About Me

Name: AJH
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

A Global New Deal: a 'time when one chapter ended and another began'

Gordon Brown, prime minster of the United Kingdom, has given the world a glimpse into his thinking on institutions and laws on a global scale in the Times of London (“The special relationship is going global”). I don't think it will take much to convince Obama.
Historians will look back and say this was no ordinary time but a defining moment: an unprecedented period of global change, and a time when one chapter ended and another began.

[N]ow is the time for leaders of every country in the world to work together to agree the action that will see us through the current crisis and ensure we come out stronger.

Rebuilding global financial stability is a global challenge that needs global solutions. However, financial instability is but one of the challenges that globalisation brings. Our task in working together is to secure a high-growth, low-carbon recovery by taking seriously the global challenge of climate change. And our efforts must be to work for a more stable world where we defeat not only global terrorism but global poverty, hunger and disease.

Globalisation has brought great advances, lifting millions out of poverty as they reap the benefits of economic growth and trade. But it has also brought new insecurities, as this – the first truly global financial crisis – underlines. Globalisation is not an option, it is a fact, so the question is whether we manage it well or badly.

I believe there is no challenge so great or so difficult that it cannot be overcome by America, Britain and the world working together. That is why President Obama and I will discuss this week a global new deal, whose impact can stretch from the villages of Africa to reforming the financial institutions of London and New York and giving security to the hard-working families in every country.

I believe that central to this new investment is that every country backs a green recovery for the future, that every country that wishes to participate in the international financial system agrees common principles for financial regulation, coordinated internationally, and changes to their own banking system that will bring us shared prosperity once again. And that, together, we must agree to reform the mandate and governance of global institutions to recognise the changing shape of the world economy and the emergence of new players.

It is a global new deal that will lay the foundations not just for a sustainable economic recovery but for a genuinely new era of international partnership in which all countries have a part to play.

I have always been an Atlanticist and a great admirer of the American spirit of enterprise and national purpose.

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Limbaugh Is Not the Problem

According to a survey from Public Policy Polling, “American voters are nearly split down the middle when it comes to their opinions on Rush Limbaugh.” (“Americans strongly divided on Limbaugh”)

46% have a positive perception of him with 43% viewing him negatively. There is a massive gender gap in those numbers, with 56% of men but only 37% of women holding a favorable opinion of him.

The numbers break down along party lines pretty much as one would expect. 80% of Republicans and only 17% of Democrats like him. Independents are pretty evenly divided with 44% seeing him unfavorably and 43% giving him a good review.

Rush Limbaugh seems to be carrying a lot of power with Republican elected officials in the early days of the Obama administration,” Dean Debnam, president of Public Policy Polling, said. “Based on these numbers you have to question whether that’s justified though. Most GOP voters have a generally favorably opinion of him, but at the same time a strong majority of them also don’t think he should have a lot of influence in American politics.”

Mr. Debnam is an idiot. Republican officials routinely ignore Limbaugh and conservatives, which has been costing them an inordinate number of supporters.

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Left Is Clueless

Tim Dickinson of Rolling Stone, very representative of the Left, still doesn't get it. In a brief post (“The GOP Adrift”) runs down the Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele controversy.

Given that the Dow once again plummeted into D’oh! territory today, the power struggle between Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele seems a frivolous side show. But in the end, Steele bowed to Limbaugh, affirming Rush’s preeminence as the angry voice of the party.

I’m not sure the Democrats can contain their glee at this state of affairs.

Without [George W. Bush], the Democrats showed some sign of fracturing. But the party’s leadership has neatly been able to pivot from the message, We’re not Bush, to the message We’re not Rush.

It’s the same damn thing, except that Rush is more deeply unpopular with the nation’s women voters.

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

“L’audace, l’audace—toujours l’audace!” (Audacity, audacity — always audacity!)

Christopher Buckley, who jumped ship to support Obama, seems to be coming around in his thinking, especially on ridiculous, irresponsible spending and the subsequent erosion of liberty.

Just remember the apothegm that a government that is big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take it all away. 
One feels almost unpatriotic, entertaining negative thoughts about Obama’s grand plan. But it is far from clear that spending oceanic sums of money is the right corrective.

