It’s Friday, September 30th, 2011….and here’s The Gouge!

We lead off the last Gouge of September with the latest pearls of wisdom from Victor Davis Hanson on a subject near-and-dear to the hearts of Progressives around the globe:

Postmodern Class Warfare

When President Obama’s polls hit 40 percent approval, he fumed at “billionaires and millionaires,” “fat cat bankers” and “corporate jet owners.” In his sloppy targeting, Obama doesn’t care much that a billionaire has 1,000 times more than a millionaire — or that his new tax proposals will take a lot more from those making $200,000 than from the tiny few making $1 million.

Instead, the president is in a populist frenzy to rev up his base against “Them,” who supposedly “are not paying their fair share.” The president’s argument apparently is not that the top 5 percent haven’t paid enough taxes. Indeed, they pay almost 60 percent of all income taxes collected, while nearly 50 percent of households pay no income taxes. Obama seems angry that the top 5 percent will still have more money after taxes than do others, and so they should pay a redistributive government still more taxes.

But 21st century class warfare is a weird thing. Take the technology that gives most what only the few once could afford. Most Americans now expect as a birthright iPhones, iPods, laptops, DVDs and big-screen televisions, thanks to cheap overseas fabrication and fierce price-cutting global competition. The typical welfare recipient now owns a sophisticated cell phone; a fat cat corporate CEO not long ago did not.

For the president, riding on a private jet from New York to Los Angeles is supposed to be privilege. But a poor person on a discount nonstop ticket can still get there as safely and almost as quickly for about one-thousandth of the cost in fuel and overhead. Once they land minutes apart at LAX, was the Gulfstream passenger all that blessed, the guy in steerage with headphones and a TV screen all that deprived?

The president believes that those who make more than $200,000 are synonymous with millionaires. But such income levels are not good barometers of wealth in a world where graduated taxes can eat up to 50 percent of a salary, and high-income areas have sky-high housing costs. Some of the less well off go to school for near free on scholarship packages to state universities. Other students pay $200,000 for a four-year private college — sometimes for the prestige of the degree rather than any quantifiably better education. Nor do we talk about off-the-books labor, where millions earn money without reporting either income or sales receipts — and often while on state subsidies.

In the old days, class warriors were proverbial men of the people who made an effort to match their lifestyles with their rhetoric. Not now. When President Obama rails about “millionaires,” we expect that in a few hours our Class Warrior in Chief will golf with Wall Street fat cats to hit them up for campaign money. We presume that the First Family prefers Costa del Sol, Martha’s Vineyard or Vail to a passé Camp David.

If director Michael Moore or New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg warns us about impending rioting and class strife, we assume both live in huge homes and are multimillionaires. The new class-warfare coalitions are comprised mostly of the less well off and the very well off, one wishing for ever more state help, the other rich enough to not mind bestowing it. No wonder both demonize as greedy and racist Tea Baggers those in the middle who are most likely to feel the cost of ever more government.

The battleground of class warfare has moved from the streets of yesteryear to the TV studio green room, the golf links or the seaside hotel retreat. And when we really do see street violence — looting in Britain or flash-mobbing in America — angry youths usually target high-end electronics stores and fashion outlets, not food markets or bookstores. They organize on social networks from their laptops and cell phones, not from soup kitchens, bread lines or dank basements.

Class warfare is now not about brutal elemental poverty of the sort Charles Dickens or Knut Hamsun once wrote about. It is too often the anger that arises from not having something that someone else has, whether or not such style, privilege or discretionary choices are all that necessary. Endemic obesity, not malnutrition, threatens America — including the nearly 50 million Americans who are on food stamps.

These are hard times, with high unemployment rates and economic stagnation. But we are not a nation of the malnourished and starving who are preyed upon by idle rich drones who pay no taxes. And a government that borrows $4 billion a day and spends $2 trillion more a year than it did just 10 years ago is hardly stingy.

