Nancy Pelosi Open to Second Stimulus

Believe it.

Nancy Pelosi has said in an article posted on The Politico today that she would be open to a second stimulus package, but it would be sometime before it would be crafted (behind closed doors with no republicans of course).

“We have to keep the door open to see how it goes,” Pelosi told reporters Tuesday following a House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee hearing on the economy.

But Pelosi said she wanted to give the $787 billion stimulus package passed last month time to work before she starts making promises on a second stimulus. Pelosi also accused the Washington media and cable news establishment of taking an overly critical approach toward the first stimulus – and expecting too much too soon.

If you want to give the previous stimulus “time to work” we may be waiting awhile. Remember, the peak spending will come in 2010. Second, everyone is expecting a quick turn around because that’s what we were promised and that’s what we need. When people pointed out that the majority of spending wouldn’t take place until 2010 the democrats cried foul and said it would all be good by September (or something like that).

We also can’t forget that if she were to propose another stimulus the deficit would climb to over $2 trillion, which is 20% of the old national debt (back when it was just $10 trillion).

One thing’s for sure, the democrats certainly aren’t wasting this crisis.

–jb

Oblivious Obama

One of the most endearing traits about Obama is his obliviousness.

He’s completely oblivious to the fact that he’s a.) a socialist and b.) a lover of big government.

In his state of the union he said he didn’t believe in bigger government, and now, when asked by a New York Times reporter if he’s a socialist, he thought it was a joke. He was so taken aback by the question that he called up the reporter to clarify and offer a response.

“It was hard for me to believe that you were entirely serious about that socialist question,” he told reporters, who had interviewed the president aboard Air Force One on Friday.

Really? I mean does Obama know the definition of socialism, does he listen to his own speeches? Nationalizing everything, spending trillions of dollars on the economy, that’s all socialism.

Opening the unusual presidential call to reporters by saying that there was “just one thing I was thinking about as I was getting on the copter,” he said it wasn’t he who started the federal government’s intervention into the nation’s financial system.

“I did think it might be useful to point out that it wasn’t under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks. It wasn’t on my watch. And it wasn’t on my watch that we passed a massive new entitlement -– the prescription drug plan — without a source of funding. And so I think it’s important just to note when you start hearing folks throw these words around that we’ve actually been operating in a way that has been entirely consistent with free-market principles and that some of the same folks who are throwing the word ‘socialist’ around can’t say the same.”

I agree, Bush got the ball rolling, but he didn’t get the ball rolling on the home bailout plan that Obama passed, or the stimulus, or universal health care, or any of Obama’s big government wishes. Not to mention Obama supported the TARP plans and his administration has spoke of nationalizing banks. Obama needs to realize the blame Bush game might have worked on the campaign trail, but you can’t simply blame Bush for everything when he’s no longer president.

For the record, here’s Obama’s response to the initial question from the Time’s reporter.

“Let’s just take a look at what we’ve done,” Obama said, ticking off efforts his administration has made to stabilize the economy. But he acknowledged that, as he told Joe the Plumber, he plans to try to spread the wealth around.

“If you look on the revenue side what we’re proposing, what we’re looking at is essentially to go back to the tax rates that existed during the 1990s when, as I recall, rich people were doing very well. In fact everybody was doing very well. . . . We said that we’d give a tax cut to 95 percent of working Americans. That’s exactly what we have done.”

Efforts to stabilize the economy, especially the way that Obama has gone about it, would certainly add to his socialist street cred, not take away from it.

As for Obama’s second point that somehow the high taxes of the 1990′s made everyone do better, that just drives home the point that Obama has no clue how the economy works. It wasn’t the high taxes that drove the 90′s economy, it was the internet bubble (the dot com bubble) and when that bubble burst guess what happened? We had a recession. Shock I know.

I’m going to be interested to see when Obama’s polls numbers start taking a dive. Almost every poll administered thus far has shown people dislike the policies he’s passing, and they also dislike the idea of big government. However, Obama’s poll numbers are still holding steady. I think in about six months time his love for big government, and his obliviousness to it, will catch up to him.

–jb

The Current #127

The Current #127
Sunday March 8, 2009

Obama’s Backwards Budget
Just a week after claiming he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term, Barack Obama submitted a budget that’s a little bloated. The total cost is nearly $4 trillion and it pushes the deficit to $1.75 trillion. Jacob and Logan discuss the hypocrisy, as well as outline the crippling tax increases included in the bill.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

No Haggling
It was released this week that three weeks ago Obama sent a letter to Russia asking them to help with U.S. efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Now if Obama knew about the history of Russia and Iran on nuclear energy he would have known this was a lost cause, but he tried anyway…and failed. Russia’s response was a bit of a slap in the face.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Regulating the Unregulatable
Leave it to the government to regulate something that is nearly impossible to regulate. The EPA has decided that they have the authority, under the Clear Air Act, to regulate farm dust. That’s right dust created by farmers either by their work or even by the dirt road they live on. How exactly are farmers suppose to curtail dust exposure?

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

FULL EPISODE

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

DOWNLOAD
64kbps | 96kbps

SUBSCRIBE (ITUNES)

SUBSCRIBE (RSS)

LINKS TO STORIES

That Sounds Familiar

Sorry for my brief layoff of posting, I’ve been sick with a cold since Tuesday. By the way, is it cold season, I feel like it’s always cold season.

Anyway, I’m still a tad under the weather but I’m sitting nice and comfy on big red chair (how republican) and now I finally have the energy to update something.

Some big news broke today. The February job numbers were released and they weren’t pretty. 651,000 people lost their jobs and there’s not much I can really say about that. It’s not really a surprise, I certainly expected that a large number of people would lose their jobs, maybe not that many, but I certainly thought the number would be large.

However, on a day when such gloomy jobs numbers were released Obama was at a police graduation (or something) claiming that his stimulus package saved some number of jobs at this police department. Really? I’d like to know how Obama arrived at that assumption. And if he’s already claiming successes on his stimulus, when barely any of the money has made it out the door, can we blame the terrible jobless numbers on him?

I certainly don’t believe we can. However, I also don’t believe that there’s been enough time for any successes to be born from the stimulus.

Obama’s presidency is built around rhetoric. Another example occurred this week, when Obama said that a bankruptcy occurs every 30 seconds due to health care? Well that’s been proven false.

Meanwhile Hillary Clinton is still traveling across the world attempting to become best buddies with every head of state. I’m sure she’ll have many pen pals when she gets back.

She was addressing a hearing at the European Parliament when she said a familiar line.

“Never waste a good crisis,” Clinton told a hearing at the European Parliament. “And when it comes to the economic crisis, don’t waste it when it can have a very positive impact on climate change and energy security.” … “This is a propitious time … we can actually begin to demonstrate our willingness to confront this. We are making up the best we can for lost time,” she added.

That echoes something Rahm Emanuel said just a few months ago. It should be becoming clear to everyone that the Obama administration isn’t attempting to fix the economic crisis, they’re attempting to push through their big government programs at the most dangerous time.

The American people just want the politicians to say what they mean, don’t hide big government expansion, own up to it. You might remember in Obama’s State of the Union he said he didn’t believe in big government. Ha! He’s not admitting that he’s implementing it but the least he could do is admit that he believes in it.

–jb

The Bodcast #24

I seriously didn’t know that I was up to episode number 24. The file system on my computer was only up to 22 so it really threw me off. Anyway, I haven’t done an episode in a long time so I thought I’d do a quick one, there was a lot of news today.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

DOWNLOAD

STORIES
The Coming Collapse of Mexico
Obama’s Letter to Russia
Global Warming Protesters Battle Winter Storm
Global Warming going “on hold”
MUST SEE CHART – Average Temperatures 2008
Obama’s Taxes Cause Disincentives to Work
Pork Spending Omnibus Spending Bill
GLOBAL WARMING MOVIE – Not Evil, Just Wrong

–jb

The Coming Collapse of Mexico

If you still need some proof that Mexico is being taken over by drug cartels check out these pictures.

