NebraskaPatriot

Even Dickens Saw The "Bleak House" in Large Government

some times when you dust off an old book, it's amazing the wisdom found inside . . .

Charles Dickens once wrote, "We spent as much money as we could, and got as little for it as people could make up their minds to give us."

In a way, that's what we have done in the country since the Great Society initiatives in the 60's. We've spent billions on poverty, education, housing, etc., and yes, I'm sure when you throw billions upon billions of dollars at something, it just has to make some difference but in reality, as Dickens wrote, we "got as little for it as people could make up their minds to give us."

There just comes a time when we have to look in the mirror and realize it's up to us and stop waiting for people or Government to "make up their minds" how much "to give us".

And that leads me into a recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal On-line by Martin Feldstein, who was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Reagan.

Mr. Feldstein opens with something that become quiet obvious to many of us in this country:

"The policies of the Obama administration have led to the weak condition of the American economy. Growth during the coming year will be sub par at best, leaving high or rising levels of unemployment and underemployment."

He then adds some specifics:

"After a temporary rise in March, the economy began sliding again in April, with declines in real wages, in durable-goods orders and manufacturing production, in existing home sales, and in real per-capita disposable incomes. It is not surprising that the index of leading indicators fell in April, only the second decline since it began to rise in the spring of 2009. The data for May are beginning to arrive and are even worse than April's. They are marked by a collapse in payroll-employment gains; a higher unemployment rate; manufacturers' reports of slower orders and production; weak chain-store sales; and a sharp drop in consumer confidence. How has the Obama administration contributed to this failure to achieve a robust and sustainable recovery? The administration's most obvious failure was its misguided fiscal policies: the cash-for-clunkers subsidy for car buyers, the tax credit for first-time home buyers, and the $830 billion "stimulus" package."

As for that wonderful Stimulus package that our very own Democrat Senator Ben Nelson helped craft to assure passage in Feb. '09 in the Senate. Well Mr. Feldstein said:

"President Obama allowed the Democratic leadership in Congress to design a hodgepodge package of transfers to state and local governments, increased transfers to individuals, temporary tax cuts for lower-income taxpayers, etc. So we got a bigger deficit without economic growth"

Mr. Feldstein also gives the President and his party credit for creating all the uncertainty that businesses now face:

"A second cause of the continued economic weakness is the president's emphasis on increasing tax rates. Although Mr. Obama grudgingly agreed to continue the Bush tax cuts for 2011 and 2012, his budget this year repeated his call for higher tax rates on upper-income individuals and multinational corporations. With that higher-tax cloud hanging over them, it is not surprising that individuals and businesses do not make the entrepreneurial investments and business expansions that would cause a solid recovery. A third problem stems from the administration's lack of an explicit plan to deal with future budget deficits and with the exploding national debt. This creates uncertainty about future tax increases and interest rates that impedes spending by households and investment by businesses. The national debt has jumped to 69% of GDP this year, from 40% in 2008. It is projected by the Congressional Budget Office to reach more than 85% by the end of the decade, and to keep rising after that. The reality is even worse since ObamaCare alone will cost more than $1 trillion in its first 10 years."

In the end, Mr. Feldstein acknowledges that we can turn this ship around but he doubts Obama has any intent on making the required changes:

"The economy will continue to suffer until there is a coherent and favorable economic policy. That means bringing long-term deficits under control without raising marginal tax rates—by cutting government outlays and by limiting the tax expenditures that substitute for direct government spending. It means lower tax rates on businesses and individuals to spur entrepreneurship and investment. And it means reforming Social Security and Medicare to protect the living standards of future retirees while limiting the cost to future taxpayers. All of these things are doable. But the Obama administration has not done them and shows no inclination to do them in the future."

As Dickens said, "We spent as much money as we could, and got as little for it". Maybe it's time to spend more wisely and demand more individual responsibility from the person that we see each day in the mirror . . .

A New Congress, An Old Problem With Little Wiggle Room

so will they do what is morally right or what is politically right . . .

As new members are sworn in and the House of Representatives changes from a Democrat to Republican majority, let's review where we are with this house of cards also known as our Federal Fiscal state:

January 4, 2007 – Democrats take over control of Congress. The national debt stands at $8.67 trillion. 

January 5, 2011 – Republicans take over control of Congress. The national debt stands at $13.87 trillion.

In four short years, Pelosi and the gang added $5.2 trillion to the national debt.

On January 4, 2007 every man, woman and child in the U.S. owed $27,918 in federal debt.

