Obama’s First 100 Days Most Desructive Since FDR’s

Obama as FDR

An un-named senior White House adviser recently stated in an interview with press that Barack Obama’s first 100 days in office have been the most productive since FDR.  That depends on your definition of productive.  The adviser went on to list Obama’s achievements.

Passing the “largest” economic stimulus bill in American history.

Passing the $787 billion Generational Theft Act isn’t something to be proud of… not in the least.  Not to mention the fact that it does very little, if anything, to help the economy – especially given that most of the money won’t be spent until 2010 – 2011.  What it does do is pay off political friends, fund pet projects and rob my children and grandchildren’s future earnings.

Ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolishing “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Prematurely ordering the closing of a long standing military prison with absolutely no plan regarding what to do with the prisoners is a good thing?  Obama signed an order to close this facility with absolutely no idea as to the consequences, what actually happens at GITMO, nor how dangerous the prisoners are if released.  Abolishing “enhanced interrogation techniques” does nothing but kneecap our intelligence operations.  Water-boarding works… and it causes no permanent harm.  He did this for purely political reasons.  He has chosen to risk national security to give the Code Pink crowd warm & fuzzies.

Setting a fixed timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat forces from Iraq.

Setting a fixed timetable for Iraq withdrawal?  I believe that Bush actually did that with the SOFA.  Only certain combat elements will be withdrawn while many more troops will be left behind to continue their duties rebuilding Iraq, as outlined in the SOFA.

Ordering 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and enlisting, with modest new assistance, European allies in a new multi-layered strategy there and in Pakistan.

When it comes to Afghanistan you see a bit of a political shell game.  Iraq was wrong, but Afghanistan isn’t?  He’s taking troops from one area, risking destabilization, and sending them to another war zone.  As for European assistance, modest is the correct word.  Europe is sending non-combatants.  Essentially their assistance comes in the form of cooks and janitors.  Way to get ’em committed to the cause!

“Returning science to its rightful place” by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.

Returning science to its rightful place? Correction, funding worthless studies with tax payer dollars.  If ESCR was producing any kind of results, the private sector would be lining up with investments.  They’re not, because there is a much better way.  Adult stem cells.  There is virtually no chance of rejection and they’ve been shown to work on a multitude of human treatments as well as in some animals.  There is also new science regarding pluripotent cells generated from spermatogonial cells and in the creation of embryonic-like stem cells from adult cells.  None of these methods require the death of a budding life.  Not to mention that the federal government should not subsidize the killing of children for the sake of science.

Signing laws to expand children’s health insurance (financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in the federal cigarette tax the adviser did not tout).

The expansion of S-CHIP was yet another bad decision.  Expanding entitlements leads to more and more problems.  The 300% tax increase on tobacco that is funding S-CHIP is also short sighted.  If smokers quit smoking because of the price tag… where will the money to fund this entitlement come from?  More and new taxes.  What happens when the cost of S-CHIP exceeds the budget?  More taxes. 

Signing a law meant to improve the ability of women who allege pay discrimination to sue their employer.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act isn’t exactly a hallmark piece of legislation.  It is, however, another way to antagonize corporations and take personal responsibility off of the table.  Extending the statute of limitations to 180 days from each paycheck opens the door wide for trial lawyers.  When a person takes a job, they agree to work for a certain amount of money.  That amount is what the employee is willing to take… not the pinnacle of what the employer is necessarily willing to pay.   It is a bargaining process.  One shouldn’t have the power to sue because they are a poor negotiator.  Not to mention the stickier points of hiring dates.  The job market determines pay, therefor, salaries and wage rates rise and fall.  If a woman gets a job during a low point and a male gets a job at a high point, doesn’t this law open the door for her to sue the company.  Even though the company committed no acts of discrimination?  Great new law, Obama… For the trial lawyers.

Diminishing the role of lobbyists in the White House

Diminishing the role of lobbyists in the White House?  If that is what you call hiring half of them as staff… then sure.

“Forge a meaningful statement from the United Nations” criticizing North Korea’s launch of a ballistic missile.

I would hardly call the U.N. Security Council statement meaningful.  Telling N. Korea not to launch anymore missiles,

Cartoon by KAL, The Economist, London.

which is already against U.N. sanctions, isn’t even a slap on the wrist.  North Korea knew that launching a missile was against U.N. sanction and did it anyway.  Waggling a finger at Kim Jong Il and saying “bad boy, you aren’t supposed to do that” is almost laughable.  Meaningful statement, I think not.

Engaging world leaders in Europe, Turkey, Latin American and the Caribbean with “strength and humility.”

