Beautiful, But - The PRICE!

The gowns are lovely (although that dress that Shasha is wearing is a LITTLE too mature for a 14-year old).

But - almost $20,000 for a dress for a TEEN?  When the economy is tanking fast?

NOT good political thinking.

Unless you're Marie Antoinette.

Government Waste

So many things that governments spend money are not worth it.  But THIS hits a new low.

Starting to Climb Out of the Hole We're In

It's pretty clear that we're in a precarious position - we're fast running out of OPM (Other People's Money), any proposed changes are resisted - with FEROCITY! - and the clanging timpani of the Progressive cymbals is limiting our ability to think clearly.

So, what to do?

We have to look at a multi-pronged attack - fight on many, many different fronts.  In short, we have to form coalitions:

• Those that work to gain back our Constitutional Rights


• Those that dismantle the bureaucracy - getting rid of jobs/divisions/sections that are not the work of the Federal Government, flat-out working to GET RID OF newer departments - Education, Energy, Labor, Agriculture, for example.


• Those that chip away at the entrenched "civil" workers who are, variously - thugs, lazy, self-importantly building empires, unnecessary, and stealing - or, any combination of the above.  This group needs to build a case (criminal) and use that as leverage to force those employees out - WITHOUT their pension rights - they may reclaim the money they PERSONALLY put into the system, if any.


• And, my personal favorite - start a bounty system that allows those with verifiable clean records to be bonded by a COMMERCIAL firm (with NO guarantee from the government - they will personally take any risks) to get rid of a LOT of scammers, frauds, and cheats with "entitlements".  A set percentage of whatever they turn up and can prove.  This could provide employment to a lot of ambitious Millennials, who could both build up their bank accounts, get experience in doing something USEFUL, and gain a lot more skepticism about those who are collecting these taxpayer-provided monies.

I'll admit that the last idea was sparked by this.

Some Thoughts For the Next Continuing Resolution...

It goes without saying that anything the Congress passes, the President and his cronies will work, overtime, to get around.  So, I think they have to build in automatic triggers:

1. Don't just tie Department-specific cuts to the CR's being violated with Executive Action.  Make an AUTOMATIC 5% cut to ALL parts of government, if he uses EITHER bureaucratic regulation OR Executive Action to get more illegals "legalized".


2. Don't fall for a long-term solution - ANY CR has to be short-term.  The new Congress has a right to act without having their hands tied.


3. Go aggressive - use PR about the cost of illegal aliens to the country - in hospital care, incarceration, schools, spread of disease, lost jobs and downward pressure on wages, etc.  Have a daily update, and post it on Youtube, Twitter, and Facebook.  USE that alternative media - it can be an opportunity to influence younger and future voters.


4. Set up a clock of the cost of illegal aliens, just as was done with the National Debt.  The sight of those numbers were influential with some of the public, and have led to more serious discussion of debt issues.  It's a war of attrition, and we need to play full-court press.

If you have read this far, please contact your Congress-critters.

House

Senate

And, while I'm sure it's going to be ignored, perhaps the sheer numbers will begin to align our Dear Leader with reality - The White House.

MORE $$$$$$ Down the Drain?

This is outrageous, and an excellent reason why politicians should have to wear sponsorship patches - like NASCAR drivers - on their clothing.

I'm generally opposed to the whole bailout thing - if any investor screws up, and loses money, well, that's his problem.  The government (and, really, the taxpayers, whose money funds it) should NOT throw money at their feet.

The most galling thing about this is that GOOGLE is a major investor in this (Link to Financial Statements here).  The other major player is NRG (Link to Income Statement here)

Check out the links - do these companies deserve PUBLIC money to increase their profitability?  Especially since the taxpayers will NOT share in the expected return?

The Campaign to Foist Biased "Economics" on the Public

I have to believe that it started with Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics.  If you have NOT read it, I beg you, get a copy.  I absolutely HATED Economics in college, found it boring (it takes a special talent to make money - something we all want - boring).  Sowell's special talent is to make his explanation of the basic mechanisms of economics READABLE, entertaining, and fun.  When you finish this book, you will be well qualified to follow the public debate on taxes, business, government spending, and policy.

There's a new campaign to "explain" economics to the average person - look for distillations of this wretched thinking - which thinks lack of a large social state that controls everything - is the cause of all the ills of the USA.  I'm REAL sure that teachers will be indoctrinated with this at workshops, given curriculum that draws upon it, and encouraged to be "socially responsible", and teach it to their kids (in this context, "teaching" means pushing kids to agree with the outcome, if not the thinking).

I haven't the time to wade through all of Thomas Picketty's book; but I don't have to.  The blogger on An American Manifesto has, and it covers the topic throughly enough for you to understand what's at stake.

So, how DO we solve the debt problem of the USA?

One way to do so is to sell off unnecessary land and buildings.

Some of that land is owned by the states.  And, as this article about SC's state-owned land shows, government may be overleveraged with property.

But, that's just one state.  How much land/property/buildings does the Federal government own, and what does it cost us?  Approximately 1/2 the land in Western states is "owned" by the Federal government (BTW, the land in dispute by Bundy is just such land).

According to Wikipedia,

As of March 2012, out of the 2.27 billion acres in the country, about 28% of the total was owned by the Federal government according to the Interior Department.

Here's a report of SOME of the land managed by the Federal government.  Although it's long, it isn't that difficult to follow.  One of my arguments for reducing the size of federal lands is that they do such a poor job of it.  MANY of the western forest fires begin on Federally-owned land, and is a direct result of policy decisions - AND the continued holding of land in public trust.

My position:  if the property is so extensive that it cannot be maintained without risk of fire, it's too big a holding.

Does that mean that the Feds should look to reduce the size of some of the parks?  Yep.  The public doesn't benefit if the park is in flames; better to have a smaller park, and fewer fires.

Here's a link to a map showing excess federal property (not being used).  See how many are in your state.

BTW, that link was from the White House - NOT a partisan site.

2 problems with holding so much land and property:

1. The land and property costs the taxpayer - if not in use, it deteriorates.  A lot of money has to be spent to patrol it, keep it up, and provide basic maintenance.  See the NPR (Yes, THAT NPR!) report at the link.


2. That land is NOT taxable property - as it would be in private hands.  Each acre/building is removed from the local tax rolls, and that state is poorer for that.

 

 

Welcome to the Re-Boot!

I'm off work, due to snow (it's a laughable amount to a Yankee transplant, but it causes serious problems for a part of the country that doesn't have the materials, equipment, or expertise to deal with it).

 

I've decided to get back in the saddle, and add my voice to those that are passionate about changing our country BACK to:

• Less government - not just BETTER government, but LESS


• Better schools - I'm strongly of the belief that Conservatives need to start writing alternative curriculum, with the state standards in mind (although they need to get embedded in the State Boards of Education, to be able to influence the standards, as well).


• TRUE civility in public life - which ALSO includes the freedom to get into the dirt, if attacked by a pig.  No holding to a higher standard Conservatives, while allowing Leftists to go for the gonads.


• Creation/Expansion of HONEST media.  There needs to be Conservative channels on TV/Cable, as well as Conservative Packages.  Families shouldn't be forced to allow Leftist propaganda into their homes, nor near-porn.  Blocking shouldn't be necessary.


• Fewer, and Lower, taxes.  Less regulation by bureaucrats.  An end to the Imperial Presidency, including trimming the budget.  That would also include a provision that ANY and ALL trips not taken for official business be billed to the President at Air Force 1 rates/military jet rates.  Those official visits may NOT be combined with private business. Exceptions ONLY for immediate family emergencies/funerals.


