Odds and ends no. 17

Yet another compilation of stuff that doesn’t take a whole post to discuss.

It didn’t take too long, but the guys and gals at Our Country Deserves Better have a gradecard for President Obama. I’m simply shocked he didn’t get F’s across the board, but I’m not too inclined to disagree with their assessments. They’re backed up from a plethora of sources in the mainstream media.

The short story is that OCDB gives Obama a D- for Taxes and Fiscal Policy, a big fat F for National Security, another D- for Protecting the Unborn, and a D for Appointments. What does that work out to, an 0.5 GPA? That may chip farther into BHO’s steep 15-point approval drop in one week.

It’s not exactly breaking news that the stimulus program passed the House of Representatives, but Obama’s reaching out to the GOP bore no fruit at all – not a single member of the Republican caucus voted for the bill. Can’t say as I blame them – after all, the President haughtily reminded House Republicans that “I won.”

I have to give credit to Congressman Kratovil on this one too – he was one of 11 Democrats who voted no (the only Maryland Democrat to do so, needless to say.)

Even with that tilt toward moderation and independence, Kratovil is certain to be a target to be defeated by the Republicans in 2010. As for the here and now, much of the buzz in GOP circles this week concerns the upcoming election for party Chair. Unfortunately for local fans of Michael Steele, his bid could come up short according to this website called yourrnc.com.

While I like Steele, personally I think a better choice would be Ken Blackwell of Ohio. He’s the subject of this American Spectator profile by Quin Hillyer. Unfortunately, neither lead the pack – the incumbent Mike Duncan does. It’s a classic case of establishment vs. grassroots brewing, I fear.

I know fans of the aforementioned Frank Kratovil aren’t big supporters of the Club For Growth, but that group brings up an interesting market anomaly:

Have you heard of the Congressional Effect? Let’s say you invested $1 in the stock market on the days when Congress is IN session and another dollar on the days when Congress is OUT of session. Can you guess which investment has a better historic return (HINT: Congress is very capable of creating political mischief)? Find out what the Congressional Effect was for 2008 here. And here’s an old article from our friend Amity Shlaes who explains it at more length.

While neither result is doing much for our 401.k plans, one has to wonder when the markets will stop paying such attention to Congress and revert to gauging business trends. Or is that now a thing of the past?

One business trend that seems to be semi-permanent in Maryland is driving them away through excessive regulation. I’m going to wrap up this edition by pointing out an excellent post by Richard Falknor on his Blue Ridge Forum blog.

Once again, Governor O’Malley is operating with the mistaken belief that cutting greenhouse emissions in Maryland – a state with about 2% of the national population, and one who’s the 4th largest energy importer as Faulknor points out – will make a sizeable dent in global warming.

Which, by the way is not occurring. Is it my imagination or do we have a winter storm every time Al Gore comes to town?

Author: Michael

It's me from my laptop computer.

8 thoughts on “Odds and ends no. 17”

  1. I recall being dismissed at a WCRC meeting when I said that Kratovil will likely prove to be more conservative than Gilchrest. So far it seems he’s hewing to a better path than Gilchrest did, although I’d prefer a true conservative in there. I do think we traded up this election, even though Andy didn’t win. In 2010 I hope we’ll be trading up once again and have a real conservative in the seat.

  2. While I can sympathize with your comment on businesses needing to stop watching Congress (far too much is hope of corporate welfare), I think a decent amount is fear of harm being done to them by Congress, in which case I can’t blame them.

  3. Only you could try to spin a 68% approval rating as a negative! Bush would have killed for those numbers. If Obama got 53% of the vote, and has a 68% approval rating . . . well, you do the math. It seems some of you Republicans may be coming aboard!

  4. Don’t worry…once people like me show the real truth about BHO, he’ll be down below Bush’s level in no time. We’ll know who the real Kool-Aid drinkers are when Obama’s approval is 30 percent – they’ll be the ones who say he’s doing a good job.

    TwoSentz spreads the blue truth – I spread the real truth.

  5. Ok, two things: first, can we PLEASE stop the “Kool-Aid drinkers” thing? It is really, really old now–it reminds me of the people who said something was “da bomb” long after that wasn’t cool anymore. Second: I will bet you that Obama will not go to 30% approval ratings (or less) in the next 4 years. Let’s go for $50 to the charity of the winner’s choice, shall we? I know we disagree on most things, but I think we are both people of our word. Just to make it fair, the approval rating cannot be based on a single survey (I’m thinking FOX news might offer up a slanted one), but must be the average of 3-4 nationally recognized surveys. Everyone wins! C’mon, it will be fun, and I absolutely will write a check if I lose.

  6. Cool. Mine will be Habitat for Humanity. And here I thought you would make yours something I would have to grit my teeth to write a check for! I guess you’ll have to keep blogging for at least 4 more years!

Comments are closed.