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 the ‘Corporatism’ Category

Paycheck Fairness Bill: Not About Women. A Huge Power Grab for Government. UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on November 13, 2010

This Orwellian  bill is about finding out how much you make by another means and giving the government power to dictate how much a company pays and sets up the EEOC the ability to go after almost unlimited damages. The potential for political abuse is off the scale as the SEIU, trial lawyers etc. would pressure the government to use this against Wal-Mart as a weapon etc.

Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Diana Furchgott-Roth argues the paycheck fairness bill is unnecessary because there is already equal pay and there are already discrimination laws that cover this.

Related:

PROFILES IN HYPOCRISY: OBAMA SPEECHES SAY HE SUPPORTS EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN AND McCAIN DOESN’T – BUT OBAMA PAYS WOMEN IN HIS CAMPAIGN LESS! McCAIN PAYS WOMEN MORE!

UPDATE:

Forbes

Daily Caller

Caroline May

 

UPDATE-II Human Events Connie Hair:

The Senate is set for a cloture vote today on the Paycheck Fairness Act, which requires that employers collect and provide to the government certain payroll data, classified by the sex, race, and national origin of employees.  The data would be used for assessment of “fairness” of employee wages based on race and gender.

As previously reported on HUMAN EVENTS, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–Nev.) filed cloture on the motion to proceed to three bills right before Congress recessed for the elections.  Included among those three bills is the Paycheck Fairness Act, which passed the Democrat-led House in January of 2009 and is part of a left-wing wish list being pushed in the lame-duck session.

A boon for trial lawyers, the Paycheck Fairness Act, if passed, would place costly, job-killing new burdens on employers, including the following:

• Requirements for employers to prove that pay differentials are not based on sex and are “consistent with business necessity.”

• Unlimited compensatory and punitive damages for violations of the Equal Employment Act to be levied against private-sector employers.

• Characterization of all employees as belonging to “the same establishment” if they are working in the same county or in similar political subdivisions of a state.

• Automatic inclusion of employees as members of a class-action lawsuit, unless they somehow become aware of the suit and specifically opt out of it.

• Creation of more conditions for lawsuits.

• Creation of a constitutionally-questionable grant program based solely on one’s being female.

Diana Furchtgott-Roth, a senior fellow and the director of the Center for Employment Policy at the Hudson Institute, told HUMAN EVENTS that the bill would vastly expand the role of government in employer compensation decisions.

“The bill would require the government to collect data from employers on the sex, race, and national origin of employees, significantly adding to red tape, paperwork, and hiring costs, and trapping firms in costly litigation,” Furchtgott-Roth said.

She provides analysis in a new report showing that discrepancies in wages are based on many different factors.

“Average wage gaps do not represent the compensation of women compared to men in specific jobs, because they average all full-time men and women in the population, rather than comparing men and women in the same jobs with the same experience. Data from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics that women earned 80 cents for every dollar that men earned in 2008 and in 2009, using full-time median weekly earnings, ignore fundamental differences between jobs, experience, and hours worked,” the report states.

“If we compare wages of men and women who work 40 hours a week, without accounting for any differences in jobs, training, or time in the labor force, Labor Department data show the gender wage ratio increases to 86 percent.”

“When the wage gap is analyzed by individual occupations, jobs and employee characteristics, regional labor markets, job titles, job responsibility, and experience, then the wage gap shrinks even more. When these differences are considered, many studies show that men and women make about the same. For instance, a 2009 study by the economics consulting firm CONSAD Research Corporation, prepared for the Labor Department, shows that women make around 94% of what men make. The remaining six cents are due to unexplained variables, one of which might be discrimination,” the report finds.

“Dozens of studies on the gender wage gap that attempt to measure ‘discrimination’ have been published in academic journals in the past two decades. Unlike the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which uses simple mathematical tools to calculate the wage ratio, these studies use an econometric technique called regression analysis to measure contributing effects of all factors that could plausibly explain the wage gap.”

“At a time when the unemployment rate is above 9 percent and almost 15 million Americans are out of work, the Paycheck Fairness Act would impose substantial new burdens on employers that would encourage hiring overseas and discourage hiring in America,” Furchtgott-Roth warns.  “As the Washington Post concluded in a recent editorial, ‘Discrimination is abhorrent, but the Paycheck Fairness Act is not the right fix.’”

President Obama supports passage of the Act.  His Office of Budget and Management released a statement on Tuesday in full support of the legislation, hoping for change in what the Administration perceives as widespread conditions of gender and race biases in workplaces nationwide.

“The persistent gap between men’s and women’s wages demonstrates the need for legislative change.  This bill would address this gap by enhancing enforcement of equal pay laws. Specifically, it would prohibit retaliation against employees who ask about or discuss wage information, and it would provide more effective remedies for women subjected to discriminatory pay practices.  S. 3772 would strengthen the Equal Pay Act by closing judicially created loopholes in the law and bringing its class action rules into conformity with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  S. 3772 also requires the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to collect pay data to better enforce laws prohibiting pay discrimination,” the statement reads.

One senior GOP leadership aide told HUMAN EVENTS that Democrats are expected to fall just short of the necessary 60 votes required to move the legislation forward.

Stay tuned.

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Dr. Drew Pinsky on ObamaCare: ‘You will see a massive flight of physicians from the field’

Posted by iusbvision on November 12, 2010

Dr. Pinsky of course is the famed radio doctor.

Special thanks to our friends at The Daily Caller.

 

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

9th Circuit: All of your money belongs to the government & donating your own money to religious schools violates the 1st Amendment…

Posted by iusbvision on November 11, 2010

This case alone is justification for Congress using it’s Article III powers and eliminating the 9th circuit altogether.

Adam B. Schaeffer:

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments in an appeal of a 9th Circuit decision, Winn v Garriott, a challenge to one of Arizona’s education tax credit programs. It’s been getting more press than I’d expected, in the New York Times, the Washington Post, USA Today. That’s great news, because the case is far more important than just saving a program that improves education and expands educational freedom.

The 9th Circuit’s reasoning arrogates to the state all property , dissolving the distinction between public and private funds as well as public and private choices. It is a disturbing, dangerous decision.

They assert that tax cuts are the equivalent of government funds, a conclusion possible only if one assumes that all personal income belongs by default to the state rather than to the individual who earned the money. It asserts as well that when taxpayers and parents privately choose to support religious educational organizations, they are in violation of the First Amendment. This reasoning blatantly ignores the logic and plain meaning of the 2002 Zelman decision upholding school vouchers, among others.

Here is a prediction; the court will have their absurd ruling on an Arizona education tax credit program posted on the wall of judicial shame like so many others issued from their Circuit.

But I want more from the Court. This ruling is so awful that I can only pray SCOTUS rules beyond the questionable standing of the plaintiffs and comprehensively dismembers this most egregious 9th Circuit decision.


Schaeffer received his Ph.D. in American politics, with a focus in political behavior, media effects, and coalitional politics, from the University of Virginia and his MA in Social Science from the University of Chicago.

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

Glenn Beck to take on George Soros

Posted by iusbvision on November 10, 2010

Soros is a dangerous man who mas manipulated currency, been accused of mass financial crimes, toyed with governments, tries to influence our elections with fraud and his “Secretary of State Project”, he controls Media Matters and other smear outfits to trash his enemies with lies and half truths, he funds all sorts of far left think tanks and political groups and is by and large the top sugar daddy of the Democratic Leadership. Soros wants the dollar devalued, thinks the U.S. is the problem in the world, he despises the limits the Constitution imposes and he despises the Western Judeao/Christian culture.

Some consider Soros to be the most powerful man in the world.

Glenn Beck, has had enough of his crap and the economic damage he has caused. If you want to see America return to economic and cultural prosperity, start behaving in a way that helped to make us great, and to regain the moral authority that Polish anti-communist revolutionary Lech Walesa says we have lost, then the plans of George Soros must be stopped.

Posted in Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Corporatism | Leave a Comment »

Small Business Owners Fed Up!

Posted by iusbvision on November 1, 2010

Each one of these guys employs about 300 people. While Democrats give waivers to big business for all sorts of regulations  and taxes, these guys get stuck.

If you are a regular reader of this site, you know that this is exactly what we have been saying for a long time.

This article is a part of our new series on how big business loves big government.

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

Video: Who did that? Donnelly did…

Posted by iusbvision on October 28, 2010

Remember this –

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paying $210 million in bonuses with your money and no outrage why…..

And this….

GOP Leader John Boehner Goes Nuclear when he finds out that language was illegally inserted into the bill giving the AIG execs big bonuses with YOUR money. You see they were big contributors to Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT). Donnelly voted for this nonsense…  

GOP Leader John Boehner again: Here we are with an 1,100 pages that not one member has read this not one! When happened to the promise that we were going to let the American people see what was in this bill?!

Don’t believe Boehner? Well here is Shep Smith – You absolutely want to see this video –


Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

Democrats Outspend Republicans in 2010 – STUDY: Dems Launching More Personal Attacks

Posted by iusbvision on October 27, 2010

This article is a part of our new series on how big business loves big government.

Via Politico:

To hear top Democrats tell it, the party is being wildly outgunned this year in the fight for campaign cash as Republicans rely on outside groups to funnel money to GOP contenders.

But the numbers tell a different story.

It’s true that conservative third-party groups are outspending their Democratic rivals. But the Democrats still have a sizable cash advantage in their party committees – making this year’s elections a lot more of a fair fight than Vice President Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi let on.

So far, the latest figures show that the Democratic Party machinery has outraised its Republican counterpart in this campaign cycle by almost $270 million.

And even when outside spending on television advertising and direct mail is added to the mix, Republicans still haven’t closed the gap.

The money race totals come to $856 million for the Democratic committees and their aligned outside groups, compared to $677 for their Republican adversaries, based on figures compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

So much for “big corporations support the GOP” narrative.

 

Via the Wesleyan Media Project:

Negativity Update: 2010 Features Similar Rates of Negativity, But Dems More Likely to Attack Personally

 

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism | 1 Comment »

Big Business Buying Influence With Democrats: Google Pays 2.4% Federal Taxes

Posted by iusbvision on October 24, 2010

This post is another in our series of how big business loves big government. As we have shown you so many times before in our “Corporatism” category it is not the Republicans who are favored by large corporations. In spite of the constant rhetoric from the Democrat Leadership it is Democrats who receive overwhelming favor from Wall Street, the banks, and international business:

Top 20 Industry Money Recipients This Election Cycle – Who is in the back pocket of Wall Street?

And who says that spreading the cash around doesn’t buy influence; the Goldman Sachs guys and lobbyists are all over the White House. In fact after making promises to reign in the corporate lobbyists in the 2008 campaign, Obama and the Democrats relaxed the restrictions on them. Of course this influence peddling and kick backs was all over the mortgage crisis as well:

Corruption You Can Believe In: Failed Sub Primes and Mortgage Fraud Lenders Funneled Money to Dodd & Obama the Most. Fannie & Freddie Gave $200 Million to Partisans-Most Went to Democrats! Dodd, Obama Among Top Recipients. Republicans Attempted to Pass Reforms-Blocked by Democrat Leadership!

and

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paying $210 million in bonuses with your money and no outrage why…..

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has faced no scrutiny in the new financial regulations even though it was the single largest reason for the economic collapse. After already receiving $148.2 billion of your money Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac is now set to receive another bailout of between $154 to $215 billion. Democrats are expected to pass the bailout during the upcoming lame duck session of Congress after the election.   And of course do you remember the how AIG was using YOUR bailout tax dollars to pay their execs big bonus cash:

Democrats put language in the ‘Stimulus Bill’ to protect AIG executive bonuses. Dodd and Obama were the number one recipients of money from AIG. Distraction in full swing & Congress’ plan to tax the bonuses at 100% wont pass constitutional muster.

Of course the Fannie Mae/Goldman Sachs lobbyists revolving door in the White House continues.

And do you remember how British Petroleum got all those safety waivers for that oil platform from the Obama Administration leading up to that big oil spill? Obama was top recipient of BP-related dollars in 2008 receiving almost double what John McCain received.

Tobacco and Food Giant Philip-Morris lobbied Democrats for on got new regulations and taxes on tobacco, but they were done in such a way that Philip-Morris benefited. You see the narrative from politicians and leftist academics is that “regulation is done for the benefit of the people to prevent the excesses of unrestrained capitalism (freedom)”, the reality is that like in this case, the Google case we write about below, Fannie Mae, banks etc etc the regulations are designed to pick winners and losers, they are slanted to help those who make donations and wield influence.  The result is corrupt “Chicago Style” regulation that leads to the very excesses that the Democrats used as an excuse to do more regulation and pick more winners and losers which results in more excesses.

Case in point is the new “Wall Street Financial Regulation Bill” and Democrats went on and on about how they “clamped down”, its pure nonsense. The new law gives the government new powers to shut down businesses without judicial review (no one should have that kind of power and it will not be the big donors who will be shut down, it will be there competition or those who donate to “the wrong side”. The new law also creates an ongoing, endless bailout fund that benefits Wall Street where as smaller businesses will not have access to it.

New Obama-Dodd Bill Makes for Unlimited Wall Street/Bank Bailouts

Unions and Communist Activists All Too Happy With Obama-Dodd Financial Takeover Bill

Caught: White House Political Collusion in SEC Investigation. White House Wants Unlimited Bailout and Siezure Power. Can anyone be trusted with that much power? UPDATE – All the president’s Goldman Sachs men

Rick Santelli blasts lack of Fannie Mae reform, the TARP rip-off, government lies and corruption


This brings us to Norton’s First Law:

Big business loves big government, which is why big business loves domestic taxes and regulation because it keeps the small and medium sized competition out of the competition. A result is higher prices, so ultimately it is you who pays and the poor who are hardest hit. (Big business often gets loopholes written in the laws for themselves such as Nancy Pelosi trying to get a part of the tuna industry exempted from the minimum wage law).

Ok so now onto our friends at Google.

Google brings in billions of dollars in revenue and odds are you pay a higher tax rate than they do. Bloomberg News:

Google 2.4% Rate Shows How $60 Billion Lost to Tax Loopholes

Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years using a technique that moves most of its foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda.

Google’s income shifting — involving strategies known to lawyers as the “Double Irish” and the “Dutch Sandwich” — helped reduce its overseas tax rate to 2.4 percent, the lowest of the top five U.S. technology companies by market capitalization, according to regulatory filings in six countries.

“It’s remarkable that Google’s effective rate is that low,” saidMartin A. Sullivan, a tax economist who formerly worked for the U.S. Treasury Department. “We know this company operates throughout the world mostly in high-tax countries where the average corporate rate is well over 20 percent.”

The U.S. corporate income-tax rate is 35 percent. In the U.K., Google’s second-biggest market by revenue, it’s 28 percent.

Google, the owner of the world’s most popular search engine, uses a strategy that has gained favor among such companies as Facebook Inc. and Microsoft Corp. The method takes advantage of Irish tax law to legally shuttle profits into and out of subsidiaries there, largely escaping the country’s 12.5 percent income tax. (See an interactive graphic on Google’s tax strategyhere.)

The earnings wind up in island havens that levy no corporate income taxes at all. Companies that use the Double Irish arrangement avoid taxes at home and abroad as the U.S. government struggles to close a projected $1.4 trillion budget gap and European Union countries face a collective projected deficit of 868 billion euros.

Countless Companies

Google, the third-largest U.S. technology company by market capitalization, hasn’t been accused of breaking tax laws. “Google’s practices are very similar to those at countless other global companies operating across a wide range of industries,” said Jane Penner, a spokeswoman for the Mountain View, California-based company. Penner declined to address the particulars of its tax strategies.

Facebook, the world’s biggest social network, is preparing a structure similar to Google’s that will send earnings from Ireland to the Cayman Islands, according to the company’s filings in Ireland and the Caymans and to a person familiar with its plans. A spokesman for the Palo Alto, California-based company declined to comment.

Transfer Pricing

The tactics of Google and Facebook depend on “transfer pricing,” paper transactions among corporate subsidiaries that allow for allocating income to tax havens while attributing expenses to higher-tax countries. Such income shifting costs the U.S. government as much as $60 billion in annual revenue, according to Kimberly A. Clausing, an economics professor at Reed College in Portland, Oregon.

U.S. Representative Dave Camp of Michigan, the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, and other politicians say the 35 percent U.S. statutory rate is too high relative to foreign countries. International income-shifting, which helped cut Google’s overall effective tax rate to 22.2 percent last year, shows one way that loopholes undermine that top U.S. rate.

Democrats always talk about taxing the “rich billionaires” but the truth is that huge Democrat contributors like Google, George Soros and John & Teresa Kerry will never pay much in taxes. This is why the tax code is 60,000 pages long and filled with loopholes and corruption. So who ends up paying all these taxes designed to stick it to “the rich”? It is small to medium sized business, and the producer class that is soaked. Remember what I said about how big business loves big government? Who can create an upstart company and actually compete with Google when they pay 2.4% tax and you have to pay 39.9%? How can you claim that you are for jobs when you are sticking it to those who employ the most people Democrats? Small business does almost 80% of all hiring in the United States.

I can hear the objection already “so are you saying that Republicans never added to or put a loophole in the tax code” of course I am not saying that, but what I am saying is that one party is way ahead in creating this mess and we all know what party that is. The GOP is the party that has been trying to repeal/reform the tax code or just replace it altogether with a Steve Forbes style flat tax or a Neil Boortz style Fair Tax. It is Democrats who have fought tooth and nail for the status quo.

Google has given Obama over $800,000 and $270,00 to Democrats in this election cycle alone. So while Obama attacks the Chamber of Commerce (2) which represents most small to medium sized business Google skips out on $60 billion in taxes with the Obama Administration not saying a peep.

Of course Google isn’t alone. US News:

Microsoft is the top contributor with 60 percent of its nearly $1.3 million in contributions going to Democrats. This number reflects contributions made to incumbents, challengers, and national party committees. [See where Chuck Schumer’s campaign cash comes from.]

Contributions from those associated with Cisco make it the second highest contributor in the industry with $557,919 in donations, 67 percent of which went to Democratic candidates and committees. Google is next, with $456,119 in contributions, 75 percent of which went to Democrats, followed by Intel, with 57 percent of its $373,205 in contributions going to Democrats. The fifth-most-prominent computer/internet company, Hewlett-Packard, also favored Democrats, despite the fact that its former CEO, Carly Fiorina, is running as a Republican in California’s high-profile Senate race. Those associated with Hewlett-Packard gave $367,460, with only 40 percent going to Republican candidates and parties.

Google’s help to the Democrats doesn’t just go as far as campaign dollars. Google has often delisted Conservative stories and news sites from searches of Google news. Google owned YouTube has removed video’s from conservative pundits including Michelle Malkin. David Zucker had his video flagged as “18 and over only” until it created a big enough fuss where Google relented (LINKLINK). This very author has been threatened by YouTube as well, which is why I have stopped posting on my YouTube channel which so far as gotten 1.5 million views. I am now posting at DailyMotion and  Eyeblast.tv.

McDonalds and 29 other large corporations have gotten ObamaCare waivers because the new law makes health insurance costs so expensive. Where are the waivers for the smaller companies that still have over 50 employees and are getting creamed by this new law?

So lets meet the evil rich shall we?

Lets start with Leland Furniture Company in Grand Rapids, Michigan

Indeed this small business is in the top tax bracket because they bring in on paper over $250,000 a year. Of course most of that money goes back into the business paying his 25 employees, buying material and tools, paying property taxes etc.

On paper most small businesses that employ more than a dozen people hit $250,000 on paper. The truth is that there are few people who make over $250,00 per year in taxable wages, the vast majority who qualify for the top marginal tax rate in this category are small business S-corps that do most of the hiring. Think of a family business that owns 3 pizza shops and works 11 hours a day keeping the business running? With that kind of hard work shouldn’t they have a tax rate that looks more like Google’s?

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

“Summer of Recovery” Economic News Roundup! – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on October 13, 2010

Stay tuned – more updates coming to this post soon!

The White House told us this would be the “Summer of Recovery” so how did it go? The elite media has been telling us that each and every month of woeful economic news has been “unexpected” or a “surprise” since shortly after Obama took power. Finally the canard is off and he elite media is running to catch up when the train has already left the station.   For previous posts check out our Econ 101 and Energy & Taxes categories!

IBD: U.S. Won’t Recover Lost Jobs Until March 2020 At Current Pace

The U.S. economy lost 95,000 jobs in September, far worse than expectations for no change in employment. More Census-related temp jobs ended, as expected, but state and local governments slashed staff far more than predicted.

So far in 2010, the U.S. has added just 613,000 jobs — for a monthly average of 68,111. [The U.S. needs to create 125,000-150,000 jobs each month just to absorb new workers and prevent unemployment from rising.]

Employment bottomed in December 2009 at 129.588 million — two years after peaking at 137.951 million. At this year’s pace, the U.S. won’t recoup all those 8.36 million lost jobs* until March 2020 — 147 months after the December 2007 high.

That would obliterate the old post-World War II record of 47 months set in the wake of the 2001 recession.