• For Heaven's sake, it would be cheaper, and possibly safer, to buy all of a small commercial aircraft's seating, and bump passengers!  The movie Air Force 1 was only a movie (although, quite entertaining).


• Change the tax structure.  Change to a flat tax rate, and eliminate the hidden/add-on taxes.  EVERYBODY pays - even those on welfare or unemployment, or on Social Security.  If they ALL suffer when a new tax is brought in, they'll stop voting for them.  Same with Social Security - EVERYBODY pays in, and NO MORE government pensions.  You want to build your retirement, do it at YOUR expense.


• Health Care - EVERYBODY pays a co-pay, even the Medicaid patients.  It doesn't have to be that much ($1-$10), but everybody has to have some skin in the game.  If you are from another country, your country WILL be billed, if you are indigent.  If they refuse to pay, bye-bye.  We don't need more free-loaders - we have enough of them, home-grown.

I'm also going to continue beefing up the part of the site dedicated to Conservative Self-Education, and include links to books (both free, and those that can be gotten on Amazon and elsewhere).

After the Shutdown

I've been too busy with RL to do more than observe the posturing of various politicians over the last few weeks. I have, however, a few remarks to make about this time:

1. Both sides bear some blame.
   
   Various factions of the Republican Party are jockeying for position, leadership, and media attention. As a result, some important points about the future of this country are getting lost. Lets make this less about the individuals, and more about the nation, OK?



2. My major comment about the Democrat party is that they seem to exhibit remarkable cohesion on their party discipline, and, as a result, their message does reach the voter clearly.
   
   Too bad that their message is: We won, so all y'all taxpayers have to cough up as much cash in taxes as we want - forever. If we run out of money to pay off our campaign donors, just suck it up and give us more. NO reduction of spending - no matter how wasteful or ridiculous - can EVER be considered. If you protest, we're gonna talk about starving babies and homeless old people.



3. I'm so excited that average citizens stood up to the Park Service Nazis, and put those Barrycades on the White House sidewalk. That's the sort of American Action I like to see - in this country, the Government doesn't tell law-abiding citizens where they can go.



4. The settlement may be the best we can hope for. We should use the next few months to educate the American public about the dangers of long-term debt. I'm working to put together a Youtube presentation about it - it'll be a first for me.



5. TV is boring. They don't actually analyze any of the issues. They just look for cool soundbites.



6. I haven't read a newspaper in months. Most of my information is gotten from websites (OK, they are sometimes web editions of newspapers, such as the Wall Street Journal or Fortune), TV news, government sites (well, until the shutdown).



7. For those who think the answer to the government running out of money is to raise the debt ceiling:
   
   

   Consider a family who spend without regard to their budget, and eventually ran out of money, and maxed out their credit cards. If they then went to their creditors, and said, "We can't pay our bills. Our solution is for you to raise our credit limit."
   
   How many of you think their creditors would think that a good idea? How many would think their response would be, "Find a way to make do with the money you have coming in. Cut out the luxuries and frills."

   
   

MY Red Line

I found this post on Ace of Spades.  It brings up the idea of a Red Line - the absolutely non-negotiable issues that will lead you to reject a party nominee.

Such as the Amnesty Bill - it WILL eliminate any possibility of keeping a border.  Our borders will turn into a turnstile, manned with guards who produce a "Yes, Master" cringing response when ANYONE - for ANY reason - decides that they chose to walk across the border.

Do I want immigration?  Not particularly.  I'm not against someone coming to this country and ASKING for a chance to become a citizen.  I just see no reason why the American citizens who are unemployed have to watch aliens given preferential treatment to take any available jobs.

But-but-but, you see, there are all these RULES in the bill that keep that from happening....

Crap.  EVERY one of those "rules" can be waived by order of the executive branch - and they already are, in that deportation orders are negated, agents are ordered to let criminals go - ACTUAL criminals, who have committed felonies.

It's a bad bill.  Also, the way the "reconciliation process" is structured, once a bill passes both houses, ANY and ALL changes that a small committee agrees to, even if they have been rejected by one of the chambers, gets into the bill.

UPDATE:  It looks as though the Liars have come up with a "compromise" that includes SOME of the restrictions that the opponents have looked for.

Have you learnt NOTHING, Charlie Browns?  Lucy will pull that football from under you, AGAIN.

I find it hard to believe that the Stupid is so deeply ingrained in some people.

Frankly, the ONLY thing that makes sense is widespread blackmail.  Given the Thug-in-Chief's history, it's a reasonable assumption.

Powered by Qumana

Life After the Election

It's over 1 week into the last term of Obama (if you don't believe that it's possible that he may try a power grab near the end of his term). Many people looked at their paychecks, and said "What!" It's difficult to believe that they, somehow, thought that the tax increases would just pass them by. I have to bite my tongue to keep from saying "I TOLD you so" in a smarmy voice.

It's just the beginning - we'll be facing WAY more in Ooops, Surprise! from the administration. To give the public everything they asked for without raising taxes is simply not possible.

The part of this all that I am beginning to truly fear is this summer. I live in a city, as does most of my family. If sequestration does take effect, expect the "poor" (I put it in quotes to distinguish them from the truly impoverished - most of the former are making more, if you count their access to EBT, heat subsidies, rent subsidies, and all the rest, than the people to work to provide them with the benefits) to express their displeasure in LOUD, DESTRUCTIVE, and FRIGHTENING WAYS.

Post-Election, Post-Holiday Slump

There is a lot on my mind right now:

• Fast & Furious fallout continues. But the media treats the whole thing like a closed issue. Where is Congress on this? Please, PLEASE - write your Congressman, urging them to add their voice to continued hearings - INCLUDING getting access to all of the "privileged" communications.


• Then, right after that, you let them know that SOME of us care that over 300 Mexican nationals, and at least 1 Border Patrol agent, were killed by guns that the Obama administration authorized to sell to "straw purchasers". In fact, they didn't just AUTHORIZE the sale, they PRESSURED gun dealers to allow them.


• The Debt, and the non-existent Budget - 4 years without one - are crushing our economy - at least, that part that remains after the Obamacare juggernaut rolls on by. What is interesting is that the majority of the Tea Party is OLDER Americans - in contrast to the seniors of the AARP - who care more about not leaving debt to the grandchildren than for their own comfort.


• Voter Fraud - it DOES exist, and we need to start doing something about it NOW, before it causes yet another election to be questionable. Begin with:
  
• Voter PHOTO ID. ID must show full face. Obviously, states must provide photo ID for those people who don't drive, or free for those who can't afford it otherwise. The ONLY other ID that may be acceptable, and it will be the STATE'S decision, is fingerprint ID, coupled with indelible ink. If it's good enough for the Middle East, it's good enough here.


• The assault on the Catholic Church must be stopped. Government is forbidden to interfere with the religious practices of citizens, unless they violate the criminal law. Civil law is bound to respect the religious principles of church members. Heck, they even work overtime to make sure that obscure or odd religions can practice freely, even holding that Native Americans can use peyote and other similar substances in the practice of THEIR religion, even though that violates criminal drug laws.

This is just a short list of the things I'm concerned about.

Hey, Dad, I Need Money - But I Don't Want to Tell You What For!

Would you give your kid money, if approached like that?

I wouldn't.

Like most of you, I suspect there would be some hard questions:

• What do you want to do with it?


• When will you pay me back?


• Can't you manage your allowance better?


• Get a job (not YOU, HIM).

So, why should our Washington children (well, they really do, at times, act quite irresponsibly) get a pass on accountability?

How about a NEW RULE?

No Budget, No Money.

There's a Change Coming - But It Won't Be What the Leftists Anticipate

Rand Paul is, to my surprise, shaping up as a reasonable possibility for leadership of the Republican Party. His dad's followers would be wise to consider moving their support to the son.

Here's what he has to say about Harry Reid's latest Power Play.

Back Home Again in SC

I'm finally, somewhat, recovered from my long bus trip (14+ hours). I took a nap yesterday, and went to bed at 8:00, but it worked. I bounced out of bed at my usual 5am-ish time.
The holiday was great - I saw family, spent quality time with the kids and grandkids, and bonded with my brother and sister over the death of my elder brother.
I deliberately didn't bring any schoolwork. This trip was NOT for work - it was for family.
However, that means that I have to collapse all of the necessary work into the remaining 3 days.
That barely leaves me any time to focus on the US Budget Crisis.
For, it IS a crisis, isn't it?
No?
Periodically, the news gets its knickers in a twist, and trots out the usual gloom & doomers who pontificate about how The Heartless Republicans will, gleefully, deprive the Poor Children and Elderly of Desperately Needed Money. Oh, and don't forget Womyn, who, despite out-earning men, will surely starve without the government largess.
Yes, womyn DO out-earn men - with adjustments for Voluntary part-time work, and considering that they constitute a majority of the population, and hold more jobs than men do.
Not what the Femynist Leaders tell you? What can I say - stats don't lie, but Liars DO use stats.
IF the budget is such a crisis, why didn't the Democratic-dominated Congress pass a budget before this? Yes, I know that their "ideal" budget got shot down, but there's a cure for that - it's called COMPROMISE.
I'm sorry - I realize that "that word" is horribly obscene, not to mention a racist code word.
What makes it a racist code word? A Liberal says that, when used by a Conservative, a word is ALWAYS, AUTOMATICALLY a code word.
So, what can we expect? 10% cuts to non-entitlements and defense. In other words, the working population will take a hit. Those collecting government benefits, including Social Security. won't be touched.

What To Do About the Budget Process?

Obama wants to, FIRST, raise taxes.

That's the wrong approach.  Charles Krauthammer agrees with me.

Think about what you do with your own household - when faced with financial reverses, do you immediately start looking for a second job?

No.

Instead, you examine what you are currently spending money on, and look for ways to reduce the expense, or to cut it out altogether.

• You stop the newspaper, and start reading it online at work.


• You cut your cable package to the basic, or eliminate it completely.


• You hold off on new expenses.


• You buy cheaper cuts of meat; generic foods; bulk supplies at discount suppliers.


• You completely stop the frills - eating out, entertainment that costs anything, new clothes or furniture.  You buy, if you must, secondhand, or "shop" the curb deposits.

Only AFTER you have cut the monthly outgo to the bone do you consider adding income.  Your first action is to reduce expenses.

The same procedure should be undertaken by the budget-makers.

That is, if this time they will actually MAKE a budget.  Which they haven't in Obama's entire term.

Welfare Benefits for Illegal Aliens?

YES!

The federal government is ACTIVELY promoting applications from NON-citizens.  I couldn't believe that the American government could be so clueless, until I read this.

In one ad from the government, a Spanish-speaking alien is being pushed to apply for benefits, even though she tells them that she doesn't need them.

Imagine - someone who is self-sufficient is being discouraged from continuing to rely on themselves.

Not only that, but the EBT (the "bank card" that is now used for food stamp eligible purchases) is being promoted as reducing fraud, because - wait for it - the users can withdraw money from it in cash.

Get it?  They no longer have to sell the food stamps - which is illegal.  They can - legally - just ask for cash back at the register.  Which has the same effect - getting cash in their hands.  But, now that same action is LEGAL.

Confused?

So was I.

 

10 Days Out From the Election

...and I'm feeling like I can't wait.  I live with an Obama supporter, and it has been difficult, at times.

I do understand that supporter's feelings - it all started with such optimistic hope - that America would begin to relate to each other, not with automatic suspicion based on race, but on a basis of commonality.  We share so many values; the ideals that separate us are fewer than those separating us from other country's cultures.

