Monday, December 7, 2009

The Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation's President, Mark Mix has confirmed that his organization on November 20, has file a federal lawsuit, in US District Court, against the Department of Labor for failing to act on its FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request and that the DOL has continued to "stonewall" the organizations efforts to gain access to the information it has requested.
The request asks for records from communications and recorded events where specified Obama appointees and Big Labor official were presents, lists of lawsuits involving the Department of Labor and Deborah Greenfield within the past eight years, list of any gifts received by Solis in the past 5 years from Big Labor or its officials, specifically provide in detail (a) notes, (b) agreements, (c) communications, and (d) agendas related to the regulations related to the labor union and officer disclosure rules, copies of phone logs, and copies of any notes or documents related to any enforcement of any labor laws and any outside groups such as labor unions, American Rights at Work, or ACORN. Mix claims that a Conflict of Interest may exist between the DOL and unions with regards to union reporting requirements. The request was submitted April 6, 2009.
During a recent radio interview posted at the Right to Work Legal Defense Fund website, Mr. Mix specifically discussed two appointments to the Department of Labor who are alleged to previously have ties or were employed directly or indirectly by the AFL-CIO.
The current Secretary of Labor, Hilda L. Solis and Acting Deputy Solicitor, Deborah Greenfield were two individuals that were named by Mix during the interview.
Labor Secretary Solis worked for a 501C4 lobby group, where she was alleged to be an Officer and Treasure of the Organization. A 501C4 includes unlimited rights to lobby government agencies and political officials. While in the House of Representatives, Solis championed the Employee Free Choice Act (Card Check) along with other pro union bills and was the only member of Congress on the board of a pro-union organization that strongly supports the act and for whom she served as treasurer starting in 2004. The lobby group is partially funded by the AFL-CIO, however according to the AFL-CIO, the union has no influence over the organization. During her confirmation hearings, Republican Mike Enzi pressed Solis on whether her unpaid high-level positions at American Rights at Work, constituted prohibited lobbying activity. Solis denied violation of rules of conduct and stated she had not helped lobbying. Solis did acknowledge that she had failed to report those positions on her annual House financial disclosure forms at the time, which a White House spokesperson argued was an"unintentional oversight". Unfortunately, for Solis she was first elected to the House in 2000 and reelected in 2002, 2004, 2006, and 2008 while she continued to hold her position with American Rights at Work until she
was appointed to the DOL. That begs the question of why she failed to disclose her position from
2005-2009? Her appointment has garnered heavy support from the AFL-CIO and other labor organizations.
Also mentioned was the current Department of Labor Acting Deputy Solicitor (attorney) Deborah Greenfield. Greenfield was a part of the Obama transition team and attorney that worked for the AFL-CIO in filling a lawsuit last year against the Department of Labor to stop new labor requirements proposed by the Bush administration. The requirements would have required large unions to report the amount of money from pension funds that are placed into the hands of investment managers. Now working as the Solicitor for the Department of Labor Greenfield is in charge of defending the DOL from the vary lawsuit that she prepared and filed for the AFL-CIO.
At the center of the controversy, is the fact that Solis has begun to repeal much of the regulations put in place by the Bush administration, allegedly at the request of union bosses. It is also alleged that she has gone even deeper to weaken union reporting requirements that may go all the way back as far as the Landrum-Griffin Act of 1959. Officially known as the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, passed by congress, to curb union corruption and ties to organized crime. The reporting requirements are there to preserve union members rights to see where their pension dues to the union have been invested and spent, and how much of the total pension funds have been vested. Twenty eight states require that employees pay union dues or they can be fired from their job. As a union member they have a right to know where those dues are going. Different unions can vest as much as 100% of its pension funds into investment accounts. Union officials pensions, however are invested, often separately, from the rank and file members, and can include large perks and bonuses. Union members are protected against abuses by a bill of rights that includes guarantees of freedom of speech and periodic secret elections. Secondary boycotting and organizational and recognition picketing (i.e., picketing of companies where a rival union is already recognized) are severely restricted by the act. In the field of arbitration, an amendment to the Taft-Hartley Labor Act (1947) written into this 1959 act authorized states to process cases that fall outside the province of the National Labor Relations Board. Organized labor has, in general, opposed the act for strengthening what they consider the antilabor provisions of the Taft-Hartley Labor Act.
A case in point is SEIU, president Andrew Stern, also has reportedly bragged about spending $100 million dollars of union funds to support the Obama campaign, although the SEIU has never registered as a lobby. Members of the SEIU have a right to question where the funds came from.
As I stated in a past post, every bill that is pasted by Congress, the administrative branch responsible under the legislation has a great amount of latitude in the regulations with regard to
writing and administering the legislation. The only way to check on new proposed regulation changes is through the Federal Register and if no one is watching, there is vary little that can be
done to combat how these regulations are changed and administered.
So what happen to the Executive order that Obama signed his first week in office that no administrative employee can work on regulations or contracts involving a previous employer for two years?
Where is the transparency in government that Obama promised the voters during his campaign?
Finally, where is Attorney General Eric Holder and the DOJ or the FBI?

