“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."

Saturday, August 01, 2009

Turn Back the national Socialists

ht: Tiger at the Observer.

The national Socialist (aka Democratic)Party has been very busy nationalizing the auto industry, the banking industry and the health care industry. With any luck, Americans like the young man and his fellow patriots in this video will turn back the madness.


  1. What would you call this?

    House votes to clamp limits on Wall Street bonuses

    ...the new legislation would apply to all financial firms, even if they did not receive bailout money...

  2. Can you spell Overreach?
    If the Pubs have any brains, their campaign slogan would be:
    "We'll repeal it all!"
    Used to think healthcare was irreversible, but it doesn't go into effect until 2013
    ...if they survive the recess.

  3. I'm not saying that huge bonuses paid by loss making institutions is okay. It's bad business.

    It is not comforting to know that those who brought us Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac and equal opportunity lending are in charge. Their whirledview is an anathema to what made America great.

    "This is not the government taking over the corporate sector," Rep. Melvin Watt, D-N.C, said of the House action. "It is a statement by the American people that it is time for us to straighten up the ship."

    It is a takeover.

  4. How does Nancy Pelosi advance her argument? By demonizing corporate America:

    Pelosi turned her focus on the insurance sector, portraying insurance companies as the driving force behind the Democrats failure to meet President Obama's voting deadline.
    "It's almost immoral what they are doing," Pelosi said to reporters, according to Reuters. "Of course they've been immoral all along in how they have treated the people that they insure," she said, adding, "They are the villains. They have been part of the problem in a major way. They are doing everything in their power to stop a public option from happening."

    What have we come to?

  5. Welcome aboard, whit.

    It's the Commerce Clause, someone should tell that young man, that the Commerce Clause, it is all encompassing.

    From Health Care to drug prohibitions. Food inspections to University subsidies.

    A lot of good things, some not so nuch, have come from it.

  6. The Democrats not siezing power, just utilizing the precedents, in a way that some find disturbing.

    But the Federals siezed the power, incrementally startiing long ago.

    Most here appaulded the last Administration's incremental power grabs.

    Who here stood against the TARP, on principle or specifics?
    When "we" had to do, something!

    Who supported Team43 when they circumvented the Checks and Balances critical to good Government?

    As George Will wrote, at the time, TARP was an unConstitutional delegation of authority and an usurption of power.
    But that did not even slow them down.

    Now those TARP funds, I'm told, are going to be financing Cash for Clunkers.

    They're doing something!

  7. Those are strong words, one could say "propaganda" designed to undermine the private sector institutions of America. This is overreach on a scale not seen since the Roosevelt era.

    Crises, personal or public, reveal underlying character. We're seeing the pessimistic, cynical nature of mankind. The side displayed by French revolutionists, anarchists, socialists, Communists and the other assorted malcontents and despots of history. This mentality lurks, waiting for opportunity in crisis and doubt. It is a defect in the nature of the left perhaps due to an evolutionary defect passed on from one generation to the next.

  8. As I said, it has been long in coming, each step along the way, for our own good.

    Congress “ushered in a new era of federal regulation under the commerce power,” beginning with the enactment of the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887 and the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890.

    There was a time when tobacco was not a regulated substance.

  9. Tina does have a set of legs on her, don't she?

    They go right up and make an ass out themselves.

  10. I think most of us here at the EB were opposed to TARP. We watched the audacity with our mouths open is disbelief at what was happening with lightening speed.

    Oh yeah, this is a power grab. One designed to create a nation dependent on Federal largesse and placing all trust in Uncle Sam or more specifically, the Democratic Party.

  11. SULAIMANIYAH, Iraq – Iran has confirmed it detained three Americans who were in the area of the Iranian border while on a hiking trip, Kurdish officials said Saturday. The U.S. State Department has said it was looking into the situation.

    On a hiking trip?

  12. You can say Robbie Maddison is a fool or has gigantic...uh...nerve, but he was surely well paid. But, I don't think hiking pays that well so I would conclude that these three "hikers" are either absolute fools or patriots.

  13. Yeah, these guys make Robbie look like a fool:
    » Michael Yon Dispatch Night Into Day
    Might as well accomplish something while risking your life.
    (Course Afghan Debacle is Debateable.)

  14. 2164th said...
    They had no choice but to do this. Remember this is nothing personal. This is business, real big business, and the banking system and the dollar would never have been able to take a bank as large as Citi going down.

    It astounds me that this has happened, but we are in a whole new world. The lesson for the long run is simple. If something is too big to fail, it is simply too big.

    Mon Nov 24, 12:32:00 AM EST

    If we take duece's words to heart ...

    If something is too big to fail, it is simply too big.

    We'd be shrinking the US Government, not expanding it. Because it will surely fail, if we do not.

  15. And if the continued expansion of the Government is seen as a challenge to the liberties that are iconic, in the US, then one should be against that expansion across the board.

    At least until basic government services can be maintained without further expansion of the public debt.

  16. My Gawd, 'Rat's gone from Relativist to Conservative!
    Hip hip Hooray!

    In case any of you missed the higher quality CNN Video Feed of the most courageous woman in the USA.

  17. History is there to teach us, if we are prepared to learn, but don't bet on it.

    "The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and ontrolled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced. If the nation doesn't want to go bankrupt, people must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."
    -- Marcus Tullius Cicero, 55 BC

  18. That deal will never, ever get past the Senate.

    As for TARP: Well, the banking system didn't go down; and, we're Not (yet, anyway) in a Depression.

    We have a "Capitalist" system, folks. For Capitalism you have to have "Capital." Means you gotta have a robust "Banking" system. Love it, or hate it, that's what we've got.

  19. BTW, we're steadily making money on the TARP. We'll make money on everybody, except, probably, AIG.

  20. Wasn't it right after that that they killed ol' Cicero?

  21. Google...

    If you do a Google search, in the upper right hand corner of the screen, you will see "Web History". The amount of information they have on you is astounding and disturbing. Check your Web History.

    It's like Big Brother.

  22. They probably know more about you than you know about yourself.

  23. I'm sorry. You'll be consistently outwitted by the elites, out-talked by the leftist MSM, and out-voted by the anti-american/multi-culti blocs.

    You've lost. The only hope you have now is to somehow draw the crazies into over-reach, make them make the unjustifiable pre-emptive strike, claim victimhood, expose the entire sodding mess, then hit them for all it's worth. Given Ricci and the Gates affair, the possibility is actually pretty good.

  24. All Societies fail in the "long" run.

    In the short run, we'll have elections in 2010. That'll be interesting.

  25. Remember, it was "Republicans," acting like "Republicans," that got us 1929, and the Great Depression.

    We have, so far, avoided that, this time.

    The Republicans railed against Social Security, Minimum Wage, Medicare, the EPA, Civil Rights, OSHA, Anti-Trust, etc. They've been wrong, a lot.

    I grew up on a sand farm with an outdoor toilet. Folks, it got "Cold" in Feb in those days (esp. about 4:00 in the morning.

    I don't wanna go back.

  26. Google, for sake of civil liberties, should be severely restricted.

  27. I've posted on that several times, but got little interest. Why should a private company have access and disseminate your personal information without your specific permission?

  28. 12 years? I was thinking it was less than that. Oh well. They got him "in the end," anyway. :)

    Politics don't change.

  29. No, doug, I've always maintained the same standard, regardless of where that left me on your scale.

    But much as I have read, few have presented a way from the future that Cicero never lived to see, but arrived just the same.

    Whether it was on TARP or the new GI Bill. There is the ideologically standard stance of no growth, a shrinkage in the authority of Government. Then the more practical approach, try to rally support for the things I "like" and bad mouth the ones I do not. Get what I can for me and mine, while the others cash in, too.

    An equivalency standard.

    But that position always supports the growth of governmental authority, which is the greatest threat to US. Always has been.

    The manifestations of that growth vary and change, but should be opposed whereever they are found. Whether in warrantless wiretaps or the creation of Government Motors.

  30. You can remove your web history. The question is, does Google still maintain it?

  31. Better believe they do, it is all cached, somewhere.

    Like the old web pages are.

  32. Nothing disappears from the Web.

  33. You live in the public eye, like it or not. If you do not just drop out and off the grid.

  34. Despite Cicero's rhetoric, Rome maintained course and speed.

    It was in most everyone's short term interest to do so.

    Sacrifice is never a democraticly popular stance to take. Not when the opponents offer two chickens for every pot and an electric chariot in every driveway.

  35. Ever since there was a tribe, there was a government. The purpose of a tribe is and has always been for group protection and the provision of a social safety net. It has always been a pact between the governed and the leadership, willing or not. One always can leave the tribe one way or the other. Most stay willingly, some through repression. Always was and always will be such.

    We are lucky in that we can negotiate the degrees of repression or support. The thing that has changed is the technological permanent record. This has no precedent. It needs to be thought out and IMO rolled back to a degree to be negotiated.

  36. I don't know, Deuce. Important people have Always left a "Record."

    There were newspaper articles, private letters, preserved by the recipient, history books, etc.

    If your views become important people will search out your history. For most of us, they won't bother.

  37. The Wobbly Guy said:

    "I'm sorry. You'll be consistently outwitted by the elites, out-talked by the leftist MSM, and out-voted by the anti-american/multi-culti blocs.

    You've lost. The only hope you have now is to somehow draw the crazies into over-reach, make them make the unjustifiable pre-emptive strike, claim victimhood, expose the entire sodding mess, then hit them for all it's worth. Given Ricci and the Gates affair, the possibility is actually pretty good."

    I've been thinking about Wobbly Guy's comment for the last couple of hours and I would say that if he had have said that 6 mos. ago it would have been pretty accurate and a good predictor.

    But 6 mos. have passed and the left has overreached and Democrats are beginning to fight among themselves.

    The 2010 elections will be the tipping point. If the Republicans can peel away some congressional seats it will give Pelosi's rivals the excuse they need to dump her. It is hard to imagine anyone as radical as Pelosi being her replacement.

    With a smaller and more centrist Democratic congress, the Obama radicals will find it increasingly difficult to further their agenda.

    For Republicans, though, their biggest ace in the hole is Obama himself. It is increasingly obvious that he is a stumblebum.

  38. There's only "One" piece of legistation that "Terrifies" me. The one that is a dagger, aimed directly into the heart of our productivity, and ability to "Grow."

    The idea that the Enormous Tax, known as "Cap and Trade" could sneak through while we're distracted by other arguments is enough to cause me to wake up with the "cold sweats."

    That sucker could, literally, "shut us down." Nothing, I mean, "Nothing," would be unaffected. And, the effects will be "Huge."

  39. Here's some thought by Al Fin, with some quotes from Robert Zubrin, on The Death Sentence that is Cap and Trade.

  40. Better believe it, rufus, it was part of the McCain Program, Cap & Trade.

    Lieberman and Warner introduced legislation just prior to the the elction, about a year or so ago.

    It was defeated, but will return each year, from now until we're in the ground. Eventually something will pass, a modified VAT tax, based upon energy consumption instead of value added.

  41. Glenn Greenwald.
    Saturday Aug. 1, 2009 05:02 EDT

    GE's silencing of Olbermann and MSNBC's sleazy use of Richard Wolffe.
    (updated below)

    The New York Times this morning has a remarkable story, and incredibly, the article's author, Brian Stelter, doesn't even acknowledge, let alone examine, what makes the story so significant. In essence, the chairman of General Electric (which owns MSNBC), Jeffrey Immelt, and the chairman of News Corporation (which owns Fox News), Rupert Murdoch, were brought into a room at a "summit meeting" for CEOs in May, where Charlie Rose tried to engineer an end to the "feud" between MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Fox's Bill O'Reilly. According to the NYT, both CEOs agreed that the dispute was bad for the interests of the corporate parents, and thus agreed to order their news employees to cease attacking each other's news organizations and employees.

    Most notably, the deal wasn't engineered because of a perception that it was hurting either Olbermann or O'Reilly's show, or even that it was hurting MSNBC. To the contrary, as Olbermann himself has acknowledged, his battles with O'Reilly have substantially boosted his ratings. The agreement of the corporate CEOs to cease criticizing each other was motivated by the belief that such criticism was hurting the unrelated corporate interests of GE and News Corp

    Read More

  42. trish continues advocating the "Olbermann Method"

    But a review of all of Olbermann's post-June 1 shows does reveal that he has not ever criticized (or even mentioned) Bill O'Reilly since then and barely ever mentions Fox News any longer. And on June 1 -- the last time Olbermann mentioned O'Reilly -- Olbermann claimed at the end of his broadcast that he would cease referring to O'Reilly in the future because ignoring him (and "quarantining" Fox) would supposedly help get O'Reilly off the air ("So as of this show‘s end, I will retire the name, the photograph, and the caricature").

    It's all spinning about themselves, for themselves.

    Until Corporate said enough.

    That's Entertainment!

  43. . . . I assume that both Olbermann and O'Reilly would not have agreed to the truce, as the battle is ratings gold for both of them, and I'm sure they frankly hate each other and enjoy it.

    The sad truth is that what Olbermann and O'Reilly were doing in this particular instance was one of the rare examples of good journalism on these types of shows.

    Olbermann was holding O'Reilly's feet to the fire about his repeated falsehoods and embarrassing positions.
    In turn, O'Reilly was giving the public accurate and disturbing information about General Electric, including extensive technology dealings with Iran

    In my personal opinion, this was one of the rare useful pieces of information O'Reilly ever presented to his audience, and Olbermann was there to show how lousy the rest of O'Reilly's information was. Though it was in the context of a bitter feud, the two men were actually engaging in real journalism, at least in this case

  44. So now GE is using its control of NBC and MSNBC to ensure that there is no more reporting by Fox of its business activities in Iran or other embarrassing corporate activities, while News Corp. is ensuring that the lies spewed regularly by its top-rated commodity on Fox News are no longer reported by MSNBC. You don't have to agree with the reader's view of the value of this reporting to be highly disturbed that it is being censored.

    Doing business in Iran and gaining access to TARP monies.

    That tingling leg was amplified by the power of money.

    And as rufus loves to tell US, Mr Murdock is heavily partnered up with the Saudis. Who got Mr Obama into Princeton University.

  45. UPDATE: On Richard Wolffe's bio page at Public Strategies, Inc., the role he plays on MSNBC and NBC News is actually touted to the firm's corporate clients and potential clients:

    "In addition, Wolffe is an NBC political analyst. He provides political commentary on several MSNBC programs, Meet The Press, and TODAY".

    They're basically telling their clients and prospective clients: if you hire us to control and disseminate your political messaging, you'll have someone working for you -- Richard Wolffe -- who has a regular platform on MSNBC and NBC News, where he's presented as an independent "political analyst." And this is how they describe what he does for the firm: "Wolffe provides high-level counsel and insight to our clients on how to manage their reputations in a complex public environment." How much more blatantly sleazy could that be?

    -- Glenn Greenwald

  46. >>>CEO Watch.
    May 31, 2008

    GE Energy, a division of General Electric Co., has signed, with Saudi Electricity Company, contracts worth over $500 million to build and install gas turbines and generators at Saudi Arabian power plants, the company announced on May 27.

    GE Energy has won a contract to supply gas turbine generators for a 960-megawatt expansion of the Rabigh Power Plant in Rabigh City. The contract with Saudi Electricity Co. includes technical advice during installation and spare parts.

    GE Energy also has won a contract to build and install gas turbines used by four other power plants owned by Saudi Electricity Company in Jizan City, Qunfutha City, Aljouf City and Tabouk City.

    Demand for power in Saudi Arabia is rising by about 8 percent a year, GE Energy said. Saudi Arabia is one of GE's key growth regions. GE maintains a work force of more than 600 employees in Saudi Arabia and has joint ventures in energy, health care and appliances.

    "These projects are part of Saudi Electricity Co.'s ongoing efforts to meet the region's soaring power demand," said Joseph Anis, GE Energy's region executive for the Middle East, to the Associated Press.

    The gas turbines will be manufactured at GE Energy plants in Greenville, South Carolina. The generators will be made in Schenectady, N.Y.


    January 10, 2008 08:53 PM EST

    Some very disturbing news is reported publicly once again. A member of NBC press corps writes that NBC, owned by GE has stopped its newscasters from reporting about the very close relationship between GE and the Bin Laden family, or the fact that GE is still selling goods to Iran. A Canadian subsidiary of GE has supplied hydroelectric generators to Iran, while an Italian subsidiary has supplied pipeline and gas turbines to Iran. Even with the fact that Iran is listed by the State Department as one of seven state sponsoring terrorists. These nations included Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, North Korea, and Cuba. Iraq is no longer on this list.

    General Electric told the State Department, as well as the State of New York, "It is none of your business. GE is within the guidelines of the law, and will do what is best for its investors." GE told the government to go "pound sand" in more or less terms. GE utilizes offshore subsidiaries, as well as Canadian and Mexican subsidiaries to go around the law. Yet people continue to support GE by purchasing their products and singing praises of the company.

    Many think of Haliburton, as the only culprit of doing business with foreign countries that are questionable, but it seems that as deep, if not deeper in the sand and oil fields you will find Imelt, and General Electric. NBC actually knew shortly after 9-11 that General Electric was friendly with the Bin Laden Family, and that Imelt had a personal relationship with them, and did not report this fact, while screaming of the Halliburton issue

  48. I must say, viktor, that the people I speak to around here, about politics and such, do not see Obama as a stumblebum.

    None of those that voted for him in November, that I know, feel that way in the least.

    Those that did not vote for him, still would not.
    If this trait holds, then geographic distribution still is favoring the Democrats. Which it has for a while, especially in the Senate.

    The "centrist" Democrats are a small minority of their caucus, with no seniority to speak of. The next Speaker, if Pelosi were to be ousted, could well be Waxman. It certainly would not be Mr John David Dingell, Jr. and he'd be one of the "Best" prospects.

    It ain't happenin'. Ms Pelosi is representitive of a generation of Dem politicos, the ones that endured the Newt/DeLay years, they are not about to give up the fight, now that they've got the guns.

    The Pubs will make some small gains in the House, but could well lose a seat or two in the Senate.
    If we go down the list, State by State.

    It's Obama and ? for the Dems in 2012 and beyond, that is the big ticket, the Pubs won't have the ball or field positon, let alone a charismatic quarterback.

  49. While only limited amounts of the Obama Stimulous monies have hit the streets, to date, that will not be the case in 2011.

    If my understanding of how the legislation was structured, to backload the payouts, in the "out" years. With the impact growing, with time, until the cumulative effect is rippling through the society, in a wave of Federal cash.
    Dissementated through the usual, Federally subsidized, suspects.

    Letting the Dems surf to victory, in 2012.

  50. You will feel better, ...

    Because it's all about feelings, elections. Not really about any serious ideological differences. Not lately, anyway.

    While government spending at all levels increased in the second quarter, only a small amount of the $787 billion stimulus package had trickled out by June 30.

    As of July 3, only $60.4 billion of recovery funds had been distributed, the largest chunk of which went to help states cope with rising Medicaid costs. Much of the $43 billion in stimulus tax relief -- which includes the Making Work Pay tax credit for individuals -- also kicked in during the quarter.

    "I don't think the effect of stimulus has been very large," said Edward Lazear, an economics professor at Stanford's Graduate School of Business who advised former President George W. Bush. "Very little has gone out."
    The true test of the stimulus package will come in the fall, when the government reports economic activity for the third quarter. The administration is working to get the money out the door quicker, as complaints mount that stimulus is not having its promised effect.

    "The third quarter will be a critical time period for assessing the stimulus package," said Mark Thoma, an economics professor at the University of Oregon.

    Friday's GDP report comes as some experts are calling for a second stimulus package to further juice the economy. They say the first was not enough to promote a recovery.

    "It is preventing a collapse," said L. Randall Wray, senior scholar at the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. "I wouldn't say it is big enough to get us growing."

    Others, however, say that more government funding will not address the key issues -- such as the housing and financial markets turmoil -- holding back the economy.

    "You will feel better, but it won't really get at the heart of the problems driving the crisis," said Philip Levy, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who worked in the Bush administration

    $60 bn in a $14 trillion dollar economy, 'preventing a collapse', that's nuts.
    But the storyline that they'll be generating, fitting US for StimulousII.

  51. Rat

    "I must say, viktor, that the people I speak to around here, about politics and such, do not see Obama as a stumblebum."

    Well, Rat, I see him as a stumblebum, that is to say: clumsy and second rate.

    After his tours of Russia and Europe the opinion that I read is that he was out of his depth.

    His attempt at passing some kind of universal healthcare legisltion has hit a wall.

    The Gates affair shows that he has a political tin ear. If he is not closely handled he is gaffe prone.

    Rasmussen reports that his approval numbers have shrunk from a high of 65% to 50% while the Presidential Approval Index (the difference between Strongly Approve and Strongly Disapprove) has shrunk from +26% to -8%.

    Any President's approval rating is bound to shrink as the reality of governing meet expectations but I do think Obama is on shifting ground.

    Obama is poorly trained and educated and is overconfident to the point of arrogance.

    That is my opinion. I do not present this as fact.

    As you know, Rat, interpreting all the data is like reading sheep's entrails.

    Your reading would appear to different from mine.

    The is only one way to reconcile this difference of opinion:

    "Bartender! More whiskey!"

  52. BTW, Rat, I think it will be Steny Hoyer that will replace Pelosi.

  53. Coors Banquet Beer, for me, that Colorado Kool Aid, please.

    But were you impressed with Obama in October of '08, viktor? Did you vote for him? I'd submit your view is tad predisposed. ;-)

    Those that did bote for him, they still would, as far as I can see.

    The boys at Real Clear Politics, they have a good piece that puts Obama square in the norm of historic Presidental public opinion, from 20JAN09 to date.

    We'll see a Health Care Bill pass in October. Whatever it is Obama claims success.

  54. And you think that with a NRA F score that Steny will lead US on a more 'centrist' path?

    Being one of their top money raisers, he could buy the job, perhaps, but I think that job is akin to riding a tiger, as much as it's herding cats.

    He's on their bus, now, isn't he? If Pelosi is driving, he's collecting the fares.

  55. To be in full "recovery" mode we will have to be importing about 13 Million Barrels of oil/day. This will, easily, run the price back to $150.00/barrel +.

    We started trying to recover when the price was a touch over $30.00/barrel, and we were importing 10 Million Barrels/Day. Our "marginal" Imports have to, by definition, come from the Middle East.

    So, when we started trying to recover we were sending $300 Million/Day offshore for oil. That's about $9 Billion/Mo, or $108 Billion/Yr.

    In a full-blown "recovery" we can expect to be sending $2.05 (call it $2 Billion/Day offshore with close to half of it going to the Middle East. That's $60 Billion/Mo, or $720 Billion/Yr. Almost, Half of it going to "terrorist-supporting" States.

    How long do you suppose THAT "Recovery" will last?

  56. Afghan mission falls short of expectations.

    "We conclude that the international effort in Afghanistan since 2001 has delivered much less than it promised and that its impact has been significantly diluted by the absence of a unified vision and strategy grounded in the realities of Afghanistan's history, culture and politics," the report said.

    "Although Afghanistan's current situation is not solely the legacy of the West's failures since 2001, avoidable mistakes, including knee-jerk responses, policy fragmentation and overlap, now make the task of stabilising the country considerably more difficult than might otherwise have been the case.

    Masters of understatement, those Brits.

  57. That is why the will be a "New Normal", rufus.

    Exactly what that will be, hard to say, exactly. But the fundemental change in US society will become more evident and fully entrenched.

  58. The average family will be spending in the neighborhood of $15.00/day, or $450.00 month for gasoline. That's UP about $330.00 month from what they were paying when we started trying to "dig out."

    How will That effect the bottom two quintiles?

    Can you imagine any way the economy can "recover" when the bottom two quintiles are lopping off $330.00 MORE, Every Month, and sending it to Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emerites?

  59. For the life of me, I DON'T think it's Possible.

  60. As evidence that Obama Care bounced off that wall and continues to careen down Pennsylvania Avenue ...

    WASHINGTON (AP) - In a triumph for President Barack Obama, Democrats narrowly pushed sweeping health care legislation through a key congressional committee Friday night and cleared the way for a September showdown in the House.
    The 31-28 vote in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, along party lines, was weeks later than either the White House or Democratic leaders had hoped

  61. The Saudis "Own" Fox News, and NBC. The most profitable corporation on the planet is Exxon, and they're just one of several. Chevron, Shell, BP, to name a few.

    They will all fight any meaningfull progress on alternative fuels (which, in all reality is ethanol, ethanol, and ethanol) to their dying breaths. And, we're in for a bunch of years of "tough sledding," I'm afraid.

  62. No, there will not be a recovery, to the old normal.

    This is really the beginning of a restructuring, rather than the "end" of a recession.

    The fundamentals of energy, stagnated wages and the debt overhang on so many homes have closed the trail back to the old economy.

  63. Health Care passage by November, more likely than October.

    But as Senator Grassley said, he's working on it, day and night.

  64. Smuggling Coors Banquet Beer, that used to be a profitable sideline for a horse hauling buddy of mine.

    We'd be buying horses off the local track, giving them four to eight months under saddle and over fences, then ship them to CT and the East Coast show jumping circut.

    Four horses in the trailer, twenty cases of beer under the bed, in the camper shell.

    Coors Banquet Beer, that was all the rage, back in the day.
    Colorado Kool Aid.

  65. Rat

    You would be right that I did not vote for Obama. I've never been impressed with the man. So, yes, I do view his abilities through biased eyes.

    Pelosi is an out and out socialist. Hoyer is not. In that respect he is more moderate. While it is true that he is a very partisan Democrat I believe he is a man you can do business with. Simply put, I view him as more moderate than Pelosi and, if I may say, a heck of lot smarter.

    Hoyer and Pelosi have what appears to be a rapprochement but he is well known to lust after the role of Speaker. Hoyer is a very powerful Majority Leader and Pelosi is especially weak right now with abysmal approval ratings and losing seats in the next election would finish her off.

    I have to be off now, Rat. We can debate this another time if you wish.

    Outside my livingroom window is English Bay. Tonight, in about one hour, Vancouver is having a major fireworks display. This the forth in a series that has been going on the last ten days.

    The local news says there are 400,000 people on the shoreline that are going to watch.

    My wife and I are of the opinion: "seen one, seen 'em all" so we are high tailing it out of town for a few hours until the show is over.

  66. And here, we get to see that the US economy is still the model of exceptionalism, that the Democrats know it is, and the economy is forging ahead, dispite President Obama.

    This is more than a summer rally; it’s a new bull market in stocks. Resilient capitalism is pushing back against Obama.

    All a matter of perspective and predisposition, what you want to see, you often can.
    Even if it is not there.

  67. I know nothing of Mr Hoyer, other than a quick glance at his wiki bio. The NRA 'F' and his money skills.

    He is one of the old timers, so he'd fill the bill, for the Dems. As to a change in course, I'd think not. Perhaps in tone, but not in substance, except maybe at the margins.

    Have a nice night.

  68. Mark Steyn, baby.

    Health-care “reform”? As we’ve seen this past week in the House of Representatives, put not your trust in “Blue Dog Democrats.” And, as we’ll no doubt see in the weeks ahead in the Senate, put not your trust in “moderate Republicans” whose urge to “reach across the aisle” is so reflexive it ought to be covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

    The president needs to get something passed. Anything. The details don’t matter. Once it’s in place, health-care “reform” can be re-reformed endlessly. Indeed, you’ll be surprised how little else we talk about. So, for example, public funding for abortions can be discarded now, and written in — as it surely will be by some judge — down the road. What matters is to ram it through, get it done, pass it now — in whatever form.

    If this seems a perverse obsession for a nation with a weak economy, rising unemployment, and a war on two fronts, it has a very sound strategic logic behind it. As I wrote in National Review a week or two back, health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture. That’s its attraction for an ambitious president: It redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in a way that hands all the advantages to statists — to those who believe government has a legitimate right to regulate human affairs in every particular

  69. Barack Hussein Strangelove

    Where race is concerned, I sometimes think of the president as the Peter Sellers character in “Dr. Strangelove.” Sellers plays a closet Nazi whose left arm—quite involuntarily—keeps springing up into the Heil Hitler salute. We see him in his wheelchair, his right arm—the good and decent arm—struggling to keep the Nazi arm down so that no one will know the truth of his inner life. These wrestling matches between the good and bad arms were hysterically funny.

    When I saw Mr. Obama—with every escape route available to him—wade right into the Gates affair at the end of his health-care news conference, I knew that his demon arm had momentarily won out over his good arm. It broke completely free—into full salute—in the “acted stupidly” comment that he made in reference to the Cambridge police’s handling of the matter. Here was the implication that whites were such clumsy and incorrigible racists that even the most highly achieved blacks lived in constant peril of racial humiliation. This was a cultural narrative, a politics, and in the end it was a bigotry. It let white Americans see a president who doubted them.

    Mr. Obama’s “post-racialism” was a promise to operate outside of tired cultural narratives. But he has a demon arm of reflexive racialism—identity politics, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and now Skip Gates. You can only put a demon like this to death by finding out what you really believe. We should hold Mr. Obama to his post-racialism, and he should get to know himself well enough to tell us what he really means by it. As for the odd triad of Messrs. Gates, Crowley and Obama, only Mr. Crowley seems to have functioned outside his cultural narrative.

  70. Rufus,
    Does the fact that all of your socialist wetdreams are bankrupt ponzi schemes mean anything?

    Forbes and the Washington Post both describe the disastrous Massachusetts health care system — with which the Obama care models share similarities — and the post begins with a warning from the Commonwealth’s treasurer.

    Some have asked, as national healthcare reform works its way through Congress, is there anything we can learn from the Massachusetts experiment? Yes, according to the state’s treasurer, interviewed today on CNBC: Whatever you do, don’t do what we did. In a blisteringly frank interview, treasurer Tim Cahill laid out some jaw-dropping stats, which eviscerated the plan and excited every conservative’s worst fears about government getting further into the health insurance business:

    – The program has so far cost 30 percent more than anticipated.
    – It already has a $9 billion shortfall projected over the next two years.
    – Costs have risen 41 percent since the program’s inception, well outpacing the rise in healthcare costs nationwide, which stands at 18 percent.
    – We thought this program would mean fewer people would go to hospitals, which is the highest cost any insurance plan has to pay. In fact, fewer people are not going to hospitals.
    – A Harvard study shows 60 percent of state residents are unhappy with the plan. The most unhappy? Those whom it should be helping the most — those making $25,000 to $50,000 per year.
    – To cut costs, the program is now having to kick out legal immigrants.

  71. 83% satisfied with present plans, 60% unsatisfied with Romneycare:

    Such a Deal!

  72. In the end, the only way to control costs inside a bureaucratic structure is to cut doctors' pay, transfer patients into managed care, impose government global budgets and introduce price controls.

    And that's exactly what Bay State leaders have announced they'll do. Last week, a state commission recommended that the government stop paying health care providers for each procedure and instead compensate provider networks with a flat fee per patient. Of course, such a system of global payments, or "capitation," encourages provider groups to skimp on care, as they get to keep as profit any money not spent treating patients.

    If congressional Democrats get their way, every American can look forward to a similar system of capitation in the future. This would upset the care of 85% of Americans who are currently insured and greatly increase government control. Exactly the results Democratic leaders assure can't possibly happen

  73. "BTW, we're steadily making money on the TARP. We'll make money on everybody, except, probably, AIG."

  74. This comment has been removed by the author.

  75. I do find it interesing, doug, that "Democrat" keeps your links going, while it is Mr Grassley who promises to have a Health Care Bill readable by recess.

    Still trying to create a partisan divide, when there is none, ideologically. With the politicos arguing over the 'details' not the concept.

    While you, doug, gnash your teeth over the MSM, you buy into their Federal Socialist storyline of a partisan divide.

    With whit calling the Dems national Socialists, but rolling back from Republican responsibility for TARP 1 and the nationalization of the Banks.

    rufus telling US all is well, since "we" are profiting from the leglislation. It was for our own good, and good stuff we are getting from it.

    The Dems and the Pubs, they're joined at the hip.

  76. Doug... I like my bike. I used to cycle to work every day. I got pretty good at it, so much so I could ride without holding the handlebars (trick lies in the thighs and hips), but certainly not to the level shown in the video! Nevertheless, that made me an object of derision amongst the hip and trendy girls.

    I guess cutting down on my carbon footprint and preventing glueball warmening isn't as nice as it sounds when I can't drive people around in a fancy car, and is perceived as a cheapskate cyclist.

    Viktor, the overreach has yet to happen. So far, the media has managed to cover up the Gates and Ricci affairs. It's not helped when the Repubs are too stupid to take advantage.

    It really has to be an overreach that the media cannot explain away, costs real lives, stirs up real anger. It should precipitate in violent action by liberals to shore up their support, followed by a counter-attack by non-liberals that puts down the crazies for good and delegitimizes their ideology. It should also result in a revolution in liberal strongholds, especially academia and the public education sector.

    Otherwise, nothing has changed. You'll still be fighting the same goddamned battle every decade.

    Dammit, there HAS to be some way to prompt their overreach. I wish there is some aspiring black conservative who's smart and daring enough to go undercover and attempt to infiltrate to the highest levels of liberal power, and then expose the whole mess of crooks when the time is right.

    Shatter the f*$&in liberals so completely they will never mess up the world as badly as they have.

    Then it'll be a straight fight between conservatives and libertarians, and I can live with that tension. At least economically, it won't go too far wrong.