Energy

Fact Checking the President: Take A Wild Guess

The Associated-Press-as-cheerleader act is finally waning as they realize that election night euphoria is turning to a scorching case of buyers remorse, and they actually have a job to do.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama knows Americans are unhappy that the government could rescue people who bought mansions beyond their means.

But his assurance Tuesday night that only the deserving will get help rang hollow.

Even officials in his administration, many supporters of the plan in Congress and the Federal Reserve chairman expect some of that money will go to people who used lousy judgment.

The president skipped over several complex economic circumstances in his speech to Congress — and may have started an international debate among trivia lovers and auto buffs over what country invented the car.

A look at some of his assertions:

OBAMA: “We have launched a housing plan that will help responsible families facing the threat of foreclosure lower their monthly payments and refinance their mortgages. It’s a plan that won’t help speculators or that neighbor down the street who bought a house he could never hope to afford, but it will help millions of Americans who are struggling with declining home values.”

THE FACTS: If the administration has come up with a way to ensure money only goes to those who got in honest trouble, it hasn’t said so.

Defending the program Tuesday at a Senate hearing, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said it’s important to save those who made bad calls, for the greater good. He likened it to calling the fire department to put out a blaze caused by someone smoking in bed.

“I think the smart way to deal with a situation like that is to put out the fire, save him from his own consequences of his own action but then, going forward, enact penalties and set tougher rules about smoking in bed.”

Brilliant Benji. I’d have to say in this context we need to let him burn to get the stupidity out of the gene pool.

Similarly, the head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. suggested this month it’s not likely aid will be denied to all homeowners who overstated their income or assets to get a mortgage they couldn’t afford.

“I think it’s just simply impractical to try to do a forensic analysis of each and every one of these delinquent loans,” Sheila Bair told National Public Radio.

Or… “we’re too lazy (and it’s frankly not in our interest) to do any analysis whatsoever, except when it comes to which incomes can be fleeced with higher taxes, then we’ll analyze ’til the donkeys (jackasses) come home.”

——

OBAMA: “And I believe the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it.”

THE FACTS: Depends what your definition of automobiles, is. According to the Library of Congress, the inventor of the first true automobile was probably Germany’s Karl Benz, who created the first auto powered by an internal combustion gasoline engine, in 1885 or 1886. In the U.S., Charles Duryea tested what library researchers called the first successful gas-powered car in 1893. Nobody disputes that Henry Ford created the first assembly line that made cars affordable.

——

OBAMA: “We have known for decades that our survival depends on finding new sources of energy. Yet we import more oil today than ever before.”

THE FACTS: Oil imports peaked in 2005 at just over 5 billion barrels, and have been declining slightly since. The figure in 2007 was 4.9 billion barrels, or about 58 percent of total consumption. The nation is on pace this year to import 4.7 billion barrels, and government projections are for imports to hold steady or decrease a bit over the next two decades.

——

OBAMA: “We have already identified $2 trillion in savings over the next decade.”

THE FACTS: Although 10-year projections are common in government, they don’t mean much. And at times, they are a way for a president to pass on the most painful steps to his successor, by putting off big tax increases or spending cuts until someone else is in the White House.

Obama only has a real say on spending during the four years of his term. He may not be president after that and he certainly won’t be 10 years from now.

——

OBAMA: “Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they knew they couldn’t afford from banks and lenders who pushed those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some other day.”

THE FACTS: This may be so, but it isn’t only Republicans who pushed for deregulation of the financial industries. The Clinton administration championed an easing of banking regulations, including legislation that ended the barrier between regular banks and Wall Street banks. That led to a deregulation that kept regular banks under tight federal regulation but extended lax regulation of Wall Street banks. Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, later an economic adviser to candidate Obama, was in the forefront in pushing for this deregulation.

——

OBAMA: “In this budget, we will end education programs that don’t work and end direct payments to large agribusinesses that don’t need them. We’ll eliminate the no-bid contracts that have wasted billions in Iraq, and reform our defense budget so that we’re not paying for Cold War-era weapons systems we don’t use. We will root out the waste, fraud and abuse in our Medicare program that doesn’t make our seniors any healthier, and we will restore a sense of fairness and balance to our tax code by finally ending the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas.”

THE FACTS: First, his budget does not accomplish any of that. It only proposes those steps. That’s all a president can do, because control over spending rests with Congress. Obama’s proposals here are a wish list and some items, including corporate tax increases and cuts in agricultural aid, will be a tough sale in Congress.

Second, waste, fraud and abuse are routinely targeted by presidents who later find that the savings realized seldom amount to significant sums. Programs that a president might consider wasteful have staunch defenders in Congress who have fought off similar efforts in the past.

——

OBAMA: “Thanks to our recovery plan, we will double this nation’s supply of renewable energy in the next three years.”

