Last Post

Ladies and Gentlemen, boys and girls of all ages, this is my last post on Restore the Republic. True, the Republic still needs to be restored. With that I am in total agreement. And as Ron Paul has said, perhaps the country going bankrupt will be just the moment for restoration to take place. But the byline of this blog is "Thoughts on the 2008 US Presidential Election."

I have thought all that I want to think on the 2008 election!

It's been a nice outlet for rants, revelations and some rogue humor from time to time. I've enjoyed blogging on Restore the Republic.

RTR08 was established Dec 1, 2008. So we are a week past a year in publication.

Including this one, there have been 352 posts.

And though I declared the Fox New fast over, I still have not watched it. So I have been Fox-free for 339 days. It's not bad. You'll have a headache the first couple of days but you can do it!

Thanks to all who have read and to those who took a moment to comment.

Honestly, I'd like to keep blogging here but it's time for a 'change.'

So, bye bye Rudy, Mitt, Mike, John, Ron, Joe, Hillary, Sarah and Barack...I'll leave it to others to write about you now.

I leave with one last prediction....two years from today, President Obama will be among the most unpopular Presidents in history. It's not that he will do a bad job...it's just that nobody can be all that he has allowed himself to be made out to be....and realities of the world and the economy will keep him from being the liberal savior that many expect....I predict that he will do a better job than many expect but be much less popular than most would ever imagine.

To one and all....."Restore the Republic!"

- 30 -

Seems Like

Seems to me that Obama has made more conservative appointments in key positions than the Maverick would have.

Thanksgiving Address

The following is the text of the speech that Abraham Lincoln gave on the day that he signed the Thanksgiving Proclamation, “to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November...as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens.”

It is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God; to confess their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon; and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations are blessed whose God is the LORD.

We know that by His divine law, nations, like individuals, are subjected to punishments and chastisements in this world. May we not justly fear that the awful calamity of civil war which now desolates the land may be a punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins, to the needful end of our national reformation as a whole people?

We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of heaven; we have been preserved these many years in peace and prosperity; we have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation has ever grown.

But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us, and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to, feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us.

It has seemed to me fit and proper that God should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November as a day of Thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens.

--Abraham Lincoln - October 3, 1863

Expiration Date

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. - Second Amendment to the U S Constitution

One or both expire on Jan 20, 2009.

Counseling Needed

I still haven't watched a minute of TV news since Obama won Ohio. So, by default, the Faux News fast has been extended. I keep up by internet but at least there I don't have to listen and watch as major media figures swoon and prattle on about Michelle's dress or some such drivel. Obviously I need to be admitted.

Real Downer

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Wall Street slumped Thursday afternoon and the S&P 500 closed at an 11-1/2 year low as fears of a prolonged recession sparked a massive selloff.

The Standard & Poor's 500 (SPX) index lost 6.7% according to early tallies and closed at its lowest point sine April 14, 1997.

The Dow Jones industrial average (INDU) lost 445 points or 5.6%. It closed at the lowest level since March 12, 2003, just above the low of the last bear market.

The Nasdaq composite (COMP) lost 5.1% and also closed at its lowest level since March 12, 2003.

Dick Morris Scorcher

The results of the G-20 economic summit amount to nothing less than the seamless integration of the United States into the European economy. In one month of legislation and one diplomatic meeting, the United States has unilaterally abdicated all the gains for the concept of free markets won by the Reagan administration and surrendered, in toto, to the Western European model of socialism, stagnation and excessive government regulation. Sovereignty is out the window. Without a vote, we are suddenly members of the European Union. Given the dismal record of those nations at creating jobs and sustaining growth, merger with the Europeans is like a partnership with death.

At the G-20 meeting, Bush agreed to subject the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and our other regulatory agencies to the supervision of a global entity that would critique its regulatory standards and demand changes if it felt they were necessary. Bush agreed to create a College of Supervisors.

According to The Washington Post, it would "examine the books of major financial institutions that operate across national borders so regulators could begin to have a more complete picture of banks' operations."

Their scrutiny would extend to hedge funds and to various "exotic" financial instruments. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), a European-dominated operation, would conduct "regular vigorous reviews" of American financial institutions and practices. The European-dominated College of Supervisors would also weigh in on issues like executive compensation and investment practices.

There is nothing wrong with the substance of this regulation. Experience is showing it is needed. But it is very wrong to delegate these powers to unelected, international institutions with no political accountability.

We have a Securities and Exchange Commission appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, both of whom are elected by the American people. It is with the SEC, the Treasury and the Federal Reserve that financial accountability must take place.

The European Union achieved this massive subrogation of American sovereignty the way it usually does, by negotiation, gradual bureaucratic encroachment, and without asking the voters if they approve. What's more, Bush appears to have gone down without a fight, saving his debating time for arguing against the protectionism that France's Nicolas Sarkozy was pushing. By giving Bush a seeming victory on a moratorium against protectionism for one year, Sarkozy was able to slip over his massive scheme for taking over the supervision of the U.S. economy.

All kinds of political agendas are advancing under the cover of response to the global financial crisis. Where Franklin Roosevelt saved capitalism by regulating it, Bush, to say nothing of Obama, has given the government control over our major financial and insurance institutions. And it isn't even our government! The power has now been transferred to the international community, led by the socialists in the European Union.

Will Obama govern from the left? He doesn't have to. George W. Bush has done all the heavy lifting for him. It was under Bush that the government basically took over as the chief stockholder of our financial institutions and under Bush that we ceded our financial controls to the European Union. In doing so, he has done nothing to preserve what differentiates the vibrant American economy from those dying economies in Europe. Why have 80 percent of the jobs that have been created since 1980 in the industrialized world been created in the United States? How has America managed to retain its leading 24 percent share of global manufacturing even in the face of the Chinese surge? How has the U.S. GDP risen so high that it essentially equals that of the European Union, which has 50 percent more population? It has done so by an absence of stifling regulation, a liberation of capital to flow to innovative businesses, low taxes, and by a low level of unionization that has given business the flexibility to grow and prosper. Europe, stagnated by taxation and regulation, has grown by a pittance while we have roared ahead. But now Bush -- not Obama -- Bush has given that all up and caved in to European socialists.

The Bush legacy? European socialism. Who needs enemies with friends like Bush?

Two Peas

I really have no idea why Obama did not pick McCain as his running mate -- they believe the same things, said the same things, proposed the same things -- and unlike Joe Biden, John McCain didn't really want to be President. At any rate, the two peas met today to discuss how to "fix up the country." I personally think that we are as fixed up as we can be. Don't you?

Ron Paul Nails It (as usual)

The following is an OP-ED special to CNN by Congressman Ron Paul in answer to the question, "What should the GOP do now?" It's not a snippet. I encourage you to read it twice then print it and put it on your refrigerator - then read it to your children at bedtime.....

(CNN) -- The questions now being asked are: Where to go from here and who's to blame for the downfall of the Republican Party?

Too bad the concern for the future of the Republican Party had not been seriously addressed in the year 2000 when the Republicans gained control of the House, Senate, and the Presidency.

Now, in light of the election, many are asking: What is the future of the Republican Party?

But that is the wrong question. The proper question should be: Where is our country heading? There's no doubt that a large majority of Americans believe we're on the wrong track. That's why the candidate demanding "change" won the election. It mattered not that the change offered was no change at all, only a change in the engineer of a runaway train.

Once it's figured out what is fundamentally wrong with our political and economic system, solutions can be offered. If the Republican Party can grasp hold of the policy changes needed, then the party can be rebuilt.

In the rise and fall of the recent Republican reign of power these past decades, the goal of the party had grown to be only that of gaining and maintaining power -- with total sacrifice of the original Republican belief in shrinking the size of government.

Most Republicans endorsed this view in order to achieve victories at the polls. Limiting government power and size with less spending and a balanced budget as the goal used to be a "traditional" Republican value. This is what Goldwater and Reagan talked about. That is what the Contract with America stood for.

The opportunity finally came in 2000 to do something about the cancerous growth of government. This clear message led to the Republican success at the polls.

Once the Republicans were in power, though, the promises faded, and all policies were directed at maintaining or increasing power by trying to whittle away at Democratic strength by acting like big-spending Democrats.

The Republican Congress never once stood up against the Bush/Rove machine that demanded support for unconstitutional wars, attacks on civil liberties here at home, and an economic policy based on more spending, more debt, and more inflation -- while constantly preaching the flawed doctrine that deficits don't matter as long as taxes aren't raised.

But what the Republican leadership didn't realize was that ALL spending is a tax on middle-class Americans through price inflation and that eventually the inevitable consequence is paying for the extravagance with a financial crisis.

Party leaders concentrated only on political tricks in order to maintain power and neglected the limited-government principles on which they were elected. The only solution for this is for Republicans to once again reassess their core beliefs and show how the country (not the party) can be put back on the right track. The problem, though, is regaining credibility.

After eight years of perpetual (and unnecessary and unconstitutional) war, persistent and expanded attacks on our privacy, runaway deficits, and now nationalization of the financial system, Republicans are going to have a tough time regaining the confidence of the American people. But that's what must be done.

Otherwise, Republicans can only mimic Democrats and hope for an isolated victory here and there. And that's just more of the same that brought on the disintegration of the party.

Since the new alignment of political power offers no real change, we will remain on the same track without even a pretense of slowing the growth of government. With the new administration we can expect things to go from bad to worse.

Opportunity abounds for anyone who can present the case for common sense in fiscal affairs, for protection of civil liberties here at home, and avoiding the senseless foreign entanglements which have bogged us down for decades and contributed so significantly to our fiscal and budgetary crisis.

During the debates in the Republican Presidential primary, even though I am a 10-term sitting Representative Member of Congress, I was challenged more than once on my Republican credentials. The fact that I was repeatedly asked how I could be a Republican when I was talking a different language than the other candidates answers the question of how the Republican Party can slip so far so fast.

My rhetorical answer at the time was simple: Why should one be excluded from the Republican Party for believing and always voting for:

• Limited government power

• A balanced budget

• Personal liberty

• Strict adherence to the Constitution

• Sound money

• A strong defense while avoiding all undeclared wars

• No nation-building and no policing the world

How can a party that still pretends to be the party of limited government distance itself outright from these views and expect to maintain credibility? Since the credibility of the Republican Party has now been lost, how can it regain credibility without embracing these views, or at least showing respect for them?

I concluded my answer by simply stating the Republican Party had lost its way and must reassess its values. And that is what needs to be done in a hurry.

But it might just take a new crop of leaders to regain the credibility needed to redirect the Party. It certainly won't be done overnight. It took a long time to come out of the wilderness after 40 years of Democratic rule for the Republican Party to take charge. Today though, time moves more quickly. Opportunities will arise. The one thing for certain is that in the next four years we will not see the Republic restored. Instead the need for it will be greater than ever.

The problems are easily understood and the answers are not that difficult. Abusing the rule of law and ignoring the Constitution can be reversed. If the Republican Party can grasp hold of the needed reforms, it can lead the way and regain its credibility. If power is sought for power's sake alone, the Party will never be able to wrench away the power of the opposition.

In the past two years, I found that when the young people heard the message of liberty, they overwhelmingly responded favorably, fully realizing the failure of the status quo and the need to once again endorse a system of self reliance, personal responsibility, sound money, and a non-interventionist foreign policy while rejecting the cradle-to-grave nanny state all based on the rule of law and the Constitution.

To ignore the political struggle and only "hope for the best" is pure folly. The march toward a dictatorial powerful state is now in double time.

All those who care -- and especially those who understand the stakes involved -- have an ominous responsibility to energetically get involved in the battle of survival for a free and prosperous America.

It IS Amazing

Sarah Palin said this in an interview with the Anchorage newspaper:

“I think the Republican ticket represented too much of the status quo, too much of what had gone on in these last eight years, that Americans were kind of shaking their heads like going, wait a minute, how did we run up a $10 trillion debt in a Republican administration? How have there been blunders with war strategy under a Republican administration?” Palin said.

“If we’re talking change, we want to get far away from what it was that the present administration represented...So people desiring change, I think, went as far from the administration that is presently seated as they could. It's amazing that we did as well as we did.”

I Feel Your Pain

Good Sign

I still can't do it. From the moment O won Ohio, I have not watched a minute of news TV. The Fox Fast has been expanded to a total news black-out. (Can you still say 'black-out?' Does that offend both African-Americans and gays? It's hard to keep up with what's acceptable these days.)

There is a good sign, however. Obama has already offended Ahmadinejad...and been chided by him. If this is what Obama means by 'conversation,' it's not so bad after all.

Plus, there is that thought in some quarters that Obama's newly appointed White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel might be none too friendly toward Iran. Emanuel, a Jew with two of his children named Zachariah and Leah, was supportive of Bush's invasion of Iraq though critical of Bush's prosecution of the war.

Wickipedia has this to say in their bio of Emanuel:

Emanuel has been described as a “strong Israel partisan” and a “convinced Zionist” and “prominent figure in the US Jewish lobby.” A strong supporter of AIPAC, he personally introduced fellow Chicagoan Barack Obama to the organization's directors during the 2008 presidential campaign A November 2008 article claimed that while expressing empathy for Palestinians, Emanuel has explicitly condemned their leaders. In June 2007, Emanuel condemned an outbreak of Palestinian violence in the Gaza Strip and criticized Arab countries for not applying the same kind of pressure on the Palestinians as they have on Israel. At a 2003 pro-Israel rally in Chicago, Emanuel told the marchers Israel was ready for peace but would not get there until Palestinians "turn away from the path of terror", according to the Chicago Tribune.

So, is Rahm Emanuel Obama's Paul Wolfowitz?

I know that Emanuel is one of my least favorite Dems. And I think his appointment seems to look back toward the Clinton administration rather than forward to 'transformative change.' But who knows.....

Media Spin

Good Questions!

From Ann Coulter's syndicated column today:

Republicans lost this presidential election, and I don't blame the messenger; I blame the message. How could Republicans go after B. Hussein Obama (as he is now known) on planning to bankrupt the coal companies when McCain supports the exact same cap and trade policies and earnestly believes in global warming?

How could we go after Obama for his illegal alien aunt and for supporting driver's licenses for illegal aliens when McCain fanatically pushed amnesty along with his good friend Teddy Kennedy?

How could we go after Obama for Jeremiah Wright when McCain denounced any Republicans who did so?

How could we go after Obama for planning to hike taxes on the "rich," when McCain was the only Republican to vote against both of Bush's tax cuts on the grounds that they were tax cuts for the rich?

And why should Republican activists slave away working for McCain when he has personally, viciously attacked: John O'Neill and the Swift Boat Veterans, National Right to Life director Doug Johnson, evangelical pastors Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and John Hagee, various conservative talk radio hosts, the Tennessee Republican Party and on and on and on?

Cal Thomas: Religious Right R.I.P.

The following is today's syndicated column by Cal Thomas:

When Barack Obama takes the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, he will do so in the 30th anniversary year of the founding of the so-called Religious Right. Born in 1979 and midwifed by the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, the Religious Right was a reincarnation of previous religious-social movements that sought moral improvement through legislation and court rulings. Those earlier movements -- from abolition (successful) to Prohibition (unsuccessful) -- had mixed results.

Social movements that relied mainly on political power to enforce a conservative moral code weren't anywhere near as successful as those that focused on changing hearts. The four religious revivals, from the First Great Awakening in the 1730s and 1740s to the Fourth Great Awakening in the late 1960s and early '70s, which touched America and instantly transformed millions of Americans (and American culture as a result), are testimony to that.

Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative Evangelical image has failed. The question now becomes: should conservative Christians redouble their efforts, contributing more millions to radio and TV preachers and activists, or would they be wise to try something else?

I opt for trying something else.

Too many conservative Evangelicals have put too much faith in the power of government to transform culture. The futility inherent in such misplaced faith can be demonstrated by asking these activists a simple question: Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards? Of course they do not. Why, then, would conservative Evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?

Too many conservative Evangelicals mistake political power for influence. Politicians who struggle with imposing a moral code on themselves are unlikely to succeed in their attempts to impose it on others. What is the answer, then, for conservative Evangelicals who are rightly concerned about the corrosion of culture, the indifference to the value of human life and the living arrangements of same- and opposite-sex couples?

The answer depends on the response to another question: do conservative Evangelicals want to feel good, or do they want to adopt a strategy that actually produces results? Clearly partisan politics have not achieved their objectives. Do they think they can succeed by committing themselves to 30 more years of the same?

If results are what conservative Evangelicals want, they already have a model. It is contained in the life and commands of Jesus of Nazareth. Suppose millions of conservative Evangelicals engaged in an old and proven type of radical behavior. Suppose they followed the admonition of Jesus to "love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit those in prison and care for widows and orphans," not as ends, as so many liberals do by using government, but as a means of demonstrating God's love for the whole person in order that people might seek Him?

Such a strategy could be more "transformational" than electing a new president, even the first president of color. But in order to succeed, such a strategy would not be led by charismatic figures, who would raise lots of money, be interviewed on Sunday talk shows, author books and make gobs of money.

God teaches in His Word that His power (if that is what conservative Evangelicals want and not their puny attempts at grabbing earthly power) is made perfect in weakness. He speaks of the tiny mustard seed, the seemingly worthless widow's mite, of taking the last place at the table and the humbling of one's self, the washing of feet and similar acts and attitudes; the still, small voice. How did conservative Evangelicals miss this and instead settle for a lesser power, which in reality is no power at all? When did they settle for an inferior "kingdom"?

Evangelicals are at a junction. They can take the path that will lead them to more futility and ineffective attempts to reform culture through government, or they can embrace the far more powerful methods outlined by the One they claim to follow. By following His example, they will decrease, but He will increase. They will get no credit, but they will see results. If conservative Evangelicals choose obscurity and seek to glorify God, they will get much of what they hope for, but can never achieve, in and through politics.

Single Women Elect Obama

"Soccer moms" – suburban married women with young children – have drawn the attention of campaign strategists over the past decade, but an exit poll of voters showed single women were a decisive factor in Barack Obama's historic victory.

"If not for the overwhelming support of unmarried women, John McCain would have won the women's vote and with it, the White House," said the international research firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner.

Tuesday night, unmarried women supported the Democratic candidate by a stunning 70 to 29 percent margin, the firm said in a summary of its calculations, based on the Edison/Mitofsky National Election Pool published by CNN.

By contrast, married women supported Obama by a 50 to 47 percent margin.

Obama's backing from unmarried women exceeds the support he generated among both younger voters and Hispanic voters, according to Greenberg Quinlan Rosner.

from World Net Daily

Not One Minute

Since the moment that it was announced that Obama had won Ohio, I have not watched one minute of TV news. Has anything happened that I need to know? I think that I'm up to date via Internet.

Forget Retirement

The stock market took another 434 point dive today - a two day total loss of nearly 1000 points. Obviously Wall Street is just exuberant with news of Obama's election and his sure fix of the economy.

Biggest Post-Election Drop

Wall Street showed its joy at the Obama election by posting the largest post-election drop in U S History falling 486 points. That was yesterday. Today it continues to fall, down 183 points at 11 AM. Wow - what economic confidence Obama inspires!

And by the way, if McCain had been elected and the DOW had done the same thing, how do you think that story would have been spun in the media?

Taking Cover

Is he still there?

Evening Rant

Last post election rant (for the day) follows....

Liberalism didn't really win -- it's very very interesting that in California where Obama won by a landslide (obviously) the same voters amended the state constitution to read, “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” It's interesting that in Florida, which Obama won, those same voters affirmed marriage as only between a man and woman. The 'gay agenda' was turned back even by Obama voters. In fact, seven in ten black voters who voted for Obama voted against gay-marriage. (Of course, Obama claimed at the Saddleback forum that he was also opposed to gay marriage, as did Biden in the VP debate)

I agree with Savage - McCain was the worst GOP candidate in modern times and ran the worst GOP campaign in modern times.

Best election season quip goes to Ann Coulter, "McCain is just like Dole only without the energy."

A Mandate? - while the mainstream media falls over themselves in praise of Obama and his huge victory, be reminded of the electoral reality. Despite McCain's horrible candidacy and Bush's horrifying performance, Obama won five states (71 electoral votes) by the following percentages:

VA - 52%
FL - 51%
OH - 51%
IN - 50%
NC - 50%

Yes, against the worst possible candidate in the most favorable possible conditions for his candidacy, Obama just barely won. Any real GOP candidate would have defeated him.

Romney was the one - looking back, I think that Romney would have been the best GOP presidential candidate. A governor, a northeasterner, the best economic candidate (aside from Paul). Coupled with a southern conservative such as Jindal - that could have been a winner.

Best GOP Candidates Now - Romney, Jindal, Cantor, Palin.

More Random Rants

306 - My FOX News fast has lasted 306 days as of today. Though I was tempted to see what they were saying on election night, I held to the fast. And I was not alone in shunning FOX. FOX has plummeted this election season. Just released TV ratings of election night coverage has ABC winning with CNN in second (with twice as many viewers as 2004). NBC and CBC were next with FOX trailing in last. FOX has gone the way of the GOP - an old cast with an increasingly marginal appeal. That said, I will break the fast today. My fast began when FOX news, of all people, barred Ron Paul from its GOP New Hampshire primary debate.

Feeling Good about Ron Paul - it feels good at this point to have supported Ron Paul. He was his own worst enemy. Only McCain was a worse campaigner. But Paul was right on the economy, right on abortion, right on civil liberties, right on the U S Constitution, right on engaging new young voters, right on interventionism, right on The Fed, right on the Debt, right on the war in Iraq and it’s current toll.

McCain missed his final chance. The ‘bailout’ was McCain’s final chance to separate himself from Obama and to show true conservative colors. He suspended his campaign to come back to Washington and then NOTHING to differentiate himself from Obama. His own House Republicans had already led a revolt against the bailout. He should have come back to be their champion. “Obama and the Democrats are wrong on the bailout” should have been his message. But no. By that Friday he went to the debate that he said that he would not attend and had no difference between himself and his opponent on the biggest bailout in U S history!

Don’t get me started......

Random Thoughts the Day After

The Good News - America has reached beyond ‘race’ in it’s election of Barack Obama. That is good news on many levels. Further, most of ‘the world’ was hoping for an Obama victory. He will (and America will) have an incredible opportunity to ‘reboot’ its foreign policy and foreign relations image.

Waiting to See -- I personally am waiting to see if Obama’s closest friends are beyond race. Do you believe that Jeremiah Wright is beyond race this morning? Do yo believe that Ayers is beyond race this morning?

GOP gone for a Generation -- this election spelled the end of the GOP for a generation. Ronald Reagan captured the imagination and loyalty of the under 30 crowd and that crowd (me and my peers) have been Republicans every since. Barack Obama just overwhelmingly won the under 30 voters and they will be Democrats all of their lives.

Bush / Rove Did It - the moderate, pitiful, thousand-points-of-light, compassionate-conservative, big spending, government expanding, liberties stealing, war focused Bush Dynasty did in the Republican party.

Tip of the Hat - having just ripped Bush (not nearly enough) I do have to say that he did try to get his party to pass immigration legislation so as to not lose all Hispanics to the Dems, and he did try to pass reforms of Freddie and Fannie, and he did try to work toward energy-independence legislation, and he did do more than most recent presidents on HIV/AIDS not just here but around the world. He just was so weak as a leader that he could not make case OR EVEN GET THE CREDIT for having tried.

McCain was an incredibly weak candidate. As the final vote numbers suggest, despite all that favored the Democrats in this election Obama was beatable. Moderate maverick McCain offered no real alternative to Obama so why not vote for the young energetic guy?

Loss Protocol - when FSU loses an important game, I refuse to watch sports TV ‘cause I don’t want to hear about it or see replays of it. By about 10 PM last night, I had the sound off on my TV - just watching, no sound. By this morning, no TV, only internet. Bleak. We have now elected a guy who has literally said that he is not sure the the U S Constitution in its current form is relevant to today’s world.

Jekyll or Hyde - a female African-American political ‘panelist’ and Obama supporter on CNN last night nailed it - (after the results were in of course) - she said that as a Senator, Obama was left-wing and aligned with Pelosi but as a presidential candidate Obama had been a centrist - then she asked the key question: “which will he be as the President?” Of course, CNN never made that distinction in their campaign coverage and NO mainstream reporter challenged him on the differences between his voting record and his stump speech.

The Hope - that Obama the candidate will be President, not Obama the senator. That Obama really will be the unifier and positive change agent he claims to be. That he can govern and lead when has has never governed or led before. He does seem to be calm in the storm and that should serve him well.

Populist orator -- the “stump speech version” of Obama has been a populist orator - as were Bill Clinton and especially Ronald Reagan. To put in this generations’ term, they ‘connect.’

Obama will be frustrated - Obama enters the White House with more combined power (Dems control congress) than any Democrat since Carter or LBJ. But I predict that he will be frustrated in getting his agenda through AFTER the initial honeymoon. The Democrat congress doesn’t need him. They have all power. If they had gotten to 60 in the Senate, he could have been vetoed on everything. Now, none of that will happen early as he is the Savior. But that will wear off.

Intolerance -- every signal suggests that we are about to experience the most intolerant administration in history. Obama kicked reporters from three newspapers off of his plane because the papers endorsed McCain. His people tried to destroy more than one local TV reporter after they simply asked a tough question or two. Now his appointing the most arrogant and intolerant person in Washington, Rohm Emmanuel, to run his White House. Don’t get in the way of Barack (or Michelle!!!).

GOP lost the Future - lost Hispanics 67% to 31% (the majority minority voting block), lost blacks, lost people under 30 years of age, lost almost every college town - so lost the intellectual future as well. The GOP did not run a single minority candidate in a competitive race for Governor or the US Congress anywhere in America. Once again, the GOP will have ZERO blacks in Congress. So, when you look to a future Presidential ticket, where is the minority person to choose?

Big Techno Win -- Obama destroyed the GOP in internet and wifi campaigning and funds raising. Like JFK won the first real TV election, Obama won the first techno geek election.

Left-Wing Kooks -- what will Obama do with all of those left-wing crazies that he has been friends with through the years?

Too Maverick to Win -- McCain did not pull in any GOP big-hitters to campaign for him until the last weekend. Interestingly, people who decided who to vote for in the final ten days of the campaign broke decisively toward McCain.

Viet Nam Politics is Over - McCain represented Viet Nam era, Obama the first post-Viet Nam era Presidential Candidate. Young voters know nothing of Viet Nam and don’t care. They know about Iraq - and do care.

God, Guns and Gays - those will not win elections outside of the NASCAR nation.

Right Move on Iran -- I believe that Obama is right when he says that the US must be engaged in conversation with Iran. Perhaps progress can be made there.

Liberal Carte Blanche -- the Dems now control it all - President, Congress, all appointments in government, of judges and to the Supreme Court, and of all legislation.

Incredible Disappointment -- my last thought this morning is that people will soon be bitterly disappointed with this administration and the Democrat congress. It’s good that they now run it all and will have nobody to blame but themselves (after a year or so - up until then it will be ‘we are cleaning up the Bush mess’). Just as the Democrats swept congressional elections last time on an ‘end the war’ theme - then didn’t to it - and now have the lowest approval rating in the history of congress - so I believe the same will happen to this crowd. They can’t instantly end the Iraq war. They can’t instantly fix the economy. They can’t instantly fundamentally change the health-care system. And if it is up to Pelosi, Obama will not be able to deliver on his tax-cuts. So people will soon be frustrated. And it will be very interesting to see how Obama reacts when the evening news is finally critical of him and his administration.

Total Votes as of 9 AM -

Obama 08 - 62,521,169

GW 04 - 62,040,610

McCain - 55,446,169

GW 00 - 50,456,002

Reagan 80 - 43,903,230

Bring in the Puppy

The winner of the 2008 Presidential election will not be determined in the month of November.

Why?

First - note these background factors:

1. The Dems really believe that Bush ‘stole’ the election from Kerry.

2. The Obamaphiles have been told for weeks and weeks that their candidate will be the hands down winner.

3. Left-wing organizations have already been plowing the ground for law-suites against the GOP for voter suppression.

4. “Mainstream” media began last night suggesting ‘worries’ about voter intimidation keeping Obama supporters from the polls.

So - the reason why the election will not be determined in the month of November is because John McCain is going to post a stunning, comeback-for-the-ages victory on Tuesday. (Actually, it will have nothing to do with McCain - it will have to with voters just like me who 'hold their nose' and vote for McCain because the alternative is just so frightening.) The outraged Obama campaign, their Hollywood financiers, their ogle-eyed mainstream media ‘reporters,’ their leftist/socialist political action committees, and all entitlement minded people everywhere are individually and collectively going to cry “foul!” Accusations and outrage will be loud and large. Carville’s predicted riots will happen in some urban areas.

Lawsuits are going to abound.

Every vote will be challenged - in every swing state that McCain wins - Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Missouri, Ohio. Hanging chads will be sensible in comparison to what’s about to happen beginning Wednesday.

National division and acrimony will be deep and not soon healed.

It will take weeks to finally settle the legal squabbles - and declare the winner.

So, go vote, then go buy all the staples that your family needs - then return home and bolt the doors. It’s going to be quite a ride. But by the time it is over, the behaviors of these Obamaphiles will prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that voting against O was the right decision.

OK - it’s true that my prediction has only slightly better odds than green aliens landing on your lawn today.

But bring in the puppy just in case.

24

The nation is in peril and must be rescued in the next 24 hours!

Where is Jack Bauer when you need him!?!

Down to the Last

As the final snips were applied to my haircut today, I said to the stylist, "this is the last haircut that I will have before the presidential election. This is the very haircut that I will take into the voting booth."

Yep. It's down to 'the last.'

The last haircut, the last college football Saturday and NFL Sunday, the last Sunday worship service, the last Monday before the presidential election.

It's the last hurrah for John McCain (and hopefully moderate Republicanism as well).

It may also be the last gasps for capitalism, federalism, original intent, and American sovereignty.

And it most literally will soon be the last gasps for millions more unborn (or partially born) babies.

I'm Back for Now

I’m back.

It got so crazy that I finally just left the country. But I’ve returned in time for ‘the final week’ of the 2008 presidential election. It seems like this campaign has been going on for a decade. I’m glad that it will soon be over.

As best as I can tell, here’s where we are with a week to go:

Barack Obama has a zillion dollars in campaign funds. As a result, he is right this minute on every other station on my cable network. A slick, 30 minutes campaign commercial is airing wall to wall.

Barack Obama has a lead in the polls that some say is large and others say is narrow. But he leads nonetheless. And in the end it will not be about national polls but about state by state electoral results. From that perspective, a person could win just 50 more votes across the nation that his rival and yet win every state. This is why the national polls are meaningless. It’s state results that count.

Obama is poised to win in an electoral landslide.

John McCain is, well, John McCain. Old. Moderate. Unpersuasive.

It’s true that he was war hero in the War of 1812. But how many remember? Or care?

The good news that the wipe-out loss that he is about to experience will spell the end of the John McCain-Lindsay Graham wing of the GOP. Perhaps true Republican conservatism will gain traction within the party once again.

The bad news is that Barack Obama is about to President of the United States with Joe Biden as Vice President. And Lord knows who as cabinet members and Supreme Court appointees.

I may be out of the country as much as possible.

Sign of the Times

AP - NEW YORK - In a sign of the times, the National Debt Clock in New York City has run out of digits to record the growing figure.

As a short-term fix, the digital dollar sign on the billboard-style clock near Times Square has been switched to a figure — the "1" in $10 trillion. It's marking the federal government's current debt at about $10.2 trillion.

The Durst Organization says it plans to update the sign next year by adding two digits. That will make it capable of tracking debt up to a quadrillion dollars.

The late Manhattan real estate developer Seymour Durst put the sign up in 1989 to call attention to what was then a $2.7 trillion debt.

A Little Humor

Good Money after Bad

When an investment goes south and yet the investor keeps pumping cash into it 'in hopes' that it will turn around - that's sometimes called, "throwing good money after bad."

That idiom perfectly describes the recent actions of the Government.

Pitiful business decisions were made. Multiplied millions lost. The the Government steps in and "throws YOUR good money after bad." 700 billion worth.

So, you've lost your retirement and now your children have an additional 700 billion tax debt to 're-fi' somehow.

How did it help?

The stock market has continued a triple digit fall for six days in a row. 20% of total market value lost in just seven sessions. 40% lost in the last year.

The 'Candidates' are saying that this is just the beginning.

Paulson now suggests the Government buy into banks - bad banks and good banks.

Let's see - the banks owned (even in part) by the Government...

I think my first book will be "The Venezuelazation of America"

I feel confident that the title is available.

It's Over

It’s over.

McCain came into this debate trailing in the polls and facing a landslide deficit in electoral votes. He had to have a game changing performance. He had to win outright, hit it out of the park, KO his opponent. He didn’t

Obama was very poised and smooth. He waffled on a few things for sure but he nailed some answers as well. Part of it is just the difference between a man in the prime of life and a man who is elderly. Some of it is ‘generational.’ A lot is that Obama is the better debater. But most of it is substantive.

McCain just did not deliver the substantive goods. He was not really clear on nearly anything. He just talks about ‘I know how to’ leaving us asking, “OK, if you know how to, tell us!”

One friend called and lamented, “they both really say the same thing.”

A TV focus group person after the debate repeated that sentiment, “they said the same thing.” Other nodded agreement.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!! That’s what we have been saying all along - McCain is NOT a conservative so he is going to sound pretty much like Obama.

Speaking of not conservative. The worst part was when McCain said that the government should ‘buy up the bad mortgages.’ What? We should nationalize the worst part of the mortgage industry?! Is that small government Republicanism?

Oh my. One of the big lessons here is that if the GOP continues with a system that allows a primary candidate to ‘win’ a state with 30% of the vote it will continue to guarantee the nomination of someone 70% of Republicans don’t want.

So ‘my friends’ it’s over.

But it may be good news overall. My biggest fear was that if elected McCain and his type would rise and reinvent the GOP. His coming landslide loss will allow the GOP to re-evaluate itself. Perhaps true conservatives and constitutional loyalists will gain ground. If somehow this can be the end of the Bush-McCain wing of the GOP we will all be better off.

World of Hurt

We are in a world of hurt.

We are in a world of hurt for several reasons relative to our presidential choices. But one of the biggest reasons is that we have the choice between two senators.

No executives from which to choose. No choice of anyone who has ever held an executive office of any significance.

The debate tonight is a perfect example of why neither of these gentlemen brings executive experience to the presidency. Every sentence begins with these words:

“I said”

“I wrote”

“I advocated”

“I reached out”

“I know how”

See, a senator thinks “I said” is the same as “I did.”

These guys have not ever “done it” at the executive level of government.

One Question Quiz

What has the same number of letters as "Dow Plummets 700?"

Answer: Obama Landslide

SNL Does VP Debate

Botched Bailout

McCain lost his last chance at winning when he voted for the bailout. The House Republicans had already sent a loud message that the conservative base of the GOP was dead-set against the bailout of Wall Street. At the same time, Obama was for it. So let’s see -- the GOP is against it and Obama is for it. So which way did McCain vote in the Senate? With Obama of course.

McCain is a Senator of course - a group which in this case was not as in touch with the grassroots.

He should have opposed the bailout with vigorous debate. He should have given voice to the fury of the ‘working class Joe.’ He should have defended the tax-payer. And he should have led the charge with alternative ways to address the crisis.

Further, he should have named names (as he said he would as President) in fixing blame for this crisis. He should have reminded America that the Dems have been the majority party for two years - yet they did not have the leadership necessary to respond effectively to this crisis.

McCain’s campaign should have dispatched feisty Palin to attack the bailout on behalf of working moms and union-worker dads everywhere. They should have gone totally populist and defended ‘the people’ against ‘the corruption on Wall Street.”

Anyway, McCain was weak in every way in his ‘go-along’ vote for the bailout.

Voting against it would have given him the platform for the final few weeks and the last two debates to hi-light the difference between a conservative-market driven approach and a government-as-savior approach.

Only a big security threat can save him now. Or maybe Sarah can if they turn her loose. Without one or the other, I predict (again) a landslide win for Obama. Scary and sad.

Lipstick Smacked

86% surveyed say Sarah Palin won the VP debate. That may be the most decisive, lop-sided, slam dunk of a debate win since JFK's trounce of Nixon.

We'll Get Back with You

The media has completely missed the point of the ‘bailout’ story. File the previous sentence under, “what else is new?” They are so template driven that they are completely unable to operate as investigative reporters -- and no surprise, the TV versions are simply overpaid tele-prompter readers.

Here is the real story of the ‘failure to bailout.’

I’ll use two members of the Indiana delegation to make the point. Andre Carson and Mike Pense each voted against the bailout.

One is a Democrat, the other is a Republican.

One is from an urban district, the other more rural.

One is a black man, the other a white man.

One is very liberal, the other very conservative.

So, despite all that you have heard in the media, this bailout vote did not break along party lines. Nor did it break along racial lines, urban v rural lines, or liberal v conservative lines.

It broke I tell you along “more of the same” versus “we’re not going to take it any more.”

Now trust me, all elected officials of both parties are for more of the same. It’s the people who rose up in record numbers to call, fax, email, text, blackberry, walk-in, write, or otherwise telepathically communicate with those knot-heads in Washington that “we aren’t going to take it anymore.”

The ‘financial sector’ has already lost our retirements and a lot of our jobs while lining their own bank accounts through greed, gouging, fraud, corruption, conspiracy or just plain highway robbery. Now that they too are belly up, they want us to pay for their recovery.

Last time I asked my bank for a loan, they told me, “we’ll get back with you.”

Now the the banking industry is asking for a loan. And the American people are saying, “your call will be answered in the order in which it was received.”

Which is just behind the call for my retirement, my raise, my kid’s braces and college fund, my adjustable mortgage payment, my timeshare, my bill from the vet for neutering the cat, my water bill, my electric bill, my wife’s upgraded kitchen cabinets which resulted from my new golf clubs, the proctologist bill, and four friggin dollar a gallon gas!

Your estimated wait time is one decade!

Do you get the picture? Politicians are always talking about what ‘America’ wants. Which is simply the cover for what they want. Until this week. Get this - 95% of representatives who are involved in closely contested elections this November voted NO to the bailout.

A media type confidently said after yesterday’s 777 point Dow drop that, “the nay sayers of the bailout tested the market to see what it would say and it shouted back a very clear message.”

If I could talk with him today - after the Dow’s 440 point gain - I’d tell him, “Yes, and then the market heard the American people say ‘you can kiss my grits’ so they woke up this morning and went back to work.”

If the American people will keep the hammer down two things will happen, maybe three.

One - we will experience some tough times as the necessary market corrections take place. Money and jobs will be lost. It won’t be easy. But the economic situation will emerge stronger and more stable with a big bullish upturn not too far down the way.

Two - the business bums who caused this will be out on their butts instead of bailed out by your tax payer money. And ‘the government’ may get the message also - quit obligating generations of our money!

Three - the media might ‘get it’ also. But I doubt it.

Three Cheers for Indiana Delegation

Most of the Indiana congressional delegation voted NO to the bailout. All but one Republican voted NO. All but a couple of Democrats voted NO. Why, even arch-liberal Democrat Andre Carson voted NO. Talk about Pelosi not being able to deliver her votes.

Sucking Sound

That sucking sound that you hear is more than your retirement account draining away under the worst Wall Street meltdown ever - it's also the sound of the leadership vacuum that exists in Washington.

Palin should Bow Out

In Kathleen Parker’s Friday column in conservative magazine National Review she called for Sarah Palin to step aside.

National Review is billed as, “America's most widely read and influential magazine and web site for Republican/conservative news, commentary, and opinion.”

Here are some bits from Parker’s column titled, “Palin Problem.”

“As we’ve seen and heard more from John McCain’s running mate, it is increasingly clear that Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn’t know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions warrant her promotion.”

“Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.”

“McCain can’t repudiate his choice for running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP’s unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden.”

“Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first.”

“Do it for your country.”

I have to say that I am not surprised and neither should you be if you have been a reader of RTR08. I've dropped a couple of hints along the way that some were or soon would be headed toward this sentiment. Personally, I think that the reports of her demise are premature. I agree that she has not been super impressive in major media sit-down interviews. But she is very impressive in person (by all reports - including those from the U.N.). And she is very impressive on the stump. Now she must be impressive versus Biden in the VP debate. At least in part becauase Biden is such a pompous and sanguine buffoon capable of being extremely condescending (which won't work versus a female) while offering a-gaff-a-minute, I believe Palin will emerge the clear victor of the VP debate. At which point, she must be placed in a secure room and not let out except to make stump appearances, attend religious voter's events, be interviewed by right wing hosts and then attend her pregnant daughter's wedding, hopefully the weekend before the election. But she must not bow out.

Palin Needed

"The polls" that I have seen indicate Obama was 'the winner' of the first Presidential debate. That was my impression as well as I watched it. I am not saying that I agreed with Obama more - just that I thought that he had the better night overall. McCain was weak at the start but got much better as the debate moved toward the hour mark. Obama's team obviously learned from the Forum at Saddleback. Obama greatly improved. He made points quickly and often had outlined points (1, 2, 3). He was well rehearsed. McCain appeared rehearsed but had a more limited arsenal. I thought that he was generally weak on rebuttal though he had a couple of good moments of response. It was clear that McCain had more personal awareness of foreign policy from first hand experience. The big problem though is that security and foreign policy was where he was supposed to dominate Obama - this was McCain's home court - but he tied at best and probably 'lost' even if narrowly.

The net net - McCain needs Palin to hit a home run versus Biden. Despite some inexperience, I believe that Palin will be quite impressive.

Bailout Irony

Have you caught the incredible irony of the past 48 hours of ‘bailout’ politics?

The Democrat nominee for President, Barack H. Obama, has used this line in his stump speech for at least a year, “we can’t afford four more years of Bush economic policy.”

So isn’t it interesting that it’s the Democrats (including Obama) who back Bush’s 700 billion bailout while the Republicans do not.

Bailout goes Prime Time

"The entire economy is in danger."

"We're in the midst of a serious financial crisis."

"There has been a widespread loss of confidence, and major sectors of America's financial system are at risk of shutting down."

"More banks could fail, including some in your community."

"Our country could experience a long and painful recession."

Why, it sounds like a stump speech last winter and spring by Ron Paul. Of course, he was just a cranky old man with a 'the sky is falling' message. Who can win primaries with a message like that? Laughable as I recall. That's back when 'the economy is fundamentally sound' - long before 'I've suspended my campaign...we should cancel the debate.' What if everyone had suspended their campaigns last winter, canceled the debates last spring - and dealt with this before the raft got within a foot of the falls? That would have been leadership. Anybody can say we need a stop sign after the crash.

Buffet's Perspective

Warren Buffet is buying five billion of dollars of Goldman stock today - says it's a 'lead pipe cinch' that you can make 10% on these financial sector stocks. But his comments on where we were and are at this moment is very sobering. He is a supporter of the bailout BTW. The interview is about 30 min long but the first few minutes is all that you really need.

Laying it on the Line

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Dear Friends,

Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.

The events of the past week are no exception.

The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."

That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.

The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!

• The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.

• Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

• Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.

There goes your country.

Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.

Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.

Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.

The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?

When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?

Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.

In liberty,

Ron Paul

Ron Paul Responds to Bailout

(CNN) -- Op Ed Commentary by Ron Paul


Many Americans today are asking themselves how the economy got to be in such a bad spot.

For years they thought the economy was booming, growth was up, job numbers and productivity were increasing. Yet now we find ourselves in what is shaping up to be one of the most severe economic downturns since the Great Depression.

Unfortunately, the government's preferred solution to the crisis is the very thing that got us into this mess in the first place: government intervention.

Ever since the 1930s, the federal government has involved itself deeply in housing policy and developed numerous programs to encourage homebuilding and homeownership.

Government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were able to obtain a monopoly position in the mortgage market, especially the mortgage-backed securities market, because of the advantages bestowed upon them by the federal government.

Laws passed by Congress such as the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to make loans to previously underserved segments of their communities, thus forcing banks to lend to people who normally would be rejected as bad credit risks.

These governmental measures, combined with the Federal Reserve's loose monetary policy, led to an unsustainable housing boom. The key measure by which the Fed caused this boom was through the manipulation of interest rates, and the open market operations that accompany this lowering.

When interest rates are lowered to below what the market rate would normally be, as the Federal Reserve has done numerous times throughout this decade, it becomes much cheaper to borrow money. Longer-term and more capital-intensive projects, projects that would be unprofitable at a high interest rate, suddenly become profitable.

Because the boom comes about from an increase in the supply of money and not from demand from consumers, the result is malinvestment, a misallocation of resources into sectors in which there is insufficient demand.

In this case, this manifested itself in overbuilding in real estate. When builders realize they have overbuilt and have too many houses to sell, too many apartments to rent, or too much commercial real estate to lease, they seek to recoup as much of their money as possible, even if it means lowering prices drastically.

This lowering of prices brings the economy back into balance, equalizing supply and demand. This economic adjustment means, however that there are some winners -- in this case, those who can again find affordable housing without the need for creative mortgage products, and some losers -- builders and other sectors connected to real estate that suffer setbacks.

The government doesn't like this, however, and undertakes measures to keep prices artificially inflated. This was why the Great Depression was as long and drawn out in this country as it was.

I am afraid that policymakers today have not learned the lesson that prices must adjust to economic reality. The bailout of Fannie and Freddie, the purchase of AIG, and the latest multi-hundred billion dollar Treasury scheme all have one thing in common: They seek to prevent the liquidation of bad debt and worthless assets at market prices, and instead try to prop up those markets and keep those assets trading at prices far in excess of what any buyer would be willing to pay.

Additionally, the government's actions encourage moral hazard of the worst sort. Now that the precedent has been set, the likelihood of financial institutions to engage in riskier investment schemes is increased, because they now know that an investment position so overextended as to threaten the stability of the financial system will result in a government bailout and purchase of worthless, illiquid assets.

Using trillions of dollars of taxpayer money to purchase illusory short-term security, the government is actually ensuring even greater instability in the financial system in the long term.

The solution to the problem is to end government meddling in the market. Government intervention leads to distortions in the market, and government reacts to each distortion by enacting new laws and regulations, which create their own distortions, and so on ad infinitum.

It is time this process is put to an end. But the government cannot just sit back idly and let the bust occur. It must actively roll back stifling laws and regulations that allowed the boom to form in the first place.

The government must divorce itself of the albatross of Fannie and Freddie, balance and drastically decrease the size of the federal budget, and reduce onerous regulations on banks and credit unions that lead to structural rigidity in the financial sector.

Until the big-government apologists realize the error of their ways, and until vocal free-market advocates act in a manner which buttresses their rhetoric, I am afraid we are headed for a rough ride

Emergency Bailout

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke stepped up their campaign for a $700 billion bailout of the nation's financial systems, saying immediate action is needed for the health of the U.S. economy.

Paulson, in prepared testimony he is set to give at 9:30 a.m. ET, will tell the Senate Banking committee that passage of the bailout was necessary "in order to avoid a continuing series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets that threaten American families' financial well-being, the viability of businesses both small and large, and the very health of our economy."

"Action by the Congress is urgently required to stabilize the situation and avert what otherwise could be very serious consequences for our financial markets and for our economy," Bernanke said.

The Bush administration first announced its bailout plan five days ago. The proposals being debated would amount to the most sweeping economic intervention by the government since the Great Depression.

The July 25 RTR08 post entitled "Mother of All Bailouts" reported that the feel good legislation to 'help' those hurt in the mortgage crisis - proposed by and passed with overwhelming Democrat support - contained in it's 600 pages a provision to raise the Federal Debt Ceiling by $800 BILLION dollars. So what has happened since? The Fed and Treasury has nationalized several firms to the tune of 'up to' $200 Billion. Now today, they are asking for $700 Billion.

Six Observations:

1. The media failed to report the raising of the debt ceiling back in July and has yet to 'connect the dots' of that legislation to this action.

2. Offer any government or quasi-gov't agency $800 Billion and it WILL get spent.

3. Our economy is teetering dangerously close to disaster. Auto companies and airlines can fail - but when 'financial institutions' fail it creates panic. Panic leads to irrational reactions.

4. The nationalization of the largest financial institutions in the country makes the USA pretty much like Venezuela.

5. The USA does not have the social or moral cohesion of the Great Depression era. "God help us" if the nation experiences another depression like time.

6. And of course I have to say it, my man Ron Paul 'told you so' and tried his best to get the debate to address the gathering storm. But no. Neither the candidates nor the media celeb anchors wanted to concentrate on anything more significant than which candidate liked Reagan more. They must be bothered that this crisis is taking them off their current obsession with lipstick.

So Superior

BEIJING, China (CNN) -- The number of children sickened by suspected melamine-tainted milk products in China has more than doubled and apparently spread beyond mainland China -- raising fears that the impact of the tainted products could be more widespread that initially thought.

China's Health Ministry announced Sunday that 12,892 infants and young children have been sickened by tainted milk powder -- more than double the number previously reported -- according to state-run Xinhua news agency. Of these, 104 have serious symptoms, and 1,579 have been cured and discharged, the agency said.

Four infants have died.

This ‘my friends’ is the China that Barack Obama said is vastly superior to the United States.

Sunday Funnies

Palin Told You So

On Friday, Sept 12, in the post titled "Managed Exposure" I said that Palin's stardom may have a shelf-life shorter than the time remaining until election day. Specifically, I wrote, "Rock starlet status is tough to maintain, though she only has to top the charts for 50 days"

Yesterday, six days after my post, Karl Rove said Palin's popularity would wane. The AP reported it this way:

(AP) Republican tactician Karl Rove said Wednesday that Sen. John McCain's vice presidential pick was a political choice and that excitement over Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will subside.

"Nothing lasts for 60-some-odd days," Rove told The Associated Press. "Will she be the center of attention in the remaining 48 days? No."

Today, a week after my post, Nobel Prize winning writer George Will has a column entitled, "The Palin Bubble." In it, he writes, "Palin is as bracing as an Arctic breeze... But the country's romance with her will, as romances do, cool somewhat, and even before November some new fad might distract a nation...."

So, when you want it first, read RTR08.

The Remnant

At last, a (very) few Conservative lawmakers have spoken up in opposition to bailout mania. Here is the story, in part, as it appears in CNN Money:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Key Republicans on Capitol Hill blasted the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve on Wednesday for orchestrating an $85 billion bailout of insurance giant American International Group, and the White House for not informing them of the plan.

"Once again the Fed has put the taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars to bail out an institution that put greed ahead of responsibility and used their good name to take risky bets that did not pay off," said Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Kentucky, a member of the Senate Banking Committee.

A spokesman for Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the top Republican on the committee, said the senator "profoundly disagrees with the decision to use taxpayer dollars to bail out a private company" and is upset the government has sent an inconsistent message to the markets by bailing out AIG after it just refused to save investment bank Lehman Brothers from bankruptcy.

"The American taxpayer should not be asked to unwillingly assume the inordinate risks that financial experts knowingly undertook, particularly when taxpayer exposure is increased by the ad hoc manner in which these bailouts have been engineered," said Shelby's aide, Jonathan Graffeo.

Republican Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri complained about not getting a heads-up about the bailout and said House Republicans are struggling to "understand a coherent strategy" about which firms get rescued and which ones don't.

Rep. Adam Putman of Florida, the third-ranking Republican in the House, said the cost is "unnerving" and called on the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve "to dispatch an envoy to the Hill to bring members of Congress up to speed."

"The communications lines are not operating efficiently," he said.

Late Wednesday, the White House agreed to send a top Bush economic adviser and an official from the Fed to brief House Republicans on Thursday, according to a House GOP aide.

from CNN money