It looks like some journalists are finally catching on and admitting that Obama’s and the Democrats’ stimulus plan may not work.

Stimulus Plan May Not Work Article

My only response to this is: tell me something I didn’t already know.

Obama and the Democrats are using this recession as an opportunity to ram socialism down our throats, which has been their secret goal all along.  Obama’s plan calls for, basically, the government to hire people to do make-work projects that don’t need to be done.  Worst of all, after the government funding dries up, those jobs will disappear.

All Obama’s plan does is hire temp workers.  When the projects are completed and the money is gone, those people will be fired.  Then they will be out of work all over again.  Unless, Obama’s stimulus plan isn’t temporary and ends up being permanent.

That’s what I think this is.  The Democrats are not planning a one-time stimulus to create jobs because those jobs will all be temporary.  They are using the recession as an excuse to convert our free market-based economy to one of centralized planning.

When the Democrats control the jobs, and they control health care, and they get everyone in the nation on the welfare rolls, they will have cemented themselves in power for as long as the United States lasts, however long that might be.

It’s about power.  The DFL could cut taxes giving everyone a tax break to stimulate the economy, which it would.  But that wouldn’t give them the control they seek over the daily lives of Americans.

One economist in the article says something that I have been saying all along:

“I think the economy will recover regardless of what Washington does. But the long-term effect here will be to reduce the standard of living of the next generation because they will be saddled with all this debt,” said Chris Edwards of the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute.

That is exactly right.  What we are experiencing is called the business cycle.  The economy grows and contracts a little every few years.  This is normal and unpreventable.  Left alone, the economy will right itself eventually.  It always has before.  Obama’s jobs plan is completely unnecessary.  Odds are it will not work.

But we all know that the Democratic Party has a long track record of failure, don’t we?

Congressional Democrats are hard at work to bankrupt the United States as quickly as possible.  They are currently drafting legislation to add $850 billion to the deficit as part of an effort to jumpstart the economy which will fail miserably.

Obama originally called for business tax cuts.  Businesses, as you may know, are the economic engine of our economy for it is businesses that create jobs.  Congressional Democrats strongly oppose any tax cuts for job-creating businesses.

Of the $850 billion price tag for the package, only $300 billion will be in the form of tax cuts, mostly to middle and lower-income Americans who do not create jobs.  The other $550 billion will be spent on welfare and infrastructure programs.

Much of the non-tax cut portion of the plan will go to states so they can up funding for welfare, education, and labor services.  Not one single penny spent on welfare will create a job. Additional spending on education will not create any permanent jobs unless the spending is permanent as well.  And nobody is really sure what is meant by “labor services”.  Is this extensions to unemployment insurance?  Job training?  Who knows.

Here are the problems with Obama’s stimulus plan:

• It adds almost $1 trillion to the federal deficit;
• None of the jobs created will be permanent.  They will all be temporary and will disappear when government funding ceases;
• To make many of the jobs permanent, the government will have to continue funding them into the future, hardly making this a one-time stimulus plan and instead, making it a never-ending socialist plan;
• The infrastructure spending on highways, mass transit, and school construction will have no immediate impact because these things must be designed and contract bidding must occur before laborers will be put to work which can take six months or longer.

Obama’s stimulus plan is smoke and mirrors.  It is a Democrat feel-good plan which will not come close to creating 4.1 million jobs as Obama has claimed anytime soon.  The only near-term effect of this plan will be to more quickly push the United States toward its inevitable bankruptcy.

It’s about control.  To stimulate the economy immediately, Democrats could order an immediate reduction in payroll and business taxes.  That would put money in people’s pockets as soon as payday, which is weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly for most income earners.  But Democrats would never do this, because it would put the money earners in control of stimulating the economy.  Democrats want as much control for themselves as possible.  That is why they are spending on infrastructure.  Anyone who wants money will have to come crawling to the Democrats.  They, and they alone, will decide who is and who is not worthy of receiving money.

Obama Stimulus Article

Microsoft’s Internet Explorer is a horrible program.  It is buggy, full of security holes, and makes you vulnerable to spyware, adware, and other malicious code which can steal your passwords to important websites.  But there are alternatives that are much more secure with better features.  I recommend (all are completely free):

Firefox, Opera, Safari, Google Chrome

Using any of them will be a huge step up from buggy and insecure Internet Explorer.  Give Firefox or another one a try and I bet you will be happy you dumped IE!

