People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Friday, July 15, 2011

How Stupid Are These People?

You'll probably want to read this a couple of times.  It's that blockheaded.

The Roanoke Times yesterday wanted you to know that it has no problem with the government dictating to us what kind of light bulbs we should be allowed to buy.  See "Warner illuminates light bulb debate."

Fine.  The good folks there don't mind the United States government being involved in the minutia of our lives; they're entitled to their dependencies.

But here's the part that made me toss my Wheaties:
The light bulb regulations passed with broad bipartisan support as part of a 2007 energy bill. President George W. Bush signed it.

Since then, the rules have drawn conservatives' ire, and many former supporters in Congress have flip-flopped. They portray the changes as a ban, a government conspiracy to force all Americans to use dangerous, mercury-laden light bulbs that no one likes.

The truth is something else entirely. Starting next year, old-fashioned incandescent light bulbs will not be banned. They simply must be 30 percent more efficient. [emphasis mine]
Got that?  The government didn't ban the incandescent light bulb.  It simply required that it be completely different from that which it is today.

That's like banning the Lexus but denying it because the wording of the legislation simply required that America's favorite luxury vehicle be dramatically smaller, different in design, and called a Volt.

"The truth is something else entirely."

That from the Ministry of Truth.

You don't recall the Ministry of Truth?

Maybe this will refresh your memory:




Oh, and my all-time favorite, one that seems to have a poignant place in this discussion:


Saith the Roanoke Times.

* You might wonder, after reading the editorial, what John Warner had to do with this.  You aren't alone.  Little is said about the old dude or about how he involved himself in this debate.  Which is a good thing.  Retirement suits him.  And us.

Quote of the Day

From Michael A. Walsh:

"Here's a joke for you: President Obama nearly bankrupts the country with his out-of-control deficit spending -- then demands responsible fiscal leadership from the Republicans."

It's like criticizing conservatives for acting childish because they refuse to help Obama wreck the nation's fiscal well-being.

It's Never Been a Trust Fund

And we can thank Barack Obama for finally making it known:
Obama Exposes Social Security's Big Lie
Investor's Business Daily

In trying to score political points against the GOP by warning that retirement checks were in jeopardy if the debt ceiling isn't raised, President Obama exposed the fraud at the heart of Social Security.

The closer the self-imposed Aug. 2 deadline for raising the debt ceiling comes, the more oddly politicians in Washington are behaving — and that's saying something.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner this week ridiculously insisted on a plan within 48 hours. Sen. Mitch McConnell proposed a Rube Goldberg idea to let President Obama increase the debt by vetoing a bill denying him a debt increase, or something like that.

Obama beat everyone, however, with his scaremongering claim that Social Security checks are at risk if he doesn't get his way on the debt ceiling. "I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on Aug. 3 if we haven't resolved this issue," he told CBS News, "because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it."

Wait! What happened to Social Security's "guarantee"? You know, the iron-clad assurance of Social Security benefits in exchange for paying into the program your whole working life? It's something Democrats constantly talk about, particularly when attacking Republicans who propose privatizing the program.

Turns out, this "guarantee" is a lie

In 1960, the Supreme Court ruled that workers do not have a legal right to their Social Security benefits. Congress can cut them any time it wants, which it's done several times. And, because there are no ownership rights, if you die the day you retire after making a lifetime of payments into Social Security, your heirs get nothing.

Indeed, Social Security's only guarantee is that today's workers will get an incredibly lousy return on the huge amount of money they've "invested" in the program.

And what about that Social Security "Trust Fund" the Democrats rhapsodize about? Isn't it supposed to guarantee benefit payments for another 30 or 40 years?

Truth is, the fund is nothing more than an accounting gimmick designed to make the program look healthier than it is. Obama exposed this scam as well by showing that retirees can't trust the "Trust Fund" for anything. [link]
I feel sorry for old people.  For two reasons.  One - they thought they were owed that which they paid into the fund all these years.  With interest.  Two - because Obama has decided to use them as pawns in his cynical tax increase scheme involving the debt ceiling.  There's nothing less becoming than a president who is willing to frighten the elderly to get his way politically.

Anyway, we find out what many of us knew all along.  The money ain't there.

Look on the bright side though.  Even though it ain't where you thought it was, it's just a printing press away.  If our president decides to use it.

But Saturday Will Be Fine Too

This from the guy who walked away from the negotiation Wednesday because he got his feelings hurt.