This Chart is Revealing: Lack of Private Sector Experience of Cabinet Members

Help Wanted, No Private Sector Experience Required

By Nick SchulzNovember 25, 2009, 8:19 am

A friend sends along the following chart from a J.P. Morgan research report. It examines the prior private sector experience of the cabinet officials since 1900 that one might expect a president to turn to in seeking advice about helping the economy. It includes secretaries of State, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Interior, Labor, Transportation, Energy, and Housing & Urban Development, and excludes Postmaster General, Navy, War, Health, Education & Welfare, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security—432 cabinet members in all.

When one considers that public sector employment has ranged since the 1950s at between 15 percent and 19 percent of the population, the makeup of the current cabinet—over 90 percent of its prior experience was in the public sector—is remarkable.

http://blog.american.com/?p=7572

Global Warming Fraud update

But don't worry, Obama won't let that get in the way of going to Copenhagen to pander to the global warming crowd and compromise our economy in the process.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=N2QzZDQ0YjNmMmU3NTQwOWM2M2M0YmE2NGY4YTQzMjc=

Inhofe: CRU Scandal Bigger than ACORN Flap   [Robert Costa]

Sen. James Inhofe (R., Okla.), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, tells NRO that the leaked correspondence from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at Britain’s University of East Anglia could potentially be a bigger scandal than the release of undercover videos exposing ACORN earlier this year. “If you use financial criteria and evaluate the costs involved, then this is certainly more expensive,” says Inhofe. “It’s a wake-up call for America.”

Inhofe says that the e-mails, which reveal climate scientists working together to present a united front on anthropogenic global warming, are the “final redemption” for climate-change skeptics.

“The notion that these scientists tried to declare the science settled for personal reasons is disgraceful,” says Inhofe. “They were purposefully misrepresenting the facts. They tried to make America believe and it worked, for a time. Even my grandkids came home filled with this stuff, saying that ‘anthropogenic gases cause global warming.’ I reminded them that these things go in cycles. We’ve had warming then cooling, then warming and cooling again. I’m delighted that people are discovering that the science has been cooked for a long period of time.”

Inhofe points out that the CRU data were used in the 2007 report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which was subsequently used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as it prepared its guidelines on carbon emissions. These connections, he says, are very worrisome for the American taxpayer.

“There are tremendous economic ramifications to what these guys were trying to do,” says Inhofe. “The IPCC, for years, has been costing the government so much money, and now, wasted time in trying to pass faulty legislation based on bad data.”

Inhofe tells us that he will begin an investigation into the e-mails soon. Today, he sent letters to several scientists, some of whom allegedly manipulated climate data, as well as the inspectors general of the EPA and the Departments of Commerce, Interior, and Energy, other governmental organizations.

“Meanwhile,” says Inhofe, “Al Gore has been out there making hundreds of millions of dollars pushing anthropogenic global warming. It’s clear now that we shouldn’t listen to him. He represents the far-left extreme of Hollywood, which calls the shots for the Democratic party. He has an extremist mentality.”

Following the worldwide attention on the leaked CRU e-mails, Inhofe says that he still plans to go to the Copenhagen conference on climate change next month. He also says that cap-and-trade legislation is “dead in the Senate.”

“I’ll be going to Copenhagen to expose the truth,” says Inhofe. “I’ve been ridiculed for the past six years, yet we were right all along.” (The Oklahoman led a similar “truth squad” in 2003, during the U.N.’s climate-change negotiations in Milan, Italy.) Supporters of cap-and-trade who also plan on attending, such as Sen. John Kerry (D., Mass.), “are in denial,” he adds.

“My message will be easier to deliver, that’s for sure,” says Inhofe. “When I was in Milan, it was kind of humorous. I had put out a statement calling anthropogenic global warming a hoax and they put up my picture on ‘Wanted’ posters around the city. I tore them down, brought them home, and auctioned them at fundraisers.”

“It’s different this time,” says Inhofe. “We went to Milan with little credibility, saying that this thing is rigged, that the science is cooked. We didn’t have much to back us up in 2003. I know that Boxer and Kerry would try to misrepresent the state of cap-and-trade in the Senate. I can hear their speech now saying it’s not dead — that’s it’s passed out of a committee. But look, it’s dead. It’s not going to pass. It’s dead because regardless of what you think of the science, which these e-mails certainly don’t help, you know that the costs are simply too much. Jobs would go elsewhere if we introduced harsh carbon regulations.”

ObamaCare: Its Just Wrong, clearly explained

This is the time  ... to kill it ... its a monstronsity; born of dishonesty and political corruption.

Mending Health Care   [Yuval Levin]

These days, it seems like the actual arguments for the Democrats’ health-care proposals have all faded away. Remember back when OMB Director Peter Orszag was on television all the time talking about reducing costs? Have you seen him lately? Me neither. The case for Obamacare as cost reduction just won’t pass the laugh test anymore, and no one seems to make it. The case for covering everyone isn’t heard all that much either, since the Democrats’ plans won’t do that. The case for improved efficiency hasn’t really survived the machinations necessary to get a bill through the House and to get another to the Senate floor — as what remains after the wheeling and dealing is anything but efficient. It seems like the only case being made to (and by) wavering Democrats in Congress now is that the bill just has to pass. History is calling, we have never been closer to agreement, this is our chance, do it for the president, and on and on. The theory is that it’s this or nothing; some combination of the Reid and Pelosi bills has to pass or else we just leave our health-care system as it is.

But as Sen. Tom Coburn and former Deputy HHS Secretary (and regular Cornerite) Tevi Troy argue over at Forbes, this is no way to think about public policy. The notion that our only options are a massive new entitlement (complete with huge job-killing tax increases, a bloated new government program, and ridiculous budget gimmicks, but no real means to cut health-care costs) or just doing nothing simply isn’t true. There are lots of other options, and there is plenty of time to think them through and make some changes that actually improve our system. The two basic premises the Democrats are advancing at the moment — this or nothing, and now or never — are both false. As Coburn and Troy point out, there are better ways.

Krauthammer's Take   [NRO Staff]

On the horse trading necessary to pass Obamacare:

We saw Senator Landrieu say, "I decided there were enough significant reforms." Well, one reform that she really appreciated was a $300 million payoff to her state in the bill that was shoved in there as a way to purchase her vote. So that is a reform she could admire.

The reason I think there continues to be erosion of public support for this [health-care reform] is there is a realization that that is just one of hundreds of provisions, loopholes, payoffs, extra bureaucratic commissions, mandates stuffed into a monstrously large bill that most people don't even know about.

But there is the sense that we have had ever since the middle of the year that this is not an attempt to streamline our health-care system, which is what it needs. Ours is the best in the world, but it is inefficient. There are a lot of inefficiencies accumulated over decades.

What you want is simplicity, to strip away the inefficiencies. This [bill] will add on to them and it's going to make it utterly incoherent.

Two examples: tort reform — that would save half a trillion dollars to $2 trillion in a decade — is not in here at all. In fact, in the House bill, it's discouraged. You lose federal money if you're a state and you impose tort reform.

Second is the idea of being able to purchase your health insurance across state lines. It's a ridiculous prohibition. You buy life insurance across state lines. You buy auto insurance. You buy oranges across state lines. If you didn't, they would be extremely expensive in Wisconsin in the winter.

And the answer isn't the establishment of a public option in oranges in Wisconsin. It's allowing [interstate] competition. But the liberals won't allow [interstate] competition because they want a public option as an avenue into nationalized health care, and the excuse is it [the public option] will introduce competition.

ObamaCare Tax Deceptions in Reid's Senate bill

The Undertaker wants to tax you to death !

Reid’s Payroll Tax Deception [Yuval Levin]

The health-care bill the Senate will take up after Thanksgiving offers so many rich targets for criticism it’s hard to know where to start. But the folks over at e21 offer a great brief analysis of one of the most dishonest and cynical ploys in the bill — the increase in the Medicare payroll tax, which would raise money not for Medicare but for the new health-care entitlement (though, thanks to an accounting gimmick, would nonetheless also be counted as part of the Medicare Trust Fund), and which would not be indexed for inflation, and so would raise taxes on more and more workers each year.

And more generally, if you haven’t discovered e21 yet, you should take a look at the rest of their site. It’s a great one-stop shop for both accessible economic analysis and the best new pro-market economic ideas.


Charles Krauthammer discusses the politics of the Senate:


You asked what Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas will ask for. Well, after watching Louisiana get $100 million in what have some have called "The Louisiana Purchase," she ought to ask for $500 million at least.

Obama said he would end business as usual in Washington. If you look at section 2006, the Louisiana money, it looks as if it is a provision for all states which have had a proclamation of a disaster area in the last seven years — and then the fine print inside eliminates all the others except Louisiana. It's a new kind of business as usual. ...

There is almost no way imaginable that the vote [to allow debate to proceed on the health-care bill] will fail tomorrow. If it is, it is the ultimate humiliation [for Obama]. It's the rejection of the debate even before it starts.

The Democrats, even Lincoln who will have to be [up] for reelection, will have a second shot at killing the bill later, after the amendments. …

Now, you've got [Sen. Ben] Nelson, who is against the abortion provisions. He will allow debate, but if it's [the abortion language] not changed in the course of these amendments, he will oppose the bill at the end, which is why I think the bill at the end is going to strip out all the abortion stuff.

And then on the … public option, they're going to lose [Sen. Joe] Lieberman in the end — not tomorrow night — but in the end if it stays in. But they could possibly gain Olympia Snowe of Maine if a trigger [for the public option] is in.

So it can in the end pass, but it has to be amended in precisely the right way.

SNL skewers Obama China visit -- hilarious

Ridicule is the best form of satire IMO.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/110317/saturday-night-live-china-cold-open#s-p1-sr-i3

Keep America Safe

Never Forget Coalition Plans Rally Against Civilian Trials for 9/11 Terrorists [Andy McCarthy]

I'll be joining Debra Burlingame, Rep. Pete King (R., N.Y.), Tim Brown, and Peter Regan at a press conference tomorrow in lower Manhattan, in anticipation of a big rally the 9/11 Never Forget Coalition is organizing for Saturday, December 5, to protest the Obama administration's decision to give the 9/11 jihadists a civilian trial.

The 9/11 Never Forget Coalition has more details, here.

The announcement, in part, reads:

The 9/11 Never Forget Coalition, a diverse group of 9/11 victims, family members, first responders, active and reserve members of the military, veterans, and concerned Americans, is holding a November 24th press conference to discuss the details of their December 5th rally protesting the plan to bring the 9/11 terrorist conspirators to trial in New York City.

The Coalition formed to fight the decision of President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to try the 9/11 co-conspirators in New York City’s federal court, effectively giving war criminals the same rights as American citizens while endangering the safety of all New Yorkers. Two weeks ago, we sent a letter signed by 300 family members of 9/11 victims to the President, Attorney General and Defense Secretary Robert Gates asking them to reverse course. The letter has now been signed by over 120,000 Americans and is posted at http://www.keepamericasafe.com.

At the November 24th press conference, leading organizers of the Coalition will give details on a large rally which will be held on December 5th in New York City to protest the plan to bring terrorist detainees to trial in civilian courts.

Debra Burlingame, founder of 911 Families for a Safe and Strong America, said “We chose to hold it on Thanksgiving Week in the hope that our fellow Americans will join us in sending our prayers and messages of thanks to our troops and first responders, who will bear the brunt of these dangerous decisions made in Washington. Our rally on Saturday, December 5 will tell Attorney General Eric Holder, President Barack Obama and their supporters in Congress: We will fight you all the way!”