The current jobs slump also is the deepest of any in the post-war era, with payrolls down as much as 6.1%. They are still 5.6% below their December 2007 level.

With state and local governments likely to shed workers for at least the next year or two as budget woes continue, the hiring burden will fall entirely on the private sector.

Private employers did add 64,000 workers last month, but that was a little less than consensus forecasts and far below what’s needed.

The U.S. needs to create 125,000-150,000 jobs each month just to absorb new workers and prevent unemployment from rising. So returning to the old peak employment a decade later would hardly suggest a healthy labor market.

(Unemployment held at 9.6% last month as the separate household employment survey reported an increase in jobs. But the underemployment rate rose 0.4 point to 17.1%, matching the 2010 high.)

The bottom line: It’s quite possible that the next recession will hit before the U.S. returns to old employment highs [this means double dip recession very likely as we have predicted since march 2009.  – Editor].

AP: Unemployment has now topped 9.5 percent for 14 months in a row, the longest stretch since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

CNBC: Home foreclosure repo’s at record high – 95, 364 lost their homes in August alone

CNS News: Obama Added More to National Debt in First 19 Months Than All Presidents from Washington Through Reagan Combined, Says Gov’t Data

FactReal Report: Poverty Increasing under Obama and Democrat Congress

Reuters: Private employers unexpectedly cut 39,000 jobs in September [unexpected my ear, with Congress failing to act on keeping the current tax structure intact they have added to an already long list of new taxes coming soon]

UK Guardian: Indiana still awaits Obama’s promised green recovery.  More than a year after the president visited to announce a new era of green jobs, the grant he promised has not materialised and unemployment is high.

Montreal Gazette: Indiana’s ‘RV Capital of the World’ still awaits Obama’s promised recovery

CNBC: New Yorkers’ Income Falls for 1st Time in 70 Years

The recession put a 3.1 percent dent in the personal incomes of New York state residents, who endured their first full-year decline in more than 70 years, according to a report released Tuesday.

Paychecks or net earnings tumbled 5.4 percent, while dividends, interest and rent slid 8.4 percent, to a grand total of nearly $908 billion, the state comptroller’s report said. Not only did New Yorkers’ personal incomes fall “almost twice” as much as they did in the nation as a whole, but they have yet to recover to pre-recession levels, Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said.

AP: Social Security Administration’s inspector general report – 89,000 stimulus payments went to people who were either dead or in prison

Patterico: $111 million in stimulus money to L.A. produces … 54 jobs

CNS News: Feds Spent $800,000 of Economic Stimulus on African Genital-Washing Program

CNS News: Obama Administration Gave General Electric—Parent Company of NBC–$24.9 Million in ‘Stimulus’ Grants – GE Laid Off 18,000 people and posted $156 BILLION profit

GE owns NBC and MSNBC – is it any wonder that they are completely in the tank for Obama and have the most left wing bias in the entire elite media?

NYT: Obama letting big corporations off the hook with ObamaCare waivers [Remember THIS Editor]

Video: Democrat Congressman calls deficit, debt a “myth”

Ed Morrissey comments:

The last we heard from Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL), he impressed voters nationwide by assuring us that he didn’t care about the Constitution when creating law in Congress. Now he wants to let us know that the national debt is nothing but a “myth.”  In what will almost certainly become a sound bite in House races across the nation, Hare not only disputes the existence of debt and deficits, he insists that Democrats have to keep spending money we don’t have … for the children…

Bloomberg: Food Stamp Recipients at Record 41.8 Million Americans in July

The number of Americans receiving food stamps rose to a record 41.8 million in July as the jobless rate hovered near a 27-year high, the government said.

Recipients of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program subsidies for food purchases jumped 18 percent from a year earlier and increased 1.4 percent from June, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said today in a statement on its website. Participation has set records for 20 straight months.

An average of 43.3 million people, more than an eighth of the population, will get food stamps each month in the year that began Oct. 1, according to White House estimates.

WSJ: Middle Class Slams Brakes on Consumer Spending

AP: Consumer confidence drops to lowest since Feb.

Bloomberg: Goldman Sachs predict possible double dip recession

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said the U.S. economy is likely to be “fairly bad” or “very bad” over the next six to nine months.

“We see two main scenarios,” analysts led by Jan Hatzius, the New York-based chief U.S. economist at the company, wrote in an e-mail to clients. “A fairly bad one in which the economy grows at a 1 1/2 percent to 2 percent rate through the middle of next year and the unemployment rate rises moderately to 10 percent, and a very bad one in which the economy returns to an outright recession.” [Remember the economy must grow at 1.5% just to break even on people entering the job market, anything less means unemployment and underemployment continue to rise – Editor]

BLS: Youth Unemployment at record high 19.1% since statistic has been measured since 1948.

S.F. Gate: California used a 340% over estimate of pollution levels to pass new restrictions on economy

Daily Caller: Democrat Senators threaten to raise energy costs in lame duck session

Gallup: Unemployment up sharply to 10.1% in September

Summer of Recovery? 

Big Government: Stupid federal regulators forcing New York to replace 250,600 street signs over use of capital letters…

News Australia: CBO says US hiding true amount of debt – The CBO estimates the debt will be at $US16.5 trillion in two years, or 100.6 per cent of GDP. [at near 100% of Debt/GDP historically that is when currency and credit collapses – Editor]

CNBC: Retailers post weak July sales

HotAir: Manufacturing tanks in August

Reuters: CEOs less willing to hire, sales a worry

CNBC: July Home Sales Hit 15 year Low – Yahoo Finance: Existing home sales drop 27% in July

Rosenberg: Economy in depression, not recession

Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen: The national debt is the single biggest threat to national security

AP: Recession pushed birth rate to new low

AP: Marriages at record low

US News & World Report: The Most Fiscally Irresponsible Government in U.S. History

Fox News: Homelessness Up 50% In New York City

WSJ: Stock Market Logs Worst August in 9 Years.

USA Today: 50 million Americans on welfare programs

LA Times: 41 Obama White House aides owe the IRS $831,000 in back taxes – 638 workers on Capitol Hill owe the IRS $9.3 million in back taxes…

LA Times: Jobs aren’t coming back. Unemployment likely to stay high.

Bloomberg: Dollar falling

AFP: Dollar at 15 year low against the Yen

Business Insider: 19 Facts About The Deindustrialization Of America That Will Make You Weep

WSJ: GM Resumes Political Giving. $90,500 most to Democrats [Hey folks the govt owns 61% of that company, so this is the govt paying to get itself re-elected – Editor]

Financial Times:  US Cities Face Half a Trillion Dollars of Pension Deficits

Heritage Foundation: ObamaCare increases insurance premiums

Washington Post: Business leaders say Obama’s economic policies stifle growth

Short video that explains the current budget deficits

Priceless – Democrat Blumenthal stumped on how to create a job –

October 15 UPDATE

AP: Applications for jobless benefits rise to 462K

Jobless claims have been stuck near 450,000 all year. Few employers see much reason to create many jobs, and some are still laying off workers. [This means we have been losing almost half a million jobs a month all year – Editor]

CNN Money: 85% of college grads move home –

Stubbornly high unemployment — nearly 15% for those ages 20-24 — has made finding a job nearly impossible. And without a job, there’s nowhere for these young adults to go but back to their old bedrooms, curfews and chore charts. Meet the boomerangers.

Heritage Foundation: Obama EPA Regs – The New Job Killer

Reuters: Economic Growth Expectations Adjusted Downward  –  Our friends at HotAir had some fun with this report from Reuters saying “Reuters economists expect even more of the ‘unexpected’ next year”.

Reuters: Banks foreclosed on 102,134 properties in September, the first single month above the century mark.

CNBC: Jobless Claims, Inflation, Trade Deficit Each Surge Higher

AP: Dollar tanks, stocks drop as Bernanke speech looms

Proactive Investors:  Weak Dollar Has Gold at Record High

CNBC: US Consumer Sentiment Dips

WSJ: Mortgage Damage Spreads

AP: Government reports $1.3 trillion budget deficit

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

AFL-CIO Head Calls For Government Takeover of All Business

Posted by iusbvision on September 30, 2010

So what Trumka is calling for is a textbook definition of communism/socialism. So will the elite media apologize to Glenn Beck now?

Ok so, according to Trumka, the government will run our companies.. so I wonder who will be the czar in charge of toilet paper and tampons? European socialist countries have “government toilet paper” made to strict government regulations. Have you seen or (god forbid) ever had to use Euro-toilet paper? Believe me, you will be running back home for the Charmin in short order.

Via BigGovernment.com:

Woah! Radical AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is calling for the left to take control over private industry.

Can we call them “socialists” yet?

Rich "Union Thug" Trumka

“We need to fundamentally restructure our economy and re-establish popular control over the private corporations.”

The AFL-CIO blog reported:

With the economy continuing to stagger and job creation not moving quickly, “working people are justifiably angry and frustrated” as they approach the Nov. 2 elections, says AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.

Trumka and Working America Executive Director Karen Nussbaum, New York Times columnist Bob HerbertEric Alterman, journalist and senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, and moderator Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of the Nation, led a panel discussion—Which Way for the Working Class? Elections 2010 and Beyond—Friday afternoon in New York City.

More than 400 people attended the event at the Great Hall at Cooper Union.

Trumka said it is vital to channel working-class anger away from Fox News and Tea Party extremists who are delivering

a cynical, deeply dishonest and incoherent message—that big government is somehow to blame for the current crisis that the budget deficit will eat our children, and that illegal immigrants took all the good jobs.

However, he added, “The good news is they haven’t bought into right-wing ideology. They are just confused about who to blame.” But:

We have to offer working people something other than the dead-end choice between the failed agenda of greed and the voices of hate and division and violence.

…In the short term, said Trumka, the labor movement has to “recapture the moment and take control of the national conversation.” Building for the future,

we need to fundamentally restructure our economy and re-establish popular control over the private corporations which have distorted our economy and hijacked our government. That’s a long-term job, but one we should start now.

Last week this socialist called Sarah Palin the new McCarthy. Now he wants the left to take over private industry.

mm

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Reminder: Big Business Loves Big Government (especially Democrats)

Posted by iusbvision on September 29, 2010

In the 2008 election big business, bankers and Wall Street etc overwhelmingly supported Obama and the Democrats. Goldman Sachs guys and lobbyists are all over the White House. In fact after making promises to reign in the corporate lobbyists, Obama and the Democrats relaxed the restrictions on them.

The truth is that Big Business loves big government, because the regulations they influence and the taxes Democrats pass turns the small to medium sized business competition into no competition.

Republicans are the party of small business and the people they employ which is the majority of workers. Republicans dont get massive donations filtered through George Soros and the Tides Foundation to countless PACS and 527’s like the Democrats do. The majority of donations to Republicans are in individual donations of $200 or less. There facts are easily verified by public records.

Examine the proof in the following 2 links –

Corruption You Can Believe In: Failed Sub Primes and Mortgage Fraud Lenders Funneled Money to Dodd & Obama the Most. Fannie & Freddie Gave $200 Million to Partisans-Most Went to Democrats! Dodd, Obama Among Top Recipients. Republicans Attempted to Pass Reforms-Blocked by Democrat Leadership!

and

Democrats put language in the ‘Stimulus Bill’ to protect AIG executive bonuses. Dodd and Obama were the number one recipients of money from AIG. Distraction in full swing & Congress’ plan to tax the bonuses at 100% wont pass constitutional muster. – UPDATE: Shep Smith goes off on Congress.

Be sure to also see  crony capitalism and our corporatism and corruption category. And don’t forget – Corruption: Most Stimulus Funds Spent in Democrat Districts…

Related stories

Top 20 Industry Money Recipients This Election Cycle – Who is in the back pocket of Wall Street?

The Lobbying Boom – The numbers are in

Foreign Press Goes After Obama for Breaking Lobbyist Pledge

Palin: Dodd Bill Institutionalizes Corrupt Crony Capitalism

More Journalistic Malpractice at the NYT: NYT does hit piece on GOP Leader for taking lobbyist donations, but ignores that the Democratic Leadership has taken much much more…

Drug Industry Spends $150 Million to Lobbyists to Support ObamaCare and Democrats.

NPR: Lobbyists acting as fund raisers for Democrats all over the health care reform bill.

Lobbyists Find Plenty of Work as Clients Contend for Stimulus Package’s Billions

Democrats Health Care Bill Packed With Frivolous Spending

Washington Post selling access to Obama officials. All new Definition of “in the tank”

Democrats move against company who gave testimony they didn’t like in Congressional hearing.

Congressional travel junkets up 50% since Democrats took power.

Fox and CNN hit Obama over broken promises.

Washington Post: The Fierce Urgency of Pork

SHOCKER: AP Calls out Obama on Misleading the Public on Porkulus Bill

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paying $210 million in bonuses with your money and no outrage why…..

Clinton Took $6 Million From Foreign Interests

UK Daily Telegraph: Obama’s Top Ten Broken Promises

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Mortgage Crisis | 1 Comment »

Don’t Be Fooled: “Disclose Act” Designed to Skew Elections, Not Make Them Fair.

Posted by iusbvision on September 23, 2010

This is typical of the Democrat leaderships M.O..

When the Democrats wanted to take away the right of workers to have a secret vote when it comes to unions, the Democrats called that “The Employee Free Choice Act” (HR 800).

A similar game is going on with the so-called “Disclose Act” that passed the House and Republicans are trying to block in the Senate. The Democrats say:

We are just trying to keep the Chinese and others from having influence on our elections by using disclosure. You Republicans just want to take all sorts of secret illegal money and keep the people from finding out what billionaires are funding you.

This is textbook Orwellian doublespeak. 

The truth is that the Democrats get all sorts of secret money. The Tides Foundation does not disclose its super wealthy donors no matter where in the world they are from. Tides funds many of the Democrats pressure groups and 527’s.

The bill is designed to make SOME corporations and groups file a mountain of paperwork to run a political ad. Unions and other Democrat constituency groups are exempted. The NRA is exempted too only because the Democrats fear them. This is Chicago style politics once again.

David Patten:

The Disclose Act that House Democrats passed Thursday would “shred” the U.S. Constitution and represents a “blatant partisan maneuver to protect their incumbency,” according to U.S. Chamber of Commerce Executive Vice President R. Bruce Josten.

Josten says the Disclose Act, which passed by a 219 to 206 margin, reveals just how much Democrats fear the nation’s rising anti-incumbent fervor.

“I think it’s clear what’s going on here,” says Josten. “The House Democratic majority and the Senate Democratic majority in Congress are clearly trying to tilt the playing field in the middle of the game, racing and rushing to do it.”

Only two Republicans voted for the act: Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao of Louisiana and Rep. Michael Castle of Delaware.

Just last week it looked like the bill was in trouble due to a controversial “carve out,” or exception, granted to the National Rifle Association excluding it from the bill’s provisions. But the bill was resuscitated in part thanks to a strong endorsement from the White House.

The administration declared Monday that the Disclose Act “takes great strides to hold corporations who participate in the Nation’s elections accountable to the American people. As this is a matter of urgent importance, the administration urges prompt passage of the Disclose Act.”

But Josten says the act would heavily restrict the rights of more than 100,000 associations nationwide to run ads expressing their political views.

Groups opposing the measure span the political continuum, including the ACLU, the Sierra Club, PIRG (the federation of state public interest research groups), the chamber and many others.

The chamber recently called the bill a “desperate attempt” by Democrats to grab a political advantage in the midterm elections.

The act requires companies and associations to submit a mountain of paperwork to the Federal Election Commission if they want to run an ad. [IUSB Vision Editor’s note – most small business are members of associations to pool their resources. This bill is designed to freeze them out from political adverstising]

Some companies – those that receive substantial government contracts or took TARP bailouts – would be altogether banned from spending money on election advertising.

It also bans any company with more than 20 percent foreign ownership from advertising, which means international companies that employs tens of thousands of U.S. citizens, which also attract substantial foreign investment, could no longer pay for U.S. campaign-related advertising.

CEOs who are major donors would have to appear on in ads to notify the public of their involvement. The top donor to the advertising organization would be required to appear in the commercial to explain their role as well.

Finally, a TV ad would have to list the top five funders to the organization. The disclaimers alone would preclude the possibility of a 15-second advertisement.

Josten and other business leaders charge the act’s onerous provisions are obviously designed to dissuade the business community from exercising its First Amendment rights.

Another reason the bill’s intentions are suspect: Its principal author is Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.

Van Hollen’s primary job, as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, is to get Democrats elected to Congress.

“Organized labor, which notably was the single largest political spender in the 2008 election, some $420 million, who just in the past three weeks has announced their intention to spend $150 million minimally in this election to protect ‘incumbency,’ to quote them, they are carved out of the bill, no effect on them, no real disclosure, no real reporting requirements required of them,” he tells Newsmax.

[IUSB Vision Editor – This is where it gets really interesting.. they know it is unconstitutional so the bill is designed to take as long as possible to get through the courts in hopes to impact the next two elections]

According to Josten, every other bipartisan campaign reform dating back to 1943 has contained a provision requiring an expedited Supreme Court review, to ensure no infringement of the First Amendment. But not this one.

“This piece of legislation in fact precludes expedited Supreme Court review interestingly enough,” Josten tells Newsmax. “It forces any potential challenger to the litigation to go through a district court process to be heard. And then ultimately, maybe three or four years from today … you get your hearing before the Supreme Court. They are clearly trying to cut off any opportunity to raise the constitutional issues that this bill tampers with, and I say in fact begins to shred.”

Whether the act becomes law now depends on whether Democrats can muster enough votes to bring it to the floor of the Senate. So far, GOP sources tell Newsmax, the 41 Republican votes needed to block the bill are holding firm. But Democrats are expected to mount a serious effort to encourage a defection.

The Disclose Act stems from Citizens United vs. FEC, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down McCain-Feingold campaign-finance regulations that limited the rights of companies and associations to run political advertising.

The Supreme Court ruled such restrictions are an unconstitutional abridgment of the First Amendment’s guarantees of free speech.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

Democrats Shut Down American Light Bulb Factories

Posted by iusbvision on September 23, 2010

General Electric is closing its last incandescent light bulb factory in the U.S. to comply with the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Representative Joe Barton of Texas is pushing to repeal the act and says that the government is mandating consumer behavior since the bulbs will no longer be available for purchase by 2014.

The bulbs they are mandating are much more expensive and have so much murcury in them that they are a threat to pets and children. They are made in China etc now…

Some people in Congress had to get paid for this little provision….

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Energy & Taxes, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

President’s leadership inept over oil spill

Posted by iusbvision on June 13, 2010

Granted Mike Huckabee may be angling to run for president again but in this case he is spot on. European countries have offered to loan us skimmer ships to help clean up and they were ignored. Florida wants to clean up its own beaches and the feds wont let them. Louisiana was out with plans for barriers and clean up very early and the feds wont let the states help with the cleanup and in fact are not even talking to the states with Republican governors. Companies who make oil spill equipment are contacting the federal government only to not get calls returned. Combine this with the fact that the MMS didn’t buy and position the equipment they were required to and come to find out that many of their employees are watching porn at work just goes to show that government may be incapable of responding well to any disaster.

UPDATE – Jim Quinn reports that JPS Industries of Bristol,  New Hampshire shipped 3 miles of boom to the oil slick site early on. The bureaucrats rejected it because it was non spec., specifically because it was the wrong color ….. we could not make this up folks.

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

Heritage Foundation Submits Video to Obama’s “Show How Great Government Regulation Is” Video Contest.

Posted by iusbvision on May 17, 2010

They asked for it :)

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes | Leave a Comment »

Obama trying to change federal regs to allow just a few employees to unionize an entire company by force

Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2010

Welcome to Chicago.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Government posts 19th straight monthly budget deficit. Four Times the monthly deficit of 1 year ago.

Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2010

Greece here we come.

Al-Reuters:

(Reuters) – The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month, the Treasury Department said on Wednesday.

It was more than twice the $40-billion deficit that Wall Street economists surveyed by Reuters had forecast and was striking since April marks the filing deadline for individual income taxes that are the main source of government revenue.

Department officials said that in prior years, there was a surplus during April in 43 out of the past 56 years.

The government has now posted 19 consecutive monthly budget deficits, the longest string of shortfalls on record.

For the first seven months of fiscal 2010, which ends September 30, the cumulative budget deficit totals $799.68 billion, down slightly from $802.3 billion in the comparable period of fiscal 2009.

Outlays during April rose to $327.96 billion from $218.75 billion in March and were up from $287.11 billion in April 2009. It was a record level of outlays for an April.

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

The Real Deal on the Oil Platform Accident. What you need to know (so far). UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2010

UPDATE VVideo: Sarah Palin on the BP oil spill, the slow federal reaction, the contributions to Obama, and the elite media’s hypocrisy on all of it.

I will get into the reasoning for this but first and foremost this was an accident that has revealed yet another likely government corruption scandal.

Yes this was an accident, accidents happen and will always happen, but as we learn and grow accidents of this type, size, and scale will happen less frequently and have a smaller impact. Just because accidents happen does not mean that we should stop offshore drilling any more than we should stop driving or flying. Flying is the safest way to travel and drilling is very safe and much more so when the latest technology is used. Less drilling means more oil tankers that are much less safe. The answer to more safe energy is more drilling by the United States, not less.

