Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, June 22, 2010


No newsbites yesterday; sorry; busy day.

Anyway...

What's old is new again in The Age of Obama.

(*SIGH*)

13 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/22/AR2010062200813_pf.html

The top U.S. general in Afghanistan was summoned to Washington for a White House meeting after apologizing Tuesday for flippant and dismissive remarks about top Obama administration officials involved in Afghanistan policy.

(*SNORT*)

* YEAH... EVERYTHING'S FINE WITH THE OBAMA "FOREIGN POLICY." NOTHING TO BE... er... ALARMED ABOUT.

(*SMIRK*)

* SERIOUSLY, FOLKS... EVEN THE MOST BASIC DISCIPLINE IS BREAKING DOWN DURING THIS PUTZ'S WATCH.

* OH... AND IN THE MEANTIME... MORE BLOOD AND TREASURE SPILLED...

(*SIGH*)

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704895204575320581980487938.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLETopStories

A Pakistani-born U.S. citizen, calling himself "a Muslim soldier" avenging U.S. attacks in Muslim countries, admitted Monday that he tried to detonate a crudely made car bomb in New York's Times Square in May. ... He faces life in prison when he is sentenced.

* HE SHOULD BE FACING EXECUTION.

* THE UNITED STATES OF 2010 IS A FUNDAMENTALLY UNSERIOUS AND ONE MIGHT EVEN ADVANCE THE NOTION "SUICIDAL" COUNTRY.

* SO... YEAR AFTER YEAR... TEN, TWENTY, THIRTY, FORTY, FIFTY YEARS - PERHAPS LONGER - U.S. TAXPAYERS WILL BE PAYING TO FEED, SHELTER, AND OTHERWISE CARE FOR THIS PIECE OF GARBAGE.

* HEY... I'VE GOT AN IDEA! LET'S REQUIRE THAT ALL SENTENCES ARE ACCOMPANIED BY A COST PROJECTION - AN OFFICIAL ESTIMATE OF THE LIFETIME FINANCIAL COSTS OF THE SENTENCE.

William R. Barker said...

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10971283

[R]ecent premium hikes requested by insurers for individual coverage averaged 20%. Some customers were able to switch plans and pay less, so people paying on their own actually wound up paying 13% more on average.

* OH...! HALLELUJAH! "ONLY" 13%. (NOW OF COURSE THE REASON THEY'RE PAYING LESS (*SNORT*) IS OF COURSE BECAUSE THEY'RE GETTING LESS...!!!

* AIN'T OBAMACARE GREAT!

William R. Barker said...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2010/voters_say_hillary_more_qualified_to_be_president_than_obama_romney_gingrich_palin

U.S. voters think Hillary Clinton is more qualified to be president than Barack Obama...57% of voters feel Clinton is qualified to be president...

* USUALLY I IGNORE POLLING BECAUSE BY AND LARGE IT'S EITHER MEANINGLESS OR DISTORTED (OR BOTH).

* ONE POINT I WILL MAKE THOUGH: THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO FACT-BASED BACKING FOR THE CONTENTION THAT HRC IS QUALIFIED TO BE A GOOD PRESIDENT.

* SERIOUSLY. OF THE POLLING SAME WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU GUESS COULD COME UP WITH ANY SOLID FACTS TO BACK UP THE CONTENTION THAT HRC IS QUALIFIED TO BE A GOOD PRESIDENT? SERIOUSLY... SHE'S SECRETARY OF STATE AND SINCE SHE'S BEEN SECRETARY OF STATE ALL WE'VE SEEN IS ONE FOREIGN POLICY DISASTER AFTER ANOTHER.

* GOD HELP THIS ONCE GREAT NATION...

William R. Barker said...

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/104635-dems-wont-pass-budget

House Democrats will not pass a budget blueprint in 2010, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) will confirm in a speech on Tuesday.

* AND OF COURSE NO "BLUEPRINT" MEANS NO BUDGET...

* FOLKS... THIS IS YOUR DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IN ACTION.

The House has never failed to pass an annual budget resolution since the current budget rules were put into place in 1974.

* FOLKS... OUR COUNTRY IS IN THE HANDS OF... OF... OF I DON'T KNOW WHO. ONE THING I DO KNOW - THEY'RE INCOMPETENT AND CORRUPT. THEY'RE INCOMPETENT AND CORRUPT TO AN EXTENT NEVER BEFORE SEEN IN AMERICAN HISTORY.

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704895204575320560421570360.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

In many respects, the Deepwater Horizon disaster and Katrina are mirror images of each other. The harm from Katrina was on state land - mainly Louisiana, but also Florida, Alabama and Mississippi. As a result, President George W. Bush and the federal government were limited in what they could do.

* YES... RECALL THAT PRIOR TO THE START OF THE AGE OF OBAMA THERE WAS THIS QUAINT OLD CUSTOM OFTEN REFERRED TO AS "THE RULE OF LAW."

For example, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff wanted to take command of disaster relief on the day before landfall, but Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco refused.

* AGAIN... HISTORIANS WILL CONFIRM THAT "PRE-AGE OF OBAMA" THERE WERE LIMITS UPON PRESIDENTIAL POWERS.

Federal response was hindered because the law gave first authority to state and local authorities.

* SOME OF YOU MAY RECALL "MR. CHOCOLATE CITY" HIMSELF, RAY "THE NIMROD" NAGIN, AS THE MAN ON THE SPOT.

* OH... AND PLEASE RECALL... THE FREE AND INDEPENDENT CITIZENS OF NEW ORLEANS SAW FIT TO REWARD NAGIN FOR HIS... er... "MASTERFUL PERFORMANCE OF HIS DUTIES" DURING THE KATRINA DISASTER WITH RE-ELECTION TO A SECOND TERM!

(*SMIRK*)

State and local efforts - particularly in New Orleans, and Louisiana more broadly - interfered with what actions the federal government could actually take. New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin was late in ordering an evacuation and did not allow the use of school buses for evacuation, which could have saved hundreds of lives. President Bush had no power to change that decision.

* REALITY'S A BITCH. (*SHRUG*)

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill is on federal offshore territory.

The federal government has primary responsibility for handling the situation, while state and local governments remain limited in what they can do. ... As opposed to Katrina, state and local attempts to address the oil spill have been hindered by an ineffectual and chaotic federal response.

Two days after Katrina's landfall, Mr. Bush suspended the Jones Act [in order] to allow assistance [in foreign] for Katrina victims.

During Katrina, over 70 foreign countries pledged emergency assistance.

In the current situation, President Barack Obama has not suspended the Jones Act.

Many countries such as the Netherlands, which would like to help and have expertise in cleaning oil spills, can offer only limited relief. This is significantly delaying the cleanup.

The Jones Act, which requires American crews, is a favorite of organized labor, a major supporter of Mr. Obama.

* I'M SURE THAT'S JUST A COINCIDENCE... (*ROLLING MY EYES*) (*SNICKER*)

Mr. Bush was a Republican, and elected Democrats controlled Louisiana and New Orleans, the main victims of Katrina. Many claimed Mr. Bush neglected New Orleans for this reason. Mr. Obama is a Democrat, and the states affected by Deepwater Horizon - Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida - all have Republican governors. I have not seen anyone, even on the right, claim that the ineffectual response of the Obama administration is due to partisan politics.

* WOW... GOOD POINT! I HAD FORGOTTEN THAT! ALL IN ALL, GREAT OP-ED!

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704256304575321140400008942.html?mod=WSJ_hps_MIDDLEThirdNews

Pentagon contracts for truck transportation and security along its supply chain in Afghanistan have spawned a thriving "protection racket" that is lining the pockets of local warlords and undermining the central government's authority at the cost of U.S. taxpayers, according to a congressional probe.

A six-month investigation of over $2 billion in Pentagon contracts for trucking food, fuel, supplies and ammunition to support the U.S.-led war against the Taliban found that contractors - some with close ties to Afghan President Hamid Karzai - are operating with little or no oversight and routinely bribe local officials and possibly Taliban commanders for safe passage of goods.