Four years later, each of us now owe $44,662 in federal debt.

That is a 60% increase in four years. Or look at this way, each baby born today will enter the world already in debt by over $44,000 with that amount growing every day.

In the November election, Republicans made it very clear that they would cut spending and reduce the deficit. So now it’s put up or shut up time and let me warn everyone, the chorus of whaling and gnashing of teeth is about to begin. You will be stunned by the high pitch level.

The cries out of Washington will be deafening from every special interest group across every political spectrum. These groups will pull out all the stops. Some will shamelessly parade victims out in front of the State run national press, who will be more than happy to present tear-jerker after tear-jerker of news reports ending of course with a common theme that Republicans are heartless and completely omitting a very basic fact that we are BROKE! (see blog entry of 1-4-11 on the consequences of Obama's non-stop money printing)

Back when we were only a couple trillion in debt(being sarcastic!), we could afford to give in to all the sad stories but those days passed long ago and the outrageous orgy of spending that has occurred in Washington over the past several years has to stop. Every department, every agency, every program is going to have to be cut. There will also need to be a reduction of staffing at all levels.

My whole point of this is to awaken folks to the reality. You can not reduce spending in Washington without affecting programs that have long tentacles with legions of supporters and dependents.

So get ready, because if Congress does what it HAS TO DO then a program or subsidy close to you will soon be reduced or eliminated. Folks, if we don’t, then we will ultimately face a complete meltdown crushed beneath an unsustainable debt load.

So which would you prefer, cutting your favorite program or subsidy in the name of fiscal sanity and security or rioting and chaos as we’ve watched in many European cities as the result of insolvent governments?

How is this even a decision? 

 

 

Federal Government Goes 0 For 2

maybe a light at the end of the tunnel . . .

ObamaCare passed last spring and the “Stimulus” program passed back in February ’09 have become faces of excessive Government intrusion and nanny-state governance. For many of us, they are prime, number one examples of why we desire a greater majority of government decisions being pushed back  down to the state and local levels.

On Monday (12-13-10), a federal district court judge in Virginia ruled that Congress “exceeded its authority” by imposing an individual mandate to purchase insurance. The website Hot Air points out the really important parts of the ruling in Virginia vs Sebelius:

“[Judge] Hudson rejected the government’s argument that it has the power under the Constitution to require individuals to buy health insurance, a provision that was set to take effect in 2014.”

Judge Hudson then wrote these two very interesting sentences:

“Of course, the same reasoning could apply to transportation, housing or nutritional decisions. This broad definition of the economic activity subject to congressional regulation lacks logical limitation”

As the folks at Hot Air were quick to point out, Judge Hudson’s two sentences described the progressive-liberal agenda and why the Constitution forbids it.

There is added significance in the ruling coming from this court as it is known as the “rocket docket” from which important cases are speedily launched to the U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. The very backbone upon which ObamaCare is built is now rejected. This will be one to watch in the coming days and weeks ahead.

Now a moment of less dramatic impact but still insightful into the workings of our Federal Government.

For most of us, $141,000 is a good amount of pocket change (!), in fact, enough for a company to hire and pay a couple people to work.

Remember the Stimulus program passed back in February ’09? Remember how we had to quickly pass it because we had all these “shovel ready” projects just waiting to get started that would put Americans back to work? Remember how Vice President Biden was going to be the watchdog for abuse and make sure our almost 900-billion in tax dollars were spent appropriately? Remember President Obama telling us that “no one messed with Joe” [Biden]? Well, since that time, we found out just what Washington-speak for Stimulus is and it’s not pretty. One ideological wish list after another had money thrown at it. And now, we have yet another example of Stimulus money not going to produce jobs but someone’s pork project, this time at the National Science Foundation.

Here are the brief disappointing details. The National Science Foundation gave $141,000 in Stimulus funds to Montana State University to fund a six-week student trip to China to study dinosaur eggs and other fossils. Now, the trip on its own is a great experience for those students so I’m not questioning that, what I am questioning is the use of Stimulus money. How many jobs did that $141,000 Stimulate or create? I think we all know the answer and over the past two years, it’s become an all too familiar answer to Stimulus outlay after Stimulus outlay.

This is yet another example of why we need to get as much control back down to the state and local level. Trust me, if the State of Nebraska had taken state tax dollars that were meant for job creation and given it to one of the college or universities for a trip to China to study dinosaur eggs, I can guarantee you that phone lines and e-mails would be flooding into the State Capitol. It would be a very unpleasant time for state senators and the Governor and trust me, they would feel the heat. I’m very confident in saying that answers and a resolution would be forthcoming. Yet, no one in Washington seems the least bit concerned. Oh well, it’s just $141,000 no biggy. Well, here’s a dose of reality nuanced just for the elites in Washington.

This is yet another example of the complete ineptitude of the Stimulus program. Remember the Stimulus program was passed after our Democrat U.S. Senator Ben Nelson stepped in and marshaled it past a filibuster and to a successful vote in the Senate. Yet another proud moment for Cornhusker Kickback Ben which I’m sure he will make into a real snappy campaign ad in 2012 (sarcasm)!  

Now there will be those that will debate that we giving tax cuts (soon I hope) and cost the treasury $800-billion over two years. I would remind everyone there is a big difference. First, Obama/Pelosi/Reid and Mr. Nelson sold the Stimulus as a job creator. Again, the phrase “shovel ready projects” was the mantra.   Second, the Stimulus has cost almost one-TRILLION dollars and produced how many jobs? And don’t give me the “it saved jobs” unless you have hard numbers which no one can produce because if we are going to go down that road then the Bush tax cuts after 9-11 saved thousands upon thousands of jobs. Are Bush’s detractors willing to say that? I think hell will freeze over first and cue the song “The Sound of Silence”.

Third and most important, the Stimulus took money from you and me in the form of taxes and redistributed it throughout the country on ideological wish lists that Democrats have for decades wanted but were unable to get passed through Congress. Conversely, the tax cuts that should be approved this week, will maintain the tax rate levels that we’ve had and will NOT take additional money from tax payers rather leaving it to families across the country to spend as they see fit. I know, novel concept allowing folks to decide how they want to spend their own money but hey, call me silly, it Stimulates me.

 

Now This Is the Senator Nelson We Know

you knew at some point he just couldn't help himself . . .

Nebraska Democrat U.S. Senator Ben Nelson has been trying his darnedest to get us to forget his pivotal leadership in getting the Stimulus bill passed in February '09 and ObamaCare earlier this year.

In fact, let's step back in history to just one year ago when Mr. Nelson began his quest to sell his vote which ultimately allowed ObamaCare to become law. Yup, a proud moment in Nebraska's history was taking place under the cover of darkness one year ago when Mr. Nelson and his now famously known act was forever branded into history as the Cornhusker Kickback.

Ever since the Cornhusker Kickback, Senator Nelson has been siding with Republicans in the Senate because his internal polling is so horrible in Nebraska that his prospects for 2012 are dim(I maintain I don't think he will see re-election). For those who have watched the Nebraska Democrat through the years knew exactly what he was doing and I'm afraid for the Senator, so do a great number of Nebraskans.

So maybe on Saturday, Mr. Nelson decided it was time to just go back to being Ben Nelson when he voted with the Democrats to maintain the current tax levels for everyone except for those with incomes of more than one-million dollars.

Nelson claims he voted for it because he didn't want to hold the middle class tax cuts hostage. Unfortunately, everyone knew the bill would fail on Saturday. It was no surprise so what Mr. Nelson did was make himself look, well, partisan. He chose to make Obama and Reid happy yet try and spin this as some morally justified vote. The only ones holding up extending the current tax rates is Obama, Reid and Pelosi in the House.

So in the end, Senator Nelson really took a weak position on Saturday, in fact, it was just stupid. He tried to claim the mantel of the champion of the middle class yet that effort fell flat and meaningless. It was a sham and was pure political gamesmanship. I guess Mr. Nelson didn't get the message on November 2nd. We are tired of the games.

He really has been in Washington too long . . .

 

Side note: By the way, for those millionaires like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates' father  who think they aren't paying enough in taxes, there's a real simple solution, have your assistant make out a check to the Federal Government and send it in. I'm tired of you whining that it's not fair you aren't paying more taxes. Enough already. Send a check to the Feds and leave the other folks alone who are out there trying to create jobs and reinvest in their companies. The Treasury could use a couple extra billion dollars. If you chose not to do that then do us all a favor and stop the whining already.

Questions Remain for Both Parties

Dems leaders in denial while Republicans find many new faces with strong views . . .

For Democrats, the November election was a kick in the pants and one wonders if the leadership in Washington really got the message. I do firmly believe that the message has been loud and clear to the majority of the elected Democrats who survived and represent districts from Pennsylvania west to Utah and all parts in between. They get it but of course, those folks don’t control the party.

Leadership positions in the House for Democrats are controlled by the Liberal factions from the Northeast and West Coast and for Democrats, their worst nightmare may be occurring if Nancy Pelosi truly goes through and runs for minority leader. If that happens, Pelosi will be the face of the Democrats in Congress once again after the worst shellacking in 72 years. This would be staggeringly stupid but Liberals outnumber the remainder of their Congressional brethren and so it appears it will happen.

For Republicans, now this will be interesting to watch. They have at least 80 new freshmen and these folks come from a wide swath of the country. They come to Congress ready to reduce Government and cut spending. The big question is will their leadership really go for cutting the budget or will they just tinker on the fringes? How vocal and aggressive will these new members be?

Over in the Senate, it’s good news, bad news for Republicans there. The bad news is that Republicans didn’t win control of the Senate. The good news is that Republicans didn’t win control of the Senate!

In reality, the best Republicans could have hoped from the 2010 election was a 51-49 majority. That would have been a huge problem for Republicans as they tried to run the Senate because they have a couple squishy members such as Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. The Women of Maine along with Mr. Graham have demonstrated through the years that they are incredibly unreliable for Republicans.

In addition, the reality for Senator Scott Brown is that he is up for re-election in Massachusetts in 2012  and you will not find a stronger leftist state in the country. He has been fiscally conservative but has trended toward his state’s tastes on non-fiscal issues. But Senator Brown for me is fine because has been very solid fiscally and that is THE issue of importance for the coming years. Social issues have been put on the backburner by the American people.

The bottom line is that Republicans would have struggled to hold a majority together on a whole host of issues and Collins, Snowe and Graham would have gained the ultimate power to control the fate of legislation in the Senate. Consequently, Republicans might have electorally held the majority but legislatively Democrats would control the chamber and made life miserable for Republicans who would also bear all the responsibility in the court of public opinion.

So there you go. As someone once said, “A politician thinks of the next election – a statesman of the next generation.” It’s time for the statesmen to rise and be counted . . .

 

 

This is A Must View

Below is Pat Caddell. He was a very important advisor in the Carter Administration so he not someone who comes from the Right. I strongly suggest you watch the video below because it gives those of us out in the Central Plains a bit of hope that maybe we can get this turned around.

Senator Nelson, Where Are The Jobs????

plug the damn hole . . .

Remember how proud our Democrat U.S. Senator Ben Nelson was when he personally helped forge the "compromise" that allowed the Stimulus also known as Porkulus to pass in Feb. '09. It was going to save jobs and cure all our ills. Well, sixteen months later, we are still waiting for the jobs.

Even the A.P. can't hide the numbers that came out this morning on the job market:

"Employers cut 125,000 jobs last month, the most since last October, the Labor Department said Friday. The loss was driven by the end of 225,000 temporary census jobs. Businesses added a net total of 83,000 workers, an improvement from May. But that’s also below March and April totals.

The nation has 7.9 million fewer private payroll jobs than it did when the recession began.

Analysts expected private payrolls to rise by about 110,000, according to Thomson Reuters. The report indicates that businesses are still reluctant to hire as the economy slowly recovers form the worst recession since the 1930s.

The unemployment rate fell as 652,000 people gave up on their job searches and left the labor force. People who are no longer looking for work aren’t counted as unemployed."

Senator Nelson, the jobs market has a very large hole in it and your solution is not and will not work, so in the famous words of your leader, "Plug the damn hole."

May I suggest tax cuts for small business as the best plug to try. Remember, Mr. Nelson, businesses with fewer than 250 employees provided most of the net job growth in the 2002-2007 expansion according to the latest Forbes Magazine. In fact, here's a portion of a column in Forbes by David Malpass that outlines very well the job killing policies that you and your Democrat friends on Capitol Hill are doing to small business:

"The 2,300-page health care bill will take months and years to decode and will weigh heavily on small-business decisions. New regulations are mushrooming from the constant string of thick "stimulus" bills, the coming law on new financial regulations and the sure-to-be-bad tax bill toward year's end. The threat to profit is explicit in Washington's evolving "economic justice" platform. Small businesses already face a high top marginal tax rate, horrendous tax complexity and layers of new taxes, yet the revenue-extraction process is intensifying. The jump in tax rates planned for the end of the year, the expansion of the Medicare tax and the threat of a value-added tax are just the transparent side of the tax shakedown. Under the surface, the taxation of capital gains and dividends (rates will jump), private equity (the government is redefining long-term capital gains into ordinary income) and foreign profits.

Normal business loans, the bread-and-butter staple of a healthy partnership between banks and small businesses, are down 8% from the already reduced levels of a year ago. Normal bank lending is further penalized in the coming 2,000-page financial services regulation bill and the latest anti-growth decisions by the Financial Accounting Standards Board in May. The FASB, an unelected new regulatory mega-power, seems bent on outdoing Sarbanes-Oxley in transferring jobs to the accounting field--already one of the top growers--from innovation and growth elsewhere in the economy. While Washington pays lip service to the challenges facing small businesses, it repeatedly chooses its own expansion over results. In effect, government has become a huge silent partner in all businesses, often taking a majority of the profits and forcing many unprofitable business decisions without the risk that it will be fired."

So Mr. Nelson, if you are serious about running for re-election as was reported yesterday, then I have a little suggestion for you: Start acting like you care about every-day Nebraskans and less about how your fellow Democrats, the President and the national media view you. And just think about how you can become THE power broker in Washington by grabbing like minded Democrats to join Republicans and block and change all this nonsense coming out of the offices of Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

There is no better time than now to start . . . 

Senator Nelson Gets A Slap of Reality

this should only raise the level of anger toward our good Senator . . .

More delightful (sarcastic!!) details are coming out on what is ahead for us with ObamaCare.

Let me  digress for a moment. We've recently seen the type of ponzi scheme television ads that Obama  has running for his car company, ObamaMotors, formerly knows as GM where they tell you they've paid back taxpayers and there's Hope and Change moving GM to new heights. But in reality, ObamaMotors took money from one taxpayer funded kitty and used it to pay the debt racked up in another taxpayer funded kitty fund. ObamaPonzi, yup, real truth in advertising there and with Hope and Change, we are getting all kinds of new phrases.

So now comes along ObamaCare. And if Obama had his government ad folks come up with ads for ObamaCare, surely he would make sure that it had all those disclaimers at the end that we now see for any new drug that is out on the market. You know where the voice over speed reads all the side effects. Well folks, the difference is that the side effects for ObamaCare would not be diarrhea or cramps or hives or chest pain, although after reading a report out today on ObamaCare, you might have those reactions. 

The blog Hot Air has a very good read on one of the major adverse cause and effects of ObamaCare, which I would strongly suggest you read by clicking here.

So you may ask how does our good Democrat U.S. Senator Ben Nelson fit in to all of this. Well, remember, Nelson was THE Senator who sold his soul and his vote broke the Republican filibuster on ObamaCare and led us to this point. Senator Nelson has in every interview I've heard or read been supportive of ObamaCare and his vote in support of it.

So Senator Nelson, I guess you did Nancy Pelosi good. You helped pass Obamacare and by doing so according to the California Liberal, we would and now are finding out what's really in the bill and it's what critics were saying and why those of us in Nebraska did not want it. 

 

It's Rather Simple Really

It's interesting how history repeats itself. Back in the early years of the Reagan Administration, the President wanted to cut taxes. Oh my god, Democrats lamented, the rich will only benefit. We fast forward to 2010 and Obama-Reid-Pelosi are echoing those same histrionics which were proven wrong by Reagan whose tax cuts were responsible for the longest sustained economic growth period in our nation's history.

As Stephen Hayward wrote about Reagan's views during this time in  his book, The Age of Reagan: The Conservative Counterrevolution: 1980-1989:

"Liberal rhetoric on the issue is revealing. Allowing people to keep more of their own money was called "showering money on the rich", as though all wealth belonged to the government rather than the people. This Democrat attitude is rooted in a fallacy - the idea that wealth is distributed, mostly by government, rather than earned by individuals and apportioned by markets."

As a society, we have certain obligations but we passed the point of fulfilling those obligations long ago.

Apparently, nobody has told Obama that. Looks like the message will have to be delivered in November.

 

Leaves Me Shaking My Head

really . . .

Remember when poll after poll showed that the majority of Americans believed that Obamacare would INCREASE costs of medical insurance and healthcare? And the President and fellow Democrats contending that we could add 34-million to the system and costs wouldn't go up?

It made most of us just shake our heads in disbelief. In appears Obama and Democrats now have a new report out by their own side that is just so very interesting.

You see a report running in today's USA Today from the economic analysts in Obama's own Health and Human Services Department confirm what most of us dumb old folks out here in towns across this country have been saying in those polls.

The article is a must read which you can by clicking here. But let me warn you, it will only make you even madder if you have been against Obamacare. It's simply amazing that a report like this is now out. It begs the question:

Where the hell was this during the debate.

I've said this before and I will say it again. When will this nightmare be over . . .