The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for November 23rd, 2010

Obama misleads my neighbors in Kokomo.

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

We are all glad that the plant in Kokomo was prevented from closing due to a large taxpayer bailout. The concerns with the bailout plan remains the same.  The bond holders were illegally hosed including Indiana retirement funds. That was real economic damage. The other problem with government rushing in to prevent loss to a highly inefficient corporation is that the reforms are done for political reasons and not economic ones. This can result in reforms that do not go far enough. The bailout was done in such a way where the union that had clearly over reached did not have to take its fair share of the shared sacrifice that the taxpayer and the rest of the private sector has taken. The result is that even after the reforms the labor costs are still excessively high when compared to foreign automakers that are making cars in Indiana, Kentucky and Tennessee.

I am by no means saying that people should not be paid well, but many of these union workers, much like many government union employees are paid beyond well, especially when it comes to Cadillac benefits that they contribute very little towards. The result is a company that may get along in the short term, but still faces a real disadvantage. These shortcomings are well known and have been covered by journalists, commentators, and blogs for a long time.

The problem I have with President Obama today is the dishonest narrative that he keeps repeating. If he gets his way it will cost Indiana even more jobs than the 40,000 plus that have left since the stimulus.

Fox News:

PERU, Ind. — President Obama used part of his appearance at a Chrysler factory on Tuesday to hammer home his argument that the country cannot afford to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans — even though his speech was advertised by the White House as a celebration of the auto bailouts.

The tax cuts apparently are weighing heavily on Obama’s mind as he prepares for a meeting with GOP leaders at the White House on Nov. 30, the first one since his party was punished by voters in this month’s midterm elections.

Newly empowered Republicans, who captured the House and increased their presence in the Senate, are pushing to extend the Bush tax cuts to all Americans, saying that the economy is too fragile for a tax hike on anyone.

But Obama told the crowd at the Chrysler transmission plant that the country cannot afford the $700 billion cost for extending tax cuts to individuals making $200,000 and above or families making $250,000 and above.

“I don’t think that we can afford it right now, not when we are going to have to make some tough decisions to rein in our deficits,” he said.

 

This is coming from the man who signed budgets that increased yearly deficit spending over the Republicans by a factor of seven. Obama went on to say that we should not be giving tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires, but here is the problem. Even if the tax cuts all expire and we tax rates increase in January, the super rich will hardly be effected, but small businesses will get creamed and Obama knows it.

Why?

I – The super rich benefit from a 16,000 page tax code is not just filled with exceptions and shelters for those with influence, the code defines much of the super rich’s income as non taxable, or it is defined as income that is covered under a different rate than “taxable wages”. For Example: John Kerry made $5,072,000 in 2003 and his total combined federal tax burden was 12.34%. If all the Bush era tax cuts expired Kerry would have still only paid a fraction over 13%.

II – The truth is that there are not many people who make taxable wages over $200,000. The vast majority who pay that tax at what will be the 39.9% rate are small business “S-corporations”, not the John Kerrys of the world.  While these small businesses bring in that much money on paper, most of their income goes back into the business. These are not “millionaires and billionaires”, they are people who have a roofing business, or own a couple of pizza shops, or a small manufacturing company.  These are the businesses that do 75% of the hiring in this country.

III – Google is a multi-billion dollar company and they paid a federal tax of 2.4%. They gave $800,000 to Obama and the Democrat leadership and throw gala events for Obama, yet where is Obama’s class warfare rhetoric when Google skips out in many millions of taxes?  Obama has no problem attacking the Chamber of Commerce, who by the way represents most small business.

This brings us to Norton’s First Law: Big business loves big government, because big government taxes and regulates small and medium sized business, out of the competition.

Video: Government Strangling Small Business With Red Tape

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes | Leave a Comment »

TSA pulls pants off 71 y/o man with knee implant. TSA Supervisor yells at man “I have the power”

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

Video: Iran, North Korea, Cuba indict U.S. for human rights abuses. Obama Administration apologetic…

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

A UN watchdog group posted this video and it is typical of what a complete farce the UN has become. In this video the worlds worst human rights abusers indict the United States as the worlds big human rights violator. Obama Administration officials comments legitimize the nonsense coming from these regimes.

