Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, both government controlled companies plan to pay 7600 workers more than $210 million in retention bonuses. The two companies have been taken over by regulators and have received bailout money.
After the $165 million AIG bonus uproar will there be the same reaction to this government entity?
Friday, April 3, 2009
90% of Mexican guns come from the US?
Sen. Dianne Feinstein said at a Senate hearing: “It is unacceptable to have 90 percent of the guns that are picked up in Mexico and used to shoot judges, police officers and mayors … come from the United States.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeated it to reporters on a flight to Mexico. This "fact" has also been repeated by William Hoover, assistant director for field operations at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and by CBS newsman Bob Schieffer.
The problem is it isn't true. What's true, an ATF spokeswoman told FOXNews.com, in a clarification of the statistic used by her own agency's assistant director, "is that over 90 percent of the traced firearms originate from the U.S." But a large percentage of the guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.
The real numbers are, according to the Mexican government, 29000 guns were recovered from crime scenes and of those 5114 were traced to the US, a 17% rate.
There is a big difference between 17 and 90%. Don't let the left convince you that banning gun sales here would solve gun crimes in Mexico.
The problem is it isn't true. What's true, an ATF spokeswoman told FOXNews.com, in a clarification of the statistic used by her own agency's assistant director, "is that over 90 percent of the traced firearms originate from the U.S." But a large percentage of the guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.
The real numbers are, according to the Mexican government, 29000 guns were recovered from crime scenes and of those 5114 were traced to the US, a 17% rate.
There is a big difference between 17 and 90%. Don't let the left convince you that banning gun sales here would solve gun crimes in Mexico.
Iowa OK's same sex marriage
The Iowa Supreme Court today ruled that that marriage should not be limited to one man and one woman. Even though a Des Moines Register poll in 2008 of Iowa lawmakers showed that a majority of Iowa’s lawmakers —123 of 150 — said they believed marriage should only be between a man and a woman and that 62% of Iowans said they believed marriage should be only between a man and a woman.
Once again a liberal court has overturned the will of the people.
Once again a liberal court has overturned the will of the people.
Budget plans-Republican vs Democrat
Two budgets are being proposed. Admittedly, one of them won't get much play time. A few highlights are: Under the president's plan, spending will top $4 trillion this year alone, and consume 28.5% of our nation's economy. The Obama plan would result in an exploding deficit, a doubling of the nation's debt in five years, and an increase of that debt to more than 82% of our nation's GDP by the last year of the budget. The Republican budget achieves lower deficits than the Democratic plan in every year, and by 2019 yields half the deficit proposed by the president. Under the Republican plan, debt held by the public is $3.6 trillion less during the budget period.
One of the biggest differences may be in taxes where instead of raising taxes the Republicans make permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax laws. In fact, they cut taxes and reform the tax system. Individuals can choose to pay their federal taxes under the existing code, or move to a highly simplified system that fits on a post card, with few deductions and two rates. Specifically, couples pay 10% on their first $100,000 in income (singles on $50,000) and 25% above that. Capital gains and dividends are taxed at 15%, and the death tax is repealed. The proposal includes generous standard and personal exemptions such that a family of four earning $39,000 would not pay tax on that amount. In an effort to revive peoples' lost savings, and to create an incentive for risk-taking and investment, the budget repeals the capital gains tax through 2010 for all taxpayers.
Discretionary spending is froze for five years, allowing it to grow modestly after that. The President's cap-and-trade scheme is rejected and our energy needs are solved by opening exploration on our nation's oil and gas fields, and by investing the proceeds in a new clean energy trust fund and infrastructure.
More detail can be found in the Wall Street Journal.
One of the biggest differences may be in taxes where instead of raising taxes the Republicans make permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax laws. In fact, they cut taxes and reform the tax system. Individuals can choose to pay their federal taxes under the existing code, or move to a highly simplified system that fits on a post card, with few deductions and two rates. Specifically, couples pay 10% on their first $100,000 in income (singles on $50,000) and 25% above that. Capital gains and dividends are taxed at 15%, and the death tax is repealed. The proposal includes generous standard and personal exemptions such that a family of four earning $39,000 would not pay tax on that amount. In an effort to revive peoples' lost savings, and to create an incentive for risk-taking and investment, the budget repeals the capital gains tax through 2010 for all taxpayers.
Discretionary spending is froze for five years, allowing it to grow modestly after that. The President's cap-and-trade scheme is rejected and our energy needs are solved by opening exploration on our nation's oil and gas fields, and by investing the proceeds in a new clean energy trust fund and infrastructure.
More detail can be found in the Wall Street Journal.
