He Wasn’t Their First Choice, But Wadhams and Hillman Both Pleased with Michael Steele as RNC Chair

by Ben DeGrow | 1:12 pm, January 31, 2009

Not exactly breaking news: former Maryland lieutenant governor Michael Steele is the new chairman of the Republican National Committee. Polipundit has a blow-by-blow account of the six rounds (and five hours) of yesterday’s balloting to achieve a majority of support from the 168 delegates. Five candidates started the day. At the end it came down [...]

Churchill case heats up

by John Martin | 10:57 pm, January 30, 2009

RMN: Ward Churchill and Bill Owens have frosty encounter Former Gov. Bill Owens on Friday compared onetime CU professor Ward Churchill to a famous movie maker — and it wasn’t a compliment. “In retirement, he’s starting to look a lot like Michael Moore,” Owens said of the overweight and frumpy director of Bowling for Columbine [...]

William Ayers To Defend Ward Churchill At CU In March Ahead Of Ex-Professor’s Lawsuit

by elpresidente | 9:50 pm, January 30, 2009

Thankfully, Drunkablog was on top of this over a week ago:

Come and hear the shocking truths behind the right-wing attacks on Churchill. Hear what they don’t want you to know!

Date: Thursday, March 5, 2009
Time: 6:00pm – 9:00pm
Location: Glenn Miller Ballroom, at CU Boulder inside the UMC

Quote of the week

by Mr. Bob | 4:06 pm, January 30, 2009

Courtesy the American Thinker writer Douglas Obrien.
Describing the impassioned speach of Rod Blagojevich.

“He (Rod Blagojevich” truly believes that his amoral approach to public policy, the shakedowns, the threats, the posturing, the relentless spin, was all perfectly acceptable because it was done in furtherance of an agenda of pure beneficence.”

Friday Satire>>The Sacred Word of Obama and Other Experts Questioned

by Ben DeGrow | 8:10 am, January 30, 2009

The true-believing capital-L Liberals are the unquestioned experts on your life, the universe, and all that. Supposed experts who appear to disagree? Well, they are just a delusion of Right-wing fantasy. When it comes to the great all-encompassing theory of climate change, pay no attention to these highly-respected international scientists (or the scientist formerly in [...]

Did the Dems take too big a bite?

by Rossputin | 1:40 am, January 30, 2009

It’s still early to read too much into it, but the fact that not one Republican member of the House voted for the massive, bloated spend-a-thon which is posing as a “stimulus” bill might mean the Democrats have, in their first 10 days of full control, already over-reached.

It will be interesting to see whether there is newly-found spine among GOP Senators like Mitch McConnell…and especially interesting if the GOP were to be able to hold together a filibuster should a bill similar to the current proposal be brought forward.

My guess, however, is that liberal Republicans like John McCain and both Senators from Maine would side with the Democrats in that case, and they will work in the deadly spirit of “bipartisanship” to pass a bill which jams one knife into the heart of America rather than two. You get my point regarding the relative difference of effect on the nation.

It’s probably too far from the next election for the current debate to be important in terms of an election issue…unless the GOP shows a clear opposition to the bailout in the Senate to match or nearly match the house and then the economy doesn’t recover within 2 years. I believe the economy won’t recover in any important way within 2 years…and I believe it certainly won’t if this “stimulus” passes, because the only thing it stimulates is the national debt.

I don’t want to get too optimistic that the Democrats and Barack Obama will waste a tremendous amount of political capital within their first few weeks in power. But it’s certainly not out of the question at this point, and it’s nice to dream.

One thing we need is for everyone who is represented by a Republican in the House to contact him or her and thank that person for his “no” vote. Even better, everyone who is represented by a Republican should send his campaign fund $10 with a note saying it’s specifically in appreciation of defending the taxpayer.

Maybe that’s easy for me to say because I’m represented by a Democratic congressman and, can it be true?, two Democratic Senators. Yeech.

Democrat Pollsters Hedge Bets on Ritter Re-Election…Wouldn’t You Right Now?

by Ben DeGrow | 9:22 pm, January 29, 2009

Democrat pollsters are hedging their bets over the re-election chances of Colorado Governor Bill Ritter. The well known, respected local election analyst Floyd Ciruli says:

Although Bill Ritter works hard and cares about Colorado, he fails to inspire confidence among the most attentive publics. Of course, Colorado governors tend to be re-elected, and the Republicans are [...]