The hope was that we could all work together to forge an improved America - inclusive, tolerant, and working for the best in America.

That didn't happen.

Very soon after Obama took office, he met with Congressional leaders of both parties.  When the Republicans questioned the amount of spending in his proposals, he replied,

"I won."

His meaning, that, because of the election, he had total say in any spending or managing of the government, without input from the other side, clearly signaled his approach - his way, or the highway.

Later, he was caught on video explaining his thinking further.  He wanted no criticism from Republicans, or of his plans (video at link):

"But I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess. I don't mind cleaning up after them, but don't do a lot of talking."

So, no, Republicans did not "work with him" - they had no reason to think that they would be listened to, and it was clear that open disrespect and churlishness was the norm for the Obama administration.  That signal came from the top.

Still, in that time period, approximately 65% of the population supported his domestic and foreign initiatives.

So, what happened?

Well,  there were some reality checks.  Obama's bow to the Saudi king was NOT well received - Americans do NOT bow to any foreign king, by long tradition.  The criticism stung Obama, I think.  He made a point of bowing to leaders of even minor countries in the months following that gaffe.  I think he did so, trying to convey the idea that there was nothing special about that bow.

But, there was.  President Adams, in his first visit to King George as the American representative (I believe Sec of State), did, in fact, give courtesy bows to the king.  That was as much an attempt to smooth over relations after the Revolutionary War as setting precedent.  Future representatives did NOT bow.

Obama, and the Mrs., were, in fact, quite rude to the Queen and her ambassadors. Giving them cheap DVDs that wouldn't play on British players, gifts for the princes from the WH gift shop, and an Ipod for the Queen - filled with speeches from Obama - and - in the case of Michelle - touching the Queen - putting her arm around her for pictures.  That's a BIG no-no, and against established protocol.  The Queen took it calmly, creating no fuss.  But, surely, the Protocol office must have emphasized that breach to her - why do it?

In country after country, Obama experienced belligerent rants against America - and did not respond, except to say that he was glad that he, personally, hadn't been disrespected.  No defense of America.  In fact, often, Obama apologized for her actions.

More recently, he failed to respond to Iranian protestors, while encouraging the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Libya, and multiple other Islamic countries.  If he had wanted a takeover of the Middle East by Muslim extremists, he couldn't have acted more obligingly.

By the mid-point of his term, Obama's approval ratings had plunged.  It was a natural result of his own actions, the ridiculously high cost of his programs, and the total failure of them to improve the economy.  People were also quite critical of his foreign policy.

So, his party lost in the elections - big time.  He finally had a Congress and Senate in the hands of the opposing party.

Can you say "we won"?

He did manage to pass legislation.  However, he also took some defeats.  He encountered more criticism and opposition.

The man doesn't take criticism well - he is notoriously thin-skinned.  It brings out the mean and petty in him, and he showed it, on many occasions.

Again, popularity down.

All of this is NOT racism.  It is the norm in American politics.  When you assume that you are above criticism, the American public will remind you - No, you're not.

In the last year, civility has dropped like the sky diver from space.  Both parties have been more mean.  The tone has often been over-the-top nasty.  Even though Obama has many times called for toning it down, his campaign has not hesitated to make the low blow.

• Claiming that Romney was responsible for killing a woman


• Claiming that Romney was a felon who did not pay any taxes


• Claiming that Romney's Bain killed American companies, rather than the truth - they took FAILING companies, and gave them money and a chance to succeed


• Critiquing Ann Romney's wardrobe - which she paid for herself - as too expensive.  Ignoring the fact that Michelle's clothes were comparably priced, and often donated/sold below cost - a little-known perk for First Ladies.


• Making anti-Mormon illusions to Romney's faith.  WHAT a coincidence that major newspapers, national news magazines, and a Broadway musical JUST HAPPENED to hit the headlines with Mormon themes at this time.


• Oh, but religion - OBAMA'S religion - is off-limits.

These are just some random issues that quickly occurred to me.  Other reasons for Obama's fall from grace are:

• Fast & Furious - as in Watergate, it isn't so much the crime, it's the cover-up


• Solyndra and other "Green" firms and the connection with Obama donors


• Foreign donations/violations of election laws in the Obama campaign


• The rising unrest in the world


• The growing debt - AND the extent to which we are indebted to China


• The growing dependency on the government - welfare, food stamps, and other "entitlements" are skyrocketing


• The widely held perception that Obama is "phoning it in" - just going through the motions

I haven't even brought up the Benghazi attack.  The fallout from that may wind up with some less-than-honest Administration officials facing Federal charges after the election.  Unless Obama wins, in which case, it will all be swept under the rug.

NOW, do you understand why Obama's team treats it as CRUCIAL to win?  Their very freedom may be on the line.

Prepare for VERY dirty attacks in the next 10 days.

Let's Have Some FUN With the Video of Obama's Speech!

Here's the link.

I want everyone to visit it, and hit the Thumbs DOWN button.  It has less than 2,000 votes, so, if we do so, then send the link to everyone on our Facebook pages, and our personal email list, we can probably move that ranking to more DISLIKES than LIKES.

Wouldn't THAT be FUN!

I watched it today (I fell asleep waiting for it to come on - well, the convention was boring, but also I had an early - 7:30 am - interview). I noticed several things:

• Obama's got only a few gestures - he twirls his hands around his wrists, he puts his fingers against his thumbs and uses the whole hand as a pointing gesture of emphasis,  sometimes he separates the fingers and thumb, but does the same gesture, and he puts his flat palms about 6-10 inches apart, and does a karate chop (sometimes karate chops with fists).  He uses all of them a bit too much - he's clearly been coached by a "speech doctor".  Who wants to make a drinking game - a shot or chug for each time he does his hand calisthenics?


• I never saw anyone - Black or White - look more Nixonian when he frowns.


• When he's talking about something that is arguable (some would use the word LIE), he closes his mouth and runs his tongue over his teeth before continuing.  An unconscious indication that he knows he is telling an untruth?


• Again, he makes that tongue-moving gesture right after he claims that he cut taxes for small businesses.


• Again, he make that same gesture right after he says, "you elected me to tell you the truth".  I really do think we have our "tell".


• The applause and cheers, through most of the speech, seem tepid and obligatory.  This is not the frenzied, over-the-top enthusiasm of the last campaign.  This is:  I HAVE to cheer for this guy - the alternative is worse (for me).  Looks like the "spontaneous" excitement of a crowd in a Communist state.

How does imposing new regulations MAKE cars go further on a tank of gas?  MAGIC?  Imposing a regulation simply sets the goal - if it's not achievable, it could KILL the auto industry.

"LESS dependent on foreign than anytime in the last 2 decades"?

This from Forbes:

U.S. crude oil consumption is roughly 7 billion barrels per year, of which approximately 4.5 billion barrels is imported.  Based on data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, about 24 trillion cubic feet of natural gas per year would be needed to replace the 4.5 billion barrels per year we import.

The U.S. currently produces just under this amount each year.

From the LA Times:

U.S. net petroleum imports have fallen to about 47% of the nation's consumption, down from a record 60.3% in 2005, Energy Information Administration statistics show. It's been 15 years since the nation's reliance on foreign oil has been this low.

Finally, from FactCheck.org, who analyzed a campaign making the same claim:

Obama "boasts that U.S. dependence on foreign oil has declined to below 50 percent, as a net share of total demand, for the first time in more than a decade. That’s true, and increasing U.S. oil production is a factor (despite Republican criticisms that Obama is anti-drilling). But economists say the chief factor is reduced oil consumption, brought on by the recent economic recession."

I'll have more later - I can only take so much of this bilge at one time.

The DNC Convention

8:47 pm - a Sister is talking about how Obamacare is a GOOD thing.  Sister Simone Campbell, from the Nuns on a Bus tour.

I'm sure that she is a good-hearted person.  I don't believe that she is the last word on how Catholics need to vote.  I don't agree that the Romney/Ryan budget plan is "immoral".

Funny how she worries about the budget, but not about forcing abortion & birth control on people who are morally opposed to it.

It is NOT immoral to plan your spending so you can avoid debt.

8:55 pm - Rahm Emmanuel is being interviewed.  When asked why donors haven't contributed to the Obama campaign, he started stuttering, and made a lame, incoherent answer.

Rahm is implying that Republicans, after the elections when Clinton was president, caved, and the legislation that passed was ALL Clinton's idea.

Huh?

Boy, is he trying to spin.

He says that Obama will have a "broad-stroke, vision" speech, that will totally change this election.  Somehow, the more detailed speeches of Romney and, even more so, Ryan, are NOT visionary.

Rahm is complaining that the Republicans impeached Clinton, voted against the American involvement in Bosnia (he even admits that the vote took place when the troops were "in the air" - so, that would be NOT asking the Congress to declare war?), and "obstructed" Clinton by sending bills to be signed - but were vetoed - that were not acceptable to Clinton.

Rahm is claiming that Obama voted to implement "welfare to work" as a state senator.

I checked, and I thought Rahm was wrong.

President Obama had a convenient change of heart regarding welfare reform when it was time to run for President. In 1998, when he was an Illinois state senator, Obama said:  I was not a huge supporter of the federal plan that was signed in 1996. Having said that, I do think that there is a potential political opportunity that arose out of welfare reform. And that is to desegregate the welfare population—meaning the undeserving poor, black folks in cities, from the working poor—deserving, white, rural as well as suburban.

The same year, he reiterated that “the 1996 legislation I did not entirely agree with and probably would have voted against at the federal level.”

Well, he voted against it, with an executive order this year.

 

Reflections on DNC's 1st Night

Most of the speakers were a relative snooze, with a few exceptions:

• Tammy Duckworth - she's running for Congress, and is a VERY impressive disabled vet.  On the positive side, she should be a strong voice for vets.  On the negative side, she supports the Democratic platform.  Still, a really good speaker, and apparently a remarkable woman.


• Julian Castro - a good choice for the keynote address.  As he has only been the mayor of San Antonio for 3 years, it will be difficult to predict how he will prosper in the future.  He is a good, although not excellent speaker (he is polished in how he presents his lines, waiting effectively for responses, but, in general, he has little to say that isn't a slogan for the Democratic platform).  I heard no new ideas, or fresh strategies.  Oh, and unlike Christie, little of substance.


• Michelle Obama - that dress!  As the fashionable would say, FABULOUS!  For once, she left off the boob belt, and the results were great - AND slimming.  Also, she didn't go for her favorite full skirt, and it really minimized her hips and butt.  This is how a First Lady should dress all the time - not trying to set a style, with over-the-top accessories, but with classic lines that actually work with her figure.  As to her speech - VERY well-delivered.  She talked not only about Barack the man, but supported his policies in a positive way.  Unfortunately, the effect will be lost once people realize that the speech wrapped dogs**t is gold wrapping paper.  The economy still sucks, SS and Medicare are broke, and Obamacare will bankrupt the US into dissolution.

The entire night should be used as an example of how to train the noobs.  Generally, they used their time effectively, and spoke with polish.

The polls should show an upward movement for Obama; in contrast, Romney isn't showing much of a post-convention bounce.

I'm not totally trustful of those polls.  They favor those with land-lines - younger people often don't even own a home phone, instead using their cell for all purposes.  So, it's over-sampling the home-owners.

Republicans are probably NOT answering most polls, judging from the people I've talked to - I know that I refuse to answer polls.  I suspect that this election will be fought right down to the finish line, with the results uncertain until the last.