For some reason I don’t feel as safe as before. Since about noon.

Weird.

Obama won’t give up his Blackberry!

This is news?

Why should he? He’s the Chief Executive. He’s the boss.

I’m all for Obanana keeping his smart phone.

He’s not just the first African American President. He’s the first President that won’t look stupid thumbing his old racketeering pals a message.

“Dude. Like this is so cool. Did you guys see my new ride?”

He needs to be kept abreast when he’s sunning his washboard abs.

“I want to be able to have voices, other than the people who are immediately working for me, be able to reach out and send me a message about what’s happening in America.”

For example, soon-to-be disappointed voices like Peggy Joseph.

Security issues.

“I think we’re going to be able to hang on to one of these. My working assumption, and this is not new, is that anything I write on an email could end up being on CNN,” he said.

Oops. What the President-Elect meant to say was:

“Anything that CNN writes for me to say…”

National Security?

“So I make sure to think before I press ‘send’,” he said.

Let’s hope as President he thinks before he presses any buttons.

Obama’s Blackberry can take the place of his teleprompter when he’s on the fly.

“If I’m doing something stupid, somebody (in Jail-JR) in Chicago can send me an e-mail and say, ‘What are you doing?’

That might happen a lot.

Conservative Republicans in Congress may out-numbered but they may still be in the majority.

The real fiscal policy battle is going to be among liberal and conservative Democrats, the “Blue Dogs” as they are known, and they seem to think Barack Obama is one of them.

“Barack totally gets it . . . He is smarter than Bill Clinton and disciplined.” So says Tennessee Democratic Congressman Jim Cooper on the Thursday before Mr. Obama’s inauguration.

Sitting in his office a stone’s throw from where the festivities will take place, I ask about his role in the big transformation coming to Washington. He’s one of the leaders of a gang of moderate Democrats called the Blue Dogs. They’re meeting their first Democratic president in a while, and Mr. Cooper may have a big effect on the agenda. He smiles gently and says, “If we were to ally with the Republicans, we could swing any vote in the House of Representatives.”

The Blue Dogs gang is growing and is made up of a number of Democrats that didn’t vote for the first Stimuless Package, or the Big Three (…Two…One) Bailout, are against tax increases and actually favor “targeted” tax cuts.

So far they want to play nice with Lefty Pond Scum like Frank ‘n Beans, Pelosi and Reid, but this could be the makings of a surprise and possibly epic battle for the high ground.

If they are inclined to wrangle with Nancy Pelosi and the more liberal contingent in the Democratic Party, they will drive policy, especially as a check on spending. “Ideally the White House will see things our way, so they will present legislation on the Hill that we find acceptable,” Mr. Cooper says. “If they stray too much from that or if a certain part of Congress strays too much from that, then we may have to object.”

But is Barack one of them?

Obama To Hold Fiscal Responsibility Summit

Obama said that he has made clear to his advisers that some of the difficult choices–particularly in regards to entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare – should be made on his watch. “We’ve kicked this can down the road and now we are at the end of the road,” he said.

The question is whether Obama actually used the perjorative “entitlement” and whether his idea of “choices” is cutting benefits and/or forcing Social Security and other entitlements to do more with less…or just raising taxes.

If the Blue Dogs are right, we might actually have another Bill Clinton on our hands, one that won’t dip his pen in the company ink (Michelle would rip his head off I surmise), which given the fiscal policies of GWB, might be Change^© we fiscal conservatives can live with.

…albeit given the lack of choice in the matter for the next two to four years.

But what of the monster stimulus package? What doth the Chien Bleu say of that?

“…I think there are infrastructure things that are legitimate to spend money on,” like the interstate highway system. “For the stimulus package to work in the economy, you have to have long-term credibility. If people think we are inviting inflation back in, or if we’re not going to prudently manage the nation’s finances, the stimulus package is largely a waste of time.”

A great thing about Mr. Obama’s plan, he says, is the tax cuts. “I think stimulus can come in a variety of forms, but I think the key message is Democrats are not for tax increases. Democrats can be for tax cuts when appropriate, when needed, when targeted. We can argue about the type of cut, but the key element of this proposal was facing the payroll tax. That is the most regressive, most antijob tax in America and very few presidents in American history have touched it. And Barack is touching it in this package. That is an achievement of immense proportions in and of itself.”

I’m still not convinced this stimulus will stimulate anything and I remain skeptical of Barack Obama’s definition of a “tax cut.”

In the mean time, check out these quotes…from a Democrat no less…Blue Dog Cooper:

[The deficit is] even worse than most people think, he says, because of dodgy accounting used by the federal government.

“The U.S. government uses cash accounting,” he says. “That is illegal for any enterprise of any size in America except for the U.S. government. Every for-profit business, every not-for-profit business, every state and local government has to use real accounting except for Uncle Sam.”

Barack Obama is inheriting over $60 trillion of problems. This is not counting the bailout, or Social Security or anything.”

Standard & Poor’s reported that the U.S. Treasury bond would lose its AAA rating by 2012 because of the way Washington has been carrying on. America would have the same credit rating as Estonia and Greece, and then the same as Poland and Brazil, and then it would be like . . . Mexico. “Yet no one knows about this,” he says.

We will be watching Congressman Cooper and his Dogs.

Let the battle begin.

Barack Obama has a dream of affordable broadband internet for every American household and six billion dollars of the Democrats stimulus package is earmarked to that end.

Broadband carriers say it’s too little and it will be too late.

“I was incredibly impressed how quickly the House moved,” says Shirley Bloomfield, senior vice-president for federal relations at Qwest Communications (Q), a Denver-based communications provider that serves 14 Western states. “They’ve got some good concepts. But $6 billion is not going to get you to ubiquitous broadband.”

…some communications providers warn that the package as designed in the House bill may get bogged down by too much government bureaucracy, and fail to create jobs quickly—a key objective of the federal stimulus.

…the House bill is focused on using grants, loans, and loan guarantees, but it doesn’t use tax incentives at all. Grants would likely take many months to be distributed, whereas some companies say they could act much more quickly if they knew they could receive tax credits for their investments. “With grants it is eight months of bureaucracy before any money gets to its destination,” says an official for a large communications provider. “If you are looking for a quick stimulus hit, tax credits would be better.”

Do you mind if I repeat that?

“If you are looking for a quick stimulus hit, tax credits would be better.”

Just as giving free money to banks doesn’t guarantee they will lend it out, internet network providers may not be interested in stimulus money conditioned with government mandates, further diminishing the stimulus’ potential impact on growth.

However, some organizations such as Public Knowledge are hopeful that open access will mean that network builders—such as Verizon Communications (VZ), AT&T (T), Time Warner Cable (TWC), and Comcast (CMCSA)—must allow rivals to use their networks at wholesale prices.

“You would be required to lease space over these networks the way we used to do.”

If this is the case, ITIF’s Atkinson warns that many broadband providers would not participate in the program. “You’ll effectively have a boycott,” he says. “You’ll see very, very few takers.”

Internet access is a boon to the free flow of information, education and free enterprise, but high-speed access is not a right of every American citizen. Spending billions of dollars so more Americans can access their email, update their Facebook page and surf porn more efficiently has dubious value for the incremental creation of jobs.

The media is in a froth over BHO’s inauguration and high pre-approval ratings but Obama may find it difficult to fill the shoes given him by the people for whom he is…was…the people we…or they…were waiting for…or something like that. Sorry.

Public expectations for his performance in office far exceed those for any president in a generation.

On the eve of his inauguration Tuesday, the poll found that 65 percent of those surveyed believe Obama will be an “above average” president or better, including 28 percent who think he will be “outstanding.”

Which is all fine and good. In comparison…

According to previous pre-inauguration polls, just 47 percent believed George W. Bush would be an “above average” or “outstanding” president when he entered his first term, 56 percent thought Bill Clinton would be “above average” or better and 38 percent thought George H.W. Bush would be. The earlier pre-inaugural numbers all came from the Gallup Poll, except for Clinton’s, which came from the ABC News/Washington Post poll.

But check out these amazing predictions for Obama’s Presidency; breathtaking.

