Saturday, November 08, 2008

Obama Watch - Nov. 8 2008

Memories are faulty. Big E is going to try to keep track of Barry Obama's

3. Income Tax Cut for 95% of America. Never mind that about 40% of Americans don't currently PAY income tax; BO promised during the campaign that he would give a tax break to the 95% of Americans making less than $250,000 per year.

  1. From the Obama Campaign Website (http://www.barackobama.com/taxes/11-8-08)

-No family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase.

- Typical middle class family will receive well over $1,000 in tax relief

- Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s .

- Cut taxes overall, reducing revenues to below the levels that prevailed under Ronald Reagan (less than 18.2 percent of GDP). "The Obama tax plan is a net tax cut – his tax relief for middle class families is larger than the revenue raised by his tax changes for families over $250,000. Coupled with his commitment to cut unnecessary spending, Obama will pay for this tax relief while bringing down the budget deficit."

If Barry does all this, I will vote for the fool in 2012.

4. Fiscal Stimulus Package. From BO's press conference 11-7-08:
"If it [stimulus package] does not get done in the lame-duck session, it will be the first thing I get done as president of the United States . . . A fiscal stimulus plan that will jump-start economic growth is long overdue. I've talked about it throughout this - the last few months of the campaign . . . we should get it done.""

While I have little doubt that Barry, Harry and Nancy will try to dust off the ineffective gimmick of sending out $500 checks; I doubt that it will get done before March and I guarantee you that it won't be effective.

Friday, November 07, 2008

Obama Watch - Nov. 7 2008

Big E will be memorializing the gaffes, mis-steps, scandals, contradictions and campaign reneges of the ill-fated Obama Administration.

Let's see: today is Friday November 7. The election is 3 days old.

Item 1: Obama's New Politics. This is going to be a "post-partisan" administration pursuing new politics, one that rises above entrenched partisan rifts to unite a divided country. Remember "Change We Can Believe In"? So who is Barry's first appointment? Rahm Immanuel, a retro play (was senior advisor to Bill Clinton from 1993 to 1998), one of the most partisan choices available. Yah, "New Politics." Right.

Item 2: Cut and Run in 16 Months. We heard often during the 21 month Obama campaign about how opposed he was to the Iraq war, and his plan to get the troops out in 16 months, despite the fact that major combat operations had already been over for years, the efficacy of the 2007 troop surge had exceeded expectations, and the U.S. role had already been reduced to peace-keeping and transitioning the job of keeping the peace to the Iraqi military.

"Barack Obama will work with our military commanders to begin the phased withdrawal of our troops out of Iraq in the first 16 months," Sen. Jack Reed told delegates at the Democratic National Convention in August. This strategy is still being touted on Barry's transition website today. http://change.gov/agenda/iraq/

That would mean troops out May20, 2010. Won't happen. And Big E will be there to document that failure.

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Hillary's Comeuppance

This excellent article by the Associated Press is an excellent summary of how Hillary got to be where she is today.

Her biggest problem is that she is not likable; that's not a fault, it's a fact. But surrounded by yes-men and sycophants, she never heard that. It's like the worst of the worst on American Idol: all of their lives they have been singing in the church choir, and they are shocked when they learn that the larger world is a much harsher judge.

Bolstered by her own hubris, she always believed that this was her turn, and still can't seem to grasp that she'll have to wait for another day to get her ride on the carousel.

Muddled Vision for Champaign County Nursing Home

Today's News-Gazette article about the Champaign County Nursing Home really gets to the crux of the problem behind this debacle of local government. I confess I haven't been paying attention, but it appears that the place we find ourselves in today is the result of a lack of clear goals for this facility.

County homes have historically been a place where folks without means (either because of age, infirmity or mental illness) were allowed to live. They were clearly charitable institutions, funded largely by taxpayer subsidy. There was no discussion about breaking even, or making a profit; the budget discussion was about how to pay the bills.

Here in Champaign County (home of the dysfunctional 27-member County Board), there appear to be competing visions regarding the County's $27 million investment. [Not surprising, given that the biggest dream that some of the members have is to get elected to the worst-in-the-nation Illinois General Assembly, or worse, to be mayor of Urbana. ]

Some apparently expect the home to run on at least a break-even basis. But if that is the case, why is government involved at all? Is there a lack of private nursing home companies out there? Not likely. Why in the world would an impotent county government imagine that it is in a better position than a professional private company to run this operation? If the goal is to minimize expense to taxpayers, sell the damn thing to a professional operator and cut your losses.

It is not a little ironic that the idea of booting impoverished Medicaid recipients is being floated. If the goal of the facility is to provide refuge to those who would otherwise be out in the cold, this step would be absolutely contraindicated.

So what's it going to be, you dummies? A decision to provide heavily-subsidized care, or to make the facility a self-sufficient enterprise? The choices could not be more stark, but resolution will require courage and clear-thinking. I, for one, am not holding my breath.

Friday, May 02, 2008

Its NOT the Economy, Stupid

The economy showed "remarkable signs of resilience Friday as job losses slowed, the dollar gained a bit of muscle for a change and there were even indications that food prices may be easing." The unemployment rate actually decreased by 1/10th of 1%, although the actual number of jobs decreased.


While the economy is obviously taking a rest, those who traffic in gloom and doom will have to temper the hand-wringing a bit.

That's bad news for the Hill and Barack crowd, who are heavily engaged in the rhetoric that we are all going to hell in a handbasket, NOW.

We heard the same tripe in 1992, when, despite evidence that the economy had started to rebound in late summer, the disaster drum continued to be beaten, all to the benefit of a certain New Democrat from Arkansas.

This year, let's all keep in mind that (a) the economy has ups and downs, (b) we are probably in a down, (c) in life, it's almost never as great or terrible as we think, and (d) the news media is slow to pick up on change, as the inertia pushes last month's story about 6 months past its prime.

My question: is is REALLY that bad?

The phony-baloney 'subprime mortgage mess' is a total red herring; 99% of Americans are indifferent.

Gas prices? Yes, they've gone up, along with the price of eggs, groceries and everything else that is transported by truck. Call me insensitive and elitist, but I'm hard-pressed to believe that an additional $20 a week for gas is going to ruin anyone's life.

The stock market? Sure, your 401(k) has taken a beating. But, unless you are retiring tomorrow, it's just numbers on a piece of paper.

The truth? Things are about like they've been for a long time. To hell with any politician who tells you any different.