Clinton 1998: Saddam has WMDs

NY Times: America is Hunkering Away From Immigration

From today’s New York Times editorial:

From San Diego on the Pacific to Brownsville on the Rio Grande, a steel curtain is descending across the continent. Behind it lies a nation so confused and conflicted by its immigration problems that it has decided to wall itself off and wait for things to fix themselves. This country once was a confident global magnet for an invigorating flow of immigrant workers and citizens-to-be. Now it is just hunkering.

I hate to write this, but the New York Times is almost right. However, it is the politicians in Washington, not us, who have failed us so miserably. As Sen. John McCain continues to say on the campaign trail, “I got the message,” Americans want the border secured first. This is the message Americans have sent to Washington, D.C. for at least the past six years. Have they listened yet? No. They haven’t. I am not a proponent of erecting a fence across the entire US-Mexico border, the border should have been closed right after September 11th and the U.S. could have completely re-done our outdated immigration policies.

This brings me to the “experience” question. Both Sen. Hillary Clinton and McCain tout their experience in Washington as reason to vote for them. But, what has their experience brought us except for more broken policies? Our immigration policy is broken, our debt is out of control, and social security and medicare are in trouble. What have they done about it?

I’m still waiting for our politicians to lead.

Francis: NAFTA’s problem is Mexico

Diane Francis, writing in The National Post cites Mexico as the problem with NAFTA.

NAFTA should be amended because circumstances, and the players, have changed since 1989 and 1993, when the bilateral FTA was inked, followed four years later by the trilateral NAFTA.

Frankly, the problem is Mexico.

Her point is simple. Of the three North American Nations, America and Canada are partners. Our two countries economies are large, wages are similar and trade is strong. America’s relationship with Mexico is much different. Though we have a decent trade relationship with Mexico, their economy is much smaller than ours, wage differences are out of this world, and we basically have two very different ways of life.

She goes on:

Three-way trade has been beneficial for all concerned. But Canada’s relationship with the U.S. should be decoupled from Mexico’s so that the two rich neighbours can take the next important step, which is to form a customs union. This would be mutually beneficial, but is not happening because Mexico is not ready for this due to poor governance and deep socio-economic impediments.

When Mexico gets its act together, it can join, along with other hemispheric neighbours who are ready, such as Chile.

Don’t worry about learning the language

Less and less immigrants becoming citizens in Canada are learning one of the two languages spoken there, English and French.

As Toronto’s Daily Star writes:

In B.C. and Ontario, the provinces where most immigrants land, a large number reported using a language other than English or French at work. The proportion held steady at 30 per cent in B.C. over a five-year period and dipped only slightly to 20 per cent from 21 per cent in Ontario.

You can be sure this is happening in America right now. Most of us are not opposed to legal immigration. As Americans, we can appreciate the value of making a better life for yourself as long as you are willing to work hard and not exploit the system. Is it too much to ask you learn the language of the country you are coming to? I don’t think so.

The World Has Plenty of Oil

Nasen Saleri writes today in the Wall Street Journal (subscription required):

Many energy analysts view the ongoing waltz of crude prices with the mystical $100 mark — notwithstanding the dollar’s anemia — as another sign of the beginning of the end for the oil era. “[A]t the furthest out, it will be a crisis in 2008 to 2012,” declares Matthew Simmons, the most vocal voice among the “neo-peak-oil” club. Tempering this pessimism only slightly is the viewpoint gaining ground among many industry leaders, who argue that daily production by 2030 of 100 million barrels will be difficult.

In fact, we are nowhere close to reaching a peak in global oil supplies.

He goes on to say four factors will determine when we have reached our peak oil output:

The four factors — resources in place (how many barrels initially underground), recovery efficiency (what percentage is ultimately recoverable), rate of consumption, and state of depletion at peak (how empty is the global tank when decline kicks in) — are inherently uncertain.

Let’s focus on the rate of consumption for a moment. As gas prices continued to increase Americans continued to use record amounts of gasoline. Most of us just adjusted what we bought. Gas is a very important resource that allows millions of people to drive to work, the grocery store, to see family, etc. We need it. So to save money in order to keep the tank full, Americans have been going to McDonald’s one less time per week.

Just yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported:

As crude-oil prices climb to historic highs, steep gasoline prices and the weak economy are beginning to curb Americans’ gas-guzzling ways.

In the past six weeks, the nation’s gasoline consumption has fallen by an average 1.1% from year-earlier levels, according to weekly government data.

That’s the most sustained drop in demand in at least 16 years, except for the declines that followed Hurricane Katrina in 2005, which temporarily knocked out a big chunk of the U.S. gasoline supply system.

The free market is an amazing thing isn’t it?

This time, however, there is evidence that Americans are changing their driving habits and lifestyles in ways that could lead to a long-term slowdown in their gasoline consumption.

Liberals rejoice! Politicians didn’t have to raise taxes on us or the oil companies. We are using less gas on our own. Don’t hate on the free market.

But, why are gas prices continuing to go up if we are using less. The Wall Street Journal has the answer:

Investors piling money into commodities as a refuge from inflation have helped push oil prices close to their inflation-adjusted record of $103.76 a barrel, set in 1980.

 

 

The Obama-Rezko connection

Sen. Barack Obama’s friend Tony Rezko is on trial for corruption in Chicago. Most of Rezko’s ties are with Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. But, Rezko has some ties to Obama.

Obama has known Rezko since he was in law school. Obama turned down a job offer from Rezko upon his graduation, but Obama billed him for five hours of work when he was a community organizer. Rezko made all his money in real estate and from Papa John’s and Panda Express fast food restaurants. Read more about the case and Rezko’s big ties to Gov. Blagojevich here.

Obama wanted to buy a mansion on Chicago’s South Side with money from his second book. He found a house to buy, but the owner of that house also owned the adjacent property next door and was only going to sell both of them. Obama bought the house and Tony Rezko’s wife bought the land next door. Obama paid $1,650,000 for the house while (which was valued at $1,950,000) Mrs. Rezko bought the land for $625,000. Obama later paid the Rezko’s $104,500 for a strip of the land in 2005, after Rezko was already being investigated.

There isn’t much to go on here and it certainly won’t stick to Obama.

Obama: The Untouchable

Sen. Barack Obama is the modern day Eliot Ness.  He is untouchable.  He is Teflon.  Nothing sticks to him.  Not the Rezko ties and trial, not the NAFTA fight with Canada.  Nothing.  Why?

Abraham Katsman points out Obama is no different policy wise from either Sen. Hillary Clinton or Sen. John Edwards, but for some reason people faint if when they see him like he was Michael Jackson.

His evident charisma aside, a clue to the source of Obama-mania may be found in the demographics of his support: he is far and away the favorite of younger voters and college students, routinely winning over 75% of the votes of Democrats under 30. Obama has tapped into is the first generation educated in schools focused on “self-esteem.” Now, the products of self-esteem education have come of political age in substantial numbers, perhaps with profound implications for this and future elections.

For the past two decades, America’s educational establishment has stressed the inculcation of self-esteem as the supreme educational goal. Self-respect - the product of struggle and achievement - is out; self-esteem - the entitlement tofeel great self-worth regardless of actual accomplishment - is in.

Strict correction of misspelling or of wrong answers to math problems is discouraged. Competition is a big no-no: many youth sports leagues forbid keeping score, lest any child’s self-esteem suffer from the indignity of losing. Posting honor rolls is discouraged, as it might injure the self-esteem of those who did not make the grade.

Grade inflation is rampant in schools: according to one recent study, about half of today’s college freshman had an “A” average in high school compared to under 20% in the late 1960s, even though SAT scores have tanked over the same period. The focus on self-esteem has, in a sense, been a huge success.

We live in a time where every kid who plays sports gets a trophy.  I turn 30 in June.  My younger brother will be 27 in July.  When I played little league trophies were given out to the championship team.  Three years later, when he played, everyone in little league was given trophies just for playing.   It’s amazing the difference just three years can make.

I am also part of the grade inflation era.  I did well through elementary, middle and high school and I would like to think it was because I worked hard.  But, I do believe there is some truth to grade inflation.  After all, we can’t make kids feel bad by giving them failing grades.  Some teachers aren’t even using red pens anymore because of the psychological effects on the children.  One teacher said, “If you see a whole paper of red, it looks pretty frightening.”  We are raising a nation of wimps and it makes you wonder how we as a nation survived all these years.

Is our nation of wimps the reason Obama gets all the support he does because of his messages of hope?

The Remake of Hillary Clinton continues

Because Sen. Hillary Clinton was an active first lady during the Clinton years, many Americans already had an opinion of her before she decided to run for President. In fact, most Americans think poorly of her. Recent polls show her unfavorability numbers as high as 51%. This Rasmussen poll shows 50% don’t like Hillary. It’s hard to win an election when so many people don’t like you.

Hence, the remake of Hillary Clinton. This has been going on for more than a year. Clinton is trying to make herself appear more human and less shrill. She smiles on the campaign trail, she laughs and she jokes with the media. Hillary didn’t do that back in 1993.

She cracked a joke about a year ago saying, “we face a lot of evil men, you know, people like Osama bin Laden comes to mind and what in my background equips me to deal with evil and bad men.” An obvious shot at her husband. This was Hillary trying to be funny. In one of the later debates, Hillary again joked about her husband’s infidelities. She said, “everybody here knows I have lived through some crises and some challenging moments in my life.” The crowd loved it.

She produced a Soprano’s spoof to pick her campaign song, flew on Hill Force One, and has cried three times so far. The message: Sen. Hillary Clinton is not a robot. In the past few days, she has appeared on Saturday Night Live to make fun of herself. She cracked a couple jokes on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

I have seen Clinton during a couple of campaign stops in Iowa and New Hampshire. She appeared motherly and friendly in order to remake that cold-hearted image. I have to be honest. It has worked. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t agree with Hillary Clinton on much if anything and I certainly won’t vote for her. However, I no longer think she is an inhumane, emotionless, shrill politician. I have seen her laugh, cry, and drink a beer with the press corp. All of it has been calculated and planned, but if she wins, I know she is capable of being human.