What’s news today?
Billy Graham continues to be recognized for his work.
From CNSNews
“The Rev. Dr. Billy Graham and President Ronald Reagan now stand at the top of the list — in terms of the number of times anyone has been named to Gallup’s Top 10 Most Admired Men list.
According to the pollster, Graham, who is 94, has been named to the Gallup list 56 times since 1955, more than anyone else — male or female.”
_______________________________________
The next 3 are all related. It seems Obama campaign contributors aren’t the only ones getting in on the “Green” scam. Looks like some of those “Evil” Oil companies are getting in on the fraud too.
From ZeroHedge
“Wondering why rail traffic has been somewhat surprisingly consistent despite uncertainty? Concerned at government’s tenticular reach into each and every aspect of our lives? This somewhat stunning anecdotal report from OilPrice.com might shed some light:
A cargo train filled with biofuels crossed the border between the US and Canada 24 times between the 15th of June and the 28th of June 2010; not once did it unload its cargo, yet it still earned millions of dollars… The companies “made several million dollars importing and exporting the fuel to exploit a loophole in a U.S. green energy program.” Each time the loaded train crossed the border the cargo earned its owner a certain amount of Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs), which were awarded by the US EPA to “promote and track production and importation of renewable fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel.”
We suggest this is merely yet another unintended consequence (just as we noted here) and perverted incentive of central planning and an all encroaching government.”
I dug around and found the original story from CBCNews/Canada
“CN internal documents obtained by CBC News show that the company had agreed to flip the shipments back and forth across the border using its rail lines and tunnels 24 times without unloading any cargo. This garnered CN $2.6 million.”
Here’s the followup piece from CBCNews/Canada
“CBC News received several tips after a recent story about a company shipping the same load of biodiesel back and forth by CN Rail at a cost of $2.6 million in the summer of 2010. It turns out the shipments were part of a deal by a Toronto-based company, which made several million dollars importing and exporting the fuel to exploit a loophole in a U.S. green energy program.”
_______________________________________
Another victory against ObamaCare. May it die from a thousand such cuts.
From TheFreeBeacon
“Another business won temporary relief Thursday from the Obamacare mandate to provide contraception against its religious convictions, bringing the total number of injunctions against the mandate to 10.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted Triune Health Group preliminary injunctive relief against the mandate.
Triune’s owners, Christopher and Mary Anne Yep, are “ardent and faithful adherents of the Roman Catholic religion” who object to the government forcing them to purchase insurance “for drugs and services to which they object based on their religious convictions,” according to the court’s two-page decision.”
_______________________________________
Why are Economists united in their dislike for the fiscal cliff deal?
Ummmmm…….. ‘Cuz it stinks? Yep, final answer. And no, I’m not an economist. But I could play one on TV. 😉
From Time.com
“One of the truths revealed by the debate over the fiscal cliff is that lawmakers in Washington are in bitter disagreement over the cause of and solution to our economic malaise. There is the Keynesian camp, which believes that the economy is being hindered by a general lack of demand, and that the government needs to spend more in order to get the economy going again. Then there is a faction of economists — let’s call them the uncertainty hawks — who believe that businesses and individuals would be more willing to make the investments necessary to spur economic growth if they had a clearer idea of future tax bills and government spending levels. And finally there are the deficit hawks, who believe economic growth is being hampered by large federal deficits and debt, and that the best way to encourage economic growth is to shrink the deficit, mostly through reducing government spending.
With the recent deal over the fiscal cliff, however, a strange thing happened: Despite the fact that many of these camps’ ideas are in direct opposition with one another, the final deal ended up satisfying nobody — causing economists across the ideological spectrum to declare the deal a dud.”
Wandering Views 
Of course the fiscal cliff deal is a dud. All it did was postpone the fix. Both sides need backbone. Both sides need leadership. Both sides need kicked out and replaced with people who have common sense to know that you cannot continue spending more than you take in; that even if it hurts “the children and elderly”, we need to cut all spending in order to save what we have left of our once Grand Republic.
LikeLike
I guess I’m aligned with two camps of economists as I see uncertainty and the deficits are both hampering the economy.
Actually the tax deal, according to the reports that I’ve seen, was not as bad as I expected and, since many of the provisions became ‘permanent’, as far as taxes there is more certainty. The deficit picture is probably worse though.
