The Obama Birth Certificate

Attention conspiracy theorists: President Obama was born in Hawaii, please give that one up. As Andrew McCarthy points out in National Review, the controversy surrounding Obama's birth certificate should be about his honesty (or lack thereof) about his past.

During the campaign, Obama lacked experience, so he ran on a compelling story, as detailed in two auto-biographies. Much of this life story is a complete fabrication, as McCarthy details. McCarthy hypothesizes that Obama doesn't want the birth certificate released because it will reveal additional details about the Muslim heritage he alternately embraces and shuns whenever it suits him. The media has been very interested in Sarah Palin rumors, but hasn't bothered to examine the details of Obama's past:

Astonishingly, reporters see their job not as reporting Obama news but as debunking Obama news, or flat-out suppressing it. How many Americans know, for example, that as a sitting U.S. senator in 2006, Obama interfered in a Kenyan election, publicly ripping the incumbent government (a U.S. ally) for corruption while he was its guest and barnstorming with his preferred candidate: a Marxist now known to have made a secret agreement with Islamists to convert Kenya to sharia law, and whose supporters, upon losing the election, committed murder and mayhem, displacing thousands of Kenyans and plunging their country into utter chaos?

Obama has not been honest about his past and it's worth finding out the truth.

Tea Party

This woman has no idea why people would be upset about out of control, unprecedented in modern times government spending. "Don't you know Illinois is getting stimulus money?" She views these people with absolute disgust - a bunch of nuts, mind-numbed robots doing the bidding of Fox News - people too stupid to understand the greatness of Obama.

The Onion

"Media Having Trouble Finding Right Angle on Obama Double-Homicide"

Great article from the Onion - I hate that Jon Meacham.

Freedom of Choice Act

On the campaign trail Obama said "the first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." This act would override and eliminate any state restrictions on abortion (such as partial birth abortion and parental consent) and would also remove protections for physicians that don't want to perform abortions and force all hospitals to perform abortions. 

The Catholic church says it may close all of its 624 U.S. hospitals if this legislation passes. Bishop Thomas Paprocki said that if FOCA becomes law, "It would not be sufficient to withdraw our sponsorship or to sell them to someone who would perform abortions. That would be a morally unacceptable cooperation in evil."

The Catholic church operates 13% of the country's 5,000 hospitals and employs 600,000 people. There's also the possibility the church would engage in civil disobedience. Better yet, let's pray that Congress stands up the president. Is there any doubt that Obama is the most virulently pro-abortion president we've ever seen?

Don't Worry, the Financial Wizards are in Charge

This quote today from President Obama made me wistful for a Mitt Romney presidency: "On the other hand, what you're now seeing is profit and earning ratios are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long-term perspective on it." 

Profit and earning ratios? Oh my. How many points did the Dow drop on that one? Perhaps Obama was thinking of P/E ratios - which stands for price/earnings. 

Here's how the AP reported the gaffe: "Trying to pump up the nation's confidence, President Barack Obama said Tuesday that Wall Street has been hammered so hard that 'buying stocks is a potentially good deal'..." Nothing to see here folks. He's a genius, trust us.

Payday for Hamas

Hillary Clinton on the Israel - Palestinian conflict: "We happen to believe that moving toward a two-state solution is in Israel's best interests." Ah, putting it only as a liberal can. "We know what is best for Israel - so they'd better fall in line and follow our lead." Shouldn't we consider what Israel thinks is in its best interest? Perhaps the people who are actually subject to the rocket attacks, suicide bombings, and threats of complete annihilation from its neighbors should decide instead. 

Meanwhile, Obama has our printing press working overtime in order to send $900 million in aid to Hamas, who last I checked, is a terrorist organization. The administration is trying to reassure people that this huge sum is not going to the terrorists, but to nongovernmental organizations... who will then spend the money as directed by Hamas. 

Obama's War on Capitalism and Non-Profits

Those of you who hoped for a moderate Obama presidency didn't have to wait long to be proven very, very wrong. In a few short months Obama has declared war on the freedoms that make this country great. His plans to start paying for his unprecedented spending binge are truly frightening. He is declaring war on achievement, on private-enterprise, on housing, on non-profit organizations - on capitalism (just a word that describes freedom in the economic sense) in general.

For those of you who make $250k+, you're going to get hammered. Good thing we live in a world where what happens to these people makes no difference to us. Oh wait. If big investors have their capital gains taxes raised from 15 to 20% - that encourages people not to invest, costing us jobs and keeping our 401ks down. Obama wants to eliminate the deduction for home mortgage interest - pretty much the worst thing you could do to the housing industry.

Most alarming of all, Obama wants to limit the tax deduction the rich get for giving to charity. This will harm the fund raising efforts of every non-profit organization in this country (most of whom are already struggling in this economy). The proposed changes are estimated to cost non-profits about $4 billion a year. Obama is saying, "Don't give non-profits your money, give it to me instead - I can spend it better."

"If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.” - President Obama

Apparently Obama is not aware that families earning less than that have utility bills. Obama's plans for a cap and trade system will impose massive new taxes on energy companies. His plan states that he will use this cap and trade system to provide tax credits for working families. These working families will pay the increased tax on their energy, and then get it back from their most merciful president.

Obama's policies are all anti-growth. They will slow the economic recovery and change this country for the worse. His presidency will end (hopefully in four years) with an enormous debt and a much bigger and more oppressive government.

Major Tax Hike on the Way

Here's the headline: "Obama's First Budget Seeks To Trim Deficit". How nice. We wouldn't want to put the words "higher taxes" in a headline about Obama, now would we?

Obama is planning to raise taxes on the "wealthy" and businesses. Apparently Obama has forgotten that we are in a recession. The administration has announced a White House summit on "fiscal responsibility." I wonder if Obama has to stop himself from laughing out loud when he says that phrase, considering he just signed the most fiscally irresponsible bill in our nation's history.  

Serious investors (i.e. those making over $250,000) will see their capital gains tax raised from 15-20% - that should really help the stock market, which has already dropped 10% in the month since Obama took office. Capital gains taxes reduce the incentive to invest. Investing is already a scary prospect - now investors have another huge reason to sit on their money, instead of using it to create jobs. Obama plans to raise total taxation by 19%. Considering the times we are in, this is economic malpractice.

As I've noted many times on this blog - taxes on corporations and small businesses hurt everyone - they don't just punish big bad business and people dressed like the Monopoly Man. Those taxes are passed down to you and I in the form of higher prices. Higher prices mean decreased demand for those goods and services, which means the companies have to lay more people off - maybe even you. 

If Obama really cared about the deficit, he wouldn't have signed a bill loaded with hundreds of billions in pork projects for Democrats in the House and Senate. This is all part of a plan to advance his health care agenda which will further erode our economy, reduce economic freedom, and introduce us to government-rationed health care. 

More on Stimulus

Click here to read the Heritage Foundation's open letter to Congress, urging them (unsuccessfully) not to pass the stimulus bill. They note that this is by far the most expensive bill ever passed, yet it has been rammed through without vetting and without debate. 

This bill is the height of irresponsibility and is exactly what we should expect, unfortunately, when Democrats are in charge of the House, Senate, and the White House. The politicians who voted for (or signed) this bill owe an apology to today's young people and our children and grandchildren. 

Obama and the Democrats are being dishonest when they call this a stimulus bill. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this bill will weaken long-term economic growth! So if the federal government says it will hurt our economy, it must not be a stimulus bill. Instead it a massive give away - hundreds of billions of dollars going to the Democrats' various pet projects and causes. 

Most people don't care. They're just happy Obama is doing something about the economy and don't bother finding out just what that is. And when the economy recovers (as it will at some point), Obama can take credit, even though his bill will do far more harm than good. 

Generational Theft

President Obama, addressing Congress:

All of you are committed to building a more responsible, more accountable government, and part of what that means is making sure that we're spending precious tax dollars wisely and cutting costs wherever possible. During this period of economic emergency, families are tightening their belts. So should Washington... Those of us who manage the public's knowledge will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can they restore the vital trust between the people and their government.

The $787 billion ($3 trillion plus by the time we finance it) "stimulus" bill just passed by the House at Obama's request is the exact opposite of everything Obama said - it is not responsible, accountable, wise, or doing "business in the light of day." The Democrats promised to release the bill at least 48 hours in advance of voting on it. They broke that promise and not a single representative had read the 8 inch thick, 1071 page bill before they voted on it. Zero Republicans voted for it and 7 Democrats voted against it. They are trying to rush this through so opponents can't share what's actually in the bill with the public before it's too late. Unfortunately, the Senate will pass it later this week and Obama will sign it.

Obama and the Democrats seem to be arguing that if only we flush enough taxpayer money down the toilet, our economy will come back. Just a few items:

• $300 million for "streamlined" golf carts
  
• $8 billion for high speed rail connecting LA and Las Vegas (construction will begin in about 5 years, after the environmental impact study)
• $180 million for "diplomatic and consular services"
  
• $30 million to protect the habitat of an endangered mouse in San Francisco
• $2.2 billion to ACORN - the leftist "community organizers" who systematically engage in voter fraud.

Very little of the money will do anything to stimulate the economy when we need it - now. Most infrastructure projects won't get going for a few years. Mostly the bill is a once in a lifetime Christmas list for Democrats and a way to make government much, much bigger (and the individual much smaller). This bill will add to our already crippling national debt and could cause crushing inflation. Many critics have called it "generational theft" - this money will be repaid by our children and grandchildren.

Obama claims this bill will "create or save" 3.5 million jobs. This comes to somewhere between $225k and $275k in tax payer money per job created, even if he's right. In addition, the bill lays the framework for socialized medicine and increases federal government interference in the doctor-patient relationship. It does away with President Clinton's welfare reform that led to dramatic reductions in dependency on welfare and child poverty.

But haven't huge stimulus packages worked before? No. They failed during the Great Depression, they failed in Japan in the 90's, and Bush's mini (in comparison) package also failed. Consider Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Treasury Secretary, and his analysis of the New Deal: "We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. ... I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started ... And an enormous debt to boot!"

The economy will turn around. It's just a question of how long it will take. Most of the spending will start kicking in after the economy is picking up again, and will then cause massive inflation. Inflation has to be fought by tightening the money supply, which will slow the economy back down. Oh, and did I mention that our projected deficit for a two-term Obama presidency is $8.4 trillion?

A better plan would cut the payroll tax or the corporate tax rate (among the highest in the world). This bill will only hurt our economy, erode individual liberty, and increase the tyranny of big government.

Abortion Extremists

On Drudge: Florida woman goes to abortion clinic to abort her 23 week old baby. Baby is born alive. Baby is put in trash by workers at clinic and dies. 

President Obama thinks this should be legal. 

Obama's Inaugural

A historic day, no doubt. I think we're in no danger of overlooking this. The media is behaving a little different than during Bush's, huh? There are 240 million people in this country who did not vote for Obama, including the 58 million who voted for John McCain. While it's great that we've reached a point as a country where we can elect an African-American, that doesn't mean it's good for the country to have Barack Obama as president, just as it would have been bad for the country to have Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton in the Oval Office. 

Obama's inaugural address was supposed to be soaring, words that would go down in history, words that would inspire a generation. I thought his speech was unmemorable and unfocused. I thought he was unfair to President Bush ("we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our boundaries" as if Bush's $15 billion in spending to fight HIV/AIDS was nothing). The most memorable part of the ceremony was the prayer at the end by Rev. Joseph Lowery: 

We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right.

Apparently a black president means nothing in the civil rights movement. The entire prayer was nothing but a political speech to God, punctuated with demeaning comments about whites and Asians.

Obama Clears Obama

I was just made aware of this illustrative headline from the Politico: "Obama report clears Emanuel,  other aides." What a relief! Also, what a time saver for the busy journalist: just accept reports from the Obama administration about the Obama administration as fact. 

My New Senator

Senate Democrats have now decided that they will seat Blago's choice to replace Obama, and apparent high bidder, Roland Burris. Here's a question: does Burris add to or detract from the character of the Democrats already in the Senate? 

Consider a few other fine individuals in the Senate:

• Robert Byrd (D-WV) - current President pro tempore of the Senate, former Exalted Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan. 
  

• Ted Kennedy (D-MA) - committed manslaughter (never charged) by driving (drunk) into a channel with a young woman he was having an affair with - she drowned.  
  

• Al Franken (D-MN) - tax cheat and all around disgusting human being. 
  

• Patrick Leahy (D-VT) - forced to give up his vice-chairmanship of Senate Intelligence Committee after leaking classified information to a reporter about an operation against Egyptian sponsored terrorism - at least one operative died because of the reporter's story, earning the senator the nickname "Leaky Leahy." He later leaked classified information about a Reagan operation to topple Libyan dictator and terrorist Moamarr Gadhafi, causing the operation to be aborted. Not too much later, he allowed a reporter to view classified reports on Iran-Contra. But don't worry, he's a hero because he opposed the Iraq war. 
  

At least a huge abortion extremist who argued that you have the right to kill your new born baby if it survives an abortion is no longer in the Senate, but I guess having Barack Obama as president isn't an improvement. 

The good news is, Burris will probably be beaten by moderate Republican Congressman Mark Kirk during the next election. I also encourage NY Gov. Patterson to, you know, appoint Caroline Kennedy to Hillary Clinton's seat, because, you know, she'll also be easy to beat, you know. 

Best Quotes of 2008

The Media Research Center (a conservative media watchdog) has handed out its awards for best quotes of 2008. The winner is MSNBC's Chris Matthews for his comments after an Obama speech in February: "I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often... And that is an objective assessment." The runner-up was this Reuters post-election headline: "Media bias largely unseen in U.S. presidential race." 

A couple other good ones:

"Not doing it [fighting global warming] will be catastrophic. We’ll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not ten but 30 or 40 years, and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals." — CNN founder Ted Turner on PBS’s Charlie Rose, April 1.

“When NBC News first assigned me to the Barack Obama campaign, I must confess my knees quaked a bit....I wondered if I was up to the job. I wondered if I could do the campaign justice.”
— NBC reporter Lee Cowan in an article for NBC’s “The Peacock” advertising supplement, March 23-29.

Romney's Stimulus Plan

I detailed some shortcomings of Obama's economic plan last week. Now let's talk about what should be done instead. Mitt Romney wrote a column last week, detailing his prescription for our economy, and most of it is pretty agreeable. The basic difference between Obama and Romney on the economy boils down to government spending vs. tax cuts (Keynesian vs. supply side economics).

Romney cites empirical research that indicates that a $1 increase in government spending (i.e. a stimulus check) will increase GDP by between $1 and $1.40. $1 in tax cuts, on the other hand, increases GDP by $3. This is a major blow to the Keynesian model.

Why do tax multipliers exceed spending multipliers? Here's the basic idea: tax cuts give people more money to spend, which stimulates demand (the essence of Keynesian prescriptions) but unlike increased government spending (which increases demand in the same way), lower taxes encourage investment, which generates jobs and more production. For example, let's say Obama lowered payroll taxes, effectively lowering the cost of employing people. Using our basic supply/demand curve, we know that lower labor costs will increase demand for labor. Workers will take home more of their pay, which they will spend, driving up demand for goods and services, and companies will hire more people.

Romney agrees that infrastructure projects should be a high priority, but notes that the economic benefits of these projects are no where near immediate because these projects take a while to complete. Romney warns against excessive regulation and the Employee Free Choice Act that would "virtually impose unions on small business by eliminating the right of workers to vote by secret ballot in the workplace. This 'card check' payback for the AFL-CIO’s support of the Democrats would devastate business formation and employment".

Romney does support government spending on "basic research" for technologies that will make us more energy dependent. I maintain my basic argument on this subject: while the impact on global warming is debatable and energy independence would be great, this government spending is not likely to help the economy in the long term and definitely won't help in the short term.

All choices in government require trade-offs:

There is a danger that new spending and deficits will lead to runaway inflation, flight from the dollar, and another economic crisis. It is essential, therefore, that Congress and the president commit to reform entitlement spending as soon as the economy recovers. With the footing of our long term economy at risk, with entitlements already reaching 60 percent of federal spending and with baby boomers nearing retirement, this can be delayed no longer.

Unfortunately, elections have consequences and Obama is likely to choose ideology over sound economics.

More Expensive Energy

President elect Obama's plan for the economy seems to center on two tactics: a huge ($1 trillion) stimulus package and "investment" in new energy sources and more fuel efficient technology. Neither encourages production and both are extremely inefficient uses of our tax dollars.

A big stimulus check, which will only go to low and middle-income Americans, is intended to stimulate demand for goods and services - "priming the pump", if you will. Classic Keynesian economics. Unfortunately, there are easily foreseeable problems with this plan. Economists favoring this approach are counting on a huge multiplier effect: you spend your check to buy x, the guy who sold you x uses the profits to buy y, and so on. The increased demand for goods and services caused by the stimulus is supposed to encourage more production of goods and services to meet this demand. However, in these economics times, low and middle-income people will likely save the money or use it to pay down debt instead of running to Best Buy. Saving and paying down debt eliminates the multiplier effect, does nothing to stimulate the economy and increases the national debt.

The trillion dollars has to come from somewhere and it is likely to come from higher taxes on people making too much to get a stimulus check in the first place and from higher corporate taxes. Aside from the injustice of this income redistribution, higher taxes on the most productive workers and corporations discourages production and job growth. Tax cuts also get more spending money in people's pockets, but have the added benefit of encouraging production and job growth.

Obama plans for huge spending increases on alternative fuels and green technology. He claims that these green jobs will boost the economy. Absolutely wrong headed. We can argue about the wisdom of spending billions on policies that will have zero effect on the climate another time. If Obama's green policies are about global warming, then he should sell them as such, but don't tell me they are good for the economy. Markets are very good at finding the best price for energy. For our cars, you can't beat gasoline. However, our government pays huge subsidies to add ethanol to the mix. Subsidies for alternative energy increase the amount we as a country pay for energy. Every extra dollar we spend on energy is a dollar we can't spend on education, health care, or a hat, a big ol' hat with a bill that goes buuuup (sorry, but this blog has been movie reference deficient of late).

Investing in green jobs is simply taking the tax payers' money and spending it on things they wouldn't choose to spend their own money on. Green jobs do nothing to add to the production or standard of living of the American people. Paying a researcher $100k a year to find new ways to increase our energy costs does not help the economy. It's little different (from an economic perspective) from paying someone to dig ditches and then fill them in again. Sure, you created a job, but you had to take money from other people to do it and you gave them nothing back in return.

Chicago Change

Ah, the change we can believe in. Obama didn't talk to Gov. Blagojevich about the Senate seat? Obama is unaware of anyone on his staff talking with Blago about the seat? Bull and more bull. Why wouldn't he talk with Blago about the seat? If Obama and his staff were completely uninvolved in this crime, they need to start talking, because it appears that Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel has been recorded discussing the issue with Blago. Based on the reaction so far, as I see it there are three possible scenarios: 

1. Rahm talked with Blago about the seat, and the governor proposed a three way deal in which Obama favorite Valerie Jarrett would get the Senate seat, Blago would get a high paying job with a union, and Obama would do favors for the union once president. The Obama camp refused and contacted the department of justice but is holding off on telling everyone this for unknown reasons. 
   
2. Rahm and/or Obama talked with Blago and Rahm talked the deal over with Obama, who refused but didn't contact Patrick Fitzgerald. 
3. Rahm and Obama were continuing to negotiate with Blago, but he found a better deal with Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr., who held a fundraiser for Blago a week ago, raising him $1 million. 

One thing seems certain, Obama is lying. Good start Obama. Welcome to Chicago-style politics, America.

Obama and Blagojevich

My prediction about Blagojevich yesterday may come to pass even sooner than I expected. Everyone knew he was a crook, even before he was reelected governor in 2006 - he was already under investigation for his hiring practices (high paying jobs in exchange for big campaign contributions) and rumors of pay to play politics in state contracts were everywhere. At the time, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was already investigating what he called "very serious allegations of endemic hiring fraud" with a "number of credible witnesses." Everyone who voted for him, endorsed him, or supported him should be ashamed of the disservice they did to the state of Illinois, and that includes President-elect Obama.

Obama endorsed Blagojevich in 2002 and 2006 and served as a top adviser to him in 2002. Many Democrats found this crook so unpalatable that they refused to work with him on his campaign for governor, including former Blagojevich adviser and now top Obama adviser David Axelrod, but not Obama. In August of 2006, Obama stumped for Blagojevich: "We've got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois."

As a State Senator and as a US Senator, Obama never shied away from aligning himself with some of the dirtiest politicians in all the land. He never once crossed anyone in the Chicago Machine. Even when he had the opportunity to support a liberal Democrat, Forrest Claypool, for Cook County Board President, a candidate that pledged to end the cronyism, corruption and extortion, he instead backed Todd Stroger, the son of the previous president. With Obama's support, Stroger won the primary by 7% of the vote. Stroger has wasted no time, he's increased the sales tax to 10.25%, laid off hundreds of nurses, and cut 43 prosecutors, all so he can hire more friends and family to high paying, do-nothing jobs.

One of the most serious charges facing Blagojevich is that he attempted to auction off Obama's vacated Senate seat to the highest bidder. There is evidence that Blagojevich attempted negotiations with Obama and a labor union, offering the seat to an Obama adviser in exchange for a high paying job at the labor union, whom would receive political favors from Obama once he's president. To his credit, Obama turned him down, but not to his credit, it doesn't appear that he or his camp reported this to authorities.

Today, when asked if he had any contact with Blagojevich about the Senate seat, Obama said "I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening." However, a few weeks ago, Axelrod discussed the candidates to replace Obama in the Senate on Fox News Chicago saying, "I know [Obama has] talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them." Hmmm.

Obamanomics is Coming

Faced with challenging economic times, Obama's remedies all discourage work, investment, and job growth when we need more of all three. Another stimulus check? This is nothing more than redistribution of wealth and the recipients are likely to just stick the money in their bank account. Longer unemployment benefits may or may not be necessary, but any benefit should be weighed against the cost: the unemployed will wait longer before finding a new job. Taking away workers' right to a secret ballot on the decision to form a union will hurt job growth and is fundamentally unjust. Raising capital gains taxes and corporate taxes dissuades investors from creating jobs in this country and will send capital overseas. I'm sure China and India won't mind.

Obama named Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm to his economic advisory team. Maybe she can share her policy secrets for Michigan's booming economy with the rest of the nation. As Phil Gramm and Mike Solon note in the Wall Street Journal, states still have some freedom in their own economic policies. The effectiveness of state policies will be evident in movement of people into the state, increased per-capita income and employment growth.

A study that ranked states according to these three factors found that from 1996-2006, Texas, Florida and Arizona were the three most successful states. The three worst were Illinois, Ohio and Michigan. A third of all new jobs created during this ten year period came from Texas (1.7 million), Florida (1.4 millions) and Arizona (.6 million). Illinois gained only 122k, Ohio lost 63k and Michigan lost 318k jobs and the citizens of these states saw their real income increase by just 58% of the national average.

Economic policies matter. The successful states have lower taxes, lower government spending and they are right-to-work states (employees are not forced to join or contribute to unions). The least successful states promote all powerful unions and have a higher minimum wage, yet their workers make far less.

Obama promises to bring the economic policies of Illinois, Ohio and Michigan to the nation.