THE FACTS: While the president’s stimulus package includes billions in aid for renewable energy and conservation, his goal is unlikely to be achieved through the recovery plan alone.

In 2007, the U.S. produced 8.4 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, including hydroelectric dams, solar panels and windmills. Under the status quo, the Energy Department says, it will take more than two decades to boost that figure to 12.5 percent.

If Obama is to achieve his much more ambitious goal, Congress would need to mandate it. That is the thrust of an energy bill that is expected to be introduced in coming weeks.

——

OBAMA: “Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs.”

THE FACTS: This is a recurrent Obama formulation. But job creation projections are uncertain even in stable times, and some of the economists relied on by Obama in making his forecast acknowledge a great deal of uncertainty in their numbers.

The president’s own economists, in a report prepared last month, stated, “It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error.”

Beyond that, it’s unlikely the nation will ever know how many jobs are saved as a result of the stimulus. While it’s clear when jobs are abolished, there’s no economic gauge that tracks job preservation. The estimates are based on economic assumptions of how many jobs would be lost without the stimulus.

All I can say is wow. Read the full article here.

Video: Escaped The Plantation, Voting McCain

Perhaps the best speech given during this entire campaign cycle.

The O-Team
More genius by ZO. See more great clips here

The SF Surrender Poodle Has No Intention of Drilling

There’s nothing good to say about the shrilling hollow head of Nancy Pelosi. After watching her venomous and classless, yet always canned and poorly performed, talking points for more years than I can frankly stand anymore, I find her to be so offensive that I can’t find words other than these to describe it.

Anyway, adding to the pile of reasons “we think she’s worst human San Fran-sicko ever produced” (nod to you bathtub boy), are the latest jerky movements the DNC hand operating that empty head (sometimes you can see the strings from which her hands and feet dangle as well) expressed regarding drilling for oil offshore. In typical Surrender Poodle partisan fashion, the people need to settle for the appearance-of-desire.

Instead of getting us out of this energy mess, The Poodle is playing typical Democrat politics of talk-big-then-hide-the-missing-follow-through. The WSJ published a piece today on the situation…

The ruse began late Monday night, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi released a 290-page bill and then waved it through less than 24 hours later, 236-189. “Closed” rules prohibited the GOP from offering alternatives. The real game was to give vulnerable Democrats political cover by letting them vote for more offshore drilling — while also making more drilling all but impossible, thus appeasing the party’s green wing.

The bill would allow exploration on the Outer Continental Shelf, but only in waters 100 or more miles out in the Atlantic and Pacific. The farthest reaches of the OCS contain resources, but undersea geography and deep water make development very — if not prohibitively — expensive. Areas closer to land are far richer and easier to access. Conveniently, Mrs. Pelosi’s bill imposes a 50-mile “buffer zone” around the country.

READ FULL ARTICLE

Shameful, Nancy, but nothing new coming from you.

Obama’s Grand Energy Plan…

Here’s the word for word on his latest ad…

On gas prices, John McCain’s part of the problem. He and Bush support a drilling plan that won’t produce a drop of oil for seven years. McCain will give more tax breaks to big oil. He’s voted with Bush 95% of the time. Barack Obama will make energy independence an urgent priority, raise mileage standards, fast-track technology for alternative fuels, a $1,000 tax cut to help families as we break the grip of foreign oil. A royal plan and new energy.

“…Obama will make energy independence an urgent priority…” – Wow, if only it were that simple greenhorn.

“…Raise mileage standards…”

Wow, great idea. Once again, if only it were that simple greenhorn.

“…Fast-track technology for alternative fuels”

What, like ethanol, which practically takes as much energy to produce as it provides? Oh, and that production energy comes from oil because the Left is afraid of nuclear. Make no mistake, I’m ALL about alternative energy and the environment, (that and animal rights are categories on which I tend to agree more with the Left), but stating the generalities makes his clear lack of ideas painfully obvious. And what’s worse, he obviously hasn’t been able to hire anyone with ideas or his rhetoric would eventually present one. Fishing from an empty idea pond…

“…a $1,000 tax cut to help families…”

Throw out one from the Right strategy of lower taxes to seem reasonable and score points, before it counts. They’re so out of ideas that they’re using ones from the Right?

The Left must know their candidate has the same leadership experience, but less street smarts, than his driver, but that bed’s made and that’s the best they could do (giggle). That said, it’s not all that different from the Right. No idea how it happened, but we ended up with the worst of the initial bunch (save Paulson). McCain’s in dire need of someone with some economic savvy and real world experience in the private sector (Romney).

All I know is that as oblivious (i.e. Left) as McCain is on many subjects, he’s significantly less dangerous than the horror of letting a blind-eye to history Soros-sock-puppet pull this country’s pants down.