REALLY JOE? REALLY? Updated

I'm going to keep this short and sweet because I am absolutely sick and tired of this demagogic crap.

VP Joe Biden once again claimed that people who oppose President Obama's so-terrible-even-the-democratic-majority-senate-won't-pass-it American Jobs Act apparently don't mind if people are raped or murdered because of the lack of cops on the beat due to budget cuts.  (Doesn't that mean he's criticizing his own party?)

GUSHERS AS FAR AS THE EYE CAN SEE

The Obama administration is in the midst of a series of crises that all have something in common.  They are all gushers, and the administration is slow to react and ineffective with all of them.

The Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico is the most physical  representation of this premise. The Obama administration was responsible for coordinating the cleanup and working with BP in partnership to deal with the disaster, while allowing BP to fix the well as quickly as possible (preferably with the help of a panel of industry experts, not congressmen).  Instead, he waited a ridiculously long time -  a month - to address the nation about the disaster, dragged his feet on requests by governors of the affected states and waited almost two months to talk to the heads of BP - on day 58, to be exact.  To make things worse, instead of working in partnership with BP to solve the problem and expedite the cleanup, the administration threatened litigation, demanded huge sums of money and demonized the company and the industry to the public in an attempt to garner support for their pet eco-legislation.  And here we are, more than 80 days later, and the oil is still gushing, the press are blocked from reporting accurately and the people are suffering.  The oil is still creeping towards our shores and the response has been sporadic and anemic.  It has been nearly three months - there should be a synchronized, well organized response worked out, but there isn't.  It seems sometimes that the primary objective of the administration is litigation and moratoriums, not making things right on the ground, where it counts.

Which brings us to our next political gusher.  Jobs.  There just doesn't seem to be any relief in sight, even with a nearly trillion dollar stimulus package, a huge increase in budgetary spending. and all sorts of porky little goodies in a myriad of other legislative actions.  The administration is trying to sell the public that they are pro-business, but the fear in the business sector over increased upcoming regulations and taxation and the demonization of corporate america tells a different story.  The drilling moratorium they are trying to force through the judicial system (they're on their third attempt already) seems to be more about scoring political points with their base, but will probably do more harm than good if successful, since there are hundreds of thousands of jobs on the line - in a recession, in states that are already in deep distress from the loss of the fishing industry and tourism.  Every month we are told that we have turned the corner, and things are getting better.  But when the unemployment number dropped from 9.7% to 9.5% recently, it wasn't because of an increase in jobs, it was because over 500,000 people have given up and dropped out of the workforce.  That is not a victory. 

The third political gusher is the deficit/debt.  This country is hemorrhaging money at an alarming pace.  For every issue that has come up, the administration's answer seems to have been throwing enormous sums of money at it.  We are being burdened with new legislation that is going to cost north of a trillion dollars and wasted ten economically devastating months  The $835 billion stimulus was a bust, and so they have put forward a new whatever-you-want-to-call-it-just-so-its-not-'stimulus' bill, arguing that they just didn't go big enough the first time.  Really?  Nearly a trillion dollars wasn't enough?  The experts are advising an immediate end to spending or there is a possibility of a major crash.  Instead they are trying to pour more money into the system like it's going out of style, and, at best, we are stagnating; at worst we are going over a cliff.

The fourth gusher is in Arizona, where they have been plagued by a flood of illegal immigrants.  Most of the illegals are peaceful, hardworking people who just want a better life, but there is are many that are not, and they are wreaking havok on the state.  Above and beyond that, the peaceful illegals are still a burden on the state - a state that is facing a budget deficit of over a billion dollars this year and more than three billion next year.  The biggest problem, though, is that the mexican drug cartels have moved in with a vengeance.  The administration's response to the situation has been to sue the state over their immigration enforcement legislation and to put up signs declaring portions of the state to be too dangerous for americans.  Because nothing says 'effective governance' like forfeiting sovereignty of 80 miles of American land.  Obama has halted all building on a border fence and, although he has sent down national guard troops, it is woefully inadequate.  The administration seems content to allow things to continue as they have been, even though more and more americans are dying, and a major city, Phoenix, is becoming a violent no-man's land. 

For those who prefer to play the 'blame Bush' game, yes, many of these problems started under Bush. But the 2006 and 2008 elections were referendums against the Bush years. Obama and the democrat led congress ran on and were put in office specifically to change these things. The more things change, it seems, the more they stay the same.  Or, in this case, get worse.

Which brings us to the final gusher.  This is the one that has been caused by all the others - the deluge of political fallout.  And boy, is it a doozy.  From the drop in approval to the sinking polls, it doesn't look good.  This administration seems to have forgotten that they were ushered into power by citizens who were not so much voting for them as voting against the previous administration. They have dropped the ball on that mandate, and as a result voters are flowing in an ever increasing flood away from congressional democrats who, in turn, are starting to distance themselves from the president.  Others are even trying to sell themselves as 'outside the beltway'.  Um, if you've been in office for, say, 18 years, you're an insider.   This gusher started with a trickle of political goodwill last year, but now is approaching floodlike conditions.  Even the White House spokesman is conceding a possible loss of the House.  Here we are in mid-July, and reality seems to be suddenly dawning on those in power (but not all).  They are trying to staunch the flow by slinging mud and blaming others, but the other gushers have so seeped into people's consciences that it's unlikely they will be distracted.

In 2008, we were faced with an economic crisis that was worse than anything we had faced in decades, so we installed a government that promised change.  In a year and a half, we have added unprecedented spending, the worst oil spill in american history, a major crisis on the border and unemployment that went from 6.7% at the end of the Bush administration all the way up to 10.2% in Oct. '09, settling now to the current rate of 9.5%, with no end in sight.  All of these major crises have been backburnered by the administration in favor of passing health care legislation or attempting to push through amnesty comprehensive immigration reform and cap and trade in order to capitalize on them without ever doing anything concrete to solve the actual crisis.  With all of these crises, the administration has taken abominably long to act, which has, in turn, allowed them to get so much worse.

The final gusher is set reach maximum flow in November and, much like the other gushers, the administration is doing too little, too late, and this one looks like it, too, is out of their control.

FAREWELL REALITY, SHE BARELY KNEW YE

As Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi is the keeper of the national wallet.  She has also been the driving force behind every major spending bill that has come to the floor since 2007.  She is responsible for passing the budget and even created legislation that would, as she and others in the administration insist on alleging, "save or create" jobs. 

Today, she came out with a statement that not only brings up questions about her competence, but her sanity as well (perhaps a botox-induced brain injury?).  When talking to reporters today about extending unemployment benefits yet again in a "jobs" bill she has been trying to put over for the past month, her spin went spiraling out of control:

"It injects demand into the economy," Pelosi said, arguing that when families have money to spend it keeps the economy churning. "It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name."

What she is trying to say is that the unemployment benefits put money in people's pockets, which they then spend.  That spending is apparently what causes job creation.  If that were so, some of those unemployed people would be getting those new jobs, right?  But with the jobless numbers bad yet again, it sure doesn't seem like her half-baked scheme is working. 

Someone should clue Ms. Pelosi in that the spending people do when they are on unemployment is on the bare necessities - things there are already jobs for.  It is when you spend over your normal budget on 'splurge items' that potential jobs might be made.  Considering unemployment benefits only pay a fraction of what people made at the jobs they lost, there is no additional spending - every last penny is spent on necessities. 

In fact, one might argue that high unemployment causes even more job losses, because the unemployed people are not only not splurging anymore, they are also tightening their belts - cutting out expenditures like, say, pest control or dining out entirely, and reducing costs by dropping things like premium cable packages or cell phone service for more basic plans.  This reduction in spending affects the bottom line of various businesses, which then effects their job creating abilities.  It's economics 101, Madame Speaker. 

Perhaps Ms. Pelosi should be put on unemployment this year so that she can understand the concept more fully....

Above and beyond that, the best she can come up with for job creation is unemployment benefits?   Hundreds of billions of dollars down the rabbit hole at this woman's insistence, and this is what we get for it?

How is this woman not being laughed out of Congress - or ridden out of town on a rail?

WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT - GULF SPILL EDITION

Finally, the media and democrats are starting to ask questions about the response to the Gulf oil spill.  And it only took them......34 days.

The array of liberals stepping up to the plate is quite impressive, really.  CBS's Katie Couric, NBC's Brian Williams, ABC's Diane Sawyer, even Chris Matthews and James Carville.  Note how Carville still manages to blame BP, though:

"I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here," he said. "They're naive! BP is trying to save money, save everything they can... They won't tell us anything, and oddly enough, the government seems to be going along with it! Somebody has got to, like shake them and say, 'These people don't wish you well! They're going to take you down!'"

That's right, Mr. Carville, it's those mean old oil executives taking advantage of poor little Obambi.  He just doesn't know any better and is being hoodwinked by those big, bad oilmen. 

Uh-huh.

After literally decades of the left castigating the oil industry as satan incarnate, we are now supposed to believe that they think BP et al are our saviors when it comes to the worst oil spill in our history? A spill caused by their lax safety precautions and shortcuts, let's not forget.  And now we're supposed to buy that our far-left administration is putting all of their faith in the oil companies? 

And no, I'm not saying the government should be capping the well - that is not their area of expertise. But they certainly could be doing more to protect our shoreline and try to control the damage instead of dumping it all in BP's lap - let them concentrate on capping the well first.  Unfortunately, the well is only half the problem.  The other half is the damage to the shoreline, and this is something the  feds should be tending to.  This requires mass mobilization in multiple states, and so far there is nothing indicating that is happening.  The administration needs to step up and get in the game in more than a finger pointing capacity.

After all, BP wasn't alone in the "shortcuts", and there is supposed to be an action plan at the ready.  According to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (emphasis mine):

§4202 Strengthens planning and prevention activities by: (1) providing for the establishment of spill contingency plans for all areas of the U.S. (2) mandating the development of response plans for individual tank vessels and certain facilities for responding to a worst case discharge or a substantial threat of such a discharge; and (3) providing requirements for spill removal equipment and periodic inspections.

That law has been in effect for 20 years, and yet, in the Gulf region, there was a major shortage of boom that took weeks to be remedied.  Shouldn't there have been some sort of stockpile, considering the number of deep water oil wells in the Gulf?  There is legislation on the books that require federal and state readiness.  So why weren't they ready?   In all fairness, of course, that critique does not just rest solely on the Obama administration, it encompasses every administration since 1991, but why did no one check to see if there were booms while the rig was still on fire?  You know, a 'what if' scenario - also known as a 'contingency plan'.
At least there is some attention being paid to the issue now.  There are already accusations and hearings, but all of that political clap-trap needs to be put aside.  This is a major disaster, not a political football.

Time is of the essence, and they have now wasted 36 days.  Accusations and comparisons to Katrina and Bush's response time, etc., etc., etc. can wait.  Control and clean up first, point fingers later.  Chris Dodd's ham handed attempt to place the blame for this disaster at Bush's feet is not only laughable, it's a complete waste of time.  And with this thing, we just don't have the time to waste.

The fire raged for 4 days before the rig sank - four days that should have been spent prepping for a leak as well as fighting the fire.  When the oil started to creep towards shore, the administration should have responded to Gov. Jindal's requests to build artificial sandbars offshore of Louisiana's barrier islands.  Jindal finally was forced to give a presser where he announced that he was just going to do it, whether the EPA approves or not.  The damage dredging would do to the environment is minimal in comparison to the oil decimating the fragile marshlands.  The rewards outweigh the risks on this one, and hopefully Gov. Jindal's plan will work. 

What's really amazing is the deafening silence from the environmental community.  Hello?  Are you seeing what is happening?  Where is the outrage?  36 days.  Absolute radio silence.  They must be on an eco-retreat.  It seems that to these liberal organizations, it comes down to a choice between supporting the cause or supporting the politics, and politics seems to win out every time.  To these people, circling the wagons to protect politicians is more important than their precious environmental causes. 

Every time I see the live shot of the oil billowing out of that well, unchecked, it is like a knife to my heart.  As a Floridian, I lament the potential destruction of the coral reefs that encircle my state.  I have spent many, many happy hours snorkeling in that gloriously clear water and discovering the wonders of the reefs.  I think too about the lush wetlands that will take years, possibly decades to return to normal and the huge loss of wildlife, from fish to fowl and everything in between

If the administration and the press can't get concerned over wetlands and animals, how about the people and economies of the impacted states?  Louisiana was finally recovering from Katrina, but tourism and fishing are their main industries.  Both will be decimated by this disaster.  Those who take their living from the sea are, for the most part, private individuals, not large corporations.  This is not only going to have a major impact on the state's economy, it is also going to have a huge impact directly on the lives of private citizens who now have no means to (literally) put food on the table.

The impact of this event will not be fully understood until the well is capped.  With a lot of luck, the "Top Kill" method that is underway as I write will be successful.  Once the "damn hole" is plugged, then all efforts can turn to clean-up.  If it doesn't work, we're looking at another month before a relief well can be drilled.  Another month of oil gushing into the Gulf unchecked.  What a horrifying thought.

I have to say that I am utterly stunned by the lack of reaction on this crisis.  We are always the first to any disaster; it's who we are as a nation.  At least, that's how we were until about a year and a half ago.  Since then, we have responded admirably (and generously) with crises in other countries with lots of Presidential attention, money and press coverage.  Unfortunately the "response" (and I use that term loosely) by the White House and the press to domestic crises has been extraordinarily...underwhelming.  

Perhaps they should look upon this spill as what it is - a global disaster.  Water isn't stationary, it flows.  So, too, then does the oil within it.  Once it hits the Gulfstream, Gof forbid, it will impact the entire eastern seaboard and possibly Europe and West Africa.  Maybe the thought of all that oil and tar washing up on, say, Cuba might get their sympathy.   Or perhaps it should be framed as a chance for them to show the rest of the world all of the fabulous ideas they have for cleaning up the planet.  Or haven't they gotten any further in their plans than 1.) collect money to pay for eco agenda?

You'd think the feds would love to jump in here and make a big presence.  Think about all of the legitimate jobs they could create with clean-up efforts stretching over multiple states, if nothing else!  Let's not forget the major PR for, if not quick, at least a thorough response. 

Instead, they are using the opportunity to have hearings and push Sen. Kerry's (D-MA) newfangled Cap and Trade bill.  Can't let the crisis go to waste now, can we guys? 

Why fix a problem when you can just exploit it in order to pass an agenda and then drop it like a hot potato to move on to the next item on the checklist?

THE STATE OF OBAMA

Was it just me or was that an incredibly boring speech last night from the Great Orator?  It just seemed like a rehash of the past bazillion speeches he has given.  Blah, blah, blah, blame Bush....blah, blah, blah, party of no...blah, blah, blah, attack, complain, deceive.  No wonder his democrat supporters wanted to get drunk.

At least he expanded his rhetorical attacks to include the Supreme Court, so that's a refreshing change - I'm sure congressional Republicans and Wall Street bankers are happy for the break.

The only thing that kept the speech from being a total snoozefest was the remarkable amount of, shall we say...inconsistencies.  The AP does a fact check analysis of the speech and finds it wanting.  Here are some highlights:

• Spending Freeze - It's unrealistic, probably won't pass, and doesn't rescind the 12% average increases democrats instituted last year with the stimmulus bill.  Pelosi, tone-deaf idiot that she is, called today for the freeze to include defense spending as well.  For the details on what a waste a freeze would be, check this out.
• Bipartisan Fiscal Commission - A lame attempt to shield democrats from their profligate ways by forcing republicans to help make unpopular spending cuts and tax increases.  This is also remarkably redundant, because one of the jobs of Congress is to be fiscally responsible and monitor their own spending.
• Lobbyists - Is he kidding us with this?  Does he really think we don't know there are at least 12 lobbyists currently holding top positions in his administration?
• Jobs - Obama trotted out the number "two million" when he spoke about jobs 'saved or created'.  This number is a joke.  Back in December, the number on their website was about 650,000, but many of those were highly questionable.  It's amazing that in one month they managed to add an additional 1.35 million jobs, even though the unemployment figures took another 'unexpected' dip.  I guess that comes from their new calculation method - if a company takes stimulus dollars, every job in the company is now considered saved or created.  Quite a racket.
• Transparency - I'm surprised the man doesn't clang when he walks - he must have a huge brass pair to tout transparency after the past year.  FOIA requests are ignored by the White House, and we all know about his broken promise of CSPAN cameras capturing the health care debate.  Backroom deals and dead-of-night passage of legislation has become the norm for this administration.  Not only are bills not posted for 5 days for the public to read before voting, but now they aren't even released to members of Congress to read - vapor bills have become the norm.  They are actually voting before they write the bills now.

That isn't the complete list, but they are the most egregious ones.  On top of flat out lies, he also omitted quite a bit.  In a State of the Union speech, especially in our post 9/11 world, and even more especially because of the failed Christmas Day attempt, national security should be a main talking point.  It was barely given a paragraph, and even then it was a slam on George Bush:

"And in the last year, hundreds of al-Qaida's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed - far more than in 2008."

The insinuation, of course, is that he is tougher on terror than Bush was.  First, it is impossible to verify, as we do not release body counts.  Second, it's hard to project that image when he insists on treating terrorists who are actively trying to kill American civilians as common criminals and has restricted our military's ability to combat our enemies by forcing them to follow the Army field manual - effectively giving our civilian police forces more options and tactics than our military.

He basically stated that, Massachusetts election or not, he was sticking with his agenda.  He has heard the people and found them to be wrong.  He knows best.  Health care is still a priority and he is still determined to spend us into collapse prosperity.  He is not misguided in his plans, he is determined.  He is a fully committed socialist who is refusing to bend to the will of the people.  His tactic is to attack any and all resistance and force his will on the People. 

When, exactly, do we cross the threshold from tone-deaf to tyrannical?