofascist enemy detainees "enemy detainees." The President embarked on an I'm-not-Bush and we're-sorry-for-being-arrogant international tour. To the receptive, admiring G-20 nations, the President flogged America, calling us domineering and overbearing. What did the swooning leaders give in return? Virtually nothing. He wanted more assistance in fighting the war in Afghanistan. The NATO members offered more advisers and trainers, all, mind you, out of harm's way and only on a temporary basis.

The President offered a new relationship with Iran, provided Iranians "unclenched their fist." The President even sent a shout-out video to the Iranians on one of their holidays. What did he get in return? Iran promised to continue its march toward the development of a nuclear weapon and called Israel the "most cruel and racist regime."

Obama offered North Korea a kinder, gentler foreign policy. What did he get in return? The North Koreans, in violation of a United Nations resolution, attempted to launch a long-range missile. The President condemned the act. The United Nations Security Council convened an emergency session. What happened? Nothing. Well, not exactly nothing. North Korea kicked out the U.N.'s nuclear inspectors and announced the resumption of its nuclear weapons program. And North Korea, along with Iran, arrested and imprisoned American journalists.

On the other hand, Washingtonian magazine graced us with a spiffy, Photoshopped cover of a fit and toned swimsuit-wearing President Obama. So all is not lost.

At least he looks good.

By Larry Elder - a syndicated radio talk show host, contributor to TownHall.com and best-selling author. His latest book, "What's Race Got to Do with It?" is available now.

Related Articles:

• More on "The black-white divide in Obama's popularity"
  
• The black-white in Obama’s popularity
  

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

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.

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...