EXCELLENT article on the Iraq War's costs versus Obama's spending.
Iraq: The War That Broke Us -- Not
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Stimulus Spending Tops Iraq War Cost
Remember a while back I said that Obama is spending far more than Bush? Liberals keep telling me it's because the numbers I used don't count Iraq. Well...they're wrong. My numbers do count Iraq.
The CBO has just proven that point.
HERE
The CBO has just proven that point.
HERE
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Summer Of Recovery II
So, the “Summer of Recovery” has been dealt another staggering blow.
It was a roundhouse from the graveyard followed by a 1-2 combo that has now shown the “SOR” for the glass jawed paper fighter it always was.
1st- HOUSING- Sales of new homes fell by 12.4 percent over last month’s ballyhooed figures to bring in the WORST RATE OF NEW HOME BUYING SINCE 1963. Couple that with existing home sales hitting a new 15 year low and the housing market landed one punch that felt like two.
2nd-MANUFACTURING- Orders for manufacturers fell again for July and if it hadn’t been for a 76% jump in commercial aircraft demand it would have fallen even further than it did. This was a big departure from the administration’s Midwest Manufacturing Tour rhetoric last month where VP Biden and P Obama toured factories and towns talking about the “SOR” being fueled by manufacturing.
3rd- JOBS- All year long the administration has crowed about the creation of jobs as each new jobs report talked about growth in jobs numbers. Then they kept mum all year long as those numbers were revised DOWN after each job report’s initial release.
So what does the administration have to say about all this?
The silence has been deafening.
It was a roundhouse from the graveyard followed by a 1-2 combo that has now shown the “SOR” for the glass jawed paper fighter it always was.
1st- HOUSING- Sales of new homes fell by 12.4 percent over last month’s ballyhooed figures to bring in the WORST RATE OF NEW HOME BUYING SINCE 1963. Couple that with existing home sales hitting a new 15 year low and the housing market landed one punch that felt like two.
2nd-MANUFACTURING- Orders for manufacturers fell again for July and if it hadn’t been for a 76% jump in commercial aircraft demand it would have fallen even further than it did. This was a big departure from the administration’s Midwest Manufacturing Tour rhetoric last month where VP Biden and P Obama toured factories and towns talking about the “SOR” being fueled by manufacturing.
3rd- JOBS- All year long the administration has crowed about the creation of jobs as each new jobs report talked about growth in jobs numbers. Then they kept mum all year long as those numbers were revised DOWN after each job report’s initial release.
So what does the administration have to say about all this?
The silence has been deafening.
Dr. Laura and the 1st Amendment
I am a long time fan of Dr Laura Schlessinger. I have enjoyed her radio show for years. I have read most of her books and enjoyed all that I’ve read. I agree with her moral stance on many, many issues and have sometimes felt convicted by her words when she pointed out something on the radio that I was doing at home. I have always found her to be logical and consistent in her application of her stated morals. She has served as a beacon of sanity in a sea of moral chaos that has washed over this country in the past 20 years. Her voice has been one of the loudest to call for personal responsibility and to police yourself when it comes to your morals.
A few days ago, on Larry King Live, Dr Laura owned up to having said something distasteful on air, but then bitterly declared that “I want to be able to say what’s on my mind and in my heart and what I think is helpful and useful without somebody getting angry- some special interest group deciding this is a time to silence a voice of dissent and attack affiliates and sponsors…I want to take back my first amendment rights.”
I have the utmost respect for Dr. Laura and I do NOT disagree with what she’s said about the use of the “N-word” on her program nor do I think her use of it was out of place in the discussion she was having on air that day. She made a valid point, though her delivery may have been somewhat in poor taste.
But her statements on Larry King make no sense from a moral standpoint. She wants the ability to say what she wants to say, the way she wants to say it, but doesn’t want anyone else to be able to do the same when it comes to her? It’s hypocritical and not the sort of thing I expect from Dr Laura.
Yes, she is under attack, but these kinds of attacks are nothing new to Dr Laura. She’s been fighting these battles for 30 years or more. Groups on the left of the political spectrum have long hated her and seek any opportunity to attack her and silence her if possible. Gay groups like GLAD and PFLAG have repeatedly called for boycotts of her sponsors and their products based on her comments about homosexuality. The NAACP has protested her views regarding the dissolution of the black family. The NOW has protested her views on abortion. All of these groups have gone to her sponsors at one time or another and asked them to stop their sponsorship of her show. As a result of their efforts, her show is not getting the ratings it once had. Her sponsors are not as willing to back her as they used to be. Her show and her livelihood have suffered because of these things.
That’s what I think she means by taking back her 1st Amendment rights. Right now, she’s under constant scrutiny by forces aligned against her and she’s tired of being a target. She’s tired of the battle. I understand that, but she needs to realize that her behavior here is hurting her credibility and undermining her character. She would never recommend to a caller that they hold themselves to a lesser standard than they do others. She would never recommend that a caller do what feels good to them and say “to hell with what is right and wrong”. And if freedom isn’t for everyone under the law, it is not TRUE FREEDOM.
My advice to Dr Laura, who has given so much advice to others, is simple. Take a break. Breathe in, breathe out and get your mind right. Then go take on the day.
A few days ago, on Larry King Live, Dr Laura owned up to having said something distasteful on air, but then bitterly declared that “I want to be able to say what’s on my mind and in my heart and what I think is helpful and useful without somebody getting angry- some special interest group deciding this is a time to silence a voice of dissent and attack affiliates and sponsors…I want to take back my first amendment rights.”
I have the utmost respect for Dr. Laura and I do NOT disagree with what she’s said about the use of the “N-word” on her program nor do I think her use of it was out of place in the discussion she was having on air that day. She made a valid point, though her delivery may have been somewhat in poor taste.
But her statements on Larry King make no sense from a moral standpoint. She wants the ability to say what she wants to say, the way she wants to say it, but doesn’t want anyone else to be able to do the same when it comes to her? It’s hypocritical and not the sort of thing I expect from Dr Laura.
Yes, she is under attack, but these kinds of attacks are nothing new to Dr Laura. She’s been fighting these battles for 30 years or more. Groups on the left of the political spectrum have long hated her and seek any opportunity to attack her and silence her if possible. Gay groups like GLAD and PFLAG have repeatedly called for boycotts of her sponsors and their products based on her comments about homosexuality. The NAACP has protested her views regarding the dissolution of the black family. The NOW has protested her views on abortion. All of these groups have gone to her sponsors at one time or another and asked them to stop their sponsorship of her show. As a result of their efforts, her show is not getting the ratings it once had. Her sponsors are not as willing to back her as they used to be. Her show and her livelihood have suffered because of these things.
That’s what I think she means by taking back her 1st Amendment rights. Right now, she’s under constant scrutiny by forces aligned against her and she’s tired of being a target. She’s tired of the battle. I understand that, but she needs to realize that her behavior here is hurting her credibility and undermining her character. She would never recommend to a caller that they hold themselves to a lesser standard than they do others. She would never recommend that a caller do what feels good to them and say “to hell with what is right and wrong”. And if freedom isn’t for everyone under the law, it is not TRUE FREEDOM.
My advice to Dr Laura, who has given so much advice to others, is simple. Take a break. Breathe in, breathe out and get your mind right. Then go take on the day.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Social Security Is In Trouble
In response to a question about Social Security President Obama just yesterday insisted: "So here’s the thing. Social Security is not in crisis."
Actually Mr. President, here’s the thing… it is.
For the first time, Social Security is going to have to dip into the so-called “Trust Fund”. This year, 2010, Social Security is going into its “Trust Fund” for $41 Billion dollars. This is 7 years ahead of when it was projected to have to do so. And they’re saying that in 5 years it’s projected to have to do this more often to meet demand. How is that not a crisis?
But Paul Krugman, Keynesian Economist extraordinaire says not to worry…the Social Security Trust Fund holds $2.5 TRILLION dollars from surpluses that SSA ran for the past 25 years. According to Mr. Krugman, those surpluses were being put into a special account and “the program won’t have to turn to Congress for help or cut benefits until or unless the trust fund is exhausted…” which should be sometime in 2037 according to him.
Actually Mr. Krugman, there is no special account on which the SSA can draw.
By LAW, Social Security has to lend any surplus revenues to the US Government, which puts it in as part of the general fund and issues an IOU to the SSA for the amount. In the past 25 years, Social Security has contributed $2.5 TRILLION dollars to the operating budget of the United States Government. A government, by the way that is running record deficits.
That means that in order to give the SSA $41 Billion dollars this year, the government will have to BORROW another $41 billion from investors. That’s right, in order to pay back social security money it borrowed, the government will now borrow AGAIN, thus increasing the deficit by $41 billion dollars.
And you’re telling me that the President and/or Mr. Krugman are unaware of this?
Having read the remarks of both Mr. Krugman and President Obama, I find that I either must question their intelligence or their integrity. It’s one or the other, either they’re uninformed or they are liars.
Actually Mr. President, here’s the thing… it is.
For the first time, Social Security is going to have to dip into the so-called “Trust Fund”. This year, 2010, Social Security is going into its “Trust Fund” for $41 Billion dollars. This is 7 years ahead of when it was projected to have to do so. And they’re saying that in 5 years it’s projected to have to do this more often to meet demand. How is that not a crisis?
But Paul Krugman, Keynesian Economist extraordinaire says not to worry…the Social Security Trust Fund holds $2.5 TRILLION dollars from surpluses that SSA ran for the past 25 years. According to Mr. Krugman, those surpluses were being put into a special account and “the program won’t have to turn to Congress for help or cut benefits until or unless the trust fund is exhausted…” which should be sometime in 2037 according to him.
Actually Mr. Krugman, there is no special account on which the SSA can draw.
By LAW, Social Security has to lend any surplus revenues to the US Government, which puts it in as part of the general fund and issues an IOU to the SSA for the amount. In the past 25 years, Social Security has contributed $2.5 TRILLION dollars to the operating budget of the United States Government. A government, by the way that is running record deficits.
That means that in order to give the SSA $41 Billion dollars this year, the government will have to BORROW another $41 billion from investors. That’s right, in order to pay back social security money it borrowed, the government will now borrow AGAIN, thus increasing the deficit by $41 billion dollars.
And you’re telling me that the President and/or Mr. Krugman are unaware of this?
Having read the remarks of both Mr. Krugman and President Obama, I find that I either must question their intelligence or their integrity. It’s one or the other, either they’re uninformed or they are liars.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Russians To Fuel Iranian Nuke Plant.
I have found another great example of exactly WHY we should not trust the Russians to do the right thing when it comes to nukes.
The Russians have agreed to provide more fuel to the Iranians, despite the fact that Iran will not stop enriching Uranium. This deal comes AFTER we've signed the latest nuclear non-proliferation and reduction treaty with the Russians.
For God's sake, someone get Obama OUT OF OFFICE before he kills us all!
Read the story HERE.
The Russians have agreed to provide more fuel to the Iranians, despite the fact that Iran will not stop enriching Uranium. This deal comes AFTER we've signed the latest nuclear non-proliferation and reduction treaty with the Russians.
For God's sake, someone get Obama OUT OF OFFICE before he kills us all!
Read the story HERE.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
