Yearly Archives: 2011

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 26)(Royal Wedding Part 10)

Another bad group of tornadoes heading to Central Arkansas tonight. Yesterday eight people were killed in Arkansas.

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Spendthrift politicians and runaway spending. Is a balanced budget amendment the answer? Professor Williams looks at the situation. (He argues for law banning spending over certain limit of GDP, not for the balanced budget amendment.)

Wall Street Journal columnist and FOX News contributor John Fund talks to the Mackinac Center for Public Policy about the 2010 elections and their implications in Michigan as well as the evolution and impact of Alternative/New Media on the political landscape in Michigan and beyond.

Mark Pryor may have seen the light concerning cutting federal spending, but I still have my doubts because I know he is still very close to all those liberal Democrats. Sometime I wonder why the Democrats can not see the light concerning the need to cut spending and attack the huge federal debt. Below is a portion of an article by John Fund of the Wall Street Journal that was published on April 20, 2011:

About That Speech

Mr. Obama’s budget speech makes more sense when one realizes that his sinking poll numbers indicate an erosion in support with his liberal base.

 At first glance, President Obama’s partisan speech last week attacking GOP budget proposals was precisely what an incumbent running for re-election shouldn’t do. It was not a speech designed to appeal to independent voters, a group Mr. Obama has suffered serious erosion with.

But Mr. Obama’s tone makes more sense when one realizes that his sinking poll numbers also indicate an erosion in support with his liberal base. 

The more that Mr. Obama feels he has to haul out class-warfare rhetoric and avoid offering serious proposals to stave off a fiscal crisis, the more he is endangering his standing with independent voters who remain unsettled by a sluggish recovery. The latest Gallup Poll pegs Mr. Obama’s support among independents at just 35%. Right now, Mr. Obama is more concerned with shoring up his liberal base than with wooing independents. That’s a sign of weakness.

Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund speaks to Americans for Prosperity Illinois, Part 3


Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself at 3:57 pm CST on April 26, 2011.

In my past posts I could have been accused of giving just general ideas of where to cut. Now I am starting in with specifics that are taken from the article “Federal Spending by the numbers, Heritage Foundation, June 1, 2010 by Brian Riedl. He notes:

  • The Legal Services Corporation, which is supposed to provide legal services to the poor, has repeatedly ignored warnings to stop spending its money on alcohol. It also funds limousines, first-class airfare, and “death by Chocolate” pastries for its executives.
  • The Department of Energy spent nine years and $153 million on an obsolete cyber-security project that was supposed to safeguard America’s nuclear weapons information.
  • The stimulus set aside $350 million for a national broadband coverage map—even though one private firm stated it could create one for $3.5 million.
  • Fannie Mae—now backed up by taxpayers—paid $6.3 million in legal defense costs for ousted executives such as Franklin Raines. An additional $16.8 million was spent defending Fannie Mae’s regulators in litigation against the former executives.
  • The Census Bureau spent $2.5 million on Super Bowl ads, and on-air mentions by sportscasters.
  • New documents reveal that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) lost 1,000 computers in 2008. Not to be outdone, Homeland Security officers lost nearly 200 guns in places like restaurant restrooms, convenience stores, and bowling alleys. Several of the guns ended up in the hands of criminals.
  • ______________________________________
  •  

    Attending a Wedding

    Princess Diana wearing a pink outfit at the wedding of her former flatmate Carolyn Pride and William Bartholomew, London, September 1982. (Photo by Jayne Fincher/Getty Images)

    Part 7

    JULY 29, 1981: Prince Charles kisses his bride's hand on the balcony of Buckingham Palace in London July 29, 1981.

    Associated Press

    JULY 29, 1981: Prince Charles kisses his bride’s hand on the balcony of Buckingham Palace in London July 29, 1981.

    __________________________________________

Balanced Budget Amendment the answer? Boozman says yes, Pryor no (Part 16, Milton Friedman’s view is yes)(Royal Wedding Part 9)

Last night here in Arkansas we had tornadoes.

Take a look at this video from last week in the St. Louis Airport:

Milton Friedman on Phil Donahue Show in 1980 provides a direct and to-the-point defense of capitalism and free trade. He explains how governmental regulations, no matter how well-intended, are inevitably infiltrated by business interests which use governmental power to stifle competition.

Photo detail

Steve Brawner in his article “Safer roads and balanced budgets,” Arkansas News Bureau, April 13, 2011, noted:

The disagreement is over the solutions — on what spending to cut; what taxes to raise (basically none ever, according to Boozman); whether or not to enact a balanced budget amendment (Boozman says yes; Pryor no); and on what policies would promote the kind of economic growth that would make this a little easier.

Senator Pryor and  Congressman Mike Ross are the only surviving Democrats in  Washington from Arkansas. Mike Ross supports the Balanced Budget Amendment. Human Events reported:

The House passed a Balanced Budget Amendment in 1995 as part of the “Contract for America.”  As mentioned, the BBA failed in the Senate in 1997 by one vote.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R.-Va.) reintroduced that same BBA from 1995 at the beginning of this year as HJ Res 2, which was referred to the Judiciary Committee.  The bill has 215 co-sponsors, including 13 Democrats: Jason Altmire (Pa.), Sanford Bishop (Ga.), Dan Boren (Okla.), Leonard Boswell (Iowa), Jim Cooper (Tenn.), Henry Cuellar (Tex.), Peter DeFazio (Ore.), Jane Harman (Calif.), Jim Matheson (Utah), Mike McIntyre (N.C.), Collin Peterson (Minn.), Mike Ross (Ark.), and David Scott (Ga.).

There is no doubt that Ross is more conservative than Pryor, but he is also has been targeted by the Republicans. Jason Tolbert reported today:

The National Republican Congressional Committee has a radio ad out today hitting Congressman Mike Ross for his votes against all five budget proposals.

In Feb of 1983 Milton Friedman wrote the article “Washington:Less Red Ink (An argument that the balanced-budget amendent would be a rare merging of public and private interests),” and here is a portion of that article:

Here, for their consideration, are my answers to the principal objections to the proposed amendment that I have come across, other than those that arise from a desire to have a still-bigger government: 

**2. The President and Congress are guilty of hypocrisy in voting simultaneously for a large current deficit and for a constitutional amendment to prevent future deficits.** 

Of course, I have long believed that congressional hypocrisy and shortsightedness are the only reasons there is a ghost of a chance of getting Congress to pass an amendment limiting itself. Most members of Congress will do anything to postpone the problems they face by a couple of years–only Wall Street has a shorter perspective. If the hypocrisy did not exist, if Congress behaved “responsibly,” there would be no need for the amendment. Congress’s irresponsibility is the reason we need an amendment and at the same time the reason that there is a chance of getting one. 

Hypocrisy may eventually lead to the passing of the amendment. But hypocrisy will not prevent the amendment from having important effects three or four years down the line–and from casting its shadow on events even earlier. Congress will not violate the Constitution lightly. Members of Congress will wriggle and squirm; they will seek, and no doubt find, subterfuges and evasions. But their actions will be significantly affected by the existence of the amendment. The experience of several states that have passed similar tax-limitation amendments provides ample evidence of that.

__________________________________________-\

 

 

Gala Recital Dress

The Princess of Wales attends a gala recital evening at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, November 1981. She is wearing a dress by Bellville Sassoon. (Photo by Jayne Fincher/Princess Diana Archive/Getty Images)

 

Part 6

JULY 29, 1981: Prince Charles and his bride Diana, the new Princess of Wales, are cheered by the crowd thronging the Royal Processional route back to Buckingham Palace after their marriage in St. Paul's Cathedral.

 

Associated Press

JULY 29, 1981: Prince Charles and his bride Diana, the new Princess of Wales, are cheered by the crowd thronging the Royal Processional route back to Buckingham Palace after their marriage in St. Paul’s Cathedral.

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 25)(Royal Wedding Part 8)

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Tornado that hit Central Arkansas 4.25.11

We had a tough night with the storms last night. My son and his family came over and we watched the live weather coverage from 5:30pm to 8:30pm last night as tornadoes went through our county (Saline) but most the damage was just past us.

Here is an update from www.Ozarkfirst.com :

Tuesday, April 26 2011
 

(Vilonia, AR) — Emergency officials say five deaths are attributed to severe weather in Arkansas on Monday.

Two people were killed in a violent tornado that hit the Faulkner County town of Vilonia.

Officials are not releasing the names or ages of the victims, but did confirm the two fatalities occurred in two different homes.

According to Stephan Hawks, Public Information Officer for Faulkner County, the storm left a path of destruction approximately 3 miles wide and 15 miles long, and destroyed 14 to 16 homes in Vilonia.

Storm spotters reported the width of the tornado was at least a half-mile wide and sent debris flying into the air.

Three other deaths in the state are a result of flash flooding.

One woman died in Washington County when her vehicle was swept into the Illinois River.

Washington County Sheriff Tim Helder says the victim, Consuelo Santillano of West Fork, attempted to drive her van through high water on Highway 265 when the vehicle stalled.

She reportedly made it out of the vehicle, but was swept into the flood waters.

Her son was a passenger in the vehicle, but escaped without injuries.

Two more deaths were recorded in Madison County, where an elderly couple drowned in War Eagle Creek.

Officials are not releasing the names of the couple who died, but said they were attempting to drive through rushing water covering Highway 23 between Huntsville and Witter when their vehicle was carried away.
_______________________________

Emergency officials say seven deaths are attributed to severe weather in Arkansas on Monday.

Four people were killed in a violent tornado that hit the Faulkner County town of Vilonia.

Officials are not releasing the names or ages of the victims.

According to Stephan Hawks, Public Information Officer for Faulkner County, the storm left a path of destruction approximately 3 miles wide and 15 miles long, and destroyed 14 to 16 homes in Vilonia.

Storm spotters reported the width of the tornado was at least a half-mile wide and sent debris flying into the air.

John Fund’s speech at Right Nation 2010, the unprecedented gathering of conservatives, Republicans, and Tea Party independents on September 18th just outside Chicago.

Mark Pryor may have seen the light concerning cutting federal spending. Sometime I wonder why the Democrats can not see the light concerning the need to cut spending and attack the huge federal debt. Below is a portion of an article by John Fund of the Wall Street Journal that was published on April 20, 2011:

About That Speech

Mr. Obama’s budget speech makes more sense when one realizes that his sinking poll numbers indicate an erosion in support with his liberal base.

 At first glance, President Obama’s partisan speech last week attacking GOP budget proposals was precisely what an incumbent running for re-election shouldn’t do. It was not a speech designed to appeal to independent voters, a group Mr. Obama has suffered serious erosion with.

But Mr. Obama’s tone makes more sense when one realizes that his sinking poll numbers also indicate an erosion in support with his liberal base. 

Mr. Obama is also hurting with another key element of his coalition: Hispanics. His job approval with them is now only 54% in the latest Gallup poll, down from 73% two years ago. Similarly, voters under the age of 30 give him a tepid 55% approval rating.

Obama strategists thought they had dodged a bullet earlier this year when it became unlikely the president would attract a serious primary opponent like Howard Dean or former Sen. Russ Feingold. But now it’s clear that Mr. Obama has to worry that a dispirited liberal base could stay home in 2012, or that a spoiler third-party candidate could drain votes away from him the way Ralph Nader did with Al Gore in 2000.

Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund speaks to Americans for Prosperity Illinois Part 2



Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself at 6:54 am CST on April 26, 2011.

In my past posts I could have been accused of giving just general ideas of where to cut. Now I am starting in with specifics that are taken from the article “Federal Spending by the numbers, Heritage Foundation, June 1, 2010 by Brian Riedl. He notes:

  • Improper or fraudulent Medicare spending now totals $47 billion annually—12.4 percent of its budget.
  • New York distributed $140 million in stimulus money into the individual accounts of families on welfare, yet neglected to mention it was intended for school supplies. Local ATMs were depleted, and much of the money was reportedly spent on “flat screen TV’s, iPods and video gaming systems” as well as “cigarettes and beer.”
  • Washington will spend $615,175 on an archive honoring the Grateful Dead.
  • Federal employees owe more than $3 billion in income taxes they failed to pay in 2008.
  • Each month, taxpayers provide $40,000 worth of office space, cell phones, staff, and an SUV for former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who currently works as a lobbyist for private corporations and foreign governments.
  • House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her staff have charged taxpayers $101,000 for “in-flight services”—including food and liquor—during trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. Charges reportedly include “Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, and Corona beer.”
  • ____________________________________
  • Out: Tony and Cherie Blair

    Former Prime Minister Tony Blair didn’t get invited, prompting rumors that it was a deliberate snub to the former Labour leader, who clashed with the queen over her handling of Princess Di’s funeral. Cherie, too, would have reason to be snubbed: She refused to curtsy for members of the royal family.

    Katie Nicholl, author of “Behind the Palace Walls” talks to Erica Hill about Kate Middleton, the commoner about to join the royal family.

    2007

    A jaunty brown beret topped off Middleton’s breezy look at the Cheltenham Festival races.

    __________________________________

Brummett:We must increase debt ceiling or disaster will occur (Part 3) (Royal Wedding Part 7)

John Brummett in his article “Pryor’s words drift in gentle breeze,” Arkansas News Bureau, April 24, 2011 asserted:

Raising the debt ceiling is essential to paying our debts and keeping the national and world economy functioning. Spending cuts must be made in the future, not by reneging on debt from the past. It is disingenuous to join these issues.

John Brummett in his article “Dear visa, my debt ceiling is capped,” April 25, 2011, Arkansas News Bureau, he notes:

Nine times in the last decade the federal government has crept near its debt ceiling and Congress has voted to raise it.

Tea party types say they intend this time to tie their votes to raise the debt limit to actual and concurrent spending reductions.

But this is no equation. You absolutely owe your debt. Quite separately, it’s up to your future behavior whether you can fashion spending reductions to gain control of tomorrow’s debt so that you don’t have to keep dealing with these kinds of untenable financial and political situations.

Our legal debt limit is $14.3 trillion. We are at $14.1 trillion and counting. A lot of fast compounding is going on. We’ll reach the limit about May 16.

Politically, this is what is likely to happen: Conservatives playing to the tea-drunken grandstand will engage in yet another round of brinkmanship, braying about spending reductions and casting at least one vote — for next year’s campaign literature — against raising the ceiling.

Then they will cut a deal in the last hours that could have been consummated more responsibly weeks before, thus avoiding uncertain and damaging signals to global financial markets that prompted Standard & Poor’s to start talking about downgrading the United States’ credit rating.

There even is talk in credible circles that conservatives will let the deadline pass, and choose to wait for the visible beginnings of calamity, before coming around.

That would be even more irresponsible than the minority vote cast in 2006 against raising the debt ceiling by a young liberal Democratic senator from Illinois.

Yes, Barack Obama did that. He ought to be ashamed. In a way, he deserves the irresponsibility that bedevils him now.

But at least his vote didn’t have real consequences, being merely hollow and demagogic.

It didn’t hurt anything except, that is, the young senator’s credibility in the unlikely event he ever became president and encountered a tea party revolution. And who could have dreamed of either of those things happening?

Jeffrey Scribner wrote the excellent article “Let’s not increase the Debt Ceiling,” www.LewRockwell.com, April 22, 2011. Here is a portion of that article:

Deficit spending has not prevented a recession. Moreover, there is reason to believe that not extending the debt limit will actually be good for the economy. Government spending will be curtailed. Some government services will also be curtailed. This provides fertile ground for more free enterprise solutions, more little companies, more employment in the private sector and more GDP growth. Why should we believe those who say increase the debt ceiling or suffer a recession?

Using the FY 2010 numbers above we can see that in order not to create more debt, Congress would have to hold spending, including debt service, to $2,162 Billion. Congress would have to cut $1,294 Billion from FY 2010 spending levels to do that. Where would you cut?

We can fund Social Security and Defense without borrowing. However, the first call on available funds would have to be servicing the current debt. We might have to change Medicare and Medicaid along the lines suggested by Paul Ryan and we would have to be very careful about everything else. Wouldn’t this be a good thing? Just think, after a few years, Congress might actually start to think about surplus budgets to pay down debt and gain spending flexibility from lower debt service costs.

Finally, since Congress will never cut spending enough to balance the budget, it is necessary to force that action via refusal to increase the debt limit. There is no time like the present to do this.

April 22, 2011

Jeff Scribner [send him mail] is President of ASI Enterprises, Inc., an investment bank serving small and medium sized businesses.

______________________________-

Part 3

JUNE 10, 1981: The Royal Wedding stamps featuring Britain's Prince Charles and his bride to be Lady Diana Spencer went on sale a week before their wedding on July 29, 1981. In values of 14 and 25 pence (28 and 50 cents), they were designed by Jeffrey Matthews and the photograph was specially taken by Lord Snowdon.
Associated Press
JUNE 10, 1981: The Royal Wedding stamps featuring Britain’s Prince Charles and his bride to be Lady Diana Spencer went on sale a week before their wedding on July 29, 1981. In values of 14 and 25 pence (28 and 50 cents), they were designed by Jeffrey Matthews and the photograph was specially taken by Lord Snowdon.
JULY 29, 1981: Prince Charles and his bride the Princess of Wales wave from the balcony of Buckingham Palace after their marriage at St. Paul's Cathedral. Standing with them on the balcony are: Edward van Cutsem (one of the pages) and Catherine Cameron, 6, one of the five bridesmaids.
Associated Press

JULY 29, 1981: Prince Charles and his bride the Princess of Wales wave from the balcony of Buckingham Palace after their marriage at St. Paul’s Cathedral. Standing with them on the balcony are: Edward van Cutsem (one of the pages) and Catherine Cameron, 6, one of the five bridesmaids.
JULY 29, 1981: With a 7.6-meter (25-foot) sweeping train, Lady Diana Spencer leaves St. Paul's Cathedral arm-in-arm with Prince Charles after their wedding ceremony. Nearly a million well-wishers crowded the two-mile route to Buckingham Palace.

Associated Press

JULY 29, 1981: With a 7.6-meter (25-foot) sweeping train, Lady Diana Spencer leaves St. Paul’s Cathedral arm-in-arm with Prince Charles after their wedding ceremony. Nearly a million well-wishers crowded the two-mile route to Buckingham Palace.

 

ABC’s Barbara Walters talks to WISN 12’s Patrick Paolantonio about her special tonight on the upcoming royal wedding.

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 24)(Royal Wedding Part 6)

Lots of tornadoes tonight in Arkansas. My family and I have been watching the TV all night long and the tornadoes have been going through Saline County all night long.

Let me point something out about the way the Democrats handled the healthcare debate. President Obama said it would be posted on the internet before  it was voted on. Also there is the claim that costs will magically go down. Take a look at the video clip below by John Fund. 


U.S. Sen. Mark Pryor at the 2009 Democratic Party Jefferson Jackson Dinner, Arkansas’s largest annual political event. Look at how happy Pryor is about Obamacare. 


Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Sometime I wonder why the Democrats can not see the light concerning the need to cut spending and attack the huge federal debt. Below is a portion of an article by John Fund of the Wall Street Journal that was published on April 20, 2011:

About That Speech

Mr. Obama’s budget speech makes more sense when one realizes that his sinking poll numbers indicate an erosion in support with his liberal base.

 At first glance, President Obama’s partisan speech last week attacking GOP budget proposals was precisely what an incumbent running for re-election shouldn’t do. It was not a speech designed to appeal to independent voters, a group Mr. Obama has suffered serious erosion with.

But Mr. Obama’s tone makes more sense when one realizes that his sinking poll numbers also indicate an erosion in support with his liberal base. Only about three-quarters of self-identified liberals approve of his job performance, a number that has drifted downward since Mr. Obama compromised on tax cuts and decided to keep Guantanamo open. His latest budget deal with House Republicans only further confused his base. “I have been very disappointed in the administration to the point where I’m embarrassed that I endorsed him,” one senior Democratic lawmaker told the Daily Beast last week.

Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund speaks to Americans for Prosperity Illinois



Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself at 7:26 pm CST. 

In my past posts I could have been accused of giving just general ideas of where to cut. Now I am starting in with specifics that are taken from the article “Federal Spending by the numbers, Heritage Foundation, June 1, 2010 by Brian Riedl. He notes:

  • Because of overstaffing, the U.S. Postal Service selects 1,125 employees per day to sit in empty rooms. They are not allowed to work, read, play cards, watch television, or do anything. This costs $50 million annually.
  • Washington will spend $2.6 million training Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job.
  • Stimulus dollars have been spent on mascot costumes, electric golf carts, and a university study examining how much alcohol college freshmen women require before agreeing to casual sex.
  • Examples from multiple Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports of wasteful duplication include 342 economic development programs; 130 programs serving the disabled; 130 programs serving at-risk youth; 90 early childhood development programs; 75 programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities; and 72 safe water programs.
  • A GAO audit classified nearly half of all purchases on government credit cards as improper, fraudulent, or embezzled. Examples include gambling, mortgage payments, liquor, lingerie, iPods, Xboxes, jewelry, Internet dating services, and Hawaiian vacations. In one extraordinary example, the Postal Service spent $13,500 on one dinner at a Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse, including “over 200 appetizers and over $3,000 of alcohol, including more than 40 bottles of wine costing more than $50 each and brand-name liquor such as Courvoisier, Belvedere and Johnny Walker Gold.” The 81 guests consumed an average of $167 worth of food and drink apiece.
  • ____________________________________________
  • _

    In: Guy Ritchie

    Filmmaker Guy Ritchie will join the Beckhams and other celebrities at Will and Kate’s royal nuptials. Ritchie is described on the official guest list as “a friend of Prince William and Miss Middleton.” Wills allegedly frequents Ritchie’s popular pub in London, Punch Bowl.

    The couple’s (William and Kate) eight-year courtship started in college

    2006

    Middleton attended Prince William’s graduation from the Royal Military Academy in a wide-brimmed picture hat.


Will Senator Pryor be re-elected in 2014? (Part 4)(Royal Wedding Part 5)

Dr. Jay Barth with Hendrix College comments on our latest poll results on Arkansas politics (clip from Talkbusiness)

Talk Business reported today in the article “Poll Shows Beebe Strength, Pryor Shaky,” the following:

A new Talk Business-Hendrix College Poll shows Gov. Mike Beebe (D) maintaining his high job approval rating, while Sen. Mark Pryor (D) appears to be battling a voting public frustrated at Washington.

In a Talk Business-Hendrix Poll taken during the legislative session, Beebe had a 62% job approval rating with only 19% disapproving of his job performance.

“Beebe’s numbers are amazing,” said Dr. Jay Barth, professor of political science at Hendrix College, who helped craft and analyze the poll.

Sen. Mark Pryor, who is not up for re-election until 2014, may be the next big target for Arkansas Republicans who gained two Democratic House seats in 2010. In our poll, Pryor received a 40% job approval rating, with 36.5% voicing disapproval of his job performance. 23.5% did not have an opinion on Pryor’s job performance.

Could Pryor be suffering from the forces that sunk Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) in her 2010 re-election campaign?

“I think to some degree he is. Certainly, he has become a polarizing figure because basically all things political – especially now related to Washington – are polarizing,” said Barth. “Assuming he runs for re-election, we’re going to see a tough Republican opponent… I think the national Republican Party is going to see this as a winnable seat mainly due to the poor performance of Democrats in national elections over the last couple of cycles.”

Barth added that Pryor is in better shape than Lincoln since the election is still two cycles away, the popularity of his family’s name, and the fact that he has some better numbers in Republican-rich northwest Arkansas than most Democrats normally pull.

I take it as a hopeful sign that Senator Pryor is willing to be a part of a deal that includes a plan of meaningful cuts to the federal budget before he will will agree to vote for an increase in the debt ceiling.  That is a result of listening to what the people of Arkansas have to say on the matter!!!! 

Jay Barth makes the comment that Republicans will be expecting to defeat Pryor “due to the poor performance of Democrats in national elections over the last couple of cycles.” Anybody can open their eyes and see the clear trends in Arkansas.

The makeup of the Arkansas State Legislature has changed dramatically in the last few months. This  has been true of the states around Arkansas too. The number of Republican State Representatives in surrounding states outnumbers the Democrats 540 to 319 (MO, TN, TX, OK, MS, LA, and KS) while the Republican State Senators are 178 to 99. Only Mississippi’s State House of Representatives is controlled by the Democrats while the other 13 bodies are controlled by the Republicans.

The liberals in Arkansas seem to be angry about the shift in political power in the south. John Brummett has resorted to name-calling.

Does Pryor have a chance to win re-election? He needs to be a standup guy when it comes to getting this national debt down and that doesn’t mean trying to raise taxes on a slow economy. Traditionally the spending our federal government has done in the last 50 years has been less than 20% of GDP, but this year it is 24.7%. We must get our spending down!!!!!!!

I think that Lt. Governor Mark Darr would defeat Senator Pryor in 2014 , but it appears that Darr is considering running for governor in 2014.

The crowd freaks out as Bill Clinton arrives, and then Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor speaks at an Obama rally in North Little Rock on 10/24/08.

________________________________________

After the announcement of Prince William’s engagement to Kate Middleton, we look at how life will change for the royal bride to be. (Nov. 16)

 

Part 5

JULY 27, 1981: One of the coaches which was used for the wedding leaves Buckingham Palace during a rehearsal for the procession.

Associated Press

JULY 27, 1981: One of the coaches which was used for the wedding leaves Buckingham Palace during a rehearsal for the procession.

Brummett:We must increase debt ceiling or disaster will occur (Part 2) (Royal Wedding Part 4)

John Brummett in his article “Dear visa, my debt ceiling is capped,” April 25, 2011, Arkansas News Bureau, he asserted:

Nine times in the last decade the federal government has crept near its debt ceiling and Congress has voted to raise it.

Tea party types say they intend this time to tie their votes to raise the debt limit to actual and concurrent spending reductions.

But this is no equation. You absolutely owe your debt. Quite separately, it’s up to your future behavior whether you can fashion spending reductions to gain control of tomorrow’s debt so that you don’t have to keep dealing with these kinds of untenable financial and political situations.

Jeffrey Scribner wrote the excellent article “Let’s not increase the Debt Ceiling,” www.LewRockwell.com, April 22, 2011. Here is a portion of that article:

It so happens that there are just about enough votes in the current House of Representatives to prevent an increase in the debt ceiling. If the debt ceiling is not increased, there will be bigger spending cuts in the 2011 budget and the 2012 budget and every budget after that because we are very close to the debt ceiling. If the debt ceiling is not increased, money cannot be spent that would raise the debt over that ceiling. Deficit spending would end immediately. Congress will be finally forced, at least for a little while, to allocate austerity rather than funding their favorite expenditure with borrowed money.

The voters could then decide whether to re-elect those who voted to increase the debt ceiling or those who tried to be responsible and voted not to. Some people are saying that failure to raise the debt ceiling will cause a catastrophe. If that happens, the voters can consider it. What if there is no catastrophe – just a lot less spending? The voters can consider that, too. Some big spenders are claiming that failure to increase the debt ceiling will cause a recession. We have managed to get into a recession and sustain it while adding to the debt every minute. Deficit spending has not prevented a recession. Moreover, there is reason to believe that not extending the debt limit will actually be good for the economy. Government spending will be curtailed. Some government services will also be curtailed. This provides fertile ground for more free enterprise solutions, more little companies, more employment in the private sector and more GDP growth. Why should we believe those who say increase the debt ceiling or suffer a recession?

__________________________________________

Prince William and Kate Middleton were interviewed by ITV’s Tom Bradby shortly after they announced their engagement. Erica Hill speaks with Bradby about how the royal couple is coping with the global attention.

JULY 29, 1981: The scene at the High Altar in St. Paul's Cathedral during the marriage of Prince Charles and Lady Diana Spencer.
 
Associated Press

JULY 29, 1981: The scene at the High Altar in St. Paul’s Cathedral during the marriage of Prince Charles and Lady Diana Spencer.

Part 4

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 23) (Royal Wedding Part 3)

 

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself at 3:44 pm CST.

In my past posts I could have been accused of giving just general ideas of where to cut. Now I am starting in with specifics that are taken from the article “Federal Spending by the numbers, Heritage Foundation, June 1, 2010 by Brian Riedl. He notes:  

  • .
  • The federal government made at least $98 billion in improper payments in 2009.
  • Washington spends $92 billion on corporate welfare (excluding TARP) versus $71 billion on homeland security.
  • Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.
  • Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them—costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually—fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.
  • The Congressional Budget Office published a “Budget Options” series identifying more than $100 billion in potential spending cuts.
  • _________________________
  •  

    1995

     

    2002

    Middleton walked the runway at a University of St. Andrews charity fashion show with ribbons and tight ringlets. 
    The 13-year-old student at St. Andrew’s School was a wash-and-wear athlete, playing field hockey, tennis and volleyball.

    (I got this clip below  off the internet and I did not like it very much. It attempts to put Kate Middleton in a bad light. I really did not appreciate that since she seems to be a nice girl.)

     

    In: Victoria and David Beckham

    David Beckham and Prince William—who is president of the English Football Association—met at last year’s World Cup in South Africa, and the two reportedly “got on like a house on fire, both personally and professionally.” The prince and the football star bonded in Johannesburg over the summer as ambassadors to England’s 2018 World Cup bid. Shortly after the Beckhams received their invitation, designer Victoria announced she would be sending over a selection of dresses as a gift to the bride-to-be. The Beckhams will be attending the wedding service at Westminster Abbey on Friday and also possibly a lunch for 600 people hosted by the queen at Buckingham Palace. They were not invited to Prince Charles’ ultra-exclusive dinner dance, which only 300 guests will attend.

    _____________________________________

Brummett:We must increase debt ceiling or disaster will occur (Part 1) (Royal Wedding Part 2)

John Brummett in his article “Dear visa, my debt ceiling is capped,” April 25, 2011, Arkansas News Bureau, he observes:

The first thing I intend to do is join the tea party. Then I’m going to refuse to raise my debt limit. Then I’m going to call the Visa people.

“Y’all have me down here owing $6,000,” I’m going to say. “But I’ve become a fiscal conservative. I’m getting really disciplined fiscally. I’m taking my household back.

“My self-imposed debt ceiling is $4,000. I’ve opted not to raise it. Nary a cent. I only went over it because the oral surgeon demanded immediate payment.

“So $4,000 is the most you rascals will get out of me. You may as well quit compounding the interest on this outstanding balance. I am serious about this. You may consider this baby capped at four grand.

“Oh, by the way: Don’t even think about canceling this card. I have a second round of dental work coming up and the oral surgeon doesn’t give these implants away.

“Thank you, and remember: Vote Palin-Bachmann.”

You are thinking this is absurd. You are right, of course.

But you are not intellectually entitled to call it absurd if you are among the seven in 10 Americans telling pollsters you don’t want the federal government’s debt ceiling raised. You are not intellectually entitled if you are one of these right-wing politicians pandering to this tea-drunken grandstand by threatening to vote not to raise it.

Here is how real fiscal responsibility works: You repay the debt that you have incurred to date. You make spending reductions prospectively by showing sufficient discipline to reduce the future pace at which you incur debt. You dare not let your existing debt go unpaid lest your credit score suffer and you get denied the next time you find yourself in a bit of a pinch and need to finance a refrigerator at Sears.

Jeffrey Scribner wrote the excellent article “Let’s not increase the Debt Ceiling,” www.LewRockwell.com, April 22, 2011. Here is a portion of that article:

Nero fiddled while Rome burned. The President and the Congress are playing political games while the national debt grows to out of control proportions. We should hold the government’s feet to the fire and force an end to spending using borrowed money. An opportunity to do this will arise in a month or so.

In April, almost seven months after the start of the fiscal year, Congress finally passed the FY 2011 Federal Budget, nominally $38 Billion (about one percent) less than the proposal by the President. Two things are significant here. The first is that this is the first budget for FY 2011. Congress has spent money from the beginning of FY 2011 (01 October 2010) until mid April by “continuing resolution” in the absence of any budget. The second important point is that the 2011 budget, with the aforementioned $38 Billion reduction, spends more money than was spent in 2010. It is still in deficit. It has been adding to the national debt all year through continuing resolution and will continue to add to the debt for the rest of the year via the budget that was finally passed.

The House of Representatives has also passed a “Budget Blueprint” prepared by Congressman Paul Ryan, Chairman of the House Budget Committee. If all spending and receipts outlined in this document are implemented by the House and Senate and are then signed by the president, spending will be reduced by about six trillion dollars and the deficit will be reduced by about four trillion dollars over ten years. Do you really believe that this will happen? Even if it does, the Federal Government will continue to run deficits and add to the national debt for the next ten years, albeit at a slower rate than the present.

 

 

What does this tell you about the difficulty in reining in the runaway spending that has become the habit of Congress? It tells me that something a lot more drastic has to be done to get a grip on Federal spending and to stop adding to the debt immediately.

______________________________________________

Kate and William Interview Part 2

In 1981 I got up early in the morning to watch the Royal Wedding live. Now that I have the ability to tape it, I may just record it and watch it later. Here is a clip from the 1981 wedding.

Part 2

 
photo

Royal wedding 1981

Balanced Budget Amendment the answer? Boozman says yes, Pryor no (Part 15, Milton Friedman’s view is yes) (Royal Wedding Part 1)

 Milton Friedman on Phil Donahue Show in 1980 provides a direct and to-the-point defense of capitalism and free trade. He explains how governmental regulations, no matter how well-intended, are inevitably infiltrated by business interests which use governmental power to stifle competition.

Photo detail

Steve Brawner in his article “Safer roads and balanced budgets,” Arkansas News Bureau, April 13, 2011, noted:

The disagreement is over the solutions — on what spending to cut; what taxes to raise (basically none ever, according to Boozman); whether or not to enact a balanced budget amendment (Boozman says yes; Pryor no); and on what policies would promote the kind of economic growth that would make this a little easier.

In Feb of 1983 Milton Friedman wrote the article “Washington:Less Red Ink (An argument that the balanced-budget amendent would be a rare merging of public and private interests),” and here is a portion of that article:

Here, for their consideration, are my answers to the principal objections to the proposed amendment that I have come across, other than those that arise from a desire to have a still-bigger government: 

**1. The amendment is unnecessary. Congress and the President have the power to limit spending and balance the budget.** 

Taken seriously, this is an argument for scrapping most of the Constitution. Congress and the President have the power to preserve freedom of the press and of speech without the First Amendment. Does that make the First Amendment unnecessary? Not surprisingly, I know of no one who has criticized the balanced-budget amendment as unnecessary–however caustic his comments on congressional hypocrisy–who would draw the conclusion that the First Amendment should be scrapped. 

It is essential to look not only at the power of Congress but at the incentives of its members–to act in such a way as to be re-elected. As Phil Gramm, a Democratic congressman from Texas, has said: Every time you vote on every issue, all the people who want the program are looking over your right shoulder and nobody’s looking over your left shoulder….In being fiscally responsible under such circumstances, we’re asking more of people than the Lord asks.” 

Under present arrangements, Congress will not in fact balance the budget. Similarly, a President will not produce a balanced budget by using the kind of vetoes that would be required. The function of the amendment is to remedy the defect in our legislative procedure that distorts the will of the people as it is filtered through their representatives. The amendment process is the only effective way the public can treat the budget as a whole. That is the function of the First Amendment, as well–it treats free speech as a bundle. In its absence, Congress would consider each case “on its merits.” It is not hard to envisage the way unpopular groups and views would fare.

__________________________________________-

Kate and Prince William interview Part 1

I had the opportunity to travel in 1981  and visit 20 European countries and the last country I visited was England. I left England just a few days before the royal wedding. Some of the people on the same tour that I went on actually made plans to attend the royal wedding. Below is a clip from the 1981 Royal wedding.

Part 1

The Royal Wedding. St. Paul’s Cathedral, 29th July 1981. Commentary by the late Tom Fleming. Divided into 8 parts, this very rare recording was made on a domestic video recorder from the live BBC broadcast. As this was a formal State occasion, funded by the British tax-payer and the broadcast paid for by British Television Licence holders, then there is a powerful moral argument that this recording of mine should belong in the public domain.
(I only wrote the above preamble because some commercial enterprise has claimed copyright infringement on my video which I find outrageous under these special circumstances)

This recording was made using Memorex VHS video cassettes at a time when domestic VCR’s were very few and far between in the U.K. Considering the age of these recordings and their linear Mono soundtracks; I think they have stood up rather well. Blank video cassettes were hideously expensive at the time but I am so glad that my original investment has paid off today now that I can share this long past national event with the whole wide world