Watch more videos at the link.
Well, it's about time. The Beltway is waking up to the realities of President Obama's budget plan, which taxes, spends, and borrows as far as the eye can see. The president's vast new commitments in the areas of health care, energy, and education have already spooked small-government Republicans and the foreign investors who help finance America's public debt. Now even some Democrats are beginning to realize that the president's fiscal policies are unsustainable in the long--and maybe medium--run. What took them so long?There's more at the link.
The realities of the modern global economy require government to play a substantial role in ensuring the national and economic security of the people. Americans aren't going to dismantle the welfare state. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are--like the Pentagon--here to stay. The task, then, is to ensure that those programs are sensibly structured and financed, and compatible with robust economic growth. And on this score, Obama's budget is a big, fat failure.
It's true, as he so often reminds us, that Obama inherited a public debt that had doubled to 40 percent of GDP from 20 percent, and an economy in the midst of a deep recession. But Obama proposes to take a bad situation and make it much worse.
It was pretty much inevitable that government would pick up the pieces of the financial crisis and its aftermath. A stimulus bill and some form of bank bailout were going to be facts of life. And tax revenues are plunging thanks to the recession. So the federal government's balance sheet was always going to deteriorate in 2009. The problem is that Obama's policies would move us from deterioration to disaster. The national debt Obama gripes about? His budget will double it to 80 percent of GDP in 2019. Whatever that is, it's not "a new era of responsibility."
The debt burden, moreover, is likely to increase as tax hikes weigh down the economy. Obama's budget brings rates up to Clinton-era levels. But those rates probably will be raised even more to service a growing debt and pay for new spending. And don't forget the added levies that will hit us if Obama has his way. There could be taxes on employer-provided health benefits, the indirect tax of a carbon cap-and-trade scheme, an increase of the payroll-tax cap, and maybe a national Value Added Tax.
See also, John Steele Gordon, "The Economic Contradictions of Obama-ism":
In its proposed budget for fiscal year 2010, the Obama administration has also said it would inaugurate a “cap-and-trade” program to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This program would require all companies to buy at auction the right to emit the gas, which all fossil fuels—oil, gasoline, coal, natural gas, etc.—do, in varying amounts. The total amount of emissions allowed would be strictly limited.Cartoon Credit: Michael Ramirez.
While billed as a program to reduce greenhouse gases, cap-and-trade is, inescapably, a tax on virtually all economic activity, as fossil fuels are an input in nearly all economic outputs. Even a lawyer, after all, has to use electricity to have the lights on in his office and power his computer. And electricity is mostly generated by fossil fuels, especially coal, the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide.
This segment on the O'Reilly Factor was exceptional. O'Reilly managed to eviscerate nearly a dozen "evil" Far Left entities in one segment.Exactly.
Bill O'Reilly ripped apart "evil" Far Left players: NBC, John Podesta, Think Progress, Jeff Zucker, Center for American Progress, General Electric, and Amanda Terkel.
No wonder they hate him.
Bill O'Reilly condemned the "evil" Far Left loons for attacking rape victim Alexa Branchini at a fundraiser this past week in Florida. Elements at NBC News encouraged the loons to protest the Alexa Foundation, an organization that supports rape victims. After the event O'Reilly producer Jesse Watters confronted an over-matched and dishonest Amanda Terkel from Think Progress who led the charge against the Alexa Foundation.
Far Left blogress Amanda Terkel whined in her latest post at Think Progress that she was harassed by Bill O'Reilly producer Jesse Watters.
How pathetic.
If it was a fantasy in Iraq “to use military and civilian power to promote democracy, nurture civil society and rebuild failed states,” it remains a fantasy today. It makes no difference what label one gives to it, and it is certainly not a fantasy that only neoconservatives embrace. If Americans have not learned by now that such efforts are folly, and more important that they would not be worth it even if they turned out to be successful, it may indeed say something about our national character. What I fear is that Obama, who has always been an interventionist with great confidence in this fantasy of what American power can achieve, believes that the “energetic and ambitious response” is what the American public desires and will support for years to come ....Let me start with this last part first: The "Long War" is the war on terror, and to question if it ever made sense "in the first place" is precisely why "paleoconservatives" are rightly marginalized as unpatriotic. When the U.S. was attacked in September 2001, the "paleos" were quick to blame the U.S. for its expansive foreign engagement as triggering a generously deserved "blowback." Virtually no one else in American politics felt the same way, except for a few hare-brained academic radicals, the same folks who would later agitate for a "million Mogadishus" on American forces. When the Iraq war came, Patrick Buchanan made unhinged anti-Jewish attacks on the Bush administration's neoconservatives, asking "whose war" is this? Of course, "losertarians" like Justin Raimondo have made common cause the leading factions of the neo-Stalinist left, and here we have Daniel Larison excoriating the Iraq deployment as "folly," as if U.S. forces under General David Petraeus had not engineered the greatest military/strategic turnaround since World War II. And this is after even some of the most hardline "paleos" have conceded to reality in acknowledging the magnitude of the American victory.
