Ron Paul Congressional Hypocrite

Congressman Ron Paul is bad for America on so many levels. There were the anti-black/ anti-Semitic Newsletters which were published under his name (which he claimed he never read). And yes there were those really whacko public statements like; the federal reserve was behind Watergate, that Lincoln was wrong to push us into a Civil War over slavery, or his assertion that condemning the HAMAS terrorist rocket attacks promotes violence. But those items only suggest that the Texas Republican Congressman is a bigot as well as a bit of a lunatic, which not bad by today’s congressional standards.

On top of all that, Congressman Paul is a hypocrite.

Ron Paul is believed to be a “fiscal conservative” and if you ask him he will tell you that he has never voted for an earmark. That statement is 100% correct. What Paul does is to make sure that the earmarks he wants are put into a bill, and then he votes against the bill. Its the best of all possible worlds. He gets to bring home the bacon on a local basis and makes the anti-earmark claim on a national basis.

For example in last year's 111th Congress, Ron Paul sponsored or co-sponsored 17  earmarks totaling almost $24 Million dollars

During the 2009 Fiscal Paul sponsored or co-sponsored 23 earmarks totaling almost $81  million dollars. That's almost $105 million in earmarks over two years. Can you imagine if he wasn't a fiscal conservative?


In 2009 Paul appeared on Neil Cavuto’s Fox News show to defend his earmarks.
If you cannot see video below click here

CAVUTO:Congressman, the rap is that you’re a porker, that — that a lot of pork, $73 million-plus, went to your district. Is that true?

REP. RON PAUL, R-TEXAS: Well, it might be. But I think you’re missing the whole point. I have never voted for an earmark. I voted against all appropriation bills. So, this whole thing about earmarks is totally misunderstood.

The Congressman believes that the earmarks are just fine as long as he is open about them. These earmarks may very well be legitimate programs, but by specifying the location and the recipient of the program there is no thought given to “is this the most efficient place to house this program?” Money can be sent to a place that does not have the best resources or personnel to implement the earmark, causing a program to be more expensive than if it were done in someone elses district.

Paul may be very transparent about the hypocrisy of requesting an earmark then voting against the bill (because he knows it will pass), but his twisted logic doesn’t make it any less hypocritical.

Whenever I post something negative about Ron Paul (which is just about every time I post about him), I get the NASTIEST comments and emails. He doesn’t have a lot of supporters but those that do are very well organized and support him do so with a passion. The problem is Ron Paul does not represent himself truthfully. Along with his history of being a “drooling crazy” type and a bigot, the man is the typical Washington DC spin-master, saying one thing but doing another. He has a good fiscal script but frankly we have all seen that movie before and it got old a long time ago.

Dana Milbank Speaks of Shanda (Embarrassment) But Acts Like Just Another Progressive Schmednrik (Stupid Person)

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank tends to use an unusual barometer to select his topics.  He likes to write about subjects for which he has a very strong opinion, but very little knowledge. His latest column, Joe Lieberman joining Glenn Beck: a shanda proves my point.  Unfortunately Milbank would not know a shanda (Yiddish for embarrassment), if one jumped up kissed him on the lips and wished him a gut morgan. (good morning).

The purpose of this column was to criticize Senator Joe Lieberman for joining Glenn Beck for his August rally in Jerusalem called "Restoring Courage."

“I’d love to participate,” Lieberman confirmed when The Post’s Felicia Sonmez found him in a Capitol hallway. “It’s just going to be a rally to support Israel and the U.S.-Israel relationship.”

This nearly caused me to plotz [faint].

Notice how cleverly Milbank stuck a Yiddish word into his column to prove his Jewish "street cred?"

Joe Lieberman, first Jew on a presidential ticket, was embracing Beck, the leading purveyor of anti-Semitic memes in the mass media. One of the most visible Jews in America was making common cause with a man who invoked apocalyptic Christian theology in promoting his rally in Israel.

I admire Lieberman, and I’ve defended him over the years when he defied party and faction. But if he shares a stage with this creature, he will surrender the decency that has defined his public life.

