February 13, 2009

Things I’d Like to Post About Today ….. (0213009, Morning)

Filed under: TILTpatBIDHAT — Tom @ 8:53 am

….. But I Don’t Have Any Time For:

  • You have to get to the last paragraph of this report from Bloomberg (HT NewsAlert via Instapundit) to get to the most important quote from Rogers Holdings Chairman Jim Rogers about Tax Cheat Tim Geithner — “‘He caused the problem all last year. He came up with TARP, and he came up with all these absurd bailouts. Mr. Geithner has never known what he is doing. He doesn’t know what he is doing now and pretty soon everybody is going to find out, including Mr. Obama.” Ruh-roh.
  • The job numbers in the mislabeled “stimulus” package don’t add up. Looks like Tim Geithner isn’t the only one who “doesn’t like math.” Hot Air has more.
  • Speaking of math, the true cost of the mislabeled “stimulus” package is $3.27 billion (HT Michelle Malkin), primarily because, as Heritage says, “No one believes that the increased funding for programs the left loves like Head Start, Medicaid, COBRA, and the Earned Income Tax Credit is in any way temporary.” For those on the left who object to going out multiple years, my response is, “You did that with the Bush tax cuts. Fair is fair.” And why did a congressman have to separately ask the Congressional Budget Office for this info? That alleged Trio of Transparency — Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid — should have had this at the ready.
  • Rasmussen says that Americans “Oppose Any More Government Help For Banks” by almost 3-1 (56% – 20%). Any more “help” like that coming from Tim Geithner and we’ll be at Dow 7000 in no time.
  • The five most recent editions of the Carnival of Ohio Politics are here (#154), here (#153), here (#152), here (#151), and here (#150). Credits for astute assemblage go to “Jack Daniels” Williamson of Buckeye RINO, Lisa Renee at Glass City Jungle, Boring Made Dull, Ben Keeler at Keeler Political Report, and Jill at Writes Like She Talks, respectively.
  • Among the benefits of Judd Gregg’s principled withdrawal as Commerce Secretary nominee is the fact that it mostly forced the issue of the Obama administration’s plan to control the 2010 census from the White House into the open. Publications and broadcasters who had ignored the intended power grab when it was first exposed mostly cited it as a reason for Gregg’s change of heart. Perhaps a few readers and viewers will wonder why Gregg’s withdrawal is the first time they heard about it. Although Brent Baker at NewsBusters reports that the TV networks gave the census issue short shrift, they did not avoid mentioning it, (update/correction) with the exception of CBS, which really isn’t a news organization any more anyway. Update: At NewsBusters, Scott Whitlock reports that the nets’ morning shows didn’t mention the Census at all, proving that they’re not in the news business any more either.


  1. Was Sen. Judd Gregg the only one of Obama’s nominations without tax and conflict of interest problems???? Or was he the second one, a Repub as well???

    Comment by dscott — February 13, 2009 @ 9:13 am

  2. Isn’t having a Treasury Secretary who doesn’t like math worse than the McCain quote about not being an economics experts? That is a great quote. Sadly I’m sure you’ll have reason to use it again. I though all guys liked math and some girls didn’t like math. Maybe this is a metrosexual thing. :-)

    Comment by Largebill — February 13, 2009 @ 9:23 am

  3. #1, Maybe having tax problems is a feature, not a bug.

    #2, I guess no one has ever looked into whether possible metrosexual Ken of Barbie & Ken also thought that “math is hard.” :–>

    Comment by TBlumer — February 13, 2009 @ 9:28 am

  4. WSJ article, a doosy. If you were impressed with the $3.57 trillion figure get some smelling salts out for the cost of the whole 9 yards…The Real Stimulus Burden


    The nearby chart shows how the bill will increase the 2009 budget deficit, which is already the largest in modern history. Perhaps you recall the deficit wails from the Reagan years, but the peak deficit was only 6% of GDP in 1983. In the Clinton years we were told taxes had to rise to reduce a deficit of merely 3.9% of GDP. CBO estimates the 2009 deficit will reach 8.3% of the economy, not including the stimulus or bank bailout cash. Toss in those, and analysts at the Strategas Group estimate the deficit could hit nearly $2 trillion, or 13.5% of the U.S. economy.

    There are other nauseating tidbits in there as well. However, The projected $2 Trillion federal deficit for 2009 represents a (2/10.8) 18.5% INCREASE in the National Debt in just ONE year. Now I ask you, is there $2 Trillion in the entire world available to be lent to the US government in just one year??????????

    Let me pose another question, if the Federal Reserve has to buy those bonds with freshly printed money how will this affect the exchange rates and therefore the price of oil? Because I assume the oil producers are not going to stand by while their product value is lowered via exchange rates if they leave oil denominated in dollars. They will move more to the Euro and Yen in order to support the value of oil. Once this happens, the value of the dollar will plunge further as a glut of dollars will be on the market, a currency which no one will want to loose their principal. As the dollar devalues what foreigner would want to hold US bonds, denominated in US dollars?? For them it is a double whammy, lose via exchange rate and lose principal via an inevitable rise in interest rates since the Fed and Treasury will no longer be able to control the secondary market sales driven by deep discounts to get out before they lose even more.

    It seems like the Dems are really painting themselves into a corner on this one and this time the owner of the footprints in the paint will be undeniable.

    Comment by dscott — February 13, 2009 @ 2:58 pm

  5. A little more that you don’t want to know concerning Tim Geithner.


    It’s especially troublesome because it’s not the first time for Geithner. During his Senate confirmation process, it came out that he didn’t pay his Social Security or Medicare taxes during his years as an employee of the International Monetary Fund. I don’t think anyone would accuse him of willfully trying to evade his tax obligations. He’s probably sincere when he says he just screwed up. But just weeks after admitting that, he screwed up again with his non-plan plan. Not good. Two strikes.

    Or is it three? In a written submission to the Senate Finance Committee considering his nomination, he made the rash statement that “President Obama — backed by the conclusions of a broad range of economists — believes that China is manipulating its currency.” Rash, but true. Obama did indeed say that more than once on the campaign trail. But Geithner should never have said it.

    That’s because, by law, the Treasury has to make an official annual list of countries it finds are manipulating their currencies, and once that determination is made, there are serious diplomatic and trade consequences. It was very foolish for Geithner to all but declare, before even taking office, that Treasury under his leadership would make this finding. President Obama ended up having to personally call the president of China to apologize, and Geithner has since retracted the remark.

    Is that three strikes for Geithner? Should the market say, “You’re out”? There’s a risk that that’s what’s happening. Dangerous — because once a political figure gets a reputation for screwing up, like, say, Dan Quayle, it’s virtually impossible to ever restore his reputation. And right now we just can’t afford to have a Treasury secretary who doesn’t command respect.

    Comment by dscott — February 13, 2009 @ 3:14 pm

  6. the Default-o-matic has been updated: http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2009/02/default-o-matic-update-closer-to-brink.html

    Comment by dscott — February 13, 2009 @ 4:08 pm

  7. The last today, I promise.

    Now some words from Tom’s favorite writer on the economy:

    Analysis: Stimulus won’t jump-start economy
    By Jeannine Aversa / Associated Press


    No, the big stimulus plan won’t “save or create 3.5 million jobs,” as the president and congressional Democrats claim — at least not this year.

    The economy will remain feeble through 2009, analysts warn, and businesses will keep shedding jobs, though not as many as they would have without the $789 billion boost.

    The stimulus agreement, heading for final votes in the next day or so, goes to the heart of President Barack Obama’s strategy to revive the economy and will go far in shaping how Americans view his economic leadership.

    What it won’t do is quickly snap the country out of the painful recession, now in its second year.

    It should provide some relief, economists say, though some argue it won’t plow enough money into the economy to prop it up.

    In others words it’s all Bush’s fault for not deficit spending enough…So already the libs are back peddling by blaming Bush for a year long recession when in fact it’s only been 6 months that their pump priming of the economy with deficit spending isn’t going to work as advertised. Hmmm, kind of like the TARP?

    Comment by dscott — February 13, 2009 @ 4:40 pm

  8. Breaking News, not told by MSM!!!!


    Comment by dscott — February 13, 2009 @ 5:30 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.