Banning off shore drilling will make offshore energy drilling and exploration LESS SAFE. Cuba, China, Mexico and others are building offshore oil wells just off our coasts. So who is going to use the safest technology us or them? If we do not get that energy they will and we will be borrowing money to buy the oil from them. There are trillions of dollars worth of energy wealth kept off-limits by our government largely due to wealthy environmental extremists, some of who get funds from the oil cartel (OPEC).

The oil rig was using an older technology (single backup shut-off system) and was owned by a company called TransOcean. British Petroleum (BP) was leasing the platform. The new rig technology has secondary and tertiary  safety redundancies built-in. Granted the blow out valve technology has never failed before now, but this was a record depth well.

While ultimately BP will have to pay much of the bill for this accident the government was supposed to have a role to play in partnering withe energy companies to help clean up these accidents when they happened. The government was very late getting to the show. Why?

There is a government agency within the Department of the Interior called the Minerals Management Service (MMS) that is funded by energy companies. One of the key missions of the MMS is to use that money to buy fire booms and other equipment and have equipment pre-positioned off the coasts in strategic areas to respond to accidents. This way the government could assist in the clean up efforts lightening fast. The plan to have equipment ready for such a spill was implemented in 1994 after the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound. Billions donated by energy companies, bureaucracy hired, papers pushed and no fire booms and other equipment actually pre-positioned. Read this carefully and you will see what an outrageous failure the government response was.

Alabama News:

Despite plan, not a single fire boom on hand on Gulf Coast at time of oil spill

If U.S. officials had followed up on a 1994 response plan for a major Gulf oil spill, it is possible that the spill could have been kept under control and far from land.

The problem: The federal government did not have a single fire boom on hand.

The “In-Situ Burn” plan produced by federal agencies in 1994 calls for responding to a major oil spill in the Gulf with the immediate use of fire booms.

But in order to conduct a successful test burn eight days after the Deepwater Horizon well began releasing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf, officials had to purchase one from a company in Illinois.

When federal officials called, Elastec/American Marine, shipped the only boom it had in stock, Jeff Bohleber, chief financial officer for Elastec, said today.

At federal officials’ behest, the company began calling customers in other countries and asking if the U.S. government could borrow their fire booms for a few days, he said.

A single fire boom being towed by two boats can burn up to 1,800 barrels of oil an hour, Bohleber said. That translates to 75,000 gallons an hour, raising the possibility that the spill could have been contained at the accident scene 100 miles from shore.

“They said this was the tool of last resort. No, this is absolutely the asset of first use. Get in there and start burning oil before the spill gets out of hand,” Bohleber said. “If they had six or seven of these systems in place when this happened and got out there and started burning, it would have significantly lessened the amount of oil that got loose.”

In the days after the rig sank, U.S Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mary Landry said the government had all the assets it needed. She did not discuss why officials waited more than a week to conduct a test burn.

At the time, former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration oil spill response coordinator Ron Gouguet — who helped craft the 1994 plan — told the Press-Register that officials had pre-approval for burning. “The whole reason the plan was created was so we could pull the trigger right away.”

Gouguet speculated that burning could have captured 95 percent of the oil as it spilled from the well.

Washington Examiner:

Why didn’t federal officials implement an oil spill clean up plan they’ve had on the books since 1994 as soon as possible after crude began pumping into the Gulf of Mexico following the explosion and sinking of BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling platform 53 miles south of Louisiana in the Gulf of Mexico?

The Mobile Register reports that Ron Gouget, who formerly managed the oil spill cleanup department of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as well as a similar unit for the state of Louisiana, is criticizing the Obama White House’s failure to act according to existing government plans in the event of a spill in the area now being deluged with thousands of barrels of crude oil every day.

Gouget said when he was at NOAA, the agency created a plan that required burning off an oil spill in the region in its earliest stage, if the prevailing winds would not push the smoke and soot from the operation inland. The plan is still in effect, but was not activated last week by NOAA.

~
“It may have been a political issue. The burn would make a big plume and lots of soot. Like Valdez, the decisions to get the resources mobilized may not have occurred until it was too late,” Gouget told the Register. “This whole thing has been a daily strip tease. At first they thought it was just the diesel, then they said the well wasn’t leaking. It’s unfortunate they didn’t get the burning going right away. They could have gotten 90 percent of the oil before it spread.”

Unbelievable. The rules were there, the money was available and through Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations and the mission that gave this government agency meaning did not get done (and these are the people we are supposed to entrust national health care too? No thanks).

What other factors delayed the appropriate federal response and contributed to the problem?

Waivers were issued to get out of a costly environmental impact study were granted partly as a result of BP lobbying according to The Washington Post. Would the study have made the rig safer and made the accident less likely? Probably not. This is appears to be a case of if you have the clout you don’t pay the cost of the study, but if don’t have the clout you pay the piper.

However, the problem with members of Congress and the Administration leaning on the “government regulators” so that the regulation process is captured by the industry they are supposed to watchdog is a problem as the video from the House Government Oversight Committee explains:

Politico and NewsBusters are reporting that Obama was the largest recipient of BP cash:

While the BP oil geyser pumps millions of gallons of petroleum into the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama and members of Congress may have to answer for the millions in campaign contributions they’ve taken from the oil and gas giant over the years.

BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company’s political action committees — $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals.

On top of that, the oil giant has spent millions each year on lobbying — including $15.9 million last year alone — as it has tried to influence energy policy.

During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.

The Initial Exploration Plan submitted by BP to the MMS was approved and the safety inspections were to be conducted in compliance with the rules according to the plan:

But… NOLA.com reports that the MMS engineer admitted in the congressional hearings that he approved the blowout preventer (failsafe backup device) without assurances it would work. Nice.

While BP did at first underestimate the size of the leak it is unclear if this was deliberate or a simple mistake.

Jake Tapper reports that the Department of the Interior Chief of Staff decided to take a vacation to the Grand Canyon three days after the spill:

Though his agency was charged with coordinating the federal response to the major oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Department of the Interior chief of staff Tom Strickland was in the Grand Canyon with his wife last week participating in activities that included white-water rafting, ABC News has learned.

The Stricklands departed for the Grand Canyon three days after the leaks in the Deepwater Horizon pipeline were discovered.  Ultimately, after the government realized that the spill was worse than had been previously thought, officials decided that Strickland was needed in the Gulf so Strickland was taken out of the Grand Canyon by a National Park Service helicopter.

One government official, asking for anonymity because of the political sensitivities involved, told ABC News that some Interior Department employees thought it was “irresponsible” for Strickland to have gone on the trip, given the crisis in the Gulf, which was fully apparent at the time he departed for the Grand Canyon.

Gateway Pundit reports that on the 12th day after the explosion President Obama stopped his campaign tour and visited the site:

After 12 days of campaigning against the Arizona immigration law and Wall Street bankers while pushing his next big government takeovers in energy and banking, Barack Obama finally decided to visit the oil slick disaster zone today.

Doug Ross posted President Obama’s activities the last 12 days while the oil slick grew to over 1,000 square kilometers. The President is finally visiting the disaster zone today.

Even the New York Times was critical:

BP Is Criticized Over Oil Spill, but U.S. Missed Chances to Act

The Department of Homeland Security waited until Thursday to declare that the incident was “a spill of national significance,” and then set up a second command center in Mobile. The actions came only after the estimate of the size of the spill was increased fivefold to 5,000 barrels a day.

The delay meant that the Homeland Security Department waited until late this week [April 30 – IUSB Vision Editor] to formally request a more robust response from the Department of Defense, with Ms. Napolitano acknowledging even as late as Thursday afternoon that she did not know if the Defense Department even had equipment that might be helpful.

By Friday afternoon, she said, the Defense Department had agreed to send two large military transport planes to spray chemicals that can disperse the oil while it is still in the Gulf.

Just priceless…

Speaking of priceless. The White House put the timeline of its response to the oil mess in its own White House Blog. It is almost laughable. They had a meeting, they had a deceleration, they sent out two Coast Guard ships and a helicopter, they had more meetings, they set up a command center, they send a couple of bureaucrats to the Gulf Coast, they brief Obama…. well I think you are starting to get the picture. At least on the 25th they started sending responders to the coasts to prepare to help to clean up oil that may come ashore.

If Bush and/or his people had done what you see above what would the elite media reaction be?

UPDATE – Charles Krauthammer, Mort Kondrake, and Stephen Hayes comment:

NOTE: By the way, oil has always been measured in “Barrels”; now the elite media is measuring it in gallons to inflate the sound of the number.

UPDATE II – MMS was not doing all of the inspections it was required to do.

AP:

LOS ANGELES – The federal agency responsible for ensuring that the Deepwater Horizon was operating safely before it exploded last month fell well short of its own policy that the rig be inspected at least once per month, an Associated Press investigation shows.

In fact, the agency’s inspection frequency on the Deepwater Horizon fell dramatically over the past five years, according to federal Minerals Management Service records. The rig blew up April 20, killing 11 people before sinking and triggering a massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

UPDATE III – Today Susan Collins of the Homeland Security Committee of the Senate thanked BP for being transparent and totally cooperative with the committee. Senator Collins then chastised the Obama Administration for not allowing the MMS to appear.

UPDATE IVU.S. Drilling Regulator Quits Amid Criticism Over Rig Disaster

Bloomberg:

May 18 (Bloomberg) — The top-ranking U.S. official in charge of ensuring the safety of offshore oil rigs resigned four weeks after the Gulf of Mexico disaster that killed 11 workers, sank a $365 million vessel and triggered leaks that have gushed millions of gallons of crude into the sea.

Chris Oynes, associate director of the offshore energy and minerals management program for the Interior Department’s Minerals Management Service, has left his job, Bill Lee, an agency spokesman, said yesterday in an interview.

 

UPDATE V – Democrats propose to increase offshore drilling tax by 500%. Remember folks, companies don’t pay taxes, they pass those taxes on to you in the form of higher prices. The politicians can claim innocence when they force a company to become the tax collector for the government. –  LINK

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Stuck on Stupid | 1 Comment »

Unions and Communist Activists All Too Happy With Obama-Dodd Financial Takeover Bill

Posted by iusbvision on May 12, 2010

This is also known as the Wall Street Special Favors and Unlimited Bailout Bill. If you ever wonder why Wall Street gives so much more to Democrats than Republicans, this is a good reason why.

