Peter Koelliker replied to comment from John Batchelor

I take it you have watched Trump’s show. I have not. Therefore, your references to his show escape me. I base my assumptions on what I do see: Trump Towers in New York and Trump Casino in Atlantic City.

Given our current economic conditions, his claim that he still has enough money to manage a presidential campaign also speaks volumes. In addition, I hear what he says. I have heard nothing, since embarking on his quest for the presidency, with which I disagree. What he said previously, is of no importance to me since it was not said as one who would hoodwink the public in a political sense. From now on, I will pay attention.
-----------------------------------------------
It is now generally accepted (mostly by conservatives) that raising taxes does not necessarily translate into more revenue for the government; that, in fact, what the government collects is likely to stay the same as a percentage of GDP no matter what the tax rate is. This is not fantasy. It can be documented by historical example. Therefore, the emphasis should be on growth.

If our problem is that government does not have enough money to pay its bills – as we are told – then lowering taxes across the board would seem to be a significant part of the solution. Yet current policy makers insist that we go in the opposite direction.

There should not even be an argument about this. The same percentage taken out of a smaller pie will result in reduced intake by the treasury and vice versa. The fact that we cannot agree means that something else is at stake: social engineering in the form of the redistribution of American’s wealth as to achieve total equality (both domestic and globally).

Our politicians are loath to tell us of their true intent; our universities fail to educate. So we are sent out into the street to protest the mere possibility that our neighbor makes a dollar more a week than we do. This is considered ‘unfair’. Everyone should have the same after all. The next step is for all of us to start wearing matching uniforms.

It bugs me no end when politicians use this canard to bat around. Why don’t they just tell us outright that they want to make us all the same, discard all pretense of actually balancing the budget and raise the debt limit to infinity? This way, all of us would be cured of the compulsion to compete and concentrate on simply staying alive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
“How I wish, how I wish you were here
We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl,
Year after year
Running over the same old ground
What have we found?
The same old fears
Wish you were here”

--Pink Floyd

Spitting In the Wind

As POTUS struggles politically, his biggest enemy is rewind. There is now plenty of video of POTUS’ previous speeches and pronouncements. Polls indicate that the ‘hope and change’ thing no longer connects. We’ve heard it all before and the past two and a half years have done nothing to bolster Obama’s credibility for the broad range of American voters.

We’ve also heard the loyal opposition. It too has been discredited to the point imparting a general sense of hopeless acceptance of its inability to make even so much as a dent in the now widespread notion that things will get worse (‘before they get better’ is at this point not even on the horizon).

The notion that gasoline prices will determine the fate of POTUS in 2012 is absurd. It is now apparent that the media will not make it an issue that can be tied to the president. If not an issue, it will have no effect except dragging down the economy still further - which too will not be an issue by virtue of the media basically ignoring the metrics. In fact, there is now the widespread perception that Obama actually wants $5 to $7 dollar gas - and that this would be a good thing - that it would suit his ideological objectives with regard to greenhouse emissions, depopulating the suburbs (and thereby revitalizing urban centers), achieving energy independence, and redistributing what‘s left of America‘s wealth. Add to this the overall perception that Obama is pursuing a course that is essentially anti-American.

This last point can be argued depending on where one stands. The 13% of committed socialists that now seem to have exclusive rights to the president’s ear would submit that things are going just swimmingly, while the rest of us are still hedging our bets.

Obama is playing to both camps. He is hoping to placate the majority with vague ‘hope and change’ rhetoric while reinforcing his credibility with his left-wing base. It’s a tricky maneuver to be sure, but made very much easier given the way major media slants things to favor the Left.

Does Obama have a chance in 2012? I think so. As I wrote in my brief entitled, “In Quest of the Prize Pig”, I feel he has a better than even chance of even winning the political battle.

Where does that leave us? For one thing, we’ll be left to battle the historical tide as random pieces of flotsam in an ocean as big as the world. And, as the use of mirrors will likely be banned, we’ll be unable to see the likely result of spitting in the wind.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Traipsing Around In The Hallway

There have been other instances when we first sent in ‘advisors’; then we armed our preferred side; then we provided air support; and, finally, we put American boots on the ground. It did not end well. You’d think we would learn. But aren’t we starting the same cycle all over again in Libya?

There was a time when we went all out in support of the notion that we are killing our planet, based on ‘irrefutable’ scientific evidence, graphs and projections - which were then proven to have been manufactured for political advantage. Yet, we are still operating on the original premise and demanding wholesale changes in the way that we live.

There was a time when Keynesian economics was the talk of the town. It dictated hiking Federal spending in order to increase prosperity and jobs. We were told that that economic activity increases by $2 for every dollar spent on unemployment insurance, and the like. We were told, we had at last discovered the golden goose; we had invented a perpetual motion mechanism that would spew greenbacks forever. Two for one. The more unemployed, the better for our economy… It’s not working.

The result of all these things should have been foreseen by those who promoted such policies. They should have known that it wouldn’t end well. These are the brightest among us, after all. If they don’t know, how should we with our mere high school education and a couple of college credits in basket weaving?

I maintain they did know – maybe not the first time it was tried, but certainly the second and third. And here we’re repeating all the same mistakes over again. Why?

Isn’t it obvious? Redistribution of wealth. It’s a core belief among those now in power that this must absolutely be done. They know the people bought it the first time around. And they know the people will buy it again: all the same promises; all the same lies. And then, when they figure out it’s not working, we’ll simply say, “Oops!” And they’ll assume we noticed our mistake and will correct it. This will give us time to do it again. And, again, we'll say, “Oops!” And “Oops!” it is until they’re ready to revolt, but by then it’s too late. They will have been bled of all their power to seriously resist.

Why Libya? It’s the same principle that applies: “Oops!” and “Oops!” again, until our precious army has been discredited beyond redemption. With the economy in tatters; Congress in tatters; the military in tatters, America’s enemies will have won. That’s when we’ll get Israel!

Don Trump has been getting a lot of press attention for keeping Obama’s birth certificate controversy alive. He himself is not exactly strident about it, knowing it’s become the third rail of American politics …and he does want to be president. It does give an opening, however, to those who want to keep the issue going. Why is it an issue in the first place?

Carter made a lot of mistakes, both in foreign policy as well as domestic. These can be filed away as teachable moments for future American presidents. These were teachable moments too for America’s enemies.

The law draws a distinction between someone falling asleep while smoking a cigarette in bed and someone deliberately pouring gas into the stairwell of a building and setting it on fire. Granted, the end result is the same.

Obama has been in office long enough for us to question his motives. As such, it is logical for us to question which team he’s actually playing on. His birth certificate would provide a clue; as would his school records. The fact that these are unavailable to us just goes to intensify our suspicions. Obama’s reluctance to provide this evidence is an indication of something being seriously amiss: Someone has been, or is about to be, snookered.

At the very least, we would find out if our president is merely a guy with a cigarette, or the guy with the red 5 gallon can, traipsing around in the hallway.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/