Tom Rants

Some Republican politicians this year, having lost the moral high ground on fiscal and economic issues after wallowing in the mud of political corruption are, ironically, wrapping themselves more than ever in the rhetoric of values. The commonly used theme is that the United States is a «Christian nation» and that the US legal system is based on «Judeo-Christian values.» Lately I'm left wondering if some of these folks don't need a refresher course in exactly what Judeo-Christian values are.

• Hillel the Elder, one of the most important figures in the development of modern Judaism, summed up the Jewish law thus:
  

  What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Law; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.

• Jesus Christ, inarguably the most important figure in Christianity, summed things up thus:
  

  Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

This is the Law and the Prophets...The rest is explanation...almost like they met in the Temple or something.

When it comes to public discourse and public policy, it's hard to reconcile the most basic premise of both Jewish and Christian values with the actions of these «values» politicians when it comes to personal matters either. As if political corruption weren't enough, there's case after case where these Christians might want to pay more attention to the words of Christ:

Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye?

You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

Whether it's divorcing your wife of 30 plus years to marry a lobbyist and claiming to be a defender traditional marriage by voting to incorporate bigotry into the Constitution, touting family values while carrying on with prostitutes or keeping kids in foster care or worse rather than let them be adopted into loving homes, Republican politicians would do well to stick with economic conservatism if they can't walk the walk of «Judeo-Christian values» in their own lives. If they want to improve the moral fabric of the nation, then they should lead by example, instead of trying to use the blunt instrument of government to remove specks from their brother's eyes. If they could simply recommit themselves to the «values» of limited government and sound fiscal policy, that would do far more to strengthen families than providing example after example of hypocrisy and deceit.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant Congressionally chartered entities that act as market makers for the resale of mortgages in the United States, are supposedly in trouble. On the verge of failure, in fact, if the whiners in the media are to be believed.

The problem is that they're expected to need to raise in the neighborhood of $75 billion in new capital as a result of a new financial accounting standard on off-balance sheet entities. This seems like a huge amount, until you consider that they each have portfolios worth, conservatively valued, literally trillions of dollars. The difficulty is that this is not a good time for raising money in the mortgage business.

Hank Paulson wants to solve the problem by regulating them more, which typically means raising their capital requirements even further, adding insult to injury. This is reminiscent of nothing so much as the Federal Reserve action, documented by Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz, reducing the money supply at the beginning of the Great Depression. The action that made Ben Bernanke say, «Yes, we did it. We're very sorry. We won't do it again.» Maybe he won't have to, if the Treasury Department does it instead.

Well, okay, it's also reminiscent of the government's piss poor handling of the off balance sheet liabilities of Enron. When it became apparent that Enron had a big exposure the government responded with heavy handed threats of regulation of its bankers who responded by beginning to call loans. Enron was awash in cash one day, the government threatened and Enron was bankrupt. As bad as the Enron failure was, it was a minor economic ripple compared to the potential that either of the mortgage giants, let alone both, fail.

There's certainly room to evaluate the structure and regulation of the mortgage giants, but that doesn't address the short term issue which is itself the result of throwing new regulations at them at a bad time, kicking them when the mortgage markets they make are down. Realistically the options in the short term are to encourage them to raise private capital, to let them fail and virtually eliminate the US mortgage market, or directly or indirectly bail them out with taxpayer money.

There is a short term solution that's pro-growth, pro-market, non-inflationary and leaves open the option of slowly raising those capital requirements to a safer level as they raise capital privately: make the earnings of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and, for good measure, Ginnie Mae securities tax free for 10 years, both the debt and equity securities. The class warriors who want to encourage more regulation and eventual nationalization of the pair won't like that. They'll paint it as a «tax break for the rich.» To some extent they'll be right, but the rich in this case (as in most) are the little old ladies whose retirement savings are tied up in the supposedly safe income producing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac securities and who will be broke and eating cat food if the government «bails out» the pair. A cynic might think that's the goal of the class warriors.

Phil Gramm, whose economic advice is one of the principle redeeming factors in a McCain candidacy, hasn't exactly been tossed under the Straight Talk Express for his remarks about the economy, but he's apparently been told that he's riding in the cargo area for a few weeks.

Democrats are outraged at Gramm's remarks because, well, being outraged is what Democrats do best. And the McCain campaign is appeasing the Democrats because if he does they may like McCain better when they pull the lever for Obama.

Barack Obama says we don't need another Dr. Phil. I'm not sure why - most of America loves Dr. Phil. He also cited high gas prices as evidence of a recession, which shows that Obama should have failed his Economics 101 class, if he ever took one.

Consider this. With 25% of the labor force unemployed (and at a time when far fewer women were in the labor force), the soil literally blowing off the farms all across the Great Plains as they were being foreclosed, the failure of 4,000 commercial banks and 1,700 S&Ls leading to a declaration of a complete bank holiday, Treasury securities earning negative interest, money supply down 40%, industrial production down 47%, GDP down 30% and the wholesale price index down 33%, «Dr. Phil» Roosevelt declared «We have nothing to fear but fear itself.» He's now ranked among the greatest Presidents, certainly considered a hero to Democrats and that line is one of the most often quoted in American political history.

Fast forward to 2008. Unemployment, of a much larger labor force, is below the level of the Clinton «boom» years at 5.5%, the biggest problem facing most farmers in the plains states is where to spend all that money from selling corn at record prices for ethanol production, the FDIC's «watch list» of problem banks is near historical lows with only 76 banks, Treasury security spreads are returning to normal and were never anywhere near earning negative yields, money supply is stable (M1) to up (M2), industrial production is stable, GDP rose 1% in the first quarter, wholesale prices are up, Phil Gramm says «We have nothing to fear but whining» and he's pilloried. The liberal double standards never fail to amaze.

Meanwhile McCain is visiting Michigan where he lost to Mitt Romney because he had the guts to engage in real Straight Talk himself in Januray: «Some of the jobs that left the state of Michigan are not coming back.» John McCain is at his best when he's shooting straight and at his worst when he's pandering to the media. Hopefully he'll realize that Phil Gramm has this one exactly right and that he had it right himself in January.

• A grand jury decided not to indict Joe Horn for shooting and killing two men burglarizing his neighbor's home with his shotgun. Before confronting the men with his shotgun Horn had called 911, the police had not arrived and the men were leaving with a bag full of valuables. Harris County Assistant District Attorney Warren Diepraam commented «In most situations, calling 911 is the best remedy, not calling out for your 9-millimeter.» I guess it's a good thing Horn decided to use his shotgun then, Warren.
• It's becoming more common for judges to bar the use of words like «victim,» «rape,» 'murder,» and «crime» from criminal trials. While it makes sense to require the professionals - the lawyers, police officers, experts - to use nonprejudicial words, they're taking it a step further. Victims of rape are being expected to refer to the act of rape as «sexual intercourse.» In the recent controversial case one smart U.S. District Court Judge, Richard Kopf, wrote:
  

  there is something profoundly disturbing about a judge telling a citizen that she cannot say she was raped when testifying as a victim in a criminal case, particularly when the victim is presumably trying to do nothing more than describe what happened to her. This brings to mind the blue burkas of a distant place.

  True that.

• Good news for liberals who typically support the right to die and are aghast at the Supreme Court's recent decision upholding gun rights. The Court really is on your side. The CDC reported that 55% of gun deaths in 2005 were suicides. The Heller decision probably did more for the right to die in one fell swoop than 100 Jack Kevorkians.



• Much has been made of the fact that Osama bin Laden hasn't been caught. Less has been said about the fact that the Bush administration has caught the planner of the abortive Bojinka plot from 1995 who evaded the Clinton administration for 5 years and went on to orchestrate the 9/11 attacks. Now, the Bush administration has filed charges against another Clinton era terrorist that was caught during the Bush administration - a planner of the USS Cole bombing, Abd al Rahim al-Nashiri. Nashiri has been in custody since 2002, enjoyed the hospitality of Camp Delta and the recreational watersports of the CIA. Next, let's give him a fair trial and then hang him.

Story links after the cut...

Keep reading →

Like Saul on the road to Damascus, there's a bright light in my eyes...

The stage lights at Plaster Student Center at Missouri State University where four rows away the next President of the United States will speak in a few minutes.

Any nagging doubts about a McCain Presidency were resolved in the last two days by his conversion to the Gospel of cheap oil and the last five minutes by seats that aren't in the nosebleed section.

Photos, video, bloviating to follow.

So, apparently President Bush and Senator McCain are both listening to reason on offshore drilling. The political deal with the devil that Bush made to push drilling in Alaska, where it's politically popular, and not off the shores of the lower 48, where local politicians opposed drilling in their backyard, may turn out to be the biggest mistake of his Presidency. Unfortunately at the time, environmental extremists owned the ANWR issue because they made it about greedy oil companies and greedy Alaskans trying to hurt the lichens. You can't be a much more defenseless underdog than a lichen. With oil prices at $1 a gallon, it was hard to sell the American people that drilling mattered much and, with little to focus public concern, it was easy for the elites to push the idea that preventing US drilling in the Arctic was the best way to protect the Arctic environment.

With offshore drilling, especially now with gas prices over $4/gallon nationally, it's the snobbish, elitist, Not-in-my-backyard Floridians and Californians against the rest of the country. Those who stand in the way of offshore drilling in the name are hurting the economy, hurting our national security, hurting the poor, hurting the working class and, oh by the way, hurting the environment all in the name of not spoiling their view with an oil platform.

As I noted before, there's no evidence I'm aware of that shows an oil spill is more likely from a tanker carrying oil from a nearby offshore drilling platform compared to one delivering oil from Saudi Arabia. The Gulf platforms all rode out the worst that Katrina, Rita and every other hurricane of the last 5 years has thrown at them with no spills. A 3 million barrel supertanker crossing the ocean has a lot more opportunity to produce a spill and, if it happens, a much bigger one.

But there's more to it than just the potential for a mid-ocean oil spill by a 3 million barrel supertanker coming from the Mideast. For all the noise environmentalists make, the US has one of the strictest environmental protection regimes in the world. Not drilling here means buying oil from countries with far worse environmental records.

We can let oil companies drill here, where they'll be expected to keep it clean and be proactive to prevent problems, or we can import more oil from Nigeria, which «has one of the worst environmental records in the world. In recent years, the country has seen the execution of a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, widespread social and environmental problems stemming from oil operations in the Niger River delta, and the world's highest deforestation rate.»

We can have a few more oil rigs breaking the clean blue line of the Hollywood horizon or we can help finance the Russian exploration of the Arctic, leaving the Arctic Ocean to the devices of the country that «succeeded in wiping from the map almost an entire sea - the Aral, now largely a toxic desert - and turning the world's deepest freshwater lake, Baikal, into a borscht of cadmium and mercury deposits.» How do you think those Alaskan lichens will fare if the Russians repeat their recent history?

And, by the way, aren't our neighbors to the North a socialist paradise that can do no wrong? Yet, they also seem to be expanding oil production as fast as humanly possible - and selling it to us. If oil production is so bad for the environment, why are the sainted Canadians doing it and why isn't Barack Obama demanding they stop?

Not drilling offshore is bad for the economy. It's bad for every class - the working class, the poor and, though they may not feel the pain as much, the rich. It's bad for our national security, leaving us dependent on brutal dictators, theocrats and genocidal maniacs. Higher oil prices mean more money in the coffers of al Qaeda and in that battle, if you're against offshore drilling, you're against US.

But a less recognized fact is that NOT drilling offshore is bad for the environment. «Environmentalists» who prefer Americans to use oil produced in areas with less protection for the environment are showing that their concern really is all about the view.

Keep reading →

<sarcasm>

• Usher was just on Jimmy Kimmel Live! He's apparently written a song about voting because of all the people who've sacrificed so much for the right to vote. People like, according to Usher, Rosa Parks. Funny, I didn't realize it was the bus to a polling place.

  (Before you comment: It's the incredible ignorance of her role in history that is disrespectful of Ms. Parks. My disrespect is reserved for Usher and other ignorant, holier than thou liberal celebrities.)

• Everyone's busy talking about the Obama/Clinton Dream Ticket. Forget it. The Big Ticket does include Hillary Clinton, but it's going to take a third party/independent movement. The Big Ticket is Clinton/Paul. They won't have to worry about ballot access either - elections and rules don't matter - they're ENTITLED!
• There's supposedly a video out there of Michelle Obama that is much worse than any of her previous scandalous remarks. It's so bad that people who don't mind her slamming America are going to rush right out and cast an absentee ballot for John McCain. Apparently in the video she's talking about Barack's grandmother and refers to her as «whitey».

</sarcasm>

In the race for the GOP nomination for Missouri Governor, voters have a clear choice: a lawyer who went to Washington and became part of the problem or an economist who stayed in Missouri and became part of the solution.

Kenny Hulshof represents the worst of what's wrong w