Surf safely and enjoy faster performance with more features by dumping Internet Explorer today!

The stock market has fallen once again after the election of Barack Obama.  He portrayed himself as the savior who was going to rescue the economy that he said was wrecked by Bush.

The fact of the matter is that stock values are based on future expectations.  If the market had viewed the election of Barack Obama as a positive, the market would have went up.  But the market did not go up;  the two days after the election the market went down, losing almost 10% of its value.

Let’s look at the Obama Effect on the stock market.  Below are daily closing values for the two most well-known stock market indexes, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and the S&P 500.

11/04/2008 (Election Day)

• DJIA: 9625.28
• S&P 500: 1005.75

11/05/2008

• DJIA: 9139.27
• S&P 500: 952.77

11/06/2008

• DJIA: 8695.79
• S&P 500: 904.88

Closing values as of 11/12/2008:

• DJIA: 8282.66
• S&P 500: 852.3

Since the day Barack Hussein Obama was elected president by millions of idiots, the economy has lost trillions of dollars of wealth. Almost $2.5 trillion in wealth evaporated after the election of Obama.  The Dow Jones Industrial Average is down 14% and the S&P 500 is down 15.26% in the week following the presidential election.  This is despite oil dropping from $70.53 on election day to about $55 on 11/12/2008.  The per barrel price of crude oil dropped 22% and still the American stock market went down.

Maybe Barack Hussein Obama put some African voodoo curse on the market or something.  Obama stinks.  Literally.  It’s been said that 100 million Americans own stock directly or indirectly via retirement investments.  All those people have seen 15% of their wealth disappear in the week since Obama defeated John McCain.

I hope those people who voted for Obama and lost wealth are happy they are now poorer.

Feel free to verify the data for yourself:

http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/historical/

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran, congratulated Barack Hussein Obama on his victory in the 2008 presidential election.

Is anyone surprised that a sponsor of terrorism and advocate of the extermination of all Israelis like Ahmadinejad would congratulate Barack Hussein Obama on his victory?  No surprises here.  In fact, most people could have predicted this.

Ahmadinejad said in his letter to Obama:

People in the world expect war-oriented policies, occupation, bullying, deception and intimidation of nations and imposing discriminatory policies on them and international affairs, which have evoked hatred toward American leaders, to be replaced by ones advocating justice, respect for human rights, friendship and noninterference in other countries’ affairs.

War-oriented polices?  Occupation?  Bullying?  That sounds exactly like the same things Barack Obama and the Democrats have been saying for years.

That hate-filled nut Ahmadinejad thinks just like a Democrat.  Again, no surprises…

In the past two days the stock market has gone down almost 9%.  If you had $100,000 invested in a retirement plan, you would have lost between $9,000 and $10,000 in only two days.

The election of Barack Obama is to blame.  The market would have gone up, at least the first day after the election, if Obama was seen as positive for the economy.  If the market thought Obama had the ability to turn the economy around instead of just wrecking it, stocks would have risen.

Today the Dow closed down 443 points for a loss of 4.85%.  The S&P 500 closed down 47.81 points, shedding 5.02% of its value.  That’s a lot of money being lost by tens-of-millions of Americans.

But since millions of Obama supporters not only don’t have jobs nor money invested, living on welfare, they are immune to the market catastrophe the election of Barack Obama has caused.

I said in an earlier post that as John Kerry climbed in the polls during the 2004 election the stock market dropped. After George Bush was elected President, stock markets all over the world rallied.

For the second day in a row following the election of Barack Hussein Obama the stock market has had disastrous declines. Hundreds of billions of dollars in wealth have disappeared because of Barack Obama. If the election of Obama was seen as a positive thing, the markets would have responded favorably. Instead, the markets are tanking.  The sinking economy has already been priced into stocks since they’ve dropped nearly 35% over the course of the past year.  In fact, stocks are probably undervalued;  it is highly unlikely that the value of the entire economy dropped that much.  Plus, the credit crisis has been addressed and the weakest banks have already failed.

Why is this happening? Because Obama promised to increase taxes on certain industries and certain individuals. Higher taxes mean less money in the economy, less money for people to spend and invest, and thus less economic activity which creates wealth and jobs.

Then we must also factor in Obama’s and the Democrats’ plans to impose carbon taxes to combat mythical global warming. We came out of one of the coolest summers in recent years in the United States and the liberal left still insists we are experiencing global warming. Carbon taxes on energy will take money away from businesses, take money out of the pockets of ordinary Americans, and severely crimp the economy in already difficult times.

Less money means less economic activity. It is as simple as that. Yet Democrats are not smart enough to figure it out.

If Obama wanted the market to rally, he could publicly rescind his pledge to raise taxes and impose carbon taxes on the American economy. Will he do that? Well, if he did, it would be a huge broken promise to his liberal supporters, many of whom are socialists and communists and are aching for more wealth confiscation.

As of this writing the Dow Jones Industrial Average is down almost 400 points for the day, or about 4.25%. The S&P 500 is down about 40 points, or 4.4%.

It is unmistakable: the election of Barack Obama has not been good for the stock market or the economy as a whole.

Millions of Americans voted for Obama because of the slumping economy. If they were smart, they would have known that his plans would be disastrous. It’s tempting to say “live and learn”, but I don’t think Democrats are very capable of learning much of anything seeing as how they make the same mistakes over and over again.

Last night Democrat Barack Hussein Obama was elected President of the United States and this morning the stock market drops.  Gee, who could have ever predicted that would happen?  How about anyone with a brain…

When Bush was re-elected back in 2004, the stock market rallied.  Not just in the USA, but stock markets all over the globe rallied.  As a matter of fact, and you can verify this yourself, back in 2004 the stock market dropped as John Kerry climbed in the polls.  As Kerry got closer and closer to Bush in the polls, the market dropped more and more until it finally rallied after Bush was elected for a second term.

Now, we have further empirical proof that Democrats are bad for the economy.  As of this writing the market is down 350 points, or 3.6%, (Dow Jones Industrial Average) and the S&P 500 is down the same percentage.  From the article:

A case of postelection nerves sent stocks plunging Wednesday as investors again anxious about recession began questioning what impact a Barack Obama presidency will have on business and the overall economy. The Dow Jones industrials dropped more than 350 points and the major indexes all fell more than 3 percent.

But the selling picked up momentum as the market worried anew about the weakness of the economy and pondered what an Obama administration might do.

Obama’s victory means that industries such as oil and gas producers, utilities and pharmaceuticals may face greater regulation and even taxes, while labor unions and automakers are expected to benefit.

Obama and the Democrats promised to raise taxes on the “rich”.  It is the rich who do the investing and job creation in this country.  So, when you raise taxes on them, they have less money to invest in projects.  Obviously, that is going to drag the market down.

Obama and the Democrats also promised to raise taxes on investments.  An investment such as a stock is worth the discounted present value of its future returns.  Higher taxes means lower returns on investment.  So, it only makes sense, mathematically, that the value of investments such as stocks would drop.

Obama and the Democrats plan to take money from those who earn it and risk their own money investing so they can redistribute it to those who don’t build factories, don’t buy stocks, and don’t do much of anything except sit around and collect a welfare check.

Less money to spend for anyone–even the rich–means less economic activity.  Less economic activity means lower tax revenue.  Why?  Because income derived from economic activity is what is taxed in this country.

See how simple that logic is?  Too bad Democrats aren’t smart enough to figure it out.  We are now living in a nation run by morons.  Democrat morons.

Try looking at the academic achievement in Democrat-voting strongholds sometime.  The average high school graduate reads at an 8th grade level, and half the students drop out before graduation!  These are the dolts who elected Obama.

UPDATE:

After the above was posted the market tanked.  With 20 minutes left of trading the DJIA is down 450 points, or 4.65%.  That’s attrocious!  Billions of dollars of value have evaporated thanks to the dimwits who elected Barack Obama.

UPDATE II:

We heard that Obama is going to do all these great things.  Why, he’s going to stop global warming!  Obama is going to restore our standing in the world!  Obama’s going to create millions of jobs?  Hell, the day after he gets elected the stock market tanks.  The DJIA finished down 486 points, or 5.05%.  The S&P 500 was down 5.27%.  That’s a significant one-day loss.

Why do rich liberals exhibit such flagrant hypocrisy?  Do they think we are not smart enough to see what frauds they are?

Washed-up 80s pop star Cyndi Lauper appeared at the Democratic National Convention in Denver yesterday.  She was shown saying something to the effect that this is a very important election or some other nonsense.  A few days ago Lauper was quoted in the St. Paul Pioneer Press saying the following:

President Bush brought the American people to a place where they expect change. Our polar ice caps are melting. Polar bears are dying. Who is going to take care of the water, the air? I lived through the Civil Rights movement. This is the most extraordinary election in my lifetime. But you have to make up your own mind. Know the friggin’ facts.

Interesting.  You see, Lauper has been touring rigorously this year, flying all over the country and perhaps even abroad.  Why?  To make money for herself, that’s why.  She cares so much about the environment, the melting polar ice caps and dying polar bears, all supposedly the result of global warming, does she?

Then why does Lauper cause so much pollution?  What is the carbon footprint of a pop star like Cyndi Lauper touring the country and performing in several different cities in a week, for a several month stretch?  How much carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere to transport her, her band, and the equipment to the various concert venues?  How massive is the carbon footprint of the few thousand fans who travel to the auditorium to see her perform, not to mention the electricity used by the lighting and sound systems?

Cyndi Lauper is a typical liberal:  she is a total and complete fraud.  Even worse, she’s a rich limousine liberal.  She feigns concern for the environment to the point where she will tell others how they should live their lives, but she considers herself so high and mighty that she would never alter her lifestyle to combat global warming.  Instead, she’ll go on concert tour after concert tour so she can make lots of money and afford her lifestyle of wealth, luxury, and excess.  Economic inequality, anyone?

Ms. Lauper:  not all Americans are as dumb as you are.  Just because you sang some simple, bubble-headed pop songs twenty years ago with your biggest hits written by others does not mean you have the right to tell us how to live our lives.

About 100 low class liberals were arrested in Denver while protesting in the area for the Democratic National Convention.

Police used pepper spray on the malcontents who blocked traffic and rushed a police safety line while carrying rocks.

This is just one example of the kind of trash that liberals are.  How in the world can liberals possibly think that harassing and inconveniencing the general public, not to mention costing taxpayers millions to police them, is a good way of convincing people to embrace their positions?  Wouldn’t blocking traffic and harassing people just make people mad?  Absolutely.  But that is demonstrative of the mental disorder that is liberalism.

If you want to convince people that you hold the correct position on an issue, the best way to do that is to articulate it logically and let people decide for themselves.  Harassing and inconveniencing the citizenry is the wrong course of action.

Yahoo News Story

Presumptive DFL presidential nominee Barack Obama is in Germany today to give a speech pandering to euro liberals.  According to news reports, Obama is very popular in Germany, with 74% of poll respondents saying they would vote for them if they could largely based on his youthfulness, John F. Kennedy-like charisma, and his skin color.

None of those are valid reasons to vote for someone to be the leader of the USA and the free world. That’s just pure idiocy from people who can’t think beyond a manufactured public image created by political consultants.

Obama’s speech will be focused on US-Europe relations.  Liberals have been pounding away on the theory that the image of the United States has been damaged in recent years by the actions of President George W. Bush.  For some irrational reason, lefties believe that liberating 25 million Iraqi civilians from that cruel and ruthless dictator Saddam Hussein was unjust.  So that is why Obama decided on this topic for his speech which, undoubtedly, was written by Obama’s hired speech writers.

Several weeks ago Ralph Nader said that Obama was capitalizing on white guilt.  One must wonder if white guilt is the reason Obama is so popular in Germany.  Remember, this is a nation that tried to exterminate the Jewish race.  What other possible reason could there be for Obama’s popularity with a foreign nation that can’t vote for him and likely is largely unaware of his true character and his associations (Tony Rezko, Jeremiah Wright, William “Bill” Ayers).

In the end, it doesn’t matter what Germans think, because they can’t vote in American elections.  And that’s a good thing, because this is the nation that put Adolf Hitler into power because of his charisma and public speaking prowess, the same basis as their support for Barack Obama. Germans were wrong once, and they are again.

It is really sickening the way the American media is drawing parallels between Obama and the German visits by JFK and Ronald Reagan. The difference between those two and Obama is that they were presidents at the times of their visits and they actually discussed issues of substance, not pap like Obama is doing.

A CNN article says that Justice Department officials discriminated against liberals and those with Democratic Party ties denying them from taking part in a program designed to funnel new lawyers into government jobs.

That sounds like a great way to weed out idiots to me.  If you are a liberal, your brain doesn’t function properly and we don’t want you.

Every business should do that.  Productivity and profits would soar.  I’m sure employee theft would decline markedly, too.  Who wants a company filled with whining pissants who want to steal every penny you’ve got?

Yes he did it.  Barack Obama has played the race card against the Republicans.  This is what Obama said:

We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run. They’re going to try to make you afraid.

They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?

Yes, Obama, you are inexperienced.  You are also a giant hypocrite who engages in everything he claims to be against from earmarks to grant requests for political contributors to crooked real estate deals.

It has nothing to do with you being black, Barack Hussein.  Our opposition to you is because you have no experience, you want to raise taxes and further block domestic oil drilling, you are weak on terrorists, and you have no track record to speak of other than your hypocritical behavior such as granting favors to contributors.  You are an absolute fraud.

Had people known more about Obama prior to his early victories in the primary season he would have never made it as far as he’s gotten.  The office of the presidency is the most important job in the world.  A relative  unknown like Obama with no experience is not suitable.

Barack Obama has character flaws so big you could drive a cement truck through them.  This is John McCain’s race to lose and if he doesn’t get out there and start criticizing Obama, he will lose.  Playing nice is not going to cut it when you’ve got the vast majority of the journalists and news media vigorously hyping your opponent. The news is nothing but a constant stream of pro-Obama propaganda.

At least Obama admitted that he is inexperienced. That’s one of the few truthful things that has ever come out of his mouth.

Don’t forget this crucial fact, Obama:  the Democratic Party is the party of slavery.  It’s true.  It was the Republican party that ended slavery.  The Democratic Party wanted slavery to continue.

Reuters article

Political journalists and Democratic Party bigwigs have been ratcheting up the pressure on Hillary Clinton to quit the race so their favored candidate, Barack Obama, can become the nominee. After this week’s votes in Indiana and North Carolina, Hillary trails Obama by 156 delegates, making it pretty much impossible for her to catch up without significant support from super delegates, which is becoming less likely with each passing day.

But why should Hillary quit? This has been her dream for years and the entire reason she put up with her husband’s cheating ways the past three decades. She’s been drawing a majority of the white vote. Given that whites still make up almost 70% of the population, that is definitely an advantage that her opponent does not have and something that will be critical come November.

Even hardened Conservatives like me who dislike Hillary with a passion feel that her desire to fight on makes her more worthy of respect than she otherwise would have been. We don’t like people who give up easily. We like people who struggle to overcome the obstacles, even if they fail in the process, and we give them credit for trying. Those are basic values that Conservatives appreciate, unlike Democrats who love it when people spend their entire lives on welfare.

Does that mean Conservatives will vote for Hillary? No. But, a lot of swing voters may come to her side because of the way she fights for what she believes in. Many may feel that a President who will be a fighter for “change” (a hollow concept) is just what this country needs. And she is clearly demonstrating that she is a fighter. Nobody can argue that.

Hillary definitely needs to draw more distinctions between herself and Obama. She should attack his character. Things like William Ayers, his wife’s $200,000 raise and the $1 million earmark Obama requested for her employer, his real estate deal with Tony Rezko, his $8,000 a month payments from Robert Blackwell Jr. for whom Obama wrote a letter requesting a grant, etcetera.

Obama is a highly flawed candidate. His character can easily be attacked, and it should be, for it is concrete proof of who he is as a person and who he will be as a leader. He is not a uniter. Nor is he an agent for change in Washington. He is another corrupt political hack on the take who has demonstrated that he is for sale to anyone willing to send some cash his way.

