Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for June 12th, 2009

From Reuters:

 The Obama administration stepped up efforts on Thursday to push for measures to tie executive pay at all publicly traded companies more closely to performance, but faced some skepticism from lawmakers.

Allpublically traded companies…who needs the Constitution?  Comerade Obama will relieve businesses of the “burden” of bargaining with their executives to set pay.  Unbridle ambition interwined with unquenchable lust for power.  I wonder when the remaining Americans, you know, the ones with the courage to make their own lives, will decide that the usurper has reached too far?

On Wednesday, the Treasury Department said that seven companies receiving government bailout money will be subject to strict oversight on pay for their top executives and other highly paid employees. Treasury also said it wants new laws to empower the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to ensure that shareholders have more say in setting pay.

“While the financial sector has been at the center of this issue, we believe that compensation practices must be better aligned with long-term value and prudent risk management at all firms,” Treasury Counselor Gene Sperling told the House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services.

And that is the crowbar that they will use to pry their way into board rooms around the country, including those who turn down the government’s offer of ‘help’.

Both President Barack Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner have said that Wall Street compensation practices encouraged excessive risk-taking, sowing the seeds of the financial crisis that has driven the United States and many other countries around the globe into recession.

Ignoring, of course, the effects of the CRA and the Dhimicrats steadfast refusal to look into the activities of Freddie and Fannie while their friends and cohorts were taking their case out in wheelbarrows and dump trucks.  Why is it Bwarney Franks and Chris “the freind of Angelo” haven’t been driven out of DC by angry mobs yet?

Lawmakers from both major parties expressed uneasiness at the prospect of what they considered growing interference by government in business affairs. They suggested that regulatory reform and a determination to let companies stand or fail on their own would be preferable to putting taxpayer money into struggling companies.

I wish I could believe this, but billions of dollars away from where we started, I’m not buying their sudden meeting with Jesus.

You can go read the rest.  I have a sudden urge to go re-read the Constitution yet again.  Try as I might, I haven’t been able to find the part that gives Congress the authority to interfere with the ability of individuals and entities to enter into a contract.

Read Full Post »

From the Associated Publicists:

GREEN BAY, Wis. – Surrounded by supportive citizens in the heartland, President Barack Obama on Thursday challenged lawmakers back in Washington who criticize his proposed health care overhaul. “What’s the alternative?” he asked.

“Supportive citizens”.  That’s an interesting way for the Press to refer to itself.  “What’s the alternative?”  Gee, I dunno.  How about not forming yet another government burocracy, staffed be people who are not elected and completely unaccountable to the recipients of the very “care” you propose to give them with money that is not yours and that hasn’t yet been printed.   Not every “problem” can be made better by government meddling and liberal application of the public fisk.

A dispute over Obama’s desire to create a new government-sponsored health plan to compete with private insurers is forming a major obstacle to bipartisan consensus on health reform. So the president, undertaking a new and aggressive push to see legislation enacted this year, worked sell his ideas on health reform directly to Americans.

And gee, no one knows why that would be, except when the regulator is also a player in the market, the private entities soon learn they are at a disadvantage, and the net effect for the consumer is a decrease in choice, not an increase in competition.

He described his critics as naysayers.

And I describe him as a red-cored leftist who is saturated with ambition and the desire to change this nation from a beacon of freedom to another slovenly outpost of mediocrity, dampening the souls of men and destroying their dreams as it forces them into endless shuffling lines to receive whatever the elite ruling class deems sufficient to mete out to the masses forces to be dependent upon them.  While my definition is more descriptive, the name calling doesn’t get us anywhere.

“I know there are some who believe that reform is too expensive, but I can assure you that doing nothing will cost us far more in the coming years,” Obama said at a town-hall style meeting at a high school here. “Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will go up. Our wages will be lower, our jobs will be fewer, and our businesses will suffer.”

Of course, he didn’t explain why Americans should even begin to believe the forecast offered by a proven liar who has demonstrated a complete inability to act with fiscal restraint.

The president’s warnings come as reservations have been expressed by health care providers, Congress — led by Obama’s fellow Democrats — and the public. The brief ride from the airport to a town hall-style meeting featured a rare sight for the new president: a large gathering of protesters.

This shouldn’t be a shock.  Now that his fiscal policies are starting to take hold, more Americans who care about what he is doing have lost their jobs, and have the time to join the true-believers and party faithful who can be counted on for his much needed ego boost of the slobbering adoration of the masses he came to save.

Signs held among the several hundred demonstrators lining his route said “NObama” and “No to Socialism.”

I like “No taxation without representation!” myself, but maybe that’s just me.

Meanwhile, back in the feverswamps of the DC, some Republicans showed just enough backbone to destroy the media assisted myth of broad bipartisan support for this madness.

“We see that as a slippery slope to having the government run everything,” Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wy., said at a news conference.

The Senator might be on to something there.  Maybe if he just keeps reaching, he’ll find a clue and apply it to the problem at hand.

But Obama, answering a question at the town hall meeting, said no one — “certainly not me” — is interested in a nationalized health care system, like that in Great Britain. The president said the government is not going to force any change upon people who are pleased with the plan they already have with their employer.

The lie of course being that once government gets in and sets the amounts paid for various proceedures, and brings all sorts of coersion to bear on medical care providers, many will leave the business rather than accept government mandated poverty.   The ones that remain will not be free to set the rates for their labor.  The government will have relieved them of that “burden” by backdoor means. The synergistic effect will both drive private insurers and doctors out of the business, leaving no real choice for coverage and too few doctors to serve too many patients, which would be much like…hey waitaminute!!!  You mean that The Pretender-In-Chief is lying???

“When you hear people saying socialized medicine, understand, I don’t know anybody in Washington who is proposing that,” he said.

…he said, with his fingers crossed behind his back, as he hoped no one would actually think it through, and realize that that is exactly what he proposed.

For his goal of reshaping the nation’s health care system to bring down costs and extend coverage to 50 million uninsured Americans— an overhaul that has vexed Washington for decades — Obama has set an August deadline.

And hoped that the usual tactic of creating an air of urgency would be enough to once again pressure Congress into passing legislation spending trillions of dollars with little or no consideration of the reasoning behind it would work yet again.

“This next 6-8 weeks is going to be critical,” he told his audience, asking them to help pressure Congress to get it done. If the country puts off health care reform, he said, “it’s never going to happen.”

“ITS CRITICAL!!! WHY???  BECAUSE I SAID SO, DAMMIT!!!  I hope he’s right.  If we can put this off long enough, the effects of his disasterous spending will start to take hold, and spending trillions of our dollars when we are getting slammed by inflation and high interest rates, Congress will have a much harder time looking in the eyes of their constituents and believing that passage of such a boondogle would not cost them dearly.

Senators of both parties agree on many big issues, including getting all Americans covered and prohibiting insurance industry practices that deny coverage to people with health problems. But there remain major disagreements over how to pay for the $1.5 trillion it will cost over the next decade to cover uninsured Americans, whether to require employers to offer coverage and whether government-sponsored insurance should be one option.

Demonstrating why both parties fail to understand that they are part of the problem.  “Getting all Americans covered” with ObamaCare is not their job.  However, if they insist on going down this road, I insist on their participation in the plan, with no special favors for them.  I suspect that such a restriction would cool their enthusiasm.

Obama has detailed few specifics that he is for and against, and did not break any new ground on Thursday. He said he won’t run roughshod over Congress with a “my way or the highway” approach and is “happy to steal other people’s ideas.”

Of course not.  Direct opposition isn’t his way.  He’ll simply send one of his ‘czars’ to threaten and extort those who do not see the wisdom in destroying America to save it.

The president also acknowledged that extending coverage will cost “a good deal of money at a time where we don’t have extra to spend.” He promised anew that he will not allow reform to add to the deficit, and said he will propose new savings “in the days to come” beyond those already outlined to help explain how reform will be financed.

But, he said, that won’t be enough.

That’s a british understatement.

“I’ll be honest, even with these savings, reform will require additional sources of revenue,” Obama said.

You think?

He proposes raising taxes on the highest-earning Americans by limiting the value of deductions they can claim, including charitable donations. This idea has little backing on Capitol Hill.

I see.  Equality in everything but tax treatment.  Spoken like a true class warrior.

Read Full Post »