Barney Frank says GOP is nuts
Posted from Matt Lewis:
It's official, we Republicans are nuts -- in the clinical sense of the term. At least that's how the venerated Congressman Barney Frank sees it. The remarks came yesterday, after Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) slammed the Democrats for passing a stimulus package that permitted AIG to grant huge bonuses using taxpayer dollars. Instead of responding, Frank said that Culberson was attacking him for trying to fix the stimulus' problems, and that Republicans suffered from "a psychological disorder I am not equipped to diagnose". This, of course, was an attempt by "Dr. Barney" to tear others down -- and thereby hide his own shortcomings (how's THAT for psychoanalysis?). Still, I must confess, he's on to something. What ails our congressional leaders? Republicans do have a disorder -- but not the kind Frank thinks -- what Republicans suffer from is an inferiority complex.Republicans are so demoralized that we spend our time sniping at the minutia of the other side's agenda rather than producing bold, radically different proposals that could actually help America. We're too scared of big bad Barney and his friends to actually be effective. And we're convinced that the other side can do no wrong -- and we can do no right. Sadly, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy
It's official, we Republicans are nuts -- in the clinical sense of the term. At least that's how the venerated Congressman Barney Frank sees it. The remarks came yesterday, after Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) slammed the Democrats for passing a stimulus package that permitted AIG to grant huge bonuses using taxpayer dollars. Instead of responding, Frank said that Culberson was attacking him for trying to fix the stimulus' problems, and that Republicans suffered from "a psychological disorder I am not equipped to diagnose". This, of course, was an attempt by "Dr. Barney" to tear others down -- and thereby hide his own shortcomings (how's THAT for psychoanalysis?). Still, I must confess, he's on to something. What ails our congressional leaders? Republicans do have a disorder -- but not the kind Frank thinks -- what Republicans suffer from is an inferiority complex.Republicans are so demoralized that we spend our time sniping at the minutia of the other side's agenda rather than producing bold, radically different proposals that could actually help America. We're too scared of big bad Barney and his friends to actually be effective. And we're convinced that the other side can do no wrong -- and we can do no right. Sadly, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy
Should pot be legalized?
Not my normal post but there has been a lot about this in the past months. Is pot really any more dangerous than alcohol?
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Those progressive Muslims
Part of a new Afghan law states "As long as the husband is not traveling, he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night," Article 132 of the law says. "Unless the wife is ill or has any kind of illness that intercourse could aggravate, the wife is bound to give a positive response to the sexual desires of her husband".
Only once every four days?
Only once every four days?
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
My next car
Pretty cool huh? I'm just wondering if Government Motors...I mean General Motors is going to continue the Hummer line now that Pres. Obama is in charge!Wonder who's going to be fired next by this administration? I'm not to fond of my boss and I don't think he runs the company very well...maybe I'll write a letter to the Pres!
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/04/01/business/econwatch/entry4911030.shtml
Is Obama at Notre Dame a big deal?
Is this just following the tradition of having the new Pres. speak at graduation or is it hypocrisy?
Does belief in God make you a better person?
Just throwing it out there. I know there are good atheists and bad Christians. What do you think?
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Did Canada Healthcare kill Richardson? follow-up
Tiredofthecrap first brought up the possibility that it was the Canadian National Health Care System that killed Natasha Richards and not the fall.
After doing some online detective work, here is what I found.
http://news-briefs.ew.com/2009/03/natasha-richa-3.html
Entertainment Weekly did report a 45 minute delay because of the drive from Centre Hospitalier Laurentien to Sacre-Coeur Hospital in Montreal
Richardson was later transferred to the Montreal trauma center Hopital du Sacre-Coeur. The ambulance carrying her arrived there less than 45 minutes after leaving the first hospital, at 6:38 p.m. The Globe and Mail reports that a neurologist on duty was overheard saying that Ms. Richardson's pupils were unresponsive, a sign of advanced brain damage. It is possible that had Richardson been transported by medical helicopter sooner, she might have survived.
There appears to be a great deal of discussion among medical personnel as to if her death could have been prevented.
http://nhsblogdoc.blogspot.com/2009/03/natasha-richardson-medical-technology.html
The biggest loss of time was when the initial EMS response was declined, the fact that several hours passed before a CT scan was performed, and the delay before making the decision to transport her to a tertiary care center in Montreal. Those delays could conceivably happen in the United States as well.
There also appears to be a movement to silence discussion of that possibility.
http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2009/03/leave-natasha-richardson-out-of-the-health-care-debate.html
I’m not advocating for or defending Canada’s single-payer health system. Merely, I ask that journalists considering doing this story to ask deeper questions that get beyond the anecdote. Consider asking about the trade-offs that go along with providing seemingly unlimited CT scans and helicopters. Ask what would happen if she were an uninsured U.S. resident.
The answer to the last question is that she would have had the CT Scan and her life might have been saved.
After doing some online detective work, here is what I found.
http://news-briefs.ew.com/2009/03/natasha-richa-3.html
Entertainment Weekly did report a 45 minute delay because of the drive from Centre Hospitalier Laurentien to Sacre-Coeur Hospital in Montreal
Richardson was later transferred to the Montreal trauma center Hopital du Sacre-Coeur. The ambulance carrying her arrived there less than 45 minutes after leaving the first hospital, at 6:38 p.m. The Globe and Mail reports that a neurologist on duty was overheard saying that Ms. Richardson's pupils were unresponsive, a sign of advanced brain damage. It is possible that had Richardson been transported by medical helicopter sooner, she might have survived.
There appears to be a great deal of discussion among medical personnel as to if her death could have been prevented.
http://nhsblogdoc.blogspot.com/2009/03/natasha-richardson-medical-technology.html
The biggest loss of time was when the initial EMS response was declined, the fact that several hours passed before a CT scan was performed, and the delay before making the decision to transport her to a tertiary care center in Montreal. Those delays could conceivably happen in the United States as well.
There also appears to be a movement to silence discussion of that possibility.
http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2009/03/leave-natasha-richardson-out-of-the-health-care-debate.html
I’m not advocating for or defending Canada’s single-payer health system. Merely, I ask that journalists considering doing this story to ask deeper questions that get beyond the anecdote. Consider asking about the trade-offs that go along with providing seemingly unlimited CT scans and helicopters. Ask what would happen if she were an uninsured U.S. resident.
The answer to the last question is that she would have had the CT Scan and her life might have been saved.
Is it that far fetched?
(2009-03-22) — With the debate over AIG executive bonuses nearly bringing official Washington to a standstill in the past three weeks, the Obama administration today expanded its plan to control Wall Street executive pay, adding provisions to limit compensation for star performers in the National Football League (NFL), National Basketball Association (NBA) and Major League Baseball (MLB).
“Some of these sports stars, like AIG execs, have negotiated sweetheart deals paying them millions of dollars, and yet they lose games,” said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. “The president shares the outrage of the American people at these obscene salaries and bonuses. There’s nothing that makes the little people feel littler than the thought of these fat cats getting fatter just because that have specialized skills that are in high demand in a free-market economy.”
Indeed, the White House released a recent poll showing that 75 percent of Americans answered ‘Yes’ to the following question: “Do you believe President Obama should personally limit the compensation of anyone who earns a lot more than you do?”
“How hard can it be to show up on Sunday and toss a few passes?” said Mr. Gibbs. “The fact that some people earn a lot more money than others just demonstrates the savage inequalities inherent in a capitalist system, and explains why the president has taken deliberate action to end it.”
Under the terms of the pay-limit plan, the president would appoint a panel of university economists, union leaders, and “ordinary American community organizers” to establish paycheck parity between average hourly-wage workers and the people “who have carved out for themselves an unequal portion of the pie.”
“In America you can dream as big as you want, but everyone agrees we need strict controls on those whose dreams have come true,” Mr. Gibbs said. “The people deserve a system in which there are no limits to your potential, only to your achievements.”
The proposal would exempt most Hollywood stars and popular recording artists, he said, “since much of their money is already returned to the people in the form of contributions to the Democrat party and its candidates.”
“Some of these sports stars, like AIG execs, have negotiated sweetheart deals paying them millions of dollars, and yet they lose games,” said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. “The president shares the outrage of the American people at these obscene salaries and bonuses. There’s nothing that makes the little people feel littler than the thought of these fat cats getting fatter just because that have specialized skills that are in high demand in a free-market economy.”
Indeed, the White House released a recent poll showing that 75 percent of Americans answered ‘Yes’ to the following question: “Do you believe President Obama should personally limit the compensation of anyone who earns a lot more than you do?”
“How hard can it be to show up on Sunday and toss a few passes?” said Mr. Gibbs. “The fact that some people earn a lot more money than others just demonstrates the savage inequalities inherent in a capitalist system, and explains why the president has taken deliberate action to end it.”
Under the terms of the pay-limit plan, the president would appoint a panel of university economists, union leaders, and “ordinary American community organizers” to establish paycheck parity between average hourly-wage workers and the people “who have carved out for themselves an unequal portion of the pie.”
“In America you can dream as big as you want, but everyone agrees we need strict controls on those whose dreams have come true,” Mr. Gibbs said. “The people deserve a system in which there are no limits to your potential, only to your achievements.”
The proposal would exempt most Hollywood stars and popular recording artists, he said, “since much of their money is already returned to the people in the form of contributions to the Democrat party and its candidates.”
