Sword and Sextant

Here you are, but I’m just quoting in full.

Completely Reckless, Completely Irresponsible
from the Office of Senator Mitch McConnell

Thursday, December 17, 2009

‘And here’s the most outrageous part: at the end of this rush, they want us to vote on a bill that no one outside the Majority Leader’s conference room has even seen. That’s right. The final bill we’ll vote on isn’t even the one we’ve had on the floor. It’s the deal Democrat leaders have been trying to work out in private’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Thursday regarding the importance of getting it right on health care reform:

“Senators on both sides acknowledge that the health care bill we’re considering is among the most significant pieces of legislation any of us will ever consider.

“So it stands to reason that we’d devote significant time and attention to it.

“Indeed, some would argue that we should spend more time and attention on this bill than most — if not every — previous bill we’ve considered.

“The Majority disagrees.

“Why? Because this bill has become a political nightmare for them.

“They know Americans overwhelmingly oppose it, so they want to get it over with.

“Americans are already outraged at the fact that Democrat leaders took their eyes off the ball. Rushing the process on a partisan line makes the situation even worse.

“Americans were told the purpose of reform was to reduce the cost of health care.

“Instead, Democrat leaders produced a $2.5 trillion, 2,074-page monstrosity that vastly expands government, raises taxes, raises premiums, and wrecks Medicare.

“And they want to rush this bill through by Christmas — one of the most significant, far-reaching pieces of legislation in U.S. history. They want to rush it.

“And here’s the most outrageous part: at the end of this rush, they want us to vote on a bill that no one outside the Majority Leader’s conference room has even seen.

“That’s right. The final bill we’ll vote on isn’t even the one we’ve had on the floor. It’s the deal Democrat leaders have been trying to work out in private.

“That’s what they intend to bring to the floor and force a vote on before Christmas.

“So this entire process is essentially a charade.

“But let’s just compare the process so far with previous legislation for some perspective. Here’s a snapshot of what we’ve done and where we stand:

• The Majority Leader intends to bring this debate to a close as early as this weekend — four days from now, on this $2.5 trillion dollar mistake

• No American who hasn’t been invited into the Majority Leader’s conference room knows what will be in that bill

• This bill has been the pending business of the Senate since the last week of November — less than four weeks ago.

• We started the amendment process two weeks ago.

• We’ve had 21 amendments and motions — less than two a day.

“Now let’s look at how the Senate has dealt with previous legislation.

“No Child Left Behind (2001):

• 21 session days or 7 weeks.

• Roll Call votes: 44

• Number of Amendments offered: 157

“9/11 Commission/Homeland Security Act (2002):

• 19 session days over 7 weeks.

• Roll Call votes: 20

• Number of Amendments offered: 30

“Energy Bill (2002):

• 21 session days over 8 weeks

• Number of Roll Call votes: 36

• Number of Amendments offered: 158

“This isn’t an energy bill. This is an attempt by a majority to take over one sixth of the U.S. economy — to vastly expand the reach and the role of government into the health care decisions of every single American — and they want to be done after one substantive amendment. This is absolutely inexcusable.

“I think Senator Snowe put it best on Tuesday:

‘Given the enormity and complexity,’ she said, ‘I don’t see anything magical about the Christmas deadline if this bill is going to become law in 2014.’

“And I think Senator Snowe’s comments on a lack of bipartisanship at the outset of this debate are also right on point.

“Here’s what she said in late November:

‘I am truly disappointed we are commencing our historic debate on one of the most significant and pressing domestic issues of our time with a process that has forestalled our ability to arrive at broader agreement on some of the most crucial elements of health care reform. The bottom line is, the most consequential health care legislation in the history of our country and the reordering of $33 trillion in health care spending over the coming decade shouldn’t be determined by one vote-margin strategies – surely we can and must do better.’

“The only conceivable justification for rushing this bill is the overwhelming opposition of the American people. Democrats know that the longer Americans see this bill the less they like it. Here’s the latest from Pew. It came out just yesterday.

“A majority (58 percent) of those who have heard a lot about the bills oppose them while only 32 percent favor them.”

“There is no justification for this blind rush — except a political one, and that’s not good enough for the American people.

“And there’s no justification for forcing the Senate to vote on a bill none of us has seen.

“Americans already oppose this bill. The process is just as bad.

“It’s completely reckless, completely irresponsible.”

Ouch babe.

I wonder how this is somehow the GOP being divisive? Just kidding, its Bush’s fault, isn’t it? It isn’t? Tell me more!

Basically, Dean said “OMG scrap Senate ObamaCare ‘cuz it sux”. Gibbsy then drools out something about Deano being clueless. The Vermont Screamer then says he won’t “vigorously” back Obama’s re-election bid in 2012.

A couple miscalculations by Obama/Gibbs here: First, Dean wanted the public option, and the Senate bill doesn’t have anything like that, so HowHow thinks it should be scrapped. At least he’s following some principle, as opposed to, you know, letting someone else write the whole thing, change it whenever, and back it regardless to call it a political “win”.

Second, Dean is the chair of the DNC, and not a blue-dog freshman Rep. from flyover country. He’s also a fiery little guy, so messing with him isn’t the greatest idea. As I’ve been recently stating, Obama hasn’t done much for Liberals yet on policy, and his speeches are even sounding Bushian (just war doctrine!) these days. I doubt Dean fully means this, but there’s a little fire under every cloud of smoke.

Be careful, Barack. Your political enemies already despise you, I doubt you could afford to piss off your own party much worse…

To start, I will say that this article is revealing both a truth of the 2009 stimulus, and a dark reality of government itself. In that light, I will be spending little time flogging Obama on this, except as it relates to the steaming pile of stimulus he dropped on this nation with spread cheeks.

And away we go!

Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession’s first 18 months — and that’s before overtime pay and bonuses are counted.

Whoa. Looks like a time to invest in government futures, doesn’t it? The public sector is hurting badly, and yet the government is passing out raises. Isn’t that sensible and great? Of course, silly.

The trend to six-figure salaries is occurring throughout the federal government, in agencies big and small, high-tech and low-tech. The primary cause: substantial pay raises and new salary rules.

Go go gadget pay raise! Its just that simple! (infomercial applause) Just raise your own pay and WHOA, you got yourself a six figure salary!

Let’s get serious, now:

• Pay hikes. Then-president Bush recommended — and Congress approved — across-the-board raises of 3% in January 2008 and 3.9% in January 2009. President Obama has recommended 2% pay raises in January 2010, the smallest since 1975. Most federal workers also get longevity pay hikes — called steps — that average 1.5% per year.

•New pay system. Congress created a new National Security Pay Scale for the Defense Department to reward merit, in addition to the across-the-board increases. The merit raises, which started in January 2008, were larger than expected and rewarded high-ranking employees. In October, Congress voted to end the new pay scale by 2012.

• Paycaps eased. Many top civil servants are prohibited from making more than an agency’s leader. But if Congress lifts the boss’ salary, others get raises, too. When the Federal Aviation Administration chief’s salary rose, nearly 1,700 employees’ had their salaries lifted above $170,000, too.

So Bush said 3% and Obama says 2%. I have a better question: Who in the fuck gets a raise when the economy is contracting and tax dollars pay your paycheck. Only the slimy bastards in government. This is a problem that starts at the top and permeates the whole of our government. The distance between civil and private employees is now so vast that in times of struggle, the government fucking prospers.

Throw the bums out. All of them.

One more line that sticks in my craw:

The growth in six-figure salaries has pushed the average federal worker’s pay to $71,206, compared with $40,331 in the private sector.

We hear so much about corporate greed and people only going into business for profit and all that shit. We hear about the layoffs and tough times and unemployment, and how everyone is tightening the belt. We hear about all this, and the average salary of a private employee is close to half that of a government jerk!The next time some government official spouts off about the money thrown around in the private sector, just think about the strain on your back as your bloated masters get fatter even as we starve.

I’m not going to throw out a ton of OMGWTFBBQ here, but this grade is a bit high, in my opinion.

Enormous deficit spending on a historic scale
The stimulus bill is a large failure and a huge albatross so far
Unemployment is over 10%
No gay rights bills
No gun control bills
No abortion bills
He used TARP money to buy equity in GM and Chrysler, which has done nothing
He won the Nobel while escalating a war and giving a very Bushian “just war” speech
He has changed HIS OWN war strategy already in that same war
He’s so far failed to push a Health Care Bill across Congress (Reid doesn’t have 60)
He’s failed to get Cap and Trade, so he resorted to the EPA fiat
His approval rating is 44% according to Rasmussen (always lower than the others, but shit…)
He genuflected on the IOC altar and failed to net the games for Chicago (thank God)
He still blames Bush for everything
Played the race card against the Police, of all organizations

As a conservative, I believe Obama deserves a very low F as a President so far, but that is a partisan stance allied against socialist policies and the fact that Obama represents everything politically terrible in this world.

However, I believe a B+ is far too high for liberals, as well. Isn’t it? There has been almost no movement on any horizon important to Dems in year one. Only the rhetoric remains, frankly.

Barry, however, thinks he’s doing better than good. (A is excellent, B is good, C is average, right?) Better than good is missing the boat by a huge margin, even for liberals, I’d imagine. I have a hard time believing continued loyalty to Barack is anything more than holding out hope against hope that something will come of all this mess. Look at your personal agendas, folks. None of the boxes are checked so far, are they?

Okay, so I’m usually pretty prepared to have an argument about politics, but I have been continually caught off-guard about Iraq/Afghan war spending. Finally, I am rectifying this problem, and we’re gonna take a look at the Congressional Research Service’s report on the subject, entitled “The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11″. This report was released on September 28th, 2009, by the way.

Here’s the link.

Alright, let’s check the tape.

With enactment of the FY2009 Supplemental (H.R. 2346/P.L. 111-32) on June 24, 2009, Congress has approved a total of about $944 billion for military operations, base security, reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans’ health care for the three operations initiated since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Afghanistan and other counter terror operations; Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), providing enhanced security at military bases; and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).

So, $944 billion dollars since 2001. There you have it. No more distortions or issues with numbers. Just under a trillion (gosh, that sounds so Obama-aged, doesn’t it?).

Here’s another thing. Some projections of future spending, which I think assumes no surging. This includes a gradual drawdown scenario, so that’s the thing we have to swallow to read this.

• $161 billion in FY2009;
• $147 billion in FY2010;
• $128 billion in FY2011;
• $101 billion in FY2012;
• $79 billion in FY2013; and
• about $77 billion a year for FY2014 through FY2018.100

So now, let me sling some arrows! For comparison’s sake, here’s some spending figures:

War on Terror Since 2009: $944B
2009 Stimulus Bill: $787B over seven-ish years
Senate Healthcare Bill (based on six years of spending leveraged against ten years of taxes): $849B over 10 years
Cap and Trade Bill Cost: $1761 per family (per White House)

So whenever a liberal wants to roil away about the war spending being the driving factor of federal spending, smack them the hell down and show them the above report. You could also make a strong case that national security is covered explicitly under the US Constitution, whereas welfare programs, health care legislation, and energy taxes are not, but constitutional arguments are not effective on liberals, as they don’t believe in it.

WaPo has the story right here.

Alright, here’s a quote:

SEOUL — President Obama will not announce his decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan before the Thanksgiving holiday, senior aides said Thursday.

The answer is: Nothing again. Nothing? Not even a promise to say something after Thanksgiving, or before Christmas? Really? Just more delays, huh?

The news came as the president greeted 1,500 troops at Osan Air Base in South Korea, just before boarding Air Force One and heading back to Washington after an eight-day trip to Asia.

Our boy-king has some stones, don’t he? Go meet with troops, even mentioning that they’re a great photo op, and delay a decision that literally means everything to the military. Meanwhile, our missionless troops die in Afghanistan whilst the President does what exactly?

Obama said in interviews Wednesday that he would reveal his decision within the next several weeks. On Thursday, aides clarified that there would be no announcement before Thanksgiving, one week away. Senior administration officials said Obama intends to meet with his national security team again before going public with his plans.

So, I’ve used the word several many times in my life, and meant different things when I said it. Its meant 3 weeks and even up to 10 or more weeks sometimes. This is about as open-ended as Obama can make this. Can’t even commit to a deadline on his decision that has lingered for 4 or 5 months now.

Obama did not mention the looming decision in his remarks to U.S. troops, referring to the Afghan conflict only by thanking South Korea for its efforts and expressing gratitude to the American military personnel who have served there.

It must not have come up. Honest mistake. Now, I’m gonna give Barry a little bit of slack based on this:

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has stated that without the deployment of up to 40,000 additional troops within the next year, the mission “will likely result in failure.” But some aides are arguing for a much smaller troop increase, and the U.S. ambassador in Kabul, Karl W. Eikenberry, has questioned whether the Afghan government can be a reliable partner.

I get it, Obama. Its a hard decision, but we’re literally spending lives and money, which you’re apparently concerned about these days (psst, you already tripled the deficit, dummy), without a serious mission in a country full of people trying to murder us. DO SOMETHING. You wanted to be President, now fucking do it.

Let’s talk about our Dollar, okay? Okay, I will.

Our dollar is failing. India just bought 200 million tons of gold, China is moving into gold, the G20 was openly discussing moving away from the dollar as the international currency. The value is plummeting, and gold is soaring.

Why is the dollar failing? Well, friend, we have some debts against our own money. Problem is, we’re not paying it off. As a matter of fact, our President has already spent a ton of money on non-military matters. Its scaring our debtors, and they are balking at backing a President that, in his own words, is “just getting started.” Not only are we not paying anything off, but we’re spending ever faster against our credit.

Obama has no intention of slowing his spending ways, as the push for health care reform has proven. If Medicare is used as any barometer, as liberals love to do. Medicare has a $36T unfunded liability. Yeah, any program that runs a deficit like that cannot honestly be used as a success in any respect. The bill’s first 10 years will run a 900 billion dollar deficit, but even that is gaming the system. You see, that number is gained from 10 years of taxes matched against 6 years of spending, so only the first ten years are even at that number. Let’s also remember that the 500 billion cut from Medicare will NEVER happen. When the time for these cuts comes, they will be cut. Alright, back on track…

There has been a lot of talk about the financial crisis being over, or the recession being over, or a jobless recovery. This talk is all premature. A great wave is going to devastate this nation, thanks to our President, and his continual drive to submerge the nation’s head beneath the waters of financial solvency. Our collapsing dollar will lead to inflation like we haven’t seen since, um, I don’t know, Jimmy Carter.

Imagine when our unemployment is around 8-11% and then 10% inflation hits. Imagine when the whole country takes that hit atop our current situation. I wonder how hollow Obama’s speeches will sound when he waxes poetic about his policies. Will he see the Hoovervilles he built in the distance?

I’m going to keep this moderately short and to the point.

The Fort Hood shooter was not a madman. He was not crazy in a medical sense. He may have simply “snapped” that day, but it was his proclivities that led to his actions.

The man was a radical Islamist. He was a pseudoterrorist that simply crossed over the lines after numerous internet postings and attempted contacts with Al Qaeda. He is simply part of the modern-day plague of this world: radical Islam.

I’ll say it again. Radical Islam is a monumental problem in this world, and it represents the most destructive single force in it. These wicked men, sometimes alone, sometimes in groups, convinced of divine missions, conspire to spread fear and destruction. They are triply terrible when you consider their evasion of consequence by committing suicide and their senseless disregard for their own lives.

From this and recent history, two things:
One, its time to simply accept that this world has an enormous sickness in radical Islam that needs to be named, culled, and eradicated. If this man were a radical Jew, he’d be publicly derided, as he should be. There are no special protections afforded by being Muslim. The double standard is horrible to behold, but everywhere. Did you know its a fucking crime to have a Bible in Saudi Arabia? If you are a Muslim, you get beheaded for it! I hardly think calling out that Muslims are about 95% of the world’s terrorists is hateful. It is what it is. Spineless evasion of mentioning the reason Hasan did this helps nothing.

Two, its time to call out regular Muslims. Where in the hell are the strongly worded letters and shouts from the Islamic community decrying these terrible attacks? Why don’t the peaceful Muslims inform on their evil brethren? Why aren’t the clerics screaming for justice for the soldiers? At some point, the silent Islamic community becomes an accomplice in addition to a silent witness. There are good Samaritan laws on the books that force people to aid the greater community against crime when they have a chance, and its about time society examines why the Muslim religion largely lets this happen.

That is the lesson for today, children. When you are a big corporation rampant with fraud/waste/bad judgment, your first move should never be to lean on Mommy Government for a free bailout. There are myriad principled reasons for this, many of which regard robbing your own customers, the taxpayers, of their money so you can continue bad practices.

I thought it was the wrong way to go for each of these corporations and for the government, as well. However, I think the punishment for the very executives that caused this mess will be 60% right on target, but 40% completely wrong. Let’s break each half down:

60% on target:

Executives control the direction of a corporation. They push products, investments, practices, and policies to their workers and retail outlets, in whatever fashion they are manifested. These men, bankers and auto guys alike, used poor judgment in handling corporate affairs, and their businesses tanked. They then asked the taxpayers, or more accurately the Congress, for a governmental bailout, funneled by friends in high places to their coffers. They let the government in, and now they deserve the paycuts, and all the crap that comes their way from allowing power-hungry politicians a piece of their own pie. Their moral deficiencies are their own estates’ downfall.

40% way off:

The government caused huge parts of these problems that led to the failure of banks and the auto industry. GM and Chrysler STILL pay far more to their employees than Toyota and Honda, which leads to higher quality at a lower price for the Japanese automakers. Banks were forced by the Community Reinvestment Act to lend to poor risks to maintain profit margins they are obligated to pursue for their shareholders. Unions and housing aid firms like, you guessed it, ACORN, each played their governmentally-backed role in forcing unworkable conditions for these giants of Corporate America.

I’d normally have these ratios at 50/50, but Ford did it the right way. Even under the burden of their problems, this organization stood up to the temptation of “free money” from the Feds, and they are pressing ahead. Similarly, smaller banks, and some of the larger ones have returned (or attempted to return) their money from the TARP program. The banking system was an actual liquidity crisis, so I would rank immediate return of money almost as high as Ford’s flat refusal.

The government is an evil, sinister mistress when it comes to gaining power, isn’t she? When banks wanted out of the TARP controls, she wasn’t quite ready for some of that return. Nay, the hooks were in Citi and the others, and they don’t come out so easily. Even small banks were subject to mysterious “liquidity tests”, and many were refused at the door, even when providing enormous proof of their solvency. As a friend to my father’s bankers, I have heard these tales.

So let us partially enjoy watching the result of giving in to base tendencies and letting the government “save you” for the greater good. Always for the greater good.

A bit OT: What happens if GM fails again? Does it get another bailout? The new car sales bubble directly caused by Cash for Clunkers is hurting the business, as well as creating a new used parts scarcity that we haven’t even seen yet, as all the old cars can’t be salvaged. Does Ford get their fair bailout if their problems swallow them up, or does the government only protect GM/Chrysler? Who decides what companies should be owned by the government if it comes to saving a sector? Who is the almighty arbiter of whether GE, Phillips, Kohler, Sun Microsystems, or Nabisco get a pass on bad business?

Finally, what is the impact on the average citizen who is now being shown that the government no longer respects or is willing to accept that freedom and capitalism is the freedom to succeed AND to fail? Just the other day, a friend was telling me about his science fair experience back in high school (some 20 years hence). He got first place and a blue ribbon in one of them, which he really thought was great, until he realized that the top 1/3 got his ribbon, the next third got a red 2nd place ribbon, and the bottom 1/3 received a third place ribbon. Even the worst showing got a prize. Its no wonder my generation is so effed up politically when no one has been scolded in class, spanked by their parents, out first in dodgeball (not even allowed anymore), picked last in kickball, cut from a sports team, or given no accolades for poor work. Kids aren’t even held back in school anymore for failing to progress! Their social development is too fragile, the teachers (and whoever) argue.

Isn’t that a funny term? “Social” development. Sounds a lot like “social” justice to me, in that its a bastardization of a real term to mean something that you only use when hiding children or even adults from the realities of the world we live in. Our President uses terms like that all the time, which gives me quite the view into his psyche.

Just thought I’d mention that while the Pentagon, the SecDef, and the citizenry are demanding some action on the situation in Afghanistan, our President chose… well, he went with the snooze button.

At the very least, pull soldiers out while you him and haw (sp?) around, Mr. President. You are the decider, remember? Do you remember when you said that? Soldiers are dying while you teeter on the fence! Its tragic to lose them when there is a goal in mind, but senseless and criminal to let them die without a clear mission! I don’t give a shit what Bush did, and we can’t change it anyhow. Pull the fucking trigger one way or another.