It’s Monday, March 4th, 2013….but before we begin, we take a moment to wish Jackie Bruetting, TLJ’s oldest and hottest sister, a very happy 58th:

The Lovely Jenny and Jacqueline

A sister-in-law like this almost makes us wish we wuz frum West Virginny….or at least Dundalk.  Seriously, Happy Birthday, Jackson; and many happy returns!  Brutus, you’re a very lucky man!

And since her younger daughter was born on the same day, we also extend Happy Birthday wishes to our niece Katie:

Eric, you won the lottery as well.  And to those of you who don’t know CAPT Eric Mitchell, USMC, meet an authentic American hero….just like his father-in-law!

Now, here’s The Gouge!

First up, courtesy of the WSJ, AEI president Arthur Brooks offers his thoughts on….

Republicans and Their Faulty Moral Arithmetic

Conservative values and money issues are worth less than concern for the poor.

 

In the waning days of the 1992 presidential campaign, President George H.W. Bush trailed Bill Clinton in the polls. The conventional wisdom was that Mr. Bush seemed too aloof from voters struggling economically. At a rally in New Hampshire, the exhausted president started what was probably the fourth campaign speech of the day by reading aloud what may have been handed to him as a stage direction: “Message: I care.”

How little things have changed for Republicans in 20 years. There is only one statistic needed to explain the outcome of the 2012 presidential election. An April YouGov.com poll—which mirrored every other poll on the subject—found that only 33% of Americans said that Mitt Romney “cares about people like me.” Only 38% said he cared about the poor. (Gee….

….anyone wonder why?!?  And that number only increased after his infamous 47% flop.)

Conservatives rightly complain that this perception was inflamed by President Obama’s class-warfare campaign theme. But perception is political reality, and over the decades many Americans have become convinced that conservatives care only about the rich and powerful.

Perhaps it doesn’t matter. If Republicans and conservatives double down on the promotion of economic growth, job creation and traditional values, Americans might turn away from softheaded concerns about “caring.” Right?

Wrong. As New York University social psychologist Jonathan Haidt has shown in his research on 132,000 Americans, care for the vulnerable is a universal moral concern in the U.S. In his best-selling 2012 book “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion,” Mr. Haidt demonstrated that citizens across the political spectrum place a great importance on taking care of those in need and avoiding harm to the weak. By contrast, moral values such as sexual purity and respect for authority—to which conservative politicians often give greater emphasis—resonate deeply with only a minority of the population. Raw money arguments, e.g., about the dire effects of the country’s growing entitlement spending, don’t register morally at all.

Neither does rank hypocrisy help!

Conservatives are fighting a losing battle of moral arithmetic. They hand an argument with virtually 100% public support—care for the vulnerable—to progressives, and focus instead on materialistic concerns and minority moral viewpoints.

The irony is maddening. America’s poor people have been saddled with generations of disastrous progressive policy results, from welfare-induced dependency to failing schools that continue to trap millions of children.

Meanwhile, the record of free enterprise in improving the lives of the poor both here and abroad is spectacular. According to Columbia University economist Xavier Sala-i-Martin, the percentage of people in the world living on a dollar a day or less—a traditional poverty measure—has fallen by 80% since 1970. This is the greatest antipoverty achievement in world history. That achievement is not the result of philanthropy or foreign aid. It occurred because billions of souls have been able to pull themselves out of poverty thanks to global free trade, property rights, the rule of law and entrepreneurship.

The left talks a big game about helping the bottom half, but its policies are gradually ruining the economy, which will have catastrophic results once the safety net is no longer affordable. Labyrinthine regulations, punitive taxation and wage distortions destroy the ability to create private-sector jobs. Opportunities for Americans on the bottom to better their station in life are being erased.

Some say the solution for conservatives is either to redouble the attacks on big government per se, or give up and try to build a better welfare state. Neither path is correct. Raging against government debt and tax rates that most Americans don’t pay gets conservatives nowhere, and it will always be an exercise in futility to compete with liberals on government spending and transfers.

Instead, the answer is to make improving the lives of vulnerable people the primary focus of authentically conservative policies. For example, the core problem with out-of-control entitlements is not that they are costly—it is that the impending insolvency of Social Security and Medicare imperils the social safety net for the neediest citizens. Education innovation and school choice are not needed to fight rapacious unions and bureaucrats—too often the most prominent focus of conservative education concerns—but because poor children and their parents deserve better schools.

Defending a healthy culture of family, community and work does not mean imposing an alien “bourgeois” morality on others. It is to recognize what people need to be happy and successful—and what is most missing today in the lives of too many poor people.

By making the vulnerable a primary focus, conservatives will be better able to confront some common blind spots. Corporate cronyism should be decried as every bit as noxious as statism, because it unfairly rewards the powerful and well-connected at the expense of ordinary citizens. Entrepreneurship should not to be extolled as a path to accumulating wealth but as a celebration of everyday men and women who want to build their own lives, whether they start a business and make a lot of money or not. And conservatives should instinctively welcome the immigrants who want to earn their success in America.

With this moral touchstone, conservative leaders will be able to stand before Americans who are struggling and feel marginalized and say, “We will fight for you and your family, whether you vote for us or not”—and truly mean it. In the end that approach will win. But more important, it is the right thing to do.

We see Brooks’ point; but on the other hand, as leading abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison remarked in reaction to an earlier form of slavery:

We’d also observe the vast majority of that 38% who felt Mitt Romney didn’t “care about the poor” needed little convincing.  But Brooks is right regarding the irony being maddening.  Then again, arguing feelings with facts….

….is always infuriating, as well as futile.  But it’s a battle every Conservative candidate for public office will wage….every single day of their campaign or term in office.  Yes, the sky is blue, just as the welfare state indeed has an unparalleled record of utter failure.

Yet for a large majority of The Anointed One’s acolytes, no amount of evidence to the contrary, no matter how irrefutable, will ever convince them otherwise.

Since we’re on the subject of spin, i.e., deliberate Liberal misrepresentation of the truth, here’s a rather revealing report from the WaPo, courtesy of Jeff Foutch:

Sequester spin: Obama’s false claim of Capitol janitors receiving ‘a pay cut’ 

 

“Starting tomorrow everybody here, all the folks who are cleaning the floors at the Capitol. Now that Congress has left, somebody’s going to be vacuuming and cleaning those floors and throwing out the garbage. They’re going to have less pay. The janitors, the security guards, they just got a pay cut, and they’ve got to figure out how to manage that. That’s real.”

— President Obama, news conference, March 1, 2013

This column has been updated with a new Pinocchio rating

This was a pretty evocative image the president offered at his news conference Friday on the sequester — janitors sweeping the empty halls of the Capitol, laboring at less pay. When we first heard his remarks, we thought he was perhaps overstating matters. Even at federal agencies that have planned furloughs, none are expected to begin on Saturday; such actions are weeks away at many federal agencies. But that’s perhaps a minor rhetorical overreach.

But then our colleague Ed O’Keefe obtained the sequester plan released by the Architect for the Capitol, which employs Capitol Hill janitors on the House side. (The Sergeant at Arms employs the janitorial staff on the Senate side.)

The Facts

We have embedded an image of the first AOC document below:

Dear AOC Employees,

Sequestration takes effect today and the AOC’s current funding for Fiscal Year 2013 will be reduced by approximately 5.3%. While this reduction in funding will be difficult for us to absorb,the good news is the AOC has taken proactive steps to slow spending and plan for the cuts since last October. As I mentioned in my note to you last week, our planning and preparations will allow us to implement changes more slowly, reducing the impact of Sequestration on our customers and AOC employees.

At this time, we will begin implementing the AOC’s Sequestration plan. The top priorities in theplan are maintaining critical support for Congress and the Supreme Court and supporting AOC employees. We will focus our efforts first on the following:

• Reducing or eliminating certain contracts

• Postponing some repair and alteration projects

• Trimming maintenance and operations programs

• Reducing bench stock and supply levels

• Delaying replacement of old equipment

• Further reducing overtime, training, and awards

• Limiting new hiring

We do not anticipate furloughs for AOC employees as a result of Sequestration. However, we willnot know the AOC’s final budget for this year until Congress passes legislation to replace theexisting continuing resolution, which expires March 27. If that legislation further reduces our budget, we may have to consider additional spending reductions, which could include furloughs. We will utilize furloughs, if necessary, only as a way to avoid more harmful actions such as a Reduction in Force.

In the coming weeks, you will hear more news as we begin to implement different actions in our Sequestration plan. Additionally, I will provide another update once we learn more about our final funding level for the rest of Fiscal Year 2013. To stay informed, I encourage you to subscribe today to receive AOC news and announcements to your personal email address or phone – subscribe today.

.It is important that we continue to work together as one team to overcome the challenges created by these funding cuts and achieve our critical mission. I truly appreciate how hard you work everyday to care for our customers.

Thank you,

Stephen T. Ayers, FAIA, LEED AP

Architect of the Capitol

Stephen T. Ayers, the  architect of the Capitol, listed a number of steps being taken to reduce expenses, including limiting new hiring and postponing repairs. This line jumped out at us: “We do not anticipate furloughs for AOC employees as a result of Sequestration.” In other words, no pay is being cut for workers at the Architect of the Capitol. (We view an unpaid furlough as an effective pay cut.)

A White House official noted at first that the memo does refer to “further reducing overtime.” Technically, that could mean some janitors might see less pay, but it’s unclear how many actually earn overtime. Under the reasonable person test, a possible reduction in overtime appears a bit different from “just got a pay cut.”

The White House thought our position was unreasonable. “Folks who are getting paid hourly aren’t breaking up their paycheck to say, well, technically this portion of my paycheck came from my overtime pay, so I’m not going to actually count that towards my income,” an official said. “They rely on that overtime and they pay their bills with that income. So, we disagree with this ‘reasonable person test.’”

Then, another White House official asserted that the janitors–both part-time and full-time–are contracted out by the Architect of the Capitol. “Since the AOC said that the contracts would be reduced or eliminated, it’s hard to convincingly make the case those contract workers won’t be affected,” he claimed.

In other words, White House officials assumed there was an impact but they were not exactly sure themselves. We will also note that the president said the pay cut was happening “tomorrow.”

Yeah….and 40,000 teachers in West Virginia were just laid off!

But this White House claim was also wrong. PolitiFact in 2009 quoted Eva Malecki, AOC communications officer, as saying that while there are a few contract workers, a majority of the janitorial staff “are federal employees.” We sought further clarification from her but then a memo that O’Keefe obtained late Friday nullified all of the White House’s assertions.

Indeed, Obama’s remarks at the news conference so alarmed Capitol Hill officials that an e-mail was sent by the Capitol building superintendent that comments that people who clean the building would get a cut in pay were “NOT true.” We have embedded the document below:

(The White House officials’ aggressive pushback of this column ended after we sent a copy of this email to them.)

On the Senate side of the building, Sergeant at Arms Terry Gainer said the cleaning technicians are his employees–not contract employees, except for setting up rooms for meetings and events.

“None of my employees will have their pay cut nor will they face furloughs assuming the cost saving strategies initiated months ago (hiring freeze, overtime reduction and delayed in equipment replacement etc.), in conjunction with a very aggressive early retirement program we began two weeks ago, reap the savings anticipated,” he said in an e-mail.

As for security guards at the Capitol, Gainer, who is chairman of the Capitol Hill Police Board, added:

“Our Centurions will face neither pay cuts nor furloughs; they are standing tall through sequestration and all. (We are saving $ by reducing overtime which is accomplished by closing doors of convenience, safety will not be compromised but health improved for visitors and staff by longer treks. )”

The Pinocchio Test

Obama’s remarks continue the administration’s pattern of overstating the potential impact of the sequester, which we have explored this week. But this error is particularly bad–and nerve-wracking to the janitors and security guards who were misled by the president’s comments.

We originally thought this was maybe a Two Pinocchio rating, but in light of the AOC memo and the confirmation that security guards will not face a pay cut, nothing in Obama’s statement came close to being correct.

Four Pinocchios

We offer but one simple question: can anyone imagine a Republican President caught in a similar lie not being hounded out of office?  His entire life’s lie, his every policy founded on falsehoods and fabrications.  Geraldine Ferraro was right.

In a related item detailing similarly purposeful political histrionics:

TSA: Hiring freeze could double checkpoint waits

 

The Transportation Security Administration announced Friday it would adopt a hiring freeze and reduce overtime spending in response to federal spending cuts — a move it said could double wait times at checkpoints at the busiest airports. Travelers won’t notice longer waits immediately, the agency said. But because of turnover, it said, it expects slots for 1,000 security officers to be vacant by Memorial Day and 2,600 vacancies by the end of September.

“With TSA staffing levels decreasing over time, we expect that during busy travel periods wait times exceeding 30 to 40 minutes could double at nearly all of the largest airports,” the agency said in a statement. “In addition,” it said, “passengers who schedule their travel outside of peak flight schedules and plan to arrive close to their scheduled flight time may see their wait times now reach 30 minutes or more.”

Yeah….like the service could be any slower, let alone worse.  And with over 47,000 screeners across the county, only a federal bureaucracy utilizing Obamath, and pursuing a purely political agenda, could possibly conclude a 5% reduction in work force somehow equates to 2X the wait time.

Gee….maybe we’d need less screeners and all get through faster if we concentrated our efforts on them….

….instead of her:

And no, this isn’t racism; it’s what was once an American virtue: good, old-fashioned common sense.

Speaking of the Devil….

DHS No Longer Uses Control of Border as Measurement of Success

 

The US Department of Homeland Security no longer uses control of the actual border as a measure of how well the Border Patrol is doing its job, according to written testimony released today by the Government Accountability Office. The GAO said that by the end of fiscal 2010, the Border Patrol had been able to secure “operational control” of only 44 percent of the US-Mexico border. Then, with 56 percent of the border not under “operational control,” DHS simply stopped using “operational control” as a measure of the Border Patrol’s performance.

Since then, DHS has counted the number of illegal border crossers the Border Patrol apprehends, and used this count as an “interim” measure of whether the Border Patrol is accomplishing its mission. According to GAO, this “interim” measure limits DHS’s accountability and Congress’s ability to conduct oversight of the department.

This is a Progressive ploy as old as the Dimocratic Party, and a particular favorite of the Liberal Overlords in the Old Line State.  While running for mayor of Baltimore, the highly-ambitious Martin O’Money….

….promised improved scholastic achievement and lower crime in the inaptly-named Charm City.  That he did so by lowering the passing grade from 70 to 60 and changing the methodology by which violent crimes were reported failed to raise even a single eyebrow over at the venerable newshound-turned-Dimocratic-lapdog Baltimore Sun….or anywhere else in Maryland.

Next up, a narrow ray of sunshine in an otherwise cloudy forecast, provided by Carl Polizzi and this forward from Examiner.com:

Every sheriff in Florida pledges to protect Second Amendment rights

 

On Sunday, Feb. 17, Watch Dog Wire reported that they received an email from Constitutional Sheriffs stating that all 67 sheriffs in the counties of Florida have signed a pledge declaring that they not only support the Second Amendment, but that they will protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms. 67, that’s every single county in the state.

Florida has become the first state to receive 100% support from every sheriff, which makes a huge statement opposing tyrannical acts against the United States Constitution. A statement that many other states are most likely soon to follow.

It’s like Blondie said:

And The Obamao’s providing the shovels….at taxpayer expense, of course.

Which brings us to the “Dumb and Dumber” segment, courtesy of one of Joe Biden’s few academic equals:

Sec. of State John Kerry Invents New Country

 

Newly minted Secretary of State John Kerry is sweeping through Europe and the Middle East on a nine-nation tour, meeting with top global heads to forge diplomatic relations — and, apparently, even creating new countries.

Mr. Kerry was trying to praise diplomats who were working on behalf of the United States in the Central Asian region, but in doing so, he created a new country. He thanked the diplomats for their work in “Kyrzakhstan,” according to various media reports, and credited their efforts in “support [of] democratic institutions in Kyrzakhstan and Georgia.”

The National Review suggests Mr. Kerry could have confused America’s major ally in the war on terrorism, Kyrgyzstan, with its neighbor to the north, Kazakhstan… At least Mr. Kerry’s faux pas will likely be short-lived. The State Department has scrubbed his error from official agency transcripts of his speech, The Telegraph reports.

Stateside, Mr. Kerry has taken flak for creating a new Major League Baseball icon in “Manny Ortez” – a mash of Red Sox heroes David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez. He also gave the famed Green Bay Packers a new home, “Lambert Field,” apparently in reference to storied Lambeau Field.

But trust us, The Sox….they’re his team!  Yeah….and “Yaz” is the capital of “Kyrzakhstan“.

And in today’s Money Quote, Michael Boobberg offers the Limousine Liberal’s view of economics:

“We are spending money we don’t have,” Mr. Bloomberg explained. “It’s not like your household. In your household, people are saying, ‘Oh, you can’t spend money you don’t have.’ That is true for your household because nobody is going to lend you an infinite amount of money. When it comes to the United States federal government, people do seem willing to lend us an infinite amount of money. … Our debt is so big and so many people own it that it’s preposterous to think that they would stop selling us more. It’s the old story: If you owe the bank $50,000, you got a problem. If you owe the bank $50 million, they got a problem. And that’s a problem for the lenders. They can’t stop lending us more money.”

Spoken like a true billionaire who’s never had to balance his own check book, drive his own car, cook his own food….or defend his own home or person.

Then there’s today’s installment of the “Get Out of Jail Free” segment, aka Jersey Shore, courtesy of Tom Bakke and Zerohedge.com:

Jon Corzine Defines “Friends In High Places”

 

Get your hand off my wallet, you bearded bandit!

As we all know, it helps to have friends in high places. To most of us, that means we know the bartender on Friday night so we can get served quicker than the next guy drowning his weekly sorrows. To others, however, that means knowing the President of the United States. That could come in handy when you steal lose $1.6 billion in client funds and want to avoid being held responsible for it. (It may also help to have J.P. Morgan involved.)

Pure coincidence no doubt. Surely charges are just around the corner…

From the Obama-Biden fundraiser detail: *Note that he’s not raising funds in order to repay his clients – Just those that keep him out of jail

On the Lighter Side….

Finally, since someone mentioned anarchy, we’ll call it a day with “The Best Laid Plans” segment, courtesy of Bret Baier and another hopelessly misguided Liberal initiative, entitled….

Workshop Weekend

 

This weekend is Workshop Weekend in Oakland, California. Residents there can sign up for a host of classes organized by the city — such as Cheese-making, Origami Photo Albums, and Introduction to Lock Picking.

The mayor has received lots of angry e-mails about that last class especially considering burglaries are up 40 percent this year in Oakland. The mayor has apologized for promoting that last class in her newsletter. We checked — tomorrow’s lock picking class is sold out.

No doubt, most likely by the end of the week, a significant segment of Raider Nation will finally appreciate who needs 30-round magazines.

Magoo