Ryan’s "Path to Prosperity" Budget Proposal Cuts Big But is it Enough?

by PerlStalker | 7:51 pm, April 5, 2011

The GOP “Path to Prosperity” 2012 budget has been released in all it’s glory. Let’s let Paul Ryan set the stage.

I’ve embedded the entire plan below. There’s a summary up on the House Budget Committee’s web site. That summary is, as you might expect, light on details. Let’s start with Cato’s Chris Edwards’ analysis posted at National Review.

As a first step toward budget sanity, Ryan proposes further cuts to discretionary spending beyond those currently being debated. However, his main focus is on transforming the so-called entitlements. He would transition Medicare from the current Soviet-style system to one based on consumer choice. Instead of a system based on payments to health-care providers, new retirees would receive a “premium support” payment to buy a private insurance plan of their own choosing.

This gets the Federal government out of the health insurance racket. Rather than competing against the private insurance industry and driving out of business, Ryan’s plan allows people to chose their own provider. Seniors will be able to chose the plans that best fit their needs instead of being shoehorned into a one-size-fits-all (none?) government program.

For Medicaid, food stamps, and other federal-state aid programs, the Ryan plan embraces block grants. The states would receive a fixed pot of money, but be given more flexibility on program design. That would end incentives for states to over-expand their programs with “free” federal dollars. Block granting was the successful approach of welfare reform in 1996, and it should be warmly received by today’s large group of conservative governors.

As much as I would like to see the end of all Federal spending on entitlements, this is the next best thing. States get to design plans that work best for the needs of the state. Remember, different states have different demographics. Those with a younger population might design their plans differently than a state with a aging population. The block grants, as Edwards mentions, would also encourage states to be as efficient with their entitlement spending as possible.

Also included in the plan is a framework to eliminate most of the loopholes and other craziness from the tax code. Most of the details are supposed to be worked out by the House tax-writing committee. It’s unfortunate that Ryan’s plan doesn’t go all the way to a Flat Tax but it’s a lot better than the tangled mess we have now.

Moving over to the Cato Institute’s own site, Edwards compares Ryan’s plan with Obama’s budget and makes a few more observations about the size, or lack thereof, of some of the cuts. Notable among the cuts are cuts to farm subsidies. That’s a big win if we’re ever going to eliminate all government subsidies.

Geoff, over at Ace of Spades, has his own take on the bill. Go read it and take a look at the pretty picture comparing Ryan’s proposal to the Federal Debt Commission’s plan and Obama’s proposal. The gist of it is that Ryan’s plan is a good start. It should for them framework for a many more years of cuts.

I have to agree with Geoff here. Ryan’s plan sets us on the path to a balanced budget but doesn’t actually balance the budget for close to 20 years. Edwards suggests pushing some of the reforms, such as the Medicare changes, forward sooner which would bring the savings closer and balance things out that much sooner.

It’s also worth noting that Ryan’s proposal hardly touches defense spending. I’ve mentioned it before. Not ever defense dollar is sacred. There are cuts there that can and should be made. For example, we should abandon this ridiculous attack on Libya, pull out of Afghanistan and finish the withdrawal from Iraq. Even if we make no other cuts, those moves will save millions of dollars. Assuming that Harry Reid even lets this come to the floor of the Senate, expect their to be amendments to cut defense spending. Hopefully, someone will propose an amendment to do something about your friendly neighborhood gropers at the TSA.

I’d like to close with Chris Edwards’ final paragraph in his post at National Review because I think he sets stage nicely for what’s to come.

Political leaders keep saying that we need an “adult conversation” on federal budget reforms. Republican Ryan has started that conversation, and now it is up to Democrats to put aside their childish rants about “extremism” and offer up their own plan to avert the coming fiscal disaster.

