Math v. Vitriol

With Wisconsin lost, all that is left for the Left to do is mewl and spit vitriol.
This is the perfect time for Conservatives to take the high ground, and win the day with calm, common sense, and actual honest-to-God numbers.

As Matt Welch argues over at Reason, "No amount of crying over evil Scott Walker will help governments fix their bleeding balance sheets."

Get Serious About Governing, Democrats

  [...]   Wisconsin has been the front line of America's Democrat vs. Republican, blue vs. red rhetorical war for 16 months now, ever since newly elected Republican governor Scott Walker pushed through a budget repair bill that withdrew government from the union dues-collecting business for public employees and removed the collective bargaining power of most government unions, an act that triggered historic public protests. So on the morning after Walker survived a labor-led recall election by a higher margin than he originally won office in 2010, there were plenty on the left grumbling darkly about the Dark Lord rising over our once-free country. 

At The American Prospect, Harold Meyerson compared Walker's actions to a "jihad" and suggested (paradoxically) that a post-union labor movement might just resort to rioting. Walker "wins one for the plutocrats," Joan Walsh lamented at Salon, without really explaining how the monocle-wearers could win 38 percent of the union vote. 

Such demonization was of a piece with leftish commentary in the run-up to the recall. Esquire's Charles P. Pierce described Walker as a "goggle-eyed homunculus hired by Koch Industries to manage its midwest subsidiary formerly known as the state of Wisconsin," which would now be subject to "the habits of oligarchy." Even more grossly, The Nation's Katrina vanden Heuvel wrote in The Washington Post that Walker's policies were intended to "cleanse the electorate of people who don’t look, earn or think like him."    

[...]    

So, progressives: What is the right percentage of a government budget to be spent on public sector pensions? If this requires that cities and states simply need to come up with bigger budgets (through increased taxes) precisely how much bigger would be appropriate? If you don't want to increase overall budgets, what other government services are you willing to cut?    

[...]    

As long as Democrats keep dodging these questions, no amount of plutocrat-baiting will reverse their political fortunes. Governments at all levels are out of money. Progressives are going to have to come up with a better response to that than saying "we were robbed."

Indeed....

Under New Management

When I saw this AP photo....

All I could think of was "This Establishment Under New Management".

I believe that it is the flag that sells it....

Commies Aren't Cool Redux

It was almost two years ago, when we first saw the Obama-Ché connection, thanks to a campaign worker in Houston.



At that time my response was:



But now the whole Obama-Che thing has gone too far!



To that, provocation, I can only respond....Viva La Revolucion!



But if red isn't your color, you could always go green....



And just remember, all those authentically obnoxious lefty Ché shirts were brought to you by....capitalism.



[Hat Tip: Instapundit]

2009: The First Year of Global Governance

Mark Steyn distills our future succinctly:

"'Climate change' and 'health care' are different ends of the same stick: They're both all-purpose pretexts for regulating every aspect of your life..."

But to protest this is somehow dangerous....

States of Disrepair

We can learn lessons from state's failed 'Progressive' programs.

Most good conservative thinkers make the Federalist argument that we should strive to limit the power and reach of the federal government, and instead leave most matters to be handled by the individual states.

However, recent events might give many conservatives pause concerning this cornerstone philosophy, given that some states have been acting like teenagers who have been handed the keys to the liquor cabinet and family car on the same key chain.

Take for instance articles from today concerning three of the most prominent 'Blue' states.

New York - The Obsolete New York Model: Where a tax-eating majority votes itself a permanent income....Struggling under the accumulated burden of eight decades of “progressive” government, we New Yorkers can serve as a warning to our fellow Americans as President Obama, following the New Deal playbook, seeks to use the current financial crisis to provide a new rationale and legitimacy for the gargantuan machinery of the federal government.

California - Following Calif. Off A Green Cliff: Climate Change: A 2006 California law meant to lead the way on global warming looks like an economic disaster in the making. So far, Congress and Obama have ignored the warnings.

Massachusetts - Bay State Rationing: Health Care: Massachusetts' universal medical program is no longer universal. Coverage is being dropped for 30,000 because not enough money is around to pay for everyone. There's a lesson in this for Congress.

The running theme here is that these states have implemented unsustainable government largesse, and show us exactly what President Obama's proposed programs will bring us on a national scale. They are the cure that makes the disease worse.

Of course, one only need compare these examples to other states that have fared much better. To be parochial, I will trumpet my adopted home state....

Texas - Going Alamo: Why jobs and companies are flocking to a big small-government state. If you want to know where the future is headed, look where the people are going. And if you want to know where the people are going, check with U-Haul. Here's an interesting indicator, first noted by the legendary economist Arthur Laffer: Renting a 26-foot U-Haul truck to go from Austin to San Francisco this July would cost you about $900. Renting the same truck to go from San Francisco to Austin? About $3,000. In the great balance of supply and demand, California has a large supply of people who are demanding to move to Texas. There's a reason for this.

God help me if I ever get orders to PCS to California!

Protests - Pictures of Contrast

Some interesting pictures out there today of both 'Tea Party' protests and 'A New Way Forward' protests.

First a Tea Party in Pittsburgh (via Instapundit):



Second, a 'New Way Forward' protest in Boulder, Co:



Notice any difference?

Just to make sure I am not cherry picking photos to fit my meme, lets try that again....this time, same city!

Tea Party protest, Chicago:



Pro-Bigger Govt protest, Chicago:



Hmm...still looks the same to me. Let's see which ones get more media coverage. Perhaps the scales will tip this weekend on that front.

Lastly, no post about political rallies is complete without looking at some of the great signs that people make and carry around.

Anti-Govt solution:



Pro-Govt solution:



OK, perhaps I am biased , but even despite the lack of punctuation, I have to give it to the Anti-Govt solution guy. But you do have to give that lefty protester some credit...he wants to Nationalize *and* Decentralize the banks at the same time. I might be willing to let him have his way, just to see how they would pull that off...

Winners in Life's Lottery

Dick Gephardt was famous for calling the rich the "winners in life's lottery".

He was of course implying that all those that were rich were simply undeserving trust-fund leeches, and that of course is unfair to the other 95% of America. Never mind that most of these 'winners' worked hard to get where they were...that gets in the way of the memé...

Interestingly though, we now have a new class of folks who are more deserving of the label "winners in life's lottery." I refer of course to those 9 million mortgage defaulters who will be the beneficiaries of President Obama's Mortgage plan.

Lets see.....get a mortgage you can't afford, get nailed by a nasty financial downturn, and get bailed out and keep your home. Wow! I can't think of anyone else who might be worthy of being called "winners in life's lottery". Talk about something that is is unfair to the other 95% of America....

Markets Know Best

They say that the financial markets price in the future they see coming down the pike, based on current indicators.

So one might ask, why exactly are the markets continuing to sell off? What do they see coming? In short...the death of free enterprise.

Investors Business Daily has a pretty good write up on what has the markets spooked.

Is It Any Wonder The Market Continues To Sink?

Today, as the market continues to sell off and we plumb 12-year lows, we wish we had a different explanation. But it still looks, as we said four months ago, "like the U.S., which built the mightiest, most prosperous economy the world has ever known, is about to turn its back on the free-enterprise system that made it all possible."

Here is a quick summary of their main points on what is driving the market down:
- Mainstream Media being OK with the arrival of Socialism
- Talk of nationalization of major banks
- Stimulus bill with lots of pork (but no Earmarks though, so I am told) and no meaningful tax cuts
- $75 billion bailout for only 9 million , and nothing for honest hardworking homeowners who pay their mortgages
- Needed energy solutions taken off the table
- A Congressional majority more willing to payback it's special interest buddies who gave them millions in campaign cash
- That aforementioned Congressional majority acting like the rulers in a one-party state
- The emergence of trade protectionism, and the stagnation of free-trade
- Business leaders treated as criminals
- Talking down of the economy instead of words of hope. "Yes We Can" has become "Maybe We Can..."
- Lack of commitment to a strong defense

As IBD says...."All this in barely a month's time." Can't wait to see what is coming in month #2.....wait, I think the market is already telling us....and it ain't a pretty story.

Video Stimuli

Feeling a weight of dread in these dark hours, before our political betters impose upon our children and grand-children unending seas of debt?

Well, sit up straight, and watch this inspring video of free-thinker and a small-minded blowhard.



Thanks to Jack Dunphy, guest posting over at Paterico's, for this great find. I am off to youtube to find more similar inspiration.

Over the past two weeks, I have re-read Animal Farm, and am working my way through the second half of Atlas Shrugged. I think my next re-read will be Friedman's Free to Choose...

Quarterly Exxon Obscene Profit Reality Check

People! Pay attention! We have covered this topic before....

Yes...Exxon made a profit of $45 billion. Feign shock/disgust/outrage at the "obscene" profits if you want. But know this...your rage is aimed in the wrong direction.

While Exxon was earning a $45 billion profit out of $477 billion of revenue...governments around the world were squeezing a profit of $116 billion out of that same revenue.

Yes, that is right. According to the numbers, Exxon paid $116 billion is total taxes in 2008. That is a profit 2.5x the one that Exxon is supposedly guilty of earning.

So if you think we need a 'Windfall Profit Tax" when it comes to oil profits, perhaps we should levy it on government, because no one made a bigger windfall than them.....

Hugo's Big Mess

Now that I am back to driving on a daily basis, I have been taking note of the prices at gas stations along my routes.

On interesting thing that I have noticed is that the prices at CITGO are significatnly higher than at other stations (by several to 15 cents). Why might that be? Perhaps it could be due to the ultimate benefactor of CITGO profits?

For those of you who don't know, CITGO is a "wholly owned subsidiary of Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., the national oil company of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela."

In other words, it belongs to Hugo Chavez.

Given the rapid decline in the price of oil, Hugo's little dictatorship is in desperate need of capital to prop up its tottering leadership and infrastructure.

Perhaps he wants to keep prices a little bit higher than everyone else to squeeze every last cent he can out of his most precious lifeline?

Who knows, but its just my observation....

UPDATE: Instapundit also posts concerning Hugo's massive revenue problems. Glenn had best be careful, or Hugo might nationalize Instapundit too....

Polar Bear Party Poopers

Instapundit talks about some good economic news on the Tennessee front:

In the face of rising demand for coal, Knoxville-based National Coal Corp. plans to expand production by re-opening some idle mines in Tennessee and Alabama and by digging one new underground mine in Tennessee.

Unfortunately he does not consider the sure-to-be-follow-up-story that we all know is coming. It will read something like this.....

"National Coal Corp's plans to expand coal production have been put on hold after the National Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club filed suit in Federal Court to block the mining. They argue that mining for coal has a direct contribution to Global Warming, and thus has a direct negative effect on the Polar Bear which was recently placed on the endangered species list by the U.S. Interior Department."

Welcome to our future folks!

UPDATE: For some good background on this issue, go read Hugh Hewitt's punditry:
- PBIP: The Approach and Outbreak of Polar Bear-Induced Paralysis
- The Polar Bear Tractor Beam
- Polar Bear Pushback

'Our Best Interests'

As usual, Mark Steyn does the best job of pointing out the idiocracy of the liberal view of what is in the best interests of this country:

"Obama and far too many Democrats have bought into this delusion, most thoroughly distilled in Thomas Frank's book "What's The Matter With Kansas?", whose argument is that heartland voters are too dumb (i.e., "moronic muppets") to vote for their own best interests.

Europeans did "vote for their own best interests" – i.e., cradle-to-grave welfare, 35-hour workweeks, six weeks of paid vacation, etc. – and as a result they now face a perfect storm of unsustainable entitlements, economic stagnation and declining human capital that's left them so demographically beholden to unassimilable levels of immigration that they're being remorselessly Islamized with every passing day. We should thank God (forgive the expression) that America's loser gun nuts don't share the same sophisticated rational calculation of "their best interests" as do Thomas Frank, Obama, too many Democrats and the European political establishment.

Had this view of "our best interests" been prevelant 232 years ago, then perhaps we would still bebe sending our taxes to London rather than Washington.

In short, this upcoming election is really about whther we want to continue being the US of A, or whether we desire to be the European Union.

Commies Aren't Cool

Houston, we have a problem....



The only response to this less-than-subtle statement by Barack Obama staffers is this:



'nuff said!

Unless of course you prefer this variation:


UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers...Do freedom and capitalism a solid and buy one of those cool shirts! (PS-I have no affiliation)

UPDATE II: Texas Rainmaker points out why Che was a plain ol' bad guy, and should not be deified:

1. Che was responsible for the execution of thousands of political prisoners in Cuba (most of them purely for their opposition to Castro’s communist policies or for no reason at all).

2. Che enjoyed torturing and abusing the prisoners, including children.

3. Che was instrumental in setting up the Castro regime’s massive forced labor camps and secret police apparatus.

4. Che tried to organize campaigns of terrorism against civilians in the US and elsewhere (though he largely failed in these efforts).

But hey, he rode a motorcycle, he can't be that bad right?

UPDATE III: More Good insight:

"If you were running a candidate’s local campaign office, what would you put on the wall? Old Glory? The Texas flag? Or maybe the banner of a hostile Communist police state?"

The Profits of Patriotism

During the last GOP debate, John McCain stirred up a hornets nest in an attempt to tear down Mitt Romney's credentials by referring to his military service this way:

"I did it out of patriotism, not for profit"

Holy mutual exclusivity Batman!

Personally I think Romney could make a pretty good line out of this. Perhaps...

"Unlike my opponent, in my career I have served both out of patriotism, AND for profit. And there's nothing wrong with that."

Mitt, give me a ring and I will tell you where to send the residuals check. Ooops, that didn't sound very patriotic of me now did it....

Criminalizing Health Care...again

Why is every time the Dems come forward with their version of great health care, it always involves punitive actions alongside the proposed healing?

This year's entry comes from John Edwards:

"It requires that everybody be covered. It requires that everybody get preventive care," he told a crowd sitting in lawn chairs in front of the Cedar County Courthouse. "If you are going to be in the system, you can't choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK."