God Bless


Friday, December 4, 2009

This little story has floated around the internet for years. It seems to make an appearance every time the liberals get busy. Since BO made his
job pitch, it seems only appropriate to resurrect the story and give credit where credit is due with a new revision of the key players.

Author's Note: I can not take credit for the revision. I simply copied the story as I received it and passing it along.
Sometimes we all have to take a step back and let in a little humor or the liberals would
drive us all off the cliff with them.
And as Larry would say, "I don't care who ya are, now that FUNNY!!"


The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away...

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!


The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies
for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be
allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of
the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog
appears on Oprah
with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy
Being Green.'

stages a demonstration in front of the ant's
house where the news stations film the group singing,
"We shall overcome " . Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray to God for the
grasshopper's sake.

President Obama
condemns the ant and blames President Bush, President Reagan, Christopher
Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper's plight.

Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid
exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off
the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his
fair share..

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning
of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to
pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the

The story ends as we see the grasshopper
and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant's
food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant's old house,
crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken
over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and once peaceful,

The entire Nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in 2010.

I fully support a timetable to withdraw!

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

I know there are many of you that will disagree with me, but I fully support a timetable to withdraw...that is a timetable to withdraw from health care and climate change legislation.  Why is the left only so willing to throw in the towel when it comes to war, why not their Marxist domestic agenda?  At home, they are only too willing to bet all the marbles with no  contingency plan for when their programs don't work.

I feel it important to note, that I feel my recent support for a timetable to withdraw is a huge concession away from my previous support for the trigger option (real guns would be involved) and the nuclear option (Marxist legislation, deserted island in the pacific, and enriched uranium, the destruction would be sweeping and historic?).

GE to Sell the Obama News Channel to Comcast

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Hot off the presses from Wall Street, it looks like a deal is being finalized to sell NBC, which includes the cable news channel MSNBC, to Comcast.  In case, you aren't familiar with Comcast, they are the second largest cable company behind Time Warner and will be new to the TV world.

I wouldn't expect any magic in changing NBC's programming away from the liberal agenda, but it will be interesting to see if the Obama mouthpiece is toned down.  A smart strategy for NBC would be to shake things up.  The network often trails in viewer ratings.

Retired Navy Master Chief Scores an Obama Broadside

Monday, November 30, 2009

Here is an open letter to President Obama sent by retired Master Chief Harold Estes, USN.
I bet the HUFF & PUFF Post or any of the other liberal news organizations covered, interviewed, or printed a word of his letter. I think that it deserves to be passed on.
The Master Chief could not have said this more elegantly and mirrors what many of us have been trying to say.
Its unfortunate but I believe that the Obama liberal base really does not give a damn.
To them its what is in it or me or me first, as long as I'm not the one who has to suffer or
pay for it. After all, its "Obama money.
I want to personally Thank the Master Chief for standing up and defending our nation once again. He has more than earned the right to sit back and let someone else stand up and step into the line of fire. I also wish him a Happy Birthday and may God Bless him and all of our servicemen and women, young and old for their desire to fight to keep this nation safe regardless of which idiot sits in the White-house.
Are you listening Congressman Massa?
In view of your position on Afghanistan, you could use a lesson on what it means to be a patriot. I think that the Master Chief has pretty clearly defined it for you.
Its more than being a military veteran. It's a lifetime commitment to a nation and its citizens, not ones personal beliefs or party agenda.

Dear President Obama,

My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don't believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert.
I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos'n Mate. Now I live in a "rest home" located on the western end of Pearl Harbor, allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country.
One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.
So here goes.

I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

I can't figure out what country you are the president of.

You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like:
" We're no longer a Christian nation"
" America is arrogant" - (Your wife even
announced to the world,"America is mean-
spirited. " Please tell her to try preaching
that nonsense to 23 generations of our
war dead buried all over the globe who
died for no other reason than to free a
whole lot of strangers from tyranny and

I'd say shame on the both of you, but I don't think you like America, nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House.

After 9/11 you said," America hasn't lived up to her ideals."

Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War? I hope you didn't mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom.

I don't think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected.

Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man.

Shape up and start acting like an American. If you don't, I'll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue. You were elected to lead not to bow, apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.

And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don't want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts, who was putting up a fight? You don't mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don't want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists.

One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you're the Commander-in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you're not in this fight to win, then get out. The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you're thinking of.

You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president. You're not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. That's not our greatest threat. Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now.

And I sure as hell don't want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle.

Harold B. Estes

Climategate and the difference between Science and Unscience

The scientific way of resolving Climategate via UK Telegraph:

In a statement welcomed by climate change sceptics, the university said it would make all the data accessible as soon as possible, once its Climatic Research Unit (CRU) had negotiated its release from a range of non-publication agreements.

The publication will be carried out in collaboration with the Met Office Hadley Centre. The full data, when disclosed, is certain to be scrutinized by both sides in the fierce debate.

As I pointed out last week, this is the way a scientific person would settle the Climategate scandal.  I also said that the above would never happen.  Was I wrong?

The unscientific way of resolving Climategate via Times Online:

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

Question!  If you release all data, but the data you've scrubbed, can this be considered releasing all data?  

It also begs the question, "why would a scientist throw out raw data."  To a real scientist, raw data is gold.  You'd never destroy it!  Raw data is what allows people to find errors, recreate your work, prove your theories and establish improvements to models.  

CRU is boasting of 95% disclosure of their temperature data.  Sounds nice, 95%, but sometimes the devil is in that 5%.

NY Times teaches us about "what capitalism can learn from socialism" and cars

I admit it, I love reading the NY Times!  Why read the funnies when you can watch the left's spin machine in action.  With last Friday's piece "US Teaches Car Makers Capitalism," comedy is at your fingertips.

Obama's nationalization of the car companies was vastly unpopular and aside from the stimulus, it is the only thing Obama has actually done since taking office.  Time for the Times to manufacture a stunning success for socialism.  Please remember to check your energy and health care usage at the entrance to your new Obama utopia!

As with all MSM outlets, news is covered in half-truths.  I've got to be honest with you the problems with the article were many and I can't possibly present them in a way that doesn't make my post look like a dissertation.  Here is all the information abridged.

The spin formula:

1.  Capitalists do not care about efficiency. They are greedy and want only want profit.  
2.  Their greed blinds them to logical, objective decision making (the Times says while batting their eyes at Obama)
3.  The rising price of domestic cars is proof that Obama's cost cutting strategies are working?  I don't know how the opposite outcome proves the strategy, but this is why they call it spin folks.
4.  Gee!  Why can't we just take over the banks and be socialistic.  Then we'd do everything right.

Here is the article's greatest hit:  (Please remember: this is not exhaustive by a longshot!)

Evidence of what is going on came this week in the consumer price figures for October. The index for new autos was up 1.6 percent for the month, and 3.8 percent for the last 12 months. It has been more than a decade since that index rose by nearly that much. That is what can happen when companies focus on raising margins, no matter what the impact on volume.

The Times is totally correct that GM and Chrysler are focused on margins.  One way to do so is to cut costs.  By lowering your costs and holding price steady, you can increase your profit.  The problem?  The proof of a successful cost cutting strategy is a stable or slightly lower price, but level or increased profit.  Instead, the article is touting higher prices, which is indicative of a value or quality centered strategy.  It sounds like nit-picking, but in actuality, it means all the marbles.  

Why?  Because unlike the Times' straw man argument that:

One rap on socialism has always been that governments are much more worried about jobs than profits. No politician wants to be responsible for layoffs, so the government is happy to rely on optimistic assumptions to avoid painful decisions.

The real rap on socialism is that it favors cronies.  The UAW now owns GM and Chrysler, check.  The other rap is that government does not run as efficiently as the profit seeking behavior found in free markets.  Proof that the government is not running efficiently would be…rising prices!  

Maybe double check!

Al Gore and his favorite topic...Clim...I mean Capitalism

Friday, November 27, 2009

Al Gore was silent for days after the Hadley e-mails pointing to global warming the scam were leaked out. Fearful that his gig was up, Gore carefully crafted his next message as the fallout from Hadley began. He waited until Thanksgiving to give it a play. Interestingly enough, as Al Gore speaks up for the first time in days, he says nothing about global warming or climate change--nope, it's about responsible long-term capitalism.

Gore with David Blood ask, "Why do investors and business leaders continue to focus on the short-term and ignore the fact that businesses that think long-term end up more competitive and profitable?"

While immediately there are not obvious themes of global climate change in the essay, we know Gore's long-term plans have been to profit from the long-term scare tactics of climate change which are now public record in the Hadley e-mails. His essay is really a what is at stake for Al Gore, who has spent the better part of a decade frauding the world to fulfil his long-term goals of carbon domination similar to the very same practices liberals attack the oil for, even though Gore has made plenty of investments in big oil in his time--remember Occidental? Read More at BBCW

Someone found my site via "Dan Maffei Sucks"

Thursday, November 26, 2009

I haven't looked at my analytics in a long time. I figured I'd check them out and see how my new blogging strategy was doing. So far, my hits are about 40% higher than last month. I was looking over the google search words, where I was pleasantly surprised.

That's right! Someone found my site via "Dan Maffei Sucks." Dan Maffei is a local Democrat congressman that I have written about in the past.

That just made my Thanksgiving.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Global Warming Hoax and how unscience begets unscience

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Hit Tip to Green Hell Blog for the Video

Earlier this week hackers broke into the computers at the Hadley CRU, one of the four institutes feeding data to the UN's IPCC.  The information that was released as a result is playing out its own little doomsday scenario on AGW science's credibility.  A UK Telegraph writer has a great breakdown of some of the more juicy details found in the hacked information, here.  However, while you watch the global warming hoax unravel, make sure to be mindful of how unscience begets more unscience.

What am I talking about?  Long before these emails were released, estimates from AGW scientists simply did not make sense.  Let me give you an example from one of my earlier posts:

The holy Grail of AGW reports, the IPCC, was estimating average global temperatures over the next 100 years, using data from the last 100 years.  Of those temperatures, any rational person would maybe grant that the last 40 years of temperatures were accurate (that's when they started using satellites to measure temperature).  If I were making an economic model with as many points in my forecast as were in my data set, I would be laughed at.  Read more here.

Such problems were annoying, but easily side stepped by the AGW crowd by justifying their unscience with more unscience.  Anyone raising these concerns were shrugged off or labeled crazy.  How scientific of them.  Thus, over the years as criticism mounted over the AGW unscience, AGW scientists were spared the rigorousness of being scientific in exchange for a bully pulpit, a microphone and a chance to play world politics.  

Problems such as the fact that the earth has been much cooler and much hotter regardless of human activity were no obstacles to the unscience of AGW.  Ian Plimer, an Australian scientist and AGW skeptic has often pointed out that in the history of the entire planet, we are in a cool period.  Today, even the most ardent AGW scientist would not disagree that the planet has been cooling for the last 4 years (many others say 10 years).  They shrug.  "Temperatures are not constantly going up, they go up and down, but trend up," the AGW crowd says without a single explanation for the temperature drop.  Does no one see the problem with declaring the issue of rising temperatures settled science even as they have no clue what is causing the receding of temperatures? A problem with a model is a problem that needs an answer according to the scientific method.  Instead, what we got was Al Gore marketing, PR and polar bears.

Instead of dealing with the unscience of their science, they chose more uscience.  Now that the house of cards is falling, don't expect them to fall back to any body of science they've been perfecting for vindication.  That is what I would do if I were using science and not unscience to promote my theory.  I'd show the world my books, my data, and let rational thought prevail.  That is not what will happen here.  It's back to the bully pulpit and unscience for these fakers.  Instead, we are about to experience a rapid expansion of even more unscience.  There will be blame games.  There will be denials.  There will be name calling, cover ups and finger pointing and none of it will have anything to do with science.  As it all unfolds, don't get caught up in the idea that real science is about to parade triumphantly down the street.  What you are about to see is the explosion of unscience.  

Evidence that the Unscience is Exploding

Newsbusters on MSM's blackout of the scandal

More recently exposed unscience

Absorption of CO2 has increased, not deteriorating and deforestation's impact embellished.

How to break the bad health care news to your co-workers

My company recently held meetings to role out the health benefits for 2010.  There was a giant elephant in the room and its name was health care reform.  

HR started a panic when it indicated that they were "closely watching the health care reform legislation."  That led many others to wonder, why "they" were watching the reform.  After all, the reform is only for people without heath care and we, that comprise the 200 million that have insurance, already have insurance.  There is no reason to watch the legislation form…unless…

It was someone in the back row that asked if the company was considering dropping our health care benefits if the health care reform passed.

What was most surprising was the number of people who looked puzzled. I had a chance to speak to several of them after the meeting.

"Why would "our company name redacted" be thinking about dropping our health care coverage if the health care bill is passed?"  One asked.  My first impression was that this person must be a liberal.

I was only too willing to lay out the cold hard truth of the legislation.  "Well, according to the congressional budget office, companies have an incentive to drop coverage since people can go sign up for government health care."

Since we were talking about health care and I have a great deal of knowledge on the symptoms of bad legislation, I decided to give my coworkers their prognosis.

"If they pass the congressional bill, the CBO estimates we have a 1 in 10 chance of losing our plans.  The senate bill has it at 1 in 20."

Their reply?

"Well, I'm sure that they'll fix all that before making it law.  It doesn't make sense passing a bill that would kick people out of their current health insurance."

No, they will pass health care legislation because their ideology is more important than you and yes, it is crazy.

Alas! Someone is finally listening to me!

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Via the Washington Examiner

Five months ago, I laid out my confusion regarding the large support from younger generations for Obama's agenda.  There is a huge disconnect from the under thirty crowd regarding what health care reform really means for their generation.  In short, I cannot understand why any rational person, from this generation, would support the Obama agenda.

It looks like the Washington Post has finally caught on:

"Now comes the House-passed health-care "reform" bill that, amazingly, would extract more subsidies from the young. It mandates that health insurance premiums for older Americans be no more than twice the level of that for younger Americans. That's much less than the actual health spending gap between young and old. Spending for those age 60 to 64 is four to five times greater than those 18 to 24. So, the young would overpay for insurance that -- under the House bill -- people must buy: Twenty- and thirtysomethings would subsidize premiums for fifty-and sixtysomethings. (Those 65 and over receive Medicare.)"

The article goes on:

"Although premium changes would apply mainly to people using insurance "exchanges," the differences would be substantial. A single person 55 to 64 might save $3,490, estimates an Urban Institute study. By contrast, single people in their 20s and early 30s might pay about $600 to $1,100 more. For the young, the extra cost might be larger, says economist Diana Furchtgott-Roth of the Hudson Institute, because the House bill would require them to purchase fairly generous insurance plans rather than cheaper catastrophic coverage that might better suit their needs."

When Obama was asked what the middle class would get from his health care reform he answered, "Peace of mind."  The young missed it, but those words from Obama are, in actuality, a call to serfdom.  Make no mistake, this is serfdom.  In medieval times, a serf would work part of the landowner's property in return for food and protection.  At least the medieval serfs of yore traded their freedom in exchange for something they had needed.  For peace of mind from your philosopher-king, Lord Obama, you will pay dearly for what you don't need, health insurance.  

Did we say 3.5% GDP growth? Oops!

Do remember last month's GDP report showing that the economy grew at 3.5%.  Well, experts are expecting the estimate to be adjusted downward to 2.9%.  This is not unusual.  GDP figures come out every quarter and during off-months the numbers are adjusted.  According to the AP:

"A government report due out Tuesday morning is expected to show that the economy expanded at a pace of 2.9 percent from July through September, according to Wall Street economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters. If they are right, it would mark a slower expansion than the 3.5 percent pace reported a month ago. Most of that rebound reflected federal support for spending on homes and cars.

The main forces behind the expected third-quarter downgrade: commercial construction was weaker, the nation's trade gap was more of a drag, businesses trimmed more of their stockpiles and consumers didn't spend as much.

So, the good news is the economy finally started to grow again, after a record four straight losing quarters. The bad news: The rebound, now and in the months ahead, probably will be lethargic.

Federal Reserve officials and other economists say growth won't be strong enough to quickly drive down the nation's unemployment rate. The nation's current 10.2 percent jobless rate marks only the second time in the post-World War II period that unemployment has topped 10 percent."

It will be interesting to see the revised numbers.  Over the last few quarters, the only component to GDP that was growing was government and as the article pointed out, all the elements that are not government are expected to be revised down.

NY Times discovers that there is a deficit problem!

Monday, November 23, 2009

Big Hat tip to Rob Verdi at The 46

Rob Verdi at The 46 is an excellent news aggregator.  I've followed his site almost since the inception of my own blog and he has tipped me off to numerous breaking news stories, including the most recent Times article.  Rob writes:

Is Obama alone responsible for this, of course not. Has he exacerbated the problems to levels almost unbelievable, heck yeah! as for what next:

"Treasury officials now face a trifecta of headaches: a mountain of new debt, a balloon of short-term borrowings that come due in the months ahead, and interest rates that are sure to climb back to normal as soon as the Federal Reserve decides that the emergency has passed.

Even as Treasury officials are racing to lock in today's low rates by exchanging short-term borrowings for long-term bonds, the government faces a payment shock similar to those that sent legions of overstretched homeowners into default on their mortgages.

With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government's tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year, even if annual budget deficits shrink drastically. Other forecasters say the figure could be much higher."  Read more at The 46

Please remember to add Rob's site to your list of pages for research.  I promise you won't be disappointed.

The “Fix” is in on new deficits and Media Matters' mindless drones

You may have missed it with the CBO scoring and vote on the Senate health care bill, but the Doctor fix passed the house last Thursday.  I wrote about the Doctor Fix shenanigans last week.  Whenever you hear the media state the cost of health care legislation as scored by the CBO, be sure to tack on at least $210 billion to that number.

On a related note, I like to see what the mindless left are up to every now and then, so I stopped on over at Media Matters.  They had a post on how Fox & Friends had overstated the cost of health care by including the Doctor Fix in the overall cost of health care legislation, which is the honest thing to do I might add.  Fox & Friends even mentioned that they were adding the Doctor Fix to the cost of the bills.

Here is the best part.  The article wasn't actually about how Fox incorrectly reported anything.  It was about how hypocritical the right is for complaining about the Doctor Fix deception.  However, it is clear from the mindless drone responses at the bottom that none of the lefty drones actually read any of the information.  Here is a taste!

Bluestate69 said: "fox news motto "when all else fails, LIE!!" "

I'm sorry mindless drone.  The Media Matters article plainly defends that Fox's analysis was correct.

Read More about the Doctor Fix:

Hot Air has two excellent posts on the Doctor Fix here and here.

Million Med March Today!

Saturday, November 21, 2009

Hat Tip to Right Klik

If you are looking for something to do today, how about the Million Med March? Marchs are happening all over the US to protest the Senate bill.

Find a march near you!

Government: working hard to squelch recovery

Friday, November 20, 2009

Via the Drudge Report

It looks as though several city mayors are looking at budgetary problems as a result of the economic downturn.  The poor budget management of states and cities highlights the real truth about government in an economic downturn.  Government is a 2,000 pound gorilla, jumping on your back as the private sector tries to climb the hill of recovery.

"While federal stimulus funds have helped states close budget gaps and preserved jobs for many state and school-board employees, the mayors said federal money hasn't done much to ease their day-to-day budget problems. "The stimulus is going to special things," said Chuck Reed, mayor of San Jose.

Beyond budget and services cuts, the mayors discussed new ways to raise revenue at a time when incomes are stagnant and the national unemployment rate is at 10.2%. Philadelphia, for instance, has temporarily increased its sales tax while Mesa has levied a property tax for the first time."

States and local governments face different budgetary problems then the politicians at the federal level.  For example, they often have to finance lavish unfunded federal mandates that are out of their control (I'm sure they can't wait for health care reform).  However, take a look at these mayors' solutions to the problem.  Sales taxes are down, because people are buying things, because they don't have jobs.  So how do cities respond?  Raise taxes that aren't dependant on sales, like property taxes.  It is no wonder that we are headed for a second dip in the recession.  

Knock, Knock, Knock!  The Taxman cometh.

Geithner asked to step down

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Via Lonely Conservative

Treasury Secretary Tim ‘Turbo Tax’ Geithner was asked to step down by Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX). Geithner was extremely defensive, blamed it all on Bush and refused to step down. Brady asked Geithner where he was working at the time of the financial meltdown and Geithner stuttered his response.

Picture it – your bosses call you in for a performance evaluation. They point out where you’re lacking and you get belligerent and blame your predecessor...Read more at The Lonely Conservative

Reid’s health care bill CBO Scoring is good politics, but the legislation still stinks

Last night, the CBO released the scoring for Reid's health care bill.  Instantaneously, the news reports gushed over how Reid's bill would not only be deficit neutral, but would in fact reduce the deficit by nearly $130 billion in ten years.  Unfortunately, the good news is more the result of well-timed politics than actually creating good legislation.  

The real reason the news seems so positive regarding Reid's legislation is the direct result of Reid not making the legislation available to be criticized ahead of the CBO scoring.  The media, in its pliant attitude towards leftist policies are merely trumpeting the wonderful news for all to hear before anyone has a chance to tell you what policies are included in the bill.  Let me be the first to fill you in on how the CBO projected surplus gains on the legislation:
  • The Doctor Fix is out; wink-wink!  You can read all about this scam in one of my more recent posts.  Without the Doctor Fix, a 23% cut in Medicare reimbursements, any of the health care legislation that has been proposed thus far would project surpluses.  I don't think a single rational human being would make the argument that cutting payments to doctors and hospitals is the best approach to tackling the deficit.  Pass the Doctor Fix separately and projected surpluses magically turn into deficits.
  • If a program adds to state and local deficits, but not the federal deficits, does that really mean that the program is deficit neutral?  One of the biggest pieces of this legislation is a gigantic expansion of the Medicaid and S-Chip entitlement programs.  These won't add to the Federal Budget though, instead Uncle Sam has decided to create an Unfunded Mandate for the states so that Washington politicians can pretend that there are no budgetary effects.  How many states are going broke right now?
  • What are costs of implementation and enforcing the mandates?  They don't keep score at the CBO.  Costs that are associated with enforcing mandates, such as increased oversight by the IRS, are not accounted for in CBO scoring.  If the CBO has to calculate this every time congress wanted to pass legislation, they'd never be able to find deficit neutral legislation.
  • The CBO did not indicate whether the legislation actually bends the increasing costs to health care.  As I've pointed out before, this is the real issue.  I'm fine with balancing the budget.  It is a plus to legislation, but the cost crisis is in stemming the rate of health care cost increases year over year.  All the legislation being proposed by Democrats is akin to kicking Grandma to the curb and taking away the large sums of entitlement money currently allotted to a few (old people) and reallocating those entitlements to a larger number of people.  

It's a great way to buy votes, but it doesn't do anything to fix, reform, or improve health care.  I'm sick and tired of all the pretending that this legislation is anything more.

Side Note:

Backdoor single payer is also stronger in Reid's bill.  The new bill charge's only $750/year to those that refuse to purchase health care.  That's a mere $62.50/month.  I can't imagine why anyone would purchase health care insurance under this mandate, if the same legislation is going to bar insurance companies from refusing coverage based on preexisting conditions.  It creates a situation where no one will buy insurance until they need to use it, which will either make private insurance more expensive or put private companies out of business.

Another Side Note:

I was unable to determine from the report whether Reid's bill had the same revenue generating scheme as the Bacchus bill. The Bacchus bill collected 10 years of taxes to fund 7 years of costs.

Read the scoring here.

Update #1

MSNBC has the scoop on some more gimmicks in the Senate bill. The effective date for the legislation is one year later, 2014. Therefore, the effects of legislation that will occur for six of the ten years in the ten year window, will be spread out accross ten years. That's in part, how the senate bill comes in lower then the congressional bill. Also, tax start a year earlier, so we will collect taxes for 7 years to pay for 6 years of costs. Does that sound like it pays for itself?

Hungry for more news? Check out these links!

Democrats hit hardest by Obama recession and more at Left Coast Rebel. See more excellent writing on this topic at Reaganite Republican.

What about the 255 million people not in Reid's bill?

Who in the world vetted and supported Eric Holder's nomination? Track and Klik have video of Eric Holder...sounding...how can I say it?...You'd better just see for yourself.

Even more!

The Czar of the Czars!

Alas the Democratic Hodgepodgery!

Obama is thinking really really hard on Afghanistan

It depends on your definition of Created

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

The CBO has scored the health care bill. I'll be looking to get you some input tomorrow after I've read it. In the meantime, while CNN is productively fact checking SNL and the AP is doing the important job of fact checking Sarah Palin, the Washington Examiner is fact checking something that matters. Obama's saved and created jobs. They have pooled all the bogus saved and created news reports and made an interactive map. It's very interesting.

So far 10% of the jobs saved and created are bogus and this is strictly what has been reported. It is not a full audit.

Making some changes to New Conservative Generation and I need your help

Tonight, I take my final for my fall graduate course (it seemed as though this class would never end).  If you are new to this site, I have been laboring to complete my MBA for several years now.  I take about two courses a year, one in the fall and one in the spring.  It's a snail pace, but I'm a working man in the business of finance.  It's the best I can do.

With the end of my class tonight, I plan on refocusing my efforts to the blogging world and I could use input from my friends and readers.  I'd like to share some of my plans and get your ideas as well.

What I plan on doing:

Focusing the content of New Conservative Generation

Left Coast Rebel, a great friend of mine and brilliant blogger, has suggested I focus my posts on public finance and economics with a twist of unashamed, conservative political analysis and commentary.  If you want to interest readers, you need to differentiate.  Given my experience, education and background, going content specific is a great angle for me and this site.  I hope you will stop by often to read and comment on my posts regarding the money and economics involved in the politics and policy of the day.  You may have noticed, that I have already started.  Please let me know what you think.

Going Local in a Big Way

I live in Upstate NY, which means I live in the area of NY that is not NYC.  As evidenced by the NY-23 election, the local races here will prove to be a key battle ground for 2010.  There are about 4 or 5 upstate congressional seats held by Democrats in Republican strongholds and I plan on putting 110% into promoting local candidates with smart, level-headed ideas.  

What are your thoughts?

Side projects?

I've long been thinking about starting other cooperative sites with other bloggers.  However, I have not been able to bring anything to fruition.  If you enjoy my writing, would like exclusive NCG content for your site, or just would like to engage in a side project, please shoot me an email.

Would you like to post your content?

I'm open to picking up your content as well, especially if you want to provide content relating to economics and finance (that's my proposed shtick).  Please send me an email.

Other thoughts?

What do you like?  What do you think should change?  What would you like to see?

Thank you everyone for your input and support!

Recently passed, Pelosi’s health care bill was not scored deficit neutral by CBO and news of a new Congressional Confidence Scheme

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

My headline above is not entirely accurate, but then, few specifics regarding health care legislation is being reported accurately. Pelosi’s self proclaimed “most open and transparent” congress in over a hundred years has been nothing of the sort under Democrat leadership. So what’s the latest Democratic scam to surface from Pelosi’s grifters? Why it’s the doctor fix, resurrected from the health care chopping block and it is piggy-backing fiscal responsibility.

Let me set the stage.

Democrats received all kinds of heat over the summer for the deficit costs of HR3200. The way Democrats tried to sell HR3200 went a little like this, “Our health care reform is deficit neutral! In fact, we’ll even have a surplus. Except for the Doctor fix which is one third of the total cost of the plan. The rest is surplus Baby!” In combination with the November elections showing voters were growing weary of Big Spend Democrat policies, Pelosi’s legislation needed a deficit neutral CBO scoring to get Blue Dog support. As a result, Pelosi dropped the Doctor Fix from her bill.

The Doctor Fix is a correction to current legislation, which promises to dramatically cut the reimbursement rate that doctors receive for Medicare. Essentially, it was the carrot being used to get AMA support.

Since Pelosi fixed the Doctor Fix Bob Barker style, her health care bill got the deficit neutral thumbs up from the CBO and Democrats passed the legislation. Byron York is reporting that the Doctor Fix is back and it’s piggy-backing Pay-Go legislation.

According to the Washington Examiner:

But it just happens that the Democratic version of Pay-Go contains a specific exemption for the doctor fix. So the House could approve a measure that would cost $210 billion, have no way to pay for it and still meet the requirements it has set for itself in terms of restraining spending.

In essence, the house plans to pass a bill requiring that congress find funding for all spending with an amendment that costs $210 billion in unfunded spending.

It’s a slick gimmick so that the lapdog media can report lies of omission. Congress will say that health care legislation is fully funded by congress. The media will report this as if it were true. Congress will say that they passed Pay-Go legislation that requires congress to fund all legislation. The media will report this as if it were true. It’s a confidence game perpetrated by congress with the media as an accomplice.

In reality if the Pay-Go bill is passed, we will have the same deficit ridden health care legislation as would have occurred under HR3200 and a Pay-Go bill to curb unfunded spending that kicks in right after congress has maxed out the taxpayer's credit card.

Now I’m not saying that a Doctor Fix should not be considered and debated. I’m not saying that Pay-Go isn’t something that should be considered and debated. I’m saying that Democrats are grifting legislation to sell you an unconventional health care mortgage and hiding all the nasty details in the fine print. Those that are perpetrating this are the same that have condemned banks as bastions of greed for the same shenanigans.

Read more about leftist shenanigans:

The report the left was starving for

Your weatherman may believe in the bogeyman, but not climate change

Calling out those that don't get McCain. Not that one, The Other McCain

Obama Has A Dream and Reaganite Republican is having a little fun with them.

GMs best seller is Green Cars…Just Kidding!

Monday, November 16, 2009

Remember when GM went bankrupt?  If you can't remember, Obama and the entire leftist echo chamber blamed SUVs on GM's failures.  It was GM's abstinence in entering the hybrid market that caused their collapse, but not union contracts.  Don't look at the union contracts.  Anything but big labor, because there is nothing to see here.

Thanks to the wonderful strategy of the left, GM's best sellers since bankruptcy are hybrids;  Just kidding!

AP reports:

"GM said its improved performance was fueled by new products including the Chevrolet Camaro muscle car, and the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain midsize crossover vehicles. The company's top sellers through October were the Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck and Impala full-size car."

Good thing we screwed the bondholders, AP goes on:

"The better showing also reflected lower debt payments. The automaker paid $250 million in interest for the latest period, far lower than the $1.1 billion it had to pay in the first quarter, before it went into bankruptcy protection. Before Chapter 11, GM was weighed down by a huge debt of almost $95 billion that has since been cut to $17 billion."

Too bad the government still has its hands in GM's pocket:

"Although GM reported positive cash flow for the third quarter, it does not expect that to continue into the fourth quarter because of the government loan repayments and a $2.8 billion payment to help Delphi Corp., its former parts division, out of bankruptcy protection."

And, union workers are going to love seeing their retirement fund diluted by:

"GM has said it plans to sell stock to the public late next year so taxpayers can recoup at least part of their remaining investment."

Obama brings back terrorism to NYC

I try hard to stay away from the topics of law and foreign policy. A wise man knows his strengths and weaknesses. I’ve been through several law classes in my endless collegiate career and my grades in those classes never revealed legal genius. Despite my better judgment, I’m going to jump right into both subjects in the same post. With all the analysis and discussion over KSM being tried in NYC, I couldn’t let the subject pass without a few sage words. In short, many are missing the most important paradigm being established in the White House’s recent move (you can read the foolishness here and here)

The arguments for a civilian trial has been regurgitating from the left for years. I believe the following letter to the editor in a NJ paper sums up the standard leftist argument:

“Dismiss any of the hogwash people are spewing that bringing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the horrific 9/11 attacks, and four other Guantánamo detainees to trial in New York is foolish. The overdue legal proceedings are an opportunity to showcase America at its best.

Our justice system is built on the bedrocks of due process and rule of law, which sadly have been put aside for terrorist suspects languishing for years in Gitmo. It’s time to bring those principles front and center again.”

Doesn’t it just fill you with warm, fuzzy feelings of America? There is always some meany to cut down to size or some victim to be saved, but this kind of rhetoric from the leftist machinery is a charade for the simple. I have always enjoyed how arguments from the left come rapped in pretty, pink bows, while inside the box is a totally different beast. So let’s open the box and take a look at the monster we have been regifted.

The cold, hard reality is that the upcoming KSM trial will be an exhausting mockery of our constitution and the whole world will be watching it. Are we going to throw out evidence, because KSM was not read Miranda Rights? Are we going to allow evidence not obtained through the specific due processes established over 200 years of case law? What would be the appropriate jury of peers, certainly not 12 US citizens? Was a warrant issued for KSM’s detention? How could a judge even consider hearing the case of a man who was not indicted timely? These are the procedures and rights provided by the constitution in civil trials. Is the left now demanding that these rights be subverted?

The hypocrisy of the left can be exposed in a simple question. Under what circumstances, do we exonerate KSM? If we are going to subvert all the procedural rights granted under the constitution, then you are making a mockery of yourself and the constitution. Many in Obama’s administration have all but assured that these procedural constitutional land mines would not be countenanced by the judge hearing the trial. What we are guaranteed is a show trial, which by definition is both unconstitutional and a horrific example of America at its worst (not best as the author above has opined).

I have no doubt that there are many well intentioned people that buy into the argument presented by the left above. That is why the Obama administration has wrapped the constitution wrecking ball KSM trail in flowery wrapping paper for the masses, a clever ruse indeed. The lapdog media is sure to follow suit. You on the other hand, shouldn’t.

Read More on this Topic @

And So it Goes in Shreveport: "It is a presidential decision—one about the hard, ever-present trade-off between civil liberties and national security."