The Baltimore Riots, The Problems In The Black Inner Cities, & The Failure Of Progressive Ideals (Updated)

The following is Judge Andrew Napolitano, appearing on Fox News, opining that the investigation into the death of Freddie Gray in Baltimore, the ostensible justification for the recent riots there, has not been properly handled and that the riots might well have been avoided had the Baltimore City Police Department reacted with greater swiftness. That assumes of course that the investigation could have been concluded much quicker, and I do not know if that is accurate:



Regardless, Judge Napolitano is right about what should happen going forward. Freddie Gray is owed justice. There is also no question that Freddie Gray's wrongful death was the ostensible justification for the Baltimore riots. That said, the real issues plaguing a very substantial portion of the black community, particularly those in the inner cities, go far deeper than the issue of Freddie Gray's death or police misconduct.

Senator Harry Reid, the Democrat majority leader, though repeating the utter canards that racism is at the root of the problems experienced by inner city blacks, in fact came close to hitting the mark from the floor of the Senate Monday:

"[T]he underlying problem [giving rise to the Baltimore riot is] that millions of Americans feel powerless in the face of a system that is rigged against them.”

Reid stressed that “it’s easy to feel powerless when you see the rich getting richer while opportunities to build a better life for yourself and your family are nonexistent in your own community.”

“It’s easy to feel devalued when schools in your community are failing. It’s easy to believe the system is rigged against you when you spend years watching what President Obama called today ‘a slow-rolling crisis’ of troubling police interactions with people of color,” he continued. “No American should ever feel powerless. No American should ever feel like their life is not valued. But that is what our system says to many of our fellow citizens.”

“No American should be denied the opportunity to better their lives through their own hard work. But that is the reality that too many face. In a nation that prides itself on being a land of opportunity, millions of our fellow citizens live every day with little hope of building a better future no matter how hard they try. We cannot condone the violence we see in Baltimore. But we must not ignore the despair and hopelessness that gives rise to this kind of violence.”

The reality is that Democrats own the inner cities as well as this nation's response to the plight of our black citizens since the start of the Great Society and the welfare state. They try to maintain the canard that the only things holding back blacks in the inner city today are rampant (conservative) racism, white police racism, and but a bit more application of government spending. The reality is that racism is absent from all but the fringes of society today, that inner city black youths have exponentially far more to fear from other black youths than from white police, and that the Great Society welfare state has not just failed a substantial portion of the black community, but actually worsened their situation over the past half century.

Several writers have addressed this issue today. The Editorial Board of the WSJ points out the obvious, that the progressive blue-city model is a failure. As to Baltimore city in particular, the authors note:

The latest figures from Maryland’s Department of Labor show state unemployment at 5.4%, against 8.4% for Baltimore. A 2011 city report on the neighborhood of Freddie Gray—the African-American whose death in police custody sparked the riots—reported an area that is 96.9% black with unemployment at 21%. When it comes to providing hope and jobs, we should have learned by now that no government program can substitute for a healthy private economy.

Then there are the public schools. Residents will put up with a great deal if they know their children have a chance at upward mobility through education. But when the schools no longer perform, the parents who can afford to move to the suburbs do so—and those left behind are stuck with failure. There are many measures of failure in Baltimore schools, but consider that on state tests 72% of eighth graders scored below proficient in math, 45% in reading and 64% in science.

At National Review, Michael Tanner notes that Maryland maintains one of the highest tax rates in our nation, as well as a very generous welfare system, a highly unionized work force, and an environment largely hostile to private business. Baltimore city itself suffers from declining population, high crime, very high unemployment, high out-of-wedlock births, and poor schools. As he concludes:

Once order is restored in Baltimore, there will be time to take stock. We can expect to hear the usual chorus about neglected neighborhoods and the need for government jobs programs or additional social spending. Instead, we should take to heart President Obama’s admonition that “When what you’re doing doesn’t work for 50 years, it’s time to try something new.”

Big government has failed Baltimore. If we learn nothing from what just happened — if we simply go back to throwing money at the same tired old programs — it will be just a matter of time until this happens all over again."

In yet another article, Michelle Malkin makes the same point, that the left is out of ideas to address the problems in the black inner city communities beyond spending ever more money on exactly the same type of programs that have utterly failed to this point. But probably the most articulate on these issues today is Kevin Williamson writing at National Review:

St. Louis has not had a Republican mayor since the 1940s, . . . the city is overwhelmingly Democratic, effectively a single-party political monopoly from its schools to its police department. Baltimore has seen two Republicans sit in the mayor’s office since the 1920s — and none since the 1960s. Like St. Louis, it is effectively a single-party political monopoly from its schools to its police department. Philadelphia has not elected a Republican mayor since 1948. The last Republican to be elected mayor of Detroit was congratulated on his victory by President Eisenhower. Atlanta, a city so corrupt that its public schools are organized as a criminal conspiracy against its children, last had a Republican mayor in the 19th century. . . . Atlanta is effectively a single-party political monopoly from its schools to its police department.

Black urban communities face institutional failure across the board every day. American cities are by and large Democratic-party monopolies, monopolies generally dominated by the so-called progressive wing of the party. The results have been catastrophic, and not only in poor black cities such as Baltimore and Detroit. Money can paper over some of the defects of progressivism in rich, white cities such as Portland and San Francisco, but those are pretty awful places to be non-white and non-rich, too: Blacks make up barely 9 percent of the population in San Francisco, but they represent 40 percent of those arrested for murder, and they are arrested for drug offenses at ten times their share of the population. Criminals make their own choices, sure, but you want to take a look at the racial disparity in educational outcomes and tell me that those low-income nine-year-olds in Wisconsin just need to buck up and bootstrap it?

There are people who should be made to answer for that: What has Martin O’Malley to say for himself? What can Ed Rendell say for himself other than that he secured a great deal of investment for the richest square mile in Philadelphia? What has Nancy Pelosi done about the radical racial divide in San Francisco?

. . . [The rioting] we have seen in places such as Ferguson and Baltimore is much more ordinarily criminal than political. But there is a legitimate concern here — from which no one seems to be willing to draw the obvious conclusion: There is someone to blame for what’s wrong in Baltimore.

Would any sentient adult American be shocked to learn that Baltimore has a corrupt and feckless police department enabled by a corrupt and feckless city government? I myself would not, and the local authorities’ dishonesty and stonewalling in the death of Freddie Gray is reminiscent of what we have seen in other cities. There’s a heap of evidence that the Baltimore police department is pretty bad. This did not come out of nowhere. While the progressives have been running the show in Baltimore, police commissioner Ed Norris was sent to prison on corruption charges (2004), two detectives were sentenced to 454 years in prison for dealing drugs (2005), an officer was dismissed after being videotaped verbally abusing a 14-year-old and then failing to file a report on his use of force against the same teenager (2011), an officer was been fired for sexually abusing a minor (2014), and the city paid a quarter-million-dollar settlement to a man police illegally arrested for the non-crime of recording them at work with his mobile phone. There’s a good deal more. Does that sound like a disciplined police organization to you?

Yes, Baltimore seems to have some police problems. But let us be clear about whose fecklessness and dishonesty we are talking about here: No Republican, and certainly no conservative, has left so much as a thumbprint on the public institutions of Baltimore in a generation. Baltimore’s police department is, like Detroit’s economy and Atlanta’s schools, the product of the progressive wing of the Democratic party enabled in no small part by black identity politics. This is entirely a left-wing project, and a Democratic-party project. When will the Left be held to account for the brutality in Baltimore — brutality for which it bears a measure of responsibility on both sides? There aren’t any Republicans out there cheering on the looters, and there aren’t any Republicans exercising real political power over the police or other municipal institutions in Baltimore. Community-organizer — a wretched term — Adam Jackson declared that in Baltimore “the Democrats and the Republicans have both failed.” Really? Which Republicans? Ulysses S. Grant? Unless I’m reading the charts wrong, the Baltimore city council is 100 percent Democratic.

The other Democratic monopolies aren’t looking too hot, either. We’re sending Atlanta educators to prison for running a criminal conspiracy to hide the fact that they failed, and failed woefully, to educate the children of that city. Isolated incident? Nope: Atlanta has another cheating scandal across town at the police academy. Who is being poorly served by the fact that Atlanta’s school system has been converted into crime syndicate? Mostly poor, mostly black families. Who is likely to suffer from any incompetents advanced through the Atlanta police department by its corrupt academy? Mostly poor, mostly black people. Who suffers most from the incompetence of Baltimore’s Democratic mayor? Mostly poor, mostly black families — should they feel better that she’s black? Who suffers most from the incompetence and corruption of Baltimore’s police department? Mostly poor, mostly black families. And it’s the same people who will suffer the most from the vandalism and pillaging going on in Baltimore, too. The evidence suggests very strongly that the left-wing, Democratic claques that run a great many American cities — particularly the poor and black cities — are not capable of running a school system or a police department. They are incompetent, they are corrupt, and they are breathtakingly arrogant. Cleveland, Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore — this is what Democrats do.

And the kids in the street screaming about “inequality”? Somebody should tell them that the locale in these United States with the least economic inequality is Utah, i.e. the state farthest away from the reach of the people who run Baltimore.

Keep voting for the same thing, keep getting the same thing.

What happened to Freddie Gray demands justice. What has happened with a substantial portion of the black community over the past half century started as a tragedy, Today, in a nation as rich as ours, it has now reached the point of obscenity. It is every bit as equally deserving of justice.

Update: This from Powerline:

The Washington Post reports that a prisoner who was in the police van with Freddie Gray says he could hear Gray “banging against the walls” of the vehicle and believed he “was intentionally trying to injure himself.” According to the Post, the prisoner’s statement is contained in an affidavit that’s part of an application by the police for search warrant seeking the seizure of the uniform worn by one of the officers involved in Gray’s arrest or transport.

I can’t tell for sure from the Post’s report whether the prisoner executed the affidavit or whether the affidavit is from a police officer who relates what the prisoner allegedly told him. It looks like the Post is saying it’s the latter.

It seems counter-intuitive to suppose that Gray inflicted serious bodily injury on himself. However, without knowing Gray’s state of mind at the time — e.g., was he high on drugs; was he trying to set up a claim of police brutality — it’s impossible to evaluate the plausibility of the perception that this is what happened.

In any event, if Gray’s fellow prisoner does indeed say he heard Gray banging against the walls and that Gray seemed to be trying intentionally to injure himself, this will cast doubt on claims that police mistreatment caused Gray to sustain injuries while he was in the van. Such evidence will also make it difficult to attribute Gray’s death to the police.

The Post says that “video shot by several bystanders to Gray’s arrest shows two officers on top of Gray, their knees in his back, and then dragging his seemingly limp body to the van as he cried out.” Thus, some of his injuries may be due to what happened during the arrest, while others may be due to what happened in the van.

There is also the police commissioner’s statement that officers violated policy by failing properly to restrain Gray via a seat belt while he was in the van. However, the police union is pushing back on this assertion.

The union president says that the policy mandating seat belts wasn’t emailed to officers until three days before Gray was arrested. Moreover, it was emailed as part of a package of five policy changes.

Officers should, of course, read about all policy changes. But human nature being what is, the union president’s statement that officers tend not to do so is plausible. It would be one thing if the officers who dealt with Gray had violated a longstanding, widely known policy on seat belts. It’s another if, as seems to be the case, the policy was brand new and had only just been communicated by email as part of package of policy changes.

In any event, the Post’s report suggests that the facts surrounding Gray’s unfortunate death may not be as straightforward as those who have rushed to condemn the police assert them to be. The best approach remains what it has been all along — wait for the facts before forming a judgment.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

The Watcher's Question -- How Would You Improve Race Relations In America?

Each week the Watcher's Council holds a forum. This week's topic is "how would you improve race relations in America." Having been invited to respond, here is the extended version of my answer. A shorter version will appear at the Watcher's forum.

Update: The Forum has now been posted. There are several very good answers to the question. Do pay the forum a visit.

There will always be some degree of tribalism, it being human nature. But racism today is largely absent from this country. Those who harbor "racist" views are relegated to the very fringes of society. Virtually all Americans of whatever color or political persuasion would like to see nothing more than blacks fully embracing the opportunities life in this nation offers, and enjoying the fruits of their efforts equally with all others. So why are race relations problematic today, and why, by all metrics, are black Americans worse off than others? It can all be summed up in one picture:

This picture is from one of Rev. Al's protests a few years ago. The sign the woman is holding up says everything. Racism is no longer a real issue in society, but the left must maintain the canard that it is. Blacks must be made to see themselves as permanent victims of racism and as being championed by the race hustlers of the left. Moreover, it's important to note the poor grammar used on the sign. It screams out that the woman who wrote it has been failed by whatever schools she attended, thus limiting her opportunities to thrive in America.

So with that in mind, the first thing to understand about race relations is that the left are invested in seeing that the "racial divide" remains as wide as possible. This is political, as it has been since the early 60's, when the marxist "new left" -- our modern left -- made common cause with the heirs of Martin Luther King's civil rights movement. They morphed that movement from an effort to build a color blind society with equality of opportunity for all into a color centric, unified block of people who are fed daily a tautology that they are, and will ever be, permanently victimized by white conservatives. Actual history of support for blacks and civil rights was ignored or rewritten, and it was done so effectively that, to this day, blacks vote 90% as a block for Democrats. If the modern left ever loses even a portion of that block of support, it would be catastrophic. While quite literally everyone I know on the right would like to heal the "racial divide," for the left, their very political survival depends on using it to "divide and conquer."

Thus do you have Rep. John Lewis claiming that any effort to insure the integrity of the vote, something that should be of greater importance to blacks than any other racial group, is actually an effort to deprive blacks of their right to vote. Thus do you have a man at the pinnacle of academia, Harvard Prof. Henry Gates, and other black intellectuals teaching their students about critical race theory, color blind racism, white privilege, and to believe that black slavery was an unpardonable sin such that, irrespective of today's reality, they should keep their two hundred year old racial grievances alive until all blacks are paid reparations. Thus do you have the Department of Justice using disparate impact theory to claim that racism is rampant, despite the fact that they can find no actual incidents of racism in any individual instance. For the modern left, it is critical to keep blacks beliving that all of America today is nothing more than 1954 Selma, Alabama writ large.

The second thing to understand is that blacks have paid a heavy price indeed for their Faustian bargain with the left. By virtually every metric, while the lives of blacks have improved, and while many black individuals have been able to embrace the opportunities this country has to offer, a very substantial portion of blacks have not. It is obscene that, in America, some 25% of blacks live in poverty. It is obscene that, where in 1965, less than 30% of black children were born into a single parent family, that number is now over 70%. It is obscene that that 30 to 40 percent of inner city kids don’t graduate from school, and a very substantial number who do graduate are functionally illiterate. It is obscene that blacks are seven times more likely to commit violent crime than other races. And it is obscene that these problems are cyclical. Nothing the left has done for blacks has broken this cycle, and it all portends to get much worse as cities, where large numbers of blacks congregate and many of whom take public sector jobs, fall into bankruptcy and economic chaos from the failure of the blue political / economic model.

The third thing to understand is that the left takes blacks for granted. In the pantheon of left wing victim groups, perhaps no group gets more attention and ink, but falls lower on the scale of importance. No two things would perhaps benefit the black lower and middle class than good entry level jobs and better education. But those needs run up against the reality that unions, and especially teachers unions, are the financial foundation of the left. Thus did you have Obama, almost in his first days as President, end the school voucher program in the nation's worst performing school district. Thus do you have the D.C. city council voting to, in essence, keep Walmart from opening stores in their district. And thus do you have Obama on the cusp of legalizing millions of Central and South American illegal aliens -- nearly all of whom will be competing for jobs with the black lower and middle class -- in order to gain Decomcrat voters. When it comes to blacks, the left feels no need to balance their needs against those of leftwing economic interests because they have the only thing they need from blacks -- their votes -- already locked up.

The fourth thing to understand is the race card. The race card has been incredibly powerful tool, and the left has not hesitated to use it whenever possible since the 1960's. It has been used to silence all debate and end careers. It serves the triparte purpose of mining white guilt, keeping the focus off of the real problems in the black community, and keeping blacks focused on nursing historical racial grievances. How many blacks today see imaginary racism as their greatest threat? And when was the last time conservatives made an actual, concerted push to reach out to blacks? The answer to that last question is never. The RNC at the national level spends next to nothing on reaching out, having written off the black vote since 1964.

So, how to improve race relations? The answer in today's post-racial America starts and ends with politics. Conservatives must convince blacks that they have their best interests at heart -- that we see them as equal members in the melting pot. Conservatives must also convince blacks that the solutions we propose will, in the long term, work to their advantage. When conservatives call for the end to teacher's unions, no single group of people would benefit more from that then blacks. When conservative call for an end to, or at least a lowering of, the minimum wage, no single group of people would benefit more from that then blacks. When conservatives call for altering laws that decrease the stability of the family unit, no single group of people would benefit more from that then blacks. Conservative must make their case, both that they have black Americans interests firmly at heart, and that blacks have been sorely used by the left.

But to do that, conservatives have to break through a wall of lies and propaganda from the left, at the national level, but most importantly, at the local level. They need to appear at every black forum to make their case, from the NAACP to Howard University to the inner city schools and the local black churches, despite the fact that they will be buried under an avalanche of race cards. And they need to become vociferous in immediately responding to the race card whenever it is played. All of that requires determination, money, and conviction. Rand Paul has flirted with it, and my hat is off to him for at least making some efforts in this regard, but it needs to become a focus for conservatives and Republicans alike, at all levels. That and only that is how you will improve race relations in America.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

Another Prostitution Scandal - This One Involving Senator Menendez of N.J.

A Democrat Senator goes to the Dominican Republic and hires a pair of hookers. After a few hours of fun, he doesn't pay them the agreed upon price, thus managing to stiff them both twice in a single transaction. What do you think - a game changing scandal?

The Democrat in question is Senator Bob Menendez of N.J. He is 58 years old and divorced. He is up for re-election next Tuesday. The most recent polls show that he holds a 14 point lead over his Republican challenger. The allegations against him have been raised by two prostitutes through their attorney and were published a few hours ago in the Daily Caller. Menendez himself has not yet responded to the allegations, but an aide, contacted yesterday, refused comment on the "false allegations."

Even assuming that these allegations are true, its not likely that this will be a game changer. True, client number nine, Gov. Eliot Spitzer, and Rep. Anthony Weiner, both Democrats, have been brought down by sex scandals in the recent past. But, both were married at the time, and in Spitzer's case, you had the yawning hypocrisy of him having spent years prosecuting organized prostitution in New York. With Weiner, it was the ignominy of him publicly broadcasting a picture of his woody across the internet. That was too much for even Democrats to swallow.

Spitzer and Weiner aside, Democrats have a track record of being incredibly forgiving of sex scandals. Bill Clinton is the poster child for Democrat tolerance. Before him, Barney Frank's squeeze was running a gay prostitution ring out of his apartment - forgiven. Gary Studds may not have read many books, but he did bend over a few pages in the halls of Congress prior to his reelection. Scandals of all sorts swirled around Ted Kennedy, but if his murder of Mary Jo Kopechne didn't stop his repeated reelection, no mere sex scandal would. For a more detailed history of Washington sex scandals of the past fifty years, see here.

Bottom line, this scandal, standing alone, isn't going to cause a 14 point swing among New Jersey voters between now and Tuesday. The only thing Senator Menendez could do to get himself in any appreciable trouble with his constituency over this allegation would be, if it is true, to lie and cover-up. But even then, it will be long after the election before a cover-up could be proven. Between today and next Tuesday, it will be just he said she said she said. Menendez will be safely ensconced in his seat for another six years before the issue will again arise.

This is not a game changer. All that said, Menendez would be wise to lay off the Viagra and for God's sake, learn the one lesson every government official in Washington should know by now - if you are going to hire foreign hookers, pay them their full asking price.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

The DNC Tries To Hatch A New(t) Strategy

The DNC has apparently reached the conclusion that Newt Gingrich will likely be the Republican nominee for President. They had their Romney strategy in place - the rich are evil and Romney, with a net worth of around $250 million, is a card carrying member of the evil rich club. Too bad all these months of class warfare rhetoric won't play so well with Newt, whose net worth is within the same ballpark as Obama's.

So how to demonize Gingrich? Within the past 24 hours, the DNC released on the internet an ad painting Gingrich as the "original" Tea Party guy (21st century variety, not 18th century, just to clarify). Here is the ad below. Two things strike me about the ad. One, this looks like an ad the Gingrich campaign themselves might have come up with. Two, if the Democrats want to demagogue Gingrich, they should never show him explaining his positions. The last 20 seconds of the ad shows Gingrich explaining why he wants to cut the capital gains and corporate tax - to create jobs. The DNC is obviously struggling at the moment. I almost feel sorry for them. Almost.



(H/T: Legal Insurrection)

Read More...

Summary only...

Heh - Wisconsin's Dems Trying To Run

This is so good on so many levels. And as Powerline points out:

Cartoonist Phil Hands of the Wisconsin State Journal is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, yet he is onto the Wisconsin public sector unions and the Democratic Senators who don't want to show up for work. . . . One may hope that if the Democrats have lost Wisconsin's editorial cartoonists, they have lost Wisconsin.

Read More...

Summary only...

Change You Can't Have: Obama & The DNC Interfere In Wisconsin Politics

More thugogracy from Obama and the DNC. The voters of Wisconsin spoke in November, asking for a change from Democrat controlled politics in the state that had run up a $3.6 billion tab. Now Obama and the DNC have insinuated themselves into Wisconsin politics, saying that there is some change that voters just shouldn't have, regardless of election results. Specifically, Obama and the DNC want to protect their piggy bank - public sector unions that threaten to bankrupt the state.

To understand just how despicable this federal effort to interfere in Wisconsin state politics is, know that Wisconsin's voters, in November, voted overwhelmingly for Republicans. Going into the 2010 elections, Democrats held the governorship, a 3 seat majority in the Wisconsin State Senate, and a 5 seat majority in the State Assembly. Scott Walker, in his campaign for governor, did not hide how he intended to address the budget shortfall, nor the issue of public sector unions at the heart of Wisconsin's budget woes:

. . . UW political scientist Barry Burden said. “It was part of Walker’s campaign message that he was going to ask state employees to contribute more … and that he was going to tackle unions.”

The voters of Wisconsin responded. By the time the election was over, Republicans had swept the Democrats from power, taking the governor's race, a four seat majority in the state Senate, and a massive 22 seat majority in the State Assembly. The people had spoken.

But that didn't suffice for the state's Democrats. During their 2010 lame duck session, they tried to tie Walker's hands in dealing with unions by approving 17 new union contracts. That effort to circumvent Wisconsin's voters ended only when two Democrats refused to countenance such a despicable act.

When Republicans took office, Gov. Walker proposed a Budget Repair Bill, the terms of which are more fully outlined here. It would require public union employees to contribute to their health and pension benefits, it would cap wage increases to inflation unless approved by a state wide referendum, it would require unions to annually recertify and to collect their own dues. With that restriction, unions could still collectively bargain for wage increases, but benefit increases would be solely within the purview of the state. As far as wages and benefits, this still leaves Wisconsin's public sector employees better off than Wisconsin's average private sector employees.



While Wisconsin state politics is strictly a local affair, anything that threatens public sector unions is a national threat to Obama and the DNC. This from Ben Smith at Politico:

The Democratic National Committee's Organizing for America arm -- the remnant of the 2008 Obama campaign -- is playing an active role in organizing protests against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's attempt to strip most public employees of collective bargaining rights.

And indeed, if you go to Organizing For America's website at my.barackobama.com, you find:

Organizing for America is mobilizing on the ground in Wisconsin to defend the rights of public employees from an attempt by the governor to take away their right to organize.

Jessie Lidbury, regional field organizer, explains why this is so important:

We’ve got a fight on our hands and it’s personal. Over the past few days serious developments have surfaced of Governor Scott Walker presenting a “Budget Repair Bill” that will essentially gut collective bargaining for public employees here in our own backyard of Wisconsin.

Over the next couple days nurses, teachers, snowplow drivers, prison guards, and public servants will be standing together to let Governor Walker, know what is at stake: livelihoods, heath care, our children's education, and the rights of all workers. . . .

Our job as organizers is to take action, and what better way than to help out our friends in the labor community. . . .

And the "action" the left is taking shows the civility for which they are so famous:



This federal level engagement into Wisconsin state politics, between Obama terming the proposed legislation as an "assault" and the DNC's direct action, is outrageous. I would like to see Gov. Walker go the full monty and just outlaw public sector unions in Wisconsin, the way such unions were deemed unlawful for much of our nation's history. Really, that is the only answer this toxin in our society.

As I have written before:

Unions in the public sector are a growth industry with 39% of all state and local public employees belonging to unions. What can possibly justify public sector unions in 2010? This is not the era of sweatshops and 80 hour work weeks. And indeed, today we see public sector union employees earning significantly more than their private sector counterparts.

Public sector unions are particularly insidious. They are not subject to market forces and they have every reason to seek growth of government. This from a 2009 Heritage Foundation article:

. . . As Heritage fellow James Sherk reported earlier this year, for the first time in history most union members work for the government, not the private sector. The days when “union member” meant an American working in a steel plant, or coal mine, or auto factory are gone. Today, unions are dependent on government, not the private sector, for their livelihood. Therefore, unions have little interest in private sector job growth. Private sector jobs don’t help fund political campaigns. But government jobs do. The change in incentives has been devastating to American taxpayers. Manhattan Institute senior fellow Steven Malanga explains why:

In the private sector … employers who are too generous with pay and benefits will be punished. In the public sector, however, more union members means more voters. And more voters means more dollars for political campaigns to elect sympathetic politicians who will enact higher taxes to foot the bill for the upward arc of government spending on workers.

This is why you see big labor supporting Obamacare and cap and trade taxes. Private sector job growth does nothing to increase union dues … only the further expansion of government does.

This is public theft on a grand scale. The Democrats are laundering our tax dollars through public sector unions via mandatory union dues from public employees. Bet you didn't realize that you were funding Democratic efforts to keep Obama and the far left in power, did you. At any rate, the Democrats are horrified at the thought that it may soon unravel. In fact, they are far more horrified at that prospect than they are concerned with allowing the Wisconsin voters be heard through their newly elected government. Democracy be damned. Apparently in the world of hope and change, there is some change that is just not acceptable.

Related Posts

- Public Sector Unions: A Toxin, A Crisis & An Opportunity
- Read'n, Writ'n & Unioniz'n
- What, Marx Or Lenin Weren't Available?
- Gov. Chris Christie, What Leadership Looks Like
- California: From Riches To Public Sector Unions To Ruin
- Detroit's Public School System, School Board & Teachers' Union
- Unions & Teachers: The Alpha & Omega
- Living With Public Sector Unions
- Public Sector Unions
- Obama, The Stimulus & Teachers' Unions
- Yet Another Reason Why Public Sector Unions Should Be Done Away With
- Grand Theft Democrat
- Another Win For Teachers Unions, Another Defeat For DC Students
- Reason 10,001 Why Public Sector Unions Need To Be Outlawed
- Public Sector Unions Go To War To Prevent Democratic Change In Wisconsin

Read More...

Summary only...

Another Win For Teachers Unions, Another Defeat For DC Students

The District of Columbia Public Schools rank below all 50 states in national math and reading tests, squatting at the bottom of the list for years at a time. More than 40 percent of D.C. students drop out altogether. Only 9 percent of the District’s high schoolers will finish college within five years of graduation. And all this failure doesn’t come cheap: The city spends $14,699 per pupil, more than all but two states and about $5,000 more than the national average.

Katherine Mangu-Ward, Last Chance For School Reform, Reason.com, May 2010

DC schools are the poster child for why public sector unions - and teachers unions in particular - need to made illegal. Michelle Rhee, who did her best to turn around this travesty in D.C., was fought tooth and nail by the teacher's union. And ultimately, the union won. Rhee was fired in October, 2010. And the teachers union won again yesterday, when an arbitrator ordered that 75 underperforming teachers fired by Rhee during their probationary period in 2008, were entitled to be reinstated with two years back pay. That is estimated to cost the D.C. Public schools $7.5 million. These people don't give a damn about students or education, just money and power. And in that, they are in full partnership with the Democrat party.

I wonder if I need to start ending all of my posts with "Teachers unions delenda est."

Read More...

Summary only...

Kicking the Blue Dogs

How many times can you kick a blue dog before they go red? We are in the process of finding out.

The far left owns the Democrat Party - and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Pelosi and her ilk have nothing but disdain for "conservative" blue dog Democrats. According to Politico today:

There's been "no communication" this Congress between House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi . . . and members of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition, one of its top members said Monday.

Rep. Heath Shuler (N.C.), who challenged Pelosi for the job of Democratic leader in the 112th Congress, suggested that Blue Dog Democrats feel shut out from the leadership in the House.

With that kind of pariah treatment, is it any wonder that Pelosi is the best friends Republicans have, at least in the south, where virtually all blue dogs are kennelled. Having jammed Obamacare down the blue dogs' throats, having shut them out of the creation of most of the major legislation, and now ignoring them, Crazy Nancy and company are kicking the blue dogs red. This from the LA Times today:

Conservative Democrats switch to GOP across the Deep South
Defections reflect the Democrats' drubbing in the midterm election and Republicans' consolidation of power in the South.

For Democrats, Ashley Bell was the kind of comer that a party builds a future on: A young African American lawyer, he served as president of the College Democrats of America, advised presidential candidate John Edwards and spoke at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston.

But after his party's midterm beat-down in November, Bell, a commissioner in northern Georgia's Hall County, jumped ship. He joined the Republicans.

Bell, 30, said he had serious issues with the healthcare law and believed that conservative "blue dog" Democrats in Congress who shared his values had been bullied into voting for it.

Bell's defection is one of dozens by state and local Democratic officials in the Deep South in recent months that underscore Republicans' continued consolidation of power in the region — a process that started with presidential politics but increasingly affects government down to the level of dogcatcher.

"I think the midterms showed you really can't be a conservative and be a member of the Democratic Party," Bell said.

Since the midterm election, 24 state senators and representatives have made the switch in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and Texas.

In some cases, the ramifications have been profound: In Louisiana, defecting Democrats gave Republicans a majority in the state House for the first time since Reconstruction; in Alabama, they delivered the GOP a House supermajority. Republicans have 65 votes to the Democrats' 39, enough to pass constitutional amendments over Democratic opposition.

The trend continued through late January — when nine officials in Lamar County in northeastern Texas left the Democratic Party — and into last week, when Louisiana Atty. Gen. James D. "Buddy" Caldwell switched parties, leaving the GOP in control of every major state office in Baton Rouge. . . .

I have always thought the term "conservative democrat" to be an oxymoron in any event. That said, as Hot Air observes:

When Reagan won his two big victories, he did so with the support of what were called Reagan Democrats, especially in the South, who backed Reagan but stayed with the Democratic Party. Obama and Pelosi have done what even Reagan couldn’t do — convert Southern Democrats to the GOP.

Read More...

Summary only...

Nonverbal Responses To Recently Voiced Democratic Concerns

One does not need an extensive vocabulary to respond appropriately to concerns recently voiced by Democrats. For example:

Having been swamped in the 2010 elections, particularly in state legislatures where Congressional redistricting will soon take place, it would seem that several Democrats now want to make redistricting "fairer" via federal control over state redistricting plans. The only approriate response:


And over in the House Oversight Committee, Dem. Rep. Elijah Cummings is demanding veto power over the Chairman Issa's use of subpoenas to investigate the Obama Administration. That one deserves an equal response:


Then in Virginia, where the Attorney General is investigating fraud by climate science charlatan Michael Mann, the Democrats are seeking to take away his subpoena power and scuttle the investigation. Let's call George Bush out of retirement for that response, since he resisted all attempts to regulate CO2 during his administration:



Indeed, responding appropriately requires few words indeed.

Read More...

Summary only...

Civility & Other BS

Republicans took 63 House seats and 6 Senate seats in the 2010 election. That occurred because the majority of Americans were mad as hell - mad at the direction Obama was leading the country; mad at the way the left was thuggishly going about its business; and mad at the left's disregard of America's core principals. The majority of Americans voiced that anger in the lead-up to the 2010 election, and they were motivated by that anger to vote the Democrats to the most devastating defeat of either party in nearly a century.

Make no mistake, today's calls for "civility" from the left are nothing more than a call to curb the momentum of the right and to blunt their disagreement with the left's agenda. It is the last gasp of the left's recent effort to delegitimize conservatives with a blood libel - that the right's passioned disagreement with the left's agenda led to the mass murder in Arizona. And the only reason that effort failed was because virtually everyone on the right side of the aisle stood up and called "Bull S***!!!!!"

The right's problem over the past decade has been far too much "civility" whilst the left has daily used scurrilous ad hominem attacks to delegitimize the right. Obama, in just the past three months, has referred to conservatives as "hostage takers" and "enemies" of Hispanics. Rep. Clyburn has spent the past year calling the Tea Party movement "racist" and, most recently, described Sarah Palin as attractive but stupid. How's that for civility?

Where were the calls for civility when the far left was calling Bush a liar and comparing him to Hitler, or when they were calling Cheney the second coming of Satan? What about when the left were willing to do or say anything to undermine the war in Iraq and our nation's national security for their own political gain?

If the left wants civility, they should start with their own house. Knock off all the ad hominem attacks, apologize for the grotesque attempt to tar the right with a blood libel, and admit that their effort was undertaken without a shred of evidence. They should further come clean that the aim of this attack was not to improve civil discourse - charging your opponents with complicity in murder is not not conducive to that end - but was aimed at delegitimizing conservative speech. Until then:


And here is my prediction. Any new found "civility" on the left will not last more then nine days - which is when Obama will take the podium to give the State of the Union speech. You can rest assured he will make ad hominem attacks against the right. The guy is a child of the far left - and that's what the far left does. Intellectual honesty and a desire for robust debate on the issues are far from their strong suits. It's just that, up until a few days ago, their rhetorical paradigm usually worked.

Update: Don Surber expresses similar thoughts, as does I Own The World and Nice Deb.

Related: This on the intersection of left wing civility and logic (H/T Legal Insurrection)

Read More...

Summary only...

Losing The MESSAGING WAR Yet Again - This Time On Obamacare

When will our Congresscritters on the right figure out that their messaging is absolutely broken. They may be on the side of the angels, but as long as the left dominates the MSM, they have to work three times harder to get their message out.

Specifically what I am referring to was the left's gambit of having the CBO send a letter on day one of the 112th Congress asserting that repeal of the monstrosity of Obamacare would add $270 billion to the deficit.

Here is reality:

Ryan said this afternoon at the National Press Club that the only reason a Congressional Budget Office letter claims the national health care law will reduce the deficit--i.e. bring in more revenue through tax hikes and Medicare cuts than it spends on Obamacare--is because "the books have been severely cooked"--not by the CBO but by the Democrats who wrote the bill.

"CBO has to score what you put in front of them," Ryan explained. "And if you put a bill in front of them that ignores the discretionary cost of the $115 billion you need to spend to run this new Obamacare program, that double counts the Medicare savings, that double counts the CLASS Act revenue, that double counts the Social Security revenue, that does not count the "Doc Fix"--you add all that stuff up, net it out, we're talking about a $701 billion hole--deficit."

"So if you actually do real accounting, get away the smoke-and-mirrors, get away the budget gimmicks, this thing is a huge deficit-increaser. . . .

That's great. But if the general public doesn't hear it, it is useless. Every Republican in Congress should be jumping up and down on camera calling the left lying sob's for having CBO write this piece of fantasy and trying to sell it to the American people. Otherwise, what will happen is what I just watched a few minutes ago - on Studio B no less - where the story was Republicans pusshing ahead with an attempt to repeal Obamacare even though the CBO will add $270 billion to the deficit. End of story. Absolutely f*** incompetent idiots.

Read More...

Summary only...

Scary Movie

The video below, from Rep. Whip Eric Cantor, documents our left-led decent into fiscal insanity, from day one of the Obama administration to today.



(H/T Dr. Sanity)

Read More...

Summary only...

In Search Of Cajones

Over the past few weeks, I have been harping on the fact that the traditional national paradigm has disappeared. Americans recognize that we are on an unsustainable path and that the bill for decades of free lunches is now due. Americans only require some national leadership. The days when Democrats could demagouge entitlements are over. We see it in NJ with Chris Christie. Paul Ryan is trying to do the same thing at the national level. The problem is that our Congressional Republicans don't get it and are still too craven to act. Dick Armey articulated that thought on Meet The Press yesterday:

In an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" over the weekend, former House Majority Leader Dick Armey issued a warning that Republicans risk being targeted by the Tea Party if they don't get with the program when it comes to signing onto fiscally conservative policy. . . .

"The difference between being on -- a co-sponsor with Ryan and not is a thing called courage," explained the prominent conservative voice. "So we're saying to the Republican Party , you know, 'Get some courage to stand up for the things that are right for this country. Don't stand there and, and, and hide from the issue because you're afraid of the politics.'"

Armey went to underscore his bottom line: "The issue of public policy that governs the future of my children is more important than your politics, and if you can't see that, we'll replace you." . . .

Read More...

Summary only...

Social Security & Fixing The Nation

Several days ago, I wrote that Social Security is a corrupt Ponzi scheme that needs to be turned into a national 401k system. Moreover, this is not 2005. America recognizes that our whole entitlement system and debt spending needs to be radically altered. It is why November is going to be a wave election. But while America gets it, neither Democrats, who are again demagouging the issue of Social Security, nor Republicans, who are cowering in fear of the demagogouery, get it. Two very good posts today, one from No Oil For Pacifists and a second from Another Black Conservative, touch on those issues.

This from No Oil For Pacifists:

Finally, page 14 summarizes the Social Security "gap": "Over the infinite horizon, the shortfall (unfunded obligation) amounts to $16.1 trillion in present value."

Conclusion: I'm not saying there's no risk associated with stocks and bonds. But at least you own them--you have no right to Social Security benefits, which can be changed or eliminated by future legislation. And would you invest in a corporation that admits it will lose money within five years and run out of capital just over 20 years later? Even a mediocre stock market may be better.

Simply put, Social Security is unsustainable. So, which is more prudent? Or the Ponzi Scheme? Which is the greater gamble?

(links omitted)

And Another Black Conservative takes note of what can be deduced from Chris Christie's ever increasing popularity in bluest of blue New Jersey:

If Chris Christie can make the hard choices in a blue state like New Jersey and not suffer from it, then national Republicans need not worry about making the hard choices when they take control of Congress. The American people have pretty much figured out that the bill for decades of reckless spending has come due. They are pretty much ready to take the harsh medicine needed to put our financial house in order. All that is required is a dose of honesty from Washington and change in the national narrative.

Amen

Read More...

Summary only...

Union Pensions, Democrats, & The Tree Of Liberty

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Stephens Smith, November 13, 1787

When Obama pushed through the stimulus, taking a vast portion of America's wealth and using the bulk of it to keep public sector union workers in their jobs, I was very upset.

When I saw Teachers Unions attempting to soak we the tax payers for all we were worth while the same unions were in large measure responsible for a public education system that was becoming ever more substandard, I was deeply troubled.

When I saw Obama, at the urging of the NEA, cancel a thriving voucher program of proven and substantial benefit to the inner city poor of Washington, D.C., I was appalled.

When I saw a teachers' union press forward an agenda to sexualize our children and normalize homosexuality in elementary school, I was horrified.

When I saw teacher's unions refuse to negotiate to reduce wages and benefits in our dismal economy because they were expecting a bailout from Obama, and then when I saw that Obama and Congress in fact pass that bailout, I was spitting blood.

When I saw our Democrats fund this bailout of the teachers' unions by raiding the Food Stamp Program at a time when a record number of Americans, over 40 million, are depending on food stamps to keep them from starvation, I was disgusted.

When I saw a union refuse to allow simple life saving measures to be used by teachers to protect an ill child, but instead demanded that more union members be hired to do the job, I was speechless.

When I saw Unions press forward on Card Check to take away the right to a secret ballot and open up the unionization process to intimidation and thuggery, I was outraged.

And now, with unions pressing Congress to pass a bill that would have all taxpayors assume the liability for their mishandled pension plans, I am furious beyond measure.

You can find the full story on this bill, S. 1357, The Create Jobs & Save Benefits Act of 2010, here. NCPA summarizes the issue:

Big Labor is going Code Red on the issue, in the face of a looming accounting change that would force companies to confront the Ponzi-style nature of multi-employer pension plans, says the Wall Street Journal.

Currently, there are some 1,500 union-run retirement vehicles which fall into this class, in which companies across an entire industry pay into a single pension pool. Hundreds of these multi-employer pools are badly underfunded, thanks to years of labor funneling money into new pay and benefits, rather than into the funds for retirees, says the Journal.

The big problem with these plans:

- When one company in the pool goes out of business, the other companies remain on the hook for the cost of the plan.

- These spiraling liabilities inspired Pennsylvania Senator and Big Labor favorite Bob Casey to introduce legislation to cordon off "orphaned" pensions -- those for which an employer has stopped contributing or withdrawn from the plan -- and drop them on the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC).

- The PBGC is already significantly underfunded and taxpayers are its ultimate backstop. Yet the Casey bailout could dump as much as $165 billion in new liabilities on the PBGC, while multi-employer plans would get a clean bill of health.

This cause has taken on new political urgency, and no less than Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin has endorsed the bill. The reason for the rush is new rules that may soon be issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). Those proposed rules would expose the multi-employer time bomb, says the Journal.

Kevin Williamson, writing at NRO, further explains how this proposed legislation is a backdoor to nationalization of all of these mishandled, underfunded union pension plans. Moreover, see this excellent post on the issue from Yid With Lid.

Only seven percent of Americans work in private sector unions. These unions have been notrorious for corruption and mishandling of their dues and pension plans. Yet, were this legislation to pass, all Americans would become responsible for underwriting the irresponsible and corrupt acts of these unions. Why? The only saving grace of the unions, from a political standpoint, is that they rabidly support the Democrats. Passing S. 1357 would by outright theft. It would be taxation with distorted representation. No sane taxpayer not in a union or a Democratic official beholden to unions could possibly support this legislation.

The intersection between unions and Democrats has, in a world where the mainstream media is fully in the latter's pockets, distorted our government to the point that it is, seemingly, beyond the ability of our democracy to repair itself. The ultimate test of that will be if the legislation to backdoor taxpayor funding of union pensions passes. If it does, then we are indeed coming very close to the point when we need to heed the call of Thomas Jefferson and start watering the Tree of Liberty.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Death Of Hope

(H/T Hot Air)

Who best represents the interests of blacks in America - at least the vast majority of blacks who are not making a living off the race baiting gravy train? The one silver lining in the dark cloud that has been the far left having control of Congress and the Presidency is that they have exposed themselves as far more concerned about creating statist structures, increasing government power and funnelling money to teachers' unions than they have shown about jobs for Americans generally and the education for the inner city poor specifically. As Hot Air notes: "The GOP has a generational opportunity to show its relevance on economics and limited government to a broad, formerly hostile audience that finally discovered that Obamanomics is nothing more than smoke and mirrors … very expensive smoke and mirrors." I would add that Republicans should be down in the inner cities making their case not merely on the economy, but also on education, vouchers, and an end to the teachers' unions. Obama's decision to kill the DC voucher program for poor children in DC at the behest of the NEA ought to be Exhibit One.

Read More...

Summary only...

Hola, Amigos - Señor Reid Says Its Time To Get Back On The Plantation

There is nothing like demanding mindless loyalty and obeisance on the basis of race, ethnicity or nationality. That is, after all, the Democrat's way. And likewise, its the Democrat's way to demonize anyone who strays from their plantation.

Amazingly, someone in the MSM must have choked on this, because they actually called up Señor Reid's office and said, yes, he really does need to say more. The response:

“Sen. Reid’s contention was simply that he doesn't understand how anyone, Hispanic or otherwise, would vote for Republican candidates because they oppose saving teachers’ jobs, oppose job-creating tax incentives for small businesses, oppose investments in job-creating clean energy projects, and oppose the help for struggling, unemployed Nevadans to put food on the table and stay in their homes,” read the statement.

Let's pull those apart.

"Oppose saving teachers jobs."

The "civil rights issue of our generation" is education. Some 25% of blacks and a significant number of Hispanics are mired in a vicious cycle of poverty, the only cure for which is improved education in lower income enclaves. The Democrats are wholly on the wrong side of that issue.

The Democrats are wedded to money from the Teachers' Unions - entities that are all about money and the number of teachers (and thus increasing union dues). The teachers' unions are the enemy of increasing the quality of education in America. For a detailed explanation - see here. Recall that one of the first acts of the Obama Administration was to cancel, at the urging of the NEA, a wildly successful voucher program benefiting inner city poor in the nation's most underperforming school system, Washington D.C. public schools. Obama's kids attend private school in D.C.. But the poor of all races in D.C. no longer have the option to send their children to the same school as Obama's kids.

Does that sound like a good reason to stay on the Democrat's plantation?

"Oppose job-creating tax incentives for small businesses."

This is a joke, right. There has never been, in our history, a Congress or an administration more anti-business. From massive government spending on everything but the expansion of small business to the vast expansion of entitlements and regulations, all of which portend to increase the costs to business, Obama is, in the words of one small business owner, Wayne Allen Root, "The Great Jobs Killer."

With his massive spending and tax hikes -- rewarding big government and big unions, while punishing taxpayers and business owners -- Obama has killed jobs, he has killed motivation to create new jobs, he has killed the motivation to invest in new businesses, or expand old ones. With all this killing, Obama should be given the top spot on the FBI's Most Wanted List.

Indeed, to quote Mort Zuckerman:

We are, without question, in a period of decline, particularly in the business world, . . . The real problem we have…are some of the worst economic policies in place today that, in my judgment, go directly against the long-term interests of this country. [Zuckerman added that he detects in the Obama White House] hostility to the very kinds of [business] culture that have made this the great country that it is and was. I think we have to find some way of dealing with that or else we will do great damage to this country with a public policy that could ruin everything.

Does that sound like a good reason to stay on the Democrat's plantation?

"Oppose investments in job-creating clean energy projects."

Reid and the Democrats absolutely refuse to allow America to exploit its natural resources - which, if opened up, would see the greatest expansion of jobs in America than at any other time in our history. The government wouldn't have to subsidize anything. It would just need to stand out of the way of private business. Instead, Reid and the left are pushing massively subsidized projects that create few permanent jobs and do so at great cost. Moreover, in the long run, these efforts will only contribute to much higher costs of energy.

Does that sound like a reason for Hispanics to stay on the Democratic plantation?

"Oppose the help for struggling, unemployed Nevadans to put food on the table and stay in their homes."

Lollllllllllllllllllll . . . . This coming from the flaming ass who just funded a multi-billion dollar pay-off to Teachers' Unions by cutting billions from the nations food stamps program?

Does that sound like a good reason to stay on the Democrat's plantation?

Marco Rubio's response to Señor Harry's wildly racist rants are worth a listen:

My suggestion. Run. Escape Señor Reid's plantation. If you are a black-American, White-American, Hispanic-American, or whatever American, and you want to enjoy the opportunities and freedoms of America, drop the hypen and run like the wind.

Read More...

Summary only...

Truth & Desperation

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs unloads in an interview with the Hill - on Obama's base. They were the one's who HOPEd Obama would CHANGE America into a fully red socialist utopia. They are simply not - nor ever will be - satisfied with anything less. Oh, and they screech endlessly. This from The Hill's interview with Gibbs:

“I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” Gibbs said. “I mean, it’s crazy.” . . .

Of those who complain that Obama caved to centrists on issues such as healthcare reform, Gibbs said: “They wouldn’t be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president.”

The White House, constantly under fire from expected enemies on the right, has been frustrated by nightly attacks on cable news shows catering to the left, where Obama and top lieutenants like Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel have been excoriated for abandoning the public option in healthcare reform; for not moving faster to close the prison at Guantánamo Bay; and for failing, so far, to end the ban on gays serving openly in the military. . . .

Attacks from liberal political groups like the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), which raises money for liberal candidates and causes, are also frustrating to the White House.

Adam Green, one of PCCC’s founders, repeatedly blasted Obama for a “loser mentality” during the healthcare debate, criticizing the president and Emanuel for not trying harder to include the public option in the final healthcare legislation. The group even ran ads accusing Obama of ignoring the will of the millions who voted for him by courting the support of Republican Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe.

The CCCP refuses to acknowledge that the majority of Americans opposed Obamacare, let alone the single payor system. Obama couldn't ignore that. But the CCCP is throwing a tantrum anyway. The reality is that enough of the far left agenda has been passed that we are now, in the words of Pat Caddell, in pre-revolutionary America.

At any rate, my favorite line from the interview:

The press secretary dismissed the “professional left” in terms very similar to those used by their opponents on the ideological right, saying, “They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. . . .

Heh. Truth will out.

And while the far left forms a circular firing squad around Gibbs and the One, the DNC is trying its best to drag George Bush back into our political discourse in time for November. Pay no attention to the fact that you hired a grossly incompetent group of Democrats to lead our nation who, as we now know, shouldn't have been trusted with the budget for a local PTA. Instead, let's concentrate on that most enjoyable of past times, Bush Derangement Syndrome. This from DNC's communications director, Brad Woodhouse, quoted in the Hill:

Serious question here — where is George Bush? Why is he not on the Campaign Trail for Republicans?

In recent weeks Republican leaders have said they want to return to the “exact same agenda” that was pursued under George Bush (Pete Sessions), that President Bush will be seen in a more favorable light by the public as time goes on (John Cornyn), that the Bush tax breaks for the wealthy and big oil should be extended without paying for them (John Boehner, Jon Kyl, et al.) and that Republican candidates would welcome George Bush in to campaign for them in this fall’s election. . . .

I think the better question here is - why is every Democrat politician up for election treating Barack Obama like he is carrying the black plague? And indeed, why are they not out touting all of their legislative achievements?

From Georgia to Texas to points in between, Dems are using every excuse in the book rather than appear at a photo-op with Obama. And over at Hot Air, they have an ad for Indiana’s Congressman Joe Donnely, (D-IN) who leaves out of his ad the facts that he is a Demcorat and that he voted for Obama's "legislative achievements."

It is desperation time for the left. And as to bringing up George Bush - who today would not want to be back in the Bush economy?

Read More...

Summary only...

If All Politics Are Local . . .

There was an election in my small neck of the southern backwoods the other day. It is a purplish area that leans mildly to the right. We have perennially had Democrats on our county commission, and the occasional Democrat mayor. And the Democrats on our Commission have not done a bad job. I have been generally pleased with the local government.

Usually, in local elections, once when gets elected to the commission, its is a virtual certainty that they will retain the seat for a long time, at least unless they do something stupid and end up on the scandal sheet in the local dinosaur media. Even in tough times, incumbents have a very strong advantage.

Not this year. Republicans just swept the field. They won the mayor's spot and unseated the three Democrat incumbents on the county commission. One of those unseated was in my very small District, where we elected a black Republican to unseat a multi-term Democratic incumbent.

The people in my county are on the warpath. They are hunting anyone with a D next to their name. There is no doubt in my mind that this was not so much a local election as it was a referendum on our national political leadership. This of course does not mean anything for the rest of America, but I will be surprised if this does not play out similarly on a nation-wide scale come November. The Dems have every right to be scared.

Read More...

Summary only...

Getting Tired Of Ringing The Bell

Over the weekend, Obama yet again blamed our economic mess on the "failed policies" of the Bush administration. About a week ago, Congress passed massive new financial regulation predicated on the canard that Wall St. was at the heart of the economic melt-down. Congressional Republicans ceded this narrative to Obama and the left in 2008 and have failed utterly to reclaim it since. The reality of it all, as I have pointed out ad infinitum on this blog - and as I documented in detail in the post Hurricane Sup-Prime - the cause of our economic melt-down was evisceration of lending standards by Democrats on the basis of racial politics. They introduced a racial component into what had been color-blind lending standards. They took the easy - and disastrous - route to solving a problem of home ownership for minorities that could and should have been handled very differently.

The Weekly Standard revisits the issue in their review of the IMF's former chief economist, Raghuram Rajan's new book, Fault Lines: How Hidden Fractures Still Threaten the World Economy:

. . . This is an account of what ails us that is radically at odds with the familiar tale of greedy bankers in $5,000 suits. “Almost every financial crisis has political roots,” Rajan writes. The credit market—at least as regards housing—was distorted by government policy, not by a sudden and mysterious escalation in “greed.” The trends that shook the world economy came out of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, out of the Federal Housing Administration, and out of their “regulator,” the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

By 2000, HUD required that low-income loans make up 50 percent of Fannie and Freddie’s portfolios. Out of “compassionate conservatism,” perhaps, the Bush administration raised that mandate to 56 percent. Rajan cites Fannie Mae’s former chief credit officer, Edward Pinto, who notes that, by 2008, “the FHA and various other government programs were exposed to about $2.7 trillion in subprime and Alt-A loans, approximately 59 percent of total loans to these categories.” Peter Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute found that government-mandated loans accounted for two-thirds of “junk mortgages.”

Another way of looking at this problem is provided in a study done by Rajan’s Chicago colleagues Atif Mian and Amir Sufi. They found that, if you look at the period between 2002 and 2005, the number of mortgages obtained in a given ZIP code “is negatively correlated with household income growth.” In other words, lenders preferred un-creditworthy borrowers to creditworthy borrowers. In a market governed by “greed” and undistorted by government pressure, such a result would make no sense.

Perhaps the greatest failing of Republicans in the last century has been their failure to get this message out to the public. It has directly resulted in the election of the same people who destroyed our economy in the first place to the position of complete control of Congress and the Presidency. It has allowed these people to pass a radical legislative agenda that doesn't merel fail to address the root causes of our financial meltdown, but actually adds more fuel to the fire. I am getting tired of ringing this bell. When will our Congressional Republicans begin doing so? The fate of our nation in 2012 may depend on it.

Read More...

Summary only...