Friday, July 23, 2010

Who really has created spiraling deficits?

Today in the NY Times Mr. Krugman argues that Pres. Bush is responsible for the current budget deficit problems, amongst other things (

But Keith Hennessey shows on his blog who is really leading a decade of spiraling deficits, Pres. Obama. (

As Mr. Hennessey points out, Pres. Bush's avg deficit, with 2008 included, was 2.7%. This is just above the historical avg of 2.6%. Pres. Obama's 9 yr projection (Mr. Hennessey explains why he uses 9 yrs on his blog) is 6.35% according to the CBO's current estimates. Granted a lot could happen in another 7 yrs (assuming Pres. Obama gets a 2nd term, which is looking unlikely) but to say that Pres. Bush was an out of control deficit spender does not match the historical record. Pres. Bush wasn't the most fiscally responsible President of all time, but he wasn't even close to the worst. Pres. Obama looks to be taking that title.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

It's about time

Nice op ed from Gregg Sherrill in today's WSJ standing up for business. As he says, business has been too silent and too passive when it comes to the criticism that it has received lately. I am not sure if it is fear or what, but I do not understand why the bank CEO's, BP's CEO, or any of the other people called in to testify in front of Congress just sit there and take the verbal lashing given to them. These executives are private citizens, Congress works for them, and they don't need to be lectured by some half wit rep who never made it past an entry level job before being elected to office (see Kucinich, Dennis).

As much as I dislike overpaid CEO's, I dislike politicians even more, and I realize that big corporations employ tens of millions of people while politicians do nothing but interfere so that they can toot their own horn on CSPAN.

If all of the good CEO's and businesses of the world would stand up to the various govt's trying to portray them as the bad guy I think that they would find that they have a lot of supporters.

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Minority Report a reality?

The NY Times editorial board believes it's a good idea to allow law enforcement to search and investigate partial DNA matches. The cite a recent example in CA in which a serial killer was charged after being found through a partial DNA match to his son.

I do not think that it is a good idea, nor constitutional, for someone to be investigated simply because they have a family member committing crimes. If the police are unable to find the criminals then maybe we need better police, but what we do not need is for police to interrogate and bully innocent citizens. I wonder how that pillar of liberty, the ACLU, will react to this.