I just finished reading Karl Rove's autobiographical "Courage and Consequence" which I highly recommend. It provides a detailed insight into the truly herculean organizational effort involved in running a major political campaign. It also was extremely supportive of George W. In particular he cites many examples of Dubya's decency, determination and yes even his intelligence.
As I have stated earlier in this space, I firmly believe that history will be very kind to the 43rd president just has it has been to Harry Truman who - like Bush - left office a the nadir of his popularity due in large measure to discontent with the Korean War. Sound familiar? Rove also provides an inside the White House view of the four major events that defined the Bush presidency - namely 9/11, the Iraq war, Katrina and the financial crisis.
9/11 not only fundamentally changed America it also radically altered the priorities of the Bush agenda - which until then had been mostly focused on domestic issues. It also presaged the rationale and the political and public support for the removal of the Iraqi regime and what became known as the "Bush Doctrine" of attacking not just the terrorist groups themselves but also those governments that provide safe haven and support. It is noteworthy that at least in this area the Obama administration has continued the "Bush Doctrine" without any change.
On the Iraq war Rove rightly credits Bush with the wisdom and courage to pursue the "surge" strategy in spite of cries from the left that the war was already lost (to quote Harry Reid among others) and even some skeptics within his own administration. It is now clear that the current progress - both on the political and security fronts - would not have occurred without this action. He also points out repeatedly the hypocrisy and dissembling of the Dems who were on the record as fully supportive of the Iraqi operation in the beginning but later became its most fervent critics. Among these scoundrels were the usual suspects of Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, John Kerry and even Nancy Pelosi.
Bush took a lot of criticism - even to the point of being labeled a racist - over the Katrina response. What got lost in all the uproar were a number of key facts. First the real reason for the woeful response in New Orleans was not an ineffective federal agency but the lack of an emergency plan and delays and dithering both pre and post hurricane by the mayor - Ray Nagin - and governor - Kathleen Blanco. The feds had pushed for an evacuation 72 hours prior to landfall but the Nagin didn't act until 24 hours before the event. Regarding the post hurricane response given that disaster response is always a city and state responsibility, the only way the federal government can help is either through a request from the state governor or to declare the area in a "state of insurrection." Despite repeated attempts to get the governor to act, she failed to do so and as result the people of N.O. suffered unnecessarily. Just to prove this point just contrast what happen in Mississippi and Alabama. These states were affected just as badly by the storm but in these cases the states had a plan and were quick to request federal assistance. Unfortunately the critics of the Bush administration jumped on the Katrina event to unfairly paint Bush as uncaring and incompetent rather than directing their ire at the real local culprits. What I find unbelievable is that even after his abominable and largely absentee performance New Orleans re-elected Nagin.
The proximate cause of the financial collapse and consequent bank bailouts and recession was the bursting of the housing bubble. Now what does not get talked about enough is that the housing bubble was the result of years of progressive democratic pressure to make home ownership more affordable for the masses - including those who did not have the financial wherewith all to take on a mortgage. The key players in this debacle were Freddie and Fannie Mae and folks like Rep. Barny Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd. In fact it was the democrats - including then Senator Obama - who blocked the Bush administration efforts to reign in these two GSE's years before the bubble went pop. So when I hear the liberals complain that Obama inherited a financial crisis I want to scream since it can be clearly proven that it was caused by Obama and his democratic cronies in the first place. Granted the whole crisis was exacerbated by a few too clever for their own good Wall Street types who invented the credit default swap and the unregulated nature of this instrument, but let's not forget who the real villains were that created the conditions for the wildfire to begin.
Next up on my reading list is "Decision Points" by George W. himself. Unfortunately there is a waiting list of 145 people in the queue for one of the 45 copies of this book in the Houston library system so it may take a while to get my hands on it.
Comments are always welcome.
Monday, January 3, 2011
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Energy Policy - Even the President doesn't get it
Like many of us I decided to watch at least some of BHO's press conference today regarding the Republican tsunami that just washed into Foggy Bottom. It was all pretty predictable. What got me leaping out my chair, however, was his response to a question on whether or not the cap and trade concept was dead in the water.
Now one would think that the Prez would be well briefed on energy issues since he makes such a big deal out of the need for "green" technologies and "green" jobs. I am a big supporter of new nuclear power projects in the US so was pleased to see him give a nod in support of new nuclear plant development. It was at that point that he went off the rails. He said we need more nuclear power to help reduce our dependence on foreign oil!!
I have said it before in this space and I will say it again since this seems to be a myth that won't die. With the exception of emergency back-up diesel and gasoline powered generators, the US does not - repeat does not - use any significant amount of oil for the production of electricity. So let's be clear - new nuclear power generation will not reduce our dependence on foreign oil one iota. (Nor for that matter will new wind farms or solar power plants - sorry T. Boone Pickens.)
What it will do is replace coal and natural gas as the major alternative sources of fuel for this purpose. If the Prez had said we need to promote nuclear power as a way to help reduce the generation of CO2 then he would have been correct, but to use foreign oil reduction as the strawman benefit shows either a complete lack of understanding of the nation's energy infrastructure or a cynical throw away line to avoid upsetting the natural gas and coal lobbies and their union constituencies.
So the only conclusion one can reach is that BHO is either ignorant when it comes to energy issues or is deliberately mis-representing (dare I say lying about) the facts to promote his own political and policy objectives. Guess which one I would choose.
As readers of this space are aware I am a man-made global warming skeptic. Note that I am not saying that the globe is not warming, but I reject the notion that it is largely man-made. Just look at what is currently happening in Indonesia. The Mt Merapi volcano has been spewing gas and ash into the atmosphere for over a week and this is not the first such major eruption this year. While I have no hard data my guess is that one volcano like Merapi dumps as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere in a week as the human population does in a year.
It is a conceit of the human condition that makes us believe we are such an important and significant influence on the global climatic system. Doesn't the power of a hurricane like Andrew or Katrina or a volcano like Merapi give us pause and make us awed by the absolute futility of man in the face of the globe's natural phenomenon. I am willing to accept the notion that the global climate may indeed be in a warming cycle, but I reject, and there is no credible evidence to support, the hypothesis that this warming is solely the result of human activity.
So Mr. President, while I applaud your support for new nuclear power plant development, let's get our facts straight on what the benefits will be. The best way to reduce our dependence on foreign oil is to move to an all-electric ground transportation system. If you are worried about CO2 emissions then nuclear power is the most logical choice to power that new fleet of electric vehicles.
Comments are always welcome.
Now one would think that the Prez would be well briefed on energy issues since he makes such a big deal out of the need for "green" technologies and "green" jobs. I am a big supporter of new nuclear power projects in the US so was pleased to see him give a nod in support of new nuclear plant development. It was at that point that he went off the rails. He said we need more nuclear power to help reduce our dependence on foreign oil!!
I have said it before in this space and I will say it again since this seems to be a myth that won't die. With the exception of emergency back-up diesel and gasoline powered generators, the US does not - repeat does not - use any significant amount of oil for the production of electricity. So let's be clear - new nuclear power generation will not reduce our dependence on foreign oil one iota. (Nor for that matter will new wind farms or solar power plants - sorry T. Boone Pickens.)
What it will do is replace coal and natural gas as the major alternative sources of fuel for this purpose. If the Prez had said we need to promote nuclear power as a way to help reduce the generation of CO2 then he would have been correct, but to use foreign oil reduction as the strawman benefit shows either a complete lack of understanding of the nation's energy infrastructure or a cynical throw away line to avoid upsetting the natural gas and coal lobbies and their union constituencies.
So the only conclusion one can reach is that BHO is either ignorant when it comes to energy issues or is deliberately mis-representing (dare I say lying about) the facts to promote his own political and policy objectives. Guess which one I would choose.
As readers of this space are aware I am a man-made global warming skeptic. Note that I am not saying that the globe is not warming, but I reject the notion that it is largely man-made. Just look at what is currently happening in Indonesia. The Mt Merapi volcano has been spewing gas and ash into the atmosphere for over a week and this is not the first such major eruption this year. While I have no hard data my guess is that one volcano like Merapi dumps as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere in a week as the human population does in a year.
It is a conceit of the human condition that makes us believe we are such an important and significant influence on the global climatic system. Doesn't the power of a hurricane like Andrew or Katrina or a volcano like Merapi give us pause and make us awed by the absolute futility of man in the face of the globe's natural phenomenon. I am willing to accept the notion that the global climate may indeed be in a warming cycle, but I reject, and there is no credible evidence to support, the hypothesis that this warming is solely the result of human activity.
So Mr. President, while I applaud your support for new nuclear power plant development, let's get our facts straight on what the benefits will be. The best way to reduce our dependence on foreign oil is to move to an all-electric ground transportation system. If you are worried about CO2 emissions then nuclear power is the most logical choice to power that new fleet of electric vehicles.
Comments are always welcome.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Thinking about Traffic Lights
As I sit here in the Singapore Airlines' Business Class lounge on my way back to Houston from Jakarta, I recall a John Stossel show from a month or so ago questioning the need for traffic lights. The reason this came to mind is that I just spent two weeks in Indonesia where traffic lights are the exception and not the rule.
Now as Mr. Stossel says its seems self evident that traffic lights are needed to keep us from all running into each other and help control the flow of traffic at intersections. But I just spent two weeks in an environment of very heavy traffic with millions of motorcycles careening around among cars, trucks and buses all without traffic lights at most intersections. So you might ask how does this all work without an accident every two minutes.
In an amazing demonstration of the free market and people rising to fill a needed niche, the reason it works is that at every intersection where there is significant traffic interaction volunteer civilians - i.e. local people - become self appointed traffic control officers. They stand in the middle of the intersections with their whistles at the ready and ensure that traffic moves and that everyone has a fair shot at making it through. Now these are unpaid positions but the drivers give them tips as they roll through so helping with traffic control is a paying profession.
At intersections where there is not enough traffic (and consequent tips) to justify a volunteer TCO, drivers simply slow down and make sure it is safe to proceed and often yield to others so that collisions are avoided. So incredible as it may seem John S's proposition that traffic lights are unnecessary turns out to perfectly valid.
It just makes you think about all the other things that government does for our own good that are unnecessary and/or counter-productive.
Now as Mr. Stossel says its seems self evident that traffic lights are needed to keep us from all running into each other and help control the flow of traffic at intersections. But I just spent two weeks in an environment of very heavy traffic with millions of motorcycles careening around among cars, trucks and buses all without traffic lights at most intersections. So you might ask how does this all work without an accident every two minutes.
In an amazing demonstration of the free market and people rising to fill a needed niche, the reason it works is that at every intersection where there is significant traffic interaction volunteer civilians - i.e. local people - become self appointed traffic control officers. They stand in the middle of the intersections with their whistles at the ready and ensure that traffic moves and that everyone has a fair shot at making it through. Now these are unpaid positions but the drivers give them tips as they roll through so helping with traffic control is a paying profession.
At intersections where there is not enough traffic (and consequent tips) to justify a volunteer TCO, drivers simply slow down and make sure it is safe to proceed and often yield to others so that collisions are avoided. So incredible as it may seem John S's proposition that traffic lights are unnecessary turns out to perfectly valid.
It just makes you think about all the other things that government does for our own good that are unnecessary and/or counter-productive.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Seriously Now!
Is it even remotely possible to take the Obama administration and its left wing lackies in congress seriously any more? The so called Hope and Change message has been proven a false god. On top of that the cynical and condesending dismissal of a tidal wave of disapproval among the electorate is stunning in its arrogance. In support of my contention I would offer up a few examples of recent events.
On top of the list has to be the way the health care bill was bulldozed through congress in spite of well documented disapproval from the public and in willful disregard of both the unintended consequences (e.g. higher not lower health care costs, higher taxes on small business and middle class individuals, inevitable rationing, higher unemployment) and the incalcuable legacy of debt that will burden generations to come. In spite of the claims of the administration and the Pelosi/Reid cabal, every thinking citizen knows that this bill will increase and not reduce the deficit.
Number two. The whole country knows that illegal immigration and the border violence that comes with it are not being addressed effectively by the federal government. So rather than applaud and welcome the attempt by Arizona to assist the feds in enforcing the federal government rules (yes the federal government not Arizona requires that resident immigrants carry their "papers") what does the Obama administration do but demonize and sue the state of Arizona to block it from doing what an overwhelming majority of Americans think makes common sense.
Third the offshore oil drilling ban as a response to the BP oil disaster is not even supported by the folks impacted the most - namely the gulf coast residents. These folks know how important the high skill/high paying oil drilling jobs are to the local economy. So in the midst of a recession what do the bright lights on the BHO team do but make every effort to inflict further economic pain on the folks most affected already by the spill. Even when blocked by two federal courts the BHO administration continues on its self-defeating course. None of this makes any sense.
Finally there is the so called financial reform bill that the Prez and company are touting as the bill to end all financial crises. What rubbish. Neither Obama or the dems in congress that wrote this monstrosity know what it will and will not do. Chris Dodd even admitted as much. But most glaringly it does not address one of the fundamental causes of the recent housing bubble -namely out of control GSE's Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. These two instruments of liberal policy were left untouched. No one can take the financial reform bill seriously given this egregious exception.
There are many other examples that I could pick from the daily news as this administration and the democrats in congress run hell bent on ramming their ideology driven agenda down our throats in face of growing fear and public opposition. No wonder the Tea Party is growing in strength.
Now I ask you. Can anyone take anything coming out of Foggy Bottom seriously? Seriously!
On top of the list has to be the way the health care bill was bulldozed through congress in spite of well documented disapproval from the public and in willful disregard of both the unintended consequences (e.g. higher not lower health care costs, higher taxes on small business and middle class individuals, inevitable rationing, higher unemployment) and the incalcuable legacy of debt that will burden generations to come. In spite of the claims of the administration and the Pelosi/Reid cabal, every thinking citizen knows that this bill will increase and not reduce the deficit.
Number two. The whole country knows that illegal immigration and the border violence that comes with it are not being addressed effectively by the federal government. So rather than applaud and welcome the attempt by Arizona to assist the feds in enforcing the federal government rules (yes the federal government not Arizona requires that resident immigrants carry their "papers") what does the Obama administration do but demonize and sue the state of Arizona to block it from doing what an overwhelming majority of Americans think makes common sense.
Third the offshore oil drilling ban as a response to the BP oil disaster is not even supported by the folks impacted the most - namely the gulf coast residents. These folks know how important the high skill/high paying oil drilling jobs are to the local economy. So in the midst of a recession what do the bright lights on the BHO team do but make every effort to inflict further economic pain on the folks most affected already by the spill. Even when blocked by two federal courts the BHO administration continues on its self-defeating course. None of this makes any sense.
Finally there is the so called financial reform bill that the Prez and company are touting as the bill to end all financial crises. What rubbish. Neither Obama or the dems in congress that wrote this monstrosity know what it will and will not do. Chris Dodd even admitted as much. But most glaringly it does not address one of the fundamental causes of the recent housing bubble -namely out of control GSE's Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. These two instruments of liberal policy were left untouched. No one can take the financial reform bill seriously given this egregious exception.
There are many other examples that I could pick from the daily news as this administration and the democrats in congress run hell bent on ramming their ideology driven agenda down our throats in face of growing fear and public opposition. No wonder the Tea Party is growing in strength.
Now I ask you. Can anyone take anything coming out of Foggy Bottom seriously? Seriously!
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Was the VA Duped?
As I was watching TV yesterday an ad sponsored by a VA organization came on the screen. It had a Iraq war veteran narrating a video showing an IED blowing up a Humvee. He said this is how he was wounded and then elaborated on the deadly nature of these devices and how they were being made in Iran and supplied to AQI. He then said that every $1 increase in the price of oil provides $1billion to Iran to keep making these weapons. I don't know if this was a true statement but as an exporter Iran clearly benefits from higher crude oil prices.
Up to this point I'm thinking OK where is this headed? Then the background picture shifts to a wind farm and the narrator says we need to shift to renewable energy to reduce our demand for oil so that Iran's IED piggy bank is short changed. I about flew out of my chair. As posited in earlier posts on this blog, with the exception of emergency back-up diesel or gasoline power generators, the US does NOT consume oil in the production of electricity!! Thus the juxtaposition of a wind farm with an appeal to reduce our consumption of oil was and is a non sequitur. As also previously stated in this blog the only way that wind energy can be used to reduce our dependence on oil is to put sails on cars and trucks.
I am not sure what angers me most. That this VA organization allowed itself to be used for a blatantly emotional and false appeal that shifting to alternative energy for electricity production will help protect out troops, or that the sponsors cynically ran this ad with the expectation that the average person doesn't understand that all these wind turbines do absolutely nothing to stem the US use of oil for transportation.
The ignorance, cynicism, demagoguery and just plain stupidity that surrounds the US energy infrastructure and policy making process is simply stunning.
Just to be clear I am in favor of wind, nuclear, solar and hydro as relatively carbon free technologies for the production of electricity. What I object to is the implication that these sources of electric power will affect the demand for oil in this country. This includes the T Boone Pikens ads that ran a year or so ago making the same false claim about the virtues of wind energy. (BTW T Boone has since gone very quiet on this subject.) My solution to reducing our dependence on foreign oil is more domestic drilling and a national commitment to more nuclear power plants in parallel with the rapid development of an all electric ground transportation system. It is the only solution that makes sense.
Up to this point I'm thinking OK where is this headed? Then the background picture shifts to a wind farm and the narrator says we need to shift to renewable energy to reduce our demand for oil so that Iran's IED piggy bank is short changed. I about flew out of my chair. As posited in earlier posts on this blog, with the exception of emergency back-up diesel or gasoline power generators, the US does NOT consume oil in the production of electricity!! Thus the juxtaposition of a wind farm with an appeal to reduce our consumption of oil was and is a non sequitur. As also previously stated in this blog the only way that wind energy can be used to reduce our dependence on oil is to put sails on cars and trucks.
I am not sure what angers me most. That this VA organization allowed itself to be used for a blatantly emotional and false appeal that shifting to alternative energy for electricity production will help protect out troops, or that the sponsors cynically ran this ad with the expectation that the average person doesn't understand that all these wind turbines do absolutely nothing to stem the US use of oil for transportation.
The ignorance, cynicism, demagoguery and just plain stupidity that surrounds the US energy infrastructure and policy making process is simply stunning.
Just to be clear I am in favor of wind, nuclear, solar and hydro as relatively carbon free technologies for the production of electricity. What I object to is the implication that these sources of electric power will affect the demand for oil in this country. This includes the T Boone Pikens ads that ran a year or so ago making the same false claim about the virtues of wind energy. (BTW T Boone has since gone very quiet on this subject.) My solution to reducing our dependence on foreign oil is more domestic drilling and a national commitment to more nuclear power plants in parallel with the rapid development of an all electric ground transportation system. It is the only solution that makes sense.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Yes Virginia - Elections do have consequences
The past year as been an object lesson in political science and the unmistakable fact that elections have consequences. Just over one year ago the Obama administration was sworn in and coronated by the MSM as the saviour of the republic and America's standing in the world. Chris Matthews at MSNBC had to change his underwear every time he talked about Obama the messiah.
But reality intruded and while the economy was imploding - due in large part to democrats who beginning in the mid-90's pressured Fannie/Freddie and the large banks to extend and guarantee mortgages to folks clearly unqualified (see earlier posts) - Obama fiddled with the health care debacle, extended olive branches to Muslims and granted civil liberties to terrorists while the unemployment rate soared. Day by day the BHO administration moved further away from the heartbeat of America.
But this was the logical outcome of the 2008 presidential election that swept an untested, lifetime civil servant, someone with no business experience and unsavory lifetime associations, and an unabashed socialist into the White House. Well the American electorate got what it deserved. It voted for change and got it in spades. See elections do have consequences.
But whoa Nelly! A political earthquake in form of a simple Senate race in Massachusetts has set the world (at least the American political world) back on its axis. Now all the dems in congress are running scared - and they should be. Health care - at least in the current package - is dead, bi-partisan moves are underway to force the trial of KSM and his cronies back to where it belongs before a military tribunal in Gitmo and everyone in DC is starting to talk about how to help small businesses that are the engine of employment growth. Wow! Once again elections have consequences.
The joke of the first stimulus was that it did nothing to encourage or increase private employment. The bulk of the so call "saved jobs" were in the public sector - school teachers, police, firefighters, social workers, etc. Not that these are not important jobs but the notion that simply plumping up public worker enrollments is a job growth initiative is ludicrous, and in the end counter productive to real job growth as it simply creates additional unfunded liabilities for cites, counties and states already facing financial and budgetary Armageddon.
During the years of the GWB administration his detractors often repeated the inaccurate folk myth that, "Bush lied and people died," with reference to the stated reason for the Iraq war. Bush didn't lie about WMD. All the western nations' intelligence services were of the opinion that Hussein either had or was developing WMD. Turns out they were wrong, but that does not mean Bush lied.
On the other hand the blatant lies coming out the mouth of BHO and his toadies over the past year regarding the health care bill, transparency, bi-partisanship, etc. are legion. Why doesn't anyone in the MSM take Barak and company to task on this issue. Things that make you want to go hmmmm.....
I can't wait for the Nov 2010 elections. As was the case in 1994 I think these will have even more consequential consequences.
Comments are always welcome.
But reality intruded and while the economy was imploding - due in large part to democrats who beginning in the mid-90's pressured Fannie/Freddie and the large banks to extend and guarantee mortgages to folks clearly unqualified (see earlier posts) - Obama fiddled with the health care debacle, extended olive branches to Muslims and granted civil liberties to terrorists while the unemployment rate soared. Day by day the BHO administration moved further away from the heartbeat of America.
But this was the logical outcome of the 2008 presidential election that swept an untested, lifetime civil servant, someone with no business experience and unsavory lifetime associations, and an unabashed socialist into the White House. Well the American electorate got what it deserved. It voted for change and got it in spades. See elections do have consequences.
But whoa Nelly! A political earthquake in form of a simple Senate race in Massachusetts has set the world (at least the American political world) back on its axis. Now all the dems in congress are running scared - and they should be. Health care - at least in the current package - is dead, bi-partisan moves are underway to force the trial of KSM and his cronies back to where it belongs before a military tribunal in Gitmo and everyone in DC is starting to talk about how to help small businesses that are the engine of employment growth. Wow! Once again elections have consequences.
The joke of the first stimulus was that it did nothing to encourage or increase private employment. The bulk of the so call "saved jobs" were in the public sector - school teachers, police, firefighters, social workers, etc. Not that these are not important jobs but the notion that simply plumping up public worker enrollments is a job growth initiative is ludicrous, and in the end counter productive to real job growth as it simply creates additional unfunded liabilities for cites, counties and states already facing financial and budgetary Armageddon.
During the years of the GWB administration his detractors often repeated the inaccurate folk myth that, "Bush lied and people died," with reference to the stated reason for the Iraq war. Bush didn't lie about WMD. All the western nations' intelligence services were of the opinion that Hussein either had or was developing WMD. Turns out they were wrong, but that does not mean Bush lied.
On the other hand the blatant lies coming out the mouth of BHO and his toadies over the past year regarding the health care bill, transparency, bi-partisanship, etc. are legion. Why doesn't anyone in the MSM take Barak and company to task on this issue. Things that make you want to go hmmmm.....
I can't wait for the Nov 2010 elections. As was the case in 1994 I think these will have even more consequential consequences.
Comments are always welcome.
Monday, January 11, 2010
How's that Hope and Change Thing Working for You
Let's see now. There was the promise of transparency - particularly with regard to the health care debate (C-Span anyone?), no pork in the defence appropriations bill, a bi-partisan approach to governing and a new image of America on the world stage. You betcha'.
There was a fascinating and spot on article by Ernest Christian and Gary Robbins in the Jan 5, 2010 edition of Investor's Business Daily to the effect that thus far BHO is winning the race to the bottom of the heap as the worst President since Jimmy Carter. Not the least of BHO's shortcomings is his flagrant disingenuousness (dare I say lying) during the campaign. He was the quintessential snake oil salesman with his H&C rhetoric, and the American public (at least the critical middle/independent block) swallowed the elixir with grand anticipation of a new world/American order.
No honest and unbiased observer could possibly deny that the health care debate and legislative crafting process has been anything but open. It has been all back room negotiations, bribes, payoffs and promises and the Republicans have been shut out of the debate entirely. The absolute worst display of the political process at work for all to see. And why the rush and shady deal making. The truth is that the democratic leadership in congress is well aware of two things - the current proposal for health care reform is unpopular with a majority of Americans and with the Dems unpopularity on the rise there is no chance of anything like the current bill passing after the 2010 elections. So they are taking cynical advantage of a momentary position of total congressional and executive control to jam it down our throats whether we want it or need it.
Let's be clear. Americans generally support health care reform. They just don't like the Democratic proposal. Please see my previous post for the four reforms that will deal with the most pressing concerns related to health care - and these do not require a 2000 page bill.
So much for transparency and bi-partisanship and the Defence appropriations bill was so pork laden it oinked. Another promise down the tubes.
As far as the new world order and respect for America is concerned the facts speak for themselves. Iran has blown BHO off like a feather. North Korea the same. China and India walked out of the Copenhagen climate talks without so much as a howdy do. Russia got the eastern European missile shield project cancelled without blinking an eye and Muslim fanatics are on the attack from even more venues than before. Yeah BHO's apology tours, Muslim outreach programs, Gitmo and terrorist trial decisions, and spineless response to terror attacks has certainly improve America's standing in the world.
I have said before that despite the hatred and vitriol spilled at GWB at the end of his administration, I believe that like Truman, Dubya will be seen in a much more favorable light in future years than he was on the eve of his exit from office. Likewise I believe BHO will be seen as an abject failure in public and foreign policy - much like Jimmy Carter - and like Jimmy I hope that he is only a one term president.
Not sure about you but the H&C thing is not working for me.
Comments and feedback are always appreciated.
There was a fascinating and spot on article by Ernest Christian and Gary Robbins in the Jan 5, 2010 edition of Investor's Business Daily to the effect that thus far BHO is winning the race to the bottom of the heap as the worst President since Jimmy Carter. Not the least of BHO's shortcomings is his flagrant disingenuousness (dare I say lying) during the campaign. He was the quintessential snake oil salesman with his H&C rhetoric, and the American public (at least the critical middle/independent block) swallowed the elixir with grand anticipation of a new world/American order.
No honest and unbiased observer could possibly deny that the health care debate and legislative crafting process has been anything but open. It has been all back room negotiations, bribes, payoffs and promises and the Republicans have been shut out of the debate entirely. The absolute worst display of the political process at work for all to see. And why the rush and shady deal making. The truth is that the democratic leadership in congress is well aware of two things - the current proposal for health care reform is unpopular with a majority of Americans and with the Dems unpopularity on the rise there is no chance of anything like the current bill passing after the 2010 elections. So they are taking cynical advantage of a momentary position of total congressional and executive control to jam it down our throats whether we want it or need it.
Let's be clear. Americans generally support health care reform. They just don't like the Democratic proposal. Please see my previous post for the four reforms that will deal with the most pressing concerns related to health care - and these do not require a 2000 page bill.
So much for transparency and bi-partisanship and the Defence appropriations bill was so pork laden it oinked. Another promise down the tubes.
As far as the new world order and respect for America is concerned the facts speak for themselves. Iran has blown BHO off like a feather. North Korea the same. China and India walked out of the Copenhagen climate talks without so much as a howdy do. Russia got the eastern European missile shield project cancelled without blinking an eye and Muslim fanatics are on the attack from even more venues than before. Yeah BHO's apology tours, Muslim outreach programs, Gitmo and terrorist trial decisions, and spineless response to terror attacks has certainly improve America's standing in the world.
I have said before that despite the hatred and vitriol spilled at GWB at the end of his administration, I believe that like Truman, Dubya will be seen in a much more favorable light in future years than he was on the eve of his exit from office. Likewise I believe BHO will be seen as an abject failure in public and foreign policy - much like Jimmy Carter - and like Jimmy I hope that he is only a one term president.
Not sure about you but the H&C thing is not working for me.
Comments and feedback are always appreciated.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
The Honeymoon's Over
In earlier posts I stated that I would give team Obama a chance to demonstrate their true colors. I even gave Obama a 100 day report card that I thought was fair and again hopeful that he would demonstrate an ability to govern more from the center than some of his more radical left wing cohorts like Madam Chairman Pelosi.
Unfortunately from my perspective the administration's missteps are just too big to ignore any longer.
First let's take the health care issue. Do Americans believe that health care reform is needed? Absolutely yes! Do they think that any of the Democratic bills currently being promoted are the solution? Absolutely not! Meaningful, cost-effective and comprehensive health reform can be achieved by enacting legislation that accomplishes four goals. 1) A limit on or new system to handle medical malpractice lawsuits; 2) a prohibition of denying coverage for pre-existing conditions; 3) portability of insurance in the face of job loss or other life changing event; and 4) allowing private insurance companies to compete across state lines. These four reforms will deal with the most pressing of the health care access and cost issues that we currently face and will not increase the federal deficit one penny.
Mandating coverage, taxing small businesses or soaking the rich are not the answer. Nevertheless the Dems seem hell bent on ramming their public option (i.e. the first step towards a national health care system) down the throats of the American public in spite of increasing public opposition. They are doing this now because their window of opportunity for such an unpopular move is very tight.
As we sit the dems control both houses of congress and many of them see this legislation as their rightful political legacy. They also know that because it is unpopular the size of their majorities is likely to take a major hit in the 2010 elections so it's now or never.
I'm rooting for never and that with a return of a more balanced congress in 2011 a more sensible reform package such as the one outlined above will have a chance at being passed.
Next has been this president's naive and befuddling approach to international relations. Why does he think that cow-towing to foreign leaders and apologizing for America's past policies and actions - like saving the free world from fascism in the 1940's, rebuilding Europe and Japan after WW2 and cracking communism in the 1980's were bad behaviors - will increase our standing or influence. Clearly Iran, China, North Korea, Russia and most of South America have given him the big brush off. Ironically the only one showing any semblance of balls in dealing with these issues Hillary. Let's face it - Obama's touchy-feely approach to international relationships is a disaster.
When it comes to Afghanistan my own view is that we are either in or out. Right now I lean towards out, but if we are in we need to be all in. What is not acceptable is that after declaring in the campaign and in March of this year that Afghanistan was the "just" war and one that we must win, he is fiddling while Rome burns. The fact that he is either unwilling or unable to make a decision on the troop increase is just more evidence that he lacks the conviction of his own words.
Last and most recent is his decision (and make no mistake this is his decision and not Holder's) to try the 9/11 conspirators in federal court rather than by military commission. What a travesty! The only possible explanation for this decision is to allow these thugs to use the American legal system as a platform to bash past American (read GWB) policies. What a cynical way to push a political vendetta at the expense of the 9/11 victims and their families.
Mr. Obama your honeymoon is over.
As always comments are most welcome.
Unfortunately from my perspective the administration's missteps are just too big to ignore any longer.
First let's take the health care issue. Do Americans believe that health care reform is needed? Absolutely yes! Do they think that any of the Democratic bills currently being promoted are the solution? Absolutely not! Meaningful, cost-effective and comprehensive health reform can be achieved by enacting legislation that accomplishes four goals. 1) A limit on or new system to handle medical malpractice lawsuits; 2) a prohibition of denying coverage for pre-existing conditions; 3) portability of insurance in the face of job loss or other life changing event; and 4) allowing private insurance companies to compete across state lines. These four reforms will deal with the most pressing of the health care access and cost issues that we currently face and will not increase the federal deficit one penny.
Mandating coverage, taxing small businesses or soaking the rich are not the answer. Nevertheless the Dems seem hell bent on ramming their public option (i.e. the first step towards a national health care system) down the throats of the American public in spite of increasing public opposition. They are doing this now because their window of opportunity for such an unpopular move is very tight.
As we sit the dems control both houses of congress and many of them see this legislation as their rightful political legacy. They also know that because it is unpopular the size of their majorities is likely to take a major hit in the 2010 elections so it's now or never.
I'm rooting for never and that with a return of a more balanced congress in 2011 a more sensible reform package such as the one outlined above will have a chance at being passed.
Next has been this president's naive and befuddling approach to international relations. Why does he think that cow-towing to foreign leaders and apologizing for America's past policies and actions - like saving the free world from fascism in the 1940's, rebuilding Europe and Japan after WW2 and cracking communism in the 1980's were bad behaviors - will increase our standing or influence. Clearly Iran, China, North Korea, Russia and most of South America have given him the big brush off. Ironically the only one showing any semblance of balls in dealing with these issues Hillary. Let's face it - Obama's touchy-feely approach to international relationships is a disaster.
When it comes to Afghanistan my own view is that we are either in or out. Right now I lean towards out, but if we are in we need to be all in. What is not acceptable is that after declaring in the campaign and in March of this year that Afghanistan was the "just" war and one that we must win, he is fiddling while Rome burns. The fact that he is either unwilling or unable to make a decision on the troop increase is just more evidence that he lacks the conviction of his own words.
Last and most recent is his decision (and make no mistake this is his decision and not Holder's) to try the 9/11 conspirators in federal court rather than by military commission. What a travesty! The only possible explanation for this decision is to allow these thugs to use the American legal system as a platform to bash past American (read GWB) policies. What a cynical way to push a political vendetta at the expense of the 9/11 victims and their families.
Mr. Obama your honeymoon is over.
As always comments are most welcome.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Another Ball and Chain on Nuclear Power
Today the Obama administration implemented its campaign pledge to close the completed but never opened Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. This after 13 billion of taxpayer dollars have been spent to prepare the facility to receive spent fuel from the nation's nuclear power facilities. Not only that since the feds have unilaterally breached the contract the US government signed with the nuclear electrical utilities to receive the spent fuel, we the taxpayer will continue to pay fines and penalties.
What an asinine policy decision!
Look, if you are one of the man-made global warming chicken littles - as our current prez seems to be - a conversion to an all-electric ground transport system recharged with electricity from nuclear power plants is the only rational policy position. In the interest of full disclosure I have not tasted the man-made global warming theory Kool-Aid, but I do agree that as a general principle limiting the amount of fossil fuel we consume is a good thing from both an air quality and energy security perspective.
That is why I am just astounded at the oxymoronic thinking that drove Obama's decision to close Yucca Mountain. Clearly if you are genuinely concerned about CO2 emissions then you would logically be a strong supporter of nuclear power. Closing Yucca Mountain only creates a further obstacle and and increases the uncertainty regarding new nuclear plant development and/or re-licensing of existing nuc plants.
In a few days Obama is off to Copenhagen to sign an international agreement to limit the emission of greenhouse gases. The hypocrisy of this event in the face of his decision to further limit the use of nuclear power in the USA is stunning.
What an asinine policy decision!
Look, if you are one of the man-made global warming chicken littles - as our current prez seems to be - a conversion to an all-electric ground transport system recharged with electricity from nuclear power plants is the only rational policy position. In the interest of full disclosure I have not tasted the man-made global warming theory Kool-Aid, but I do agree that as a general principle limiting the amount of fossil fuel we consume is a good thing from both an air quality and energy security perspective.
That is why I am just astounded at the oxymoronic thinking that drove Obama's decision to close Yucca Mountain. Clearly if you are genuinely concerned about CO2 emissions then you would logically be a strong supporter of nuclear power. Closing Yucca Mountain only creates a further obstacle and and increases the uncertainty regarding new nuclear plant development and/or re-licensing of existing nuc plants.
In a few days Obama is off to Copenhagen to sign an international agreement to limit the emission of greenhouse gases. The hypocrisy of this event in the face of his decision to further limit the use of nuclear power in the USA is stunning.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
The Joe Wilson Affair
Okay so it is deemed unseemly to call out that the President is lying when he speaks to congress. Well Joe Wilson's only mistake was that he picked the wrong moment. He objected to BHO's statement that his health care plan would not cover illegal aliens. Joe's call out was premature. It was based on the fact that the dems had killed amendments to the House bill that would have specifically denied such coverage. Joe over-reached because the bill was still a work in progress. As a result BHO could claim that the "final bill" - whatever that is - would meet the test of his statement without being disingenuous.
Joe's timing was off because as we have now learned that both the examples that BHO put forward as "problems" with our existing health care system and that demonized the private insurance industry turned out to be completely bogus flat out lies. Joe didn't know it, but his outburst was simply mistimed.
The fact is that BHO and his dem supporters have lied time and time again about what their plan will and will not do. Here's what it will do:
To top it all off Harry Reid - the leader of the Dems in the Senate - has exempted his own state from the federal mandate provisions of the health care bill. What a cynical and unforgivable move on his part. This guy is dying in the state polls and - we can only hope - will be out of office next term. He is trying to salvage his seat at the expense of all the other states that will now have to subsidize Nevada.
Isn't politics a joke?? How do these Bozo's get elected in the first place and why do we as the electorate keep returning them to do mischief?
Please feel free to provide comments.
Joe's timing was off because as we have now learned that both the examples that BHO put forward as "problems" with our existing health care system and that demonized the private insurance industry turned out to be completely bogus flat out lies. Joe didn't know it, but his outburst was simply mistimed.
The fact is that BHO and his dem supporters have lied time and time again about what their plan will and will not do. Here's what it will do:
- It will force younger people to buy health insurance whether they feel they need it or not.
- It will bring 10's of millions of people into a system that is already overwhelmed from a supply side perspective.
- It will cut payments to doctors and hospitals as a way to control cost further exacerbating the above problem.
- It will at the end of the day force rationing of health care as that is the only proven way to control costs - as Britain, Canada and all other nations that have a single payer systems have learned.
- It will tax those employees that have "gold plated" (e.g. unions) employer provided health care plans.
- Remarkable as it may seem it will fine and - according the latest legislation being reviewed - imprison those that do not buy the government mandated insurance.
To top it all off Harry Reid - the leader of the Dems in the Senate - has exempted his own state from the federal mandate provisions of the health care bill. What a cynical and unforgivable move on his part. This guy is dying in the state polls and - we can only hope - will be out of office next term. He is trying to salvage his seat at the expense of all the other states that will now have to subsidize Nevada.
Isn't politics a joke?? How do these Bozo's get elected in the first place and why do we as the electorate keep returning them to do mischief?
Please feel free to provide comments.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Requiem for a "Lion"
As everyone's mother has always told them, "It's not nice to speak ill of the dead," but I am fed up already - and it's only the first day - at all the fawning praise of Ted Kennedy's life. I would love to hear someone in the MSM step up and interview surviving friends and family of Mary Jo Kopechne to get their opinion on his being characterized as a "Lion."
Ted Kennedy rode on the coattails of his family name his whole life. He was a cheat in school and a scoundrel and coward in the face of a true human tragedy at Chappaquiddick. The left wing loons loved him for his unabashed progressive agenda. The fact that he was elected to the US Senate for as long as he was says more about the cynicism of Massachusetts electorate than his prowess as a senator.
To top it off in his final days and knowing his clock was about to run out he actively tried to get the law he promoted overturned so that his Democrat governor could appoint a like minded lib in his place. Recall that five years ago he pushed for a special election law in Massachusetts to block the Republican governor at that time - Mitt Romney - from being able to appoint a replacement for John Kerry who was running for Prez. But according to Ted now that Democrat is in the state capital building, it is "vital" that the state of Massachusetts have two senators immediately. I guess it's only important to have two senators when you can assure that they will be good soldiers in promoting the the socialist agenda of the current occupant of the White House. What unabashed hypocrisy.
As for me I will not miss Ted Kennedy or his bloviated rhetoric one bit. The US Senate and the country are better off without his influence.
Ted Kennedy rode on the coattails of his family name his whole life. He was a cheat in school and a scoundrel and coward in the face of a true human tragedy at Chappaquiddick. The left wing loons loved him for his unabashed progressive agenda. The fact that he was elected to the US Senate for as long as he was says more about the cynicism of Massachusetts electorate than his prowess as a senator.
To top it off in his final days and knowing his clock was about to run out he actively tried to get the law he promoted overturned so that his Democrat governor could appoint a like minded lib in his place. Recall that five years ago he pushed for a special election law in Massachusetts to block the Republican governor at that time - Mitt Romney - from being able to appoint a replacement for John Kerry who was running for Prez. But according to Ted now that Democrat is in the state capital building, it is "vital" that the state of Massachusetts have two senators immediately. I guess it's only important to have two senators when you can assure that they will be good soldiers in promoting the the socialist agenda of the current occupant of the White House. What unabashed hypocrisy.
As for me I will not miss Ted Kennedy or his bloviated rhetoric one bit. The US Senate and the country are better off without his influence.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Recent Rubbish from the Administration
Why, pray tell, was Hillary Clinton in India signing an agreement to allow US companies to bid on nuclear power projects in that country when the Obama administration is unsupportive of nuclear power in the US? HC correctly stated that allowing US firms to participate in the Indian projects would provide high paying, high technology jobs to US workers. Well if it works in India don't you think the same logic would apply in the US where even more high skilled design, manufacturing and construction jobs would be created by an aggressive push to make nuclear power the backbone of our electrical production infrastructure?
As has been posited before in this space, the only intelligent solution to our energy independence problem is to create a battery-based all electric ground transportation system fueled and recharged by electricity from nuclear power plants. Not only will this free us from dependence on foreign oil but to the extent that CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels is of concern, this is the silver bullet solution. As much as it is hyped by the Obamaites and their MSM camp followers wind and solar ain't going to get the job done.
On the Health Care Reform issue tonight we will hear the "Savior" himself pitch his vision to the country. I suspect that he will reiterate the phrase that I have heard more than a few times this week that, "The worst thing we can do is to do nothing." Well here's a newsflash. That statement is not only false, it is dangerous. Despite all the liberal hand wringing on this issue and despite its shortcomings, the US health care system is still the best in the world when it comes to choice and quality of care. It may not be the most universal in its availability, but no one can argue that if you are really sick you need to be in the US for the very best care.
So the response to the above claim is "Rubbish." The worst thing we can do to the health care system in the US is to legislate changes that restrict choice, mandate coverage, increase costs (which even the CBO says is inevitable) and in the end ration care. In every country where there is universal national health care, treatment options are always rationed because at the end of the day that is the only way to contain costs.
Speaking of costs, the real way to address the problem with the cost of health care in the US is to enact meaningful medical tort reform. The ugly truth is that it is the trial lawyers who drive up the cost of malpractice insurance and the over prescription of tests and drugs as the docs try to defend themselves from these ambulance chasers. But do you think tort reform will play any part in a democratic drafted bill. Forget about it. The dems are in the pocket of the trial lawyers association and its hefty contributions to their campaigns.
When Obama complains that his plan is not about politics and that the critics are just taking partisan shots, I just want to puke at the hypocrisy of that statement.
And why, one has to ask, is Obama on such a rant about the need to move quickly. The answer is simple. He knows the only way to ram his wrong headed socialist agenda down the throats of the American people is to do it so quickly that no one has a chance to really understand what he is doing and what the consequences - both intended and unintended - might be. This is a stealth health plan and BHO is trying his best to get it passed under the radar of congress and the American people.
My friends, watch your wallets and your health care options because both are in serious jeopardy if Obama gets what he wants.
As has been posited before in this space, the only intelligent solution to our energy independence problem is to create a battery-based all electric ground transportation system fueled and recharged by electricity from nuclear power plants. Not only will this free us from dependence on foreign oil but to the extent that CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels is of concern, this is the silver bullet solution. As much as it is hyped by the Obamaites and their MSM camp followers wind and solar ain't going to get the job done.
On the Health Care Reform issue tonight we will hear the "Savior" himself pitch his vision to the country. I suspect that he will reiterate the phrase that I have heard more than a few times this week that, "The worst thing we can do is to do nothing." Well here's a newsflash. That statement is not only false, it is dangerous. Despite all the liberal hand wringing on this issue and despite its shortcomings, the US health care system is still the best in the world when it comes to choice and quality of care. It may not be the most universal in its availability, but no one can argue that if you are really sick you need to be in the US for the very best care.
So the response to the above claim is "Rubbish." The worst thing we can do to the health care system in the US is to legislate changes that restrict choice, mandate coverage, increase costs (which even the CBO says is inevitable) and in the end ration care. In every country where there is universal national health care, treatment options are always rationed because at the end of the day that is the only way to contain costs.
Speaking of costs, the real way to address the problem with the cost of health care in the US is to enact meaningful medical tort reform. The ugly truth is that it is the trial lawyers who drive up the cost of malpractice insurance and the over prescription of tests and drugs as the docs try to defend themselves from these ambulance chasers. But do you think tort reform will play any part in a democratic drafted bill. Forget about it. The dems are in the pocket of the trial lawyers association and its hefty contributions to their campaigns.
When Obama complains that his plan is not about politics and that the critics are just taking partisan shots, I just want to puke at the hypocrisy of that statement.
And why, one has to ask, is Obama on such a rant about the need to move quickly. The answer is simple. He knows the only way to ram his wrong headed socialist agenda down the throats of the American people is to do it so quickly that no one has a chance to really understand what he is doing and what the consequences - both intended and unintended - might be. This is a stealth health plan and BHO is trying his best to get it passed under the radar of congress and the American people.
My friends, watch your wallets and your health care options because both are in serious jeopardy if Obama gets what he wants.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
My Education in Education
It's been a while since my last post. One reason for this is that for the last four months or so I have been working as a substitute teacher in the Houston school system. Anyone who has run the gauntlet of substitute teaching knows how difficult this form of public service can be. This is especially true when one is working in "underprivileged" Title 1 program schools.
My very first sub assignment was a 7th grade math class in just such an environment. The school's demographics were 88% Hispanic, 10% black and 2% Caucasian. The community that feeds students to this middle school is not a ghetto but is most definitely low income where Hispanic gang violence - including drive by shootings - is a regular occurrence. As a general rule the culture of this community does not value education, so parent involvement and support is non-existent. For these parents school is no more than a state run day care center where any academic progress is just a by product.
In Texas in order to "graduate" from 8th grade and move on to high school, all students are required to pass state run standardized tests in English (reading), math and science. As a result there are 17 and 18 year old boys and girls still treading water in middle school along side 11 year old 6th graders. These kids are simply "putting in their time" until by law at 18 they no longer have to attend school. On-campus gang fights and teen pregnancy are not at all uncommon. My initial trial by fire as a substitute teacher was in this academic wasteland.
Not surprisingly I had the typical classroom management issues that face all substitute teachers but at this school they are an order of magnitude more challenging. In spite of the distractions I made my best effort to teach the material and found to my surprise that at least a few of the students were in fact interested in learning but could not bring themselves to participate in the classroom session due to peer pressure to be disruptive and disinterested. I found this out in the last period of the day which is a free period when some of the students came to me for one-on-one assistance.
I shared this experience with the head of the math department and she asked that I return on a continuing basis to team-teach and tutor 7th and 8th students along with the regular math teachers to help them prepare for the state math test. This is what I have been busy doing for the better part of the last 4 months. I am happy to report that we had a 75% pass rate in math for our 8th graders this year. Not a world beating performance, but this is up from less than 50% last year. I like to think I had something to do with this improvement.
My very first sub assignment was a 7th grade math class in just such an environment. The school's demographics were 88% Hispanic, 10% black and 2% Caucasian. The community that feeds students to this middle school is not a ghetto but is most definitely low income where Hispanic gang violence - including drive by shootings - is a regular occurrence. As a general rule the culture of this community does not value education, so parent involvement and support is non-existent. For these parents school is no more than a state run day care center where any academic progress is just a by product.
In Texas in order to "graduate" from 8th grade and move on to high school, all students are required to pass state run standardized tests in English (reading), math and science. As a result there are 17 and 18 year old boys and girls still treading water in middle school along side 11 year old 6th graders. These kids are simply "putting in their time" until by law at 18 they no longer have to attend school. On-campus gang fights and teen pregnancy are not at all uncommon. My initial trial by fire as a substitute teacher was in this academic wasteland.
Not surprisingly I had the typical classroom management issues that face all substitute teachers but at this school they are an order of magnitude more challenging. In spite of the distractions I made my best effort to teach the material and found to my surprise that at least a few of the students were in fact interested in learning but could not bring themselves to participate in the classroom session due to peer pressure to be disruptive and disinterested. I found this out in the last period of the day which is a free period when some of the students came to me for one-on-one assistance.
I shared this experience with the head of the math department and she asked that I return on a continuing basis to team-teach and tutor 7th and 8th students along with the regular math teachers to help them prepare for the state math test. This is what I have been busy doing for the better part of the last 4 months. I am happy to report that we had a 75% pass rate in math for our 8th graders this year. Not a world beating performance, but this is up from less than 50% last year. I like to think I had something to do with this improvement.
Monday, March 9, 2009
BHO Report Card
Here's my assessment of BHO's performance since his inauguration.
Economy - Yes something had to be done to inject capital into the banks and since the fed has used up its most effective pump priming tools, the only significant option left is fiscal policy - thus the bloated, earmarked stimulus package. His biggest mistake was allowing the left wing kooks in the house to write the bill so they could include all their little pet projects that the Bush administration had more effectively blocked. Not to say that the republicans were without blame in this 'pork" game. Witness Ron Paul - he of a most conservative and libertarian bent - was one of the worst offenders from my state of Texas. Plus much of what is in this bill will take many months if not years to have any meaningful effect on job creation and consumer confidence so my overall assessment is too much, too late and we'll pay dearly for it with inflation down the road. Grade C-.
Housing - As much as I personally abhor the idea of bailing out people who bought houses that they knew they couldn't afford, doing nothing is not the best option since stabilizing housing prices is key to stabilizing the economy and the markets. Whether or not the TALF legislation will be effective in doing so remains to be seen since the details of how it will work are still a little fuzzy, but we'll see. Grade an optimistic B.
Markets - Obama and his team seem blissfully unconcerned about Wall Street. Well Wall Street seems very concerned about Obama and his policies since the market has been free fall to new 12 year lows seemingly every day since his election - only to accelerate since the inauguration. Message to the Obamaites - the financial security of Main Street is intimately linked to the strength of Wall Street. Pension funds, 401K's, IRA's and the like have all been battered - and by extension the financial security of millions of Main Street folks - by the recent market implosion. To paraphrase an often misquoted former President of GM, what's good for Wall Street is good for Main Street. Obama was loud and clear on the Armageddon message to get his stimulus bill through congress, but I think he oversold the fear factor and needs to use his bully pulpit to talk up the strengths and examples of resiliency of the American economy (and there are more than just a few of those) that will lead to a strong recovery. In other words he needs to listen a little more to Warren Buffet and less to Barney Frank. Grade F.
Stem Cell Research - Reopening the door to embryonic stem cell research is a very good idea. Grade A.
US Oil Shale - Blocking large tracts of western lands to oil shale development is a very bad idea when we need all the sources of energy we can muster. Grade D-
Iraq - As much as it may rankle the hotheads on the left, BHO has generally a good job listening to his generals and executing Dubya's plan. Let's just remember that when the troops finally do come home and leave a stable, self-governing Iraq behind we know whom to thank. The "Surge" worked. Grade B+
Afghanistan - Too soon to tell where this waste of a nation is headed, but I do like Obama's resolve not to allow it to become the last refuge of the radical Taliban and Al-Qaeda factions that are still a severe threat to the west and all other developed nations. This place reminds me of the Mad Max film sets. Grade - Incomplete
Iran - Not off to the best start. Throwing Poland and the Czech Republic under the bus in an attempt to curry the assistance of Russia was naive at best and perhaps dangerous as it exposed how helpless the US government feels about having any influence in Iran. In the end however this will likely not be our problem to solve since absent some remarkable internal transformation driven by more moderate forces within the country, Israel will do what it needs to do - regardless of international opinion - to protect itself from the mad mullahs of Qom and Tehran. Grade D.
As always feedback and comments are most welcome.
Economy - Yes something had to be done to inject capital into the banks and since the fed has used up its most effective pump priming tools, the only significant option left is fiscal policy - thus the bloated, earmarked stimulus package. His biggest mistake was allowing the left wing kooks in the house to write the bill so they could include all their little pet projects that the Bush administration had more effectively blocked. Not to say that the republicans were without blame in this 'pork" game. Witness Ron Paul - he of a most conservative and libertarian bent - was one of the worst offenders from my state of Texas. Plus much of what is in this bill will take many months if not years to have any meaningful effect on job creation and consumer confidence so my overall assessment is too much, too late and we'll pay dearly for it with inflation down the road. Grade C-.
Housing - As much as I personally abhor the idea of bailing out people who bought houses that they knew they couldn't afford, doing nothing is not the best option since stabilizing housing prices is key to stabilizing the economy and the markets. Whether or not the TALF legislation will be effective in doing so remains to be seen since the details of how it will work are still a little fuzzy, but we'll see. Grade an optimistic B.
Markets - Obama and his team seem blissfully unconcerned about Wall Street. Well Wall Street seems very concerned about Obama and his policies since the market has been free fall to new 12 year lows seemingly every day since his election - only to accelerate since the inauguration. Message to the Obamaites - the financial security of Main Street is intimately linked to the strength of Wall Street. Pension funds, 401K's, IRA's and the like have all been battered - and by extension the financial security of millions of Main Street folks - by the recent market implosion. To paraphrase an often misquoted former President of GM, what's good for Wall Street is good for Main Street. Obama was loud and clear on the Armageddon message to get his stimulus bill through congress, but I think he oversold the fear factor and needs to use his bully pulpit to talk up the strengths and examples of resiliency of the American economy (and there are more than just a few of those) that will lead to a strong recovery. In other words he needs to listen a little more to Warren Buffet and less to Barney Frank. Grade F.
Stem Cell Research - Reopening the door to embryonic stem cell research is a very good idea. Grade A.
US Oil Shale - Blocking large tracts of western lands to oil shale development is a very bad idea when we need all the sources of energy we can muster. Grade D-
Iraq - As much as it may rankle the hotheads on the left, BHO has generally a good job listening to his generals and executing Dubya's plan. Let's just remember that when the troops finally do come home and leave a stable, self-governing Iraq behind we know whom to thank. The "Surge" worked. Grade B+
Afghanistan - Too soon to tell where this waste of a nation is headed, but I do like Obama's resolve not to allow it to become the last refuge of the radical Taliban and Al-Qaeda factions that are still a severe threat to the west and all other developed nations. This place reminds me of the Mad Max film sets. Grade - Incomplete
Iran - Not off to the best start. Throwing Poland and the Czech Republic under the bus in an attempt to curry the assistance of Russia was naive at best and perhaps dangerous as it exposed how helpless the US government feels about having any influence in Iran. In the end however this will likely not be our problem to solve since absent some remarkable internal transformation driven by more moderate forces within the country, Israel will do what it needs to do - regardless of international opinion - to protect itself from the mad mullahs of Qom and Tehran. Grade D.
As always feedback and comments are most welcome.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Change? More like back to the future!
For a guy who campaigned hard on the theme of a fundamental change in the way Washington works, President Obama's cabinet choices are somewhat befuddling. Let's see now.... We have the Attorney General, the Chief of Staff, the head of the CIA and the ambassador to the UN all folks from the Clinton administration. Not to mention the new Secretary of State - Mrs. Clinton her very own self!! I guess in hindsight the Dems were happy with the way Washington works when they are in charge and only object to the process when the GOP is calling the shots. Things that make you want to go hmmmmm........
And how about those ethics? Lot's of role models there. Richardson had to bail out as Secretary of Commerce because of a conflict of interest regarding campaign contributions and municipal bond projects in New Mexico. Daschle just removed his name from consideration for HHS Secretary and Nancy Killefer from consideration as "Performance Czar" (whatever that is?) due to unreported taxes. Treasury Secretary Geithner squeezes by in spite of tax problems of his own. Then we have the whole congress giving a pass on Bubba's influence peddling to Saudi sheiks and other foreign interests while confirming his wife as secretary of state. Am I the only one that is appalled at the blatant hypocrisy of the Democratic party and the MSM which up till now has largely ignored these issues.
What's particularly galling is that it is the dems who are in the vanguard of raising taxes to fund their never ending list of pork barrel and social engineering initiatives. But it seems when it comes to paying taxes the old "What me Worry?" attitude that seems to be the operative mindset. How about that Charlie Rangel as another example of Dems who think only Republicans should pay taxes. Some wag suggested that we all invoke the Rangel Rule when we fail to pay our taxes.
The times may be a changin' though for the Obama extended honeymoon. At the press conference today Obama's press secretary Robert Gibbs was getting grilled on the litany of tax and other problems that team Obama's picks have run afoul of. His responses were revealing in that rather than helping to bring transparency to the process (I think that was another BHO campaign theme), he was stonewalling and refusing to admit that there was anything wrong with the vetting process. The press corps was getting restless. Is it possible that the anointed one's free pass from the MSM might be revoked sooner than we first thought? Perhaps.
And how about those ethics? Lot's of role models there. Richardson had to bail out as Secretary of Commerce because of a conflict of interest regarding campaign contributions and municipal bond projects in New Mexico. Daschle just removed his name from consideration for HHS Secretary and Nancy Killefer from consideration as "Performance Czar" (whatever that is?) due to unreported taxes. Treasury Secretary Geithner squeezes by in spite of tax problems of his own. Then we have the whole congress giving a pass on Bubba's influence peddling to Saudi sheiks and other foreign interests while confirming his wife as secretary of state. Am I the only one that is appalled at the blatant hypocrisy of the Democratic party and the MSM which up till now has largely ignored these issues.
What's particularly galling is that it is the dems who are in the vanguard of raising taxes to fund their never ending list of pork barrel and social engineering initiatives. But it seems when it comes to paying taxes the old "What me Worry?" attitude that seems to be the operative mindset. How about that Charlie Rangel as another example of Dems who think only Republicans should pay taxes. Some wag suggested that we all invoke the Rangel Rule when we fail to pay our taxes.
The times may be a changin' though for the Obama extended honeymoon. At the press conference today Obama's press secretary Robert Gibbs was getting grilled on the litany of tax and other problems that team Obama's picks have run afoul of. His responses were revealing in that rather than helping to bring transparency to the process (I think that was another BHO campaign theme), he was stonewalling and refusing to admit that there was anything wrong with the vetting process. The press corps was getting restless. Is it possible that the anointed one's free pass from the MSM might be revoked sooner than we first thought? Perhaps.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Why do people have weird ideas?
In an earlier blog I named a few of my heroes in the cause of rational thinking. One of those is Michael Shermer who writes the Skeptic column every month for Scientific American. His latest in the December 08 issue talks about the penchant for us mere mortals to seek meaningful patterns in the random cacophony of news and events that bombard us every day. This is called patternicity.
As examples Mr. Shermer asks why do people see faces in nature, hear voices in electronic white noise, or images of the Virgin Mary in coffee stains and dirty windows. The answer he effectively argues is that we are programed by evolution to do so because sensing and reacting to patterns is at the very least a competitive advantage and in some cases a survival mechanism.
It is a competitive advantage because it provides for greater efficiency. For example early humanoids that were able to detect and then predict patterns of movement of game would be more efficient hunters. Similarly the ability to recognize patterns in the behavior of predators would clearly lead to a greater probability of survival and thus would be a genetic trait that would be reinforced in subsequent generations.
Mr. Shermer refers to work done by Harvard University biologist Kevin R. Foster and University of Helsinki biologist Hanna Kokko who have put forth the notion that whenever the cost believing a false pattern is real (i.e. a false positive) is less than the cost of not believing a real pattern (i.e. a false negative) natural selection will favor the development of patternicity.
A real life example that we can all identify with is how we react to a sudden change in our environment. Be it a loud noise or a surprise encounter with another person most people would describe their reaction as being startled - or some might say that (or you) gave me a fright. In other words we are programed to react to such situations as potential threats. You can see how the above theory works in this situation. Clearly the risks of reacting to a non-threat situation as if it were real are low, but the risk of not reacting to a real threat situation are very high.
The problem - As Mr. Shermer points out - is that we are not very good at figuring these probabilities so our tendency to see all sorts of weird patterns in non-meaningful data is usually a harmless low-cost artifact of our evolved need to detect and react to non-weird patterns. So keep on looking for UFO's and messages in tea leaves. For the most part it won't hurt anyone, but don't quit your day job.
As examples Mr. Shermer asks why do people see faces in nature, hear voices in electronic white noise, or images of the Virgin Mary in coffee stains and dirty windows. The answer he effectively argues is that we are programed by evolution to do so because sensing and reacting to patterns is at the very least a competitive advantage and in some cases a survival mechanism.
It is a competitive advantage because it provides for greater efficiency. For example early humanoids that were able to detect and then predict patterns of movement of game would be more efficient hunters. Similarly the ability to recognize patterns in the behavior of predators would clearly lead to a greater probability of survival and thus would be a genetic trait that would be reinforced in subsequent generations.
Mr. Shermer refers to work done by Harvard University biologist Kevin R. Foster and University of Helsinki biologist Hanna Kokko who have put forth the notion that whenever the cost believing a false pattern is real (i.e. a false positive) is less than the cost of not believing a real pattern (i.e. a false negative) natural selection will favor the development of patternicity.
A real life example that we can all identify with is how we react to a sudden change in our environment. Be it a loud noise or a surprise encounter with another person most people would describe their reaction as being startled - or some might say that (or you) gave me a fright. In other words we are programed to react to such situations as potential threats. You can see how the above theory works in this situation. Clearly the risks of reacting to a non-threat situation as if it were real are low, but the risk of not reacting to a real threat situation are very high.
The problem - As Mr. Shermer points out - is that we are not very good at figuring these probabilities so our tendency to see all sorts of weird patterns in non-meaningful data is usually a harmless low-cost artifact of our evolved need to detect and react to non-weird patterns. So keep on looking for UFO's and messages in tea leaves. For the most part it won't hurt anyone, but don't quit your day job.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
The Auto Industry Dilemma
When is a "bailout" not a bailout? When it isn't. The choice of the loaded word "bailout" to describe the recent $700B TARP legislation and now being used in the context of the US auto industry travails is both unfortunate and inaccurate.
First a few facts. As previously explained in this blog we got into this mess because the dems in congress and their activist legal pit bulls cajoled and threatened banks to lend money to people who couldn't afford it to buy houses. Then they compounded the problem by strong arming Frannie and Freddie into guaranteeing those loans so that they could be packaged and sold as high quality investments. This whole house of cards was working fine until the housing bubble popped and folks who had no business being in homes they couldn't afford in the first place were under water and facing higher interest rates as their "teaser" mortgage rates began to reset to market values.
If this weren't bad enough a few "too clever for their own good" insurance industry types created the Credit Default Swap (CDS) product which basically became a naked short vehicle for investors to bet that there would be a higher than normal default rate. This proved to be like throwing gasoline on a fire. The result is history.
So when the media and some in congress referred to the TARP as a Wall Street bailout they were flat out wrong and in some cases purposely disingenuous. The TARP was absolutely necessary to protect Main Street from a complete lock up of the credit markets. Furthermore the way the TARP funds have been used to date is anything but a taxpayer funded bailout of the financial industry. The TARP funds have been used to purchase preferred stock in banks and other financial institutions. These purchases are time bound with respect to when they have to be liquidated and the taxpayers made whole, and in the meantime Joe and Jane taxpayer get to earn a very nice interest rate to boot. Not a bad deal for anyone.
Now to the auto industry discussion. There are people out there that just have it in for Detroit. I am not sure why but just as inexplicable as the left's hatred of Bush there are people who perceive the US auto industry as venal, corrupt and incapable of producing a quality product. I'm not saying the execs in the US industry are angels but let's face it, the real problem with the US auto industry is the legacy of the gold plated union contracts that were cut back in the 50's when the US auto industry was the only game in town. And as far as quality is concerned, I have owned both Ford and GM products for the last 16 years and I would match their quality with any of the foreign competition. The fact is that public perception of the quality of US manufacturers is a decade or more behind the reality. Now this is a legacy that the auto makers have to take ownership of because of all the crap cars they produced in the 70's and 80's. Trust lost is very hard to regain.
The US needs a strong domestically owned auto industry. It's not just jobs but also technology development and manufacturing process improvements. Furthermore once again whatever package is ultimately approved by congress it will not be a "bailout." It will have all kind of hooks to ensure that the taxpayers are repaid (remember we did this once before with Chrysler on Lee Iacoca's watch) and that executive compensation is moderate. My only concern at this point is that in pandering to the enviro-nazi movement the democratic controlled congress may try to dictate products that must be built rather than letting consumers drive that decision.
Bottom line - I am for helping the US auto industry through this trying and temporary situation and I hope you are too.
First a few facts. As previously explained in this blog we got into this mess because the dems in congress and their activist legal pit bulls cajoled and threatened banks to lend money to people who couldn't afford it to buy houses. Then they compounded the problem by strong arming Frannie and Freddie into guaranteeing those loans so that they could be packaged and sold as high quality investments. This whole house of cards was working fine until the housing bubble popped and folks who had no business being in homes they couldn't afford in the first place were under water and facing higher interest rates as their "teaser" mortgage rates began to reset to market values.
If this weren't bad enough a few "too clever for their own good" insurance industry types created the Credit Default Swap (CDS) product which basically became a naked short vehicle for investors to bet that there would be a higher than normal default rate. This proved to be like throwing gasoline on a fire. The result is history.
So when the media and some in congress referred to the TARP as a Wall Street bailout they were flat out wrong and in some cases purposely disingenuous. The TARP was absolutely necessary to protect Main Street from a complete lock up of the credit markets. Furthermore the way the TARP funds have been used to date is anything but a taxpayer funded bailout of the financial industry. The TARP funds have been used to purchase preferred stock in banks and other financial institutions. These purchases are time bound with respect to when they have to be liquidated and the taxpayers made whole, and in the meantime Joe and Jane taxpayer get to earn a very nice interest rate to boot. Not a bad deal for anyone.
Now to the auto industry discussion. There are people out there that just have it in for Detroit. I am not sure why but just as inexplicable as the left's hatred of Bush there are people who perceive the US auto industry as venal, corrupt and incapable of producing a quality product. I'm not saying the execs in the US industry are angels but let's face it, the real problem with the US auto industry is the legacy of the gold plated union contracts that were cut back in the 50's when the US auto industry was the only game in town. And as far as quality is concerned, I have owned both Ford and GM products for the last 16 years and I would match their quality with any of the foreign competition. The fact is that public perception of the quality of US manufacturers is a decade or more behind the reality. Now this is a legacy that the auto makers have to take ownership of because of all the crap cars they produced in the 70's and 80's. Trust lost is very hard to regain.
The US needs a strong domestically owned auto industry. It's not just jobs but also technology development and manufacturing process improvements. Furthermore once again whatever package is ultimately approved by congress it will not be a "bailout." It will have all kind of hooks to ensure that the taxpayers are repaid (remember we did this once before with Chrysler on Lee Iacoca's watch) and that executive compensation is moderate. My only concern at this point is that in pandering to the enviro-nazi movement the democratic controlled congress may try to dictate products that must be built rather than letting consumers drive that decision.
Bottom line - I am for helping the US auto industry through this trying and temporary situation and I hope you are too.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
A Historic Election
Much to my chagrin the American electorate has confounded traditional political expectations. I say that not because Obama is 50% African-American, but because for the very first time ever they have elected a truly blank slate. This result can only be explained as the triumph of mindless hope over objective evidence of any significant executive or legislative ability or experience.
I now must revert to hoping that the trust the American people have placed in President-elect Obama turns out to be justified. Unlike the Bush-hating left who wanted to see Bush and all of his policies fail regardless of their consequences for our troops and our future, I truly hope that Obama succeeds beyond my wildest imagination. I will keep an open mind and should he be able to hold to the center and support substantive and beneficial policies he might even win my vote in 2012. If on the other hand he becomes the tool of the hard core left wing of the Democratic party - exemplified by Ms. Pelosi - then not only will the country be worse off but our current problems will only magnify in severity.
I am somewhat amused, however, at the off noted reaction from the black community and its angst-ridden caucasian sympathizers that now for the first time they can actually tell their children that anything is possible. As if that weren't the case before. What nobody talks about is that the only reason Obama got to this point was that he was raised and nurtured by white grandparents. In other words his color was never an issue. It was his policies, values and ideas. This is something that the black community doesn't want to hear. They would prefer to blame any and all individual failure to move up the social and political ladder on racism - either overt or latent.
The fact is that America has moved beyond race but still is rooted in its core values. A black culture that revels in misogynistic hip-hop, thinks ebonics is equivalent to standard english, and is dismissive of excellence in education will never produce a viable presidential candidate. It took a mixed race gentleman with a solid educational and outstanding communication skills to make the breakthrough. Let's hope that's a lesson learned.
Please feel free to let me know what you think.
I now must revert to hoping that the trust the American people have placed in President-elect Obama turns out to be justified. Unlike the Bush-hating left who wanted to see Bush and all of his policies fail regardless of their consequences for our troops and our future, I truly hope that Obama succeeds beyond my wildest imagination. I will keep an open mind and should he be able to hold to the center and support substantive and beneficial policies he might even win my vote in 2012. If on the other hand he becomes the tool of the hard core left wing of the Democratic party - exemplified by Ms. Pelosi - then not only will the country be worse off but our current problems will only magnify in severity.
I am somewhat amused, however, at the off noted reaction from the black community and its angst-ridden caucasian sympathizers that now for the first time they can actually tell their children that anything is possible. As if that weren't the case before. What nobody talks about is that the only reason Obama got to this point was that he was raised and nurtured by white grandparents. In other words his color was never an issue. It was his policies, values and ideas. This is something that the black community doesn't want to hear. They would prefer to blame any and all individual failure to move up the social and political ladder on racism - either overt or latent.
The fact is that America has moved beyond race but still is rooted in its core values. A black culture that revels in misogynistic hip-hop, thinks ebonics is equivalent to standard english, and is dismissive of excellence in education will never produce a viable presidential candidate. It took a mixed race gentleman with a solid educational and outstanding communication skills to make the breakthrough. Let's hope that's a lesson learned.
Please feel free to let me know what you think.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Campaign Observations
As we enter the home stretch of the campaign I would like to share a few thoughts and observations.
I am amazed by the MSM (mainstream media) focus on what they describe as Sarah Palin's inexperience and unfitness for the VP office. By any objective measure as a successful and very popular mayor and state governor (of any size or population), she has demonstrated more executive talent and experience than Obama. I believe that what the MSM really means is that as an outsider to Washington and being relatively unknown to them makes her "inexperienced." Not how I would define it but that's the MSM view of the world.
Along the same lines I was amused and disappointed to hear Colin Powell - a man I greatly respect and honor for his service to our country - would use the selection of Palin as VP as the "reason" he is endorsing Obama. What nonsense. There are a host of policy reasons he could have cited but let's be honest. I think it is obvious that Powell desperately wanted to support Obama because he is black but he couldn't say that, and since he couldn't do so on policy grounds he picked what he believed was an easy target. A straw man endorsement for sure.
Obama remains to me and many others a complete cipher. He has no established record of any accomplishments at all. He talks a good game but hearkening back to another campaign slogan of a generation ago - "Where's the beef?" The most revealing event about his true position on where he would try to lead the country was his comment to the now infamous Joe the plumber. Obama is at his core a socialist and redistributionalist. This is the European model and explains why he is so popular across the pond.
In addition I just saw a chilling video wherein Obama himself details his plans for our nation's defence. What he proposes amounts to unilateral disarmament. Why would any of us trust this guy with the presidency?
As I have said in an earlier blog the real problem with an Obama presidency is that it is clear that both the House and Senate will be controlled by very large democrat majorities. Putting Obama, Reid and Pelosi in series will result in the most left wing troika this country has ever seen. If this happens stand by and watch your wallets.
I am amazed by the MSM (mainstream media) focus on what they describe as Sarah Palin's inexperience and unfitness for the VP office. By any objective measure as a successful and very popular mayor and state governor (of any size or population), she has demonstrated more executive talent and experience than Obama. I believe that what the MSM really means is that as an outsider to Washington and being relatively unknown to them makes her "inexperienced." Not how I would define it but that's the MSM view of the world.
Along the same lines I was amused and disappointed to hear Colin Powell - a man I greatly respect and honor for his service to our country - would use the selection of Palin as VP as the "reason" he is endorsing Obama. What nonsense. There are a host of policy reasons he could have cited but let's be honest. I think it is obvious that Powell desperately wanted to support Obama because he is black but he couldn't say that, and since he couldn't do so on policy grounds he picked what he believed was an easy target. A straw man endorsement for sure.
Obama remains to me and many others a complete cipher. He has no established record of any accomplishments at all. He talks a good game but hearkening back to another campaign slogan of a generation ago - "Where's the beef?" The most revealing event about his true position on where he would try to lead the country was his comment to the now infamous Joe the plumber. Obama is at his core a socialist and redistributionalist. This is the European model and explains why he is so popular across the pond.
In addition I just saw a chilling video wherein Obama himself details his plans for our nation's defence. What he proposes amounts to unilateral disarmament. Why would any of us trust this guy with the presidency?
As I have said in an earlier blog the real problem with an Obama presidency is that it is clear that both the House and Senate will be controlled by very large democrat majorities. Putting Obama, Reid and Pelosi in series will result in the most left wing troika this country has ever seen. If this happens stand by and watch your wallets.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Who Caused the Current Financial Crisis? Not Bush and not Wall Street
What a day! The Dow suffered its worst loss in history. The S&P and Nasdaq also got clobbered big time. How did it come to this? The genesis was in the sub-prime market meltdown and the consequent inability to value these assets on the books of banks and other financial institutions. Note that these securities are not valueless but no one knows how to fairly value them.
Now here's where it gets interesting. One of provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley is that companies are now required to take a conservative approach in valuing any balance sheet assets. Since no one can put a fair value on the securitized mortgage assets, Sarb-Ox requires that they be written down to essentially zero. This is what is causing the failure of banks and other financial companies such as Bear Sterns and Morgan Stanley.
So what happen? The short answer is that up until 2 years ago Frannie and Freddie were prohibited by law from providing security for mortgages issued to unqualified borrowers. In other words there were specific borrower qualification requirements that banks had to follow in order to use the Fannie and Freddie facility. Guess what happened. The congressional Democrats were unhappy that so many low income people could not qualify under these rules so they forced (remember that the Dems have controlled congress for the last two years) Frannie and Freddie to lift their requirements. This gave banks and other lenders a free reign to sign up mortgages with as many people as possible regardless of their ability to pay. Not only that they were allowed to market all sorts of non-conventional products such as interest-only and teaser rate adjustable loans that the GSE's were now allowed (in fact encourgaged) to securitize. In addition liberal activist attorneys sued lenders - e.g. Citibank - if they did not aggressively market this junk even though most bankers realized that this was a very risky move.
Who raised the alarm? The Administration and John McCain were on the forefront in issuing warnings but they went unheeded. Bottom line is that we have the congressional democrats and their leaders to blame for the current crisis and no one else.
You can perhaps understand why I am outraged at the blatant and unabashed hypocrisy of BHO, Pelosi and in particular Barney Frank who orchestrated the situation we now have to fix.
Even more remarkable is that they try to blame it on Bush and "greedy" Wall Street! Unbelievable. This is a very important election issue that can not and must not be swept under the rug.
Now here's where it gets interesting. One of provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley is that companies are now required to take a conservative approach in valuing any balance sheet assets. Since no one can put a fair value on the securitized mortgage assets, Sarb-Ox requires that they be written down to essentially zero. This is what is causing the failure of banks and other financial companies such as Bear Sterns and Morgan Stanley.
So what happen? The short answer is that up until 2 years ago Frannie and Freddie were prohibited by law from providing security for mortgages issued to unqualified borrowers. In other words there were specific borrower qualification requirements that banks had to follow in order to use the Fannie and Freddie facility. Guess what happened. The congressional Democrats were unhappy that so many low income people could not qualify under these rules so they forced (remember that the Dems have controlled congress for the last two years) Frannie and Freddie to lift their requirements. This gave banks and other lenders a free reign to sign up mortgages with as many people as possible regardless of their ability to pay. Not only that they were allowed to market all sorts of non-conventional products such as interest-only and teaser rate adjustable loans that the GSE's were now allowed (in fact encourgaged) to securitize. In addition liberal activist attorneys sued lenders - e.g. Citibank - if they did not aggressively market this junk even though most bankers realized that this was a very risky move.
Who raised the alarm? The Administration and John McCain were on the forefront in issuing warnings but they went unheeded. Bottom line is that we have the congressional democrats and their leaders to blame for the current crisis and no one else.
You can perhaps understand why I am outraged at the blatant and unabashed hypocrisy of BHO, Pelosi and in particular Barney Frank who orchestrated the situation we now have to fix.
Even more remarkable is that they try to blame it on Bush and "greedy" Wall Street! Unbelievable. This is a very important election issue that can not and must not be swept under the rug.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
