January 18, 2011

Lickety-Split Links (011811, Morning)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 6:21 am

Dick Cheney: “Obama has learned that Bush policies were right”

President Obama has “learned from experience” that some of the Bush administration’s decisions on terrorism issues were necessary, according to former Vice President Dick Cheney.

In his first interview since undergoing major heart surgery last July, Cheney said he thinks Obama has been forced to rethink some of his national security positions now that he sits in the Oval Office.

Cheney’s giving Obama too much credit. I believe that the correct take is: “White House pollsters have learned that moving away from some of the Bush administration’s decisions on terrorism issues would be political suicide.”


It’s not like there’s bandwidth rationing going on (just give the FCC time) — “The following article on Muslim-Christian relations was solicited and then rejected by the Washington Post’s ‘On Faith’ blog.” It’s published here at Pajamas Media, which apparently found the necessary bandwidth.


As Steve Jobs again takes a medical leave from Apple, it’s worth reflecting on what the company has accomplished, and what similarly innovative companies face today.

Accomplishments, even including failures, which nonetheless moved along innovation: Apple II, Apple III, Lisa, Macintosh, Newton, iPod/iTunes, iPhone, iPad –and I’ve surely missed a few.

Apple went public in 1980. When it did so, “it generated more capital than any IPO since Ford Motor Company in 1956 and instantly created more millionaires (about 300) than any company in history.”

It would be easy to assume that had Apple faced today’s regulatory environment, it would nonetheless have successfully gone public, as did Google roughly 20 years later. I’m not so sure. Given the early-stage setbacks with the Apple III, the company’s founders and investors might instead have sold out to IBM, which did not become a truly despised rival until the Mac debuted in 1984.

Does anyone believe that we’d have seen a similar litany of life-improving innovations under Big Blue? Neither do I, which leads me to wonder what we’ve lost because more recent pioneers like YouTube and many other smaller firms and their investors have concluded at crunch time that getting bought out by Google or Microsoft is preferable to navigating the costly, treacherous waters of going public under Sarbanes Oxley.


Venezuela’s Oil Reserves top Saudia Arabia’s — Too bad statist and socialist Hugo Chavez can’t figure out how to keep production going:

Venezuela’s oil production fell to 2.36 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2008, after climbing as high as 3.18 million bpd in 1997, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) estimated the country’s output was about 2.24 million bpd in December (2008).

There is some evidence of improvement, but the country’s failure to capitalize on its good fortune it is the Chavez regime’s most obvious failure. The country could be extremely prosperous, but instead is in serious decline.



  1. Oh Tom, when will you learn? Chavez, Obama, Gore and the rest of the elites who presume to run the world WANT oil shortages for their own reasons. Cornering the market on oil requires there be limited supply to give them the leverage to maximize profits and power. Consider for a moment Obama and the liberals insistence on gas and oil drilling bans using various nonsensical eco reasons as a ruse to restrict future supply. By exercising this power to restrict flow, they indeed demonstrate POWER. The exercise of power is about EGO not leadership. The Gores and Soros’s of the world become ever more wealthier at the expense of the little people and Obama and Chavez get their campaign funding for re-election from them. It’s all about power and money, CRAP on the the little people. It’s called cronyism.

    BTW- devaluing of the dollar works to Soros advantage because Obama’s policies make it a certainty the dollar will devalue and if you KNOW the direction of the market you can make the BIG BUCKS. Obama and Soros are nothing more than mob gangsters who wring a company dry to enrich themselves, they don’t give a crap about the long term health of the workers or the company. It’s all about today and being rich and the power to stick to everyone else.

    Comment by dscott — January 18, 2011 @ 4:56 pm

  2. #1 dscott, I get everyone but Chavez wanting a shortage. He needs the money to fuel his handouts. His state-owned company isn’t producing what it should, and it’s because it’s a basket case, not because he’s deliberately under-producing.

    Comment by TBlumer — January 18, 2011 @ 5:44 pm

  3. While it is logical to think in rational terms that Chavez does want increased oil output for Venezuela, his personal agenda depends on the opposite. The exercise of arbitrary power is not rational to people like us. The exercise of power is about Ego. The power over others. Making the entire populous poverty stricken is necessary for the total exercise of power since EVERYONE at that point is totally dependent on the State. Who is the State? Chavez and anyone who has their livelihood dependent on Chavez. I wrote about this abuse of power: http://www.publiusforum.com/2010/04/13/the-inflationary-spiral/

    Self serving people such as Chavez and Mugabe are successful by their own terms, NOT by ours!

    Comment by dscott — January 19, 2011 @ 9:20 am

  4. BTW – If you need to see the end results of Obama’s self serving plan in America then look at Detroit. Here is the example of what one party rule by Democrats preaching Equality of Outcome results in the poverty of the governed by the elites who exercise power for their own selfish gain. Do you hear the rulers of Detroit having second thoughts about how they ran the city literally into the ground? NO?

    California is in transition to Detroit on a statewide scale, do you hear these politicians, Democrats, having second thoughts of driving out the industrial base and destroying 100s of thousands of jobs in the name of AGW? NO? In fact, they want to double down on it. Why not? Because just like the pols in Detroit, the Dem rulers of CA are getting their salary every month and exercising power over people. The short term gain of impoverishing the State via wealth redistribution outweighs the long term of wealth creation by the masses (individuals) from their POV.

    The bottom line is: if individuals create wealth and thus solve their own problems on their own terms then who needs the leadership of the elites proposing solutions? Ego, Tom, it’s all about ego. Hence any solution by Republicans for small government doing only essential services is completely at odds with the self interest of Democrats – read: liberals in general.

    Comment by dscott — January 19, 2011 @ 11:58 am

  5. Here’s exactly what I’m talking about – CA doubling down on stupid. Dems want to extend tax increases to the tune of $12 billion to balance their budget even though it was the tax increase that made their budget situation worse by driving wealth producers OUT of the state.

    California Declares Fiscal Emergency


    Brown was sworn in to his third term early this month and has presented lawmakers with a plan to balance the state’s books with $12.5 billion in spending cuts and revenue from tax extensions that voters must first approve.

    Notice how that sentence is worded, of the $24.5 billion short fall, $12.5 billion will be budget cuts so by implication that means the temporary tax increases that the Governor wants to KEEP is $12 billion via voter approval! In other words the Dems under Schwartzenagger RAISED taxes by $12 billion at the beginning of the economic downturn which then CREATED the $24.5 billion shortfall 2 years later!!!!! Talk about your epic fail of policy!! What we see here is the Laffer Curve played out on a State scale.

    So the larger question is, will the voters of CA finalize the act of economic suicide by doubling down on a failed policy? The Dems are hoping that voters being presented with a false compromise will give them cover for making bad policy decisions in the first place. What needs to happen is a budget cut of $24.5 billion and allow the tax rates to roll back thus allowing people to KEEP more of their money for wealth creation activities.

    Comment by dscott — January 21, 2011 @ 11:01 am

  6. #5, a tax “extension” that was supposedly temporary is not a tax increase, but preventing the Bush “tax cuts” (federal) from expiring and keeping the same system we’ve had for 8 years in place — cuts that were always intended to be permanent — is somehow a seriously problematic tax cut.

    Comment by TBlumer — January 21, 2011 @ 11:07 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.