Free Markets, Free People

Daily Archives: June 8, 2012


Obama: The private sector is doing fine

When I first heard this I thought, “I want what he’s smoking”.  Because you have to be high on something and totally unaware of reality to make a statement like that.

So, I thought, it has probably been taken out of context or shortened or something, because even understanding that it is being attributed to Obama, no one would be that out of touch. 

Giving him the benefit of the doubt I waited until I could get a transcript of the whole exchange.

Boy was I wrong.  Not only can someone be that out of touch, it was indeed Obama:

Question: What about the Republicans saying that you’re blaming the Europeans for the failures of your own policies?

President Obama: The truth of the matter is that, as I said, we created 4.3 million jobs over the last 27 months, over 800,000 just this year alone.

The private sector is doing fine. Where we’re seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government. Oftentimes cuts initiated by, you know, Governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don’t have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in.

And so, you know, if Republicans want to be helpful, if they really want to move forward and put people back to work, what they should be thinking about is how do we help state and local governments and how do we help the construction industry? Because the recipes that they’re promoting are basically the kinds of policies that would add weakness to the — to the economy, would result in further layoffs, would not provide relief in the housing market, and would result, I think most economists estimate, in lower growth and fewer jobs, not more.

If you’ve ever wondered what word salad looks like, feast your eyes.

The way back to prosperity is creating jobs in the government sector?  More spending?  I’m sorry, that’s just ignorant.  The whole answer is incoherent.  Don’t they know better than to let him loose without his teleprompter?

Nick Gillespie is as stunned as anyone else:

The stammering, halting, tentative delivery of Obama strikes me as symptomatic of a whiskey priest who’s dying for a drink right after saying Mass. He doesn’t believe what he’s saying but also doesn’t have a clue as to how to move forward or address his failings. Yes, the private sector is doing fine, if by fine you mean pretty goddamned awful.

Oh, and fyi, it looks like the fight is going to be a little different this time around.  Already out?  An ad with the remark.

Nice.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO


Were Democrats “massively outspent” in Wisconsin?

One of the more persistent memes coming out of Wisconsin is the Democrats were badly outspent by the Republicans in the Wisconsin recall elections.  Various ratios of 6, 7 or 8 to 1 have been tossed around.

But is that the case?

It appears not to be:

Altogether, at least $77.1 million surged into Wisconsin campaigns and political groups between Jan. 1, 2011 — two days before Walker took office — and April 23 of this year, according to campaign finance statements filed with the state Government Accountability Board.

The period covers the first 16 months of Walker’s tenure, including his controversial measure to effectively eliminate public sector collective bargaining, which turned the state into a national battleground and sparked 15 recall elections.

The bulk of that money — $71.9 million — was split about in half between Democratic candidates and affiliated organizations, and Republican candidates and their affiliated groups.

What some of those tossing around the ratios mentioned will do when pinned down about their numbers is then claim the ratio represents the amount spent by the Walker campaign as opposed to Tom Barrett’s campaign.  Barrett, of course, entered the race at a fairly late date (primary), so certainly Walker, who had been under the recall gun for a while, had obviously raised and probably spent much more than Barrett was able to do.

But is that a fair point?   Not really. 

Katherine Cramer Walsh, a UW-Madison associate professor of political science, said the relative parity in fundraising was surprising, especially in light of a provision in state law that allows the targets of a recall to raise unlimited money between the time a recall drive is initiated and the time an election is called. That provision helped Walker raise millions more than he could otherwise. Through April, his campaign had raised at least $22.8 million, smothering his Democratic rivals.

However:

“The perception out there is that the Republicans are much more flush with cash, and that isn’t supported here,” Cramer Walsh said.

Why?  Because the vast majority of the money on the left went to other organizations instead of candidates and was spent during the entire time of the recall by these organizations, just as Walker was forced to do:

The State Journal’s analysis found that at least $35 million went to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, Democratic candidates in recall elections and union groups including the AFL-CIO, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the Service Employees International Union, Wisconsin Education Association Council and others.

On the right:

On the other side, at least $36.9 million flowed into the Walker campaign, the Republican Party of Wisconsin, pro-Walker groups and GOP officeholders tagged for recall, the analysis showed.

In the real world, that’s pretty much dead even on the money side of things (about $5.2 million in contributions went to third parties.) 

Regardless though, it is soothing to the leftist ego to believe that their righteous cause was smothered by massive spending by the other side.  It fits their ideology to a tee.  So expect it to continue to be the excuse du jure coming out of Wisconsin and the main reason they will dismiss the results as a portent of national disaster and blame “outside corporate money” for all the evils in the world.

Frankly I hope they do continue to believe that to be true.  It reminds me of their eternal belief that there’s nothing wrong with their message, it’s just the packaging and delivery that are faulty.  Let’s add “massively outspent” to the false litany of woe for the left.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO


The UN in one picture

As anyone who has read this blog knows, I’m not a fan of the UN.  I normally call it the “Third World Debating club”.  It is world redistribution headquarters and a mockery of both democracy and any united action.  For the latter I’m mostly grateful because the obvious underlying desire of the professional UN types is the establishment of a world government, or at least, a world taxing authority, and the redistribution of income.

But it was supposed to be an organization of states that could combine to stop genocide, totalitarianism, etc.  Instead it has become this:

 

UN

 

The picture says even more than the conversation bubbles show.  Note the copyright date.  Yes, that’s how long the killing in the Sudan been going on and the picture says it all.

Instead the UN has been busy putting despots on the Human Rights Committee and making Robert Mugabe a UN “leader for tourism”.  Mugabe. The octogenarian dictator who has literally destroyed Zimbabwe’s economy and reduced the country to a police state?  What was Fidel too sick to take it?

People continue to argue that while it is corrupt, inept and abusive, it is a “useful forum” for the world’s leaders.

No it’s not.  It’s a third world debating club where the most serious attempts made by any of its members are to syphon money from the “rich” countries to their countries.

Anyway, the picture distills the problem to a fine point. 

Totally useless, waste of money and certainly not at all fulfilling its charter.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO