My Beauty Best Teacher

Thomas Sowell put out another brilliant article today, and the title of my post is the title of the headline. Democratic President of the United States Barack Obama is actively and personally trying to create a potential disaster for our nation, and Sowell writes about it in clear and powerful language. Here are some selected parts, although you should read the whole article here:

When that person is the president of the United States, the potential for disaster is virtually unlimited. Many people are rightly worried about what this administration's reckless spending will do to the economy in our time and to our children and grandchildren, to whom a staggering national debt will be passed on. But if the worst that Barack Obama does is ruin the economy, I will breathe a sigh of relief. He is heading this country toward disaster on many fronts...

Sowell goes on to talk about the country heading towards disaster by Obama and the Democrats putting in place and rhetoric encouraging and helping Iran to become nuclear, but he could have talked about Obama destroying our manufacturing capabilities with the energy limit-and-tax bill, or the Democrats policy of nationalizing key industries and then running them into the ground, or the Democrats and Obama taking over health care of you and you family so that they can encourage aborting your babies and killing off your grandparents. These are all disasters in the making, but Sowell goes another direction:

Nothing has torn more countries apart from inside like racial and ethnic polarization.

Sowell is right- identity politics is a corrupting influence on a country and will rip countries to pieces. Whether they be poor (Rwanda) or okay (Czechoslovakia), what tore apart these nations was identify politics. Making judgements and decisions based on race, color, sexual orientation, political affiliation, or religion- America was founded on not doing this, and we now have elected a President who is going to try hard to encourage these very things. Sowell ends his essay with these powerful lines:

This is a president on a mission to remake American society in every aspect, by whatever means are necessary and available. That requires taking all kinds of decisions out of the hands of ordinary Americans and transferring them to Washington elites-- and ultimately the number one elite, Barack Obama himself.

Like so many before him who have ruined countries around the world, Obama has a greatly inflated idea of his own capabilities and the capabilities of what can be accomplished by rhetoric or even by political power. Often this has been accompanied by an ignorance of history, including the history of how many people before him have tried similar things with disastrous results.Moreover, ignorance by itself is not nearly as bad as charging full steam ahead, pretending to know.

While the mainstream media in America will never call him on this, these repeated demonstrations of his amateurism and immaturity will not go unnoticed by this country's enemies around the world. And it is the American people who will pay the price.

America will pay the price for electing this Democrat.

While Obama spent his time responding to the Gulf Oil spill by deciding "whose arse to kick", on my blog I took the correct approach to the spill. The correct approach to the spill was not to demonize a company, not to overreact to the events, not to try to make political hay out of the events, and not to make the damage worse.

The correct approach was to "gather the experts — federal, state, local, public and private — not to discover who is to blame but to secure their active and continuous involvement until the crisis is resolved". Mitt Romney said that, and I talked about it in my post Mitt Romney on Leadership, when I said that "what we need right now is someone who will use what power and authority and resources that the federal government has to help, and other than that stay out of the way." Obama didn't choose that correct approach- he closed his group and cast blame.

Another correct way to respond to the Gulf Oil spill would be to take a look at government policies and see if they are in any way making the situation worse. I did so when I was one of the early bloggers writing about the Jones Act- see my post Obama: Didn't Waive the Jones Act, Made Gulf Spill Worse. In that post, I wrote "Don't kid yourself- there is a lot that the government can do to help the situation in the Gulf- like getting the heck out of the way of people who want to help"- that's right, the correct approach would be to get government out of the way, not get it more in the way. Obama didn't do that either.

In Obama Can Help with Gulf Oil Spill I gave our clueless partisan hack of a President some advice on what to do when I wrote:

Obama CAN help to contain and clean up and prevent future Gulf Oil disasters- but he isn't doing that. He isn't helping to contain the spill- in fact, it appears that he is not repealing regulations that hinder fighting the spill and he is hindering efforts by states to build reefs and other means of protection. He isn't helping to clean up the spill- he has created a vacuum of leadership at the top of our nation, a vacuum that is sucking the oil right out of the ground and spewing it everywhere in a potent symbol of his inadequacy for the Presidency. And he isn't helping to prevent future Gulf Oil disasters, unless you consider his attempts to drive the US back into the Stone Age by killing energy production a way to help prevent future spills like this one. Obama can help the Gulf Oil Spill... but he isn't. The same things could be said for the Democrats who are running Congress as well.

One of the great things about being a policy advisor like me is that I can suggest solutions and options, and then compare the results of what politicians did to what I suggested. If Obama would have taken my suggestions, the Gulf Oil spill would have not been a hysteria-filled situation, would not have been front-page news, and would have appeared to everyone who asked about it to be 'not a big deal.' Oh, I know liberals would have been all upset that I was ignoring the situation and not giving it the attention that it deserved, but the most important thing about the Gulf Oil spill was to not make the situation worse- the rig had exploded already, the oil was leaking already, and freaking out after that would only make the situation worse.

But Obama and the Democrats in Congress did freak out, and now crashing visitor numbers and plummeting fish sales are devastating businesses in the region. Yeah, likely less people would have visited the Gulf region due to the oil spill, but after Obama and the Democrats promoted an image of oil everywhere that it resorts had to start planning on an 80% drop in revenues.

Figures show just 16 of the state's 180 holiday beaches are at all polluted, while the bulk of the spill appears to have dispersed, or be dispersing out at sea, but perception becomes reality, and President Obama and Democrats hyped the oil spill for political purposes and created a perception that oil is evil, and now the taint of their lies has tainted the entire Gulf economy.

Simon Jenkins, writing in The Guardian, writes:

The spill has been another classic of state terror in which incident and response are wholly out of proportion to one another. As the oil leak began back in April, Obama declared a disaster, banned fishing in 37% of the Gulf and ordered a halt to underwater oil exploration, putting some 27,000 jobs at risk. Columnists screamed it was "Obama's 9/11" and demanded he "harness the nation's outrage". He was attacked for playing golf within 58 days of the disaster. With dial-a-quote scientists howling blue murder, any who might have looked at previous spills and thought it might not be so bad would have been unpatriotic disaster-deniers.

Hardly a day passed without the president castigating BP, the hated "British Petroleum" – never its American site operators, Transocean and Halliburton, or his own regulators. It was a field day for xenophobes. The president used the sort of language normally visited on global terrorists. He was going to "get BP" and make them "pay for this". It was another Hurricane Katrina, but one that could thankfully be blamed on foreigners.
Now, mysteriously, Obama speaks of we, we, we … who "have this thing under control". His environment adviser, Carol Browner, says "the vast majority of the oil appears to have gone". Less than 10% of coastline saw any oil at all. There have been no sightings of dead fish floating in the sea and most fishing will soon be "back to normal". The Gulf is apparently "clean, safe and open for business", and a lovely place to take the kids. It is OK, everyone. Disaster has turned to triumph, so let us all think about the midterm elections.

So whose fault really was the collapse in the local economy? It began with a failed oil well, responsibility resting with BP, but blame still not apportioned. Yet as every terrorist knows, it is not the bomb that does the real damage, it is the publicity multiplier given it by the media and politics. The bomb causes the bang; the target is then relied on to supply the megaphone.

The great conflation of fear – often egged on by "the science" – is the result of government gladly allowing itself to go mad for a day, to raise a fear, glean a headline or win a budget rise. Obama grotesquely exaggerated the oil threat to advance his personal and party cause.

As voters, we have to hold those people responsible for doing the damage they have done to our economy and nation. Thankfully, as voters we can hold Democrats responsible this coming election. Please do so.

Alex Renton reports on the damaging effects of US food aid to Malawi.He quotes Charles Rethman who stated:

It's very short-sighted - it doesn't make any sense. It's going to short-circuit the effort to improve nutrition here, it undermines farmers, households. It's not sustainable and it won't bring about any long-term change to malnutrition rates,'

It has been shown that this type of assitance

can and does often do more harm than good. The very promise of free food can cause disaster-hit populations to leave their homes and move to refugee camps. They may become dependent on it, making it harder for them to take up their lives again when the disaster or danger has passed. Farmers leave their fields, prices fall and local traders lose their businesses. Clearly, while food aid saves lives in a disaster, it can hamper the return to normality.
It has done more insidious damage, as detailed by some aid agencies. Food aid can permanently damage the economies of nations it was sent to help. Vast tonnages of rice donated by the USA and Japan to Indonesia after the country's economic collapse in 1997 caused damage to farmers and distributors that has never been repaired: having been one of the world's largest producers, Indonesia is now a net importer of rice.

via African Agriculture

Before we visit the best posts of 2011, let's all take a moment to reflect back on some of my best posts from last year, 2010, and see how the analysis, predictions, and theories that I advanced in those posts have held up over the past year.

Obama: Didn't Waive the Jones Act, Made Gulf Spill Worse:
Occasionally I break a major story, like this one, which I was on well in advance of the MSM. Here was the story that I broke in 2010:

In reply to the emails from snarky liberals who ask 'just what do I expect Obama to do about the Gulf oil spill', the reply is 'get the hell out of the way'...Let loose the power of free markets and civil society and restrict government to limited and defined roles, and the world will be a better place. In this particular case, just 'what can Obama do'? Here is one of dozens of examples that are specific and have few drawbacks but Obama isn't doing- Obama can temporarily waive the Jones Act....

In retrospect, it is clear that Obama did have a reverse-Midas touch with the Gulf Oil spill- every move he made or didn't make during this disaster was the wrong one. From not temporarily waiving the Jones Act (which effectively forbid foreign nations from assisting the US by banning ships flagged, crewed, constructed, or owned by other nations from transporting cargo from one US port to another US port) to overstating the extent of the disaster (his talking about it caused a larger drop in tourism to the entire Gulf region than the actual disaster did), we can see in the Gulf oil spill just how aimless and unhelpful President Obama is when America faces an immediate crisis, and this post was yet more support to that argument.

Obama Nicknames
Every President has a nickname- Reagan was the Gipper, Bush was W, Clinton was Slick Willy, Thomas Jefferson was Long Tom, Chester Arthur was the Walrus, Calvin Coolidge was Cool Cal- so in this post I decided to pull together some of the top Obama nicknames that I have seen or heard. It's a good and solid list, and I've added to it over the past year (2011). My personal nickname for Obama: Waffles the Clown.

Oppose Race to the Top: Reasons Why Conservatives Should Oppose RTTT
This post was one of my 'thinking posts', where I was asked a question that I should have considered before but hadn't, and I went home and really thought through my views and beliefs and arrived at an answer. My instinct was always to oppose Race to the Top, which was President Obama's major education initiative, but I wanted to make sure that I was opposing it for the right reasons- not because the NEA was against it or because Obama came up with it, but because it violated conservative principles. Read the whole post, but here is a bit of it...

Recently, Michigan Senate Majority leader Mike Bishop asked me for my opinion on the President's Race to the Top program. I told him that I didn't support it, and he looked at me in a way that said "I thought you were a conservative" and "I thought you wanted to help education." At the time, I struggled to explain why I didn't like the program- I didn't really know all the details to it, but suspected that I was indeed correct in opposing it from what little I knew. He thought I was just a tool of the teachers unions, who also oppose RTTT, but I knew that for some reason I didn't like this initiative by Obama, and it wasn't just paranoid anti-Obama sentiment.... Today, via theblogprof, via Right Wing News, I came across the an article called "Ten Rules for Anti-Government Republican Radicals in D.C. ." As an anti-government conservative radical, the kind that our founding fathers were, the kind of people that built our nation and made our country a great success, I find these rules to be useful in helping me begin to articulate why I oppose Race to the Top....

Since I put together this post, I've gone on the radio multiple times in a variety of shows to talk about a true conservative approach to education, one that emphasizes decentralization of power, local control, less federal spending, regular and measured policies, structural changes, the humanity of the system, the lessening of federal laws, and the passage of good solid legislation. A good conservative believes 'first, do no harm' and 'less is more' and that the purpose of the state is to protect life, liberty, and property, and Race to the Top is not legislation that a conservative should support, even though it attacked the NEA and labor unions and put in place small good changes to the system. Read my whole post and you'll see yet another reason why thinking individuals should be opposing Obama in 2012.

Obama's New NASA Policy- Yet More Broken Promises and Lies
American Exceptionalism is being killed by Obama, in ways big and small. Once America was a great nation that put men on the moon- an exceptional nation capable of spaceflight and exploring new worlds. Now...:

Out of all of the broken promises of President Obama, this one is probably not the biggest to a lot of people. Out of all of the phony and lying rhetoric about hope and change, this latest policy announcement that kills hope and changes things for the worst is probably not the most backstabbing that he has uttered. But that does not mean that Obama's plans to destroy NASA's budget and redirect its mission away from exploration is not big or important to me....

Obama's attack on NASA didn't stop in 2010 as he continued to oppose its vision of boldly exploring new worlds and demonstrating America's amazing exceptionalism. I revisited this theme several times in 2011, notably in my posts Nuclear Power and Manned Space Flight: Victims of Democrat's Progress Backwards? and Obama Killed My Child's Dream of Being an Astronaut.  Obama and the Democrats will not be happy until America is an average nation that has fallen back into the pack of tyranny and debt that is the history of the world, and their policies towards NASA are an example of this.

Recommended Read: Codevilla's 'America's Ruling Class'
This post was an attempt to get people to read one of the most important essay's of 2010- Codevilla's essay America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution that was published in the American Spectator.

...it lays out quite clearly the two classes that are evolving in our nation- what Codevilla calls the 'ruling class' and the 'country class.' Codevilla echo's what I tell my students every year- it is getting increasingly important to understand how the ruling class in our society works and how they use government to maintain their ruling status, because our society is increasingly about what the government does and less so about what you do...

Revisiting this essay today, you can clearly see the increasingly divide in America between those people who are benefiting from government connections and those who are not, increased by the policies pushed by the modern-day Democratic party and to a lesser although still significant extent the Republican Party. Solyndra is a great example of this- a company that found favor in the ruling class was able to secure loans and help while other companies not favored by the ruling class had money taken from them in the form of taxes and regulations and fees and permits. The massive expansion in food stamps or the massive expansion of taxpayer subsidized healthcare are also great examples of how the ruling class is increasingly looting all of us in order to give gifts and trinkets to the country class as our nation descends into tyranny.

I'm getting sick and tired of the increasingly amount of articles written by liberal bloggists and journalists who argue that Barack Obama can't do anything at all to help the situation with the Gulf Oil Crisis. There is article after article, blog post after blog post, all arguing the same thing- this was a natural disaster, the responsibility for the containment and cleanup is entirely on BP, Obama had nothing to do with it, Obama has nothing to do with it, and Obama and the Democrats in Congress who are running our nation right now are not to be blamed for it. They are wrong though- Democrat President Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress running our nation can and should be blamed for their failures during the Gulf Oil Crisis.

First, as I wrote in Obama: Didn't Waive the Jones Act, Made Gulf Spill Worse that:

Don't kid yourself- there is a lot that the government can do to help the situation in the Gulf- like getting the heck out of the way of people who want to help. Obama could have waived the Jones Act and allowed foreign ships to assist in transporting goods (like oil-skimming booms) in order to help clean up the mess. But he didn't. Obama refused to waive the Jones Act.

Second, as I wrote in Mitt Romney on Leadeship that:

Romney is right- what we need right now is someone who will use what power and authority and resources that the federal government has to help, and other than that stay out of the way. Attacking BP isn't going to help anything, and there will be plenty of time for that later if that is what is called for. And sitting down with lawyers, labor union leaders, watermellons, and anti-war activists isn't going to help him come up with any new ideas to solve this issue. It's Day 52- what sort of leadership has he demonstrated from his position as most powerful leader in the world?

Third, New York Times columnist CAMPBELL ROBERTSON wrote in Efforts to Repel Gulf Oil Spill Are Described as Chaotic:

From the beginning, the effort has been bedeviled by a lack of preparation, organization, urgency and clear lines of authority among federal, state and local officials, as well as BP. As a result, officials and experts say, the damage to the coastline and wildlife has been worse than it might have been if the response had been faster and orchestrated more effectively.

“The information is not flowing,” Senator Nelson said. “The decisions are not timely. The resources are not produced. And as a result, you have a big mess, with no command and control.”

Obama should not be held responsible for the Deepwater Horizon Rig blowing up, but after it did, he should have been on the situation, providing leadership. This was federal waters, the federal government has extensive resources available, and the one thing that the President of the United States can do better than anyone else is act as a crisis manager. Once the rig blew up, Obama doesn't have to go out there with a straw to suck up the oil, but he does have to put in place a team who can organize federal, state, and local officials and put in place clear lines of command and clear lines of communication. That's his job. The President's job is to step in when there is a disaster and lead. He doesn't have to do anything- man a rig, visit the Gulf Coast, clean pelicans- but he does have to LEAD, or at least delegate that leadership to someone else who can then lead (like a crisis manager or something).

Fourth, lawmakers passed the federal Oil Pollution Act in 1990 to ensure that plans were in place for oil spills, so the response effort would be quick, with clear responsibilities for everyone involved. This means that Congress and the President are responsible for making sure that these plans were in place and ready to go. Oh, I know Obama has only been President for a couple years now (it seems like a lot longer), but the Democrats have been running Congress for years longer than that- at what point do we hold them responsible for not making sure that that laws in our nation are being followed? If the government can't take responsibility for something like this, passed almost 20 years ago, on what leap of faith can you expect them to take responsibility to do anything right as their responsibilities expand under Democratic leadership?

Obama CAN help to contain and clean up and prevent future Gulf Oil disasters- but he isn't doing that. He isn't helping to contain the spill- in fact, it appears that he is not repealing regulations that hinder fighting the spill and he is hindering efforts by states to build reefs and other means of protection. He isn't helping to clean up the spill- he has created a vacuum of leadership at the top of our nation, a vacuum that is sucking the oil right out of the ground and spewing it everywhere in a potent symbol of his inadequacy for the Presidency. And he isn't helping to prevent future Gulf Oil disasters, unless you consider his attempts to drive the US back into the Stone Age by killing energy production a way to help prevent future spills like this one. Obama can help the Gulf Oil Spill... but he isn't. The same things could be said for the Democrats who are running Congress as well.

Voters need to hold these people responsible and throw them out of office. Unlike a lot of conservatives, I'm not calling for big government and all powerful government to solve the situation, but I am calling for a government that shows leadership during a crisis and works to get out of the way of people trying to help. That's something that is possible, but not happening, under President Obama and the Democrats in Congress.

We all know that the Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress have fought to make sure there is no new nuclear power (see my post Yucca Mountain for information on how Obama has defied Congress and shut down the Yucca Mountain project). Obama and the Democrats have also worked to make it more difficult for more energy production through coal. After the Deepwater Horizon accident, Obama and the Democrats put in place an ”arbitrary and capricious” ban on all oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico in waters over 500 feet in depth, a ban that was intended to do “irreparable harm” to businesses.

But perhaps you didn't know that for some reason, since June, the Department of Interior has refused to issue any permits for oil and gas drilling in the Gulf in waters less than 500 feet of depth- effectively banning through administrative decree any drilling in shallow waters.

Via Sweetness&Light, this story is from CNN’s Money.Com:

Stealth ban on Gulf drilling, By Steve Hargreaves, Senior writer
June 25, 2010

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — The offshore drilling ban imposed after the BP disaster is only supposed to hit operations in deep water — 500 feet or more. But drillers in shallow water say they haven’t been issued permits since the April 20 explosion. The delay has already forced hundreds of layoffs, and many more could be on the way.

"I’m almost out of business over here," said Paul Butler, president of Spartan Offshore, a small drilling company in Metairie, La.

"The Department of Interior isn’t issuing permits," said Jim Noe, a Hercules executive. "By mid July all of our rigs will be on the beach, and the workers without a job."

That could be a lot of jobs. Jobs are on the line: Deep water drilling, which is currently banned while an investigation into the Deepwater Horizon accident is underway, is estimated to employ at least 35,000 people on both the rigs and in jobs that support them.

Nearly that many jobs (at least 35,000) could also be at stake (lost) over (a ban on) shallow water drilling. While shallow water rigs are smaller and employ only about half as many people, there are almost twice as many of them in the Gulf, according to the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association…

Safety first: An Interior Department spokeswoman said there is no freeze on shallow water drilling. However, she said, new safety procedures were put in place following the Deepwater Horizon spill.

"Companies have to comply before we can issue them permits," the spokeswoman said. "No one has fully complied."

Spartan’s Butler said there was a long delay between when Interior stopped issuing permits and when the new safety guidelines came out. Indeed, the first Interior Department notification to oil companies about the new requirements was dated June 8, nearly two months after the disaster.

Butler said he has been scrambling to get his paperwork in order and hopes that permits will be issued soon…

So, in summary, the ever-expanding federal government, which is increasingly in charge of more and more aspects of our life after voters put Democrats into Congress and the Presidency, decided that it was going to put in place new safety requirements on shallow-water drilling rigs, took two months to publish these requirements, and has been refusing to issue any permits for drilling since it decided to change the requirements, causing the loss of thousands of jobs already and the potential loss of thousands more, all with the intent to drive up the cost of energy so that you and your businesses use less, so that the globe will not warm up in spite of its relatively recent emergence from a Little Ice Age. In summary, idiots that idiot voters elected are putting in place idiotic policies because of idiotic beliefs.

Michigan National Committeeman Keith Butler met with a group of young Republicans tonight, and had some interesting comments on what is going on in Washington DC. Butler is a former candidate for US Senate (he lost the primary) and is a noted speaker and a good conservative.

First, he wanted to make sure that Republicans don't rest on their laurels now that Obama says he is dropping the public option. Even though the public option may be removed from the bill, the rest of the bill is pretty bad public policy too. Butler reminded everyone that one of the worst parts of the bill is that the ideas proposed in it will be harmful to small businesses in our nation.

As to the future of the Republican Party, according to Butler the information is looking good for conservatives. Americans want divided government again- they are not happy with the Democratic party dictating everything (in my post Obama Wins, Democrats Control I predicted this). If the Democrats continue on their current course and Republicans stay conservative, the Republicans can win big in 2010 and restore some of this balance again.

The problem is that although people have realized that when the bought the Democratic Party they put a down payment on the destruction of our nation, they are not yet buying what the Republican Party is selling, mostly because the last time Republicans were in power they went all soft and voted for big government, pork, earmarks, and tried to give amnesty to illegal immigrants. Butler says (and I agree with him) that the way to victory for the GOP is to stick to our principles- small government, low taxes, less regulation, strong military, and family values.

The main issue in voters minds is going to be the economy. If the unemployment rate stays above 8%, voters will likely punish Democrats. I'm not hoping it stays that high, but I am hoping that voters realize that when they voted for Democrats, they voted to turn America into Michigan (an economic disaster). The Democrats won the election last time because the Republicans set up a situation where a man like Obama could win, and they took advantage- the GOP needs to now take advantage of the disaster that is the Democratic Party control of our country.

The good thing about the losses last election, according to Butler, is that now the GOP is desperate for voters, and is now going hard after voters of different ethnicity's, industries, and geographic areas that they didn't used to go after. Now the GOP is going after these groups, and that is a good thing- all Americans need to hear the message of the core principles and have a chance to vote for good politicians who believe in life, liberty, and property.

Echoing my last post, I question the moral character of those people who vote for liberal Democrats. Saying this makes me feel like I am painting too broad of a generalization, and if you vote Democrat, I'm not saying you're a bad person- it's just that for all the talk I hear from the leftists of this country about how Bush is evil, I've never heard him gloat about people dying or bad things occurring. You may think he's an idiot and his policies are wrong, but he is a moral person- he cares about others and is genuinely anguished when bad stuff happens.

Contrast this to Democrats. They chuckle when bad stuff occurs- when hurricanes hit, a war goes poorly, the economy sputters, etc- they rub their hands in glee, and get excited that they think their chances of getting elected improved. Ask yourself- when bad things occur when Democrats are in power, do you feel joy? Or do you get bitter and upset, and out of a desire to help, vote Republican? When bad things occur when Republicans are in power, do you feel joy? Do you chuckle, get excited, and think to yourself- now we can prove that Republicans are bad- now that bad things occurred Democrats will gain in power?

Which side is moral? Which side are you on?

This isn't out of far-right field either- Obama has been trying to make political hay out of the Hurricane Katrina- which incidentally was a failure by Democrat politicians (Governor and Mayor) and big bureaucracy (FEMA), not a product of Bush and his black people hating weather machine. And here we have video of Don Fowler, former Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and Democratic Congressman Don Spratt caught on video laughing about the fact that a hurricane is about to hit New Orleans, to the political advantage of their party.

Oh, and what does Obama propose to do if there is another government failure on the level of Hurricane Katrina. From his website, Change to Socialism, here is what he proposes with the 'Katrina Issue':

Obama introduced legislation requiring disaster planners to take into account the specific needs of low-income hurricane victims. (And) He worked with members of the Congressional Black Caucus to introduce legislation to address the immediate income, employment, business and housing needs of Gulf Coast communities.

In other words, when disaster strikes, his proposes to spend more time talking about things and provide more welfare. Why doesn't he just stop hurricanes in their tracks- after all, he is the one, and can walk on water and all that.

UPDATE: Fowler was forced to apologize today- "One doesn't anticipate that one's private conversation will be surreptitiously taped by some right-wing nutcase," said Fowler. "But that's the nature of what we're dealing with." In other words, he's sorry he got caught, but in this world of free speech and open government, sometimes it happens. Now, if you elect a Democrat, it'll never happen any more...

And the Award Goes To: Bill Myers, Staff Writer for the Washington Examiner

First question was on thoughts about the bailout, whether it was a good thing or bad thing. According to Biden, Obama was THE mover and shaker on it, that his ideas were shaping this policy, and that his ideas became the bailout plan. Huh- so this is what it is like to live in Venezuela- politicians can just make stuff up. Palin's reply was to make it real to every day people. I guess this means she is dumb, because Americans are all dumb, right? She sounds nervous and very coached. Less good.

Asked about gap of polarization. Biden solved many problems, is noted bipartisan... really? He then mocked McCain by going after the "fundamentals are still strong" comment- didn't Obama make that same comment this week? Palin's response- Obama is same old liberal Democrat, bought and sold by special interests. Moderator says "neither answered the question"- what was her question anyways?

Asked about predatory lending. Huh- notice how every issue is through the lens of a liberal- pro-bailout, Republicans are more polarizing than Democrats were, 'predatory lending'... wonder if the next question will be on global warming or something. Palin has to play on their turf. That's rough. Missed their answers- both blah.

Biden did say that the best way to fix economy was to give more power to government. Palin should point out this fundamental difference between the two candidates- Obama/Biden believe in government, McCain/Palin believe in the people. Biden talked about more regulation. Palin talked about tax relief. Biden accuses Palin of not answering the question on deregulation- there was a question on deregulation? That's the Palin I like! She is not going to be led around by Biden or the moderator- she is going to say what she needs to say. That smile is real now. Now look at her go. Opps, cut off now. Time up? Wonder what kind of clock the moderator was using to time this exchange.

Biden says that under McCain's plan 100 million households would have their taxes raised. Are there even 100 million households in the US? I wonder how accurate this figure is. It sounds 100% made up. Palin points out that Obama's plan is a wealth redistribution plan, and that the increased taxes will fall on small businesses. Government is problem, not solution. Biden says that it isn't redistribution when money is taken from rich (small businesses, wealthy individuals) and given to the poor- it is fair. Ring... ring... hello? Soviet Union? How you doing?

Moderator- would you like to defend McCain's healthcare plan? Is she going to ask Biden if he would like to defend Obama's healthcare plan? Nope. The moderator never asked this. Palin says feds can't run poop, so don't give them more power. With the bailout, what expansions of government will you now forgo? Biden says nothing, in fact, like Obama did last week, he said he would expand government further, and eliminate wasteful spending with line-item veto and closing loop-holes in the tax code. Palin says that Obama is hypocritical- voted for tax breaks and now talks about getting rid of them. She interacts well with Biden and the camera. Biden isn't bad- he is a good speaker- I can see why he is a long-time Senator. I don't mind him- he's better than Obama is.

Moderator- Palin, can I get you to say something bad about McCain's policies? Palin, with a tired reply, says you won't suck me into your trap. Moderator- Biden, speak about how your vote helped out people? Biden- okay. Will give more power to courts to adjust your mortgage rate. Wow. Did I hear that correctly? Did he just say he would give our courts the power to tell a bank to lower your monthly payments? Seriously? Palin talked about energy- wasn't really the time for this card to be played.

Moderator- talk about climate change, and how anyone who doesn't agree with the mythology to it is an idiot. Palin- there are cyclical changes, let's not argue with the causes, let's focus on what we can do. Biden- climate change is man-made, without a doubt. Cause is man. Must kill man. Man is destroying polar ice cap. America uses a lot of energy. Must stop Americans from using energy.

Moderator- Biden, you talk about what you support- can you reconcile this with your voting record? Palin- drill, baby, drill. All of the above approach to energy issue. Biden- you can't take my statements at a rally out of context- look at my record. Huh. Obama never said 'look at my record'- I remember Obama pulling random out-of-context quotes out.

Moderator- do you believe in granting same benefits to same-sex couples? Biden- Constitution calls for it. Must have a different version as me. Palin- careful about redefining the age-old definition of marriage. Had to defend herself from 'bigot' charge. Biden didn't- it is okay to be anti-conservative, but not okay to be anti-liberal. Palin is not supportive of gay marriage. Biden says not supportive of gay marriage either. Moderator twists question and asks it of Palin- Palin refuses trap again, and answers same question Biden was asked.

Moderator- missed question, but something about Iraq and funding of troops. Biden said he and Obama agree fully on one thing- that implies that on a lot of other issues, they disagree. Biden wants to 'end the war'- and probably forget it was ever fought. Palin points out that it isn't about 'ending the war'- it is about winning the war. Palin jokes that Biden was very supportive of McCain- I like Palin, and I like Biden. They're good politicians. Biden says that McCain voted against funding for the troops- I think that that's playing games with votes, and not an honest attack. McCain has been wrong on a lot of issues with Iraq. Moderator lets that stand.

Pakistan or Iran- who to fear? Biden- Iraq not part of war on terror. Should be building schools and hospitals in foreign countries. Palin- military and terrorists both consider Iraq central to war on terror. Iran more unstable, needs to be dealt with. Diplomacy is hard work- it isn't just 'let's sit down and talk it out.' Obama's ideas on diplomacy are dangerous. Biden- Iran not even controlled by Achy, need to sit down and talk. Brags about Bush's diplomacy with Iran, saying he'd do the same- don't brag about bad ideas, brag about good ones.

Moderator- Palin, solve Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Palin- will work for two-state solution, will back Israel. Biden- Joe Biden friend of Israel. Hezbollah same legitimacy as Israel. Moral relativism. Moderator- do you support Bush? Palin- nope. Positive change coming. Biden- McCain the same as Bush. Moderator let this stand. Palin brought up Obama's reckless comments about our soldiers being bad- we will win in Afghanistan. Moderator- you can talk about whatever you want Biden. Biden- touted Obama's loose-nukes legislation. Disagreement on what McClellen (leader in Afghanistan) actually said. Wonder who is right? If it's Palin, that's stunning- Biden is a 30 year senator, Palin is rather new to this.

Moderator- Biden, you have quite a record of intervention. Biden- Success and winning is important. End result is it worked. It saved lives. Why doesn't he apply the same logic to war in Iraq? Partisan logic- he was against Bush. Good old leftist- wants to intervene all over the world, but doesn't want to use the military. Palin is a good old righty- doesn't want to intervene, but when do wants to win. Palin brings out the old 'for it before I was against it line'- she is getting the better of this debate. She is nicer, nice smile, serious knowledge. Talks to Biden. Gives him credit where it's due. Biden is okay too, smiles as well, good knowledge, talks to Palin. I like him, just don't agree with him. Obama I don't like, he scares me, and I don't agree with him.

Moderator- Heartbeat away. How would Biden be different from Obama? Same in principle, different in practice. Palin different than McCain? She's a maverick, and McCain likes that, so they don't agree on everything. Will make government more relevent to everyday people. Biden- McCain is the same as Bush, and Bush has been unmitigated disaster, overseeing 7 years of recession, war, and disaster. Palin- folksy answer about looking forward and change, transitions well to policy points about education.

Moderator- both candidates dissed VP spot. Palin joked that both made jokes that no one got, so no big deal, don't read too much into it. Biden also knows role to play. The thing is- which joke does the media focus on? Which joke, Biden's or Palin's, does the media say reflect on the candidate? The media talks about Palin's joke, not Biden's. Moderator- do you agree with Cheney's ideas about the VP? Palin- flexible and understands how policy is created. Biden- Cheney is bad man and evil. Although I think that is baseless, I actually agree with Biden on this what role the VP is supposed to play in our system- VP is useless position in our government.

Missed question, but caught Biden talking about what people on the streets want. McCain= Bush. Palin replied that McCain is a maverick, and pointed to record and support from Democrats.

Final question to Biden- can you think of a single policy issue where you have changed your views? Biden- wasn't tough enough on judges early on. Seriously? Same question to Palin- didn't veto some budgets, wanted to work more with other party, but some regrets that had to pass those budgets.

Final question, first to Biden- how do you change the tone in Washington? Learned lesson from Mike Mansfeild- Republican? Democrat? Don't question motives of politicians- just disagree with their policies. That's fair enough. I believe Biden on this- Obama questions motives all the time. Palin- appoint quality people, regardless of their political beliefs, to positions of influence in administration. It's all about policies and proposals, not about meaningless empty rhetoric. Rained solid blows at the end.

Closing statement of Palin- enjoyed debate, doesn't like filter of media. Will have to fight for freedom, have to fight hard to maintain our liberties, will fight so that we don't look back and think about what we've lost as a nation. Closing statement of Biden- again mentions that this is the most important election ever. Says we need fundamental change- and not change towards lower taxes, not change towards less government, but fundamental change towards higher taxes and more government- a government that controls education and healthcare.

Good debate. Thought moderator stayed out of the way. I thought Biden did a good job, but Palin did even better- more personal, likable, and made policies more real.

After debate coverage- CNN- Palin did good for a women, but she dodged questions. MSNBC- someone spewing Democratic talking points I heard last week, word-for-word. FOX- balanced, thoughtful- most thoughtful comment- journalists are too baised and can't make this call.

Who is Geronimo Stilton?
That’s me! I run a newspaper, but my true passion is writing adventure stories. Here in New Mouse City, the capital of Mouse Island, my books are all bestsellers! My stories are funny, fa-mouse-ly funny. They are whisker-licking-good tales, and that’s a promise!

Red Pizzas for A Blue Count
My troublemaker cousin was trapped in Transratania! And before I could even squeak, my sister, Thea, dragged me along on her rescue mission. Little did we know that Transratania is the land of vampire bats! Holey cheese, bats give me goose bumps!
Attack of the Bandit Cats
Captured by cats! It’s every rodent’s worst nightmare. It al started when my cousin Trap convinced me to join him on a quest for a legendary island covered in silver. But before you could say “hot cheese on toast,” we were attacked by a ship of pirate cats!
A Fabumouse Vacation for Geronimo
Sometimes a busy businessmouse like me needs a nice, relaxing vacation. But everytime I tried to get away, disaster struck! By the time I finally tore myself away from The Rodent’s Gazette, all the good trips were booked up. I found myself stuck in a flea-ridden old hotel, sharing a room with a bunch of Gerbil Scouts!

 

Click here to buy from Amazon

The good news about the budget for fiscal year of 2011 is that it did not set a record for the largest deficit ever. No, that record was set in 2009 at $1.412 trillion, when the Democrats who controlled Congress from 2006 passed a budget that lame-duck moderate Republican President Bush then signed into law- a budget that included the bank bailouts of a trillion dollars. 2011 was better than that awful year for governance- but only by a little bit, as the final deficit for fiscal year 2011 came in as the second highest deficit in the history of our nation, $1.299 trillion.

The Republicans are not blameless in this deficit- they have been in control of at least half of Congress since January of 2011, so they own most of this budget that resulted in the second highest single year deficit in the history of the United States- at a time when we're not fighting any new wars, not building any sort of major monuments, not engaged in any sort of national race for space or atomic bombs, and no longer passing massive stimulus bills and bank bailouts at the height of a major crisis. Nope, this 2011 deficit is just outright bad- just a lot of blown money and spending way beyond what is sustainable, and the GOP was party and parcel to this budget.

Oh, I know that they only control half of Congress and don't control the Presidency or the bureaucracy and walked into this mess- but if the GOP wants to blame Obama for the mess he has caused than it is only fair that they take a good share of the blame for the 2011 fiscal deficit. The 'budget deals' they signed into law were bad deals, and any GOP Congressman who stood to vote for those or who urged new spending programs should be held accountable.

Tea Party people, this doesn't mean that the GOP is just as bad as the Democrats or that there needs to be a third party- no, it means that the GOP must be held accountable in their primary elections by facing true conservative challenges and must be made to answer questions regarding their votes.

As must though as the GOP is not blameless for this utter disaster in governance, the Democrats are to be held in full blame for passing on these massive debts to our children and doing such a utter rotten job of managing money.

Democrats controlled the House of Representations from 2006 to 2010 (and apparently the fiscal year goes Oct-Oct, so they are to blame for the 2011 deficit from Oct-Jan), and controlled the Senate from 2006 to today so are to blame in full for the deficit of 2011. And US President Barack Obama is a Democrat and has been President since 2010, so shares blame for this as well.

The deficit in 2011 was $1.299 trillion.

The deficit in 2010 was $1.293 trillion.

The deficit in 2009 was $1.412 trillion.

The wrath of voters should fall on anyone part of this horrible mismanagement's in the ship of state, and since Bush and many of the Republicans from 2009 and prior are not on the ballot and it appears that their mistakes and bad policies have been continued and deepened and made normal by the Democrats, the wrath of voters should fall in full on the Democratic President, the Democrats in the Senate, and the big-spending GOPers and Democrats in the House who oversaw this travesty.

In the FT:

Nigerians have not seen their president for more than two months and tensions are mounting, with huge security implications for the oil-producing giant and the wider region. If Abuja does not resolve the impasse over its leadership and return governance to a clear constitutional track very soon, it will spell disaster.

More here

Related articles by Zemanta

• Over 300 Died in Nigerian Clashes (online.wsj.com)

Texas Board of Education on Friday recently approved a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light.

But liberal blogs are going crazy, stating that it is totally wrong to put a conservative stamp on social studies curriculum and that the only allowable stamp allowed in education is a firmly liberal stamp. Blogs like the Daily Kos, which Obama reads often, suggest that it is better to homeschool your children now that the Texas Board has prohibited discussion of "transvestites, transsexuals and who knows what else."

There are a lot of reasons to homeschool children- look at Detroit Public Schools, in the firm solid grip of liberal policies and an utter disaster- but suggesting that you pull your child out of public schools because they won't learn valuable important information about transvestites in social studies is disgusting. I mean, in Detroit (firmly controlled by Democrats), kids have an equal chance of being shot or graduating high school, but that's okay to liberals and readers of the Daily Kos, as long as those students learn in their history classes about transvestites and transsexuals, and that's wrong.

For fun sometime you need to slum it in blogs like the Daily Kos and read the comments that liberals and Democrats put on that blog. They're voters too, don't forget that, and some of you may have even voted with them last election (or voted third party, which is the same in reality as voting for the most communist person on the ticket).

It's fun to read things on the Daily Kos like "unlike with socialist governments, we don't get a vote" and "But, in Texas, it is not a democracy. Their governor (Bush) lost the popular vote; and then lost the electoral vote. And then was appointed by the Supreme Court. So, to Texans, this is not a democracy." Yup, that's why I went back to school to get my teaching degree, and why I am a conservative teacher- I really hope that I can catch these idiots in school before they are released into the wilds and teach them that socialist governments (like China or Soviet Union) are bad, and that Bush won the 2000 election according to the laws of our nation.

Hopefully, the more conservative we can make education, by changing curriculum and standards and textbooks and methods and teachers to conservative ones, the better educated our children will be, and there won't be Democrat voters out there who comment "I compare the Texas right wing to the Taliban."

Over the weekend, my dad told me that I better tone down my attacks on Obama or one day I might disappear. I laughed at that- but then today I read that the White House, on their official blog, requested that people notify Obama's thugs of any sites or people who are saying bad things about the administration’s health care proposals. Via the Belmont Club.

This isn't paranoia- the link is http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things. I quote:

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov

What do you suppose the White House is going to do with the information that these informants bring to the administration? Do you think that the White House is going to contact everyone who disagrees with them on websites or over email and have a reasonable chat with them, debating the merits of the proposal and the criticisms leveled? Or do you think that Obama will begin to use the power of the executive branch to start to keep tabs on these people, have the IRS look into their financial dealings, and maybe even run some background checks on them like they did with Joe the Plumber?

Just in case anyone is wondering, the contact information for the White House office is flag@whitehouse.gov. Since the White House can't keep track of all of my blog posts, here are a couple of them that I think are particularly good- feel free to pass them on to Obama and let him know that I am not scared of his thugs- Obama creates disaster in the making, Obama's Health Care Plan Attacks Life, Liberty, and Property, Obama Says 'Just Die Already', Obama's Brother Tried to Rape 13-Year Old Girl, Denied Visa in Britain, Obama's Aunt Still Living in US and Defended by Democratic Donor Attorney, and many others.

