Monday, August 30, 2010


Glenn Beck has a rally. Sharpton is furious. The rally is on the 47th anniversary of the date and in the same place as MLK gave his “I have a dream” speech. Now certainly the MLK speech is justifiably memorable. But who remembered the date? Three weeks ago, it would have been interesting to have asked the population at large the date of that speech. The percentage of people who got it correct would have been less than the margin of error. It is doubtful that the people who attended Sharpton’s rally would have done much better.

Friday, August 27, 2010

Democrats aren't the only dopey ones

I attended the Republican Party committee meeting last night (8/26). I learned two things:
1. The three candidates for the Republic nomination to oppose Tim Bishop are all attractive candidates and espouse solid free market policies. Happily, the policy differences between the three are all but indistinguishable.
2. Democrats do not have a monopoly on stupidity.

The Conservative Party required their nominee to pledge that he would run regardless of the outcome of the Republican Party primary for the position. Mr. Altshuler plans on honoring his pledge. He is understandably in a bad spot and at least it is the honorable thing to do.

But if Mr. Altshuler does not win the Republican primary there will be two candidates opposing Mr. Bishop. Both will campaign on the same basic policies and on the fact that they are not Tim Bishop. Unfortunately, a candidate running only on the Conservative line will not win this election. So, a vote on the Conservative line will become a vote for Mr. Bishop! This will be of incredible benefit to Mr. Bishop’s chances for re-election since the margin of victory for this seat will almost certainly be less than the number of votes obtained on the Conservative line. Those votes must go to a candidate who can win.

The need to reverse the current economic direction is way too important and Mr. Bishop must be defeated by a candidate who has his head screwed on Right. The solution is for the Conservative Party to release Mr. Altshuler from that pledge if he does not win the Republican primary. To do otherwise is to support Mr. Bishop.

Providing Mr. Bishop with assistance in this manner is a disgrace to the Conservative Party. It can only be hoped that the Party is not doing the same thing in other election districts but if this any example that is a vain hope.

Friday, August 20, 2010

Looking the wrong way

The Obama administration has taken the position that there are so many illegal aliens that it is folly to try to do anything about them. Their plan is to make them legal aliens rewarding the people who are here illegally at the expense of other people who are waiting to get in - people who might actually have some marketable skills that do not involve a shovel or a paper hat.

Think about that. Their argument is that there are lots of them so let’s not catch any of them. There is ample proof that law enforcement does not catch all of the bank robbers, rapists pedophiles and perpetrators of assorted other illegal acts. But that is not taken as reason that because we cannot catch criminal A we should not try to catch criminal B. Doesn’t work that way.


A judge ruled that a terrorist does not have the right to a speedy trial. The basis of the decision was not spelled out but the guy was arguing that he had 6th amendment rights. A judge has finally ruled that a foreign national that tries to blow up people is not entitled to the protections of the US Constitution. Good for the judge. The bad news is that the headline of the story was “Ruling a setback for high valued detainees”. These editors seem to think thisis a setback for someone. “Ruling a victory for people who want to prosecute terrorists” seems to be more appropriate.

Pensions and the AG

Somehow it is a surprise to AG Cuomo that government workers are milking the NYS and municipal pension systems. Public sector jobs are paid 50% more than private industry in salary and benefits and this has been going on for years. They don’t contribute anything to their pension plans and can pad them at will before retiring. He also missed the part about the incredibly high percentage of them that retire as “disabled”. If someone is hurt on the job they deserve whatever they get, but when 99% of LIRR employees retire with a disability there is a problem. Or perhaps I underestimate the danger of injury from the ticket punching.

Really easy money

The Fed and the Administration want to provide more money to banks to lend to small businesses. One question needs to be asked before determining whether this makes any sense. Will the lending guidelines that will be forced upon the banks be the same as the government’s (almost non-existent) mortgage lending guidelines that created the current economic situation? Banks are supposed to lend to businesses that have an expectation of paying the loan back. Giving away money will not help anything. That does not mean they should not lend to small businesses or do so without risk. It means reasonable lending criteria. Some things are easy – like not giving mortgage credits to people in jail – but the government couldn’t manage to avoid that. Some are made harder with government interference, quotas and set asides. Banks have money; the government just has to create the situation where they can lend and small businesses can expand. Immediate write-off of capital expenses would be a start; dropping all the expenses for a new employee would be a good follow up.


Political parties are not clear indicators of anything, there being dopes on both sides. We should all be concerned with the basis of the economic message that the two groups are preaching.

Obama’s message is an appeal to class envy – the long time Democratic strategy to convince people that if the other guy has a dollar that is a dollar that you don’t have. They promote this as “fairness” since “they” have something that “you” don’t. Obviously, they do not consider this as fair. Their solution is to take it away from them (tax ‘em) and give it out. They understand that Redistribution is popular - as long as it is the other guy’s wealth that is redistributed. The Dems think that not only should “the rich” pay more in dollars because they have it, they should pay more at a higher rate because they can. Their balancing act is to convince people that anyone who makes more than they do is rich and the target of these policies.

In this model, the symbol of all things evil is Bush’s “tax cuts for the rich”. So, Obama promises to repeal that and cut taxes for everyone else. But half the people don’t pay any taxes. So, the O man gives them money from the Stimulus (Google Making Work Pay) and calls it a tax cut. That is what he means when he says he cut taxes for more than half the people. He borrowed money, gave it away to people who don’t pay taxes in the first place and called it a tax cut - an average of $8 a week for everyone involved. Anyone remember getting that? Can anyone figure out what that stimulates?

The other message is simple - economic freedom - you make what you make and you get to keep it. The premise is that economic growth and wealth creation is a good thing – even if some people make a profit (Oh the horror!) while doing so. Profits mean jobs, some jobs that make more than others, but jobs are created none the less.


Progress is a pretty good thing. The range of things that make life better and easier is constantly expanding. People invent stuff and other people improve on inventions and find new applications for products. Who could argue? Well, there is one group that has been fighting progress for hundred of years. Once they were called guilds, now they are unions. Whatever the name, their main aim is to stand as a roadblock to progress.

The union stance is that they are insuring quality products by making sure that only qualified people do whatever the job it is they are protecting. “Qualified people” of course means members of the union.

There is no doubt that the stronger the union the higher the level of wages/benefits that can be obtained from the evil capitalist employer. That is good for the union members – in the short term – and bad for everyone else.

The bottom line is that jobs change over time. Most of jobs that people have now did not exist in 1900. Had the Amalgamated Buggy Whip Makers and the United Horseshoemen of America existed you can be sure they would have been violently opposed to the automobile. That would fit their purpose but it would not help. The examples are as numerous as the inventions. Setting up organizations whose primary focus is to make sure that they oppose change thwarts the creation of new jobs, blocks efficiency which distorts the market wages and prices. All this makes progress and job creation even harder to achieve.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Obamanomics again

The First Dope announces yet another plan that is supposed to help small businesses. As usual the idea is to call the program something that everyone agrees is a good idea. The actual plan is somewhat different.

He wants to give the Small Business Administration $12 billion to states (?) to provide loans and provide banks with under $10 billion in assets another $30 billion dollars to make small business loans. The basis of the idea is to “ease the terms for loans”. Brilliant!! Another program that is designed to give money out to people based upon no known lending standards. And the money would not have to be repaid to the government based upon how many small business loans were made. Another $30 billion down the drain.

The double whammy is that they want to lower the loan standards and at the same time reward the banks for making the loans with low standards. Sound familiar? This is exactly what Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae did to mortgage lending that cause all the problems in the first place.

Keep doing the same thing and expect different results. Definition of an Idiot.

Trials & Tribulations

After years of investigation, preceded by lots of mudslinging, the Obama Justice Department has determined that it has no case against former Representative Tom Delay. The guy was hounded out of office and the Obama DoJ that would obviously love to pin something on this guy, admits they have no case. When the mud was being slung, this was prime media news. The decision to drop the case rated a few lines in the back of the paper.

The same Obama DoJ dropped the charges against the late former Ted Stevens (R. Alaska). Another guy the slandered – which was the point a few weeks before his reelection bid? They did what they wanted and he lost the election. They don’t care about the charges and just drop them. Hear that in any of the coverage of his death?

The smears that Sarah Palin was forced to defend herself against fall into exactly the same category. People on the other side generate unproven rumors about “federal investigations”. This hits the papers and the initiators are quoted as “proof”. There were no federal investigations, there were no local investigations, and there were only rumors and what turned out to be frivolous lawsuits that she had to pay personally to defend. No charges no DoJ case. Think Obama and Holder would have pursued this if there was anything there? But they didn’t.

Then we have Rangel and Waters. A Democratic House is brings these two up on charges. Note, a Democrat controlled House. That tells you something about how bad this must be. They want a speedy trial so that the Democrats still have a majority when they face their jury.


There is a great deal of interest and approval for the requiring the installation of breath activated ignition locks on the cars of DWI offenders. Using technology to solve a problem, add to the safety of the public and reduce crime is a good thing. The same approval is not seen regarding the cameras that take pictures of people going through red lights and stop signs.

Complaint One seems to be that the cameras are a way for municipalities to raise money. So what? People who do something that they should not do are fined. Good. We need more of that.

Complaint Two acknowledges that the cameras lower the more violent T-Bone accidents but note that cameras increase rear end accidents. That would be because many people assume a yellow light means “speed up and go through it” and as a result they hit the guy who in front of them who actually stops. Rear end accidents are the fault of the guy in the back. You are supposed to be far enough behind the car in front that you can safely stop no matter what. In addition, if we cannot rely on the other guy to drive properly - things like stopping when appropriate, staying on the right side of the road, not tail gating and speeding – we are all at risk.

Complaint Three is astounding. A former judge is suing on Constitutional grounds because his wife got several tickets and he cannot cross examine the camera. He is wasting tax money.

Dopey Plans

A recent letter to the local paper came up with a brilliant solution to all of the current economic problems. He wants to strengthen unions so that they can raise wages. Brilliant but there is a faster way. All that the Obama and his minions have to do is raise the minimum wage to $125 an hour. Everyone would then make at least $250,000 a year. Consumer spending would increase as they buy stuff with their new found wealth. The result would be manufacturing jobs and the deficit would disappear since everyone would be taxed. This guy probably bought Brooklyn Bridge last week.

It is economic idiocy like this that is driving President’s policy down the road to ruin and being cheered on by those who have no idea what they are talking about.


Newsday is pushing the Cap and Trade bill as a solution to dealing with climate change, speeding up the development of alternative energy solutions, promoting job creation and curing dandruff. The Editors propose that Congressional Democrats will not act because they are too timid and fear “an anti-incumbent tsunami”. Well, every Congress should fear an anti-incumbent tsunami. That is why it is called democracy.

As for the Cap and Trade bill, the appeal is vague. At most basic, it is another tax on business and since business deals with taxes by raising prices, it is a tax that will be paid by consumers. In a world where the market for carbon based fuels is world wide, if the US is the only one having this tax, business in the United States will be put at another competitive disadvantage. Just what we do not need now – or ever. (There is no chance that the world’s biggest polluters – China and India – will do the same.) Further, underlying this whole approach is not only a restriction on carbon based fuels but a desire to cut fuel consumption across the board. These guys actually are looking to lower the standard of living. Their ideas are to not use the air conditioning as much; to use mass transit – no matter how inconvenient; and to buy those light bulbs with the mercury in them.

We will be a third world country soon.

Bank rules

The new bank rules have begun. Banks are not allowed to charge fees for overdrafts unless the customer has declared beforehand that they will accept the charges. Here a vote for expanding the law to cover Congress. It is the same situation. If they have no money – and they don’t – they are not allowed to spend anything. They are currently overdrawing the country’s account and the taxpayers in the country will have to pay the resulting interest charges. I do not remember making the decision to accept these charges.

Sunday, August 15, 2010


The First Dope is saying that people are opposing this mosque because they were "traumatized" (his word) by 9/11. Apparently, he was not traumatized - he had no emotional reaction to Muslin nut jobs killing "the Infidel" - meaning every who is not a Muslim. He also has no opinion on the wisdom of the Hamas supported Imam throwing gas on the fire. He instructed his State Department to finance the Imam's trip to the Middle East to raise money to build the thing. He is expending your tax dollars to help find financing for this thing.
He thinks that that this another emotional reaction by the same people who are just clinging to their guns and Bibles.

Could this get any dopier?

Freedom of Speech does not allow you to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. The same argument applies here to the freedom of religion.

His lips were moving again

First, Social Security is not an entitlement. People and their employers pay into it.
Second, any privatization program would not impact people over 40 (various plans go lower)
Third, these plans all guarantee that the resulting payout will be no lower than what "regular" SS would have been.
Third, I an 64, if my and my employers SS contributions had been put into an account that tracked the Stock Market, I would have a private account with over 3/4 of a million dollars. This is even after the recent downturn and would pay more in interest that what I will receive from Social Security and would go to my kids when I die.
Privatization is a good idea that the Democrats hate because it will stop them from being able to spend SS taxes.
I wish it has started 40 years ago.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Will it work this time?

The Obama administration continues to pour money into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. With the recent $1.8 billion, the total is now $148.1 billion and Freddie alone lost $6 billion in the 2nd quarter of 2010. The reasons for lending them more money are vague. They both talk about continued focus on the quality of new business. Their new business means continuing to purchase mortgage loans with no down payment and limited (no) income. This is what caused the problem in the first palace and they are still doing it and tax dollars are going to support this insanity.

A recent Newsday article [Freddie wants another $1.8B] said; “During the housing boom, Freddie and Fannie faced political pressure to expand home ownership and competitive pressure from Wall Street to back ever riskier loans.” Well, that is half right. There certainly was documented political pressure from Dodd, Frank and Andrew Cuomo to expand home ownership. Their plan was to let everyone buy any house they wanted. Just give everyone a 105% mortgage loan (to even cover the closing costs) and don’t require any sort of income verification. These wizards were on record as proclaiming the safety and soundness of such loans up to two weeks before the bottom dropped out. But the plan as usual, is to shift the blame to Wall Street – the evil bankers. But read that part again. It says “competitive pressure from Wall Street”. So, Wall Street was competing with the US Treasury to make bad loans? Huh? Even if that made any sense (which it does not), by what economic theory does it make sense for agencies of the Federal Government to compete with private industry to do something as stupid as to make mortgage loans that everyone knew were bad investments? The custodians of the public treasury could easily have said “No”. They have no “competitive pressure”; they have no risk of going out of business.

The whole episode was caused by the Government and they are still at it.

Sunday, August 8, 2010

The Common Defense - Part 2

The second great external challenge to the Common Defense is from the nut jobs that follow a religion that considers everyone else an infidel who should be killed or converted. Here the arguments are more subtle and so more dangerous.

The current Administration is simply not fighting this war. Of course, there is military action in Afganistan and Iraq. Whether is goes far enough or too far is a subject for a different debate. The subject here is whether the Administration gets understands what it is fighting.

There are organizations of nuts who clearly want to do as much harm to this country and its citizens as possible. The idea of promoting the common defense is that he government needs to do whatever is necessary to stop it and protect people. And do they? No. This Administration's primary concern is whether these nuts get the proper legal treatment. The international conventions on the subject clearly define that the people captured as part of these movements are not subject to the conventions covering captured soldiers. The vast majority of them are not US citizens and in no way need to be afforded the protections of the US Constitution that they are trying to destroy. Those that are US citizens are guilty of treaon and can be legally shot in time of war. In the face of all of this, the debate is about whether these guys were properly given the Miranda rights that they are not eligible for in the first place. The administration is putting their responsibility to provide for the common defense at the bottom of thgeir priority list.

Perhaps the Administration's problem in seeing this comes from an inability to realize what they are fighting. These are self proclaimed religious warriors fighting according to their interpretation of the tenants of their religion. (Whether this is what the religion really dictates is another debate for later.) But this Administration does not get the religion thing. They don’t do the religion thing at all so just can’t understand what the big deal is. To them, these nuts are just another group clinging to their guns and Bible but this time it’s a Koran and not a Bible.

Until this Administration figure out what its responsibilites are they have no chance to do what is necessary.

The Common Defense - Part One

The first responsibility of the government is to protect its citizens against outside attacks – you know that “provide for the common defense” thing. A government that cannot do that it is worthless to its citizens. It is before promoting the general Welfare, and securing the Blessings of Liberty because unless the citizenry is safe, the General Welfare and Blessings of Liberty are meaningless concepts.

There are currently two challenges to the common defense. The first is unrestricted immigration. Unrestricted immigration is overwhelming our economy. Our social services are in jeopardy – schools, hospitals, the judicial system and other services are strained to the breaking point.

The politically correct amnesty brigade has a list of justifications for continuing to allow this flood.

This is a “country of immigrants” is often the first thing heard. True enough, but previous waves of immigrants passed through whatever were the legal processes of immigration at the time. Not so now. People are now moving from where they are to where they can get more stuff. (Government services) It is not my problem - or yours - that there are other countries that cannot provide for their own citizens because their politicians are even more corrupt and economically idiotic than ours. We have enough trouble dealing with our own dopes. The idea of immigration policy is that people who have something to contribute should be encouraged to come here, assimilate to the country and make their contribution – whatever it is. The idea that the government is encouraging people not to assimilate is an insult to those who passed this way before. Government mandates to have all signs in multiple languages, translators for everything, NYC schools teaching in over 100 languages does not help people assimilate. Think about the need for signs that say “Vote aqui”?

Another reason given for doing nothing is that actions against illegal aliens would be racist since the overwhelming majority of the illegals are Hispanic. To say that this is convoluted logic is an understatement. Incredibly, we are apparently to believe that if only more illegal aliens were white, then preventing illegal immigration would be politically correct! As always, it is someone else’s fault so they blame the Canadians! According to this bit of double-speak, if only more Canadians were streaming across the border, the government would act.

The last major argument is that “they” take jobs that “we” won’t do and at wages “we” won’t take. Ask the 10% of the people that are unemployed if they would take these jobs at the same untaxed wages. This argument also doesn’t answer the question of how these jobs were performed before this flood of illegals. That is because before the flood, lawns were mowed, holes were dug, restaurants were staffed, all the other stereotypical jobs got done and businesses got along just fine.
While the illegal flood crests, these people here who just don’t get the “illegal” part of illegal alien. Since they don’t get the illegal part, they oppose any effort to stop it. And the illegals join their protests. It is the height of folly that people who are here illegally protest against the law that says they are illegally and against any attempt to enforce those laws. Suppose another criminals banded together to do the same thing?

None of these make any sense.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

A Truth!

Remember when the First Dope said that his health care plan would cover everyone except illegal aliens?

Turns out that he was telling the truth. His plan is to just announce that the illegal aliens are no longer illegal. No problem. He just signs another bill – no debate – no chance for the supposed Party of No to say “No” – he just does it by presidential fiat. So the "sort of" illegals get covered by Social Security and all the other benefits. Voting for people with green card sis next. Watch for it. Remember when this was a democratic republic?

Saving Money

The newest report is that the savings rate is up but personal spending is unchanged. It looks like people know what to do even if the government doesn’t. A higher savings rate is good. A higher savings rate means more money is available to lend. That is what banks do. It gives a lie to the Administration’s constant statements about the lack of credit availability. Credit is available. The Administration just wants to go back to when the availability of credit meant that anyone who could fog a mirror could get a car loan or a mortgage. That is what caused the problem in the first place. The real problem now is that people/businesses don’t want to borrow in the face of uncertainty. Uncertainties like: How far up are taxes going to go for individuals and businesses? What will this health care thing cost? Will it be profitable to hire another employee? What is the next thing that this Congress will do to redistribute income?


The Army is investigating whether some officers were not properly referential enough when referring to The First Dope and Vice-Dope. These officers did not disobey any orders; they expressed the opinion (that they thought was of the record) that the President is a dope as are some of his minions. It has clearly happened before that officers have thought the President was a dope. But his is not MacArthur/Truman; this is a few aides. The difference is that this President does not tolerate anything less than idol worship. It is laughable to think that these inquiries were not instigated by the White House. So, it is “off with their heads” as a lesson in Obama’s version of free speech to everyone in the military and out. And this is from a President who does not know what is proper when the National Anthem is played and will not display the Flag at his speeches.

Equal Opportunity Racism

Ruth Ginsburg announced that "the prospect of three women on the Supreme Court is exhilarating" and was praised for it; Sotomayer says that a "wise Latina woman" would be better for the Court and gets a pass. Could another Justice say "that I look forward to serving with as many white guys as possible because that would be really cool" and avoid the racial backlash. Exactly what is the difference? They are all racist statements.

Monday, August 2, 2010


Democrats action about the 9/11 bill and small business bills is pure posturing. The Republicans want to add an amendment to insure none of this tax money gets distributed to illegal aliens. Fine, add the amendment and vote on it. The Democrats want to spin this like the Republicans are voting against benefits to 9/11 people. Seems like there is a clear right and wrong here.

But the local paper calls this a “gotch” amendment. When there is an amendment that makes sense to the majority of the people, why is it obstruction to want to vote on it?