Updated 2011-04-05 22:16: A couple of things. First, the video above wasn’t showing up. That’s fixed now. Second, the Congressional Budget Office has their preliminary, long-term analysis of Ryan’s proposed budget. I think this is the analysis that Ryan mentions in the video. They show this plan not reaching a break even point until 2040. I don’t think America needs another 30 years of deficits. As I said before, it’s a good start.

Path To Prosperity FY2012

Wisconsin Ground Zero for state supreme court elections as progressives pursue power by seizing control of judicial branch

by CTBC Director | 4:11 pm, April 5, 2011

The “Colorado Model” progressive “Blueprint” is being aggressively exported to other states…
An essential element of the “Colorado Model” used to facilitate a “progressive” takeover of our state was missed in the eponymous Weekly Standard article (The Colorado Model by Fred Barnes, July 2008) and the otherwise excellent (and highly readable) book, The Blueprint (by former Rep. [...]

Education Next’s One-Two Punch for Effective Teaching, Productive Spending

by Eddie | 3:27 pm, April 5, 2011

The good experts at Education Next have come forward with a potent one-two punch on teacher quality with a relevant message for Colorado policy makers, particularly in a time when tightened budgets weigh heavy on some minds. Are they listening? ….
Part of the short-term solution to the K-12 budget situation is cutting unproductive spending in [...]

Citizens’ Budget at CU-Denver

by Jon Caldara | 1:07 pm, April 5, 2011

Fiscal Policy Center director Penn Pfiffner is at it again, spreading the good ideas inside our Citizens’ Budget project. This time he’s taking his presentation on the road and sharing it with an audience at the CU-Denver’s Anschutz Medical Campus downtown. We’d love for you to come out and enjoy a fantastic lunch presentation this [...]

Civil Unions Debate & the Beer Wars

by Jon Caldara | 11:20 am, April 5, 2011

*As seen last Friday on my show, Devil’s Advocate*
First up, a debate on civil unions in Colorado:

In the second half, we tackled the great beer debate raging here in Colorado:

Recall efforts in Wisconsin

by Al Maurer | 10:37 am, April 5, 2011

When they don’t vote the way you want them to, recall the legislators.

TV Reporters to Register with the Federal Government

by Ari Armstrong | 9:42 am, April 5, 2011

The following article by Linn and Ari Armstrong originally was published April 1 by Grand Junction Free Press.A menace stalks our society, contributing daily to panic and untimely death. Irresponsible television reporting whips the public into a passio…

Circular Logic on Gov’t Pensions

by Joshua Sharf | 8:22 am, April 5, 2011

In this morning’s Denver Post editorial, explaining why government employees should only temporarily be asked to take more partial responsibility for their own retirement, comes this remarkable claim: But it shouldn’t be a long-term fix. Shifting the makeup of the pension funds could adversely affect the financial soundness of PERA. That’s because employee and employer [...]

Goldstone says "oops"

by Rossputin | 7:02 am, April 5, 2011

On Friday, South African judge Richard Goldstone offered a half-hearted apology for and retraction of his 2009 “Goldstone Report,” a particularly damaging and libelous document accusing Israel of war crimes and “crimes against humanity” during Operation Cast Lead in late 2008.

Goldstone’s “oops,” given in a Washington Post op-ed, blames his jumping to the worst possible – and obviously wrong – conclusions on “Israel’s lack of cooperation with our investigation.” Had any nation but Israel been treated this way, the international community would have rightly castigated Goldstone and his report as propaganda rather than investigation.

Please read the entirety of my article about the import of the Goldstone Report and its author’s semi-retraction at the American Spectator web page:
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/04/05/goldstone-says-oops

Scenes From Lincoln’s Union Rally

by Joshua Sharf | 6:29 am, April 5, 2011

So why is the IBEW out there at a rally dominated by AFSCME and SEIU?

“Keep your government hands off my…government pension!”  Seriously, you can’t make this stuff up.

I wonder if he knows the history of the Davis-Bacon Act?

State insurance exchanges will only allow ObamaCare’s roots to grow, make repeal more difficult

by Brian T. Schwartz | 5:30 am, April 5, 2011

“Governors like [Georgia governor Nathan] Deal and [Louisiana governor Bobby] Jindal know that any exchange can only serve as fertilizer that will allow Obamacare’s roots to grow deeper into the soil – and making repeal more difficult.” – John Graham

Lower Your Expectations For Public Servants

by Mike Krause | 8:38 pm, April 4, 2011

As Colorado Springs voters head into a municipal election, the Colorado Springs Gazette’s reliably pro-free market, pro-liberty editorial page editor Wayne Laugesen reminds us all that “politicians can’t give you a life.”
We’re taught that elections choose leaders, which isn’t true at all. Elections choose public servants, who should have nominal roles in our lives — [...]

Ritter debating renewable energy

by completecolorado | 4:16 pm, April 4, 2011

Hope you had the chance to read Vincent Carroll’s excellent piece from April 2, “Ritter Drubbed in Green Debate.”
For those of you who may have been looking for a link, look no further.

Debate: Clean Energy Can Drive America’s Economic Recovery (iq2us.org) from Intelligence Squared US on Vimeo.
This link will take you to a home page [...]

Many Interesting Angles to Watch as Douglas County Voucher Pilot Rolls Out

by Eddie | 2:20 pm, April 4, 2011

Maybe it’s a little hometown Colorado bias at work here, but in my mind Douglas County vouchers is the education story of the year. I hope you didn’t think the story was essentially over once the Board adopted the program a few weeks ago. Because it’s not.
Now that the official policy for the pilot [...]

It isn’t over in Wisconsin

by Al Maurer | 9:23 am, April 4, 2011

The left goes down hard, and they’re not going to give up in Wisconsin.

VIDEO: Citizens’ Budget Sing Along

by Jon Caldara | 8:48 am, April 4, 2011

Who knew a song about the budget, taxes, spending, and policy making could be so much fun??

Please share our song, 50 Ways to Cut Colorado Spending and our Citizens’ Budget project.

Credit where credit is due

by Rossputin | 6:54 am, April 4, 2011

Like a medieval “doctor” telling an ignorant patient that his recovery was due to being bled by leeches, Barack Obama’s claims that our recent modest economic improvements flow from his economic policies aren’t – and shouldn’t be – fooling anyone (except perhaps reporters and other Democrats).

On Friday morning, the Department of Labor released the March employment data showing a gain in nonfarm payrolls of 216,000 jobs, and an unemployment rate of 8.8%, down 0.1% from February and down 1% since November.

N.Y. Times reporter Jackie Calmes, no partisan she, offered this hopeful analysis: “[A]s the unemployment rate ticked down, the hopes of Mr. Obama and his party ticked up: perhaps by the approaching election year they could claim vindication for the stimulus policies Democrats have enacted, or at least dodge the sort of blame that Republicans so effectively stuck them with last November in the midterm elections.”

Please read the rest of my article on why the economy has had modest improvement lately and where the political credit will and should be placed:

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/04/04/withholding-credit

Amendment for ObamaCare waiver stalls Colo. Health Insurance Exchange, SB 11-200

by Brian T. Schwartz | 5:30 am, April 4, 2011

Reps. Amy Stephens and Shawn Mitchell stall the CO health insurance exchange bill (SB 11-200) with amendment that requires a waiver from ObamaCare mandates before exchange can be implemented.

If low-income Coloradans spend big bucks on booze, candy, & movies, they can afford higher Medicaid copays

by Brian T. Schwartz | 10:09 pm, April 3, 2011

Are Colorado Medicaid recipients spending hundreds of dollars on candy, booze, cigarettes, and movies while the state forces taxpayers to fund their medical care? Yes, suggests the 2009 Consumer Expenditure Survey.

The must-see re-election “ad” for Pres. Obama

by Kelly Maher | 8:36 pm, April 3, 2011

Pres. Obama’s team is said to be preparing the announcement that he will run for re-election in 2012. But the National Republican Senatorial Committee may have beaten him to the punch with a Web ad that’s been viewed more than 500,000 times in a few days. Take a look… Related Posts:Sen. Bennet and Pres. Obama: [...]

Healthcare Exchanges don’t fare well in Oklahoma

by Al Maurer | 3:55 pm, April 3, 2011

Obamacare appears to have nine lives–or is it a hockey mask and a chainsaw?

Backbone Radio, April 3, 2011: To exchange or not to exchange; energy lawsuit; helping Wisconsin

by Rossputin | 5:42 am, April 3, 2011

Audio archives for this show:

Segment 1 – Intro; Nancy Rumfelt of Liberty Watch about SB 200 and health care exchanges
Segment 2 – State Rep Amy Stephens on SB-200 and more
Segment 3 – Chris Jankowski of the Republican State Leadership Committee on the continuing battle in Wisconsin
Segment 4 – Paul Chesser of the American Tradition Institute on challenging Colorado’s Renewable Portfolio Standard
Segment 5 – Salena Zito of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on Wisconsin and the political implications of census data
Segment 6 – Steve Moore’s “A Nation of Takers, not Makers”; closing thoughts

From Ross Kaminsky:

Please join me for this Sunday’s edition of Backbone Radio on Newstalk 710 KNUS in Denver and 1460 KZNT in Colorado Springs from 5 PM to 8 PM.

In our first hour, we’ll hear from both sides of the debate over Colorado Senate Bill 200 (SB 200), titled the Colorado Health Benefit Exchange (text HERE), sponsored in the state’s House of Representatives by House Majority Leader Amy Stephens and in the State Senate by Democrat Betty Boyd.  The measure would, among other things, allow the creation of a Colorado-based health insurance exchange free from the tentacles of Obamacare.  Or would it be?

The politics around the issue have been swirling, especially in Republican circles with some Tea Party activists derisively calling the plan “AmyCare” and arguing that it plays in to the Obama Administration’s hands.  Amy Stephens vehemently disagrees with that view but understands the optics of the situation, with the word “exchange” perhaps fatally poisoned by its use by Obamacare supporters.

So, we’ll hear first from Nancy Rumfelt of Liberty Watch who opposes SB 200 and then we’ll speak with Representative Stephens about her view of the bill, the politics around it, and the likely outcome.

In our second hour, we’ll switch gears and talk about national politics, particularly the ongoing battles over public sector union “rights” and costs and the political impact of these enormous, perhaps nation-changing fights against the fiscal leeches sucking the blood from our states’ budgets.

Of course, the biggest fight so far has been in Wisconsin where Republicans appear to have won despite the attempt of a far-left judge to stop implementation of the law which restricts aspects of public sector unions’ collective bargaining.  But now that the story is off the front pages, that doesn’t mean that the fight is over. Indeed, the bigger fight is just starting with union activisits using the recall provisions in Wisconsin law to cause recall elections against Republican state senators. (There will also be recall elections for a few of the Democrat state senators.)

One of the few out of state groups helping the Republicans (there are quite a handful helping the Democrats) is the Republican State Leadership Committee, whose president, Chris Jankowski, will be our guest to talk about his group’s efforts.  (A few days ago, I made a modest donation to the RSLC to help their efforts in Wisconsin.)

Next, we’lll be breaking some important Colorado news when we talk to Paul Chesser of the American Tradition Institute’s Environmental Law Center which is filing a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Colorado’s Renewable Portfolio Standard, based upon evidence that the state’s law violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Specifically ATI’s complaint argues that because the state mandate provides economic benefits to Colorado’s renewable electricity generators that are not available to out-of-state power generators, and because the state imposes burdens on interstate electricity generators that are not balanced by the benefits to Colorado and its citizens, that the RPS violates the Commerce Clause. The complaint also states that the law promotes renewable sources and discriminates against lower cost, more reliable energy generation from out of state suppliers, which is unconstitutional.

In our third hour, we’ll talk more about the public sector union battles before turning to the fascinating issue of US Census results and their political implications with one of my favorite columnists, Salena Zito of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.  Salena’s article entitled “Wisconsin recall battle: 2012 now” was what alerted me to the existence and work of the RSLC and she’s currently writing an article on the census-related issues which will be, as all her writing is, interesting and insightful.  We’re fortunate to be able to have her on the show for half an hour.

Please join me by listening to (and calling in to) this week’s Backbone Radio program from 5 PM to 8 PM on 710 AM KNUS in Denver and 1460 AM KZNT in Colorado Springs.

If you’re not in range of the radio waves, you should be able to listen to the show online by clicking HERE.

I hope you’ll actively participate in the conversation with me: Call the studio at 303 696 1971.

Senate Bill 11-200: The Colorado Health Benefit Exchange

by Brian T. Schwartz | 5:30 am, April 3, 2011

Colo. SB 11-200 “proposes to create an unaccountable bureaucracy.” “The [Exchange] Board could … support legislation compelling exchange membership, & payment of its fees/taxes on health insurance. … the bill allows the Exchange Board to create a monopoly insurance broker w/ unlimited taxing power. “

No, It’s Not a Revenue Problem

by Jon Caldara | 8:30 am, April 2, 2011

We can always count on our good friend John Andrews to give us some good press – this time on the opinion pages of the Denver Post. Last week John asked a great question, “Who says Colorado has a revenue problem?” In the article, John mentions our work with the Citizens’ Budget project. In it, [...]

Steve Moore: A nation of takers

by Rossputin | 7:17 am, April 2, 2011

Writing at the Wall Street Journal where he serves on the Editorial Board, my friend Steve Moore has written what I think is one of the most important pieces of intellectual ammunition I’ve read in a very long time.  The statistics Moore quotes are shocking, even for those of us who consider ourselves aware of how much of a Leviathan our government has become.

Here’s Steve’s article, and here’s the LINK to the original:

If you want to understand better why so many states—from New York to Wisconsin to California—are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, consider this depressing statistic: Today in America there are nearly twice as many people working for the government (22.5 million) than in all of manufacturing (11.5 million). This is an almost exact reversal of the situation in 1960, when there were 15 million workers in manufacturing and 8.7 million collecting a paycheck from the government.

It gets worse. More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers. Nearly half of the $2.2 trillion cost of state and local governments is the $1 trillion-a-year tab for pay and benefits of state and local employees. Is it any wonder that so many states and cities cannot pay their bills?

Every state in America today except for two—Indiana and Wisconsin—has more government workers on the payroll than people manufacturing industrial goods. Consider California, which has the highest budget deficit in the history of the states. The not-so Golden State now has an incredible 2.4 million government employees—twice as many as people at work in manufacturing. New Jersey has just under two-and-a-half as many government employees as manufacturers. Florida’s ratio is more than 3 to 1. So is New York’s.

Even Michigan, at one time the auto capital of the world, and Pennsylvania, once the steel capital, have more government bureaucrats than people making things. The leaders in government hiring are Wyoming and New Mexico, which have hired more than six government workers for every manufacturing worker.

Now it is certainly true that many states have not typically been home to traditional manufacturing operations. Iowa and Nebraska are farm states, for example. But in those states, there are at least five times more government workers than farmers. West Virginia is the mining capital of the world, yet it has at least three times more government workers than miners. New York is the financial capital of the world—at least for now. That sector employs roughly 670,000 New Yorkers. That’s less than half of the state’s 1.48 million government employees.

Don’t expect a reversal of this trend anytime soon. Surveys of college graduates are finding that more and more of our top minds want to work for the government. Why? Because in recent years only government agencies have been hiring, and because the offer of near lifetime security is highly valued in these times of economic turbulence. When 23-year-olds aren’t willing to take career risks, we have a real problem on our hands. Sadly, we could end up with a generation of Americans who want to work at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

The employment trends described here are explained in part by hugely beneficial productivity improvements in such traditional industries as farming, manufacturing, financial services and telecommunications. These produce far more output per worker than in the past. The typical farmer, for example, is today at least three times more productive than in 1950.

Where are the productivity gains in government? Consider a core function of state and local governments: schools. Over the period 1970-2005, school spending per pupil, adjusted for inflation, doubled, while standardized achievement test scores were flat. Over roughly that same time period, public-school employment doubled per student, according to a study by researchers at the University of Washington. That is what economists call negative productivity.

But education is an industry where we measure performance backwards: We gauge school performance not by outputs, but by inputs. If quality falls, we say we didn’t pay teachers enough or we need smaller class sizes or newer schools. If education had undergone the same productivity revolution that manufacturing has, we would have half as many educators, smaller school budgets, and higher graduation rates and test scores.

The same is true of almost all other government services. Mass transit spends more and more every year and yet a much smaller share of Americans use trains and buses today than in past decades. One way that private companies spur productivity is by firing underperforming employees and rewarding excellence. In government employment, tenure for teachers and near lifetime employment for other civil servants shields workers from this basic system of reward and punishment. It is a system that breeds mediocrity, which is what we’ve gotten.

Most reasonable steps to restrain public-sector employment costs are smothered by the unions. Study after study has shown that states and cities could shave 20% to 40% off the cost of many services—fire fighting, public transportation, garbage collection, administrative functions, even prison operations—through competitive contracting to private providers. But unions have blocked many of those efforts. Public employees maintain that they are underpaid relative to equally qualified private-sector workers, yet they are deathly afraid of competitive bidding for government services.

President Obama says we have to retool our economy to “win the future.” The only way to do that is to grow the economy that makes things, not the sector that takes things.

Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for The Wall Street Journal editorial page.

Help Big Govt Gary Slim Down

by Ben DeGrow | 4:13 pm, April 1, 2011

You can help Big Govt Gary do some serious slimming down. We’re talking about a very serious weight problem. Social Security pounds? Medicare bloat? Pentagon paunch? Check out this clever new video to get started:

The Case Against the Health Exchange

by Jon Caldara | 1:33 pm, April 1, 2011

Health Care Policy Center Director Linda Gorman lays out the case against Colorado having a state health benefit exchange program. The health exchange is of course, one plank in the sinking ship of ObamaCare.
In just a couple of pages, we believe Linda will convince you that, “Like ObamaCare pre-existing condition insurance, state exchanges are solutions [...]

A Petition Process Change of Heart?

by Jon Caldara | 1:06 pm, April 1, 2011

Maybe the special interests stacked against our petition rights have finally come around! Maybe they will do something about HB 1326 and revive our petition process…

APRIL FOOLS!

Falcon 49 School Bus Capitol Photo-Op: Serious About Tough Decisions Ahead?

by Eddie | 10:52 am, April 1, 2011

There are plenty of gag April’s Fools news stories floating out there this morning (my wishful-thinking favorite so far is Edspresso’s “Obama Administration Flips on School Vouchers”). But confusing as it may be, this story is legit: The same Falcon District 49 I lauded for taking a step towards more productive spending, the same district [...]

Operation Shinobi

by Rossputin | 10:21 am, April 1, 2011

April 1, 2011 – According to a high-ranking CIA official speaking on the condition of anonymity, the Obama Administration has made a radical and top-secret change in policy regarding the Middle East. Given authority by an Executive Order signed on Thursday, the CIA is inserting specially-trained former US Army Rangers and Navy SEALs into Arab nations across the Middle East and North Africa.

