Will Obama Jobs Summit and Nobel ‘moves to the center’ create jobs and peace?

In short, no and maybe and never forget that modern Democratic Party moves toward the center are akin to  bank robbers (Bonnie Pelosi and Clyde Reid pictured) taking a day off.

Government policies that foster the creation of private sector jobs are not a secret

Over a year ago, this column suggested that President Barack “spread the wealth” Obama would, before the 2010 elections, discover that there wasn’t enough wealth to spread around and turn to some tax cut and/or supply side measures.

It appears that I was “right” in a technical sense, but the post-Jobs Summit Stimulus II by another name is quite puny and has no more chance of stimulating private sector job creation than did the Stimulus I aka government growthulus bill.

In short, Obama’s move to the center is about as close to the Bill Clinton center as Pluto’s closest distance to Earth during its elliptical orbit. Of course, there could always be a Stimulus III for Easter, but I digress.  The Obama proposals:

The one-year only small business incentives are very similar to those tried by President Jimmy Carter and his filibuster-proof Democrats that failed miserably;

The “cash for caulkers” aka “sexy insulation” proposal is another one-shot gimmick; and

In the one area of government spending that could actually out people to work on public infrastructure, Obama proposes only $50B.

Why is creating private sector jobs such a low priority for ObamaDems? The first stimulus that didn’t allocated only 10% of the massive $700B+ bill to public works, with most of that puny amount to be spent in 2010 and beyond. Yes, many signs have been spotted on empty lots advertising the “economic recovery act”, but the vast majority of the funds not related the safety net for the truly needy were to “save” state and local government jobs and to create federal jobs that taxpayers must fund.

Bottom line: ObamaDems don’t care about the poor and middle class, unless caring is defined as indefinite unemployment benefits, welfare, food stamps and labor union “protection” (GM takeover is best example of the latter).

And if anyone thought that these proposals were any kind of significant move to the center, those thoughts should have been disabused by his attack on “bank fat cats” yesterday, so upset was he that Bank of America dared to pay its TARP ransom and escape his meddling controls.

Apparently, Obama has written off the 2010 elections in which he will not be on the ballot; is delusional on economic policy; and/or thinks he can fool the public into thinking he is trying to create real jobs for them.

Wasn’t it Deputy Barney Fife that said: Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me? If they truly wanted to spur job creation, all they have to do is study the effect of the supply side tax and regulation cuts under Reagan and JFK.

Why doesn’t the Drive-By Media ridicule Obama like they did Reagan and Dubya when he used the word “evil”?

It is because they don’t believe he believes it. The Drive-Bys are a protection racket for the Democratic Party, but why anyone would trust a Democrat President given that party’s behavior since November 1963, I haven’t a clue, unless the reason is child-like denial or pure ignorance.

However, I will give the President kudos for more than just the first part of his war speech when accepting the Nobel “aka hate Bush” Peace Prize and his actions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The best deterrent for “evil” is to kill evil doers, and Obama has allowed the armed forces to continue to kill them. Bravo!

Obama has not surrendered in Iraq aka Connecticut Middle East and Pakistan is fighting with renewed vigor against al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Keep it up.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed.

Deliverer is a synonym for Messiah, and Lucifer wields pitchforks

The soon to resign CEO of the nation’s largest bank, Ken Lewis, and his cocky defender here at Examiner, have been vindicated in spades, with this announcement last week:

Bank of America Corp. said Wednesday it has repaid the entire $45 billion it owed U.S. taxpayers as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Bank of America was among hundreds of banks that received government support through the government’s TARP program. The bank received $25 billion as part of the initial round of investments when the credit crisis peaked last fall. It received an additional $20 billion in January shortly after it acquired Merrill Lynch in what was a heavily scrutinized deal.

Repayment of the funds frees the Charlotte, N.C.-based bank from the government restrictions that have hampered its search for a new CEO, including executive pay limitations.

Bank of America has been searching for a successor to Lewis since it announced in late September that he planned to retire on Dec. 31.

President Barack Obama asked about recently announced executive bonuses, stated that he didn’t “come to Washington to save fat cat bankers who still don’t get it.”

No, he came to try and literally sic pitchfork lynch mobs on them while many were getting threats to their life and safety. His administration falsely claimed that Bank of America Corporation (BAC) was “insolvent”, despite the fact that it had never missed a payment on its obligations. It was clear that Obama wanted his Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to be BAC’s new CEO. He tried everything to drive it into the ground, and he did succeed in getting Ken Lewis removed as Chairman of the Board.

But while Obama was taking apology tours and dating Michelle at the taxpayers expense, Lewis took no salary for two years and paid the government back its un-asked for loan, nine years early.

Obama is looked upon (or was) as some sort of Messiah during the 2008 Presidential campaign by yutes, Europeans and the American left in the press and the Democratic Party.

But do Messiah’s wield pitchforks? No.

Messiah’s perform miracles, and given Lewis’ performance, he must better understand the tendency of Messiahs to be crucified. The TARP pay back miracle follows on the heels of the miracle he performed in turning the merger with a bankrupt Merrill Lynch into a money maker, after being forced to go through with the deal by Geithner’s predecessor at Treasury, Hank Paulson, during the financial crisis late last year.

Lewis also survived lies about the deal by Paulson and Fed Secretary Ben Bernanke, both of whom claimed that they didn’t coerce Lewis to go thru with the deal after learning of Merrill’s balance sheets.

Finally, he survived relentless attacks by the dead-tree drive by media outlet (Charlotte Observer) in his hometown that tried to out North Carolina’s largest private employer out of business. Guess they thought it would sell more newspapers?

Ken Lewis was attacked by the economy, the media, congressional show trials and a thuggish, Chicago Way President and Administration.

The result: Bank of America survives and does more to reduce the deficit that all of the above combined.

Could the man that de-TARPed Bank of America do the same for the United States of America?

Ken Lewis for President 2010!

Click here for all prior DeVine columns on this subject.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed.

Cap-and-tax high energy tax attack on the poor and middle class is dead

Finally,  a so-called Blue (moderate) Dawg Democrat stands up to the Hectorer-in-Chief, and conservatives could do a lot worse than for that democrat to be the Scots-Irish author of Born Fighting who famously tried to start a fight with the former occupant of the White House.

One of the most passionate and enduring dreams of President Barack Hussein Obama, directly consistent with the Marxist dreams of his Kenyan father, is that Americans learn a lesson from high energy prices even if it bankrupts the coal industry.

But the lesson Americans learned when gasoline reached $4/gallon two summers ago is that man-made global warming aka climate change was a fetish of an affluent society, a relic of the pre-Great Recession salad days.

The fact that ObamaDems’ cap-and-tax attack on the poor and middle class bill has been stalled for months concentrates the mind. Obama’s pending pilgrimage to the climate change revival required that the Nobel Messiah perform a miracle before his Transfiguration, so he had his EPA Gabriel issue a threat to his congressional subjects.

The threat got caught in a Virginia Webb:

Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) sent a letter to the president late last week warning Obama against agreeing to any binding climate change agreement during a conference in Copenhagen, Denmark this month.

“I would like to express my concern regarding reports that the Administration may believe it has the unilateral power to commit the government of the United States to certain standards that may be agreed upon at the upcoming [conference],” Webb wrote to Obama.

“Although details have not been made available, recent statements by Special Envoy on Climate Change Todd Stern indicate that negotiators may be intending to commit the United States to a nationwide emission reduction program,” Webb added. “As you well know from your time in the Senate, only specific legislation agreed upon in the Congress, or a treaty ratified by the Senate, could actually create such a commitment on behalf of our country.”

It appears that even if the pagan religion were true, Webb long ago decided that it would not justify the draconian measures desired by the Left, as evidenced by his appropriately puny bill to continue the Bush Administration research in wind and solar power.

But after the climategate emails showing the scientific data was fraudulent, all you hear now are death rattles.

There will be no new taxes on energy, just as Cockstradamus crowed two years ago.

I don’t think Charles Krauthammer need worry:

Not everyone is pleased with the coming New Carbon-Free International Order. When the Obama administration signaled (in a gesture to Copenhagen) a U.S. commitment to major cuts in carbon emissions, Democratic Sen. Jim Webb wrote the president protesting that he lacks the authority to do so unilaterally. That requires congressional concurrence by legislation or treaty.

With the Senate blocking President Obama’s cap-and-trade carbon legislation, the EPA coup d’etat served as the administration’s loud response to Webb: The hell we can’t. With this EPA “endangerment” finding, we can do as we wish with carbon. Either the Senate passes cap-and-trade, or the EPA will impose even more draconian measures: all cap, no trade.

Thank you for the clarity on this issue Senator Webb.

Now, how about Virginia tobacco?

Just as the EPA threat is based on a non-Congressionally approved, unilateral executive overreach “finding” that what humans breathe out is an “endangerment” to human health, so is the recent action by the FDA to regulate tobacco, but to only apply the law to “clove” and other flavored cigarettes as dangerous to children.

But just as the EPA can’t selectively apply its regulations only to big business, the FDA can’t just protect children. Adults matter too! The problem is that everyone knows CO2 is not a health hazard. Kim Strassel points out the legal problem:

But the EPA’s legal vulnerabilities go beyond that. The agency derives its authority to regulate pollutants from the Clean Air Act. To use that law to regulate greenhouse gases, the EPA has to prove those gases are harmful to human health (thus, the endangerment finding). Put another way, it must provide “science” showing that a slightly warmer earth will cause Americans injury or death. Given that most climate scientists admit that a warmer earth could provide “net benefits” to the West, this is a tall order.

Then there are the rules stemming from the finding. Not wanting to take on the political nightmare of regulating every American lawn mower, the EPA has produced a “tailoring rule” that it says allows it to focus solely on large greenhouse gas emitters. Yet the Clean Air Act—authored by Congress—clearly directs the EPA to also regulate small emitters.

The laws being passed by this ObamaDem Congress are disastrous enough (non-stimulus, $1.8T budget deficit, etc).The Republic can’t stand Napoleonic edicts and this conservative Republican is glad that at least one Democrat is willing to stand up for the separation of powers to protect We the People from the ideological leftist nut who garnered the necessary electoral votes to appoint 911-truthers and Maoists to the executive branch.

I suspect that Webb won’t be getting an invitation to White house parties given his Copenhagen executive overreach warning epistle, and we suspect that Obama won’t be making a get tough with John Conyers-type phone call to Webb as well.

The Secret Service’s diligence on party-crashers just got a priority alert. The problem is though, that the people who have invitations to White House parties and who occupy the offices are the danger, not tabloid moguls.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson 

ObamaDems don’t care about winning wars, honoring the troops, deterring terrorists, creating non-government jobs or allowing anyone to secure a loan in this country without their prior approval.

This is the first in a series, focusing on the governing concept of President Barack Obama that we identified early in his Administration and dubbed “expostfactObamalism”, due to ObamaDems’ attempts last Spring, to retroactively tax AIG-bonuses at a 90% confiscatory rate and to criminalize the enhanced interrogation techniques and the giving of legal advice justifying same, that CIA agents and Justice Department lawyers used to keep us safe after 911.

The recent decision to provide Khalid Sheik Mohamed (pictured, courtesy of TMR) with a civilian trial and return to the scene of his horrific handiwork near Ground Zero in New York City inspired the need to return to this issue, given its departure from fundamental American principles and comparability to the the regular criminalization of politics by Third World banana republics.

Actions of this kind so violate fundamental fairness that  the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions explicitly state, for example, that:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. – US Const. Art. 1, sec. 9

No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall be made. – Texas Const. Art. 1, sec. 16

U.S. Supreme Court precedents have severely limited the applicability of these concepts to criminalization of deeds deemed legal at the time, but have allowed their applicability, at least in the criminal realm to similarly-situated groups rather than just named individuals. However, our culture and traditions have, until the rise of the ObamaDems, have mostly followed the concepts embodied by the most detailed language of the Lone Star State’s language cited above.

Our purpose today, is to re-introduce the concept of expostfactObamalism in a number of contexts, which we will revisit over the coming week in more detail, as indicated below:

KSM trial in NYC

Possibly the most vile and cynical action taken by the liberal Democratic Administration, the decision to refuse to accept a guilty plea from the mastermind of 911 is a direct assault on previous administration. Such a trial serves no useful purpose as Attorney General Eric Holder (in the role of Janet Reno as Bill Clinton’s Waco raid foil) admits that KSM can be held indefinitely as an enemy combatant.

KSM was about to be convicted and executed under the rights-sensitive, U.S. Supreme Court-demanded, Democratic Party majority passed and signed  by Obama into law, military tribunals at Gitmo. The result of civilian trial in NYC can produce no better outcome, and promises to be a show trial that indicts President George W. Bush et al, with KSM and the other four terrorist defendants testifying essentially as witnesses corroborating the “testimony” of candidate Barack Obama’s campaign criticisms of the United States at war.

As we have oft repeated, Dems say and do for free, what the terrorists would gladly pay them to say and do. We suspect the irony of Mohamed echoing the words of ObamaDems, including Barack Hussein Obama and other ObamaDems, will not be lost on the American people.

Jobs summit fraud

The stimulus wasn’t, but could have been. Even the Keynesian part wasn’t. We know this because now ObamaDems are post-2009 Election Day in Virginia and know that they don’t have enough wealth to spread around to cover the stench of the fact that Dems Don’t Care about the poor and middle class.

If ObamaDems cared about actual people having actual jobs (save for government and union jobs), they would have front-loaded the recovery act with shovel-ready jobs. That they didn’t is an admission that they only care about the perception of progress on jobs leading up to Election Day 2010.

If they cared about creating jobs, they would celebrate the cooling Earth of the past 11 years, breathe a sigh of relief that we discovered the fraud of the global warming/climate change claim, and accept the reality of oil as the now and indefinite future fuel of prosperity and liberty. Read George Will, here.

We will have extensive coverage of this issue after the President’s address to the nation on Tuesday, but suffice to point out for now that:

• Obama is whining about the deficit and consequent lack of resources after his $1.8T first budget deficit, squandered the moment and our currency on a government growthulus bill posing as a stimulus;
•  ObamaDems reject any and all of the proven supply-side policies that produced the Reagan-Clinton 25-year recovery and tie all proposals for tax relief to crony capitalism that requires investors to follow the advice of federal bureaucrats;
• Seeks to monopolize mortgage, student and small business loans within the federal government’s discretion in order to enforce the above; and
• Creates two Americas that John Edwards never hinted at, i.e. One Union, One Non-Union, and guess which gets the shaft.

The non-surge in Afghanistan is expost facto pre-911 mentality

West Point address admits ObamaDems’ Bushlied Era and campaign claims that the Afghan war was one of necessity was a fraud

Charles Krauthammer’s paraphrase of Winston Churchill as Obama:

We shall fight in the air, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields, we shall fight in the hills — for 18 months. Then we start packing for home.

President Obama’s cynical use of West Point cadets as props for his diatribes, insults and lies against his predecessor as Commander in Chief (and oh, btw, I am sending 30,000 more of you chumps into war) showed just what a small man he is. I got through two pages of the eight-page transcript before having to write this column, the main follow-up to which will detail the vile hurlings from Obama’s mouth later in the week. For now, consider:

1. No mention of victory
2. Enemies of liberty described as mere ”extremists”, never terrorists
3. No praise for Iraq victory
4. Blames Cold War muhajadeen strategy that defeated the Evil Empire, for 911. We “allowed” 911 to happen
5. Blames Taliban resurgence on Iraq War
6. Lies concerning supposed denials of Afghan Theater troop requests by then Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld
7. Ad nauseum ad infinitum….in next column

 The AJC’s Jim Wooten Thinking Right:

It is tacky and disrespectful of the Office of the President for the Commander-in-Chief to assemble his troops, as Obama did at West Point, and use the occasion to trash their former Commander-in-Chief. This is the action of a small-bore leader.

We were told during the Bushlied Era, that we had to get Usama bin Laden, but now, not so much. But a war tax? We need that.

More later, every day this week…

But before we conclude part one, one comment on the relatively strong support the President has received from prominent Republicans, like Newt Gingrich, for his decision to send 30K troops to Afghanistan. Newt, like Karl Rove and Bill Kristol, disagree with exit strategies that telegraph to allies and enemies alike that we haven’t the stomach to finish the job, but do think that General Petraeus can win the war with the extra troops.

I was asked by an Astute Conservative Political Observer in Alabama is Newt had gone over to the dark side due to his praise of Obama’s decision on the increase of troops in Afghanistan.

No, he hasn’t, although some of his actions on climate change, support for moderates in contested GOP primaries and other actions do show he has been inside the Beltway too long.

However, the main lesson to be drawn from this exercise as contrasted with the behavior of Democrats (including then Senator Obama who refused to vote the fund the troops as a campaign game of chicken with Hillary) is the consistency of Republicans in supporting Commanders in Chiefs and troops in the Field.

By contrast, Democrats use war and the troops as political issues and pawns.

Dems are vile.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed

Hoping, like DeVine Law Gamecock to hear a Commander-in-Chief tonight, for the first time since President George W. Bush’s farewell?

Don’t count on it.

It appears that President Barack Obama already leaked the warrior-related details Monday, before the Charlie Brown Christmas preemption speech in prime time tonight:

President Obama issued orders to send about 30,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan as he prepared to address the nation Tuesday night to explain what may be one of the most defining decisions of his presidency.

Mr. Obama conveyed his decision to military leaders late Sunday afternoon during a meeting in the Oval Office and then spent Monday phoning foreign counterparts, including the leaders of Britain, France and Russia.

Mr. Gibbs told reporters at the White House that Mr. Obama would discuss in the speech how he intended to pay for the plan — a major concern of his Democratic base — and would make clear that he had a time frame for winding down the American involvement in the war.

No mention of victory as more troops get sent into a war zone. Oh no, merely ending “involvement”. Sounds like Obama thinks America was mere bystander as Afghans on horses scared Obama into Pakistan.

As we discussed yesterday, when Democrats speak of “exit strategies”, they really mean surrender/cut and run. They give the enemy a time schedule so they can better prepare their supply lines and plan their next attacks.

Why overdo it now, when the Great Satan is telling you when attacks will be more fruitful.

And oh yes, we finally get to the real crux of this speech: Taxes.

Let’s raise taxes and call it exit strategy.

For the Democratic Party, taking the fruits of one’s labor trumps all other issues, even including, ah hell, especially including war.

President Obama, would you please surprise us and your advisers tonight and deliver a Commander-in-Chief call for victory in this war against those that put holes in Manhattan, the Pentagon and the Keystone State?

Isn’t winning this war and thus deterring enemies from more attacks at least as important as socializing America health care for everyone but you, fellow D.C. politicians, federal employees and unions?

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Gamecock just announced the dawning of the first Black Friday in his memory that won’t be black and Cockstradamus crows at the dawning of the feared double-dip recession; but JimmyCrackCorn and ObamaDems don’t care.

Red Friday I

DeVine Law won’t be in the North American shopping mall equivalent of the Running of the Bulls today, but he never is nor will be. His three main goals in life are to never get hot; never be forced to speak to a Police between Dusk and Dawn; and never, ever go to a shopping mall (Drug stores on Christmas Eve have plenty of presents to choose from, but I digress.)

But now that Thanksgiving Day 2009 (brought to you by Pilgrims, Washington, Lincoln and God) is over, can we get serious about how much more we would like to be thankful for on Thanksgiving Day 2010 so that Black Friday 2010 has a darker hue than today’s in the red one?

Character Test

We spoke last year of being tested as a people no matter whether Obama or McCain prevailed, given the loss of so much housing and other wealth and given the state of debt held by individuals and government.

The test was going to be bad enough without a government, at one hostile to the Liberty that leads to wealth creation and enamored of economic-crisis driven blank checks for government growthulus.

Porkulus is more caring than Govenment Growthulus

Then we were served up a Dems Don’t Care about the poor and middle class non-Stimulus better characterized as Government Growthulus, not the more ubiquitous epithet of “porkulus.”

Cockstradamus laughed on January 13th of this year when Hugh Hewitt’s wide-eyed economic optimist Brian Wesbury announced the “most intense” period of the recession behind us. We hope that HH. BW and Larry Kudlow-ites have enjoyed moving the shells of the Dow Jones game around as they have followed the wave of deficit spending on saved and created pencil-pushing state, local and federal government jobs as well as Bernanke’s assault on the once Almighty Dollar. Hope that 2.8% downward revised GDP in the Third Quarter warmed your soul for the intensity of accumulated long-term unemployment that will make January 2009 look like salad days even to Wesburyites, as they read CBO Director Doug Elmendorf:

CBO Director Elmendorf said today the country has not yet seen the worst of joblessness, despite some encouraging signs of economic growth.

Speaking at the American Association for Budget and Program Analysis’ fall conference, Elmendorf said the CBO projection of this past summer, which saw the unemployment rate peaking at 10.5 percent next year, underestimated the autumn’s rise in jobless numbers. The rate hit 10.2 percent in October.

“We are weighing our precise forecast going forward,” Elmendorf said, adding that the employment picture is expected to get worse before it gets better.

CBO has forecast that it will take years before unemployment falls to a “sustainable” level of 5 percent, Elmendorf said, because the current jobless numbers are so high.

“If one judges the pain of a recession by the excess of the unemployment rate over the long-run level … this picture is very clear that most of the pain of the recession is ahead of us, not behind us,” he said.

All things Stimulus

Stimulus I consisted of several parts:

a) safety-net unemployment and COBRA health insurance for the truly needy;
b) one-time, approx. $400 individual tax cuts for incomes under $250K;
c) public works pork; and
d) Government Growthulus increases in the federal bureaucracy and aid to states, who used them to retain government employees.

Ford has a better idea

Ford Motor Company and many other non-bailed out companies have so far weathered the creative destruction of this Great Recession to post profits with less employees. But never let government have to do that. We all know we need every last school administrator backing up the lowly teachers.

COBRA

But, Gamecock favored the extensions of unemployment and COBRA and favors even further extensions now. Unemployment comp has been extended, but I urge all to support H.R. 3930, introduced by Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., on extending COBRA.

We also favored a massive public works program to put people to work IN 2009! But instead, we got a puny public works program that mainly printed signs in 2009 with most all of the tiny budget for public works to be spent in the few months before Election 2010, so that voters see a shovel beside a “This project funded by the Recovery Act” sign.

ObamaDems don’t care about the poor

ObamaDems didn’t care about the suffering of the 10-17% unemployed in 2009 and the first half of 2010. They do care about getting re-elected and hope they have made enough of the unemployed victim dependents by next Election day.

I only wish Stimulus I had served up more pork, as we await the likely servings of no better than Tofu with the Jobs Summit and Stimulus II.

Yes, I would love for a real stimulus to come out of Obama’s December Jobs Summit and that it be called Stimulus II, or even, Barack Obama We Love you II, if it were a real stimulus.

While I don’t share the optimism of Rush Limbaugh and others that even the supply-side tax and regulation cuts that have always worked in the past (see 1920s, 1960s and 1983-2006) would work as quickly as in the past, until we start laying the foundation for wealth and job creation, we are simply prolonging suffering unnecessarily.

Or is the suffering necessary?

Maybe it is necessary that we suffer so that our minds are concentrated on the hideous results of Big Government and failed liberal Democratic Party policies.

Democrats took over the House and Senate in January 2007. The Great recession started in December 2007, nine months before the credit crunch. The repeal of Bush Republican policies on taxes and regulations is the reason, even before the Dems’ Fannie Mae protection plan via Senate filibusters took hold.

Is it possible that fears of a massive Gingrich-like 1994 repeat could get ObamaDems to rethink the spread the wealth already accumulated strategy and actually enact policies that would encourage, rather than demonize private sector job and wealth creation?

I doubt it, but if we are to have more to be thankful for next year, the Reagan, JFK, Coolidge way is the only way.

Savings are key to future growth

But one other way will also be a necessary part of any recovery, and that will be the way the author of Thanksgiving set out in his Holy Bible, and that will be to build houses on solid rock rather than sand and to store up goods for rainy days.

The fact is that Obama can push housing tax credits (and I favor them); small business loan subsidies (and I favor them), but until people save up money that makes them feel secure enough to risk money on a business and until lenders see the likelihood of profits being earned from new loans, there won’t be any real, REAL job producing loans. Instead, all we will get are the next moves towards the next bubbles.

Want to have a more stimulating 2010 with more to be thankful for on the last Thursday in November and really, really Black Friday?

Dare ObamaDems

Dare Blue Dawgs to vote for any health care bill that doesn’t end state monopolies and enact federal tort reform. Dare them to pass an energy tax assault on the poor and middle class cap and trade. Dare them lest we cap them and trade them in for Republicans that won’t make Pelosi and Reid sycophants for ObamaDems and JimmyCrackCorn, because them don’t care.

We do remain thankful for God’s Providence, especially including Obama’s inexperience. Can you imagine the threadbare clothing we would be in crisis over if the Obama Administration were actually competent?

We are also very thankful for the good work that Rush Limbaugh (no thanks to Newt) has done over the years in exposing the hoax of man-made global warming, which forms the latest basis for post-Berlin Wall socialists to tear down Liberty and the wealth it produces that makes us lemmings less dependent on Obamas.

Yet, even in the face of the exposed hoax, President Obama is going to Copenhagen to vow the continues assault on American Tiny Tims this winter.

The Ghosts of Christmas past, present and future await Scrooge in 2010 and 2012.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed.

Before disabusing readers of Drive-By Media-driven notions that moderate Democrats and extremist Republicans actually exist [portions of this column originally appeared as, generally, "Moderate Democrats and Extremist Republicans don't exist" at Modern Conservative, as well as Examiner.com and here at Redstate.com] in the modern world, let this Gamecock’s announcement of his Modern Conservative dawn (debut) also crow of what modernized this former liberal Democrat into a proud Reaganite.

DeVine Law will conclude with suggestions of how social conservatives and libertarians must strongly ally themselves to prevent the de-modernization of these United States.

Pre-modern conservatives lost elections

From the 1950s debut of William F. Buckley’s National Review magazine and Whittaker Chambers‘ publication of his ”Witness” autobiography; through the Barry Goldwater and Gerald Ford defeats in the 60s and 70s, the only Republican bright spots were Richard Nixon’s electoral victories, which were basically devoid of any conservative policy triumphs.

The most conservative events before the 1981 Dawn of the Modern Conservative Era, were President John F. Kennedy’s recovery-inducing supply-side income tax rate cuts and blockade of Russian missile-laden Cuba.

Fortunately, America was able to survive and prosper in the pre-modern era due to many shared conservative values among the members of both, then moderate, parties. That circumstance basically ended when Lee Harvey Oswald’s magic bullets found their mark in 1963.

The left took over the world’s oldest political party while the still-moderate Grand Old Party eventually secured tennis court passes from Speaker Tip O’Neil, but were unable to prevent the betrayal of the Hmong, South Vietnamese and the kicking of the black man out the house so Uncle Sam could be daddy.

Then came Reagan, Newt and Rush

Modern conservatism has incorporated all, and I mean all, that was good about classic liberalism, whether it be President Ronald Reagan’s acceptance of the “safety net for the truly needy”; Martin Luther King’s content of character mantle; or the liberty to retain most of the fruits of one’s labor so as to maximize happiness pursuits.

Unapologetic and unabashed conservatism wins every time it’s tried. I know, for, as a county chairman, delegate, and activist in the Democratic Party during the 80s and 90s, I waved good-bye to national security, pro-life democrats wracked by the failed policies of the filibuster-proof Democratic Party majority James Earl Carter years, as they joined the Gipper and saved America and the World from inflation-caused economic disaster and the Red menace.

But it wouldn’t be until my 2001 move from trial lawyer to corporate work/column writing and from Spartanburg to Atlanta that my conservative epiphany would be made manifest.

After 5000 years, conservatives have reached some conclusions

Unshackled by the parochial concerns in my hometown, and educated for 12 years by Rush Limbaugh’s EIB network, this former JFK Democrat proclaimed himself a Modern Conservative before September 11, 2001. After all, I had:

• Always called the Soviet empire, evil;
• Experienced the fruits of supply-side throughout the Reagan recovery, including the Newt-induced continuation during the Clinton years; and was
• Repulsed by the Borking of Judges Robert and Clarence.

I eschewed the failed policies of Democrats from 1964-2000, including those of President Bill Clinton before the 1994 Rush/Gingrich revolution; was repelled by merely bombing Afghanistan night watchmen after the 1998 African embassy bombings while seducing near-minor interns; and favored George W. Bush’s tax cuts to McCain’s crooked-talk and Gore’s multiple personalities.

One of my favorite quotes of William F. Buckley from his Firing Line PBS talk show, was that one of the main differences between liberals and conservatives is that “after 5000 years of human history, conservatives have reached some conclusions.”

After 38 years, DeVine Law reached those same conclusions.

Then came the ObamaDem assault on all things exceptional about America

I, like Charles Krauthammer in the latest National Review cover story (dead-tree magazine only), don’t mind self-identifying as a “neo-con”, given my support for a robust and aggressive foreign policy that liberates Grenadas and makes Iraqs into Connecticuts after removing evil regimes that threaten American security. I see national security conservative as a synonymous label.

I usually self-identify as a social conservative, though, due to the ubiquity of false stereotypes in the media and even within the conservative movement, and because this country was founded upon Judeo-Christian values that are under assault, and have been since the 60s.

But in truth, conservatism is most aptly defined economically by a preference for as small a government as we can stand, for whenever we hand over responsibilities to the government, we necessarily give up a portion of our Liberty.

Conservatives and Americans of all stripes that still share a love of Liberty and a belief in American exceptionalism, now face an unprecedented threat to our liberty that requires that we all ally ourselves electorally behind a force that can not just arrest the advance of ObamaDem socialism (much as Reagan with Boll weevils and Newt with a triangulator), but that can REVERSE it.

For that one must coalesce in ONE PARTY in a filibuster-proof Senate, strong majority House of Representatives and the White House. It begins in Election 2010.

The loss of Liberty will not be reversed by a third party nor by a coalition of Republicans and Blue Dawg Democrats

You dreamers of a new third-party GOP rising from Whig ashes, wake up. Ain’t gonna happen.

Dreamers that Blue Dawgs in the Senate (There is only 1-8 real blue dawgs in the joke of a House, so we skip it.) will continue to protect us from high energy taxes via Cap and Trade and a Public Option, wake up.

For ObamaDems and Bernankes that are destroying the U.S. dollar with trillions in non-stimuli (that passed the blue dawg House and Senate btw) as we speak, don’t you know the lessons of Louisiana (Landriue) Purchase II, will not be lost on Nelsons, Bayhs and Lincolns. Start the bidding at $300M.

And abortions will be banned to give some dems cover. But don’t worry, you can count on one hand, the number of abortions that won’t happen because of that. Its a non-issue the dems will use to get socialism writ large as we all thank God that “only” 49,000,000 more abortions will be had in the next 26 years as since 1973’s Roe v. Wade, rather than the 49,000,004 that would be had if government paid for them. Not even enough lives saved to put 5 basketball players on the court, but I digress.

But what of Independent Democrat Senator Joe ‘don’t need no stinkin’ public option’ Lieberman? The ObamaDems will find nomenclature and devices to satisfy Joe. I hope he proves me wrong, and I certainly admire his career-long hawkish national security defense stances and his moral voice against Bill Clinton, but somehow I think a provision protecting the insurance industry (See stronger mandate threats of imprisonment if you don’t get the Colonial Life rider?) will be inserted that will re-write what “public” and “options” mean in Merriam-Webster.

Bottom line: We face permanent deconstruction of America if WE THE PEOPLE don’t reverse, and I mean REVERSE (not just stop further advances) the policies put in place by ObamaDems before the 2010 election.

The GOP is the ONLY vehicle to save America short of a Revolution

And given the action against the Navy Seals and the KSM trial, I think the ObamaDems are perfectly capable of instigating a revolution. In fact, one could argue that Obama already fired on Fort Sumter equivalents.

I said all the above, in part, to say this to my social conservative friends

In some cases, in order to win super, filibuster-proof majorities in Congress, we will have to support economic conservatives that are libertarian on social issues. Do the math.

But not to worry, most social policy is made at the state and local level or the courts, and as of now, we have a 5-4 majority on most social issues. Yes, on abortion, we need another vote, but let’s cross that bridge in 2012 by retaining the pro-life plank, pro-traditional marriage plank, federalism advocacy; and nominate only a pro-life presidential nominee.

But conservatives can re-take the GOP only with libertarian help, and an appeal to federalism is the ticket to satisfy both sides. I don’t think this media and Frum-Brooks supposed schism is actually very real, and don’t think social conservatives will have to compromise on this matter very often. But let us embrace the John Stossel’s of the world who share our abhorrence of the far left meddlers that would take away all of our liberty unless we reverse this slouching towards Gomorrah, NOW!

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed.

Dick Morris echoes Gamecock’s 2006 crowing of the Myth of Moderate Democrats

The man who saved Bill Clinton from the far left of the Democratic Party but who was unable to get him to carpet bomb Osama bin Laden’s lair, wrote this week of the myth of the moderate Democrat. Naturally, this author of the 2006, Drawl and that’s all: The Myth of the Moderate Southern Democrat in D.C., was intrigued by the echo.

Dick Morris wrote mostly of a more specialized version of the rot of the party Andrew Jackson made famous, with his description of the Pelosi cloakroom bargaining for the right of her “blue dawg” subjects to vote against socialized medicine, so long as the bill could be passed to the Senate.

My three year old column was compelled by my experiences of:

• The disconnect between the election years’ rhetoric of MSM and self-described “moderates” like House member John Spratt and Senator Ernest Hollings of my Palmetto State home;
• The voting records of nearly all (the very few exceptions, see Alabama’s Parker Griffith, prove  the rule) Democrats as compared to nearly all Republicans, including their most liberal;
• The Democratic Party’s unpatriotic launch of the “Bush-lied Era” after 911; and
• The musings of the most famous moderate Democrat of the all.

The Picture of Dorian Gray

I do not deny that in many, if not most ways, Bill Clinton’s presidency was a success. I give much credit to Bubba’s Southern-learned pragmatism, but most of the credit must go to the Reagan slayings of inflation and the USSR, as well as his wealth-producing tax and regulation cuts.

This elephant’s ears haven’t forgotten the DNC, supposed moderate, Donkey-in-Chief’s broken middle class tax cut promise; Justices Breyer and Ginsburg; missile technology to China; and the pardoning of FALN terrorists during his last days.

Our Oscar Wilde side is also still repelled by the disconnect between the picture of what WJC did after Newt weilded the Speaker’s gavel, and what he has said walking the earth like a 21st century Dorian Gray, from his:

1. 2003 praise of Iran as the foreign nation’s government most akin to his values;
2. Conversion to the pagan religion of man-made global warming scare merchant-in-chief;
3. Recent admission from the signer of the Defense of Marriage Act under the Gingrich guillotine that he was “always for gay marriage”;
4. The womanizer-in-chief’s recent  public utterance characterizing small-government tea party advocates as gay orgy “tea baggers”; and
5. The public airing of his cynical permanent campaign ideology (shared by President Obama and the late communist Saul Alinsky) admonishing congressional democrats to “pass anything” so they can claim political victory since, after all, they can amend it later.

And that is the best “moderate” the Democrats have?

Yes, it is.

My former party is vile and wrong. It is a vampire that needs a stake driven through its heart in the sunlight. The closest it gets to being killed is usually by the Carter and Obama-like suicides induced by the re-education of mostly non-political independents and duped useful idiot Democrats in the failings of liberal economic and domestic policies as well as the aggression-inviting weakness all Democrats exude to enemies abroad.

I refer to conservatives that vote for Democrats by Lenin’s “useful idiot” term because, given that the left has made Democratic Party its home base for 60+ years, and given their takeover since 1963 (and especially since 2001), any vote for a “D’, empowers the left from the time of their first vote for a Jack Ass speaker to their procedural votes to ram through non-stimuli.

Modern conservatives must disabuse themselves of the notion that there  is not a dimes worth of difference between the parties.

My last calculation found a $1.4 trillion difference between ObamaDems’ first budget and George W. Bush’s worst. It is ObamaDems that want to hike energy taxes on the poor and middle class; usurp your right to choose health insurance; and retreat from defending our Liberty abroad.

The policies of the ObamaDems are extreme by any objective, substantive measure, against nearly any American government from George Washington through George W. Bush.

And if our only hope to keep the City Shining on the Hill are so-called Blue Dawgs, then just go ahead and turn off the lights. I have every confidence that Bayh, Nelsons and Lincolns will let me down again. In fact, the only time I have ever had any expectations met by a Democrat of any kind since 1963 or by a Blue Dog, ever, it has been by this one:

Yet, it is Republicans that always get called “extremists”

Extremists have never held sway in the GOP. Ever. Oh DeVine, you may say, but what about Nixon’s “southern strategy” and those religious right “nuts.”

The Republican Party was born to oppose slavery; was prevented from granting civil rights to Blacks by the Democratic Party for decades after the Civil War; and voted in greater numbers than LBJ’s democrats for the 1964-5 civil and voting rights acts.

Nixon sought votes in the South? Who knew? Yes, former segregationist, mostly southern democrats bolted the Democratic Party in the 60s and 70s, but they never got the first quid pro quo in terms of legislation, judges or policies from the Party of Lincoln.

Most Americans disapprove of abortion as birth control and a majority self-describe as pro-life.

Modern conservatives will only enjoy a governing majority that can turn back ObamaDem socialism by allying themselves with social conservatives. We win with the Reagan-Rush message. We lose with the McCains and Rockefeller country clubbers whose wives and daughters forget to take the pill.

But then, are moderate Republicans of any use?

Yes, but only if they are followers and/or joiners on conservatives’ terms. If moderates lead the GOP, the nation is pulled to the left. The liberals already have a party. Its called the Democratic Party, and as we have seen, it is controlled by the real extremists of any substantial numbers, i.e. leftists.

Moderates, by definition, don’t stand for much of anything, and so are drawn into parochial and institutional concerns, rather than the national interests on substance.

Hence, the supposed “need” to pass something. The use of the anti-conservative mantra that to do “nothing” is unacceptable. The bringing home of the pork. The “need” to reach across the aisle and find a compromise solution. You know, the kind that solve no problem; actually makes the problem worse; but does allow for “maverick” re-election campaigns.

But, given that the northeastern United States continue to enjoy statehood status despite my “reverse-Secession” call for returning them to territorial status and requiring that they pass some Constitution Amendments to rejoin the Union, we must abide the presence of a certain number of moderates after they defeat conservatives in primaries.

We must win a majority in the House and a filibuster-proof super-majority in the Senate if we are to actually reverse the century-long trend to the left that has us slouching towards Gomorrah.

And then there are the “appropriators” that Redstate’s pilgrim describes as under the “moderate” label. I invite that persistent cuss to expound on that sub-category for our enlightenment.

[Portions of this column originally appeared in my debut column with Modern Conservative dot com.]

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

[Part one of Mike DeVine's report on Fox Business Channel's, John Stossel's speech last week at Atlanta's Emory University Law School may be reviewed here.]

No more Emmys for you

John Stossel made a name for himself at ABC as the nation’s best consumer affairs reporter. Last Wednesday, before  his “Bashing Business” lecture at Emory Law School’s Tull Auditorium, John Stossel was introduced as a six-time Emmy award winner.

After describing his metamorphosis from big government liberal to free market libertarian, Stossel advised the audience that he won no more Emmys when he started defending private business. He thinks that the fact that market competition actually protects consumers more than government is just too counter-intuitive for too many people in an affluent society that take wealth creation for granted.

DeVine Law agrees, but during a conversation with Atlanta’s guest, we both also agreed that possibly the best hope for a political education in the incompetence of Big Government is taking place as we speak, courtesy of the ObamaDems.

Americans don’t like meddlers

Your humble rooster greeted Stossel as a conservative fan, and even after he described his radical libertarianism (favors abortion on demand; same-sex marriage and drug legalization), we still welcome his philosophy with open arms as his consistency in opposition to government meddling in the affairs of adults, is quite impressive.

No, DeVine Law is still a pro-life defender of marriage who favors a go slow approach on surrendering in the Drug War, and would a oppose such libertarian GOP primary candidates who face strong conservatives that share Stossel’s pure conservative economic views.

But we can’t build a governing majority at the federal level without libertarians, and Stossel is as good an advocate for the free market in economics as one can find. Stossel recently on the Health Care Bill now before Congress:

The 1,990-page bill is breathtaking in its bone-headed audacity. The notion that a small group of politicians can know enough to design something so complex and so personal is astounding. That they were advised by “experts” means nothing since no one is expert enough to do that. There are too many trade-offs faced by unique individuals with infinitely varying needs.

Government cannot do simple things efficiently. The bureaucrats struggle to count votes correctly. They give subsidized loans to “homeowners” who turn out to be 4-year-olds. Yet congressmen want government to manage our medicine and insurance.

Competition is a “discovery procedure,” Nobel-prize-winning economist F. A. Hayek taught. Through the competitive market process, we producers and consumers constantly learn things that force us to adjust our behavior if we are to succeed. Central planners fail for two reasons:

First, knowledge about supply, demand, individual preferences and resource availability is scattered — much of it never articulated — throughout society. It is not concentrated in a database where a group of planners can access it.

Second, this “data” is dynamic: It changes without notice.

No matter how honorable the central planners’ intentions, they will fail because they cannot know the needs and wishes of 300 million different people. And if they somehow did know their needs, they wouldn’t know them tomorrow.

His opposition to “meddlers” reminds of what I consider the sine qua non discourse on same at Hillbilly Politics:

We all know at least one person who meddles in everybody else’s business… and we hate them. There are any number of reasons why we hate them but the most frequent answer to such a question as why is we are adults, not children, and can handle our own lives just fine without interference…

So what does that have to do with politics, you ask?

Simply, if we hate that kind of interference in our daily lives, why did a majority of Americans elect to office a bunch of meddling mothers and mothers-in-law?

* You can’t stimulate the economy by restricting it. If you’re lucky you merely maintain the status quo. If you’re unlucky, as is usually the case, the meddlers make things worse. Propping up failing businesses that didn’t tend to the business of business, aka customer service, only closes the window of opportunity for others to do it better. Entrepreneurship languishes in limbo in this case.

* You can’t replace existing energy with energy that hasn’t been developed yet and you can’t force it by restricting the use of existing energy resources…

You can read all of StephC’s essay here.

After that, check out John Stossel’s 2006 bestseller,  Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel – Why Everything You Know is Wrong (now in paperback).

Liberals prefer to pass new laws when existing laws are more than adequate

One of the most prescient points that Stossel made in Atlanta last week, that was also made by Bob Barr of the AJC, echoes something I discerned about liberals long ago, when in my trial lawyer heyday. Someone would commit a crime or someone would be hurt at work or by a product and the liberal (and, to be fair, not a small number of Republicans in legislatures) knee-jerk response would be to pass a new law to “solve the problem.”

No matter that the “problem” is us. Since Eve bit the apple or, to be more specific, since Cain slew Abel, man has killed, stolen, and been negligent. Moses gave us the Ten Commandments and England gave us the Common Law, and there hasn’t been much improvement on them over the past 3000 years.

But that doesn’t stop leftist Utopians from thinking they can meddle with Titanic deck chairs and make man perfect, and it surely doesn’t stop politicians from the goal of being seen as “doing something” in order to keep the cushy job that requires them to hold their hands out like beggars 24/7 365.

The (Bob) Barr Code:

At a recent Commerce Committee hearing, during which concerns were raised about the constitutionality of such legislation, and about the principle of “federalism,” Rockefeller proudly proclaimed his constitutional disinterest thus — “I don’t really give a hoot about states’ rights or federal rights on this one.  I care about results.”  The “results” include another nail in the coffin of constitutional governance in the United States.

Meddlers will never cease, so neither must we small government conservatives and libertarians. Let us reason together at the federal level and compete over social issues at the state level.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed.

One week after President Obama’s speech to Congress, opposition to his health care reform plan has reached a new high of 55%. The latest Rasmussen Reports daily tracking poll shows that just 42% now support the plan, matching the low first reached in August.

A week ago, 44% supported the proposal and 53% were opposed. Following the speech last Wednesday night intended to relaunch the health care initiative, support for the president’s effort bounced as high as 51% (see day-by-day numbers). But the new numbers suggest that support for health care reform is now about the same as it was in August.

Seventy-four percent (74%) of Democrats now support the plan while 80% of Republicans are opposed. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 67% are opposed.

The latest figures show that, overall, 23% Strongly Favor the plan and 44% are Strongly Opposed. In late August, those figures were 23% and 43% respectively.