In a related item, courtesy of Bill Meisen and Carl Polizzi, The Obamao offers some insight into why his scholastic records will never see the light of day:

Obama: ‘I Don’t Think Ethics’ Was My Favorite Subject

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-i-dont-think-ethics-was-my-favorite-subject

What a surprise!  Truth be known, if we’re to believe the President, neither was any other course took.  Which begs the question how, given an admitted lack of scholastic achievement, Tick-Tock was able to tread the ivied halls of Columbia and Harvard?  Could have been achievement; but then again, college admittance to college was the first time he played….

….the race card, in this case, Affirmative Action, another well-used weapon in the class-warrior arsenal and a favorite of under-performing, disinterested minority students across this great land.

But as James Taranto details in today’s “Nothing Could Be Finer Than To Be In Carolina….Except Of Course Wasting ANOTHER $500B Taxpayer Dollars” segment, no matter what The Obamao says or does, the MSM will make fools of themselves, in this case quite literally, in order to defend their man:

We really like Fareed Zakaria’s latest Washington Post column, because we only had to read the first sentence of it: “President Obama’s jobs bill is better than doing nothing in the face of a national crisis, but it won’t have much impact on unemployment.” (?!?)

You really don’t need to read further. The stark illogic of the lead sentence tells you all you need to know. A “jobs bill” that “won’t have much impact on unemployment’ is “better than doing nothing,” even though doing nothing would save hundreds of billions of dollars. It reminds us of the famous exchange from “Animal House”:

To be sure, Zakaria’s column isn’t as witty, but that’s a high standard.

Meanwhile, WSJ.com has a report on Obama’s legislative strategy for Stimulus Jr.:

The White House says its plan is to continue traveling the country to build support among Americans for the measure (and for Mr. Obama himself). Once the American people are convinced, they will pressure their legislators, who will pass the bill. The implication: Negotiations, which didn’t go well for the president over the summer, won’t even be needed.

We can think of only one thing that could possibly go wrong with that.

For another example of the favoritism of the Fourth Estate, we turn to today’s “MSM Bias….WHAT Bias?!?” segment, and another item from Best of the Web:

Twenty-six-year-old Rezwan Ferdaus “was arrested Wednesday and accused of plotting to blow up the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol, as well as attempting to assist Al Qaeda in attacking U.S. troops overseas,” Fox News reports:

Ferdaus, who graduated Northeastern University in 2008 with a degree in physics, is accused of beginning in early 2010 a plot to bring violent “jihad” against the U.S, who he described as “enemies of Allah.”

Ferdaus is also accused of supplying eight mobile phones to undercover FBI agents who he thought were recruiters for Al Qaeda. The phones were modified to be used as electrical switches for IEDs, and Ferdaus thought they could be used to kill American soldiers, the affidavit said. Ferdaus also allegedly made a training video to demonstrate how to make more the weapons.

Ferdaus said “that was exactly what I wanted,” when he was told one of the devices killed three U.S. soldiers and injured four to five others in Iraq in June, authorities said. . . .

“I want the public to understand that Mr. Ferdaus’ conduct, as alleged in the complaint, is not reflective of a particular culture, community or religion,” said Carmen Ortiz, U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. “In addition to protecting our citizens from the threats and violence alleged today, we also have an obligation to protect members of every community, race and religion against violence and other unlawful conduct.”

We must admit, we were a bit puzzled by Ortiz’s disclaimer. What “culture, community or religion” could she possibly be talking about? Hmm, maybe there’s a clue in that talk about “al Qaeda” and “jihad” and “Allah.” Could it be that Ferdaus is a Mu . . . a Mu . . . a . . .

Oh, what the hell, we’ll just let CBS News come out and say it: “Mass. Musician Accused of D.C. Terrorist Plot.”

Nothing to see here folks….

….move along….otherwise known as the old “If we close our Liberal eyes and count to ten they’ll be gone” ploy!

Meanwhile, in the Crescent City….

Anti-Obama sign in Uptown neighborhood draws controversy

There are several political signs attracting all kinds of attention in one Uptown neighborhood. On Wednesday, crowds gathered at the corner of Calhoun and Coralie streets, looking at several signs depicting President Barack Obama as either a dunce, a puppet or a crying baby in a diaper.

“It disrespects the nation — and President Barack Obama represents our nation,” said Skip Alexander, as he looked at one of the signs. “He represents everybody, not some people.” (No, no….his own words indicate….

….quite the opposite!)

Dozens of protesters came by the house in the 1500 block of Calhoun throughout the day, demanding the sign come down. “He wouldn’t do that to [President] Bush, I’m sure. (Sooo….your point is….what?!?  Assuming of course the First Amendment is still in force.) It’s just insulting. It’s insulting,” said C.C. Campbell-Rock. “He’s going to have to take them down.”

“This is nothing put pure racism,” said Raymond Rock. “This is a disgrace.” (Racist?…..racist?!?….

….racist HOW?!?)

The home is owned by Timothy Reily, who declined to be interviewed about the signs. Former Mayor Ray Nagin showed up at the house and went inside to speak with Reily. He emerged later and would not comment on what they discussed. (Perhaps because Reily reminded Nagin why they call him “Chocolate” Ray?!?)

Some neighbors tell Eyewitness News that Reily has been putting the signs up for months. Some of the protesters learned about the signs through a local radio station on Wednesday morning. “He can put up a sign if he wants to. It doesn’t bother me,” said Harold Gagnet, a neighbor. “I think it’s fine. It’s on his property,” said Katherine deMontluzin. “He can say whatever he wants.”

The signs have created such a firestorm of controversy, though, that police came to the scene– called in by City Council Member Susan Guidry. She represents the district where the home is located. Guidry said she was concerned about public safety and was trying to figure out if the sign was even legal. She also said she spoke to Reily, but didn’t get far.

“We have to determine that there is a zoning law that prohibits perhaps the size of the sign, perhaps the way that it’s erected, that it is leaning over onto public property,” Guidry said. “Whatever we can use, we will, but of course, we do have to balance that with First Amendment rights.” (Ya gotta love a City Council member who doesn’t know her own city’s zoning laws!  And since when do cops enforce sign ordinances?)

Yet, the signs remain in place, fanning the flames of a free speech debate on both sides of the fence.

And who, after all, would wish to fan the flames of a DEBATE?!?

Next up in the Environmental Moment, courtesy of the WSJ, Lucian Pugliaresi, president of the Energy Policy Research Foundation and a former staff member on Reagan’s NSC offers….

The Lessons of the Shale Gas Revolution

North American oil production can double by 2035.

In response to a 2009 request from Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, the National Petroleum Council (NPC) reported earlier this month that oil production in North America could double by 2035—to 20 million barrels per day.

Where can all this oil come from? For one, the hydraulic fracturing (fracking) technique used in shale gas production is now being applied to extract oil. The vast oil reserves in Canada’s Alberta Province are increasingly being tapped. There is more oil to be had with greater access to federal lands in Alaska and the western U.S., and accelerated drilling in the deep waters in the Gulf of Mexico.

But to realize the enormous potential outlined in the NPC report, we need to understand how the policies of the federal government act as a serious brake on access to the reserves and the exploitation of new technologies to tap them.

The shale gas revolution started in Texas, migrated quickly to Arkansas, Oklahoma, Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania and then leaped to North Dakota—where the technology for producing shale gas was applied to oil development. Even New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, no longer wishing to miss out on the economic opportunity for his state, has pulled back from his state’s comprehensive ban on hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling for shale gas.

What do these states all have in common besides interesting geology? Their federal land holdings are extremely small and mineral rights are in private hands. Thus landowners were not prohibited from coming to terms with oil and gas companies, providing immediate opportunities to test new drilling technologies. Knowledge gained in one region could move quickly to another. Regulatory and environmental reviews were largely the responsibilities of state and local governments, and disagreements could often be resolved at the local level.

Contrast the shale gas revolution to oil and gas development on the vast lands owned by the federal government. There access to reserves is burdened by endless federal environmental reviews, congressional oversight, permitting delays and bureaucrats who insist that oil and gas resources do not exist in areas of interest to oil and gas companies.

