Thursday, January 28, 2010

News Flash -- Capitalism Works

On January 27th, Ford Motor Company announced that had a profit of $2.7 billion in 2009. While this was no doubt achieved with the help of the misguided "Cash for Clunkers" program that ran in the fall of 2009, the stunning fact is this: Ford, the only US based auto manufacturer that did not accept any stimulus or "bailout" money from the US Federal government was the only US based auto manufacturer to report a profit.

It is clear to this writer that Ford is exhibiting a better level of fiscal discipline and program management than either Government Motors or Fiat's Chrysler division. Ford is providing a quality product at a competitive price and consumers are buying. And the same attributes that made it possible for Ford to avoid living on the government dole are now paying in newfound profitability.

Congratulations are in order for CEO Alan Mulally and his company. I only hope that other American companies and THEIR GOVERNMENT take notice.

Meanwhile, even though I've always been a Chrysler kind of guy (RAM truck, Crossfire Coupe), my next car will probably have to be a Ford.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

MacroEconomic Theory Rap

This is priceless.


Simply proof that anybody that is arrogant enough to think that we can design, much less control something as complex as macroeconomics shouldn't be working for the American people. The best we can do is bump the highs and try to shorten the duration or magnitude of the lows.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Italian Minister Slams U.S. Haiti Aid Effort.

Reported on January 25th Mr. Guido Bertolaso, Italy’s top disaster relief official lambasted and impugned the so-called “U.S.-led” relief effort in Haiti as a “pathetic” failure.

The confirmed death toll for Haiti is now 150,000, which if true represents nearly 1.5% of Haiti’s total population. It is estimated that nearly three million Haitians are now homeless, which would be about 1 in 3 Haitians. Reports from Haiti indicate that the government is all but gone with little or no native police or military presence in ravaged neighborhoods and that mobs of looters have been ravaging the remains of both retail businesses and private residences alike. Further, vigilante mobs have been executing suspected looters without due process or trial. Haiti is on the verge of reverting to the “law of the jungle”. And yet, Mr. Bertolaso believes that the U.S. has confused “military intervention” with “emergency intervention”.

I would invite Mr. Bertolaso to identify just exactly what he would do if given unlimited opportunity. For myself, I have seen angry mobs in the U.S. and they will turn violent if not controlled. And never in the history of our nation have we had to deal with a crisis on the level with the situation the Haitians face. At the same time that the U.N., with assistance from numerous nations, tries to distribute food, water, clothing and medical supplies to desperate Haitians, it has to deal with the fact there is essentially no effective Haitian government that could assist in controlling the victims from violence.

Desperate people will perform desperate acts. We have seen over and over again where well-meaning missionaries or aid workers have been attacked, injured or even killed while trying to distribute supplies to victims of disasters. We have also seen over and over again where those same supplies tend to go to the strong instead of the weak and helpless unless armed men oversee such operations. Strength respects only greater strength, and 13,000 armed soldiers trained in the art of imposing its will on organized enemy resistance will likely find little opposition from bands of thugs trying to monopolize on the supplies being provided by the generous people of the world.

I further suspect that had the United States simply decided to take over coordination over the relief effort, that Mr. Bertolaso would then have lambasted the arrogance of the Americans in taking over what should be a U.N. operation. So the U.S. is damned either way. In such a case, I support the U.S., considering our overwhelming contribution to Haitian relief, to just go ahead and take over the relief operation.

Oh yeah, to date, the United States has delivered about $184 million in aid to Haiti. By the same date, Italy had contributed about $9 million. By my math, that means that the U.S. response to this tragedy is about twenty times the size of the Italian response. That apparently is a fact that Mr. Bertolaso did NOT get quoted on.

Monday, January 18, 2010

The Wisdom of Luis Rodriguez, Massachusetts voter.

According to a FoxNews.com article concerning the strongly contested race between Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Martha Coakley for Ted Kennedy's vacated Senate seat, a voter by the name of "Luis Rodriguez" appears to speak for many across the nation:

The 46-year-old plastics factory supervisor, who emigrated to the U.S. in 1988 from Uruguay and became a citizen last year, said he's fed up with what he calls the lies told by Washington. It's enough for him that Coakley supports Obama, who Rodriguez says has failed to make good on his pledge for openness.

"We don't buy what we can't afford. We don't spend what we don't have," said Rodriguez, echoing the anger expressed by other voters who say Democrats are too eager to bail out bankers and people who bought homes they couldn't afford. "These people, what they're doing now, they're spending money they don't have so they can get elected again."


Assuming that the attribution is correct (you never know, after all, this was reported on Fox News, which according to President Obama's administration is not a "real news organization", then I would have to say that Mr. Rodriguez has completely and correctly stated my opinion concerning Democratic lead initiatives. They are a "chicken in every pot" in order to maintain control in a government that Democrats believe should be used to "take care" of it's citizens, whether they want it or not.

'nuff said.

MSNBC Ed Schult "I'd Cheat to Keep Brown From Winning".

MSNBC's political talkers continue to prove that they are an entirely owned subsidiary of the Democratic National Committee.

As reported on January 16th by the Washington Times and then highlighted on the much vaunted (or reviled) DrudgeReport, MSNBC's Ed Schultz made the following statement:

"I tell you what, if I lived in Massachusetts I'd try to vote 10 times. I don't know if they'd let me or not, but I'd try to. Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are."



Ed's comments were made in context of the surprisingly competitive Massachusetts Senatorial seat election between Democrat Martha Coakley and Rebuplican Scott Brown. And expectedly, he's supporting Coakley over Brown.

I'd not be surprised if you were to say "Ed who?". Ed Schultz is a MSNBC primetime opinion talker (6pm to 7pm Eastern). This puts him up against Brett Baier on Fox News, who is crushing him in the ratings.

Ed appears to be a little unclear on the whole "democracy" concept that is supposedly the basis for our government. You know, that part that says that each person gets a single vote, and when you tally up those votes, the candidate with the most of them win? (OK, the US Presidential Election doesn't quite work like that because of the Electoral College thingy that actually helps low-population states a little, which makes it possible to win the popular vote by a slim margin and still lose the electoral college vote by a fairly large margin.)

What Ed, a national (in theory) cable commentator is doing is encouraging voter fraud in the State of Massachusetts for the benefit of the Democratic Candidate.

Now say what you like about the right-wing talkers like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilley but you have not heard them encourage illegal voter behavior or insinuate that they'd do it themselves.

And what do you think the "main-stream" media pundits, talkers and bloggers would be doing right now had Hannity or Beck said the same thing in support of Scott Brown? So I'm completed fascinated by the defeaning silence from them concerning Ed's angry outburst. I attribute it to one of two possibilities: One) Nobody watches "The Ed Show" on MSNBC except for other political hacks, so they're the only ones noticing, or Two) most of media in this country is friendly to left of center commentators and are willing to give him a pass on his indiscreet commentary and thereby doing a huge disservice to the voting public by failing to equally illuminate outrageous commentary from either the left or right.

As I have said to my friends many times, you must consider the source from which the comment came and then discount it accordingly.

Friday, January 15, 2010

Not Kowtowing to Special Interests? Dems are Lying to Us.

On Wednesday, after a fifteen hour closed-door session between key Democratic Senate and House leadership and Labor Union executives, it sounds like just like Senator Nelson's "Cornhusker Kickback", the special tax on "Cadillac" plans will be deferred until 2017 on labor union members.

What a crock of flup. Didn't Candidate Obama run on a platform that specifically said that they would not kowtow to special interests? In fact, doesn't he specifically say in a current political ad for Candidate Coakley, the Democrat running for Teddy Kennedy's vacant senate seat, that a vote for Coakley will help cement the progress being made against special interests in Washington?

This is how bizness is done in Washington, ladies and gentlemen. It's a process where people are bought and sold. The labor unions have managed to buy themselves 7 years of protection from Health Care Reform costs even though they will be permitted to participate in it immediately.

Just like the campaign lies of "transparency and openness" in the current administration, we are now seeing that special interest involvement in the writing of legislation is alive and well.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Candian Troops Show Their Heart To Belgian Boy



The Story: "A lone young Belgian boy is waiting to salute the Canadian troops passing
by who had been attending a memorial service."

This does not indicate where this little scene occurred. "Eyes right!" is a command normally reserved to troops that are engaging in a "Pass in Review", and is issued just prior to troops coming on line with the reviewing stand where the dignitaries or military superiors usually are.

Clearly, the little lad's military uniform and very proper military bearing impressed the fellow commanding the contingent (The quality of the video makes it hard for me to determine if it's an officer or an NCO. My guess would be that he is an NCO.)

May there forever be a Canada!