Because Obama is setting far too ambitious goals for Afghanistan with too few resources, while largely neglecting (or exacerbating) more significant problems inside Pakistan that are gradually making our position in Afghanistan untenable, he runs the risk of jeopardizing public support for the much more limited and achievable security goals that are in our interest and the interest of Afghanistan’s neighbors. In the end, he will have the support of the fantasists who led us into Iraq and liberal internationalists who are still invested in the idea of nation-building, and he will have to face the growing numbers of people who have grown weary of a Long War that has ceased to make any sense (if it ever made sense in the first place).
The Competitive Enterprise Institute plans to recognize “Human Achievement Hour” between 8:30pm and 9:30pm on March 28, 2009 to coincide with Earth Hour, a period of time during which governments, individuals, and corporations have agreed to dim or shut off lights in an effort to draw attention to climate change. Anyone not foregoing the use of electricity in that hour is, by default, celebrating the achievements of human beings.Meanwhile, "Do New Bulbs Save Energy if They Don’t Work?" Check the commentary on that at Memeorandum, and get a good laugh at Freddie deBoer's leftist orthodoxy while you're at it. Lights out, eh Freddie?
Krugman has a bit of a reputation for settling scores. "He doesn't suffer fools. He doesn't like hauteur in any shape or form. He doesn't like to be f––ked with," says his friend and colleague Princeton history professor Sean Wilentz.If he doesn't get his way with a bolder direction from Obama, don't be surprised to see even more strident hit pieces against the Democrats' economic program. That's the theme Mike Allen takes up in his piece at The Politico, "Krugman: The Left's New Anti-Obama"(via Memeorandum):
What is striking about this development is that Obama’s most thoughtful critic is taking on the president from the left at a time when, as Jonathan Alter notes, so many others are reflexively arguing that the administration is trying too much too soon.See also my essay, "Democrats to Milk Economic Crisis for Trillions," where I note, "This is why progressive leftists love Paul Krugman. The guy's a Princeton economist and Nobel laureate. More importantly, the man's an "establishment" statist who can use his "credentials" to discredit those who rightly repudiate his socialist program."
Unfortunately, there were more pernicious commemorations this week as well, when demonstrators marched in support of cop-killer Mixon, chanting "police oppression," or some other such baloney.
Melanie Morgan has been posting on this, and she's got an essay up at World Net Daily as well, "You Say You Want a 'Revolootion'?":
Today the city of Oakland, the Bay Area and the entire country say goodbye to four police officers who were murdered by a parolee, no-good street thug. Thousands are expected to attend the funeral of officers killed Saturday: Sgts. Mark Dunakin, 40, of Tracy; Erv Romans, 43, of Danville; and Daniel Sakai, 35, of Castro Valley. Officer John Hege, 41, of Concord, also was shot Saturday and declared brain-dead Sunday. He was taken off life support late Monday.More at the link.
Lovelle Mixon, the cops' killer and a suspected child rapist, is now a popular icon in the sick and twisted minds of those who support Mixon's murderous actions and hate the cops. The other night on TV, a reporter held pictures of Mixon's victims and some maniacs stepped forward and spit on the photographs. It was sickening, but what do you expect from street punks who take no personal responsibility and worship the likes of Che Guevara, a mass murderer, the Black Panthers, and now Mixon, the pervert and cop killer.
Mixon's apologists are proud of themselves and are not only spitting on pictures of the officers who died in the line of duty, but they're marching in the open, videotaping themselves and trying to intimidate folks who don't believe in their radical lunacy.
* Dan Collins, "A Primer on Crapweasels, Punks and Parasites."
* Nice Deb, "Oakland Leftist Moonbat Drones March In Support of Cop Killer."
* Saber Point, "Unbelievable: Blacks Hold Memorial Service for Oakland Cop Killer."
* Kathy Shaidle, "Stay classy! Protesters mourn death of cop-killing child rapist."
* Stilettos in the Sand ..., "Lovelle Mixon - Piece of Sh!t."
* Van Helsing, "Moonbats March in Adoration of Cop Killer."
Check out the entire post, and get busy babe-blogging! Those needing inspiration might want to visit Theo Spark's page, where you'll always find good stuff, albeit NSFW more often than not, so be careful not to go afoul of "The Hustler's" guidelines cited at the roundup.* Ladybloggers can be eligible by posting beefcake;
* Gaybloggers cannot be eligible by posting beefcake, but can qualify by posting Marilyn Monroe or other camp diva photos ...
I'm in no mood to desconstruct this rubbish, although I can hope that Time goes the way of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. It's not like there won't be more Pravda-style mouthpieces available.The '80s spirit endured through the '90s and the 2000s, all the way until the fall of 2008, like an awesome winning streak in Vegas that went on and on and on. American-style capitalism triumphed, and thanks to FedEx and the Web, delayed gratification itself came to seem quaint and unnecessary. So what if every year since the turn of the century the U.S. economy grew more slowly than the global economy? Stuff at Wal-Mart and Costco and money itself stayed supercheap! Even 9/11, which supposedly "changed everything," and the resulting Iraqi debacle came to seem like mere bumps in the road. Even if deep down everyone knew that the spiral of overleveraging and overspending and the prices of stocks and houses were unsustainable, no one wanted to be a buzz kill.
In the Road Runner cartoons, after each fall, the coyote is broken and battered but never dies. America isn't going to expire either. But unlike him, we will be chastened and begin behaving more wisely. For years, enthusiasts for unfettered capitalism have insisted that the withering away of enterprises and entire industries is a healthy and necessary part of a vibrant, self-correcting economic system; now, more than at any time since Joseph Schumpeter popularized the idea of creative destruction in 1942, we must endure the shocking and awesome pain of that metamorphosis. After decades of talking the talk, now we're all obliged to walk the walk.
We cannot just hunker down, cross our fingers, hysterically pinch our pennies, wait for the crises to pass, blame the bankers and then go back to business as usual. All that conventional wisdom about 2008 being a "change" year? We had no idea. Recently Rush Limbaugh appeared on Sean Hannity's Fox News show, panicking not so much about the economy but about how the political winds are blowing as a result. If we finally manage to achieve something like universal health care, Limbaugh warned, it would mean "the end of America as we know it." He's right, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. This is the end of the world as we've known it. But it isn't the end of the world.
I didn't listen to this clip, but I already know I didn't miss anything. Why can't we just figure out a way to get rid of this pig and everybody who listens to him and make the world a better place?Hat Tip: The People's Blog.
There's more at the link.Barack Obama used to get very upset about federal budget deficits. Denouncing an "orgy of spending and enormous deficits," he turned to John McCain during their presidential debates last fall and said, "We have had, over the last eight years, the biggest increases in deficit spending and national debt in our history … Now we have a half-trillion deficit annually…and Sen. McCain voted for four out of five of those George Bush budgets."
That was then. Now, President Obama is asking lawmakers to vote for a budget with a deficit three times the size of the one that so disturbed candidate Obama just a few months ago. And Obama foresees, for years to come, deficits that dwarf those he felt so passionately about way, way back in 2008.
Everywhere you go on Capitol Hill, you hear echoes of the last campaign's spending debate. So on Thursday morning, as the budget fight raged, I asked McCain about the president's seemingly forgotten concern about deficits. McCain doesn't like to rehash the campaign - "The one thing Americans don't like is a sore loser," he told me - but when I read him Obama's quote from the debate, he said, "Well, there are a number of statements that were made by then-candidate Obama which have not translated into his policies."
That's an understatement. The deficit issue could be one of the most, if not the most, consequential of Obama's unkept campaign promises. Just how consequential was made clear last week in a little-noticed conference call featuring Budget Director Peter Orszag. Orszag was trying to explain to reporters how the Obama administration calculated its rather rosy forecasts for economic growth. Near the end of the call, he was asked whether deficits along the lines of those predicted by the Congressional Budget Office are sustainable."
Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann has shown an uncanny knack for infuriating critics with sometimes off-the-wall behavior and comments, all the while advancing her own political career.There's more at the link, but the conclusion to the article, a quote from political scientist Lawrence Jacobs, is worth citing: "The larger party infrastructure is about winning elections, and Michele Bachmann is about saving America ... Michele Bachmann is a microcosm of the tension between the Republican Party that wants to win elections and conservatives who want to fight and win policy battles. That is the core of it."
Minnesota politicos say the Republican congresswoman, having fended off perhaps her toughest challenge last year, could hold on to her seat indefinitely -- thanks in part to the conservative makeup of her district.
But Bachmann, a lightning rod of the left, also may be poised to run for governor or senator, according to the political chatter. Either way, the longer Bachmann stays in office, the more she seems to rile her opponents nationwide with a style some call genuine, but others call clueless.
"For what pisses off the Democrats, it really energizes that conservative base she has," said Lawrence Jacobs, a political professor at the University of Minnesota. "This is not a strategic politician. This is a movement conservative. She's a true believer."
Bachmann, 52, is a born-again Christian -- she has said God called her to go to law school and to run for Congress -- who cut her political teeth in the Minnesota Legislature pushing for an amendment to ban same-sex marriage. She won election to the U.S. Congress in 2006, going against the wave of Republicans forced out of office that year. Since then, she's concentrated more on tax and spending issues. She was in the spotlight this week as she questioned Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke during a hearing about federal intervention in the financial system.
Bachmann told FOXNews.com her ultimate goal in Congress is to overhaul and simplify the tax code, while fighting the efforts of the Obama administration to expand government and increase the tax burden. She said President Obama has gone on a spending "blitzkrieg," and she argued that the recent flap over AIG bonuses is just another sign that Washington needs an exit strategy for its financial intervention.
As for her re-election last year, she said it was just proof of her appeal.
"The fact that people knew that I am who I say I am and I'll vote the way that I vote and do so unapologetically, that's one thing people appreciate," she said. "You know, we're the state that voted in Jesse Ventura."
"The nation needs all the conservative fighters we can get in D.C.," she added.
**********
UPDATE II: Newsbusters defends Bachmann, in "Matthews Calls Bachmann the 'Mata Hari of Minnesota'; Rolling Stone's Taibbi Says 'Guy Huffing Glue' More Sensible" (with video).
The leftosphere smells blood in the wake of Bachmann's denunciation of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's comments suggesting an "openness" to the displacement of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency. Eric Kleefeld's got a post up right now, "Bachmann Blasts Obama's 'Economic Marxism,' Calls For 'Orderly Revolution' To Save Freedom." Here's the key quote from the audio:
At this point the American people - it's like Thomas Jefferson said, a revolution every now and then is a good thing. We are at the point, Sean, of revolution. And by that, what I mean, an orderly revolution - where the people of this country wake up get up and make a decision that this is not going to happen on their watch. It won't be our children and grandchildren that are in debt. It is we who are in debt, we who will be bankrupting this country, inside of ten years, if we don't get a grip. And we can't let the Democrats achieve their ends any longer.Just so folks are clear, notice how Bachmann clarifies her point: "And by that, what I mean, an orderly revolution ..."
Bachmann simply isn't well. Were she not an elected member of the U.S. Congress, she'd probably be shouting conspiracy theories and holding cardboard signs on some sidewalk somewhere. But what I find especially interesting is that her paranoid delusions are so detached from obvious truths. If Bachmann wanted to complain that a 39.6% top rate was the epitome of Marxism, she'd be just another conservative. But she's convinced herself that the Obama administration will "move us to an international currency," due entirely to her breathtaking stupidity.Gird your loins, conservatives!
**********
UPDATE: See also Snooper Report, "I Want To Bear Michele Bachmann's Babies!"
There’s a lot of consequences to our understanding of this situation. The first is, I think, another nail in the coffin in the notion that you can ever have a truly free market when you have a currency. When you have a currency, you’ll have lending, and when you have lending, you’ll have interest, and human nature being what it is, lenders will wring out as much interest as they can when they can, offsetting the balance of our economy ... So we need a strong regulatory apparatus to limit the size of interest rates and the degree to which banks are leveraged, in order to prevent the kind of situation we have now ....Folks can debate this notion of "imaginary money" (isn't all money imaginary, really, since we place our faith in pieces of security-encoded paper, with pictures of our presidents on them, and are comforted in the notion of the "full faith and credit" of the United States government?). It's this meme of the "hollowed out economy" I want to debunk right here. The claim that the U.S. doesn't produce things is a Big Lie of the protectionist left. In thinking about this, I recall a piece some time back in the Wall Street Journal, "Still Built on the Homefront," which includes some correctives statistics:
Secondly, the pro-globalization furor that has gripped our consciousness in recent decades bears a lot of blame ... The idea that globalization is good for the United States, the world and its people is an attitude that people insist on with incredible zeal, and this insistence comes from conservatives and liberals, Democrats and Republicans. But the consequences of globalization for the United States have meant a hollowed out economy, where we produce very little of actual value, and where a huge amount of our growth comes from the accumulation of imaginary money.
Rumors of the death of U.S. manufacturing have been greatly exaggerated. Even as high-profile manufacturers like American auto makers stumble, a remarkable amount of stuff is still made in the U.S., from construction equipment in North Dakota to high-end ranges in Mississippi, artificial knees in Indiana and pipe organs in Ohio.This is obviously not to say the U.S. is problem free, or that there's absolutely no room for regulation in an industrial society. I'm just more fascinated at leftist ecstasy at the notion that they've finaly got their "crisis of capitalism." For more on this, see Cathy Young's piece at the Weekly Standard, "Reveling in the Financial Crisis: Naomi Klein, Rising Star of the Kooky Left."
While manufacturing represents a relatively small part of the U.S. economy - about 17 percent of GDP compared with China's 41 percent - and the number of plants has dwindled, the U.S. is still by far the world's largest manufacturer by raw value of the goods produced, $1.79 trillion worth last year, nearly twice its nearest rival, Japan. China produces more of the things most consumers think of as coming out of factories - cellphones, toys, and coffee makers - but the U.S. continues making goods that tend to be more complex, difficult to transport, and time-sensitive.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
This is the most encouraging speech I've heard from this president. The U.S. will reinforce the deployment with increased troop contingents and the administration will redouble civilian nation-building efforts and regional diplomacy. But the most important point here is the tone: Obama sounds tough. He speaks of the virtues of hard military power, for example, when he says, "There is an uncompromising core of the Taliban. They must be met with force, and they must be defeated." Although the tough talk was leavened with the language of reconciliation and multilateralism, the president's sense of commitment and urgency is a little surprising for one who was the most antiwar candidate among top-tier Democrats in last year's presidential campaign.I haven't had time to absorb the president's decision to double-down on Afghanistan this morning. I am, however, skeptical for two reasons. The first is that pacifying that entire region - the region that defeated the British and the Soviets - is a gargantuan task whose costs do not seem to me outweighed by the obvious security benefits. As long as we can prevent terrorist bases forming that could target the US mainland, I do not see a reason for this kind of human and institutional enmeshment. My fear is that it multiplies our enemies, drags us further into the Pakistan nightmare, and will never Westernize a place like Afghanistan without decades-long imperial engagement. Secondly, I do not believe that Iraq is as stable as some optimists do, and fear that we will not be able to get out as cleanly as the president currently envisages. To be trapped more deeply in both places in a year's time seems Bush-like folly to me.Sullivan has even stronger words in response to David Brooks' neocon encomium to the renewed project in Afghanistan.
I always wondered how Iraq would have progressed with balanced media coverage and fewer outright declarations of failure from the halls of congress. The next few months in Afghanistan could provide the closest thing to an answer we're ever going to get.
Be sure to watch the judges' accolades, and Simon's surprise.
I don't get it. Everyone saying how the GOP's got to get hip with the younger crowd, and as soon as one of the party's rising stars goes out for an evening of entertainment, it's Britney-gate.
The latest “scandal” brewing at far left blogs involves a story that first broke at the liberal Wonkette blog about how House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) allegedly “blew off” Obama’s presser Tuesday night for a Britney Spears concert. Think Progress sums up the thoughts of the far left on this “issue” (via JWF) ....Republicans need to go to more concerts. Screw political correctness. They need to get out and have some fun. Good for Cantor, but you've got to ask yourself, why is Mary Landrieu denying this? I don't think the issue is the missed press conference. It's that officials don't want to be seen as morally depraved. Wow, and we thought social conservatism was dead?
Are these people really that stupid that they don’t understand the difference between the President of the United States trying to sell his econ plan on a late night talk show versus the House Minority Whip attending a concert, allegedly with a few Congressional Democrats (or was it at the request of a fundraiser?), during (the latter part of - see update below) the Obama presser? Apparently so.
Are these fruitcakes also not aware that it’s possible that Cantor recorded or TiVo’d the presser? At last check, only one bright bulb thought to speculate on that possibility, seeing that Cantor talked at length Wednesday morning on NBC about what Obama said at the press conference.
