By Steve Butler

BACK in the days when leadership existed, Franklin Delano Roosevelt got on the radio and announced that the government would stand behind any bank savings deposit up to $10,000. It was a complete surprise to everyone including Congress, but it stopped the run on the banks, and blind-sided legislators got on board the next day to create and pass a bill without delay.

This time around, we have an economic condition set in motion by an unfettered (unregulated) greater fools theory that captured the imagination of our financial system’s self-styled masters of the universe. To understand in simple terms what has happened, we can picture the horse racing industry where breeders and owners of horses invest money and hope to get some back if their horse wins or has some value for breeding purposes.

An acquaintance of mine back East sold a winning horse to a Saudi for $125 million which covered a lifetime of horse-breeding losses. Extreme perhaps, but at least this was real money based on a real product

(Read More)

“The Barack Obama campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading TV ad during the presidential campaign,” News 4 reported.

“They want to remind voters that Obama is a Christian who wants to cut taxes for those making less than $250,000 a year,” said KMOV reporter John Mills.

The Barack Obama Truth Squad is an initiative based on pure unadulterated Marxism, a Marxism where the end justifies the means. Through the Marxist dialectic, Marxists are taught to lie and to accuse their detractors of lying.

Let it be remembered that on Saturday, Sept. 27, 2008, Barack Hussein Obama became the only truth.

And let it be remembered that also on Saturday, Sept. 27, 2008, Missouri Governor Matt Blunt called BS! on this attempt to silence free speech:

St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.

What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.

This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights. The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate, to suppress support and donations to conservative organizations targeted by this anti-civil rights, to strangle criticism of Mr. Obama, to suppress ads about his support of higher taxes, and to choke out criticism on television, radio, the Internet, blogs, e-mail and daily conversation about the election.

Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts - not a free society.

Now, here is a statement from Joyce:

As a citizen, I believe that elections should be about issues. I also have enormous respect for our First Amendment and freedom of speech. My sole purpose in participating in this initiative is about getting truthful information to the voters. This has never been or never will be about prosecuting people.

Clearly there are those who are attempting to twist the purpose of this initiative for their own benefit. This attack is a great example of how the truth is distorted in campaigns and what we’re trying to stand up against. [emphasis added]

Joyce and liberal bloggers are spinning this as an attempt by conservatives to squelch the free speech rights of St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer. However, these people are all in elected public positions in the local law enforcement and judicial systems and as such are not ordinary citizens. By virtue of their positions they carry the color of authority as well as a duty to pursue their official tasks in an unbiased manner.

IF these people were committing to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading TV ad during the presidential campaign REGARDLESS of the target of the ad, they would be well within their rights. But to openly and publicly state that they will pursue enforcement of the law on a partisan basis is a gross violation of the law and I CALL BS! on them!

Seeing the limitations of partisan politics ever more clearly election after election, and ESPECIALLY CLEARLY this internet-enhanced election cycle, I must admit that the rancor, the criticism, the bad decisions for partisan gain and the disunity flowing from these efforts is saddening and disheartening.

Having experienced the unity and positive energy of the world’s only World Community, it is interesting to compare its administration with the current Obama-McCain show.

Whereas both the candidates declare (or make efforts to HIDE) the ‘planks’ of their platform, the Community of Light elects representatives elect their administrative servants from the whole pool of adults, without nomination and without a ‘platform’, recalling some of the guidelines that serve them well:

Beware, beware lest the foul odor of the parties and peoples of foreign lands in the West, and their pernicious methods, such as intrigues, party politics and propaganda — practices which are abhorrent even in name — should ever reach the … community, exert any influence whatsoever upon the friends, and thus bring all spirituality to naught. The friends should, through their devotion, love, loyalty and altruism, abolish these evil practices, not imitate them. It is only after the friends completely ignore and sanctify themselves from these evils, that the spirit of God can penetrate and operate in the body of humanity, and in the… community.

If we but turn our gaze to the high qualifications of the members of (administrative institutions), “…we are filled with feelings of unworthiness and dismay, and would feel truly disheartened but for the comforting thought that if we rise to play nobly our part every deficiency in our lives will be more than compensated by the all-conquering spirit of His grace and power. Hence it is incumbent upon the chosen delegates to consider without the least trace of passion and prejudice, and irrespective of any material consideration, the names of only those who can best combine the necessary qualities of unquestioned loyalty, of selfless devotion, of a well-trained mind, of recognized ability and mature experience”.

And in a different consideration:

“…reference to personalities before the election would give rise to misunderstanding and differences. What the friends should do is to get thoroughly acquainted with one another, to exchange views, to mix freely and discuss among themselves the requirements and qualifications for such a membership without reference or application, however indirect, to particular individuals. We should refrain from influencing the opinion of others, of canvassing for any particular individual, but should stress the necessity of getting fully acquainted with the qualifications of membership referred to in our Beloved’s Tablets and of learning more about one another through direct, personal experience rather than through the reports and opinions of our friends.

There are more explicit guidelines, but if you take just a moment to visualize, in YOUR mind’s eye, people all around the world, today, gathering together courteously and quietly and prayerfully to elect governments that are based practically and wholly on justice, courtesy, compassion, rational consideration, personal integrity and a deep, abiding respect for all humans IN the administrative process and IN the community so administered, you’ll get just a taste of what is so sadly MISSING in America’s political system today.

Others are starting to see, too…

The questions, their answers, and my snarky comments:

Q. What policies will you support to ensure that America remains the world leader in innovation?

Obama: My administration will increase funding for basic research in physical and life sciences, mathematics, and engineering at a rate that would double basic research budgets over the next decade. We will increase research grants for early career researchers to keep young scientists entering these fields. We will increase support for high-risk, high-payoff research portfolios at our science agencies. And we will invest in the breakthrough research we need to meet our energy challenges and to transform our defense programs.

INCREASE FUNDING DOUBLE BASIC RESEARCH BUDGETS INCREASE RESEARCH GRANTS INCREASE SUPPORT INVEST IN THE BREAKTHROUGH RESEARCH - Wait, let me guess…he’ll do all this without raising taxes, right? NOT!! “We will increase support for high-risk, high-payoff research portfolios at our science agencies.” As if! The Dems would be too afraid of ending up with egg on their faces if those “high risks” don’t pan out.

McCain: My policies will provide broad pools of capital, low taxes and incentives for research in America, a commitment to a skilled and educated workforce, and a dedication to opening markets around the globe. I am committed to streamlining burdensome regulations and effectively protecting American intellectual property in the United States and around the globe.

Broad pools of capital? From where? Do I hear higher taxes under McCain, too? Low taxes, incentives for research, streamlining burdensome regulations - those are basically sound ways of accomplishing goals without putting the cost on the backs of the taxpayers.

What is your position on the following measures that have been proposed to address global climate change — a cap-and-trade system, a carbon tax, increased fuel-economy standards, or research?

Obama: . . . Specifically, I will implement a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. I will start reducing emissions immediately by establishing strong annual reduction targets with an intermediate goal of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

. . . I will also create a Technology Transfer Program dedicated to exporting climate-friendly technologies, including green buildings, clean coal and advanced automobiles, to developing countries to help them combat climate change.

McCain: I will institute a new cap-and-trade system that over time will change the dynamic of our energy economy. By the year 2012, we will seek a return to 2005 levels of emissions, by 2020, a return to 1990 levels, and so on until we have achieved at least a reduction of 60% below 1990 levels by the year 2050.

. . . I am also committed to investing $2 billion every year for the next 15 years on clean coal technologies, to unlock the potential of America’s oldest and most abundant resource.

And we will issue a Clean Car Challenge to automakers, in the form of a tax credit to the American people, for every automaker who can sell a zero-emission vehicle.

We will commit up to a $5,000 tax credit to each and every customer who buys that car.

Well, no matter which candidate you favor they both want to cripple the American economy with a cap-and-trade system that will accomplish nothing (unless someone can explain to me how shuffling carbon credits around will reduce overall emissions). That said, IF there is an international market for climate-friendly technologies then Obama’s proposed Technology Transfer Program has possibilities. McCain’s tax credits for zero-emission vehicles also holds promise, but that $2 billion a year for 15 years for clean coal research is just a another tax hike that will effectively offset those tax credits. A disguised form of wealth redistribution. I thought that was the exclusive ground of the Democrats, but I guess I was wrong.

In an era of constant and rapid international travel, what steps should the United States take to protect our population from global pandemics or deliberate biological attacks?

Obama: Overseas, I will launch a Shared Security Partnership that invests $5 billion over three years to forge an international intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure to take down terrorist networks. I will also strengthen U.S. intelligence collection overseas to identify and interdict would-be bioterrorists before they strike and expand the U.S. government’s bioforensics program for tracking the source of any biological weapon.

. . . I will invest in new vaccines and technology to detect attacks and to trace them to their origin, so that we can react in a timely fashion. . . . Because of the unpredictability of the mode of biological attack, I will stress the need for broad-gauged vaccines and drugs and for more agile and responsive drug development and production systems.

$5 BILLION OVER THREE YEARS INVEST IN NEW VACCINES

Just trying to keep up with the tax hikes. I like the idea of strengthening U.S. intelligence collection overseas as well as improving our responsive capabilities.

McCain: First, we must limit the spread of disease to the United States. Second, we must limit the spread of disease within the United States. . . . Third, we must mitigate symptoms of the disease and minimize suffering and death with effective treatments and countermeasures. . . . Similar response capabilities would be necessary if a deliberate biological attack were to occur.

. . . We must fund research and development of new medicines and vaccines and make sure that we have adequate stockpiles of countermeasures and a robust and well-thought-out distribution plan in case crisis strikes.

FUND RESEARCH

Is funding research really the best answer? How about allowing the free market to work with some other kind of incentive, such as tax breaks? Historically, private companies give us much more bang for our buck than any government program.

What is the right policy balance between the benefits of genetic advances and their potential risks?

Obama: I have been a longtime supporter of the recently passed Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act.

In addition, concerned about the premature introduction of genetic testing into the public domain without appropriate oversight, I introduced the Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2007, aimed at ensuring the safety and accuracy of such testing.

Advances in the genetic engineering of plants have provided enormous benefits to American farmers. I believe we can continue to modify plants safely with new genetic methods, abetted by stringent tests for environmental and health effects and by stronger regulatory oversight guided by the best available scientific advice.

Obama may have been on board with the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act from the beginning, but he wasn’t there for the vote that passed it. In fairness neither was McCain, and since it passed 95-0 there wasn’t really the need for two more votes.

The Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2007 has been stuck in committee since its introduction in March 2007.

McCain: As genetic research becomes increasingly deployed, the need to ensure privacy of human records will become all the more essential, as will be the rigor to ensure there is no genetic discrimination. The scientific potential and ethical issues associated with genetics are important and complex enough that I will seek out the wise counsel of experts about how to ensure that we are best serving the needs of the American people.

Genetic research can already provide real assistance for those in some of the poorest regions who lack access to adequate food. . . . Our aid programs should help focus on research into higher-yielding crops and make investments in infrastructure that will help farmers increase their yields and deliver their products to market.

OUR AID PROGRAMS

When are we going to stop subsidizing farming? The lower food prices on depression-era crops are offset by the higher prices on other produce, thus any savings to the consumer is a wash. Not to mention that those depression-era crops - wheat, sugar, corn, etc. - are also those often associated with obesity in the poor.

And stating what a good President does anyway - consult experts - is a pretty non-responsive response.

So there you have it, the candidates on science and me on their responses. Make of it what you will.

California’s record-breaking tardiness in passing a budget isn’t just a new record, it has real consequences

California has broken its own dubious record for tardiness in passing a budget - 74 days and counting. Much has been written about this impasse, its causes and consequences, and most of it is more eloquent than I can manage.

Here, therefore, are picks from other sources outlining the debacle that is the California budget, with my comments:

As lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger continue to haggle over how to plug a $15 billion gap in the budget, health care clinics have reduced their staffs, community college students are being denied tuition grants, and art classes at one high school have moved to the lawn because the school district cannot afford new portable classrooms…Governor Schwarzenegger has already ordered a temporary pay cut, to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 an hour, for roughly 176,000 state workers and has laid off nearly 10,000 others…
…There are essentially three budget plans in play, with the two sides in the Democratic-controlled Legislature divided by partisan differences, and the Republican governor more or less splitting that difference. Democratic lawmakers and Mr. Schwarzenegger want to raise the state sales tax, currently 7.25 cents, by a penny for three years. But in Year 4 the governor would lower the tax by a quarter of a cent below its current level, a proposal the Democrats oppose.

Republican lawmakers reject any tax increases. They want to cut roughly $10 billion in spending beyond various reductions agreed to earlier this year, and to borrow nearly $2 billion from projected lottery revenue. Democratic leaders and Mr. Schwarzenegger oppose tapping the lottery, whose proceeds benefit education, and would also like to see fewer cuts than the Republicans want, though seeing a need for billions more to be pared.

Instead of cutting the wages of state workers - a move that many, including me, suspect is illegal - how about cutting off the pay of the state legislators? (I’d include the Governor, but he already refuses pay.) Nothing like a hit in the wallet to get negotiations moving. And apparently the Governor agrees with me (emphasis added):

An impatient Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger ripped Democratic and Republican lawmakers today for collecting per diem checks, vacationing at political conventions and refusing to leave their “ideological corners” as California’s budget stalemate is causing “severe consequences” for education, health and public safety.

“I think it is very important for the California people to know that while the state is 2 1/2 months late on a budget, and while there are severe consequences…to education and health care and hospitals and law enforcement and firefighting, there are absolutely no consequences for the legislators,” Schwarzenegger said in an appearance at Marshall Medical Center in Placerville. “Absolutely none.”
…
The legislative session ended Sunday. But members of the state Senate — who normally would have left the Capitol for the year — are continuing to accrue their $170-a-day, tax free per diem because of the longest California budget impasse in history.

Sen. President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, has ordered his house to meet each day this week while waiting for Republicans to put their budget counterproposal into a bill that can be voted on.

Republicans say that won’t happen until Friday. Meanwhile, the Senate waits. Tuesday’s session lasted about a half hour.

Perata has defended his decision to hold sessions even if there’s nothing to vote on, saying, “(The media) would hammer us if we were not (here) doing what we’re suppose to be doing.”
…
“We have seen already the Democrats introduce their budget. They’re asking for a tax increase of $10 billion. That was voted down,” Schwarzenegger said. “Then you have the Republicans who are now doing their budget even though it is 2 1/2 months late. And it relies on borrowing. That won’t work and it will be voted down.”

The governor said the state is still $9 billion in debt from borrowing its way out of a budget deficit in 2003 and “they (GOP lawmakers) want to go again and borrow more money.

“It’s like a family that has overextended itself on credit cards and then gets another credit card to pay off more credit cards,” he said.

Ah, so Perata puts image over substance. Braaavo!

Both parties need to realize that when you’re overextended you DON’T borrow, you DON’T bite the hand that feeds you (the taxpayers) - you suck it up and make painful cuts in your spending.

The Wall Street Journal notes how higher taxes are not the answer:

(more…)

Presidential candidate Barack Obama is touting a health care reform plan that sounds very familiar. It includes:

The 2006 Massachusetts health care reform plan “expanded the state’s Medicaid program, offered qualified residents financial assistance to purchase insurance, created a new state agency to connect residents with affordable plans and - perhaps the most talked-about change - required all residents with access to affordable coverage to enroll in a plan or incur financial penalties. For employers with more than 10 employees, the law requires that those who do not make a “fair and reasonable” contribution toward worker health coverage, pay up to $295 per employee per year into a state fund.”

And how is that plan working out for Massachusetts?

Well, strictly in terms of coercing encouraging people to get insurance it has been a great success.

Among adults with incomes below 300 percent of the poverty level, the study found uninsurance dropped by almost 11 percentage points, and among adults at less than 100 percent of the poverty level - those eligible for fully subsidized coverage - uninsurance rates dropped by more than two-thirds.

That’s pretty impressive. At least until you compare it to the problems the plan is facing:

And the future is looking a little scary:

The only REAL solution to the health care crisis is to allow the free market to work freely.

Get employers out of the equation - there is NO reason why we should be limited to whatever few (often inferior) healthcare plans are offered by our employers. There is NO reason why our employers should be held responsible for our health insurance (think of it this way…would it make sense for your only affordable option for car insurance to be whatever two or three plans your employer signs up for? Giving you NO choices regarding the amount of your deductible, the amount of coverage, or the areas of coverage, and therefore NO choice regarding the amount of the premium or the reputation of the insurance company?)

Under the current system doctors and patients alike are held hostage by the insurance company, who really calls all the shots. Under universal health care doctors and patients are held hostage by the government, who would really call all the shots. Only in a truly free relationship, where patients can choose their own medical plans, their own doctors, their own course of care, and how much they are willing to pay for it, and where doctors make their medical choices based on what is best for their patients, where they can choose how many patients to care for and what to charge for their services, can the market truly work as it’s supposed to.

Certainly there should be regulations to protect patients from unscrupulous doctors, standards for medical care, and safety nets for the needy. But those objectives can be achieved without creating another government behemoth that will inevitably go the same route as Social Security and Medicare into an unaffordable and unwieldy money pit that is the epitome of inefficiency.

From the IBD article:

The Obamas discourage work in the private sector. “Don’t go into corporate America,” Michelle has exhorted youth. “Work for the community. Be social workers.” Shun the “money culture,” Barack added. “Individual salvation depends on collective salvation.”

“If you commit to serving your community,” he pledged in his Denver acceptance speech, “we will make sure you can afford a college education.” So, go through government to go to college, and then go back into government.

While it may be laudable to seek to help the whole as well as the individual, yet the individual only has direct sovereign CONTROL over The Individual! Hence America’s historic and current strength: The individual ‘pursuit of happiness’, ‘pursuit of excellence’!

The emboldened bit up there, “Individual salvation depends on collective salvation,” is pure Marxism, and as such we here must call “BS!” on it. More than 100 years of collective attempts to collectively conjure social freedom has resulted in horrendous injustices on a massive scale approaching 100 MILLION deaths in the previous century!

No, Obama, our collective salvation depends upon INDIVIDUALS CHOOSING to do their individual best, for the greater good, with justice and freedom for all.

Grumpy