Colorado Senate Democrats Flee from True School Financial Transparency

by Ben DeGrow | 9:03 pm, January 29, 2009

Last night I told you about the inspiring testimony of citizens in support of financial transparency for Colorado schools. Today, it was the legislators’ turn to do the damage. And damage they did:

Senator Bob Bacon introduced an amendment that establishes a “voluntary pilot program” for transparency. It passed and is now on its way [...]

With All Due Respect Mr. President, Barry Poulson Does Not Agree

by Jon Caldara | 10:46 am, January 29, 2009

The Cato Institute took exception to President Obama when he said,
There is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jump start the economy.
So they took out a full page ad in the New York Times showcasing the amount of support the “other side” enjoys… from a [...]

John Carter Introduces the Rangel Rule

by Mr. Bob | 8:53 am, January 29, 2009

Rep. John Carter, a Texas Republican, sent out a press release earlier today about his innovative new bill:

“Rangel Rule”

All U.S. taxpayers would enjoy the same immunity from IRS penalties and interest as House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY) and Obama Administration Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, if a bill introduced today by Congressman John Carter (R-TX) becomes law.

Carter, a former longtime Texas judge, today introduced the Rangel Rule Act of 2009, HR 735, which would prohibit the Internal Revenue Service from charging penalties and interest on back taxes against U.S. citizens. Under the proposed law, any taxpayer who wrote “Rangel Rule” on their return when paying back taxes would be immune from penalties and interest.

from NRO 01/28 06:13 PM

Etch Yesterday in Stone as Rare Proud Moment for Congressional GOP

by Ben DeGrow | 7:58 am, January 29, 2009

It’s not often that I can say Congressional Republicans make me proud by their actions. So let’s etch January 28, 2009, in stone as one of those momentous occasions. Hats off to the House GOP yesterday for standing 100 percent united against the Obama-Democrat trillion dollar pork bill that promises to mount piles of debt [...]

Extortion, Bribery Still Legal in Colorado! YES!

by Jon Caldara | 1:15 am, January 29, 2009

In case you don’t recall last fall’s ballot ransom, allow me to refresh.  Unions extorted $3 million cash from businesses in exchange for them pulling  four business-destroying initiatives from the ballot.  I was offered $800,000 of that $3 million to pull my Amendment 49, which apparently unions didn’t like.  And what a “principled” idiot I [...]

Coloradans, You Can Make a Difference for School Financial Transparency

by Ben DeGrow | 10:03 pm, January 28, 2009

Update, 1/29: More coverage on Colorado Spending Transparency and Ed News Colorado, as well as a kind link from the Open Records blog.
This morning the Colorado Senate Education Committee got a bit of a surprise, it might seem, with a slew of concerned citizens coming forward to testify in support of Senate Bill 57 (PDF) [...]

Your Orwell Moment of the Day

by T.L. James | 9:44 pm, January 28, 2009

  It was a source of great satisfaction to him, he said–and, he was sure, to all others present–to feel that a long period of mistrust and misunderstanding had now come to an end. There had been a time–not that he, or any of the present company, had shared such sentiments–but there had been a [...]

Will Democrats Try to Stiff Us with Another Arbitrary, Pointless Tax Hike?

by Ben DeGrow | 9:16 pm, January 28, 2009

Four years ago, a narrow majority of Coloradans bought the slick advertising of the Referendum C tax hike. Today, statehouse Democrats seem to have forgotten all their grandiose promises. (Or were they not telling us the truth in the first place?)
A great catch by Face The State (go and listen to the brief audio [...]

Global Warming: Policy Change, Not Climate Change, Is the Real Danger

by Julian Dunraven | 4:28 pm, January 28, 2009

By Julian Dunraven, J. D., M.P.A.

Honorable friends:

Global warming does indeed seem to be a pervasive problem. Yesterday it plagued me in my morning paper, harangued me from radio and television broadcasts, and even managed to insinuate itself into the conversation of irksome social acquaintances. Although I have become accustomed to bad policy masquerading as good science, and even look forward to reading my Global-Warming-Article-of-the-Day in the paper, yesterday’s news was particularly insufferable.

Todd Hartman of The Rocky Mountain News started it off, trumpeting Dr. Susan Solomon’s new pronouncement that CO2 emissions “will irreversibly change the planet,” for centuries to come no matter what we do. I suppose someone should suggest to Dr. Solomon that, if she has noticed human behavior has little to no impact on climate change, it might be because the whole things is part of the earth’s natural and periodic cycles. However, I was rather hoping her pronouncement might end the climate change squawking; after all, she does not seem to have much hope that there is anything more to be done. Alas, fortune is not so kind.

True believers never lose hope, and so NPR did its best to keep the faith alive by broadcasting proposed solutions. It seems a few members of the scientific community were watching “The Simpsons” and drew a bit too much inspiration from Mr. Burn’s attempt to block the sun by raising a giant metal disk over Springfield. Of course, the earth is a lot bigger than the town of Springfield, and thus there would have to be quite a few of these disks launched into orbit before we could block enough sunlight to begin cooling the earth. The disks would also have to be replaced occasionally as they fell out of orbit. The real sticking point is the cost, which is currently several trillion dollars. It is always unfortunate when mere economics gets in the way of good Simpsons . . . or science rather.

Another absurd proposal NPR and others have deigned to promulgate, involves launching sulfur particles into the atmosphere. This, would be far cheaper than the Mr. Burns plan, and would sufficiently darken the sky to promote global cooling. Unfortunately, it may also severely change weather patterns, increase acid rain, and—oh yes—darken the sky. No one quite knows how many species of animal and plant life would be devastated from a decrease in light sufficient to cool the earth. It might eventually leave the world a barren wasteland, but everyone agrees it would be a cooling barren wasteland.

Fortunately, it is only bureaucrats like those running the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) who seem to use middle school science fair projects as the standard for publishable research. The IPCC’s report, which was authored by a mere 52 scientists, was widely touted as representing the final and absolute conviction among the scientific community that Global Warming is the result of human produced CO2 emissions. Instead, the Republican minority of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, led by Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), has soundly refuted this in its Minority Report, which cites over 650 scientists, all contesting the IPCC’s claims.

One of the more interesting dissenters is Dr. Don Easterbrook, whose study of the climate indicates normal and alternating periods of warming and cooling stretching back for millennia. Not only does Dr. Easterbrook contest the idea that Global Warming is caused by humans, after looking at the sun’s recent activity and the Pacific Ocean’s decadal oscillation, he has staked his reputation on his theory that we are now entering a period of Global Cooling, and the Warming advocates will soon see their arguments collapse.

Whether or not he turns out to be correct will be largely irrelevant for the next four years. President Barack Obama’s cabinet selections clearly indicate the he accepts the idea of human caused Global Warming absolutely, and intends to write policy with that in mind. In his January 2009 Monthly Review, Richard Loomis of World Energy gives a thorough analysis of “President. Obama’s Energy Picks.”

As. Mr. Loomis explains, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sees Global Warming as a national security threat and, during her campaign, advocated for strong carbon cutting measures. Steven Chu, as Secretary of Energy, has expressed great distaste for oil, dislikes nuclear power for the waste it generates, and refers to coal as, “my worst nightmare.” Solar, wind, and natural gas power and natural gas fuel seem to be his preferences. Carol Browner, the “Energy Czar,” comes to us from the EPA, where she argued that California should be granted a waiver from the Clean Air Act to allow it to more strictly regulate carbon emissions. Lisa Jackson, the EPA Administrator, pushed a moratorium on new coal plants as the EPA head for New Jersey. Then there is Ken Salazar as Secretary of the Interior who, while not joining the rest in his hatred of coal, is strongly opposed to expanding oil drilling whether on land or off shore.

From this list, Mr. Loomis is correct to fear some sort of cap and trade mechanism being forced on the U.S. by executive order. And herein lies the real danger of Global Warming. In his January 24th broadcast of “the Big Picture,” Jim Puplava warns that the U.S. will have a difficult time convincing the rest of the world to join in such an initiative during this economic crisis. Europe especially will be disinclined to rely more on natural gas when Putin has consistently demonstrated his willingnes to use the gas supply as political leverage. Thus, the U.S. will be forced to pursue carbon reduction policy alone. The high energy costs of such a policy would put the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage to Europe, China, and our other major trading partners. This is especially worrisome at a time when tax revenues are declining and government spending is increasing, and Mr. Puplava is right to wonder how much more of our debt the world will continue to finance when other nations are beset with their own economic problems.

Then there is peak oil. The recent IEA World Energy Outlook reports a 9.1% annual depletion rate in the world’s oil reserves. All major oil fields are in decline, virtually no new discoveries are being made, and oil demand continues to rise across the world—despite the economic crisis—especially in China, India, and oil producing nations developing their own economies. We are set for an oil supply crisis to hit between 2012-2015. Our own oil reserves are not sufficient to avert this problem, but they can help buy more time for us. However, as developing an oil field takes anywhere from 4-6 years, we would need to start investing today. Instead, low oil prices, and the refusal of the Obama administration to expand drilling while it considers actually raising taxes on oil produces has all but killed capital investment in this vital field.
Natural gas fuel is also a viable stop gap measure while we search for something to more permanently replace oil. However, it is not unlimited, and if we insist on squandering it to supply our electricity, it will not be of much help to us when we face the coming oil supply crisis.

As I have said before, Global Warming is something science is still vigorously debating as it attempts to fully understand the causes of climate change. However, to the Obama administration, the debate is over. In the midst of an economic crisis, it is willing to tax coal and nuclear power into extinction—despite an already overburdened grid. It is willing to put our nation’s entire economy in peril of the worst oil supply crisis ever seen and squander the natural gas resources that could help protect us. And it is willing to do all of this solely on the basis of its faith in human caused Global Warming. Whether climate change is a real problem caused by humans is still up for debate. However, the dangers of policy change based on that premise are very real and imminent.

The Stasi would have loved her

by John Martin | 4:24 pm, January 28, 2009

Everybody’s had this, so I’ll just pile on. Post columnist Kristen Browning-Blas channels the civil-rights stalwarts of yore (and mine): Have you ever been in that awkward situation where someone makes an off-color joke, or worse, a blatantly racist one? People laugh uncomfortably, or look away, or pretend they didn’t hear. Maybe your son’s new [...]

“Chicago-Style” Politics Becomes Entrenched In Colorado; Shady Deals Exposed

by elpresidente | 2:21 pm, January 28, 2009

Republicans: Remove a ballot initiative in exchange for compensation = bribery.

Democrats: Hey, it’s just free speech!

From Face The State:

Jon Caldara, president of the Independence Institute, testified in favor of the bill. He was a primary backer of Amendment 49 and told the committee that on the eve of the deadline to remove initiatives from the ballot, he was offered $800,000 to pull the initiative. “What an idiot I was not to take that $800,000,” Caldara said, sarcastically adding he now has incentive to put bad measures on the ballot in order to gain financial benefit. Committee member Rep. Beth McCann, D-Denver, was notably disturbed by Caldara’s story and suggested further investigation into his allegations.

But the bill also had its share of detractors. Democrat go-to attorney Mark Grueskin, who served as legal counsel for the unions during the 2008 election, testified in opposition. He argued the bill would violate free speech by banning a monetary exchange for removing a ballot measure. “Like it or not money is speech under both [the Colorado and U.S.] Constitutions,” he said.

Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck, who also spoke before the committee, fired back at Grueskin. “The act of paying someone money might be an act of free speech, but it might also be an act of bribery,” he testified.

The bill was ultimately killed on a 6 to 5 vote, with McCann being the only Democrat to vote in favor. Stephens was disappointed, but said she would continue to pursue the issue. “Now that we know those are the terms, we have a new Chicago-style politics,” she said.

Sen. Mike Kopp, R-Littleton, was the bill’s Senate sponsor and called its defeat the “Blagojevich-ization” of Colorado.

Props to McCann for opposing what Ben describes–quite accurately, in my estimation–as “political blackmail.”

But then again, think of the unions!

Speaking of corruption, here is a somewhat-related story that should be drawing more attention and is not:

The Lakewood Housing Authority bought its new headquarters for $3.1 million – $300,000 more than the seller paid for the property the same day as the sale.

The July 23 transactions have raised a few eyebrows, including those of one Lakewood City Council member.

But Bill Lunsford, the housing authority’s development manager, points to an appraisal that valued the office building at $3.2 million – $100,000 more than the quasi-public agency paid.

Lunsford said he had no way of knowing that the firm selling the property was closing on it the same day for $2.8 million.

“If we obviously had this opportunity to buy it from the previous guy at what I hear now is $300,000 cheaper, we would have done it,” Lunsford said Monday.

Oops, our bad.

Yeah, right.

Thanks to the Independence Institute for providing first-hand testimony on behalf of the anti-corruption bill defeated by union-enslaved Democrats, and for shedding light on the type shenanigans exposed in the housing authority’s operations.

I have a feeling that not only will a similar bill come up again (especially if this type of activity occurs again) under a Republican-controlled legislature, but that many more exposés of sketchy deals involving government or quasi-governmental/public assistance organizations. The questionable circumstances of the Lakewood Housing Authority’s purchase are probably only the tip of the iceberg.

Salazar opposes Gitmo plan

by John Martin | 12:19 pm, January 28, 2009

NIMBY: Republicans who oppose moving terror suspects from Guantanamo Bay to Colorado’s Supermax prison now have a Democratic ally:  Rep. John Salazar. The Western Slope congressman says prisoners at the Cuba-based U.S. Naval detention center should not be sent to the maximum-security prison in Florence. “I frankly think it seems more appropriate to send them [...]

More less than stimulating items in the Stimulus Package

by Mr. Bob | 8:56 am, January 28, 2009

So far the Democrats have been using their influence to once again send pet pork to grateful special interest groups and projects…where’s the “change” huh? This is business as usual.

The President is trying to woo the GOP by listening to their complaints about these things and so far only two have been removed…money for Contraception, and now Millions for the Washington Mall.
…time for the Republicans and their constituents to put the pedal to the metal. Keep up the pressure, this is not supposed to be a pork package, it a stimulus bill and besides being a horrible idea to borrow more money to stimulate the economy (an idea that got us in the mess in the first place,) now they are including things that have nothing to do with stimulating the economy. And of course those proposing the ideas are the very ones that caused this mess to begin with.

Don’t let them fool you, this was not caused by unrestrained Capitalism…we don’t have that in America. It was caused by Government mettling in Banking affairs, making it attractive for them to make bad loans to perform a social experiment.

From HolyCoast.com

Next should be the money for ACORN. Those funds are designed for only one purpose: Pay off organizations that spend their time as Dem street workers. There’s nothing about ACORN funding that will stimulate the economy. The GOP needs to keep identifying non-stimulus spending and shining the light on it. The Dems obviously are desperate for GOP votes given the way they are caving on these other items.

And while they’re at it, there’s no reason to approve $75 million for smoking cessation. Again, not a measure that will stimulate the economy.

UPDATE: What about $335 million for STD prevention? Again, doesn’t belong in this bill.

I’m beginning to think that the Senate Republicans need to filibuster this bill until all these stupid non-stimulus provisions can be identified and removed. Read the rest

Rossputin: Bill Ritter’s Transparent Try to Set Stage for Another Tax Hike

by Ben DeGrow | 7:48 am, January 28, 2009

When I recently pointed out Governor Bill Ritter’s public proclamation in favor of transparency, this wasn’t the kind of transparency I was talking about. Rossputin explains:

There’s a reason that the first thing Ritter is proposing to do is cut education and prison funding, and “temporarily” suspend the homestead exemption which lowers property tax for many [...]

Colorado Democrats Kill Clean Government, Anti-Political Blackmail Bill

by Ben DeGrow | 7:28 am, January 28, 2009

From the Denver Post:

A bill that would have barred back-room ballot initiative deals got the heave-ho at the state Capitol Tuesday.
House Bill 1069, from state Rep. Amy Stephens, R-Monument, would have made it illegal for anyone with a ballot initiative certified by the secretary of state to then withdraw that initiative because of a deal [...]

Your medical records: Will government employees get paid to read them?

by Brian Schwartz | 12:30 am, January 28, 2009

Amanda Carpenter suggests that it will:
Universal healthcare is going to get a big boost from the $825 billion stimulus bill if it passes in current form.
$600 million is allocated on page 50 of the bill to double funding to pay doctors and nurses employed by the National Health Services Corps. The bill states: “A key [...]

A Colorado budget shortfall? You don’t say, Bill.

by Rossputin | 12:26 am, January 28, 2009

Good morning, class. For today’s lesson, let’s compare these two quotes from two news stories:

“Ritter said it’s too early to begin slashing the budget and he wants to see what happens if Congress approves a bailout of the financial industry. He said estimates from his budget office indicate there will be no shortfall.”

and

“Faced with a $1 billion state budget deficit over the next 18 months, Gov. Bill Ritter today proposed closing two prisons, slashing spending on education and furloughing state workers, who also wouldn’t get a pay increase next year.”

And what do you think was the period of time between these two remarkably different announcements?

The answer: Less than four months.

The first quote is from late September, 2008, when even Democrats in the legislature were discussing cuts that might have to be made. The second quote is from yesterday, late January, 2009, when the stark realities — which apparently everyone but Ritter was aware of — couldn’t be hidden any more.

There had been some signs of life inside the muddled brains of Ritter’s team: A few weeks ago, the governor’s office admitted there would be a large shortfall (but still underestimated it) and gave this remarkable explanation of why the legislature’s estimate was probably more accurate: “They (legislative staff) were utilizing a more current data source for their capital-gains projections.” Ummmm…and just why are you offering any estimate if you know your data is flawed? Any half-decent geek can explain the computer science term “GIGO” to the governor. It means “Garbage in, Garbage out.”

I also wonder how many long-time state employees wonder if their pay would have been frozen, rather than maybe getting a very tiny raise, if the governor hadn’t lied through his teeth about implementing a hiring freeze.

There’s a reason that the first thing Ritter is proposing to do is cut education and prison funding, and “temporarily” suspend the homestead exemption which lowers property tax for many senior citizens, and it’s the oldest liberal trick in the book: He’s setting the stage for a tax increase proposal “for the children” and with the specter of violent felons roaming the streets unless we go along.

Well, it’s time to just say no to more liberal government expansion.

[They passed Ref C when times were good, but then didn't spend the money as they promised and didn't save any for a rainy day. Indeed, they did exactly what we opponents of Ref C said they'd do. Furthermore, as I warned at the time, the worst thing that could happen to Colorado after the passage of Ref C would be a recession after C had been in place for a few years. This is because Ref C raises the "baseline" for government spending not to the prior year's spending level but to the highest spending level for any year's spending during the so-called "five year time-out". It's that fact which makes Ref C an absolutely permanent tax hike and not a limited-effect measure.]

The Denver Post story says Ritter is proposing to close a “children’s therapeutic hospital at Fort Logan.” Are you kidding me? Could that be any more pathetic or transparent? Saying that the budget problems will cause sick kids to be tossed out of hospitals?

It’s time to call Ritter and his spendthrift economorons on their ploy. Let them threaten the kids all they want. Let them threaten education all they want. Force them to make cuts to government programs across the board. We all have to cut back, and public schools can do just as well with less if we force them not to let teachers’ unions divert money into their own coffers. Let a few prisoners out…I dare you.

You heard it here first: Ritter’s announcement is a prelude to a huge proposed tax hike. It’s time for Coloradans to stand up and say “Enough!” Enough of your lies, enough of your spending, enough of your lack of fiscal discipline, enough of wasting our money to buy votes, and most of all, enough of telling us that the world will come to an end unless we agree to higher taxes.

Nearly Half of Coloradans Admit They Don’t Know Who Michael Bennet Is

by Ben DeGrow | 10:26 pm, January 27, 2009

Congressional Quarterly says Michael Bennet “needs to get better known” — who? Oh yeah! Colorado’s junior junior U.S. Senator. The Democrats’ Public Policy Polling – in a herculean effort to put an impossibly meaningful spin on an election that’s more than 21 months away – finds almost half of Coloradans will admit they don’t even [...]

Bank Execs Keep Their Jobs After Miserable Failure

by Mr. Bob | 12:11 pm, January 27, 2009

The AP’s review reveals one of the ironies of the bank bailout: The same executives who were at the controls as the banking system nearly collapsed are the ones the government is counting on to help save it.

Even top executives whose banks made such risky loans they imperiled the economy have been largely spared any threat to their jobs, as Washington pumped billions in taxpayer money into the companies. Less fortunate are more than 100,000 bank employees laid off during a two-year stretch when industry unemployment nearly tripled, bank stocks plummeted and credit dried up

Read the rest

Just when you think Global Warming alarmists can’t get worse…

by Mr. Bob | 12:02 pm, January 27, 2009

Global warming ‘irreversible’ for next 1000 years: study

NOAA senior scientist Susan Solomon said the study, published in this week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal, showed that current human choices on carbon dioxide emissions are set to “irreversibly change the planet.”

Researchers examined the consequences of CO2 building up beyond present-day concentrations of 385 parts per million, and then completely stopping emissions after the peak. Before the industrial age CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere amounted to only 280 parts per million.

The study found that CO2 levels are irreversibly impacting climate change, which will contribute to global sea level rise and rainfall changes in certain regions.

The authors emphasized that increases in CO2 that occur from 2000 to 2100 are set to “lock in” a sea level rise over the next 1,000 years.

Give up now, we are all gonna die and it’s our fault we progressed, we invented and we made life easier for our fellow humans. Read the rest if you can stomach it.

RMA 2.0: Rocky Mtn Blogs Radio Show #11

by elpresidente | 11:09 am, January 27, 2009

**NOTE: New time and extended format–Every Tuesday–next show January 27, 8:30 pm.

The Blog Talk Radio version of the Rocky Mountain Alliance. A weekly discussion about politics–national, state, and local–featuring RMA members bloggers led by featured host and producer Joshua Sharf, with rotating co-host duties from Ben DeGrow of Mount Virtus, Randy Ketner of Night Twister, and Michael Alcorn of Best Destiny.

**January 27 lineup–elections expert Jan Tyler and State Sen. Greg Brophy.

Last week (all shows archived): Guests included Todd Shepherd, Independence Institute and Mark Hillman, Colorado Republican National Committeeman.

Next week–TBD.

January 13–State Rep. Ellen Roberts, R-Durango (HD 59) and State Senator Mike Kopp, SD 21, R-Littleton.

January 6–CU Regent Tom Lucero, chairman of the successful Amendment 54 campaign and a candidate for CD 4 in 2010.

December 30–RMA took a look back at a dismal year in their 2008 year-in-review.

December 23–Joshua and fellow commentators (including yours truly) hosted Jim Pfaff of Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Opinion Times. Pfaff discussed the AFP Colorado report “Keeping Colorado Competitive” and bridging the Christian/libertarian gap.

On December 16 we hosted State Rep. Kevin Lundberg (District 49), and discussed the Salazar appointment as the Secretary of the Interior in the Obama cabinet.

The December 12 edition featured Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier.

**Bookmark the new RMA Radio home page, with embedded player and calendar of upcoming shows and featured guests.

Stream the show live, or play/download the podcast at your convenience.

I’ll update co-host and guest info for each episode as it becomes available. Stay tuned . . .

RMA’s shows are archived–if you missed any of them, be sure to check out the archive page to stream or download, or scroll down this page a bit, for the embedded archive player.

The Rise of Gold and Fall of The Dollar

by Julian Dunraven | 9:00 am, January 27, 2009

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Honorable friends:

Last month I wrote that the bailout total, which has now reached more than $8.5 trillion, with another $850 billion stimulus to come this year, will eventually force us into dangerous levels of inflation. I thank the Bangor Daily News and Bridget Johnson at The Rocky Mountain News for picking up on that post. Since then, although the Fed printing presses have been running at a frantic pace, nearly doubling the money base, much of it has not yet reached the money supply. That is about to change.

As the credit crisis hit and companies began to deleverage in earnest, selling anything they could to obtain dollars and pay down debt, U.S. treasury bonds sold very well. Our people, seeing the credit crunch and falling prices, began to fear a deflationary trend and flocked to treasury bonds as well. Truly markets are psychologically driven—and often insane. More rational heads have reminded us that real deflation requires a contraction in the money supply—which the Fed’s printing has made all but impossible. It seems, however, that reason is beginning to reassert itself.

U.S. treasuries are now selling at almost zero percent interest rates. As a result, $1 million invested into a one month treasury bill, rolled over each month, will earn you only a meager $100 annual interest. A one year treasury bill for $1 million will earn you only $4,300. No one can live off such pathetic returns, certainly not our retirees. As for other governments, such returns offer little incentive to continue financing our debt, which increasingly looks to be utterly unmanageable. As a result U.S. Treasury sales are beginning to decline.

As the Ludwig von Mises Institute points out, our biggest creditor nations are unlikely to increase their investment. Japan has been a net seller of U.S. Treasuries and it has its own problems to deal with from demand destruction affecting its exports. OPEC nations are suffering from falling oil prices and their own resulting economic woes render them unable to finance more of our debt. The Caribbean banks are suffering from the credit crunch forcing liquidity and in no position to offer help. That leaves China, which is passing its own $585 billion stimulus, of which the government is providing only $170 billion, leaving the rest to be financed out of its foreign exchange reserves—such as U.S. treasuries.

To further complicate the matter, Chuck Butler’s Daily Pfenning yesterday picked up on news that Chinese officials are now contemplating selling U.S. Treasuries in part out of retaliation that the U.S. government has cast blame on China for the global financial crisis. Yu Yongding, a former member of the People’s Bank of China’s policy board, also warned that “supply of Treasuries may far exceed demand in the future.”

Thus, as the Fed finds itself unable to sell sufficient treasury bonds to finance all the government spending, it will have no choice but to begin quantitative easing, a polite term for printing money and injecting it directly into the money supply. In other words: massive inflation.

As part of their efforts to accomplish this enormous monetary expansion and devaluation in a vain effort to stimulate the economy, the Ludwig von Mises Institute points out that the central banks have finally abandoned their attempts to artificially suppress the price of gold through naked short selling and dumping. Slapstick Politics discussed this inevitability back in October.

As I predicted last month, the result of all of this has been a drop in the value of the dollar and a precipitous rise in the price of gold as people try to find a way to preserve their wealth. The other major fiat currencies of the world are no better, as James Turk of Gold Money illustrates. The central banks of the world have all embarked on this strategy of bailouts and spending together, and they are all devaluing their currencies together. That trend is likely to continue for some time, and gold remains the best protection against it.

For those of you who still have yet to purchase gold and are cringing at its current price surge to around $900 per ounce, there are some hopeful signs to watch for. Although I do not think the bailouts and stimulus packages will be at all effective at solving the financial crisis in the long run (a topic Slapstick Politics will continue to address), I do expect them to produce a short term boost in confidence in the near future. The strange aura of hope that the Obama administration has coming into office will assist this as well. There may also be another period of deleveraging in the near future. In either scenario, several investment specialists speculate that the price of gold could plummet back down to $650-700 per ounce. If that happens, it would be a wonderful time to purchase. Before the central banks have completed their efforts at quantitative easing, most gold investment experts are estimating the price of gold could rise to anywhere from $1,500-5,000 per ounce. The Ludwig von Mises Institute goes quite a bit further, speculating that gold could climb to almost $10,000 per ounce. While I tend to lean toward the more conservative estimates, gold continues to provide the best possible protection against the inflation and devaluation the central banks of the world are now foisting upon us in what is perhaps the greatest theft of wealth in history.

Rocky Mtn Alliance Blog Talk Radio at 8:30 PM: Jan Tyler, Sen. Greg Brophy

by Ben DeGrow | 8:00 am, January 27, 2009

Tune in starting at 8:30 PM local Mountain Time this evening for the 11th edition of Rocky Mountain Alliance Blog Talk Radio, the third of 2009. Tonight’s scheduled guests are locally-based elections expert Jan Tyler and state senate assistant minority leader Greg Brophy (R-Wray).

Don’t forget. If you miss the live broadcast of tonight’s show, you [...]

keep looking »

Featured Posts

• Judge Rules Americans Can Be Forced to Testify Against Themselves

  In order to protect our rights, our security must be protected. In order to protect our security, our rights must be invaded. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

• World Economic Forum in Switzerland: Global Elites Celebrating Hypocrisy
• SCOTUS decision on warrantless GPS surveillance produces an expected friend of privacy
• You didn’t want your Fifth Amendment rights, anyway, did you?
• Keynesian Economists Finally Catch Up and Agree: China to Have Hard Landing
• The Beauty of Private Property—from China?
• Regime Uncertainty, Regulatory Surge, and Unemployment Numbers