Obama summons Democrats to WH for debt-ceiling meeting; Update: Meeting with Boehner, Cantor added; Update: Obama to accept short-term deal?

posted at 2:00 pm on July 20, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

This should be one of the least productive meetings ever held in Washington DC:

    President Barack Obama is summoning top Democrats from the House and Senate to the White House Wednesday afternoon for talks on raising the nation’s debt ceiling.

    White House spokesman Jay Carney says the meeting will take place shortly before 3 p.m. EDT. When asked why Obama was not meeting with Republicans, Carney would only say there were no other meetings to announce.

I’m certain that the President wants to gather them in the West Wing to review all of their published plans for dealing with deficit reduction and the debt ceiling.  But what will they do in the second minute of the meeting?

They’re probably going to discuss how to push the Gang of Six proposal as the solution, even though it won’t be ready until well after the debt-ceiling deadline of August 2nd.  Obama insisted last week that he wouldn’t accept an interim debt-ceiling hike, even to get to the “grand bargain” he demanded in his series of press conferences.  In fact, The Hill expanded on what the timing would be on the GO-6 bid:

    Senate Democratic leaders, for their part, said there is not enough time to combine the group’s plan with a bill to raise the debt ceiling. It could take weeks or even months for the slim framework to be drafted into legislative language and scored by the Congressional Budget Office, sources said.

    Washington has less than two weeks to meet an Aug. 2 deadline, when the nation faces a possible default. Lawmakers and Senate aides alike wondered whether the Gang of Six had coalesced too late to have an impact on the partisan standoff.

    The only possibility would be for Obama to agree to a short-term increase in the nation’s borrowing authority, but Democratic leaders say that is unlikely.

So that means that Democrats would want the McConnell plan as their fallback, right?  Er … no:

    House Democratic leaders are attacking Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) debt-ceiling fallback plan, characterizing it as a political ruse intended to scapegoat Democrats and taint them at the polls.

    “I’m not a fan of the McConnell proposal,” Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said Tuesday during a press briefing in the Capitol. “It’s designed to protect mostly Republican members of Congress from taking responsibility for votes that they’ve already made.”

What will be the meeting agenda today, then?  The President wants to discuss the non-existent plans from Democrats in order to push the proposal that a small bipartisan group announced without any legislative language, so that he can get the debt-ceiling hike he demanded weeks or months after his own drop-dead date, while refusing to accept the bill approved in the House last night that would raise it immediately or to contemplate any other short-term solutions.

I take it back.  This might be the longest meeting in Washington history, if it requires attendees to determine what the heck they’re doing there in the first place.

Update: Well, it looks like the schedule wasn’t as closed as Carney first indicated.  According to his Twitter feed, the White House has now added a 5 pm meeting with John Boehner and Eric Cantor.

Update II: Bloomberg says that Obama will now accept a short-term debt-ceiling hike (via Poor Richard’s News):

    The Obama administration signalled it may accept a short-term increase in the U.S. debt limit if it is combined with a major agreement to cut the deficit.

    “The president has been clear that he will not support a short-term extension of the debt ceiling” without an agreement to cut the deficit, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters today. President Barack Obama plans to meet with top congressional Democrats today as the Aug. 2 deadline for raising the US$14.3-trillion debt limit nears.

The Financial Post, which published this Bloomberg wire report, says this is a “strings attached” offer — but by whom?  It was the Republicans who insisted on tying the debt ceiling hike to substantial deficit reduction.  This is a capitulation on Obama’s earlier refusal to consider a short-term extension to allow for more bargaining time.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/20/obama-summons-democrats-to-wh-for-debt-ceiling-meeting/

Rick Perry’s wife gives the green light

posted at 8:45 am on July 21, 2011 by Tina Korbe
printer-friendly

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has said his decision as to whether he’ll run for president hinges primarily on his ability to raise enough money to mount a successful campaign — but, just in case his supporters fear a Mitch Daniels moment, it’s good to know Perry’s wife is already on board.

    Following a brief meeting on state finances Tuesday, Perry talked expansively for the first time on what his wife, Anita, has been telling him about a White House run.

    “My wife was talking to me and saying: ‘Listen… get out of your comfort zone. Yeah, being governor of Texas is a great job, but sometimes you’re  called to step into the fray,’” the governor said.

    As an experienced political wife, Anita Perry has been stepping into the fray with her husband since he ran for the Texas House in 1984.

But Anita isn’t merely supportive; she’s also likely to be an asset should Perry decide to run. She wants her husband to join the race not out of vanity, but out of a genuine concern for the direction of the country. As a nurse, for example, she has expressed worry about Obamacare’s probable effects on the nation’s health care system. That conviction should carry her better than sheer ambition ever could as she weathers weeks on the campaign trail herself. And after years as the First Lady of Texas, she has already overcome her original shyness to canvas for votes for her husband. She’s used to a grueling schedule, as one profile of her makes clear:

    Even seated, she is still on the run. Her weeks are a collection of calls, meetings, travel and speeches. Her agenda is preserving county courthouses, sponsoring the Texas Conference for Women, promoting tourism, pushing childhood immunizations and raising money to restore the Governor’s Mansion, gutted by arson two years ago.

    This is the Anita Perry described by her friends: unadorned, straightforward and as steady as her blue-eyed gaze.

Perhaps most importantly, she’s also accustomed to the praise and criticism of her husband that come with the territory of an elected executive position — and makes it her priority to keep him grounded.

If Rick Perry has a checklist, he should be nearing the end of it — and, so far, it seems, every item has been checked in the “yes” column. A call? Check. Wife’s support? Check. Fundraising potential? Check. Positive polling? Check. He still faces those pesky comparisons to former President George W. Bush — but, as those “Miss me yet?” shirts hint, that’s not necessarily a negative.

FOREX IS AN ART

When you say trading, people will say trading is an art. Look at all the books that has been published on the subject. They will say the art of trading forex.

In that sense, we must take forex as an art and not a science. I know, some people may not agree with me and all the post that is in this blog. I don't blame them coz I was actually in the same place as they were when I started trading. Trying to find the answer to forex using every logical explanation.


This is the answer that you have been looking for. I am going to give it to you straight away. Let see if your mind can accept it.

Forex is not a science. There is not a single mathematical equation that can explain it. Do not forecast, do not predict, do not anticipate. All you need to do to make profit is to follow the market. If the price is going up, you buy. If the price is going down, u sell. You may not win all the time but if you follow the market, in the end you will be in profit. Make profit and build up your capital up to a point where a few winning trades per month will bring huge profit.

Can you accept it? Can you mind admit it? Is your logical mind challenged? Do you feel helpless? Welcome to the real world :)

http://www.allnews.xxxmthai.com/?cat=11

ITS SIMPLE.

orry for the less updated blog. I dont feel that I have anything else to put in. The answer is all in here. This was more like a log to me. I put in everything that I learned in forex.

To make things easier, I will summarize it.

What is Forex?
Forex stands for Foreign Exchange Market. Where you buy 1 currency over the other (exchange). Its a business, no matter what people say. It involve buying and selling like any other business only difference is the medium is currency.

How to trade Forex?
The idea behind forex trading is to make profit from the difference in prices. Simply put, buy when the price is low and sell it when the price is high. Its just like the item you buy in stores, the store keeper is selling it at a higher price to make profit except in Forex you can sell first at high price and buy back later when the price is low.

When to buy and when to sell?
Logically you will sell when the price is going down and you will buy when the price is going up. It is simple but in practice this is what killing most traders. Something so simple can be so complicated.

How to know when the price is going down/up?
The price is going down when it no longer making new high. The price is going up when it no longer making new low.

Final advice
Forex is a human activity. It involve buying and selling. Because it is a human activity, it is not predictable. You cannot predict when is the time you need to go to toilet or when you are going to cut your hair. It is all based on situation. Prediction is an over statement of intelligence in Forex. You dont need it.

Fortunately not everything is unpredictable. By nature human tends to follow what other people are doing. In Forex there is something called the Trend. It happen when lots of people are doing the same thing at the same time (follow??). when more and more people are buying, you buy. When more and more people are selling you sell.

Dont get greedy. Put a reasonable target for each trade and get out once you get your target. There will always be another trade tomorrow and you dont have to trade everyday to make profit. Btw, last week I only trade once.

Good luck to all you traders. For the new blood, take your time. Give it 2 years before you can understand it and go for the kill.

http://www.allnews.xxxmthai.com/?cat=11

The ‘Golden Proportion Girl’ revealed… sorta’

Obama summons Democrats to WH for debt-ceiling meeting; Update: Meeting with Boehner, Cantor added; Update: Obama to accept short-term deal?

posted at 2:00 pm on July 20, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

 

This should be one of the least productive meetings ever held in Washington DC:

President Barack Obama is summoning top Democrats from the House and Senate to the White House Wednesday afternoon for talks on raising the nation’s debt ceiling.
White House spokesman Jay Carney says the meeting will take place shortly before 3 p.m. EDT. When asked why Obama was not meeting with Republicans, Carney would only say there were no other meetings to announce.

I’m certain that the President wants to gather them in the West Wing to review all of their published plans for dealing with deficit reduction and the debt ceiling.  But what will they do in the second minute of the meeting?
They’re probably going to discuss how to push the Gang of Six proposal as the solution, even though it won’t be ready until well after the debt-ceiling deadline of August 2nd.  Obama insisted last week that he wouldn’t accept an interim debt-ceiling hike, even to get to the “grand bargain” he demanded in his series of press conferences.  In fact, The Hill expanded on what the timing would be on the GO-6 bid:

Senate Democratic leaders, for their part, said there is not enough time to combine the group’s plan with a bill to raise the debt ceiling. It could take weeks or even months for the slim framework to be drafted into legislative language and scored by the Congressional Budget Office, sources said.
Washington has less than two weeks to meet an Aug. 2 deadline, when the nation faces a possible default. Lawmakers and Senate aides alike wondered whether the Gang of Six had coalesced too late to have an impact on the partisan standoff.
The only possibility would be for Obama to agree to a short-term increase in the nation’s borrowing authority, but Democratic leaders say that is unlikely.

So that means that Democrats would want the McConnell plan as their fallback, right?  Er … no:

House Democratic leaders are attacking Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) debt-ceiling fallback plan, characterizing it as a political ruse intended to scapegoat Democrats and taint them at the polls.
“I’m not a fan of the McConnell proposal,” Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said Tuesday during a press briefing in the Capitol. “It’s designed to protect mostly Republican members of Congress from taking responsibility for votes that they’ve already made.”

What will be the meeting agenda today, then?  The President wants to discuss the non-existent plans from Democrats in order to push the proposal that a small bipartisan group announced without any legislative language, so that he can get the debt-ceiling hike he demanded weeks or months after his own drop-dead date, while refusing to accept the bill approved in the House last night that would raise it immediately or to contemplate any other short-term solutions.
I take it back.  This might be the longest meeting in Washington history, if it requires attendees to determine what the heck they’re doing there in the first place.
Update: Well, it looks like the schedule wasn’t as closed as Carney first indicated.  According to his Twitter feed, the White House has now added a 5 pm meeting with John Boehner and Eric Cantor.
Update II: Bloomberg says that Obama will now accept a short-term debt-ceiling hike (via Poor Richard’s News):

The Obama administration signalled it may accept a short-term increase in the U.S. debt limit if it is combined with a major agreement to cut the deficit.
“The president has been clear that he will not support a short-term extension of the debt ceiling” without an agreement to cut the deficit, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters today. President Barack Obama plans to meet with top congressional Democrats today as the Aug. 2 deadline for raising the US$14.3-trillion debt limit nears.

The Financial Post, which published this Bloomberg wire report, says this is a “strings attached” offer — but by whom?  It was the Republicans who insisted on tying the debt ceiling hike to substantial deficit reduction.  This is a capitulation on Obama’s earlier refusal to consider a short-term extension to allow for more bargaining time.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/20/obama-summons-democrats-to-wh-for-debt-ceiling-meeting/

“Do you have a degree in economics?”

posted at 1:30 pm on July 20, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

Matt Lewis flags this must-see moment from MSNBC, admittedly a phrase heard only slightly more often than “the good judgment of Anthony Weiner.”  Contessa Brewer gets into an argument over economic policy with Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), and tries to talk him down by snidely asking him whether he has a degree in economics … which, to Brewer’s embarrassment, Brooks does:




Brooks actually has three degrees: political science, economics, and law. As a lawyer, Brooks would have been experienced enough not to make Brewer’s mistake in a cross-examination, which is to ask a question without first knowing the answer. Not only that, but Brewer was being flat-out rude as well as foolish; MSNBC invited Brooks to appear to get his perspective on the issues. If their hosts respond by belittling them (whether it backfires or not), what does that say about MSNBC, its management, and the kind of invitations they make?
Since Brewer made an issue out of having an economics degree before engaging in economics debates, she must have a doctorate in the subject herself, right? Not exactly. According to her Wikipedia entry, Brewer has a baccalaureate in broadcast journalism (magna cum laude). Apparently they didn’t teach interviewing skills at Syracuse, or logic either, as a requisite for the degree.
As it happens, I don’t have a degree in economics (or journalism), either.  I think that it’s entirely possible that the 2008 collapse could have triggered a deflationary spiral that would have created a depression instead of a sharp recession absent the interventions in the fall of that year; it’s at least an arguable point.  I don’t have an issue with Brewer discussing economics without a degree, except that she doesn’t seem sharp enough to grasp the issues on her own — as demonstrated by demanding a level of expertise for the debate that she herself doesn’t meet
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/20/do-you-have-a-degree-in-economics/

Forex Fundamental Analysis

What is fundamental analysis in forex ?

It's a type of market analysis whereas involving studying the economic situation of countries to trade currencies effectively. It gives information, how the big political and economical events influence forex trading.

Economic calender & who's providing ?

It's created by economists where they predict economics figures and values according to previous months.

Its contains data :

Date - Time - Currency - Data Released - Actual - Forecast - Previous

Economic data can be found at www.forexfactory.com/calendar.php

What are the most important figures that influence forex market ?

Interest rate

Traditionally, if a country raises its interest rates, its currency will strengthen because investors will shift their assets to that country to gain higher returns

Employment Situation

Decreases in the payroll employment are considered as signs of a weak economic activity that could eventually lead to lower interest rates, which has negative impact on the currency

Trade Balance, budget and treasury budget

A country that has a significant Trade Balance deficit will generally have a weak currency as there will be continuous commercial selling of its currency

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

It's reported quarterly and is followed very closely as it is a primary indicator of the strength of economic activity. A high GDP figure is usually followed by expectations of higher interest rates, which is mostly positive for the currency.

Less powerfull economic indicator are

Retails sales - it's the first real indicator of the strength of consumer expenditure

Durable goods - Rising durable goods orders are normally associated with stronger economic activity and can therefore lead to higher short-term interest rates, which is usually supportive for a currency

ชมพู่ The Mall Beauty Aholic 2011

FOREX IS AN ART

When you say trading, people will say trading is an art. Look at all the books that has been published on the subject. They will say the art of trading forex.

In that sense, we must take forex as an art and not a science. I know, some people may not agree with me and all the post that is in this blog. I don't blame them coz I was actually in the same place as they were when I started trading. Trying to find the answer to forex using every logical explanation.

This is the answer that you have been looking for. I am going to give it to you straight away. Let see if your mind can accept it.

Forex is not a science. There is not a single mathematical equation that can explain it. Do not forecast, do not predict, do not anticipate. All you need to do to make profit is to follow the market. If the price is going up, you buy. If the price is going down, u sell. You may not win all the time but if you follow the market, in the end you will be in profit. Make profit and build up your capital up to a point where a few winning trades per month will bring huge profit.

Can you accept it? Can you mind admit it? Is your logical mind challenged? Do you feel helpless? Welcome to the real world :)

http://www.allnews.xxxmthai.com/?cat=11

FOREX WITH PEACE OF MIND

Hi everyone,

I hope all of you are doing fine and have lots of pips to enjoy. Just got back from a vacation. 6 days there and I got bored and get back home. Leave my wife and kids there to do their shopping. It seems that I like it better at home than to stay at hotels. Maybe I'm getting old :)

Been a while since I have updated this blog. Been thinking of deleting or selling this blog to anyone who wants it.

Met a friend while on vacation. It seems he is making 15k average per month without even knowing how to trade. Talk about forex with peace of mind. You guys wanna know how he did it? Let me tell you his story.

He wanted to learn from me how to trade but I am reluctant to teach him since this is not something I can teach. I can tell you how I did it but I cant guarantee you can do it the same way I did. Its not pure technical or skill. There are some form of mind control involve. I cant change your mind. You have to do it your self. Free your mind.

He kept asking me how to make money in forex. I gave him a way that is a bit risky but with care everyone can do it. I told him to find a trader that is looking for investors. Lots of new traders around with good skills but low capital. These traders are looking for a way to maximize their income, so they take in few accounts to manage. They trade their own account and at the same time execute the exact same trade on their managed accounts. They take profit from their own account and take commission on manage accounts.

Turns out after 1 year my friend manage to get 15k average monthly income and he knows nothing bout trading. There are few rules to follow if you want to do the exact same way.

1. Study the trader records. At least 3 months maintain profit.
2. Open a trading account with your name tied to your banking account. (dont ever hand him your money)
3. Get the trader details just in case he decide to make a run for it.
4. Ready to accept trading losses. If its a trading loss, accept it and release him from his burden. Trading is already hard enuf. Now you know why I dont manage accounts.
5. Give him your trading account details and leave him alone.

6. Take him out for dinner at the end of the months. Dont ask, let him tell you bout the trading.

Hope that is clear enuf. Those steps are minimal. Extra precaution is always welcome but dont put pressure on the trader. We dont want to send him to a mental hospital or something.

Good luck everyone and happy trading. Im not going to give any trade setup since its all based on situation. If its there, then i trade. Ifs its not there, then I just watch and play with my RC helicopter. My new hobby is RC helicopter btw, a very expensive hobby.... oouch.


 http://www.allnews.xxxmthai.com/?cat=11

A New Blog On A Long Lost Hobby

Hello traders,

I hope you are doing well. I have setup a pool to find out how many people need forex training. I cannot guarantee success to any of you but with a little training you should be able to see what forex is and how it moves.

I would really like to ask for people to stop spamming this blog. I have lots of promotional comments which I deleted and will continue to delete in the future. So just dont do it.

I have also created a new blog on Remote Control Hobby. Used to play RC long time ago but stopped for a while. Now I am continuing this long lost hobby again. Do visit my RC Explorer blog. It will be like this blog but only a different topic. I do my logs on blogs.

http://www.allnews.xxxmthai.com/?cat=11

Bachmann “incapacitated” by migraines?

posted at 10:55 am on July 19, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

 

The Daily Caller’s Jonathan Strong drops a bombshell on the Michele Bachmann campaign today with a report that migraines incapacitate the presidential hopeful on a regular basis.  The headline also alleges “heavy pill use,” a loaded phrase that insinuates some sort of addiction — an insinuation that the story fails to support.  An unknown number of unnamed sources form the basis of this story:

The Minnesota Republican frequently suffers from stress-induced medical episodes that she has characterized as severe headaches. These episodes, say witnesses, occur once a week on average and can “incapacitate” her for days at time. On at least three occasions, Bachmann has landed in the hospital as a result.

“She has terrible migraine headaches. And they put her out of commission for a day or more at a time. They come out of nowhere, and they’re unpredictable,” says an adviser to Bachmann who was involved in her 2010 congressional campaign. “They level her. They put her down. It’s actually sad. It’s very painful.”
Bachmann’s medical condition wouldn’t merit public attention, but for the fact she is running for president. Some close to Bachmann fear she won’t be equal to the stress of the campaign, much less the presidency itself.
“When she gets ‘em, frankly, she can’t function at all. It’s not like a little thing with a couple Advils. It’s bad,” the adviser says. “The migraines are so bad and so intense, she carries and takes all sorts of pills. Prevention pills. Pills during the migraine. Pills after the migraine, to keep them under control. She has to take these pills wherever she goes.”

What are the examples of Bachmann being “incapacitated” by her migraines?  Strong only offers one — a missed campaign appearance for then-Rep. Roy Blunt in his ultimately successful Senate campaign.  She was treated at a hospital and went home the same day.  The only other incidents cited by Strong’s report came two months earlier, an episode that caused her to miss … er … no appearances, although she did visit an urgent-care center, and another event in October of last year, in which she laid down for a while and went to urgent care for treatment later.
The “heavy use of pills” would be familiar to anyone who deals with migraines, but Strong’s description sounds more like someone who actively manages their medical condition rather than being the second coming of Neely O’Hara from Valley of the Dolls:

Of particular concern to some around her is the significant amount of medication Bachmann takes to address her condition.
The former aide says Bachmann’s congressional staff is “constantly” in contact with her doctors to tweak the types and amounts of medicine she is taking. Marcus Bachmann helps her manage the episodes.

Her husband helps his wife manage her medical issues — and that’s a surprise?  Migraines require the kind of review described in this passage, because the conditions shift and medications don’t always provide consistent relief.  Shouldn’t someone who has migraines be in contact with her physicians to ensure that medication works as it should and that the condition doesn’t incapacitate the sufferer?  And wouldn’t it be more strange if Marcus didn’t take a supporting role in that effort?
Bachmann doesn’t have a reputation for being a political wallflower.  She has tirelessly traveled to Tea Party events, appears constantly on talking-head political news shows, and is perhaps the most prodigious fundraiser in the House.  Bachmann didn’t do all of that by being incapacitated.  I’ve known Bachmann for several years, and I’m only aware of her missing one event (the Blunt appearance) in all of that time. If her migraines were anywhere near as incapacitating as Strong’s piece suggests, we would have known about it a year ago or more.
The sourcing on this story doesn’t instill much confidence, either.  Strong’s cites are:

• a former aide says.
• three people who have worked closely with Bachmann
• an adviser to Bachmann who was involved in her 2010 congressional campaign.
• The former aide says …
• the adviser says.

Strong writes that “TheDC agreed to provide the sources anonymity because they were providing information only a select group of people could know, at great professional risk.”  I’m not an idealist that says that anonymous sources should never be used, but in this story, anonymity is extremely curious.  It doesn’t protect whistleblowers calling attention to corruption or wrongdoing; it’s protecting people who didn’t like working for Bachmann.  If the former Bachmann aides fear for the Republic, why aren’t they openly speaking out?  The “great professional risk” appears to be that politicians won’t hire people who are disloyal and stab people in the back, anonymously or not.

Vegas mogul blasts Obama as “greatest wet blanket to business … job creation in my lifetime”

posted at 10:12 am on July 19, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

 

Steve Wynn knows what a bad bet looks like.  One of the acknowledged visionaries of modern Las Vegas and gaming worldwide, Wynn has built his fortune on widely-dispersed disposable income and the copious leisure time not just of the wealthy but also of the middle and working classes.  He also has to meet a large payroll (several of them, actually) and make critical decisions on investments, both personally and professionally.  So when the 69-year-old Wynn declares that Barack Obama has been the “greatest wet blanket to business and progress and job creation in my lifetime,” it’s an expert opinion.
And that’s not even the most incendiary thing Wynn said:

And I’m saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems, that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration. And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America.
You bet and until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it’s not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President. And a lot of people don’t want to say that. They’ll say, God, don’t be attacking Obama. Well, this is Obama’s deal and it’s Obama that’s responsible for this fear in America.

As it turns out, Wynn isn’t a big fan of redistributionism, either (emphasis mine):

The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don’t invest, their holding too much money. We haven’t heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody’s afraid of the government and there’s no need soft peddling it, it’s the truth. It is the truth. And that’s true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I’m telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he’s gone, everybody’s going to be sitting on their thumbs.

If Wynn is afraid of the “weird political philosophy” of Obama, then perhaps he should rethink his support of Harry Reid.  After all, the Senate Majority Leader has spent the last two-plus years doing nothing else but carrying Obama’s weird political water on Capitol Hill.  How exactly has Reid differed from Obama in that time?  Perhaps Wynn should have th0ught about that before maxing out his donation to Reid in 2009.
In fact, a look at Wynn’s contributions over the previous two electoral cycles confirms that he donates to both Republicans and Democrats. Wynn appears to favor Republicans over Democrats slightly in the previous three-plus years, but not by much.  Notable for its absence, however, is any donation to Barack Obama.  Most of his contributions to Democratic candidates took place in the 2008 cycle, although he did max out to Reid as noted in the 2010 cycle as well  as to Rep. Shelley Berkley in his own state, as well as Rep. Charlie Rangel and gave a thousand dollars to Rep. Bennie Thompson.  Did Wynn believe that Rangel, Thompson, and Berkley would make Obamanomics less scary?  Wynn may know what a bad bet looks like, but that hasn’t kept him from making a few himself.
Otherwise, Wynn gets to the heart of the problem with Obama and his “weird” Obamanomics.  It’s all about class warfare, not economic growth or health, and most of those in the business world who made the same bad bet are belatedly realizing it.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/19/vegas-mogul-blasts-obama-as-greatest-wet-blanket-to-business-job-creation-in-my-lifetime/

School girl Han Chae-I

School girl Han Chae-I, More interesting focus on Korean girls, most of Korean are cute and more popular about Korean movie, Karaoke ....

Uh oh: GM backlog looking a lot like 2008

“Is GM falling into old, bad habits?” asked one industry analyst when the backlog data for General Motors was made public yesterday. The bailed-out automaker now has a growing inventory in its truck lines of 122 days worth of sales, nearly twice that of its non-bailout domestic competitor Ford Motors for similar lines. With sales flattening in the auto market, GM has now returned to the high inventory of its pre-bailout condition:

The Detroit-based automaker, 33 percent owned by the U.S. after its 2009 bankruptcy, has 280,000 Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups on dealers’ lots around the country. If sales continue at June’s rate, that would be enough to last until November.

After GM’s truck inventory swelled to 122 days worth of average sales, the company said 100 to 110 will be normal going forward for such a large and complex line of vehicles, compared with 60 to 70 days for most models. Peter Nesvold, a Jefferies & Co. analyst, isn’t convinced.Ford Motor Co. (F), which makes similar trucks, is running at 79 days, and Nesvold says GM averaged 78 days on hand at year end from 2002 to 2010.

“It’s unbelievable that after this huge taxpayer bailout and the bankruptcy that we’re right back to where we were,” Nesvold, who has a “hold” rating on the stock, said in a telephone interview. “There’s no credibility.” In a research note he asked: “Is GM falling into old, bad habits?”

GM says that the answer to the question is “no,” but there are other similarities noted by Bloomberg in this analysis. A former chief sales analyst calls GM’s line “dated,” and now predicts that GM will have to heavily discount in the fall to move the moribund inventory. The pickup line hasn’t changed since 2006. Ford, in contrast, began offering a V-6 engine on its trucks as an option and has been rewarded with significant movement in inventory.

The federal bailout of GM only made sense if the automaker’s difficulties entirely sprang from the financial collapse (caused mainly by government intervention in housing and financial markets through Fannie and Freddie junk bonds), and had been both competitive and profitable without it. That was obviously not the case; GM had struggled for years against foreign and domestic competition. The bailout forced GM to make some long-needed changes, such as consolidation of its product lines, as well as allowed the company to benefit from a politically-engineered bankruptcy that left the legacy benefit issues largely on the backs of taxpayers.

However, the basic management issues remained and apparently still do. Even with the bailout, the company has trouble operating in a profitable and efficient manner. That points to the bailout being a very bad investment for taxpayers, and with billions of dollars already lost on loans to GM and Chrysler, is a rather easy conclusion to reach. As Doug Ross puts it, more succinctly:

You mean that abrogating bankruptcy law, screwing over secured creditors and rewarding Democrats’ union supporters with billions in equity, tax breaks and subsidies didn’t really fix GM?

Gee, that was hard to predict.

Nike signs Vick to new endorsement deal

Despite the bad publicity that still dogs Michael Vick, with fans still hounding him for his dogfighting conviction, Nike decided to re-sign the Eagles QB to a new endorsement deal four years after canceling a multimillion-dollar contract. No terms were released, but one has to conclude that Vick didn’t sign for kibbles and bits:

Nike re-signed Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Michael Vick to an endorsement deal Friday, nearly four years after dropping him amid his legal troubles.

Nike, which signed Vick as a rookie in 2001, terminated his contract in August 2007 after he filed a plea agreement admitting his involvement in a dogfighting ring. Vick spent 21 months in prison.

CNBC first reported the deal. Terms were not released.

”Michael acknowledges his past mistakes,” Nike said in a statement. ”We do not condone those actions, but we support the positive changes he has made to better himself off the field.”

Nike resumed a formal relationship with Vick in 2009, in which Nike supplied Vick with product for free, but paid him no fee. It appears that Nike intended to test the waters with Vick in two ways: to see whether an association with him would create a consumer backlash, and to see whether Vick really had turned a new leaf. After two years, Nike must have concluded that an endorsement deal wouldn’t backfire on them.

Coughing up free product is one thing, however; paying Vick cash for an endorsement is quite another. Vick has done well to keep his nose clean after his second chance in the NFL, but outside of Philadelphia, plenty of fans still believe that Vick got off too lightly for his dogfighting and cruel treatment of the dogs in his possession. Did Nike have no other athletes in better position to represent its product than Vick? And what will the slogan be for this ad campaign — “Stop dogging it” instead of “Just do it”? And does it make sense to sign Vick to a new endorsement deal when it appears likely that the NFL will shut down for at least part of the 2011 season?

Leaders of the Christian Right find their preferred candidate in Rick Perry

In advance of any kind of campaign declaration (or even any kind of confirmation of campaign rumors), Texas Republican Gov. Rick Perry is sitting pretty for the GOP presidential nomination.

Just two recent successes, ripe for bragging: The Republican Governors Association, of which Perry is chair, raised $22.1 million for the first half of the year, eclipsing its six-month totals for 2007 to 2009, and erased its debt left over from the 2010 elections. (Admittedly, that cash is not for presidential campaign purposes, but it surely says something about Perry’s popularity and the general appeal of a Republican governor.) And Perry’s supporters independently secured a vendor slot at the Ames, Iowa, straw poll, just because they’re that committed to him as a(n undeclared) candidate.

Add to that, this: Leaders of the Christian Right are now seeking him out behind the scenes.

In early June, TIME has learned, a group of prominent figures on the Christian Right held a conference call to discuss their dissatisfaction with the current GOP presidential field, and agreed that Rick Perry would be their preferred candidate if he entered the race. Among those on the call were Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council; David Barton, the Texas activist and go-to historian for the Christian Right; and John Hagee, the controversial San Antonio pastor whose endorsement John McCain rejected in 2008.

Religious conservatives have often played a substantial role in choosing past Republican nominees, but leaders on the Christian Right have been conspicuously quiet so far in this campaign season. Privately, however, they are enthusiastic about Perry and are encouraging the Texas governor to throw his ten-gallon hat into the ring.

Perry’s favor with the Christian Right is relatively new, and he is their candidate of choice as much by default as anything.

If that’s true, he’s a pretty decent default. Take his current project — an all-day Christian prayer event called “The Response” — as just one example of the way he’s showing his support for the Christian conservative cause. The American Family Association will co-sponsor the explicitly Christian event, scheduled for Aug. 6 in Houston. Perry also recently signed a gay marriage ban into law at a Christian school in Fort Worth with evangelical heavyweights Tony Perkins (Family Research Council), Rod Parsley (Ohio mega-church pastor), and Don Wildmon (American Family Association) in attendance.

So, it’s not so much a surprise that the Christian Right would support Rick Perry, as it is a surprise they find the present GOP field so dismal. You’d be hard-pressed to find two more socially conservative presidential candidates than Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, for example. Santorum might be easily dismissed — as Time’s Amy Sullivan so wittily put it, “his poll numbers in Iowa are smaller than the number of children he has” — but Bachmann’s impressive surge in popularity might conceivably have garnered her the support that Perry has picked up seemingly without so much as lifting a finger.

It must come back to that little thing called electability. In the minds of the Christian Right, it seems, Perry’s got it.

Video: Mexican officials want Fast & Furious officials extradited for trial

Imagine, Fox News’ William Lajeunesse asks, if Mexico had decided to investigate American drug distribution and links to cartels by allowing a flood of cocaine to cross the border for tracking purposes. Americans would be outraged, especially as deaths mounted, and would demand the extradition of the government officials who sent the cocaine streaming into the US that caused the deaths. Similarly, some government officials in Mexico want the extradition of ATF and DoJ officials who greenlighted Operation Fast and Furious and flooded their country with illegal weapons:

While I understand their passion, Mexico’s government doesn’t have a very sturdy moral platform on which to preach in this instance. There is ample evidence of official corruption in Mexico that already does send illegal drugs over the border. The US would probably demand extradition if they could identify officials as part of that process, so the point is well taken, but it’s hardly a hypothetical, either.

Besides, those officials should be held accountable here in the US for their handiwork, especially as those guns continue to flood back into the US. The administration’s attempt to score points on those who legally own and purchase weapons in the US backfired when the ATF decided to become an illegal gunrunner itself. There must be accountability for those who ordered and approved the illegal sale and trafficking of these weapons.

Reagan parallels won’t work for Obama in 2012

So says Jonah Goldberg in USA Today as a rebuttal to supporters of Barack Obama in advance of the 2012 election. The latter have claimed that the trajectory of the 2012 election parallels that of 1984′s presidential contest, with high unemployment and a short distance from a sharp and painful recession. Goldberg points out that the trajectory isn’t similar at all — in fact, it’s nearly an opposite:

5.1, 9.3, 8.1, 8.5, 8, 7.1 and 3.9.

While that might sound like a controversial series of Olympic curling scores, these numbers in fact add up to a grave problem for Barack Obama.

They are the quarterly percentage gains in gross domestic product starting in 1983 through to Election Day 1984. And they aren’t the only significant numbers. In 1984, real income for individuals grew by more than 6% and inflation plummeted. The unemployment rate in November 1984 was still 7.2% — relatively high — but ithad dropped from 10.8% in December 1982, and it was clear the momentum was for even lower unemployment. “Staying the course” with Ronald Reagan made sense to most people, which is why he won re-election in a 49-state landslide.

Sadly for Obama — but far worse for the country — that kind of growth seems like a pipe dream. Last month, the Federal Reserve lowered its forecast for 2011 GDP growth from a range of 3.1% to 3.3%, made just two months earlier, to a much slower 2.7% to 2.9%. And it revised downward its projections for 2012 and 2013 as well.

The White House clearly assumed that they would see similar numbers from their stimulus package spending. As Jonah points out, Obama’s team encouraged comparisons to Reagan last year in anticipation of “Recovery Summer” and a wave of economic growth. Instead, the best quarter in the last five has been 2010Q3′s 2.8%, a number so anemic that it falls more than a full percentage point below Reagan’s worst quarter leading into his re-election. The initial Q2 number due at the end of this month will almost certainly fall below Q1′s 1.7%, and might go negative based on economic indicators in April and May.

Unemployment has also been just as problematic. Obama promised that spending $775 billion would keep the jobless rate below 8%. Instead, we have only had a handful of months below 9% in the two-plus years since the stimulus passed, and unemployment has started rising again. Civilian participation in the workforce has fallen to a 30-year low, masking the real jobless rate. The June figure is due on Friday, and like the Q2 GDP number, is almost certain to be unhelpful for the administration.

Obama has a year to get the economy moving in order for the comparison to be fully valid. By this time in 1983, however, Reagan already had a roaring recovery and a kick-start to the massive job creation that dropped unemployment by more than three full percentage points by the time of the election. The more relevant comparison might be George H. W. Bush in 1992, when a weak recovery had started by the end of 1991, but the perception of recession stuck with the electorate. And that might be the best-case scenario Obama has.