iPhone: American Ingenuity that didn't need Government

Like so many other Americans, I own an iPhone. It's a tremendous device. It amazes me to no end that I carry with me in my pocket a little five ounce device that is significantly more powerful and capable than my family's first computer, which we got on Christmas Day of 1993.  (Back then, this computer was a technological marvel with it's 14k Dial-Up Modem, 300 MB of RAM, 2X CD-Rom Drive and Windows 3.1 Operating System.)

Then, (relative) disaster struck on Easter Sunday. I dropped my phone and it landed just right that the protective case didn't stop the large, spiderweb crack I got in my screen. Thankfully, I had purchased insurance on my phone and after paying the deductible and waiting a day for it to ship, I received my replacement phone.

I expected I would spend hours the day I received my replacement re-downloading apps, inputting passwords ad nausea, and resorting my apps into the convenient folders I'd set up, because I'm that OCD.  That's what I expected. It wasn't what I did.

Thanks to one of the many terrific features built in to the iPhone, I was able to backup all my apps and settings before activating my old phone. Once I turned on my new phone I merely restored the backup I had saved and BAM! my new phone began to install all my apps, photos, contacts, ringtones, notes, podcasts, you name it, right back on to my new phone while I worked. My new phone was in my hands at 9 am, and by noon it had re-downloaded everything for me and my phone was restored to it's former glory.

I'm continually amazed at the innovation and quality of American companies. Between my iPhone and my Kindle Fire HD Tablet, I've become a fully integrated modern computer device user. (Those who know me would think this is hilarious since I didn't even own a laptop computer until 2010, didn't have a tablet until I won my Kindle Fire in a contest this past November, and didn't have a smartphone until this January.)

Apple is an American success story.  It began, as we all know, in a garage by Steve Jobs and his partner Steve Wozniak.  It grew to provide personal computers, and later to revolutionize the smartphone and computer tablet markets with the iPhone and iPad.

When the original iPhone launched in 2007, the smartphone market was owned by Blackberry and it's primary competition was the Blackberry Curve 8300. The iPhone, in a sentence, blew the Curve out of the water. It was a level of technological achievement above competition that mobile phones haven't seen since.

Here's what was the most impressive thing about it: Apple Incorporated in general and the iPhone in specific did not require government "investment" or "stimulus." Despite what the Left and our President seem to believe, most major technological innovations in our country come from the private sector without government interference. (The majority of innovations that came from government came from the military, specifically products the military developed for it's own use and were adapted for civilian use -- see cellular phone, computer.)

As Ralph Waldo Emerson famously stated, "If a man can write a better book, preach a better sermon, or make a better mousetrap than his neighbor, though he builds his house in the woods, the world will make a beaten path to his door." With the iPhone, Apple did indeed build a better mousetrap, and the world did indeed beat a path to their door.  All without the help of government.

Obama Claims Fiscal Restraint, Backs it with Fuzzy Math

Many of you may be wondering where are the reactions to the Wisconsin Recall Election.  As always, I am waiting 24 hours to give my reactions so that I can give you a thoughtful reaction with final numbers. So, coming tomorrow will be my reactions to the Wisconsin Recall. Thanks for reading!

Fuzzy Math is nothing new to liberals. Whether it's the foolish practice of Static Budgeting or the Obama Administration setting the costs of Obamacare on 12 year budgets instead of the standard 10 year budget, the Left LOVES to make their spending seem less significant and costly and validate their big government spending. But President Obama has officially crossed the line into the ridiculous by claiming that he has had "the lowest rate of increased spending in 60 years."

In fairness, it was not the Obama Administration that is putting out these figures. It's MarketWatch. But President Obama remains culpable for running with this data and making the claims of his own fiscal restraint.

So let's talk about some of the issues with these numbers:

1. All 2009 spending was attributed to George W. Bush. Now, in fairness, SOME of that spending legitimately belongs to Bush, specifically T.A.R.P.  The total expenditures of T.A.R.P. was about $431 Billion. was about ($151 Billion of the 2009 Budget was T.A.R.P.).  However, it neglects the fact that an additional $831 Billion was Obama's Stimulus Package. 
2. Even though the entirety of T.A.R.P. was considered as Bush era spending (justifiably so, as Bush did in fact pass it into law) but then when about $169 Billion in T.A.R.P. funds were repaid in 2010, that repayment was credited to Obama as a "spending cut" of 1.8%.  So even though Bush saw his spending numbers increase, when that money was returned, the benefit went to Obama.
3. MarketWatch further considered Obama as having a "spending cut" of $56 Billion in 2010 from 2009. Unfortunately, this "cut" is based on the spending on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac dropping from $96 Billion in 2009 to $40 Billion in 2010. The only way this can be called a cut is if we assume that money would've always been spent. Unfortunately, it's not like bailing out Fannie and Freddie is a nondiscretionary budget item. At all.
4. It can be legitimately and I would argue accurately stated that any spending cuts in 2011 and 2012 are a result of the Republicans winning the House of Represeentatives in 2010. Remember, in the 2011 Debt Ceiling battle, the Democrats just wanted to raise the debt ceiling and make zero cuts. It was the GOP that forced any cuts at all. So giving Obama credit for them is just a lie.

Bottom line, if you try to credit Obama for "fiscal restraint" based on these numbers it is nothing but sophistry and political tricks. Again, it's not the Obama Administration's fault that these numbers are were crunched. It is, however, his fault for lying to the American public to call himself fiscally restrained. To call Obama the biggest budget cutter in 60 years is more than sophistry. It's a blatant political lie.