The Church of the Painful Truth

If Barack Hussein Obama is such an intellectual (as we’re constantly told by his supporters) then answering a question that any eighth-grader could answer in a single sentence shouldn’t be that difficult.

It seems, though, that Barry was asked a simple question that he couldn’t answer, although he did manage to speak for several minutes without answering it (to be fair, about one third of that time was consumed by the utterance of “uh…” and “umm…”). Just watch for yourself.

I guess it’s not good for your campaign to admit being pro baby-killer.

HT: Pat Dollard

Investor’s Business Daily argues that the main reason that the markets are headed in a downward direction is investors’ fear of a socialist administration taking over.

The Crash: “Why has the market dropped so much?” everyone asks. What is it about the specter of our first socialist president and the end of capitalism as we know it that they don’t understand?

The freeze-up of the financial system — and government’s seeming inability to thaw it out — are a main concern, no doubt. But more people are also starting to look across the valley, as they say, at what’s in store once this crisis passes.

And right now it looks like the U.S., which built the mightiest, most prosperous economy the world has ever known, is about to turn its back on the free-enterprise system that made it all possible.

It isn’t only that the most anti-capitalist politician ever nominated by a major party is favored to take the White House. It’s that he’ll also have a filibuster-proof Congress led by politicians who are almost as liberal.

Throw in a media establishment dedicated to the implementation of a liberal agenda, and the smothering of dissent wherever it arises, and it’s no wonder panic has set in.

What is that agenda? It starts with a tax system right out of Marx: A massive redistribution of income — from each according to his ability, to each according to his need — all in the name of “neighborliness,” “patriotism,” “fairness” and “justice.”

I couldn’t agree more.

Perhaps the socialists and their supporters haven’t considered this, but I’m curious as to what happens when the entities from which the wealth is being taken finally get disgusted enough to stop paying? They could move offshore, walk away, stop producing or any other number of likely scenarios. Many possibilities, but one result — nothing left to confiscate. What will happen then?

Ben Stein has an excellent and oh-so-true article on How to Ruin the U.S. Economy.

I highly, highly recommend that you read it, since it helps to dispel all the partisan bickering and “wasn’t ME…” nonsense that’s going on right now concerning which major political party should take the heat for destroying the economy and shouldering the US taxpayers and several generations of their descendants with financial hell.

Maybe NOW some folks will finally be convinced that a third party is a viable option or that both major political parties require some SERIOUS housecleaning.

For those of you that still insist on blindly voting straight-party, have no fear — the beltway bandits of your particular major political party are counting on you to keep them in office — even though they’ve already done a terrible amount of damage, there may actually still be something left for them to destroy.

There’s yet more good news from Wall St. this morning.

At the start of Friday’s session, losses for the year totaled a staggering $8.3 trillion, as measured by the Dow Jones Wilshire 5000 Composite Index, which tracks 5,000 U.S.-based companies representing almost all stocks traded in the U.S.

Both presidential candidates have been speaking a lot of rhetoric on this subject, but the facts here speak for themselves. Government meddling in the market may offer a temporary solution to a problem (real or perceived), but in the end, valid economic principle will always win.

I can’t even begin to describe how disgusted and irritated I am over the meddling of politicians in our markets. Governmental meddling for political purposes is what caused this mess, and more governmental meddling to solve the problem (likely inspired by fear of losing their cushy congressional seats rather than by any concern for the citizens) has been completely ineffective.

If this isn’t enough evidence to demonstrate that more government isn’t a cure for market ailments, I don’t know what is.

Typical of the refuse-to-learn-and-keep-your-head-in-the-sand syndrome that’s affected Congress (and companies and the constituency of the US for the past decade or so), insurer AIG, upon receiving their taxpayer-funded bailout check, immediately went on a spending spree.

Less than a week after the federal government had to bail out American International Group Inc. (AIG), the company sent executives on a $440,000 retreat to a posh California resort, lawmakers investigating the company’s meltdown said Tuesday.

See the bill for the tab here.

And congress can feign all the anger that they want to — I don’t beleive that the vast majority of voters will buy it.

Typical child-rearing procedures call for rewarding the bad behavior of a child with an unpleasant punishment in order for them to understand the consequences of their actions. In the real world, this is how things work — bad decisions result in unpleasant consequences. Rewarding bad behavior with a pleasant surprise reinforces the bad behavior instead of correcting it.

But congress, as usual, has their collective head inserted firmly in their collective rectum and rewarded bad corporate, congressional and consumer behavior with the taxpayer-funded Peoples’ Mother of all Bailouts.

Is anybody out there honestly surprised that AIG went out and repeated the same bad behavior after learning that making bad financial decisions (at the order of the government, it’s true) will result in a taxpayer-sponsored infusion of cash?

And what about out elected representatives that refuse to recognize reality? They can claim all the anger that they want — but any reasonable person could have seen this coming a mile away. Are these REALLY the pepole that we want holding the purse-strings of the United States?