President Obama has been out this week with new economic stimulus ideas, and he has been slamming Republicans. His message is essentially the same, and it is now clear his message is wearing thin. This morning, the new daily presidential poll by Rasmussen shows Obama at his lowest approval rating yet...41%, and highest disapproval rating, 58%.
In my last post, I suggested that Obama is the worst president ever, at least in my lifetime. It is clear that he has turned off a lot of the voters who put him in office. And, it is clear that he has no clue about what makes the economy grow. More stimulus spending and a rehashing of old ideas is not the answer.
What he doesnt get is that the populist message he continues to try and spread, pitting the rich against the poor and middle class, is not going to get this economy rolling. Furthermore, he doesn't get that the uncertainty caused by his tax policies and healthcare program are what is keeping employers from hiring.
The man is in over his head, and it is plainly obvious. Hopefully, a Republican congress will keep him from passing more liberal policies, then in another two years, we can move on from this failed presidency.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Worst President Ever!
I am old enough to remember our presidents dating back to Jimmy Carter. I agree with most people that George Bush was not a good president. As much as the left despises George Bush, I can faithfully say that I feel the same animosity toward Barack Obama.
Every damn day I read another column, or see another video clip where Obama slams the Republicans and George Bush for the problems we face today. Obama is not a leader, he is a whiner and complainer. Does anyone recall George Bush whining and complaining about his critics, or the hand he was dealt by 9/11? Does anyone recall Bill Clinton complaining about the Republican opposition after they took control of Congress? No, he worked with them to balance the budget and pass welfare reform, and we had years of prosperity.
On the other hand, Obama blames the Republicans and George Bush for our current problems. Bush has been out of office for 18 months, and the Republicans are a significant minority party in Congress. Yet, he blames them for blocking opposition.
Blame, blame, blame. This president is the worst. Unfortunately, we have at least two more years, and unless the Republicans come up with a better candidate than Mitt Romney or Sarah Palin, I fear we will be stuck with this jackass for another four more years. Hopefully, Americans will have completely come to their senses about this guy by then.
Every damn day I read another column, or see another video clip where Obama slams the Republicans and George Bush for the problems we face today. Obama is not a leader, he is a whiner and complainer. Does anyone recall George Bush whining and complaining about his critics, or the hand he was dealt by 9/11? Does anyone recall Bill Clinton complaining about the Republican opposition after they took control of Congress? No, he worked with them to balance the budget and pass welfare reform, and we had years of prosperity.
On the other hand, Obama blames the Republicans and George Bush for our current problems. Bush has been out of office for 18 months, and the Republicans are a significant minority party in Congress. Yet, he blames them for blocking opposition.
Blame, blame, blame. This president is the worst. Unfortunately, we have at least two more years, and unless the Republicans come up with a better candidate than Mitt Romney or Sarah Palin, I fear we will be stuck with this jackass for another four more years. Hopefully, Americans will have completely come to their senses about this guy by then.
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Why We Are Where We Are Today - Government Inefficiency and Meddling
I had a great discussion last night with a couple friends about our current economic problems. One friend is a Wall Streeter and the other is a cost accountant married to a teacher. The Wall Streeter specializes in trading debt of distressed companies, and one focus of his attention these days is the homebuilders. My other friend is a long time Democrat, but probably of the moderate variety. And just for more background, I have made a living in the real estate industry for 20 years.
The conversation turned to the housing bubble and its causes and why it will be years before it recovers. It is interesting that when you read the main street media, the blame is almost entirely focused on Wall Street. Naturally, this pisses off my Wall Street friend to the nth degree. He and I both know better.
In the 1990's under President Clinton, Glass-Steagall was repealed. This allowed the banks to get into investment banking and trading. With their inside knowledge on business due to their lending, this was thought to be huge boon to the banks, and it was.
Also, under both Clinton and Bush, home ownership was pushed hard. The government wanted more Americans to have the opportunity to own their own home. So, through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, lending restrictions were eased to the point of folly. I have a friend who is a residential real estate appraiser. At one time he appraised a house in a not so nice neighborhood that was under contract for $40,000. His appraisal was coming in at $20,000, so he informed the bank. The banker told him it didn't matter, because they had to make more loans in that neighborhood due to government regulation.
So, we had a government telling banks they needed to lend money to people who could never pay the money back. We had Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac backing loans of 100% financing to borrowers with low credit. Then we had Wall Street bundle these loans into mortgage backed securities that were sold and traded. We also had an extremely low interest rate environment due to the recession that began when the tech bubble burst. And voila, we have a new real estate bubble.
People began to foolishly expect 10% appreciation and more on their homes, and borrowed to the hilt. Now the market has collapsed and we have a substantial over supply of homes across the country.
The government, in its infinite wisdom, decides to try and spur demand through an $8,000 tax credit. People who could, took advantage of this, but it came nowhere near solving the problem. The problems of the real estate market were simply kicked down the road. Banks still have many under water loans on their books. The homebuilders got a huge tax break from the government at the cost of billions to taxpayers that is barely keeping them afloat.
To combat the collapse in the real estate market, the government came up with its TARP program at the end of 2008, to help the banks stay solvent. This was followed by the $800 billion+ stimulus program that the administration claims has saved 3.5 million jobs, while the unemployment rate continues to rise.
Here is why I am not a believer in government fixes. I have seen firsthand how inefficient government operates. Here in our town, the federal government has wanted to construct a new building to replace an existing building that became obsolete after the Oklahoma City bombing. I was hired to consult on the project. I worked on the project for three years and the government paid me hundreds of thousands of dollars. They hired other consultants for similar amounts and more. I was hired to help them determine the best site for the new building by determining values of various city blocks.
The local government desperately wanted the new building at a specific location where its development would help spur other economic development. The federal government officials who would occupy the building wanted nothing to do with that site because it was not near any of their favorite restaurants and other amenities. So, this political battle had been waged for six years at the cost of millions of dollars until the Feds finally did settle on that site where the local government wanted the new building.
I have to believe this kind of thing goes on all the time. Just look at the federal reaction to Katrina and the BP oil spill. Bureaucracy gets in the way and makes things worse.
The government has now created a new healthcare entitlement program at the cost of trillions after a stimulus package that has done nothing to jumpstart the economy. Yes, the economy is better than it was last year, but could it have been better? If instead we cut taxes and put off plans for a new entitlement program, business would not be scared to invest in new employees and equipment.
Government needs to get out of the way at times and let the markets take care of themselves. Unfortunately, it has not, and now we have a sluggish economy and a mountain of debt. Things are not going to get better any time soon.
The conversation turned to the housing bubble and its causes and why it will be years before it recovers. It is interesting that when you read the main street media, the blame is almost entirely focused on Wall Street. Naturally, this pisses off my Wall Street friend to the nth degree. He and I both know better.
In the 1990's under President Clinton, Glass-Steagall was repealed. This allowed the banks to get into investment banking and trading. With their inside knowledge on business due to their lending, this was thought to be huge boon to the banks, and it was.
Also, under both Clinton and Bush, home ownership was pushed hard. The government wanted more Americans to have the opportunity to own their own home. So, through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, lending restrictions were eased to the point of folly. I have a friend who is a residential real estate appraiser. At one time he appraised a house in a not so nice neighborhood that was under contract for $40,000. His appraisal was coming in at $20,000, so he informed the bank. The banker told him it didn't matter, because they had to make more loans in that neighborhood due to government regulation.
So, we had a government telling banks they needed to lend money to people who could never pay the money back. We had Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac backing loans of 100% financing to borrowers with low credit. Then we had Wall Street bundle these loans into mortgage backed securities that were sold and traded. We also had an extremely low interest rate environment due to the recession that began when the tech bubble burst. And voila, we have a new real estate bubble.
People began to foolishly expect 10% appreciation and more on their homes, and borrowed to the hilt. Now the market has collapsed and we have a substantial over supply of homes across the country.
The government, in its infinite wisdom, decides to try and spur demand through an $8,000 tax credit. People who could, took advantage of this, but it came nowhere near solving the problem. The problems of the real estate market were simply kicked down the road. Banks still have many under water loans on their books. The homebuilders got a huge tax break from the government at the cost of billions to taxpayers that is barely keeping them afloat.
To combat the collapse in the real estate market, the government came up with its TARP program at the end of 2008, to help the banks stay solvent. This was followed by the $800 billion+ stimulus program that the administration claims has saved 3.5 million jobs, while the unemployment rate continues to rise.
Here is why I am not a believer in government fixes. I have seen firsthand how inefficient government operates. Here in our town, the federal government has wanted to construct a new building to replace an existing building that became obsolete after the Oklahoma City bombing. I was hired to consult on the project. I worked on the project for three years and the government paid me hundreds of thousands of dollars. They hired other consultants for similar amounts and more. I was hired to help them determine the best site for the new building by determining values of various city blocks.
The local government desperately wanted the new building at a specific location where its development would help spur other economic development. The federal government officials who would occupy the building wanted nothing to do with that site because it was not near any of their favorite restaurants and other amenities. So, this political battle had been waged for six years at the cost of millions of dollars until the Feds finally did settle on that site where the local government wanted the new building.
I have to believe this kind of thing goes on all the time. Just look at the federal reaction to Katrina and the BP oil spill. Bureaucracy gets in the way and makes things worse.
The government has now created a new healthcare entitlement program at the cost of trillions after a stimulus package that has done nothing to jumpstart the economy. Yes, the economy is better than it was last year, but could it have been better? If instead we cut taxes and put off plans for a new entitlement program, business would not be scared to invest in new employees and equipment.
Government needs to get out of the way at times and let the markets take care of themselves. Unfortunately, it has not, and now we have a sluggish economy and a mountain of debt. Things are not going to get better any time soon.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Time to Talk About Term Limits Again?
If the ethics problems of Charles Rangel and Maxine Waters don't suggest that it's time to discuss term limits again, I don't know what will. Charlie has been in Congress for 40 years and Maxine for 20 years. This has entrenched them in power. They represent districts where they will never face a Republican challenge, unless the black community finally wakes up and realizes that the Democratic party simply seeks to make them even more dependent on government.
The government gerrymandering of congressional districts has resulted in many districts on both sides of the political spectrum where the extremists from both parties will never be challenged. This is why we have such partisan politics today. Think Nancy Pelosi or Barney Frank could ever be challenged by a Republican? The same can be said for many Republicans in southern congressional districts.
As a result, it is virtually impossible to get rid of career politicians. The end result is that the longer they stay, the more corrupt they become. Rangel represents the worst of him. Yet, even though he is fighting is battle to the end, he was already offered only a reprimand!
Where is the justice in that? The man cheated on his taxes. He was the chairman of the House Ways and Means committee, the very committee that determines much of how our tax dollars are spent. That is ILLEGAL behavior. Yet, where is the IRS in all of this? Have they filed suit against Rangel? Last I saw, Wesley Snipes lost his latest appeal and is heading off to jail for his tax indiscretions. Could this happen to Rangel? Doesn't look like it. Instead, Obama suggests he should retire with dignity! Huh?! The man is a crook and he should be allowed to retire with dignity?
What planet are these politicians living on!?
The government gerrymandering of congressional districts has resulted in many districts on both sides of the political spectrum where the extremists from both parties will never be challenged. This is why we have such partisan politics today. Think Nancy Pelosi or Barney Frank could ever be challenged by a Republican? The same can be said for many Republicans in southern congressional districts.
As a result, it is virtually impossible to get rid of career politicians. The end result is that the longer they stay, the more corrupt they become. Rangel represents the worst of him. Yet, even though he is fighting is battle to the end, he was already offered only a reprimand!
Where is the justice in that? The man cheated on his taxes. He was the chairman of the House Ways and Means committee, the very committee that determines much of how our tax dollars are spent. That is ILLEGAL behavior. Yet, where is the IRS in all of this? Have they filed suit against Rangel? Last I saw, Wesley Snipes lost his latest appeal and is heading off to jail for his tax indiscretions. Could this happen to Rangel? Doesn't look like it. Instead, Obama suggests he should retire with dignity! Huh?! The man is a crook and he should be allowed to retire with dignity?
What planet are these politicians living on!?
Pelosi wants to Spend Another $26 Billion
Just a couple weeks after Congress voted to spend $34 billion to extend jobless benefits, Nancy Pelosi is bringing the House back from its summer recess to vote on another $26 billion bill to send aid to the states who face budget crises. This supposedly will help save 140,000 teacher jobs and other government jobs.
So, what's another $26 billion? $34 billion here, $26 billion there, pretty soon we'll be talking about real money!
And Obama and the Democrats still find the nerve to trash George W. Bush for running up the deficit! Yet, we will be having trillion dollar deficits as far as the eyes can see, because now that the Democrats and Obama have raised the bar on spending, they surely don't want to go back to pre-recession levels.
This is how Washington grabs power. In an emergency, they raise the spending, which makes the public more dependent on government, and then they raise taxes. There is no effort whatsoever to cut spending once the emergency has passed.
I read that 45% of the population paid no federal income taxes in 2009. 45%! Yet, the Democrats want to let the Bush tax cuts expire on January 1. They may let the lower bracket rates stay the same, but raise the rates at the high end. They will combine this with an increase in capital gains tax rates and revive the estate tax. Their excuse is that this will only effect about 2% of the population. Well, that 2% is who creates the jobs! Additionally, I want to be part of that 2%!
Yet, since this will result in an economic headwind, how will I make enough income to get into that top 2%? I will keep striving of course, but Washington continues to make it more and more difficult for all of us. Until we get some fresh new leadership down there, such as a JFK or a Reagan, this economy will be a dud for years to come.
So, what's another $26 billion? $34 billion here, $26 billion there, pretty soon we'll be talking about real money!
And Obama and the Democrats still find the nerve to trash George W. Bush for running up the deficit! Yet, we will be having trillion dollar deficits as far as the eyes can see, because now that the Democrats and Obama have raised the bar on spending, they surely don't want to go back to pre-recession levels.
This is how Washington grabs power. In an emergency, they raise the spending, which makes the public more dependent on government, and then they raise taxes. There is no effort whatsoever to cut spending once the emergency has passed.
I read that 45% of the population paid no federal income taxes in 2009. 45%! Yet, the Democrats want to let the Bush tax cuts expire on January 1. They may let the lower bracket rates stay the same, but raise the rates at the high end. They will combine this with an increase in capital gains tax rates and revive the estate tax. Their excuse is that this will only effect about 2% of the population. Well, that 2% is who creates the jobs! Additionally, I want to be part of that 2%!
Yet, since this will result in an economic headwind, how will I make enough income to get into that top 2%? I will keep striving of course, but Washington continues to make it more and more difficult for all of us. Until we get some fresh new leadership down there, such as a JFK or a Reagan, this economy will be a dud for years to come.
Lanny Davis commentary on Obama
Lanny Davis wrote a nice little piece today, asking President Obama to bring us together, as he had pledged during his campaign. Davis was approached by a conservative Republican last year, Ronald DeMoss, to set up a civility commission. They sent out a petition to all members of Congress and the governors of all 50 states, asking for a vow to engage in civil debate. They got one signature. Davis is now asking Obama to sign it.
Trouble is, Obama is the most uncivil president we've had in my memory. I heard that Nixon was pretty bad. Since then, it is clear to me that Obama is the worst in this category. Every day he slams the Republicans for something, and he and the Democrats continue to take pot shots at George Bush.
It was clear right after the inaugural address that Obama never had any intention to work with Republicans on any of his agenda...it was simply too far to the left. He had enough power with huge majorities in Congress to ram through what he wanted, and that's what he has done, all the while uniting the opposition against him and calling them obstructionists.
Obama is all talk when it comes to having dialogue with the opposition. He has never once embraced a single Republican idea to be included in any of the legislation he has signed.
I believe this president is far too arrogant to ever try and bring people together. He has lost all of his political goodwill and expended any political capital he may have had with Republicans who were willing to work with him due to the way he rammed through the stimulus and Obamacare.
I suspect that if the Republicans gain control of the House, things will be worse. The second two years of this administration have the potential to be dreadful. I don't see him moving to the center like Clinton because he is too much in bed with the far left of his party.
Trouble is, Obama is the most uncivil president we've had in my memory. I heard that Nixon was pretty bad. Since then, it is clear to me that Obama is the worst in this category. Every day he slams the Republicans for something, and he and the Democrats continue to take pot shots at George Bush.
It was clear right after the inaugural address that Obama never had any intention to work with Republicans on any of his agenda...it was simply too far to the left. He had enough power with huge majorities in Congress to ram through what he wanted, and that's what he has done, all the while uniting the opposition against him and calling them obstructionists.
Obama is all talk when it comes to having dialogue with the opposition. He has never once embraced a single Republican idea to be included in any of the legislation he has signed.
I believe this president is far too arrogant to ever try and bring people together. He has lost all of his political goodwill and expended any political capital he may have had with Republicans who were willing to work with him due to the way he rammed through the stimulus and Obamacare.
I suspect that if the Republicans gain control of the House, things will be worse. The second two years of this administration have the potential to be dreadful. I don't see him moving to the center like Clinton because he is too much in bed with the far left of his party.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Bad Day For Obama and Democrats
Last night, Missouri voters overwhelmingly voted to repeal the health insurance mandate signed into law earlier this year by Congress. 71% of the voters cast their ballot in favor of the measure to repeal the mandate. If that isn't a slap in the face of Democrats, and an indication of what they face at the polls in November, I don't know what is.
Oh wait, I do! A new poll conducated by USA Today/Gallup shows Obama with a 41% approval rating...that is the absolute lowest level of any poll out yet. Republicans also now hold the edge in the generic ballot box measure by an average of 6 points across the polls that Realclearpolitics.com follows.
There is still a lot of time to go, and I continue to suspect that things will tighten up a bit by November, as I have zero faith in all but a few Republicans. But, at these levels, Democrats are in huge trouble to not only lose control of the House, but to there is potential for the current numbers to be absolutely flip flopped. Can you imagine a Congress where there are 255 Republicans in the house against only 180 Democrats? While not probable, it is possible. That possibility should send a huge wave of panic through the White House.
It is clear they are already panicking. Every day, Obama take the opportunity to slam the Republicans. Now, the Democrats indicate they want to tie the current Republicans to the policies of George W. Bush. That will now make the Democrats look like they are out of ideas, since their ideas have clearly failed in the eyes of the people.
Oh wait, I do! A new poll conducated by USA Today/Gallup shows Obama with a 41% approval rating...that is the absolute lowest level of any poll out yet. Republicans also now hold the edge in the generic ballot box measure by an average of 6 points across the polls that Realclearpolitics.com follows.
There is still a lot of time to go, and I continue to suspect that things will tighten up a bit by November, as I have zero faith in all but a few Republicans. But, at these levels, Democrats are in huge trouble to not only lose control of the House, but to there is potential for the current numbers to be absolutely flip flopped. Can you imagine a Congress where there are 255 Republicans in the house against only 180 Democrats? While not probable, it is possible. That possibility should send a huge wave of panic through the White House.
It is clear they are already panicking. Every day, Obama take the opportunity to slam the Republicans. Now, the Democrats indicate they want to tie the current Republicans to the policies of George W. Bush. That will now make the Democrats look like they are out of ideas, since their ideas have clearly failed in the eyes of the people.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The Stimulus Revisited
You can't make this stuff up. In a report published by Senators Coburn and McCain, $194,000 of the stimulus passed last year to boost the economy went to a grant to two Texas universities to study how the stimulus is received by the public.
A Maryland consulting firm received over $360,000 to report National Institute of Health stimulus spending efforts and their benefits.
$498,000 went to the American Legacy Foundation, which provided Blackberry smartphones to low income smokers so they can call a hotline to deal with their addiction. Apparently, two jobs were created out of that. Doing what?
A million dollars were sent to a school in Kansas to provide students with Ipod Touch devices that were loaded with applications to help motivate students to learn.
Ummmm...this is what happens when you give a blank check to Nancy Pelosi and her cronies and ask her to go stimulate the economy. Instead, she treated the money like a crack addict and simply fueled her own addiction for funding worthless projects with taxpayer money. And what do we have to show for it? The weakest recovery after a recession ever and a trillion dollar annual budget deficit for as far as the eye can see.
A Maryland consulting firm received over $360,000 to report National Institute of Health stimulus spending efforts and their benefits.
$498,000 went to the American Legacy Foundation, which provided Blackberry smartphones to low income smokers so they can call a hotline to deal with their addiction. Apparently, two jobs were created out of that. Doing what?
A million dollars were sent to a school in Kansas to provide students with Ipod Touch devices that were loaded with applications to help motivate students to learn.
Ummmm...this is what happens when you give a blank check to Nancy Pelosi and her cronies and ask her to go stimulate the economy. Instead, she treated the money like a crack addict and simply fueled her own addiction for funding worthless projects with taxpayer money. And what do we have to show for it? The weakest recovery after a recession ever and a trillion dollar annual budget deficit for as far as the eye can see.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Can You Believe Anything Obama Says?
Ok, I have decided to pretty much make it my goal to do all I can to make sure Obama doesn't get re-elected in 2012. I am not sure that a Republican takeover of Congress this Fall will help that. It probably helps his cause, the way it did with Clinton in the 90's. Right now, since they are the minority party, Obama and the Democrats have to take all the blame for the current problems this nation faces. Therefore, if I were purely a party partisan, I might want the Republicans to make gains, but stay in the minority.
Yes, I do want to see this country get turned around. I did want Obama to succeed. I wanted him to defeat Hillary Clinton in the primary, initially. But, once I learned more about him, the less I liked him. Now, I am convinced he is simply a vain, arrogant, egotistical man more impressed with being a celebrity than he is in having the ability to solve the nation's problems.
I can't believe anything that this man says anymore. He shows up on "The View" and delivers this gem..."We shouldn't be campaigning all the time. There is a time to campaign and there is a time to govern." Huh?
Coming from the president who has made more talk show appearances and more photo-ops and more speeches to talk up his agenda than any other president in history, I find this mind boggling. The man is constantly in campaign mode.
Then, the man has the nerve to go to Detroit and claim that the bailout of GM and Chrysler has been a success. Again, huh? The bailout has simply gone to save the jobs of union workers working within a company whose products no one wants to buy. GM just announced its first quarterly profit in three years. If not for the problems with Toyota, I guarantee that GM would not be making a profit.
If you want to look to an auto company that is doing things right, you can stay in Detroit and look at Ford. Ford kept away from government money, and has improved its product line and has been significantly improving its market share.
The bottom line is that I think Obama is a lousy president. He campaigned as a moderate, but his agenda is clearly liberal. He campaigned as a uniter, and has divided us more than ever. Every day, he slams the Republican party for obstructing his agenda, when he and the Democrats have more power than any party has since LBJ. He and the Democrats still blame George W. Bush for everything. Blame, blame, blame. The man acts with no class.
I'm sorry, but I just don't like the guy. I guess that makes me a racist.
Yes, I do want to see this country get turned around. I did want Obama to succeed. I wanted him to defeat Hillary Clinton in the primary, initially. But, once I learned more about him, the less I liked him. Now, I am convinced he is simply a vain, arrogant, egotistical man more impressed with being a celebrity than he is in having the ability to solve the nation's problems.
I can't believe anything that this man says anymore. He shows up on "The View" and delivers this gem..."We shouldn't be campaigning all the time. There is a time to campaign and there is a time to govern." Huh?
Coming from the president who has made more talk show appearances and more photo-ops and more speeches to talk up his agenda than any other president in history, I find this mind boggling. The man is constantly in campaign mode.
Then, the man has the nerve to go to Detroit and claim that the bailout of GM and Chrysler has been a success. Again, huh? The bailout has simply gone to save the jobs of union workers working within a company whose products no one wants to buy. GM just announced its first quarterly profit in three years. If not for the problems with Toyota, I guarantee that GM would not be making a profit.
If you want to look to an auto company that is doing things right, you can stay in Detroit and look at Ford. Ford kept away from government money, and has improved its product line and has been significantly improving its market share.
The bottom line is that I think Obama is a lousy president. He campaigned as a moderate, but his agenda is clearly liberal. He campaigned as a uniter, and has divided us more than ever. Every day, he slams the Republican party for obstructing his agenda, when he and the Democrats have more power than any party has since LBJ. He and the Democrats still blame George W. Bush for everything. Blame, blame, blame. The man acts with no class.
I'm sorry, but I just don't like the guy. I guess that makes me a racist.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Democrats Want You To Pay More Taxes, While They Evade Them
Yesterday, the House Ethics committee investigating New York Rep. Charles Rangel, a Democrat and head of the House Ways and Means Committee, which writes new tax law, laid out its case against Rangel and his evasion of taxes.
When Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was nominated for this post by President Obama last year, it was disclosed that he had failed to pay tens of thousands in income taxes.
Former Democratic senate leader Tom Daschle, who was nominated to be head of the Department of Health, had to remove his name from consideration when it was disclosed that he owed over $100,000 in taxes.
The excuses of all three were pretty lame. And, I don't suggest that these issues only involve Democrats. However, Democrats want to let the Bush tax cuts expire, at least for those earning over $200,000 annually. They want the capital gains tax rate and dividends tax rate to go back up, and they want the estate, or death tax, to be revived. All because they have been spending money in an out of control fashion and have run up a national debt that they used to scold George W. Bush for.
Do the Democrats have any credibility at all anymore?
When Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was nominated for this post by President Obama last year, it was disclosed that he had failed to pay tens of thousands in income taxes.
Former Democratic senate leader Tom Daschle, who was nominated to be head of the Department of Health, had to remove his name from consideration when it was disclosed that he owed over $100,000 in taxes.
The excuses of all three were pretty lame. And, I don't suggest that these issues only involve Democrats. However, Democrats want to let the Bush tax cuts expire, at least for those earning over $200,000 annually. They want the capital gains tax rate and dividends tax rate to go back up, and they want the estate, or death tax, to be revived. All because they have been spending money in an out of control fashion and have run up a national debt that they used to scold George W. Bush for.
Do the Democrats have any credibility at all anymore?
Economists Don't Know Jack!
Economists, highly paid by Wall Street firms to forecast the economy with the hope of determining the direction and strength of the stock market, are pretty much worthless. This is coming from someone who graduated with a BA in Economics.
Did economists see the housing bubble bursting? No. Did they see the plunge in the stock market and economic recession that resulted? No. Did they see the tech bubble in 1999? No. Did they see the resulting recession that resulted from that? No.
Obama's economists predicted that if the stimulus would not be passed last year that unemployment would rise to 9.0%. If it would be passed, unemployment would be capped at 8%. It was passed, and unemployment reached as high as 10.1% and currently stands at 9.5%.
Now, Obama shill Mark Zandi, the economist at Moody's, which failed to provide accurate bond ratings for many of the corporations and countries around the world over the last several years, is now out with an economic model that suggests that if the stimulus were not passed, we would have plunged into a 2nd Great Depression and unemployment would be at 15%. Why should we bother to believe the guy?
Every day we see economists arguing on CNBC about more stimulus spending or tax cuts, etc. They make forecasts about the strength of the economy through estimates of GDP, and neither side ever gets it right. They are no more accurate at forecasting the economy six months to a year down the road than a weather man is forecasting the weather two weeks ahead of time.
With that in mind, the government should learn to just quit paying attention to these idiots and get out of the way in regard to trying to assist the economy. The Federal Reserve Board, headed by Ben Bernanke, is full of economists. Last week, Bernanke indicated he really does not know what the current state of the economy is. That should tell you something.
The government relies on these economists to set policy, and since the government tries to solve our problems, this is not good. They are relying on bad information. Isn't that what George W. Bush relied on when he sent our troops to Iraq? Now you know the consequences when the government relies on bad information.
Did economists see the housing bubble bursting? No. Did they see the plunge in the stock market and economic recession that resulted? No. Did they see the tech bubble in 1999? No. Did they see the resulting recession that resulted from that? No.
Obama's economists predicted that if the stimulus would not be passed last year that unemployment would rise to 9.0%. If it would be passed, unemployment would be capped at 8%. It was passed, and unemployment reached as high as 10.1% and currently stands at 9.5%.
Now, Obama shill Mark Zandi, the economist at Moody's, which failed to provide accurate bond ratings for many of the corporations and countries around the world over the last several years, is now out with an economic model that suggests that if the stimulus were not passed, we would have plunged into a 2nd Great Depression and unemployment would be at 15%. Why should we bother to believe the guy?
Every day we see economists arguing on CNBC about more stimulus spending or tax cuts, etc. They make forecasts about the strength of the economy through estimates of GDP, and neither side ever gets it right. They are no more accurate at forecasting the economy six months to a year down the road than a weather man is forecasting the weather two weeks ahead of time.
With that in mind, the government should learn to just quit paying attention to these idiots and get out of the way in regard to trying to assist the economy. The Federal Reserve Board, headed by Ben Bernanke, is full of economists. Last week, Bernanke indicated he really does not know what the current state of the economy is. That should tell you something.
The government relies on these economists to set policy, and since the government tries to solve our problems, this is not good. They are relying on bad information. Isn't that what George W. Bush relied on when he sent our troops to Iraq? Now you know the consequences when the government relies on bad information.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Republicans Blowing it in Nevada
Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader from Nevada, was ripe for the picking in the upcoming mid-term election. He is very unpopular in his state, and a posterboy for the problems in DC. His approval rating has been well below 50% for months. Yet, in the latest Rasmussen poll, he has regained the lead over challenger Sharon Angle. Her apparent extremist views, incompetence, and an inexperienced political team has caused her to drop in the polls.
The Republicans in Nevada appear to have blown it. In fact, you can say this is a symptom of the party nationally. This is what gave rise to the Tea Party movement. Unfortunately, the movement contains some outliers with some out of mainstream views.
Republicans have not put together their message for the fall campaign yet. They need to keep it simple... smaller government, less spending, investing in legitimate job creation, a more credible health plan, and an energy plan that steers a course a way from dependence on foreign oil, but one that doesnt say just "drill baby drill." I am not sure the Republican leadership is capable of providing such a message.
As a result, in spite of the supposed wave in the electorate this year away from Democrats, I think the Republicans will have a tough time regaining the House, and likely will pick up only a few seats in the Senate. This opinion, of course, may change over time, but due to incompetent Republican leadership, I am not as optimistic as some.
The Republicans in Nevada appear to have blown it. In fact, you can say this is a symptom of the party nationally. This is what gave rise to the Tea Party movement. Unfortunately, the movement contains some outliers with some out of mainstream views.
Republicans have not put together their message for the fall campaign yet. They need to keep it simple... smaller government, less spending, investing in legitimate job creation, a more credible health plan, and an energy plan that steers a course a way from dependence on foreign oil, but one that doesnt say just "drill baby drill." I am not sure the Republican leadership is capable of providing such a message.
As a result, in spite of the supposed wave in the electorate this year away from Democrats, I think the Republicans will have a tough time regaining the House, and likely will pick up only a few seats in the Senate. This opinion, of course, may change over time, but due to incompetent Republican leadership, I am not as optimistic as some.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Obama Poll Numbers
I was waiting for this to happen. Recently, President Obama's poll numbers have been sliding quite steadily. This drop has sort of accelerated in the last two weeks. His approval rating fell below is disapproval rating a couple weeks ago, but a couple polls by networks were still keeping him near the surface. In the Realclearpolitics averages today though, those two poll numbers were dropped since they occurred two weeks ago. Both polls indicated Obama's approval ratings above 50%, which I never believed for a second.
Even the polls now conducted by the press organizations are showing him under 50%. He now has an average approval rating of 45.7% and an average disapproval rating of 49.0%. Only the Time magazine poll of nearly two weeks ago shows him with a net positive approval rating. The Reuters poll yesterday showed him even, while all others give him a net negative rating.
Consider this though...in one poll whose numbers I looked at more deeply, his approval rating among black Americans was 93%. That suggests that his approval rating among whites is well below 40%. Among hispanics, his approvals are in the upper 50s. In other words, he has lost the independent voters.
It is clear that the vast majority of Americans have tired of Obama and his over abundance of speeches, his blaming of George W. Bush for the state of the economy, and the GOP for blocking progress. Americans voted for a positive change in 2008, and Obama is simply more divisive than George Bush. His policies were not popular with the majority of Americans, yet he rammed them through with partisan votes. The economy has not rebounded as strongly as it should after such a plunge. And now, his political capital is tapped out.
What will happen in November is anyone's guess. The Republicans have a strong chance to retake the House. If they do, Obama has two choices. Stick to his liberal ideology, or move to the center like Bill Clinton. I personally think his ego is too big to do the latter because he has a view of the world and what it should be like, and does not seem capable of compromising on that view.
Clinton on the other hand managed to do some good things when he moved back to the center and that is why he was re-elected and has remained popular. We'll see what Obama does after November 2nd.
Even the polls now conducted by the press organizations are showing him under 50%. He now has an average approval rating of 45.7% and an average disapproval rating of 49.0%. Only the Time magazine poll of nearly two weeks ago shows him with a net positive approval rating. The Reuters poll yesterday showed him even, while all others give him a net negative rating.
Consider this though...in one poll whose numbers I looked at more deeply, his approval rating among black Americans was 93%. That suggests that his approval rating among whites is well below 40%. Among hispanics, his approvals are in the upper 50s. In other words, he has lost the independent voters.
It is clear that the vast majority of Americans have tired of Obama and his over abundance of speeches, his blaming of George W. Bush for the state of the economy, and the GOP for blocking progress. Americans voted for a positive change in 2008, and Obama is simply more divisive than George Bush. His policies were not popular with the majority of Americans, yet he rammed them through with partisan votes. The economy has not rebounded as strongly as it should after such a plunge. And now, his political capital is tapped out.
What will happen in November is anyone's guess. The Republicans have a strong chance to retake the House. If they do, Obama has two choices. Stick to his liberal ideology, or move to the center like Bill Clinton. I personally think his ego is too big to do the latter because he has a view of the world and what it should be like, and does not seem capable of compromising on that view.
Clinton on the other hand managed to do some good things when he moved back to the center and that is why he was re-elected and has remained popular. We'll see what Obama does after November 2nd.
The Stimulus and Infrastructure
I just read an editorial by PA governor Ed Rendell this morning about how the nation's infrastructure is in such poor shape. When you look at roads in Pennsylvania, you can easily understand why he writes this. Our roads are annually ranked by truck drivers as among the worst in the country.
But, it's not just in PA that we have infrastructure issues. It wasnt that long ago we had that catastrophic bridge collapse in Minnesota (2007). When you drive around most major cities here in the northeast down to DC, it is common to get caught in a major traffic jam at least once a week. Traffic jams result in less productivity.
Yet, when the $800 billion stimulus package was passed last year, it did very little to address these issues. Occasionally, we see a sign touting the stimulus along with some road construction. I travel down to DC now and then and have seen one small strip of I-270 being worked on where this sign is visible. Between Frederick and Rockville, I-270 needs widened due to the ever growing population in both areas. Yet, there is no sign of that happening.
The fact is the stimulus was misguided into the pet projects of liberal leaders, the pockets of the unions, and to ease some of the budget concerns facing state and local governments. All it did was put off the pain of spending and employee cuts in state and local governments until now.
We are going to have a slow recovery. Corporations are flush with cash from all of the savings they created by cutting jobs the last two years. They are shy to hire new workers due to Obamacare and since the Bush tax cuts are set to expire January 1st. The government is now essentially out of money due to the high deficits and voter anger about all the spending that has done nothing to create new jobs. As a result, the recovery in jobs will be slow. Oh, what could have been.
But, it's not just in PA that we have infrastructure issues. It wasnt that long ago we had that catastrophic bridge collapse in Minnesota (2007). When you drive around most major cities here in the northeast down to DC, it is common to get caught in a major traffic jam at least once a week. Traffic jams result in less productivity.
Yet, when the $800 billion stimulus package was passed last year, it did very little to address these issues. Occasionally, we see a sign touting the stimulus along with some road construction. I travel down to DC now and then and have seen one small strip of I-270 being worked on where this sign is visible. Between Frederick and Rockville, I-270 needs widened due to the ever growing population in both areas. Yet, there is no sign of that happening.
The fact is the stimulus was misguided into the pet projects of liberal leaders, the pockets of the unions, and to ease some of the budget concerns facing state and local governments. All it did was put off the pain of spending and employee cuts in state and local governments until now.
We are going to have a slow recovery. Corporations are flush with cash from all of the savings they created by cutting jobs the last two years. They are shy to hire new workers due to Obamacare and since the Bush tax cuts are set to expire January 1st. The government is now essentially out of money due to the high deficits and voter anger about all the spending that has done nothing to create new jobs. As a result, the recovery in jobs will be slow. Oh, what could have been.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Now We Know Why FOX News Exists
I've been following the JournoList controversy over the last few weeks, and now that it is starting to really burst into flames, I thought I would throw in my two cents.
If you are unfamiliar with the controversy, the JournoList was created by Washington Post blogger and opinionator Ezra Klein a couple years ago. Klein is a regular political writer for WP and makes it known that his views are liberal. The JournoList includes liberal/progressives throughout academia and the media. These folks would often trade emails and discuss their views on politics, and they were very active during the 2008 presidential campaign.
As it turns out, these people were doing a bit more than just exchanging ideas. They were coordinating attacks on the McCain campaign, and trying to figure out ways to blunt the attacks on Obama, particularly involving the Jeremiah Wright scandal. The people on the JournoList (oh, I just read that the O stands for Obama) write for major publications such as the Washington Post, Newsweek, Time and The Economist.
Is it any wonder then why FOX News exists? Journalists clearly do not report without a bias any more. They inject their opinions into their columns. Considering that 80% of journalists consider themselves liberal, it was necessary to counteract that bias with the opposite bias.
The bottom line is you can't trust your favorite newspaper columnist or network news anchor anymore. If you want the truth, you need to read both sides of the story. You can't just read the Huffington Post, you need to read the National Review as well.
So, while you might complain that FOX News is biased to the right, the rest of the networks are clearly biased to the left, and so are most newspaper publications. Yet, because this country is still more conservative, FOX remains the most popular. It's a good thing, because the other major networks outnumber them 4 to 1 (CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN). And, the conservative publications are far outnumbered by the liberal ones. Keep an open mind folks, don't believe everything you read.
If you are unfamiliar with the controversy, the JournoList was created by Washington Post blogger and opinionator Ezra Klein a couple years ago. Klein is a regular political writer for WP and makes it known that his views are liberal. The JournoList includes liberal/progressives throughout academia and the media. These folks would often trade emails and discuss their views on politics, and they were very active during the 2008 presidential campaign.
As it turns out, these people were doing a bit more than just exchanging ideas. They were coordinating attacks on the McCain campaign, and trying to figure out ways to blunt the attacks on Obama, particularly involving the Jeremiah Wright scandal. The people on the JournoList (oh, I just read that the O stands for Obama) write for major publications such as the Washington Post, Newsweek, Time and The Economist.
Is it any wonder then why FOX News exists? Journalists clearly do not report without a bias any more. They inject their opinions into their columns. Considering that 80% of journalists consider themselves liberal, it was necessary to counteract that bias with the opposite bias.
The bottom line is you can't trust your favorite newspaper columnist or network news anchor anymore. If you want the truth, you need to read both sides of the story. You can't just read the Huffington Post, you need to read the National Review as well.
So, while you might complain that FOX News is biased to the right, the rest of the networks are clearly biased to the left, and so are most newspaper publications. Yet, because this country is still more conservative, FOX remains the most popular. It's a good thing, because the other major networks outnumber them 4 to 1 (CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN). And, the conservative publications are far outnumbered by the liberal ones. Keep an open mind folks, don't believe everything you read.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Unemployment Benefits Create Jobs! Huh?
Recently, Nancy Pelosi suggested that the best way to stimulate the economy is to extend jobless benefits to the unemployed. Her reasoning is that giving the unemployed some money will get them to spend some money, which in turn provides new business and therefore helps to create new jobs.
Ok, if that is the best way to stimulate the economy, why didn't we just take that $800 billion stimulus and give the unemployed one big chunk of cash? Or, triple their weekly benefits? Then the recession would be long gone!
This morning, Michigan AFL-CIO leader Mark Gaffney echoes this sentiment. But, he doesn't even bother to provide any evidence. He has the nerve to go on to say that all the Republicans want to do is provide the rich with undeserved tax cuts. Who the hell is he to say who deserves what?
Unfortunately, this is not how the economy works. Extending jobless benefits keeps some people from looking for work at low paying jobs. They keep looking for higher paying jobs while collecting these benefits. Since a $1 of tax dollars spent is a $1 taken away from the private sector to spend, no real growth will occur.
I've had a conversation today with a client who owns a HVAC contracting firm. He says business is still dead. There is no building going on, no major retrofitting of existing buildings, so there is no demand for his product. That suggests that the stimulus has not stimulated.
The bottom line is that the massive redistribution of wealth that has occurred in the last year with the stimulus and Obamacare has left the government with a huge pile of new debt on top of the old debt and a weak economy.
Time to rethink what works and what doesn't.
Ok, if that is the best way to stimulate the economy, why didn't we just take that $800 billion stimulus and give the unemployed one big chunk of cash? Or, triple their weekly benefits? Then the recession would be long gone!
This morning, Michigan AFL-CIO leader Mark Gaffney echoes this sentiment. But, he doesn't even bother to provide any evidence. He has the nerve to go on to say that all the Republicans want to do is provide the rich with undeserved tax cuts. Who the hell is he to say who deserves what?
Unfortunately, this is not how the economy works. Extending jobless benefits keeps some people from looking for work at low paying jobs. They keep looking for higher paying jobs while collecting these benefits. Since a $1 of tax dollars spent is a $1 taken away from the private sector to spend, no real growth will occur.
I've had a conversation today with a client who owns a HVAC contracting firm. He says business is still dead. There is no building going on, no major retrofitting of existing buildings, so there is no demand for his product. That suggests that the stimulus has not stimulated.
The bottom line is that the massive redistribution of wealth that has occurred in the last year with the stimulus and Obamacare has left the government with a huge pile of new debt on top of the old debt and a weak economy.
Time to rethink what works and what doesn't.
Monday, July 19, 2010
The Difference Between Lebron James And Manute Bol
I just read online that Lebron James is checking out a $50 million home in Miami, where he is heading after his obnoxious, nationally televised, free agency decision to play for the Miami Heat. Not even Tiger Woods owns a $50 million home, and while Lebron is wealthy, he is not anywhere near Tiger’s league, or former league I should say.
On the other hand, we had the recent passing of Manute Bol, who spent much of his small fortune trying to improve conditions in his native Sudan. Bol ultimately died as a result of his selflessness, as he put off returning to the U.S. for treatment of a medical condition that ultimately cost him his life. He put off returning to honor the request to make an appearance in Kenya, even while he is in a very weakened condition. By the time he returned to the U.S., he was too sick.
This is the difference between a selfish American athlete, and a selfless non-American athlete who gets it. In this economy, with nearly 10% unemployed, and the unemployment rate among black males more than double the national rate, King James is more interested in flaunting his money like so many before him.
What is the point of owning a $50 million mansion? Isn’t a $10 million mansion enough? Just think what good James could do with the difference in value between those two homes. How about making an investment in the Cleveland community he just pissed off with his free agency announcement? Instead, James is more intent on announcing to the world that he has arrived. Let’s see how long it takes him to blow it all, like Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and Michael Vick, did before him.
On the other hand, we had the recent passing of Manute Bol, who spent much of his small fortune trying to improve conditions in his native Sudan. Bol ultimately died as a result of his selflessness, as he put off returning to the U.S. for treatment of a medical condition that ultimately cost him his life. He put off returning to honor the request to make an appearance in Kenya, even while he is in a very weakened condition. By the time he returned to the U.S., he was too sick.
This is the difference between a selfish American athlete, and a selfless non-American athlete who gets it. In this economy, with nearly 10% unemployed, and the unemployment rate among black males more than double the national rate, King James is more interested in flaunting his money like so many before him.
What is the point of owning a $50 million mansion? Isn’t a $10 million mansion enough? Just think what good James could do with the difference in value between those two homes. How about making an investment in the Cleveland community he just pissed off with his free agency announcement? Instead, James is more intent on announcing to the world that he has arrived. Let’s see how long it takes him to blow it all, like Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and Michael Vick, did before him.
Job losses Mystify White House
I just read a blog by John Harwood, a Democratic lackey who writes for the New York Times and is often seen on MSNBC. He writes that the continued weakness in the jobs situation continues to mystify the White House and Democrats.
It is no mystery to me. Repeat after me... Obamacare
The uncertainty about the costs of Obamacare to small businesses and large businesses alike is probably the single biggest reason why employers are unwilling to hire new workers at this point. They see their healthcare costs surging even more because of this new healthcare bill. Additionally, with the Bush tax cuts set to expire on January 1, and the threat of cap and trade legislation passing in a lame duck Congress after the election, it is no wonder that businesses are not hiring.
There you have it Mr. Harwood. Maybe you and the rest of the Democrats should open your eyes.
It is no mystery to me. Repeat after me... Obamacare
The uncertainty about the costs of Obamacare to small businesses and large businesses alike is probably the single biggest reason why employers are unwilling to hire new workers at this point. They see their healthcare costs surging even more because of this new healthcare bill. Additionally, with the Bush tax cuts set to expire on January 1, and the threat of cap and trade legislation passing in a lame duck Congress after the election, it is no wonder that businesses are not hiring.
There you have it Mr. Harwood. Maybe you and the rest of the Democrats should open your eyes.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Why Independent Voters Run from Democrats
I just read a great reply to Howard Fineman's article regarding the defection of Independent male voters away from the Democrats. This reply was written by a Michael Vargas. He is an idependent voter like me, who obviously gets it. Obama and his Democratic friends don't get it, and I don't think the Republicans do either. Here is what he said...
"Typical incompetent Beltway blathering; desperate to understand why the Dems will lose, Mark Penn-ian pollsters are quickly interrogated who declare essentially that there's a subset of voters out there who vote based on common sense. No kidding.
Though to be sure, if you are registered with the gangster factions Demo-Rat Party and Rethuglican Party, then you do, indeed, have no common sense.
Here's the scoop for you Fineman, from an "indie male" you and the pollsters are so eager to shove into a box and label: Obama is either an accomplice or a patsy, and both ways a liar.
He said he'd put an end to neocon boondoggles like Gitmo and Middle East warmongering, then he reneged.
The phony "stimulus" exists entirely to preserve the same DemoRat interests that are currently bankrupting cities and states.
The promised "reform" of health care and Wall Street was passed onto an obviously corrupt Congress, who produced legislation welcomed by the very villains necessitating reform, akin to anti-racketeering laws approved by Tony Soprano.
Speaking of the weasel boys of Wall Street, they've escaped repercussion without missing a beat, the latest being this absurd Goldman/SEC settlement. Accomplice or patsy.
If "indie males" are like me, we're aghast that our votes wound up duplicitously spent on a double-down of both neoliberalism and neoconservatism, with a heaping dash of embedded liberalism to placate the wretched DemoRat base. One we could live with if it meant at least stopping the others, but all three??
Speaking of which, your friends, the DemoRats' strategy of raising the spectre of the Rethuglicans won't work.
Yes, we hate them. But we hate yours ever more.
At least we know where the Rethuglicans stand; simple antagonistic malice, like Sauron the flaming eyeball from the Lord of the Rings.
The DemoRats are instead Brad Douriff's "Wormtongue" character: endlessly whispering pieties and promises in your ear, and before you know it you are withered, impotent, and firmly under control."
"Typical incompetent Beltway blathering; desperate to understand why the Dems will lose, Mark Penn-ian pollsters are quickly interrogated who declare essentially that there's a subset of voters out there who vote based on common sense. No kidding.
Though to be sure, if you are registered with the gangster factions Demo-Rat Party and Rethuglican Party, then you do, indeed, have no common sense.
Here's the scoop for you Fineman, from an "indie male" you and the pollsters are so eager to shove into a box and label: Obama is either an accomplice or a patsy, and both ways a liar.
He said he'd put an end to neocon boondoggles like Gitmo and Middle East warmongering, then he reneged.
The phony "stimulus" exists entirely to preserve the same DemoRat interests that are currently bankrupting cities and states.
The promised "reform" of health care and Wall Street was passed onto an obviously corrupt Congress, who produced legislation welcomed by the very villains necessitating reform, akin to anti-racketeering laws approved by Tony Soprano.
Speaking of the weasel boys of Wall Street, they've escaped repercussion without missing a beat, the latest being this absurd Goldman/SEC settlement. Accomplice or patsy.
If "indie males" are like me, we're aghast that our votes wound up duplicitously spent on a double-down of both neoliberalism and neoconservatism, with a heaping dash of embedded liberalism to placate the wretched DemoRat base. One we could live with if it meant at least stopping the others, but all three??
Speaking of which, your friends, the DemoRats' strategy of raising the spectre of the Rethuglicans won't work.
Yes, we hate them. But we hate yours ever more.
At least we know where the Rethuglicans stand; simple antagonistic malice, like Sauron the flaming eyeball from the Lord of the Rings.
The DemoRats are instead Brad Douriff's "Wormtongue" character: endlessly whispering pieties and promises in your ear, and before you know it you are withered, impotent, and firmly under control."
Friday, July 16, 2010
Republicans Will Blow Mid-Terms
I just saw a poll where Harry Reid now has a lead over Republican challenger Sharron Angle. Apparently, she is scaring more voters away than Reid can piss off. He still can't seem to clear 44%, so Angle still has a chance, if she keeps her foot out of her mouth.
In Delaware, Mike Castle's lead is also shrinking. As election day gets closer, the races will tighten, and it will be a matter of turnout. Republicans are more motivated to vote, and Independents give Democrats low approvals. Independents also give Republicans low approvals. So, if Republicans are not able to offer a message and plan to Independents, they simply won't turn up at the polls. Even though Republicans are more motivated right now, they are still outnumbered by Democrats.
With just under 4 months to go, I don't get why the Republicans have not produced their 2010 version of the Contract for America yet. In my view, the Republicans have inept leadership at the top. Therefore, I just don't see how they gain the House, and they certainly will not get control of the Senate.
In Delaware, Mike Castle's lead is also shrinking. As election day gets closer, the races will tighten, and it will be a matter of turnout. Republicans are more motivated to vote, and Independents give Democrats low approvals. Independents also give Republicans low approvals. So, if Republicans are not able to offer a message and plan to Independents, they simply won't turn up at the polls. Even though Republicans are more motivated right now, they are still outnumbered by Democrats.
With just under 4 months to go, I don't get why the Republicans have not produced their 2010 version of the Contract for America yet. In my view, the Republicans have inept leadership at the top. Therefore, I just don't see how they gain the House, and they certainly will not get control of the Senate.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
How Accurate are Political Polls?
There is something going on in America, and I don't think the political polls have really gotten a good read on its pulse. Once again, a major network poll (ABC/Washington Post) came out and showed that Obama has a 50% approval rating. Every single month, you can count on one of the big net works, ABC, NBC, CBS or CNN to come out with a poll that shows higher support for Obama than the vast majority of other polls. Surprisingly, the latest CBS poll showed him at only a 44% approval.
I read an interesting piece recently. Obama's approval among black voters remains very high at 90% and above. They will not abandon him, yet. Black voters have far more invested in Obama than any other voting bloc, because he is the first black president. They need him to do well, and I don't need to discuss the reasons why. Latino voters would feel the same about the first Latino president.
So, with 90% approval from black voters, you can bet that his approval rating among everyone else must be abysmal considering that his average total approval rating is only 47%. I guarantee that George W. Bush did not get 90% support from ANYONE during the last two years of his presidency.
But, I still think the 47% approval rating by the polls overstates them, or it at least overstates the publics approval with the Democrats as a whole. Here is why I think this. I just read an editorial piece by Joe Conason in the New York Observer. Conason is a liberal. His article is titled "Change at a Cost." He says voters should be careful what they wish for if they vote to change the power in Congress back to the Republicans.
When I read the article at about 9:30 this morning, there were 10 comments after the article. All of them lambasted Conason. There was not one supporting comment from a reader who agreed with Conason.
With this in mind, it is clear that the mood of the country toward the Democrats is much darker than what the polls state. While I still believe that the Republicans can find a way to screw up the election and not achieve the majority in the House, it is clear that, right now, the numbers for the Democrats could be far worse than what many polls are suggesting. Voters are much more angry now, and without Obama on the ballot, many black voters who turned out in 2008 won't be turning out in 2010.
I read an interesting piece recently. Obama's approval among black voters remains very high at 90% and above. They will not abandon him, yet. Black voters have far more invested in Obama than any other voting bloc, because he is the first black president. They need him to do well, and I don't need to discuss the reasons why. Latino voters would feel the same about the first Latino president.
So, with 90% approval from black voters, you can bet that his approval rating among everyone else must be abysmal considering that his average total approval rating is only 47%. I guarantee that George W. Bush did not get 90% support from ANYONE during the last two years of his presidency.
But, I still think the 47% approval rating by the polls overstates them, or it at least overstates the publics approval with the Democrats as a whole. Here is why I think this. I just read an editorial piece by Joe Conason in the New York Observer. Conason is a liberal. His article is titled "Change at a Cost." He says voters should be careful what they wish for if they vote to change the power in Congress back to the Republicans.
When I read the article at about 9:30 this morning, there were 10 comments after the article. All of them lambasted Conason. There was not one supporting comment from a reader who agreed with Conason.
With this in mind, it is clear that the mood of the country toward the Democrats is much darker than what the polls state. While I still believe that the Republicans can find a way to screw up the election and not achieve the majority in the House, it is clear that, right now, the numbers for the Democrats could be far worse than what many polls are suggesting. Voters are much more angry now, and without Obama on the ballot, many black voters who turned out in 2008 won't be turning out in 2010.
Obama and Democrats Cared More About Legacy than Jobs
We’ve got unemployment at 9.5% and a real unemployment rate over 16%, and NOW the Democrats and Obama are whining about jobs, or trying to tell us where we would’ve been without the stimulus. Now, they want to spend more money, money they don’t have.
Ummm, contrary to what some economists say, I believe we’d be better off if the stimulus had never been passed. After all, how many economists could see the real estate bubble ahead of time? How many of the top bankers at the Fed could see it? None, nada, zippo. So, why shouldn’t we believe that no stimulus would have been better than what we got?
All the stimulus did was keep the states from laying off the workers and making the painful cuts they face now. Now, we have an even bigger fiscal mess, yet the left still says we should keep throwing good money after bad. Why wasn’t more money thrown at real projects? Our highways are so clogged right now, that work alone would have produced thousands of jobs across the country. Instead, the Democrats bailed out public employee union jobs, which now are in danger anyway. What about all those crumbling bridges we have across the country? How about some more nuclear plants to help with our energy issues? What about more drilling for natural gas on Federal land?
No, instead, the Democrats were more interested in securing their legacy by ramming a huge new entitlement, Obamacare down our throats. And now, as time goes on, we are finding out just how this healthcare bill will actually force our costs higher, and many will be forced out of the current insurance they have, contrary to what Obama said while selling the bill. By doing this, and focusing on cap and trade legislation, business has decided instead to hoard cash due to the uncertainty caused by Washington politicians who are more intent on growing the business of politics rather than the businesses that produce real jobs.
Americans feel like they’ve been conned, and in a few months, they will be rendering judgment on the con artists.
Ummm, contrary to what some economists say, I believe we’d be better off if the stimulus had never been passed. After all, how many economists could see the real estate bubble ahead of time? How many of the top bankers at the Fed could see it? None, nada, zippo. So, why shouldn’t we believe that no stimulus would have been better than what we got?
All the stimulus did was keep the states from laying off the workers and making the painful cuts they face now. Now, we have an even bigger fiscal mess, yet the left still says we should keep throwing good money after bad. Why wasn’t more money thrown at real projects? Our highways are so clogged right now, that work alone would have produced thousands of jobs across the country. Instead, the Democrats bailed out public employee union jobs, which now are in danger anyway. What about all those crumbling bridges we have across the country? How about some more nuclear plants to help with our energy issues? What about more drilling for natural gas on Federal land?
No, instead, the Democrats were more interested in securing their legacy by ramming a huge new entitlement, Obamacare down our throats. And now, as time goes on, we are finding out just how this healthcare bill will actually force our costs higher, and many will be forced out of the current insurance they have, contrary to what Obama said while selling the bill. By doing this, and focusing on cap and trade legislation, business has decided instead to hoard cash due to the uncertainty caused by Washington politicians who are more intent on growing the business of politics rather than the businesses that produce real jobs.
Americans feel like they’ve been conned, and in a few months, they will be rendering judgment on the con artists.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
George Steinbrenner Dies
I just saw on CNBC that George Steinbrenner, longtime owner of the New York Yankees, has died. Steinbrenner was a controversial owner due to his relationships with his managers over the years, and his willingness to spend huge money to buy the best talent money could buy in order to allow his team to be in the running for the World Series every year. For a long time, the tactic did not work, but ultimately his management team was able to blend good chemistry among the star players and role players.
Unfortunately, Steinbrenner epitomized what is wrong with baseball today, unless you are a Yankee fan of course. Small market teams do not have the ability to compete every single year. Occasionally, a team like Tampa Bay or Florida is able to have a good team, but then the owner are forced to trade their high priced free agents. Ultimately, it is the California teams along with the New York teams, Philadelphia and Boston who are able to compete year in and year out. Small market teams in Baltimore, Pittsburgh and Kansas City have not been competitive for years.
Steinbrenner is to blame because it was he who started the trend of paying huge money to free agents starting with Reggie Jackson in the 1970's. While his winning legacy will long be remembered by Yankee fans, he will be long despised by fans in these other cities.
Unfortunately, Steinbrenner epitomized what is wrong with baseball today, unless you are a Yankee fan of course. Small market teams do not have the ability to compete every single year. Occasionally, a team like Tampa Bay or Florida is able to have a good team, but then the owner are forced to trade their high priced free agents. Ultimately, it is the California teams along with the New York teams, Philadelphia and Boston who are able to compete year in and year out. Small market teams in Baltimore, Pittsburgh and Kansas City have not been competitive for years.
Steinbrenner is to blame because it was he who started the trend of paying huge money to free agents starting with Reggie Jackson in the 1970's. While his winning legacy will long be remembered by Yankee fans, he will be long despised by fans in these other cities.
Where are Republican Presidential Candidates?
Where are the Republican presidential candidates? Yeah, I mean the real ones. Honestly, Sarah Palin? Mike Huckabee? Newt Gingrich? Mitt Romney? Can’t they do any better than that?
Palin vs. Obama would be a landslide no matter how low Obama’s poll numbers are. Same if it is Huckabee or Gingrich. I would have thought Romney had a chance last time around, but somehow he let John McCain beat him in the primary. Republicans have a history of giving the next guy in line his chance, and that would be a toss up to determine who that next guy (or gal) is. Palin could stake her claim since she was on the ticket last time. Romney and Huckabee could stake theirs since they were essentially co-runners up in the primary last time. Gingrich has no claim.
Politically, Romney is the only one moderate enough to sway independents. Palin and Gingrich are lightning rods, while Huckabee is simply too conservative.
Hopefully, the field will widen out, and a candidate will come out of nowhere for the Republicans much like Bill Clinton did for the Democrats in 1992. The conditions are somewhat similar, with the economy, real estate and banking troubles and continued war in the Middle East. The country will want a change at the top, someone different. George H.W. Bush was the man in charge then, and he is the only one-term president we have had in the last 30 years. Hopefully, Obama will be the next, but it will likely take a very appealing candidate, rather than the current Republican re-treads, to do the job.
Palin vs. Obama would be a landslide no matter how low Obama’s poll numbers are. Same if it is Huckabee or Gingrich. I would have thought Romney had a chance last time around, but somehow he let John McCain beat him in the primary. Republicans have a history of giving the next guy in line his chance, and that would be a toss up to determine who that next guy (or gal) is. Palin could stake her claim since she was on the ticket last time. Romney and Huckabee could stake theirs since they were essentially co-runners up in the primary last time. Gingrich has no claim.
Politically, Romney is the only one moderate enough to sway independents. Palin and Gingrich are lightning rods, while Huckabee is simply too conservative.
Hopefully, the field will widen out, and a candidate will come out of nowhere for the Republicans much like Bill Clinton did for the Democrats in 1992. The conditions are somewhat similar, with the economy, real estate and banking troubles and continued war in the Middle East. The country will want a change at the top, someone different. George H.W. Bush was the man in charge then, and he is the only one-term president we have had in the last 30 years. Hopefully, Obama will be the next, but it will likely take a very appealing candidate, rather than the current Republican re-treads, to do the job.
Can Republicans Win in California?
I just read a new SurveyUSA poll that indicated both Meg Whitman in the race for governor (against Jerry Brown) and Carly Fiorina in the race for Senate (against incumbent Barbara Boxer) have leads. In most previous polls both Republican candidates have trailed, but have been close and within the margin of error.
There is still a lot of time left, and in my opinion, the two Democrat candidates are weak, but still, I think it is quite telling that two Republicans have a chance to win statewide in California. If both were to win, this would be an even bigger blow to the Dems than Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts earlier this year. Of the two, I think Whitman has the better chance against an aging Jerry Brown. He is a known entity, and I suspect that California’s attitude may be “been there, done that.” It is interesting that the Democrats could not come up with a better candidate.
Fiorina is not as strong a Republican candidate as Whitman due to her lack of success as CEO of Hewlett Packard. But, Barbara Boxer, the more liberal of California’s two female Senators, has low approval ratings. The time is right for her to be knocked off, but I am not sure that Fiorina can pull it off. The debates will certainly go a long way toward determining this winner.
There is still a lot of time left, and in my opinion, the two Democrat candidates are weak, but still, I think it is quite telling that two Republicans have a chance to win statewide in California. If both were to win, this would be an even bigger blow to the Dems than Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts earlier this year. Of the two, I think Whitman has the better chance against an aging Jerry Brown. He is a known entity, and I suspect that California’s attitude may be “been there, done that.” It is interesting that the Democrats could not come up with a better candidate.
Fiorina is not as strong a Republican candidate as Whitman due to her lack of success as CEO of Hewlett Packard. But, Barbara Boxer, the more liberal of California’s two female Senators, has low approval ratings. The time is right for her to be knocked off, but I am not sure that Fiorina can pull it off. The debates will certainly go a long way toward determining this winner.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Awful World Cup Final
I did my best to watch the World Cup Final yesterday, but it was horrible. The Dutch came out aggressively in order to take Spain out of its regular ball control game, and a record yellow cards were awarded. Both sides blew most of their chances, until finally, Spain scored late in extra time with the Dutch down a man.
Admittedly, there have been Super Bowl games that were difficult to watch. However, I used to enjoy watching many of the big matchups in World Cup soccer. But, this year, as I watched, I often found myself turning the channel. The rest of the world can keep this game. It will NEVER catch on as a major sport here in the U.S. It will simply be something fun to see every four years like the Olympics.
For me, NHL playoff hockey will continue to reign supreme as the best sport to watch.
Just my two cents again.
Admittedly, there have been Super Bowl games that were difficult to watch. However, I used to enjoy watching many of the big matchups in World Cup soccer. But, this year, as I watched, I often found myself turning the channel. The rest of the world can keep this game. It will NEVER catch on as a major sport here in the U.S. It will simply be something fun to see every four years like the Olympics.
For me, NHL playoff hockey will continue to reign supreme as the best sport to watch.
Just my two cents again.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Income Inequality at Heart of Our Recession? What Crap
Hi just read former Labor Secretary Robert Reich's column regarding the cause of the current recession (yeah, we are still in one). He blames income inequality. He suggests that median wages from 2000 to 2007 went nowhere, while the Wall Street types were making fortunes.
So, his suggestion is that Target and Wal-mart be forced to pay higher wages, and that companies not be allowed to layoff many workers at once, be forced to pay a year of severance. Can you say income re-distribution? The haves have the money because they are smart and creative while the have-nots are too lazy and dumb to do any better for themselves. Of course, not all hard workers are like that. And it is unfortunate that people lose their jobs during a recession. Most of us are feeling the pinch and weren't prepared for it.
But, rather than sit on my ass, I have been pro-active at trying to improve my situation. I am scaling back on my living expenses by providing a rent to own opportunity to a family that can make better use of my home. I am creating more opportunities for the businesses I enjoy, and creating a plan to get out of debt.
That is just me though. I've always been motivated, to an extent. Apparently, Mr. Reich would rather we live in a communist society where we are all equal. No reward for hard work. Instead of a company being responsible to its shareholders, it is supposed to be run inefficiently in order to keep its workers employed. Where will the incentive for new business and technology creation come from if the government is going to dictate what you must pay your employees and how long you must keep them?
The beauty of America is that you can create a business out of your garage or your dorm room and turn yourself into a billionaire. Yeah, it requires a brain and motivation. But those are the kind of people who create jobs. Just look at how much wealth Google and Apple have created over the last decade. Then just look at how mediocre companies that are heavily unionized perform...ummm, Chrysler and GM come to mind. Who would you rather work for?
While there is income inequality in this land, that is a symptom of what makes this country great...everyone with the motivation has the opportunity! Sitting around whining about inequality doesn't get you anywhere.
So, his suggestion is that Target and Wal-mart be forced to pay higher wages, and that companies not be allowed to layoff many workers at once, be forced to pay a year of severance. Can you say income re-distribution? The haves have the money because they are smart and creative while the have-nots are too lazy and dumb to do any better for themselves. Of course, not all hard workers are like that. And it is unfortunate that people lose their jobs during a recession. Most of us are feeling the pinch and weren't prepared for it.
But, rather than sit on my ass, I have been pro-active at trying to improve my situation. I am scaling back on my living expenses by providing a rent to own opportunity to a family that can make better use of my home. I am creating more opportunities for the businesses I enjoy, and creating a plan to get out of debt.
That is just me though. I've always been motivated, to an extent. Apparently, Mr. Reich would rather we live in a communist society where we are all equal. No reward for hard work. Instead of a company being responsible to its shareholders, it is supposed to be run inefficiently in order to keep its workers employed. Where will the incentive for new business and technology creation come from if the government is going to dictate what you must pay your employees and how long you must keep them?
The beauty of America is that you can create a business out of your garage or your dorm room and turn yourself into a billionaire. Yeah, it requires a brain and motivation. But those are the kind of people who create jobs. Just look at how much wealth Google and Apple have created over the last decade. Then just look at how mediocre companies that are heavily unionized perform...ummm, Chrysler and GM come to mind. Who would you rather work for?
While there is income inequality in this land, that is a symptom of what makes this country great...everyone with the motivation has the opportunity! Sitting around whining about inequality doesn't get you anywhere.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Education Still Gets More Expensive
Penn State University announced a 5.9% hike in tuition costs for the upcoming school year. It boggles the mind how our schools of hire learning are able to get away with these hikes year after year after year. The cost of tuition at PSU will have more than doubled in nine years. I can't think of many more items that have doubled in price over that period of time.
The school president indicated that the factors for the increase include no increase in state money, a $30 million increase in salaries to maintain competitive, $23 million for rising health care and pension costs, $11.4 million for building maintenance, $10 million for new programs and $1 million for need based student aid.
The only factor on that list that I see as reasonable is the last one. $30 million in salary increases to remain competitive? The rest of the world is trying to find a job, yet our educators continue to thrive, just like our professional athletes. $23 million for rising health care and pension costs? Well, make the employees contribute a little more, not the students!
Every year a college education becomes less attainable for most students. And, the question is, is it really worthwhile? Ok, if you absolutely know what profession you want to be in when you are 18, and it requires continuing education, then a 4 year degree and masters or grad school may be warranted. If not, get an online degree and become an entrepreneur. That is where the big money is! A college education and graduate degree will simply saddle you with debt that will take years to pay off. And for what? Only 24% of the 2010 graduating class had a job lined up after graduation this year.
It is clear to me that college is becoming more and more of a rip off.
The school president indicated that the factors for the increase include no increase in state money, a $30 million increase in salaries to maintain competitive, $23 million for rising health care and pension costs, $11.4 million for building maintenance, $10 million for new programs and $1 million for need based student aid.
The only factor on that list that I see as reasonable is the last one. $30 million in salary increases to remain competitive? The rest of the world is trying to find a job, yet our educators continue to thrive, just like our professional athletes. $23 million for rising health care and pension costs? Well, make the employees contribute a little more, not the students!
Every year a college education becomes less attainable for most students. And, the question is, is it really worthwhile? Ok, if you absolutely know what profession you want to be in when you are 18, and it requires continuing education, then a 4 year degree and masters or grad school may be warranted. If not, get an online degree and become an entrepreneur. That is where the big money is! A college education and graduate degree will simply saddle you with debt that will take years to pay off. And for what? Only 24% of the 2010 graduating class had a job lined up after graduation this year.
It is clear to me that college is becoming more and more of a rip off.
Friday, July 9, 2010
A nation of Arrogant Leaders
The U.S. it seems is dominated by arrogant, egotistical, self-centered leaders. Not just in politics, but in other areas of life...sports, business, entertainment, etc.
Last night, Lebron James held a one hour spectacle on ESPN labled as "The Decision." As if the entire world would be captivated by where this egotistical ass chose to play basketball for the next few years. Unfortunately, millions tuned in to hear this announcement, so what does that tell you about this country? We have nothing better to do than sit and watch some gazillionaire tell us where he intends to be employed? Meanwhile, millions are out of work and begging for a chance to work ANYWHERE!
Tiger Woods...need I say more? The arrogance with which he conducted his life the last five or six years speaks volumes about the man. And yet, he still can't seem to show any humility. Probably the most ungracious winner and sorest loser in sports. Phil Mickelson wins the Masters a year after learning both his mother and wife have breast cancer, and Tiger can't congratulate him during an interview after his round because he is pissed he didn't win himself.
Obama-Pelosi-Reid...we know what's best for the country in spite of what you think, so welcome to our stimulus package that has failed to stimulate, welcome to Obamacare that most of you didn't want and screw you Arizona, we want to keep the illegal immigrants here, because those are potential voters to save our asses.
90% of the politicians in Washington, as well as state and local government. They really could care less about the average Joe, it's more about increasing their power.
Just about all of Wall Street. Still not much apology there for screwing the country, and the world economy for that matter. The bigger keep getting bigger, and local banks get screwed.
Hollywood...these folks never seem to think that the rule of law applies to them. Just look at Lindsey Lohan this week...shocked at the prospect of going to jail after violating her probation. Charlie Sheen? Mel Gibson?
Honestly people, why do we continue to put these idiots on a pedestal? Oh, wait, because its the media that does it! The arrogant media, the elite media. This is what sells, so they put these people at the forefront of our lives. Then the media tries to minimize and de-legitimize real movements such as the Tea Party. The Tea Party movement, which is filled with every day people who have had enough of all this crap. Yet, the media labels them as extremists.
The country is run by a bunch of self-serving, arrogant people and it is time for the regular guy to take back this country.
Last night, Lebron James held a one hour spectacle on ESPN labled as "The Decision." As if the entire world would be captivated by where this egotistical ass chose to play basketball for the next few years. Unfortunately, millions tuned in to hear this announcement, so what does that tell you about this country? We have nothing better to do than sit and watch some gazillionaire tell us where he intends to be employed? Meanwhile, millions are out of work and begging for a chance to work ANYWHERE!
Tiger Woods...need I say more? The arrogance with which he conducted his life the last five or six years speaks volumes about the man. And yet, he still can't seem to show any humility. Probably the most ungracious winner and sorest loser in sports. Phil Mickelson wins the Masters a year after learning both his mother and wife have breast cancer, and Tiger can't congratulate him during an interview after his round because he is pissed he didn't win himself.
Obama-Pelosi-Reid...we know what's best for the country in spite of what you think, so welcome to our stimulus package that has failed to stimulate, welcome to Obamacare that most of you didn't want and screw you Arizona, we want to keep the illegal immigrants here, because those are potential voters to save our asses.
90% of the politicians in Washington, as well as state and local government. They really could care less about the average Joe, it's more about increasing their power.
Just about all of Wall Street. Still not much apology there for screwing the country, and the world economy for that matter. The bigger keep getting bigger, and local banks get screwed.
Hollywood...these folks never seem to think that the rule of law applies to them. Just look at Lindsey Lohan this week...shocked at the prospect of going to jail after violating her probation. Charlie Sheen? Mel Gibson?
Honestly people, why do we continue to put these idiots on a pedestal? Oh, wait, because its the media that does it! The arrogant media, the elite media. This is what sells, so they put these people at the forefront of our lives. Then the media tries to minimize and de-legitimize real movements such as the Tea Party. The Tea Party movement, which is filled with every day people who have had enough of all this crap. Yet, the media labels them as extremists.
The country is run by a bunch of self-serving, arrogant people and it is time for the regular guy to take back this country.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
American Football vs. World Football (soccer)
I've been watching many of the World Cup games, particularly some of the big matchups and some of the U.S. games. I was particularly interested in England vs. Germany, Brazil vs. Netherlands, Germany vs. Argentina and Germany vs. Spain. So, I watched at least a portion of these games, and I yawned. American Football is far superior to watch. I say this even though I despise all the timeouts during the games.
While the action in soccer generally does not stop much, the pace of play is often slow, and rarely is the action very intense at the end of a game when the game is on the line. Sure, there can be a flurry of activity when one team needs a goal, but the players really have so little control over the outcome, it is rare that you get that big score at the end of the game when it is needed, like the U.S. got against Algeria.
On the other hand, look at all of those fantastic finishes in big playoff football games over the years. Can you get a more thrilling finish to a game than when the Steelers beat Arizona in the Super Bowl in the last seconds? Never in a soccer game. If the game is tied near the end of regulation, the teams play not to lose.
I've enjoyed some of the games, but you won't see me tuning into any Major Soccer League games any time soon, unless I need some sleep.
While the action in soccer generally does not stop much, the pace of play is often slow, and rarely is the action very intense at the end of a game when the game is on the line. Sure, there can be a flurry of activity when one team needs a goal, but the players really have so little control over the outcome, it is rare that you get that big score at the end of the game when it is needed, like the U.S. got against Algeria.
On the other hand, look at all of those fantastic finishes in big playoff football games over the years. Can you get a more thrilling finish to a game than when the Steelers beat Arizona in the Super Bowl in the last seconds? Never in a soccer game. If the game is tied near the end of regulation, the teams play not to lose.
I've enjoyed some of the games, but you won't see me tuning into any Major Soccer League games any time soon, unless I need some sleep.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Where are Republican Ideas?
Clearly, most Americans are frustrated with the policies of Obama and the Democrats. With a slow recovering economy that is not producing enough jobs, many feel that the stimulus has not done what it was intended to do. This is no surprise to those of us who actually paid attention to what was in the stimulus package. It was essentially a payoff to supporters of the Democratic party and President Obama filled with pork and wasteful spending that had no chance of stimuluting the economy for the long run. There were a few good investments, but nowhere near enough to put the economy on a sustainable path of growth.
After passing this lousy stimulus package, the Democrats decided to spend the next year ramming a trillion dollar healthcare package down our throats. Now that it is receiving more scrutiny since more details are known, it is realized that the package will ultimately increase the cost of healthcare substantially.
In this environment, and a new financial regulation bill being debated in the Senate, business is unwilling to hire due to the uncertainty. Next year, the Bush tax cuts are set to expire. This includes income taxes, capital gains taxes and estate taxes. So, the folks who create the jobs, are getting ready to hand over more money to the government. Combine that with the healthcare bill and they realize that the cost of doing business has gone up substantially, so why should they hire new workers?
But, where are the Republican ideas? Cutting corporate taxes and other taxes are ideas that are easily dismissed by Democrats as causing the deficits we now have. Republicans have never been good stewards of the budget, just like the Democrats never have. Democrats realize that spending will never be cut (because they certainly don't want to cut it), so we can't cut taxes.
Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has produced a plan for attacking the budget deficit and potentially creating some jobs, but it is also widely dismissed by the Washington pols, because it would never realistically be passed. The establishment Republicans such as Mitch McConnell would never support it. Like the Democrats, most Republicans don't have the cahunas to pass legislation that will affect Social Security, Medicare and the like. I like some of Ryan's plan, but it has no chance of ever seeing the light of day.
What we need on both sides of the aisle are more credible people to get together and attack these issues. Ryan is one of them. I don't see too many others. In other words, we need to throw the bums out of both parties, and get some new people in Washington.
After passing this lousy stimulus package, the Democrats decided to spend the next year ramming a trillion dollar healthcare package down our throats. Now that it is receiving more scrutiny since more details are known, it is realized that the package will ultimately increase the cost of healthcare substantially.
In this environment, and a new financial regulation bill being debated in the Senate, business is unwilling to hire due to the uncertainty. Next year, the Bush tax cuts are set to expire. This includes income taxes, capital gains taxes and estate taxes. So, the folks who create the jobs, are getting ready to hand over more money to the government. Combine that with the healthcare bill and they realize that the cost of doing business has gone up substantially, so why should they hire new workers?
But, where are the Republican ideas? Cutting corporate taxes and other taxes are ideas that are easily dismissed by Democrats as causing the deficits we now have. Republicans have never been good stewards of the budget, just like the Democrats never have. Democrats realize that spending will never be cut (because they certainly don't want to cut it), so we can't cut taxes.
Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has produced a plan for attacking the budget deficit and potentially creating some jobs, but it is also widely dismissed by the Washington pols, because it would never realistically be passed. The establishment Republicans such as Mitch McConnell would never support it. Like the Democrats, most Republicans don't have the cahunas to pass legislation that will affect Social Security, Medicare and the like. I like some of Ryan's plan, but it has no chance of ever seeing the light of day.
What we need on both sides of the aisle are more credible people to get together and attack these issues. Ryan is one of them. I don't see too many others. In other words, we need to throw the bums out of both parties, and get some new people in Washington.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Republicans Blocking Progress?
It is amazing to me that just about every day I read about someone in the Democratic party, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, or some journalist, whining about how the Republicans are blocking progress. With control of all of Washington, how is this possible? George W. Bush was able to pass through an idiotic war, tax cuts, a prescription drug benefit, no child left behind, etc., yet he never had anywhere near the majorities in the House and Senate that the Democrats do.
Oh wait, maybe it is simply the incompetence of the people in charge of the Democratic party that is blocking "progress." Or, maybe it is the fact that the American people do not want the "progress" that the Democrats prescribe? Or, maybe it is both?
No one likes a whiner, and this president and his crony bitch and whine every day like its that time of the month. How about we get some leadership?
Oh wait, maybe it is simply the incompetence of the people in charge of the Democratic party that is blocking "progress." Or, maybe it is the fact that the American people do not want the "progress" that the Democrats prescribe? Or, maybe it is both?
No one likes a whiner, and this president and his crony bitch and whine every day like its that time of the month. How about we get some leadership?
Friday, July 2, 2010
Pelosi and Stimulating Jobs
Nancy Pelosi was once again speaking out of her ass the other day when she suggested that one of the biggest ways to stimulate the economy is to provide unemployment checks to those who are unemployed. She indicates that money is used to spend money, and that helps to create jobs.
Well, if that isn't a head scratcher, I don't know what is. If it was as simple as that, wouldn't we have zero unemployment? When someone loses a job, all we gotta do is write them a check, they spend it, and a job is created!
Ok, so, why are we stuck near 10% unemployment? We've been writing to checks to some folks for over a year. What are they doing with that money? Stuffing it under their mattress? Oh, wait, they are using it to pay their rent or mortgage, and by some groceries. Other than that, their isn't enough money in those checks to spend it on much else.
I believe we need a safety net such as unemployment insurance. However, the notion that it creates jobs is just an outrageous fabrication, and another example of Democrats grabbing at straws and trying to pull on the heartstrings of voters who are sick of all the wasteful spending in DC. The Democratic agenda is going down in flames because of the weak economy. Their ideas and programs have provided stiff headwinds to any economic recovery, and they are realizing that they will suffer mightily at the polls in November. I hope this actually becomes the case, because the triumvirate leadership of Obama-Pelosi-Reid has been a disaster.
Well, if that isn't a head scratcher, I don't know what is. If it was as simple as that, wouldn't we have zero unemployment? When someone loses a job, all we gotta do is write them a check, they spend it, and a job is created!
Ok, so, why are we stuck near 10% unemployment? We've been writing to checks to some folks for over a year. What are they doing with that money? Stuffing it under their mattress? Oh, wait, they are using it to pay their rent or mortgage, and by some groceries. Other than that, their isn't enough money in those checks to spend it on much else.
I believe we need a safety net such as unemployment insurance. However, the notion that it creates jobs is just an outrageous fabrication, and another example of Democrats grabbing at straws and trying to pull on the heartstrings of voters who are sick of all the wasteful spending in DC. The Democratic agenda is going down in flames because of the weak economy. Their ideas and programs have provided stiff headwinds to any economic recovery, and they are realizing that they will suffer mightily at the polls in November. I hope this actually becomes the case, because the triumvirate leadership of Obama-Pelosi-Reid has been a disaster.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Democrats Getting Worried
So I can get a balanced view of the world, I often read the more liberal commentaries just to get an idea of what those people are thinking. Since I pretty much already know what the right wingers are thinking, I don't need to read their crap.
It is amazing to me how differently liberals view the world compared to the rest of us. And they continue to make their arguments with old stale facts that don't share the whole story.
This morning I read Gene Lyons comments in Salon. Same old argument. It was Bush's tax cuts for the rich that lead to the current deficits we have. Ummm...Bush cut taxes for EVERYONE! Geez, isn't that fair? In fact, in the real world, over 45% of the U.S. workforce does NOT pay taxes.
It was not tax cuts that lead to deficits. It was an ill-conceived war and the fact that Bush and the Republicans went on a spending spree typical of the Democrats. However, the Bush deficits came nowhere close to what we have in store now and into the foreseeable future.
After all of the spending on the stimulus, TARP, auto bailouts, bank bailouts, cash for clunkers, home buyer tax credits, etc., where is the economy today? Getting ready to roll back over into another recession. This morning, new jobless claims rose by 13,000 and the 4 week moving average is at its highest level since March. Continuint claims also rose. Yesterday, ADP reported that the private sector likely added only 13,000 new jobs to the economy in June.
I spoke with a realtor yesterday who indicated that sales have fallen by two-thirds since the homebuyer tax credit ended. You can't fix a structural problem with a band-aid. The tax credit only helped the homebuilders, who overbuilt and paid exorbitant amounts for land in areas that could not support that much supply.
The Democrats must be shaking in their boots, because the economy is getting set to roll over during the home stretch to the mid-term elections. You can see it on their exasperated faces, faces such as Paul Kanjorski, who rolls his eyes and whines and complains that it was the Republicans who caused this mess.
The Republicans didn't cause it any more than the Democrats. The Washington culture caused it. They are out of touch. Voters are getting ready to make a change again like they did two years ago. Democrats are worried.
It is amazing to me how differently liberals view the world compared to the rest of us. And they continue to make their arguments with old stale facts that don't share the whole story.
This morning I read Gene Lyons comments in Salon. Same old argument. It was Bush's tax cuts for the rich that lead to the current deficits we have. Ummm...Bush cut taxes for EVERYONE! Geez, isn't that fair? In fact, in the real world, over 45% of the U.S. workforce does NOT pay taxes.
It was not tax cuts that lead to deficits. It was an ill-conceived war and the fact that Bush and the Republicans went on a spending spree typical of the Democrats. However, the Bush deficits came nowhere close to what we have in store now and into the foreseeable future.
After all of the spending on the stimulus, TARP, auto bailouts, bank bailouts, cash for clunkers, home buyer tax credits, etc., where is the economy today? Getting ready to roll back over into another recession. This morning, new jobless claims rose by 13,000 and the 4 week moving average is at its highest level since March. Continuint claims also rose. Yesterday, ADP reported that the private sector likely added only 13,000 new jobs to the economy in June.
I spoke with a realtor yesterday who indicated that sales have fallen by two-thirds since the homebuyer tax credit ended. You can't fix a structural problem with a band-aid. The tax credit only helped the homebuilders, who overbuilt and paid exorbitant amounts for land in areas that could not support that much supply.
The Democrats must be shaking in their boots, because the economy is getting set to roll over during the home stretch to the mid-term elections. You can see it on their exasperated faces, faces such as Paul Kanjorski, who rolls his eyes and whines and complains that it was the Republicans who caused this mess.
The Republicans didn't cause it any more than the Democrats. The Washington culture caused it. They are out of touch. Voters are getting ready to make a change again like they did two years ago. Democrats are worried.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Bad Stock Market Bad For Obama and Democrats
The stock market closed at its lowest close of the year today, and its lowest level since November. If you happen to follow the market closely, and pay attention to technical analysis of the market, the current trading pattern suggests that the market could drop another 10% to 20% from current levels. The stock market is often viewed as a leading indicator of the economy, as are Treasury yields. The 10 year treasury note yield is now below 3%. Lower yields and stock prices reflect the expectation that the economy is weakening.
A weak economy spells doom for the Democrats in November. Americans will look at weak job numbers and weak stock prices and conclude that the Democratic economic agenda has failed after being in place for nearly two years. The Obama argument that he inherited a bad situation will fall on deaf ears, if it hasn't already.
On the other hand, Republicans still need to come up with a plan of their own. They can no longer just say vote against the Democrats. They need to convince voters to vote FOR Republicans.
No matter what, Democrats will see losses in November. If the stock market maintains its current downward trajectory, they will lose both the House and Senate.
A weak economy spells doom for the Democrats in November. Americans will look at weak job numbers and weak stock prices and conclude that the Democratic economic agenda has failed after being in place for nearly two years. The Obama argument that he inherited a bad situation will fall on deaf ears, if it hasn't already.
On the other hand, Republicans still need to come up with a plan of their own. They can no longer just say vote against the Democrats. They need to convince voters to vote FOR Republicans.
No matter what, Democrats will see losses in November. If the stock market maintains its current downward trajectory, they will lose both the House and Senate.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Mixed Martial Arts Death
I read for the first time about a death of a fighter after a mixed martial arts match. The fight occurred in South Carolina and was the debut fight for Michael Kirkham. Kirkham collapsed after his bout on Saturday night. The coroner indicated the cause of death as bleeding in the brain.
This should come as no surprise to anyone. These fighters are big and very strong, and they fight with limited padding on their hands to allow for grappling. Quite frankly, anyone could be killed by one punch or kick to the right spot on the head. MMA referees are typically quick to stop bouts, but I have seen plenty of punishment dished out before the ref steps in, particularly when one fighter is raining punches on his opponent from a full mounted, ground and pound position.
I suspect we will see a few more of these deaths going forward, and no one should ever be surprised if a top name fighter is killed.
This should come as no surprise to anyone. These fighters are big and very strong, and they fight with limited padding on their hands to allow for grappling. Quite frankly, anyone could be killed by one punch or kick to the right spot on the head. MMA referees are typically quick to stop bouts, but I have seen plenty of punishment dished out before the ref steps in, particularly when one fighter is raining punches on his opponent from a full mounted, ground and pound position.
I suspect we will see a few more of these deaths going forward, and no one should ever be surprised if a top name fighter is killed.
Monday, June 28, 2010
The Need For Term Limits
With the passing of Robert Byrd, we have seen in the last year three long time members of the Senate leave Washington either through death or through finally getting voted out. Byrd, Ted Kennedy and Arlen Specter are the three members I am thinking of. Byrd served over 50 years, Kennedy over 45, and Specter about 30.
If Robert Byrd is not an example of the need for term limits, I don't know who is. He could barely function in the last several years. How could he possibly be representing West Virginia to the best of his ability?
Kennedy is an example of someone who was simply too entrenched in power to be removed. With his name and his wealth, it was virtually impossible to vote him out, although few people in Massachussetts were inclined to do so.
Specter is an example of a cynical politician whose only concern was saving his job. In the last year, it was clear he no longer had core beliefs. He switched from the Republican party to the Democratic party because he knew he could not win the Republican primary due to his votes to support the stimulus in 2009. Once he became a Democrat, he supported virtually every policy of the Obama administration. In return, he received the support of the Democratic powers in his bid for re-election, which was stopped cold in the Democratic primary.
I suspect that Harry Reid in Nevada will be difficult to remove as well. He is currently the most powerful member of the Senate, and while currently trailing his opponent, he has plenty of money to spend on his re-election bid. He will at least make it close, when in fact, it is clear most Nevadans don't want him representing the state any longer.
At some point, when a politician spends too much time in Washington, they become corrupt. However, they become so entrenched in power by catering to the lobbyists, who end up helping their re-election bids, it becomes extremely difficult to remove them.
This needs to change. We see corruption at all levels of government because of the lack of term limits. Here in Pennsylvania, we have a number of representatives under investigation, yet they face little challenge in their re-election bids due to how much power they wield.
The only way Washington and many state governments can be fixed is with term limits. Until we see that day, we will continue to see power centrally located within an inefficient government that no longer represents the will of the people it serves.
If Robert Byrd is not an example of the need for term limits, I don't know who is. He could barely function in the last several years. How could he possibly be representing West Virginia to the best of his ability?
Kennedy is an example of someone who was simply too entrenched in power to be removed. With his name and his wealth, it was virtually impossible to vote him out, although few people in Massachussetts were inclined to do so.
Specter is an example of a cynical politician whose only concern was saving his job. In the last year, it was clear he no longer had core beliefs. He switched from the Republican party to the Democratic party because he knew he could not win the Republican primary due to his votes to support the stimulus in 2009. Once he became a Democrat, he supported virtually every policy of the Obama administration. In return, he received the support of the Democratic powers in his bid for re-election, which was stopped cold in the Democratic primary.
I suspect that Harry Reid in Nevada will be difficult to remove as well. He is currently the most powerful member of the Senate, and while currently trailing his opponent, he has plenty of money to spend on his re-election bid. He will at least make it close, when in fact, it is clear most Nevadans don't want him representing the state any longer.
At some point, when a politician spends too much time in Washington, they become corrupt. However, they become so entrenched in power by catering to the lobbyists, who end up helping their re-election bids, it becomes extremely difficult to remove them.
This needs to change. We see corruption at all levels of government because of the lack of term limits. Here in Pennsylvania, we have a number of representatives under investigation, yet they face little challenge in their re-election bids due to how much power they wield.
The only way Washington and many state governments can be fixed is with term limits. Until we see that day, we will continue to see power centrally located within an inefficient government that no longer represents the will of the people it serves.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
World Cup Soccer
I've just watched the first half of the England-Germany soccer game. It is clear to me that the refereeing in soccer is the worst of any major sport in the world. Why don't they have a goal camera as they do in hockey to verify a ball across the line? How could the referee miss a call like that in the first place?
After watching two goals by the U.S. disallowed in round robin play, it is clear that the officiating in soccer is clearly as bad and as political as Olympic skating. Truly a joke. This is another reason why Americans will never warm up to soccer completely. We hate when human error determines the outcome of a game.
After watching two goals by the U.S. disallowed in round robin play, it is clear that the officiating in soccer is clearly as bad and as political as Olympic skating. Truly a joke. This is another reason why Americans will never warm up to soccer completely. We hate when human error determines the outcome of a game.
The Obama/McChrystal saga
I had to laugh yesterday when I read that General Stanley McChrystal was actually a huge supporter of Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. McChrystal is apparently a diehard Democrat.
So, over the course of the next 18 months since Obama has been in office, McChrystal developed an opinion of Obama and his national security team that was quite unfavorable. If that isn't a reflection of what is actually going on here in the U.S., I don't know what is.
The plain and simple truth is that Obama is not a leader and is in over his head. Unfortunately, I still don't see anyone on the Republican side that could provide that leadership in 2012. I would even accept a better Democrat at this point. None over there either.
So, over the course of the next 18 months since Obama has been in office, McChrystal developed an opinion of Obama and his national security team that was quite unfavorable. If that isn't a reflection of what is actually going on here in the U.S., I don't know what is.
The plain and simple truth is that Obama is not a leader and is in over his head. Unfortunately, I still don't see anyone on the Republican side that could provide that leadership in 2012. I would even accept a better Democrat at this point. None over there either.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
U.S. Soccer Still Not Ready From Prime Time
U.S. soccer is still not among the elite, not even close. The U.S. was essentially dominated for most of the game by Ghana. Ghana had the quicker athletes and more crisp passing. This allowed them to possess the ball much more than the U.S. Once again, turnovers at the midfield led to scoring opportunities for the opposition. Unfortunately, the U.S. finally could not come all the way back.
What I have seen from U.S. soccer this year, and in past World Cups is that we have no trouble putting good athletes on the field, and we are always in great condition. However, we still do not seem to have the ultimate skills to match teams like Brazil, Argentina, The Netherlands and Spain.
The fact is, our BEST athletes do not play soccer. Here in the U.S., our best athletes play football and basketball. Until we are able to convince our most elite athletes to take up soccer, we will never put our best athletes on the field and that is why soccer will never flourish in the U.S. Our best athletes could potentially develop the skills I see from players in Brazil and Spain.
Just imagine if we would have our top NFL wide receivers, running backs and cornerbacks developing their skills in soccer instead of football. Do you think we would ever lose a World Cup? How about a couple point guards? And a goalie with the size and athletic skill of Lebron James? Until these kids see that they can make as much money playing soccer in the U.S. as they can in football and basketball, we will continue to produce decent national soccer teams, but it is doubtful we will ever win a World Cup.
What I have seen from U.S. soccer this year, and in past World Cups is that we have no trouble putting good athletes on the field, and we are always in great condition. However, we still do not seem to have the ultimate skills to match teams like Brazil, Argentina, The Netherlands and Spain.
The fact is, our BEST athletes do not play soccer. Here in the U.S., our best athletes play football and basketball. Until we are able to convince our most elite athletes to take up soccer, we will never put our best athletes on the field and that is why soccer will never flourish in the U.S. Our best athletes could potentially develop the skills I see from players in Brazil and Spain.
Just imagine if we would have our top NFL wide receivers, running backs and cornerbacks developing their skills in soccer instead of football. Do you think we would ever lose a World Cup? How about a couple point guards? And a goalie with the size and athletic skill of Lebron James? Until these kids see that they can make as much money playing soccer in the U.S. as they can in football and basketball, we will continue to produce decent national soccer teams, but it is doubtful we will ever win a World Cup.
Fiscal Austerity vs. Fiscal Insanity
I just read a great article on the G-20 summit being held this weekend in Toronto in the Telegraph, a UK publication. It outlines the differences in the approaches toward handling the current economic crisis between the Obama administration and his counterparts Angela Merkel from Germany and the new UK Prime Minister, David Cameron.
While Obama wants to continue to try and spend our way out of this recession, Germany and Britain are planning the opposite. They are looking more toward the long term now. They realize there is no short term fix to the current problem. They do realize that if they continue to rack up big deficits, there will be no confidence from consumers or business in their economies going forward, and therefore, no hope for recovery in the foreseeable future.
This is what Obama does not get. As intelligent as this man is reported to be, he clearly is not in tune with what is going on in this country. Americans are hunkering down, trying to save our pennies, because we see a fiscal implosion in DC. We realize that if Washington does not come up with a credible plan to deal with the deficits, that it will negatively impact all of us.
Obama clearly does not have an understanding of the theory of expectations. Markets, businesses and people tend to look ahead now and then. Not all the time, but in periods of difficulty, we do. Yes, some people simply bury their heads in the sand and hope for the best. But, the decision makers survey the landscape to see what lies ahead.
What these people see is a culture in Washington that is unwilling to make the tough decisions to return to balanced budgets. They see a government that wants to continue to add new programs with money it does not have. They see a Washington that is unwilling to tap into our own natural resources to provide for our own energy. They see a Washington that remains corrupted by greed and scandal.
Since all they see is a Washington that is getting in the way, they are preparing more for the worst than for the best. Businesses are not hiring because they have no confidence in this economic recovery. As a result, people who have jobs are worried about whether they will keep their jobs, and are spending less.
Washington needs to come up with a plan. Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has a plan. It will only have a chance to be implemented if the Republicans take back Congress. Obama will likely stand in the way. Then we will need to throw him out too.
While Obama wants to continue to try and spend our way out of this recession, Germany and Britain are planning the opposite. They are looking more toward the long term now. They realize there is no short term fix to the current problem. They do realize that if they continue to rack up big deficits, there will be no confidence from consumers or business in their economies going forward, and therefore, no hope for recovery in the foreseeable future.
This is what Obama does not get. As intelligent as this man is reported to be, he clearly is not in tune with what is going on in this country. Americans are hunkering down, trying to save our pennies, because we see a fiscal implosion in DC. We realize that if Washington does not come up with a credible plan to deal with the deficits, that it will negatively impact all of us.
Obama clearly does not have an understanding of the theory of expectations. Markets, businesses and people tend to look ahead now and then. Not all the time, but in periods of difficulty, we do. Yes, some people simply bury their heads in the sand and hope for the best. But, the decision makers survey the landscape to see what lies ahead.
What these people see is a culture in Washington that is unwilling to make the tough decisions to return to balanced budgets. They see a government that wants to continue to add new programs with money it does not have. They see a Washington that is unwilling to tap into our own natural resources to provide for our own energy. They see a Washington that remains corrupted by greed and scandal.
Since all they see is a Washington that is getting in the way, they are preparing more for the worst than for the best. Businesses are not hiring because they have no confidence in this economic recovery. As a result, people who have jobs are worried about whether they will keep their jobs, and are spending less.
Washington needs to come up with a plan. Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has a plan. It will only have a chance to be implemented if the Republicans take back Congress. Obama will likely stand in the way. Then we will need to throw him out too.
Soccer Has NOT Arrived in U.S.
I'm sorry, but just because the U.S. broke through with a big goal in the game against Algeria to move on to the second round of the World Cup does not mean soccer in the U.S. has arrived. Just because lots of people were watching the morning telecast on a weekday, does not mean soccer has arrived in the U.S.
Until we see football stadiums filled to capacity in every major city for Major Soccer Leaugue games here in the U.S., then no one can say that soccer has arrived. Soccer is not even in the same ballpark as NHL hockey, which is clearly a notch below the other three big sports, football, basketball and baseball. Hockey fans in most of the big cities in the north fill their indoor stadiums, usually seating about 20,000, to capacity for most regular season games. The NBA in many cities underperforms hockey.
Soccer, played outside, is usually played in small stadiums that seat 20,000 to 25,000, and they remain half empty for most games.
All the interest in the U.S. team right now will wane once the World Cup is over. I would venture to guess that not even a World Cup championship would result in anything resembling soccer's arrival in the U.S. You will never see soccer become as popular as American football in this country. NEVER.
Most Americans simply find it boring. The game is slow, except for an occasional flurry of shots on goal at some stages. The players whine, and do play acting on the field to draw fouls. While it can be rough at times, it is clear that soccer players are nowhere near as tough as hockey players.
Americans like to see LOTS of spectacular action during a game. We like to see the athletes make spectacular plays throughout, not just a few times during the game. I equate watching soccer with watching baseball. It is boring. The only reason baseball flourishes here in the U.S. is that it was created here.
Soccer is so boring, we tried to Americanize it with indoor soccer. That helped to speed up the action a bit, but eventually, most of those leagues failed too.
Soccer in the U.S. is more like the Olympics. We have an interest in seeing American athletes do well in the biggest event held every four years, but once they are over, we don't pay attention. And I certainly do not ever expect there to be any interest in a soccer draft in my lifetime. If a kid is good, he is off to Europe to play, just like all of the best players in the world.
No matter what though, I will be cheering for our team just like everyone else. Just don't try to tell me that it's the next big thing here in America. They've been trying to tell us that for the last 20 years.
Until we see football stadiums filled to capacity in every major city for Major Soccer Leaugue games here in the U.S., then no one can say that soccer has arrived. Soccer is not even in the same ballpark as NHL hockey, which is clearly a notch below the other three big sports, football, basketball and baseball. Hockey fans in most of the big cities in the north fill their indoor stadiums, usually seating about 20,000, to capacity for most regular season games. The NBA in many cities underperforms hockey.
Soccer, played outside, is usually played in small stadiums that seat 20,000 to 25,000, and they remain half empty for most games.
All the interest in the U.S. team right now will wane once the World Cup is over. I would venture to guess that not even a World Cup championship would result in anything resembling soccer's arrival in the U.S. You will never see soccer become as popular as American football in this country. NEVER.
Most Americans simply find it boring. The game is slow, except for an occasional flurry of shots on goal at some stages. The players whine, and do play acting on the field to draw fouls. While it can be rough at times, it is clear that soccer players are nowhere near as tough as hockey players.
Americans like to see LOTS of spectacular action during a game. We like to see the athletes make spectacular plays throughout, not just a few times during the game. I equate watching soccer with watching baseball. It is boring. The only reason baseball flourishes here in the U.S. is that it was created here.
Soccer is so boring, we tried to Americanize it with indoor soccer. That helped to speed up the action a bit, but eventually, most of those leagues failed too.
Soccer in the U.S. is more like the Olympics. We have an interest in seeing American athletes do well in the biggest event held every four years, but once they are over, we don't pay attention. And I certainly do not ever expect there to be any interest in a soccer draft in my lifetime. If a kid is good, he is off to Europe to play, just like all of the best players in the world.
No matter what though, I will be cheering for our team just like everyone else. Just don't try to tell me that it's the next big thing here in America. They've been trying to tell us that for the last 20 years.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Democrats, not just Republicans, in Bed with Business
I just read an editorial by Ruth Marcus in the Washington Post suggests that corporate sympathy is embedded in the GOP's DNA. This was in response to Congressman Barton's apology to BP CEO Tony Hayward at the hearing last week (or was it the week before?).
Seems to me that Ms. Marcus has already forgotten about how much Goldman Sachs has invested in the Democratic party since Bill Clinton was in office. Or, how Senator Dodd received a below market interest rate loan from Countrywide Credit. How about Barney Frank touting Fannie Mae in 2008, saying it was in fine shape?
Let's face it, both sides of the aisle are in bed with big business. Corruption reigns supreme in Washington, and that is why the voters are angry and making it known in the voting booth.
Seems to me that Ms. Marcus has already forgotten about how much Goldman Sachs has invested in the Democratic party since Bill Clinton was in office. Or, how Senator Dodd received a below market interest rate loan from Countrywide Credit. How about Barney Frank touting Fannie Mae in 2008, saying it was in fine shape?
Let's face it, both sides of the aisle are in bed with big business. Corruption reigns supreme in Washington, and that is why the voters are angry and making it known in the voting booth.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Housing Market Still Weak
Existing home sales in May fell 2.2%. Economists were expecting a surge in sales since there should have been a surge in contracts signed in March and April as the deadline for the tax credit was set to expire. Instead, actual sales fell.
I've insisted for some time that the residential market is beholden to the jobs market. Until we see the unemployment rate drop significantly, there just won't be enough new home buyers. All the tax credit did was extend the period of time it will take for this market to bottom out. It was meant to help bail out the mortgage brokers, real estate agents and homebuilders, all of whom were complicit in this mess.
Still, Washington keeps throwing money at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and they have been left out of the financial regulation bill that is being considered in Congress. That culture of corruption is at the heart of the matter, yet since Congress has received so much in the way of political contributions from these industries over the years, it is no wonder they don't have the courage to deal with the issues. Same ole same ole.
I've insisted for some time that the residential market is beholden to the jobs market. Until we see the unemployment rate drop significantly, there just won't be enough new home buyers. All the tax credit did was extend the period of time it will take for this market to bottom out. It was meant to help bail out the mortgage brokers, real estate agents and homebuilders, all of whom were complicit in this mess.
Still, Washington keeps throwing money at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and they have been left out of the financial regulation bill that is being considered in Congress. That culture of corruption is at the heart of the matter, yet since Congress has received so much in the way of political contributions from these industries over the years, it is no wonder they don't have the courage to deal with the issues. Same ole same ole.
Obama Getting No Respect From Military
Apparently, General Stanley McChrystal, the general in charge in Afghanistan, is offering his resignation to President Obama after being called back to Washington because of an article in Rolling Stone magazine, where the general and his staff offered none to favorable quotes about the civilians they are dealing within the Obama administration.
The fact is, the military feels hamstrung by this ridiculous troop withdrawal deadline put in place when Obama decided to send another 30,000 trips to Afghanistan. Telling the enemy when you plan on leaving before you even start the next fight does not make for good military strategy, or political strategy with your allies.
Obama had said in his presidential campaign that this was the war we should have been fighting all along instead of in Iraq. However, when it came time to make a decision on strategy due to increasing failure in Afghanistan, Obama catered to his base, and set the deadline, since he knew he was going to piss them off with a troop surge. So, in other words, he made a half-ass commitment to the troops, and that simply doesn't sit well with them.
I am not sure we can win there. While I feel like we should stay, for humanitarian reasons, then we need to make a stronger commitment over there. Otherwise, we need to just get out, and focus on protecting our borders and keeping an eye on the bad guys from afar.
The fact is, the military feels hamstrung by this ridiculous troop withdrawal deadline put in place when Obama decided to send another 30,000 trips to Afghanistan. Telling the enemy when you plan on leaving before you even start the next fight does not make for good military strategy, or political strategy with your allies.
Obama had said in his presidential campaign that this was the war we should have been fighting all along instead of in Iraq. However, when it came time to make a decision on strategy due to increasing failure in Afghanistan, Obama catered to his base, and set the deadline, since he knew he was going to piss them off with a troop surge. So, in other words, he made a half-ass commitment to the troops, and that simply doesn't sit well with them.
I am not sure we can win there. While I feel like we should stay, for humanitarian reasons, then we need to make a stronger commitment over there. Otherwise, we need to just get out, and focus on protecting our borders and keeping an eye on the bad guys from afar.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Thoughts on the U.S. Open Golf Championship
I am a huge fan of the U.S. Open, and watch it every year from start to finish. I enjoy watching it more than most other tournaments because it is more a battle of attrition and nerves, rather than a weekend putting tournament. I want to see the pros battle their emotions and nerves to fight through adversity. Quite often, the winner of the U.S. Open is the one who simply survives.
This week, however, I think we witnessed that the quality of the golf at the highest level is not what it should be. The tournament was held at Pebble Beach, site of Tiger's most dominant victory, Tom Kite's survival in 1992, Watson's magnificent chip in on 17 in 1982 and Nicklaus' classic 1-iron off the pin on 17 in 1972.
Did we see any big, clutch shots like these on Sunday? Incredibly, three of the game's biggest names, Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson and Ernie Els were all in the hunt on Sunday, at least heading into the round. Yet, no one achieved greatness. Tiger Woods has yet to win a major by coming from behind in the final round. When he presses, he becomes average.
Mickelson is simply never quite sharp enough to win a U.S. Open. Whether it's a balky putter, a wayward driver, or imprecise iron shots, he is never quite up to the task in this tournament. Augusta fits perfectly into his game, as he can hit heroic shot after heroic shot and get away with poor tee shots. The U.S. Open is never so kind.
Ernie Els had the best chance of the three to win. He has won a U.S. Open twice before, but in both cases, he was simply the last man standing, rather than the guy who went out and grabbed the trophy.
Back in the day, we had some tremendous duals in the U.S. Open. Greg Norman against Fuzzy Zoeller at Winged Foot. Curtis Strange against Nick Faldo. Watson against Nicklaus. Nicklaus against Isao Aoki. Palmer against Nicklaus and Ben Hogan in 1960. In more recent times, if Tiger is not on his game, it is just the final survivor who wins. The big names seem to fold up when the opportunity presents itself. This is why other than Tiger's wins, we don't see many big names winning this tournament. Last year, it was Lucas Glover. In 2008 Tiger wins, and is challenged by Rocco Mediate. Lee Westwood was there too, but while a great player, has never won a major.
In 2007, it was Angel Cabrera. He is a great player for about one or two weeks every two or three years. In 2006, it was Geoff Ogilvy. Where has he been since? Nice player, but not destined for greatness. In 2005, Michael Campbell, who has since fallen off the face of the earth. 2004, Retief Goosen, whose meltdown in 2005 allowed Campbell to win. Goosen is never anywhere to be found in majors any more.
In 2003, Jim Furyk. Nice player, but more of a check cashing machine than a great golfer.
When are we going to see the truly great players duke it out for this title? Instead, all we see are nice players wilt in the toughest tournament to win and then mouth off about the difficulty. Witness Ian Poulter whining about the short par 3 7th on Saturday. He complained about the inability to hit the green. Just a few groups later, Dustin Johnson hits it within a foot of the pin on that hole.
I did disagree with some of the conditions put in place by the USGA this week. The 17th was a joke. Last I had heard was that only 7 players had hit that green all day on Sunday. That was less than 10% of the players. If they wanted the green to be that firm, they needed to move up the tee.
The 14th hole was a mockery. While somewhat entertaining to watch, that hole simply embarrassed the pros, who had trouble holding that green with a wedge.
Otherwise, I thought the course provided a great test, and Graeme McDowell is a worthy champion, although he simply survived.
This week, however, I think we witnessed that the quality of the golf at the highest level is not what it should be. The tournament was held at Pebble Beach, site of Tiger's most dominant victory, Tom Kite's survival in 1992, Watson's magnificent chip in on 17 in 1982 and Nicklaus' classic 1-iron off the pin on 17 in 1972.
Did we see any big, clutch shots like these on Sunday? Incredibly, three of the game's biggest names, Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson and Ernie Els were all in the hunt on Sunday, at least heading into the round. Yet, no one achieved greatness. Tiger Woods has yet to win a major by coming from behind in the final round. When he presses, he becomes average.
Mickelson is simply never quite sharp enough to win a U.S. Open. Whether it's a balky putter, a wayward driver, or imprecise iron shots, he is never quite up to the task in this tournament. Augusta fits perfectly into his game, as he can hit heroic shot after heroic shot and get away with poor tee shots. The U.S. Open is never so kind.
Ernie Els had the best chance of the three to win. He has won a U.S. Open twice before, but in both cases, he was simply the last man standing, rather than the guy who went out and grabbed the trophy.
Back in the day, we had some tremendous duals in the U.S. Open. Greg Norman against Fuzzy Zoeller at Winged Foot. Curtis Strange against Nick Faldo. Watson against Nicklaus. Nicklaus against Isao Aoki. Palmer against Nicklaus and Ben Hogan in 1960. In more recent times, if Tiger is not on his game, it is just the final survivor who wins. The big names seem to fold up when the opportunity presents itself. This is why other than Tiger's wins, we don't see many big names winning this tournament. Last year, it was Lucas Glover. In 2008 Tiger wins, and is challenged by Rocco Mediate. Lee Westwood was there too, but while a great player, has never won a major.
In 2007, it was Angel Cabrera. He is a great player for about one or two weeks every two or three years. In 2006, it was Geoff Ogilvy. Where has he been since? Nice player, but not destined for greatness. In 2005, Michael Campbell, who has since fallen off the face of the earth. 2004, Retief Goosen, whose meltdown in 2005 allowed Campbell to win. Goosen is never anywhere to be found in majors any more.
In 2003, Jim Furyk. Nice player, but more of a check cashing machine than a great golfer.
When are we going to see the truly great players duke it out for this title? Instead, all we see are nice players wilt in the toughest tournament to win and then mouth off about the difficulty. Witness Ian Poulter whining about the short par 3 7th on Saturday. He complained about the inability to hit the green. Just a few groups later, Dustin Johnson hits it within a foot of the pin on that hole.
I did disagree with some of the conditions put in place by the USGA this week. The 17th was a joke. Last I had heard was that only 7 players had hit that green all day on Sunday. That was less than 10% of the players. If they wanted the green to be that firm, they needed to move up the tee.
The 14th hole was a mockery. While somewhat entertaining to watch, that hole simply embarrassed the pros, who had trouble holding that green with a wedge.
Otherwise, I thought the course provided a great test, and Graeme McDowell is a worthy champion, although he simply survived.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Obama Continues to Blame Republicans for Blocking "Progress"
I just read where President Obama, in his weekly radio address, continues to whine about Republicans blocking progress. Ummmm...last I saw, the Democrats were in control of the White House, Senate and House of Representatives. Not only are they in control, but they have substantial majorities in both the House and Senate. How is it possible that the Republicans are the ones blocking progress?
Ah, yes, because they stand united in opposition to Obama's agenda, just like the majority of voters!
Funny thing the Democrats are pointing to a Gallup poll out that shows Americans are in favor of more spending and stimulus to create jobs and boost the economy. Notice how that question was phrased...it assumes that the economy will improve and jobs will be created if only the government spent more money.
Have a look at this quote... (“We have tried spending money,” FDR Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau Jr. said in 1939. “We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. ... I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot!”)
Last I saw, we've spent over $1 trillion in stimulus, bailouts, and in the TARP, yet we have an unemployment rate near 10%, and this is the longest it has remained this high since the 1930's. It was only World War II that saved our economy back then. What will save us now?
Ah, yes, because they stand united in opposition to Obama's agenda, just like the majority of voters!
Funny thing the Democrats are pointing to a Gallup poll out that shows Americans are in favor of more spending and stimulus to create jobs and boost the economy. Notice how that question was phrased...it assumes that the economy will improve and jobs will be created if only the government spent more money.
Have a look at this quote... (“We have tried spending money,” FDR Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau Jr. said in 1939. “We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. ... I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot!”)
Last I saw, we've spent over $1 trillion in stimulus, bailouts, and in the TARP, yet we have an unemployment rate near 10%, and this is the longest it has remained this high since the 1930's. It was only World War II that saved our economy back then. What will save us now?
Friday, June 18, 2010
Democrats Only Have Themselves To Blame For Current Mood In America
Democrats still can't seem to look themselves in the mirror and say "maybe we did make a mistake." That phrase can refer to the election of Barack Obama in both the Democratic Primary in 2008 as well as the general election that year. It can refer to the passing of the $800 billion plus stimulus package. It can refer to jamming through a healthcare plan that most Americans did not want. It can refer to their ignoring the Tea Partiers last year during the healthcare debate.
Democrats now want to spend another $50 billion on providing the states money to supposedly save police and teacher jobs. They also want to spend another $100 billion on more stimulus.
The Democrats and White House are way out of touch when it comes to the mood of the country. Vice President Biden is out there telling everyone how wonderful the economy looks when unemployment remains near 10%. The private sector is not creating jobs as evidenced by the latest Labor Department employment report and the weekly initial jobless claims figures, which refuse to drop below 450,000 per week.
President Obama seems to think that every time he gives a speech, everything will work out. However, with each successive speech, his bounce in the polls decline. After this latest speech regarding the oil spill, his approvals have actually declined, according to both the Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls. He has now hit an all time low approval rating in the Rasmussen poll of likely voters.
This latest speech showed exactly how tone deaf Obama seems to be. Americans wanted to know how and when the oil leak may be plugged, yet Obama was talking about the necessity for a new cap and trade energy bill and switching to a green economy.
It is becoming more clear to Americans that we can not rely on the Federal government to be the solution to every problem. The government does best when it comes to emergency issues and providing a safety net for the needy. Otherwise, this huge bureaucracy just gets in the way with too much red tape, and too many bureaucrats worried about covering their asses. Americans want a lean, more efficient government. This will be the message in November, and this is why the Democrats' days as the majority party in Washington are numbered.
Democrats now want to spend another $50 billion on providing the states money to supposedly save police and teacher jobs. They also want to spend another $100 billion on more stimulus.
The Democrats and White House are way out of touch when it comes to the mood of the country. Vice President Biden is out there telling everyone how wonderful the economy looks when unemployment remains near 10%. The private sector is not creating jobs as evidenced by the latest Labor Department employment report and the weekly initial jobless claims figures, which refuse to drop below 450,000 per week.
President Obama seems to think that every time he gives a speech, everything will work out. However, with each successive speech, his bounce in the polls decline. After this latest speech regarding the oil spill, his approvals have actually declined, according to both the Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls. He has now hit an all time low approval rating in the Rasmussen poll of likely voters.
This latest speech showed exactly how tone deaf Obama seems to be. Americans wanted to know how and when the oil leak may be plugged, yet Obama was talking about the necessity for a new cap and trade energy bill and switching to a green economy.
It is becoming more clear to Americans that we can not rely on the Federal government to be the solution to every problem. The government does best when it comes to emergency issues and providing a safety net for the needy. Otherwise, this huge bureaucracy just gets in the way with too much red tape, and too many bureaucrats worried about covering their asses. Americans want a lean, more efficient government. This will be the message in November, and this is why the Democrats' days as the majority party in Washington are numbered.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Gulf Oil Cleanup Needs Leadership - Where is Winston Wolf?
After catching some of President Obama's speech regarding the Gulf Oil Spill debacle, it is clear there is no leadership at the top. Hell, if even Olbermann and Matthews are knocking the prez on MSNBC, you know it looks bad.
What, or rather, who we need is Winston Wolf! Yeah, remember, the Wolf, the character in Pulp Fiction played by Harvey Keitel that was called in by Marcellus Wallace to deal with the mess created by the characters portrayed by John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson.
The Wolf sped to the scene, made his assessment, then began barking orders to direct the clean up. He did what Obama never seems to want to do, and that is make a DECISION! Obama always seems to want to defer or to blame. Rarely does he give direction and leadership. Instead, he calls in the experts and confers. In his speech tonite he continues to bring up the qualifications of his staff, the Nobel prizes and such, rather than give direction.
Well, hopefully, Winston Wolf is out there somewhere and he can get this mess cleaned up.
I also read tonite that Governor Jindal in Louisiana has finally leaped over the federal bureaucracy and ordered the National Guard to begin creating sand barriers off the coast to keep the oil from getting into the wetlands and marshes down there. Jindal has been frustrated for weeks by the lack of cooperation from the feds and finally took matters into his own hands.
Maybe Governor Jindal should be in charge of the clean up as well. Seems to me the governor of Louisiana is a better equipped leader than the current POTUS.
What, or rather, who we need is Winston Wolf! Yeah, remember, the Wolf, the character in Pulp Fiction played by Harvey Keitel that was called in by Marcellus Wallace to deal with the mess created by the characters portrayed by John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson.
The Wolf sped to the scene, made his assessment, then began barking orders to direct the clean up. He did what Obama never seems to want to do, and that is make a DECISION! Obama always seems to want to defer or to blame. Rarely does he give direction and leadership. Instead, he calls in the experts and confers. In his speech tonite he continues to bring up the qualifications of his staff, the Nobel prizes and such, rather than give direction.
Well, hopefully, Winston Wolf is out there somewhere and he can get this mess cleaned up.
I also read tonite that Governor Jindal in Louisiana has finally leaped over the federal bureaucracy and ordered the National Guard to begin creating sand barriers off the coast to keep the oil from getting into the wetlands and marshes down there. Jindal has been frustrated for weeks by the lack of cooperation from the feds and finally took matters into his own hands.
Maybe Governor Jindal should be in charge of the clean up as well. Seems to me the governor of Louisiana is a better equipped leader than the current POTUS.
Here Comes Hillary!
Uh oh, here comes Hillary Clinton! Dana Milbank wrote in the Washington Post today that Hillary is now more popular than President Obama. No surprise there. Hillary has not been in front of the cameras much during this Gulf Oil spill debacle. Obama has been taking a bit of a beating in the press over the issue. While his approval ratings have been in decline since Day 1 of his presidency, Hillary's have stayed the same.
The mid-term elections in November will go a long way toward determining whether Obama will face a strong primary challenge from any Democrat. If there is one that can actually defeat a presidential incumbent, it would be Hillary Clinton. However, the feat will be extremely difficult to pull off. I am no presidential historian, but I would venture to guess that it has been extremely rare for an incumbent president to lose in a primary. It never occurred in the 20th century.
You can bet that if the Republicans re-take the House and Senate, that there will be major fall-out. I doubt both will occur. If they do re-take the House, which seems to be a bit more plausible, and come close in the Senate, there will be many in this administration that leave. If Hillary Clinton resigns as Secretary of State, you can bet that she will be thinking about another run for president.
The mid-term elections in November will go a long way toward determining whether Obama will face a strong primary challenge from any Democrat. If there is one that can actually defeat a presidential incumbent, it would be Hillary Clinton. However, the feat will be extremely difficult to pull off. I am no presidential historian, but I would venture to guess that it has been extremely rare for an incumbent president to lose in a primary. It never occurred in the 20th century.
You can bet that if the Republicans re-take the House and Senate, that there will be major fall-out. I doubt both will occur. If they do re-take the House, which seems to be a bit more plausible, and come close in the Senate, there will be many in this administration that leave. If Hillary Clinton resigns as Secretary of State, you can bet that she will be thinking about another run for president.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Why I'm Not a Republican
I just read a quick article in The Weekly Standard, a conservative paper, how Mike Huckabee is ripping Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels for asking for a truce on social issues to focus on the economic problems this country faces. This is why I am more of a Liberterian than a Republican, and why I left the Republican party years ago.
With all of the issues we have facing this country such as unemployment, energy, financial regulation, the economy in general, and geopolitical concerns, the right wing of the Republican party still wants to have its say on gay marriage and abortion. These are simply polarizing issues and independent voters like myself hate to be dictated to in this regard, just like we hate how the Democrats want to dictate our healthcare and how much energy we consume.
The Tea Party does not focus on these social issues. It is more concerned with every increasing government spending which will result in ever higher taxes.
To the right wing Republicans I say, it's the economy stupid! You can preach family values all you want, just keep it out of politics!
With all of the issues we have facing this country such as unemployment, energy, financial regulation, the economy in general, and geopolitical concerns, the right wing of the Republican party still wants to have its say on gay marriage and abortion. These are simply polarizing issues and independent voters like myself hate to be dictated to in this regard, just like we hate how the Democrats want to dictate our healthcare and how much energy we consume.
The Tea Party does not focus on these social issues. It is more concerned with every increasing government spending which will result in ever higher taxes.
To the right wing Republicans I say, it's the economy stupid! You can preach family values all you want, just keep it out of politics!
World Cup Soccer vs. Stanley Cup Hockey
As the World Cup is under way in South Africa, I have attempted to watch a couple games, although I admittedly missed the USA vs. England match. Coming on the heels of the Stanley Cup finals, I am finding the World Cup to be EXTREMELY boring. Not only that, but there is that incessant background noise at each game from fans blowing on those ridiculous plastic horns throughout the entire game.
I used to be a big fan of soccer, and I admire the skill of the players. I hate the slow pace of the games and some of the acting on display when players try to draw a foul.
Hockey, on the other hand, is my favorite sport to watch, hands down. As with many sports, I don't sit and watch many regular season games, as I have too many other things to do. I will keep a game on in the background as I am working in the evening, but I won't sit and watch many games.
Last week, my favorite NHL team, the Philadelphia Flyers lost in six games to the Chicago Blackhawks. With the exception of game 5, a 7-4 win for Chicago, every game was excellent, and the action was truly amazing. Not only are hockey players amazing athletes, they are the toughest and most passionate athletes in all of sports.
While my Flyers lost in the finals, it proved to be an amazing run by this team and I have nothing but high hopes for the future. Tonite, my other favorite team, the AHL's Hershey Bears have a chance to clinch their second straight Calder Cup and third in four years. Go Bears!
I am sure as the World Cup progresses, I will watch a few more games as I do every year. The "beautiful game" can truly be beautiful to watch when the likes of Brazil, Spain, Germany or The Netherlands is on the field. But, once the World Cup comes and goes, I likely won't watch another game until 2014. In the meantime, I will continue to watch hockey!
I used to be a big fan of soccer, and I admire the skill of the players. I hate the slow pace of the games and some of the acting on display when players try to draw a foul.
Hockey, on the other hand, is my favorite sport to watch, hands down. As with many sports, I don't sit and watch many regular season games, as I have too many other things to do. I will keep a game on in the background as I am working in the evening, but I won't sit and watch many games.
Last week, my favorite NHL team, the Philadelphia Flyers lost in six games to the Chicago Blackhawks. With the exception of game 5, a 7-4 win for Chicago, every game was excellent, and the action was truly amazing. Not only are hockey players amazing athletes, they are the toughest and most passionate athletes in all of sports.
While my Flyers lost in the finals, it proved to be an amazing run by this team and I have nothing but high hopes for the future. Tonite, my other favorite team, the AHL's Hershey Bears have a chance to clinch their second straight Calder Cup and third in four years. Go Bears!
I am sure as the World Cup progresses, I will watch a few more games as I do every year. The "beautiful game" can truly be beautiful to watch when the likes of Brazil, Spain, Germany or The Netherlands is on the field. But, once the World Cup comes and goes, I likely won't watch another game until 2014. In the meantime, I will continue to watch hockey!
Saturday, June 12, 2010
I Was Right, Obama Was Less Qualified Than Sarah Palin
My Democrat friends always laughed when I would say that Barack Obama was less qualified to be president than Sarah Palin. They were justified in their remarks by her performances in interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric. But, I never claimed that Palin was as smart as a brain surgeon. That is not what the job of president requires.
Case in point...who do you think was the smarter man, Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan? Most would argue that Carter had more intelligence, yet who is viewed as the more successful president? Reagan, hands down.
I never claimed that Obama was not intelligent. He clearly is. However, he never managed a small business, let alone a city, a county or a state. Palin had experience as mayor of a small town and governor of a small state. One could argue that she was successful at both.
At the time of his election, much like Jimmy Carter, the country wanted to move on from scandal and a Republican party that had controlled the White House for eight years. Any Democrat would have won election against John McCain.
Unfortunately, Americans made the wrong decision. Let's review Obaman's presidency to date...yes, he inherited a financial mess. But, what did he do first? He allowed Nancy Pelosi and her very liberal friends in Congress to craft a disaster of a stimulus bill. The original cost was $787 billion, and now is projected to be over $850 billion. Yet, what do we have to show for it? This stimulus bill was designed to invest and create many so-called "green jobs." Yet, as George Will has recently pointed out, the administration has not even defined what a "green job" is yet.
Remember when the Democrats used to say that the stimulus would "save or create" millions of jobs? Well, we don't hear that phrase any more do we? The economy, tied to the natural business cycle, would have rebounded on its own without the stimulus because of all the monetary easing being done by the Federal Reserve and Treasury. How much it would have rebounded, no one knows, but that is how the business cycle works.
After the stimulus, Obama and the Democrats turned their attention to health care. After a year, they finally rammed through legislation that most Americans didn't want, and most want to repeal today. This hugely complicated bill has caused tremendous uncertainty among individuals and businesses alike. The effect has been to stunt growth further.
Let's turn our attention to foreign policy, and specifically Iran. Last summer, Iran held bogus elections that held Ahmedineajad in power. The country was on verge of civil war as protesters greeted the election results with disdain. Obama showed no support for the protesters, because he was too involved with trying to appease Ahmedinejad so that Iran may pull back from its uranium enrichment program. Late last year, the administration signaled a major deadline for Iran to comply, or else. Or else what? The U.N. Security Council has finally passed new sanctions, none of which will do one thing to keep Iran from continuing on its current path. Basically, Iran thumbed its nose at Obama.
How about Israel? Obama totally disses the Israeli Prime Minister and now has a 4% approval rating in Israel. Our only true ally in the Middle East, and he treats them worse than Iran. No wonder the birthers continue to beat their drum about where Obama was born.
Now we have the Gulf Oil spill. The reaction to Obama's handling of the oil spill is worse than the reaction to Bush's handling of Katrina. He was slow to react, and now comes off as a petty man just looking to blame others and make a scapegoat out of someone. Instead of providing leadership and getting the best people together to solve the problem, Obama is looking for an "ass to kick." Now it comes out that the administration actually falsified a recommendation that there be a moratorium on drilling.
Finally, let's look at how things are going in Washington. Obama ran as a "post-partisan" candidate. Washington is now beset by more partisanship than any time under the Bush administration. I never believed he would be a moderate president, based upon his voting record in the Senate.
So where are we now, less than 18 months after Obama took office? We have 9.7% unemployment (hire if you count the people who have given up the search and the underemployed), $13 trillion in government debt, the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history, three terror attacks on American soil and an administration that refuses to use the terms Islamic terrorist, jihadist, etc., a disastrous health care bill that will only add to our debt, continued problems in the Middle East with foreign leaders who show zero respect for our president, and an extremely partisan Congress.
Sarah Palin is a polarizing figure, but remember, John McCain was the man at the top of the ticket, a man who has a record of working with the other side. Who would you rather have as president now America?
In the last 18 months, Palin has actually helped to successfully elect Scott Brown in Massachussetts, and helped several other candidates win primaries against Republican establishment candidates. I suspect that as time goes on, if there are Republican successes in November, Palin will become a much stronger potential candidate.
Case in point...who do you think was the smarter man, Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan? Most would argue that Carter had more intelligence, yet who is viewed as the more successful president? Reagan, hands down.
I never claimed that Obama was not intelligent. He clearly is. However, he never managed a small business, let alone a city, a county or a state. Palin had experience as mayor of a small town and governor of a small state. One could argue that she was successful at both.
At the time of his election, much like Jimmy Carter, the country wanted to move on from scandal and a Republican party that had controlled the White House for eight years. Any Democrat would have won election against John McCain.
Unfortunately, Americans made the wrong decision. Let's review Obaman's presidency to date...yes, he inherited a financial mess. But, what did he do first? He allowed Nancy Pelosi and her very liberal friends in Congress to craft a disaster of a stimulus bill. The original cost was $787 billion, and now is projected to be over $850 billion. Yet, what do we have to show for it? This stimulus bill was designed to invest and create many so-called "green jobs." Yet, as George Will has recently pointed out, the administration has not even defined what a "green job" is yet.
Remember when the Democrats used to say that the stimulus would "save or create" millions of jobs? Well, we don't hear that phrase any more do we? The economy, tied to the natural business cycle, would have rebounded on its own without the stimulus because of all the monetary easing being done by the Federal Reserve and Treasury. How much it would have rebounded, no one knows, but that is how the business cycle works.
After the stimulus, Obama and the Democrats turned their attention to health care. After a year, they finally rammed through legislation that most Americans didn't want, and most want to repeal today. This hugely complicated bill has caused tremendous uncertainty among individuals and businesses alike. The effect has been to stunt growth further.
Let's turn our attention to foreign policy, and specifically Iran. Last summer, Iran held bogus elections that held Ahmedineajad in power. The country was on verge of civil war as protesters greeted the election results with disdain. Obama showed no support for the protesters, because he was too involved with trying to appease Ahmedinejad so that Iran may pull back from its uranium enrichment program. Late last year, the administration signaled a major deadline for Iran to comply, or else. Or else what? The U.N. Security Council has finally passed new sanctions, none of which will do one thing to keep Iran from continuing on its current path. Basically, Iran thumbed its nose at Obama.
How about Israel? Obama totally disses the Israeli Prime Minister and now has a 4% approval rating in Israel. Our only true ally in the Middle East, and he treats them worse than Iran. No wonder the birthers continue to beat their drum about where Obama was born.
Now we have the Gulf Oil spill. The reaction to Obama's handling of the oil spill is worse than the reaction to Bush's handling of Katrina. He was slow to react, and now comes off as a petty man just looking to blame others and make a scapegoat out of someone. Instead of providing leadership and getting the best people together to solve the problem, Obama is looking for an "ass to kick." Now it comes out that the administration actually falsified a recommendation that there be a moratorium on drilling.
Finally, let's look at how things are going in Washington. Obama ran as a "post-partisan" candidate. Washington is now beset by more partisanship than any time under the Bush administration. I never believed he would be a moderate president, based upon his voting record in the Senate.
So where are we now, less than 18 months after Obama took office? We have 9.7% unemployment (hire if you count the people who have given up the search and the underemployed), $13 trillion in government debt, the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history, three terror attacks on American soil and an administration that refuses to use the terms Islamic terrorist, jihadist, etc., a disastrous health care bill that will only add to our debt, continued problems in the Middle East with foreign leaders who show zero respect for our president, and an extremely partisan Congress.
Sarah Palin is a polarizing figure, but remember, John McCain was the man at the top of the ticket, a man who has a record of working with the other side. Who would you rather have as president now America?
In the last 18 months, Palin has actually helped to successfully elect Scott Brown in Massachussetts, and helped several other candidates win primaries against Republican establishment candidates. I suspect that as time goes on, if there are Republican successes in November, Palin will become a much stronger potential candidate.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
More on Obama Polls
I just read that Obama's poll ratings in Florida are now 54% disapprove to 40% approve, a switch of 19 points over the last six weeks...due completely to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
The next presidential election is a long way off. But, you can bet if there is any hint of oil on Florida beaches in 2012 that Obama has no chance of winning Florida, and he can pretty much kiss his re-election chances good bye. Even Sarah Palin might be able to beat him in that case. Scary! Do you think Hillary Clinton will remain Secretary of State for much longer if Obama continues to sink? I bet she is starting to lick her chops!
The next presidential election is a long way off. But, you can bet if there is any hint of oil on Florida beaches in 2012 that Obama has no chance of winning Florida, and he can pretty much kiss his re-election chances good bye. Even Sarah Palin might be able to beat him in that case. Scary! Do you think Hillary Clinton will remain Secretary of State for much longer if Obama continues to sink? I bet she is starting to lick her chops!
Presidential Tracking Polls
As I've mentioned previously, any time Obama's poll numbers really begin to slide, he can always rely on one of the big networks to help keep them stable. This week, the ABC News/Washington Post poll indicated a 52% approval rating for Obama, the only recent poll that gives him over 50%. I wonder if they bothered to poll anyone in Louisiana? Even the Gallup tracking poll, which polls everyone, had him recently at 45% approval. Every month this happens, whether it is NBC, CBS, ABC or CNN, there is a poll that will give Obama a 50% approval rating. Even in states like PA, Michigan and Ohio, his numbers are way under 50%. So, I guess they just ask a few more New Yorkers and Californians their opinion to offset his dreadful numbers elsewhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)