That was, as Tom Lehrer would say, the week that was. President Barack Obama gave his first State of the Union speech. Governor Bobby Jindal gave his first and possibly last Republican response. The president presented a $3.6 trillion budget, and announced that we are getting out of Iraq but not really. And Rush Limbaugh gave—as he put it, fun intended—his first nationally televised address to the nation.

Hold on—there’s a typo in that paragraph. “$3.6 trillion budget” can’t be right. The entire national debt is—what—about $11 trillion? He can’t actually be proposing to spend nearly one-third of that in one year, surely. Let me check. Hmm. He did. The Wall Street Journal notes that federal outlays in fiscal 2009 will rise to almost 30 percent of the gross national product. In language that even an innumerate English major such as myself can understand: The US government is now spending annually about one-third of what the entire US economy produces. As George Will would say, “Well.”

But let’s all be honest about this: No one knows how all this is going to turn out in the end. Do you, really? If we learned one thing during the runup to this rancid enchilada, it is that most of the smartest people in the room were wrong, and the other ones were crooked.

I’m all for audacity and all for hope. “L’audace, l’audace—toujours l’audace!” (Frederick the Great) is an inspiring motto. It worked for Patton. Whatever you think of this leviathan budget, President Obama cannot be accused of being a trimmer, or reticent. And with the New York Times running heart-breaking front-page stories about out-of-work executives now working as $11-an-hour janitors, I’m all for hope, too.

And remember what de Tocqueville told us about a bureaucracy that grows so profuse that not even the most original mind can penetrate it.

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Morons & Their Dogs

Some idiot dog owner has been letting his pet let loose all along Lancaster Drive, particularly on the sidewalks. It is just so disgusting. I can't believe how many inconsiderate boobs live around here. A recent idea by a German politician brought all of this to mind.

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Earth's climate continues to confound scientists."

[A]ccording to a new study, global warming may have hit a speed bump and could go into hiding for decades.”

Earth's climate continues to confound scientists. Following a 30-year trend of warming, global temperatures have flatlined since 2001 despite rising greenhouse gas concentrations, and a heat surplus that should have cranked up the planetary thermostat.”

This is nothing like anything we've seen since 1950,” Kyle Swanson of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee said. “Cooling events since then had firm causes, like eruptions or large-magnitude La Ninas. This current cooling doesn't have one.”

How about less activity (namely solar flares) on the Sun?

In 1997 and 1998, the tropical Pacific Ocean warmed rapidly in what Swanson called a 'super El Nino event.' It sent a shock wave through the oceans and atmosphere, jarring their circulation patterns into unison.”

I am not so sure about that.

But just what's causing the cooling is a mystery. Sinking water currents in the north Atlantic Ocean could be sucking heat down into the depths. Or an overabundance of tropical clouds may be reflecting more of the sun's energy than usual back out into space.”

It is possible that a fraction of the most recent rapid warming since the 1970's was due to a free variation in climate,” Isaac Held of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Princeton, New Jersey wrote in an email to Discovery News. "Suggesting that the warming might possibly slow down or even stagnate for a few years before rapid warming commences again."

Don't let evidence like this dissuade you from thinking “man made” climate change is a severe problem though.

When the climate kicks back out of this state, we'll have explosive warming,” Swanson said. “Thirty years of greenhouse gas radiative forcing will still be there and then bang, the warming will return and be very aggressive.”

Meanwhile, Pelosi and friends were “snowed out” of the global warming rally in D.CPolitco has a short video segment on it.

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How Rush Is So Right

A gentleman at the Huffington Post has a peculiar post on Rush Limbaugh's opposition to the stimulus (“Why Limbaugh Is Right to Oppose Obama's Economic Policies”). The misspellings in this guy's piece are just plain funny (“econimic”/“suprising”/“Baghad”/“Pilgrams”). You would think people at HuffPo, especially the major contributors, would spell-check or even use word processing software before posting. Talk about lazy.
 
Stealing Rush's own tagline, the writer ends with, “It's a war of ideas. Bring it on, Rush.”
 
AJH
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rush @ CPAC

Go Rush!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (7) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

'Obama Declares War'

Larry Kudlow has some harsh words for Obama and company in his latest posting (“Obama Declares War on Investors, Entrepreneurs, Businesses, And More”).

Personally I have always liked Kudlow and his clearcut, no-nonsense style, especially when it comes to the subject of economics.

Let me be very clear on the economics of President Obama’s State of the Union speech and his budget.

He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.

While not quite as high as spending levels in Western Europe, we regrettably will be gaining on this statist-planning approach.

Obama’s cap-and-trade program will be a huge across-the-board tax increase on blue-collar workers, including unionized workers. Industrial production is plunging, but new carbon taxes will prevent production from ever recovering. While the country wants more fuel and power, cap-and-trade will deliver less.

Noteworthy up here on Wall Street, a great many Obama supporters — especially hedge-fund types who voted for “change” — are becoming disillusioned with the performances of Obama and Treasury man Geithner.

There is a growing sense of buyer’s remorse.

AJH


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The UK Desperately Needs Its Very Own 'Bill of Rights'

All sorts of people from diverse backgrounds (commonfolk, lawyers, judges, politicians) are gathering at several cities in the United Kingdom to discuss the erosion of civil liberties there.

Meetings of the 'Convention on Modern Liberty' are being held in London, Belfast, Bristol, Cardiff, Cambridge, Glasgow and Manchester.

American journalist Jamie Malanowski has called for the UK to implement a Bill of Rights, modeled after the first ten amendments to the American Constitution.

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fidelity CEO 'Slams' Stimulus, Bailouts

Edward Johnson slams FDR,‘New Deal II’

Fidelity’s Edward “Ned” Johnson jumped into the controversial debate over President Obama’s “New Deal II” and what Johnson called government “make-work projects.”

“We can only hope that the government’s cure doesn’t further sicken the patient,” Johnson wrote in his annual update on Fidelity’s performance over the past year.

“During the ’30s, Congress - with guidance from the president and the same kind of good intentions - shifted the country’s cash flow away from productive businesses to government make-work projects, which most likely prolonged the Great Depression,” wrote Johnson, arguably Boston’s most powerful business executive.


Those policies helped make “money ridiculously easy to obtain and business people eager to comply with the policies,” Johnson wrote.
AJH
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Eastwood: “People have lost their sense of humor”

I love this opening from a story at Yahoo! News India, which is a good source for some issues not generally reported in the American media.

Acting legend Clint Eastwood, 79, apparently believes that political correctness has rendered modern society humourless.”

Apparently Eastwood's comments left the writer somewhat unclear, thinking apparently that Clint might actually be a racist. Apparently political correctness crept into the writing a bit. Obviously there is no “apparently” about it; Eastwood does not like what has happened.

I have enjoyed most of his movies and love the fact that he, as he ages, the powers in Hollywood don't deter him from speaking the truth.

People have lost their sense of humor. In former times we constantly made jokes about different races. You can only tell them today with one hand over your mouth or you will be insulted as a racist.”

I find that ridiculous. In those earlier days every friendly clique had a 'Sam the Jew' or 'Jose the Mexican' - but we didn't think anything of it or have a racist thought. It was just normal that we made jokes based on our nationality or ethnicity. That was never a problem. I don't want to be politically correct.”

We're all spending too much time and energy trying to be politically correct about everything.”

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

“Insane . . . A Disaster . . . Simplistic”

David Brooks is not “a conservative New York Times columnist” as Beth Fouhy of the Associated Press notes in her “Analysis” of Jindal and the reaction to his address (“Jindal draws flak from GOP, Dems over speech”).

Brooks characterized Jindal's arguments as “insane” and “tone-deaf” on The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer.

To come up in this moment in history with a stale, 'Government is the problem, you can't trust the federal government' is just a disaster for the Republican Party,” Brooks said.

Juan Williams focused on Jindal's delivery.

"It came off as amateurish, and even the tempo in which he spoke was singsongy," Williams said, adding that the content of the speech was "very simplistic and almost childish."

Rush Limbaugh defended Jindal on his radio show Wednesday while acknowledging that “stylistically,” Obama had outshined Jindal.

The people on our side are making a real mistake if they go after Bobby Jindal. We cannot shun politicians who speak for our beliefs just because we don't like the way he says it.”

AJH

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive