John Stewart, on Solyndra

He gives the administration a lot of leeway for "good intentions". Having said that, he also nails them to the wall on Solyndra.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Its genuinely hilarious, and refreshing to see the left make fun of the left in government. Even if he did have to throw Fox News into the mix.

"Pass This Bill"; Obama... and jobs

I ran across two videos today that are worth their weight in gold; mainly for the work that went into them.

My first nod goes to the Huffington Post.
Yes, you read that right... the Huffington Post.
Some editor must have spent a week in the editing suite putting together this representation of the president telling us that he was focused on jobs... since 2009:

The second one is the president telling us to "pass this bill", 90 times in 5 speeches over 1 week.
Politico deserves a Pulitzer for this one.

Nobel winner quits Physics group over Global Warming

The headline kinda says it all.

Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Resigns Over Global Warming

What I like about Ivar Giaever's letter is that he addresses the real problem of how this issue is debated. Global Warming data is taken as incontrovertible evidence, when it is anything but.

From his letter:

Dear Ms. Kirby

Thank you for your letter inquiring about my membership. I did not renew it because I can not live with the statement below:

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.
The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.
If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period.

Best regards,

Ivar Giaever

Nobel Laureate 1973

PS. I included a copy to a few people in case they feel like using the information.

A Brief History of Social Security being called a Ponzi Scheme

The latest talking point between the left seems to be that calling Social Security a Ponzi Scheme is a new thing.

This proves to me that the left has the shortest memory of any creature on earth.


In 2007, Krugman, quoting others:
(Chris Matthews, & Russert)

Mr. Russert: “Everyone knows Social Security, as it’s constructed, is not going to be in the same place it’s going to be for the next generation, Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives.”

Mr. Matthews: “It’s a bad Ponzi scheme, at this point.”

Mr. Russert: “Yes.”

From the American Thinker Magazine, 2005:

In the past several months as the debate over Social Security reform has taken center stage in the theater of the absurd that is modern American politics, the idea has been floated that the entire pay—as—you—go structure of this system closely resembles a Ponzi scheme, albeit one that is about to collapse.

Not far enough back for you?
In 2004, the Daily Howler blamed the phrase on earlier generations:
(quoting Ed Crane)

And so it goes in the offices of the Social Security Administration, home of the world's largest Ponzi scheme. Sold originally to the American public as a program to care for the indigent elderly, then as a "national pension plan" into which we pay "insurance premiums," Social Security has always been a fraud, a pay-as-you-go slush fund for politicians to dip into...

Geez. That's back in 1994!

The Cato Institute, in 1999:

Why is Social Security often called a Ponzi scheme?

If anyone tells you that this is something new, please copy and paste. Freely.

FY 2008, the budget passed by Dems

One of my favorite things to do is to examine what was said, in a prediction, in history.

For instance, let's say that you were wondering about the FY 2008 budget. Who passed it, and what was said about it?

The U.S. Congress on Thursday approved a $2.9 trillion fiscal 2008 budget that funds President George W. Bush's huge defense buildup while also adding money for Democrats' domestic priorities.

The budget, written by Democrats who control both chambers of Congress, received no backing from House Republicans, while only two moderate Republicans in the Senate supported it.

Okay... so from this, we know that the Democrats wrote the 2008 budget.
Furthermore, we can state that exactly 2 Republicans in congress, total, supported it.
Its worth reading the article if you have the time.

Let's keep going... shall we?
This was a non-binding budget. Meaning that Democrats knew that there was a possibility that their spending priorities would get cut off at the legs. Or as one other article stated it:

The move appears to set up a clash this September with Bush, who has yet to veto a single appropriations bill, but who seems eager to get started.

The budget was a result of a lot of back and forth, with Republicans saying that Democrats were being overly optimistic on what they thought their tax plans would bring in.
Furthermore, the Democrats were counting on 'reserve funds':

The House and Senate versions of the budget depend on "reserve funds" to pay for additional spending for such programs as children's healthcare and farm aid. With the reserve funds, Congress can avoid the hard choices that drawing up any budget, whether it's for a household or the federal government, usually entails.

There's only one catch: The reserve funds are empty.
If Congress wants to fill them, it will have to do what it has tried to avoid: cut from defense or domestic programs, raise taxes or borrow the money and drive up the deficit.

I'm going to continue researching this. But I wanted to share.