AP from Hotair.com comments:

Via Powerline, a case study in degenerate autocracies using the UN for cheap propaganda in the name of “human rights.” The occasion here is the U.S. having submitted its first-ever universal periodic review of its human rights record, which it’s now required to do every four years per the same UN resolution that created the Orwellian body we know as the UN Human Rights Council. That’s the same Human Rights Council that includes China, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia as members, and which counts among its accomplishments a proposed international ban on “religious defamation.” Iran, North Korea, and Cuba aren’t on the Council, but luckily for them, the universal periodic review process doesn’t limit comment to members. It’s first come, first served, to all UN participants. These three came early, and boy, did they serve:

According to the Council’s procedure, all U.N. members are given carte blanche to comment and make recommendations to the state in the docket. But since only three hours are allotted per state, the practice has emerged of allowing approximately only the first sixty to speak.

This morning fifty-six countries lined-up for the opportunity to have at the U.S. representatives, many standing in line overnight a day ago in order to be near the top of the list. Making it to the head of the line were Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and North Korea…

Iran – currently poised to stone an Iranian woman for adultery – told the U.S. “effectively to combat violence against women.”

North Korea – which systematically starves a captive population – told the U.S. “to address inequalities in housing, employment and education” and “prohibit brutality…by law enforcement officials.”

The temptation here is to frame this as an Obama problem, part of his world apology tour, etc, but that’s only half the equation. His deputies could have and should have treated this “critique” with the utter contempt it deserved, but as I noted above, we’re now obliged by resolution to account for our sins periodically to vastly worse offenders.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

Popular Mechanics: New TSA scanners and procedures won’t catch anyone. UPDATE: CNN says body scanners don’t work

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

It is rather obvious to those of us who have looked at this issue, but it is nice to have the science speaking up.

UPDATE – CNN: Body scanners don’t work. 

UPDATE II – Scientists write White House with concerns over X-Ray Exposure of body scanners – http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf

Popular Mechanics:

Q – What is really being seen by these machines?

A – Bruce Schneier: In theory, it sees stuff that isn’t part of the body. So if you’ve got a stapler in your pocket, it will show up. The thought is that it will see stuff that a metal detector won’t detect, like a ceramic knife. But this doesn’t seem to be borne out by reality.

Q – The machines have shown up in the wake of the so-called underwear bomber, who tried to blow up a plane with chemicals stored in his briefs. Would this technology have stopped him?

A – The guys who make the machines have said, “We wouldn’t have caught that.”

Q – So what kind of attack will this prevent, that otherwise might be successful?

A – There are two kinds of hijackers. There’s the lone nutcase, like someone who will bring a gun onto a plane because, dammit, they’re going to take the whole plane down with them. Any pre-9-11 airport security would catch a person like that. The second kind is the well-planned, well-financed Al Qaeda-like plot. And nothing can be done to stop someone like that.

Q – Has there been a case since 9/11 of an attempted hijacker being thwarted by airport security?

A – None that we’ve heard of. The TSA will say, “Oh, we’re not allowed to talk about successes.” That’s actually bullsh*t. They talk about successes all the time. If they did catch someone, especially during the Bush years, you could be damned sure we’d know about it. And the fact that we didn’t means that there weren’t any. Because the threat was imaginary. It’s not much of a threat. As excess deaths go, it’s just way down in the noise. More than 40,000 people die each year in car crashes. It’s 9/11 every month. The threat is really overblown.

Q – Do you think there’s been an over-reaction, on the part of the government and the press, to the underwear bomber?

A – That case was really instructive. Nobody was injured, and the plane landed safely. It was a success! And it was pre 9-11 security that made it a success. Because we screen for superficial guns and bombs, he had to resort to a syringe and 90 minutes in the bathroom with a bomb that didn’t work. This is what success looks like. Stop bellyaching!

Q – What’s the motive behind introducing this new level of security?

A – It’s politics. You have to be seen as doing something, even if nothing is the smart thing to do. You can’t be seen as doing nothing.

Q – Does it surprise you that at last, after several escalations in the TSA’s level of intrusiveness, the public seems to have finally rebelled?

A – Back in 2005, when this full-body scanner technology was first being proposed, I wrote that I thought this would be the straw that broke the camel’s back, because it would unite conservatives and liberals. Nobody wants their daughter groped or shown naked.

Q – Is privacy being violated, in your estimation?

A – You go get groped and you tell me.

Q – Have you had a pat-down?

A – Yes, actually, just a couple of days ago.

Q – Is this security theater?

A – 100 percent. It won’t catch anybody.

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism | Leave a Comment »

How Media Bias Works: The Miami Herald Undermines Marco Rubio

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

How is it that the big networks and many large newspapers always quote “experts” that constantly reinforce false elite media narratives?

The answer is, because that is exactly what most journalists are trained to do in J-school. “What is that Chuck, are you saying that most journalists are taught to manipulate the public instead of making the public as best informed as they can”? That is exactly what I am saying and I know this all too well as I just finished my communications degree from Indiana University. I graduated with honors.

The journalistic philosophy taught in most J-schools is the “Walter Lippmann Objective Method”, but there is nothing objective about it. Lippmann’s method was to have the media use an elite technical class of “experts” to tell the public what they needed to hear in order to vote the “right way”. Anyone who has read Walter Lippmann’s book Public Opinion comes to understand very quickly the contempt he has for popular sovereignty and self auto-determination. Fortunately I had one communications professor who thought that Lippmann’s philosophy was nonsense, I had an English professor who thought so as well. Not every student is so lucky.

The method used to present you these experts is dishonest from the get-go. The journalist has an idea of the storyline or narrative he wishes to present. So he goes through his Rolodex and finds a person that can be portrayed as an expert who will (big time scare quotes here)independently verify and present the point of view the reporter intended to present in the first place.

Often times a reporter will run across a “man on the street” who just happens to totally and convincingly reinforce the narrative you usually see in the elite media. The implication was that the reporter just started talking to people on the street and wow isn’t the media in touch with “regular folks”. The truth is that the “independent regular person found on the street” knows the reporter would be there well in advance. I remember one study I saw a few years ago where the same person was in a dozen random man on the street interviews.

CNN was caught doing just this in a presidential debate where every “random audience person” ended up being a Democrat campaign operative, several of  whom had previously appeared on CNN – LINK.

The media bias in this example is from the Miami Herald. Of course the “Republican” who can always be counted on to trash conservatives in the elite media, David Frum, picked up on this right away as it goes along with his “conservatives are knuckle dragging neanderthals” narrative:

WASHINGTON — When a French TV station set out to understand the American phenomenon known as the tea party, it sent a reporter to Florida, down a dusty country road, past a bug-swarmed pond, and into a Pasco County pasture filled with people waving American flags.

It was Oct. 30, three days before Election Day. The crowd had come to Hallelujah Acres Ranch to hear Republican Senate nominee Marco Rubio, frequently hailed — and claimed — as one of the tea party’s biggest success stories.

But the typically unflappable candidate seemed uncomfortable with the French reporter’s questions about his tea party ties, as he did when an admirer asked him to autograph a tea party banner.

If the tea party is expecting Rubio to plant its yellow “Don’t Tread on Me” flag in the hallowed Senate chamber, it’s in for a letdown. This career politician who once carried the state party’s American Express card defines himself first and foremost as a Republican.

Rubio’s pollster, Whit Ayers, tactfully put it this way: “I think he’ll carry the banner for hopeful and optimistic conservatism and whoever wants to follow that banner is welcome to join.”

PARTY LOYALTY

Rubio has already made it clear that he will not be a rogue senator. One day after the election, he declared his support for the GOP establishment when he said he looked forward to serving under Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. He didn’t mention Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, viewed as the more ideologically pure conservative and alternative power center, who championed Rubio’s campaign early on.

Two days later, McConnell tapped Rubio to deliver the weekly GOP address.

Rubio, 39, struck a pragmatic tone at the post-election news conference held in Miami, saying Republicans and Democrats have to work together to tackle big, immediate problems like the national debt and the war in Afghanistan. He did not launch salvos at President Barack Obama, as he usually does, and said he would reach out to Florida’s Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson.

“Early on in the primary, a conservative group of passionate, well-intentioned people coincided with his beliefs and somehow he got this tea party label, which I don’t think is totally representative,” said Republican fundraiser Jorge Arrizurieta.

“Did he embrace and receive the support of the tea party? Absolutely,” Arrizurieta said. “But will he move away from being a real Republican candidate? No way.”

Tea party leaders still claim Rubio as their own. Among Florida voters, 39 percent said they supported the tea party movement. Rubio got 86 percent of that group.

What you see used here are classic advertising association techniques to try and drive a wedge between Rubio and voters. As you will see the Miami Herald creates this narrative using no real information to imply that Rubio was all talk and he is just another country club Republican that got tossed out of office in 2006.

If the tea party is expecting Rubio to plant its yellow “Don’t Tread on Me” flag in the hallowed Senate chamber, it’s in for a letdown. This career politician who once carried the state party’s American Express card defines himself first and foremost as a Republican.

While the old “Don’t tread on me” flag from the American Revolution can be seen at some Tea Party events; neither Jim DeMint, Dick Army or Michele Bachmann keep that flag in their office. They fly the American flag just like everyone else.The American Express card crack is another advertising associative technique. We see the commercial on TV and they give the impression that if you have an AMEX card you are “somebody”; well the Marlboro man does the same thing but just from another cultural angle. Heck I am dirt poor and I have had a big corporate AMEX card before. It means nothing. Over half of the country supports the Tea Party movement, are we to think that none of them have an American Express?

Rubio has already made it clear that he will not be a rogue senator. One day after the election, he declared his support for the GOP establishment when he said he looked forward to serving under Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. He didn’t mention Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, viewed as the more ideologically pure conservative and alternative power center, who championed Rubio’s campaign early on.

Again this narrative is pure nonsense. DeMint is not in the official leadership so Rubio saying that he would anticipate serving under DeMint would be unnecessarily divisive. That is not how things are done in Washington and that is not how DeMint and the Tea Party want things done. DeMint and the Tea Party have made an effective Tea Party Caucus that can effectively control the GOP with shear numbers. Do we see Marco Rubio moving to the old 2006 GOP positions that got the party kicked out of power or do we see Senator McConnell changing his positions to conform with DeMint, Rubio, Johnson, Kirk, Coats , Toomey etc. The few who are left in the old GOP leadership are racing to get in line with DeMint and his new freshman Senators.

“Early on in the primary, a conservative group of passionate, well-intentioned people coincided with his beliefs and somehow he got this tea party label, which I don’t think is totally representative,” said Republican fundraiser Jorge Arrizurieta.

Ohh it just happened that some of Rubio’s beliefs coincided with some in the Tea Party…. umm no. Rubio was in peoples face with the same narrative of the Tea Party and made it very clear that the GOP is been given a second chance, but is on probation and had better start governing as they campaign. In fact, Rubio was so eloquent in presenting the Tea Party narrative that the Democrat Party tried to get the Democrat in the race to drop out and support the big government RINO Charlie Crist. Here is a small sample of why the Democrats are scared to death of Marco and why we can expect more dishonest propaganda from the Miami Herald:

Last but not least, the talking head Jorge Arrizurieta. Who is this guy? Well he is a corporate lobbyist and minor fund raiser for the early Bush machine including Jeb Bush in Florida, so you can be sure he is in reporter’s rolodex.   Arrizurieta now supports Mitt Romney who the Tea Party doesn’t trust because of the failure of “RomneyCare” in Massachusetts, and his election year flip flops on abortion and other key issues. It seems that Romney has grown up some since losing the primary against John McCain, but we will see.

So as you can see, the Miami Herald made an emotionally convincing narrative out of nothing but cracks about flags, AMEX cards, not trying to run DeMint for party leader and a crack from a minor lobbyist. They started in just a few days after the election and such the Miami Herald’s push to get Obama re-elected has begun. The best way to combat this nonsense is to get in the media’s face with a little New Jersey style attitude and a little teaching like you have found in this post.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Post 2010, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Video: Government Strangling Small Business With Red Tape

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Post 2010 | Leave a Comment »