* OH, PLEASE.... I AM SHOCKED... SHOCKED... THAT BRIBERTY GOES ON IN AFGHANISTAN! (*SMIRK*)

* THE PROBLEM ISN'T SO MUCH THAT DOLLARS ARE REPLACING CASUALTIES (THAT'S A GOOD THING!) BUT THE LARGER PICTURE THAT COMES OUT OF THIS SIMPLY REINFORCES THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE IN AFGHANISTAN IN FORCE TO BEGIN WITH!

The Pentagon has acknowledged it has a problem with corruption in Afghanistan.

* YA THINK...?!?!

On Friday, the Defense Department announced plans to create a task force...

* FOLKS... OUR COUNTRY IS DYSFUNCTIONAL. YES... YOU READ THAT CORRECTLY... "PLANS TO CREATE A TASK FORCE..." (*SIGH*)

In all, last year coalition forces awarded about $14 billion in local contracts. Moving goods over land by truck is critical in Afghanistan, a landlocked country with poor infrastructure. The $2 billion HNT contract moves roughly 70% of all goods and materiel sent to U.S. troops through eight contractors. One of the largest, NCL Holdings, was founded in 2005 by the son of Afghanistan's Defense Minister.

* YOU'RE TAKING THIS IN, RIGHT...???

The report singles out an Afghan warlord called Commander Ruhullah - known to locals as "The Butcher" for his violent tactics - as "the single largest security provider for the U.S. supply chain in Afghanistan."

* MAKE YOU PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN, HUH...

Commander Ruhullah guards some 3,500 U.S. supply trucks a month for several contractors, charging up to $1,500 per truck for their safe arrival in Kandahar. His forces guard trucks with heavy guns that are technically off limits to U.S. contractors. Critics have said powerful local militias such as Commander Ruhullah's have flourished by rebranding themselves as private security companies. The forces of Commander Ruhullah operate under contract with Watan Risk Management, a security firm owned by Ahmed Rateb Popal and Rashid Popal, cousins of Mr. Karzai.

* DID WE LEARN NOTHING FROM VIETNAM...???

Afghan army and police officials also get a piece of the action, according to the report. Watan Risk Management officials told House investigators the company pays between $1,000 and $10,000 a month to nearly every Afghan governor, police chief and local military commander whose territory the company traverses.

* CHICAGO POLITICS WRIT LARGE. WELCOME TO THE AGE OF OBAMA... INTERNATIONAL!

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704895204575320892241446242.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop

The President has appointed a seven-person commission to take what he says will be an objective look at what caused the Gulf spill and the steps to make offshore drilling safe. ... Mr. Obama filled out his commission last week, and the news is that there's neither an oil nor drilling expert in the bunch.

* PLEASE... PLEASE... PLEASE... TELL ME THAT THIS IS NOT THE CASE...!!!

One co-chair is former Democratic Senator Bob Graham, who fought drilling off Florida throughout his career.

The other is William Reilly, who ran the Environmental Protection Agency under President George H.W. Bush but is best known as a former president and former chairman of the World Wildlife Fund, one of the big environmental lobbies.

* LET'S SEE... WHO ELSE...

Donald Boesch, a University of Maryland "biological oceanographer"...

Terry Garcia, an executive vice president at the National Geographic Society...

Fran Ulmer, Chancellor of the University of Alaska Anchorage...also on the board of the Union of Concerned Scientists...

Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council...

Rounding out the panel is its lone member with an engineering background, Harvard's Cherry A. Murray, though her specialties are physics and optics.

* OK. SHOULDN'T THERE BE... er... PETROLEUM ENGINEERS... GEOLOGISTS... PERHAPS A SEISMOLOGIST ON THE PANEL...???

Whatever their other expertise, none of these worthies knows much if anything about petroleum engineering. Where is the expert on modern drilling techniques, or rig safety, or even blowout preventers?

The choice of men and women who are long opposed to more drilling suggests not a fair technical inquiry but an antidrilling political agenda.

(*SHRUG*) (HARD TO ARGUE...)

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel took this theme for a test drive on Sunday when he said that Republicans think "the aggrieved party here is BP, not the fisherman." He added that this ought to remind Americans "what Republican governance is like." The antidrilling commission could feed into this campaign narrative with a mid-September, pre-election report that blames the disaster on the industry and Bush-era regulators and recommends a ban on most offshore exploration. The media would duly salute, while Democrats could then take the handoff and force antidrilling votes on Capitol Hill.

* UNFORTUNATELY... SOUNDS PLAUSIBLE. (*SHRUG*) (*PURSED LIPS*)

William R. Barker said...

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9GGG1G00&show_article=1

Mexico is asking a federal court in Arizona to declare the state's new immigration law unconstitutional.

Lawyers for Mexico on Tuesday submitted a legal brief in support of a lawsuit challenging the law.

* HMM... CAN A SOVERIGN NATION SUE THE UNITED STATES OR A PART THEREOF...??? I WOULD GUESS THAT THEY CAN'T - THAT THEY WOULD HAVE NO STANDING - BUT THINGS BEING WHAT THEY ARE... (*SHRUG*)

* ANYONE KNOW FOR SURE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER...???

William R. Barker said...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/22/mexican-gangs-permanent-lookouts-parkland/

Mexican drug cartels have set up shop on American soil, maintaining lookout bases in strategic locations in the hills of southern Arizona from which their scouts can monitor every move made by law enforcement officials, federal agents tell Fox News.

“To say that this area is out of control is an understatement," said an agent who patrols the area and asked not to be named. "We (federal border agents), as well as the Pima County Sheriff Office and the Bureau of Land Management, can attest to that.”

(*JUST...NUMB*)

* OH... AND BY THE WAY... IF NEWS REPORTS ARE TO BE BELIEVED, PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS DECIDED TO JOIN MEXICO IN SUING ARIZONA AS OPPOSED TO ASSISTING ARIZONA IN PROTECTING ITSELF, ITS CITIZENS, AND AMERICA.

William R. Barker said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/opinion/22Brownfield.html?ref=opinion

* OP-ED BY CHRISTOPHER BROWNFIELD, FORMER NUCLEAR SUBMARINE OFFICER:

President Obama needs to create a new command structure that places responsibility for plugging the [Macondo oil well] leak with the Navy, the only organization in the world that can muster the necessary team.

Then the Navy needs to demolish the well.

[T]he Navy...alone has the resources to stop the flow. [The Navy] commands explosives experts who have vast knowledge of underwater demolitions. And it has some of the world’s finest underwater engineers at Naval Reactors, the secretive program that is responsible for designing nuclear reactors for nuclear submarines. With the help of scientists in our national weapons laboratories and experts from private companies, these engineers can be let loose on the well.

[T]he Navy could focus on stopping the leak with a conventional demolition. This means more than simply “blowing it up;” it means drilling a hole parallel to the leaking well and lowering charges to form an explosive column. Upon detonating several tons of explosives, a pressure wave of hundreds of thousands of pounds per square inch would spread outward in the same way that light spreads from a tubular fluorescent bulb, evenly and far. Such a sidelong explosion would implode the oil well upstream of the leak by crushing it under a layer of impermeable rock, much as stepping on a garden hose stops the stream of water.

It’s true that the primary blast of a conventional explosion is less effective underwater than on land because of the intense back-pressure that muffles the shock wave. But as a submariner who studied the detonation of torpedoes, I learned that an underwater explosion also creates rapid follow-on shockwaves. In this case, the expansion and collapse of explosive gases inside the hole would act like a hydraulic jackhammer, further pulverizing the rock.

The idea of detonating the well already has serious advocates. A few people have even called for using a nuclear device to plug the well, as the Soviet Union has done several times. But that would be overkill. Smartly placed conventional explosives could achieve the same results, and avoid setting an unacceptable international precedent for the “peaceful” use of nuclear weapons.

At best, a conventional demolition would seal the leaking well completely and permanently without damaging the oil reservoir. At worst, oil might seep through a tortuous flow-path that would complicate long-term cleanup efforts. But given the size and makeup of the geological structures between the seabed and the reservoir, it’s virtually inconceivable that an explosive could blast a bigger hole than already exists and release even more oil.

William R. Barker said...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2010-06-22-editorial22_ST_N.htm

If there are two things that middle-class taxpayers who behave responsibly don't like, they are (1) having their money go to irresponsible people, and (2) having their money go to richer people.

* I'D CONCUR!

Federal housing policy manages to hit the daily double.

* YEP!

Start with President Obama's anti-foreclosure program, which gives homeowners who have taken on too much mortgage debt a chance at a federally subsidized refinancing deal.

On Monday, his administration released a report saying that most borrowers who had entered the program have dropped out, often because they could not document their income.

(*SMIRK*)

Last week, Fitch, one of the major credit rating agencies, predicted that most people who do get new loans will default within a year.

* YA THINK...?!?! (*ROLLING MY EYES*)

The Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, is merely the latest in a multidecade series of misguided policies to promote homeownership. These policies have accomplished little but drive up home prices and promote irresponsible lending and borrowing. They are major contributors to the federal deficit and often assist people who don't need help.

Tax breaks to homeowners will cost the Treasury $212 billion per year by 2012, according to the Urban Institute. That's about four times what is spent on homeland security.

More than half of the total comes from the deductibility of interest on mortgages. The program is wildly popular, of course, because everyone likes a tax break. But its absurdity is evident in the fact that it applies to mortgages of up to $1 million. So average Joes are helping the rich live better.

(*NOD*)

Then there are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the "government sponsored enterprises" that buy and guarantee mortgages. Now that they have collapsed, leaving a bill estimated at $381 billion, their repeated claims that they posed no risks to taxpayers have been exposed as falsehoods.

* AND YET BARNEY FRANK IS STILL ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL MEN IN CONGRESS... AS OPPOSED TO WEARING STRIPES AS AN INMATE OF A FEDERAL PENITENTIARY! (LET'S NOT EVEN MENTION CHRISTOPHER DODD...)

For all of this, what has the country gotten? Over the past half-century, the homeownership rate has risen only modestly, from 62% in 1960 to 68% at the height of the housing bubble. In Canada, which has no mortgage deduction or many of the other subsidies present here, the ownership rate is about the same.

* EDUCATED PEOPLE KNOW THIS. FOLKS WHO REGULARLY READ BARKER'S NEWSBITES KNOW THIS.

Housing subsidies are like a narcotic. Once enacted, they quickly lose their potency. Buyers have more money to spend, so prices rise. Then, when a recession turns the high into a hangover, real-estate lobbyists and their allies clamor to up the dosage.

[Obama's] HAMP program is a classic example. Helping borrowers who are in so much trouble that they will default even with much better terms is little but a gift to bankers, who will take less of a hit in foreclosure. It also raises questions of fairness about why taxpayer money is going to the most imprudent of mortgage holders.

Similar questions could be raised about why - after all that has been learned in the past five years about credit bubbles, and after many private lenders are now demanding down payments in the range of 20% - the Federal Housing Administration allows loans with down payments as little as 3.5%.

William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/21/AR2010062104679.html

Democrats have a long list of national problems they say they want to solve. But on Friday, the office of House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), who directs the House's schedule...released a memo detailing the chamber's schedule for the rest of the year. House members, originally scheduled to spend five weeks of recess in their districts this summer, will get to leave Washington a week early - Aug. 2 instead of Aug. 9.

* NICE! TACK ON ANOTHER WEEK OF PAID VACATION...! (FOLKS... YA CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP...)

"With unemployment near double-digits, no plan to offer a budget, and without a bill passed to give our troops fighting overseas the money they need, this seems an odd time for Democratic leaders to announce they want to do one less week of work here in Washington," said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio.)

* ONE WOULD THINK... (*SHRUG*)