Keep fighting, Hillary. I won’t vote for you, but I do have more respect for you than I ever did. Quitters never win, and winners never quit.

Barack Obama released his 2007 tax return today which showed $4.2 million in income for 2007.

Obama, as you may know, has been preaching about the horrors of economic inequality. It looks like he’s very unequal, doesn’t it? Obama is just another lying Democrat fraud who tells us how to live while enjoying his money.

If Obama truly cared about economic justice, he’d begin by relieving himself of his wealth by giving it all away. Giving your own money away…how’s that for justice, Obama?

You want to know what else is interesting? Obama’s wealth is the result of his political career. His career in politics turned him into a celebrity which enabled him to become rich. Without politics, he’d still be chugging away in an office somewhere as a lawyer.

I guess politics can be very rewarding financially if you can find a way to appeal to Democrat voting idiots.

AP Article

I took a look at Hillary Clinton’s official website today… Wow, you could spend a lifetime pointing out the idiocy of this woman’s positions. Let’s look at some of them for a minute and reveal just what a fraud and idiot this woman is, OK?

http://hillaryclinton.com/issues/middleclass/

First up is this little bit:

Income inequality has risen to the highest levels since 1929…

Hillary Clinton has $50 million! She and her husband have earned $109 million in seven years! Who the hell is she to complain about income inequality when she represents that inequality herself? And if she doesn’t like money, why doesn’t she give her money away?

Lowering taxes for middle class families

Lowering taxes? The tax burden in the United States is already severely skewed toward the upper income bracket. Her goal isn’t to reduce taxes, it’s to redistribute wealth from the upper bracket to the lower brackets so she can buy votes.

Providing quality, affordable health care to every American

What a meaningless bit of drivel that is. This is a woman who has fought against tort reform, which would make it more difficult for trial lawyers, who are big financial backers of the Democratic Party, to file frivolous lawsuits against people. In many areas of the country, average malpractice insurance premiums for Obstetricians exceed $100,000 per year. Who pays the cost of that insurance? The patients and the health insurers, do. Would tort reform reduce frivolous lawsuits and thus reduce the cost of malpractice insurance? Absolutely it would.

Making college accessible and affordable

The fact is that the most liberal institutions of higher learning in this country have the highest tuition. More liberal, higher cost. And we are to believe that a liberal like Hillary Clinton is going to make college affordable?

Bolstering retirement security by promoting savings and investment

How stupid does this woman think we are? She promises to raise taxes! Taxes erode the return from savings and investment and actually discourage them. Why would anyone put their money at risk if the bulk of it is taxed away?

Returning to fiscal responsibility and moving towards balanced budgets

That’s hillarious! Hillary Clinton has proposed hundreds of billions in new spending. How is she going to pay for it? Raising taxes will reduce economic activity, which in turn reduces tax collections. Every time Hillary opens her mouth she proposes new spending. And we are to believe she is going to move toward a balanced budget?

Harnessing innovation to create the high-wage jobs of the 21st century

Again, high taxes reduce investment and thus reduce innovation. Even a Democrat voter should be able to make that connection.

Unbelievable. Every one of Hillary Clinton’s ideas will do more to harm the middle class than to help it.

The idiocy of the Democratic Party never ends!

At a time when oil has reached a record price, just under $110 per barrel, Democrats in the House Natural Resources Committee passed a bill to permanently ban oil drilling off the coast of Sonoma and Marin Counties in California.

According to this article, oil companies have long wanted to get at the oil offshore. The Democrat plan would double size the of the Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank national marine sanctuaries, preventing access to the liquid gold beneath the ocean floor.

Now, unless you are a total and complete idiot, in other words, a Democrat, you know that the Democratic Party has been blocking domestic oil drilling for years.

In all the years from 2001 to 2006, Democrats have blocked oil drilling in Alaska, and more recently they have blocked oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

Most Democrat voters are either not smart enough to care about this or are unwilling to look beyond their hand which is extended for more welfare freebies. The Democratic Party’s policy of blocking domestic oil drilling is raising the cost of everything they buy, harming productivity, and costing them a fortune at the pump.

But those Democrats just aren’t smart enough to see it, are they?