As the Reid/Pelosi/Obama vision of America continues to materialize before our eyes, one thing is already very clear… an America dependent on government is a sustaining source of power for those who feed that dependency.

In a warped perversion of the old “trickle down” economics, far-left liberals are accelerating the flow of wealth with high powered siphons and are doing so without even trying to hide their disdain of those who supply the life-blood of our economy.

Impatient with voluntary trips to the economic blood bank by those who live and thrive in our economy, they have turned to vampirism and will greedily feed off the hosts until they are bled dry.

When 40% of the country not only pays zero income tax but actually receives a check from the government at tax time (that’s right, 40% of the country actually makes a profit on April 15), when 10% of the country pays 73% of all income taxes collected by the federal government, what we have is a major redistribution of wealth.

But even that is not enough for the far left, they want to expand the number of available hosts (declaring more of us to be rich in the process) and ramp up the flow from all available hosts to feed more of the vampire class and expand their base so that, in their minds, perpetual power will be within their reach.

Vlad would be proud.

The problem is that this is not sustainable.  When all hosts are bled dry, the economy will collapse and all will suffer, the vampires, the hosts… and those of us caught in the middle.

What works best for our country?

The same thing that has worked, albeit cyclically, for decades.

• Those of us with lots of money who invest in our nation and fuel the engines that creates jobs
• Those of us doing fairly well, buying lots of stuff and keep the economy afloat
• Those of us getting by and working hard for a better life for our families
• Those of us struggling that need our help
• And.. a government that protects those of us who struggle while staying out of the way of the rest of us

When the government becomes the economy, the economy will collapse from the top down as the rich stop creating jobs, the well off and those getting by have no money to feed the economy, and finally those who are struggling no longer have the rest of us to help them out because we are standing beside them instead of reaching out with a helping hand.

A nation of vampires is doomed to a life in the shadows…

I was impressed this week to see a commercial proclaiming that GM had repaid loans from the American people five years early.  Very impressive indeed, and surely a sign of economic recovery that this huge auto manufacturer was able to dig out of a hole and pay back what they owe.

Well…  maybe not.

From Senator Grassley’s note to Treasury Secretary Tim “TurboTax” Geithner”:

General Motors (GM) yesterday announced that it repaid its TARP loans. I am concerned, however, that this announcement is not what it seems. In fact, it appears to be nothing more than an elaborate TARP money shuffle.

On Tuesday of this week, Mr. Neil Barofsky, the Special Inspector General for TARP, testified before the Senate Finance Committee. During his testimony Mr. Barofsky addressed GM’s recent debt repayment activity, and stated that the funds GM is using to repay its TARP debt are not coming from GM earnings. Instead, GM seems to be using TARP funds from an escrow account at Treasury to make the debt repayments. The most recent quarterly report from the Office of the Special Inspector General for TARP says “The source of funds for these quarterly [debt] payments will be other TARP funds currently held in an escrow account.”

<snip

In reality, it looks like GM merely used one source of TARP funds to repay another.

Wow!  This is a great idea and an example for all of us to follow.  Pay off your loans with a loan from the original lender.

In fact, from now on I plan to pay my credit card bill in total by using that same credit card…   no more worries about credit card bills for me.  They will be paid in full every month and it won’t cost me a dime.

Should be interesting to see how this plays out… perhaps there is a reasonable explanation.  If not, there is surely an explanation that will satisfy the kool aid drinkers among us.

Just saw this news report from AP on FoxNews:

A federal judge has ruled the U.S. government’s move to cut off funding to ACORN is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon issued the preliminary injunction against the government Friday. She ruled that it is in the public’s interest for the organization to continue receiving federal funding.

ACORN claimed in its lawsuit that Congress’ decision to cut off its funding was unconstitutional because it punitively targeted an organization.

A lawyer for ACORN says the decision sends a sharp message to Congress that it can’t single out an individual or organization without due process.

What they are essentially claiming here is that Congress passed a Bill of Attainder directed at ACORN:

A bill of attainder (also known as an act or writ of attainder) is an act of the legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial.

I’m no lawyer, but since when is it considered punishment to refuse to fund an organization or person?  Does that mean every other organization that Congress chooses to not spend our tax dollars on can claim they are being singled out and punished?

This is a ridiculous ruling, this judge is wrong, and this will get reversed if our government bothers to appeal it… be interesting to see if they do appeal since they probably like the idea of being “forced” to fund ACORN.  That way they can fund this bunch of crooks and say they had no choice, the judge made them do it.

This ruling does send a sharp message though… government spending is so out of control, organizations can now claim an inalienable right to our money.

July 2 this year we published a chart showing a significant and growing gap between the unemployment rate for men and women.  Even sent a copy of the chart to a couple of media folks.  Either missed all of the media discussion on the subject or no one thought it was interesting enough to report.

Yesterday’s opinion piece in the WSJ, by David Paul Kuhn, is the first I’ve seen on the subject.

Why is this gap significant?  If we assume that in most American households the man is still the main source of income, the impact of the unemployment rate on American families is greater than has been reported since the rate for men 20-years and older passed 10% all the way back in July.

Here’s the latest chart:

Not sure why this has not been worthy of discussion before today, but here are some excerpts from the WSJ article:

Last month the unemployment rate climbed above 10% for the first time in more than a quarter century. Less noticed is that male workers crossed this same threshold six months earlier. Since the U.S. became the world’s dominant economic power, no downturn has fallen more disproportionately on one gender.

The unemployment rate for men, 11.4%, based on seasonally adjusted data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, outpaces the rate for women, 8.8%. We now have the largest jobless gender gap since tracking became possible in 1948.

<snip>

And yet, for all its unprecedented scope and nature, the limited attention and passive response it has received are remarkable. Imagine the outcry if women amounted to roughly three in four lost jobs in this recession.

<snip>

The solution is not a male version of the Labor Department’s Women’s Bureau. Men don’t need to start viewing themselves as victims. But the stimulus or new jobs bills could be adjusted to address the wave of male unemployment by expanding public works spending. It would make for more effective policy and be fairer. As the feminist movement taught us, what happens to one gender happens to us all.

Especially since the impact spreads to the whole family when dad is out of work.

Yet another shameful display of immature behavior by Democrats today.  Maybe I am just not hearing about Republicans behaving this way, but it seems like I keep hearing about elected Democrats behaving like little children across the country.

From Fox News -

The Democratic chairman of the House committee responsible for government oversight has indefinitely locked Republican members out of the hearing room, following a dispute over a mortgage loan controversy.

Kurt Bardella, spokesman for ranking Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said Chairman Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., had the locks on the Republican entrance changed Tuesday.

The move was apparently was in retaliation for Issa’s efforts to subpoena records on Countrywide’s so-called VIP loan program and for a video Issa’s staff recorded of Democrats darting from their chambers a week ago in the face of a vote.

“They say we will have access to the hearing room when the general public does,” Bardella told Foxnews.com. “I’m embarrassed for them.”

They’re kidding, right?

This follows other fine examples of mature behavior from NY Democrats:

From Salon - Tuesday marked just the latest twist in an ongoing, and embarrassing, fight over which party will control New York’s State Senate. The saga began two weeks ago, when two Democrats joined with Republicans to wrest power from the Democratic Party, which had gained the majority in last year’s election after a four-decade drought. Democrats, though, weren’t willing to accept the results of the coup, and wouldn’t go back to work. With the body deadlocked and neither party willing to cede control, Gov. David Paterson called a special session to try to force the two sides to come to an arrangement.

So before the special session was gaveled to order at 3 p.m. Wednesday, Democrats snuck in to the chamber through a back entrance and locked themselves in — and the Republicans out. By doing so, they beat the GOP to the punch; Republicans were going to enter the chamber at 2 p.m.

Eventually, the Democrats did let their opponents in to the Senate, but that only led to more tension. A Republican tried to go to the rostrum in order to preside, but there was already a Democrat up there, so a sergeant at arms blocked the Republican’s way. Then, Republicans started holding the session, presiding from the floor. Democrats, though, refused to participate, but the GOP went ahead and acted like they were. Oh, and there are now two separate gavels being used.

So…  the Republicans made a good political play by getting two Democrats to vote their way and the Democrats responded by… locking the door.

Then there was Texas, where House Democrats actually left the state to prevent a vote:

From CNN: With action in the Texas House brought to a standstill, roughly 50 state Democratic representatives said they would remain in neighboring Oklahoma “as long as it takes” to block a Republican-drawn redistricting plan that could cost them five seats in Congress.

Not in the majority? No problem…  just leave the state and refuse to return until you get your own way.

And just recently, the incident that apparently led to the latest lockout by the Democrats:

Oh.. and why was this video made?  Because the Democrats left the chamber to avoid a vote… see a pattern forming here?

What is with these people?  Next time, let’s elect adults.

Three  years ago, Nancy Pelosi discussed her agenda for the House under Democratic leadership:

WAPO 10/6/2006 – House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi is thinking 100 hours, time enough, she says, to begin to “drain the swamp” after more than a decade of Republican rule.

<snip>

All the days after that: “Pay as you go,” meaning no increasing the deficit, whether the issue is middle class tax relief, health care or some other priority.

So clearly the deficit is the top priority according to Pelosi.  Even health care reform must take a back seat to stopping the growth of the deficit.  The deficit can not increase, it’s pay as you go from now on folks, not one dime of deficit increase.   Deficit growth must be stopped at all cost.

Yeah, no increasing the deficit, no increasing… yeah…

No increasing the deficit?

The deficit has gone up over $4,000,000,000,000 ($4 trillion) since Pelosi made  it a priority to not increase the deficit.

And that’s WITHOUT the anticipated impact of health care “reform” Pelosi is pushing.

Is it me, or does it seem like you can not believe anything Pelosi says.

How could we even think such a thing?

The federal government would never do that…

… I suppose one way to convince folks that the government has no plans to intrude in the relationship between health care providers/insurers and patients is to tell health insurers what they can and can’t say:

From WAPO:  The federal government has ordered health insurers to stop telling Medicare beneficiaries that proposed health reform legislation could hurt seniors and jeopardize their benefits.

The government might take enforcement action against insurers that have tried to mobilize opposition to the legislation by sending their enrollees “misleading and confusing” messages, a senior official of the Department of Health and Human Services said in a memo Monday.

Well, I’m convinced….

Not only is it clear that the federal government has no intention of interfering in the relationship between patient and health care providers/insurers, it is also clear that they will forcefully defend their First Amendment rights to freedom of appropriate/approved  speech.

Why are folks upset over this?  Team Obama is just trying to help us to understand that what they are doing is for our own good and confusing messages to the contrary are just not helpful.

Now hush…