If Obama or any of his thugs want to contact me about my posts, my email address is aconservativeteacher@gmail.com. Happy reading!

Via Committee for Justice Blog :

CFJ has learned from a reliable source that Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, reportedly on President Obama’s Supreme Court short list, boarded a flight from Detroit to Washington, DC last night. If Granholm is coming to DC for an announcement of her nomination to the Court, we’ll know as soon as this morning. If she’s coming to DC to interview for the job, it serves as confirmation that she is on the short list. In either case, it’s worth taking a look at her record, including the scandals that have plagued her.

CFJ says that for SCOTUS, Granholm's role in the economic disaster that is Michigan really is not going to be that important. Although she has been incompetent and mismanaged the state into the worst in the nation every year of her administration, that kind of resume is actually something the Obama team looks favorably on. And her opposition to traditional marriage and support of abortion are just policy differences- the kind that Obama says don't really matter, and that we should all just be nice about and agree with him since they aren't worth much (that's the point of his Notre Dame speech, right?). And her lack of experience in anything judicial isn't going to hurt her either- the Obama team favors putting people with no experience over those with experience- then Obama doesn't feel bad being so inexperienced at his job.

The real scandals that CFJ points to that might knock her off the list (allowing someone with a cleaner record of no experience and empathy to become an activist liberal Supreme Court judge)are her tax problems (Obama doesn't want to look bad by appointing yet another tax cheat) and her record while acting as Corporation Counsel for Wayne County. As CFJ mentions, after Granholm's time in that office, the FBI and state auditors have been busy for years, cleaning up the corruption of her administration, including the awarding of no-bid and grossly-expensive contracts to her husband's businesses by Wayne County.

Check out the full post here.

Many people are asking me 'who are you voting for'. They know that I am a solid conservative, they know that I read and research all of the candidates, and they know that I teach government for a living so I know my stuff, so they feel I can offer advice to them on who to vote for. Every person's vote is their own, and I've always been a little shy about trying to tell people who to vote for, but because there is a demand for my opinions on the subject, I will suggest some options for voting in the coming primary election here in Michigan.

For Governor of Michigan, the options for the Republicans are Pete Hoekstra, Rick Snyder, Mike Bouchard, Mike Cox, and Tom George. I recommend that you vote for Pete Hoekstra. Tom George is not Governor material. Mike Bouchard is a #2. Rich Snyder I've written about several times (Analyzing Rick Snyder's 10 Point Plan, Exclusive: Rick Synder Blackmailed Young Supporters for Votes in Straw Poll on Mackinac Island, Rick Snyder- Do Not Support). That leaves it down to two serious candidates- Cox and Hoekstra. Both are solid conservatives in my opinion. Cox has shown that he knows how to lead and has solid executive experience, but is slimy and personally treated me badly. Hoekstra on the other hand has a good record in Congress and people speak well about him. So I'm going with Hoekstra, although I really like Cox too. For more in-depth discussion on these candidates, see theblogprof's I endorse Mike Cox for MI Governor, and here's why.

For Governor of Michigan, the options for the Democrats are Andy Dillon and Virg Bernero. I recommend that you vote for Andy Dillon. Although I worked for Dillon's recall several years ago due to his role in pushing for the largest increase ever in Michigan's history, since then he has obviously learned his lesson, and has been much more moderate. He has tried to pass legislation that every side likes and be a leader. If you vote for Dillon, expect a slightly better version of Granholm. Virg Bernero is a communist with a streak of Stalinism in him. I heard him interviewed on the radio, and he sounded proud to be a thuggish communist. Putting him in the Governor's office would be an unmitigated disaster for Michigan and would destroy hope for ever emerging from the molasses of Granholm's administration. I know the unions are backing him and funneling money into his coffers, but that's a joke too- it's sad when the MEA backs a guy who sent his kids to private schools over people who sent their kids to public schools (like Mike Cox).

For Representative in Congress from Michigan's 9th District the options are Rocky Racqkowski, Paul Welday, Anna Janek, and Richard Kuhn. I recommend that you vote for Rocky Racqkowski. Our district needs a solid leader who will fight for what our district wants (not a bought-off partisan hack like Gary Peters). Anna Janek is unprepared and Richard Kuhn lacks the energy the office might require. Paul Welday is a serious challenger, but his years in Washington appear to have tainted him a bit- he's a lobbyist and policy advisor who wants to now be the boss. Rocky is a veteran, business leader, was a leader in Michigan's Congress, and will be a great leader for our district. See my post on this race 9th Congressional District Republican Primary Debate for more analysis.

For State Senator of the 26th District of Michigan the options are Tim Terpening, Fran Amos, Michael Matheny, and David Robertson. I recommend that you vote for. I recommend that you vote for David Robertson. I've never heard of Tim Terpening and Michael Matheny before, although I see they are decent people. Fran Amos was a good Representative, but has a limited base and rubs a lot of people the wrong way. The 26th District is a pretty Democrat district, and we need someone who can win in those areas. David Robertson has shown that he can win in those areas, and is a solid Tea Party guy too.

For Judge of the Probate Court in Oakland County Michigan the options are Kathleen Ryan, Jamie Marie Verdi, J. Martin Brennan, Dana Margaret Hathaway, and Barbara B. Murphy. To be honest, I don't know much about these candidates, so I would direct you to look at the League of Women Voters Voting Guide Questionnaire that each filled out, and also take a look at OpenSecrets.org. I recommend that you vote for Marie Verdi though, because Kathleen Ryan donated money to Debbie Stabmenow (D), J. Martin Brennan has donated thousands to Democrats over the years, and Barbara Murphy has also donated thousands to Democrats over the years, and Verdi's answers on the questionnaire were decent.

For anyone who is curious, I am not on the ballot this year.

To any candidate who reads my blog, and I know there are a few of you out there, I want to pass on the following message- I've talked to you personally or attempted to do so several times, and so I gave you all a chance to earn my vote. Some of you blew me off, some of you offended me, and some of you insulted me, all without knowing the power of my pen, so I hope that because you treated me (a voter) that way, you suffer. Thus my wrath is great and probably powerless.

Although I have written several times about what is going on with the auto companies (Government Motors, Obama the CEO, on SNL, Obama Forces Private Businessman Out of Job), I'm not a lawyer, and so I don't have the correct grasp on language that some real lawyers do. I mean, I know intuitively that what is going on is not right (What does a Political Economy look like? and Michigan Businesses Battle Government Regulations ...), but I can't describe what is going on in the US as well as the guys over at Power Line can. This is a great post (read it here):

The Chrysler reorganization is shaping up as another milestone in the decline of the rule of law under Barack Obama. We've said for quite a while that bankruptcy is the only viable option for Chrysler and General Motors, not--as Obama claims--because they don't know how to make the right kinds of vehicles, but because their unsustainable union contracts make it impossible for them to be profitable. That reality has now been turned on its head, as the administration has tried to bully Chrysler's secured creditors into going away, while the United Auto Workers Union, solely on the basis of political clout, would be paid at an implied rate of 50 percent and would emerge owning 55 percent of the company, with the government also holding a stake.

This is banana republic capitalism at its worst. Political influence, rather than the law, dictates the rights of the parties. When some of the secured creditors refused to be intimidated, Obama libeled them in the press, saying, outrageously, "I don't stand with those who held out when everyone else is making sacrifices." Actually, under Obama's plan the politically favored parties, principally the UAW, will benefit--will steal money, to put it crudely--from the parties who held out. Those parties call themselves the "non-TARP lenders."

This highlights the government's conflict of interest in this transaction, as in so many others now underway. Some of Chrysler's secured creditors are banks who received TARP money. As the New York Times put it, those lenders are "beholden to Washington" and "defying the administration was never a serious option."

It remains to be seen what will happen in bankruptcy court. Already one key player, Perella Weinberg Partners, "under intense pressure from the White House," has caved in and agreed to accept Obama's terms. Whatever the ultimate result, this episode will have consequences. The Wall Street Journal notes:If the current plan is pushed through, then good luck to any unionized firm trying to raise secured debt on decent terms in the future.

For Chrysler, the administration's plan spells disaster. It is inconceivable that the UAW, the principal source of Chrysler's problems, will manage the company back to profitability. More likely, Chrysler will become a vehicle through which the federal government provides uneconomic subsidies to unionized auto workers and retirees.

Barack Obama's conduct in this affair has been disgraceful. Our bankruptcy laws are well developed and are fairly implemented by experienced bankruptcy judges. Priority among creditors is established according to legal rules and precedents. The process is transparent and subject to appellate review. But in this case, the law did not favor the parties who have the most influence with the White House--notably, the United Auto Workers--so Obama substituted political threats and bullying for due process. Il Duce would have approved.

I would also suggest you check out this article in the Detroit News- here are a couple good parts:

They are being demagogued as "speculators" by President Barack Obama and as "vultures" by Gov. Jennifer Granholm and Oakland County Congressman Gary Peters.

They are the smaller bondholders who have refused to bow to the pressure of the Obama administration and accept a minuscule number of pennies on the dollar as repayment for their loans to Chrysler.

This confrontation could have been avoided if the Obama administration had treated the bondholders as equitably as the United Auto Workers, which gets far more money for the dollar.

The good-faith loans from the bondholders provided the operating capital for which Chrysler pledged its assets as collateral, an important role that the Obama administration wants to ignore as part of its forced restructuring program that favors the politically connected UAW.

The heavy-handed tactics of the Obama administration represent another government intrusion into the private sector and attempt to victimize a constituency that does not have the political clout of the unions.

The noncompliant bondholders are going to take their chances on winning back a bigger share of their shareholder investments in bankruptcy court, where the independent role of the judiciary will be expected to fairly judge their claims.

One hopes the Obama administration will not try to bully the courts the way it has private businesses.

It already will be tough to raise desperately needed money in the market for Chrysler to make its future vehicles after Obama's intervention and scapegoating of investors as "speculators." Government intimidation would represent an even greater danger to the country and obstacle to Chrysler's future

A smart man would bet money that the bankruptcy process will not be impartial and free from undue influence by government- rule of law has already be disregarded by the President, who wants to run America as he personally sees fit, and so I don't doubt for a second that he will personally pressure judicial appointments to decide the way he wants them to decide. America is dying, and our President is going to stop at nothing to loot the carcass for the benefit of himself and his friends.

UPDATE: Powerlineblog follows up with another good post to read-Banana Republic, Part II

Open Access papers a boon for developing world scientists-SciDev
Supporting Nollywood the Directors Guild of Nigeria
Challenges for Craftspeople-BBC
Is Kenya teetering?-NYTimes
Challenges for the book industry-George Ngwane
Questioning the Nigerian Stock Exchange-Basil Enwegbara
The real Water Board-WashAfrica
South-South ties contd. Asian footsteps in the continent.
Power-sharing government is a recipe for “disaster”-FT
Leadership starts with you not him!-Joachim Ezeji
The Ghadafi virus-The Moor Next Door
Public-private investment partnerships in health systems-Output Based Healthcare
Examining Charles Soludo Nigeria's Central Bank Governor-234Next

After a careful tallying of votes and considerable consideration of all bribe offers, I have ruled that The Best Posts of A Conservative Teacher 2008 are:

• Liberal Teachers: about liberal teachers and their agenda
• Working on the Standards: remembering my attempts to fight liberal bias on state tests
• Obama Calls for More Public Service: comments on Obama's call for more public service
• Happy-nicing Ourselves into a Dictatorship: Obama brings us into a brave new world
• Comparing Michelle Obama's Speech to Condoleezza Rice's Speech: this gem gives amazing insight into two women who have a lot of influence over Presidents
• Obama's Energy Plan Vision: see the pictures
• Global Warming Melted my Ice Cream Cone: shockingly, hot magma is causing ice to melt under Greenland, not my SUV
• Shays' Rebellion and the Financial Bailout- A Surprising Connection: title of post says it all
• Former Student Reports Voter Fraud on College Campus: I become more cynical about elections after hearing many of these personal stories
• Obama, Granholm, Kwame, Michigan, and Lions: The results of hope and change: written months before the disaster seasons of UM and Lions and the prison term for Kwame and the continuing destruction of Michigan's economy... only prediction not correct yet is on Obama
• Green Jobs, Jeff Daniels, the MEDC, and the myth of FDR: random connections
• Liberal Judge rules homeless voters may list air as addresses to get ballots: ah, liberal judges, making up laws as they go
• Parent protests assigned book: my call to action causes school district to pull liberal book from curriculum
• Buying the American Presidency One Criminal Act at a Time: on Obama's fundraising
• America Has Strayed from Its Founding Children's Books Ideals: what are you reading your child?
• Joe the Plumber Must Be Destroyed: also Palin
• Barack Obama was a member of the New Party: on Obama's membership in radical left organization
• My Experience Meeting Bill Ayers: my protests may have contributed to my eventual separation from that school district
• Warren Schools Blows Budget on Green Boondoggle: a sign of things to come
• Recent Evaluation of Michigan's Business Tax: sometimes I feel like a journalist, then I realize I'm doing real investigative work
• May You Live in Interesting Times: it's a curse
• Obama's Draft Registration Raises Serious Questions: anyone in MSM get this one?
• Libertarians Screwed Themselves By Not Voting or Voting Libertarian: to my libertarian readers
• Our Long Conservative Nightmare is Over: satire
• Bizarro World and the Israeli-Hamas Conflict: explore the concept
• Rezko's Lawyer Owns Obama's House?: does anything about Obama surprise
• Can you Smell what Barack is Cooking?: shady book stew
• Orwell's Children: is future 1984 or Brave New World?
• Beware of the Church of Climate Alarm: they have wooden stakes and will shove one through your heart if it will make you stop polluting the air with your stinking conservative breath

Go back and spend a minute enjoying some of these classic posts from 2008, and get ready for a new year! My blog is growing (thousands of hits), and with your continued readership, and telling your friends, and linking to it on your blog, and emailing me- we will grow it further. My battle continues- be part of it by linking to A Conservative Teacher often!