Obama’s Inauguration Speech failed to meet expectations.

His “Don Pardo” announcer notwithstanding, how could it not have.

Already he has fallen victim to soaring expectations set forth by months of rhetoric and unsubstantiated promises. Obama set himself up to fail. Here, now, and in the months to come.

One hundred and fifty million dollars later and he can’t retreat fast enough. His speech was mediocre – especially by his own standards.

Maybe by design.

Might I lend a hand?

My fellow citizens:

(more…)

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

Weird.

…I wish President Obama all the best.  It would be a great thing for this country if he were not a resounding flop.

As a pragmatist who pays attention to history?  I think Obama, with his gigantistic statist ambitions and “vote present” mentality, has the potential to be the worst, weakest, most disastrous president of my cognitive lifetime.  And that’s if his more authoritarian notions – the permanent compaign, the clamping down on freedom of speech – don’t come to pass.

For today, I’ll focus on the former.  Good luck, Mr. President.  Unlike some of your more deranged fans’ behavior over the past eight years, my fellow conservatives and I are a loyal opposition.

But we are watching.  You get no more free passes.  And while conservatism’s been on the ropes for the past four years, we’re in much better shape for a comeback than, say 35 years ago.  Another Gingrich Revolution awaits you in two years if you’re not a whole lot smarter than your administration seems to be starting out.

At any rate, good luck and God Bless America.

NPR continues its endless hagiography with this episode of This American Life, entitled the “Inauguration Issue”, which should be called “White Liberals Vent Their Anger Over Having To Put Up With Cognitive Dissonance”.

Audibly-granola-chomping environmentalist:

“All of a sudden, it seemed like the kind of world where people and countries can work together again!”

It’s the kind of thing that’s worth putting in a time capsule for people to understand the madness of this era.

Andrew Breitbart at Big Hollywood on ithe cavalcade of hypocritical celebs who, mirabile dictu, are pledging to change the world for the better now that Bush is out of office.

Because, y’know, he kept them all in handcuffs and locked in the basement of a Halliburton office:

Moore’s nauseating video [watch the whole nauseating thing here] — which, like Steven Soderbergh’s “Oceans” franchise, grants a pristine look into the modern celebrity’s sense of self-importance — is not a sign of desire to serve the country under Obama. Watch, by March this pledge like New Year’s resolutions will fall by the wayside. It is a sign that the Democrat is in the White House now. It is a sign that they get to sleep again in the Lincoln Bedroom.Twenty years ago AIDS was the number one cause for the Hollywood left. Remember the trendy red ribbons at all the self-aggrandizing awards shows? Hollywood has moved on (dot org) to better blame-your-fellow-American causes. But President Bush didn’t. And aside from Bob Geldof and Bono , they ignore this president’s demonstrable goodness

Remember – it’s Obama’s election that makes it possible for these vacuous ninnies to do what they supposedly believe is right.

And yet…:

Amazing that Geldof and Bono could valiantly fight their battles and serve humanity without being paralyzed by the Leader of the Free World 2000-2008’s all-encompassing awfulness.

Remember this video: It is a instructive relic of the era of celebrity decadence and boutique anti-Republican activism under President Bush. It is a sickening display that they want fast and easy absolution for having comported themselves like ill-behaved children for eight difficult and war-torn years.

Good luck, President Obama. The rest of you can go to hell.

Absolutely.

(Except Marisa Tomei.  She can be saved.  I can just feel it).

Dumbest of the lot:

Anthony Kiedis (”To be of service to Barack Obama,”)

Kiedis, of the Red Hot Chili Peppers (a band I hated twenty years ago) is pledging servitude.

God Bless America.

It’s Progressive Lightbulb Jokes!

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.

Those neocons! Condoning torture!

The proposal Obama is considering would require all CIA interrogators to follow conduct outlined in the U.S. Army Field Manual, the officials said. The plans would also have the effect of shutting down secret “black site” prisons around the world where the CIA has questioned terror suspects – with all future interrogations taking place inside American military facilities.However, Obama’s changes may not be absolute. His advisers are considering adding a classified loophole to the rules that could allow the CIA to use some interrogation methods not specifically authorized by the Pentagon, the officials said, although the intent is not to use that as an opening for possible use of waterboarding.

Bad torturing neocons!

As far as the mainstream media is concerned, there is one standard of ethics for Republicans…:

In 2001, President George W. Bush nominated Chavez to a post in his cabinet as Secretary of Labor. Chavez was soon forced out because it was alleged that she had employed an illegal immigrant 10 years earlier. Subsequent investigation uncovered that Chavez had not, in fact employed the woman in question, but had sheltered her and given her some emergency assistance because the woman was threatened with domestic abuse. The woman, Marta Mercado, is now a U.S. citizen.

…and another for Democrats:

Contrast the political uproar and media storm over Chavez’ nomination with the quiescent reaction of our electeds in the halls of Congress and our pals over at CNN and the New York Times regarding President-elect Obama’s nomination of Timothy Geithner to be the Secretary of the Treasury.

Geithner, you may recall, is the man who may soon be in charge of trillions of our tax dollars who thinks paying taxes is only for the little people. While working for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) from 2001 to 2004, Geithner failed to pay self-employment taxes totaling more than $45,000 including interest. Interestingly, the IMF, an international entity, pays its employees’ taxes and even sends them a notice regarding the taxes owed.

“But it’s not really the same kind of thing!”

Well, yeah.  It’s actually more than the same:

Just to ram the point home that laws are meant for some and not for others, Geithner also employed an illegal immigrant as a housekeeper (“Haven’t we all?” the U.S. Senators conducting the confirmation hearing must be thinking to themselves.)

You might be saying to yourself “News flash, Berg; duh.  Of course there’s a double standard!”.  And you’d be right.

My real question:  under these circumstances – where the major media refuses to point out ethical lapses (to say nothing of double standards) on the part of the incoming administration, can you imagine them not trying to shut down talk radio and the blogs, the conservative alternative media that are the only people that ever really question Obama on anything?

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?

While in DC next week, this would be just about the only map you really need.

Note, borne of years of blogging experience:  when leftybloggers start attributing conservatives’ actions to having “crushes”, just tune them out.

However, in this case…

A new video posted today shows more footage from the event, including evidence of what appears to be a Coulter crush on former Sen. Norm Coleman.

…I don’t think I ever tuned Chris Steller in in the first place.

Oh, yeah:

Franken, at one point gesturing as if his skull was exploding, asks, “What does that mean?! What does that mean?!”

I bet we’ll see a lot of that after Franken gets seated in the Senate.

…that even before he’s inaugurated, President-Elect Obama is having such a great affect on world opinion of the US among those that have hated us for so long.

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.

Even Obama supporters are tired of his campaign’s money-grubbing ways:

Word has just been received at The Ticket that President-elect Barack Obama sent out an actual e-mail today without asking for more money from tired donors. No, really.

The N.Y. Times’ Katharine Seelye recently reported growing donor fatigue among eager and happy Obamaites to whom it has occurred that they’ve already given nearly $1 billion to buy all this change to believe in, even many long weeks after the ex-freshman senator won the White House already.

And when’s it gonna end? “I’m way over this thing,” Obama volunteer Abe Silk complained this week on Huffington Post. “You guys really want me to donate $25 to ‘make the inauguration a success’? What on earth does that even mean?”

Oh, Abe (and, by extension, all you dewy-eyed naifs that drank all that “hope and change” koolaid)!  You are not “way over” “this thing”.  It’s just begun.  Only it’s going to come out of  your paychecks pretty soon.   And the only way to be “over it” is to vote for…

…well, no, tu no puedes think about that, can you?

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^©

Dictators need to have a war to keep their nation in a state of crisis.  If they don’t have one, they need to manufacture one.

I was going to write about Obama’s state of the union speech yesterday – but I’m going to use King’s observations instead, since he’s both qualified and coherent:

“All we have to fear is the status quo,” I think, is how Ed characterized that. But I think much of this is hyperbole. Take for example “2 million out of work.” The context for this is a workforce over 140 million people. Through November, the 12 month percentage change in employt is a decline of 1.4%. (You can play with the data.) This doesn’t even match the 12-month percentage change in March 2002, hardly a period that called for the drama of this speech. Payroll employment declines of 2.5% or more have occured in both the 1974-75 and 1981-82 recessions. We may get to that level; I think that’s more likely than not some time in the next six months, at which point you will say “4 million out of work” rather than two. But let’s keep some perspective rather than dwell on “we could lose a generation of potential and promise.” That’s just bathos. Four million jobs lost sucks, but it’s not without recent precedent when the size of the economy is accounted for.That same perspective is needed elsewhere. 2.8 million more people involuntarily in part-time work? Take a look at the data. 25% of them are workers age 16-24. We don’t have data before 1994 for the unemployment series that includes part-time workers who wish they were full time (known as U-6), and we know it’s higher than it has been since we’ve tracked the current series. But it was pretty high in 1994, also not a date when we thought the end of the world was nigh.

King – an actual licensed economist, for those who don’t already know – goes on to show how bad the crisis at this moment is not, at least for most Americans.  Read the post.

The question:  why did Obama uncork a stemwinder on exactly how badly we all need his trillion-dollar hug?

Rahm Emanuel noted that the new administration didn’t want to waste a crisis, that they could pass things in crisis mode that wouldn’t get past Congress in normal times. The speech tries to elevate a normal recession into a crisis. In doing so it risks imposing a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist anymore when fiscal policy works through its lags.

See “The New Deal, Circa 1939”.

(And yes, I wrote this before I read Roosh’s excellent “Trillion Dollar Hug“, which you need to read now).

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.

It’s the Blagojevich burger:

It is the invention of Kuma owner Michael Caine, who once sold a Chicago City Council Burger, topped with foie gras. That was much tastier. But then, &*!% ’em: The Blago begins with a 10-ounce patty, a feisty foundation that remains nonetheless in the &#@$ background, marrying well with the *&^@# condiments; the patty is best ordered pale pink for maximum evocativeness. Next, the burger is topped with a very thick slice of bologna, ensuring every bite of beef is undercut by a mouthful of salty, startlingly bold baloney.The grandest touch, however, is the “bun.” Burger and bologna are held between grilled cheese sandwiches of Wonder Bread and processed American cheese.

The grace note: yellow mustard, squirted into the shape of a dollar sign.

The price? “Negotiable”:

Caine has sold about 70 since last week, and he won’t take less than $10.

“But if you want to pay more, sure.”

This is, after all, a &%$! valuable hamburger.

Last time I went to a burger joint, all I got was appreciation.

(Via Peg)

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.”

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?

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.