Cross-Posted: TobyToons.com (Conservative Political Cartoons)

As the price of oil shoots through the roof because of political instability, and the inability of the Obama Administration to say yes to Canadian oil and thousands of jobs, we have to turn to other energy sources. Fortunately, there’s a cleaner and safer opportunity in natural gas right here in the United States

But some Chicken Littles in the environmental panic industry are preventing people from heating their homes and driving up the cost of electricity, while simultaneously denying needed jobs in the worst unemployment in decades. They claim to have found environmental damage in the process to retrieve the gas from shale deposits – called hydraulic fracturing, but the short answer is they’re wrong. The long answer is that they’re really fracking wrong: hydraulic fracturing is safer, cleaner, and cheaper than any of our current alternatives; and that’s just what’s scares these pseudo-scientists.

We must look at the scientific facts before making a policy decision, and the facts about shale gas, when you cut through a great deal of disinformation, are simple. First, it’s less expensive than the fossil fuel alternatives. At $66 per megawatt-hour, natural gas beats the dirtier and more dangerous coal, which costs around $90 per MWh. It even costs less than solar, wind (off and onshore), nuclear, oil and bio-diesel.

And shale gas doesn’t just save money, it saves lives. On average, fifty to sixty coal miners die every year. Every miner must wear artificial breathing apparatus to protect them in case of a disaster, disasters which happen with alarming frequency. Explosions, cave-ins and methane leaks combine to make coal mining the most dangerous job in the United States today.

(more…)

On this day last year, I posted two charts that I developed using the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank’s interactive website.

Those two charts showed that the current recovery was very weak compared to the boom of the early 1980s.

But perhaps that was an unfair comparison. Maybe the Reagan recovery started strong and then hit a wall. Or maybe the Obama recovery was the economic equivalent of a late bloomer.

So let’s look at the same charts, but add an extra year of data. Does it make a difference?

Meh…not so much.

Let’s start with the GDP data. The comparison is striking. Under Reagan’s policies, the economy skyrocketed.  Heck, the chart prepared by the Minneapolis Fed doesn’t even go high enough to show how well the economy performed during the 1980s.

(more…)

(Reuters) – Home prices fell more steeply than expected in November, and consumer confidence soured in January, highlighting the hurdles still facing the economic recovery.

The S&P/Case-Shiller composite index of single-family home prices in 20 metropolitan areas declined 0.7 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis, a survey showed on Tuesday, a bigger drop than the 0.5 percent economists expected.

The decrease added on to the 0.7 percent decline seen in October from September.

(more…)

Governor Bill Weld and Mitt Romney, circa 1990 (Photo courtesy of the Boston Globe)

In his campaign for the presidency, Mitt Romney often touts his job creating record as the CEO of Bain Capital, a very successful private equity firm he left for politics in 1999. His critics, meanwhile, attack that record, saying that he was a corporate raider who cut jobs and put profits ahead of people. The truth, as always, is somewhere in between. But there’s one jobs record that is easily verifiable: that of state workers in Massachusetts.

“[Romney's] cuts to the state bureaucracy, however, turned out to be fairly modest,” write Boston Globe reporters Scott Helman and Michael Kranish in the newly released book, The Real Romney.  ”After four years, he reduced the payroll of agencies under his direct control by 603 jobs, according to his administration’s tally.”

(more…)

I’ve already bragged that the Cato Institute is America’s best think tank, highlighting the fact that we took the lead in battling against Obama’s faux stimulus at a time when many were dispirited and reluctant to fight big government.

I’m biased, of course, so I’ll understand if you discount what I say. But I hope you’ll agree that my colleagues have put together an excellent video response to the President’s state-of-the-union speech.

As part of my contribution to the video, beginning around 6:35, I debunk the President’s class-warfare tax agenda by citing IRS data from the 1980s to explain that higher tax rates don’t necessarily mean higher tax revenue.

After a night’s sleep, here are a few additional observations on the President’s remarks.

