Fausta’s Blog

The 2011 aid request for Latin America Analysis of the Obama administration request for foreign policy assistance, by the Center for International Policy,

The Obama administration’s foreign aid request differs significantly, if not radically, from what came before. For Latin America, the difference is notable, as this slideshow indicates.

2011 Foreign Ops

Please note there will be no Carnival of Latin America this week due to a technical problem.

Doug Ross explains how Pelosi’s Children and Grandchildren Used Military Jets As Private Cross-Country Shuttle Service So They Could Avoid Dealing With the Rabble.

Doug got the documents that show it, by using the documents obtained by Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Follow the link to read the manifests and travel requests. Pelosi’s military travel cost the Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a two-year period.

Special thanks to Chris Muir for the illustration!

Via Instapundit, Cato Institute Scholars Analyze the 2010 State of the Union Address

Meanwhile, Marc Thiessen looks at the national security question:

the president’s brief discussion of terrorism focused not on what he was doing to defend the country but was, rather, a vigorous defense of himself. His first words on the subject were a chastisement of those who would dare criticize his handling of terrorism, declaring that “all of us love this country” and warning his Republican critics to “put aside the schoolyard taunts about who is tough.” It’s all about him. No acknowledgement of how close we came to disaster or praise for the brave passengers who subdued the terrorist. No, only this message for his critics: If you question the wisdom of telling a captured terrorist “you have the right to remain silent,” you are really questioning the president’s patriotism and engaging in childish taunts.

The fact is, the American people have real concerns about Obama’s approach to terrorism. They do question the wisdom of eliminating CIA interrogations, closing Guantanamo Bay, bringing the terrorists held there to this country, putting Khalid Shiekh Mohammed and his cohorts on trial in civilian courts, and giving captured terrorists Miranda rights after 50 minutes of questioning. Instead of acknowledging these concerns, Obama dismissed them. It was strange, defensive, arrogant — and un-presidential.

Or, as Michelle Obama’s Mirror put it,

Summary of the big read in a half dozen wordsor less: insincere, preachy, condescending, immature, petulant and smirky.

And not what the Union needs.

NOT SUITABLE FOR WORK UPDATE
LANGUAGE WARNING – this link is not suitable for work:
Nobody can eviscerate a rara avis the way Ace can (h/t Larwyn).
And don’t bother reading Florence of Arabia, either.

Most U.S. Union Members Are Working for the Government, New Data Shows

For the first time in American history, a majority of union members are government workers rather than private-sector employees, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced on Friday.

In its annual report on union membership, the bureau undercut the longstanding notion that union members are overwhelmingly blue-collar factory workers. It found that membership fell so fast in the private sector in 2009 that the 7.9 million unionized public-sector workers easily outnumbered those in the private sector, where labor’s ranks shrank to 7.4 million, from 8.2 million in 2008.
…
According to the labor bureau, 7.2 percent of private-sector workers were union members last year, down from 7.6 percent the previous year. That, labor historians said, was the lowest percentage of private-sector workers in unions since 1900.

Among government workers, union membership grew to 37.4 percent last year, from 36.8 percent in 2008.

After rising the two previous years, overall union membership fell by 771,000 in 2009, to 15.3 million, largely because employment declined over all. But the rate of private-sector unionization fell because two sectors where unions are especially strong — manufacturing and construction — suffered especially large job losses. Construction lost more than 900,000 jobs last year, falling to 5.9 million, while 1.3 million factory jobs were lost, declining to 11.6 million.

The overall unionization rate edged lower, to 12.3 percent last year from 12.4 percent in 2008.
…
Notwithstanding the recession, government employment grew last year, inching up 16,000, to 22,516,000, according to the bureau.

Fred Siegel, a visiting professor of history at St. Francis College in Brooklyn and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative research organization, said, “There were enormous political ramifications” to the fact that public-sector workers are now the majority in organized labor.

“At the same time the country is being squeezed, public-sector unions are a rising political force in the Democratic Party,” he said. “They depend on extra money for the public sector, and that puts the Democrats in a difficult position. In four big states — New York, New Jersey, Illinois and California — the public-sector unions have largely been untouched by the economic downturn. In those states, you have an impeding clash between the public-sector unions and the public at large.”

As John Steele Gordon points out, these public service unions have become The engine of spending,

A big part of the problem is that the laws in place that cover collective bargaining were devised in the 1930’s when public-sector unions didn’t exist. A corporation is a wealth-creation machine and collective bargaining is a negotiation over how to divide the profits between stockholders and labor. Each side knows that if they drive too hard a bargain, they will injure the goose that lays the profit eggs. If labor is paid too much, the company will be less competitive. If it is paid too little, good workers will leave for better-paying jobs elsewhere. But in the public sector, unions and the bureaucrats who negotiate with them are playing with someone else’s money (yours, to be precise), and have overlapping interests in spending more of it. Bureaucrats, after all, measure their prestige by the size of the budget they control and the number of people who report to them.

The result has been an explosion in public-sector compensation. Federal workers now earn, in wages and benefits, about twice what their private-sector equivalents get paid. State workers often have Cadillac health plans and retirement benefits far above the private sector average: 80 percent of public-sector workers have pension benefits, only 50 percent in the private sector. Many can retire at age 50.

The public-sector unions have become the engine behind ballooning state and federal budgets. There will be no cure for excess government spending until their power is decisively curbed. It would be a winning issue for a Republican presidential candidate in 2012. The Democratic candidate, deeply beholden to Andy Stern, who has visited the White House more than anyone else not in government since Obama has been in office, will be very hard pressed to defend against such an attack but will have no option but to try.

Sweetness and Light casts a shadow on the long-term, though

Even the Soviet Union saw that that unions were unnecessary when everyone worked for the state.

Not there yet, but here’s a parting word from Labor Secretary Hilda Solis,

Noting that union members generally have higher earnings, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis said in a statement: “As workers across the country have seen their real and nominal wages decline as a result of the recession, these numbers show a need for Congress to pass legislation to level the playing field to enable more American workers to access the benefits of union membership. This report makes clear why the administration supports the Employee Free Choice Act,” a bill that would make it easier to unionize.”

And for the Dems to continue to use unions as a source of political slush funds while we all pay for it.

For starters, he wants to fight for you by trying to pass a bill you despise

Tragicomedy from today’s “permanent campaign” stop in Ohio: “This is not about me!” saith The One, before launching into the salute to his own political fortitude that you’re about to see. Which, in fairness, is all he has left. No one likes the bill, it’s killing him with independents, but he’s invested too much political capital in it to end up with absolutely nothing. So he’ll end up with a hugely pared-down bill, a.k.a. almost absolutely nothing, and then tout it as some grand accomplishment that he’ll build on later even though everyone knows that he won’t. Remember, the goal, practically from day one, was simply to pass something, and that’s exactly what they’re going to get. “Something.”

Opposition to O-Care is back up to 58 percent in today’s Rasmussen tracker, incidentally, which ties the mark for the highest disapproval rating yet. Stay tuned for the numbers next week after the Dems launch their bold new plan to nuke Scott Brown’s vote by going with reconciliation.

It’s not about healthcare at all, it’s all about control: Control over the economy. Control over how the American people vote. Control over our lives.

That’s what Obama wants.

The Anchoress is asking a question relevant to my first question: What Does Obama Like About America? The short answer is, not a heck of a lot:

We know all the things the Obama administration dislikes about America: Banks, business, journalists who ask actual questions, investors, entrepreneurs, unintimidated voters, traditional alliances, military tribunals, Gitmo, the private sector, the middle class, cities that are still thriving, or trying not to turn into Detroit, people who make more than federal workers while working within the private sector, George W. Bush, transparency, capitalism and possibly the rights to free speech, the rights to dissent and tea partiers.

Also, in general, he doesn’t seem to like being president, much, and having to do more than look pretty, read the teleprompter and blame Bush.

What does he like about America? As one sycophant in the WH press corp has asked, What “enchants” him? The question is worth asking as Obama seems to be declaring a war against suburbia. 77% of Americans think our president is against business. Jobs? I guess we’ll all have to work for the government. It’s the only thing Obama seems to like.

It’s all about the control.

Everything else is the means to that end.

Can it be stopped?

We’re about to find out.

Zelaya will be leaving the tin foil-lined room soon: Zelaya to leave Honduras next week says adviser

Ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya will end his four-month refuge in the Brazilian embassy and leave the country next week, when his term would have ended, his closest adviser said on Thursday.

Zelaya, a leftist who was ousted in a coup on June 28, accepted an agreement backed by the government of the Dominican Republic to travel to the Caribbean country, close Zelaya aide Rasel Tome told Radio Globo radio.

Introducing Son of No Sheeples: Mako Snark

Pelosi Rejects Senate Health Care Bill, meanwhile Obama Now Signals He Could Accept Limited Health Bill

What a guy: Specter tells Bachmann to “act like a lady”

Frank Gaffney writes about the Obama administration’s Dangerous Accommodations. While many credit the healthcare debate for Scott Brown’s victory, Andrew McCarthy points out It’s the Enemy, Stupid
National-security strength lifts Scott Brown.

Scott Brown went out and made the case for enhanced interrogation, for denying terrorists the rights of criminal defendants, for detaining them without trial, and for trying them by military commission. It worked. It will work for other candidates willing to get out of their Beltway bubbles.

Victor Davis Hanson on Our Philosopher-King Obama
He doesn’t mind pushing noble legislation that most people oppose. Why is that?

Why, then, does the Obama administration persist with such an apparently unpopular agenda?

Like Plato’s all-knowing elite, Obama seems to feel that those he deems less informed will “suddenly” learn to appreciate his benevolent guidance once these laws are pushed through.
…
There is one other trait of this administration similar to those of utopian philosopher-kings. Our elite must have the leeway to be exempt from their own rules.

Michael Fumento asks, Why does everybody think BPA is safe but us?

Off-Air America

John Edwards finally got around to publicly admitting he’s the father

In a written statement provided exclusively to NBC News, the former North Carolina senator and Democratic presidential candidate says he’s taking responsibility for the child, Frances Quinn Hunter

Meanwhile he shamelessly promoted his wife’s book which aimed to rehabilitate him. Saint Elizabeth and the Ego Monster, indeed.

The National Enquirer is submitting its John Edwards coverage for a Pulitzer Prize. Can’t wait for Oprah to reunite John with all his children!

BONUS
Top 10 Craziest Things Ever Said By Pat Robertson; here’s the one about spooky yoga:

Or maybe he means Yoda?

I was at tango when the results came in: Scott Brown won the Senate seat formerly occupied by Ted Kennedy, the day before the 1-year anniversary of Obama’s inauguration,
Democrats seek back footing after epic Mass. loss

Republicans are rejoicing and Democrats reeling in the wake of Scott Brown’s stunning victory over Martha Coakley in a special Massachusetts Senate election that Brown insists was not simply a referendum on President Barack Obama.

Still, Obama grimly faced a need to both regroup and recoup losses on Wednesday, the anniversary of his inauguration, in a White House shaken by the realization of what a difference a year made. The most likely starting place was finding a way to save the much-criticized health care overhaul he’s been trying to push through Congress.
…
Brown will become the 41st Republican in the 100-member Senate, which could allow the GOP to block the health care bill. Democrats needed Coakley to win for a 60th vote to thwart Republican filibusters.

Brown became the first Republican elected to the U.S. Senate from supposedly true-blue Democratic Massachusetts since 1972.

Democrats are upset, and the liberal reaction is what one expects.

Clearly the Brown victory shakes up the balance of power in Washington since

The Brown victory forces the White House and congressional leaders to decide how—or whether—to salvage their long-sought health-care overhaul. Rushing the bill after losing Massachusetts carries political risks. So does letting it collapse.

Anticipating rough sledding for the bill, the S&P health-care sector stock index surged by more than 2% Tuesday, leading all other industry sectors, with managed-care stocks posting strong gains.

But another important factor is Brown’s stance on national security: Marc Thiessen, in an email this morning notes,

Most of the focus on the Massachusetts Senate race has been on health care.

But according to Senator-elect Brown’s chief strategist, terrorist interrogation was the issue that put his candidate over the top.

“People talk about the potency of the health-care issue,” Brown’s top strategist, Eric Fehrnstrom, told National Review’s Robert Costa, “but from our own internal polling, the more potent issue here in Massachusetts was terrorism and the treatment of enemy combatants.”

The Republicans should celebrate Brown’s victory, yes. It shows that

Any candidate that condescends, takes for granted, turns a deaf ear and ignores the will of the people will go down like Martha Coakley. Every seat will be contested if the constituents are discontented.

But the Republicans would be wise to apply that lesson to their own candidates, and listen to Rick Moran,

On the one hand, there is the danger that if the GOP were actually to cooperate with Democrats on issues of mutual concern, they wouldn’t get any credit for their efforts from the voters. On the other hand, there is the real danger that the charge of “obstructionism” by Democrats may carry a little more weight given the circumstances of Brown’s victory.

Threading the needle on expectations is going to be an interesting problem for the Republican leadership, one made more complex by the activism of the tea party movement. Paralysis may be the only viable option when so many are so angry at so much of the inside-the-beltway elite. “Responsible” governance might require that the GOP work with the Democrats to at least bring the economy out of its horrible doldrums. But anything proposed beyond tax cuts would probably be met by fierce resistance from those who see any government spending to stimulate the economy as worse than useless and an actual betrayal of conservative principles.

Such might be the case, but the question of whether the bulk of the American people will stand still for gridlock with the economy in the shape it is in today needs to be answered. The Republicans may want to think long and hard about that in the run-up to the 2010 midterms, when voters may decide that those who obstructed measures that might have lifted the economy out of its malaise without offering any realistic alternative of their own should not be rewarded with the keys to power.

The Republicans have their work cut out for them.

And yes, thank you and congratulations, Scott Brown.

538 Model Posits Brown as 3:1 Favorite: The forecasting model that predicted all 35 Senate races in 2008 predicts Brown will win, and not only that,

Coakley’s odds are substantially worse than they appeared to be 24 hours ago, when there were fewer credible polls to evaluate and there appeared to be some chance that her numbers were bottoming out and perhaps reversing. However, the ARG and Research 2000 polls both show clear and recent trends against her. Indeed the model, which was optimized for regular rather than special elections, may be too slow to incorporate new information and may understate the magnitude of the trend toward Brown.

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion will be liveblogging starting at 8:30AM today.

Will this mean the end of healthcare reform?

The bigger hurdle for Democrats, however, will be the anxiety and political upheaval caused by the election. If Brown wins, it will be in large part because of high turnout from independents who oppose the health care reform bill. That’s going to make going forward with reform, already a big gamble, even riskier.

Or will the Dems resort to a big gambit, and rush the bill through before Brown is seated, if he wins?

We live in interesting times, alright.

In a lighter mode, Obama: Coakley Victorious if Brown Gets Less Than 60%

Update
In Louisiana, the race is seen as important for the nation,

Kermit Hoffpauir, also of Baton Rouge, said he decided to make calls to help clients in his chemical process equipment business.

“The party in power’s an economy killer,” he said.

————————————————
Please note there will be no podcast this morning due to a change in a business appointment.

After Obama made a fuss about Scott Brown’s truck, Leslie’s omnibus is trucking in support of Scott Brown.

I can’t vote in Massachussets, and don’t own a pickup truck, but if I did I’d love one like this Ford pickup,

The Whited Sepulchre is also trucking right along.

Here’s the Scott Brown ad,

Brown, by the way, drives a GM truck. I guess Obama forgot the government now owns GM?

Elevating the political discourse even further,

Coakley dismisses Schilling: ‘Another Yankee fan’

In the intensifying Democratic precriminations game over who to blame if Coakley loses, here’s one for the blame Coakley camp: On another talk radio show, “Nightside With Dan Rea,” Coakley jabs Rudy Giuliani as a Yankee fan, then goes on to describe Brown supporter Curt Schilling, the great former Red Sox pitcher, as a Yankee fan as well.

Not lagging behind, The Nose on Your Face has come up with a follow-up video, New Coakley Ad: Scott Brown Is A Yankee Fan,

Jules Crittenden finds the election impossible to call.