Democrats=Bad@Math

For a long time I have been puzzled on how the left and far left in politics can persist in spending money and pushing for even more programs to spend money in a time of economic need. I thought maybe they were just so focused on votes and pushing through a socialist agenda, that they didn't want to be bothered with the bottom line. I thought maybe they didn't understand that every fee or tax is passed onto consumers as part of the cost of a product or service. But that's not the case. Simply put, Democrats are bad at math. They can't balance a checkbook. They can't maintain a budget. And they sure as hell can't run this economy. But don't take my word for it. Read it in the Wall Street Journal......

"By DANIEL B. KLEIN
Who is better informed about the policy choices facing the country—liberals, conservatives or libertarians? According to a Zogby International survey that I write about in the May issue of Econ Journal Watch, the answer is unequivocal: The left flunks Econ 101.
Zogby researcher Zeljka Buturovic and I considered the 4,835 respondents' (all American adults) answers to eight survey questions about basic economics. We also asked the respondents about their political leanings: progressive/very liberal; liberal; moderate; conservative; very conservative; and libertarian.
Rather than focusing on whether respondents answered a question correctly, we instead looked at whether they answered incorrectly. A response was counted as incorrect only if it was flatly unenlightened.
Consider one of the economic propositions in the December 2008 poll: "Restrictions on housing development make housing less affordable." People were asked if they: 1) strongly agree; 2) somewhat agree; 3) somewhat disagree; 4) strongly disagree; 5) are not sure.
Basic economics acknowledges that whatever redeeming features a restriction may have, it increases the cost of production and exchange, making goods and services less affordable. There may be exceptions to the general case, but they would be atypical.

Therefore, we counted as incorrect responses of "somewhat disagree" and "strongly disagree." This treatment gives leeway for those who think the question is ambiguous or half right and half wrong. They would likely answer "not sure," which we do not count as incorrect.
In this case, percentage of conservatives answering incorrectly was 22.3%, very conservatives 17.6% and libertarians 15.7%. But the percentage of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly was 67.6% and liberals 60.1%. The pattern was not an anomaly.
The other questions were: 1) Mandatory licensing of professional services increases the prices of those services (unenlightened answer: disagree). 2) Overall, the standard of living is higher today than it was 30 years ago (unenlightened answer: disagree). 3) Rent control leads to housing shortages (unenlightened answer: disagree). 4) A company with the largest market share is a monopoly (unenlightened answer: agree). 5) Third World workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited (unenlightened answer: agree). 6) Free trade leads to unemployment (unenlightened answer: agree). 7) Minimum wage laws raise unemployment (unenlightened answer: disagree).

How did the six ideological groups do overall? Here they are, best to worst, with an average number of incorrect responses from 0 to 8: Very conservative, 1.30; Libertarian, 1.38; Conservative, 1.67; Moderate, 3.67; Liberal, 4.69; Progressive/very liberal, 5.26.
Americans in the first three categories do reasonably well. But the left has trouble squaring economic thinking with their political psychology, morals and aesthetics.
To be sure, none of the eight questions specifically challenge the political sensibilities of conservatives and libertarians. Still, not all of the eight questions are tied directly to left-wing concerns about inequality and redistribution. In particular, the questions about mandatory licensing, the standard of living, the definition of monopoly, and free trade do not specifically challenge leftist sensibilities.

Yet on every question the left did much worse. On the monopoly question, the portion of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly (31%) was more than twice that of conservatives (13%) and more than four times that of libertarians (7%). On the question about living standards, the portion of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly (61%) was more than four times that of conservatives (13%) and almost three times that of libertarians (21%).
The survey also asked about party affiliation. Those responding Democratic averaged 4.59 incorrect answers. Republicans averaged 1.61 incorrect, and Libertarians 1.26 incorrect.
Adam Smith described political economy as "a branch of the science of a statesman or legislator." Governmental power joined with wrongheadedness is something terrible, but all too common. Realizing that many of our leaders and their constituents are economically unenlightened sheds light on the troubles that surround us."

Mr. Klein is a professor of economics at George Mason University. This op-ed is based on an article published in the May 2010 issue of the journal he edits, Econ Journal Watch, a project sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research. The article is at: http://econjwatch.org/articles/economic-enlightenment-in-relation-to-college-going-ideology-and-other-variables-a-zogby-survey-of-americans

Obama's Failed Diplomacy

From the Wall Street Journal:

"The Obama bowing pictures are becoming iconic not for those reasons, however, but because they express a growing political perception, and that is that there is something amateurish about this presidency, something too ad hoc and highly personalized about it, something . . . incompetent, at least in its first year..."

I am not a big fan of Peggy Noonan. I only on occasion agree with her observations. But this column expresses the opinions that I have had regarding this administration's approach to diplomacy and protocol. It has been clumsy at best. And not a good or endearing sort of clumsy, but a deliberate flaunting of tradition in order to achieve some unknown display of a type of condescending obeisance. The bowing of President Obama to the Emperor of Japan is just another in a series of diplomatic faux pas which seem to be planned to show America's willingness to let go the reins of power.

No nation makes headway with foreign leaders by acting out a Uriah Heep type of demeanor. Reagan encouraged the Fall of the Berlin Wall, Truman when face with the possibility of a million American casualties on the beach in an invasion of Japan chose to drop the Bomb. Being the President is a serious job with serious implications. Unfortunately this White House seems to be running on the same game plan they used during the campaign. It's just not working.

From the IPOD for Queen Elizabeth II to the unseemly bowing to Saudi and Japanese royalty, it appears that this administration is trying to ingratiate itself with foreign heads of states by denigrating America's power and diminishing our policies. It is hamhanded and amateur. But then again, if you will read this column, you will see that even seasoned Democrat supporters are questioning their support in the face of a White House staff that acts as if they are either lacking in the abilities and knowledge for the job or that they are deliberately flaunting protocol with the goal being to shove off the burden of leadership.

Either action betrays a seriously flawed agenda and one that does not serve the American people well. Also note that the Democrat quoted said that if the healthcare bill fails to pass it would actually be a win for Obama because the bill itself is so inherently flawed. If this is what his friends are saying, then why is it that press refuses to acknowledge the concern expressed across demographic categories by the direction this Obama Administration and this liberal dominant Congress? I can only say that the core far Left are willing to follow this administration over a cliff if need be to maintain their fragile world view.

With healthcare being in peril, defacto unemployment at 17% and the Copenhagen treaty questionable in light of recent revelations on fraud and misdirection used to achieve Global Warming claims, wouldn't it make far more sense for this president to stay home and hammer out some meaningful pragmatic legislation to get American back to work? I am tired of worrying about the rest of the world, it's time for America First.