'Diaper Need Awareness Day'

You gotta read this piece from Mark Steyn, at National Review, "Adult Babies: There’s almost nothing you can’t get government to pay for."

Bill Whittle's Afterburner: 'How to Steal Power'

Via Instapundit:

How Taxes Destroy Liberty

It's not just taxes per se, but the increasing scope of government power to redistibute income for economic and social engineering.

Read this essay, from Myron Magnet, at City Journal, "On Tyranny and Liberty."

Can This Government Be Fixed?

An interesting piece, from Susan Page, at USA Today:

The third threatened government shutdown this year was narrowly averted. Congress' deficit "supercommittee" is apparently on a track to nowhere. And there has been contentious debate but little action on the proposals to help the jobless.

Can this government be fixed?

Americans are increasingly frustrated by the disconnect between what they say they want in their government, and what they see happening in Washington. A majority want compromise; they see polarization. They want economic and other problems addressed; they see gridlock and a series of perils-of-Pauline cliffhangers. By a record 4-1 ratio in a new Gallup Poll, they express dissatisfaction with the way the country is being governed.

"We are in this period of great anxiety because of economic uncertainty … and that has people worried about their future," says Dan Glickman, a former Democratic congressman and Cabinet secretary affiliated with the Bipartisan Policy Center. "What they need is confidence building, and what I don't think they sense from our government system is confidence building. Everything they see is division."

While President Obama and congressional leaders wrestle over immediate crises — a stopgap deal approved by the Senate late Monday has put off the latest budget showdown until Nov. 18 — a growing number of think tanks and advocacy groups with such names as No Labels, Americans Elect, Third Way and Ruck.us are trying to address underlying factors that fuel Washington's partisan stalemate.

The result, he says, has "got people either nervous as hell or disengaged."

Keep reading.

The proposed "solutions" are gimmicks.

For the most part, the government will be fixed when the economy is fixed. The voters need a clear set of alternatives and they need to put a solid majority in power to get things done. Folks thought that was Barack Obama (and the Democrat-Socialist Party), but now even the media elites are saying he "wasn't ready" for the office. Well, duh. Let's give this guy the boot in 2012 and get somebody in there who has a clue, someone who'll fix things --- a conservative who'll fix things. Democrats just make things worse.

September 11 Attacks Spurred Expansion of Homeland Security Programs at America's Colleges and Universities

Continuing coverage of the series at Los Angeles Times, "9/11, Ten Years After."



Here's a report from Wednesday, "9/11 spawned big changes on campus."



Check the whole thing. It's fascinating. But, while it's great that more and more students have cultivated a deeper sense of civic duty following September 11, the idea that increasing numbers of students are turning to the public sector for government jobs is a little dismaying. In a time of deep economic stagnation, the nation should be churning out enterprisers and inventers. Instead, we churn out bureaucrats and regulators. There's certainly a place for each in a $15 trillion economy, but the pace of government growth relative to the private sector has not declined. Strange. But then again, this is exactly the stuff that Mark Steyn's been warning about, so ain't that the darnedest?

There Are No Coincidences in Presidential Politics

From Chris Cillizza, at Washington Post, "Coincidences don’t happen in presidential politics. Ever" (via Memeorandum):

There are no coincidences in presidential politics.



Strategists spend hours poring over every word a president utters, every policy position he takes and every state he visits, a level of attention to detail that makes happenstance virtually nonexistent.



And so, when the White House announced today that President Obama would deliver his much-anticipated jobs speech on Sept. 7 at 8 pm — the exact same day and time that the 2012 Republican candidates are scheduled to debate in California — the idea that the timing was purely coincidental was, well, far-fetched.



It’s clear that this White House saw an opportunity to drive a major — and direct — contrast between President Obama and his potential Republican rivals and took it.

Keep reading.



Petty and small sounds about right.



Also at Lonely Conservative, "Obama Calls for Joint Session of Congress for New Economic Plan Speech, On Same Night as GOP Debate," and Legal Insurrection, "Just say No to Obama Joint Session of Congress campaign speech."



UPDATE: At NYT, "Obama Reschedules Economy Speech at Boehner’s Request":

President Obama acquiesced to a request from Speaker John A. Boehner on Wednesday to move the date of his proposed address to a joint session of Congress to Thursday Sept. 8, after Mr. Boehner all but rejected Mr. Obama’s request to speak next Wednesday.

'I Didn't Change. The World Changed'

From Daniel Henninger, at Wall Street Journal, "In an interview, Dick Cheney says 'It's important to have people at the helm who are prepared to be unpopular'."



I think Dick Cheney's been the rock of American public life for the last 10 years. He's unruffled in his convictions, more impressive as he got older.



RELATED: The left's revulsion of the former V.P. is picking up over at Memeorandum. See especially, ABC News, "Former Powell Chief of Staff: Cheney “Fears Being Tried as a War Criminal”." And click through at Memeorandum for Conor Friedersdorf's attack on Cheney. Friedersdorf's an airhead.

Berlin Copes With Car Burning Surge

Via Google, here's the headline at Wall Street Journal, "Berlin Authorities Struggle to Stop Car Burning Surge."

BERLIN — German authorities are scrambling to contain and make sense of a surge in car torchings in the nation's capital that have raised fears that the vandalism spree could escalate into the broader, more dangerous forms of street crime that have recently hit other pockets of Europe.



Setting cars on fire has become a popular form of class protest and petty crime in recent years in Berlin, triggered in part by tensions over fast-rising rents and other forms of gentrification in this relatively poor city compared with other major German cities. But the latest spate—including some 60 cars torched in four nights—marks a sharp surge in the arson attacks. While previous car burnings were largely confined to Berlin's up-and-coming working class neighborhoods, such as Kreuzberg and Friedrichshain, the latest spate has rapidly spread to its more affluent western districts.



They also come amid a wave of street violence across other parts of Europe—most notably riots in London and other U.K. cities this month—that so far has largely left Europe's largest economy relatively unscathed. Elsewhere on the Continent, violence has erupted in countries chafing under austerity measures, such as protests marred by police clashes in Spain and Greece and the deadly firebombing of an Athens bank building just over a year ago.



In Berlin, the circumstances behind the rash of car torchings appear largely local, but many residents and crime experts believe growing economic tensions within the city limits play a role. While Germany's national unemployment rate hovers around 7%, in Berlin it remains stuck at 13.5%. Meanwhile rising rents and real-estate prices are displacing more of its poorer residents from its central and increasingly trendy neighborhoods.

And checking back at that Google search, a number of articles have mystified titles, such as "Is 'Tourism Fatigue' Behind Berlin Arson Wave?", at Spiegel, and "Berliners Still Can't Work Out Who's Torching Their Luxury Cars," at Business Insider. But c'mon, there's no mystery. Business Day nails it, "Berlin’s far left vents fury on ‘fat cat’ cars":

ARSONISTS had set fire to 26 cars in Berlin in the past two days, mainly Mercedes-Benzes, BMWs and Audis, police said yesterday, bringing the number torched in the city this year to at least 138.



Far-left extremists were targeting German luxury cars, symbols of the country’s wealth and export prowess, police said.



"The arsonists want to hit what they say are ‘fat cats’," Berlin police spokesman Michael Gassen said. A special unit was investigating the fires as political crimes after the police received letters claiming responsibility that derided globalisation, gentrification and rising rents, he said. No arrests have been made in the most recent string of attacks.



The fires come amid worsening economic data and political discontent in the country. German growth, last year the motor of Europe’s recovery, almost ground to a halt in the second quarter. Gross domestic product, adjusted for seasonal effects, rose 0,1% from the first quarter, the Federal Statistics Office said this week.



Almost two years into the European debt crisis , restiveness over Germany’s contribution to rescues is weighing on Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition as voters rebel over providing aid to fellow euro-zone countries.



When Germany in 2009 experienced its worst recession since the Second World War , a record 221 cars were torched.



A key factor in the unrest is that about 40% of youths are either without a high school certificate or a paying job, said Johannes Becker, head of the Centre for Conflict Studies at the University of Marburg. "In Britain … people are predisposed to jumping on the bandwagon . They see that something is up and want to be part of it, to add some fuel to the fire, as it were. With these cars in Berlin, they are in contrast consciously trying to send a message."

See? That wasn't hard. Far left groups are seizing the moment to heighten revolutionary tensions, but since it's not likely any of the European democracies are at risk of their governments being overthrown, the violence ends up being purely anarchist and nihilist. And that's all you're going to get from the progressive, neo-communist left. It's all of a piece. And it's not only murderously destructive, it's morally reprehensible. Freakin' ASFLs.

Government-Funded Wealth in Washington D.C.'s Suburbs

This is pretty fascinating, especially given the national angst about taxing and spending. At WaPo, "Government dollars fuel wealth: D.C. enclaves reap rewards of contracting boom":

Millions of dollars worth of federal contracts transformed Anita Talwar from a government accounting clerk into a wealthy woman — one who can afford a $2.8 million home in the Washington suburbs with its own elevator, wine cellar and Swarovski crystal chandeliers.



Talwar, a 59-year-old immigrant from India, had no idea that she and her husband would amass a small fortune when she launched a company providing tech support to the federal government in 1987. But she shrewdly took advantage of programs for minority-owned small businesses and rode a boom in federal contracting.



By the time Talwar sold Advanced Management Technology in 2004, it had grown from a one-woman shop to a company with more than 350 employees and $100 million in annual revenue — all of it from government contracts.



Talwar’s success — and that of hundreds of other contractors like her — is a key factor driving the explosion of the region’s wealth over the last two decades. It also has exacerbated the gap between high- and low-wage workers, which is wider in the D.C. area than almost anywhere else in the United States.



Washingtonians now enjoy the highest median household income of any metropolitan area in the country, and five of the top 10 jurisdictions in America — Loudoun, Howard and Fairfax counties, and Falls Church and Fairfax City — are here, census data shows.



The signs of that wealth are on display all over, from the string of luxury boutiques such as Gucci and Tory Burch opening at Tysons Galleria to the $15 cocktails served over artisanal ice at the W Hotel in the District to the ever-larger houses rising off River Road in Potomac.

This isn't something to be proud of. The Washington Leviathan is the capitol's biggest driver of wealth, either through government contracting, or through government employment. It's a situation Mark Steyn discusses in America Alone. We've given up freedom to an ever increasing bureaucratic establishment that's the arbiter of material success. And it's self-fulfilling. If you want more people to be successful expand the size and scope of government. Somehow I think James Madison wouldn't have been pleased.



BONUS: See if you can make heads or tails of these two letters to the editor, which are critical of the posts coverage of the government-funded suburban luxury. (There's a reverse kind of outrage, not at the luxury itself, but to the possibility that such media coverage might create a backlash to government largesse.)

Northrop Grumman Bails Out of Los Angeles, Ending Headquartered Relationship Dating From 1939

At Los Angeles Times, "Northrop execs bail out of L.A., but the firm is still grounded in the region":

Northrop Grumman Corp., the last big-name aerospace company headquartered in Southern California, is headed out of town this week.



The nation's second-largest military contractor, founded in 1939 by visionary aircraft designer Jack Northrop, is officially moving its main office to Falls Church, Va., on Monday. It is a milestone for the corporation that along the way absorbed big names like TRW Inc., Litton Industries Inc., Westinghouse Electronic Systems and Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical.



Today, the company is an industry giant with about $35 billion in annual sales, building such things as sophisticated satellites, high-flying spy drones and the ghostly B-2 stealth bomber. While 300 members of its corporate staff departs, it still will have about 30,000 jobs in the Southland and remain one of the region's largest private employers.





The company joins an exodus of military companies — including Lockheed Martin Corp., Science Applications International Corp. and Computer Sciences Corp. — that have abandoned the Southland since the mid-1990s in favor of headquarters nestled nearer to decision makers in Washington.



"This is an important move for the company, and it's one that we believe will improve the effectiveness in serving the nation and our customers," said Northrop Chief Executive Wesley G. Bush in announcing the decision to move the company back in January 2010. "The proximity to Washington enables us to be a more integrated part of the federal process."

More at that top link.

Runaway Spending

Cool graph.



At Heritage Foundation, "Runaway Spending, Not Inadequate Tax Revenue, Is Responsible for Future Deficits."

Democrats Pushing Obama to Do More to Create Jobs

At LAT, "Democrats urge Obama to be more aggressive on jobs."



They claim to have "new ideas." But Democrats simply want more spending. The innovation comes from the subterranean language devised to slough off these new big-government boondoggles on the people.

Conservative Happy Hour with Bill Whittle

Okay, I'm heading out to the Bill Whittle event, in Newport Beach.



I'm sure he'll have a bang up presentation, given all that's been in the news just this last week. And for questions and answers, I'll be interested to see if he has an emendation to his optimistic take on American exceptionalism, seen here, in part, at his outstanding video presentation: "Bill Whittle's Firewall: 'What We Believe, Part 7: American Exceptionalism."

And tune back in here later tonight for a report and more regular blogging!

Main Street Bank, Kingwood, Texas, to Go Out of Business

What's interesting about this is that the bank chairman, Thomas Depping, cites strangulating regulation as driving him from the market. See Wall Street Journal, "Fed Up: A Texas Bank Is Calling It Quits":

Main Street Bank lends most of its money to small businesses and is earning decent profits. But the Kingwood, Texas, bank is about to get out of the banking business.



In an extreme example of the frustration felt by many bankers as regulators toughen their oversight of the nation's financial institutions, Main Street's chairman, Thomas Depping, is expected to announce Wednesday that the 27-year-old bank will surrender its banking charter and sell its four branches to a nearby bank.

Mr. Depping plans to set up a new lender that will operate beyond the reach of banking regulators—and the deposit-insurance safety net. Backed by the private investment firm of Microsoft Corp. co-founder Paul Allen, the company won't be able to call itself a bank, but it will be able to do business the way Mr. Depping wants.



"The regulatory environment makes it very difficult to do what we do," says Mr. Depping, who last summer saw his bank hit with an enforcement order from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Continue reading.



If you're reading Mark Steyn's After America, this story is yet another eerie example, found in the book, of the kind of stifling anti-American regulatory burdens shutting down innovation and growth in this country. Perhaps Depping will do better in his new venture, but the move to shutter the bank is an real indictment of job-killing government oversight.

Markets Plunged Despite President Obama's Reassurance

I meant to post this yesterday. And Stormbringer provides extra incentive, "BARACKALYPSE NOW: IT TANKED AS HE TALKED!"

And the latest at Wall Street Journal, "Markets Sink Then Soar After Fed Speaks":

The Federal Reserve sent investors lurching from worry to hope as it warned that the economy would remain weak for some time but said it was prepared to take further steps to shore it up.



The Fed's statement, which included plans to keep interest rates near zero for at least the next two years, ultimately sent the Dow Jones Industrial Average up 4%, its biggest daily gain since March 2009. Yields on Treasurys dropped as money poured in.



Trading was chaotic. Investors were initially discouraged by the Fed's announcement just after 2:15 p.m. EDT, disappointed that policy makers didn't announce any new initiatives and disheartened by the Fed's gloomy appraisal of the economy. That sent the Dow down more than 200 points within minutes.



Then, just as quickly, the market rebounded as traders focused on a phrase low in the Fed's statement, which said the central bank had discussed a "range of policy tools" that it was "prepared to employ." That prompted speculation that the central bank might soon step in with additional measures aimed at spurring the economy. In the last hour of trading, the Dow shot up 500 points, closing with a gain of 429.92 points, or 4%, at 11239.77. In Asia Wednesday morning, Tokyo shares opened higher, rising 1.9% at the start of trading.

See also LAT, "Dow gains 429 after remarks from Fed."



When in doubt, parse the Fed's statements (and ignore President Barack "Steve Urkel" Obama).

Bank of New York Mellon Charging Negative Interest on Deposits

When I went to deposit a check yesterday, the screen on the ATM machine flashed, "Special 1% Interest Rate on CDs of $25,000 or More!"

I thought, my God, banks don't pay interest anymore!

So, yep. You pay them, or at least on big money deposits at Mellon Bank. See New York Post, "BoNY: Big deposits will cost you a pretty penny."

You can keep your stinkin' money.

The financial markets are so foul that Bank of New York Mellon -- overwhelmed by a flood of investors pulling their money out of stocks and stashing it in bank accounts -- is going to start charging its largest institutional customers for holding their cash deposits.

The nation's largest custodial bank announced that it would charge customers more than a tenth of a percentage point for "extraordinarily high" deposits of $50 million or more.

The unusual move by the bank, which manages more than $1.1 trillion in assets for investment funds and money managers looking to safely park their dough, is hoping to discourage customers from plowing even more money into their accounts.

Also at New York Times, "Nervous Investors Chase Low-Risk Assets."

In a sign of just how much cash had poured into commercial bank accounts, Bank of New York Mellon said on Thursday that it would charge institutional clients with more than $50 million on deposit a fee of 13 basis points. The move is intended to recover some of the cost of managing the money, but is also a bid to slow the so-called hot money that has been ricocheting between Treasuries, money-market funds and pure cash balances at the big banks.

The Bank of New York Mellon said the fee would only be applied “to a small number of institutional clients with extraordinarily high deposit levels where the deposits have increased significantly in recent weeks, well above market trends.” The bank did not disclose just how much cash had poured into its coffers recently.

The good news is that investors are pouring their money into U.S. banks. We're lucky that way. When we've seen financial crises in Mexico and Thailand in recent decades, the money flowed out of those countries, leaving them dry and needing bailouts from the U.S. There's a reason we need to worry about our debt overhang. We don't want go the way of Mexico!

Mark Meckler Interview at Der Spiegel

See, "Interview with Tea Party Co-Founder Mark Meckler: 'We Have Compromised Our Way Into Disaster'":

SPIEGEL: The world is looking at Washington and sees gridlock and chaos. How much have the negotiations over the United States' debt ceiling hurt America's standing in the world?

Meckler: Saying that these debates have hurt our image is absurd. What you currently see in Washington is one of the most responsible debates ever about the size and scope of government. The world should look at what is going on in the United States as a model for what should happen in all countries.

SPIEGEL: We look at it and see a Congress held hostage by a small group of radical Tea Party members unwilling to agree to any budget compromise and risking a US default.

Meckler: What do you mean by "a small group?" Forty-one percent of voters in the last US election said they agreed with Tea Party values. And the primary values of the Tea Party are about fiscal responsibility.

SPIEGEL: But you are willing to accept a US default if your demands for massive budget cuts and no tax increases are not met. That seems rather irresponsible or even unpatriotic. Most leading economists forecast financial "Armageddon" in that case.

Meckler: Default is a false threat. We take in over $220 billion in revenues every month and our debt service is only roughly $20 billion. The only way we will default is if the President of the United States makes the irresponsible choice not to pay our debts. We Tea Party Patriots put principles first, and we have to understand what America is about. Our country was founded on an idea: liberty. But it requires fiscal responsibility for people to be free. We are becoming slaves to our own government. Every US family now owes $400,000 to $500,000 in national debt. We Tea Party Patriots fight for the future of the nation, and there can be nothing more patriotic than that.

Continue reading.

Tea Party Sees No Triumph In Compromise

At report at Wall Street Journal:

The agreement to cut deficits and raise the debt ceiling hammered together in Washington caps a remarkable two-year surge by the tea-party movement—forcing Republicans and Democrats alike to refocus on spending and, at the same time, proving the political power of the tea party.

Yet, a chorus of tea-party activists and leaders across the country denounced the agreement on Monday, saying it included little in the way of the change they actually sought.

"People are saying, 'These tea partiers, aren't they wonderful, they are changing the conversation,'" said Ellen Gilmore, a leader of the LaGrange Tea Party Patriots in Georgia. "Well, we got absolutely squat—except for the conversation."

However, the deal struck Sunday falls far short of many tea-party groups' stated goals of no increase in the debt ceiling, vastly larger budget cuts and passage of a balanced-budget amendment. The central question facing the loose-knit tea-party movement today, two years after it sprang into existence, is whether its organization and leadership can grow to match its ideological force.

Actually, the tea party is stronger than I thought it'd be after the election. Members of Congress have really taken the limited government message to heart, and that goes all the way to Speaker John Boehner. I think activists should be patting themselves on the back and mobilizing to get more grassroots representatives elected in 2012. And the GOP presidential field sure is taking the tea partiers seriously. See Los Angeles Times, "Almost all GOP presidential hopefuls oppose debt deal."

Time for Institutional Reform? Well, Only When Democrats Are Losing

Leave it to the bright lights of the political science profession to call for major structural reforms on the heels of the debt deal. It reminds me of all the useless handwringing over the filibuster once Obama-the-Socialist was elected. Progressives lost. And the losers are screaming foul! See Jacob Hacker and Oona Hathaway, at New York Times, "Our Unbalanced Democracy" (via Memeorandum):

OUR nation isn’t facing just a debt crisis; it’s facing a democracy crisis. For weeks, the federal government has been hurtling toward two unsavory options: a crippling default brought on by Congressional gridlock, or — as key Democrats have advocated — a unilateral increase in the debt ceiling by an unchecked president. Even if the last-minute deal announced on Sunday night holds together, it’s become clear that the balance at the heart of the Constitution is under threat.

The debate has threatened to play out as a destructive but all too familiar two-step, revealing how dysfunctional the relationship between Congress and the president has become.

The two-step begins with a Congress that is hamstrung and incapable of effective action. The president then decides he has little alternative but to strike out on his own, regardless of what the Constitution says.

Congress, unable or unwilling to defend its role, resorts instead to carping at “his” program, “his” war or “his” economy — while denying any responsibility for the mess it helped create. The president, on the defensive, digs in further.

This is, to say it plainly, pure bull. The system's working just the way it's supposed to. The electorate voted for a GOP House majority in 2010. And the Republicans stuck to their guns, to the shock of the old establishment, both Democrats and Republicans alike, who have historically, in previous rounds of debt "negotiations," faked spending restraint while hiking taxes. We have a presidential system and the separation of power. Each office is elected individually, with elections staggered every two years between the House (two-year terms, the entire membership up for reelection every two years), the Senate (six year terms of office for political insulation, with one-third of senators elected every two years), and the president (four year terms of office, term limited since 1951 to prevent cults of personality). Thank the Framers of the Constitution. They built a system that effectively prevents tyranny of the majority. If the voters are unhappy, they get to pick the government they want in 2012. That's how it works. No one's taking hostages. The system's not dysfunctional. If you don't like the filibuster, elect 60 senators from your own party to the majority in the Senate. That solves the problem. If you don't like Republican backbone in the House, take back the chamber in 2010. That's how it works. Amazing how progressives whine about how the sky is falling when folks say we ought to live within our means. It's all going to work out, and in the end the average voter will have demonstrated more influence than the upper-crust academics sneering from their ivory towers.

Image Credit: The People's Cube.

New York Times Slurs Republicans as 'Hostage-Taking Extremists'

It's no mystery where the Times' editorial board gets such language. The progressive blogosphere has long been awash in beyond-the-pale attacks on principled conservatives. And the tone has taken a desperate turn of late. Government spending is out of control and leftist elites called for more of the same as an ostensible solution. The White House never offered an original plan and Senate Democrats played obstruction until the last moment. As I noted previously, elections have consequences. The GOP deserves credit for sticking to the political currents that brought them majority power last year in the House of Representatives. There's still a long way to go on the road to reform, and progressives are suffocating at the prospects of more good government rationalization. And reading this is like hearing the tormented screams of the demon being impaled. It's excruciating when your expansionist agenda is decisively crushed. But with luck it's just a start:

There is little to like about the tentative agreement between Congressional leaders and the White House except that it happened at all. The deal would avert a catastrophic government default, immediately and probably through the end of 2012. The rest of it is a nearly complete capitulation to the hostage-taking demands of Republican extremists. It will hurt programs for the middle class and poor, and hinder an economic recovery.

It is not yet set in stone, and there may still be time to make it better. But in the end, most Democrats will have no choice but to swallow their fury, accept the deal and, we hope, fight harder the next time.