Bloodthirsty Liberal

Socialism is that remarkable process which can turn wealth and abundance in natural resources into inflation and poverty.

We can but marvel:

President Hugo Chávez announced a sharp devaluation of Venezuela’s currency on Friday night, a move that reflects the financial stress faced by his government since the price of oil, the country’s top export commodity, fell from its peak as a result of the global financial crisis.

The action, which Mr. Chávez had repeatedly ruled out in the past, came after Venezuela’s economy contracted by 2.9 percent in 2009. Hampered by disarray in the oil industry and nationalizations that have shattered business confidence, the economy is expected to remain sluggish this year even as other large Latin American economies show signs of vibrancy.

“This is all about one objective: revitalizing the productive economy,” Mr. Chávez said in a cabinet meeting that was broadcast live on state television.

One could sympathize with Tubby the Two-Bit Dictator when oil was down in 30s a barrel—sympathize, or laugh garlic breath in his fat face, my preferred approach. But oil is over $80 a barrel, and gas is rising at the pump. It takes a specially skilled market-wrecker to ruin an economy with that kind of IV hooked up to your country’s coffers.

“Revitalizing the productive economy”: those words spoken by an avowed Socialist should make any investor’s blood run cold.

I’m going to speculate here, if you’ll allow me.

I recently heard someone mention that the Obama’s still haven’t picked a church to attend in Washington. It makes no difference to me, I don’t attend church, either (and the president might find it easier to get a tee time during services). But it seemed to be a big deal to them.

As this reporter from Time (hardly anti-Obama) observed:

The Obama family attended services at St. John’s Episcopal this morning [Sunday, October 11, 2009], and the Secret Service even let them walk the two blocks across Lafayette Park on this gorgeous October day. It marked the first time the family has gone to church in Washington since Easter, when they also visited St. John’s, although the Obamas have been worshipping at Evergreen Chapel at Camp David whenever they spend the weekend at the Maryland retreat.

It has also been three and a half months since the White House insisted that the First Family continues to look for a church in Washington to join. Few people would blame them if they decided it would be too disruptive to upend a local congregation–Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush all chose to largely avoid Washington churches for similar reasons, and conservatives defended their decisions to do so. It’s all the more surprising then that the White House has chosen to dig in on this point and continue to maintain that the Obamas will choose a local church as their main place of worship. It only becomes a Church Watch if they make it one.

Well put.

Now, one could point out the obvious and say Obama, who dismissed the pious as “bitter clingers”, needs at least to pay lip service to a search for church.

But I wonder if there isn’t something else going on, something deeper, something more illustrative to who he is. And, again, I’m paraphrasing Rush here, who frequently declares that Bill Ayres and Van Jones and Valerie Jarrett and Jeremiah Wright aren’t anomalies. They are Obama. And he is they.

Check out this speech Wright gave recently to the publishers of Monthly Review, a “no-nonsense” Marxist magazine, and see if it doesn’t sound like someone who inspired the wealth-spreader-in-chief, the Great Apologizer:

“You dispel all the negative images we have been programmed to conjure up with just the mention of that word socialism or Marxism.”

He called America “land of the greed and home of the slave.”

“My work with liberation theology, with Latin American theologians, with the Black Theology Project and with the Cuban Council of Churches taught me 30 years ago the importance of Marx and the Marxist analysis of the social realities of the vulnerable and the oppressed who were trying desperately to break free of the political economics undergirded by this country that were choking them and cutting off any hope of a possible future where all of the people would benefit.”

President Obama can’t bear false witness, can’t turn against the one faith that speaks to his soul—and I wouldn’t want him to. Rev. Wright was his pastor for 20 years, performed his marriage, baptized his children. I bet Wright feels the pain and disappointment of Jesus when he told Peter that he would deny him. And I bet Obama feels the shame and guilt of Peter.

The only other reasonable interpretation is that Obama arrived on the scene in Chicago a young man on the make. Smart man that he is (and articulate! and clean!), he quickly saw that his path to bigger things went through Wright’s church. When Wright was no longer useful to him, when no religion was of any use to him, he dropped him, dropped it, like a heavy load. Who needs it.

But I don’t believe that. I believe Obama is a true believer. And I don’t see why he should deny himself his spiritual shepherd, or why we should be denied the truth of his beliefs.

Venezuela teaches us how to impoverish people

Five months after Venezuela nationalized dozens of oil service contractors in Zulia state, the once-bustling industrial dock on Lake Maracaibo is nearly abandoned, and the 16 red flags raised to celebrate the takeovers are already tattered and faded.

A few small groups of workers remain, hoping to get the jobs they were promised after the expropriations.

“We demand our jobs. Because we haven’t gotten an answer, we’re still here,” said Demostenes Velasquez, who for months has lived under thescorching sun in a tent improvised from remnants of oil union election pamphlets.

Like Velasquez, many workers on the eastern shores of the lake have protested or gone on hunger strikes to demand jobs promised them after President Hugo Chavez’s government expropriated 76 oil services companies on the Maracaibo Lake. The western region has a long history of oil production.

As part of his drive to install socialism in the OPEC nation, Chavez expropriated the companies contracted by state-run PDVSA, with promises of social prosperity and worker justice.

Why can’t we learn from events?

Over the months since then, protests have intensified so much the government sent troops to control the discontented workers. Many of the protesters sewed their lips together and chained their hands and feet to call the president’s attention to their plight.

BROKEN PROMISES

Despite the protests, most of the workers don’t blame Chavez or his revolution, but individual managers of the state oil company.

“Five months ago, our President Hugo Chavez announced the glorious news (of the nationalization) that would benefit the town, but some (PDVSA) managers have contradicted it,” said Velasquez, a self-proclaimed “Chavista” who dresses in the red clothing popular with champions of the president.

The raft of nationalizations in Venezuela since 2007 has brought pressures on the government to improve lives for workers. But petroleum revenues have dropped with crude oil prices in the recession, leaving Venezuela without funds to fulfill the promises made to gain worker support.

- Aggie

A wealthy but naive innocent is kidnapped and held for ransom for weeks by a secretive and cult-like revolutionary group, which is led by a charismatic but manipulative leader. When freed, the victim has an eerily vacant stare, and mouths the same radical platitudes espoused by the captors.

Move over SLA (Symbionese Liberation Army) and General Field Marshal Cinque.

Make room for GM (Government Motors) and President Obama

Once the world’s largest and most powerful automaker, the troubled company is expected to emerge cleansed of massive debt and burdensome contracts that would have sunk it without federal loans. Spurred on by the Obama administration’s support, the process took just 40 days, even slightly quicker than crosstown rival Chrysler Group LLC’s 42-day timeframe.

On Thursday, a bankruptcy court order allowing GM to sell most of its assets to a new company went into effect. The new GM, 61 percent owned by the U.S. government, will face a brutally competitive global automotive market in the middle of the worst sales slump in a quarter-century.

…

The Obama administration has said it does not plan to interfere with day-to-day operations, though it ousted ex-CEO Rick Wagoner and has been involved in picking the new company’s board.

Most of GM’s model lineup is expected to stay unchanged for now. But the company on Friday will probably show off its newer, more efficient models, as well as plans for a U.S.-made subcompact and rechargeable electric vehicles.

…

Experts say GM’s future success will depend largely on its ability to persuade consumers that it’s a different company, one that builds cars that will equal or outlast Japanese models. To illustrate the change, GM is considering a new name.

And a new logo:

General Motors could literally turn green as it readies itself for major management and cultural changes that will coincide with its escape from bankruptcy protection.

People briefed on its plans say the company is looking into changing the background color of its corporate logo from blue to green in an effort to show consumers that it is leaner and greener, more focused on fuel efficiency and better able to make quick decisions.

We need a new phrase to describe this chilling phenomenon: I suggest Cadillac Syndrome.

Would you send this man as your president to negotiate nuclear deals with the Evil Empire?

“The narrow focus of the Freeze movement, as well as academic discussion of first- versus second-strike capabilities, suit the military-industrial interests, as they continue adding to their billion-dollar erector sets.”

…

“When Peter Tosh sings that ‘everybody’s asking for peace, but nobody’s asking for justice,’ one is forced to wonder whether disarmament or arms control issues, severed from economic and political issues, might be another instance of focusing on the symptoms of a problem, instead of the disease itself.”

Dear God, what is this man talking about? When Barack Obama wrote that in 1983, Russia was still the Soviet Union, choking the life out of half a continent and hundreds of millions of people.

Do you think he was talking about justice for the Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, and the others trapped behind the Iron Curtain? The old line goes, “when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail”. For Obama, when all you have is tired Marxist orthodoxy, everything looks like “economic and political issues”.

Because this is the same guy who said in 2001 of the United States Constitution:

[G]enerally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

…

I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.

So the civil rights movement was just a half-assed waste of time, the nuclear freeze was a joke (he got that right). Neither rose to the level of revolution, which is what he was looking for.

I just want to know: when President Obama and the wife and girls were in Moscow, did they pose for family snapshots next to the Lenin Mausoleam?

“Scooch in everybody. I want to get Sasha and Malia on either side of his head.”

Caroline Glick:

On Monday Obama arrived in Moscow for a round of disarmament talks with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. According to most accounts, while in Moscow Obama plans to abandon US allies Ukraine and Georgia and agree to deep cuts in US missile defense programs. In exchange, Moscow is expected to consider joining Washington in cutting back on its nuclear arsenal just as the likes of Iran and North Korea build up theirs.

Of course, even if Russia doesn’t agree to scale back its nuclear arsenal, Obama has already ensured that the US will slash the size of its own by refusing to fund its modernization. In short, Obama is working to implement the precise policy he laid out as an unoriginal student conformist 26 years ago.

…

Since entering office seven long months ago, Obama has demonstrated that his guiding philosophy for foreign affairs is that the US and its allies are to blame for their adversaries’ hostility toward them. All that needs to happen for peace to break out throughout the world is for the US and its allies to quit clinging to their guns and religions and start apologizing for their rudeness.

…

The basic reality that the US is being led by a radical ideologue who clings to his views in the face of overwhelming proof of their falsity is the most fundamental fact that world leaders must reckon with today as they formulate policies to contend with the Obama administration. This is first and foremost the case for Israel.

And she goes on from there.

And while she’s absolutely right, it’s not just about Israel. When she wrote “The US is being led by a radical ideologue who clings to his views in the face of overwhelming proof of their falsity,” she could have just stopped there. It applies to everything he does.

It has:

Massive government intervention in the economy has spurred the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to launch an unprecedented campaign to promote a basic American principle: capitalism.

As much as $100 million will go toward public education, lobbying, grassroots organizing, and a high-profile advertising campaign over an unspecified number of years.

“Dire economic circumstances have certainly justified some out-of-the-ordinary remedial actions by government,” said Thomas Donohue, President and CEO of the Chamber “But enough is enough. If we don’t stop the rapidly growing influence of government over private sector activity, we will squander America’s unmatched capacity to innovate and create a standard of living and free society that are the envy of the world.”

Expect the public shaming to commence shortly.

President Obama, March 30, 2009:

“These companies — and this industry — must ultimately stand on their own, not as wards of the state,” Obama said at the White House.

Obama spoke after the White House forced GM CEO and Chairman Rick Wagoner to step down. The president said the move was not a “condemnation” of the chairman — rather a “recognition that it will take a new vision and new direction to create the GM of the future.”

He said his interest lies in giving the company the opportunity to make “much-needed changes” so that it can emerge profitable and competitive.

“Let me be clear. The United States government has no interest in running GM. We have no intention of running GM,” Obama said.

President Obama, June 1, 2009:

President Barack Obama pushed General Motors Corp. into bankruptcy on Monday and said it was part of a “viable, achievable plan that will give this iconic company a chance to rise again.”

Obama said he hoped the firm would emerge quickly from bankruptcy court, and said the government was ready to commit an additional $30 billion to help the company get on its feet.

He said the government would own 60 percent of the new GM — much as it has taken part ownership of Chrysler, banks and other corporations in recent months — and acknowledged that could prove controversial with some.

Seeking to ease those concerns, Obama said, “What I am not doing, what I have no interest in doing, is running GM.”

Oh, I see. Entirely consistent.

So when I read… :

Obama sought to reassure Americans about the government’s role, saying the breathtaking plan – injecting a fresh $30.1 billion in loans to GM in return for a 60% stake and the right to reconfigure its board of directors – was the only way to ensure GM’s survival while protecting federal money.

I’m sure that’s also entirely consistent.

The consistency of slime.

While we anti-Barackists were screaming bloody murder over his misguided and harmful socialist economic initiatives, we were not without that modish quality of HOPE that the US economy was strong enough (and capitalistic enough, if that’s not redundant) to resist his Venezuela-ization.

Damn:

The Rasmussen Investor Index dropped 15 points on Friday, the largest single day decline ever recorded in its seven-year history. The drop caps a week of extreme volatility for the Index and now shows investor confidence at the lowest level in two months.

The culprit — both for the volatility and the current low level of confidence — is shifting perceptions on where the economy is heading next. Today, just 24% of investors say the economy is getting better while 47% say it is getting worse. A couple of days ago, the outlook was much less pessimistic: 34% better and 40% worse.

Well, that’s just perception, fickle and fleeting; what about reality?

Are you sitting down?

The yield of the benchmark U.S. 10-year bond, which moves in the opposite direction to the price, rose by 0.15 percentage point from Wednesday to 3.355%, its highest level in six months. … Thursday’s selloff in U.S. and U.K. government bonds highlights the risks the two countries face as they try to jump-start their economies. The two governments hope that all the money they are borrowing will spur so much growth that the debt will shrink as a portion of their economies. The risk is that growth will be weak, leaving the economies still struggling but with heavy debt loads.

But I’m just quoting a conservative pessimist. I bet the New York Times sees sunnier days:

The dollar skidded to its lowest point in five months this week, battered by creeping fears that Washington’s costly efforts to stimulate the economy are growing harder to finance and may set off an unwelcome bout of inflation. Analysts are increasingly concerned that a rise in prices could hurt consumer spending, deepening the recession.

…

“Those little footsteps coming down the hallway have begun to frighten many people,” said David M. Darst, chief investment strategist at the Global Wealth Management Group of Morgan Stanley. “The dollar has sold off inexorably, slowly but surely. The key thing driving it is psychology.”

The Federal Reserve is printing money from thin air, and the government is issuing trillions of dollars in new debt as it tries to spend its way out of the recession with a huge stimulus package, new lending programs, health care overhauls and automotive rescues.

Experts warned there might not be enough demand to sop up all those new dollars and dollar-denominated Treasury securities. That led investors to fret about the sustainability of the United States government’s AAA sovereign credit rating after the Standard & Poor’s ratings agency warned this week that the sovereign rating of Britain — which is spending hundreds of billions of pounds to engineer a recovery — is under threat.

On Thursday, the influential bond fund manager Bill Gross of Pimco said in an interview on Bloomberg Television that the United States might eventually lose its triple-A credit score.

Of course, I wrongly assume this is bad news to President Obama. The worse the economy (which he inherited!), the more socialism he can force through.

“Obama Lambasts Big Business” may be the least attention-grabbing headline in journalism, so I’ll keep this short:

Listen to President Obama, and the status quo seems a cesspool. Pervasive “loopholes” engineered by “well-connected lobbyists” allow U.S. multinationals to skirt American taxes and outsource jobs to low-tax countries. So the president proposes plugging loopholes. Some jobs will return to the United States, he said, and U.S. tax coffers will grow by $210 billion over the next decade.

Sounds great — and that’s how the story played. “Obama Targets Overseas Tax Dodge,” headlined The Post. But the reality is murkier; the president’s accusatory rhetoric perpetuates many myths.

Follow the link to read the differences between the myths and the realities. Let me just observe that “myth” is the perfect word to associate with His Oneness.

There, that wasn’t so bad, was it? Short, sweet, concise.

Can we all agree that however one feels about President Obama’s economic policies, those policies are based on the European model of democratic socialism (a model much of Europe is trying to undo)?

How’s that working out for them?

EU economies will contract by 4% this year, the European Commission has forecast, in a massive revision from its earlier prediction.

The worsening of the global financial crisis, dropping levels of world trade and continuing house value falls had prompted the downgrade, it said.

Europe’s economy would not start recovering until the second half of next year, the commission added.

It also predicted unemployment in the 27-nation EU would reach 10.9% in 2010.

The jobless figure would be 11.5% across the 16 countries using the euro, known as the eurozone, it added.

We might envy a contraction of only 4% (ours contracted over 6% in that last quarter alone), but an unemployment rate of 11.5%? We’d have riots in the streets.

Isn’t fairness the unifying theme of the Obama administration? (I’d call it envy and resentment, but David Axelrod inexplicably rejected those slogans.) What’s fair about not having a job—just knowing that some corporate fat cat is out of one too?

And check out these other headlines from the BBC site:

THE EURO ECONOMY
LATEST NEWS

Ireland unveils emergency budget
Eurozone’s GDP revised downwards
Eurozone unemployment rises again
Irish unemployment at fresh highs
Germany’s unemployment rate rises
Irish credit rating cut by S&P

All the social safety nets in the world aren’t going to save you if you’ve got no money to pay for them.