Seventy-one percent of those polled said the economy will likely improve during the first year of his presidency; 65 percent said unemployment will go down; 72 percent said the stock market would be on the rise; and 63 percent said their personal economic situation would improve.

From where we stand, a dog with a note in his mouth could accomplish that.

Some conservative economists say that additional stimulus may only prolong the grief at best, triggering runaway inflation down the road and resulting in an even more bloated federal bureaucracy.

“I think the economy will recover regardless of what Washington does. But the long-term effect here will be to reduce the standard of living of the next generation because they will be saddled with all this debt,” said Chris Edwards of the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute.

Even without the new spending proposed by Obama, the U.S. has a $1.2 trillion budget deficit this year, he noted. “If that isn’t already enough of a Keynesian stimulus, what is?”

Given some of the ideas put forth so far by the Obama administration, we may soon find ourselves wanting for that pooch.

…best analysis I’ve seen.

Sorry, Al.

I’ve heard people say the porn industry will have a surge during a down economy.

You’ll be OK.

Why Norm Coleman Will Win

In his annual State of the City address, Mr. Bloomberg described New York as “shaken” but “not broken,” and he put forward a nine-point plan to preserve and create 400,000 jobs, which he said he could accomplish without new government spending.

Did you hear that Jimmy Obama?

I noticed the outside temp sensor in my car doesn’t measure below minus 25.

Even the Japanese think we’re crazy to be outside today.

At least I don’t do it while writing or commenting, unlike someone else we know.

Seven Cups of Coffee a Day May Lead to Hallucinations

Jan. 14 (Bloomberg) — Consuming the caffeine in seven cups of instant coffee a day may leave you more likely to see, hear and smell things that aren’t there, U.K. researchers said.

People who drink at least 330 milligrams of the stimulant a day were three times as likely to have hallucinations as those who consumed less than 10 milligrams a day, Durham University researchers found in a study of 219 college students published today in Personality and Individual Differences.

Some habits are worth the risk. They will bury me with a bag of Starbucks Italian Roast.

…and finds the government stopped paving it, in favor of the low road.

General Motors and Chrysler flew their private jets to Washington to beg for some cheese.

Congress said “No.” George W. Bush said “Yes.”

So they got it, along with all the “strings.”

Ford said “No, thanks” and sent in their offense, announcing new energy-efficient and technologically-advanced models and boasting of higher quality and industry publication endorsements.

And now they want to kick some Detroit rear quarter panels. They want the Big Three to become The Big Ford.

Company insiders say the overarching goal was to separate Ford in the public mind from General Motors (GM) and Chrysler. As the crisis afflicting the auto industry has deepened, Mulally & Co. have gone out of their way to convince car buyers that Ford is stronger, greener, and more technologically advanced than those other guys. Executive Chairman William C. Ford Jr. sees an advantage if “people view us as a company that pulled itself up by its own bootstraps.”

At a time when GM’s and Chrysler’s financing arms have been hard-pressed to make loans to potential buyers, Ford has been using television, online, and radio ads to remind the world that it has money to lend. And executives have been falling over themselves to promote Ford’s kudos from Consumer Reports, which this month noted that of eight new Detroit cars it recommends, six are Fords or Ford brands.

In a dismal fourth quarter, it notes, only Ford, Honda (HMC), and Toyota increased their market share among the top six carmakers.

And yet?

This is why the President should have respected Congress’ and the people’s rejection of the bailout:

But GM, in exchange for federal help, likely will swap equity for debt and may emerge with a stronger balance sheet. By taking the high road, Ford could find itself at a competitive disadvantage.

President Bush in one fell swoop turned the American automotive industry upside down by rewarding failure and inadvertently but predictably penalizing success. Contrary to President Bush’s assertions otherwise, in the long run you can’t protect capitalism by abandoning free-market principles; especially to this magnitude.

GM and Chrysler should have been allowed to fail.

Ford Motor may find this out the hard way thanks to President Bush. Our nation may found out the hard way thanks to the President-Elect.

Barack Obama has made it clear you won’t get it from the President.

First off, as a refresher, there are leading economic indicators and there are lagging economic indicators.

The stock market is a leading economic indicator in that to the degree investors have the data and the visibility, the market tracks the forseable future, barring any unforseen events such as natural disasters, wars or terrorist attacks.

The 21 percent rally in the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index since Nov. 20 reflects speculation the worst of the recession is over, according to Biggs, managing partner at hedge fund Traxis Partners LLC, and Doll, chief investment officer for BlackRock Inc. Equities will probably keep rising, they said yesterday on Bloomberg Television.

“Sometime around the middle of the year there’s going to be pretty conclusive evidence that the economy has stabilized,” Biggs said. “That’s what the stock market is now looking forward and seeing, and that’s why I think that this rally carries further.”

Employment on the other hand, is a lagging indictor. Unemployment usually confirms what we already know, or at least suspect. The fact that we are hearing news of job losses is, at least from a macro standpoint, good news, as long as we are all resigned to the fact that we are in fact in a recession. Job losses usually mark the beginning of the end.

Context is everything. By no means is 7.2% unemployment severe in the context of past recessions. It’s been much higher in modern times, and around 5 1/2% of that is “built in” – represents the unemployable.

My advice is to reject media analysis of the economy, including – I mean especially – Barack Obama. His understanding of basic economics is impaired.

the president elect warned that failure to pass legislation enacting his proposals within the next few weeks risks letting the U.S. fall into a deeper and more prolonged recession.

…his understanding of politics and fear however is quite well developed, which makes him motivated. And dangerous.

Barack Obama has outlined his plans to create jobs in America via speeches during his inspiring campaign and his calming and reassuring tone as Occupier of the Office of the President Elect.

As economic conditions have evolved and Obama’s confidence in his magical powers has grown, he has revised his goals and ambitions for job creation over the past year.

In an effort to be a progressive source of economic guidance and as a public service, we have gathered and cataloged the President-Elect’s “Job” Creation Goals as outlined in his many and factual addresses to the nation.

Using the same mathematics and economic theory* employed by Obama’s advisers and cutting-edge spreadsheet technology, we have analyzed and extrapolated Barack Obama’s “job” creation predictions.

Here is a sampling of the data and its sources (emphasis mine-JR):

Feb 13, 2008 WASHINGTON – Democrat Barack Obama said Wednesday that as president he would spend $210 billion to create jobs in construction and environmental industries, as he tried to win over economically struggling voters.

Obama’s investment would be over 10 years as part of two programs. The larger is $150 billion to create 5 million so-called “green collar” jobs to develop more environmentally friendly energy sources.

December 24th, 2008 Dec. 24 (Bloomberg) — President-elect Barack Obama is still four weeks away from inauguration, and already the size of government is growing. His initial goal of creating 2.5 million new jobs has been upped to 3 million, rising in lockstep with a proposed economic stimulus package.

We know money buys influence. Now we find out it can buy jobs as well.

If only it were that simple.

Jan 10, 2008 Jan. 10 (Bloomberg) — President-elect Barack Obama said his two-year plan to boost the U.S. economy will generate up to 4 million jobs, higher than his previous estimates, the biggest portion of them in construction, manufacturing and retail.

Here is our analysis:

As you can see, by this time next year, Barack Obama will have predicted the unprecedented creation of over 32 Million Jobs by the end of 2011. This is cause for great rejoicing and a renewed confidence in our political system.

The surplus of new jobs will actually allow many workers to choose more than one, although experts predict an executive order will limit job selection to two per worker and three per household for American citizens and  three per worker and five per household for illegal aliens undocumented workers that can document a contribution to the Obama ’08 campaign.

We will revise our estimates as new data is made available to us via the media.

*Hopey Changey^©

Obama gave a speech yesterday. Word has it (I didn’t watch or listen) he discussed the economy in no uncertain terms.

Let me guess though, I’ll bet he used the words “crisis” numerous times; I’ll bet he furrowed his eyebrows real good like and probably had a real ominous look on his face too.

Were ya scared?

Did he make you think you need him to save you? …that this crisis is too severe for you to solve it on your own? Did he speak of sweeping, decisive, massive and immediate action being required on the part of the federal government? Did you need a hug? A big government hug?

These days it seems like it is our patriotic duty to consume more. And if we don’t choose to spend more money ourselves, the government will do it for us.

Obama is building his case: You need big government. You need guys like him; guys that are smarter than you cuz they read more books, went to better schools and have more letters after their name. Guys that aren’t afraid to take massive, decisive action; to write big checks with someone else’s money.

These problems, despite being undeniably caused by liberal policies in the first place, must be solved by the government. The government must “create” three million “jobs.” The government is the answer, no matter what the question, when you’re a liberal.

Liberals can’t do anything if it doesn’t justify government’s growth and influence in our lives.

But wait a minute. Isn’t it excessive spending that got us into this mess in the first place? Spending more now seems like drinking Scotch to cure a hangover.

But what if the right thing to do right now is nothing?

Here and there are some small signs that the economy is at least bottoming — a crucial stepping stone to meaningful recovery.

New orders, employment, backlogs, and exports all ticked higher than the previous month.

The November factory-orders report showed non-defense capex rising at a 3.9 percent annual pace, the first increase in four months and the best gain in 10 months. Computer orders surged 12.5 percent.

Commercial construction rose 0.7 percent annually in November, and is up 12.1 percent over the past three months.

And in the November personal-income report, real disposable income jumped 1 percent for the month and is up 7.1 percent at an annual rate over the past three months. Real consumer spending in that report rose 0.6 percent in November.

Additionally, the credit freeze continues to thaw. The three-month LIBOR rate is all the way back to 1.4 percent. And corporate bond rates continue to decline, a signal that private capital markets are starting to function again. The 30-year mortgage rate is holding around 5.3 percent.

At a recent conference in San Francisco, academic economists were very pessimistic, expecting recession to last through the whole year. But easy money and low retail gas prices may be a lot more stimulative than the academics think.

The stock market says we’re already over half way through the recession, it’s up almost twenty percent since it’s low point in November.

Americans are already saving more. Banks are amassing cash which they will lend as soon as their balance sheets improve.

Unemployment has a long way to go to match Reagan-era suffering let alone Great Depression levels. Reagan came into office with 7.6% unemployment, it rose to 9.7% then fell to 5.5% on his watch.

Riddle me this: How did he do that?  How big was Reagan’s government stimulus? (It’s a trick question).

Obama’s fear mongering is designed to set the stage for the hero to enter. The damsel in distress is you, he’s going to rescue you, and we all know what the hero gets to do to the damsel once he rescues her.

It’s not enough for Obama to be the first African American President of the United States.

Obama needs a legacy, and in the annals of history, the great liberals, the ones with fist-pounding speeches and legacies, all did the same thing. Increase government, create ever more massive government spending and debt, and screw the next generation (or two or three).

Obama’s 9/11 is the economy and he is going to take the only action a liberal knows.

The economy will improve. The free-enterprise system will come to the rescue like it always does. Capitalism will survive. It may have started already. Obama just wants the credit for it.

You see liberals have just one lever in front of them, and they’re always itching to pull it whenever we give them the chance. Obama wants to pull it so hard, it will be in the history books.

Whether you are a conservative, liberal or independent, or can’t find it with both hands, I can’t imagine anyone outside Democrats in Congress thinking highly of this proposal, highlighted in the Most Viewed Story of 2008 on InvestmentNews.com.

Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nation’s $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.

Powerful? Maybe so. Smart?

Well now, we know they wouldn’t be Democrats if they were smart, would they.

And here’s proof:

the director of the Congressional Budget Office, Peter Orszag, testified that some $2 trillion in retirement savings has been lost over the past 15 months.

A poor, certainly intentional and patently alarmist choice of words. I can’t corroborate my suspicion, but I’m convinced Orszag is a prodigy of Al Gore.

The market drops, like it does from time to time, and this one was a big one, but certainly no precedent, and $2 Trillion is “lost“. Someone with Orszag’s book-learnin’ credentials should know the difference between a presumably temporary (and albeit severe) fluctuation in the market, and a permanent loss.

The sky is not falling. The market will recover from the cluster of liberal social engineering and corruption that caused this crisis; this despite the fact that those culpable are still at the helm or advising the Occupant of The Office of the President Elect.

Orszag is on a mission.

House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif., and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, are looking at redirecting those tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute.

Liberal Democrats have uncovered yet another avenue for government to invade our lives, confiscate our hard-earned dollars, and throw them down the same rat-hole that is the soon-to-be-insolvent Social Security Administration. It’s not the “nation’s 401k system.” It’s my 401k. It’s your 401k.

Under Ms. Ghilarducci’s plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5% of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3% a year, adjusted for inflation.

The reason prudent investors choose to diversify into equities and bear their inherent risk is that historically over time that risk has returned a premium over “safer” investments that may have less volatility but don’t keep pace with inflation and therefore lose purchasing power.

In the mean time, these dollars are invested back into our economy unlike the dollars that would be “invested” by the government on your behalf. Most likely they would be stolen by greedy liberals with a penchant for spending other peoples’ money.

“I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s,” Ms. Ghilarducci said in an interview. “401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won’t have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break.”

The colossal arrogance of Ms. Ghilarducci is beyond comprehension. Teresa, you ignorant slut. It’s not a subsidy. It’s our money.

401k’s will be a boon to federal coffers as most of the dollars invested in “the nations 401k system” will be taxed once distributed to the retiree. True to form, liberal democrats’ myopia prevents them from waiting that long. They want your money. They want it now.

401k’s have been a boon to future retirees and may be the sole source of retirement income for many hard-working and deserving Americans who will never ever come close to recovering their mandatory contributions to the mismanaged Social Security Administration.

Most people understand this simple concept.

Apparently Democrats don’t, or are counting on the fact that we’re too stupid to get it or too uninvolved to do anything about it.

As the bumper sticker says, “If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Twice the cost of a Zamboni at $160,000…

Toronto, Canada’s largest city, is slowly phasing out their Zambonis in favor of Finnish-made IceCats. So is the National Hockey League. And the reason is carbon monoxide: while the Zambonis run on propane or natural gas, the IceCats are all-electric. In an indoor arena, that can make all the difference: it’s no big surprise to read that a study in the American Journal of Public Health determined that replacing carbon-emitting resurfacing machines with electric ones would reduce the concentration of nitrogen dioxide in indoor arenas by 87%.

87% percent of what number? How much difference can a Zamboni or two make in a huge ice arena?

Who’d a thought you could make a Zamboni any uglier.

Is it just me, or is it ironic that the NHL is a spectacle featuring juiced up hockey players beating the piss out of each other while at the same time worrying about inhaling too much NO²?

Hysteria can be hysterical.

…not a qualification either.

One of the least vulgar things he’s done…is Mick Jagger.

I think I’m going to be sick (again).

This just popped (or pooped-right AC?) into my Yahoo mail.

“wake up and unlock your own personal happiness in 2009”

All you gotta do is listen to Oprah on XM.

You first.

Wellstone, Dayton, Ventura now Franken.

Strange things keep happening in Minnesota, where the disputed recount in the Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken may be nearing a dubious outcome. Thanks to the machinations of Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and a meek state Canvassing Board, Mr. Franken may emerge as an illegitimate victor.

Mr. Franken started the recount 215 votes behind Senator Coleman, but he now claims a 225-vote lead and suddenly the man who was insisting on “counting every vote” wants to shut the process down. He’s getting help from Mr. Ritchie and his four fellow Canvassing Board members, who have delivered inconsistent rulings and are ignoring glaring problems with the tallies.

And that’s just politics, not to mention professional sports. At least in this case we can rightfully claim he’s not a Minnesotan.

I think I saw a bumper sticker that said that works for the military. Maybe not.

Flush with riders, transit is short on money and options

Revenue from the sales tax on motor vehicles, which provides about 38 percent of the funding for Metro Transit’s bus operations, has plummeted as car sales slumped. State government, already plagued by a shortfall in the billions, isn’t in a great position to help ease a transit funding deficit estimated at $11 million for the current year and at $60 million for the next two-year budget period.

I have a novel idea. How about charging the people that use it a fare commensurate with the costs? You know, like real businesses do. One of two things will happen.

People will buy cars. Problem solved.

People will pay their share. Problem solved.

One remedy — raising fares by as much as 50 cents in 2009 — isn’t leaving anybody laughing. And it would fill only part of the gap.

How about a dollar then?

Oops. Richardson is out.

WASHINGTON — Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, President-elect Barack Obama’s choice for commerce secretary, withdrew from consideration for that job on Sunday, saying a pending investigation into whether his administration gave lucrative contracts to a political donor would have “forced an untenable delay” in his confirmation.

…and said his administration had “acted properly in all matters.” But he said he had concluded that the inquiry could last weeks or even months, drawing out his confirmation hearings and distracting the new administration as it grappled with the economic crisis.

Maybe he just wasn’t interested in the grappling.

It’s okay. He, like Obama, wasn’t qualified any way. He’s been a politician since he graduated from college. Commerce? He’s done none.

The investigation concerns CDR Financial Products Inc., a Beverly Hills, Calif., company that in 2004 was awarded two consulting contracts worth about $1.4 million to advise the State of New Mexico on a large bond issue for building infrastructure, one of Mr. Richardson’s initiatives. The company’s president, David Rubin, a major Democratic contributor, gave about $100,000 to two political action committees controlled by Mr. Richardson, as well as $10,000 to his re-election campaign in 2005, according to published reports.

Oh, well other than that transaction. Sounds like commerce.

…allegedly.

The announcement, just days before the Senate is to begin confirmation hearings for some of Mr. Obama’s cabinet selections, was a setback for the president-elect, who has assembled his cabinet in near-record time. It raises questions about the thoroughness of Mr. Richardson’s vetting, deprives the Obama administration of a prominent Hispanic — Mr. Obama has, however, named two other Latinos, Representative Hilda L. Solis of California and Senator Ken Salazar of Colorado, to cabinet posts — and leaves a hole in the new White House economics team at a critical juncture.

Whatever happened to just picking the most qualified candidate for each position, whether they are Women, Men, Black, Red, White or Blue; Catholic or Jew; Pet Lover or Snappy Dresser?

Would America – no, not the media – the average American, actually give a rodent’s rear end? Are there teams? Are we all making sure we each get our guy (gal) in Obama’s cabinet? If so, then I’m pissed because I’ve heard no mention of an Irish-Italian making the cut.

We didn’t pick our President that way.

…or did we?

By the way, is Snappy Dresser still considered a protected class?

A couple weeks ago, I “attacked” a young lady who agreed to be interviewed and quoted by name in the StarTribune. She was objecting to health questions posed by her employer (who pays for some or all of her and her coworkers’ health insurance) regarding her personal habits.

She and her husband are on a rightful mission to repeal the Smoking Ban, a government intrusion on a slippery-slope and an infringement on the rights of hospitality-business owners and their patrons. But apparently they have confused the legitimacy of their cause with the burden that smoking and obesity, predominantly the products of personal choice and lifestyle, are to our health care system.

This is no small issue given the rising amplitude of liberal chatter to socialize our health care system, which would undoubtedly remove any elements of personal accountability.

Be not confused. The two issues are separate. Smoking is legal and smoking is conducive to poor health – for the smoker and her hapless bystanders. We all pay higher health care costs because of it.

Nonetheless, I don’t begrudge smokers’ personal choices nor business owners’ right to allow patrons to enjoy a perfectly legal activity in their establishments. But keep your smoke off my body, and don’t make me pay for your personal choice. An assertion not usually lost on liberals or conservatives.

As the system is organized, we’re all in this together which means the system has an interest in the degree you have chosen vis a vie your habits or lack thereof, to be a burden to it, statistically at least.

I drive fast and get more speeding tickets than most motorists. I don’t expect you to pay for my actuarial increment.

Let’s be clear on this too. The argument that tobacco taxes mitigate the incremental cost to society is naive. Look no further, all moneys collected by the biggest Ponzi scheme in history The Social Security Administration over the years are accumulating at interest for your retirement, too.

The Syllogism? Contrary to the logic “I’ve smoked three packs a day for eleventeen years and haven’t been hospitalized or died (yet),” ipso facto smoking isn’t bad for your health:

1. Among other issues, smoking causes heart attacks.

A smoking ban in one Colorado city led to a dramatic drop in heart attack hospitalizations within three years, a sign of just how serious a health threat secondhand smoke is, government researchers said Wednesday. The study, the longest-running of its kind, showed the rate of hospitalized cases dropped 41 percent in the three years after the ban of workplace smoking in Pueblo, Colo., took effect. There was no such drop in two neighboring areas, and researchers believe it’s a clear sign the ban was responsible.

The study suggests that secondhand smoke may be a terrible and under-recognized cause of heart attack deaths in this country, said one of its authors, Terry Pechacek of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

At least eight earlier studies have linked smoking bans to decreased heart attacks, but none ran as long as three years. The new study looked at heart attack hospitalizations for three years following the July 1, 2003 enactment of Pueblo’s ban, and found declines as great or greater than those in earlier research.

2. Heart attacks are expensive. Billions are spent on devices and medications for the prevention and prevention of heart attacks.

3. We all pay for the aggregate expense as subscribers to group health insurance plans and via Medicare and Medicaid.

4. Hence, if I don’t smoke, and you do, the system is making me pay for your poor personal choices; the basis for my “attack.” That fact and the pressure of rising costs has incented health care providers and employers to rightfully seek to separate and quantify those who make good choices from those who don’t.

Because it’s fair. Because it’s good business. Risk classes should be separated and held accountable to the degree they are a burden to the system. Please don’t come crying to me if you’ve drawn the short straw by your own volition.

It’s an intrusion of your rights only to the extent that the way health care is delivered, via your employer, is also broken – so the system isn’t perfect.

…and if “We The People” don’t fix the system, the government will.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

I’m going to be sick.

I just read Nick Coleman’s snarky satire on Zygi’s recent offer to the good people of Minnesota: Vikings Stadium As Economic Stimulus.

Minnesota is in trouble, with a $5 billion deficit staring us in the face and more red ink to follow. We can’t cut our way out of budget problems like that. We have to spend our way out. That’s where Zygi comes in. Thanks to Zygi, we are almost out of trouble already.

Billion dollar football stadium? What are you talking about? That ain’t no stadium. That’s a public works project.

…and I agree.

I’m going to go lay down now.

“This town needs an enema”

Thanks for Ye Olde Photo Shoppe and the Quote Derek!

John Candy (God rest his soul) probably couldn’t have anticipated that world events would transform his 1995 film Canadian Bacon into a docu-drama.

Among the most unthinkable scenarios for most Americans is the unthinkable idea that the United States could become the disunited or turn into divided states. Even though this union accumulated very slowly in the first place, and against all odds — in other words it was not inevitable — the fact that the USA will not always be as united, or at least united in the way it is now, is considered, well… unthinkable.

But as Juan Enriquez notes in his amazing PopTech talk, based on his book “The Untied States of America: Polarization, Fracturing, and Our Future”, no US president has ever died under the same flag that he was born under. That is, the borders of the United States has constantly shifted even in modern times. The last state was added in 1959 (after I was born!) and more could be added still. Americans are comfortable ADDING states, but it might not take much to subtract one. The outcome of the US Civil War has biased Americans to disbelieving in subtraction, but that might change.

In these scenarios, Minnesota becomes part of Canada, which of course we Minnesotans have known all along.

Right? 

The upside: The Canadians will put an end to all this outdoor stadium foolishness.

HT Althouse

All other national problems having been solved…

Senator Herb Kohl, Democrat of Wisconsin and the chairman of the Senate antitrust subcommittee, wanted to look behind the curtain. He was curious about the doubling of prices for text messages charged by the major American carriers from 2005 to 2008, during a time when the industry consolidated from six major companies to four.

So, in September, Mr. Kohl sent a letter to Verizon Wireless, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile, inviting them to answer some basic questions about their text messaging costs and pricing.

I get unlimited text messaging for ten bucks a month. What an outrage.
Reportedly, Verizon Wireless, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile sent the Senator text messages in response:

AT&T: ^URS

Sprint: 4Q

T-Mobile: ADAD. AFAHMASP. BIOIYA.

I think T-Mobile went a bit too far. …Germans.