Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, July 24, 2012


For all you Dylan fans out there...

(*WINK*)

Posted by at

9 comments:

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/e52c592a-d4ad-11e1-bb88-00144feabdc0.html#axzz21XsemU9r

* BY PATRICK J. BUCHANAN

Triumphant in the first Gulf war, George H.W. Bush, in October 1991, went before the UN to declare that the US’s goal was now to build a “New World Order.”

* "TRIUMPHANT...?" HE LEFT SADDAM HUSSEIN IN POWER! (*SNORT*)

Rejecting this as Wilsonian Utopianism, my 1992 presidential campaign called for an end to U.S. military intervention where no vital interest was imperiled, for federal action to secure our southern border, and for a halt to the outsourcing of U.S. manufacturing jobs.

(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

We advocated a Hamiltonian policy to support industry and a Jeffersonian foreign policy of peaceful commerce with all nations but entangling alliances with none. And we were denounced as isolationists and protectionists.

* YEP... (*SIGH*)

We lost. But Mr Bush lost too, when Ross Perot, running on the same theme – putting America first – stripped away a third of the coalition Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan put together, leaving George H. W. Bush with an incumbent’s smallest share of the vote since William Howard Taft.

George H. W. Bush’s foreign policy record could not save him. The U.S. was looking inward in 1992, as it does today. As Mitt Romney burnishes his foreign policy credentials this week, he should keep this lesson in mind.

Having learned from his father’s defeat, George W. Bush offered a “more humble” policy. But after September 11, he had a Damascene conversion, went nation-building in Afghanistan and Iraq, and declared the U.S.’s goal was “to end tyranny in our world.” Americans responded by relieving the Republican party of both houses of Congress in 2006 and the presidency in 2008.

* GOTTA DISAGREE WITH BUCHANAN HERE. IT WAS THE CORRUPTION AND HYPOCRISY OF THE RINO GOP WHICH GOT THEM KICKED OUT OF POWER IN '06. AS FOR OBAMA vs. MCCAIN... WELL... IT WAS OBAMA vs. MCCAIN! (*SNORT*)

We cannot afford any more neo-imperial nonsense. With trillion-dollar deficits, a soaring national debt, and 10,000 baby boomers reaching eligibility for Social Security and Medicare every day, the U.S. is beginning to break under the strain of its commitments.

* AND YET... THE SPENDING CONTINUES... THE NEO-IMPERIAL NONSENSE CONTINUES... (*SHRUG*)

What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world but suffer the loss of his soul? A biblical hubris took hold of our republic. By pushing Nato into Russia’s front yard, planting bases in central Asia, dispatching democracy crusaders to subvert regimes in Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia, we undid the good work of Reagan and drove Moscow back into alliance with Beijing.

* YEP... (*SIGH*)

* TO BE CONTINUED...

July 24, 2012 at 11:10 AM
William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

U.S. influence in the Middle East is at a nadir. Our alliances with Turkey and Saudi Arabia are frayed. Pakistan bristles. Israel impatiently dismisses our pathetic pleas for it to stop building settlements. And as the Muslim Brotherhood rose when Hosni Mubarak fell in Cairo, so it looks likely to rise again when Bashar al-Assad falls in Damascus.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

America needs a new foreign policy rooted in today’s reality, not in yesterday’s cold war or in tomorrow’s dream of global democracy. For as Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan reminds us, in his region democracy is a bus you get off when it reaches your stop.

We must roll up the empire and put America first again.

We should swiftly complete Barack Obama’s work, end the war in Afghanistan and close U.S. bases in central Asia.

We should tell Ukraine and Georgia that Nato membership is closed. (No U.S. interest there justifies risking a clash with Russia.) Let us tell Vladimir Putin that if he stays out of our yard, we will stay out of his.

Half a century ago, Dwight Eisenhower told John F. Kennedy to start pulling troops out of Europe, or else the continent would end up permanently dependent on the U.S.; was Ike not right?

Europeans should take full responsibility for their own defence.

* DEFENSE FROM WHOM? DEFENSE FROM WHAT? (YEAH... GOOD QUESTIONS, RIGHT?)

The near debacle in Libya, where Britain and France might have been fought to exhaustion by Muammer Gaddafi had not the U.S. intervened, exposed the atrophied state of Nato’s European members.

(*NOD*)

South Korea has a population twice that of North Korea and an economy 40 times as large. What are US soldiers still doing in the demilitarized zone?

(The frontier that will determine the fate of the U.S. is not the 38th parallel, but the 2,000-mile border with Mexico!)

Elsewhere in Asia, it is Russia’s land that China covets but India’s that China holds. Vietnam and the Philippines are defying Beijing’s claims to the Spratly Islands. Japan is showing a resolve to hold the Senkaku Islands. Let the neighbors do the containment.

* AS LONG AS WE MAKE CLEAR THAT THERE ARE LINES WE WON'T ALLOW CHINA TO CROSS...

In the Islamic world, Victor Hugo’s dictum applies: stronger than all the armies of earth is the power of an idea whose time has come. Islamic fundamentalism and ethno-nationalism, the two forces tearing countries apart from central Africa to south Asia, are not problems that can be solved by Seal Team Six.

Let us cease our interventions and call a halt to our endless hectoring.

How other nations rule themselves is not really the U.S.’s business.

If there is nation-building to be done, let it begin here. The watchword of the Romney campaign and presidency should be enlightened nationalism.

Time, again, to put America first.

July 24, 2012 at 11:10 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/310319/colorado-shooting-and-media-thomas-sowell

* BY THOMAS SOWELL

Since so many in the media cannot resist turning every tragedy into a political talking point, it was perhaps inevitable that (1) someone would try to link the shooting rampage at the Batman movie in Colorado to the Tea Party, and that (2) some would try to make it a reason to impose more gun-control laws.

Too many people in the media cannot seem to tell the difference between reporting the news and creating propaganda.

NBC News apparently could not resist doctoring the transcript of the conversation between George Zimmerman and the police after the Trayvon Martin shooting. Now ABC News decided that the fact that the man arrested for the shooting in Colorado was named James Holmes was a good reason to broadcast to the world the fact that there is a James Holmes who is a member of the Tea Party in Colorado.

The fact has since come out that these are two different men, one in his twenties and the other in his fifties. But corrections never catch up with irresponsible news broadcasts. The James Holmes who belongs to the Tea Party has been deluged with phone calls. I hope he sues ABC News for every dime they have.

This is not the first time that the mainstream media have tried to create a link between conservatives and violence. Years ago, the Oklahoma City bombing was blamed on Rush Limbaugh, despite the absence of any evidence that the bomber was inspired by him.

Similar things have happened repeatedly, going all the way back to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which was blamed on a hostile right-wing atmosphere in Dallas, even though the assassin had a long history of being on the far-Left fringe. But, where the shoe is on the other foot — as when the Unabomber had a much marked-up copy of an environmentalist book by Al Gore — the media heard no evil, saw no evil, and spoke no evil.

As for gun-control advocates, I have no hope whatever that any facts will make the slightest dent in their thinking — or lack of thinking. New York’s Mayor Bloomberg and CNN’s Piers Morgan were on the air within hours of the shooting, pushing the case for gun-control laws.

You would never know, from what they and other gun-control advocates have said, that there is a mountain of evidence that gun-control laws not only fail to control guns but are often counterproductive. For those people who still think facts matter, it is worth presenting some of those facts.

Do countries with strong gun-control laws have lower murder rates? Only if you cherry-pick the data.

Britain is a country with stronger gun-control laws and lower murder rates than the United States. But Mexico, Russia, and Brazil are also countries with stronger gun-control laws than the United States — and their murder rates are much higher than ours. Israel and Switzerland have even higher rates of gun ownership than the United States, and much lower murder rates than ours.

Even the British example does not stand up very well under scrutiny. ... It was in the later decades of the 20th century that the British government clamped down with severe gun-control laws, disarming virtually the entire law-abiding citizenry. Gun crimes, including murder, rose as the public was disarmed. (Meanwhile, murder rates in the United States declined during the same years that murder rates in Britain were rising...)

The real problem, both in discussions of mass shootings and in discussions of gun control, is that too many people are too committed to a vision to allow mere facts to interfere with their beliefs — and the sense of superiority that those beliefs give them.

Any discussion of facts is futile when directed at such people. All anyone can do is warn others about the propaganda.

July 24, 2012 at 11:10 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443437504577545770682810842.html?grcc=388687ac5686ff6752bb711b16963d59Z3ZhpgeZ0Z756Z200Z71Z2&mod=WSJ_hps_sections_news&grcc2=97fca8d78517ec77452a4fbf14c52abb~1343139151493~18f3b45caef80572d421f68a979bd6dc~tsteub~1343138920481~3~2~0~0~0~756~200~71~0~2~

Around one in 10 employers in the U.S. plans to drop health coverage for workers in the next few years as the bulk of the federal health-care law begins, and more indicated they may do so over time, according to a study to be released Tuesday by consulting company Deloitte.

Deloitte's findings differ from estimates by rival firm McKinsey & Co. last year that found 30% of employers say they would "definitely or probably" stop offering health insurance after 2014, as well as calculations by the Congressional Budget Office that estimated around 7% of workers could lose coverage under the law by 2019.

July 24, 2012 at 11:11 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444330904577539263257191398.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats seized control of [the college student loan] market with legislation that passed along with ObamaCare in 2010.

With roughly $1 trillion in student loans outstanding, close to $900 billion are federal loans, and Uncle Sugar is responsible for more than 90% of recent loan originations.

Even though nearly 90% of defaults are occurring on loans backed by the taxpayer, last week the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rolled out a new report on purported flaws in the private market.

(To underline the absurdity of focusing on private loans, the White House's own budget is forecasting default rates above 20% on some types of federal loans issued in fiscal 2013. That means defaults could be in the titanic range above $20 billion. All of the private firms probably won't issue half that amount in total loans, never mind bad loans.)

The new report says that Congress should consider letting borrowers discharge their private student loans through bankruptcy. This would reverse a hard lesson learned during the 1970s. After a surge in former students declaring bankruptcy to avoid repaying their loans, Congress acted to protect lenders beginning in 1977. First it limited the ability of borrowers with government loans to use bankruptcy as a bailout ramp, and later the ban was applied to all student loans (with some exceptions for hardship cases).

This reform also protected future borrowers. (Credit miraculously becomes more available when lenders believe they might be repaid.)

Yet as with so many other policies, the Obama Administration displays little interest in learning from the mistakes of the 1970s. If there's not a great outcry over letting borrowers stiff private lenders, eventually you can expect the roll-out of a similar policy for government loans. Most people with difficulty paying back private loans are also struggling with government loans.

While we don't doubt Mr. Obama's sincere impulse to redistribute money, the timing of this effort suggests it is one more election-year pander to the young voters who showed up for Mr. Obama in 2008 but may be less enthusiastic this time.

Unemployment among Americans age 20-24 hit 13.7% in June, up from 13.3% in January. So first the President made a big deal over cutting student loan interest-rates to save a few bucks, and now he's telling young voters he's making it easier for them to avoid repaying at all.

Young voters may appreciate Mr. Obama's latest efforts to help them weather the Obama economy. But wouldn't it be easier merely to encourage job creation rather than try to anticipate and make taxpayers pay for every consequence of joblessness?

July 24, 2012 at 11:11 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444873204577537232812750926.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

The most recent signal of a weakening economy comes from the U.S. consumer, with the Commerce Department reporting last week that retail sales fell 0.5% in June, far below the expected 0.2% increase.

A stunning 70% of U.S. retailers missed their sales targets in June, the third consecutive month that sales have weakened and the worst showing since November 2009.

What we're witnessing is the breakdown of the great American jobs machine.

* FOLKS... DEMOCRATS HAVE CONTROLLED AT LEAST ONE HOUSE OF CONGRESS SINCE JANUARY 2007. THEY CONTROLLED BOTH HOUSES DURING ALL OF 2007-2008-2009-2010. THEY STILL CONTROL THE SENATE! THEY'VE CONTROLLED THE WHITE HOUSE SINCE JANUARY 2009!

* FOLKS... CHECK THE CALENDAR - TODAY IS JULY 24, 2012...!!!