From our friend Michael Van Der Galien at News-Reel:

“As thousands of union members converged on Wall Street last week, they were joined in solidarity by Kevin Keating,” writes Capitol Confidential for Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government. “Keating, a photographer on the 1976 movie ‘Harlan County, U.S.A’ and an unabashed communist joined his union brethren in demanding the Obama-Dodd financial takeover bill that would give unions greater ability to takeover the governing boards of companies and drain resources into their own coffers.”

Although Obama doesn’t strike me as a communist himself – I agree with Glenn Beck who calls him a “radical progressive” – it’s crystal clear that communists are suspiciously supportive of his plans; Keating is one of them.

It goes without saying that communists are happy because they realize that the president is “radically transforming” the country. And that should worry all those concerned with preserving democracy, political freedom and, yes, capitalism.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Outrage: Obama Administration Targets Military for Pay Reductions

Posted by iusbvision on May 11, 2010

Here is the problem. Obama has the federal government on a hiring spree. Government workers such as those in the SEIU already make 30-300% more than their private sector counterparts. The IRS is hiring 16,000 new agents to enforce new ObamaCare taxes.

If this was a part of an overall budget cutting plan I could live with this, but while federal employees who donate to Democrats are getting fat & happy off of us, at the same time the administration wants to sock it to the workers in the federal government who usually vote GOP and that would be the military.

Via Newsmax:

President Barack Obama — who came to power with the help of government employee unions across the nation and has lavished on them hundreds of billions in stimulus funds to keep them on federal, state and local payrolls with no strings attached — is moving to cut spending on salaries for military personnel.

This weekend The Washington Post headlined story, “Pentagon Asking Congress to Hold Back on Generous Increases in Troop Pay,” disclosed that the Obama administration is “pleading” with Congress to give military personnel a much smaller increase in pay than lawmakers have proposed.

The Pentagon contends that Congress simply has been too generous with troops during the past decade.

In fact, lawmakers have lavished so much money on troops, according to the Post, that service members are now better compensated than workers in the private sector with similar experience and education levels.

For example, the military brass claims that an average sergeant in the Army with four years of service and one dependent would receive $52,589 in annual compensation, according to the paper. This figure includes basic pay, housing, and subsistence allowances, as well as tax benefits.

Meanwhile, a U.S. postal letter carrier, with no supervisory or hazardous duty, makes approximately $80,000 a year when all benefits are factored in.

Critics of the Obama administration’s efforts to cut soldier’s pay say America’s security has been strengthened by higher pay rates, as qualified veterans are re-enlisting at record rates, reversing the problem the military witnessed just a few years ago.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism | Leave a Comment »

UPS & Unions Lobbying Government to Change Labor Rules to Screw FedEx

Posted by iusbvision on May 10, 2010

UPDATE – FedEx Fights Back – BrownBailout.com  Another update HERE.

This is what the Democrats say, “We need more regulation” because government only has your best interest at heart.

This kind of corruption is called “Corporatism”, “Political Market Economics” and my least favorite term “Crony Capitalism” because once the government cronies get involved it ceases to be capitalism.

Via Big Government.com and Reason TV:

The AP is reporting that the Obama administration has changed a 76-year-old rule to make it easier for unions to claim dues members in the airline and rail sectorssince, you know, those are such vibrant industries right now that need to have their wealth redistributed to workers.

That’s not the only bailout unions are looking for in this area. Be sure to check out this classic explanation from Reason.tv:

Posted in Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101 | Leave a Comment »

New Obama-Dodd Bill Makes for Unlimited Wall Street/Bank Bailouts

Posted by iusbvision on April 22, 2010

UPDATE – Goldman Sachs supports New Democrat “Wall Street” Bill. Of course they do. If you didn’t see this coming you must be a registered Democrat. – LINK. Karl Rove explains some of the reasons Goldman Sachs would benefit from the bill HERE.

UPDATE II – Sen. Jim DeMint confirms IUSB Vision analysis of bill:

We talk about crony capitalism and picking winners and losers, this takes it to such a corrupt and foolish extreme that it blows way beyond a mere fracture of the public trust into full blown criminality. See our previous post HERE.

I try to avoid quoting partisan sources, but in this case not only are the GOP critisisms absolutely right, they are in fact understating the damage this kind of legislation can do.

1. Obama-Dodd Bill Creates $50 Billion Permanent Bailout Fund That Senate Democrats Plan To Keep. (Page 277, S. 3217, Restoring American Financial Stability Act Of 2010, Introduced 4/15/10; Carrie Budoff Brown, “Dems Stand By $50B Fund,” Politico, 4/19/10)

2. Obama-Dodd Bill Could Lead To More Taxpayer-Funded Bailouts By Expanding Federal Reserve’s Power To Establish “Policies And Procedures Governing Emergency Lending.” (Page 1365, S. 3217, Restoring American Financial Stability Act Of 2010, Introduced 4/15/10)

3. Obama-Dodd Bill Could Make Taxpayer-Funded Bailouts Even More Expensive By Allowing FDIC To Make “Additional Payments” To Firms That Backed Failed Financial Companies. (Page 245, S. 3217, Restoring American Financial Stability Act Of 2010, Introduced 4/15/10)

4. Obama-Dodd Bill Uses Taxpayer Dollars To Guarantee Debt Of Banks And Bank Holding Companies Through The Power Of The Federal Reserve And FDIC. (Page 1379, S. 3217, Restoring American Financial Stability Act Of 2010, Introduced 4/15/10)

5. Obama-Dodd Bill Could Institutionalize Bailouts By Allowing A New Financial Oversight Council To Determine Which Companies Are “Too Big To Fail.” (Page 35, S. 3217, Restoring American Financial Stability Act Of 2010, Introduced 4/15/10)

6. Federal Trade Commission Fears That Obama-Dodd Bill Could Have “Overall Result” Of “Less Protection For Consumers, And Fewer ‘Cops On The Beat.’” (Federal Trade Commission, Letter To Sen. Hutchison, 4/16/10)

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Caught: White House Political Collusion in SEC Investigation. White House Wants Unlimited Bailout and Siezure Power. Can anyone be trusted with that much power? UPDATE – All the president’s Goldman Sachs men

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

[Editor’s Note – This is a bit of a complex story. Please read the following story carefully. After you are done go HERE for a story update.]

The SEC (Securities Exchange Commission) is supposed to be an independent agency. This may be the scandal that brings an administration down. When the GOP takes Congress back they will have subpeona power and the investigations are going to fly.

Barack Obama took nearly a million dollars from Goldman Sachs and four million from Wall Street.

Barack Obama worked to prevent mortgage reform and to prevent reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Barack Obama took the second highest amount of money from the mortgage giants in the Senate.

Now Barack Obama is making political hay out of an SEC investigation of Goldman Sachs (of which, believe it or not they might actually be innocent in this one case).

There is evidence that the White House knew about the coming SEC investigation in advance. The timing for Obama’s new financial regulation bill seemed just a little too sweet. The White House (who insists that it didn’t know about this in advance) bought the advertising for the Google search term “Goldman Sachs SEC”. The SEC in a highly unusual party line move decided to sue Goldman Sachs just now at the beginning of Obama’s push for this legislation.

Financial News:

The Securities and Exchange Commission decided to sue Goldman Sachs Group over the objections of two Republican commissioners, suggesting an unusual split at the agency that could politicise one of its most prominent cases in years.

The legislation gives the White House near unlimited bailout power (unlimited Wall Street bailouts) and the ability to sieze any private business without any check and balance. That is the kind of power you see in Stalinistic regimes, not the United States. The legislation also has no provisions to reform the two biggest players in the mortgage scandal, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who funded almost $200 million to partisan activities, and whose multimillion dollar bonuses were protected by Democrat legislation.

[Editor’s Note – Ok who wants to say that this is not the biggest power grab and opportunity for corruption of our lifetimes? Does anyone know a mainstream Democrat or Republican voter who would trust any man with this kind of power? But do not be fooled, this “lawsuit” is for public release only (PR purposes). It will either go away or Goldman Sachs will get a slap on the wrist and gladly pay, as Goldman has made a fortune since the economic collapse and the Obama Administration continues to be a revolving door for Goldman employees, lobbyists and influence peddling.]

Rush Limbaugh played some of the evidence the media has discovered so far. In spite of what you think of Limbaugh he is very factual here in what he presents and it is worth watching (Hat Tip Rightscoop for the video):

Charlie Rose to Rahm Emanuel: How is it that the New York Times knew about the SEC Investigation Before Goldman Sachs did….

By the way I did a Google on “Goldman Sachs SEC” and sure enough….

There it is on the very top, “Help Change Wall Street” and it goes to this:

.. amazing…

Real Clear Politics: Limbaugh: White House Had Advanced Knowledge Of SEC Suit Against Goldman Sachs

In the mean time even MSNBC criticized Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid for dodging questions on Goldman Sachs/Wall Street fund raisers hosted by the president of Goldman Sachs. Video:

Charles Krauthammer discussing the Obama Administration’s “Financial Reform Bill.” He said it would provide “no check, no balance” for Executive power: 

Brad Sherman Congressman (D-Calif.), member of House Financial Services Committee (Via Politico):

But there are serious problems with the Dodd bill. The Dodd bill has unlimited executive bailout authority. That’s something Wall Street desperately wants but doesn’t dare ask for. The bill contains permanent, unlimited bailout authority.

House Republicans put out this statement about this power grab:

Washington, Apr 19

With a new national survey showing that nearly eight in 10 Americans say they don’t trust the federal government, Washington Democrats are getting ready to force through Congress a permanent bailout bill that establishes an unelected council of federal regulators with the power to seize any U.S. business and do with it as they see fit.

The permanent bailout bill authored by Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) creates a Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) made up of federal regulators – including representatives from the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve, the CFTC, FDIC, and the SEC.  In other words: the government bureaucracies asleep at the switch the last time around.

This clique of regulators could – by a 2/3 vote – deem any firm (financial or non-financial) “systemically significant,” which is merely jargon for other jargon: “too big to fail.”  At that point, according to economist Larry Lindsey, the Council would “authorize the FDIC and Treasury Secretary to treat each of the firm’s shareholders and creditors as they choose, without regard to bankruptcy law.”  Any institution could be ordered to “break itself up, stop selling certain products, or even go out of business,” according to the Heritage Foundation.

INSTITUTIONALIZING “TOO BIG TO FAIL,” HURTING SMALL BANKS.  Senior Atlantic editor Clive Crook sees the council of regulators as a major factor in how Washington Democrats’ permanent bailout bill institutionalizes “too big to fail”:

Sen. Dodd’s bill “adds new bodies … a Financial Stability Oversight Council to coordinate the policing of systemic risks.  Overall, after much shuffling of duties among this expanded list of regulators, the plan makes the system more complicated, not less. … Under the Dodd plan, although the senator denies it, many big financial firms would indeed be declared too big to fail. The market would put banks that meet the assets threshold for Fed supervision into this category.  Other financial firms would be viewed the same way if the Financial Stability Oversight Council designates them as ‘systemically significant.’” (National Journal, 3/20/10)

Once these firms are deemed ‘systemically significant,’ they will be seen as safer firms to lend to than small firms that are not government-backed.  The result will be a permanent market distortion, favoring large companies over small ones.  This will hurt small businesses and smaller banks at the worst possible time for our economy.

ENDLESS BAILOUTS FOR WALL STREET. In a speech last month, SEC Commissioner Troy Paredes outlined how Washington Democrats’ financial bailout bill would grant this council of regulators “unbounded power” to intervene in U.S. businesses:

“…[E]ach of the proposals I took time to reference would, in my view, result in just this sort of open-endedness.  For example, by allowing the new regulator to consider so many factors in deciding whether a firm is systemically significant, the bills in Congress go far to empower the regulator.  The council of regulators could readily find some basis, among the host of factors it is permitted to consider, to justify designating a financial firm for heighted prudential oversight.

“Equally uncertain are the extent and character of the more restrictive standards that may be imposed to bind the size or activities of a systemically-significant firm; there are no clear limits on the degree of government intervention that could be expected. … I do not welcome the prospect of such unbounded power, even if exercised with the best of intentions.  It would inject too much uncertainty into the system and aggregate government authority to a worrisome degree.”PROTECTING BANKERS, NOT TAXPAYERS.  Carnegie Mellon economist Allan Meltzer sees the new bureaucracy as “just another way to pick the public’s purse” given how regulators are historically inclined to protect bankers, not taxpayers:

“So setting up an agency to prevent systemic risk, as Mr. Dodd has just proposed, is just another way to pick the public’s purse.  Systemic risk will forever remain in the eye of the beholder.  Instead of shifting losses onto those that caused them, systemic risk regulation will continue to transfer cost to the taxpayers.  The regulators protect the bankers.  They continue to lose sight of their responsibility to protect the public.(The Wall Street Journal, 3/19/10)

POLITICS.  Manhattan Institute fellow Nicole Gelinas examines how the council of regulators would inevitably “fall victim to politics”:

“In a bubble, more people are over-exuberant than not. The new Financial Stability Oversight Council would not escape this fact.  It would also fall victim to politics. Imagine that the Fed and other agencies had restricted all but the plainest-vanilla mortgages back in 2000…. The regulators would have tempered the bubble–but the politicians wouldn’t have seen it that way. Instead, they’d have accused bureaucrats of roping off citizens from the American dream. … We need politicians and regulators to implement simple rules that don’t require faith in omniscient, micro-managerial government planning.” (Forbes.com, 3/29/10)

In his Cooper Union speech in March 2008, then-Sen. Barack Obama said, “Reshuffling bureaucracies should not be an end in itself.”  Instead of protecting taxpayers by crafting reforms that are regulator-proof, Washington Democrats have devised a system that is regulator-reliant.  Republicans believe we should stop endless bailouts for Wall Street and reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government mortgage companies that sparked the meltdown by giving high-risk loans to people who couldn’t afford it. For more information on the House Republican plan, click here.

UPDATEMalkin: All the president’s Goldman Sachs men – LINK

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Fannie and Freddie Amnesia: Taxpayers are on the hook for about $400 billion, partly because Sen. Obama helped to block reform.

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

We have said this since the scandal broke. In fact if you go back to the earliest posts of our mortgage crisis coverage you wills ee that we were saying this before some of the big newspapers. Today the Wall Street Journal gives us a much-needed reminder of recent history.

By the way Democrats in Congress made sure that Fannie Mae got millions in bonuses with our money.

Transparency, Congress & Corruption: AIG and Fannie Mae Bonuses

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paying $210 million in bonuses with your money and no outrage why…..

Wall Street Journal:

Now that nearly all the TARP funds used to bail out Wall Street banks have been repaid, the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stand out as the source of the greatest taxpayer losses.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that, in the wake of the housing bubble and the unprecedented deflation in housing values that resulted, the government’s cost to bail out Fannie and Freddie will eventually reach $381 billion. That estimate may be too optimistic.

Last Christmas Eve, Treasury removed the $400 billion cap on what the government might be required to invest in these two GSEs in the future, and this may tell the real story about the cost to taxpayers. In typical Washington fashion, everyone has amnesia about how this disaster occurred.

The story is all too familiar. Politicians in positions of authority today had an opportunity to prevent this fiasco but did nothing. Now—in the name of the taxpayers—they want more power, but they have never been called to account for their earlier failings.

One chapter in this story took place in July 2005, when the Senate Banking Committee, then controlled by the Republicans, adopted tough regulatory legislation for the GSEs on a party-line vote—all Republicans in favor, all Democrats opposed. [Including Obama who took the second highest amount of cash from these people in the Senate – IUSB Vision Editor] The bill would have established a new regulator for Fannie and Freddie and given it authority to ensure that they maintained adequate capital, properly managed their interest rate risk, had adequate liquidity and reserves, and controlled their asset and investment portfolio growth.

These authorities were necessary to control the GSEs’ risk-taking, but opposition by Fannie and Freddie—then the most politically powerful firms in the country—had consistently prevented reform.

The date of the Senate Banking Committee’s action is important. It was in 2005 that the GSEs—which had been acquiring increasing numbers of subprime and Alt-A loans for many years in order to meet their HUD-imposed affordable housing requirements—accelerated the purchases that led to their 2008 insolvency. If legislation along the lines of the Senate committee’s bill had been enacted in that year, many if not all the losses that Fannie and Freddie have suffered, and will suffer in the future, might have been avoided.

Why was there no action in the full Senate? As most Americans know today, it takes 60 votes to cut off debate in the Senate, and the Republicans had only 55. To close debate and proceed to the enactment of the committee-passed bill, the Republicans needed five Democrats to vote with them. But in a 45 member Democratic caucus that included Barack Obama and the current Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), these votes could not be found.

Recently, President Obama has taken to accusing others of representing “special interests.” In an April radio address he stated that his financial regulatory proposals were struggling in the Senate because “the financial industry and its powerful lobby have opposed modest safeguards against the kinds of reckless risks and bad practices that led to this very crisis.”

He should know. As a senator, he was the third largest recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, behind only Sens. Chris Dodd and John Kerry.

With hypocrisy like this at the top, is it any wonder that nearly 80% of Americans, according to new Pew polling, don’t trust the federal government or its ability to solve the country’s problems?

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Illinois Democrat on ObamaCare: I don’t worry about the Constitution

Posted by iusbvision on April 2, 2010

Citizen journalists doing what Katie Couric isn’t competent enough to do….

Via our friends at HotAir.com:

All things considered, this clip’s more depressing than the already legendary Hank Johnson clip from last night. Like Madam Speaker, not only does he regard the novel and crucial constitutional issue involved to be beside the point, he almost seems irritated to be asked about it. Reason 8,293,511 why Americans now feel such utter contempt for their representatives.

Oh, and he might be surprised to know that O-Care really doesn’t insure everyone. I didn’t realize that point was still in dispute, least of all for a guy who’s read the bill, ahem, three times.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

How Attitude Change Propaganda Works: Hate Group vs NPR vs Ann Coulter

Posted by iusbvision on March 31, 2010

A short lecture on attitude change propaganda, how it works, how subtle it can be and how new media is used to spread it. The comparison of two podcasts, one from a hate group, the other from NPR.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Culture War, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | 4 Comments »

Rick Santelli blasts lack of Fannie Mae reform, the TARP rip-off, government lies and corruption

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2010

Rick Santelli confirms IUSB Vision editor Chuck Norton’s analysis from long ago Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two biggest problems in the mortgage industry are not being reformed, the feds are dumping billions into them and they are still getting their fat bonuses at taxpayer expense.

Santelli also points out that the TARP program was a rip off, a bait & switch. They promised to use the money to buy up toxic assets and instead used the money instead to buy control of banks and pick winners and losers in the banking industry. Bank A would get TARP money, bank B would not, bank A buys bank B and gives 5 million to ACORN or another arm of the Democratic Party. Welcome to politics Chicago style.

The Proof: Links (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,)

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Brilliant: Paul Ryan on why this health care process is an unprecedented disgrace and abuse of the rules. They are trying to pass health care without voting on it. UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2010

UPDATE – Speaker Pelosi says that Congress will have to pass ObamaCare for you to find out what is in the final version of the bill

 

Here is how they are trying to pass ObamaCare without actually voting on it:

The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill. You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House. Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House – without an actual vote by members of the House.

An article in this morning’s edition of National Journal’s CongressDaily breaks the story, starting with the headline: “SLAUGHTER PREPS RULE TO AVOID DIRECT VOTE ON SENATE BILL.” Excerpts:

House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.

Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.

The CongressDaily report was authored by Anna Edney, with Billy House and Dan Friedman contributing.

Sarah Palin comments HERE.

Mini Update – Gibbs Dismantled By NBC Over The “Dirty Or Underhanded Process” of Deem & Pass

Mini Update II – Pelosi and Slaughter sued to stop the self executing rule they are now using in 2005 – LINK.

The Wall Street Journal comments:

We’re not sure American schools teach civics any more, but once upon a time they taught that under the U.S. Constitution a bill had to pass both the House and Senate to become law. Until this week, that is, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi is moving to merely “deem” that the House has passed the Senate health-care bill and then send it to President Obama to sign anyway.

Under the “reconciliation” process that began yesterday afternoon, the House is supposed to approve the Senate’s Christmas Eve bill and then use “sidecar” amendments to fix the things it doesn’t like. Those amendments would then go to the Senate under rules that would let Democrats pass them while avoiding the ordinary 60-vote threshold for passing major legislation. This alone is an abuse of traditional Senate process.

But Mrs. Pelosi & Co. fear they lack the votes in the House to pass an identical Senate bill, even with the promise of these reconciliation fixes. House Members hate the thought of going on record voting for the Cornhusker kickback and other special-interest bribes that were added to get this mess through the Senate, as well as the new tax on high-cost insurance plans that Big Labor hates.

So at the Speaker’s command, New York Democrat Louise Slaughter, who chairs the House Rules Committee, may insert what’s known as a “self-executing rule,” also known as a “hereby rule.” Under this amazing procedural ruse, the House would then vote only once on the reconciliation corrections, but not on the underlying Senate bill. If those reconciliation corrections pass, the self-executing rule would say that the Senate bill is presumptively approved by the House—even without a formal up-or-down vote on the actual words of the Senate bill.

Democrats would thus send the Senate bill to President Obama for his signature even as they claimed to oppose the same Senate bill. They would be declaring themselves to be for and against the Senate bill in the same vote. Even John Kerry never went that far with his Iraq war machinations. As we went to press, the precise mechanics that Democrats will use remained unclear, though yesterday Mrs. Pelosi endorsed this “deem and pass” strategy in a meeting with left-wing bloggers.

This two-votes-in-one gambit is a brazen affront to the plain language of the Constitution, which is intended to require democratic accountability. Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution says that in order for a “Bill” to “become a Law,” it “shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate.” This is why the House and Senate typically have a conference committee to work out differences in what each body passes. While sometimes one house cedes entirely to another, the expectation is that its Members must re-vote on the exact language of the other body’s bill.

As Stanford law professor Michael McConnell pointed out in these pages yesterday, “The Slaughter solution attempts to allow the House to pass the Senate bill, plus a bill amending it, with a single vote. The senators would then vote only on the amendatory bill. But this means that no single bill will have passed both houses in the same form.” If Congress can now decide that the House can vote for one bill and the Senate can vote for another, and the final result can be some arbitrary hybrid, then we have abandoned one of Madison’s core checks and balances.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Neglected by ‘lazy’ nurses, man, 22, dying of thirst rang the police to beg for water

Posted by iusbvision on March 7, 2010

Yet another in a long string of problems of cruelty and neglect in the British National Health Service (NHS).

Read the article below and tell me if you spot the union mentality of the nurses who helped kill this young man. It is the same mentality that failing union teachers have.

UK Daily Mail:

A man of 22 died in agony of dehydration after three days in a leading teaching hospital.

Kane Gorny was so desperate for a drink that he rang police to beg for their help.

They arrived on the ward only to be told by doctors that everything was under control.

The next day his mother Rita Cronin found him delirious and he died within hours.

She said nurses had failed to give him vital drugs which controlled fluid levels in his body. ‘He was totally dependent on the nurses to help him and they totally betrayed him.’

A coroner has such grave concerns about the case that it has been referred to police.

Sources say they are investigating the possibility of a corporate manslaughter charge against St George’s Hospital in Tooting, South London.

Mr Gorny, from Balham, worked for Waitrose and had been a keen footballer and runner until he was diagnosed with a brain tumour the year before his death.

The medication he took caused his bones to weaken and he was admitted to St George’s for a hip replacement in May last year. The operation left him immobile and unable to get out of bed.

His 50-year-old mother says that he needed to take drugs three times a day to regulate his hormones. Doctors had told him that without the drugs he would die.

Although he had stressed to staff how important his medication was, she said, no one gave him the drugs.

She said that two days after his hip operation, while Miss Cronin was at work, he became severely dehydrated but his requests for water were refused.

He became aggressive and nurses called in security guards to restrain him.

After they had left, he rang the police from his bed to demand their help.

Miss Cronin, who is divorced from her son’s father Peter, said: ‘The police told me he’d said, “Please help me. All I want is a drink and no one is helping me”.

‘By this time my son was confused due to his lack of medication and I think the nurses just ignored him because they thought he was just being badly behaved.

‘They were lazy, careless and hadn’t bothered to check his charts and see his medication was essential.’

That evening, Miss Cronin visited him. She said: ‘I told Kane to behave himself because I thought he had been causing trouble – and I feel so bad about that now. I thought maybe he was having a bad reaction to the morphine he was on but in fact it was because he had not had his medication.’

The next morning she visited him before going to work. ‘He was delirious and his mouth was open,’ she said. ‘I gave him a drink of Ribena.

‘I told three nurses there was something wrong with my son and they said, “He’s fine” and walked off. I started to cry and a locum doctor who was there told me not to worry.

‘Eventually the ward doctor came round, took one look at Kane and started shouting for help.’

Miss Cronin was asked to leave her son’s bedside. ‘He died an hour later,’ she said. ‘I didn’t even realise he was dying. I didn’t even have a chance to say goodbye.’

The death certificate said Mr Gorny had died because of a ‘water deficit’ and ‘hypernatraemia’ – a medical term for dehydration.

And you can’t sue them because they are the government.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Culture War, Economics 101, Health Law, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Should the states amend the Constitution to stop these land grabs?

Posted by iusbvision on March 6, 2010

The Founders never wanted to see federal power used this way. The video also gives a good example of how constant meddling by the federal government undermines consumer and investor confidence.

Most of these land grabs serve one purpose, to stop mining, drilling, natural gas, foresting, hunting etc etc. These land grabs are huge job killers. This also tends to make forest fires much worse. The timber companies used to manage the underbrush in the forests. When Bill Clinton forbade them to do that we ended up with forest fires that consumes massive amounts of land. ….that’s right, government mismanages land too, not just your money.

Via Ed Morrissey at Hotair:

Jim DeMint took to the Senate floor and the pages of the Washington Times earlier this week to expose a plan by the White House to seize over 10 million acres of land in nine Western states. Using an obscure clause in the Antiquities Act of 1906, the Department of the Interior under Ken Salazar would designate the land as “monuments” in order to block the use of the resources in those states. DeMint correctly asserts that this is not only a perversion of the intent of the Antiquities Act, but also a huge power grab by the federal government at the expense of the states.

Americans should be wary of any plans a president has to seize land from the states without their consent. Any new plans to take away states’ freedom to use land as they see fit must be stopped.

That’s why I sponsored an amendment to block Mr. Obama from declaring any of the 14 lands listed in the memo as “monuments.” Unfortunately, the Senate, led by Democrats, rejected it on Thursday evening by a vote of 58-38.

It was particularly disappointing that the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, of Nevada, voted against the amendment. The government owns more than 80 percent of the land in Nevada and the unemployment rate there is 12.8 percent. Surely it would help job prospects if more land were open for business.

This is a nationwide problem. The government currently owns 650 million acres, or 29 percent of the nation’s total land.

Federal bureaucrats shouldn’t be wasting time thinking up ways to acquire more, especially in the middle of a recession. Taking the nation’s resources offline will stifle job creation and dry up tax revenues.

If anything, the government should be selling land off, not locking more up. By voting against my amendment, the Democrats tacitly endorsed Mr. Obama’s secret plan to close off millions more acres to commerce.

It’s not the first time an administration has used this act to seize land from states. Jimmy Carter grabbed 50 million acres from Alaska over their loud objections, and Bill Clinton almost 6 million in 22 separate actions. These executive actions bypassed Congress altogether and made a mockery of state sovereignty. After all, if a state can’t keep the federal government from unilaterally declaring that their land no longer belongs to them, then states have no real power at all — and neither do the people, represented by Congress.

DeMint’s amendment got defeated on a party-line 58-38 vote.

..and the Democrats said that jobs are their number one priority….

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

Economics 101: The Kondratiev Wave and the Value of Loss in Capitalism

Posted by iusbvision on March 5, 2010

Capitalism is a profit and loss system. Profit rewards good ideas, good management, satisfied customers, and reasonable risk. Loss punishes those who take foolish risks, manage badly, abuse customers, etc.

Loss often saves companies and jobs. When the government bailed out the airlines decades ago, they still went bankrupt did they? But after they did the airlines reorganized and did better. Some airlines went under and they were bought up by the good ones so parts of those companies were preserved. When Studebaker went under the good parts of it were bought up. If GM had been allowed to reorganize under bankruptcy or if the good parts of GM would have been bought up the company would have relaunched itself likely better than the position it is in today.

On the long-term macro-economic scale, the government, keynesian theory, and socialist/progressives try to stop that wave or its impact; doing so is often foolish and damaging to an economy in the long-term.

Government tries to prop up the economy in the down cycle or during recessions by spending and rewarding loss with bailouts so that the utility effect of loss isn’t allowed to progress as it should. The ill-conceived stimulus package is an example, while a small percentage of it was helpful, most of it was good money after bad.

Glenn also talks about how capital and investments go where they are treated well. China has lower corporate taxes and capital gains taxes than the United States. China also does not have a problem with political ideologues bent on punishing wealth.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Only 21% Say U.S. Government Has Consent of the Governed

Posted by iusbvision on February 19, 2010

I have never witnessed polls like this, Americans are showing a clear contempt for both political parties and after seeing this it becomes clear why Tea Party is polling ahead of both Democrats and Republicans. Also note the massive disconnect between the political class the the governed.

Speaking as a political scientist, these numbers show that the government is losing its legitimacy (please be sure you know hat that word means in poli-sci terms before you comment). This can only mean big changes are ahead.

There is also an indicator that independents may be more conservative than Republicans now, if this trend continues it changes everything.

Rasmussen Reports:

The founding document of the United States, the Declaration of Independence, states that governments derive “their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Today, however, just 21% of voters nationwide believe that the federal government enjoys the consent of the governed.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 61% disagree and say the government does not have the necessary consent. Eighteen percent (18%) of voters are not sure.

However, 63% of the Political Class think the government has the consent of the governed, but only six percent (6%) of those with Mainstream views agree.

Seventy-one percent (71%) of all voters now view the federal government as a special interest group, and 70% believe that the government and big business typically work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors.

That helps explain why 75% of voters are angry at the policies of the federal government, and 63% say it would be better for the country if most members of Congress are defeated this November. Just 27% believe their own representative in Congress is the best person for the job.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Video Economics 101 – Government Run Monopolies, Mortgage Industry, Education, Insurance, Cable TV, etc.

Posted by iusbvision on February 15, 2010

Brilliant:

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Culture War, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

Video Economics 101: Moral Hazzard. How Government Caused the Mortgage Crisis

Posted by iusbvision on February 15, 2010

We have posted a series of articles with indepth information on how this mess came about, but this video gives the best 4 minute synopsis of the problem as I have ever seen.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Bloomberg: 77% of U.S. investors believe Obama is anti-business

Posted by iusbvision on February 8, 2010

Bloomberg News:

Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) — U.S. investors overwhelmingly see President Barack Obama as anti-business and question his ability to manage a financial crisis, according to a Bloomberg survey.

The global quarterly poll of investors and analysts who are Bloomberg subscribers finds that 77 percent of U.S. respondents believe Obama is too anti-business and four-out-of-five are only somewhat confident or not confident of his ability to handle a financial emergency.

Think about it, you blame everything on “the wealthy”, you tell them that you are going to punish them for investing by raising capital gains taxes from 15% to 28%, he unilaterally trie dto break the law and change the rules so that the GM bond holders didn’t get paid and his political allies did. Why would someone invest and buy bonds if the government can change the rules at the drop of a hat?

Let us not forget that Obama and the Democrats have been attacking the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and even the Black Chamber of Commerce.

By the way, the capital gaines tax in China is zero, maybe that is a big part of the reason people are investing there and not here.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »