BULLS AND BEARS, CAVUTO, FORBES, CASH-IN

2/22/14 (40H)
National debt is now at $17.3 trillion. And still Obama asks for $56 billion more in spending. What happened to the millions spent on the stimulus—shovel ready jobs??
The latest estimates on household increases due to OBC is family @ $260.00 and individual @ $160.00—long ways from that $2500.00 savings. There is no plan is place for the IRS to do any collections on OBC. Re the CBO they estimate that the $10.10 mim. Wage will cost us 500,000 jobs.

Dems have a proposal to give all newborn babies $500.00 to start a savings account of some sort—through the government. Unions are trying to unionize some athletics’ at some of the private colleges?

Sebelius says there are no job losses due to OBC, every economics says this—but she didn’t mention any of them.
Fisker is bankrupt but don’t worry the Chinese are buying them—they still owe the government $139 million. They also bought the bankrupt battery company A123 on which we lost millions.
Since 2009–$32 billion spent on 26 green energy projects @2300 jobs or $14 million a job.

The government likes this mim. wage because then people will not have to work as hard.
Hollywood stars and ball players get millions for a single picture/season, why hasn’t obama gone after them like he has CEO’s and big business

Advertisements

BUT PEOPLE, ITs ONLY MONEY

Surely a lot of this will not be news to you, but just in case. The following are just a few examples of how our government is spending “our” money.

$224,863.00 for a study on ONE size fits all Condoms. In 2009 they spent $423,500.00 on a study to learn why condom usage is so low in the USA.
Then there the untold millions paid to the failed Obamacare website CGI-sorry Michelle!
$5.25 million in food stamp fraud in Butler county CA.
We’ve went from just over to 200 to 268 millionaires in congress, their average worth is $1,009 million.
In 1962 we had 2.48 million federal civilian employees, in 2011 its now 2.75 million.
Any bets on the amount of the bailout given to the insurance companies?
Iran just got $500 million toward its promised $7 billion for sanctions.
In 50 years the war on poverty has cost more than $20 trillion. In 1964 36 million on it and today its 47 million.
10 helicopters are being purchased from RUSSIA for Afghanistan—nobody makes them in the USA??
There were 18.9 million marijuana users in 2012.
Since 2009, $32 billion in green energy loans for 26 projects, only got us 2300 jobs—that’s $14 million a job.
Anybody know the number of military General who have been forced to retire or resign lately?
As on 2/13/14—6,286.377 have lost their insurance.
The stimulus according to Obama created 8 million jobs???
Lastly with income inequality the IRS is still going to get $62.5 million in bonuses in 2013, in 2012 it was $89.1 million.
And Pelosi is the current top democratic fundraiser somewhere around $35 million.

NEGOTIATING WITH OURSELVES:

2/24/14 (47H)

OBAMA’S DIPLOMATIC MARCH TO AN IRANIAN BOMB:

Komenini’s 1970 lectures, published as Islamic Government, give a good picture of a new vanguard leading a purged and transformed society. Westernized leftists who’d rallied around the reformist president Mohammand Khatami (1997-2005) fewer would have made so gross an error as to predict the evanescing of Iranian theocracy in the 1990’s. “Realists” like Kerry always want a apply Jacques Derrida to foreign policy: ideas reified on the page. Some dems congressmen and senior adm officials appear to be giving the Iranian regime a strange benefit of the doubt.
So what can one say when officials the white house, Dems, congressmen, newspaper editors, heavy-weight columnists, think tankers and academics describe the “interim?” nuclear deal struck on 11/24 in Geneva. Joint Plan of Action—as a serious diplomatic first step that could lead us away form an Iranian nuke and an American “march to war”?
Leaders of the revolutionary guard have never been taciturn in describing how attached they are to their nuclear program and how much they loathe the USA. Clerical regime has been importing and building the means to construct nuclear weapons for more than 20 years.
Rouhani and minister Zarif are lying through their teeth when they say that the Islamic Republic has never had any design to build atomic weapons. One has to ask what deputy national security adviser Benjamin Rhodes meant when he confessed “It just stands to reason if you close the diplomatic option you’re left with a difficult choice of waiting to see if sanctions cause Iran to capitulate, which we don’t think will happen, or considering military actions”.
David Albright estimates that in order to ensure that the program serves only civilian purposes, Tehran would have to disable approximately 15,000 centrifuges from its uranium enrichment plants at Natanz and Fordow, close down the Fordow facility. And convert the heavy-water reactor at Arak to a light-water facility incapable of producing plutonium for a bomb. The ISIS projection would still leave Tehran with an enrichment capacity—it would still have 4.000 spinning first-generation centrifuges.
Zarif’s deputy Abbas Araghchi, has flatly stated this will not happen. “As far as we are concerned, the heavy-water reactor at Arak is clear: It must remain as a heavy-water reactor. Iran’s nuclear program has not been set back at all.
Ali Akbar Salehi, head of Iran’s Atomic Energy—“we are not halting any nuclear activity, but only voluntarily reducing enrichment of six months, so that there can be comprehensive negotiations to determine what will happen with enrichment about 5%.
“No activity will be halted”. Salehi must know well, neutralizing Iran’s nuclear weapons quest would also require Tehran to make available its paperwork and engineers involved with centrifuge-mfg and the importation of centrifuge parts and open Iran to unchallenged spot inspections by the UN. Ali Velayati the Islamic Republic will not allow inspections of undeclared sites.
The regimes centrifuge research untouched by the interim deal, will give it the capacity to construct ever-more advanced centrifuges in larger numbers, provided Tehran has no supply problems. And why should it have supply problems? So far, UN, US and EU sanctions against nuclear-related machinery have not seriously impeded the regimes impressive growth in centrifuge production since 2006 (134 spinning centrifuges then; around 9,000 with and addition 10,000 installed today). The US government has no satellite or aerial means of detecting an enrichment facility hidden in a warehouse.
Clandestine facilities loaded with advanced centrifuges could easily be started fro scratch and rapidly developed. Langley has been unable to penetrate either Iran’s ruling elite or the nuclear-weapons research establishment.
Conceivable circumstances are: If the paint of sanctions is so intense that he fears for the regimes survival. The military threat form the Obama adm is tangible and regime-threatening or Khamenei and the Revolutionary Guards who dominate a big slice of the Iranian economy, gets hooked on sanction relief and become avaricious and avuncular capitalist.
Obama might still be obliged to strike Iran nuclear facilities if the Guard did something monumentally stupid—like organize another big terrorist strike against Americans.
An Iranian act of terrorism might have to be really big to force Obama to take out Tehrans nuclear sites.
If sanctions relief proves to be worth much more to Iran than the $7 billion claimed by the White House this reasoning makes no historical sense. The Iranians regime has already lost a least $100 billion because of nuke-related sanctions.
The regime will likely become even more paranoid and unstable, not less, as more wealth allows more Iranians again to feed their Western desires.
Obama’s speeches and radio interviews form 2007 and 2008 displayed his ignorance of Islamic and Iranian history. But for the last five years Obama has had access to all the classified material on the clerical regime’s nefariousness and mendacity about the nuclear program most glaringly about the Fordow site.

Has Obama learned from his “let’s make-up presidential entreaties to Khamenei; the crushing of the Green Movement; Iran’s lethal actions against Americans troops in Iraq and AFG ; the thwarted terrorist strike in a Georgetown restaurant in 2011, Tehran’s all-in support to the Assad regime. Yet all this may not be enough o overwhelm the president ideology telling him how the world ought to work and what is own historic possibilities.
In all probability, Khamenei will walk as soon as the western powers insist that Tehran actually make concessions that enfeeble the nuclear program, Rouhani argued the US and its European allies can be divided and defeated through clever diplomacy. The supreme leader wasn’t lying when he said in Qom that they hadn’t been forced to the negotiation table in Geneva; he came “ to negotiate with the Devil to eliminate its evil,” to beat the Devil at his own diplomatic game.

The current nuclear negotiations will fail. The white house will most likely be unable to bend for enough to satisfy the supreme leader and his men.

Source—weekly standard, reuel marc gerecht

WILL I GET THE “POT HEAD” VOTES NOW

(20H) 2/15/14

The administration made a unilateral decision to curtail enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act in states where smoked marijuana has been defined as medicine. Next, the administration announced it would not enforce the federal law when the sates of CO and WA sought to permit the open sale of marijuana. Obama tells the country that “it’s important” that legalization experiments “go forward”. OBC is in disarray, and Syria is on fire, but marijuana is important? Obama offers “as has been well documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different form the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of may adult life. I don’t think it is more dangerous than alcohol”.
The president is cutting the legs out from under every p[aren’t and schoolteacher and clergyman across the country who is trying to steer kinds away from illegal drugs. Our “coolest president” ever has made drug education into a punch line.
Obama speculated that legalizing “hard” drugs, including cocaine and meth, might ultimately be a matter of creating a “negotiated” or “calibrated” dose for safer use.
The result is appalling. Allow more and more poison to harm more and more families, destroy the respectable basis for prevention education that deters the use of these poisons. Isn’t it even more striking that “NO” serving dem or rep has called the administration to task?
Where is the bi-partisan work against the drug problem that was led for years by senators Biden, Leahy, Feinstein, Hastch,Grassley,and Sessions and representatives Rangel, Cummings, Hoyer, Issa, Ros-Lehtinen and Wolf? Why don’t the dedicated public servants at such places as the National Institute on Drug Abuse and Drug Enforcement adm—speak up?
Obama simply ignores the know magnitude of marijuana addiction and the growing list of dangers associated with regular and frequent use. Surveys show that 79% of America’s 23.9 million illegal drug users in 2012 used marijuana. Over a fifth of pot smokers needed treatment according to current diagnostic criteria: that is, 4.3 million users of marijuana need treatment, more than all other illegal drugs combined. Marijuana is a much wider health problem that what Obama called the “hard” drugs of cocaine and meth (heroin).
Today’s marijuana has many times the potency and is more of a danger for addiction. Worsening or even triggering serious mental illness, depression and psychosis up to 8 IQ points. Short-term memory loss, inhibited concentration and impaired motor function these are the known dangers facing the low estimate of 18.9 million users. Marijuana users have jumped almost 24% under Obama—from 15.3 million in 2008 to 18.9 million in 2012.
Obama makes two moral arguments that get to the heart of the distortion in today’s attitudes about illegal drugs. First Remnick says “what clearly does trouble him is the radically disproportionate arrests and incarcerations for marijuana among minorities. “Middle-class kids don’t get locked up for smoking pot and poor kids do”. “And African American kids and Latino kids are more likely to be poor”.
The charge is ludicrous. No one gets “locked up for smoking pot”—federal mandatory minimums don’t even kick in below 2230 pounds and only 9% of federal marijuana convictions involve African Americans. There are two major causes of drug possession charges in our criminal justice system. The first is trafficking and the other is the commission of violent or property crime.
What Obama evades is the fact that there are inequities in he demography of criminal offender, demographics of their victims. He implies this is a matter of racism, but while all the possible causes are not understood with certainty. Our justice system including more that 2600 drug courts now sorts out criminals who are not violent threats but engage in crimes. Inmates in state prisons make up the largest single segment of the prison population and fewer than one-half of 1% are sentenced for possession of marijuana. Drug offenses have been declining.
Legalization of marijuana in CO and WA that “it’s important for it to go forward because its important for society not to have a situation which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law and only a select few get punished”.
Legalization is an act of justice and those who oppose it want to perpetuate injustice. Even if you did not use drugs, you are unjust to support laws that punish a few when many offend. Obama initial claim that marijuana and maybe other illegal drugs is not really harmful.
Obama clearly suggest that the racial and socio-economic disparity in enforcement discredits drug laws and those who defend them.

KISS YOUR RIGHTS GOOD BYE

Source—weekly standard, john walters, new yorker

WILL OBAMA BAILOUT THE INSURANCE COMPANIES

(4H) 2/15/14
The latest revelation about his horrible law is the presence of a “risk Corridor” (THIS WAS IN A COUPLE OF MY EARLIER BLOGS) a euphemism for an insurance industry bailout that will occur sometime in the next year. The law depends upon the voluntary participation of insurers. Private citizens are compelled to purchase insurance, but the insurers are free to walk away from OBC.
Dems put in place guarantees to cover insurance industry losses for the first few years of the program. The total cost could feasibly run into the tens of billions. Krauthammer argued “that ending the bailouts should be the first order of business for conservatives in 2014”. James Capretta, Yuval Levin, Ramesh Ponnuru and other have argued that the bailout should be a focus of conservative looking to stop OBC.
Conservatives overlapping interest in limiting the ability of organized labor, consumer advocates, and the environmentalist left to use government to regulate the economy. We need to limit Washington’s power for businesses, which is to protect the bottom line.
A tax carve out to GE, the Auto Workers, the NLRB, is being used by politicians to use the governments power for personal or political ends. While attacking the republicans by bemoaning corporate fat cats, they rake in corporate donation hand over fist. Nobody perfected this hypocrisy quite like Clinton. He funded their 1996 convention by donations from Seagrams and MCI.
The NEW LEFT jointed organized labor in demanding governmental regulation of the economy in general and business in particular. It was the democratic allies in congress who passed The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which legalized labor PAC activity.
It is now about padding the bottom line. Thus a quasi-socialist democrat can be a friend of business, provided he is willing to fight for a special carve-out during an obscure subcommittee markup of a complicated. 1000 page plus page bill about which the public knows nothing. Political scientists used to speak of “iron triangles” connecting lobbyist, bureaucrats and legislators.
Politicians are always in search of “valence” issues that split the public 80-20. Inappropriate access to government largesse is such an issue.
Leadership form conservatives on this issue would help rebrand their movement.
It is necessary to deal with this problem in order to peel back OBC, the quintessential product of today’s venomous policy-making process.
Democrats have effectively purchased private sector buy-in through such policies as this “RISK CORRIDOR”. In fact OBC festooned with payouts to every imaginable business and trade group that has a stake in American health care. These were important not merely in securing passage of the law in the firs place, but also I sustaining it over time because they give these groups a vested interest in it ”success”.
To repeal this law, it must be shown how the law is hurting people, develop feasible policy alternatives and generally keep the issue front and center before the public.
The demagogues who railed against greedy insurance companies are now set to bail those companies out, even as average people have to pay increasingly onerous tax penalties to guarantee perpetual profits for the industry.

Source—weekly standard, jay cost. Washington post

THE I.R.S. BLACKLIST

(47H) 2/15/14
As you all know the IRS has been delaying 501C’s to many conservative businesses, so I thought this story was interesting.
A LA based company is applying for tax-exempt status with the IRS. Called the Friends of Abe, it is a loose association of about 1500 “players in the entertainment industry” who gather periodically to dine together and listen to invited speakers.
Their meetings are not publicized. Members are discreet about their membership, cameras aren’t allowed and with good reason, according to the Times, “Friends of Abe keeps a low profile and fiercely protects its membership list, to avoid what it presumes would result in a sort of 21st-century blacklist”.
Worse, the IRS is on their case. The approval process for 501 © (3) nonprofit status has been unusually protracted (two years), decidedly hostile and recently included demands that Friends of Abe comply with a “10-point request for detailed information about its meetings” and reveal its membership. “Tax experts say that an organizations membership list is information that would not typically be required” by the IRS.
The Friends of Abe, as readers might have guessed, is an informal association of conservatives, not leftists, in Hollywood, which explains why they meet discreetly, are reluctant to divulge their member names. “a sort of 21st-centruy blacklist” it also explains, of course, why the IRS has singled them out for what might euphemistically be called special treatment.

Source-weekly standard, nyt,

UNWINDING OBAMACARE

(23LH) 2/15/14
Republicans in congress cannot be satisfied to sit back and watch the disaster unfold., they should take the initiative, as they did at several crucial moments in 2013, and push legislation that would speed up the process of unwinding Obamacare and lay out for the public their concrete plans for a real reform.
The GOP should begin by renewing its commitment to protect Americans. That means jettisoning, or minimum delaying the individual mandate. The mandate has always been among the least popular elements.
The CBO assumed some $2 billion would be collected in 2015 form household forced to pay this uninsured tax for 2014. If the average payment is $500.00 that would mean 4 million Americans.
The Presidents unilateral decision to exempt those with canceled 2013 individual policies from the tax in 2014. Will the president take the next logical step himself and waive the tax in 2014. Republicans should make repealing this mandate and codifying the president’s own delay of the employer mandate, their top priority in 2014, just as it was in 2013.
Republicans should hammer the other weal link in the Obamacare chain: the back door subsidy that promises a massive bailout for insurance companies. It is there to persuade insurers to play ball despite the system’s irrationality.
Especially troubling is the “risk corridor” provision of the law, under which taxpayers are on the hook for covering large portions of the losses that insurers incur on the Obamacare exchanges. If an insurer pays out claims that exceed 108% of its premium collections, taxpayers would cover about 75% of its losses. A mirror image provision is also supposed to recoup 75% of any profits above the 108% of premium collections.
There was also a great deal of political pressure on insurers to lowball their premiums in the first year of the program. There will thus likely be few if any insurance rebating profits under this risk corridor provision.
It is hard to imagine that many Americans regardless of their political leanings want taxpayers to be on the hook for covering the losses of shareholder owned insurance companies. The promise of such a bailout effectively amounts to collusion between these companies and the administration at the expense of the public.
The losses of some insurers should be cushioned by funds drown form the profits of other insurers. That is how the CBO assumed these provisions would function in OBC and they projected them to be budget neutral. Exchanges are not rational insurance markets and its risk-corridor provisions now look to be very far from budget neutral. This year it could easily cost taxpayers hundreds of millions and perhaps billions.
Rubio and Griffin bill would make them explicitly budget neutral, requiring that payments to insurers suffering losses be reduced proportionally so they total an amount no larger than the payments from he insurers reaping profits.
It is important to understand how crucial the prospect of taxpayer bailout of insurers is to the future of OBC. Insurers facing the prospect of participating in the exchanges in 2015 without the backstop of a taxpayer bailout would be forced either to price their products properly and therefore likely well above their 2014 premiums or withdraw form the exchanges altogether. Less attractive to middle income and moderate wage household who get little or nothing in subsidies.
A program that cannot survive without a massive taxpayer bailout of private insurers is not a program that is working. It is a program that is failing and needs to be replaced.
Republicans should respond with measure that help voters see that OBC is neither inescapable nor irreversible—by saying no to the mandates, the bailouts and the forced coverage cancellations that OBC requires to stay alive.

Sources—weekly standard, cbo, james capretta, yuval Levin,