The official unemployment rate is 8.2%. But if you add to that the number of discouraged workers who have dropped out of the labor market since the recession began in early 2008 — approximating eight million — the rate would be an alarming 12%.

* FOLKS... U-6 UNEMPLOYMENT IS CURRENTLY PEGGED (OFFICIALLY) AT 14.9%.

Fifty percent of the jobs created since the recession hit have been part time, with no benefits and a wage that's inadequate to enter the middle class.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

Fewer Americans are working today than in the year 2000, despite the fact that our population has since grown by 31 million and our labor force by 11.4 million.

* AND THAT'S NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THE "BAD ECONOMY," FOLKS; THAT'S BECAUSE THE DEMS HAVE DELIBERATELY UNRAVELLED WELFARE REFORM AND HAVE DELIBERATELY MADE IT EASIER TO BE "ON THE DOLL." (EVERYTHING FROM UNEMPLOYMENT EXTENTIONS TO "MARKETING" FOOD STAMPS TO MAKING IT EASIER TO GO ON "DISABILITY." FOLKS... IT'S ALL LAID OUT IN NEWSBITES!)

Official unemployment under President Obama has averaged 8.8%, a record. (Under George W. Bush, his predecessor, the jobless rate averaged 5.3%...)

Job seekers are only one-third as likely to find a job [now] as [compared to] before Mr. Obama was elected.

Today, a record number of Americans have been out of work for more than six months...

[A] record number of households have at least one member looking for a job....

(To make matters worse, some employers are shortening the work week or asking employees to take unpaid leave, which doesn't show up in official unemployment numbers.)

* O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A!

* SOME GOOD NEWS... (READ ON...)

The ratio of U.S. household debt-to-income, 134% in 2007, has dropped to a nine-year low of approximately 114% today.

* BUT THE BAD NEWS... THE FED IS STILL PUSHING INFLATIONIST POLICIES... YOUR SAVINGS ARE LOSING VALUES DAY BY DAY...

July 24, 2012 at 11:32 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/too_big_to_fail_grows_cVFocOFPEAJyQ4LgCR2ilO#.UA4WtCc8FW8.email

The two-year anniversary of Dodd-Frank has come and gone, and Too Big To Fail is only growing.

Just last week, after consultation with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Nasdaq exchange unveiled its plan to compensate investors who lost money during the botched Facebook IPO.

* COMPENSATE INVESTORS...???

Buried in the fine print of the “accommodation” plan is a key clause, in which Nasdaq says its legal liabilities must be capped because: “If exchanges could be called upon to bear all costs associated with system malfunctions and the varying reactions of market participants taken in their wake, the potential would exist for a single catastrophic event to bankrupt one or multiple exchanges, with attendant consequences for investor confidence and macroeconomic stability.”

In other words, add the Nasdaq to the list of Too Big To Fail entities.

(*GNASHING MY TEETH*)

July 24, 2012 at 11:45 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/federal-365131-states-medicaid.html

It's no secret that the states are in as much budget trouble as the federal government.

* NO SECRET TO EDUCATED, KNOWLEDGABLE PEOPLE WHO PAY ATTENTION... (*PURSED LIPS*)... BUT WHAT SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION DO WE REPRESENT? (SCARY TO THINK ABOUT, NO?)

Doubters should read a new report from a group headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker and former New York Lt. Gov. Richard Ravitch.

* "DOUBTERS" AREN'T THE PROBLEM. WE KNOW THEY'RE SIMPLY UNREACHABLE. NO. THE PROBLEM IS THOSE WHO HAVE NO CLUE AS TO THE SITUATION! AND, FOLKS... THAT'S MOST PEOPLE!

By this account, states face four insistent forces: pension underfunding of at least $1 trillion; rapidly rising Medicaid spending; possible cuts in federal aid that provides $1 in $3 of state spending; and weak growth of tax revenues that, in 2011, remained 7% below their pre-recession peak.

* AND LET ME THROW THIS OUT, FOLKS: OF YOU WHO ARE AWARE OF THIS, HOW MANY OF YOU CRINGED WHEN YOU READ THE PART ABOUT FEDERAL "AID" PROVIDING $1 IN $3 OF STATE SPENDING? Hmm...??? FOLKS... THINGS ARE SO FAR OUT OF WACK...

(*SIGH*)

What looms are higher state taxes and reduced services, affecting schools, police, parks, prisons, public universities, roads and social services. Up to a point, cuts may not do much damage; every government has waste. But we are rapidly passing this point.

* OH... ANOTHER "BY THE WAY"... GUESS WHO CAN SIMPLY LEAVE THE MOST FUCKED-UP STATES? YEP. IF YOU SAID "THE WEALTHY" YOU GET A GOLD STAR! (AND GUESS WHO PAYS MOST OF THE TAXES...) (YEP... RIGHT AGAIN! THE WEALTHY!) SO... LET'S SAYING IT TOGETHER, FOLKS... D*O*M*I*N*O E*F*F*E*C*T!

Can we do anything? Well, yes. We could nationalize Medicaid...

* Ahh.. Umm... Er... (*SCRATCHING MY HEAD*)... ARE WE TALKING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT CURRENTLY ALREADY BORROWS SOMETHING LIKE .43-CENTS OF EVERY $1.00 IT SPENDS...???

We could transfer all its costs to the federal government; in exchange, the federal government would end state aid for K-12 education and transportation.

* WHY CAN'T I GET THIS PICTURE OF CHAIRS BEING REARRANGED ON THE DECK OF THE TITANIC OUT OF MY HEAD...

Created by Congress in 1965, Medicaid is hijacking state politics. Although the federal government covers a majority of costs (typically, 57%), the rapid rise in the states' share compels cuts in other programs or steeper taxes. In the last decade, Medicaid spending has increased at nearly twice the rate of states' tax revenues, notes the Volcker-Ravitch report.

* AND SO TRANSFERRING THIS MESS TOTALLY TO THE SAME FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHICH CURRENTLY RUNS TRILLION-PLUS-DOLLAR DEFICITS IS GONNA...

(*SHAKING MY HEAD IN UTTER CONFUSION*)

(*THROWING MY HANDS UP IN FRUSTRATION*)

The pressures will only intensify as America ages. Although Medicaid serves primarily a younger population (half are children), two-thirds of its costs stem from the 25% of much sicker beneficiaries who are elderly and disabled, reports the Kaiser Family Foundation. An older America will raise these costs and squeeze states' other services.

(*SARCASTIC CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

* SO... FOLKS... ABOUT THOSE DEATH PANELS THAT DON'T EXIST AND WILL (*GUFFAW*) "NEVER" EXIST...

(*SIGH*) (*SHAKING MY HEAD WHILE ROLLING MY EYES*)

In 2011, health spending represented 27% of the federal budget, up from 14% in 1990.

For states, Medicaid spending was 24% of spending if all state funds, including federal grants, are counted, and 17% if only funds from state taxes are measured.

* EITHER WAY... FUCKED... FUCKED... FUCKED...

(*SHRUG*)

Only the federal government can devise a solution to control health costs...

(*GUFFAW*)

* FOLKS... THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS THE PROBLEM - NOT THE SOLUTION! EVERYTHING THE GOVERNMENT DOES TENDS TO INCREASE HEALTHCARE COSTS! SUBSIDIES LEAD TO PRICE INCREASES - IT'S ECONOMICS 101.

July 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/24/solyndra-figures-attend-swank-obama-fundraiser/

President Obama rubbed elbows Monday night with two men at the center of the Solyndra loan scandal at an exclusive fundraiser in California.

* OF COURSE HE DID! (*SNORT*)

Steve Westly, a financier whose money-raising prowess helped to snag him a post on the administration’s energy advisory board, and Matt Rogers, a former Energy Department senior adviser who helped to approve the Solyndra loan, were spotted by reporters at the $35,800-per-person fundraiser for the president’s re-election campaign.

(*SARCASTIC CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

“The Obama Administration betrayed American taxpayers when it dumped hundreds of millions of public dollars into Solyndra while ignoring clear warnings about the company’s dire financial situation,” Romney campaign spokesman Ryan Williams said in a statement.

“President Obama’s first term worked out well for his donors who got special access and taxpayer money for their failed ventures. It hasn’t worked as well for the 23 million Americans struggling for work in the worst economic recovery our country has ever had.”

July 24, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)