• I was disappointed, but not surprised, that he repeated the economically foolish assertion that Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.
• I also was not surprised that he didn’t say much about jobs and the economy. These four charts show he doesn’t have much to brag about.
• It was also noteworthy that he didn’t spend much time talking about Obamacare, which suggests that White House pollsters understand that government-run healthcare isn’t very popular.
• It was equally revealing that he didn’t spend much time on the so-called income inequality issue. Redistribution was implicit in what he said, to be sure, but the Occupy-Wall-Street crowd is probably disappointed that he didn’t explicitly embrace their agenda. More evidence that the pollsters played a big role in this speech.
• I’m definitely not surprised that he talked about eliminating Osama bin Laden. Kudos to the Commander-in-Chief.
• I was amazed that he had the gall to say “no bailouts,” particularly given his support for TARP, the Dodd-Frank bailout bill, and the giveaway to GM and the auto unions. And if the GM bailout is supposed to be a success, I’d hate to see his definition of failure.
• And I was stunned that he could talk about the housing meltdown and mortgage crisis without mentioning the Federal Reserve, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac. Sort of like analyzing World War II and pretending Germany and Japan didn’t exist.

Since most of the previous observation are critical, I want to stress that I’m not being partisan. I also was disappointed in the Republican response. Was the GOP smart to showcase a governor who was part of the big-spending Bush Administration? Especially one who has said nice things about the value-added tax?

(more…)

Labor union membership continues to be blind to the fact that the support of its “leadership” to President Obama and his political allies is coming at the cost of the members. Big Labor bosses and their political allies are happy to continue to throw the membership under the bus for their own personal gain. For President Obama, this is the prospect of re-election; for the labor bosses, this is the survival of their “way of life.” This can be seen through the President’s actions and comments over the past three years.

Early in his presidency, President Obama made disparaging remarks about business owners whose companies had corporate jets. This was done in a blatant attempt to incite class warfare, despite the fact that the country was in a deep recession. By his words, the President willingly sacrificed the jobs of the very people who supported him through union dues. He knew the liberal media would not expose the tragic result his words would have on the private jet and airplane manufacturing industry.

In Wichita, Kansas, the home of private aircraft manufacturing has suffered tremendously, as thousands of union employees employed by Cessna and Beechcraft have been laid off, not to mention the thousands of jobs affiliated with general aviation lost across the country including manufacturers, part suppliers, fuel, pilots, mechanics, FBO services and insurance providers. Additionally, due to the loss of significant sales, use, income environmental and aviation tax revenues, thousands of local, state and federal employee positions, many of which were union jobs, have disappeared.

Adding insult to injury now the White House Defends User Fees of $100/flight on general aviation and corporate aviation to raise revenues in Obama’s continued class warfare and redistribution of wealth scheme in his effort to bring down America. Ironically this will cost more jobs, many of them union, as revenues ultimately will be reduced as fewer aircraft are purchased and general aviation travel is curtailed due to the added expense. The vicious cycle will continue to perpetuate itself at the expense of American jobs!

(more…)

The Left has frequently salivated over Obama’s post-partisan mojo. This post-partisan rhetoric has been so much hot-air, all show and no stay. Remember the president’s speech shortly after the unspeakable tragedy in Tucson wherein he said, “But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” How quickly those words were forgotten by the man who uttered them.

Hope of civility and bipartisan cooperation soon evaporated. President Obama wasted no time blaming Republicans for wanting dirty air and dirty water and not caring about the middle class who have suffered the most under his failed policies. He has prioritized his support for his friends in the labor unions while ignoring the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget in nearly 1000 days. He has done nothing since his Tucson speech to indicate he is post-partisan; indeed he has simply heated up his rhetoric against Republicans. His decision to reject the Keystone pipeline is just the latest far-Left pandering by his administration; in fact here is what Senate Democrats had to say about the Keystone Pipeline project,

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA): “Landrieu says she’d support Keystone in payroll/ui/doc fix bill. Says ‘good deal’of D & R support for it.” (Trish Turner, Twitter, 12/15/11)

Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK): “Another sticking point is that Republicans inserted in their bill language that would fast-track the proposed Keystone X-L oil pipeline extension from Canada down to the Lower 48.  …Senator Begich is supportive of moving the project forward and his office says that’s not a problem.” (Alaska Public Radio, 12/14/11)

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND): “I personally think the pipeline is absolutely in the national interest.  It’ll help us reduce our dependence on foreign energy, at least foreign sources that are hostile to our interests… I, for one, on this side would hope that this could be part of a final package…” (Floor remarks, 12/14/11)

(more…)

Despite an anemic economic recovery and an increasingly antagonistic Iran, President Obama decided to kill the Keystone XL pipeline. Creating thousands of jobs and securing American access to oil, the much-discussed Keystone project would transport crude oil from Alberta, Canada to American refiners in Oklahoma and Texas.

For years the pipeline was an innocuous project slowly making its way through the convoluted federal approval process. After receiving all but one permit, radical environmentalist—feeling affronted two years into the Obama Administration—set their sights on the soon-to-be approved Keystone pipeline. What should have been a non-controversial construction project became anything but. Before becoming the object of environmentalist scorn, the State Department approved and advocated for the nearly identical Canadian-American pipeline in 2009, arguing:

… the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States. These included increasing the diversity of available supplies among the United States’ worldwide crude oil sources in a time of considerable political tension in other major oil producing countries and regions; shortening the transportation pathway for crude oil supplies; and increasing crude oil supplies from a major non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries producer.

Canada is a stable and reliable ally and trading partner of the United States, with which we have free trade agreements which augment the security of this energy supply. Approval of the permit sends a positive economic signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability and availability of a portion of United States’ energy imports, and in the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction jobs for workers in the United States.

Drawing an arbitrary line in the sand, environmentalists threatened to sit out the 2012 election if President Obama approved the pipeline. Organizing daily protests outside the White House, environmentalists effectively turned a non-political issue into one of the most divisive topics of 2011.

(more…)

The Obama administration is expected to reject the controversial Keystone Pipeline this afternoon, according to Fox News.

The State Department is expected to vote against the pipeline this afternoon. Transcanada will however be allowed to reapply with an alternate route going through Nebraska.

(more…)

Earlier this week, I explained why Mitt Romney is a Republican version of Barack Obama. His transgressions include being open to a value-added tax, a less-than-stellar record on healthcare, weakness on Social Security reform, an anemic list of proposed budget savings, and support for reprehensible ethanol subsidies.

Now we can add something else to the list. He wants to cut off the bottom rungs of the economic ladder and hurt low-skilled workers.

Here are a couple of passages from a report in the Oregonian.

Mitt Romney…continues to be a supporter of indexing the minimum wage for inflation. Oregon and Washington were among the first states to index their own minimum wages to inflation – nine states now do so – and it’s a favorite of liberals… Romney campaigned in favor of indexing the minimum wage when he ran for governor in 2002.  However, ABC News noted in 2007 that he wasn’t sure he supported indexing the federalminimum wage (which is lower than the minimum wage in several states).  In this new video, you could quibble that he doesn’t explicitly say he’s talking about the federal minimum — but that sure seems to be the tenor of his comments.

In other words, Romney is willing to condemn lower-skilled workers to unemployment, in hopes that he will gain some sort of short-term political advantage. In this regard, he will be just like Bush.

(more…)

Yesterday on Breitbart.tv Rick Tyler of Newt Gingrich’s Super Pac told us that all of the 100,000 jobs that Mitt Romney and his surrogates advertise having credited were created in Southeast Asia and Mexico.

“Mitt Romney gives a bad name to capitalism,” Tyler told Steve Bannon on Breitbart.tv. Tyler served as a communication adviser for many years to Newt Gingrich and though they are legally prohibited from coordinating with the Gingrich campaign, there is little doubt that Tyler is doing his former boss’s bidding.

Tyler, who is running a series of anti-Romney ads after acquiring a film profiling the former Massachusetts governor’s Bain years, backed off his harsher language today in a Washington Post story:

“Show me where those jobs are?” Tyler said, in a reference to Romney’s frequent claim that he created over 100,000 jobs at Bain. “I would contend they are Mexican jobs and southeast Asian jobs.”

. . .

“This is not free-enterprise in the sense of Steve Jobs and Apple,” Tyler said. “People think of these [firings] as isolated incidents. But there is a Bain victim in nearly every state of the union. If voters learn about a pattern of predatory corporate muggings, I think they’re going to get angry.”

Mitt Romney hasn’t shared how he calculated the 100,000 jobs that he and his campaign have been advertising, but he assures voters that they are there.

(more…)

Saturday, at the GOP debate, Romney claimed that his company and those Bain & Co. invested in had helped create 100,000 net new jobs.

That figure was contradicted by a figure of 10,000 jobs Romney had previously given in his 1994 attempt at unseating Ted Kennedy.

In June 1994, Romney ran the following ad.

“Mitt Romney has spent his life building more than 20 businesses and helping to create more than 10,000 jobs,” says a narrator. “So when it comes to creating jobs, he’s not just talk. He’s done it. . . . Doesn’t it make sense for us to have a senator with real-world experience?” (“Romney ads key economic expertise; But rival says TV campaign is thin on details,” The Boston Globe, June 15, 1994).

It’s a theme he repeated to David Nyhan of the Boston Globe in a June interview. “[Romney] says he created 10,000 jobs,” Nyhan wrote. (“To Mitt, it’s a vision thing,” David Nyhan, The Boston Globe June 22, 1994).

And Romney repeated it again in another ad that his campaign ran in September 1994.

“The private investigators Ted Kennedy hired to dig up dirt got it wrong.  The companies Mitt Romney ran provide generous health care benefits to all their employees and have helped create over 10,000 new jobs.  But Kennedy’s in big trouble — so now he’s stooping to twisted attacks — distortions — already called ’sleazy.’  Ted Kennedy is trying to destroy Mitt Romney even though Kennedy’s never held a job in the real world.  After 32 years, the last thing he can talk about is change.” (MASSACHUSETTS: TED HITS ROMNEY ON MORMON RACIAL POLICIES The Hotline September 28, 1994)

Now, in 2012, he and his surrogates are claiming that he created 100,000 net jobs.

So when did that happen?

(more…)

Message to my fellow conservatives: Please don’t blame the mainstream media for the improvement in jobs, unemployment, and economic growth. Reporters are not making this up. The economy is better. It’s going to give President Obama a leg up on the election. GOP beware, and come to your senses.

Take Friday’s jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Nonfarm payrolls gained 200,000 and the unemployment rate slipped to 8.5 percent from 8.7 percent. It may well be that a seasonal quirk added 42,000 messengers and couriers to the totals, but that will be lost in the headline reporting. It will be given back next month. It’s inconsequential to the overall story. Likewise, a normal labor participation rate would yield much higher unemployment. But that’s academic.

Like any president, Mr. Obama will take credit for these economic gains. He’s doing that right now. And he has a case to make: A year ago the unemployment rate was 9.4 percent, and in 2011 it fell almost a percentage point. In the twelve months through December 2011, the economy produced 1.64 million new jobs, while in 2010, only 940,000 were created. On a monthly average basis, 137,000 new jobs per month were created in 2011, compared to only 78,000 a month in 2010. Things are getting better.

(more…)

It seems like everyday I wake up and it’s the same old story with politics and politicians: If you vote for my bill, I’ll support yours; the Republicans hate this and the Democrats hate that; you scratch my earmark and I’ll scratch yours…

It’s frustrating.

If it’s not a disgraceful politician being exposed for illicit behavior, it’s somebody in some party being caught shoveling money to their friends or illegal back-door dealings, or charges being leveled. Then the other party thinks they have the moral high ground, even though it was their guy or gal that was caught the week before.

A massive cottage industry which produces nothing, builds nothing, and spends taxpayer money like it’s going out of style has grown up around Washington DC. It’s an establishment political class, grown fat and powerful on our backs which grows and grows…

… And regardless of the prevailing economic climate – it just keeps getting bigger.

What is the average American supposed to do?

(more…)

The most successful Obama campaign meme–repeated ad infinitum by the mainstream media–is the idea that the country is saddled with a “do-nothing Congress.”

The implication–brilliantly conveyed, though completely untrue–is that we have a “do-nothing Republican Congress,” though in fact the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has been extremely active.

It would be more accurate to say that we have a “do-nothing Senate“–by design, since it’s clear that the Demcorats’ leaders in the Senate believe that legislative gridlock works to their political advantage. It’s been nearly 1000 days since the Demcorat-controlled Senate even passed a budget–a violation of the Congressional Budget Act.

With tomorrow’s official unemployment number looming, and with today’s ADP employment report for December 2011 suggesting some improvement could be on the way, it’s worth asking what happened to Obama’s “Jobs Bill”–without which, he warned, “there will be fewer jobs.” Voters wanted Washington “to do something big and something bold,” Obama said–even if it was a stimulus packed with boondoggles and bailouts, much like the “Porkulus” that launched the Tea Party.

Lo and behold–there is a little bit of life in the job market; manufacturing is improving moderately; and consumer confidence, while still shaky, is up significantly from where it was when Obama was demanding his jobs bill.

And no jobs bill was enacted. (more…)

WASHINGTON (AP) – Consumers spent at a lackluster rate in November as their incomes barely grew, suggesting that U.S. households may struggle to sustain their spending into 2012.

The Commerce Department says consumer spending rose just 0.1 percent in November, matching the modest October increase. Incomes also rose 0.1 percent. That was the weakest showing since a 0.1 percent decline in August.

(more…)

Another week, another CEO of a major U.S. company publicly calls out Washington, DC for its onslaught of new regulation.

This time it’s Clarence Otis Jr., the CEO of Darden Restaurants, through which position he oversees Olive Garden, Red Lobster, Longhorn Steakhouse, and other major chains, along with the tens of thousands of jobs reliant on the success of these national brands. This week, Mr. Otis penned a forceful op-ed on CNN.com telling Washington that its regulatory regime is holding back the economy and preventing private job creation.

Writes Mr. Otis:

“Regulatory mandates flowing from federal health care reform may be the most visible, but the list also includes measures such as new mandatory paid leave provisions that require us to change the way we accommodate employees who need to take time off when they are ill and ever more unrealistic requirements regarding employee meal and rest breaks that, in California for example, force our employees to take breaks in the middle of serving lunch or dinner.”

The interesting thing about Otis is that he was a major donor to Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and he has been a supporter of some of the administration’s efforts in other areas.

(more…)

On the same day that the Supreme Court announced that it would take up the challenge to President Obama’s healthcare reform law, Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) launched the Health Care Innovation Challenge, a competitive program that will award up to $1 billion in taxpayer-funded grants to applicants who will “implement the most compelling new ideas to deliver better health, improved care, and lower costs to people enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid and CHIP…” At a press conference, on Monday, Ms. Sebelius said, “Efforts like these to improve the health of communities and reduce cost while sparking the economy are a priority of the Obama administration.”

Using the Obama administration’s new theme of “We Can’t Wait,” a slogan which refers to Congress’ inability to obtain the votes to pass the president’s Jobs Act, the secretary said, “In recent weeks, Congress has failed to act on the full jobs agenda, so we will continue to do what we can.”

A new Rasmussen poll, however, indicates that most American voters oppose the Obamacare jobs plan, and believe the president should wait to enact the plan in order to reach an agreement with Congress. 63% of those polled said that the president should wait to work with Congress.

(more…)

This week, Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies (Crossroads GPS) targets Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren and her self-professed ties to the #Occupy movement in a new television ad running in the Boston, Springfield-Holyoke, and Providence, RI markets for a total buy of $596,000.

The ad, “Foundation,” can be viewed here: