COLLECTIVE MADNESS


“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Obama, get your head out of Limbaugh's ass.

Spreading his ample carbon footprint.

Every day the market gets worse, people lose more money and we get a daily directive from the community organizer. Any extraneous left wing issue grabs Obama's attention and is on the table. With all that, nothing is less worthy of a president's time than a food fight with a talk radio host. It reminds me of this:



The statist coup d'etat of Barack Hussein Obama

They do not get any slicker than Obama. He knows the jive for the street or the suite. It got him elected.  Being president is something else. Theory and the theoretical conflict with action and results. The Obama phenomena was hyped on hope, but baked on  wishful thinking. 

Romance on a few drinks, nice music, dim lights, but morning always arrives. It brings unsentimental clarity. Perfume and smoke followed by asprin.  

The moves were made too fast. The breaks will come faster. The shelf life is short for presidents when times are bad.

___________________________
March 03, 2009
Obama Has No Mandate For Radicalism

By Patrick Buchanan Real Clear Politics

In his campaign and inaugural address, Barack Obama cast himself as a moderate man seeking common ground with conservatives.

Yet, his budget calls for the radical restructuring of the U.S. economy, a sweeping redistribution of power and wealth to government and Democratic constituencies. It is a declaration of war on the Right.

The real Obama has stood up, and lived up to his ranking as the most left-wing member of the United States Senate.

Barack has no mandate for this. He was even behind McCain when the decisive event that gave him the presidency occurred -- the September collapse of Lehman Brothers and the market crash.

Republicans are under no obligation to render bipartisan support to this statist coup d'etat. For what is going down is a leftist power grab that is anathema to their principles and philosophy.

Where the U.S. government usually consumes 21 percent of gross domestic product, this Obama budget spends 28 percent in 2009 and runs a deficit of $1.75 trillion, or 12.7 percent of GDP. That is four times the largest deficit of George W. Bush and twice as large a share of the economy as any deficit run since World War II.

Add that 28 percent of GDP spent by the U.S. government to the 12 percent spent by states, counties and cities, and government will consume 40 percent of the economy in 2009.

We are not "headed down the road to socialism." We are there.

Since the budget was released, word has come that the U.S. economy did not shrink by 3.8 percent in the fourth quarter, but 6.2 percent. All the assumptions in Obama's budget about growth in 2009 and 2010 need to be revised downward, and the deficits revised upward.

Look for the deficit for 2009 to cross $2 trillion.

Who abroad is going to lend us the trillions to finance our deficits without demanding higher interest rates on the U.S. bonds they are being asked to hold? And if we must revert to the printing press to create the money, what happens to the dollar?

As Americans save only a pittance and have lost -- in the value of homes, stocks, bonds and other assets -- $15 trillion to $20 trillion since 2007, how can the people provide the feds with the needed money?

In his speech to Congress, Obama promised new investments in energy, education and health care. Every kid is going to get a college degree. We're going to find a cure for cancer.

Who is going to pay for all this?

The top 2 percent, the filthy rich who got all those Bush tax breaks, say Democrats. But the top 5 percent of income earners already pay 60 percent of U.S. income taxes, while the bottom 40 percent pays nothing.

Those paying a federal tax rate of 35 percent will see it rise to near 40 percent and will lose a fifth of the value of their deductions for taxes, mortgage interest and charitable contributions.

Yet, two-thirds of small businesses are taxed at the same rate as individuals. Consider what this means to the owner of a restaurant and bar in Los Angeles open from noon to midnight, where a husband and wife each put in 80 hours a week.

At year's end, the couple finds they have actually made a profit of $500,000 that they can take home in salary.

What is the Obama-Schwarzenegger tax take on that salary?

Their U.S. tax rate will have hit 39.6 percent.

Their California income tax will have hit 9.55 percent.

Medicare payroll taxes on the proprietor as both employer and salaried employee will be $14,500. Social Security payroll taxes for the proprietor as both employer and employee will be $13,243.

In short, U.S. and state income and payroll taxes will consume half of all the pair earned for some 8,000 hours of work.

From that ravaged salary they must pay a state sales tax of 8.25 percent, gas taxes for the 50-mile commute, and tens of thousands in property taxes on both their restaurant and home. And, after being pilloried by politicians for having feasted in the Bush era, they are now told the tax deduction they get for contributing to the church is to be cut 20 percent, while millions of Obama voters, who paid no U.S. income tax at all, will be getting a tax cut -- i.e., a fat little check -- in April.

Any wonder native-born Californians are fleeing the Golden Land?

Markets are not infallible. But the stock market has long been a "lead indicator" of where the economy will be six months from now. What are the markets, the collective decisions of millions of investors, saying?

Having fallen every month since Obama's election, with January and February the worst two months in history, they are telling us the stimulus package will not work, that Tim Geithner is clueless about how to save the banks, that the Obama budget portends disaster for the republic.

The president says he is gearing up for a fight on his budget.

Good. Let's give him one.



Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Mass -Ass- Chewing. US Iraqi Style.



Hat Tip: Ash

White moderates who supported Obama shocked that he is a committed leftist.



Doug said...

Davey Brooks is shocked, SHOCKED!


That a former member of the Socialist Party, who has spent almost his entire adult life around socialists, communists, black liberationists, Muslim Arabists, and domestic terrorists, might not govern as a CENTRIST!
...took Joe all of 5 minutes to learn that BHO is a committed redistributionist.
But Joe's "Just a Plumber."

Op-Ed Columnist - A Moderate Manifesto - NYTimes.com

The president issued a read-my-lips pledge that no new burdens will fall on 95 percent of the American people.
All the costs will be borne by the rich and all benefits redistributed downward.

Those of us who consider ourselves moderates — moderate-conservative, in my case — are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was.

His words are responsible; his character is inspiring. But his actions betray a transformational liberalism that should put every centrist on notice. As Clive Crook, an Obama admirer, wrote in The Financial Times, the Obama budget “contains no trace of compromise. It makes no gesture, however small, however costless to its larger agenda, of a bipartisan approach to the great questions it addresses. It is a liberal’s dream of a new New Deal.”

Moderates now find themselves betwixt and between. On the left, there is a president who appears to be, as Crook says, “a conviction politician, a bold progressive liberal.”
On the right, there are the Rush Limbaugh brigades.
The only thing more scary than Obama’s experiment is the thought that it might fail and the political power will swing over to a Republican Party that is currently unfit to wield it.

Wed Mar 04, 06:53:00 AM EST

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

Obama Make Rookie Move with Moscow

Obama is trading a queen for a pawn.

How pathetic, the President of the United States shows he does not know the first thing about the major leagues. Russia does not control the Iranians. The Russians will flirt with anyone that stands up to the United States.

Iran is not building a nuclear weapon to threaten the US or Russia. Iran is building a nuclear weapon as a regional deterrence and to assert Iran's position in the Islamic world. A US missile shield makes sense against any aggressor with nuclear weapons and that includes Pakistan.

The Russians cannot deliver anything to the US on Iran, but they will get a veto on US security because the champ is a chump. Too bad for the courageous politicians in Poland and the Czech Republic that trusted the US in agreeing to the missile shield in the first place. Not good.


________________



Obama Offered Deal to Russia in Secret Letter

By PETER BAKER NY Times
Published: March 2, 2009

WASHINGTON — President Obama sent a secret letter to Russia’s president last month suggesting that he would back off deploying a new missile defense system in Eastern Europe if Moscow would help stop Iran from developing long-range weapons, American officials said Monday.

The letter to President Dmitri A. Medvedev was hand-delivered in Moscow by top administration officials three weeks ago. It said the United States would not need to proceed with the interceptor system, which has been vehemently opposed by Russia since it was proposed by the Bush administration, if Iran halted any efforts to build nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles.

The officials who described the contents of the message requested anonymity because it has not been made public. While they said it did not offer a direct quid pro quo, the letter was intended to give Moscow an incentive to join the United States in a common front against Iran. Russia’s military, diplomatic and commercial ties to Tehran give it some influence there, but it has often resisted Washington’s hard line against Iran.

“It’s almost saying to them, put up or shut up,” said a senior administration official. “It’s not that the Russians get to say, ‘We’ll try and therefore you have to suspend.’ It says the threat has to go away.”

Moscow has not responded, but a Russian official said Monday that Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov would have something to say on missile defense to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton when they meet Friday in Geneva. Mr. Obama and Mr. Medvedev will then meet for the first time on April 2 in London, officials said Monday.

Mr. Obama’s letter, sent in response to one he received from Mr. Medvedev shortly after Mr. Obama’s inauguration, is part of an effort to “press the reset button” on Russian-American relations, as Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. put it last month. Among other things, the letter discussed talks to extend a strategic arms treaty expiring this year and cooperation in opening supply routes to Afghanistan.

The plan to build a high-tech radar facility in the Czech Republic and deploy 10 interceptor missiles in Poland — a part of the world that Russia once considered its sphere of influence — was a top priority for President George W. Bush to deter Iran in case it developed a nuclear warhead to fit atop its long-range missiles. Mr. Bush never accepted a Moscow proposal to install part of the missile defense system on its territory and jointly operate it so it could not be used against Russia.

Now the Obama administration appears to be reconsidering that idea, although it is not clear if it would want to put part of the system on Russian soil where it could be flipped on or off by Russians. Mr. Obama has been lukewarm on missile defense, saying he supports it only if it can be proved technically effective and affordable.

Mr. Bush also emphasized the linkage between the Iranian threat and missile defense, but Mr. Obama’s overture reformulates it in a way intended to appeal to the Russians, who long ago soured on the Bush administration. Officials have been hinting at the possibility of an agreement in recent weeks, and Mr. Obama’s proposal was reported on Monday by a Moscow newspaper, Kommersant.

“If through strong diplomacy with Russia and our other partners we can reduce or eliminate that threat, it obviously shapes the way at which we look at missile defense,” Under Secretary of State William J. Burns said about the Iranian threat in an interview with the Russian news agency Interfax while in Moscow last month delivering Mr. Obama’s letter.

Attending a NATO meeting in Krakow, Poland, on Feb. 20, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said, “I told the Russians a year ago that if there were no Iranian missile program, there would be no need for the missile sites.” Mr. Obama’s inauguration, he added, offered the chance for a fresh start. “My hope is that now, with the new administration, the prospects for that kind of cooperation might have improved,” he said.

The idea has distressed Poland and the Czech Republic, where leaders invested political capital in signing missile defense cooperation treaties with the United States despite domestic opposition. If the United States were to slow or halt deployment of the systems, Warsaw and Prague might insist on other incentives.

For example, the deal with Poland included a side agreement that an American Patriot air defense battery would be moved from Germany to Poland, where it would be operated by a crew of about 100 American service members. The administration might have to proceed with that to reassure Warsaw.

Missile defense has flavored Mr. Obama’s relationship with Russia from the day after his election, when Mr. Medvedev threatened to point missiles at Europe if the system proceeded. Mr. Medvedev later backed off that threat and it seems that Moscow is taking seriously the idea floated in Mr. Obama’s letter. Kommersant, the Moscow newspaper, on Monday called it a “sensational proposal.”

Mr. Medvedev said Sunday that he believed the Obama administration would be open to cooperation on missile defense.

“We have already received such signals from our American colleagues,” he said in an interview posted on the Kremlin Web site. “I expect that these signals will turn into concrete proposals. I hope to discuss this issue of great importance for Europe during my first meeting with President Barack Obama.”

David E. Sanger and Thom Shanker contributed reporting from Washington, and Michael Schwirtz from Moscow.



Why are Americans Submitting to This?



I received this email. It is pertinent to the previous post. It makes me angry and I wonder why we as a people are so docile about the intrusion into our lives by government and commercial enterprises. Please do not give me the argument that if you have nothing to hide you should not be concerned. That defense belongs to the violators of our privacy, not the violated.

Full court records available

A few years back, the only people who had access to personal information were police detectives and the federal government. Now with the newly passed laws you too can investigate practically anyone job applicants, potential dates, neighbors, relatives, even friends. Using our legal and fully organized database links, you will have access to complete research tools.

For example, you can find out if someone has ever declared bankruptcy, gotten married, filed for divorce, been arrested, or filed a lawsuit. You can even find out about their home or auto loans,the kind of credit card debts they have, and even get a printout of their monthly cell phone bill, itemizing all their incoming and outgoing calls.

http://marchishere.com/c/KAYo3ENEkktfVpqw5Wg6Ng.html?0

To get yourself off,
press this http://marchishere.com/u/KAYo3ENEkktfVpqw5Wg6Ng.html
or write to us at:
Cust relations
9 Orchard Street
Stamford, CT 06902




Sunday, March 01, 2009

Resist! Keep Your Medical Files Out of the Hands of the Government



One of the more odious ideas and laws being handed down in the recent Democratik Diktats is the mass mandatory government collection and computerization of your medical records. Tell the government to kiss your ass. Here is why:

The internet is an unmitigated disaster when it comes to privacy. I realize, using some GI parlance from the sixties that the fourth amendment "don't mean shit" anymore. I mean who could possibly take this
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
seriously in the time of credit agencies with the zest of the Stasi watching Americans without a peep of protest.

There is no indignation at Google for recording photos and maps to our homes for the world's voyeurs. Our rulers and masters wish to data bank all of our medical records. They assure us that they will be safe. Ya vohl mein commandant, you can't even keep a secret about the president's helicopter. What's next?

______________

Marine One details leaked from P2P net
Posted by Richard Koman @ March 1, 2009 @ 2:07 PM

Bottom line: P2P is the biggest disaster for security “of all time.”

A company that monitors P2P networks says it found details about the president’s helicopter, Marine One, on a computer in Tehran. Pittsburgh station WPXI reports.

Bob Boback, CEO of Tiversa, said, ”We found a file containing entire blueprints and avionics package for Marine One. … What appears to be a defense contractor in Bethesda, MD had a file sharing program on one of their systems that also contained highly sensitive blueprints for Marine One,” Boback said.

Retired Gen. Wesley Clark, an adviser to Tiversa, added:

We found where this information came from. We know exactly what computer it came from. I’m sure that person is embarrassed and may even lose their job, but we know where it came from and we know where it went.

It’s no accident the information wound up in Iran, the company said. Countries like Iran, Pakistan, Yemen, Qatar and China are “actively searching for information that is disclosed in this fashion because it is a great source of intelligence,” Boback said.

Rep. Jason Altmire said he will ask Congress to investigate the risk to national security of this sort of exposure.

Cnet’s Charles Cooper interviewed the Tiversa’s Sam Hopkins (Cooper says he’s the CEO but the original report said Boback is CEO; the company website doesn’t list executives), who said someone at the company was running a Gnutella client - possible a buggy one.

Hopkins said it’s hardly an unusual occurence - although presumably the usual breaches aren’t so closely connected to the President.

Everybody uses (P2P). Everybody. We see classified information leaking all the time. When the Iraq war got started, we knew what U.S. troops were doing because G.I.’s who wanted to listen to music would install software on secure computers and it got compromised. … We see information flying out there to Iran, China, Syria, Qatar–you name it. There’s so much out there that sometimes we can’t keep up with it.

Bottom line: P2P is the biggest disaster for security “of all time.”

We’ve had people come into our data center and we’ve shown them things that are out there on P2P and they go away with their minds blown.


from Cnet

Current Global Factory Output, Year-to-Year


Taiwan (-43pc), Ukraine (-34pc), Japan (-30pc), Singapore (-29pc), Hungary (-23pc), Sweden (-20pc), Korea (-19pc), Turkey (-18pc), Russia (-16pc), Spain (-15pc), Poland (-15pc), Brazil (-15pc), Italy (-14pc), Germany (-12pc), France (-11pc), US (-10pc) and Britain (-9pc).

By comparison, industrial output in core-Europe fell 2.8pc in 1930, 5.1pc in 1931 and 3.9pc in 1932, according to RBS.

We need shock and awe policies to halt depression


28 Feb 2009

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard


As ordinary citizens with no power over the levers of policy, we watch from the sidelines, and weep. The whole global economy has tipped into a downward spiral. Trade and output are contracting at rates that outstrip the leisurely depression of the 1930s. Debt deflation has simply washed over the drastic measures taken by governments everywhere.

Judging by the latest Merrill Lynch survey of fund managers, investors have a touching faith that China is going to rescue us all and re-ignite the commodity boom. How can this be? Taiwan's exports to China fell 55pc in January, Japan's fell 45pc. These exports are links in the supply chain for China's industry. Manufacturing output in the Shanghai region fell 12pc in January.

My favourite China guru, Michael Pettis from Beijing University, is in despair – as you can see on his blog (http://mpettis.com). The property bubble is bursting. Developers have built more offices in Beijing since 2006 than the entire stock in Manhattan. There is a 14-year supply glut. We have seen this movie before.

Factory output is collapsing at the fastest pace everywhere. The figures for the most recent month available are, year-on-year: Taiwan (-43pc), Ukraine (-34pc), Japan (-30pc), Singapore (-29pc), Hungary (-23pc), Sweden (-20pc), Korea (-19pc), Turkey (-18pc), Russia (-16pc), Spain (-15pc), Poland (-15pc), Brazil (-15pc), Italy (-14pc), Germany (-12pc), France (-11pc), US (-10pc) and Britain (-9pc). Norway sails blissfully on (+4pc). What do they drink up there?

This terrifying fall has been concentrated in the last five months. The job slaughter has barely begun. Social mayhem comes with a 12-month lag. By comparison, industrial output in core-Europe fell 2.8pc in 1930, 5.1pc in 1931 and 3.9pc in 1932, according to RBS.

Stephen Lewis, from Monument Securities, says we have been lulled into a false sense of security by the lack of "soup kitchens". The visual cues from Steinbeck's America are missing. "The temptation for investors is to see this as just another recession, over by the end of the year. But this is not a normal cycle. It is a cataclysmic structural breakdown," he said.

Fiscal stimulus is reaching its global limits. The lowest interest rates in history are failing to gain traction. The Fed seems paralyzed. It first talked of buying US Treasuries three months ago, but cannot seem to bring itself to hit the nuclear button.

As the Fed dithers, a flood of bond issues from the US Treasury is swamping the debt market. The yield on 10-year Treasuries has climbed from 2pc to 3.04pc in eight weeks. The real cost of money is rising as deflation gathers pace.

US house prices have fallen 27pc (Case-Shiller index). The pace of descent is accelerating. The 2.2pc fall in December was the worst month ever. January looks just as bad. Delinquenc-ies on prime mortgages were 1.72pc in September, 1.89pc in October, 2.13pc on November and 2.42pc in December. This is the trajectory eating away at the banking system.

Graham Turner, from GFC Economics, fears the Dow could crash to 4,000 by summer unless there is a "quantum reduction" in mortgage rates. The Fed should swoop in to the market – armed with Ben Bernanke's "printing press" – and mop up enough Treasuries to force 10-year yields down to 1pc and mortgage rates to 2.5pc. Monetary shock and awe.

This remedy is fraught with risk, but all options are ghastly at this point. That is the legacy we have been left by the Greenspan doctrine. We are at the moment of extreme danger in Irving Fisher's "Debt Deflation Theory" (1933) where the ship fails to right itself by natural buoyancy, and capsizes instead.

From all accounts, the Fed was ready to launch its bond blitz in January. Something happened. Perhaps the hawks awoke in cold sweats at night, fretting about Weimar.
Perhaps they feared that China and the world will pull the plug on the US bond market. If so, it is time for Washington to get a grip. America remains the hegemonic global power.

The Obama team should let it be known – and perhaps Hillary Clinton did just that on her trip to Asia – that any country playing games with the US bond market in this crisis will be treated as an enemy and pay a crushing price.

Pacific allies already know that they cannot take the US security blanket for granted. As for China – and others pursuing a mercantilist strategy of export-led growth – they must know that the US can shut off its market and wreak havoc to their economy.

To Europe, they might make it clearer that unless the European Central Bank is brought to heel by the Continent's leaders (whatever Maastricht says) and forced to play its full part in emergency efforts to save the global economy, the NATO military alliance will wither and the region will be left to fend for itself against a revanchist Russia.

Should the main threat come from an exodus of private wealth, Washington may have to impose temporary capital controls. Never forget, America is the one country with enough strategic depth to go it alone, if necessary. The US is not going to let foreigners keep it trapped in a depression.

I doubt matters will ever come to this. Japan is already in dire straits. Exports crashed 46pc in January, year-on-year. The Bank of Japan may soon start buying US Treasuries for its own reasons – just as it did from 2003 to 2004 – in order to reverse the 30pc rise of the yen over the last 18 months. If it helps preserve the Sino-US defence alliance in the face of Chinese naval expansion, so much the better.
In any case, the storm has shifted across the Atlantic to Europe. Germany faces 5pc contraction this year (Deutsche Bank). The bill has come from the burst bubble in the ex-Soviet bloc. Europe's banks are on the hook for $1.6 trillion (£1.1 trillion). For the first time since the launch of monetary union, Europe's leaders are speaking openly about the risk of EMU break-up.

A run on the US dollar looks a remote threat as the euro drama unfolds. The Fed may soon have all the room for manoeuvre it needs. Small comfort.