Dan Cleary

Fighting Fire with Jet Fuel

Via IBD Editorials.

Biden: "We Misread How Bad the Economy Was"

Biden Says Administration 'Misread' the Economy
by krs601

Via Breitbart.tv.

Obama/Biden Saves Another 155,000 Jobs

What an amazingly versatile rhetorical devise that 'saved or created' line is turning out to be for the Obama Administration. What - the economy shed 'X' jobs last month? Well at least it wasn't 'Y'!

I guess actual job growth will cost us tens of trillions of dollars, instead of just trillions of dollars:

Friday, before hosting a dinner for Saturday's Race for the Cure event in downtown Washington, Biden spoke enthusiastically about the economic progress he sees the administration's stimulation package already making across the nation, despite the newly-reported loss of another 345,000 jobs across the same nation in May.

The vice president expressed sympathy for the unemployed but pleasure that 345,000 jobs were lost and not the half-million he said someone else expected. He promised additional "ramping up" during the summer.

But, the VP added, "less bad" was not the Obama administration's goal. No great Biden gaffes this day. One time he did refer to $345,000 instead of jobs. But he did not reveal any secret bunkers or nuclear codes. Less bad than it could have been.

Via Andrew Malcolm.

The Left's Intellectual Dishonesty

Matt Miller is the host of KCRW's Left, Right, & Center - a show that I listen to against my better judgment, but one that is also useful to me mainly as a tool to gauge the temperature of the political left. Although he's a senior fellow at the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress think tank, Miller nevertheless qualifies as a 'centrist' point-of-view on this decidedly liberal show, where he routinely sides with certified liberal kooks Robert Scheer and Arianna Huffington vs. the Washington Times' Tony Blankley. To be fair to Miller, he's upfront about his bias, and overall he does a decent job moderating the discussion. If it wasn't for Blankley though, the show would be indistinguishable from 'Countdown with Keith Olbermann.'

Anyway, one of Matt Miller's recurring pet peeves is Republican/conservative 'intellectual dishonesty' when it comes to sticking to the principle of low taxes in the face of the retiring Baby Boomers.

Well, what about Democrats/liberals who rarely (if ever) mention the true cost of continually expanding government programs and entitlements? Aren't they being 'intellectually dishonest' by minimizing or even flat-out lying about the economy-crippling tax hikes and huge deficit spending that are required to fund their proposals? All we ever hear from Democrats is how they are the ones who want to preserve Social Security, Medicare, etc. Well, that sounds great - but what's the cost? Are these programs so sacrosanct that we'd sooner bankrupt the country than even consider tweaking them?

In other words, why is it inevitable that taxes must go up just because the Baby Boomers are retiring? Tax hikes are not the government's only option for dealing with revenue shortfall, and I'd argue they often aren't the best option, either. Sometimes, raising taxes actually decreases revenue - as Barack Obama learned from Charles Gibson in a debate last year. The point is, until Democrats will allow Republicans to put 'entitlement reform' (can I say that?) on the table without accusing them of abandoning little old ladies in nursing homes, it is they who are most interested in stymying an intellectually honest debate on economic issues.

Gibbs's Perspective on $100 Million

What Robert Gibbs is trying to say here is that $100 million in budget cuts is HUGE, almost impossibly so. On the other hand, $8 billion in spending is 'miniscule' - a drop in the bucket. Nothing to get bent out of shape over.

Follow the logic?

Link:

No Tea Party for Chris Matthews

Too bad. He would have fit right in...

Via Breitbart.tv.

Barney Frank Takes No Responsibility for His Role in Economic Crisis

The question posed to Barney Frank was fair enough: "How much responsibility, if any, do you have for the financial crisis?" After all, Frank has been Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee since January 2007. By definition, that means Frank is of course at least partly responsible for what transpires in the economy, or, more specifically, the rules and regulations as they apply to the mortgage market, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, etc.

That's not a partisan 'accusation' - it just goes with the territory.

So why is Frank so defensive?

Via Michelle Malkin.

Dick Morris: Obama "Effectively Repealed" Declaration of Independence at G20

Other than that, the G20 was a smashing success for America...

Via Breitbart.tv.

Geithner Plan for Ridding Banks of 'Toxic Assets'

The way I read it, the plan seems to be: Create a brand-new quasi-governmental entity (a la Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae) called the 'Public-Private Investment Program'; shift all the toxic assets from the banks to the PPIP; push interest rates even lower than they already are; and continue to incentivize people to buy homes that in many cases are above their pay grade.

Geithner outlines his plan in today's Wall Street Journal:

Today, we are announcing another critical piece of our plan to increase the flow of credit and expand liquidity. Our new Public-Private Investment Program will set up funds to provide a market for the legacy loans and securities that currently burden the financial system.

The Public-Private Investment Program will purchase real-estate related loans from banks and securities from the broader markets. Banks will have the ability to sell pools of loans to dedicated funds, and investors will compete to have the ability to participate in those funds and take advantage of the financing provided by the government.

The funds established under this program will have three essential design features. First, they will use government resources in the form of capital from the Treasury, and financing from the FDIC and Federal Reserve, to mobilize capital from private investors. Second, the Public-Private Investment Program will ensure that private-sector participants share the risks alongside the taxpayer, and that the taxpayer shares in the profits from these investments. These funds will be open to investors of all types, such as pension funds, so that a broad range of Americans can participate.

Third, private-sector purchasers will establish the value of the loans and securities purchased under the program, which will protect the government from overpaying for these assets.

Read the whole thing.

VDH: Thoughts About Depressed Americans

Andrew Breitbart referred to this Victor Davis Hanson column as a 'masterpiece.'

I concur.

Why are so many Americans so depressed about things these days? It is perhaps not just the economy.

I think the answer is clear: all the accustomed referents, the sources of security, of knowledge and reassurance appear to be vanishing. Materially, we still enjoy a sumptuous lifestyle in comparison with past generations—and the world outside our borders. America remains the most sane and successful society on the planet.

But there is a strange foreboding, a deer-in-the-headlights look to us that we may be clueless Greeks in the age of Demosthenes, played-out Romans around AD 450, or give-up French in late 1939—with a sense it cannot go on. Why? Let us count the ways.

Read the whole thing.