Sequestration Starts: World Has Yet To End

By William Teach March 1, 2013 – 8:19 am

And the media is still spinning as to what the “cuts” really are. Either that or they are just partisan fools

(The Hill) Nineteen months after it was put into place, the sequester has arrived.

Barring unexpected developments, President Obama will issue an order at some point on Friday — perhaps as late as 11:59 p.m. — cancelling some $85 billion in spending across the federal government.

Said spending is simply a reduction in the size of spending increase for the next fiscal year. For the most part, federal agencies will still have the exact same amount of money they saw for the current fiscal year.

Obama is scheduled to host congressional leaders at the White House on Friday, but few expect that meeting to spark progress on undoing the cuts that both sides have bemoaned as foolish.

“I think it’s probably going to take awhile before there’s a real meeting,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said on Thursday. “I would look at tomorrow as a photo op — I really would. And I don’t know of anybody who’s viewing it differently at this point.”

Expect today’s meeting to be Obama speaking forcefully, castigating Republicans, demanding tax increases, continuing his permanent campaign. What we won’t see is any attempt to reach across the aisle.

Over in the Senate, competing Republican and Democrat sequester replacement bills were killed. In the House, John Boehner is continuing to say that they’ve already voted and passed two replacement plans, so, now it’s up to the Democrat controlled Senate.

(The Hill) Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), a member of the Finance Committee, predicted sequestration would last through the end of the year.

“Are we going to roll back the size of the cuts? No. I can promise you that,” said Burr.

Well, we’ll see if Republicans cave at some point or if they find some cajones for the long term.

Over at the Washington Post, Glenn Kessler fact checks the Obama admin/Democrat spin on Meals On Wheels seeing massive cuts, leaving seniors starving to death while losing 4 million meals a year due to Sequestration

The administration may rue the day that it issued so many scary statistics with such specificity. If sequestration remains in effect for the rest of the fiscal year, reporters will certainly attempt to check whether the administration’s predictions came close to reality.

In the case of meals for seniors, the administration did not even bother with the usual “as much as” modifier. It simply asserted that 4 million meals will disappear. Given that federal funding is just one third of the funding source, and the 4-million figure represents a relatively small part of the program, it is hard at this point to justify such specificity.

Kessler gives the spin 2 Pinocchios.

Really, though, this is all about reducing the rate of growth. The federal government needs to make serious, real cuts to the federal budget. We could save hundreds of billions by changing the way federal agencies contract out, refusing to pay for cost over-runs. The Pentagon alone could save over $200 billion a year by doing this. We could stop wasting money on duplication and redundancy. We could stop wasting taxpayer money to upgrade baseball spring training facilities and investigations into what we can learn from fish about Democracy. Consider this waste list from 2010, which is certainly not unusual. Change the allocation system so that agencies are rewarded for saving money, instead of being rewarded for spending it all, which usually results in surplus, overpayment, and waste.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Sequestration Starts: World Has Yet To End »

Posted in Economy | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Club For Growth Targets Renee Ellmers

By William Teach February 28, 2013 – 3:28 pm

Wait, Tea Party darling Renee Ellmers? Yes

(Washington Times) The fiscally conservative Club for Growth launched a new website Wednesday dedicated to holding congressional RINOs — “Republicans in Name Only” — accountable for what the group calls abandoning the principles of economic freedom and limited government.

The website, www.PrimaryMyCongressman.com, highlights districts where 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney won more than 60 percent of the vote, but the incumbent GOP congressman racked up a lifetime rating of less than 70 percent on the Club’s Congressional Scorecard.

“Big-government liberals inhabit the Democratic Party, but they are far too common within the Republican Party as well,” said Chris Chocola, the group’s president. “The Republicans helped pass billions of dollars in tax increases and they have repeatedly voted against efforts by fiscal conservatives to limit government.”

Ellmers has a lifetime rating of 66%, and she is on the list to primary. This is the problem: Conservatives send people to Washington who are supposedly Conservatives, then they end up voting squishy Republican and/or with far left Democrats. She’s certainly not the lowest, their are plenty more Republicans who are much lower (Christopher Smith from NJ is dead last at 40%), but we expect Tea Party electees to act like it.

Read: Club For Growth Targets Renee Ellmers »

Posted in GOP | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 28, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil dog sucking up the resources of Gaia, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on Sequestration infographics

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Hooray! A Better Way To Fight Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach February 28, 2013 – 10:47 am

You’ll be astounded by the wonderful new ideas!

There are essentially two solutions, but neither has been deployed on a large scale. The first is to shift massively from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, especially wind power and solar power. Some countries will also continue to use nuclear power. (Hydroelectric power generation emits no CO2, but there are only a few remaining places in the world where it can be expanded without major environmental or social costs.)

The second solution is to capture CO2 emissions for storage underground. But this technology, called carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), is not yet proven on a large scale. One approach is to capture the CO2 at the power plant as the coal or gas is burned. Another is to capture it directly from the air using specially designed chemical processes. Either way, CCS will require significant investment in further research and development before it becomes a viable technology.

Hmm, I’m missing the part where Warmists practice what they preach, giving up their fossil fueled vehicles and travel, only buying local, living a full carbon neutral life.

But there is a much better strategy than tradable permits. Each region of the world should introduce a tax on CO2 emissions that starts low today and increases gradually and predictably in the future.

Hey, I have a wonderful idea: Warmists could all ride bikes to work and take all the extra money and give it to the Government to stop bad weather. It’s no wonder “green fatigue” has been setting in, when the Believers won’t do anything but agitate.

Read: Hooray! A Better Way To Fight Hotcoldwetdry »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Do Republicans Need To Go Negative?

By William Teach February 28, 2013 – 7:29 am

That’s what Keith Koffler, reporter and editor of White House Dossier, recommends, and something I’ve been saying and writing for quite some time now

(Politico) If Republicans want a chance at resurgence, they must take a page or two out of President Obama’s worn playbook and veer sharply negative.

But only a page or two. Republicans should not lower themselves to the level of a president who routinely lobs ad hominem political epithets their way, castigating them as intolerant, heartless and petty ogres who live only to serve their masters in the top income tax bracket.

Rather, they must explain why the seemingly good-hearted prescriptions of the Left go all wrong and create more pain than they were intended to ease. Only by first knocking down the liberal edifice constructed by Obama can Republicans rebuild the popular conservative mandate that had dominated politics since Reagan.

Personally, I don’t think Mr. Koffler goes far enough as he gives examples of how the GOP should go negative, examples such as

  • Obama’s proposal to raise the minimum wage costs jobs.
  • His federal bailout of the automakers was merely a gift to the unions.
  • Obama’s tax increases on the wealthy sap the initiative of the most productive members of society while forcing them to shelter their money in unproductive ways. If Obama had tried to stimulate the economy by reducing taxes further instead of “not wasting a crisis” and throwing money around, the economy would be in better shape.

That’s what they’re doing now. And it doesn’t resonate. I compared the GOP to the adult in the room a few weeks ago, being calm, cool, attempting to rationally explain the situation. One of the commenters said they were more like the parents in the room. That’s a little closer. They’re more like the parents in the waiting room who let their obnoxious brats run around screaming, bothering other people, throwing magazines and brochures on the floor. The hellions become more and more emboldened. The GOP needs instead to be the parent in WalMart who gives the child a good swift swat on the ass, and when they start crying, tell them “I’ll give you something to cry about!”

Democrats have been on a good mission for over a decade. That’s where geese flying in, poop all over everything, make a lot of noise, poop some more, smear it around, and never leave. Then invite more geese. The GOP needs to counter this by getting out and attacking. Politics is a dirty, nasty business. Always has been, always will be.  If you’re a boxer and just keep your hands up to deflect punches, throwing a jab here and there while the opponent throws haymakers, you’re going to get beaten like a rented elephant.

The American people do not respond, in the most part, to adult talking points: they respond to smears and apocalyptic discourse, quick sound bites attacking one’s opponents. The GOP is going to lose no matter what in the Legacy Media, so they might as well take their case to the American People. Go negative. Go on the attack. Impugn Democrats, including Obama. Coordinate the attacks. Stick with the talking points and messaging. I know the inside the beltway establishment Republicans won’t like this, but, how’s your strategy been working?

Read: Do Republicans Need To Go Negative? »

Posted in GOP | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama To Finally Meet With Congressional Leaders On Day Sequester Takes Effect

By William Teach February 28, 2013 – 6:45 am

This is leadership in the age of Obama

(Daily Caller) President Barack Obama will wait until the sequester hits to have his first sequester-related face-to-face meeting with congressional leaders on Friday, according to a report by ABC News’s Jonathan Karl:

“A congressional source with direct knowledge of the plans tells me the top four congressional leaders – John Boehner, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell – will meet with President Obama at the White House Friday to attempt to negotiate a way to avoid the spending cuts that both sides have said should be avoided,” Karl reported Wednesday.

Karl reported that the White House arranged the meeting late Tuesday.

Obama has been running around the country demagogueing  the Sequestration, which was his idea in the first place, for weeks. He’s had his people sending doom and gloom emails, making dire predictions on TV of apocalypse (some have lied), and releasing criminal illegal aliens. Yet, the Chief Executive has barely had any contact with Congressional leaders, and won’t hold actual face to face meetings with them till the Sequestration actually takes effect? But he still had time to take a vacation including $1,000 hour golf lessons? Sadly, this is the type of leadership that a bare majority of Americans voted for. Hysterical doom and gloom from the neverending campaign trail while failing to have discussions.

Oh, and if things were so darned apocalyptic, why would Team Obama be considering sending more aid to the Syrian rebels, which could easily run into the tens of millions, if not more?

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Obama To Finally Meet With Congressional Leaders On Day Sequester Takes Effect »

Posted in Barry Obama, Economy | Comments Off on Obama To Finally Meet With Congressional Leaders On Day Sequester Takes Effect | Trackback URL

Climate Astrologers Come Up With New Way Of Blaming Mankind For Extreme Weather

By William Teach February 27, 2013 – 4:00 pm

All the doom and gloom talk about “extreme weather” has been debunked time and time again, yet the Warmists keep attempting to manufacture a link. Here’s the latest

(Guardian) Global warming may have caused extreme events such as a 2011 drought in the United States and a 2003 heatwave in Europe by slowing vast, wave-like weather flows in the northern hemisphere, scientists said on Tuesday.

There’s that super-scientific word “may” again. It either did or didn’t. This is conjecture and allegory.

The study of meandering air systems that encircle the planet adds to understanding of extremes that have killed thousands of people and driven up food prices in the past decade.

Such planetary airflows, which suck warm air from the tropics when they swing north and draw cold air from the Arctic when they swing south, seem to be have slowed more often in recent summers and left some regions sweltering, they said.

“During several recent extreme weather events these planetary waves almost freeze in their tracks for weeks,” wrote Vladimir Petoukhov, lead author of the study at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.

“So instead of bringing in cool air after having brought warm air in before, the heat just stays,” he said in a statement of the findings in the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

What this is proposing, per the press release, is that globull warming is taking these waves of weather and slowing or stopping them for longer than usual periods of time. They’ve looked at a whopping 32 years of data (because climate never changed before…hey, 32 years, 1980! Surprise!) and determined that mankind’s use of fossil fuels has caused the waves to do this. I wonder what caused the massive mid-American heat waves during the 1930’s before CO2 was above 350ppm?

Climate change caused by greenhouse-gas emissions from fossil-fuel burning does not mean uniform global warming…

Of course not. In this way, they can still push their junk science even when it is very cold and snowy (which is also blamed on Mankind, just not in the press release).

Read: Climate Astrologers Come Up With New Way Of Blaming Mankind For Extreme Weather »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 27, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is snow that can only be created by lots of heat, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Jawa Report, with a post on tax collectors threatening to shut a business down over $144.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Studies Show People Aren’t Too Keen On Climate Change Issue

By William Teach February 27, 2013 – 11:26 am

When compared to other issues (I had been planning to use a different article, but Tom Nelson linked to a better one)

(NORC) A newly released international study reveals that the issue of climate change is not a priority for people in the United States and around the world.

The surveys showed that when asked to rank priority worries, people were five times more likely to point to the economy over the environment. Additionally, when asked about climate change, people identified the issue as more of a national problem than a personal concern.

Coordinated surveys, conducted by the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) in 33 countries from 1993 through 2010, “are the first and only surveys that put long-term attitudes toward environmental issues in general and global climate change in particular in an international perspective,” said Tom W. Smith, Director of the General Social Survey, a project of the independent research organization NORC at the University of Chicago, and author of a paper that summarizes the surveys.

The economy ranked highest in concern in 15 countries, followed by health care in eight, education in six, poverty in two, and terrorism and crime in one country each. Immigration and the environment did not make the top of the list in any country over the 17-year period; in the United States, the economy ranked as the highest concern, while concern for the environment ranked sixth.

In terms of national averages, the order of concern was the economy (25 percent); health care (22.2) education (15.6); poverty (11.6); crime (8.6) environment (4.7), immigration (4.1) and terrorism (2.6), the surveys showed. Terrorism’s low ranking was notable in light of the widespread attention the issue has received since 2001, though it topped the list of concerns in Turkey.

And when you dig into the “environment” category

Air pollution ranked first in 13 countries, followed by climate change, which was the top concern in 10 countries. In another question, the surveys asked people which environmental problem they considered most personally dangerous and found that in only three countries was climate change listed as the most dangerous environmental problem, trailing nuclear power plants and industrial air pollution.

“One reason for the relatively low ranking of climate change is that people often believed it did not directly affect them. Climate change is seen more as a country-level problem than as a personal problem,” Smith said. “While 14.6 percent cited it as the most important environmental issue for their country, only 9 percent rated it first for themselves.”

Color me shocked that people who care about “climate change” for the country aren’t too concerned with their own behaviors. They always want Someone Else to pay the piper.

Read: Studies Show People Aren’t Too Keen On Climate Change Issue »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Trots Out “Austerity” Regarding Sequester

By William Teach February 27, 2013 – 8:58 am

Nowhere in this article, which could have been written by the White House (but, really, this is just the way Liberals think) is it mentioned that Sequestration is simply a slight reduction in the growth of government

Austerity Kills Government Jobs as Cuts to Budgets Loom

I know, I know, you’re really, really, really broken up about a reduction in government jobs. The reductions are actually in state and local government, not Los Federales.

The federal government, the nation’s largest consumer and investor, is cutting back at a pace exceeded in the last half-century only by the military demobilizations after the Vietnam War and the cold war.

And the turn toward austerity is set to accelerate on Friday if the mandatory federal spending cuts known as sequestration start to take effect as scheduled. Those cuts would join an earlier round of deficit reduction measures passed in 2011 and the wind-down of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that already have reduced the federal government’s contribution to the nation’s gross domestic product by almost 7 percent in the last two years.

What the Times’ also fails to mention is that if that money isn’t in the hands of government it is in the hands of the private sector, which knows a hell of a lot more about responsible spending than government. Of course, that money is not flowing out in this horrendous Obama recovery. And, can you really call it “austerity” when there has been no actual reduction in government spending?

Total government spending continues to increase, but those broader figures include benefit programs like Social Security. Government purchases and investments expand the nation’s economy, just as private sector transactions do, while benefit programs move money from one group of people to another without directly expanding economic activity.

If government spending stimulates, why is the economy stuck in molasses almost 4 years after the Great Recession officially ended? One would think that the $800 billion plus in Stimulus would have done something.

Let’s repeat it for the low information voters: there are no cuts. None. Nothing. No federal agency is going to get less money next year than they did this year. They will simply receive slightly less than they were scheduled to see appropriated.

It’s like this: The Department of Regulating Light Bulb Use received $1 billion this fiscal year. They were scheduled to get $1.1 billion next year. Instead, they will only get $1.098 billion next year, which obviously means that all light bulb enforcement will cease and people will riot in the streets under incandescent bulbs.

Read: NY Times Trots Out “Austerity” Regarding Sequester »

Posted in Economy, Journalistic Malpractice | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove