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.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
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.
Will Women Save Republican Party?
Last night, there were big primary elections across the country that determined what Democrats and Republicans will be squaring off in the November mid-term elections. In three big races, women won the nod for the Republican nomination...Meg Whitman for governor in California, Carly Fiorina for Senator in California and Nikki Haley for governor in South Carolina. Haley may still face a run-off election, but she dominated the field and is the likely nominee. In the two California races, the Republicans are clear underdogs, but I believe they have a fighting chance, especially if we don't see much economic improvement over the next few months.
You have to wonder if NOW will ever back any of these Republican women, especially when they run against a male. Doubtful, but it is clear that NOW does not represent anywhere near all women in this country.
I think this is a great development for the Republican party, which still seems to be dominated by some stodgy old men. Some fresh new faces, and particularly female faces, can only help their cause. The Democratic party can no longer be viewed as the only alternative for women.
You have to wonder if NOW will ever back any of these Republican women, especially when they run against a male. Doubtful, but it is clear that NOW does not represent anywhere near all women in this country.
I think this is a great development for the Republican party, which still seems to be dominated by some stodgy old men. Some fresh new faces, and particularly female faces, can only help their cause. The Democratic party can no longer be viewed as the only alternative for women.
Democrats to spend $125 million to sell Obamacare
Back to Obamacare again. Democrats feel the need to spend $125 million over the next five years to sell the healthcare program that most people love to hate. Again, they say they have just not communicated the program very well, so we are going to get bombarded with more propaganda.
This is kinda like beating a dead horse isn't it? Over the next several years, we are going to truly find out whether we like it or not. I've read plenty that large and small businesses alike are going to dump millions of employees from their healthcare programs. That is just one potential issue going forward.
We probably need to reserve judgment on the whole thing for a few years. However, I will say this...when I see how Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are bleeding red ink, I will never be convinced that this was a good idea. The government doesn't tend to manage anything very well and it doesn't matter who is in charge. All I see now are deficits that continue to rise and no one has the balls to reign them in, especially since our economy remains fragile.
So, spending another $125 million is like a drop in the bucket, but couldn't that money be better spent elsewhere?
This is kinda like beating a dead horse isn't it? Over the next several years, we are going to truly find out whether we like it or not. I've read plenty that large and small businesses alike are going to dump millions of employees from their healthcare programs. That is just one potential issue going forward.
We probably need to reserve judgment on the whole thing for a few years. However, I will say this...when I see how Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are bleeding red ink, I will never be convinced that this was a good idea. The government doesn't tend to manage anything very well and it doesn't matter who is in charge. All I see now are deficits that continue to rise and no one has the balls to reign them in, especially since our economy remains fragile.
So, spending another $125 million is like a drop in the bucket, but couldn't that money be better spent elsewhere?
Nicklaus, Palmer, & Player - Still Getting It Done
I just read that Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer and Gary Player helped raise over $15 million for a mission school in Virginia. That is a new one-day record for a PGA sponsored charitable event.
Palmer is 80, Player is 74, and Nicklaus is 70. None can hit the ball much over 230 yards on the fly any more. Yet, these three legends are still capable of drawing a crowd and entertaining fans.
There are no other sports figures that have the class of these three gentlemen. No other sports figures have given back to fans any where close to what these men have, and that is why all three, decades beyond their prime, still command the respect of fans around the world.
Palmer is 80, Player is 74, and Nicklaus is 70. None can hit the ball much over 230 yards on the fly any more. Yet, these three legends are still capable of drawing a crowd and entertaining fans.
There are no other sports figures that have the class of these three gentlemen. No other sports figures have given back to fans any where close to what these men have, and that is why all three, decades beyond their prime, still command the respect of fans around the world.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Liberals Fail Economics 101
Just read an interesting article this morning regarding the ineptitude of Liberals in regard to basic economics. The link may be seen below. The results are scary, considering that Democrats are in control of Washington. The bottom line is that they're political ideals clearly cloud their judgment when it comes to basic economic issues.
For instance, on the question of whether the company with the largest share of a particular market is a monopoly, those calling themselves liberal or very liberal tended to say yes, they agree that this is the case. Ummmm....what? A company is only a monopoly if it is "the only" company in a particular market, or at least has far great than a 50% share. Just because it is the biggest company, does not make it a monopoly...it may only have a 10% share.
On the question of whether rent control will lead to housing shortages, liberals failed again. They disagreed that this would be the case. That is one of the most basic questions in economics and they failed to get that right. If you limit the profit that a developer may generate, then why would he build new housing?
Overall, there were 8 questions, and liberals answered wrongly over 60% of the time while conservatives and liberterians answered wrongly less than 25% of the time.
What does that tell ya? The article is below
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703561604575282190930932412.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
For instance, on the question of whether the company with the largest share of a particular market is a monopoly, those calling themselves liberal or very liberal tended to say yes, they agree that this is the case. Ummmm....what? A company is only a monopoly if it is "the only" company in a particular market, or at least has far great than a 50% share. Just because it is the biggest company, does not make it a monopoly...it may only have a 10% share.
On the question of whether rent control will lead to housing shortages, liberals failed again. They disagreed that this would be the case. That is one of the most basic questions in economics and they failed to get that right. If you limit the profit that a developer may generate, then why would he build new housing?
Overall, there were 8 questions, and liberals answered wrongly over 60% of the time while conservatives and liberterians answered wrongly less than 25% of the time.
What does that tell ya? The article is below
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703561604575282190930932412.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Friday, June 4, 2010
Weak Jobs Report Pushes Stocks Lower Before Market Open
The economy received mixed news on jobs this morning as the headline unemployment rate fell to 9.7% from last month's 9.9%. Unfortunately, virtually all of the reported jobs gains came from the hiring of census workers. The total number of jobs created was about 430,000, but 411,000 of those were census workers, who will be laid off in a couple months.
I've been watching the economists and pundits on CNBC for months as they get out their pom poms, trying to cheer on job growth that just isn't there.
In my line of work I keep in touch with contractors and other folks from time to time. None of them are upbeat, none. Two contractors have mentioned at the end of April that they had no work beyond mid-Summer.
It is plainly clear to me that the government has screwed up big time in trying to create jobs. The stimulus package passed last year was a disgraceful, pork filled piece of legislation meant to appease every Democrat that had been frustrated by dealing with a Republican president. Then the administration continued to pursue the healthcare bill that provided substantial uncertainty to small business who realized their costs would go up further by hiring workers.
All we have to do is look to Europe to see what the future holds for the U.S. Government's eventually run out of money to prop up entitlements.
With the troubles in Europe and a slowing economy in China, you have added headwinds to the U.S. economy.
This administration needs to quit defending its policies and go back to square one.
I've been watching the economists and pundits on CNBC for months as they get out their pom poms, trying to cheer on job growth that just isn't there.
In my line of work I keep in touch with contractors and other folks from time to time. None of them are upbeat, none. Two contractors have mentioned at the end of April that they had no work beyond mid-Summer.
It is plainly clear to me that the government has screwed up big time in trying to create jobs. The stimulus package passed last year was a disgraceful, pork filled piece of legislation meant to appease every Democrat that had been frustrated by dealing with a Republican president. Then the administration continued to pursue the healthcare bill that provided substantial uncertainty to small business who realized their costs would go up further by hiring workers.
All we have to do is look to Europe to see what the future holds for the U.S. Government's eventually run out of money to prop up entitlements.
With the troubles in Europe and a slowing economy in China, you have added headwinds to the U.S. economy.
This administration needs to quit defending its policies and go back to square one.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Obama Whines Some More in College Speech
I just ran across bits of a speech that President Obama gave at Carnegie Mellon today. Obama feels that the American Dream may be slipping away, and as usual blames Republicans as the cause for blocking his agenda. Ummm, last I saw, the Democrats STILL dominate the Senate and House. If he can't get anything passed its because most people don't want it!
He blames Bush for turning a $237 billion surplus left by Clinton (and a Republican Congress) into a $1.3 trillion deficit (with both a Republican and Democrat Congress). Yes, Bush added to the deficit with too much spending on two wars and domestic policy. Too much spending I said. Of course, Obama makes no mention of the fact that the Congressional Budget Office projects an additional $9 trillion in deficits over the next 10 years, with Obama at the helm.
Blame, blame, blame. When will this man get it that his whining is seriously getting old. Americans want a bold leader with similar values and ideals as they do. Reagan, yes, Reagan understood this. Seems to me that the economy did awfully well from 1982 to 1999. Reagan's tax cuts and optimism got the ball rolling, and Bill Clinton, after a rocky start, got smart and got out of the way. Unfortunately, we ended up with the tech bubble at the end of his term, but there is no way to avoid bubbles...history is laden with them.
All I ever hear from Obama is that the old policies of the past did not work. Politics as usual. Tax cuts do work, but when the government spends too much, it crowds out the private sector, and well, you have where we are now. Do we really want to be like Europe?
We need a new leader, or we need a new Obama. I hope this man grows up fast, because he reminds more and more of a whiny child. The press is starting to get this too. Nobody wants Jimmy Carter part II.
He blames Bush for turning a $237 billion surplus left by Clinton (and a Republican Congress) into a $1.3 trillion deficit (with both a Republican and Democrat Congress). Yes, Bush added to the deficit with too much spending on two wars and domestic policy. Too much spending I said. Of course, Obama makes no mention of the fact that the Congressional Budget Office projects an additional $9 trillion in deficits over the next 10 years, with Obama at the helm.
Blame, blame, blame. When will this man get it that his whining is seriously getting old. Americans want a bold leader with similar values and ideals as they do. Reagan, yes, Reagan understood this. Seems to me that the economy did awfully well from 1982 to 1999. Reagan's tax cuts and optimism got the ball rolling, and Bill Clinton, after a rocky start, got smart and got out of the way. Unfortunately, we ended up with the tech bubble at the end of his term, but there is no way to avoid bubbles...history is laden with them.
All I ever hear from Obama is that the old policies of the past did not work. Politics as usual. Tax cuts do work, but when the government spends too much, it crowds out the private sector, and well, you have where we are now. Do we really want to be like Europe?
We need a new leader, or we need a new Obama. I hope this man grows up fast, because he reminds more and more of a whiny child. The press is starting to get this too. Nobody wants Jimmy Carter part II.
White House Acknowledges Poor Communication On Oil Spill
So, Vice President Biden was out yesterday suggesting that the White House has not communicated effectively with the public about its role in dealing with the Gulf Oil leak.
Hmmm...haven't we heard that before? Oh yeah, on the benefits of the health care plan!
I guess this is the new fallback position on any issue in which the public gets pissed at the White House. We just suck at communicating, but we are actually doing a good job.
Seems to me if they can't communicate well, they probably don't do much of anything very well.
Hmmm...haven't we heard that before? Oh yeah, on the benefits of the health care plan!
I guess this is the new fallback position on any issue in which the public gets pissed at the White House. We just suck at communicating, but we are actually doing a good job.
Seems to me if they can't communicate well, they probably don't do much of anything very well.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Varying Points of View
I've just read a few different articles on the state of the economy and our national debt and thought I would share them here. There are varying opinions on what to do next to start creating jobs. There are actually more than two sides to the argument, but the two basic sides are that we've already spent too much money and now we must focus on national debt vs. we didn't spend enough on the stimulus last year so we need to do more and forget about the debt in the short run. There are also the sides of the argument for a larger government role in our daily lives, and against.
There are no easy answers. However, when it is clear that one plan hasn't worked at all, it's time to come up with some new ideas. The Gulf of Mexico situation is a microcosm of this.
For whatever reasons, I don't believe last year's stimulus has done much for the economy. The typical boom and bust economy would probably have done as much. The stimulus could possibly have worked if Congress had not filled it with pork and had not forced through the healthcare package, which spooked business. The proposed cap and trade legislation and the expiration of the Bush tax cuts will also be drags on the economy.
Now, that we are faced with issues in Europe, there is another tide coming in that we have to swim against in order to get this economy jump started.
It is worth looking at Japan since 1990. They have tried stimulus after stimulus over the last 20 years, but their economy has never enjoyed a significant recovery. Deflation took hold in spite of these stimulus packages. Ultimately, too much government spending becomes a drag on the economy due to the interest payments on the debt, and the crowding out of the private sector.
What are the solutions? I don't know, as the problems are very complex. We need to provide help for the unemployed and poverty stricken, but how much and for how long? Eventually, we must get the economy going to produce the new jobs. Any way you look at it, we are probably in for more pain and more government debt.
http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/203544/does-washington-care-about-unemployment
http://www.tnr.com/blog/william-galston/75228/the-case-against-keynes-some-questions-krugman-too
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-01-column01_ST_N.htm
There are no easy answers. However, when it is clear that one plan hasn't worked at all, it's time to come up with some new ideas. The Gulf of Mexico situation is a microcosm of this.
For whatever reasons, I don't believe last year's stimulus has done much for the economy. The typical boom and bust economy would probably have done as much. The stimulus could possibly have worked if Congress had not filled it with pork and had not forced through the healthcare package, which spooked business. The proposed cap and trade legislation and the expiration of the Bush tax cuts will also be drags on the economy.
Now, that we are faced with issues in Europe, there is another tide coming in that we have to swim against in order to get this economy jump started.
It is worth looking at Japan since 1990. They have tried stimulus after stimulus over the last 20 years, but their economy has never enjoyed a significant recovery. Deflation took hold in spite of these stimulus packages. Ultimately, too much government spending becomes a drag on the economy due to the interest payments on the debt, and the crowding out of the private sector.
What are the solutions? I don't know, as the problems are very complex. We need to provide help for the unemployed and poverty stricken, but how much and for how long? Eventually, we must get the economy going to produce the new jobs. Any way you look at it, we are probably in for more pain and more government debt.
http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/203544/does-washington-care-about-unemployment
http://www.tnr.com/blog/william-galston/75228/the-case-against-keynes-some-questions-krugman-too
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-01-column01_ST_N.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)