I head back to base in the morning after my all too brief stint of Recruiters Assistance.. believe me, it was a great vacation and just the thought of going back to the desert makes my heart drop. I'm not sure when I'll be able to update this blog again but I'll try to make it a bit more regular, once or twice a month at the very least. There shouldn't be a problem in accomplishing at least that much. I know I haven't really kept up with my usual standards of thoroughness, and for that I sincerely apologize. For now you'll just have to make do with my thoughts in a more raw form as opposed to my old posts which literally took me all day to do. In any event lets get on with it, somehow it's already managed to get to be 1AM and I have quite a drive to get to in a few hours!
Deficits, Deficits and more Deficits..
It's becoming more and more clear that the Obama Presidency is not concerned with even entertaining the idea of fiscal responsibility. The post WWII average of federal spending in relation to GDP is 18%, in the past five years we've bumped that up to 25%. Is that all President Obama's fault? Of course not, the problem is that he seems intent on doubling down on the ill advised bailout mentality adopted at the end of the Bush era. There's so much that I want to explain and expand on but since my mind is currently shutting down I'll just let Mr. Samuelson from the Washington Post do the grunt work for me. Here is an excerpt from a piece he did on Monday, click here for the link.
"Two weeks before the House vote, the Congressional Budget Office released its estimate of Obama's budget, including its health-care program. From 2011 to 2020, the cumulative deficit is almost $10 trillion. Adding 2009 and 2010, the total rises to $12.7 trillion. In 2020, the projected annual deficit is $1.25 trillion, equal to 5.6 percent of the economy (gross domestic product). That assumes economic recovery, with unemployment at 5 percent. Spending is almost 30 percent higher than taxes. Total debt held by the public rises from 40 percent of GDP in 2008 to 90 percent in 2020, close to its post-World War II peak.
To criticisms, Obama supporters make two arguments. First, the CBO says the plan reduces the deficit by $143 billion over a decade. Second, the legislation contains measures (an expert panel to curb Medicare spending, emphasis on "comparative effectiveness research") to control health spending. These rejoinders are self-serving and unconvincing."
"Suppose the CBO estimate is correct. So? The $143 billion saving is about 1 percent of the projected $12.7 trillion deficit from 2009 to 2020. If the administration has $1 trillion or so of spending cuts and tax increases over a decade, all these monies should first cover existing deficits -- not finance new spending. Obama's behavior resembles a highly indebted family's taking an expensive round-the-world trip because it claims to have found ways to pay for it. It's self-indulgent and reckless."
Reckless is right. The amount of debt that this administration is willing to put on the backs of the American public is almost as appalling as the audacity and temerity with which it was enacted. We already have hundreds of billions of dollars in unfunded liabilities in the form of Medicare, Medicaid and the godfather of them all, Social Security. It's a very poorly kept secret that all these programs are already broke or will be broke within the next few years and yet this administration chooses to add to the mess instead of realistically addressing the issue in terms of affordability and accountability. Worse yet, they plan to fund this vast expansion of government into your life by yet another tax on investment of 3.8%. So not only do you pay income taxes on the original principal, but also capital gains, dividends, more income tax on the back end and now a new medicare tax.. Come to America! We're business friendly! Not quite. The decisions being made in Washington have real implications in the real world, even if the ones in control don't seem to be aware of them. Moody's Investors Service has been warning for awhile now that the US could lose it's AAA rating which would further confirm what the world already knows, the US can barely afford its current load of debt, adding yet another gargantuan entitlement program to the federal ledger might very well tip the scales. Foreign investment is already down and interest rates on Treasury bonds are slowly creeping up to encourage investment. But who would invest in a hostile business climate especially when it seems that at every turn taxes on business and the investment that funds it look skyward.
In related news, the US government is not only interested in owning car companies, and banks, but they are now the only game in town as far as the college student loan market goes. For the first time all student loans will originate, be guaranteed and serviced by the US government. As we learned in the last post, government subsidies end up being the path to hell paved in good intentions. In economic terms, it creates a malinvestment in the market by artificially lowering the price of something (housing anyone?) resulting in increased demand for something that eventually ends up in a bust when the reality of the situation sets in. All the schemes set forth by Washington these past few years have been essentially propagating the concept of third party payer systems in multiple aspects of our daily lives. In this case, it's education, but it's easy to draw a corollary to yet another untenable financial crisis somewhere along the path. IF the government is willing, through Fanny and Freddy, to underwrite and renegotiate upside down mortgages to people who do not currently nor will they in a year have the money to afford their house; and the government is also willing to provide everyone with health insurance; why then, since they are now in charge of writing and servicing all student loans, can't they provide everyone with money for a college education? The answer quite simply is inflation. Currently the way the politicians deal with this problem is raising taxes and monetizing the debt, not quite in the way a third world country does, yet; but it's along those same lines. For everything there is a tipping point, and right now we have reached ours. I don't think that even this President would be so bold as to take us that far, but clearly the concept is in horizon.
The interesting thing about it all is that the politicians in Washington, Republican and Democrat, seem to think the American public too dumb to know how to take care of our own houses, health care, vehicles or education but also think us responsible enough to decide on something as important as the definition of life: fetus or embryo. I vote for forced sterilization of all national politicians, it might be pressing my luck but I wouldn't mind throwing in some of the douche bags from Sacramento as well.. Again, sorry for the delirious rambling, Goodnight.
Video/Audio Clip(s) of the Entry:
Like I said last entry, I'm totally into acoustic covers right now.. It doesn't hurt that there are some great Asian artists on YouTube that are sick with the guitar.. AND the ukulele! I always thought this song should have been a duet..
I can't tell if you've noticed but besides the whole acoustic feel of the music so far there is a bit of a theme. I sent this to my girl awhile back and it still rings true. God I wish I was talented like this, I guess I'll just have to settle for sending my lady a link to a great Colby Caillat cover or something else similarly awesome.
Random Thoughts:
You run your fingers across my lips,
No I've never felt like this before, no, no..
I know I'm young but I know love,
And I'd know I know an angel if I saw one..
But I know very well,
Gentlemen don't kiss and tell,
And I promise I won't tell the world,
If you say you want to be my girl,
In your words..
I'm just a simple man, simple plans,
Good work, take care of my fam,
I'm sure you understand..
Because you're heaven sent, independent,
Do you think you need me?
I think I need you girl, baby cant you see?
But I know very well,
Gentlemen don't kiss and tell,
And I promise I wont tell the world,
If you say you want to be my girl,
In your own words..
Cards on the table,
Willing and able,
Stable, capable,
Of holding you down..
I'm just saying,
I'm not complaining your love is worth waiting for..
But I know very well,
Gentlemen don't kiss and tell,
And I promise I won't tell the world,
If you say you want to be my girl,
In your own words..
I'm not complaining,
Your love is worth waiting for...
Quote of the Entry: "There are four ways in which you can spend money. You can spend your own money on yourself. When you do that, why then you really watch out what you’re doing, and you try to get the most for your money. Then you can spend your own money on somebody else. For example, I buy a birthday present for someone. Well, then I’m not so careful about the content of the present, but I’m very careful about the cost. Then, I can spend somebody else’s money on myself. And if I spend somebody else’s money on myself, then I’m sure going to have a good lunch! Finally, I can spend somebody else’s money on somebody else. And if I spend somebody else’s money on somebody else, I’m not concerned about how much it is, and I’m not concerned about what I get. And that’s government. And that’s close to 40% of our national income."
-Milton Friedman, American Economist, Novelist and Nobel Prize Recipient (1919-2006)
It's another great day in this greatest nation on God's green Earth, and while it has been awhile since I've blogged, I suppose the best way to start off this much delayed post is to address a few lingering house keeping concerns. I haven't updated in awhile due to the fact that I've moved once again. During the course of this past year, I've gone from Riverside, to Walnut, and now Long Beach. Quite the change, literally from desert to shoreline, and certainly the changes that went along with each move were almost as drastic and disparate as the environs are different. To put it simply, I'm now living with my brother Phillip, his beautiful wife Carmen, (he certainly married above his station) and my soon to be 4 month old nephew Bryant (he's quite the looker, much like his Uncle). It's as comfortable a situation as I've had in a long while, and I shall be sorry to leave it when the time comes and we part ways. Don't worry, this blog will not turn into the blog of a doting uncle, and baby pictures will not start popping up all over the place, but I reserve the right to sneak one or two in, as I see fit. Maybe a few of you would welcome the change, seeing as how I know this blog can be a bit of a dry read.
In a follow up to my last post, I have a great Global Warming update for you, my beloved reader. Dr James Hansen who heads up NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and happens to be one of Al Gore's chief allies on the global warming crisis, announced that this past October, was the hottest October on record. This was shocking news, mostly because his claim was totally and demonstrably false. HotAir.com did a great summation of a UK Telegraph article that completely blasted Al Gore, Dr. James Hansen, GISS and the IPCC, funny how this story didn't get any attention at all from the media. Here's a few choice snippets for your viewing pleasure or distress, depending on the circumstances.
So lets recap here ladies and gents, GISS's numbers were wrong about Russia being 10 degrees hotter than normal because the numbers were not accurately being reported; indeed they were simply carried over from the last month, for TWO months. When the error was found GISS tried to deflect the criticism by saying they found a new hot spot in the Arctic even though there was already evidence that said that Arctic sea-ice had been forming so fast and so extensively that it was 30% more extensive than last year. Doesn't sound like good evidence of a hot spot to me. Not that it matters because apparently GISS doesn't even do it's own numbers according to their own spokeswoman, despite the fact that they are one of the 4 data sets that the UN's IPCC uses to further their global warming policy plans. Oh yeah GISS's numbers are also the most quoted. It's a good thing they have some sort of quality control system in place to guarantee their numbers.. oh wait, they don't. As if that wasn't bad enough, Dr. James Hansen who heads GISS was found to be demonstrably and irrefutably lying about global warming and the same can be said for his partner in crime, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri. Yet these are the people that 20/20 and 60 minutes will have on their shows to tell you that "the Earth has a cold," or something similarly foolish. The next time someone begins hyperventilating and/or foaming at the mouth about environmentalism, and the dangers of global warming, kindly direct them to this blog, and invite them to read, learn and perhaps use the intelligence that God gave them to do a little bit of reasoning for themselves. In any event, we've got a lot of ground to cover today, even without going back to previous topics/posts.. and a 1, 2, 3.. HAJIME!
Bailout Bust: Is it finally kosher to say that the so-called "bailout" has been a complete and unmitigated failure? If not, please just tell me when it's okay, and I promise to be right there to to say, "I told you so" when reality can no longer be obfuscated to the point of absurdity. Lets take a look at the current situation with the bailout as pertains to the automobile industry. It seems that the most recent proposal to take 25 billion dollars from the 700 billion dollar "rescue" plan has been dropped by Senate Democrats. Finally, some good news! But just so that we don't get confused, the Big 3 auto-makers already have 25 billion dollars coming in the pipeline that the White House and Congress have already signed off on. What they were asking for now, is an additional 25 billion from the socialist bailout plan administered by Bush's Treasury Secretary none other than Democrat Henry Paulson. Bet you didn't know that the purportedly harshly partisan President Bush had and continues to have many Democrats on his cabinet and staff.. yet another example of selective reporting by the media. Anyway, the word from the White House is basically this, allow the auto-makers to use the original 25 billion to cover day to day expenses and remove any mandates for re-tooling for making "green" cars. The original 25 billion was given under those restrictions and the Democrat Congress now rejects any attempt to change the allocation of the funds, because obviously they know how to run a business better than Auto Executives do, and it's not like it was government regulation that led to the downfall of American Manufacturing.. yup that sounds about right. So basically we have members of Congress who have never run a business in their life, now designing the business model for American auto-makers. The Wall Street Journal has a great article on the debacle that unfolds daily in Washington, here's a quick excerpt that I think is particularly relevant.
I'm going to go with Mitt Romney on this one, I am of the mind that the only solution to this current crisis is bankruptcy for the Big 3 just like any other company. It'll let one or more of them merge, hopefully come out of bankruptcy leaner and meaner, re-do union contracts, etc. Essentially it's the only way they can really re-organize, a bailout of any kind is really just delaying the inevitable.
The past 2 days have amounted to another huge drop on Wall Street, just about 800 points down, which is about 9-10% off the Dow. Anybody care to guess why? I've said it before, and I stick by it, the market is responding to the upcoming Obama administration and what he says hes going to do to the economy, most of which has shareholders running for the hills. To be fair though, let's take a look at what Bush's Democrat Treasury Secretary already HAS done with the help of Democrats in Congress, such as, panicking during economic hard times, bailing out one company and not the other, not allowing the market to find it's natural bottom, no transparency etc. All of that coupled with what Democrat's are planning to do going forward is turning what was once a relatively small recession into what looks to be a full fledged depression by ushering in what they call "The New, New Deal." Remember how I often lament about how no one really knows their history anymore? Well here's another great example of why history is important and how it is being demonstrably re-written to the point that it turns reality on it's head. FDR's New Deal policies DID NOT get the US out of the Great Depression. Let's take a look at some real facts about that time period; unemployment was nose diving to 20% by 1938 after 7 years of The New Deal. It was a complete failure; WWII got people working again, but it didn't get the economy going again. We didn't recover from the crash of 29' until the late 40's early 50's really, and that had nothing to do with the new deal. In 2004 a study out of UCLA came to a similar conclusion and offered this timely piece of wisdom.
I only wish that someone had payed some attention to them before we hit a point where we are faced with the option of a "10-15 year economic slump" because of "ill-conceived economic stimulus policies." Indeed everything that has caused this problem so far is a result of what happened in the first part of this century with government intervention. The Federal Reserve being created allowing the government to create fiat money, Fanny Mae was a creation of The New Deal, compulsory unionism and the UAW born in 1935, demanding inflexible work rules for the Big 3 which is now catching up to them, this idea that everyone should own a house and sub prime lending, Social Security and Medicare, Social Security is going to go bankrupt by 2017 when they have to cash in treasury IOU's that nobody knows where the government will get the money, Medicare is already bankrupt, taking money out of the general fund, not from payroll taxes, these are all creations of what? The New Deal. Granted, New Dealism, that last bunch would fall under "The Great Society" which came about in the mid 60's but that was just a reincarnation of The New Deal. If you want to know the reason why we are stuck in an economic malaise right now, it can be summed up in three words. TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT. Do we really need to go into another depression before I'm proven right, or can we just save ourselves a lot of grief and just do what needs to be done now, which is to let the market correct? Only time will tell..
Prop 8 and Marriage: The topic of Gay Marriage has been making headlines since Prop 8 passed in my home state of California on November 4, amending the Constitution of California to legally define marriage in California as between a man and a woman. To be honest I really don't know what the surprise was or why people were so outraged, seeing as how similar measures had passed before easily, it seems like such a non issue to me. I am not a lawyer, that's my brother and sister in law's profession but here's my layman's take on it. A lot of people liken gay activists struggle to that of the civil rights movement in the 60's, interracial mingling and integration. That analogy is wrong on a number of levels. First off, since the 14th Amendment of the Constitution was ratified everyone was protected under the equal protection clause and almost no one these days thinks that it should be otherwise, and if they do they are in violation of the US Constitution. Why is that important? Well it sets the stage for a fundamental distinction, that of condition vs. behavior. You can't legislate based on the condition of race or gender as those are inherent conditions of a human being. The only thing that you can legislate on is behavior, and whether or not those behaviors are inherent in a persons condition is not important if their actions or behaviors are the only way they are manifest. For the purposes of this example lets take polygamy as an example. A person may claim to have an inherent condition that predisposes him or her to engage in polygamy and a government can not legislate against that condition, but as soon that individual takes action in that regard then it becomes an illegal act. Gay Marriage really does represent a slippery slope, because it is based on the unprecedented premise of allowing a behavior to be treated like a condition inherent in a person, which should certainly not be the case.
To be honest, I look at this issue almost the same as I do abortion. I'm strongly morally and politically against it, but at the end of the day, I'm more worried about bears. (my brother often says this phrase, to denote that getting eaten by a bear is a more pressing matter in his life than whatever we happen to be talking about that is threatening or worrisome) I'm more than willing to leave both issues to the state legislatures and let democracy and federalism do their thing. The thing that is troubling though is the fact that people can not abide by the results of a vote without rioting in the streets. I thought the liberals among us were the enlightened ones, the people who were more tolerant and accepting of things than me. I find it personally amusing that I survived Obama becoming President Elect without rioting in the streets and liberals and gay activists want to live by minority rule. The fact is that we live in a filtered democracy where it comes down to a majority rule. We had minority rule once before, it was called a monarchy, we fought a war over it so we could live by the laws that we choose. We should not trade the minority rule of a King for that of a few judges, the people voted and the Constitution has been amended. Of course there is always a worry about abuse of power but that is why there are checks and balances and ultimately the best form of redress is the ballot box. The marches, protests, vandalism and violence do not speak very eloquently for the proponents of Gay Marriage, because the best way to tell the character of an activist is to observe how they set about attaining their goals. Here's some interesting statistics for you. Over 90% of the black vote went to Obama in California, no surprise right? Here's the shocker, 70% of the black vote went in favor of Prop 8. Now those same blacks who are lauded for bringing Obama to power are being targeted by Rosanne Barr who said, those black voters "showed themselves every inch as bigoted and ignorant as their white Christian counterparts." Not quite the love fest that one would expect after the liberals big win on Nov. 4th huh? One of my favorite talk show hosts Michael Medved wrote an interesting blog on the subject of gay marriage and I wanted to highlight this excerpt.
I couldn't agree more. The point is that marriage is a civil institution that has always been between one man and one woman. The fact that gay and lesbian activists want to change thousands of years of tradition for a title, when in California at least they already have the same rights as married couples in Civil Unions borders on baiting of the worst kind. It's a really sad day when I have to quote Sir Elton John, but here we go.
“David and I have a civil partnership in England. We have complete rights between the two of us, we’re protected completely. I think the word ‘marriage’ puts a lot of people off in this country. If they got over the word ‘marriage,’ I think it would be a lot easier for gay people to get together.”
Here's something that you won't here me say every day, Elton John has a point. If rights are all that the gay community are after, then seek them through legislation and leave the institution of marriage alone. If that's not enough, then you aren't really seeking "civil rights" it's more of a vendetta against a society that does not look at your lifestyle as a social norm and that's a whole different animal altogether. In the final analysis, gay rights activists aren't looking for equal rights, they are looking for EXTRA rights. Everyone, gay or straight, above the age of consent, has a right to enter into a marriage contract between one man and one woman. Similarly everyone has a right to enter into a civil union between two consenting adults. What some gay rights activists want is an extra right for two people of the same sex, above the age of consent, to enter into a marriage contract, something that has never happened until the past few decades. Marriage is one of the foundations of our society, and is something worth fighting for in this era of moral relativism, I hope that at least on this one issue we can keep traditional definitions rather than dishing out new politically correct terms to everything that can be done or described under the Sun.
Pirates?! Arr!?: Okay, by now I'm sure that everyone has heard about the pirates attacking ships off the Somali coast. On Saturday those pirates captured a Saudi Arabian super tanker carrying about 100,000,000 dollars in crude oil and in the following days a number of smaller ships have also been taken. Finally an Indian Navy warship sunk a Somali pirate mothership in the Gulf of Aden. The fascinating part about this is it's connection to American Politics. Am I stretching a connection a bit far here? Perhaps not. Has anyone ever heard phrase, "shores of Tripoli?" President Jefferson dispatched the Marines in the early 1800's to stop the pirates off the Barbary Coast, does that ring any bells? In any event that's how that phrase ended up in the Marines' anthem. We've had problems with pirates going back since day one, in fact pirating is one of only 3 crimes specifically mentioned in the Constitution. By the way, when President Jefferson dispatched the Marines to get the pirates, he did not consult with Congress, nor did he get a UN resolution, (nevermind that the UN was not in existance at the time) he acted as Commander in Chief and he decided to make war, even if Congress was going to declare war. It's called energy in the executive. But wait, I'm just about to get to the best part. What are we supposed to do with the pirates once we get them? Do we charge them with a crime? Well we can't charge them with a crime if the military captures them because under international law you can't send out the military to enforce a criminal code for all practical means and purposes. Are they members of a naval or an opposing military force? Well no, they don't wear a uniform, they don't have insignia, you really can't distinguish them from civilians. One of the reasons why the military wear uniforms is to distinguish themselves from civilians so that when they are shooting people they know they are shooting soldiers and not civlians, because the military is not supposed to target civilians. Well the pirates don't abide by those rules. They don't wear a uniform, they don't target only military members, they are not abiding by the rules of war or international law, so they are not PoW's covered by the Geneva accord, and of course they are not criminal defendants (common criminals can not be apprehended by the military). Is any of this starting to sound familiar yet?! So what should we do with these pirates if and when we get them? How about we try them as unlawful enemy combatants in a military tribunal? But wait, we've had a great debate about that, and the Democrats and liberals all say that the military tribunals that we've used since the founding of the nation are illegal. So now Obama says he wants to shut down Guantanamo Bay and bring those unlawful enemy combatants within the borders of the United States to stand trial in a criminal court. What's more, classified information won't be protected in a criminal trial. But that's neither here nor there. On the subject of the pirates, wouldn't Guantanamo Bay be a great place to detain those pirates and try them in a military tribunal? Too bad Obama and the rest of them want to shut it down as soon as he gets into office. The irony of the parallels were way too delicious to pass up. Figured I'd give you some food for thought, if we get off the politically charged subject of terrorism, can common sense and logic win out where "compassion" and ignorance have largely taken over? I certainly hope so.
An Ending of Sorts: I know I covered a lot of topics today and probably got more than just a little bit long winded, but perhaps you can draw some comfort in the fact that as long as it takes you to read my posts, it takes me at least 50x as long to write them. That being said I thank you, the reader, for taking the time to struggle through my somewhat random and unfocused writing style to gain what kernels of knowledge that I have to share. If you disagree with any of the points that I post in any of my blogs, feel free to start up a discussion with me. I do not hide from debate, as long as the arguments are well reasoned then to my mind, it would be well worth the time spent. In any event there are a lot of myths and misconceptions to deal with and I hope to eventually address them all through this blog, in this greatest nation on God's green Earth.
Video/Audio Clip(s) of the Entry:
My brother sent me this video clip earlier in this week, and while it is really funny I have to say that I understood his story and his plight a little more than I'd care to admit. We all deal with our demons in our own way, and I wish Mr. Ferguson the best of luck in continuing along the path that he has chosen for himself. That aside, it's the funniest, yet most depressing story I've yet to see.
As you know, I'm a huge fan of live performances, and this man happens to do some of the best in the business. Take the time to watch and enjoy. Don't blame me if you watch it again, and end up buying tickets when he next rolls through your town.. in fact you should probably thank me, it's well worth the investment.
Random Thoughts: Beautiful days are long gone, I can't seem to breathe, Feels like it hasn't been that long, Since you walked away from me..
Now I can try to act real strong, But you and I both know, I still think of you that way, And you should know, that,
The beautiful lights, the star filled nights, They don't mean a thing.. 'Cause you were my star, So it don't seem right, Without you here with me..
Now I can try to act real strong, But you and I both know, It's hard for me to say, You were my soul..
Now I could say that I don't love you no more.. And I could say that I've closed the door, for our love.. And I could tell you I feel it's time for us to go our separate ways.. But baby I just wouldn't be the same.. 'Cause girl your love is still on my brain..
Quote of the Entry:“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is ``needed'' before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests,'' I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.” - Barry Goldwater,American Politician and Senator (1909-1998)