So I guess the other shoe that has yet to drop is what Edwards' proposal would outline as repercussions for those who chose not to go to the Doctors. Jail? Fines? A stern talking to about personal responsibility?

I think this would be a great subject to discuss in one of the many upcoming 'Townhall' forums that the Dems love to stage. Someone should ask the question, "Mr Edwards, given your position on universal healthcare, would you have the federal government spend more time and effort hunting down American citizens who have not gone to the doctor, or people who have chosen to enter out country illegally?"

Additionally, given the record of socialized medicine "solutions" around the world, exactly how are we going to handle our annual appointments, when it takes 12 months just to the top of the list?

Hat Tip: Ann Althouse & Instapundit

Getting Richer

Instapundit links to an article from the Boston Globe about how my state of birth continues to earn its nickname of 'Taxachussetts" as Property Taxes continue to rise, and both property values and state services decline. Glenn Reynolds calls it "the inevitable result of a bloated and inefficient public sector".

I did like the hidden factoid in this paragraph, can you find it?

"Since 2000, property taxes have shot up nearly 50 percent, from $2,679, far outpacing gains in wages, which climbed 30 percent statewide over the same period, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Over the past seven years, the average annual property tax hikes for homeowners have ranged from about $150 to nearly $215."

What? Wages have increased?? By 30% since Bush took office????? I thought that wages were stagnant or falling. Isn't this the main premise of "The Two Americas"?

Somebody call John Edwards...

Conviction

As Hugh Hewitt likes to say, I too think that John McCain is "a great American, a lousy senator, and a terrible Republican."

He is not anyone I would have voted for for President, at least in the primaries.

But as of today, he is in my mind the leader of what needs to be a Senate Victory Caucus.

Let his words speak for themselves.

If we leave Iraq prematurely, jihadists around the world will interpret the withdrawal as their great victory against our great power. Their movement thrives in an atmosphere of perceived victory; we saw this in the surge of men and money flowing to al Qaeda following the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. If they defeat the United States in Iraq, they will believe that anything is possible, that history is on their side, that they really can bring their terrible rule to lands the world over. Recall the plan laid out in a letter from Zawahiri to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, before his death. That plan is to take shape in four stages: establish a caliphate in Iraq, extend the “jihad wave” to the secular countries neighboring Iraq, clash with Israel – none of which shall commence until the completion of stage one: expel the Americans from Iraq. Mr. President, the terrorists are in this war to win it. The question is: Are we?

You can also watch his irritation with defeatists here.

Oil Profit Hypocrisy

Oil prices are outrageous! Oil companies are making unfair profits off the backs of the regular Joe! The government needs to do something!

At least thats what the Main Stream Media would have you think based on the leading news coverage of this story.

Now, are prices high? Yes, but only in comparison to what we are used to paying. We have been relatively spoiled over the last 25 years to have had low gas prices.

But because of the shock, enterprising politicians want to step in and "help" us by investigating "record profits".

Now Governor Crist is calling for a Congressional investigation into big oil companies and their record profits.

So far, 21 other governors across the nation have joined him.

Now would it surprise you to learn that they might be doing this to distract attention from their own profiteering?

Check out these fun facts from earlier this year:

ExxonMobil's Record Profits -- And Record Taxes
by Jonathan Williams
February 2, 2007

Today, ExxonMobil reported the largest corporate profits in U.S. History. From Yahoo Finance:

"Oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. on Thursday posted the largest annual profit by a U.S. company -- $39.5 billion -- even as earnings for the last quarter of 2006 declined 4 percent. The 2006 profit topped the previous record, also by Exxon Mobil, of $36.13 billion set in 2005." [Full story]

While they were recording record profits last year, they were also writing checks to Uncle Sam to the tune of $100.7 billion -- two and a half times what they made in net profit. In fact, previous Tax Foundation research found that from 1977 to 2004, federal and state governments extracted $397 billion by taxing the profits of the largest oil companies and an additional $1.1 trillion in taxes at the pump. In today's dollars, that's $2.2 trillion.

So who is really making the obscene profit here??? Federal and State govts are a leech on the normal capitalistic activities of the oil companies, and get to make out like bandits.

Note in this graph from 2005 how taxes have always outstripped corporate profits:


But for arguments sake (ignoring the dozens of other factors influencing pump prices), lets say that the oil companies are engaged in criminal collusion and price gouging in order to rake in the money. Would that not make the very politicians calling for investigations complicit accessories in the fraud? You're darn tootin' it would.

However since there is remote chance that such gouging exits, it simply makes the politicians self-serving hypocrits who desire to deflect the ire of an upset public away from themselves, and on to a convenient target.

Why should we be surprised.....

UPDATE: See Update #4 at Hot Air for good perspective on how oil prices tend to work.