What this should read is: “Engaging world leaders and tin pot dictators with humiliating acquiescence.”  Going around the

world apologizing to our long-standing antagonists and enemies for wrongs that haven’t been committed does not a strong leader make.  It shows a weak hand to our enemies and a cold shoulder to our actual allies.  America has nothing to apologize for, especially to tin pot dictators.  Not to mention that no president should be touring the world dogmatically bashing and apologizing for the previous administration.  Shame on you, Barack.

 While FDR managed to create the Welfare State and extend the Great Depression by at least a decade, Obama is on track to push us into a depression and expand the burdensome welfare state.  I cannot say that Obama has been more destructive as a whole than FDR yet, but he is certainly the most destructive since FDR.

GM Gets Bailed Out Again, Then Bails Out.

I can’t say that I didn’t see this coming.  In fact, I believe that I stated it would happen.  The auto bailout saga continues with another $5.5 billion in tax payer money being made available to GM and Chrysler, as a loan of course.  According to an AP story published by the Washington Times the money will be marked for working capital.

DETROIT (AP) — General Motors Corp. could get as much as $5 billion more in federal loans, while Chrysler LLC could get $500 million as they race against government-imposed deadlines to restructure, according to a government report filed Tuesday.

The quarterly report by a special inspector general on the auto industry and bank bailout programs says the money will be made available for working capital. GM has until June 1 to complete restructuring plans that satisfy the government’s auto task force, while Chrysler has until April 30.

This is on top of the $13.4 billion that GM received, while Chrysler took home $4 billion in the initial bail outs.  GM CEO Fritz Henderson stated last February that GM would need at least $4.6 billion for the second quarter.  It looks like he’s getting too.  Making a whopping $18.4 billion in tax payer money “loaned” to GM and 4.5 billion to Chrysler.

This comes after Henderson stated in his first press conference after being crowned CEO of GM, that GM was looking into filing Chapter 11.  A statement that he has repeated numerous times, both during T.V. interviews and conference calls with press.

“We will get the job done. We will either do it out of court or we will do it in court,” he said. “But we will get the job done in terms of recreating and reinventing General Motors as a competitive enterprise – one that wins in the market place.” — Mar ’09

“I felt several weeks ago that it would be more probable that we would need to go through a bankruptcy process,” he said. “That continues today. But I wouldn’t be able to hazard a guess as to what the probabilities would be.” –Apr ’09

If GM plans to file Chapter 11, as they should have last year when the bottom fell out, then why are we going to write the failed company a check for $5 billion dollars?  The short and skinny of it can be boiled down to three letters U.A.W.  The UAW are the only ones to benefit from all of this tax payer money.  It buys them time and a quick pay out.  Not to mention the negotiations to purchase $20 billion in GM stock.  Which would likely make the UAW the largest shareholder in the company.  Smell anything fishy?

I do.  As I stated from the very beginning, GM should have never received tax payer money; they should have filed for a controlled bankruptcy.  However, the UAW doesn’t benefit from that, in fact, it probably would have been painful for them.  So, the UAW and their political allies forced GM’s hand.  $18 billion in tax payer money later… Chapter 11.  As usual, the American tax payer is left holding the bag.

Geithner Refusing TARP Repayments?

Eeeeexcellent

Today the Wall Street Journal reports that the Treasury Secretary wants bailed out banks to meet certain unspecified criterion before they can repay the TARP money loaned by the American Taxpayer. 

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner indicated that the health of individual banks won’t be the sole criterion for whether financial firms will be allowed to repay bailout funds, a position that might complicate their efforts to give back the cash.

Mr. Geithner wants to “consider the overall health” of the financial system before allowing the tax payers to be repaid in full.  There are a whole host of reasons for this, and in my estimation, the overall health of the financial system is the least of them.  Those reasons likely include profits from dividends and control of the banks.  The latter of the two is probably the chief reason.  However, Timmy has a bit of a different spin on it.

“We want to make sure that the financial system is not just stable, but also not inducing a deeper contraction in economic activity. We want to have enough capital that it’s going to be able to support a recovery,” Mr. Geithner said.

Hogwash!  This is soft-speak for “we want complete control of the economy.”  Essentially, he wants to keep the banks on the hook so that he can continue to pull their strings for whatever political machinations the Left desires.  Not to mention the added bonus of profits (to the tune of $2.5 billion thus far) on the dividends for TARP monies.  Which, I can assure you, will never be returned to the tax payers.  Instead it will line the federal coffers and later be doled out by Congress to their favorite pet projects.

Obama administration officials worry that the repayment of bailout money, combined with a general disinclination toward partnering with the U.S., could undermine their efforts to restore health to the financial sector and the broader economy.

Worried that repayment will undermine partnering?  Doesn’t that seem a bit antithetical?  Foreign and domestic investors are probably far more likely to invest in institutions that are free from federal puppet strings than those that are still firmly attached.  Repayment of the debt shows investors that the institution is making every effort to return to full profitability.  It also shows that it is making enough of a profit to maintain operations AND repay tax dollars.  This would encourage more investment from private sources and help return the financial system to stability.  Keeping the banks tied to the federal government only diminishes the confidence that investors have in these institutions.  Especially with Congress holding populist witch hunts and interfering with board decisions.  Private investors see those actions and steer clear of government strings. 

Then again it might make perfect sense.  If, of course,  you are looking to push out private investment to ensure continued government control of the banking system both here and abroad.  

“We want to be out of the financial system. We want people to be paying back the government. But we don’t want people to be paying back the government in ways that will put themselves right back in trouble and leaving themselves with inadequate capital,” Lawrence Summers, chairman of the president’s National Economic Council, said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Double speak.  Pure, unadulterated double speak.  Saying in one breath that you want out of the financial system but don’t want borrowers paying you back in the next… double speak.  What Mr. Summers meant to say was “We want to continue to receive dividends from the banks, but we do not want to relinquish our control over the finance industry.”  At least that statement would be accurate.  Because as long as the banks have yet to repay every red cent of the TARP money, the gluttonous Fedzilla  has reason to keep the shares and warrants of said banks.  The longer they can keep the banks dancing to the federal tune, the better.  At least as far as the White House and Congress are concerned.  Even if that means prolonging the pain of this recession and credit crunch.

I hate to say it… but we told you so.

Feinstein’s Financial… Conformity?

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) "I am not a crook!"

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) may have been caught with her hand in the federal cookie jar.  An obvious conflict of interest occurred when Feinstein  approached the FDIC on Oct. 30, 2008 offering to get them federal tax dollars to help with home foreclosures.  “Coincidentally” only a few days before the FDIC awarded her husband’s firm, CBRE, with a lucrative contract to sell off foreclosed properties.  Apparently the FDIC accepted her offer, as during the first session of the new congress this year, Feinstein introduced a piece of legislation that would pour $25 billion into the FDIC coffers. 

Documents reviewed by The Washington Times show Mrs. Feinstein first offered Oct. 30 to help the FDIC secure money for its effort to stem the rise of home foreclosures. Her letter was sent just days before the agency determined that CB Richard Ellis Group (CBRE) – the commercial real estate firm that her husband Richard Blum heads as board chairman – had won the competitive bidding for a contract to sell foreclosed properties that FDIC had inherited from failed banks.

About the same time of the contract award, Mr. Blum’s private investment firm reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission that it and related affiliates had purchased more than 10 million new shares in CBRE. The shares were purchased for the going price of $3.77; CBRE’s stock closed Monday at $5.14.

Is it just me, or is there a smell of conflicted interests present?  How about out right corruption?  Naturally FDIC spokesmen as well as Feinstein and Blum have all claimed that there is no connection between the contract award and the $25 billion payday.  A full chorus line of “nothing to see here, folks.  Move along.”  Keep in mind that Feinstein has no official business with the FDIC as she sits on neither of the boards that oversee it.  Not to mention that the FDIC is supposed to only operate off of monies paid from bank insurance payments.  Yet Feinstein had the benevolent forethought to “help” the FDIC and it has nothing to do with the CBRE award?  I’m just not buying it.

BUSTED

CBRE bid for the gig.  A few days before the contract is to be awarded and the wife of the Chairman of the Board offers a $25 billion dollar pay out.  FDIC goes on to award the contract and during the contract award window, Mr. Blum and affiliates purchase 10 million new shares in CBRE (that’s a lot of shares… and a lot of confidence.  $37.7 million worth of confidence.)  Dropping $37.7 million on a commercial real estate broker during a tough economic recession that was fueled by torment in the real estate market?  That takes a set of massive stones, a Midas touch, or knowledge that you are about to receive a lucrative boon to business in the form of a major government contract.  This in turn produced a nice $13.7 million profit from the stocks alone (as of Monday Apr. 21 — with potential to be much more), not to mention the compensation from sales.  Those compensation rates were reportedly above industry average as well.

I know, it’s shocking.  Who wants to bet that this will never see a Senate Ethics Comittee hearing?  Any takers? No?  What if I told you that a Republican had done this?  Who wants to bet that the Republican Senator would be in an emergency Ethics hearing as I type this?