LikeLike
I played the UN-GAME with my family New Years Eve. One of my questions was “If you were elected President, what would be the first 2 things you’d do?”
My answers
1. Arrest every sitting member of Congress.
2. Hold new elections in 30 days and resign.
That’s the only way to actually deal with the Fiscal Cliff. These clowns are useless.
LikeLike
Peter L,
Did you note the Previous and Next buttons?
LikeLike
Yes I did. But when the comments get numerous, the arrows are still near the top. But thanks!
LikeLike
I did not know there was anyone left in Detroit to murder.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/04/16352612-weve-lost-respect-for-life-detroit-records-deadliest-year-in-decades?lite
LikeLike
Me, I like the train deal! I would move those cars back and forth as many times as I could before the stupid law gets changed. Take advantage of as many senseless laws that make me money as I can.
The only way to get rid of silly laws is to follow the law. Do you want to take any bets as to whether or not this company is the only one to take advantage of this law? I don’t think the people who made this law didn’t think of this happening. Heck! I would get a tanker truck full of this crap and make it my job to drive it back and forth through a border crossing all day, every day until the law was changed. It is legal.
$400,000? $600,000? No matter how much money I made, all the taxes would be paid by the taxpayers anyway. Would I resent it? Yes and No.
LikeLike
AJ — You should note it was a gov’t funded broadcaster (CBC) exposing the exploitation of a gov’t program by a private corporation. This means it took a non-corporate entity (CBC) to expose corporate malfeasance. The lack of private investigative journalism indicates the failure of the fourth estate to monitor the business community and their use/abuse of the gov’t. I venture to guess this is because they themselves are part of the same corporate community.
The real problem in the US
http://www.salon.com/2011/11/17/the_corporate_tax_plunge_down_down_down/
http://www.politicususa.com/bernie-sanders-1-4-profitable-corporations-america-pay-0-federal-taxes.html
LikeLike
I agree with HRW, the very weak fourth estate in the US–on any subject–really is a cause for concern. Can freedom be possible if there’s no one willing to blow a whistle on any part of the government/corporate world? 😦
LikeLike
Is the fourth estate weak or blind in one eye?
When I was growing up, reading the LA Times, I always wished that right hand (not Right, Conservative, Republican) page of the 2 page Editorial/Opinion section would have had opposing articles/opinion pieces with a sliding scale graphic, Left to Right, liberal to conservative, above the 2 opposing view points.
I was always disappointed that Cal Thomas was not printed more often, even though he was sold to other newspapers by the LA Times Syndicate.
I remember not hearing my conservative viewpoints very often until Rush Limbaugh came to town. I had always, and still do, thought it was not appropriate to talk politics at church. It was not wise to talk politics at work, an inner-city Black Jr. High/Latino Middle School.
TV? Have you watched The View lately?
LikeLike
There’s a great misconception among conservatives that the media is skewed to the left. Its not — its self serving and skewed to maintaining itself and a profit. Now its true that many of those involved in the print media are Democrats but this doesn’t make them on the left — Kusinicnh and Saunders would get more and better coverage if this was the case. In addition, the profit motive has led to fewer investigative journalism, more news copy, and infotainment. Employees of a corporation, despite any left of center leanings, normally don’t investigate corporations — note how AJ’s story was broken by the CBC (which is gov’t funded) and is now mentioned on independent websites. The corporate world isn’t going to bring up anything that smells of corruption. The bias is in favour of corporations not left or right.
interestingly the Canadian media is far more to the right than the general populace. In the last federal election every major daily with exception of one endorsed the Conservative party. Only 37% of Canadians voted Conservative. The one exception is probably the only true left wing daily in North America — the Toronto Star which has endorsed the Liberal party (and sometimes the NDP) for more than a century.
As for TV — its more infotainment than news esp when its more concerned with celebrities personal lives than hard news. FOX even admitted this when they described FOXnews as entertainment in a court libel case.
Looking at the past presidential election, it was quite obvious to Nate Silver and anyone who could do electoral math that Obama was clearly the favorite yet the media insisted it was a horse race — why? because it keeps viewers watching and reading and thus consuming advertising.
LikeLike
HRW has some interesting points. It seems to me that US media may be afraid of , dare I say- retaliation form the Left if they report corruption on that side. They do investigate Republicans more since they don’t fear government intervention from the right. And they dare not report corporate corruption if that corporation owns them, as GE owns NBC, for instance.
