Blog @ MoreWhat.com

The Obama White House characterized criticism of the President’s planned speech to America’s school children as ’silly season’. The MSM seems to agree based on most coverage yet no such reaction existed for the 24/7 MSM coverage of the search for the Obama dog. Likewise it is at least humorous that the White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs would refer to anything as ’silly’ given his performance to date. And no review of this topic would be complete without the opposition party response during the Bush Administration. In 1991, then-President George H.W. Bush, a Republican, addressed students live on television, with Democrats at the time complaining the speech was costly political advertising at the expense of taxpayers.

So just how silly is the concern that a speech by a sitting US President to the nation’s school children is problematic?
School districts in at least six states say they will not show the speech in classrooms after objections from some administrators and parents.
The speech sparked criticism after U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan sent a letter to school principals urging them to allow their students to watch. The Department of Education also had material that included a suggestion that students write themselves a note on how they can “help the president.”

The Department of Education has since updated the material to instead ask students to write a note about how they can achieve their long-term and short-term education goals.

Is there a chance that after criticism surfaced about the speech not only did the Dept of Education change their stance but the President’s speech may also have been rewritten once the strategy cat was let out of the bag? C’mon, not like this is as innocent as JFK’s promotion of the President’s Council on Physical Fitness. Which, by the way, would not be a bad choice for a rerun given the torturous frequency of reminders we’re all obese. You can almost hear the President suggesting the silly season response to Gibbs as he simultaneously directs speech writer’s to make a change.

Conspiracy theories on the speech are not in short supply. But how over the top is it to suggest that a President who is in campaign mode by default would work the crowd in the nation’s schools to his political advantage? Given the fact that his campaign strategy is about all that has worked thus far it is not a surprise that he would use the only weapon he has….. talking. And next up would be the same strategy applied to a joint session of the House and Senate. One could argue the former audience is superior to the latter although the academic achievements of either are not stellar.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Why should D.C. schoolkids listen to Obama? (Michelle Malkin) 

No one wants to air their dirty laundry in public. But that doesn’t stop it from happening. It seems that when most countries are the subject of criticism about their history those raising the issue are not from the target country. Currently some in the UK are defending their brand of healthcare against criticism from those debating a similar issue in the US. Iran and North Korea are getting criticized by just about every other country for their pursuit of nukes and their subsequent denials or lame justifications for it. And the US gets criticized for just about anything and everything. A likely downside to being on top of the pile. And Russia is not exempt from criticism either.

Sunday, August 23, marks the 70th anniversary of the so-called Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - the non-aggression treaty signed in 1939 by Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov and German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop. The pact included a secret protocol dividing Eastern and Central Europe into Nazi and Soviet spheres of influence. Days after it was signed, first German and then Soviet forces invaded Poland.

This kind of discussion will ruffle the Bear’s fur. Drawing comparisons between Stalin and Hitler will not go unnoticed in Russia. …’ in May, President Dmitri Medvedev issued a decree setting up a presidential commission to counter what he called attempts to “falsify history.” ‘ And then there is mention of something that seems akin to Russia’s Soviet legacy. ‘ Russian Emergency Situations Minister Sergei Shoigu introduced legislation in parliament that would make it a crime to deny the Soviet victory in World War II.’ The criticism is having the expected reaction in the Kremlin and elsewhere.

So what else are the critics saying? Dmitry Furman of the Russian Academy of Science’s Institute of Europe calls the presidential commission to counter what it deems historical falsification an “idiotic undertaking” and a “very bad idea.” He also says Stalin’s government killed as many, or even more people than Hitler’s.

But, given the suffering Russians endured after Hitler turned on Stalin and invaded the Soviet Union, Furman says it is natural that many resist equating Stalinism and Nazism.

Furman says it is “very difficult psychologically” for Russians to put what they see as their “victors” in the Great Patriotic War, as they call World War II, on the same level with the vanquished Nazis.

This might be a case of forgetting to note that Stalin was not representative of the Russian people. It may be difficult indeed for Russia to come to grips with the legacy of a madman.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Here’s another good reading list but there’s no good ONE.  They’re all good.

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/07/friend-or-foil

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/07/acorns-labor-pains

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/07/us-versus-them

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/06/rhinocare-rinos-a-us-chamber-o

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/06/serfs-up

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/06/demolition-derby

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/05/the-great-socialist-takeover

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/05/asterisks

American Thinker: Two Hundred Days of Hope and Change

American Thinker: Doing the Obama Hustle

American Thinker: The Real Climate Agenda

American Thinker: The Decline in July Unemployment…

American Thinker: Obama the Polarizer

American Thinker: Obama’s Black Panther Scandal

American Thinker: WH Declares an End to the War on Terror

American Thinker: NYT Averts Its Eyes on Mary Robinson

As long as Americans are once again shifting to the right this blog might as well assist the public with conservative reading lists.  The American Spectator and American Thinker are two fine places to spend some time reading.  But that’s just the opinion on this know-nothing blog.  See, this blog is so cool it even comes supplied with its own liberal insult so as not to unfairly challenge weak minds.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

It is not uncommon these days to hear people quip it is time for a revolution. This frequent reaction during casual conversations about the state of the nation is presented with overtones of humor as most would agree that thoughts of revolution do not conjure images of reasonable solutions. While participants in such social intercourse may strain from the the effects of the current plague of political and economic dysfunction their desire is more a longing for a renaissance than a revolution.

OMG, another ‘French’ word enters. The Renaissance (French for “rebirth”; Italian: Rinascimento, from re- “again” and nascere “be born”)[1] was a cultural movement that spanned roughly the 14th to the 17th century, beginning in Florence in the Late Middle Ages and later spreading to the rest of Europe. Well that settles it. Rinascimento is more appealing. Besides, when you think of the French and ideas like revolution eating cake and off with their heads comes to mind. And there’s way too much of that going on these days. So, Rinascimento it is.

Hope and change was the sole product and latest offering from campaigns feeding on the stagnant realm of politics in America. The only result thus far that can be stated with any certainty is hope is disappearing and the only change has been the majority and minority status of the two dominant political parties in Washington DC. And the fourth estate, aka the mainstream media or MSM, unintentionally bears this out with the recurring theme of POLS ‘defending’ their respective positions on issues and lackluster actions to solve them. Even the MSM’s unqualified support of the liberal agenda has waned since the 2008 Presidential campaign that featured a continuous stream of fawning and adulation over then candidate Barack Obama. It appears even the media has limitations on how silly they are willing to look in the face of mounting evidence they have been duped.

We probably do not need a Rinascimento identical to that of centuries ago. And we certainly do not need a revolution that bears any resemblance to those documented historically as major events in world history. Whether a Rinascimento, a rebirth or a new beginning we may simply need enough people to share in an epiphany of sorts to get the ball rolling. Not to borrow the term ‘epiphany’ in its religious connotation rather ‘the sudden realization or comprehension of the (larger) essence or meaning of something.’

What are some of the concepts dealing with discussions of the Rinascimento relevant to our current needs? As a cultural movement, it encompassed a resurgence of learning based on classical sources, the development of linear perspective in painting, and gradual but widespread educational reform. Traditionally, this intellectual transformation has resulted in the Renaissance being viewed as a bridge between the Middle Ages and the Modern era. Although the Renaissance saw revolutions in many intellectual pursuits, as well as social and political upheaval, it is perhaps best known for its artistic developments and the contributions of such polymaths as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo, who inspired the term “Renaissance man”.

We have the ’social and political upheaval’. Some may even suggest we the gradual if not widespread educational reform. But the only evidence of ‘a resurgence of learning based on classical sources’ comes from the conservatives among us. If it is true that the Rinascimento was a bridge between the Dark Ages and the so-called Modern era it could be that conservatives are the Renaissance Man of the next rebirth to a new age of prosperity and enlightenment. Not to exaggerate the significance of conservative thought in America with a comparison to Renaissance Man but it appears the best hope for our nation given the current situation and other historic periods in history where extreme shifts allowed tyrants and their allies to prevail.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Reviewing a recording in a collection of videos assembled over many years is partly what inspired this post. That and the belief that we need to examine the human condition periodically even with all the attention to current events, politics and public affairs. The attraction of ‘culture’ as an addenda to content of many internet sites featuring news and/or analysis largely focus on celebrity, pop culture, gossip, fads and dysfunction. It seems more meaningful to explore people, places and things from the past which may provide a positive guide for the future.

The initial inspiration above relates to a video produced near the century mark of the notable accomplishments of two men from Ohio in the bicycle business which made Kitty Hawk a famous location in the world of aviation. One could say they launched the world of aviation. Although the topic is not without debate.

The story mixes nicely with a recent news story on the failure of the remarkable aircraft known as the Raptor. The F-22 has fallen on hard times and may have blemished the equally remarkable legacy and former home of Clarence ‘Kelly’ Johnson and the Skunkworks of Lockheed, now and for some time, Lockheed Martin. Johnson and the Skunkworks were responsible for such masterpieces as the U2 spyplane and this blog’s favorite, the SR=71 Blackbird.

Much about the history of aviation are the truly amazing developments that occurred over the last century. And the pursuit of such things is virtually littered with accounts of those who tried but failed to achieve what others have since or records of latent genius and intuitive journeys which never advanced from that point.

One such intuitive journey is demonstrated in the visual works of Leonardo Da Vinci. The obvious study and attention to detail in evidence in a drawing assists in documenting the time that can pass from concept to creation.

Perhaps Da Vinci is an example of a fertile mind and ample talent overloaded by the sheer quantity of interests occupying his time. You could use this item to counter the kids next time they say they’re bored and there’s nothing to do. (Just had to say that.)

His notes and drawings display an enormous range of interests and preoccupations, some as mundane as lists of groceries and people who owed him money and some as intriguing as designs for wings and shoes for walking on water. There are compositions for paintings, studies of details and drapery, studies of faces and emotions, of animals, babies, dissections, plant studies, rock formations, whirl pools, war machines, helicopters and architecture

Who are the Da Vinci’s of today and what are they achieving? They certainly cannot be found in healthcare reform or other legislative agendas.

Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci (it-Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci.ogg pronunciation (help·info), April 15, 1452 – May 2, 1519) was an Italian polymath, scientist, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, painter, sculptor, architect, botanist, musician and writer.

Now there’s a resume’.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Read a book. It’s possible this blog has never recommended reading a particular book other than Mark Levin’s Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto. But a recent visit to tsowell.com served up a reminder of a wise choice from many of Thomas Sowell’s suggested reading list. It is not new or the latest bestseller but that is certainly not a reason to discount it. In these times of social and political unrest not to mention terrorism and Jihad the book by Bernard Lewis entitled ‘ What Went Wrong’ is not only relevant but extremely well written and compelling. If you do not care to take this blog’s word for it, being on Sowell’s reading list should suffice.

Like any treatment of the topic discussed by Lewis it is not without its detractors. In the interest of fairness one search engine result that provides the dissenting viewpoint is linked here so you can have one recommendation accompanied by one random review by someone not impressed with the work or the author. It would not be surprising if this dissenting viewpoint is held by someone not fond of criticism toward someone or something they personally value, right or wrong.

A description of the book from Sowell’s site is presented here and hopefully Mr Sowell will not object.

A small book presenting a top scholar’s very readable account of the history that led the Islamic world from its pinnacles of achievement in the past to its present pathology and poisonous and dangerous hatreds.

How about a guess? Terrorists, Jihadis, Muslims and Islam will be offended. The rest of us will not. Give it a read and make up your own mind. Hopefully you have already accepted the earlier recommendation on Levin’s book and read that by now. It would not hurt to follow the link to Sowell’s lists, etc., to find other good reading material.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Is America fat? Are you fat? How many members of your family are fat? How many of your friends are fat?

The report below is published in a ‘journal’ named Health Affairs. Some non-profit named the Research Triangle Institute and the Center for Disease Control produced a ’study’. If you can look in the mirror and have responded to the questions above in a manner indicating most of the people you know are fat why do we need a study to tell us what we should already know?

Is there any valid reason for being fat? If this report and others like it are true, what does it say about a country with so many fat people. And who really believes that some people cannot help being fat?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

New research shows that obesity and the cost of treating obesity-related illnesses in the United States rose dramatically between 1998 and 2006.

The study was published Monday in the journal Health Affairs. It said obesity-related health spending was estimated at $147 billion a year in 2006, roughly double the $74 billion estimated just eight years earlier.

Researchers from a nonprofit group, the Research Triangle Institute, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in their study that obesity-related health conditions, including diabetes and heart disease, now account for 9.1 percent of all medical spending. That’s up from 6.5 percent in 1998.

The report says obesity itself rose 37 percent in that time, and nearly a third of Americans are now considered to be obese.

The CDC says the United States must bring down its obesity rates to reduce health care costs. It recommends that communities fight obesity by promoting healthy eating and physical activity.

The study also was released at the Weight of the Nation CDC conference in Washington on health and obesity.

Couch Potatoes Don’t Watch Obama

More than 70 percent of votes in a TVGuide.com poll are from people who say they would rather watch their regular shows in prime time than watch President Barack Obama.

Like this is a suprise.

And we wonder why the state of the nation is troubling and why elections turn out the way they do. If the couch potato is a large enough component of the US population it may explain why we have so many public issues to resolve. Would a couch potato be concerned about healthcare? Would a couch potato care if we were headed toward socialism? If you remember the civics literacy test results couch potatoism may be responsible for the miserable results.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Sen. Chuck Hagel Joins Faculty
Former U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) will join the Walsh School of Foreign Service (SFS) faculty this semester as Distinguished Professor in the Practice of National Governance.

Hagel will teach undergraduate and graduate student courses in U.S. foreign policy in the fall.

“Senator Hagel brings great expertise on important foreign and domestic issues facing our nation,” said Georgetown President John J. DeGioia. “He is a great addition to our community of distinguished scholars, and I look forward to his contributions to Georgetown.”

In addition to his teaching commitments, Hagel also will conduct seminars and other educational activities for SFS students and the broader university community.

“I am honored to become part of this respected institution and look forward to contributing to the important efforts that Georgetown continues to make in educating our next generation of leaders,” said Hagel.

First elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996, Hagel served two consecutive terms. He also served as chair of both the Senate Global Climate Change Observer Group and the Senate Oversight Task Force and as co-chair of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China. Hagel has been a member of four Senate committees — the Committee on Foreign Relations; the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs; the Select Committee on Intelligence; and the Committee on Rules and Administration.

“I am pleased to welcome Senator Hagel to the School of Foreign Service and know he will offer valuable insight and understanding on critical issues in foreign policy and on the policymaking process,” said SFS Dean Robert L. Gallucci.

Hagel has authored “America: Our Next Chapter: Tough Questions, Straight Answers” (Ecco 2008), in which he explores domestic issues — including the health care crisis, immigration and Social Security and Medicare reform. He also examines foreign policy problems, including China’s growing economy, India and Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities, and Iran’s aggressive political, ideological and nuclear stances.

Source: Blue & Gray (February 5, 2009)

If you want to know what happens to has been POLS after they leave the government, here’s an example. And no report was found of Hagel also working as a lobbyist but that would be no suprise.

Is Hagel being a ‘distinguished professor’ at Georgetown have any relationship to actually having credentials to teach or is this just a perk of being a former short term senator?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The only good news to be found lately comes from a not so unlikely place. Or more correctly, the news is from a not so unlikely person. Meredith Whitney, if you don’t know, is quite the interesting woman. Not only does she have an impressive resume’ of sorts but her significant other and her take on most things are extraordinary. Many unique combinations feature in this person’s life not the least of which is her reputation for being right.

She came up on the radar here from past accounts of her ability to predict things financial. While her focus in finance may be narrow her insight may be more than that. Now that she is above stealth mode to others besides her competitors, rivals or envious counterparts a question remains. Is she a flash in the pan or the real deal?

Just a little financial news to help you get going this week. Don’t look for bright spots in the economy or world of money beyond Whitney’s take below.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Whitney Gives Goldman Sachs Stock Her Only ‘Buy’ Recommendation

By Josh Fineman and Ambereen Choudhury
July 13 (Bloomberg) — Meredith Whitney gave Goldman Sachs Group Inc. her only “buy” recommendation among the eight banks she covers, saying the shares may climb 30 percent.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has a press release, presented below, that expresses concern related to the so-called Recovery Act or stimulus or porkulus bill and GAO reports indicating earlier skepticism by opponents of the plan may be justified.

The GAO reports that 16 states and DC account for about 65% of the US population as well as an equal % of the ’stimulus’ funding under their scrutiny in this second report. Links to the information are provided below. This blog’s summary is short and sweet.

Three areas of government spending are covered. Medicaid, DOT highway infrastructure and education programs are the target of these billions of taxpayer dollars. With the possible exception of DOT projects the other two areas will not likely result in new jobs. Education funding is simply being used to ‘retain staff’ and ‘continue programs’.

And GAO is concerned that transparency and accountability measures will not meet the stated goals of ‘following the money’. They offer numerous recommendations dealing with the need for more accountability.

The view from this blog has not changed. Billions in ‘recovery’ funds provided by the taxpayer will be used as expected to fund government programs. What’s new? It is unlikely many jobs will be created but saving jobs of those protected by the Obama administration will occur. You are paying for their continued support of the current administration. For all of you being layed off in the private sector the recovery act will do nothing for you to this point. Elections have consequences.

Here’s an excerpt from the GAO reports that may whet your appetite for more information.

Accountability States have implemented various internal control programs; however, federal Single Audit guidance and reporting does not fully address Recovery Act risk. The Single Audit reporting deadline is too late to provide audit results in time for the audited entity to take action on deficiencies noted in Recovery Act programs. Moreover, current guidance does not achieve the level of accountability needed to effectively respond to Recovery Act risks. Finally, state auditors need additional flexibility and funding to undertake the added Single Audit responsibilities under the Recovery Act.

Here is the link for GAO on the Recovery Act….

http://www.gao.gov/recovery/bimonthly/index.php

Here is McConnell’s press release….

GAO Report Validates Stimulus Concerns

from the Office of Senator Mitch McConnell

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

‘Americans should be skeptical anytime someone in Washington downplays scrutiny and overplays speed’

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement Wednesday regarding the GAO report on the stimulus bill and the lack of transparency and accountability:

“This week’s GAO report on the administration’s Economic Stimulus plan validates the serious concerns that many of us repeatedly expressed prior to its passage. This trillion-dollar spending plan was neither timely, targeted, nor temporary, and funds were extremely difficult to track. This is precisely the result that concerned us when advocates short-changed the debate and overpromised on results, including assurances that unemployment, now approaching 10%, wouldn’t rise above 8 percent.

“According to the report, assurances on transparency were off base, as was the promise that we’d be able to accurately track jobs. The GAO report should add to growing public concerns about the Administration’s tendency to rush and to overpromise on results when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars and increasing the national debt. But it shouldn’t surprise anyone who followed the debate.

“Americans should be skeptical anytime someone in Washington downplays scrutiny and overplays speed. They have even more reason to be skeptical now.”

###

If you are or were concerned about government spending and specifically the bailouts and porkulus scams you have reason to be.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The community organizer who is friends with the domestic terrorist William Ayers, hate monger Jeremiah Wright and hires friends from the most corrupt political machine (Illinois) has the audacity of something other than hope to reference the founding fathers and call on the public to support his agenda that is anything but American.

Like mutually exclusive terms President Obama insults the meaning of this nation’s Independence Day when he tries to connect the principles of the founding with his socialist agenda. Those who have dismissed the idea that his agenda is socialist overlook nationalizing private industry, spending and government expansion with the intent of complete government control that will render this great country into nothing more than a banana republic.

Addressing our dependence on foreign energy by taxing all we use rather than a transition approach that draws on our own fossil fuel resources until alternatives become viable in a free market is counter to American ideals which rely on the innovation of a free people. Expecting the public to buy into a universal or socialized, government-run healthcare system rather than encouraging free market solutions also runs counter to American ideals. With these two examples only God may know what the Obama agenda has planned for education, immigration and the remainder of his ideas for transforming the United States into another socialist country like some in the EU and others in this hemisphere.

And then we have the impotent GOP. Based on the report below the Senator who lost an election to the community organizer was chosen to give the opposition party response to ObamaGov. While we can all debate whether or not it would have been wise to have a united response from the US regarding turmoil in Iran the larger issues of our own nation under the leadership of Barack Obama seems more to the point or at least an issue of primary importance. We can do little to help others if we cannot help ourselves and the GOP response appears to be a continuance of Republicans being lost in the wilderness.

Will someone please find a way to encourage this nation’s leaders to remove their collective heads from their collective hind quarters and return sensible government to a young nation which just observed its 233rd birthday.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Pres. Barack Obama

On U.S. Independence Day, President Barack Obama is calling on Americans to remember the spirit of the nation’s founders, and to embrace his domestic initiatives. Republican Senator John McCain, meanwhile, wants stronger U.S. language against Iran’s violent crackdown on protesters.

President Obama, in his weekly address, asks Americans to remember the sacrifices and achievements of the men who voted for independence 233 years ago.

“We are called to remember how unlikely it was that our American experiment would succeed at all; that a small band of patriots would declare independence from a powerful empire; and that they would form, in the new world, what the old world had never known - a government of, by and for the people,” he said.

In July, 1776, the representatives of 13 British colonies in America, gathered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, voted to declare independence from Britain and formed a new nation. At the same time, colonists in hastily-organized and poorly-financed militias battled the British Army for several years, until London officially recognized U.S. independence.

Mr. Obama called on Americans to recall those patriots’ spirit and support his plans to reform the U.S. education, health care and energy policies.

“We are not a people who fear the future,” he said. “We are a people who make it. And on this July 4th, we need to summon that spirit once more. We need to summon the same spirit that inhabited Independence Hall 233 years ago today.”

The president is celebrating Independence Day with a traditional barbecue and fireworks on the White House lawn, with 1,200 military families invited to attend. He is also celebrating his daughter Malia’s eleventh birthday. Mr. Obama leaves late Sunday for a week-long trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana.

Sen. John McCain (file photo)

In the weekly Republican Party message, Senator John McCain of Arizona is also paying tribute to the nation’s founding fathers, who he says “stood up to a powerful oppressor and claimed their natural right to liberty.”

McCain is also invoking the patriots’ spirit as he calls on the Obama administration to speak out more forcefully in support of the anti-government protesters in Iran.

“They did not ask us to arm them or come to their assistance with anything other than public declarations of solidarity and public denunciations of the tyrants who oppress them. We have a moral obligation to do so,” he said.

Senator McCain is rejecting earlier White House claims that a more vocal response by Washington would have supported the Iranian government’s claims of U.S. interference.

“Do they really believe Iranians do not know why they are protesting, and who is oppressing them? Do they think Iranians whose votes were discarded, whose voices have been ignored, whose lives have been threatened by the regime they wish to be rid of, will think America has put them in that position?” he said.

U.S. Independence Day is traditionally celebrated with picnics, parades, concerts, fireworks displays, and readings of the Declaration of Independence.

The current President of the United States has expressed shall we say, disappointment, that the GOP is the party of ‘no’ and resists everything and that news sources like Fox rarely have anything positive to say about him.  It is not uncommon for liberals who call in to conservative talk radio to admonish the host for not giving Barack Obama a chance.  The following news report excerpt is representative of the kind of stories about Mr Obama’s agenda which understandably generate negative comments.  How can anyone promote such agenda items which demonstrate appalling stupidity?

Obama Announces New Energy Conservation Steps

“I know light bulbs may not seem sexy,” Mr. Obama said. “But this simple action holds enormous promise because seven percent of all the energy consumed in America is used to light our homes and our businesses.”

The president says the savings will be striking.

“Between 2012 and 2042, these new standards will save consumers up to $4 billion a year,” he said.

In his own words, seven percent of our expenditures for electricity are attributed to lighting.  Therefore the most we could save, assuming we abandoned lighting all together, which we  would not, is seven percent of what we spend.  Not sexy Mr President?  It is not even remotely sexy nor practical.  And if you divide the President’s estimate on savings to consumers for the compact ripoff by the number of households in the US it means less than 10 cents per day per household.  The additional cost of the ‘new’ lamps and questionable life expectancy could easily turn that minuscule saving into a net loss.  If you consider his words on savings and that his usage estimate includes businesses as well as residential use the savings are invisible.

additional data source: US QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau

This sort of government action is absolutely brain dead.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The debate on whether the Obama Administration is reliving FDR’s New Deal has come up from time to time. In that debate those who support Obama suggest the New Deal was a success and predictably those who oppose the new President suggest it was a failure and even prolonged The Depression.

With the debate over Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor making news another example from FDR’s years draws more historical similarities. Not only are there historic references to Obama and FDR’s economics but judicial ones as well. It even raises the level of awareness on matters of separation of powers. Although this blog is not as confident in the conclusion drawn on that topic in the excerpt below.

It is safe to say that a respect for the principle of separation of powers is deeply ingrained in every American. The nation subscribes to the original premise of the framers of the Constitution that the way to safeguard against tyranny is to separate the powers of government among three branches so that each branch checks the other two. Even when this system thwarts the public will and paralyzes the processes of government, Americans have rallied to its defense.

Perhaps more correctly, ’some’ Americans rally to its defense. Will there be any conflict between the White House and SCOTUS with the current redux of the New Deal? There was during the first New Deal.

In 1935-36, the Court struck down eight of FDR’s New Deal programs, including the National Recovery Act (NRA) and the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA). Public antijudicial sentiment intensified; many critics questioned the constitutionality of the concept of judicial review itself. As a result of this reaction, several constitutional amendments were introduced into Congress in 1936, including one that would require a two-thirds vote of the Court whenever an act of Congress was declared unconstitutional; another that would permit Congress to revalidate federal laws previously declared unconstitutional by repassing them with a two-thirds vote of both houses, and even one that would abolish altogether the Court’s power to declare federal laws unconstitutional.

FDR remained silent, hoping that the antijudicial public sentiment would continue to grow without his having to enter the fray. He avoided any direct references to the Court in the 1936 election campaign. After his election victory, however, he submitted to Congress early in February 1937 a plan for “judicial reform,” which forever came to be known as his attempt to “pack” the Supreme Court. Given Roosevelt’s record for legislative success, it is interesting to discover why this plan to reconstitute the Court with Justices more favorable to the New Deal backfired.

Ironically, the following is from the White House website and its offering of resources of and about past Presidents. Much of what is written below seems to be reflected in the Obama Administration beyond the New Deal and the Supreme Court.

By 1935 the Nation had achieved some measure of recovery, but businessmen and bankers were turning more and more against Roosevelt’s New Deal program. They feared his experiments, were appalled because he had taken the Nation off the gold standard and allowed deficits in the budget, and disliked the concessions to labor. Roosevelt responded with a new program of reform: Social Security, heavier taxes on the wealthy, new controls over banks and public utilities, and an enormous work relief program for the unemployed.

In 1936 he was re-elected by a top-heavy margin. Feeling he was armed with a popular mandate, he sought legislation to enlarge the Supreme Court, which had been invalidating key New Deal measures. Roosevelt lost the Supreme Court battle, but a revolution in constitutional law took place. Thereafter the Government could legally regulate the economy.

Roosevelt had pledged the United States to the “good neighbor” policy, transforming the Monroe Doctrine from a unilateral American manifesto into arrangements for mutual action against aggressors. He also sought through neutrality legislation to keep the United States out of the war in Europe, yet at the same time to strengthen nations threatened or attacked. When France fell and England came under siege in 1940, he began to send Great Britain all possible aid short of actual military involvement.

When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, Roosevelt directed organization of the Nation’s manpower and resources for global war.

Feeling that the future peace of the world would depend upon relations between the United States and Russia, he devoted much thought to the planning of a United Nations, in which, he hoped, international difficulties could be settled.

‘Thereafter the Government could legally regulate the economy.’ That’s a statement requiring more study. As for the other items, allowing deficits is nothing new. Heavier taxes on the wealthy, new controls over banks, etc. Then to foreign policy FDR expressed the good neighbor idea not unlike BHO cowering to the Saudis and appeasing Muslims. No unilateral defense for Obama like FDR only ‘mutual action’ against aggressors. We helped Britain, got into the war and afterwards we can blame the United Nations on FDR. You might also consider that while FDR had a good neighbor policy Neville Chamberlain in Britain was attempting to appease aggressors as well.

Obviously that is just the take on this blog. Your’s may be different. But the point remains that there are clear historical references to actions taking place today. And that old reminder is still valid. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Sometimes called the United States’ ‘first constitution’ the Articles of Confederation and the story behind them demonstrate the difficulty in forming a new nation. These days there is again much concern about ‘big government’ and too much power being wielded by the curent federal government. Yet another current example of difficulties in a country like Iraq trying to form a new government shares some similarities as well as differences with the history of the forming of our nation.

There is and was a need for the several states in America maintaining their independence and liberty from the tyranny of a central government yet having such central authority to provide strength in protecting the nation from foreign interference. Foreign trade and foreign affairs being conducted by the several states independently was not without problems. One example was Maryland’s reluctance to ratify the Articles and when under attack by the British sought help from the French who encouraged them to ratify.

The struggle among the several states to maintain their independence and liberty yet bind with a central authority for national strength and protection continues today. The Articles of Confederation represent one of our earliest attempts at resolving these issues.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The Articles of Confederation

Nov. 15, 1777

To all to whom these Presents shall come, we the undersigned Delegates of the States affixed to our Names send greeting.

Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the states of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.

I.

The Stile of this Confederacy shall be “The United States of America”.

II.

Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

III.

The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

IV.

The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different States in this Union, the free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States; and the people of each State shall free ingress and regress to and from any other State, and shall enjoy therein all the privileges of trade and commerce, subject to the same duties, impositions, and restrictions as the inhabitants thereof respectively, provided that such restrictions shall not extend so far as to prevent the removal of property imported into any State, to any other State, of which the owner is an inhabitant; provided also that no imposition, duties or restriction shall be laid by any State, on the property of the United States, or either of them.

If any person guilty of, or charged with, treason, felony, or other high misdemeanor in any State, shall flee from justice, and be found in any of the United States, he shall, upon demand of the Governor or executive power of the State from which he fled, be delivered up and removed to the State having jurisdiction of his offense.

Full faith and credit shall be given in each of these States to the records, acts, and judicial proceedings of the courts and magistrates of every other State.

V.

For the most convenient management of the general interests of the United States, delegates shall be annually appointed in such manner as the legislatures of each State shall direct, to meet in Congress on the first Monday in November, in every year, with a powerreserved to each State to recall its delegates, or any of them, at any time within the year, and to send others in their stead for the remainder of the year.

No State shall be represented in Congress by less than two, nor more than seven members; and no person shall be capable of being a delegate for more than three years in any term of six years; nor shall any person, being a delegate, be capable of holding any office under the United States, for which he, or another for his benefit, receives any salary, fees or emolument of any kind.

Each State shall maintain its own delegates in a meeting of the States, and while they act as members of the committee of the States.

In determining questions in the United States in Congress assembled, each State shall have one vote.

Freedom of speech and debate in Congress shall not be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Congress, and the members of Congress shall be protected in their persons from arrests or imprisonments, during the time of their going to and from, and attendence on Congress, except for treason, felony, or breach of the peace.

VI.

No State, without the consent of the United States in Congress assembled, shall send any embassy to, or receive any embassy from, or enter into any conference, agreement, alliance or treaty with any King, Prince or State; nor shall any person holding any office of profit or trust under the United States, or any of them, accept any present, emolument, office or title of any kind whatever from any King, Prince or foreign State; nor shall the United States in Congress assembled, or any of them, grant any title of nobility.

No two or more States shall enter into any treaty, confederation or alliance whatever between them, without the consent of the United States in Congress assembled, specifying accurately the purposes for which the same is to be entered into, and how long it shall continue.

No State shall lay any imposts or duties, which may interfere with any stipulations in treaties, entered into by the United States in Congress assembled, with any King, Prince or State, in pursuance of any treaties already proposed by Congress, to the courts of France and Spain.

No vessel of war shall be kept up in time of peace by any State, except such number only, as shall be deemed necessary by the United States in Congress assembled, for the defense of such State, or its trade; nor shall any body of forces be kept up by any State in time of peace, except such number only, as in the judgement of the United States in Congress assembled, shall be deemed requisite to garrison the forts necessary for the defense of such State; but every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of filed pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage.

No State shall engage in any war without the consent of the United States in Congress assembled, unless such State be actually invaded by enemies, or shall have received certain advice of a resolution being formed by some nation of Indians to invade such State, and the danger is so imminent as not to admit of a delay till the United States in Congress assembled can be consulted; nor shall any State grant commissions to any ships or vessels of war, nor letters of marque or reprisal, except it be after a declaration of war by the United States in Congress assembled, and then only against the Kingdom or State and the subjects thereof, against which war has been so declared, and under such regulations as shall be established by the United States in Congress assembled, unless such State be infested by pirates, in which case vessels of war may be fitted out for that occasion, and kept so long as the danger shall continue, or until the United States in Congress assembled shall determine otherwise.

VII.

When land forces are raised by any State for the common defense, all officers of or under the rank of colonel, shall be appointed by the legislature of each State respectively, by whom such forces shall be raised, or in such manner as such State shall direct, and all vacancies shall be filled up by the State which first made the appointment.

VIII.

All charges of war, and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defense or general welfare, and allowed by the United States in Congress assembled, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several States in proportion to the value of all land within each State, granted or surveyed for any person, as such land and the buildings and improvements thereon shall be estimated according to such mode as the United States in Congress assembled, shall from time to time direct and appoint.

The taxes for paying that proportion shall be laid and levied by the authority and direction of the legislatures of the several States within the time agreed upon by the United States in Congress assembled.

IX.

The United States in Congress assembled, shall have the sole and exclusive right and power of determining on peace and war, except in the cases mentioned in the sixth article

* of sending and receiving ambassadors
* entering into treaties and alliances, provided that no treaty of commerce shall be made whereby the legislative power of the respective States shall be restrained from imposing such imposts and duties on foreigners, as their own people are subjected to, or from prohibiting the exportation or importation of any species of goods or commodities whatsoever
* of establishing rules for deciding in all cases, what captures on land or water shall be legal, and in what manner prizes taken by land or naval forces in the service of the United States shall be divided or appropriated
* of granting letters of marque and reprisal in times of peace
* appointing courts for the trial of piracies and felonies commited on the high seas and establishing courts for receiving and determining finally appeals in all cases of captures, provided that no member of Congress shall be appointed a judge of any of the said courts.

The United States in Congress assembled shall also be the last resort on appeal in all disputes and differences now subsisting or that hereafter may arise between two or more States concerning boundary, jurisdiction or any other causes whatever; which authority shall always be exercised in the manner following. Whenever the legislative or executive authority or lawful agent of any State in controversy with another shall present a petition to Congress stating the matter in question and praying for a hearing, notice thereof shall be given by order of Congress to the legislative or executive authority of the other State in controversy, and a day assigned for the appearance of the parties by their lawful agents, who shall then be directed to appoint by joint consent, commissioners or judges to constitute a court for hearing and determining the matter in question: but if they cannot agree, Congress shall name three persons out of each of the United States, and from the list of such persons each party shall alternately strike out one, the petitioners beginning, until the number shall be reduced to thirteen; and from that number not less than seven, nor more than nine names as Congress shall direct, shall in the presence of Congress be drawn out by lot, and the persons whose names shall be so drawn or any five of them, shall be commissioners or judges, to hear and finally determine the controversy, so always as a major part of the judges who shall hear the cause shall agree in the determination: and if either party shall neglect to attend at the day appointed, without showing reasons, which Congress shall judge sufficient, or being present shall refuse to strike, the Congress shall proceed to nominate three persons out of each State, and the secretary of Congress shall strike in behalf of such party absent or refusing; and the judgement and sentence of the court to be appointed, in the manner before prescribed, shall be final and conclusive; and if any of the parties shall refuse to submit to the authority of such court, or to appear or defend their claim or cause, the court shall nevertheless proceed to pronounce sentence, or judgement, which shall in like manner be final and decisive, the judgement or sentence and other proceedings being in either case transmitted to Congress, and lodged among the acts of Congress for the security of the parties concerned: provided that every commissioner, before he sits in judgement, shall take an oath to be administered by one of the judges of the supreme or superior court of the State, where the cause shall be tried, ‘well and truly to hear and determine the matter in question, according to the best of his judgement, without favor, affection or hope of reward’: provided also, that no State shall be deprived of territory for the benefit of the United States.

All controversies concerning the private right of soil claimed under different grants of two or more States, whose jurisdictions as they may respect such lands, and the States which passed such grants are adjusted, the said grants or either of them being at the same time claimed to have originated antecedent to such settlement of jurisdiction, shall on the petition of either party to the Congress of the United States, be finally determined as near as may be in the same manner as is before presecribed for deciding disputes respecting territorial jurisdiction between different States.

The United States in Congress assembled shall also have the sole and exclusive right and power of regulating the alloy and value of coin struck by their own authority, or by that of the respective States

* fixing the standards of weights and measures throughout the United States
* regulating the trade and managing all affairs with the Indians, not members of any of the States, provided that the legislative right of any State within its own limits be not infringed or violated
* establishing or regulating post offices from one State to another, throughout all the United States, and exacting such postage on the papers passing through the same as may be requisite to defray the expenses of the said office
* appointing all officers of the land forces, in the service of the United States, excepting regimental officers
* appointing all the officers of the naval forces, and commissioning all officers whatever in the service of the United States
* making rules for the government and regulation of the said land and naval forces, and directing their operations.

The United States in Congress assembled shall have authority to appoint a committee, to sit in the recess of Congress, to be denominated ‘A Committee of the States’, and to consist of one delegate from each State; and to appoint such other committees and civil officers as may be necessary for managing the general affairs of the United States under their direction

* to appoint one of their members to preside, provided that no person be allowed to serve in the office of president more than one year in any term of three years; to ascertain the necessary sums of money to be raised for the service of the United States, and to appropriate and apply the same for defraying the public expenses
* to borrow money, or emit bills on the credit of the United States, transmitting every half-year to the respective States an account of the sums of money so borrowed or emitted
* to build and equip a navy
* to agree upon the number of land forces, and to make requisitions from each State for its quota, in proportion to the number of white inhabitants in such State; which requisition shall be binding, and thereupon the legislature of each State shall appoint the regimental officers, raise the men and cloath, arm and equip them in a solid-like manner, at the expense of the United States; and the officers and men so cloathed, armed and equipped shall march to the place appointed, and within the time agreed on by the United States in Congress assembled. But if the United States in Congress assembled shall, on consideration of circumstances judge proper that any State should not raise men, or should raise a smaller number of men than the quota thereof, such extra number shall be raised, officered, cloathed, armed and equipped in the same manner as the quota of each State, unless the legislature of such State shall judge that such extra number cannot be safely spread out in the same, in which case they shall raise, officer, cloath, arm and equip as many of such extra number as they judeg can be safely spared. And the officers and men so cloathed, armed, and equipped, shall march to the place appointed, and within the time agreed on by the United States in Congress assembled.

The United States in Congress assembled shall never engage in a war, nor grant letters of marque or reprisal in time of peace, nor enter into any treaties or alliances, nor coin money, nor regulate the value thereof, nor ascertain the sums and expenses necessary for the defense and welfare of the United States, or any of them, nor emit bills, nor borrow money on the credit of the United States, nor appropriate money, nor agree upon the number of vessels of war, to be built or purchased, or the number of land or sea forces to be raised, nor appoint a commander in chief of the army or navy, unless nine States assent to the same: nor shall a question on any other point, except for adjourning from day to day be determined, unless by the votes of the majority of the United States in Congress assembled.

The Congress of the United States shall have power to adjourn to any time within the year, and to any place within the United States, so that no period of adjournment be for a longer duration than the space of six months, and shall publish the journal of their proceedings monthly, except such parts thereof relating to treaties, alliances or military operations, as in their judgement require secrecy; and the yeas and nays of the delegates of each State on any question shall be entered on the journal, when it is desired by any delegates of a State, or any of them, at his or their request shall be furnished with a transcript of the said journal, except such parts as are above excepted, to lay before the legislatures of the several States.

X.

The Committee of the States, or any nine of them, shall be authorized to execute, in the recess of Congress, such of the powers of Congress as the United States in Congress assembled, by the consent of the nine States, shall from time to time think expedient to vest them with; provided that no power be delegated to the said Committee, for the exercise of which, by the Articles of Confederation, the voice of nine States in the Congress of the United States assembled be requisite.

XI.

Canada acceding to this confederation, and adjoining in the measures of the United States, shall be admitted into, and entitled to all the advantages of this Union; but no other colony shall be admitted into the same, unless such admission be agreed to by nine States.

XII.

All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed, and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed and considered as a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pleged.

XIII.

Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.

And Whereas it hath pleased the Great Governor of the World to incline the hearts of the legislatures we respectively represent in Congress, to approve of, and to authorize us to ratify the said Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union. Know Ye that we the undersigned delegates, by virtue of the power and authority to us given for that purpose, do by these presents, in the name and in behalf of our respective constituents, fully and entirely ratify and confirm each and every of the said Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union, and all and singular the matters and things therein contained: And we do further solemnly plight and engage the faith of our respective constituents, that they shall abide by the determinations of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions, which by the said Confederation are submitted to them. And that the Articles thereof shall be inviolably observed by the States we respectively represent, and that the Union shall be perpetual.

In Witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands in Congress. Done at Philadelphia in the State of Pennsylvania the ninth day of July in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy-Eight, and in the Third Year of the independence of America.

Agreed to by Congress 15 November 1777

In force after ratification by Maryland, 1 March 1781