These teams, part of “Operation Shinobi”, are tasked with the assassination of any leader of a government or military across that region who is found by the CIA, and with concurrence of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the finding, to have ordered attacks on civilians which have resulted in the death of 50 or more unarmed protesters, bystanders, or others.

Members of the Shinobi teams must meet certain requirement, both of standard and unusual killing techniques, with an emphasis on being able to kill their targets with minimum chance of being detected or identified as Americans.  Each member must pass tests including:

• Hitting 8 out of 10 head-sized targets at a distance of 2 kilometers with an Accuracy International AW338 rifle using a .338 caliber Lapua Magnum cartridge,
• Hitting 8 out of 10 head-sized targets at a distance of 200 meters while swimming, using a silenced VSS Vintorez rifle, a choice made due its small size and the likelihood that, if found, it would not be assume to be an American’s weapon
• Hitting 9 out of 10 head-sized targets with an ultra-light titanium-niobium alloy throwing star with points tipped with a concentrated extract of alpha-Amanitin, extracted from a hybrid Amanita mushroom specially bred for deadliness of toxin in a secret CIA lab and greenhouse located in the vicinity of Morgantown, West Virginia.

Each form of weapon, including the throwing stars, will be fitting with an ultra-miniature video camera which will capture the wounding or killing of the target based on CIA information that several Arab rulers have, much as Saddam Hussein did, trained “doubles” to be seen or heard in place of the actual leader.  The captured video will be used to determine whether the wounded or killed target was indeed the intended target so that a dictator cannot vanish with the world believing he is dead, having simply sacrificed someone with the bad luck to look like that dictator.

According to the CIA official present at the discussions, President Obama was initially hesitant to agree to this program, which was first brought to him by an unnamed group of high-ranking female CIA officers called “The Gals” in intelligence circles.  Prior to their meeting with President Obama and National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, and clearly frustrated by much more than just this operation, the Secretary of State was being comforted by The Gals who were telling her that “at least the country is learning who should really have been our first ‘historic’ president.”

Upon implementation of Operation Shinobi, Moammar Gaddafi had already met the targeting criteria and, although we cannot confirm or even get a comment about operational specifics, it seems likely that Col. Gaddafi will soon find a dime-sized hole through his cerebrum or suffer an even more painful death if he does not soon agree to give up control of his nation. Leaders of Bahrain, though nominally allies of the US, might also have some concern.

Perhaps more interesting than the obvious risk to leaders of these nations is the implications for foreign military, police, and security force chiefs.  Particularly in Bahrain, where the US would be hesitant to assassinate a member of the ruling family, there would be far fewer qualms about the death of a nearly unknown but still powerful general.  When the first of these “I was just obeying orders” men collapses with a fatal wound from a gunshot that nobody heard, the rest will soon be weighing the risk of not obeying those orders versus the risk of obeying them, perhaps leading to a line of such men seeking asylum in neighboring countries.

As of the writing of this article, it remains unclear whether  the disclosure of the existence of Operation Shinobi is, from the administration’s point of view, an unwelcome leak or whether it is part of an intentional campaign to threaten various Arab (and, by extension in the future, non-Arab) tyrants against the use of violence against their own people.

Although the Obama Administration does not focus on cost savings in domestic federal spending, Barack Obama was in part convinced to go along with Operation Shinobi when he was told that a .338 Lapua Magnum cartridge made to long-range military sniper specifications costs less than $25, and that a successful operation – even if it takes two shots to kill the target – could thus save tens of millions of dollars in US military spending on ongoing operations to suppress the actions of someone like Gaddafi.  Obama then signed the secret Executive Order authorizing the operation before asking, “Hey, can we tax those bullets?”

A spokesman for Tea Party freshman member of Congress (and former Army infantry officer who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and is a Master Scuba Diver) Alan West (R-FL), when asked about West’s reaction to the operation, offered only “The Speaker of the House has been informed to expect Representative West to be occasionally unavailable for votes and out of cell phone range over the next two months.”

« go back — 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