OBAMA = One Big Ass Mistake, America
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Common Sense on February 20th, 2009
Share on FacebookWho in their right mind thinks that the EPA should be allowed to control how much an industry can grow? That is exactly what the Obama Administration is pushing for. Lisa Jackson, the new EPA Administrator said on Tuesday that the EPA was “considering additional measures to regulate heat-trapping gases” (LINK). CO2 is an essential element for life. If CO2 can be defined as a pollutant, what else will the EPA regulate next? Where is the limit to their power?
If this is allowed, the EPA can shut down any industry it finds to be undesirable. The coal industry of Pennsylvania will be destroyed. Manufactured goods will increase in price. The consumer and industry costs for power will be greatly increased.
All of these outcomes are job killers. Barack Obama says he wants to create new “green” jobs, but how many currently profitable jobs will he kill in the process…and what makes him so smart that he can steer the economy away from what works to his utopian model without completely messing things up? Oh yea…it’s called arrogance.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Economics,Global Climate Change on February 20th, 2009
President Obama has set the tone and certainly is not a message of hope. Ever since taking office, he has conveyed that America is in a crisis, and our crisis could turn into a catastrophe.
Now my local paper is actively looking for stories of economic woe (LINK). The Daily Local News is seeking stories of economic trouble. They could just have easily asked for ways that people are thriving. To me, a story of success in a time of trouble would be more interesting that another depressing story of someone struggling.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Economics on February 20th, 2009
Senator Specter was jeered at a press conference in PA (Hat tip to Michelle Malkin: LINK). I can tell you that the Republicans I know in PA are outraged by Senator Sepcter. We have held our collective noses and supported him in the past, but I don’t think he will survive the primary this time. He has left the party and everyone knows it.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in PA Politics on February 20th, 2009
It was OK for Democrats to say Bush looked like a chimp (LINK), but chimpanzees are totally off limits in political cartoons when a post-racial, bi-racial Democrat is in office.
For all those sensitive folk out there…Congress wrote the stimulus bill. Who is the racist? The guy who drew the chimp or the sensitve perpetually outraged agitators who see a chimp and immediately think of Barack Obama?
The problem with this cartoon is not that it is racially insensitive. The problem with this cartoon is that it’s not funny. For funny cartoons that appeal to a conservative, check out the Town Hall Cartoon Page (LINK)
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Liberal Bias on February 20th, 2009
The culture of corruption is so bad in the Democratic party that even the AP has noticed,
The political mess for the Democratic Party, however, isn’t Burris’ conduct alone; it’s the pattern that has developed so quickly over the past few months. (LINK)
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in corruption on February 20th, 2009
A strawman argument is a rhetorical tool used to prove a point with a little help from a logical fallacy. A person using a strawman misrepresents his opponent’s position and then tries to prove his point by comparing his position to the misrepresentation.
Here is a perfect example.
Sestak: It’s better than doing nothing
We had an A-minus bill when it left the House,” Sestak said Tuesday during a visit with the Daily Local News’ editorial staff. “We should have compromised (with House Republicans) more, squeezed it a little more and put in more tax relief. Unfortunately, we got back a B bill. But that bill was better than no bill (LINK)
Representative Sestak is aware of the outrage at the wasteful spending in the bill. He is trying to justify his vote during a townhall event by claiming the stimulus bill was better than no bill.
The strawman lies in the fallacy that some people think there should have been no bill and no government action. Maybe some ulta-conservatives think nothing should have been done, but even a right winger like me thinks the government needed to do something. Any debate does not revolve around the premise that either we have a spending bill or we have nothing. The debate was always about the size of the bill and what was funded. Given an opportunity, I would have proposed spending on defense, more tax cuts and less wasteful spending. I just don’t buy the argument that spending money on crap is good for us.
Voting against the awful stimulus bill would have given Congress an opportunity to go back and do it right. Joe Sestak would have a much harder time convincing people that the bill he voted for was a better alternative to one with elements that I (and many others) have suggested…so he punted and threw up a strawman.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Congress,PA Politics on February 18th, 2009
Arlen Specter recently held his nose and voted for the stimulus bill. This flies in the face of 69% of PA Republicans who opposed the bill. I suspect he did it for a variety of reasons.
Arlen Specter is a cancer patient. It has been reported around these parts that one of his favorite causes is the National Institute of Health. By playing nice with the Democrats, he was probably able to funnel some money to his pet project. That’s typical politics.
Another key factor is the support Senator Specter has always enjoyed from labor unions. This is not typical of a Republican senator. This support is important to him and the unions are smacking their collective chops at the money distributed by this bill. All construction spending in the stimulus package will be required to go to construction companies that hire union workers. Pennsylvania is trending blue and a vote against the stimulus would have meant a backlash from unions.
Senator Specter is hoping that the GOP rolls over for him once again. He has gained a slim margin from the PA GOP in past primary battles. He was not chosen for his policies or his positions, but because he was a moderate and electable candidate. In his last bid, he barely squeaked by Pat Tommey by 2% points.
According to the Rasmussen Reports, his GOP support appears to be slipping. Fifty-eight percent of Republican voters are currently “less likely” to vote for him. Note that this is with no major candidate announcing a run against him. Senator Specter should be more concerned about winning his primary bid than retaining union support.
Retirement may be in the near future for Arlen Specter if the Republicans can get a quality candidate to challenge him…and that would suit me just fine.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in PA Politics on February 17th, 2009
I have listened to the whine of liberals for years complaining about how George Bush wanted to shut down criticism. In all that time, I can’t remember a single case where a prominent conservative suggested using the government to squelch criticism.
Now that the radicals are in power, many prominent Democrats are pushing for a variety of ways to shut down conservative talk (Links: HERE, HERE, HERE). For the past eight years, the liberal whiners have been projecting their own dastardly plans onto Republicans. Liberals must have assumed that conservatives wanted to squelch free speech because they knew that is exactly what they would do if in control themselves.
Democrats could come right out with a new Fairness Doctrine and demand that liberals be given a voice on talk radio (even though no one wants to listen to them). That is too straight forward for liberals. They never tell you want they really want. They say Social Security is a retirement plan but they want to remove the cap and turn it into welfare. They say the stimulus will jump start the economy, but it is really a push for European style socialism. They say they want everyone to have health insurance, but they really want socialized medicine. They say that a woman should have privacy, but they really want the unobstructed right to an abortion. Their goals and their tactics often seem detached.
The killing of talk radio and the 1st amendment is no different. This time around they may push for “localism“. This would allow community groups (professional activists like ACORN) to determine the content on radio stations. Either way, they want to regulate the market. Government regulation always means more rules, more lawyers and more cost. To a small radio station trying to turn a profit in an extremely competitive market, it means they will avoid political shows.
Liberals want to deny the market of free ideas and the free market enjoyed in the business of talk radio. Freedom and liberal policies just don’t mix. Is anyone surprised by the dishonesty and hypocrisy from the left?
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in free speech on February 17th, 2009
AP is reporting that President Obama plans on “establishing a presidential task force to direct the restructuring of General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC”. (LINK)
What makes him think that government oversight by policy wonks will produce better results than businessmen who spent their lives in the auto industry? Obama either thinks that he can manage the car companies better than the auto execs, or he believes that the auto companies’ weak financial positions can be used to force his mandates that would not happen in normal times. Since he has no experience in business, I would think that option #2 is what is really in play here.
Essentially, the public does not want to spend their money on hybrid, electric or alternative fuels vehicles. They are too expensive and too many people don’t believe in the global warming hysteria. Barack Obama can’t come out and mandate these changes because of the political backlash. Therefore, he must sneak in these mandates by claiming he is doing this to save jobs (baloney).
One thing Obama will not consider (liberals never do) is the unintended consequences that occur due to his meddling. What are the down sides to achieving his efficiency goals or his transformation away from oil? Will safety be sacrificed causing thousands more automobile deaths? Will cars become so expensive that only the rich can afford them? Will electric cars or plug-in hybrids cause electric power shortages? Will we have shortages of rare metals to produce advanced batteries? Will this cause electronic devices that use the same materials to increase in price? If more resources are used to purchase automobiles, what other aspects of our economy will suffer?
I have been accused of always finding the negative side of every new proposal. That may be true, but I like to think of myself as a conservative that realizes that there are trade-offs with every decision we make. I don’t let the trade-offs paralyze my decision making process, but I don’t kid myself into believing there is an ideal solution with no downside.
Barack Obama and his liberal buddies only see crisis in need of solutions. They downplay or simply refuse to see the downside to their actions. So Barack Obama will take over the auto industry and impose his world view on the auto buying public regardless of the cost. The ripples of central planning will move across the economy and most Americans won’t even know the cause.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Economics on February 16th, 2009
What irritates conservatives is the liberals’ groundless conceit that they fight from a values-neutral position, while the right seeks to impose its norms on others. Nonsense. Marriage was a settled issue until liberals began using courts to impose their moral vision on (so far) an unwilling majority. Who fired the first shot there? (LINK)…Rod Dreher
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Common Sense on February 16th, 2009
Now that the Friday the 13th Stimulus has passed through Congress like crap through a goose, I figured I would make an economic prediction. Note that these are not partisan hopes…just a prediction.
We will experience double-dip recession. By the end of the year, I expect some return to slow growth. Jobs will not return to previous levels. By the end of 2011 we will again be in a recession. The dip of the recession will also have high inflation. The stimulus will fail to produce more products and services that people actually want. The money supply will be dramatically inflated. By the end of 2011, inflation will be approaching 10%.
Just like we saw this month, politicians will need to show they are doing something. I expect to see price controls and wage controls by the end of Obama’s first term.
Our best hope is to break the Democratic trifecta of Obama, Reid and Pelosi.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in predictions on February 14th, 2009
Do you remember when $100 million was a lot of money? Here is a partial list from the Friday the 13th Stimulus as produced by Veronique de Rugy at Reason Magazine (LINK)
- $24 million for United States Department of Agriculture buildings and rent
- $176 million for renovating Agricultural Research Service buildings
- $290 million for flood prevention
- $50 million for watershed rehabilitation
- $1.4 billion for wastewater disposal programs
- $295 million for administrative expenses associated with food stamp programs
- $1 billion for the 2010 Census
- $200 million for public computer centers at community colleges and libraries
- $650 million for the digital TV converter box coupon program
- $2 billion for Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program
- $10 million to combat Mexican gunrunners
- $125 million for rural communities to combat drug crimes
- $1 billion for the Community Oriented Policing Services program
- $1 billion for NASA
- $300 million to purchase scientific instruments for colleges and museums
- $400 million for equipment and facilities at the National Science Foundation
- $3.7 billion to conduct “green” renovations on military bases
- $375 million for Mississippi River projects
- $10 million for urban canals
- $5 billion for weatherizing buildings
- $2 billion to develop advanced batteries for hybrid cars
- $3.4 billion for fossil energy research
- $5.1 billion for environmental cleanup around military bases
- $5.5 billion for “green” federal buildings
- $300 million for “green” cars for federal employees
- $20 million for IT upgrades at the Small Business Administration
- $200 million to design and furnish Department of Homeland Security headquarters
- $98 million earmarked for a polar icebreaker
- $210 million for State and local fire stations
- $125 million to restore trails and abandoned mines
- $146 million for trail maintenance at National Park Service sites
- $140 million for volcano monitoring systems
- $600 million for the Environmental Protection Agency Superfund environmental cleanup program
- $200 million to clean up leaking underground storage tanks
- $500 million for forest health and wildfire prevention
- $25 million for the Smithsonian Institution
- $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts
- $1.2 billion for “youth activities” (for “youth” up to 24 years old)
- $500 million earmarked for National Institute of Health facilities
- $1 billion for Head Start Program
- $32 million for home-delivered nutrition services
- $160 million for volunteer programs at the Corporation for National and Community Service
- $500 million earmarked for the SSA National Computer Center in Maryland
- $220 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission, U.S. and Mexico
- $8 billion for high-speed railways (This amount is 4 times higher than the one voted on Tuesday in the Senate bill)
- $1.3 billion for Amtrak
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Congress,Obama Administration on February 14th, 2009
Powerline Blog has a good post about Black History Month (LINK). Here’s a sample:
…before children learn about America’s incomparable positive history, they have the worst aspect of our history drummed into them. Thus, school children are left with the clear impression that the central fact about America is an evil one — slavery and its awful aftermath.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Education and School Choice on February 14th, 2009
The reason for plane that crashed in Buffalo killing all on board is suspected to be ice build up (LINK). Can you just imagine the Global Change nuts using this as another example to prove their point…if it wasn’t ice? They would be using it if this was 1975 (when they were warning about the coming of the next Ice Age).
They warn that a warming planet can be a catastrophe, but a cooling planet can be pretty bad too. As a matter of fact, there are a lot of catastrophes at our current heat level. I don’t claim to know the ideal temperature…but then again…I’m not trying to get the whole planet to give up wealth due to my far fetched hypothesis.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Global Climate Change on February 14th, 2009
