Saturday, December 02, 2006


In the Senate, there is no such thing as a majority. Ever since the elder Bush's administration, the filibuster has become routine. No longer reserved for civil-rights issues or for egregious legislation, it now is used to counter even motions for recess and adjournment. Members of the Senate are no longer subjected to the indignity of standing on their feet and reading a telephone book. Rather, the gentlemen's filibuster applies. The majority leader phones the minority leader and asks if a filibuster is in effect. With his feet up on his desk, the Republican replies that it is and the Democrat, despite his majority, does not even think about bringing up his bill for consideration unless he has a good shot at the 60 votes required to shut off debate. In the Senate, 51 votes determine who gets the corner office, but to pass legislation, one needs 60.

In the House of Representatives, with its 435 members, the Republican Party needed a simple majority - 218 - to rule. The Democrats need considerably more. The normal rules of a mathematical majority do not take into account the fractious nature of the Democratic Party. Where the Republican majority best resembled the Prussian Army - disciplined, unified and determined - the Democratic majority in the upcoming Congress is disunited, dispersed and divided into myriad caucuses and special interest groups. One could purchase the Republican majority wholesale by making a deal with the speaker and the majority leader. But to get the Democratic majority in line, one has to buy it retail -- caucus by caucus.

First, one has to go to check with the Black Caucus -- hat in hand -- to see if one's bill has enough liberal giveaways to round up its forty or so votes. Thence to the Hispanic Caucus for a similar screening. Then, with one's legislation weighted down with liberal provisions added by these two groups, one has to sell it to the Democratic Leadership Council moderates and, even worse, to the Blue Dog Democrats -- the out and out conservatives. If you are fortunate enough to pass these contradictory litmus tests, you then have to go to the environmentalists, the labor people, and even the gays to see that your bill passes muster. Only then can you begin to hope for House passage.



Brookes News Update

Is the US economy facing an imminent recession?: I think it's fair to draw the conclusion that it is the current monetary squeeze that's exerting a downward pressure on prices and imports and not increasing competition. Unfortunately America's thoroughly corrupt media would see this as an opportunity to destroy the Bush administration
Greenspan's price rule caused the US recession - and it's going to happen: The problem today, as always, is that nothing has been learnt from history. Monetary policy has been loose and the destructive price rule still rules
Steve Bracks' green stupidity and economic illiteracy: When it comes to economic reasoning and genuine conservation the obtuse Steve Bracks and his equally slow-witted colleagues are at a complete loss. Unfortunately the Liberal Party of Victoria isn't any better than Bracks' ignorant and destructive team
Labor thrashes the Liberal Party on wages and deregulated labour markets: For some weird reason many Liberal politicians seem to believe they are qualified to discuss economic policies despite the fact that they could not tell the difference between an isoquant and an icicle
The American Truth Forum exposes Islamic penetration of the universities: Many professors are no longer American their aim is teach children to hate America. Moreover, The number of imams at major universities is growing at a rapid rate. It does not seem to matter whether there is a substantial Muslim society at the school or not. What is the need for imams?
Is moderate inflation good for an economy?: The only ideal monetary setup is the one that eradicates inflation. This means, however, that the central bank must stop its monetary pumping. Better still, abolish the central bank
Are cut-and-run Democrats changing their tune?: Why did the media wait? Those "experts" now exposing the Democrats' exit strategy as a deadly fantasy were available to reporters before the election and yet they were ignored until the Democrats won both houses. Is this more evidence that the media runs interference for the Democrats?
Thanksgiving: Blessings and Challenges: Youngsters need to see that just because their lives are not heaven on earth, that doesn't mean they don't have a reason to rejoice. For they live in a country where anything is possible - where a poor child can grow up to become leader of the free world



Raising the Federal Minimum Wage should show how stupid that is: "Controversy remains in the United States (and elsewhere) over the effects of the minimum wage mainly because past changes in the U.S. minimum wage have usually been too small to have large and easily detectable general effects on employment and unemployment. The effects of an increase to $7.25 per hour in the federal minimum wage that many Democrats in Congress are proposing would be large enough to be easily seen in the data. It would be a nice experiment from a strictly scientific point of view, for it would help resolve the controversy over whether the effects of large increases in the minimum wage would be clearly visible in data on employment, training, and some prices.... The effects of the French minimum have been carefully studied by two excellent economists, Guy Laroque and Bernard Salanie, in a series of articles, such as " Labor Market Institutions and Employment in France," Journal of Applied Econometrics, 2002. They find that the relatively high minimum in France explains a significant part of the low employment rate of married women in France. Salanie has also argued that the high French minimum wage is important in explaining the dismal employment prospects of young persons in France, and the huge unemployment rate of Muslim youths there, estimated to be about 40 per cent.

EU strongarms little Switzerland: "But the EU, knowing that little Switzerland depends far more on them than vice versa, told the Swiss that they cannot just cherry pick the advantages of the EU, while completely opting out of paying money to the EU budget. So the EU told the Swiss: pay us a billion swiss franc per year, or we'll institute trade barriers that would harm the Swiss economy even more. Pure blackmail, in other words. The EU will thus get to enjoy the benefits of free trade with Switzerland and cherry pick another billion swiss francs, while the Swiss will have to pay up a billion swiss francs in "protection money" to the Don Corleones of Brussells." [Imagine the shrieks of "American imperialism" if Washington tried this]



"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)

Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.


No comments: