Daniel Hannan Tells it Right: You Are Not Protesting Capitalism, Occupiers

Daniel Hannan gets it right again. The Occupiers keep talking and moaning about the ills of capitalism with its bailouts, etc. Heck, some hack in the WSJ today said we needed to go to a Command and Crush economy like the Chicoms. Mr. Hannan is right. We haven't had capitalism in this country since January of 2009, heck, even late 2008 when GWB betrayed the free market system. It is not the free market system that is broken and is causing this; rather, it is all the government attempts at intervention and redistribution and picking winners and losers that is causing this. Mr. Hannan in the Telegraph:

I was struck by how wide of the mark were the beliefs they attributed to me as a Right-winger. In the interests of deeper understanding, here are ten things which – trust me – most of the Tory scum I hang around with think. Obviously, I don’t expect to turn my Leftie readers in a single post; still, they might get a clearer idea of what we actually believe.

1. Free-marketeers resent the bank bailouts. This might seem obvious: we are, after all, opposed to state subsidies and nationalisations. Yet it often surprises commentators, who mistake our support for open competition and free trade for a belief in plutocracy. There is a world of difference between being pro-market and being pro-business. Sometimes, the two positions happen to coincide; often they don’t.

2. What has happened since 2008 is not capitalism. In a capitalist system, bad banks would have been allowed to fail, their profitable operations bought by more efficient competitors. Shareholders, bondholders and some depositors would have lost money, but taxpayers would not have contributed a penny (see here).

3. If you want the rich to pay more, create a flatter and simpler tax system. This is partly a question of closing loopholes (mansions put in company names to avoid stamp duty, capital gains tax exemption for non-doms etc). Mainly, though, it is a question of bringing the tax rate down to a level where evasion becomes pointless. As Art Laffer keeps telling anyone who’ll listen, it works every time. Between 1980 and 2007, the US cut taxes at all income levels. Result? The top one per cent went from paying 19.5 per cent of all taxes to 40 per cent. In Britain, since the top rate of income tax was lowered to 40 per cent in 1988, the share of income tax collected from the wealthiest percentile has risen from 14 to 27 per cent.

4. Those of us who believe in small government are not motivated by the desire to make the rich richer. We’re really not. We are, in most cases, nowhere near having to pay top rate tax ourselves; our most eloquent champions over the years have been modestly-paid academics. We believe that economic freedom will enrich the country as a whole. Yes, the wealthy might become wealthier still, but we don't see that as an argument against raising living standards for the majority.

5. We are not against equality. We generally recognise the benefits in Scandinavian-style homogeneity: crime tends to be lower, people are less stressed etc. Our objection is not that egalitarianism is undesirable in itself, but that the policies required to enforce in involve a disproportionate loss of liberty and prosperity.

6. Nor, by the way, does state intervention seem to be an effective way to promote equality. On the most elemental indicators – height, calorie intake, infant mortality, literacy, longevity – Britain has been becoming a steadily more equal society since the calamity of 1066. It’s true that, around half a century ago, this approximation halted and, on some measures, went into reverse. There are competing theories as to why, but one thing is undeniable: the recent widening of the wealth gap has taken place at a time when the state controls a far greater share of national wealth than ever before.

7. Let’s tackle the idea that being on the Left means being on the side of ordinary people, while being on the Right means defending privileged elites. It’s hard to think of a single tax, or a single regulation, that doesn’t end up privileging some vested interest at the expense of the general population. The reason governments keep growing is because of what economists call ‘dispersed costs and concentrated gains’: people are generally more aware the benefits they receive than of the taxes they pay.

8. Capitalism, with all its imperfections, is the fairest scheme yet tried. In a system based on property rights and free contract, people succeed by providing an honest service to others. Bill Gates became rich by enriching hundreds of millions of us: I am typing these words using one of his programmes. He gained from the exchange (adding fractionally to his net worth), and so did I (adding to my convenience). In a state-run system, by contrast, third parties get to hand out the goodies.

9. Talking of fairness, let’s remember that the word doesn’t belong to any faction. How about parity between public and private sector pay? How about being fair to our children, whom we have freighted with a debt unprecedented in peacetime? How about being fair to the boy who leaves school at 16 and starts paying taxes to subsidise the one who goes to university? How about being fair to the unemployed, whom firms cannot afford to hire because of the social protection enjoyed by existing employees?

10. Let’s not forget ethics, either. There is virtue in deciding to do the right thing, but there is no virtue in being compelled. Choosing to give your money to charity is meritorious; paying tax is morally neutral (see here). Evidence suggests that, as taxes rise, and the state squeezes out civic society, people give less to good causes.

Well, there you go, comrades. I don’t expect the tents outside St Paul’s to fold overnight. But perhaps we might at least engage honestly on some of these issues rather than talking past each other. ¡Hasta la victoria siempre!

Dude, Where's My Obama Recovery?

It appears, like the hockey stick global warming data, that it never existed...Ed Morrissey reports on some stories worth noting over at HotAir. The first is from the Atlantic:

Yesterday, analysts thought the economy was expanding by 2.5% a year. This morning, they learned GDP grew by only 1.6% in the last four quarters. This is a remarkable discovery. It’s the difference between thinking we’re expanding at a decent, if disappointing, pace, and knowing we’re growing around half our historical norm.

Analysts also thought, as recently as twelve hours ago, that the economy declined 6.8% and 4.9% in the quarters bisected by Obama’s inauguration. It turns out the actual declines were much steeper: 8.9% and 6.7%.

To adopt the president’s favorite metaphor of the ditch and the driver: The ditch was a 33% deeper than we thought. And we’re driving 33% slower than we hoped.

The second bit of cold water to the face to wake us up comes from Minnesota:

Morrissey describes the trends in the chart thus:

Now we know why employment has skittered along the bottom end of the curve for so long. Our economy hasn’t been expanding much at all during the two years of recovery, noted on the bottom line by the black square. No wonder we’re barely above the employment level of the recession’s end 24 months later. We have been saying for two years that the Obama “recovery” has been smoke and mirrors, and the revisions in the GDP reporting make that pretty clear now. The other clear takeaway from this is that the Keynesian stimulus bill utterly failed to produce anything more than a temporary, artificial spike in economic indicators, and not a particularly impressive spike at that.

If we weren't engaging in a circular firing squad because we didn't get everything we wanted from the debt ceiling deal, we could be educating the public on stuff like this and building a stronger coalition for economic recovery in 2012 by evicting Barack Obama from the White House...I'm just sayin....

Fed Bailed Out GE, Where was News Coverage by MSNBC and Others?

Oh yeah, GE owned NBC and MSNBC et. al. From the Washington Post:

The Fed's efforts to prop up the financial sector reached across a broad spectrum of the economy, benefiting stalwarts of American industry including General Electric and Caterpillar and household-name companies such as Verizon

No wonder they have been such cheerleaders for Obama and stimulus and bailouts. They benefitted directly from them!

US To Bailout EU?

Yes, you read that right. Even though we are broke beyond reason, we are now going to bailout the European Union. From CNBC:

The United States would be ready to support the extension of the European Financial Stability Facility via an extra commitment of money from the International Monetary Fund, a U.S. official told Reuters on Wednesday.

"There are a lot of people talking about that. I think the European Commission has talked about that," said the U.S. official, commenting on enlarging the 750 billion euro ($980 billion) EU/IMF European stability fund. "It is up to the Europeans. We will certainly support using the IMF in these circumstances."

"There are obviously some severe market problems," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "In May, it was Greece. This is Ireland and Portugal. If there is contagion that's a huge problem for the global economy."

The remarks foreshadow a visit to Europe this week by a U.S. Treasury envoy who is expected to visit Berlin, Madrid and Paris to hold talks on the ramifications of the debt crisis.

The developments have echoes of the pressure applied by Washington on European capitals last May to create the near $1 trillion EFSF safety net that was last week used to rescue Ireland after its banking crisis spiraled out of control.

The IMF, whose biggest single shareholder is the United States, has committed 250 billion euros to the EFSF.

While reluctant to dictate to Europe how it should address the unfolding debt crisis, the U.S. government is growing concerned about the global fallout of Europe's predicament.

UGH! WTF?!?!?!?

Orszag to Citi? Hey Ted Strickland, Who are the Wall Street Insiders Now?

All during the campaign for Ohio governor, now defeated incumbent and head of the Ohio shadow government Ted Strickland talked about John Kasich as a Wall Street insider and in the pocket of big banks and business. Funny, but the facts show that Dems are the big gainers from financial donations from Wall Street as well as those who jump into positions with banks and financial firms. The latest evidence comes from the reveal that Peter Orszag, a former Obama adviser, is joining CitiBank:

Citigroup Inc., recovering from its $45 billion bailout in 2008, is in advanced talks to hire former White House Budget Director Peter Orszag, people with knowledge of the matter said.

Before joining the White House as director of the Office of Management and Budget, Orszag was director of the Congressional Budget Office and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

He previously served as economic adviser to President Bill Clinton and was a staff member of Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Orszag’s tenure at the Clinton White House overlapped with Citigroup’s former executive-committee chairman, Robert Rubin, who served as Treasury secretary from 1995 to 1999. In 2006, when Rubin, 72, helped to found an economic research group at the Brookings Institution called the Hamilton Project, Orszag was named its first director. Obama, then a senator from Illinois, spoke at the project’s unveiling.

Rubin, who in late 2007 helped oversee the search that led to the appointment of Vikram Pandit as chief executive officer, retired from Citigroup last year.

So Ted, who are the Wall Street Insiders and patsies now? Geithner and others came from Goldman Sachs and Lehman, and now Orszag is going to Citibank in the shoes of Robert Rubin. Sounds like you should look in your own house for corruption, Teddyboy.

Even Joe Biden Gets a Bailout from Obama

It turns out even the Vice-President gets a bailout now. Could it be he is "too dumb" to fail? To wit:

In a flashback to the campaigns of yesterday, the Federal Election Commission released a draft opinion to allow President Barack Obama’s campaign committee to transfer money to pay for campaign finance penalties left over from Vice President Joseph Biden’s 2008 White House run.

While a majority vote by the six-person FEC will be required for passage, the agency’s single draft bodes well for the former six-term Democratic Senator from Delaware.

Biden’s presidential campaign was fined $133,000 earlier this year after an FEC audit found minor violations, including stale-dated checks.

But his campaign does not have enough money in reserve, reporting just $82,000 in available cash on hand as of the end of September and nearly $8,000 in other debts.

So the president’s 2008 campaign, which has nearly $3.2 million in the bank, formally asked the FEC whether Obama for America could pay the outstanding fees to the Treasury Department on behalf of the vice president. The FEC is slated to vote on the measure at this week’s regular Thursday meeting.

OH-09: Iott on Latest bailout Bill to Pass in the House

Release:

Rich Iott, candidate for Ohio's 9th Congressional District, issued the following statement following passage of HR 1586 - the Education, Jobs and Medicaid Assistance Act:

"Today the House passed a second so-called stimulus, this time to bail out schools and states.

"What the career politicians in Washington fail to understand is that the over-spending has got to stop. There are good examples across the country, and right next door in our neighboring state of Indiana, where responsible governments have cut spending and encouraged job growth, resulting in budget surpluses of hundreds of millions of dollars.

"In May, Toledo voters rejected an income tax for their school system. Their message was clear - that with an 11.6% unemployment rate, they have no more money for failing schools. By Congress passing this bill in Washington today, the tone-deaf politicians have decided to spend tax dollars from all Americans to bail out the schools that local taxpayers refuse to give additional funds to. Even the liberal Washington Post criticized this measure as "more of an election-year favor for teachers unions than an optimal use of public resources."

"Career politicians in Washington are again substituting their personal preferences for the will of the people they are supposed to represent. They are, again, ignoring what the voters are telling them.

"The first so-called stimulus failed to do what Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her supporters said it would. Unemployment rose - and so did the debt. You need to look no further than the fact that, 18 months after the first stimulus became law, they're still talking about the need to create jobs.

"And while that's bad enough, they're planning to pay for this current spending by cutting the Food Stamp program - but not until 2014. So where is the money going to come from to cover the $26.1 billion cost? It's going to come from increased taxation on businesses, 'future' savings in various programs and more borrowing against the future earnings of our children and our grandchildren.

"And when the time comes to cut the Food Stamp program in order to get the anticipated 'savings,' no one really believes that Congress will do so. In fact, most people will wonder how many times between now and then Congress will actually spend those same projected savings on favors for other special interests.

"Congress needs to take a serious look at its profligate spending and get its own fiscal house in order, which would serve as a good example to state and local governments to do the same."

Deficits: How is that net Spending cut looking?

Anyone remember this?



Gee...well let's see how that's working out....From the Hill:

Bailouts for financial firms and billions in tax revenue lost because of the recession drove the deficit to a record $1.3 trillion in July, according to the independent Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Tax receipts that have fallen due to the poor economy and increased spending to save car companies, banks and mortgage firms were major contributors to the federal deficit, according to CBO, which provides official budget numbers for Congress. The federal deficit grew by another $181 billion in July.

And in the strictest sense of cutting spending at keeping that spending cut possible, we see this:

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner asked Congress to increase the $12.1 trillion debt limit on Friday, saying it is "critically important" that they act in the next two months.

More proof Obama is the liar we all expected him to be....

Obama Blows It Again: Stimulus and Bailout Money Used for Bonuses?

If they can't manage these type of things, how in the heck do you expect them to manage healthcare? Or, is Obama just rewarding his buddies? Jake Tapper has the story. Check out the video.

Shows you that quick and crazy "don't read the bills" action creates corruption and government stupidity like this.

Obama Lied and the Economy Died Update: See, the Key Was NOT to Take Stimulus/Bailout Money

Gee, why didn't Barry explain it better? I mean, companies were supposed to avoid the bailouts like the plague. That must be the real plan, because look at Ford:

Reduced Automotive structural costs by $1.8 billion, including $1.2 billion in North America+
Strong new products drove market share gains in all regions – North America, South America, Europe and Asia Pacific Africa – while achieving further improvements in transaction prices and margins
Ford’s customer satisfaction with vehicle quality reached its highest level in North America and now equals Toyota; Ford, Lincoln and Mercury brand vehicles had the fewest “things gone wrong” among all automakers; Ford leads the U.S. industry in Insurance Institute for Highway Safety “Top Safety Pick” awards
Ended the second quarter with Automotive gross cash of $21 billion; operating-related cash outflow was $1 billion, an improvement of $2.7 billion from the first quarter of 2009+++
Raised $1.6 billion by issuing 345 million new shares of common stock; completed actions to reduce Automotive debt by $10.1 billion
Ford Credit reported a pre-tax profit of $646 million, compared with a pre-tax loss of $294 million a year ago+
Ford remains on track, based on current planning assumptions, to achieve its key 2011 financial targets

Meanwhile, Government Motors is remaining kind of mum on several key factors.

Who knew? Companies, like teenagers, should have just said no.

hat tip to Bizzyblog

Strickland’s Transportation Slush-Fund Uses Federal Dollars Meant to Create Jobs

This just in...

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Ohio’s Republican congressional delegation today sent letters to Gov. Ted Strickland and U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood citing concerns about how Ohio is spending its federal stimulus dollars on studies that won’t create jobs and requesting openness and transparency for taxpayers. Full text of the letters is below and available here and here.

The Associated Press reported Monday that Ohio has refused to fund some “shovel-ready” infrastructure projects to set aside $57 million for transportation studies.

“While the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act does give governors flexibility on how they spend their state’s federal dollars, it appears that Ohio officials are violating the spirit of the law by diverting money intended for ‘shovel-ready’ projects into a planning slush-fund for proposals that have no funding stream,” the lawmakers wrote to Secretary LaHood.

Ohio’s congressional Republicans previously called on Gov. Strickland to establish an independent, bipartisan oversight board to ensure transparency in how federal dollars are being spent. Gov. Strickland has not responded to that request.

“This is not the first time that your administration has decided to spend federal stimulus in a manner inconsistent with the intentions of the bill and contradictory to the expectations of recipients,” lawmakers wrote to Gov. Strickland, citing a March 14 Cleveland Plain Dealer article detailing concerns from Cleveland schools officials about how education dollars are being allocated.

“In light of media reports indicating that these federal tax dollars are being allocated to programs that clearly violate the spirit of the law, we again ask that you immediately create an independent oversight board to give Ohioans a full and detailed accounting of how taxpayer dollars have already been spent and all planned allocations for the remainder of the year,” lawmakers wrote to Gov. Strickland.

-ee-

March 16, 2009



The Honorable Ted Strickland

Riffe Center, 30th Floor

77 South High Street

Columbus, OH 43215-6108


Governor Strickland:



As federal dollars from the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act become available, it is all the more critical that Ohioans know that their money is being spent wisely on projects that will create much-needed jobs now and provide for the economic recovery our state desperately needs. Ohio’s unemployment rate jumped to 9.4 percent in February, nearly 3 points higher than this time last year.



We are concerned about an Associated Press report Monday which stated that your administration “passed over some ready-to-go construction projects” to spend $57 million on “planning and preliminary studies.” According to the article, both Pennsylvania and Oregon put all of their highway dollars into construction while the Federal Highway Administration “has no other examples of states using stimulus money for planning.”



This is not the first time that your administration has decided to spend federal stimulus dollars in a manner inconsistent with the intentions of the bill and contradictory to the expectations of recipients.



On March 14, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that the city’s public schools might not see “the windfall they expected” due to your decision to circumvent traditional school-funding formulas in favor of models developed by your administration. We have long favored local control over education dollars believing that those involved in the day-to-day decisions of educating our children know best how to spend their resources and so we sympathize with Eric Gordon, chief academic officer of Cleveland’s public schools, who said, “It’s not [the Governor’s] to spend.”



While the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act does appear to give governors the flexibility to spend federal stimulus dollars are they see fit, diverting money through non-traditional formulas and impact studies do not uphold the stated intentions of the legislation to create much-needed jobs and put us on the path to prosperity as well as help poor children overcome unnecessary obstacles in their educational needs.



Last month, we called on you to create an independent, bipartisan oversight board to ensure a transparent and open process regarding the State of Ohio’s use of federal stimulus dollars. You have declined to do so, instead favoring a Deputy Inspector General. In light of media reports indicating that these federal tax dollars are being allocated to programs that clearly violate the spirit of the law, we again ask that you immediately create an independent oversight board to give Ohioans a full and detailed accounting of how taxpayer dollars have already been spent and all planned allocations for the remainder of the year. Furthermore, we request that http://recovery.ohio.gov be updated with a detailed accounting of each additional expenditure within 24 hours from any executive or legislative action that appropriates stimulus dollars.



As we noted in our letter of March 4, while we opposed the stimulus bill – offering instead a Republican proposal that would have created 246,000 jobs in Ohio by the end of 2010 – we continue to hope that it works to boost our economy. We want Ohioans to get back to work, we want families and small business owners to have access to the credit they need and, most of all, we want Ohioans to have a bright future.



Sincerely,



[see here for signatures]



April 16, 2009



The Honorable Ray LaHood

Secretary of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590





Dear Secretary LaHood:



On Monday, President Obama announced that more than 2,000 transportation projects in states like Ohio have been funded with federal dollars provided by the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Of serious concern, however, is an Associated Press report on the state of Ohio’s plan to divert $57 million in stimulus dollars to transportation studies instead of creating much-needed jobs right now through the “shovel-ready” infrastructure projects clearly intended by the President.



You were questioned on this matter Monday during an interview on FOX News and responded, “If there is an issue with some program in Ohio, I guarantee I will be on the telephone this afternoon making sure that money is being spent correctly.” While the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act does give governors flexibility on how they spend their state’s federal dollars, it appears that Ohio officials are violating the spirit of the law by diverting money intended for “shovel-ready” projects into a planning slush-fund for proposals that have no funding stream.



According to the Associated Press, Ohio “transportation officials passed over some ready-to-go construction projects and steered about 7 percent of their $774 million share for planning and preliminary studies.”



Mr. Secretary, the American people have a right to know that their hard-earned tax dollars are being spent wisely. Like you, we want to see our aging transportation infrastructure repaired and, where necessary, replaced. We want to see jobs created now and we want to see our economy get back on the path to prosperity. The process for allocating stimulus dollars should be open and transparent, and every taxpayer should be able to immediately see where money is being spent and why, which is why we ask you to immediately review Ohio’s list as well as ready-to-go projects that were denied funding in order to study other proposals. We thank you in advance for your response to our concerns.



Sincerely,



[see here for signatures]

Cal Thomas is Dead on....Invasion of the Freedom Snatchers

From the Jewish World Review:

The plot of the 1956 cult classic "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" seems remarkably similar to the storyline of the Obama administration, which is invading, and appears eager to take over, corporate America. Unfortunately, the reality of the threat to American corporations is far creepier than any science-fiction film could ever be.
Set in the fictional town of Santa Mira, Calif., (Washington, D.C.), the plot centers on Dr. Miles Bennell (Rush Limbaugh), a local doctor (radio talk show host), who finds a rash of patients (Americans/listeners) accusing their loved ones of being imposters (collectivists).


"Assured at first by the town psychiatrist, Dr. Dan Kaufman, (Barack Obama), that the cases are nothing but 'epidemic mass hysteria,' Bennell (Limbaugh) soon discovers, with the help of his friend Jack Belicec (Sean Hannity), that the townspeople are, in fact, being replaced by simulations grown from plantlike pods (socialism); perfect physical duplicates who kill (regulate) and dispose of (bankrupt) their human (corporate) victims. The Pod People (duped Americans who know little about capitalism and who have fallen for the "punish the rich" class warfare line) are indistinguishable from normal (free market capitalists) people, except for their utter lack of emotion (the modern version is that Obama supporters respond only to emotion and care little about substance). The Pod People (the duped Americans, who have now become socialists without realizing it) work together to secretly spread more pods (socialism) — which grew from 'seeds drifting through space (Russia) for years' — in order to replace the entire human (capitalist) race (system).

"The film climaxes with Bennell (Limbaugh) and his former sweetheart, Becky Driscoll, (Laura Ingraham) attempting to escape the Pod People, intending to warn the rest of humanity (America). They hide; Driscoll (Ingraham) falls asleep and is subverted. With the Pod People close behind, a seemingly crazed Bennell (Limbaugh) runs onto the highway frantically screaming of the alien force that has overrun Santa Mira (Washington) to the passing motorists, looks into the camera and yells, 'They're here already! You're next!'"

In other news, Atlas Shrugged....

Here is the dead on analysis:

The government, which is decreasingly capable of running itself, will now dictate to corporate America how to run companies. The Obama administration has even promised that government will insure any warranties that might be in jeopardy should GM and Chrysler declare bankruptcy. It is a dangerous precedent that should frighten all of us into opposing the administration's plans with every fiber of our still free beings.
Obama is Jimmy Carter's second term. In 1977, Carter went on television in the midst of an "energy crisis." Wearing a cardigan to signal that it, not natural gas or heating oil, was the best way to keep warm, he spoke to the American people as if our best days were behind us.


Like President Obama, Carter said we had to sacrifice and "learn to live thriftily," no longer spending or consuming as we had been. It was the year the musical "Annie" became a smash hit on Broadway with its optimistic message, three years before Ronald Reagan won the Republican nomination for president, rejecting Carter's pessimism and instead telling Americans that our best days were yet to come.


That's the message needed today. Government can't revive anything. You might as well ask the dead to get up and walk. Americans must revive themselves with the same vision and purpose that has worked in the past. If we don't want an America that resembles the system we worked 70 years to defeat, we had better get to work quickly, because the socialists are already here and they are plotting which companies to target next.

Amen, brother. Let's get started....and a special note to Ohio Republicans--the way to do this is NOT to elect pinhead jocks like Jon Husted to high office, buffoons who care more for their hairdo than in running the business of the people for the betterment of the people.

My Car Company May Be Disfunctional, But at least it Isn't Owned by Obama...

I don't think I will ever buy a GM product again. At least, not as long as they are owned and controlled by the government. And it seems more people are coming along to my way of thinking. From Bizzyblog's story on the gravitation to Ford:

On Tuesday, both USA Today and the Associated Press highlighted guarded optimism that seemed a bit beyond the justifiable after the release of March’s sales results for the auto industry.

Though there is perhaps some cause for hope, both reports made more out of the industry’s roughly 25% sales pickup from February to March (compared to a typical 20% in previous years) than was justified. More importantly, both reports failed to specifically cite:

Continued market-share losses at bailed-out General Motors and Chrysler.
Ford’s disproportionate share of that decent but not exceptional industrywide February to March pickup).

So, Conservatives, they may have some crazy ownership over there, but....

Have you driven a Ford, Lately?

I own two. Was thinking of going to Government Motors before the nationalization, but am thinking better of it.

Check out the rest of Bizzy's article....great analysis as always.

Luxury Trips: Hypocrisy, thy name is Congress

Congress is upset about luxury trips. They are ticked off. Well, maybe they should monitor their own trips (read: Pelosi, Nancy):

The U.S. Senate last month passed a measure limiting “luxury” spending for corporate travel by recipients of federal bailout funds. Two weeks later, about two dozen senators of both parties left town for political meetings on the Florida coast.

Hotel-industry leaders are seizing on those trips as ammunition in a campaign to get lawmakers and Obama administration to tone down the rhetoric against business travel, which they say is adding to their economic difficulties.

“It’s just the hypocrisy,” said Frank Fahrenkopf, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee who is president of the Washington-based American Gaming Association, one of the groups urging politicians to moderate the criticism. “We’ve got to have Washington stop beating up on us.”

On March 11, hotel executives including Jonathan M. Tisch, chairman of New York-based Loews Corp., which operates a chain of 18 hotels in North America, Bill Marriott, chairman of Bethesda, Maryland-based Marriott International Inc., the biggest U.S. lodging chain, and Jay Rasulo, chairman of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, a unit of Burbank, California-based Walt Disney Co. that operates its theme parks, met with President Barack Obama and three Democratic senators to express their concern.

Cancellations

The executives said the political attacks are having a broad effect on their business, even though the restrictions are intended to apply only to recipients of federal bailout money, and cancellations have been increasing as the rhetoric heats up.

“We’ve seen companies cancel meetings last minute, leaving 100 percent on the table just to avoid criticism and ridicule,” said Frits van Paasschen, president and chief executive of White Plains, New York-based Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc., the third-largest U.S. lodging company, who attended the White House meeting.

“We’ve also seen meeting planners move meetings from resort locations to city locations, at a greater cost to their companies, again, for optics’ sake,” he said.

A preliminary survey by the U.S. Travel Association, a Washington trade group, suggests the hotel industry suffered about $1 billion in cancellations in January and February. Las Vegas has been hit especially hard, losing more than $131 million in non-gambling revenue in recent months.

On March 18, the U.S. Commerce Department reported that spending on travel and tourism fell 0.4 percent in 2008, the first yearly decline since 2001. Spending on accommodations fell 10.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008.

Think about all the people who work in the industry who lost money, or their jobs, due to layoffs and cancellations. I thought Obama and the Dems cared about the little people. Remember Obama and Hillary spending all that time in Vegas during the primaries. Maybe Barry was learning bracketology instead of the needs of people in the hotel and travel industry. Typical liberal, talking one thing and doing another.

But wait, there is more:

The political rhetoric “has a terrible sense of McCarthyism about it,” said Laurence Geller, president and chief executive of Chicago-based Strategic Hotels & Resorts Inc., which owns 19 properties, including the Hotel Del Coronado in San Diego. Geller didn’t attend the Washington meetings.

Christopher Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat who heads the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, sponsored the amendment to the $787 billion stimulus package that requires companies receiving funds from the Troubled Assets Recovery Plan to curb “excessive or luxury expenditures,” including spending on events and private jets.
Over the weekend of Feb. 27, two weeks after the Senate passed the measure, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the party fundraising arms for Senate candidates, each held their annual winter meetings in Florida.

Naples Fundraiser

About a dozen Democrats, including Dodd, 64, gathered at the Marriott-operated Ritz-Carlton resort in Naples, Florida. Donors who gave at least $15,000 were invited and offered a “coastal view” room at the group rate of $469, according to the Democrats’ invitation.

Yes, Chris Dodd again, the Countrywide scam man.....This idiot should be frog marched to Leavenworth for all he has put America through. He is a scumbag and a disgrace to his state and his country.

Seriously, to both parties, I know we have all but thrown the Bible and God out of our governance, but there is this amazing verse which talks about worrying about the plank in your own eye before you judge the mote in your neighbor's eye.....you might want to check it out...it also has instruction on how to be a good steward of others' money....it might be useful...really....

Don't Be Fooled by the Mock Surprise and Outrage from Democrats in Congress

The Dems are acting like they are shocked, SHOCKED to find out about the AIG bonuses, and are instead of taking the blame, are seeking to inspire class warfare bloodshed toward those execs, painting those people as the villains. Reminds me of the French guy in Casablanca.....

The truth is that they knew about this a while ago. You don't have to take my word for it. Check out this great grab by Ed Morrissey of Hot Air:



The Dems in Congress knew about this at least back March 3rd. Ed Morrissey points this out from the video:

a March 3rd hearing of the House Ways and Means Committee in which Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-NY) specifically mentions the upcoming payouts of over $162 million in bonuses to AIG execs

Check out Crowley's own words:

For example, just last month, AIG paid 343 employees of AIG FP — their Financial Products division that created the financial hole that AIG is in, and in turn a multibillion-dollar bill for American taxpayers — $56 million in bonuses and are slated to pay an additional $162 million in bonuses to 393 participants in the coming weeks. And there’s more. Further bonus payments totaling approximately 230 million (dollars) are due to 407 participants at AIG’s Financial Products division in March 2010. This makes no sense to my constituency.

March 3rd. This is when it happened according to CSpan. Where was Slobbering Socialist Simp Bawrney Fhwank? Where was Geithner? They were secretly undermining our country and the confidence in the financial system, that is where they were. This is a disgrace. And it is shameful that the government would turn the mob onto private citizens when the government made the bad deal, the government put it into the bill, and some people were so caught up in demogoguery they just passed a bill without reading it!

Ed closes his piece by asking this question:

This whole episode has been a farce perpetrated by Congress and the administration to stoke artificial outrage over contractual compensation obligations. It’s a freak show put on by Democrats. They’re giving us populist circuses in order to build a mob mentality — but for what purpose?

Ed, look at your history....when the likes of Lenin, Stalin, and some Austrian paperhanger wanted to do something really really bad, what did they do? They stoked the fires to get people upset at another group and get them off of being vigilant, this allowed great atrocities to occur because people were so caught up in the mob mentality...look back at the French Rev., etc., when it became the Reign of Terror. It is all a way to develop a sense where the mob will run amok, the Reichstag will be burnt down, and a new order of "security" will be put into place. Think Senator Palpatine on an American scale.....You know, some people said that the latest Star Wars trilogy was an allegory to America....guess they just might be right....

In a sidenote, I just want to express my extreme displeasure and disappointment that my congresswoman, and a great American, Jean Schmidt, fell prey to the mob mentality and voted to overtax and retroactively seize money from the people who received the bonuses. For shame!

Rep. Schmidt: "Taxing, Spending and Borrowing is not the Right Answer"

Just days after the President made his address to a Joint Session of Congress he submitted his first budget proposal. This proposal sets forth President Obama’s priorities and vision over the next ten years. While I stand willing to work with the President and my Democrat colleagues in Congress to move the economy forward and provide relief to America’s families and small businesses, this budget is quite alarming – not so much for what it says, as much as what it will cost.
American families are feeling the pain of the current economic recession. I believe there are things that we can and, frankly, must do to help ease that pain. I could not support the so-called “stimulus” bill because it was loaded with far too much wasteful spending, placed too much emphasis on bigger government, and did not do nearly enough to encourage short-term job creation. I did support a bill that targets just job growth. A bill that cost half as much and would have, according to the experts, created even more jobs. Just last week, the House continued its free spending ways by passing the $410 billion “omnibus” spending bill, which funds government programs. That represents an 8.7% increase over 2008 funding levels – on top of the increases contained in the “stimulus” bill. We cannot borrow, tax, and spend our way to economic prosperity. History has proven that increasing taxes and debt funded outrageous government spending are job killers not job creators. The President’s budget proposes to double the national debt. Under this budget, our deficit would top $1.75 TRILLION this year. That is several times larger than the previous largest deficit in the history of our country. The Obama budget calls for another deficit of $1.2 TRILLION next year. To pay for at least some of this increased spending, the President proposes to increase taxes by $1.4 trillion over ten years. The brunt of this new tax burden will be borne by small business owners who file their taxes as individuals. Small businesses create more than 70% of the jobs in this country; does it really make sense to increase taxes on this vital economic engine? Also hurt by the proposed tax increases will be family farmers, retirees, 401k owners, as well as energy consumers and middle class families.

This budget does nothing to tighten the federal belt and President Obama’s promise to cut the deficit in half sounds good. But, a $500 billion annual deficit would still qualify as one of the largest in history. Economic projections over a ten-year period rarely turn out to be correct and unforeseen events like war and recession are never planned but often impact the best-laid plans. Nevertheless, the amount of borrowing, spending and taxing contemplated by this document are historically astounding. Every parent and grandparent must ask themselves how much money are we prepared to borrow from our children. They will be left holding the tab.