Time for a strong Independent media source. Unfortunately it takes way too much money for TV and few listen to radio news anymore.
LikeLike
HRW, if that were true than why do they all still lean that way in spite of the fact that FOX beats them all in the ratings and Left wing radio always loses money but they keep on trying.
LikeLike
HRW makes me laugh. He said, “Now it’s true that many of those involved in the print media are Democrats but this doesn’t make them on the left..”
So, Is Obama a conservative or a moderate? How was his Senate voting record different from Kucinich or Sanders? Which of the leading Democrats is not on the left? Are you thinking of Bill Clinton, who was so busy molesting people that he forgot to communize us?
LikeLike
HRW, I would disagree in part. I think (in general) the media here does tilt left. Studies bear that out. But yes, it is also self-serving.
With most journalists in the U.S. being left-of-center (as has been demonstrated in countless surveys over the past several decades), news coverage to some degree reflects that. It’s not a conservative illusion or misconception.
But while bias does exist, sometimes it is seen where it doesn’t exist. Unfortunately, so many consumers now anticipate and expect bias that they tend to see it everywhere.
Overall, the media’s credibility pretty much shot. Meanwhile, internally, the industry as a business model continues to be in a state of chaos — it’s a downward spiral of dwindling profits, layoffs and downsizing. None of that bodes well for a strong fourth estate.
Part of its problem has been self-inflicted. I continue to marvel at the arrogance of many in the media who dismiss out of hand what has been some very credible criticism, especially when it comes from conservatives.
But another part of the media’s problem simply is the result of the industry trying to survive amid rapidly changing times — when “news” is (freely) distributed & available via the Internet.
LikeLike
Peter L. — I don’t think the media is afraid to tackle corruption from the left but simply can’t find it since the anti-corporate left isn’t in power and one generally needs to be in power to be corrupt. They are afraid to tackle corruption from the right because the media is controlled and owned corporately. FOX for one change a documentary on Monsanto to be more corporate friendly. In the resulting court challenge from the filmmakers, FOX admitted to not being factually correct but that it was exercising their first amendment rights. Similarly, news pundits and hosts simply call their work entertainment as opposed to news — this exists in all media not just FOX or TV.
kbells — FOX and right wing radio wins in the ratings for the simple reason its more entertaining. Too many leftists are far too earnest and serious to hold an audience for long. FOX also wins because its target demographic — older men — watches far more television than the typically leftist — younger women.
LikeLike
rickyweaver — the yardsticks measuring left-right in America have moved considerably since McCarthy lost to Nixon. Clinton won as a southern Democrat who deliberately created a new image for the Democrats to regain the so-called Reagan Democrat. His own policies were moderate and fiscally responsible. Obama is to a certain extent even more conservative than Clinton — his health reform for example is model after Bob Dole’s plan not Hilary’s. His foreign policy is more hawkish than Reagan — read Twilight War for Reagan’s retreat from Beirut and the caution he exhibited in the Persian Gulf and Iran. The Saudis kept trying to push Reagan to a more hawkish stand. Fiscally, Obama has embraced some Keynesian ideas (which isn’t much different from Nixon or Eisenhower) but his taxation policy is far more conservative than Reagan — which is a real problem, you can’t be a Keynesian without taxation. America has too either tax more or severely cut spending everywhere and especially the military (military spending has very little spin off value). Finally, Eisenhower (read the latest bio Eisenhower: In War and Peace) is more to the left than Obama.
LikeLike
kbells — bias exists both ways. I just saw a picture on facebook of three newspaper headings. WSJ said “Small job growth creates worry” NYT said something along these lines, “Worries disappear as job growth continues slowly” The Washington Post had something similar. This is natural due to the their market orientation — WSJ is oriented to the market and its response to news whereas the other two have a larger focus.
And yes, stories of bias abound unsubstantiated. Occasionally a right wing politician will dismiss news as the MSM or left-wing bias (Bachman or Palin comes to mind but I may be wrong) Similarly, tea party signs proclaimed its not news unless its on FOX — tragically studies have shown FOX listeners are the least informed. Its unfortunate people react so quickly when a simple google search can confirm or deny.
Technology is changing media and unless it adapts it will undergo what Joseph Schumpter calls “creative destruction” — the process of economic change which destroys wealth and creates new wealth. From wikipedia In Schumpeter’s vision of capitalism, innovative entry by entrepreneurs was the disruptive force that sustained economic growth, even as it destroyed the value of established companies and laborers that enjoyed some degree of monopoly power derived from previous technological, organizational, regulatory, and economic paradigms.
LikeLike
Reagan: “Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit or debt”
Add to that Reagan raised the debt ceiling 18 times during his tenure.
Obama has contemplated cutting Social Security and has only raised the debt ceiling 6 times — at that rate he will raise it 12 times in 8 years. 6 less than Reagan.
LikeLike
HRW, You make an interesting point on foreign policy. I would contend there is nothing conservative about starting unnecessary wars (little Bush in Iraq) or poorly conducting other wars ( LBJ, little Bush and now Obama).
However, you still have me laughing when you said “(Obama’s) taxation policy is far more conservative than Reagan”. Reagan reduced the highest marginal rate from 70% to 33% while instituting real tax reform. Reagan is the only conservative we’ve had since Coolidge. Obama’s political philosophy is like that of LBJ.
LikeLike
A good example of a conservative non-interventionist foreign policy is advocated by Andrew Bacevich (far more intelligent than Paul). Obama’s Afghan policy has been fairly successful considering the deep hole that was dug by the Iraq distraction. He’s been fairly hawkish in his use of drones which has generated constant complaints from the left.
To be fair, Reagan cut the tax rate in 1987 and 1988. He maintained a high tax rate of 70% throughout most of the 80s and did not reduce taxes until the end of the term when he longer had to concern himself with the deficit which would occur. Now, taxes had been reduced to 35% with numerous tax loopholes during a time of two wars — taxes should be increased to pay for the military spending and then reduced. Instead Obama with Republican prodding has been very tepid in tax policy. BTW a real fiscal conservative would raise taxes until spending was under control especially military spending.
LikeLike
HRW, Thanks for the reference to Bacevich. I need to read some of his work.
Regarding taxes, as a young Canadian, you are forgiven for your factual errors. Reagan cut the top rate from 70% to 50% his first year in office (1981). In the 1986 Tax Reform Act he cut the marginal rate to 33% as part of the Tax Reform Act. That bipartisan bill (Bradley and Gephardt were sponsors) was designed to be revenue neutral as it did away with many loopholes. Reagan’s final tax code raised 20% of GDP with a top rate of 33%. We now struggle to raise 15% of GDP. Thank you Congress, Bushes, Clinton and Obama for rejunking up the Tax Code. One of the reasons I label a conservative while withholding the label from the Bushes is that Reagan would stand up to special interests, even business special interests.
LikeLike
hwessli,
My wife, watching “The View” didn’t know anything about “Fast and Furious” for at least 3 weeks of it being in the blogosphere every day. What about Holder’s removal of the case of voter intimidation from court? What about the scandal of the voting rights office refusing to look at voter intimidation of whites?
The newest is outgoing EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has been using aliases on EPA email accounts that she used to conduct official business. This is illegal.
Has the press looked into Benghazi? Who has questioned Hillary?
The press has also done a very poor job of looking into what happened in Fanny and Freddy during Clinton’s years.
I find your sticking up for liberals in the press one sided. You could work for them.
men·da·cious
/menˈdāSHəs/
Adjective
Not telling the truth; lying: “mendacious propaganda”.
Synonyms
lying – false – untrue – untruthful – double-tongued
LikeLike
rickyweaver,
Here’s my review of Bacevich’s latest The Limits of Power
Instead of a quick condemnation of the last decade as most agit-prop has done lately, Bacevich looks back half a century to the origins of the national security state. Framing his argument around theologian and social critic Reinhold and Carter’s “malaise” speech may seem like an unusual starting point for a conservative but his commentary on freedom from constraints, anti-consumerism, personal and moral responsibility and bureaucratic self preservation will appeal to traditional conservatives. For leftists, the book will still appeal as a calm reasonable rejection of neo-conservatism and aggressive, interventionist American foreign policy.
LikeLike
I hardly expect The View to be the purveyors of hard news.
I could easily write a similar paragraph as yours on voter intimidation and harassment from a leftist point of view using talking points from leftist blogs in the same way you’ve repeated the usual talking points of the right wing media.
