Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu arrived in Washington D.C. over the bodies of four of his citizens and one unborn child, murdered by Islamic terrorists. The media had spent a busy two days worrying that the murders might in some way interrupt the latest phase of the tragic farce euphemistically referred to as, “The Peace Process”. Luckily for the terrorists, who are the sole and only beneficiaries of these and all other negotiations, killing Israelis did not prevent the Israelis from showing up at the negotiating table anyway.
Extending a hand
The media however doesn’t think much of it, with multiple stories arguing that Netanyahu really doesn’t want peace. Time Magazine took it further with a cover story arguing that Israel Doesn’t Want Peace. Which is an inevitable assumption given that over the last two decades, Israel has turned over territory, weapons, houses, factories and cold hard cash to the terrorists. In exchange the terrorists have occasionally agreed to show up at the negotiating table, denounce Israel and demand more– in between calling for a Jihad. Clearly Israel doesn’t want peace.
Of course when it comes to walking across the bodies of his own dead citizens in order to shake the hand of a terrorist and a murderer, Netanyahu is a piker. Past Prime Ministers have shown up to negotiate after bus bombings with two digit casualties. They have sat across from Arafat, even as that greasy thug’s henchmen were busy firing their AK-47′s into the air in Ramallah to celebrate the last batch of arms and legs strewn across a shopping district by another martyr for Allah, Al Quds and Palestine. Perhaps when the terrorists manage to do more than kill four people, an unborn baby, wound a Rabbi, his wife and 12 year old girl– and the Prime Minister of Israel still shows up ready to give away the store to the terrorists, then the US government and the media will be convinced that Israel is absolutely serious about peace.
Not that there’s anything to actually negotiate. Abbas is an unelected dictator being propped up by the Obama Administration, and doesn’t represent anyone. Also Abbas has announced that he will make no concessions to Israel whatsoever. He also announced that he absolutely refuses to recognize Israel. Naturally you won’t find mention of this in the media. Certainly not in Time Magazine. There won’t be any covers reading, “Why the Terrorists Don’t Want Peace”, just as you won’t see any Time covers reading, “Why is Islam Bigoted?” The terrorists always get a pass. Their victims always get the shaft.
According to the media the biggest problem is Israeli towns (aka settlements) in areas that the terrorists want for themselves. One of those towns happens to be Jerusalem. If you believe the media, the obstacle to peace is not the murder of Jews by the terrorists, or that the leader of one of the terrorist factions has already announced that he is not willing to actually concede anything at the negotiations.
For those who believed politics was involved in the decisions in the car industry, it appears that Mr. Rattner’s new book will provide a lot of information. So much for Obama’s promise not to let politics interfere with how the companies were run.
-When Obama was told of the plan to pay GM CEO Rick Wagoner a $7.1 million severance package after Obama ordered that he be sacked, Rattner writes: “Suddenly I felt that I was indeed in the presence of a community organizer…”
-Rattner describes presidential political adviser David Axelrod coming to car meetings armed with poll data to support the takeover and Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel identify Congressmen in whose districts large Chrysler facilities were located.
-”[Obama's economic team] veered dangerously close to having the government take control of the two most troubled banks, Bank of America and Citigroup.”
-”If his team had linked arms with the outgoing administration, as President Bush’s advisers had proposed, billions of dollars could well have been saved.”
-Rattner says Chief of Staff Rahm Emanual dictated Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s schedule, public appearances and staff selections.
-He says Obama economic advisers Larry Summers and Austan Goolsbee and FDIC Chair Sheila Bair as enemies who slowed down decision making with infighting
-Rattner said Obama was frustrated with the auto companies from the start: “Why can’t they make a Corolla?” he has Obama asking.
I suppose it’s only natural that politicians who wind up on Capitol Hill forget that they are mere mortals. After all, when everyone is vying for your attention and all the Sunday talk shows are eager to have you stop by and spout off, and you have as many flunkies at your beck and call as Marie Antoinette, it must be awfully easy to believe you have achieved royal status. In fact, all that you’ve really done is beat out some other schnook in a popularity contest.
As a result, these pettifoggers must be constantly plagued by the fear that the very next election can turn them back into the very same rodents they were before their Fairy Godmother touched them with her magic wand.
For the run-of-the-mill politician, it must be bad enough, but imagine being Harry Reid, king of the Senate one day, and just another old pickle puss the next.
In a way, it would be even worse for Nancy Pelosi, who, unlike Reid, will easily win re-election, but could still go from being the queen bee on November 2nd to losing her Speaker’s gavel and watching her jumbo jet turn into a pumpkin at midnight. How bleak her life will be if there are no more TV cameras tracking her as she strides down the House corridors in her Hillary Clinton pants suit, a dozen male courtiers trailing in her wake.
For that matter, who would want to be Barack Obama if the November elections go the way they appear headed? How bitter would it be to go from filibuster-proof majorities in the House and Senate to being the lamest of lame ducks? A while back, Obama, when asked his opinion of Kevin Rudd, the ex-prime minister of Australia, said he liked him. One of the qualities he liked best about him was his humility. “I find him smart but humble.” The way he said it suggested he might as well have been describing himself. And to think, some people are convinced Obama doesn’t have a sense of humor. The notion that Obama is a humble human being is so far-fetched that it might even strain Joy Behar’s credulity. As Winston Churchill once observed of his political nemesis, Clement Attlee, “He’s a modest man, and he’s got a lot to be modest about.”
Speaking of the president, I keep wondering why we never hear anything about his mother-in-law. Is Mrs. Robinson still hanging out in the White House and are we still footing the bill for her food and lodging?
And whatever happened to Bo? Is he happy? Is he house-broken and has he been neutered? Judging by the ease with which Obama has turned Benjamin Netanyahu into a lap dog, I assume the answer to both questions is a resounding yes.
People have observed that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. In much the same way, GM’s Volt is a car designed and manufactured by a federal bureaucracy.
Building on my continuing War on the West/War on Jobs series, today’s column initiates an Obama jobs death toll. The social justice Left has always used Alinskyite story-telling to get its way. Time for the Right to better tell the stories of the forgotten victims of the Obama job-killing machine.
Regarding the new CBO report on the stimulus (coincidentally — or maybe not coincidentally — released on the same days as GOP leader John Boehner’s jobs speech), McQ says pointedly: “Of course it boosted the GDP by a sizeable amount. When you pour almost a trillion dollars out of the government bucket and that is part of the calculation of GDP, then naturally the GDP is going to be ‘boosted’. The question is, what good did it do. Claims of ‘increasing the number of people employed’ is, as is obvious, a guess cranked out by an economic model. But look around you. When what the bucket has dumped out drains away, what do we have? 9.5% unemployment – at least at an official level – 1.5% higher than what was promised if the “stimulus” wasn’t passed. A stagnant economy. Businesses neither expanding nor hiring. Car sales – down. Housing sales – way down. Consumer confidence – in the tank. Expanded regulation, increased taxation and a war on business…So let the left and the media try their best to make this more than it is – the effect on GDP calculation that absurd levels of governmental deficit spending will have. Take that out and there isn’t much to shout about, is there?”
***
The White House War on Jobs
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2010
The “Summer of Recovery” is looking more and more like the Beltway Chainsaw Massacre for America’s workers. As President Obama lolls on Martha’s Vineyard with his well-heeled Chicago pals, a new Reuters/Ipsos poll shows that 72 percent of people are very worried about joblessness and 67 percent are very concerned about massive government spending. After a nearly $1 trillion fiscal stimulus and several multi-billion-dollar corporate and union bailouts, unemployment remains stuck near 10 percent nationwide; jobless claims rose again last week. One shudders to think how many more jobs will be on the chopping block after the vacationing president finishes “recharging his batteries.”
The blame avoidance industry, of course, never takes a break. Capitol Hill Democrats blame George W. Bush. President Obama blames inaction by the, er, Democrat-controlled Congress. On Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden derided GOP Leader John Boehner’s speech on the Obama job-killing machine as a return to the past. Biden sneered about the
“good old days” when Republicans held the majority in Washington. But laid-off, unemployed, and endangered Americans in the health care sector, auto industry, oil, mining, gas, and fishing industries are no doubt wondering: What’s wrong with returning to the days when they had jobs and steady paychecks?
These are not the wealthy fat cats and Big Business titans that Democrats love to demonize.
Just as any good public speaker does, the President knows how to use word-pictures and relatable stories to make a point. And he’d like for us to believe that Republicans, alone, are to blame for our nation’s weak economy.
Speaking at a fundraising event for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in May, the President stated: “After they (Republicans) drove the car into the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want the keys back. No! You can’t drive. We don’t want to have to go back into the ditch. We just got the car out.”
That’s very clever, and it’s an illustration that likely resonates with many Americans.
But if Republicans were responsible for driving our economic “car” into a “ditch” last decade (I’ll examine the veracity of that claim in a moment), then here’s a metaphor for this new decade: Barack And Michelle Obama have been entrusted to handle a family credit card at a time when we all need to be restrained and sober-minded with our finances. And instead of emulating the discipline and self-restraint and “care for others” that they lecture us about, they have chosen instead to max-out the credit cards on their own self-gratifying expenditures, and leave the rest of us – mom and dad, adult siblings, and the grandchildren – to find a way to somehow make the minimum monthly payments.
What else can you say about a First Couple who takes 8 vacations during their first 18 months in the White House? This, of course, is the President who spent his first year in office repeatedly reminding us that the economic conditions he “inherited” were the “worst since the Great Depression,” all the while logging over 200 hours playing golf. And last month the Obama’s spent our scarce tax dollars providing a “separate flight” on a Gulfstream jet to transport their dog “Bo” to the family vacation destination in Maine-apparently Air Force One could not comfortably transport both Bo, AND the Obama family, all at the same time.
And now, America and the world have been treated to Michelle’s “vacation” in Spain (this is not a “state visit,” but indeed a personal trip) with forty of her best friends along for the ride, and her husband left at home. Even the New York Times has had to acknowledge the “hefty bill” that American taxpayers will end up paying, which may approach half a million dollars or more by the time “Michelle and friends” return home.
Such blatant disregard for the perceptions and sensibilities of the American people are often very politically costly for a President. But what we are seeing from Barack and Michelle is not merely a matter of being “tone deaf” or “out-of-touch,” as many in the media are claiming these days.
On the contrary, the Obamas seem to think of themselves as being much more than merely a U.S. President and First Lady.
The Chevy Volt, the $41,000 before-tax-credit, four-seat car that you might as well buy because you’re paying for it anyway, goes 40 miles on a charge before the engine that requires premium gasoline kicks in and will probably cost its buyers more than a few friendships because the “dude, can I bum your electrical outlet for a few hours so I can get back home?” thing will get old fast, is officially on the market.
This means that the search for the perfect Chevy Volt slogan is on. My current favorite is from Twitterer Gunservatively: “I could have had a V8.”John Hawkins suggests: “You’re rich, you love trees, you want your friends to know.”
Other slogans from the Twitterlanche of suggestions are here.
I’ll throw a couple on the pile just for Saturday fun, and feel free to add your own:
–Volt: Because “Coal” didn’t test well in the greenie demo
–The ultimate plugging machine
–This isn’t your father’s bailout
Yesterday, President Obama demonstrated just about how far the Volt can go on a single charge:
Meanwhile, John “I was against paying Mass. yacht taxes before I was for them” Kerry is on a quest to make electric and hybrid cars noisier. I tell ya, there’s no pleasing some people.
DUI: Driving under the influence…of Big Labor-pandering, left-wing radicals
My column today dives into the TARP special inspector general’s audit of the “Factors Affecting the Decisions of General Motors and Chrysler to Reduce Their Dealership Networks.” You can find it at the TARP OIG’s website here. I encourage you all to read through the entire 45-page report. The superficial MSM coverage of the audit, released late Sunday, didn’t do justice to the independent watchdog’s damning indictment of the arrogant bureaucrats in charge of nationalizing the U.S. auto industry — or the devastating consequences of politically-driven “shared sacrifice” with Obama, his SEIU cronies, and campaign lackeys behind the wheel.
Obama had the chutzpah to drag an unemployed car dealership employee laid off by Honda up on stage Monday to attack Republicans over government unemployment benefits. I suggest Republicans match him with a stage full of unemployed Chrysler and GM workers who lost their dealership jobs as a direct result of the capricious mandates of Obama’s non-expert auto experts.
Chicken Littles on Capitol Hill, I’m talking to you.
***
Dealergate: Destroying Jobs in the Name of “Shared Sacrifice”
by Michelle Malkin Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2010
Everything you need to know about the nightmare of government-controlled businesses can be found in a damning new inspector general’s report on Dealergate. The independent review of how and why the Obama administration forced Chrysler and General Motors to oversee mass closures of car dealerships across the country reveals grisly incompetence, fatal bureaucratic hubris and Big Labor cronyism. No wonder you won’t hear much about the report’s in-depth details in the so-called mainstream media.
Under the guise of “saving” the American auto industry through a bipartisan, taxpayer-funded bailout now topping $80 billion, President Obama’s know-nothing bureaucrats pushed the car companies to eliminate thousands of jobs — with unjustified haste using dubious economic models.
Obama ordered the bailout recipients to “prove” their long-term viability by submitting restructuring plans. But White House and Treasury Department “experts” rejected the auto manufacturers’ proposals, citing the too-slow pace of their plans to reduce their dealership networks over a period of five years. Once the auto companies modified those plans to meet government-backed timelines, the money flowed.
But Neil Barofsky, the federal watchdog overseeing the bank-auto-insurance-all-purpose bailout fund, found that the White House auto industry task force and the Treasury Department “Auto Team” had no basis for ordering the expedited car dealership closure schedules. They relied on a single consulting firm’s internal report recommending that the U.S. companies adopt foreign auto industry models to increase profits — a recommendation hotly disputed by auto experts who questioned whether foreign practices could be applied to domestic American dealership networks.
It is no secret that I am pro-law enforcement – very pro-law enforcement, in fact. Some of my best friends are law enforcement officers who work in local, state and federal agencies. On my wedding day in 1991, I lost a friend who was a police officer in Houston, Texas when he pulled over a car and was subsequently shot during the course of a traffic stop. I also lost a friend and several acquaintances, all law enforcement officers, in the 2001 attack on America by Islamic terrorists. Their job is among the most dangerous, especially in today’s environment, so I am in favor of any “tool” that would keep them and our country safer.
Within the last month, however, I personally found myself at odds with law enforcement while traveling by car close to the U.S. border with Canada. I was within 5 miles of our northern border in the state of New York, yet well inside the U.S. with no intention of crossing the border. In fact, I could not even see the border and was not in close proximity to any border crossing point. Nonetheless, I encountered what could be best described as a U.S. Border Patrol checkpoint.
Although I personally was not subjected to any searches and the questions asked of me were relatively non-invasive, at least one or two other motorists appeared to have hit a “speed bump” on the road called homeland security. They were pulled aside, and one of the federal officers appeared to be holding or looking at a cell phone or small camera. The license plates on both vehicles I observed being subjected to a secondary search were of U.S. origin.
Due to schedule issues, I was unable to perform any on-site inquiries about the apparent “mobile checkpoint,” although I contacted a law enforcement source later that day who verified that it was a “rolling checkpoint” that was being conducted by the U.S. Border Patrol. What greatly disturbed me, however, was what I learned later about the activities taking place at the makeshift “secondary” inspection location. This is where the two motorists were pulled aside, and one agent appeared to be inspecting an electronic device from one of the vehicles.
I was surprised to learn that federal agents, specifically those with the U.S. Border Patrol, have the right to inspect an individual’s cell phone (including call history, text messages and photographs), computers, cameras and even GPS units without needing reasonable cause or suspicion. Furthermore, that “right” extends up to 100 miles inland from our north and south borders.
My source provided me with an overview of the criteria the agents were using to select vehicles for a secondary inspection, although for legitimate security reasons, I will not disclose that criteria.
Last night, as part of his never-ending pledge to not rest one moment until the oil leak is plugged, President Obama hosted a fundraiser for Harry Reid in Nevada. You remember Nevada… the state you shouldn’t waste money taking a vacation in.
I wish the president from the political party that’s home to the legendary vehicularly-challenged Kennedy clan would stop with the “car in the ditch” metaphor, but Obama is still rolling with it:
They basically — they spent a decade driving the economy into a ditch. And now they’re asking for the keys back. (Laughter.) And my answer is, no, you can’t have the keys. (Applause.) You can’t drive. You don’t know how to drive. You drive in the wrong direction. You can’t have them back. (Applause.) We’re just getting the car out of the ditch. We can’t have you drive it back in the ditch. (Laughter.)
Harry Reid and I, we got mud on our shoes. We’re — we’ve been pushing and shoving — car is just kind of getting out, almost — almost on some pavement. (Laughter.) Some, they’re all, “no, no, we want to pull into reverse.” (Laughter.) Run right over Harry and me. (Laughter.) Get you back in the mud.
That doesn’t make sense.
I’m pretty sure that’s not mud on their shoes. Anybody who’s ever walked through a livestock pen at a farm knows what Obama and Reid have on their shoes, and it’s the same stuff they’ve been shoveling all over the rest of us.
And if the metaphor of “pushing a car out of a ditch” to get the economy back on track holds water, they could have saved the effort, called a tow truck driver, paid him $100 billion to pull it out of the ditch and we still would have come out ahead. Or better yet, leave the damn car in the ditch. I think I liked it better there.
How much did the “Cash for Clunkers” program really save you?
If you traded in a clunker worth $3500, you got $4500 off for an apparent “savings” of $1000. However, you have to pay taxes on the $4500 come April 15th (something that no auto dealer will tell you). If you are in the 30% tax bracket, you will pay $1350 on that $4500. So, rather than save $1000, you actually pay an extra $350 to the feds. In addition, you traded in a car that was most likely paid for. Now you have 4 or 5 years of payments on a car that you did not need, that was costing you less to run than the payments that you will now be making.
But wait, it gets even better: you also got ripped off by the dealer. For example, every dealer in LA was selling the Ford Focus with all the goodies including A/C, auto transmission, power windows, etc. for $12,500 the month before the “Cash for Clunkers” program started. When “Cash for Clunkers” came along, they stopped discounting them and instead sold them at the list price of $15,500. So, you paid $3000 more than you would have the month before. (Honda, Toyota, and Kia played the same list price game that Ford and Chevy did).
So let’s do the final tally here:
You traded in a car worth: $3500
You got a discount of: $4500
Net so far: +$1000
But you have to pay: $1350 in taxes on the $4500
Net so far: -$350
And you paid: $3000 more than the car was selling for the month before
Net: -$3350
We could also add in the additional taxes (sales tax, state tax, etc.) on the extra $3000 that you paid for the car, along with the 5 years of interest on the car loan but let’s just stop here.
So who actually made out on the deal? The feds collected taxes on the car along with taxes on the $4500 they “gave” you. The car dealers made an extra $3000 or more on every car they sold along with the kickbacks from the manufacturers and the loan companies. The manufacturers got to dump lots of cars they could not give away the month before. And the poor stupid consumer got saddled with even more debt that they cannot afford.
Our government convinced Joe Consumer that he was getting $4500 in “free” money from the “government” when in fact Joe was giving away his $3500 car and paying an additional $3350 for the privilege.
Just as any good public speaker does, the President knows how to use word-pictures and relatable stories to make a point. And he’d like for us to believe that Republicans, alone, are to blame for our nation’s weak economy. 