Didn't she vote FOR the Bailout??? Better late than never realizing what a mistake that was...

Comrade President Obama's Mortgage Bailout

I've been thinking about Comrade President Obama's mortgage handout/bailout lately, and if you were listening to the TIB All-Stars Show on Sunday, you know where I am going with this...

I think there just might be a way for Republicans to benefit from this experiment in socialism after all...


You see, the Butler County Republican Party spent nearly a million dollars on the Todd Mahal... And I am not alone in thinking that maybe the Butler County Republican Party should have been a little bit more fiscally responsible than to spend a million dollars we didn't have for a building we rarely use.


Does that not sound like the perfect case for Comrade President Obama's Mortgage Bailout?

I'm really liking this idea...we're going to have to give this some more thought. Maybe somebody could add this to the agenda for tomorrow night's meeting.

Strickland's "Infrastructure Czar"

...is NOT the head of Ohio Department of Transportation.

For some reason, Gov. T-Shirt Ted decided to bring in somebody else to run the show when it comes to allocating the billions and billions of dollars that T-Shirt's buddy Rahm Emmanuel is going to secure for his re-election plan latest plan to Turn Around Ohio.

Anybody else think this is a bad idea?

At least the guy isn't getting paid! Which usually means that the taxpayers get what they pay for...

Voinovich Update

Three items in the Voinovich Update...

Homeland Security Grantfor Driver's Licenses:

U.S. Senator George V. Voinovich (R-OH), a senior member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, today announced that more than $1 million is expected for the state of Ohio as part of the Department of Homeland Security’s Fiscal Year 2009 Driver’s License Security Grant Program. The program is intended to prevent terrorism, reduce fraud and improve the reliability and accuracy of state driver’s licenses. Sen. Voinovich led the Senate in securing additional funding for driver’s license security by authoring a letter to Senate appropriators seeking the funding. Ohio is expected to receive almost $1.1 million through this program.

“This funding is critical to the safeguarding of our state-issued IDs,” Sen. Voinovich said. “We must do everything we can to protect our citizens from fraud and terrorism on our soil.”

For more information, visit www.dhs.gov.

Some might find this somewhat controversial. I am not one of those... I don't like the price tag but whatever it takes to secure our identification system is okay by me.

Of course, Strickland will find a way to blow this money and not actually achieve the intended results, but that's another story for another time...

Letter sent to Sec. Paulsen regarding the usage of TARP Funds for community banks:

Dear Secretary Paulson:

When Congress passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA), Treasury ensured that this act would strengthen the financial infrastructure of our country and encourage banks to start lending again. To date, Treasury’s actions have been focused on bringing stability to the financial markets, particularly providing capital infusions to banks with the largest market share. The Treasury has invested in all but one of the twenty-five largest domestic banks, including several that continue to incur losses. The fundamental shift in the focus of EESA from buying toxic mortgage assets to direct capital infusions shows a rift in the legislative intent at the time of passage and Treasury’s priorities today. Treasury must do more to ensure community banks are receiving the assistance they need so they can continue to play a vital role in providing lending across the country.

In order to truly aid economies like my home state of Ohio, community banks must be a part of the solution to ensure wider stability in the financial sector. It is unacceptable that Treasury only provide aid to the country’s largest domestic banks and ignore the community banks. Community banks are an essential link to capital in smaller communities across the nation. EESA must make restoring credit portfolios a priority, just as it has made large financial institutions a priority.

It is still unclear how Treasury is determining which financial institutions receive a capital infusion. In order to understand why one bank is receiving assistance and another is not, the public must be able to clearly understand the factors Treasury is relying upon to make the decision. It has been said that capital infusions are only going to financially viable banks; if this is indeed the case, Treasury needs to define what makes an institution viable. How can I explain to Ohioans why a bank in Honolulu recently received a capital infusion when they were told directly by a regulator to raise capital to address its financial problems, but banks in Ohio have been denied assistance when regulators determine increased capital is needed? If ailing banks are receiving assistance from the EESA to meet regulatory requirements, then the intent of the program has certainly changed.

In closing, I would like to ask you how have the actions by Treasury to date increased lending? As far as I can see the large domestic banks that have been the receipt of capital infusions are hoarding the funds. Treasury must ensure that capital infusions result in increased lending. The congressional intent was for banks to start lending again and we must demand these banks start lending to spur economic activity. As the Treasury prepares for the transition in January to President-elect Barack Obama’s administration, it is critical that assistance to community banks is at the core of the next steps in carrying out the next stages of the EESA.

Sincerely,

George V.Voinovich
United States Senator

Oddly, I don't see another plea in there to use TARP funds for Auto Bailout.....

Americans for Limited Government: "No Room for Renegades"

For a two-party system to operate effectively, there needs to be a loyal opposition—not a supine pack of whining lapdogs.

The former calls for working with the majority when and where appropriate, and yet adhering to a certain set of principles that will not be compromised under any circumstances. Unfortunately for Republicans, even when the GOP was in the majority, it was more like the latter. The world was upside-down. It was as if they had not even won elections.

Most acts were guided under the prism of gaining consensus. As such, they were not rooted in principle.

And now, as the GOP moves into its third year of a dwindling minority status, two Republican Senators appear committed to preserving the GOP’s lapdog, “go-along-to-get-along,” consensus-driven agenda.
...
Case in point: Senator Patrick Leahy is planning to hold a hearing for Eric Holder to be the next Attorney General on January 8th. To its credit, the Senate Republican Caucus is nearly united in telling Mr. Leahy that is simply not enough time to prepare for the hearings. Mr. Holder, known for his anti-Second Amendment proclivity and his leading the charge in bogus pardons at the end of the Clinton Administration, has a number of background issues that the Senate minority wants to openly explore.

According to top Capitol Hill sources, Senate Republicans want the hearing delayed. And there would be consequences for not giving the opposition enough time to question Mr. Holder and to explore his background if the hearing is held on January 8th.

A letter objecting to the process has been signed by every Republican Senator—even moderate Republican Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins—except for Senators George Voinovich and Richard Lugar of Ohio and Indiana, respectively.

Emphasis added.

We passed this around the Alliance email list today and I asked Team Voinovich what the deal was... Apparently, our senior senator wants it both ways...again. According to my source, Voinovich wants the hearing delayed -- and spoke directly with Sen. Leahy. If I understand my source correctly, Voinovich believes that this is the best course of action to actually accomplish a delay. As usual, I think we're seeing a stunning display of hubris. George Voinovich thinks that he can talk Pat Leahy in to doing the honorable thing all by himself...

More to the point, where is Mitch McConnell on this? Why isn't there an effort to instill a sense of unity in the Senate GOP? Somebody needs to remind Senator Voinovich which party he belongs to...

Auto Bailout Update

I'm going to try to get this content as fresh as I can but this is still a developing story as I write this...

A staffer source said that the California Exemption was removed from the Senate version of the bill. So now everybody will be looking at Nancy Pelosi to see what she will do. Clearly that provision was a big deal breaker for a lot of folks as it would have destroyed the very industry that the bailout was trying to save.

Throughout the day, I had been hearing that a deal had been reached...but I've been hearing variants of that story for days and none of them have panned out.

Upon having a finalized bill for the Senate, our senior senator had this to say:

“My understanding is that we’re one step closer to giving a lifeline to millions of hard-working Americans who are worried about their jobs and providing for their families. While I am still studying the legislation, it appears that my Senate colleagues agree with my concerns regarding crippling environmental standards as well as providing strong protections for taxpayers and have moved to address those concerns. This relief is in the form of bridge loans that have to be paid back. The funding to support these loans has already been appropriated – this is not additional spending. If this compromise holds true, I will vote for this bill when it comes to the floor. We must act, and act quickly. This is not the time for political grandstanding. Time is running out for our economy. Unfortunately, some of my colleagues in the Senate do not understand how fragile things are and the anxiety other Americans are experiencing.”

I really hate the idea of an Auto Bailout, but if we have to have one I think the bill ought to be as "good" as it possibly can be... Is this the "best" we're going to see?

A source also indicated that the role of the "car czar" wasn't as bad in this new version of the Senate bill. Me? I think any car czar is a bad idea. The last thing the industry needs is some bureaucrat designing our cars... Again: These are the same great minds that run the IRS and DMV...

About this time, the House Republicans got in the act and proposed the No Bailout Alternative. Republican Leader, my Congressman and a Great American -- John Boehner -- had this to say:

“The proposal put forth by our colleagues in the Democratic majority is unworthy of American auto workers and unworthy of American taxpayers. It guarantees failure at taxpayer expense. It will keep the industry dependent on taxpayer money instead of giving auto workers the security of a viable industry that is back on its feet and ready to compete. American auto workers and taxpayers deserve better.

“A responsible plan should protect taxpayers and help auto workers and their families by allowing the Big Three to become competitive again. Our plan does this.”

You can check out the plan here.

The latest news is that the Auto Bailout is in trouble in the Senate due to a Republican revolt. And I say "Praise Jesus!"

Rep. Bob Latta:

“The auto industry is a critical segment of our nation’s economy, especially in Ohio. During the testimony from the “Detroit 3” and the drafting of this legislation, important questions remain unanswered that put the American taxpayer at serious risk.

Similar to the financial bailout, Congress is putting one person in charge of an entire area of our economy. We cannot in good faith give one person management power over the “Detroit 3” if they cannot currently manage themselves. This bill yields vast power in the “car czar” to decide what types of vehicles Americans will drive, how corporate organizations and debt will be restructured, and whether or not the companies are meeting the criteria of the bailout. This bill also fails to address what will happen to the companies should they not be in compliance with the bailout, as Congress will immediately demand repayment. It is clear each company currently does not possess the cash to operate at this time. How will they repay the loan in the near future if they cannot meet the requirements set forth in the bill? In addition, this legislation was nothing more than a short-term bridge loan to the “Detroit 3” with no guarantee they would not return in the near future for additional funding.

House Republican leadership laid out an alternative plan earlier today, mapping out a plan of faster restructuring with harder deadlines for the “Detroit 3” to meet. Additionally, the plan calls for each of the companies’ creditors to drastically reduce their respective indebtedness by at least 1/3. Most importantly, the House Republican plan is financed with government insurance, similar to fee-based programs like the FDIC, which provides much needed protection for this taxpayer investment.

Furthermore, the current proposal was introduced by Democrat leadership today and was fast tracked through normal proceedings, bypassing hearings and extensive debate. Members had less than ten hours to review the bill before voting.

Securing the nation’s auto industry is a serious concern that needs review and careful attention. This bill fails to provide accountability on American taxpayers’ investments, security to the millions employed by the automotive industry, and does not guarantee any solid restructuring plans for any of the “Detroit 3”. Under the bill, the risk behind this investment is too great for the American taxpayer.

Because of the reasons set forth above, I had to cast a no vote. Once again, too much power is vested in one individual with too much discretion on where America’s automotive future will be.”

Rep. Jean Schmidt:

“The auto industry is vitally important to the United States and the Second Congressional District; however, I believe there is a better path to reform that does not put taxpayer dollars at risk. Therefore I could not support the measure considered today by the House of Representatives.”

My fear: Remember when the first Mother of All Bailouts failed. That's looking like a pretty good deal when you compare it to what eventually passed...