Mexican Military going to fight drug cartels

Mexican military going to fight drug cartels

Mexican military going to fight drug cartels

Those are pictures of members of the Mexican military, 2,000 of them to be exact, headed to Ciudad Juarez to crack down (pun intended) on the drug gangs. If those pictures don’t illustrate the seriousness of the drug cartel problem in Mexico I don’t know what will.

The drug gangs have literally begun to overtake parts of the country, mainly along the U.S.-Mexico border. The standard police forces in these regions are no where near powerful enough to contain these gangs.

There was a recent story about how the Mexican government had captured one of the leaders of the “Los Zetas,” a drug cartel whose members are primarily former Mexican military soldiers. As the government was transporting the captured leader to the airport the gang launched an attack on the armed vehicle. This set off a fight between the government and the Los Zetas, the government prevailed. When they searched the area they discovered that the Los Zetas were heavily armed…

Mexican federal agents captured 540 assault rifles, more than 500,000 rounds of ammunition, 150 grenades, 14 cartridges of dynamite, 98 fragmentation grenades, 67 bulletproof vests, seven Barrett .50-caliber sniper rifles and a Light Anti Tank (LAW) rocket.

That’s a mini-military right there, no ordinarily police force would be able to handle that amount of supplies. Put simply, these people mean business.

And the worst of this violence is happening in Ciudad Juarez, where about half of Mexico’s drug related murders occur. Because of this Ciudad Juarez now has the distinction of having the highest murder rate in the country, there have already been 400 murders there this year. The brutality is a product of violence between rivaling drug cartels, but it has grown beyond that, murders and rapes in Juarez come at the hands of corrupt police and a corrupt government as well.

The drug cartel problem is not only a Mexico issue, it is also a United States issue. Not only are these drug cartels smuggling narcotics into the United States via Texas, but they’re also killing American citizens across the border.

Marisella Molinar lived in El Paso, Texas but commuted to her job in Juarez everyday. One day she was driving her boss into the United States so he could do Christmas shopping, unfortunately her boss was the target of a cartel attack.

As Molinar’s car was about a mile away from the border crossing back to the United States, gunmen walked up to her car and fired 85 rounds from an AK-47 into their intended target. One shot hit Marisella Molinar, a mother of two and proud grandmother, in the chest, killing her instantly.

There have also been numerous reports of cartel members crossing the border and murdering American citizens, usually by beheading them.

There are several reasons why the violence from cartels has taken a sudden spike. Last year Mexican President Felipe Calderon began a war against the drug cartels. This interrupted the normal drug routes from Mexico into the United States and thus many drug routes were up for grabs. This has lead to violence between cartels over control of lucrative drug routes.

The violence has also increased because cartels have been retaliating against the government. Calderon has waged a war on the cartels and the cartels aren’t backing down. However, unlike the Mexican military, the drug gangs don’t care if they kill innocent civilians in the process.

The increase violence is also about control and intimidation. The cartels will often simply kill innocent people to display their power in an attempt to scare a rival cartel. It’s all about getting the best routes to push drugs into the United States and throughout Mexico.

Drug violence is putting Mexico on the brink of collapse. According to the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats, Mexico is one of two countries that “bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse.”

But drug violence is only part of the problem. The Mexican economy, like many other countries, is in a severe downturn. Part of that is due to the sour U.S. economy and our increased enforcement of illegal immigration. The second largest source of foreign income for the Mexican economy is money sent back from illegals living in the United States. Unfortunately for Mexico we’ve decided to actually enforce our laws, and illegals have been either deported or leaving voluntarily.

It suddenly makes sense why the Mexicans never lent a helping hand to the U.S. when we wanted to crack down on the border, but that Mexican stubbornness is beginning to bite them in the butt.

The situation in Mexico is getting worse by the day. At the current rate the number of murders in Juarez will reach last year’s total by the end of April, and with all of the Mexican’s military focused there, cartel violence could easily spread to other border cities. Mexico is increasingly becoming a top national security threat, and we must keep this situation in the lime light. I will certainly keep you updated on the situation as it continues.

–jb

More information on the cartel violence
Ciudad Juarez:The Serial Killer’s Playground
Mexico’s Red Days

Broken Promises

One of my favorite quotes from CPAC came from congressman Todd Tiahrt when he said, “making promises creates hope, keeping promises creates trust.” That is the perfect quote to describe Obama’s presidency thus far.

Transparency has been scarce, he’s talked one way about spending and acted another, and now he’s breaking his promise on earmark spending. Obama certainly isn’t creating much trust with the American people.

White House aides indicated that President Obama will sign a $410 billion spending bill, even though it contains thousands of special projects or earmarks. The AP reports the White House “on Sunday downplayed massive deficit spending and President Barack Obama’s pledge not to sign legislation laden with billions in earmarks amid Republican criticism that he was recanting on a key campaign promise.”

What’s the reason for this reversal? They simply want to get the past in the past and move on to the future, where they’ll actually be eliminating earmarks…or something like that.

White House Budget Director Peter Orsazg said Sunday that the new administration wants to “move on … get this bill done, get it into law and move forward.” Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, called the bill and its 8 percent spending increase over 2008 “last year’s business.”

Despite the fact that he has the power to stop earmarks now, it’s simply not the time. But it will be the time in the future, and that’s when he’ll be keeping his promise, you can bet on that.

So who’s requesting all this pork. Here are the top five porkers: Cochran, Wicker, Landrieu, Harkin, and Vitter. I don’t even care what party they’re in because that doesn’t matter. What matters is these guys account for 177 earmarks totaling $161,454,975 solo and $1,735,492,237 total when pork with other members is added in.

This isn’t a republican or democrat issue, it’s a fiscal responsibility issue. And because fiscal responsibility has suddenly jumped to the top of Obama’s priority list, he should have vetoed this bill.

Some of the spending in this bill is simply absurd (and I’ll get to that later), other spending is semi-legitimate, but in a time of economic recession should be shelved until we actually have the money to spend.

Projects such as renovations to three presidential libraries (all democrats) totaling $41,500,000, should be put on hold until we have the money to actually spend. Better yet, why don’t they find private donors to cover that cost.

Some of the best ridiculous spending includes…

-$1,049,000 for Mormon Crickets
-$225,000 for Everybody Wins! (how politically correct is that?)
-$200,000 for Tattoo removal program in Mission Hills, CA (I don’t live in California and I don’t have a tattoo)
-$75,000 for Totally Teen Zone, Albany, GA
-$300,000 for GoGirlGo! Boston, MA
-$100,000 for Police Athletic League of Buffalo, Inc
-$206,000 for Wool Research
-$3,800,000 for Old Tiger Stadium Conservancy, MI
-$237,500 for Paving, sidewalks and streetlights, Islip, NY (how much does it honestly cost to pave sidewalks?)
-$45,000 for Weed It Now on the Berkshire, MA

The list goes on and on, you can view the full list of earmarks here.

I just find it funny that Obama is getting ready to sign a bill with that many earmarks when his website says

As a Senator, President Obama introduced and passed bipartisan legislation that would require more disclosure and transparency for special-interest earmarks. Obama and Biden believe that spending that cannot withstand public scrutiny cannot be justified. Obama and Biden will slash earmarks to no greater than 1994 levels and ensure all spending decisions are open to the public.

Yeah, it looks like that bipartisan legislation has really worked out well.

Obama has promised the world to the American people, and that has certainly built hope in the country. However, if he wants to be a successful president he has to come through on those promises and build actual trust.

–jb

There are More Important Things

As you all know I had the pleasure of being in attendance at Rush Limbaugh’s keynote address at CPAC on Saturday night. It was the highlight of the weekend and the energy in the room was unmatched to almost anything I’ve experienced before.

Rush was himself; intelligent, funny, and controversial. He’s not a politician, he’s not someone the democrats have to worry about running against, yet the White House feels a need, during these tough economic times, to respond to Rush’s comments.

Uhhh…what?

Robert Gibbs actually wasted time in his latest press briefing responding to what Gibbs believes is Rush’s assertion that he wants Obama to fail. I’ll remind you, Rush never said that. Limbaugh wants Obama to succeed to his standards. Basically what that means is if Obama is going to implement big government spending, Rush wants it to fail. Oh and let’s not forget the millions of liberals who wanted Bush’s presidency to fail. And I find it completely ironic that the left is whining about this considering they actually pronounced the Iraq war failed, before the surge was even fully implemented.

Gibbs has apparently forgotten this historical fact.

“I can only imagine what might have been said a few years ago if somebody might have said that on the other side relating to what was going on in this country or our
endeavors overseas,” Gibbs said.

Earth to Robert Gibbs…someone did. Harry Reid pronounced the Iraq war failed on June 13, 2007.

He added that the audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, at which Limbaugh spoke over the weekend, seemed to embrace Limbaugh’s wish for Obama’s failure, saying that Limbaugh’s “notion of presidential failures seemed to be quite popular in the room in which he spoke.”

This directly includes me, so I shall respond to Gibbs’ stupidity. For starters the mainstream media has withheld a lot from Rush’s speech. For one no one has shown the clips from the first third of the speech where Rush defines conservatism, and does so perfectly. But they’ve also withheld the part where Rush explains, via an example, his wanting Obama to fail.

In his speech Rush compared his statement to wanting the Cardinals to lose the Super Bowl. Rush said he was a Steelers fan and he, of course, enjoyed watching them win and the Cardinals lose. As I’ve said before, it’s not that he wants America to fail, it’s not even that he wants Obama as a person to fail, he wants Obama’s philosophy to fail, as it has in the past.

Gibbs goes on…

He added: “I don’t think it’s a crazy question to ask about the commenting on whether or not somebody that seems to be maybe, for lack of a better word, a national spokesperson for conservative views and many in the Republican Party, what do I think about or what does this White House think about him on at least two separate occasions in front of large and applauding audiences seeking the failure of the president’s economic agenda?”

Good lord, how long did Gibbs go on about this? If this was the Bush White House the response to this question would have been, “we have no comment.” There’s an economic crisis going on, on top of a host of other issues, and the White House Press Secretary is wasting his time responding to a radio talk show host.

Give me a break.

–jb

CPAC Day 3 – This is Rush’s House

If anyone doubted that Rush Limbaugh was the king of conservatives his keynote address today at the final day of CPAC proved them all wrong. Rush wasted no time bashing and poking fun at liberals, but at the same time spoke to the country about what a conservative is and why they care about people.

He made it a point to show that conservatives don’t view people in groups like male, female, or black and white, they view them all as people. And while everyone is created equal, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the outcomes will be equal.

He spent the better part of an hour and half addressing nearly 8,500 attendees. The main ballroom was packed, and I was privileged to be there, but there were three other overfill rooms that were watching on a video feed.

When he came out Rush got a several minute standing ovation and he was very animated during his speech, giving fist jabs to the two people sitting next to him and routinely jumping around. It was an awesome speech that was the perfect pep talk for conservatives.

All other speeches of the day were of course dwarfed by Rush but that doesn’t mean there weren’t some good ones. Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum gave great morning speeches, and Niger Innis gave a fiery speech in the afternoon about energy. Innis’ speech came at a perfect time, it was about an hour and a half before Rush’s speech so the room was filled with people saving their seat for Rush. It was a very dull panel until Innis took the mic and injected some excitement and passion into the crowd.

Ann Coulter also spoke today. She did, as usual, make fun of the left the entire time. No one was off limits, she even got a good ole’ John Edwards jab in there.

One of the more surprising talks was from Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer. They are the directors of a new film outlining the hysteria of global warming titled, “Not Evil, Just Wrong.” The two were from Ireland and were like a comedy duo going back and forth discussing the film and showing clips.

All-in-all I’d say this was the best day of CPAC. Sure I had to camp out in the main ballroom for nearly 10 hours, but I got to see a fantastic speech from Rush, and no projection screen TV could have matched the excitement and passion swarming in that room.

–jb

Obama’s Two Way Cut and Run

I completely forgot that I haven’t commented on any news for several days now, and there have been two big stories that have emerged that require at least a quick comment from me, although I must forewarn, it’s really not all that quick.

The first is Obama’s newly announced Iraq plan, which seems to be more party politics influenced than actually what’s good for the troops.

Amid complaints from his own party that he’s moving too slowly to end the war in Iraq, President Barack Obama will announce Friday that U.S. combat troops will be withdrawn by Aug. 31, 2010, but that as many as 50,000 Marines and soldiers would remain until the end of 2011.

Well that’s nice. It wasn’t, “amid complaints from military commanders,” it’s “amid complaints from his own party.” Good to see that Obama is consulting and listening to the right people in this situation.

You also might notice two interesting points in his new Iraq plan. One, it’s sightly longer than he promised on the campaign, and two, it’s not really a withdraw. I guess when you become president you’re also granted the right to amend the dictionary. He’s changed “tax credits” into “tax cuts” and now he’s changed the idea of a “draw down” into a “withdraw.” It must be nice.

The 18-month timetable for withdrawing combat troops from Iraq is two months longer than he promised during his campaign. Aides who spoke on condition of anonymity to speak frankly said that military commanders wanted the extra time. “The president found that compelling,” said one senior administration official.

So the extra time (an added 3 months from his 16 month campaign promise) is the doing of military commanders. Wait a minute, didn’t he consult military commanders before making his announcement of a 16 month timetable. That was the idea, the plan was “endorsed” by military commanders on the ground. Conditions haven’t gotten worse in the last couple months, why all of a sudden are these commanders requesting more time?

The other big news is the budget, which is big news for it’s sheer size. It tops out at a mind shattering $3.55 trillion, so much for fiscal responsibility. Speaking of that term, Obama has redefined that as well. Obama, and the liberals believe, that fiscal responsibility means a balanced budget, regardless of how large it is.

Uhhh…no, fiscal responsibility means as small a budget as possible while still funding the government’s basic responsibilities. But anyway…

The new bill increases taxes on just about everyone over the next 10 years. Obama has spun the tax increases as only on the 5% wealthiest people in the country, but that’s simply false. As Newt Gingrich said today, so long as those people don’t use electricity, gasoline, or heating oil in their homes, Obama is correct.

The bill brings forth a cap and trade program to reign in carbon dioxide, something that will certainly lead to higher costs at the pump and at people’s homes. It also increases various business taxes by $353 billion over the next 10 years, something that certainly won’t help with job creation. And it increases taxes on the wealthy by $636 billion over 10 years, including a money killing capital gains tax hike.

Remember what happened when Hoover raised taxes in the late 20′s and early 30′s? It turned a depression into the great depression. You might also remember that Hoover created the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which increased tariffs on thousands of imports, the cost of which were passed down to consumers. Not only did that act decrease the number of imports and exports it also increased the price of the products that successfully arrived here.

That same type of crippling tax increase is being supported by Obama as a cap and trade system. Because businesses will have to pay for emitting CO2 they’ll have to either budget money to pay for the CO2 (thus having to increase their revenue by increasing prices), or they’ll have to spend money and renovate all of their factories and buildings to emit less CO2, either way the consumer will be paying higher prices.

The final irony of this whole spending bill is that Obama promised to halve the deficit by the end of his first term, he’s certainly not getting off on the right foot. He also said he was going to reign in earmarks, well the Democrats spending bill included over 8,000 earmarks.

As Todd Tiahrt said today at CPAC, “making promises creates hope, keeping promises creates trust.”

–jb