Muslims send Obama resumes
According to the Chicago Trib, "In a bid to get more Muslim Americans working in the Obama administration, a book with resumes of 45 of the nation's most qualified - Ivy League grads, Fortune 500 executives and public servants, all carefully vetted - has been submitted to the White House."
Doesn't that make you feel safe?!
Doesn't that make you feel safe?!
I'm only one person. What good can I do?
I’m just one person, what good can I do? Have you ever heard those words expressed? Have you ever spoken them yourself?
A couple of years ago the Congress, President and the news media seemed hell bent on passing legislation, The Kennedy-McCain Immigration bill. When it seemed as if it would be passed and signed by then President Bush, something happened and it fell by the wayside.
Just recently the Congress passed and the President signed a bill that gave bonuses to people who agreed to come to work for a division of their company, for $1.00 a year, that had lost so much money that it was about to make the whole corporation fail. This was a done deal long before the common people found out about it.
Once the people found out about it, all hell broke loose. All of the sudden the very people (Congress, President and the Treasury Department) who made the bonuses happen, wanted to vilify the people they gave them to.
How was all of this possible? It happened because all of the people who normally would say, "I’m just one person, what good can I do?" stood up and said something.
There is one thing the politicians in Washington and at the State level want, POWER. There is one thing that they fear, UNITED CITIZENS. Show them an angry mob of voters and they will turn tail and run like a frightened deer (not vote for bill) or they will roll over and play dead like a scared opossum, (I didn’t have anything to do with it).
Most people hide behind the "I’m just one person, what good can I do?" because it allows them to bitch and complain when things don’t go the way that they want them to go.
It is my opinion that the Founding Fathers gave a voice to the common citizen not as an option to speak up but as a civic duty. That civic duty begins with registering to vote and then voting your convictions, not your party when the time comes.
It also extends to voicing your concerns and opinions when issues are raised before the governing bodies. That doesn’t mean writing or calling about the issue and ranting away. The louder and harsher your argument becomes, the more chances are that you are loosing debate. The contacts can be short and to the point and still be persuasive.
It only takes a few clicks of the mouse to be able to send your Congressman or Senator an email stressing your concern. Who the representatives are and how to contact them is available at usa.gov.
It may be true that you are only one voice. However, if you write and then encourage two other people to write that makes three. If those two both encourage two people to write that makes seven. If you do the math, you see what a great number of people you will have speaking their minds.
Glenn Beck recently referred to those people as angry town fork chasing Frankenstein with pitchforks and torches. It is that imagery that will rein in the politicians and give the power back to the people where it belongs.
It is good that we share with each other on our blogs or while sharing a beer. It will get more done if we email the politicians too.
A couple of years ago the Congress, President and the news media seemed hell bent on passing legislation, The Kennedy-McCain Immigration bill. When it seemed as if it would be passed and signed by then President Bush, something happened and it fell by the wayside.
Just recently the Congress passed and the President signed a bill that gave bonuses to people who agreed to come to work for a division of their company, for $1.00 a year, that had lost so much money that it was about to make the whole corporation fail. This was a done deal long before the common people found out about it.
Once the people found out about it, all hell broke loose. All of the sudden the very people (Congress, President and the Treasury Department) who made the bonuses happen, wanted to vilify the people they gave them to.
How was all of this possible? It happened because all of the people who normally would say, "I’m just one person, what good can I do?" stood up and said something.
There is one thing the politicians in Washington and at the State level want, POWER. There is one thing that they fear, UNITED CITIZENS. Show them an angry mob of voters and they will turn tail and run like a frightened deer (not vote for bill) or they will roll over and play dead like a scared opossum, (I didn’t have anything to do with it).
Most people hide behind the "I’m just one person, what good can I do?" because it allows them to bitch and complain when things don’t go the way that they want them to go.
It is my opinion that the Founding Fathers gave a voice to the common citizen not as an option to speak up but as a civic duty. That civic duty begins with registering to vote and then voting your convictions, not your party when the time comes.
It also extends to voicing your concerns and opinions when issues are raised before the governing bodies. That doesn’t mean writing or calling about the issue and ranting away. The louder and harsher your argument becomes, the more chances are that you are loosing debate. The contacts can be short and to the point and still be persuasive.
It only takes a few clicks of the mouse to be able to send your Congressman or Senator an email stressing your concern. Who the representatives are and how to contact them is available at usa.gov.
It may be true that you are only one voice. However, if you write and then encourage two other people to write that makes three. If those two both encourage two people to write that makes seven. If you do the math, you see what a great number of people you will have speaking their minds.
Glenn Beck recently referred to those people as angry town fork chasing Frankenstein with pitchforks and torches. It is that imagery that will rein in the politicians and give the power back to the people where it belongs.
It is good that we share with each other on our blogs or while sharing a beer. It will get more done if we email the politicians too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)