Obama Gives Away Our Economic Rights in Europe

Sorry I have not posted in days, but I have been busy organizing the Providence Tax Day Tea Party, part of the Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party on April 15th. We anticipate this will be the largest multi-city protest in American history! Be sure to sign up for a tea party in your area at http://taxdayteaparty.com

Now for some sobering news from the G-20. Dick Morris explains here how Obama gave up US economic sovereignty, without any input from the American people in his trip to Europe. How is it that he was able to give away our rights? Check here.

Most CFO's Don't Expect Recovery Until 2010

This report of CFO's expectations for economic recovery, job losses, and wages across the globe indicates a tough year ahead, in spite of the $789B Spendulus Plan. Interestingly, most of the spending for the plan will play out in time for the 2010 election season.

http://localtechwire.com/business/local_tech_wire/news/story/4665265/

$550 Billion Run on Banks?

According to Rep. Kanjorski (D-PA) during this interview on C-Span, there was a run on US Money Market Funds starting at around 11:00 a.m. on September 18th, 2008, in which during a two hour period $550 Billion dollars simply disappeared. Reports have surfaced of individuals who lost $100,000 from their money market accounts. Bloggers are abuzz over this story, and conspiracy theories abound. Immediately after this event, President Bush held a news conference with Hank Paulson at his side, in which he stated that our country was in the midst of a financial emergency. Money market accounts were frozen, and the FDIC upped the insurance from $100,000 to $250,000 per account. And then TARP was born.

Copy and paste this into your browser, and pay attention to Rep. Kanjorski's words at about the 2:20 minute point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NMu1mFao3w

What does it mean? Is this guy another gaffe prone Biden clone, who just spouts off nonsense to hear himself talk? Or did something really happen to the markets that day that nobody is talking about? Were US financial institutions hacked into, or was there a concerted effort by certain individuals and governments, such as George Soros or Saudi Arabia to deliberately tank our economy and create the October Surprise (even though it was September) that often throws a wrench into the outcome Presidential elections? Certainly Obama benefited from the economic collapse with a Republican in charge, and the narrative of the race went from one of excitement about the new face from Alaska, terror, Iraq, and an economy with a minor cold, to ECONOMY! ECONOMY! ECONOMY!

I am not an economist or a financial wizard, and I'm certainly not privy to the goings on of the powers-that-be behind closed doors. So I don't know what to make of this. Perhaps it will debunked as conspiracy theory hoo-hah, and the babbling of a crazy old Pennsylvania Congressman. But in this strange new Land of Obama, I am becoming more skeptical of government with each passing day, and there is very little that would surprise me anymore.

Bush III

Has anyone noticed how similar Obama's proposed policies are mimicking those of the Bush administration with each passing day? The liberal intelligentsia must be on the verge of having a collective stroke.

The first Bush III policy changes came soon after the election, when Obama received his first top secret security briefing. Reality must have hit him square in the face, because his grandiose ideas of a Kumbeyah world seemed to have disappeared and his stated stance on terror toughened. What did he actually think the security briefing would reveal- that Bush and his cronies had made up the stories of how extremists want to obliterate us? My bet is that Obama crapped his pants that day. Most recently, he is even backtracking on quickly closing Gitmo, because, as he now states, "there are dangerous people there who would do us great harm". Duh. Regarding the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, he has kept the Bush team on board. Hmmm, maybe he realizes that they actually know what they're doing over there.

Obama's economic policy has taken on similar aspects to Bush's, not that that is such a good thing, as Bush has become our first Socialist President with his billions of dollars in bailouts and nationalizing of private businesses. It's like the two men have merged into one persona. They are now in collusion to spend the last half of the $350 billion dollar bailout immediately, and together are trying to figure out how to coerce a skeptical Congress into giving them what they want. Even when it comes to taxes and entitlements, Obama has become more Bush-like. He's backtracked on his plans to increase taxes on the wealthy, and plans a revamp of entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.

Bush's approval ratings hover around 20%. Give Obama a year, and then watch his ratings drop like a stone into the ocean, as it dawns on his supporters that instead of the "change they can believe in", they got snookered into "more of the same."

Singing the Blue State Blues

According to The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, twenty eight states and the District of Columbia face a budget deficit for the fiscal year 2008-2009. Twenty of these 29 voted for Barack Obama and are thus considered "blue" states (or in the case of DC, a district). California faces the biggest deficit ($16 billion), as well as the largest deficit per taxpayer ($740). My home state of RI is 4th on the list according to deficit per taxpayer at $550 per person, and also has the largest unemployment rate in the nation at 8.8%. So why would does Barack Obama's economic plans rely on the same failed policies employed by these "blue" states which are bleeding red ink?

Rhode Island has a long time Democrat run State General Assembly. In fact, after this year's elections, only 10 Republicans remain in the 113 seat legislature. The state is plagued by cronyism, strong unions, high personal and corporate taxes, entitlement programs which attract the non- working as well as illegal immigrants, and rampant political corruption. And yet the voters, in their ultimate wisdom, continue to reward the same self-destructive policies and politicians without fail. The Republican Governor is all but ham-strung by a legislature which works concertedly to thwart his every policy proposal to grow the state's economy and create a business friendly environment. Rhode Island recently made national headlines when Jack Welch held it up as a dismal place in which to do business. Unless there is change, this does not bode well for the state in the years to come.

Blue states such as California and New York are lining up to ask the federal government for bail-outs. In addition, the Big 3 automakers from Michigan (another blue state that is "in the red" and which has the 2nd highest unemployment rate) are asking the federal government for loans of $25 million to stay in business, despite the fact that they admit that they have not shown innovation and failed to control the strong unions which have squeezed them dry.

Obama and his advisors are currently prioritizing which policies to enact when he transitions to President. He stated at his first press conference that he believes the policies he campaigned on are still the best way to go. Is this the economic policy that is going to shape our entire country under Obama's plans: high corporate taxes, unimpeded unions, engorged and newly created entitlement programs, and innovation busting taxes on successful small business owners, combined with a Democratic supermajority? Throw in stringent carbon emissions caps which will increase energy costs for all, along with a protectionist trade policy and a picture emerges of a downturn of which even Rhode Island couldn't dream. Perhaps Li'l Rhody's economy will be held up as example as to what we can all expect to"enjoy" under our new President-elect's direction. The rest of you have no idea what you're in for.

Lessons From The Past: Security Matters

While the economy eclipses all else as the banner topic of this election, and America looks inwardly at its growing financial pains, there are critical lessons from the past that we cannot afford to ignore. As comparisons are made between the current economy and that of the Great Depression, one should take note of what occured as a result of the government policy of the time to focus internally while ignoring international security issues.

During the Depression of the 1930's, America was not at war. While FDR worked to address the economic mess left by the Hoover administration, America's financial crisis spread outwards to Western Europe, resulting in a similar inward looking focus in those countries. This left the previously weak military powers of Japan and Germany to blossom and grow unchecked, which ultimately resulted in Hitler's rise and the the first invasion of US soil in 130 years by the Japanese on December 7, 1941.

In today's era of easy international travel, combined with the advent of biological and chemical weapons, dirty nuclear bombs, assymetrical warfare fought by Islamic terrorists, and the unstable and emerging nuclear powers of Pakistan and Iran, an inward focus would prove to be even more devastating than in the past. No longer is America as geographically protected as in the 1930's, when the vast expanses of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans served as a natural defense barrier. We cannot afford protectionist policies, and a decreased military presence. Despite our current economic pain, we cannot afford to focus inwardly, while allowing rogue nations to build their power unchecked. When Hitler invaded Western Europe and pushed the Brits back to England, America was there to bail them out and defeat the Nazi's, and subsequently end the war with the defeat of Japan. If such a global conflict were to arise today, and we needed someone to watch our back, who would be there to save us? That's correct. Nobody.