Archive for the ‘Obama’ Category

TAX WARNING to DINKs: The marriage penalty is coming back …

December 5, 2012

One of the provisions of the Bush tax plan was to eliminate the so-called marriage penalty … the tax rules and rates that had a husband & wife pay more income taxes if they were married than if they stayed single.

I’ve been bemused that in all of the chatter about Obama’s obsession with jacking rates, I haven’t heard anything about the resurrection of the marriage penalty … at least for evil rich millionaire & billionaires who make more than $250,000..

image

Here’s the rub: Obama’s tax hikes apply to individuals earning more than $200,000 and families earning more than $250,000.

Let’s do a simple example:

(more…)

Whose approval is higher – Obama’s or Twinkie’s?

November 30, 2012

OK, cheap shot.

According to Gallup, Obama now has a 49% approval rating … down a couple of points from his election draw.

image

* * * * *
What about Twinkie’s approval rating?
(more…)

“Trawling college campuses for political jailbait” … ouch

October 27, 2012

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder … and that one’s perspective on marketing campaigns depends on where they stand.

President Obama’s most recent ad – explicitly analogizing first-time voting to first-time sex  — has caused a bit of a stir.

image

Dems surrogates are saying it’s clever, edgy, clutter-breaking … and well targeted.

One conservative writer said: “Obama is largely reduced to trawling college campuses for political jailbait … in the increasingly desperate hope of getting at least a few salvageable video clips out of each day.”

We report, you decide.

>> Latest Posts

Blame it on Mr. Bill … say, what?

October 25, 2012

Holy alibi, Batman.

Circle October 24, 2012 on your calendars.

image

It’s the day that the NY Times posted to the official record “How Bill Clinton May Have Hurt the Obama Campaign”:

there is one crucial way in which the 42nd president (Clinton) may not have served the 44th (Obama) quite as well.

In these final weeks before the election, Mr. Clinton’s expert advice about how to beat Mitt Romney is starting to look suspect.

…  just after Mr. Romney locked up the Republican nomination, Mr. Obama’s team abruptly switched its strategy for how to define him.

Up to then, the White House had been portraying Mr. Romney … as inauthentic and inconstant, a soulless climber who would say anything to get the job.

But it was Mr. Clinton who forcefully argued to Mr. Obama’s aides that the campaign had it wrong.

The best way to go after Mr. Romney, the former president said, was to publicly grant that he was the “severe conservative” he claimed to be, and then hang that unpopular ideology around his neck.

Ever since, the Obama campaign has been hammering Mr. Romney as too conservative, while essentially giving him a pass for having traveled a tortured path on issues like health care reform, abortion and gay rights.

It’s not hard to understand why Mr. Obama and his advisers took Mr. Clinton’s advice to heart; to disregard it would be like telling Derek Jeter, “Hey man, appreciate the input, but I think I know how to make that flip play from the hole just fine on my own.”

For a while this summer and into the fall, the Obama-Clinton strategy seemed to be working flawlessly.

But in recent weeks, starting with the first debate, the challenger has made a brazen and frantic dash to the center, and Mr. Obama has often seemed off-balance, as if stunned that Mr. Romney thinks he can get away with such an obvious change of course so late in the race.

Which, apparently, he can.

Couple of questions:

1. Wasn’t it Bill Clinton who stole the show at the DNC and gave Obama’s campaign some oomph?

2. Wasn’t that Bill Clinton (with Springsteen) revving up the crowds in Ohio?

3. Didn’t Hillary just fall on her sword to protect Obama in the Benghazi mess?

4. Isn’t it a bit early to start pinning the blame for a loss?

Of course, I’m hoping that the Times knows something that I don’t … and the election is a fait accompli.

>> Latest Posts

“I inherited the deficit” … say, what?

October 25, 2012

Draw your own conclusion, but looks to me like Obama inherited a $500 billion deficit

…. goosed it by a trillion dollars to kinda stimulate the economy

… and has hung well over a trillion dollars, way after the Stimulus.

What’s he talking about?

image
Source: Hot Air.com

* * * * *

While we’re at it, note how the current recovery stacks up against prior recession recoveries …

image
Source: Hot Air.com

>> Latest Posts

Obama to Biden: “Shut up.”

October 24, 2012

Not really.

But, I was surprised during the debate what Obama said when talking about the decision to whack Bin Laden:

  • “… decisions are not always popular. Those decisions generally — generally are not poll-tested. And even some in my own party, including my current vice president, had the same critique as you did.” Transcript

image

There have been reports that Biden was a no vote.

Obama wasn’t asked the question, so I wonder why Obama outted his foreign relations guru VP during the debate?

>> Latest Posts

Who would you trust to handle your family’s money & bank accounts – Obama or Romney?

October 10, 2012

Interesting question asked in the latest Fox News poll.

Not surprisingly, Romney gets the nod 50% to 38%

image

Hmmm.

Remember, the Fed gov’t doesn’t have any money of it’s own – it just takes and manages our money.

And, since voter preferences are running about 50-50 … about 12% either don’t think the question is relevant or are satisfied having the inferior money-handler handling their dough.

Go figure.

* * * * *
Update

I was asked about possible sampling bias …. here are the “internals” with party affiliation … and more

click to view

Draw your own conclusions.

>> Latest Posts

Re: job creation … Steve Wynn blasts Obama … again!

October 10, 2012

Holy Smokes!

Steve Wynn, is CEO of Wynn Resorts.

image

He unloaded on President Obama again.

Punch line: “I’m afraid of the president. I have no idea what goofy idea, what crazy, anti-business program this administration will come up. I have no idea. And I have to tell you Jon that every business guy I know in the country is frightened of Barack Obama and the way he thinks.”

click to view
image

Wrap: “I can’t stand the idea of being demagogued, that is put down by a president who has never created any jobs and who doesn’t even understand how the economy works.”

* * * * *
Ken’s Prediction: I heard directly from a Fortune 500 CEO that he – and other CEO’s – were afraid to speak out against Obama because they feared retaliation from the administration. I heard directly from a guy who owned a highly profitable chain of auto dealerships that were closed when he spoke out against the auto bailouts.

Now, since Obama’s on the ropes, I expect a cascade of business execs to start speaking out.

>> Latest Posts

Obama preps for next debate with another meatgrinder interview ..

October 9, 2012

Obviously, Letterman and the ladies of The View didn’t rough Obama up enough.

So, he’s changing venues.

Obama taped an interview with Linda Ellerbee of Nick News

That’s Nick as in Nickelodeon.

image

He answered questions regarding gun control, jobs, immigration, same-sex marriage, outsourcing, bullying and obesity, as well as light-hearted questions including his most embarrassing moment.

“By answering kids’ questions directly, candidates show respect for kids,” says Linda Ellerbee.

Source

* * * * *

Flash: Big Bird Appears in Obama ad

click to view
image

>> Latest Posts

“Liar, liar pants on fire” …. eh, fugetaboutit

October 9, 2012

President Obama thought that his go-to punch during the debate was a study by the a non-partisan research group that “proved” that Romney’s tax plan “didn’t add up” and would result in middle class tax increases and cuts to Autistic kids’ healthcare.

image

Since Romney boldly rejected that shot during the debate, Team Obama has been running around with their hair on fire, screaming that Romney lied when he said his plan’s numbers tied together.

Well, for openers, the non-partisan research group is the left-leaning Tax Policy Center … and one of the economists used to work on the Obama campaign.

Hmmm.

More important, the assertion that Mitt’s plan is out-of-whack is based on a paper written by Harvard economist Martin Feldstein and Princeton economist Harvey Rosen.

Prof. Rosen has stepped forward to say that’s not true.

Prof. Rosen told the Weekly Standard  that the Obama campaign is misrepresenting his paper on Romney’s tax plan

Specifically, Prof. Rosen said:

I can’t tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work.

It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal.

The main conclusion of my study is that under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same.

That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the overall plan revenue neutral.

You can check the math that shows Romney’s plan is mathematically possible … and, shows that the only hurdle is repealing ObamaVare and its tax hikes … an action that’s high on Romney’s to do list.

Bottom line: Seems that Team Obama may be lying when it says that Romney is lying … at least about his tax plan.

>> Latest Posts

Boing! Boing !!

October 8, 2012

Pew Research reported the results of its first post-debate poll.

Better news for Mitt than I expected.

First, Pew confirms the insta-poll number from debate nite … 2 of 3 people thought that Romney won the debate … 20% of all people (mostly the 44% of Dems) thought Obama won it … (those people also probably think that Elvis is still alive.)

image

* * * * *
Likeability

Interestingly, Romney pulled even with Obama on likeability … Obama lost 5 points, Mitt gained 5 points  … now,roughly half of all folks view each of the candidates favorability.

That’s a big deal since Obama has been showcasing his likeability on The View, Letterman, etc.

image

 

* * * * *
Most important

There was a 12 point swing in the Presidential horse race number among likely voters … pre-debate, Obama was leading by 8 points … after the debate, Mitt is leading by 4.

Based on the poll’s “internals”, Romney gained ground among all groups except blacks …  who still gave Obama 92% support.

Game on.

image

>> Latest Posts

Piling on: New Yorker cover says it all …

October 6, 2012

Things are bad when you’re a liberal and the New Yorker turns on you …

image

Maybe Clint Eastwood was prophetic …

>> Latest Posts

If you missed the debate …

October 5, 2012

Here’s a 90 second recap that tells you all that you need to know …

click to view

image

>> Latest Posts

Flashback: About those 47% who don’t pay income taxes …

September 24, 2012

Romney sure caused a stir with his remark that 47% don’t pay Federal income taxes.

Well, the Homa Files was on this case over 4 years ago !

This analysis was originally posted on July 31, 2008 during the run-up to the election. It proves the point (ahead of its time) that less than half of all voters pay any income taxes now that “Make Work Pay” has been enacted (as part of the stimulus program). Think about it: the majority gets to demand more government programs that they don’t pay a cent towards. I think that’s scary. Very scary..

It’s the HFs post that continues to get the most hits, and the topic is ‘hot’ this week because of Mitt’s smokin’ gun video.

So, here’s a flashback …complete with numbers and sources.

* * * * *

Despite the drumbeat of warnings from various sources, the prospects that a minority of voting age Americans will be paying Federal income taxes under the Obama tax plan doesn’t seem to arouse much visible public anxiety.

Why?

First, for those in the emerging majority that won’t pay any income taxes – or may even be getting government checks for tax credits due – the deal is almost too good to be true. To them, Obama’s plan must make perfect sense. So, why rock the boat?

Second, some people argue that low-earning people who don’t pay income taxes shoulder a regressive payroll tax burden to cover Medicare and Social Security. Yeah, but these programs – which are most akin to insurance or forced savings plans — offer specific individual benefits that are directly linked to each wage earner’s contributions.and the benefits phase down quickly as qualifying income increases. That is, they’re not as regressive as many people argue.

Third, most of the energetic criticism of Obama’s plan has centered on its redistribution intent — taking over $130 billion of “excess” income from undeserving rich people, and giving it directly to those who earn less and need it more.

Fourth, most folks just don’t believe that the numbers will really shift enough to create a voting majority of citizens who don’t pay income taxes. They’re wrong. Very wrong.

Here are the numbers … and why they should bother you.

* * * * *

Today, 41% of voting age adults don’t pay Federal income taxes

Based on the most recent IRS data, slightly more than 200 million out of 225 million voting age Americans filed tax returns. That means that 25 million adults – presumably low income ones – didn’t file returns and, of course, didn’t pay any income taxes. See notes [1] to [4] below

Of the 200 million voting age filers, approximately 68 million (33% of total filers) owed zero income taxes or qualified for refundable tax credits (i.e. paid negative income taxes). [5]

Add those 68 million to the 25 million non-filers, and non-payers already total 93 million – 41% of voting age adults.

* * * * *

Obama’s Estimates – Make that 49%
Not Paying Federal Income Taxes

Obama says (on his web site) that he will give tax credits up of $1,000 per family ($500 per individual) that will “completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans”. And, he says that he will “eliminate income taxes for 7 million seniors making less than $50,000 per year.” [6]

Taking Obama’s estimates at face value, the incremental 17 million that he intends to take off the income tax rolls will push the percentage of non-payers close to 49% of voting age Americans — within rounding distance to a majority. [7]

* * * * *

And, Obama’s estimates are probably low,
so make the number 55% (or higher)

Since Obama’s basic proposal is for tax credits ($500 per person or $1,000 per family) – not simply deductions from Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) — they will have a multiplier impact on the amount of AGI that tax filers can report and still owe no taxes.

For example, a childless married couple that files a joint return can currently report about $17,500 in Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) and owe no income taxes. [8]

Under the Obama Plan, that couple’s zero-tax AGI is bumped up to $27,500 since their new $1,000 tax credit covers the 10% tax liability on an additional $10,000 of AGI. And, married couples filing jointly can keep adding about $10,000 to their zero-tax AGI for each qualifying dependent child that they claim. [9]

click table to make it bigger

click table to make it bigger

Based on the 2006 IRS data, approximately 25 million tax returns were filed that reported AGI less than $27,500 (the post-Obama zero-tax AGI) and required that some income taxes be paid. [10]

Assuming that 45% of those were for couples filing jointly, they represent over 22 million adults. For sure, these 22 million will come off the tax rolls – and they alone will be enough to create a non-taxpayer majority (51% of voting age adults),

click to make table bigger

And, there are more folks being pushed off the tax rolls. About 4.7 million childless individuals earn less than $13,750 (the post-Obama zero-tax AGI for childless individuals), and currently pay some Federal income taxes. This group will shift to non-payer status.

So would several million joint filers who can take advantage of the Child Tax Credit to report more than $27,500 and not pay Federal income taxes.

And, some portion of the 7 million Seniors that Obama says will have their taxes eliminated — that is the Seniors couples earning more than $27,500 (but less than $50,000) — and Senior individuals earning more than $13,750 (but less than $50,000).

So, post-Obama, the percentage of non-taxpayers will easily exceed 55% of voting age adults — a solid majority. It won’t even be close.

* * * * *

The Bottom Line – Why You Should Worry

An income tax paying minority of voting age adults isn’t just a possibility. Under Obama’s plan, it’s a virtual certainty. Based on the hard numbers, Obama’s plan will create a new majority — a powerful voting block: non-tax payers. UH-OH.

Again, for those in the emerging majority that won’t pay any income taxes – or may even be getting government checks for tax credits due – the deal is almost too good to be true. To them, Obama’s plan must make perfect sense. Count on their perpetual support for the plan.

But for those in the new minority, watch out if the new majority decides that more government services are needed, or that $131 billion in income redistribution isn’t enough to balance the scales.

The Tax Foundation — a nonpartisan tax research group – has repeatedly warned that “While some may applaud the fact that millions of low- and middle-income families pay no income taxes, there is a threat to the fabric of our democracy when so many Americans are not only disconnected from the costs of government but are net consumers of government benefits. The conditions are ripe for social conflict if these voters begin to demand more government benefits because they know others will bear the costs.” http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/1111.html

* * * * *

Sources & Notes

[1] The Census Bureau reported 217.8 million people age 18 and over; as of July 1, 2003.
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/population/001703.html

http://www.census.gov/popest/national/files/NST-EST2007-alldata.csv

[2] The IRS reported 138.4 million personal tax returns filed in 2006.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/06in11si.xls

[3] The IRS reported that in 2006, approximately 45% of filed returns were by married couples filing jointly (i.e. 2 adults per return); 55% for individual filers (including ‘married filing separately’ and ‘head of household’). http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/06in36tr.xls

[4] Calculation: 138.4 million returns times 1.45 (adults per return) equals 200.7 million adults represented on filed returns

[5] http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/06in01fg.xls http://ftp.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/06inplim.pdf

[6] http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/#tax-relief

[7] Analytical note: 93 million plus 17 million equals 110 million divided by 225 million equals 49%.

[8] Analytical note: $17,500 less a $10,700 standard deduction, less 2 exemptions at $3,400 each, equals taxable income of zero – so no federal income taxes are due.

[9] Analytical note: $27,500 less a $10,700 standard deduction, less 2 exemptions at $3,400 each, equals taxable income of $10,000, which at a 10% rate is a $1,000 tax liability that gets offset by the $1,000 Obama credit, reducing the tax liability to zero.

[10] http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/06in11si.xls

* * * * *

>> Latest Posts

Picture of the week: Remember the Somalian pirates?

September 21, 2012

Well, apparently they’ve taken their game up a notch.

But, we can all relax … the President is dishing his charm to get the pirates under control.

image 
Photo courtesy of Obama-Biden 2012

You just can’t make this stuff up.

>> Latest Posts

Behavioral analytics … bad when Target does it … OK for political campaigns?

September 19, 2012

A couple of months ago Target got some bad press when it was revealed that the company was mining customers’ purchase histories to slot them into behavioral groups susceptible to tailored promotional pitches.

For example, Target identified purchases that mothers-to-be made early in their pregnancies – sometimes before they even knew they were pregnant.  Think bigger jeans, skin care lotions.

Many folks railed that it was an example of big brother invasion of privacy.

Well, guess what?

Political campaigns are using the same methods that Target was using

The modern science of politics is increasingly based on principles from behavioral psychology and data analytics.

image

Campaigns today mine large data bases with mathematical algorithms that slot folks into categories and provide the basis for how people should be approached (or ignored).

According to the WSJ:

Perhaps the most valuable data in modern campaigns comes from statistical “microtargeting” models—the political world’s version of credit scores.

Campaigns gather thousands of data points on voters, culled from what they put on their registration forms, what they have told canvassers who have visited their homes in the past, and information on their buying and lifestyle habits collected by commercial data warehouses.

The campaigns then run algorithms trawling for patterns linking those demographic characteristics to the political attitudes measured in their polling.

Financial institutions run such statistical models to generate predictions about whether a given individual will demonstrate a certain behavior, like paying a bill on time or defaulting on a loan.

Campaigns do the same, only they are interested in predicting political behavior.

So it’s typical now to generate individual scores, presented as a percentage likelihood, that a voter will cast a ballot, support one party or the other, be pro-choice or antiabortion, or respond to a request to volunteer.

These scores now stick to voters as indelibly as credit scores.

And just as a bank officer won’t sign off on a loan without requesting one, a field director for a campaign won’t send a volunteer to a voter’s door without knowing the relevant number.

BTW: It’s Team Obama that’s doing most of this stuff.

Bad for Target … but OK for Obama.

Hmmm

* * * * *

WSJ source: “The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns” by Sasha Issenberg

>> Latest Posts

Re: Woodward’s book … save your $$$ … here’s my synopsis.

September 17, 2012

Given Woodward’s rep,  the pre-release hype, and anticipation of some good dirt on Obama …. I downloaded the Kindle version as soon as it became available.

image

I thought it was tedious with relatively little new news … reminded me of most movies: all the good parts are in the 2-minute trailer … rest of the movie is filler.

The broad theme – wisely reported —  is that Obama is clueless re: how big organizations run, what  a CEO does, how a CEO should act, and generally, how to implement ideas.

That shouldn’t surprise anybody since Obama  hadn’t run anything before becoming President, hadn’t been exposed to any effective big organization leaders and openly despises CEOS (except the late great Steve Jobs and Warren “Please Tax Me More” Buffett).

Verizon CEO Seidenberg “worried that Obama did not appreciate the importance of business. Sure, he understood it intellectually, but did he really admire the guts and instincts that made corporations succeed, hire workers, and grow America?” 

Here’s what caught my eye …

* * * * *

Obama is broadly disrespected by Congressional leaders (both House and Senate, both parities) … and his own staff.

  • Boehner ignored phone calls from Obama …  and hated “ …going down to the White House to listen to what amounted to presidential lectures.”
  • Pelosi hit the mute button and kept working when Obama would call and pontificate
  • Reid allowed a staffer to dress down the President for not having a plan … and confidentially encouraged GOPers
  • Staffers (e.g. Summers, Orzag) observed “no adult in charge” … “It was increasingly clear that no one was running Washington. That was trouble for everyone, but especially for Obama.”
  • Van Hollen: “The administration didn’t seem to have a strategy. It was unbelievable. There didn’t seem to be any core principles.”

Ken’s Take: I was a bit surprised that even Dems  think he’s a tool … they buy in to his ideology, hoped his charisma would make him a good front man – but have been disappointed, and are left trying to cover for his inadequacies.

* * * * *
Woodward presents a comparatively favorable picture of Dems: Biden, Reid, Pelosi, Van Hollen

  • Biden is presented as a savvy legislative pro who builds relationships and tries to work towards solutions … not the bungler he plays in public … McConnell: “ … a man I’ve come to respect as a straight-shooting negotiator.”
  • Reid and Pelosi come across as more thoughtful than their public personas …  effective leaders of their caucuses … cagey working the back channels with GOP leaders … generally trusted by GOP despite policy disagreements.
  • Van Hollen gets points for being a details man re: policy who’s willing to pitch and defend his points

* * * * *
Obama fails at basic CEO stuff … much like a freshly-minted MBA whose first job is running GE … 
 “When you don’t know what you don’t know, it gets you in big trouble.”

  • Disrespects people and their ideas and then expects them to support his ideas … “The polls are pretty good for me right now.”, “Do you think Ronald Reagan sat here like this?”, “I won, you lost”, “This isn’t negotiable” … surprised when folks don’t rally for him when he’s in a bind … “when you need friends, it’s too late to make them.”
  • Unable to separate the important from the incidental … “All we were going to do was nick everybody and irritate everybody and not accomplish anything.”
  • “There was no agility in the White House, no ability to get organized and move fast on critical issues”
  • Absolutely no comprehension of the difficulty of syndicating and implementing decisions … thinks agreements in meeting are the end, not the beginning of the process.
  • “Obama had no chief operating officer, no COO to implement his decisions.” … (you know, a Dick Cheney or Hillary Clinton)
  • Poor staffing choices … goes for comfort level over effectiveness … only yes-men need apply … notice how the entire economic team has turned over?
  • No structure or processes … “Any good manager, any good leader, has a team around him and a structure around him for making things work and making things happen. I never got the slightest clue that there was a structure there.” … ”The place [White House] is dysfunctional.”
  • No contingency planning … no anticipation of 2nd order effects … no Plan Bs
  • Poor negotiation skills … Coburn: “it showed how inexperienced a negotiator Obama was.”
  • No sell-in of ideas … just brute force … expects the power of his idea to carry the the day … Cantor: ”… not on the same page, not in the same book, or even the same library.”
  • Poor communications …“Most extraordinary was the repeated use of the telephone for critical exchanges. Especially baffling was President Obama’s decision to make his critical request for $ 400 billion more in revenue in a spur-of-the-moment phone call. The result was a monumental communications lapse between the key parties”
  • Poor listening skills … “Obama talked, then seemed to listen — but … was really just waiting to talk again, to make his points, to win the argument.”
  • “The president talks a good game, but when it comes time to actually putting these issues on the table, making decisions, he can’t quite pull the trigger.”
  • “How badly the White House had played what should have been a winning hand.”
  • “It was a failure of presidential leadership. He was not Reagan. He was not Clinton.”
  • “Obama really doesn’t have the joy of the game.”

* * * * *
Obama was (and is) is totally obsessed with 2 things …

  • Getting re-elected … e.g. Pushing big decisions past the 2012 election
  • Raising taxes on the top 2% … seems to be his driving mission in life

Ken’s Take:  Does Obama really think the world will change much if and when he gets his white whale?

* * * * *
A few Congressional and business leaders mused: “We were here before him and we’ll be here after him”  … 

  • Implication #1: We’ll have to live with this stuff when he’s gone … “Whatever the Congress decided could be undone by a future Congress anyhow.”
  • Implication #2: All we have to do is drag our feet and outlast him … “Guys like me can hunker down and wait you out.”

* * * * *
Best Teaching Point

Barney Frank’s advice to Paul Ryan:

Ryan sat down at one point with Representative Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat known for his biting wit and powerful intellect.

Though they were ideological opposites, Frank gave him what Ryan considered the best advice he got about how to be an effective congressman.

Be a specialist, Frank told him, not a generalist.

Focus on one set of issues.

Get on the committee that you care about, and then learn more about the topic than anybody else.

Talk to all the experts you can find … and read everything you can.

Know these things inside and out.

* * * * *
Some factoids

  • Internal Revenue Service data shows that the current tax system produces about 85 to 86 percent of what it’s supposed to … i.e. 15% non-compliance
  • 51 percent of all federal employees, including uniformed military, were at the Department of Defense.
  • Pell college grants, a Democratic and Obama favorite aimed at assisting college students, because the annual cost was now more than $ 20 billion.

* * * * *
Some random snippets

  • Golf, a game of recovery. A bad or unlucky shot wasn’t fatal. Follow it up with a good second or third shot, and you could still find yourself on the green with a chance at par, or even better. .
  • Politics meant sitting across the table from people you might not like or who were annoying. Keeping cool was essential.

* * * * *
Final note:  Woodward’s book would have been a big deal last week … Woodward caught a bad break since the Libya assassination and mid-East uprisings pushed his book out of the news coverage … .

>> Latest Posts

Encore: “It is important not to read too much into any one monthly report” … unless the data is good.

September 10, 2012

Team Obama’s reaction to last week’s dismal jobs report was quite predictable:

“It is important not to read too much into any one monthly report”

Why predictable?

Because it’s EXACTLY the same thing they say whenever the jobs numbers are bad.

Below is an encore post … a stroll down memory lane …

Question: Is it ok to read something into, say, 42 jobs reports?

* * * * *

What are you going to believe, the facts or our rhetoric?

Reported by Chris Moody of Yahoo News

When the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced the nation’s latest national employment last week, the Obama administration stressed that people should not “read too much” into the data.

Mitt Romney’s campaign pounced, and flagged the fact that the White House has repeated that same line nearly every month since November 2009.

See below for the roundup of articles from WhiteHouse.gov that Romney’s campaign posted on its site. In many of the posts, the authors for the administration do acknowledge that they repeat themselves:

June 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.”

May 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.”

April 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.”

March 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK:)

February 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.”

January 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.”

December 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

November 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

October 2011: “The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and employment estimates are subject to substantial revision. There is no better example than August’s jobs figure, which was initially reported at zero and in the latest revision increased to 104,000. This illustrates why the Administration always stresses it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

September 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

August 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

July 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

June 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

May 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

April 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

March 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

February 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

January 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

December 2010: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

November 2010: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

October 2010: “Given the volatility in monthly employment and unemployment data, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

September 2010: “Given the volatility in the monthly employment and unemployment data, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

July 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative. It is essential that we continue our efforts to move in the right direction and replace job losses with robust job gains.”

August 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

June 2010: “As always, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

May 2010: “As always, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

April 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

March 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

January 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

November 2009: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

In other words, it’s important not to read too much into the Obama administration’s past 3-1/2 years of performance.

So much for accountability …

Thanks to SMH for feeding the lead

>> Latest Posts

Great moments in Dem-ocracy …

September 7, 2012

Earlier this week we posted re: the platform bruhaha at the DNC

On Wednesday, there was a do-over on the controversial parts of the platform: reinserting the words “God” and “Jerusalem“

If you haven’t seen the video, check it out … it’s great theater.

Pay attention to the number of votes taken (3) , how the chairman had to talk very slowly so that the Dem delegates would understand what to do, and draw your own conclusion whether the two-thirds threshold was met.

Here’s the most interesting part of the drama: floor photos taken at the time show that the vote’s results were already loaded to the teleprompter … before the vote was taken.

Apparently, the votes were counted before they were cast.

Having loved in Chicago for many years, I can tell you: that’s the Chicago way.

image

>> Latest Posts

Stepping back to see the forest from the trees …

September 6, 2012

In marketing, there’s a measure called the net promoter’s index … in essence, it’s a company’s percentage of avid supporters minus the percentage of avid disapprovers.

Gallup tracks presidential approval daily … below is Obama’s net approval rating (% approve minus % disapprove) since inauguration.

Note a couple of big picture points:

  1. The overall trend during Obama’s term has been down … even adjusting for the extraordinary hope & change starting point
  2. The most recent bounce back didn’t full recover the 2011 drop
  3. The 2012 trend has been consistently down

The big election question: will Obama continue to slide until election day or stage enough of a bounce back to squeak out a win?

image

>> Latest Posts

Who’s viewed more favorably – Obama or Romney? Biden or Ryan?

September 5, 2012

Well, well, well.

According to the most recent CNN poll, more likely voters (53%) view Romney favorably than view Obama favorably (51%).

And, more view Obama unfavorably (48%) than view Romney unfavorably (43%).

BTW: Ryan is viewed way more favorably than Biden

Think the mainstream media will pick up on these poll results?

I’m betting not.

* * * * *

CNN Question #4:

We’d like to get your overall opinion of some people in the news. As I read each name, please say  if you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of these people.

image

image

>> Latest Posts

Eastwooding.

September 4, 2012

Last Thursday nite I was dismayed to watch Clint Eastwood live delivering his now infamous chat with Obama-the-empty-chair.

image

I thought the skit diminished the prime time pitches by wasting valuable time and setting, setting a wrong tone, and potentially monopolizing the next day news cycle.

Maybe I was wrong …

I think the GOP lucked into something.

First, the Eastwood pitch went viral … landing some grand symbolic punches on Obama (emperor has no clothes, empty suit, etc.) …. and coining a new pop culture expression: “Eastwooding” .

Just Google the word and you’ll see what I mean.  It was most-Googled over the weekend.

Here are  my favorite web posts … and the White House’s response.

image

image

image

I guess, sometimes it’s better to be lucky than to be smart.

>> Latest Posts

Tread marks: NEWSWEEK throws Obama under the bus!

August 20, 2012

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.

Here’s the picture; below are a couple of snippets; click to read the whole article (a must read!).

Couldn’t have said it better myself …  send to friends.

image

Snippets

The question confronting the country … is not who was the better candidate four years ago. It is whether the winner has delivered on his promises. And the sad truth is that he has not.
 

In his inaugural address, Obama promised “not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth.” He promised to “build the roads and bridges, the electric grids, and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.” He promised to “restore science to its rightful place and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost.” And he promised to “transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age.” Unfortunately the president’s scorecard on every single one of those bold pledges is pitiful.

Welcome to Obama’s America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.

The president has done absolutely nothing to close the long-term gap between spending and revenue.

After all, it’s the president’s job to run the executive branch effectively—to lead the nation. And here is where his failure has been greatest.

Larry Summers told Orszag over dinner in May 2009: “You know, Peter, we’re really home alone  …  I mean it. We’re home alone. There’s no adult in charge.  … You can’t just march in and make that argument and then have him make a decision … because he doesn’t know what he’s deciding.”

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010 did nothing to address the core defects of the system: the long-run explosion of Medicare costs as the baby boomers retire, the “fee for service” model that drives health-care inflation, the link from employment to insurance that explains why so many Americans lack coverage, and the excessive costs of the liability insurance that our doctors need to protect them from our lawyers.

The president just kept ducking the fiscal issue. Having set up a bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, headed by retired Wyoming Republican senator Alan Simpson and former Clinton chief of staff Erskine Bowles, Obama effectively sidelined its recommendations of approximately $3 trillion in cuts and $1 trillion in added revenues over the coming decade

For me the president’s greatest failure has been not to think through the implications of these challenges to American power. Far from developing a coherent strategy, he believed—perhaps encouraged by the premature award of the Nobel Peace Prize—that all he needed to do was to make touchy-feely speeches around the world explaining to foreigners that he was not George W. Bush.

America under this president is a superpower in retreat, if not retirement. Small wonder 46 percent of Americans—and 63 percent of Chinese—believe that China already has replaced the U.S. as the world’s leading superpower or eventually will.

It is a sign of just how completely Barack Obama has “lost his narrative” since getting elected that the best case he has yet made for reelection is that Mitt Romney should not be president. In his notorious “you didn’t build that” speech, Obama listed what he considers the greatest achievements of big government: the Internet, the GI Bill, the Golden Gate Bridge, the Hoover Dam, the Apollo moon landing, and even (bizarrely) the creation of the middle class. Sadly, he couldn’t mention anything comparable that his administration has achieved.

Ken’s Take:

There’s not much new news in the article’s content … all of it has been said before somewhere … much has been said here in the HomaFiles.

The news is that a liberal magazine has thrown Obama under the bus.

Newsweek, by breaking from the left-ranks, may have given permission to other media to at least jump off the bus and start reporting squarely.

OMG.

>> Latest Posts

Did the Supreme Court help Obama or Romney ?

August 17, 2012

Pundits – all of whom mis-predicted the Supreme Court decision – were largely split re: whether the decision would boost Obama’s or Romney’s Presidential chances.

Well, based on this week’s NYT-CBS poll, the SCOTUS decision was a boost for Romney:

28% said they were more likely to vote for Romney … only 13% said that they were more likely to vote for Obama … that’s more than 2 to 1.

Fair to say that the SCOTUS decision was a force boosting Romney into a dead heat in the election poll.

 

image

* * * * *

SCOTUS & Politics

From the same poll, a majority felt that  the SCOTUS decision was based on personal or political views rather than the law.

That can’t be good …

image

>> Latest Posts

Trick question: Did employment grow faster under Bush or Obama?

August 12, 2012

Team Obama says “Bush’s failed policies of tax cuts to the rich got us into this problem”.

Oh, really?

Team Romney says “The worst recovery ever”.

Oh really?

Let’s cut to the chase.

First, I assert that the housing crash was a bi-partisan effort brewed over several decades … hard to say that it was caused by Bush’s tax policies.

Second, I’ll give Obama that he inherited a mess … and, I’ll start counting from the trough.

Well, well, well.

Turns out that – with the above assumptions — the growth in employment under Bush and Obama (to date) is pretty much equal … at about a 1% compound annual rate.

Hmmm.

On one hand, Obama got handled a financial collapse … not just a garden variety business cycle recession.

On the other hand, Obama continued the Bush tax rates … and he (and the Fed) have expended trillions in fiscal and monetary stimulus.

But, Obama continues to run around saying that the Bush tax rates are the cause of all evil … and eliminating them for the wealthy will get us out of this mess.

Oh, really?

image

 

image

>> Latest Posts

“Our plan worked” … say, what?

August 7, 2012

A picture is worth a thousand words.

So, here’s a picture.

image

Source: AEI

>> Latest Posts

The “top box effect” … measuring folks with strong feelings.

August 6, 2012

Last Friday’s Rasmussen Report paints an interesting picture.

Disclaimer: yes, Rasmussen tends to lean right.

I’ve always been a proponent of the “top box effect” …  i.e. focusing of folks who either strongly approve or strongly disapprove of a product … or a candidat.

Well, Rasmussen reports that President Obama’s “Presidential Approval Index” – the strongly approves minus the strongly disapproves – is now 23 points underwater.

And, the number of folks who strongly disapprove outnumber the total number who approve (strongly plus somewhat) … 45% to 44%

Those are what’s called statistically significant numbers !

image

>> Latest Posts

Apparently young adults and Latinos didn’t get the memo …

August 1, 2012

A question in the most recent McClatchy poll caught my eye …

The question: Should Congress extend the Bush tax cuts to everybody or “only to the middle class”?

I always expect this question to come out 98% to 2% in favor of hiking taxes on the “other guy”.

So, I was surprised to see the overall count at 52% to 43% in favor of extending the current tax rates for everybody.

Gets even more interesting …

Latinos are 62% to 36% in favor of extending for everybody.

Young adults 18 to 29 weighed in 69% to 29% in favor of extending to everybody.

So, two of Obama’s key constituencies seem out of line with respect to the President’s line in the sand re: jacking up taxes on the rich.

Hmmm.

image

>> Latest Posts

Remember GMAC? … GM going sub-prime (again)

July 31, 2012

According to IBD

Near the end of 2010, GM acquired a new captive lending arm, subprime specialist AmeriCredit.

Renamed GM Financial, it has played a significant role in GM’s growth.

Ken’s Note: Approximately 20% of GM revenues go thru GM Financial

The automaker is relying increasingly on subprime loans.

Potential borrowers of car loans are rated on FICO scores that range from 300 to 850.

Anything under 660 is generally deemed subprime.

image

So, lots of fleet sales to the Federal & Blue state governments … lots of self-financed sub-prime loans to move the metal

Cue the repo man … for the deadbeats’ cars … and the stock-sliding company.

* * * * *
Note: GM shares are now about half of the IPO price.

image

>> Latest Posts

Pssst: Al Gore didn’t invent the internet … here’s who did.

July 30, 2012

The Orator-in-Chief touched a nerve with his remark “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

Let’s explore another aspect of the Roanoke Reveal.

One of Obama’s points-of-proof: there wouldn’t be an internet (or internet companies) without the government.

“The Internet didn’t get invented on its own.  Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.”
Source

Great piece in the WSJ debunks that assertion.

It’s an urban legend that the government launched the Internet.

The truth is a more interesting story about how innovation happens—and about how hard it is to build successful technology companies even once the government gets out of the way.

For many technologists, the idea of the Internet traces to Vannevar Bush, the presidential science adviser during World War II who oversaw the development of radar and the Manhattan Project.

By the 1960s technologists were trying to connect separate physical communications networks into one global network—a “world-wide web.”

The federal government was involved, modestly, via the Pentagon’s Advanced Research Projects Agency Network. Its goal was maintaining communications during a nuclear attack, and it didn’t build the Internet.

Robert Taylor, who ran the ARPA program in the 1960s has set the record straight: ” The Arpanet was not an Internet. An Internet is a connection between two or more computer networks.”

If the government didn’t invent the Internet, who did?

Vinton Cerf developed the TCP/IP protocol, the Internet’s backbone, and Tim Berners-Lee gets credit for hyperlinks.

But full credit goes to  Xerox.

It was at the Xerox PARC labs in Silicon Valley in the 1970s that the Ethernet was developed to link different computer networks.

Xerox PARC researchers realized they couldn’t wait for the government to connect different networks, so they would have to do it themselves.

It’s important to understand the history of the Internet because it’s too often wrongly cited to justify big government.

It’s also important to recognize that building great technology businesses requires both innovation and the skills to bring innovations to market.

More details in the article.

>> Latest Posts

Attention Golfers: New Federal rules … level the course, increase “fairness”.

July 27, 2012

While it may have gotten lost in the “You didn’t build it” melee, new Federal golf rules will be in effect beginning Jan 2013.

Please share with fellow golfers.

By Executive Order, President Obama appointed a Golf Czar and ordered major rule changes in the game of golf,

The rules  will become effective January 1, 2013.

The complete rule book is over  1,000 pages.

Here are a few of the changes.

Golfers with handicaps:

  • below 10 will have their green fees increased by 35%.
  • between 11 and 18 will see no increase in green fees.
  • above 18 will get a $20 check each time they play.

The term “gimmie” will be changed to “entitlement” and will be used as follows:

  • handicaps below 10, no entitlements.
  • handicaps from 11 to 17, entitlements for putter length putts.
  • handicaps above 18, if golfer’s ball is on the green, no need to putt, just pick it up.

These entitlements are intended to bring about fairness and, most importantly, equality in scoring.

In addition, a golfer will be limited to a maximum of one birdie or six pars in any given 18-hole round.

Any excess must be given to those fellow players who have not yet scored a birdie or par.

Only after all players have received a birdie or par from the player actually making the birdie or par, can the par-birdie player begin to count his pars and birdies again.

The current USGA handicap system will be used for the above purposes, but the term “net score” will be available only for scoring those players with handicaps of 18 and above.

These rule changes are intended to “re-distribute” the success of winning by making sure that in every competition; the above 18 handicap players will post only “net score” against every other player’s “gross score”.

These new Rules are intended to positively change the game of golf.

Golf should be about Fairness.

It should not be about ability, hard work, practice, and responsibility.

Importantly, these rules will not apply to President Obama, Congress or Democratic bundlers.

Thanks to JWC for feeding the lead.

>> Latest Posts

The grammar of “You didn’t build that” …

July 26, 2012

Geez, I’ve been getting emails from folks explaining what the Orator-in-Chief meant by “You didn’t build that” …  all essentially repping the Obama Truth Team’s talking point:

“The President’s full remarks show that the ‘that’ in ‘you didn’t build that’ clearly refers to roads and bridges–public infrastructure we count on the government to build and maintain.”

Please.

image

Let’s drill down.

Remember, it was Obama himself who lectured the world that “They’re not just words. Words have meaning”.

So, let’s look closely at an analysis of the words:

The word “business” is more proximate to the pronoun “that” and therefore its more likely antecedent.

“Roads and bridges” is plural; “that” is singular. If Obama was talking about roads and bridges in a grammatically correct way, he would have said, “You didn’t build those.”

I know, cut him some slack … it was only his second campaign event without using his trademark teleprompter.

No.

No slack.

Why”?

Because he self-proclaimed that he has a “gift” for oratory.

In an  interview with CNN , Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid discussed a 2005 encounter with then-Sen. Barack Obama.

Reid had praised Obama for a speech he had just given.

The  newly-elected senator declared to Reid, “I have gift.”

As the WSJ quipped

Barack Obama is supposed to be the World’s Greatest Orator, the smartest man in the world.

Yet his loyalists want us to believe he is not even competent to construct a sentence.

Hmmm.

* * * * *

P.S. Remember a couple of weeks ago when Obama kept up the Bain outsourcing riff even after the Wash Post gave his claims 3 Pinocchios?  For somebody who dishes it, he seems to have very thin skim.

>> Latest Posts

“Don’t tell me me that words don’t matter”

July 24, 2012

The Orator-in-Chief is getting hammered for his remark “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

The Dem party line is that he’s being taken out of context and may have mis-spoke.

In effect, they’re saying that words don’t matter.

Hmmm.

Remember when Obama lecture us – using a speechjacked from  Mass Governor Deval Patrick – that words do matter?

My, how times have changed.

   click to view

>> Latest Posts

But, they still like him … not.

July 19, 2012

Couple of questions from the NYT/CBS poll caught my eye …

First, keep in mind that NYT/CBS bends left … and is known to oversample Dems.

The conventional wisdom is that folks may not like Obama’s policies, but that they like him as a person.

I’ve always thought that conclusion was overstated since there’s survey because of social forces and resulting survey bias …

Recently, Obama has been quite visible on the campaign trail … with negative attacks on Romney … sometimes repeating accusations that have been discredited by fact-checkers.

Well, guess what?

In the latest NYT?CBS poll, Obama is viewed UNFAVORABLY by 48%only 36% view him favorably … that’s only 4 points higher than Romney.

Perhaps negative campaigning isn’t as effect as the pundits have been saying,

 

image

>> Latest Posts

Great moments in leadership: Obama ditches the prompter for note cards …

July 18, 2012

This is too good to believe …

The Hill reports that last week in Pennsylvania & Virginia — to “up the tempo” at campaign events” — President Obama switched  from using a teleprompter to using note cards.

Hmmm.

Isn’t that when Obama went on his impromptu rant about how government, not entrepreneurs  build businesses?

This will be fun to watch.

* * * * *
Flashback

This news flash provides an archives opportunity.

Remember when O’s prompter failed at a White House event?

click to view
image

>> Latest Posts

He wasn’t in MY class … lucky he’s not a CEO or a football coach.

July 11, 2012

Remember when Yahoo canned its CEO for “mis-stating his academic record” — claiming to have scored a computer science course that he hadn’t taken?  … or George O’Leary getting fired as Notre Dames football coach for for over-stating his academic credentials?

That’s fatal for CEOs and football coaches, but …

According to World News Daily the intrigue around President Obama’s college background continues …

Two separate database reports from the National Student Clearinghouse have contradicted President Obama’s claim he attended Columbia University for two years.

The reports have added to the intrigue generated by Obama’s unwillingness to discuss his time at the Ivy League institution, his refusal to release educational records, and the fact that many political science students and faculty there in the early 1980s say they don’t remember him.

More specifically …

Henry Franklin Graff, professor emeritus of history at Columbia for 46 years, has cast doubt on claims Obama attended classes at the New York City university.

I have no recollection of Barack Obama at Columbia, and I am sure he never attended any of my classes,” Graff says.

“For 46 years, I taught political history, diplomatic history and one of the pioneering courses on presidential history, and every future politician of note who went through Columbia in those years took one or more of my classes – every one, that is, except Barack Obama.”

Graff further says that no professor he knew could remember having Obama as a student at Columbia.

Nobody I knew at Columbia ever remembers Obama being there,” Graff insists.

Who cares?

I do, for 3 reasons:

(1) I’m amazed at how Obama has been immunized to vetting … even vetting of basic facts … like when & where did he go to college.

(2) I want to see if his GPA was higher or lower than George W. Bush’s … since the press says Obama is a genius and Bush is a dunce.

(3) I want to know if Obama has ever taken a course in economics or business … I’ve bet the under on that one and want to collect

>> Latest Posts

What are you going to believe, the facts or our rhetoric?

July 9, 2012

Reported by Chris Moody of Yahoo News

When the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced the nation’s latest national employment last week, the Obama administration stressed that people should not “read too much” into the data.

Mitt Romney’s campaign pounced, and flagged the fact that the White House has repeated that same line nearly every month since November 2009.

See below for the roundup of articles from WhiteHouse.gov that Romney’s campaign posted on its site. In many of the posts, the authors for the administration do acknowledge that they repeat themselves:

June 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.”

May 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.”

April 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.”

March 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK:)

February 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.”

January 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.”

December 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

November 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

October 2011: “The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and employment estimates are subject to substantial revision. There is no better example than August’s jobs figure, which was initially reported at zero and in the latest revision increased to 104,000. This illustrates why the Administration always stresses it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

September 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

August 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

July 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

June 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

May 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

April 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

March 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

February 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

January 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

December 2010: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

November 2010: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

October 2010: “Given the volatility in monthly employment and unemployment data, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

September 2010: “Given the volatility in the monthly employment and unemployment data, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.”

July 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.  It is essential that we continue our efforts to move in the right direction and replace job losses with robust job gains.”

August 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

June 2010: “As always, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

May 2010: “As always, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

April 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

March 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

January 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

November 2009: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.”

In other words, it’s important not to read too much into the Obama administration’s past 3-1/2 years of performance.

So much for accountability …

Thanks to SMH for feeeding the lead

>> Latest Posts

Hmmm … some interesting polling results.

July 5, 2012

The most recent CNN/ORC Poll results caught my eye.

Specifically, the demographic breakdown of President Obama’s job approval – disapproval.

Overall, CNN says that 51% approve of the job Obama is doing; 47% disapprove.

Here’s where it gets interesting:

90%  of Dems approve; 85% of GOPers dis-approve

75% of non-whites approve; 58% of white dis-approve.

62% of urbanites approve; 55% of rurals dis-approve.

57% of folks under 50 years old approve;  55% of the over 50s dis-approve.

55% of folks making less than $50k approve;  50% of those making more than $50k dis-approve.

54% in non-battleground states approve; in battleground state, 52% dis-approve

44% of independents approve; 53% disapprove

So, the Obama composite: young non-white urbanites making less than $50k.

The dis-approvers: older non-urban whites making more than $50K.

Hmmm …

>> Latest Posts

“Prosecutorial Discretion” … the chickens will come home to roost on this one!

July 3, 2012

Long ago … you know, the week before last, King-O ruled by Executive Order that Illegal “dreamers” wouldn’t be deported (though the law says they should be), that illegals ID’ed in Arizona won’t be processed by Feds (though the law says that they should be), etc.

Setting the politics aside, the legal justification is called  “prosecutorial discretion”.

That means that not all laws are to be enforced … only those that the executive branch of government judges to be worthy of enforcement.

While Dems are cheering Obama’s “bold stroke”, I’m betting they’ll rue the day.

Let me give you a couple of examples why …

The Individual Mandate

OK, un-conservative Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the penalty — err, “tax” — is constitutional and has the force of law.

Fast forward to January 2013 … and, imagine a President Romney.

Now, imagine a President Romney issuing an Executive Order to the IRS that they should not enforce ObamaCare’s individual mandate.

Better yet, imagine him reversing the executive action to add 16,000 IRS agents to enforce the individual mandate … or for that matter, any ObamaCare provisions, say the 3.8% surcharge tax on investment income.

Boom.  Gone !

“Prosecutorial discretion” in action.

Think Dems will refer to it as Romney’s bold stroke?

* * * * *
Taxes on Dividend Income

For decades — maybe centuries — economists have argued against the double taxation of dividends … once at the corporate level, once at the individual level.

What if President Romney declares — by Executive Order — that the IRS should stop collecting taxes on dividend income and stop chasing down folks who don’t pay the taxes voluntarily.  So what if the law is on the books?

Boom. Gone.

No Congressional action required.

Just garden variety prosecutorial discretion.

* * * * *
I bet you get the picture …

My instincts tell me that the principle of the executive branch cheery-picking the laws it likes isn’t a long-term winner.

As old Rev. Wright would say: “The chickens will come home to roost on this one.

>> Latest Posts

A preview of the 2012 campaign ad wars …

June 30, 2012

Remember the “Chinese Professor” commercial that ran during the 2010 elections cycle?

               click to view
image

It was generally considered to be a very effective execution.

The GOP’s stated strategy for 2012 is is to use President Obama’s own words and actions against him.

“Operation Hot Mic” is the work of American Crossroads — Karl Rove’s Super Pac.

I think the commercial is very well crafted … it combines the feel of “Chinese Professor” with the guts of “Own Words”.

Worth watching whether conservative or liberal …

              click to view
image

Thanks to JC for feeding the lead

>> Latest Posts

Important polling result … the “top box” effect.

June 25, 2012

First, a couple of disclaimers: it’s way early to put much stock in polls … and Rasmussen leans right.

That said, last week, for the first time, the percentage of folks who strongly disapprove of Obama’s job performance exceeds the total percentage of folks who approve – either somewhat or very.

Why this is significant: many researchers argue that only the”top box”, i.e. “strongly”, are all that have statistical merit  … think “net promoter index”.

So, the fact the strong disapprovers out number total approvers is a big deal … at least statistically.

I bet Rasmussen will even miss this critical relationship …

 

image

>> Latest Posts

FOX News buoys Obama’s approval ratings …

June 18, 2012

You read that right.

Yesterday’s  RCP’s poll-of-polls had Obama’s approval underwater by 1.9 points.

That’s not big news, but …

In an ironic twist, the only poll that had more folks approving than disapproving was the poll conducted by FOX News.

You know, the FOX News that’s biased against Obama

Go figure ….

image

>> Latest Posts

150 and counting …

June 14, 2012

According to Michael Barone, writing in RCP:

President Obama recently attended his 150th fundraiser.

That’s more than the number attended by the last four presidents put together.

Imagine the upside if the guy focused on doing good, on attacking the country’s real problems …

You know, on being president instead of just running for president.

If he wants the job so badly, why doesn’t he try doing it?

>> Latest Posts

Flashback: Why private sector jobs won’t be coming back any time soon

June 5, 2012

The chickens came home to roost last Friday when the BLS had to gulp and (1) revise downward March and April jobs data, and (2) boost their count participants to the job market — the statistical aberration that was making the unemployment rate look like it was going down

Last Friday’s dismal jobs report shouldn’t have been much of a surprise to loyal readers.  As we’ve said often,  CEOs are dismayed by Team Obama’s economic, regulatory and pro-union policies and won’t do any serious hiring while Obama is in power. Period.

For the record, the Homa Files pitched this case over 2 years ago in a post titled: “Why private sector jobs won’t be coming back any time soon … Hint: it’s called passive aggressive resistance” … the punch lines:

Given the Administration’s anti-corporate rhetoric, actions, and proposed game-changing rules, I doubt that many CEOs will be taking on added costs and risks to boost the administration.

More likely, they will let unemployment continue to creep along, and will slow roll the process of rehiring.

Corporate chieftains will sit back and watch the President squirm and spin his “4 million jobs – saved or created”. As Rev. Wright would say “the chickens will have come home to roost”. Passively aggressive resistance at its very best.

Unfortunately, that means we’ll be seeing high unemployment for some time – at least through the 2012 Presidential elections.

The full original post is worth another read !

* * * * *

Ken’s current take:

Certainly there won’t be any meaningful hiring until the 2012. elections are in the book.

CEO heels are dug in. I’ve heard cocktail party chatter like “Each job added is a vote for Obama … Fool me once, shame on you … fool me twice, shame on me”

CEOs started to relent a bit when the Congress tilted GOP and Obama extended the Bush tax cuts. (Whatever happened to Immelt’s job creation task force?)

But, recent moves – e.g. stopping Boeing’s move to South Carolina, stumping again for higher taxes, especially on off-shore profits – have more than offset any momentum.

We’ll be stuck with unemployment in the 8s until 2013 … or until there’s a substantial policy roll-back .

And, the latter just ain’t gonna happen …

>> Latest Posts

Do your part: Buy a thingamajig

June 4, 2012

Not to worry about the economy … President Obama has a Plan B.

His response to the bump in the unemployment rate: everybody should “buy a thingamajig for their furnace”  … in June, no less.

                                            click to view

image

You can’t make this stuff up.

I love it when the economist-in-chief talks off-the-cuff without his teleprompter.

Now, about those transcripts …

>> Latest Posts

Perhaps, the sloppiest analysis ever …

May 30, 2012

Well, maybe that’s hyperbole, but it’s certainly a candidate.

Last week, some jabrone named Rex Nutting blogged in MarketWatch that the “Obama spending binge never happened”.

Nutting cooks some CBO numbers to conclude that “under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.”

Oh really?

The crux of his argument is that all the surge in Fed spending occurred in FY2009 — the last year of the Bush presidency.

Barack the Austere has just been treading water.

image

Hmmm.

Apparently Nutting wasn’t aware that Fed fiscal years run from Oct to Sept, so FY2009 was 3/4s Obama … and included about $1 trillion of his Stimulus and bailouts.

So, the real story is that Obama uber-boosted spending to try to stimulate the economy and had has kept spending at that higher level.

Hardly belt tightening.

Nutting’s analysis was so bad that the pro-Obama Washington Post gave it 3 Pinnochios … for “significant factual error and obvious contradictions.”

That didn’t stop the President from repeating the bogus conclusion in his campaign speeches yesterday.

Shame, shame.

P.S. The entire Wash Post fact-checker article is worth reading … an example of a good analysis .. with links to a couple of other pretty good analyses.

>> Latest Posts

Thanks, Oprah … but, no thanks.

May 24, 2012

Gotta admit that I have never paid much attention to Oprah Winfrey … admired her media success … but it just didn’t matter much to me.

That’s ok, because I’m definitely not in her target market.

But, a couple of articles caught my eye last week.

The first was one of many that broadcast an excerpt from the book “The Amateur” that claimed that Oprah — despite her impactful endorsement of Obama — has been largely shunned by the Obamas.

Why?

Gossipy reports say that Michelle feels threatened by powerful women around Barack, and — according to Oprah herself — “Michelle hates fat people and doesn’t want me waddling around the White House!’

Ouch.

Regardless of cause, nobody seems to dispute that Oprah hasn’t been in view around the White House … or on Obama’s campaign bus.

* * * * *
A second article in the NRO chronicled Oprah’s decline as a mega-media powerhouse.

She’s still a big deal … just not as big as she used to be.

One theory of the case is that lost the hearts of many of her followers when she dissed Hillary — the woman candidate — and endorsed Obama:

Oprah had chosen the less-qualified, less-experienced black man over the more-qualified, more-experienced white woman.

It didn’t take long for Oprah to feel the backlash.

Hell hath no fury like millions of women scorned.

Even the major media outlets couldn’t ignore the firestorm Oprah had ignited by choosing one part of her identity over another.

One ABC News headline said it most plainly: “Women Angry Over Oprah-Obama Campaign.”

Of course, there’s more to the story than that …. Oprah also blew off the mass media networks for her own cable network and Ellen Degeneres caught fire.

Still, an interesting connection, right?

>> Latest Posts

Gallup: “National Mood a Drag on Obama’s Re-Election Prospects” … say, what?

May 23, 2012

According to Gallup :

Some six months before voters head to the polls to choose the next president of the United States,

Gallup finds several indicators of the economic and political climate holding steady at levels that could be troublesome for President Barack Obama.

According to Gallup polling in early May, Obama’s approval rating is below 50%, Americans’ satisfaction with the direction of the country is barely above 20%, and the economy remains a dominant concern.

Talk about a juxtaposition of cause & effect …  perhaps, its President Obama who is responsible for the country’s lack of confidence … rather than the lack of confidence causing headwinds for the President.

* * * * *

Side Note

41% of the country was  “satisfied with direction of the U.S.” when Bush was vying for re-election.

image

>> Latest Posts

Senate throws a shutout … Obama’s faux-budget still on the snide.

May 18, 2012

On the wire

For the 2nd year in a row, the Democratic-controlled Senate unanimously rejected President Obama’s budget submission.  This year’s vote: 99 to 0.

Coupled with the House’s rejection in March, 414-0, that means Mr. Obama’s budget has failed to win a single vote in support this year.

Team O had been saying – with a straight face, no less – that the President was offering up a “balanced approach” to begin reining in deficits., even though it It would add $6.4 trillion in new deficits over the next 10 years.

* * * * *

Ken’s Take: Amazing that the county’s CEO and top-lawmaking body are unwilling to develop an operating budget … for the 3rd year in a row. 

No company that I know of operates that way.

>> Latest Posts

Obama: “I was for it before I was against it … but now, I’m for it … unless the polls go against me.”

May 17, 2012

Unless you were on Mars last week, you know that President Obama – inadvertently coaxed by bumbling Joe Biden – announced his support for gay marriage.

Not much surprise there, but the revelation sparked some interesting politics.

Quick out of the chutes, Newsweek – the reliably liberal news mag – hit the stands with a very controversial cover announcing Obama as the first gay president … apparently a play off of Bill Clinton’s old claims that he was the first black president.

My bet: it’ll be the highest selling issue of Newsweek ever … with most of its distribution in early November … used by both the far left left and the far right to rally their bases.

image

* * * * *
Interesting Twist

On the heels of the Newsweek feature article, a New York Times survey reported that 2 of 3 people saw through Obama’s “evolution” as being more politically expedient than morally driven.

image 
* * * * *
The political motives

Consistent with the NY Times survey, the Newsweek article outlined the political rationale:

There was, of course, cold politics behind it.

One in six of Obama’s fundraising bundlers is gay, and he needs gay’s money.

When Obama announced recently that he would not issue an executive order barring antigay discrimination for federal contractors, the gay donors all but threatened to leave him high and dry.

If money was one factor making the move necessary, the youth vote — essential to his demographic coalition and overwhelmingly pro–marriage equality — clinched the logic of it. The under-30s were looking worryingly apathetic, especially compared with 2008. This would fire them back up.

The latest Gallup poll, moreover, offered another incentive.

Marriage equality is now supported by half of Americans in polls.

Independents favor gay marriage by 57 percent.

So it’s been confirmed: gay rights is indeed a wedge issue.

* * * * * *
Another plot twist

Newsweek’s political logic makes sense, except…

The New York Times/CBS News poll indicates that most respondents said that the president’s position (on gay marriage) will not impact how they vote.

But among those who say it will influence their choice, 26 percent said they are less likely to vote for Obama as a result, while 16 percent say they are more likely to.

Hmmm.

Doing the arithmetic, that means a net loss of 5% (25% minus 16% = 10% times 50% = 5%) voting for Obama in what’s generally considered a 50/50 race.

* * * * *
Dissing the media

To close the loop, Obama campaign deputy manager Stephanie Cutter went on MSNBC to dismiss the CBS/New York Times poll as “flawed”.

Note that we cited Newsweek, the NY Times, CBS and MSNBC … not FoxNews or the WSJ …  wow.

Stay tuned, this political saga isn’t over.

>> Latest Posts