Bailouts And Jobs - In India??

I had a pollster call me last night. From his accent I gathered it was coming from a phone bank far from our shores even though it was of political intent.

Actually, most of us who have computers and have had to call for technical support more often than not talk with someone who is fluent in English but not "American" English.

That brought to mind a recent Jim Hightower column berating a recent move by JP Morgan Chase.

It also made me want to reiterate my advice to seek out news wherever you can find it because in this day of cut backs too much is slipping through the cracks. Even network news is little more than Obama and a recap of the day's headlines. Cable news is totally skewed to the right or the left and papers are scant of content to say the least.

So here's the nitty gritty. Mr Hightower tells us we, the taxpayers, have poured $25 billion into Morgan Chase. What have they done with it? They've increased their outsourcing to India by 25% - to some $400 million!

Talk about unintended consequences! The government has slapped them with cost cutting goals. How better to do it then outsource more than they already have? It doesn't stop with JP Morgan Chase either. According to Business Week India's top tech firms are also bidding on at least three other $100 million contracts.

The 25-30% saved by outsourcing to India goes to the company; the workers in this country who have been replaced get nothing. Mr. Hightower makes one other point of note. Lower cost bank executives can also be found in India, but strangely, no one is looking for them! Is this how the bailout was intended to work? Somehow I doubt it, but as with other aspects of the bailouts, as well as the stimulus programs, it's being made up as they go. Has anyone seen concrete evidence that any of it is working?

The question is being asked if too much is happening all at once. My assessment at this point is yes. Program upon program is being introduced. The debt has gone beyond comprehension. Is it time to slow down and get the programs already in place working before adding to them? Forget that it has to all get done now because mid term election campaigning will take over next year. This is no way to run a country! I'd much rather see less done yet done well than piling the table so full it ultimately collapses.

I've said before and I'll no doubt repeat again, the stimulus and bailout programs have not been well thought out before the beginning of implementation. Slick rhetoric does not make it so. Just think about it. The claim that 95% of Americans who pay taxes will not see their taxes go up one dime. No. But they will see an increase preceded with the $ symbol. Everything from the local level on up where taxes are increased, be it on gas or cigarettes or alcohol or "fees" or "levies"; they are all tax increases!

Just who is minding the store? None of those Indians holding our outsourced jobs pay one cent of our taxes!

Let Me Be Frank, Barney!

Have you noticed that those who shout the loudest have the most to hide? Yep, Mr. Frank, I talking about you! You headed the committee which passed a bill giving Treasury Secretary Geitner broad control over salaries at bailout companies. Fortunately, good sense prevailed and it died.

Now you've taken it a step further with the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009" where you intend to penalize all employees of bailout companies by tying their pay to performance for as long us the bailout money remains unpaid. Retroactively yet!

Okay folks. It's time for another Dogwalk solution. No more automatic pay raises for Congress. Let's insist on a "pay for performance" scale for them. After all, it is tax payer money! Let's let the whole country rate each and every one of them, not just the people in their districts or states who might be swayed by pork.

How would Barney fare? Let's look at the mortgage mess which actually began back in the Carter administration when mortgage lenders were being accused of being racist. Pressured to make loans to minorities and those with bad credit, lenders began loosening their standards under threat of punishment by regulators. Government chartered mortgage lenders, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, encouraged this "sub prime" lending then bought up the questionable mortgages.

We all know what happened. The bubble burst but all the while Frank insisted Freddie and Fannie faced no financial crisis. Right. Also, all the while, he blamed the private sector for having gotten us into the mess. With a lot of arm twisting by the government.

Barney Frank is the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. A one time partner of Frank's was an executive at Fannie who helped develop many of the lending programs. During that time Frank blocked tough regulations on banking companies.

Okay. Frank has been in the House since 1981. He's had his fingers in a lot of pies and a go round with the House Ethics Committee over a sex scandal. Idaho's Larry Craig, not unfamiliar with such, led an attempt to have him expelled or censured over that episode. It failed but the House did vote 408 to 18 to reprimand him. Of course, as it goes in Washington, he won re-election several times over.

In the 28 years he's been in Congress I'm sure he has been on the right side of some issues. His constituents would probably give him a 10 on a scale of 10, but what would the public as a whole give him? If we can't have term limits why not hit them where it really hurts? In the pocketbook. I'm not a constituent, you see, and my rating would definitely be "sub prime"!

Obama - Messiah Or Dictator?

There is a difference between anger and worry. I've experienced too much of both lately as I watch the administration try to mend the financial crisis by trial and error.

Today, I'm halting the emotions at worry. Tomorrow it may well be back to full blown anger. I am extremely uncomfortable with the sanctions that are being heaped on corporations receiving bailout money without the ground rules being set at the get go.

Take for instance the exit of Rick Wagoner from GM. GM was to submit their reorganization plans by March 31. That's tomorrow. However, the "auto czar", who has no auto industry experience, decided it wasn't adequate. The President, on his own, told Wagoner if there was to be any chance for GM to get additional help he had to go. Did Obama have that right? Should he have that right?

Granted, the GM board should have removed Wagoner long ago. And yes, it's tax payer dollars being used to bail them out. But without preset rules and an arbitrary opinion from someone outside the industry, it makes Mr. Wagoner the scapegoat. For what? To make the administration look tough?

I listened to Obama say that for GM to go in a new direction it needed new leadership. Wagoner's number two took over. Is that new leadership?

Okay, there can be a lot of arguments for everything the administration is doing because of tax payer dollars. However, more and more it looks to be an attempt to change the way corporate America works and if so, you'll soon see us as a diminished nation even more than we already are.

The New York Times had a story which was even more frightening. They are considering regulating executive pay via regulation rather then legislation. This smacks of dictatorship.

Even worse, they are considering extending this practice to financial institutions not receiving bailout money and even to publicly traded companies.

Obama campaigned on regulation to give share holders a larger say in setting executive pay. Well, that's the responsibility of the board. If the shareholders don't like what the board is doing they can vote them out. The hitch here is the shareholders have to exercise their right and vote their proxy's if they can't attend the annual meetings.

Just like politics. You have to vote to have a say. The responsibility, in that respect, falls on the shareholders, not the executives.

"What about corporate greed?" you may ask. There is far too much of it to be sure. But if what the administration is attempting doesn't shape them up nothing will. They will just move off shore.

Speaking of greed, how about the greed for power? To have the ultimate authority to reshape an entire country into a vision not necessarily sanctioned by the people? To dictate what CEO's can and cannot do while giving Unions a pass? By doing an end run around Congress?

Think about it. We criticized the Bush administration mightily for all Bush's signing statements stating he was going to ignore parts of passed legislation. We criticized Bush for ignoring the Constitution on many occasions. We criticize the Christian Conservatives for trying to hijack the government so they can force their agenda on those of us who don't agree with it.

I'm worried. Oh, yes I am. I see our President running around the country and the world as head cheerleader while in truth the team is making up the rules as they go. Who's our cheerleader and how can we win? Without a say, we can't.

Pitch Forks and Forked Tongues

For awhile now I've been suggesting the recipients of the "bailout bonuses" aren't necessarily the bad guys. This morning on Meet the Press David Gregory repeatedly asked Timothy Geitner, why, if he knew of the bonus plan at it's inception when he was still with the Fed, did he not object rather than feigning anger so far after the fact. Geitner never answered the question. No surprise there. Never stray from the administration's talking points.

As distasteful as the whole AIG mess has been, it is but the tip of the iceberg and shows what a bunch of hypocrites we have holding the reins. According to Newsweek , five major TARP recipients made campaign contributions to members of committees overseeing the TARP program since the administration came to power. You know, the ones in front of the cameras expressing their outrage.

Two of those receiving the contributions are House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and GOP Whip Eric Cantor. This is the first real sign of bipartisanship I've seen!

The rationale is that this money doesn't actually come from the company, but rather it's employees. This is how it works. The company has a political action committee (PAC) to which the employees are strongly advised to contribute. Therefore it is employee money. The problem, as I see it, is the employee has no say as to where the money goes. To me that makes it, technically, a corporate contribution of employee funds.

Hoyer's office said accepting such contributions is legal and "policy". Pelosi and Frank have said they won't take money from TARP recipients but, the article goes on, House fundraisers have said that "down the road" they will resume accepting them. Right. As soon as it's back under the radar!

This is not how I envisioned the pay back would work. I would have thought the money would go back into the treasury coffer; not campaign coffers! It indicates to me we do indeed have the best Congress money can buy!

Intimidation Is Not Justice

When I was a youngster, there were two things I was forbidden to discuss with my friends. My mother's age and my dad's salary. They were no one's business. Nor were they mine for I knew neither.

When I learned New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo threatened to make the names of the AIG bonus recipients public it was one more step too far. His rationale was that the public had a right to know where their tax dollars went. They already do. They went to bonuses. It need go no further. The recipients had no part in determining the bonuses.

He finally thought better of it. Considering the recipients had been instructed to call 911 should they feel at all threatened, to watch out for anyone who might seem suspicious around their place of business or home and to wear nothing that would indicate that they were an employee. Of course there was also the e-mailed suggestion that these recipients "should be executed with piano wire around their necks."

It seems this whole fiasco is surrounded by people who are trying to further their careers, like Mr. Cuomo, or save their careers like Geitner and Bernanke, Dodd and Frank.

This administration and those entwined with it are beginning to bear an uncomfortable resemblance to the Bush administration's governing by fear. Bush relieved us of too many of our rights in the name of "security". The Obama administration is using the economic melt down to grab power.

Yes, we are suffering the consequences of bad management and greed but fear mongering to the point of turning us into frothing mobs of hatred is no way to solve the problem.

"We have nothing to fear but fear itself" no longer rings true. We well should fear those who instill it.

They Want What??

The current climate of the government going after everything and everybody represented by a three piece business suit and matching martini lunch reminds me of Japanese horror films where the monster emerges from murky depths and destroys everything in its path!

The monster in this case is a two headed one - one a Geitner head, the other a Bernanke. If this wasn't so serious it would be funny - just like the old Godzilla movies.

Here we have two men who were a part of the AIG bonus problem from the get go. Here we have two men who have been floundering for months, in way over their heads. Finally they tell us they have a solution. They had to tell us something before the demand for their heads really gets serious.

Buoyed by having come up with something, no one is yet sure exactly what, they've found themselves emboldened. Now they want the power to take over any financial institution they deem in need! They've got to be kidding! We don't even know if the "solution" they've come up with under duress is going to work. How the heck are they going to save others from themselves when they didn't even recognize the perils before them as they sat in on AIG strategy sessions!

The only positive I see in any of this is that they are asking for the power rather than seizing it like the Bushies did in the name of "security". Give them time, however, if Congress doesn't give them the authority they seek, they, too, may just seize it.

As I've said before and often, when the government gains too much power over the private sector, the private sector and we, the people, will lose. Yes, the private sector and we along with them are suffering mightily for mismanagement and greed. Who, however, in government has the slightest idea of how to manage such a business? Chris Dodd? Barney Frank?

Oh, stop. I can't stop laughing. Seriously though, who's next? Hmmm. How about the struggling airline industry? Do we want the government running them? Will they be able to take over, say a GE, because they have a financial branch? How many other large corporations do? Ford. Once they get their foot in the door watch out. They will spin it as a mandate from the people. Populism at its worst.

When those old monster movies were popular I loved watching them. I never dreamed I'd be living in the middle of one. The trouble with living it I'm finding, is those posing as the good guys either aren't or are the most inept hero's ever brought to light!

A Step Too Far!

According to the International Herald Tribune the Obama administration is going to seek an increase in oversight of executive pay.

Whoa! This is taking the current populist stance way too far. I can understand strict oversight of the companies who have accepted bailout money willingly, but for those whom those monies were forced on or those not involved at all, this is intrusion we will come to regret.

I think what's happening here is the general public is seeing the multi million dollar figures without knowledge of how large corporations conduct their business nor how executive level employees across the board are compensated. The administration is fast approaching European socialism where governments intrude in all things corporate.

I've read hundreds of blogs parroting the outrage of the dollar amounts of the bonuses while the populist are losing their jobs and homes. How many companies other than AIG are handing out similar bonuses? A lot. Is the public equally outraged at this? Are they even aware of it? Has it finally hit home that both Geitner and the Fed were aware of the AIG bonus plan before and complicit with it before the money was distributed? Has it come across that Senator Dodd, who denied putting the clause in the stimulus package allowing the bonus to be paid, did in fact put it in? That he lied? And that Geitner did too by not coming forward with this information?

Let's see where the outrage is for a few other things like the multi million dollar contracts athletes get, not to mention signing bonuses for untried players. How about the cost to tax payers when they're held hostage by team owners who want a new stadium or arena and won't put up the money themselves but threaten to pull the team? Where's the outrage from the people who will never make that kind of money nor get those bonuses nor even attend a game. A game! I won't even get into the money Hollywood puts out for trash! Where's the outrage? All the while this is happening people are still losing their jobs and their homes.

At the moment everything bailout is in a state of chaos. It reminds me a bit of the French Revolution when Marie Antoinette was saying, "Let them eat cake" as the people were starving. The people rebelled and aristocratic heads rolled. A parallel exists here by looking at how the web that has been spun is beginning to strangle those who wove it. That's why I suggested in yesterday's post it's time for Obama to scale back his own big picture agenda and get a handle on what in the grand scheme of things should be a relatively minor blip. Or does he really want this "revolution" to continue fomenting?

Obama should take note of Georges Danton, a revolutionist himself who fell out with Robespierre. He's noted for saying, as he went to meet Madam Guillotine, "La revolution devore ses enfantes." The revolution eats it's own children. What did he do that was so egregious to the more extreme of his own kind? He was not a fanatic and was capable of moderation and genuine reason.

This is how I view Obama. However, if he doesn't start leading, the more extreme segments of his own party as well as we, his people may begin a revolution he'll not be able to contain. Maybe now is the time for some heads to roll!

A Come Back When We Really Need One!

Man starts company, man loses company, man wins company back. A cliched romance of the best kind has occurred just when American entrepeneurialism most needs a boost!

How long ago was it when brand name retailers began disappearing from the American landscape? I can remember when Federated acquired the May company stores and brands changed forever. Marshall Fields, Lord and Taylor, Robinsons,The Bon Marche, Frederick and Nelson, Pittsburgh's Kaufmanns where I worked for a time when I was fresh out of college. Over the years it seems like everything became Macy's! Then came the downsizing and stores across the country closed.

Thinking back on this, it has been going on for years and has ultimately lead to the retail doldrums of today. Look at the names that have closed their doors just recently. Circuit City and Linen n' Things to name but two. Other specialty stores are in trouble. Ann Taylor and Talbots. Wow. Will everything end up being Macy's?

Nope. I was picking up a stack of catalogs to take out to the recycling box this morning and there sat Owner's Manuel No. 67! J. Peterman! "Wow!" I exclaimed to Hub, "Why are you throwing this out and when did they come back?" He responded with an disinterested shrug.

I remember how saddened I was when they ceased operations in 1999. Now they are back. Their catalog is iconic. It's worth getting just to read of the romance behind the clothes they carry. I even used to purchase from them though infrequently because it was expensive. The J. Peterman duster. I have the jacket length version hanging in my closet awaiting spring temperatures. It has worn like iron over the years.

What makes the story of their return even better is that the original owner has regained the rights! Good old fashioned American effort combined with some hard learned lessons has provided a most happy ending. The best part of all, the government and it's bailouts had nothing to do with it! Left to our own devices, the deserving and able will survive; those entities who lack those attributes should be allowed to fail. It isn't the brand name that's the problem, it's the people calling the shots, and as long as they remain in those positions nothing will change. Why prolong the inevitable?

How Many Tax Evaders Are Acceptable?

Here we go again! Headline on Yahoo News Trade nominee Ron Kirk agrees to pay back taxes! Yet he's the right person for the job.

What in the heck is going on? Everyone is complaining about the tax payer money the administration is pouring into businesses that should be allowed to fail, mortgages that people shouldn't have in the first place and programs that haven't been thought through as to the possible unexpected consequences. Nothing new here. It's politics. It's also known that we are actually borrowing this money from foreign countries, mostly China. Why? Could it be that too many tax payers aren't paying?

Okay, the tax code is confusing at best and it's easy for an individual to make mistakes. But what about the tax programs you buy to simplify the process? Plug in the numbers and walla, you've got your tax return. Are they flawed? Or all the tax preparation companies that have their Uncle Sams on the street corners to entice you in. Do they know what they're doing? And the professionals on a higher level who work with the Daschles of the world; do they not sit down with their clients to make sure everything is in order before submitting the return for signature? Or are these people, you know the tax payer who signs the return, truly - cheats? And if they are why are they being included in the administration under the guise that it's a "few minor issues"?

There has been much criticism about the bailout packages rewarding people for bad behavior. I believe it to be true but apparently I am wrong. Bad business decisions. Buying unaffordable homes and allowing it to be done. What the heck, those are but a few minor issues.

How can it be anything else when this is the standard applied to those who would serve in the administration? The return was prepared by a paid tax preparer. Right. Now you know where the buck really stops!

One Man's Pork Is Another's Bacon!

Kathleen Parker's column in today's Spokesman Review talked about how Bobby Jindal's Republican staff nearly did in his political ambitions by the way they framed him in his response to Obama's speech to Congress. As an aside, I agree that he is one of the bright spots in the Republican gloom and left to his own instincts he'll do just fine.

The point of this post, however, is something that was mentioned almost in passing in the column. She pointed out an instance where he was emphasizing excess pork in the stimulus bill. She also mentioned one attributed to Sarah Palin as a gaffe along the same lines. Jindal's was the mention of "volcano monitoring" as wasteful spending. I think not. Just think about it.

Palin's was a reference to fruit fly research as silly spending. Then Parker points out that fruit fly research is crucial to medical research. Did you know that? I did not.

Now I'm going to jump on the media and watchdog groups. True, there are a lot of projects that raise many an eyebrow with good reason, but now I'm wondering how many, even though they may sound silly, are not.

We know the media has become personality driven, too many reporters are lazy and substance is often lacking not to mention objectivity. I would like to see an explanation of pork projects paired with a justification before I'm so quick to condemn them.

Congress embeds pork in bills. They all have computers, cell phones, land lines, Blackberries and web sites. More and more are utilizing Twitter. Spare me. It's not like they don't have better things to do. Point being, they are not difficult to access. So ladies and gentlemen of the media, those of you who still have jobs, how about doing a little probing about these projects and inform those of us who still listen to you or read your papers. Just in case you wonder why there are so few of us and your papers are folding around you, it may be because you're not doing your jobs. I'd not expect to get this information from a columnist. I would expect it from a reporter.

Mass condemnation because we don't like pork no longer makes sense. If you guys want to continue to take home the bacon, talk to us about pork!

Fuzzy Math

Yep. I voted for Obama. I was convinced that because he was well educated and considered to be exceptionally bright we would be well served. I was convinced that because he speaks so eloquently he'd be able to explain things to the likes of me and so would his appointees.

Well. Forget Treasury Secretary Tim Geitner. His first appearance on the public stage was less than impressive. Not only was it disappointing after having Obama tell us his news conference was going to be great, his lack of explanation about anything was frightening.

Then there is the man himself. Obama. A multi-billion dollar "stimulus" bill has just been passed with more spending than stimulating. States and cities are beginning to get realistic in balking. They realize that once the federal money goes away the new programs will become unsustainable unless taxes are raised to cover them. Being politicians, they are savvy enough to realize it can be a re-election killer. The same goes for the banks who don't want the money because they don't want the Feds involved. The same goes for the auto industry. At least Ford. No one with an ounce of sense wants politicians anywhere near their businesses.

Now Obama is telling us he is going to cut this deficit by two thirds by the end of his first term. How? By raising taxes on businesses and the wealthy and cutting spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Math is not my strong suit but I'm not too bad at logic. No matter how much you raise taxes on businesses, it boils down to one thing. The consumer, you and I, pay it via pass throughs. Taxing the wealthy? How many times has "wealthy" been redefined? Cutting spending in Iraq and Afghanistan? We're not out of Iraq yet and there is no solid strategy as to exactly how or exactly when of which I am aware. An additional 17,000 troops have just been allocated to Afghanistan with the generals saying it will not be enough in the long run. What's going to be cut? Equipment? Again? I don't think so!

Okay. Maybe there are plans in the making yet to be made public. I certainly am not privy to all that goes on behind the scenes. I can only form an opinion from the information given. When I'm told, with great fanfare, that the average family is going to see an extra $67 in their paycheck beginning in April, I'm always glad I haven't a mouth full of coffee.

What the heck does $67 buy these days? Certainly not groceries for a family of two what's more a family of four or larger! If this is the "stimulus" to encourage we tax payers to go out and spend, spend, spend, they've got to be kidding! Someone is smoking something funny. It isn't me. I don't even smoke legal stuff. Forgetting the health issues, I flat out can't afford it!

Pelosi And The Pope - Does Either One Get It?

As I've watched Hillary's love tour progress around Asia I've found myself wondering if we really need a Secretary of State when we have all these Congressional delegations doing much the same thing. After all it's a redundancy of effort and an expensive one. I have no idea how many people are in Clinton's entourage, but Nancy Pelosi has seven other Democrats in hers! Not counting staff of course.

Nancy Pelosi? What the heck is she doing in Rome on my dollar? It's bad enough Obama is flying around on his big plane anywhere and everywhere. As is Hillary. I may think it's being a bit over done considering these economic times, but it is, at least, a part of their jobs. But Pelosi? She's a legislator! Supposedly she is talking with top Italian officials about the economic crisis and other "leading issues", whatever they may be. Oh, yes, she's talking to them about the environment and the situations in the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan. Right. How many troops do the Italians have committed? Or is it just chit chat?

I'm sorry. It's bad enough we, who pay our taxes and mortgages yet see the value of everything we hold dear diminish, are asked to bail out the deadbeats, but to also have to fund automatic pay raises and worldwide boondoggles is more than I can swallow. Enough!

Other than great food, wine and good shopping, what is she getting for our buck? An admonishment for every Catholic office holder who might dare to be pro choice? This from a man, and he is merely a man, who reinstated a Bishop who fervently denies the truth of the Holocaust? Talk about not getting it!

Everyone in the country is being asked to pay for the excesses of others. That should include government officials. There is not a one of them that can understand our pain unless they suffer a bit themselves. So far I'm not seeing it.

Huckabee - What A Stretch!

Wow. The ink isn't even dry on the stimulus compromise and the religious right is already up in arms!

Mike Huckabee has declared it "anti-religious". What?? It must have really hurt to have to take both the Democrats and Republicans to task for this offense. After all, it is a 'bi-partisan' bill. Well. Hardly. Three Republicans signing on hardly makes it 'bi-partisan'!

What, however, was so egregious it warranted this response? Both the House and the Senate version banned higher education funds from going to either a school or department of divinity. What's his rationale?

Actually the Congress got this right. It's what separation of church and state is all about. If included, how would you explain it to the tax payers? How would you explain to one religious persuasion that their tax dollars were being spent to support a religious persuasion to which they might be strongly opposed?

I'm not sure higher education funds fit the parameters of "stimulus, but if they do, the Huckabee wing of the Republican party needs to do better than this. It will, for sure, "stimulate"! It will "stimulate" strong opposition from those of us who actually understand and support the premise of separation of church and state!

Quit Campaigning And Start Governing!

The Republicans warned us. The other Democratic candidates warned us. Obama has never run anything!

I chose to overlook the lack of experience, preferring to focus on the message. I was heartened when he surrounded himself with people of experience. Of course I made the same error in judgement with the Bush administration. Cheney. Rumsfeld. Men with vast experience in more than one administration. Look what that got us!

I never would have anticipated the problems Obama's choices have had in paying their taxes. All I had to do was look back at the Clinton administration where several of his nominees ran into the same road blocks. In my version of hope, I'd have thought the nominees would have learned! Oh well. I also remember that Clinton's entire eight years was a constant campaign for one thing or another.

I hope that isn't the model Obama intends to follow. Let's face it, the stimulus bill is a bad one. I'm disgusted that the Democrats and Republicans can't sit down together and work out what it's supposed to be. But then I'm giving them credit which is not due. We're asking politicians to make tough economic decisions. It's like asking Bacchus to analyze what's wrong with him and tell us how to fix it. It's that ludicrous.

I also fault Obama for not laying out guidelines in the first place rather than turning it over to Congress and saying "bring me a bill." That is not leadership. I also fault him for not going through it himself and striking the non-stimulus measures.

So tomorrow he's going to take his big plane and head out to see the people. I wish him well because support for this monstrosity is eroding and all the slick rhetoric in the world can't break it down into convincingly understandable parts. Because there are none. And Congress won't step up to the plate and do what's needed to be done. No matter what the Senate sends back to the house Nancy Pelosi will have her way with it.

As an aside, I worry when I learn former Marine General Anthony Zinni was offered the Ambassadorship to Iraq by both National Security Advisor James Jones and confirmed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, only to learn in an article in the Washington Post the position was given to an outgoing Assistant Secretary of State for Asia! What a way to find out you've been shafted! Just what's the story here??

This is not only a rocky start, but a near disastrous one. Will the ship of state right itself? Does it have a Captain? Maybe we should find Jack Sparrow. At least he has a compass!

Governing By "Photo Op"

Hub, being a Republican at heart, is not enthralled with the daily Obama photo op nor the media's obsession with him. Like myself, he recognizes the flaws in sound bites. The current one that has us both concerned is the capping of executive salaries at $500,000 if their company receives bailout money. If one understands the way the business community works, a cap this severe may make we ordinary folks feel good but does little else that's constructive.

I'll agree that multi million dollar bonuses should be curbed along with retirement packages that are worth more than most of us will see in a lifetime. However, we should also consider what will be lost.

The President's salary is $400,000 per year. Everything else, with the exception of clothing and tooth paste is paid for by the taxpayers. For instance, using Air Force One costs somewhere in the vicinity of $27,000 per hour. That alone would kick his salary in to the million dollar range in very short order.

I agree with the premise that executives should not be rewarded for failing. I also feel actors are over paid at $15,000,000 per film and athletes making millions of dollars for playing their games. We should perhaps be looking at their tax returns too!

As for executives of companies receiving bailout money, they might not be guilty of failing as much as being the result of others failing. Should they be so penalized?

Then too, back to the question of what else will be lost. Assuming there are good guys caught up in this and they pay their taxes, they are used to living on multi million dollar salaries. With that comes the probability of multiple households and all the help and upkeep that is needed to maintain them. Nannies, cooks, housekeepers, grounds keepers, etc. Those are people being employed by those millions of dollars. Do we want them added to the already burdened unemployment rolls?

Consider the homes themselves. Do we want the keys to them thrown back at the banks who already have more than they can handle?

There's a lot of trickle down here and a whole lot of big brotherism that needs to be fleshed out to make sense. Consider that former Treasury Secretary Paulson forced banks that did not want bailout money to take it anyway. There is a flurry of activity afoot for companies to find funding partners so they can give the bailout money back. Those partners will no doubt be foreign entities.

It isn't as cut and dried as the rhetoric makes it sound. The administration has already backed off the "buy American" mantra due to threatened repercussions from other countries.

Soaring rhetoric and indignation sounds wonderful but it needs substance behind it. So far the substance, let alone how to enforce the pronouncements, has been lacking.

As with his cabinet appointees, Obama might be wise and cut out the photo op of the day and give himself time to think things through. The constant reminder that "I won" won't get him far if we the people continue to lose.

These Requests Are "Shovel Ready" All Right!

Boy, can a picture ever tell it all! Today was the U.S. Conference of Mayors' turn to come forward with hat in hand and their lists of "shovel ready" projects. In reading through some of the requests I'm beginning to think we are a nation governed by those who just don't get it.

Granted, a lot of the projects would indeed provide jobs and therefore stimulate the economy. However, by their own admission, some used the "throw spaghetti against the wall" approach. Throw enough and some of it will stick.

The Wall Street Journal listed some of them. $2 million for neon lights for Las Vegas. Enlightening. $4.5 for butterfly gardens and gopher tortoises for an "eco" park in Boynton Park, FL. $500,000 for an off leash dog park in Chula Vista, CA. $3 million for an environmentally friendly golf course clubhouse in Lincoln Nebraska. The construction of said clubhouse would create a whopping 54 jobs! Then what?

I shouldn't leave out $886,000 for a 36 hole "disc golf" course in Austin TX and Shreveport, LA wants the Feds to pony up the funding for eight Harley-Davidson's for their police department. Vrooooom!

Either these mayors are the smartest politicians in the country or the dumbest of the dumb. I'm not sure. When they look at what Congressional pork projects have included previously, why not try? On the other hand this does not seem to me to be the time for frivolous wish listing. It gives me the feeling the economic meltdown is not being taken seriously.

Is it?

Bailout - Dogwalk Style

I listened to the White House press briefing this morning and of course the majority of the questions surrounded the withdrawal of Tom Daschle and Nancy Kellifer, the Performance Officer nominee. Interesting point about Ms. Kellifer is that she once actually worked for the IRS!

Some of the questions revolved around the vetting process. The answer was always, "The President believes in the process." Then came praise for how these tax evaders have served their country so ably.

That being the case, I've got the solution. Greed has been discussed as part of the housing crisis. Lenders lending to those who couldn't afford the payback. Buyers buying above their means. Now think about this. Maybe it hasn't been your experience but any time Hub and I applied for a new mortgage or to re-finance one, we've had to submit our tax returns as proof of income. Of course in Daschle's case he'd have had to actually report the income on which he neglected to pay taxes.

The vetters should take a page from the mortgage application book and demand tax returns for all potential administration hires and appointees. This could deter future embarrassment assuming, unlike Daschle, actual income was reported.

Over and above that have each and every appointed official and elected member of Congress undergo an IRS audit. My guess is that would make raising taxes to help restock the treasury unnecessary. Just collect them!

I can remember when my Mom was audited after my dad died because of a discrepency. She had inherited some stock from her father back in the '50s but could not provide the cost basis to provide the value of the gains. We searched everywhere knowing my Dad was a meticulous record keeper but they were no where to be found. That exercise cost her somewhere around $8,000 she could ill afford. This was a 79 year old widow.

The point of the story is the Tax Man can dig, if so motivated, until it hurts. No documentation, pay up plus penalty. Maybe the Tax Men should remember they too pay taxes and in turn are contributing to all these bailouts brought about by greed. Not oversight. Greed.

What I'd now like to hear from our new President, one who I strongly supported, is that he withdrew the nominations. Not that he regrets them. What he should regret is not knowing in the first place, if he actually did not. I hope he gets it right before I start regretting my support.

Our Man "Flynt"

Everyone wants a piece of the bailout pie. The financial institutions, the auto industry, people who over extended themselves in the housing market and those who allowed it to happen. People like us are at the very bottom the barrel because we live within our means and carry no debt. One has a right to be bitter.

A couple of men, however, are looking out for everyman's interest. Larry Flynt of Hustler fame and Joe Francis of Girls Gone Wild have requested $5 billion to bailout the "adult entertainment industry"! The reasoning is that Congress needs to support their enterprise just as it does any other industry "cherished" by the American people. Don't you love it?

These men tell us people are depressed and having to take to bath tubs far too often for release. "It's time for Congress to rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America!" Yeah. What will guys like Eliot Spitzer and John Edwards do?

As I was searching for confirmation of this information another headline caught my eye. Aha! All is not as altruistic is it may appear! It seems Flynt is suing two of his nephews for selling their own line of films that are "inferior products" and knockoffs.

Heaven for fend, one would not like the family name dragged through the mud! The lawsuit to maintain Flynt quality will cost big bucks, but $5 billion worth?

One article on this subject ended with the statement, "Most lawmakers have called the request for bailout money a publicity stunt."

Do you think?

There's No Lipstick On The Senate Pigs

The three big pigs and their bailout bills. My version. We started with a three page bill from the administration's little pig, Treasury Secretary Paulson. It was made of straw. The big, bad wolf of a House huffed and puffed and blew it off.

Then they morphed into pigs themselves and build a bill of wood. The problem was they couldn't decide on what grade of wood; solid or full of knotty holes. So they huffed and they puffed and blamed each other and blew it off. Their bill had grown to 116 pages.

Now it's the Senate's turn. Being a wise, deliberative body, they noticed the pig shtick didn't work so they morphed into hogs and produced a bill of brick. 451 pages long!

Hub had the PDF waiting for me when I got home from errand running. Every lobbyist in the world that wanted to get something into a "must pass" bill got into this one.

Here is the said purpose of the bill:

The purposes of this Act are—
(1) to immediately provide authority and facili-
3
ties that the Secretary of the Treasury can use to
4
restore liquidity and stability to the financial system
5
of the United States; and
6
(2) to ensure that such authority and such fa-
7
cilities are used in a manner that—
8
(A) protects home values, college funds, re-
9
tirement accounts, and life savings;
10
(B) preserves homeownership and pro-
11
motes jobs and economic growth;
12
(C) maximizes overall returns to the tax-
13
payers of the United States; and
14
(D) provides public accountability for the
15
exercise of such authority.

Here are some of the provisions:

Subtitle A—Renewable Energy Incentives

Subtitle B—Carbon Mitigation and Coal Provisions

TITLE II—TRANSPORTATION AND DOMESTIC FUEL SECURITY
PROVISIONS

TITLE III—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND EFFICIENCY
...and on and on. I don't like to cut and paste but did so to give you an idea of where this is going.

I'm sorry but this bill should not be passed nor should the President sign if it is. Here we are agonizing over the result of what we've been told is greed from the home buyer on up to our largest financial institutions. It has and will have an effect on our lives for a long time to come. The purpose is to borrow from the taxpayer to re-establish liquidity within our financial institutions; not to fund every pet project under the sun!

Now is the opportunity for both candidates to shine. I'd like to hear them defend or discredit, provision by provision, every provision in this bill that has nothing to do with the bailout. Yes. It would take hours. It would also mean they would have to actually read it. That would be novel.

Gentlemen?

What Was Pelosi Thinking?

The gavel had barely fallen when the Republicans were out in force blaming Nancy Pelosi's speech at the end of the rescue plan debate for causing the vote to fail.

If ever there was a time for leadership to take a conciliatory stance this was it. Especially with so many house members facing re-election. But no. She had to use it as a campaign diatribe of her own blaming the Bush administration for everything and touting how wonderful the Democrats are. Not even all of them agreed with her. Ninety five Democrats voted against it! That's leadership?

The Senate comes next. Oh, boy.

Back to Pelosi. Here we have a woman, a seasoned politician and Speaker of the House leading the way on a serious and delicate matter. Where was the deft hand? Instead of encouraging the vote why did she have to throw it in the administration's face? This was not the time for politics as usual.

A seasoned, experienced politician. An extremely partisan politician. A slip up of major proportions. These things happen. They shouldn't. I expect our leadership, no matter the party, to know when to be prudent.

McCain claimed that by his presence all was well. It was not. Another seasoned, experienced politician. Do we really want a light weight waiting in the wings?

We've potential wars looming all around the middle east, we've natural disasters on our own turf we have yet to figure out how to handle, the next President will have the responsibility of getting this financial mess back on track. I want that President to have a number two that can look all these issues straight in the eye and know how to deal with them.

What I don't know is what we will get.