Its interesting that Milbank uses Yiddish to establish his Jewish "street cred", but calls him the leading purveyor of anti-Semitic memes" If Milbank truly wants to prove his Jewishness, perhaps he should learn the concept of, "motzi shem ra"is the spreading of malicious lies," which according to the Rabbis is a severe sin. With this comment, Milbank is showing he buys into the George Soros/ Media Matters strategy of trying to destroy Glenn Beck by branding him as an anti-Semite (the history of this strategy is outlined here).

For those of you who are not familiar with the Beck rally allow me to present this explanation.

Israel is in the most precarious position she has faced since the 1967 War. Palestinian terrorists are on three of its borders, Fatah in Judea and Samaria,  Hamas in Gaza,  Hezbollah in Lebanon. Adding to the threat is that the Syrian regime is  facing collapse, so it is tying to divert its people's attention from hating it leaders to hating Israel, Egypt is becoming radicalized and most of the parties with potential to twin the next election and take over leadership of the country are promising to tear up the Camp David treaty. And Iran, close to developing the capability to send a nuclear warhead into Tel Aviv continues to threaten to wipe the Jewish State off the map.

All this is happening in the background of a United States President, who's policies are the most anti-Israel in the short 63-year history of the Jewish State. Let's face it, Israel is more isolated today than she has ever been.

The purpose of Beck's Restoring Courage rally in Jerusalem in August is to show the world that good people of all faiths from across the world are standing with Israel.

It is time for us to courageously stand with Israel.

“I invite you to join me in Israel this summer to stand together and show the world what living a life of faith and honor really means. I invite you to join me in my quest to Restore Courage,” Glenn said.

Honesty, it would be nice if American Jewish Organizations created such a rally, but unfortunately most Jewish leaders in this country are more concerned with protecting the President's progressive agenda no matter what, than protecting Israel, which is not only the Jewish homeland, but the United State's biggest ally in the Middle East. But neither religious heritage nor the best interests of the United States are as important to most of these Jewish leaders as is reelecting Barack Obama and maintaining political power. Beck is throwing his rally partially because American Jewish leadership does not have the guts to do it themselves.

Milbank on the other hand feels that Beck's religion should eliminate him from leading such a rally:

It’s nice that Beck wants to defend Israel before the United Nations attempts in September to create a Palestinian state. But this support comes with an asterisk. Beck’s descriptions of his event as a gathering and a restoration echo his Mormon faith’s theology: there will be a “Gathering of Scattered Israel” in which Jews return to the Holy Land and are converted to Christianity as part of “the restoration of all things” and the Second Coming.

Hey Mr. Plotzing Shanda, did you know that Jewish theology is something very similar? In fact the tenth blessing of the Amidah prayer Jews recite every day is called, Kibbutz Galuyot ingathering of exiles :

"Sound the great shofar for our freedom and raise a banner to gather our exiles and unite us together from the four corners of the earth. Blessed are You, LORD, who regathers the scattered of His people Israel."

The sounding of the Shofar part is all about the coming of the Messiah (Jews believe the Messiah has not come yet and when he does will be a regular man). With his comment about Beck's religion is he saying that all Christians should not have freedom of religion in Israel or just Mormons?   Or maybe he believes Jewish practice should be banned  also, because he criticizes Beck for quoting a Jewish prophet.

Announcing his event on the radio last month, Beck invoked “the words of Ezekiel” – a prophet associated with end times theology – and said: “There are people who will say, ‘oh you are crazy, that’s not going to happen. People have been saying this is Ezekiel for 5,000 years, yadda yadda yadda.’ I have no idea if these are the Times. I just know that the old hatreds are starting up, and God will not hold us blameless. I choose to stand and be counted.”

....Beck assumed a Messianic role: “The peace that is promised comes from standing in the place where He asks us to stand. I believe I have been asked to stand in Jerusalem.” He predicted his gathering would send “a global shockwave. It will ripple across the earth.”

Mainstream Mormonism has de-emphasized this notion of a literal gathering of Jews in Israel, but megalomaniacal Beck sees value in it.

So Dana Milbank a Jew who based on his writing knows very little about Judaism, is now also an expert on the Mormon religion also (Note to Milbank: If you went to Broadway  to see  Book of Mormon, I hate to break this to you, but it is a work of fiction).

Beck is not Milbank's only Israel related target.  Another frequent target of the progressive WAPO writer is Israeli Prime Minster Binyamin Netanyahu.  For example after Obama's Middle East speech earlier this month, where he unilaterally called for negotiations to start with the 1948 armistice lines, Milbank criticized the President, not for abandoning an ally but because criticizing Israel will generate more support for Netanyahu.

... Obama bungled his Middle East speech. He unwittingly strengthened Israeli hawks such as Netanyahu and made the already remote prospect of peace that much more distant.

Milbank goes on to describe the reaction to Bibi's speech to AIPAC and Congress by his Israeli au pair, Inna who he describes as a moderate who was suspicious of the uncompromising Netanyahu, the episode turned her into a supporter.

She’s aware that Netanyahu isn’t about to strike a peace deal. After she listened on Tuesday to Netanyahu’s list of requirements for a Palestinian state — a list one Palestinian official called a “declaration of war” — she knew it was a nonstarter. “I can’t imagine it on a map,” she said.

Its interesting that Milbank is upset that Inna has become a Bibi fan, he does not argue against the President's plan, only Inna's reaction. He talks about the Palestinian reaction to Netanyahu's speech but ignores the fact that the Palestinians (even President Abbas who is considered a "moderate") refuse to accept Israel as a Jewish State and Obama refuses to push them toward that acceptance.

So what is a Shanda? Well, the fact that Senator Joe Liberman or any American Jew or not joins Glenn Beck in Jerusalem is not a shanda (if I could afford it, I would be there).  What is a shanda is the fact that the leadership of major American Jewish organizations are too cowardly to stand up to a progressive president and join the Beck rally).

What is also a shanda is a Washington Post columnist trying to establish his Jewish "street cred" by using Yiddish when he has no real idea about what Judaism is all about, uses progressive talking points to smear someone who is doing what those Jewish Leaders should be doing, protects the most anti-Israel President in history while falsely disparaging an Israeli Prime Minster.  The fact that Dana Milbank acts the part of balmalocha (Yiddish for expert) regarding Judaism, Mormonism, and Israel when he is only a partisan progressive schmednrik (Yiddish for stupid person) that is a shanda.

WARNING: The Double Dip Recession Has Started

Fans of Seinfeld will remember that at a party, double-dipping is a mortal sin. Americans will soon be reminded that with an economy a double-dip is a prescription for real misery.

A "double-dip" recession, occurs when the economy has a recession, emerges from the recession for a short period of growth, and quickly falls back into recession. The recession of the early 1980s is an example of a W-shaped recession. The economy fell into recession from January 1980 to July 1980, shrinking at an 8 percent annual rate from April to June of 1980. The economy then entered a quick period of growth, and in the first three months of 1981 grew at an 8.4 percent annual rate. As the Federal Reserve under Paul Volcker raised interest rates to fight inflation, and economy dipped back into recession from July 1981 to November 1982.

If you enjoyed the double dip of the early 1980's then get excited because it certainly looks as if we are heading into the second half of a new double dip.

The release of durable goods purchase data by the Commerce Department is just one more indication that the country is on the precipice of  part two of a double dip recession.

The Commerce Department said on Wednesday durable goods orders dropped 3.6 percent, worse than economists' expectations for a 2.2 percent fall. March's orders were revised up to 4.4 percent from a 4.1 percent increase.

While durable goods orders are extremely volatile, details of the report were the latest in a series to indicate the economy remains trapped in the soft patch.

"It's another modestly disappointing data point in a long series of slightly disappointing data points that we've gotten in the last month," said Fred Dickson, chief market strategist at D.A. Davidson & Co. in Lake Oswego, Oregon.

Its not just durable goods, the housing market continues to wallow in record lows. Also released today was the news that driven by the lack of buyers, the price of new homes continued to deflate.

The economy's sluggish tone was underscored by a separate report showing a decline in home prices in March. The Federal Housing Finance Agency's home price index fell 0.3 percent in March from February. It declined 5.8 percent from a year-ago.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said recovery in the housing market had a long way to go.

"We've got several more years to go. Again just realistically I think it's going to take time still to heal that," Geithner told Politico in a live interview.

And don't forget about unemployment, in February new unemployment claims fell to a three-year-low (but still unacceptable) 375,000. From there began to rise to the point where in April that weekly figure was back up to 475,000, it now sits at 409,000.

The straw that broke the camels back sending the economy back into a downward spiral is the price of oil. The good news is that according to the US government during the past two years the price of  regular grade gas has declined by eleven cents. The bad news is that the new price, $3.89/gallon is still $.165 higher than it was at the beginning of April, $1.06 higher than last year at the same time, and almost two and a half times what it was when Barack Obama took office.

According to Lazard Capital Markets, this spike is reminiscent of the spike we saw in 2008, which contributed to the recession we are still trying to dig out of.

Oil prices likely to go higher but entering demand destruction range; time to get more cautious. In contrast to the 2008 superspike, where oil prices spiked on runaway emerging market demand, the latest spike has been driven by supply issues as Middle East instability worsens. With unrest spreading from Egypt to Libya and Oman (and concern over possible unrest in Saudi Arabia), we believe oil prices could go significantly higher from current levels. Our price elasticity models indicate oil prices could spike to $160+/Bbl if we lost all Libyan production and one half of Saudi production.

That said, we are near levels where the market begins to worry about negative impacts on the economy (~ 5% of global GDP), which we believe warrants a more selective investment stance based on our analysis of the prior oil price spike cycle in 2008.

Since this scenario is somewhat different, being based not on demand but on supply, it is unsure whether or not it will have the same impact. But if you're looking at the oil price just in terms of GDP, we're nearing the point where things could turn ugly.

This particular oil spike may end up being different than the one in 2008, but facts also prove that  every rescission we have had since the mid-1970s has had an accompanying spike in oil prices.

Economist Jeffrey Rubin said in 2008:

Curiously, an over-500% increase in the real price of oil gets virtually ignored as a culprit behind today’s economy, eclipsed by the ongoing crisis in financial markets. Yet the run-up in real oil prices this cycle is over twice the spike in oil prices that occurred during the first or second OPEC oil shock. And those oil shocks produced two of the deepest recessions in the entire post-war period, including the 1980-82 double dip.

The price of oil influences more than how you heat your house or drive your car.  Since most manufacturing uses oil in at least some of their manufacturing process, even if it just to get product to the market. Basic food items are already in an inflationary period,  this oil spike will makes it worse. What may end up being exactly the same as 2008 is that people will have to choice between bank payments and basic staple items whose costs were driven up by their energy costs.

So what is the Obama administration doing to retard the increase in costs? According to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee absolutely nothing.

Earlier this week they issued a scathing report about the nation's energy saying in part that the President has deliberately created policies which would cause energy prices to rise.

"The United States has the largest reserves in the world—resources that can provide good paying American jobs and fuel our economic expansion. But standing between that energy and U.S. consumers is an obstacle course of government red tape, regulation, delays and obfuscations," Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) said. He pointed to statements by President Obama and Energy Secretary Chu about intentionally raising energy costs for Americans and how these goals are being implemented throughout the government.

One of the Obama administration's first moves was to cancel contracts to exploit our shale oil reserves:

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has canceled leases for energy exploration on 77 parcels of federal land in Utah, confirming that this White House is indeed a Small Oil administration.  

The previous administration, which was not beholden to environmental special interests and seemed to understand the importance of energy, had released 130,000 acres of largely uninhabited — and uninhabitable — land for oil and gas exploration.

Some of the parcels are in or near the Green River Formation, an oil-rich region in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming that has the largest known oil shale deposits in the world, holding from 1.5 trillion to 1.8 trillion barrels of crude.

As the United States continues to struggle through what is at best a weak, jobless recovery we are approaching the next economic crisis caused by higher oil prices. This crises may have had its start from the fear that the "Arab Spring" will cut off oil supplies but our President continues to put roadblocks in front of the only solution to this and the series of oil crises we have had since 1973--- drilling for the oil we have.