Shell Oil, the winning bidder on a federal lease sale in Alaska, has spent over four years and billions of dollars and is only now getting the final permits to proceed with exploratory drilling in the Arctic Ocean’s Beaufort Sea. Further court challenges remain likely.

Shell USA President Marvin Odum has stated that his board members in The Hague (Shell USA is a subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell) are now raising serious concerns over political and regulatory risk attached to investment in the United States. Court challenges over the adequacy of environmental reviews, as well as other interventions not permitted on private lands, make the process of bringing new oil and gas production from federal lands to market both slow and costly.

President Obama’s criticism of the federal oil and gas leasing program, and his call for “use it or lose it” when referring to undeveloped leases on federal lands, are the exact opposite of what is needed. (A position unfortunately in keeping with almost every one of his other policies!) We need to open more lands and minimize the regulatory burden to ensure that the oil and gas potential outlined by the NPC can be realized.

Those proponents of “peak oil” who claim the NPC report is unrealistic need only revisit our recent history with shale gas. Natural gas production has surged by more than 25% in the last four years. Yet just a few years ago, government reports and long hours of expert testimony on Capitol Hill outlined the need for the U.S. to take action to address a growing shortage of natural gas.

A crash program was called for to build receiving facilities to import foreign supplies of liquefied natural gas (LNG). Many receiving facilities were built at a cost of billions of dollars as investors bought into the government assessments. Today these facilities are operating at less than 10% capacity.

Ample supplies of oil and gas, combined with taxpayer fatigue over green subsidies, means that a range of costly and uncompetitive technologies such as biofuels and electric cars now face the prospect of financial failure. To be sure, investments in the oil and gas industry are not immune from surprises and technology advances. LNG receiving facilities in the U.S. are suffering large financial losses. The good news is that unlike the bankrupt Solyndra solar plant that received over $500 million in federal loans, losses at the LNG receiving facilities will not be picked up by the taxpayers.

Frack me?!?  NO….

….frack YOU!

On the Lighter Side….

Finally, we’ll call it a week with the Wide, Wild World of Sports, courtesy of a snippet of commentary from former-MLB commissioner Fay Vincent:

Meanwhile Jose Reyes, the marvelous Mets shortstop, got a bunt single in his first at bat and then, satisfied with his chances to win the batting title in the National league, took himself out of the game. In doing so he reminded me again of the differences between great players of my youth and the modern kids who watch their individual statistics intently, appear to care little for their fans, and ignore the sanctity of team results. Reyes won the batting title but lost my respect. If you start the game you play the game unless you are hurt.

As a kid my hero was the magnificent Yankee Joe DiMaggio. One day not long before his death, as we were enjoying a pasta lunch together and I was certain he would not be offended by my question, I asked him why he had never hit .400. I doubt he had been asked that question many times and he seemed eager to respond.

He told me a wonderful story.

“You remember, Commissioner, the Yankeesin my day usually clinched the pennant by Labor Day. This one year I was having one heck of a year and going into September I was hitting well over .400. I think it was 1939.

That year we clinched the pennant early but all of a sudden I got a bad infection in my left eye and I could barely see. Every day the manager Joe McCarthy has me in the lineup. Every day was the same. And every day my eye swells up and gets worse and I stop hitting. My average kept falling. They even gave me a shot in the eye. But still he played me. You know, he made out his lineup in April and he never changed it. Finally I had to swing around in my stance just to see the ball.  “Now, I am not complaining. I had a good year. I think I hit about .385. But that was the year I should have done it.” In fact he hit .381 that year.”

I could not resist asking whether he had ever been told by McCarthy why he kept playing him and Joe said the issue had come up only once. McCarthy answered– with no apology– he did not want Joe to be “a cheese champion.” 

McCarthy never explained what he meant but today I cannot help seeing Reyes as either cheddar or brie. Definitely not American. 

Uhhhh….while we understand the point, perhaps Vincent can’t see Reyes as American because he’s….Dominican?!?

Go Navy, Beat Air Force….like a rented mule!

Magoo