The only possible excuse for this is laziness, and that's a hard pill to swallow.  York's piece in the National Review was clearly mocking the one sided coverage of the press. So what does CNN do?  Well, they decide to throw Sara Palin under the bus in an attempt to get back at National Review.

My friends, this is despicable behavior.  I would hope that even those on the far left would realize that Drew Griffin and CNN are the top the Hitler and Stalin relied on to kill millions of people. 

A liberal press is one thing, this is clearly corrupt.  This absolute idiot on CNN should be fired, and never allowed to work in the press again. This is the kind of thing that should scare all right thinking Americans.

I would also remind those on the left, a press this corrupt, can be corrupt on the right just as easily. Do you honestly believe that Fox News would ever perpetuate a crime like this?

I am stunned at how bad this election has gotten. When a once respectable news outlet resorts to something as callous as this what are we to think?  How can America survive over the long haul with people as unprincipled as this, delivering the news.

I beg, I beg those who dislike Palin to defend this. Please help me see what I do not see. Please tell me York really doesn't like Palin.  Anything to show me that Drew Griffin and CNN are not this corrupt.

        

The fear is everywhere.  If you are under 40 years old, and not a student of history, most of this is new to you. You probably are afraid that your entire world is about to come apart at the seems.   And if you are an honest and intelligent person, you may be struggling to decide which candidate is the best choice to fix this mess.  You struggle because it is clear, neither of these fine gentlemen posses a clear understanding of economics.

Neither John McCain or Barack Obama can be defined in any school of economics. Is Obama a Keynsian, a socialist, a new age capitalist?  Nothing fits.  Is McCain a follower of Smith?  Does he believe Say's law? Who knows?

But we do know a few things. McCain wants to make a few small changes to regulating the economy, and Barack Obama is looking for an overhaul.   Neither base a philosophy on anything you can find in the historical record.  They are not men who study the past, and then make decisions based on what worked or didn't.

So how are you to decide who to vote for?



Suppose you have a fine automobile.  A car you purchased just a few months ago.  Now suppose it won't start.  You are not a mechanic, and you have no idea how to fix it. Your  two friends, Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain are offering to help.  The problem  is, they are not mechanics either, but you have no other choice. You have to pick one or the other.  Without your car, you can't go to work, or take your kids to soccer games, or go to the grocery store.  You really need your car.  Who do you pick?

The budding mechanic Mr. Obama would like to change your car.  He doesn't know what is wrong with it, so he is going to dismantle the entire automobile starting with the engine.  Then he will put the car back together, and see if it runs.  And he hopes that it not only starts and runs, but runs better.

Our only other choice Mr. McCain, doesn't know anything about cars either. His approach is to make a few tweaks.  Perhaps put some gas in it. Then check the battery, and see if that works.

Who would you rather fix your car?

Obama hasn't read the manual, but he is a nice man who really seems to have your best interest at heart.

McCain hasn't read the manual either. And he is also a nice man, who wants to help you.

Does it matter who you give your car too?  It sure does.  With Mr. McCain, it may take awhile, but he'll probably get it running.  If he doesn't he isn't likely to destroy the car.  With Mr. Obama, it will also take awhile. And if he is wrong in his approach, your car will never run again.

Here is how you should fix the car, er I mean, economy.

The crisis in front of us is nothing new.  We tried similar bailouts during the Great Depression (and it didn't work), and we tried one in 1989 (and it did work).  When trying to fix a problem it makes sense to look at history.  But you must make sure the problems are the same.

First the myths:  Because much of what you are being told, defies all economic principle and history.

1. There is no excess supply. 
All supply creates a demand.  It is not the other way around.  There was no demand for the Ipod, until it was created. The price of the products (houses) may be to high, but supply is always equal to demand at some price.

2. No asset is illiquid.
See myth 1.  When Paulson says these securities are not able to be liquidated, he is not quite telling the truth.  What he really is saying is that the companes that own this debt won't sell it at  the current price.  This is a big difference.

How we fix the problem

Liquidate the bad debt. 
This has generally been the quickest path to recovery. It involves short term pain, not long term destruction of an economy.  There is  nothing wrong with a little government intervention. As long as they don't push the debt on to me (and you) at an unfair price.  Unfair means to high.

Liquidate the bad businesses
The CEOs, fund managers, and directors can whine all they want about how forces out of their control caused this problem.  It doesn't make it true.  What caused the housing crisis?  Too much government intervention, (Hippaa, Americans with disabilities act, family leave act, restrictions on the supply of oil) and bad decisions by many people.
The over regulation on business caused labor and materials prices to rise. This pushed up the price of housing.  Finally to a level that was not sustainable.

Liquidate the stocks
Overvalued stocks should never be propped up. This is, "How to create a bubble 101".  It never, ever works, and just causes the misery to be extended.

Increase the supply of goods
Production and productivity grow economies.  To increase supply, means an increase in jobs.

Decrease the minimum wage. 
This will lower the cost of labor, and lower the cost of goods and services.  You'll make less, and be able to afford much more. 

Radically de-regulate business. 
This type of regulation decreases productivity and increases cost.

Cut the capital gains tax in half, or better yet, to zero.
You will find no examples in history where this has not led to increased revenues to the treasury, and growth in the economy.  Capital (money) is always the anti-dote to recession and depression. 

Drill for oil everywhere
Oil is not a normal commodity. When oil goes up, everything goes up.  When oil goes down, everything goes down.

Cut government spending.
The people of The United States have more power in this election than they have ever had. Only vote for politicians who favor a five percent across the board cut in spending.

Cut Iraq war funding in half within sixty days.
I don't know if the war was right or wrong, I don't think it's an easy question, and i really don't care. We've done what we can afford, and now we must go home. 

Amend the Constitution to prevent new wars.
Any time troops are committed to engage in combat, a declaration of war must be declared.  When a declaration of war is declared, taxes rates on everyone, poor to rich, must be increased to pay for the war.  This will put an immediate stop to adventurism.

In twelve to eighteen months, the economy will boom.  The treasury will be re-filled, social security (which should be cut by five percent) will be saved for the baby boomers, and life will be grand.

This is a big problem.  It is not a complicated problem. 

Oh and here is one other little bit of advice to help save the country.  You really need to watch C-span, and in particular the hearings about economic matters.  We have some senators and congressmen, who are not only short of the best and brightest the country has to offer.

Sherrod Brown from Ohio, must surely be the dumbest individual in Washington D.C. 
Bob Casey is a close second.  Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd and Harry Ried look worse than deer in headlights. They look frightened.   And all but two or three of the Republicans (Mike Pence and Michelle Bachmann are intelligent, thoughtful, and on the right track) are just as bad.

One final note: I know a lot of you progressives dislike Newt Gingrich.  But you may wish to take a look at his ideas.  I cannot find a flow in the plan or the logic. He is surely an arrogant man, but perhaps that isn't the worst trait in the world right now.

        

U4prez candidate Kempite created a draft Sara Palin caucus a few weeks ago, and low and behold, here she is as the vice president pick of Republican John McCain.  She's pro-life, pro gun, and in favor of drilling for oil in Alaska, and she also happens to be the governor of Alaska. Will this do the trick and pull some of the Hillary supporters to McCain's side?  Of course it will, the question is will it be enough.

        

Well after spending the last couple of hours monitoring the forums a couple of things are clear.

For Hillary Clinton supporters, tonight did nothing for them.  Only the slightest little crack in party unification, but it's more than mild. I only found two posts of a positive nature.  More than a few felt Michelle Obama's speech was "Preachy".  And a few others found it boring and painful to watch.

The independents were probably moved a bit more, mostly by the Obama children.  No greatly positive comments to be found, no over the top negatives.

Perhaps the most profound thing I saw tonight on Fox news, and echoed in a few forums, was the feeling of black Americans.  Juan Williams was nearly in tears, and a few of the forum posters were moved as well.  But here is what is really interesting, and should give all American's pause.  Williams, and many others seemed to be moved just at the image of a black woman, who may be the first lady of the United States giving a speech at the Democratic national convention. 

Younger blacks may not quite grasp what I think I was seeing and reading. If I can summarize the emotions in to thoughts it seems as if many are wanting to cry out, "I never thought I'd live to see this."

If you like Barack Obama, or don't, one thing I hope we can all agree on, this is a wonderful moment for America.

My thoughts on the night and the convention:
Michelle Obama's speech was a little light on substance.  Rather than embracing Barack's unique American story, they chose to portray him as just another American kid knocking around the neighborhood playing baseball and eating apple pie. 

After the first night of the convention, we still have no idea what Obama's policies will be. We know a few of his pet projects, but these are not economic policies, they are simply transfers of wealth.  Progressive liberals used to realize their was a trade off.  We give the rich higher tax rates, support a robust free market, and the money skimmed off the top is used for jobs programs, education, etc.
Obama's projects need to evolve in to real policies so we can better assess the damage, or potential benefit.

Because the race is close, and the party is still rather divided according to the grass roots chat on the web, I'd have to give tonight a C-, and that was saved from an F by the Obama children.

        

Party Unity is all the rage from the media, and the surrogates in Denver this week,  is it real?
Well not even close.  At HillaryClintonforum.net the talk is still centered around protests and indignation at Barack Obama.  Topics range from Obama's fund raising efforts and whether or not he is even legal eligible to be president.

Without listing every forum on the web, let me just give you a broad overview of what the grass roots is saying.  The Hillary supporters are not a happy bunch and one can hardly blame them.  I think most people expected the big surprise of Hillary as VP.  The consensus among both sides before the Biden pick was that this would have truly united the party.  The Republican's are ecstatic at the Biden pick.  Not because it's Joe Biden, but because it isn't Hillary.  The deep dark fears emanating from the Republican grass roots was that an Obama/Clinton ticket would have been unbeatable. 

Obama supporters backlash.  For the first time in crossover forums (where both Obama and Clinton supporters gather) we're seeing some real fighting going on.  Ed Rendell prompted this when he called MSNBC's coverage of Obama embarrassing.

The choice of Biden will effect McCain's VP pick, make no mistake about it.  Pawlenty should be out, and the stock of Fiorini and Romney will rise.  Why? Biden can be an attack dog, Romney will be able to defend himself, and Biden will just look bad attacking a female.

Right now the mood can only be described as tentative.  The grass roots Democratic party members are a far cry from unified.  If Obama is to win this election, Hillary and Bill Clinton will have to work some real magic. Only the Clinton's can unify the party at this point.

More each night and every morning. 

        

The petition is gaining momentum.  Send the link to CNN, Foxnews, your local news, and anyone you know. We the American people must stand against the politicians who ride around in limousines, with gas we pay for.
High Oil prices are caused by government blocking exploration in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, and Shale exploration and exploitation in Colorado and Utah.




The Drill for Oil Now! petition.

John McCain and Barak Obama will not drill for oil because oil wells are ugly. 
Poverty is ugly my fellow Americans.  We need politicians who understand basic supply and demand economics, and politicians who understand we the citizens of America are paying their salaries.

As soon as legislation is passed, the speculators will flee the markets, and prices will drop, when we are pumping 7 million barrels a day of domestic oil, prices will sink low enough to less the grip of OPEC, other nations, and the speculators.

The time is now. 

        

Gas prices are now at $4.00 per gallon.  The burden on the economy is becoming to great for many families and businesses to bear.  We are at the watershed event of the American economy. In the next twenty years nearly eighty million baby-boomers will become eligible for social security and Medicare.  And yet the politicians are allowing our economy to wallow in a mess that is easily fixed. This is the time when our economy needs to be growing, and growing rapidly, and yet disposable income, which drives the consumer economy is shrinking.

We have no alternative. The rise in oil prices is the result of two things, demand exceeding supply, and speculative purchasing of futures contracts. The speculation is a result of our congress and president, and all of the presidential candidates refusing to address the core issue.

While they argue, oil prices continue to rise.

We cannot let this happen, and we as American citizens, must solve the problem ourselves.  We must enact a fast track development program to get oil out of both of these locations in the shortest possible time frame.

To that end, I ask you to sign this petition.

Drill for Oil Now

It states that I will not vote for any politician, regardless of party, unless he or she supports the immediate opening of ANWR in Alaska, and the Gulf of Mexico for expedited oil exploration, and drilling.

There is no other way. Alternative fuels are a distant promise.  If we do not act by November of this year, congress will do what it does best, nothing.
This is our country, and these are our resources. They do not belong to John McCain, Charlie Crist, Barak Obama, Hillary Clinton, or any member of congress.

It is time that we remind the politicians who pays the bills, and that we, the citizens of America are the boss.

        

The outrage over the Supreme court's ruling to allow states to require a photo ID raises some interesting questions.  Why would anyone disagree with this ruling?  Surely anyone with the mental capacity to vote, can arrange to get either a driver's license, or a state id.  With growing accusations from the right and the left about fraud, requiring an ID seems to be a great first step to to avoiding mischief at the ballot box.
The only logical explanation is that voter fraud is widespread, someone knows this, and is willing to pull out all the stops to see that it can continue.
If the fraud was minimal, it wouldn't be worth so much effort to fight the ruling.  Surely the opponents don't expect rational people to believe that it is to great a burden to go have a picture taken.  Almost all of the opposition seems to be coming from the left.  The only logical conclusion is that in some areas, there must be thousands and thousands of illegal votes cast, and these votes are tipping the results.  Those opposing the ruling have a vested interest in perpetuating the fraud. 

I just don't see any other logical reason for the fight.  The oddest and perhaps most disturbing argument is that, "People of color" will be disenfranchised.  Is it just me, or is this one of the most racist statements uttered so far this year?  What is the point of this statement?  Does someone really believe that black people are not capable of getting a drivers license?  Or worse, that black people can't find the BMV?  How could this possibly stop anyone from voting regardless of skin color? 

Those who read my blog regularly know that I'm a big fan of plain old fashioned logic and rational thought.  Well, in this case I think the logic is perfectly clear.  Someone wants to perpetuate the fraud.  There is no other rational answer. 

In a democracy, two things are vital to the survival of the nation, the rule of law, and the sanctity of the vote.  If either of these pillars falls, there are just one of two results possible.  The first is mob rule, overturning real justice. The second is rule by criminals, who have no problem stealing an election. Those on the left and the right would be well advised to study your history a bit.  Both of these scenarios ultimately lead to rule by tyrant.

A thorough and honest investigation in to the voting practices of The United States is long overdue. This should be a bi-partisan effort that spans several years, to cover national elections, at the local level. As a fiscal conservative, I would still be in favor of lofty spending to see that this happens, because as I've said, nothing is more important.   Elections should be monitored in hundreds of cities and towns, absentee voters checked, and comprehensive reports delivered after every election to determine if further action is needed.

The ruling allowing states to require a photo id for voting should have passed without much notice.  The ensuing hand wringing and outrage by some, demands that we look under the covers to see just exactly what they're trying to protect.

        

In an interview with Greta Vansustern on Fox News John McCain said,"If someone can tell me how to get the price of a barrel of oil down, I'm willing to listen."

OK, start drilling for oil in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico.  This raises the supply of oil on the world market. Higher supply levels lead to lower costs.

This is one of those things about politicians that makes you wonder who is running the country.  Surely he knows the basic economic law of supply and demand.  So why would he say such a thing?  If he doesn't know how to lower the cost of oil, how can he be our next president?

        

I keep seeing these stories pop up.  Initially they were from bloggeres, but now even Time magazine has expressed that this may be the best way for the Democrats to "come together". 
There have been quite a few bad ideas floated around lately, but this has got to be one of the worst.
The Democratic party leadership is not going to turn the election over to a man who didn't campaign, and apparently didn't think he had a good shot at the nomination in the first place. 
Franklin Roosevelt struggling with the diverse nature of the party seventy years ago.  And it hasn't gotten much better.  Gore is a single issue candidate who would only make things worse. 
When you factor in the latest information on global warming, even that may not be such a "hot" issue if you'll pardon the pun. 
Here are just a few of the latest articles.
Global Warming's missing heat. from NPR.
Former Global warming activist, now skeptic. in this article
But maybe even Gore is finally seeing the light.

I'm not a complete global warming skeptic, but I'm starting to lean towards the need for much more research on this, as I think many others are. 
So what would Gore bring to the party?  Well he is probably slightly to the right of Hillary, so he could salvage a few moderates perhaps, but surely that would be offset by the disgruntled Obama and Clinton supporters who would vote for McCain. 

In all fairness, this is still a fringe idea (Gore getting the nomination) but the fact that it is picking up some steam has got to have the Dem party leadership in even more of a quandary.

The bottom line is Barack Obama has to get the nomination.  Even if Hillary Clinton pulls close in elected delegates, the party leadership and super-delegates can't let her win.  Blacks have as a group supported the Democratic party by more than 80%. If they go, the party goes.  They are the core group that holds the party together. 

If the fracture between Obama and Clinton threatens to shred the party, the only logical alternative is another black candidate.  Harold Ford could step in and probably actually save the party from itself, Al Gore would just make the schism deeper than it already is.