In Honor of Obama Ending the Iraq War

I created a little artwork.

SSDD

The Economy is Fucked: In Graph Form

We all know the economy is bad, so I'm not shattering any illusions. But the bad news is that its getting worse, especially for those most deeply affected: the unemployed.

This is a graph of the median length of unemployment for those looking for work, and it stands at nearly 5 months. So half of all those looking for jobs have been looking for over 5 months--and they aren't finding anything.

The government likes to release its unemployment statistics, and their current number is 9.3%, which gives a much rosier picture of the situation than truly exists. Like any good statist government, they have to massage the unemployment numbers to make it look like they are doing a good job, even when they aren't.

The real unemployment picture is much darker.

This graph shows the ratio of non-government jobs to the population as a whole, basically how many jobs per capita. This ratio is a true measure of unemployment, as it accounts for those who have given up looking for work or for other reasons aren't counted. You have to go back to before my birth (1985) to see a worse time to find a job in America.

Of course, I don't want to be overly dramatic, there is one sector of our economy that is doing quite well, and appears unfazed by the economic destruction taking place. That sector would be the government.

Despite its crumbling tax base, our government is having no problem steadily adding jobs, and putting an increasing strain on those who can still find work in the private sector. While our economy is taking a hacksaw to jobs, our government is happy to continue piling them on. This would be great, if it wasn't for the fact that the rest of us have to pay for those jobs. These government jobs aren't creating wealth and they aren't helping the recovery. In most cases, government jobs destroy wealth, and that's the last thing we need right now.

But why, you may ask, is the economy struggling so much? What makes today different from yesteryear? That is a question with many answers.

First, too much bureaucracy. Our economy and employment live and die on small businesses. If entrepreneurs have to fill out a thousand documents and apply for a thousand permits before they can open up a new small business, they may not even try. It isn't worth it to start a business, especially in this economic climate. The problem goes much further than this, of course, but fixing this would be a start.

Instead, Obama has added even more complexity and paperwork to the already overburdened businessman with the health care bill. He simply doesn't understand that paperwork can slow economic growth, or even set it backwards.

Second, too much uncertainty. Our government has never taken such direct control of our economy. It would be tolerable if that control was producing results, but it isn't. Instead, our economy must constantly adjust to the trillion dollar whims of Congress or the Fed, and this constant adjustment means no one can possibly plan and invest for the future. Without this investment, our economy stagnates and sheds jobs, waiting out the turbulence so it can start investing again.

With trillions in bailouts saving huge companies from their own mistakes, the laws of economics no longer apply. Companies are waiting for bailouts, or sitting tight and waiting for the economic picture to make sense, but either way they aren't expanding and adding jobs.

Third, too much debt. Our government is running up debt like a psychopathic teenager with a credit card. Our leaders have ignored the consequences of a debt based economy for decades, and now those consequences are upon us. We spend nearly a half a trillion on interest for our national debt every year. We have now taken on the debt of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which totals into the tens of trillions of dollars. That isn't even counting our un-paid-for obligations to Social Security, Medicare, ObamaCare, and, oh yeah, Two Wars.

Business leaders are not blind. They see this massive debt obligation, and they know it means at least one of two things: Much higher taxes, Drastically cut government services, or Both. Either way, this is perhaps the worst time to start a business in the history of this country. Even if you can eke out a living, or if you're lucky a profit, you can be assured that most if not all of your success will be soon taxed away by our spendthrift government.

Congress, seeing the desperate situation and the looming mid-term elections, have passed another round of unemployment benefits. I liken this to attempting to bail out a sinking ship with a coffee mug. You might buy yourself a minute or two, but the ship is still going down.

On the Individual Mandate [Quote]

"If a mandate was the solution, we could try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody buy a house."

-Barack H. Obama

Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Have a Perfect Quarter

Goldman Sachs made money on trades every single day this past quarter.

Goldman posted no less than $25 million in net trading revenue every day during the quarter, according to its 10-Q regulatory filing. For the first time in its history, it reported no net loss on any day.

“This is the first time we have reported zero trading loss days in a quarter,” Samuel Robinson, a Goldman Sachs spokesman, told Bloomberg via e-mail. “We believe it shows the strength of our customer franchise and risk management.”

Goldman Sachs 10-Q filing
The breakdown, on page 121 of the 10-Q, is as follows:

7 days at $25 million to $50 million
50 days at $50 million to $75 million
16 days at $75 million to $100 million
35 days at more than $100 million

Goldman's successes were matched by JPMorgan, who averaged $118 million PER DAY in the previous quarter.

At least we know our government's economic policies are working out for someone. But this kind of success doesn't come free. Since 1990, Goldman Sachs has given over $31 million to political candidates, with Democrats receiving the lion's share of the booty (64%). Obama leads the pack as the largest receiver of Goldman donations, with a little over $1 million.

Talk about a great investment by Goldman: $31 million donated over 20 years, and now they're making well over $31 million per day.

Now you know how to do it. You too can be successful in America, all it takes is $31 million to buy senators, congressmen, and a president or two.

It's really a bargain, when you think about it.

Obama's Debt "Reduction" Panel

I already called BS on this debt commission, and the more I learn about it the more certain I am that I was right.

The commission is scheduled to make its report by Dec. 1, about a month after the midterm elections. It is charged with recommending ways to reduce the deficit in the fiscal year 2015 to the equivalent of 3 percent of the gross domestic product or less — nearly a percentage point smaller than it is now projected to be in that year. The panel is also to recommend long-term changes in taxes and spending for the major entitlement programs — Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — whose expected growth is the biggest factor in the deficit forecasts.

This horseshit commission isn't worth the expensive chairs I'm sure they're sitting in. They aren't even trying to balance the budget or decrease our debt, they just want to grow the debt more slowly. Thanks for nothing assholes.

I'm sure their solution will be to raise taxes. After all, comrade Obama has just saddled the American people with the Health Care bill, which we will be paying for long after we're dead. Fantastic.

Are we cutting Medicare? No, we're expanding it. Are we cutting Social Security? Yeah right, old people vote. Are we cutting the Military? Fat chance, we have to build new bombs to replace our old bombs, oh and we put more people in Afghanistan, oh and that Iraq thing is still going on.

Also, notice the scheduling of the commission's report--AFTER the elections. They know the report will be ugly, because once the rest of America wakes up to the giant pit we've dug for ourselves, they will be just as mad as I am right now.

Fuck it. I'm beginning to believe that the only way out is to spend all our money, then max out all our credit cards, until no one else will lend us money and all our checks start bouncing. Because until then, nothing will change.

Obama Authorizes Murder of US Citizen

The story of Obama's new stance on citizen-terrorists is from last week, but it bears repeating:

Obama Authorizes Murder Of A US Citizen.

No arrest. No charges. No trial. Just execution.

You have been warned.

Federal District Court Finds Warrantless Wiretapping Illegal

Warrantless wiretapping: is it legal? Another judge says no.

Federal District Judge Vaughn Walker yesterday became the third federal judge -- out of three who have considered the question -- to find that Bush's warrantless eavesdropping program was illegal (the other two are District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor and 6th Circuit Appellate Judge Ronald Gilman who, on appeal from Judge Taylor's decision, in dissent reached the merits of that question [unlike the two judges in the majority who reversed the decision on technical "standing" grounds] and adopted Taylor's conclusion that the NSA program was illegal).

That means that all 3 federal judges to consider the question have concluded that Bush's NSA program violated the criminal law (FISA). That law provides that anyone who violates it has committed a felony and shall be subject to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine for each offense.

So someone in the government made illegal wiretaps, and three federal judges have found this activity to be illegal, yet no arrests have been made. I guess because ultimately the responsibility goes back to the President, no one will take action on this clear violation of the law.

...the bulk of Judge Walker's opinion was actually a scathing repudiation of the Obama DOJ. In fact, the opinion spent almost no time addressing the merits of the claim that the NSA program was legal. That's because the Obama DOJ -- exactly like the Bush DOJ in the case before Judge Taylor -- refused to offer legal justifications to the court for this eavesdropping. Instead, the Obama DOJ took the imperial and hubristic position that the court had no right whatsoever to rule on the legality of the program because (a) plaintiffs could not prove they were subjected to the secret eavesdropping (and thus lacked "standing" to sue) and (b) the NSA program was such a vital "state secret" that courts were barred from adjudicating its legality.

Those were the arguments that Judge Walker scathingly rejected.

This used to be a country of laws. Now the government only enforces law when it is convenient.

[via docfaraday]

Obama Knows Best

Americans have rejected the Democrats' health care bill.

The support/opposition split on the health care bill, according to various pollsters:

Rasmussen: 41/56
Newsweek: 40/49
Public Policy Polling: 39/50
Pew: 38/50
Quinnipiac: 35/54
Ipsos/McClatchy: 37/51
NBC/WSJ: 31/46
CNN: 38/58

Not surprisingly, most people support some provisions of health reform, but they seem to want a more piecemeal approach to fixing the system.

Just look at the latest survey from CNN and Opinion Research. When asked if they support "preventing health insurance companies from dropping coverage for people who become seriously ill," 62 percent say yes. When asked whether they support "requiring all large and midsized businesses to provide health insurance for their employees," 72 percent say yes. And when asked if they support "preventing health insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions," 58 percent say yes.

On the other hand, asked what Congress should do on health care -- pass the current bill, start work on an entirely new bill, or stop working on the issue altogether -- a huge majority opposes the Democratic proposal now on the table. Just 25 percent of those surveyed want to see the bill passed. Forty-eight percent want Congress to start over, and 25 percent want lawmakers to stop working on health care altogether. Put those last two together, and an overwhelming majority of 73 percent do not want Congress to pass the current bill.

Obama ignores the Republican call to pare down the bill, even though this decision pits him against a huge majority of Americans. As is typical with the nanny staters, they believe they know what citizens want better than the citizens themselves.

[via Instapundit]

This Sounds Awfully Familiar

Obama signs the federal debt commission into existence today with an executive order. I'm not sure why, because Ronald Reagan did the same thing 28 years ago with the Grace Commission, and Congress has yet to take any of the commission's debt reducing suggestions.

I am confident that the latest debt commission will be just as successful as the last one.

Obama vs. Pelosi

The battle is heating up.

Pelosi is bitching about how Obama is favoring the Senate, while Obama wants Pelosi to focus legislation that actually has a chance of passing.

Pelosi blames Obama for not pushing hard enough once House bills reach the Senate. I blame Pelosi for pushing bad bills to begin with.

Ginsberg and Stevens Are Out

Obama could get a couple more justices in there, but they won't tip the balance back to the Left.

Court watchers believe two of the more liberal members of the court, justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, could decide to step aside for reasons of age and health. That would give the president his second and third chance to shape his legacy on the Supreme Court.

Last week, when Obama took the nearly unprecedented step of criticizing the court's opinion in a major campaign finance case during his State of the Union speech, some believed he was showcasing for the American people that presidential elections, and Supreme Court nominations count.

I anticipate months of vigorous debate and exceedingly uninteresting news stories about the Supreme Court nominees.

Obama Trades Licks with the GOP

Obama met with the Republican caucus on Friday in Baltimore. Skip the speech and read the Q & A session.

This Could Get Interesting

House Republicans are meeting with President Obama today to rip him the proverbial "new one," and it will all be televised, live.

BALTIMORE — It’s the rumble in Baltimore as House Republicans take on President Obama today.

Gathered for a retreat in the Renaissance Hotel overlooking the blue-collar city’s famous harbor and historic Fort McHenry, members of the conservative Republican House Conference say they are itching to quiz the president and present their policy ideas rather than listen to another lofty presidential address.

“House Republicans welcome any opportunity to present our better solutions,” said Representative Mike Pence of Indiana, the No. 3 House Republican and the organizer of the House retreat.

We'll see if that big talk means big ideas from House Republicans. I know there are some good ideas out there. Are you there Ron Paul?

Obama Inspires Hope, Skepticism with State of the Union Address

Well, it wasn't an apology, but more of a mea culpa, concerning the bank bailout. I'll take it, I guess.

As for the rest of the speech, it was very well written and delivered, no surprise there. Obama attempted to distance himself from the bank bailouts while simultaneously saying they saved us from the crisis--nice move. However, we're still supporting a broken banking system, so I'm still not a fan. Nevertheless, he showed some balls, calling out Congress on its numerous failures. That I liked.

He also plans to give tax cuts and loan incentives to businesses, both small and large, to increase job creation. Sounds like something out of Reagan's playbook, which isn't surprising considering the similar hands the two were dealt.

He calls for a financial reform bill, and says he won't sign it until it's right. We'll see how that goes. As we're still relying on the banks that got us into this mess, I'm not terribly optimistic. He does have a plan to place fees on the big banks to help out smaller ones--not sure how I feel about this, but it could facilitate the changing of the financial guard.

For energy, he called for new nuclear plants, which is a no-brainer. He also called for more investment in the standard green energy BS, biofuels, etc. So he still wants a comprehensive energy bill, but I don't think Congress can produce anything I'll like.

His executive order to start a commission to bring down the deficit sounded great, but exempted defense and entitlements, i.e. 3/4 of our budget, at least. Considering defense and entitlements are creating the deficit, this is a show and little more. If it's the beginning of a move towards a balanced budget, I'll be happy, but again, we'll see.

The part I liked the most was when he called out Republican leadership for simply saying no to everything, how that's not leadership. It's true, but at the same time I'm sure Nancy Pelosi doesn't exactly have an open door policy for every Republican house member with a workable idea. Either way, he called on both parties to quit quibbling and figure it out.

It was a good speech, probably the best State of the Union I've seen, but as always with State of the Union speeches, I'll believe it when I see it.

Rove Supports Obama

Karl Rove writes in support of Obama's Afghanistan surge. In other news, a freak blizzard in hell has caused numerous delays and power outages.

President Barack Obama's speech on Tuesday night deserves to be cheered. Over the objections of his vice president and despite opposition from his political base, the president is sending an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan to fight terrorists.

...

Only a failure of presidential nerve or an unwillingness to make further midcourse corrections as the need arises will keep Mr. Obama from achieving the goals he has spelled out.

Victory can still be won. It won't be quick and it won't be easy, and it will take active leadership from Mr. Obama. But it is now within his grasp.

The Real Cost of Obamacare

The Democratic health care bill now winding its way through Congress is purported to cost a mere $1 trillion, but the true cost is hidden by legislative gimmicks.

One gimmick makes the new entitlement spending appear smaller by not opening the spigot until late in the official 10-year budget window (2010–2019). Correcting for that gimmick in the Senate version, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) estimates, “When all this new spending occurs” — i.e., from 2014 through 2023 — “this bill will cost $2.5 trillion over that ten-year period.”

Another gimmick pushes much of the legislation’s costs off the federal budget and onto the private sector by requiring individuals and employers to purchase health insurance. When the bills force somebody to pay $10,000 to the government, the Congressional Budget Office treats that as a tax. When the government then hands that $10,000 to private insurers, the CBO counts that as government spending. But when the bills achieve the exact same outcome by forcing somebody to pay $10,000 directly to a private insurance company, it appears nowhere in the official CBO cost estimates — neither as federal revenues nor federal spending. That’s a sharp departure from how the CBO treated similar mandates in the Clinton health plan. And it hides maybe 60 percent of the legislation’s total costs. When I correct for that gimmick, it brings total costs to roughly $2.5 trillion (i.e., $1 trillion/0.4).

When we correct for both gimmicks, counting both on- and off-budget costs over the first 10 years of implementation, the total cost of ObamaCare reaches — I’m so sorry about this — $6.25 trillion. That’s not a precise estimate. It’s just far closer to the truth than President Obama and congressional Democrats want the debate to be.

Six Point Two Five trillion over ten years. And here I thought we were trying to reduce costs.

[Cato via Glas]

Hope vs. Reality: The Economic Stimulus [UPDATE]

The graph says it all. Recovery Plan Fail. [via Innocent Bystanders]

Obama's Nobel: The Real Story

This makes way more sense.

Obama Redefines the word 'Tax'

Obama and Stephanopoulus disagree over what a 'tax' is.

"Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don't. How is that not a tax?" the host asked.

Obama responded: " No, but -- but, George, you -- you can't just make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase."

Nice try, but socialized medicine will require higher taxes, no matter well you can spin.