Fast and Furious (not the movie franchise) was the continuation of a Bush era program which was ended in 2011. It strikes me as a stupid idea in 2006 and a stupid idea in 2010, regardless, it was an error of the ATF not the DOJ or Holder.
Here’s an interesting article from Fortune;
http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/27/fast-and-furious-truth/
which has a far different take on the “scandal” as FOX. Is one side lying or is the truth somewhere in between. I’m far more likely to believe a story of incompetence then deliberate conspiracy.
Freddie and Fannie go way back. I don’t think the press looked at either until 2008 so they were pretty much blind to the excesses and stupidity for several administrations. They were lazy and cheap — investgative journalism cost money and its cheaper just to print AP copy.
History is sometimes just one event after another. In the case of Benghazi, it looks that way. The Republican party and its media allies were quick to use the event to political advantage and when it looked like the event was a mess of confusion; they needed a stronger narrative to save face. Look, US embassies get attacked — and people die — quite frequently. Here’s a list of attacks from Carter to Bush; its almost impossible to predict these events and nor is it always possible to provide the right level of security.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/09/14/krauthammer-whitewashes-bushs-history-to-bash-o/189890
LikeLike
Btw, Bacevich was a favourite of Frank from Seattle so you can get a sense of the viewpoint.
LikeLike
It just occurred to me isn’t voting a state responsibility? If the media is to pursue the story should they not focus on the state level? Perhaps a story on how gerrymandering in several states allowed Republicans to maintain a majority of House seats despite being outvoted.
rickyweaver — Reagan lowered and raised taxes. In terms of revenue as a percentage of GDP, taxes went down and then up. And were still higher than today. Yes, eliminating tax loopholes was responsible for part of it, but he also raised taxes (payroll, excise, etc).
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/jun/25/gerry-connolly/rep-gerry-connolly-says-reagan-raised-taxes-during/
Interestingly, capital gains tax rate was 20% in 1982 but was raised to 28% in 1987. Currently its 15% but due to go up to 20-23.5%.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/historical-changes-capital-gains-tax-191518219.html
LikeLike
Two articles worth reading
http://www.classwarfareexists.com/the-united-states-owes-most-of-its-16-trillion-debt-to-itself/
Okay I’ ve posted enough for now.
LikeLike
How is Basevich “much more intelligent than Paul?” They both seem pretty intelligent to me, and share some significant foreign policy views.
LikeLike
Bacevich is a well respected scholar, despite fairly different views than most academics, with a Phd from Princeton whereas Paul is a medical doctor who has used his political position to make pronouncements on economics and foreign policy among other issues. Paul also has a tendency to take his libertarian ideas to the absurd. I don’t see that with Bacevich.
LikeLike
Paul is a medical doctor who has used his political position to make pronouncements on economics and foreign policy among other issues.
He was a politician. I would call that “doing his job.” Anyway, he’s well respected, too, and even has Bacevich’s respect.
LikeLike
HWesseli,
ATF is part of the DOJ so Holder was responsible.
LikeLike
I watch “Bones”, “Mob Doctor” and of course “American Idol” on Fox. I prefer the Fox Sunday morning political show to the others. Other than that and the “Simpsons” I don’t watch much Fox.
I get most of my information from http://www.powerlineblog.com/ , http://hotair.com/ , http://news.investors.com/IBDEditorials.aspx and http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/ . Have you ever gone to any of them?
If Holder has nothing to hide why has he avoided testifying to Congress? Why hasn’t he sent the emails and other correspondence to Congress they have subpeonaed?
“Fast and Furious (not the movie franchise) was the continuation of a Bush era program which was ended in 2011. It strikes me as a stupid idea in 2006 and a stupid idea in 2010, regardless, it was an error of the ATF not the DOJ or Holder.”
This shows that you don’t really know what you are talking about. Look on the PowerLineBlog and use the search for Fast and Furious. Once it comes up you will have to scroll down for the various posts. The only problem for you will be that it might make you reconsider your whole love and respect for the Democratic Party.
LikeLike
What I remember is that ‘Fast and Furious’ was tried under Bush and failed to accomplish it’s objective. Under Obama it was morphed into something horrendous.
LikeLike
The idea that a government entity could reliably serve as a 4th estate version of a government watchdog is naive, to put it mildly.
LikeLike