the daily dan

The global agriculture supply situation has worsened and a failure to boost food production fast enough to meet demand may lead to shortages, said investor Jim Rogers, chairman of Rogers Holdings.

“We’ve got to do something or we’re going to have no food at any price at times in the next few years,” Rogers said in a Bloomberg Television interview with Rishaad Salamat today in Singapore. “I still own agriculture. If I found something to buy, I would buy it.”

Rogers joins former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, the UN Food & Agriculture Organization and the World Bank, in highlighting the need to boost global food production and address issues pushing prices higher. Group of 20 farm ministers agreed last week to increase agriculture output, set up a crop database and limit export bans to tackle what French President Nicolas Sarkozy calls the “plague” of rising food prices.

Monthly food prices tracked by the FAO have surged nine times in the past 11 months and last month stayed near a record reached in February, as global demand for corn and wheat outstripped production and drought and flooding ravaged harvests. The World Bank estimates higher food prices have pushed 44 million more people into poverty.

China, the world’s largest consumer of grains, energy and metals, has raised interest rates four times since October and increased bank reserve requirements nine times to tame above- target inflation. The nation’s food-price inflation was at 11.7 percent in May, matching levels in March and November when they were at the highest since July 2008, the year of the global food-price crisis.

Global stockpiles of corn, the most-consumed grain, are forecast to drop to 47 days of use, the fewest since 1974, data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture show. Inventories are declining as demand continues to outstrip production that’s forecast to rise to a fifth consecutive year of record.

The proportion of the U.S. corn harvest going to ethanol has almost quadrupled since 2002 and will reach 40 percent in the current marketing year, according to USDA data. Ethanol output has increased more than six-fold since 2002, boosted by federal renewable fuel standards and subsidies now being scrutinized by Congress.

The Standard & Poor’s GSCI Agriculture Index fell 9.6 percent this quarter, the first loss since the first three months of 2010. While corn has lost 4.7 percent this quarter, the grain is still 92 percent costlier than it was a year ago, making it the best performer in the index. Corn traded at $6.685 a bushel in Chicago today.

Inventories of wheat, used in making pasta, noodles, bread and feed for hogs and poultry, will drop to a three-year low of 184.26 million metric tons before next year’s Northern Hemisphere harvest, as output misses demand for a second year, the USDA said.

“Production just hasn’t been able to respond to new demand,” Michael Creed, an agribusiness economist at National Australia Bank Ltd., said in a phone interview from Melbourne today. Demand continues to outstrip global harvests because of rising ethanol production in the U.S. and China’s surging demand for meat, Creed said.

“Grain is a solid input into all those food sectors and so there’s really no way to go to avoid grain-based inflation,” John Bryant, chief executive officer of Battle Creek, Michigan- based Kellogg Co., the largest U.S. maker of breakfast cereal, said in a June 2 conference.

Unless governments come together to successfully address the issue of food security, “hopes for wider international cooperation looked doomed,” Annan, who served as UN Secretary General from 1996 to 2007, said last week.

“We have serious problems in inventories” of farm products, Rogers said.

Last month saw momentum in the US labour market stall, with just 54,000 jobs created. Few now expect a quick turnaround. Photo: GETTY

Inflation

The petrol station is as reliable a place as any to take America’s economic pulse. The sharp rise in gasoline prices in the first few months of the year knocked the confidence of consumers, who still account for about 70pc of the country’s gross domestic product.

That squeeze has been all the more painful because the majority of Americans have not enjoyed pay rises since the crisis. Indeed, inflation-adjusted average hourly earnings fell 1.6pc in the past 12 months. Like Sir Mervyn King at the Bank of England, Fed chief Ben Bernanke insists that inflation will prove short-lived.

The good news for the bulls is that gasoline prices have dropped by almost 10pc since reaching a three-year high at the start of May. While the news is improving, the Fed and The White House know their control over such a key variable is very limited.

Alongside their wages, house prices are the yardstick most Americans use to measure their financial well-being. Prices have already dropped a third from the peak they reached in 2006, according to the S&P/Shiller Index.

But the declines aren’t, for now at least, over. Almost three years on and the housing market is still grappling with the excess supply of homes left over by the boom. That’s meant more than a third of the homes currently being sold are classified as distressed sales.

The introduction in 2009 of a tax incentive to buy a home briefly spurred the market, but the volume of sales has retreated since it expired. While further declines in prices don’t pose the threat to America’s financial stability in the way they in 2008, the troubled state of the market remains a ball and chain around the economy.

It’s been the recovery’s Achilles heel. About 8m jobs were lost to the recession. Just over 1m have been created since.

After a disappointing 2010, the labour market gained momentum in the first four months of this year, helping push the unemployment below 9pc for the first time since the crisis. Importantly, signs of a turn in the market helped consumers battling higher gas prices.

Last month saw that momentum stall, with just 54,000 jobs created. Few now expect a quick turnaround. The Fed last week forecast that unemployment will stay above 8pc throughout 2012.

The more pressing question is whether May’s disappointment is the start of a worrying trend. The release this Friday’s release of June’s figure will begin to offer an answer.

As with unemployment, there’s no quick fix to America’s deficit. A combination of costly, state-funded retirement programmes, high defence spending and the financial crisis have sent America’s share of debt to GDP ballooning to 62pc last year from 40pc before the recession.

Without an agreement to cut spending on programmes such as medicare, as well as tax increases, that ratio will worsen. Any accord before next year’s presidential election would be a major surprise.

But there’s a far more urgent deadline. If Congress fails to lift the country’s legal borrowing limit by August 2, the US could potentially default on its debt. Focused on Europe’s debt crisis, bond investors have so far paid little attention. But Republicans last week walked out of negotiations that have become increasingly fraught.

Though a failure to lift the limit remains remote, the prospect of negotiations going right to the wire and fraying investors’ nerves during a difficult summer is highly likely.

Europe’s debt crisis has been lapping against US shores for more than a year now. And the failure of European leaders to find an answer is an increasing source of concern in Washington.

Mr Bernanke said last week that US banks have little direct exposure to Greek government debt. But there’s no doubt a disorderly default by Greece would cause convulsions across financial markets.

Perhaps the biggest impact of the current episode has been to drain some confidence from financial markets as well as businesses. The US economy can ill afford for more to seep away over the next few months.

The Federal Reserve’s massive stimulus program had little impact on the U.S. economy besides weakening the dollar and helping U.S. exports, Federal Reserve Governor Alan Greenspan told CNBC Thursday.

In a blunt critique of his successor, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, Greenspan said the $2 trillion in quantative easing over the past two years had done little to loosen credit and boost the economy.

“There is no evidence that huge inflow of money into the system basically worked,” Greenspan said in a live interview.

“It obviously had some effect on the exchange rate and the exchange rate was a critical issue in export expansion,” he said. “Aside from that, I am ill-aware of anything that really worked. Not only QE2 but QE1.”

Greenspan’s comments came as the Fed ended the second installment of its bond-buying program, known as QE2, after spending $600 billion. There were no hints of any more monetary easing—or QE3—to come.

Greenspan said he “would be surprised if there was a QE3”  because it would “continue erosion of the dollar.”

The former Fed chairman himself has been widely criticized for the low-interest rate policy in the early and mid 2000s that many believe led to the 2008 credit crisis.

Bernanke, who took over for Greenspan in 2006, began implementing the quantitative easing program in 2009 in an attempt to unfreeze credit and prevent a collapse of the US financial system. The strategy has gotten mixed reviews so far.

On Greece, Greenspan a default is likely and will  ”affect the whole structure of profitability in the U.S.” because of this country’s large economic commitments to Europe, which holds Greek debt. Europe is also where “half the foreign [U.S.] affiliate earnings” are generated, he added.

“We can’t afford a significant drop in foreign affiliate earnings,” Greenspan said.

Greenspan was also pessimistic about the U.S. deficit talks, saying he didn’t think Congress would reach an agreement on raising the debt ceiling by the Aug 2 deadline.

“We’re going to get up to Aug 2 and I think on that night, we are not going to have the issue solved,” he said.

If that happens, he said, the U.S. would have to continue paying debt holders or risk major damage in global financial markets. As a result, “we will default on everything else.”

He added: “At that point, I think we’ll all come to our senses.”

Now even the Fourth of July isn’t safe from China’s cheap labor exports. New government trade figures show that China has almost taken over the U.S. fireworks market. Worse, the communist nation is starting to push Betsy Ross aside to sell Old Glory.

In fact China, which has become America’s banker and investor, will profit heavily from all the holiday celebration throughout the United States this weekend—to the tune of $201.5 million in flag and fireworks sales.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, here’s how the figures break down:

• In 2010, the U.S. imported $190.7 million in fireworks from China. That represents the bulk of all U.S. fireworks imports and puts China close to U.S. fireworks production, valued at $231 million in 2007. U.S. makers exported $37.0 million worth of fireworks in 2010.
• Also in 2010, the U.S. imported $3.2 million of American flags. Most, $2.8 million worth, came from China, a first toehold in the $150 million domestic market for the Stars and Stripes, which American makers still command. U.S. exports were far lower, with the nation exporting only $486,026 in U.S. flags in 2010, a majority of which were purchased in Mexico.

Economists predict that China could overtake the United States this year as the world’s biggest manufacturing nation by output. That means that, in celebrating the Fourth of July, Americans are in some small way helping speed that day along.

That probably won’t please Obama, who is selling for $25 a campaign T-shirt with his picture on the front over the words “Made in the USA.”

And just this week, Obama pushed his Made in America campaign during a speech in Iowa, telling workers at Alcoa, “I want the cars and planes and wind turbines of the future to bear the proud stamp that says ‘Made in America.’ That’s what I want.”

Democratic political candidates can skip this weekend’s July 4th parades. A new Harvard University study finds that July 4th parades energize only Republicans, turn kids into Republicans, and help to boost the GOP turnout of adults on Election Day.

“Fourth of July celebrations in the United States shape the nation’s political landscape by forming beliefs and increasing participation, primarily in favor of the Republican Party,” said the report from Harvard. [See political cartoons about the 2012 GOP field.]

“The political right has been more successful in appropriating American patriotism and its symbols during the 20th century. Survey evidence also confirms that Republicans consider themselves more patriotic than Democrats. According to this interpretation, there is a political congruence between the patriotism promoted on Fourth of July and the values associated with the Republican party. Fourth of July celebrations in Republican dominated counties may thus be more politically biased events that socialize children into Republicans,” write Harvard Kennedy School Assistant Professor David Yanagizawa-Drott and Bocconi University Assistant Professor Andreas Madestam. [Enjoy political cartoons about President Obama.]

Their findings also suggest that Democrats gain nothing from July 4th parades, likely a shocking result for all the Democratic politicians who march in them. [Check out editorial cartoons about the Democrats.]

“There is no evidence of an increased likelihood of identifying as a Democrat, indicating that Fourth of July shifts preferences to the right rather than increasing political polarization,” the two wrote.

The three key findings of those attending July 4th celebrations:

• When done before the age of 18, it increases the likelihood of a youth identifying as a Republican by at least 2 percent.
• It raises the likelihood that parade watchers will vote for a Republican candidate by 4 percent.
• It boosts the likelihood a reveler will vote by about 1 percent and increases the chances they’ll make a political contribution by 3 percent.

What’s more, the impact isn’t fleeting. “Surprisingly, the estimates show that the impact on political preferences is permanent, with no evidence of the effects depreciating as individuals become older,”said the Harvard report.

Finally, the report suggests that if people are looking for a super-patriotic July 4th, though should head to Republican towns. “Republican adults celebrate Fourth of July more intensively in the first place.”

The anti-energy policies of the Obama administration range from illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico to revoking properly issued coal mining permits in West Virginia — and everything in between.

Thankfully, states are starting to fight back, Alaska serving as only the latest example.

Big energy news was broken at today’s press conference at the Chamber. Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell… and Alaska Commissioner of Natural Resources Dan Sullivan announced the state would allow drilling off a strip of state-owned land, expanding energy production:

HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA (***cough*** ***wheeze***) HHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH AHHAHA (***erp***) HAHHAHA AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA (***owww***)

I think I just wrenched my clavicle, I was laughing so hard.

Well, this is certainly going to piss off the Obama administration.

To which I say: too damn bad. Maybe they could move to another country that tolerates restricting access to its own vast energy reserves. Oh. You say there aren’t any?

It‘s no secret that today is Glenn Beck’s last day on the Fox News Channel. He’ll sign off at 6 pm and begin his own online network called GBTV. And ever since he announced he was leaving his daily program on the top-rated cable network, rumors have swirled about who would replace him in the 5 pm slot. Now, we  have an answer. And it involves multiple people.

The networked announced that it will fill Beck’s slot with an ensemble program featuring a roundtable of rotating Fox personalities. Those include Greg Gutfeld, Juan Williams, Dana Perino, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Geraldo Rivera, Andrea Tantaros, Eric Bolling, Monica Crowley, Bob Beckel and Kimberly Guilfoyle.

The new show, which is a temporary summer replacement for Beck, will launch July 11.

“The Five brings together an eclectic group of FOX talent whose knowledge of key issues and unique insights will undoubtedly make for a dynamic program,” Bill Shine, executive vice president of programming for the network, said in a press release.

(…)

Some of the revolving FOX personalities to be showcased in the weekly ensemble include: Greg Gutfeld, Juan Williams, Dana Perino, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Geraldo Rivera, Andrea Tantaros, Eric Bolling, Monica Crowley, Bob Beckel and Kimberly Guilfoyle. The program will also feature added guests, including politicians, celebrities, sports figures and key newsmakers.

Prior to the launch of The Five, FNC will run encore presentations of Glenn Beck from Monday, July 4th through Friday, July 8th. On Friday, June 30th, What Makes America Great, hosted by John Stossel will be presented at 5 PM/ET.

Beck’s final program airs tonight. After that, his daily show will appear on his new online network called GBTV. Beck will also host a special on GBTV immediately after tonight’s final broadcast at 6:30 pm ET.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner testifies in the House Small Business Committee on Wednesday, June 22, 2011. (Congressional photo)

(CNSNews.com) – Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner oversaw the largest increase in the national debt of any Treasury secretary in American history, presiding over a $3.7 trillion increase in the debt.

According to data from the Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Public Debt, the national debt has increased $3,723,575,990,130.10 from Jan. 26, 2009 until June 30, 2011, Geithner’s entire tenure to date as Treasury secretary.

When Geithner took office the total national debt stood at $10.6 trillion. As of June 30, 2011, it had risen to $14.3 trillion.

In fact, the debt accrued under Geithner is greater than all federal debt accrued in the first 204 years of the nation’s history. The national debt did not reach $3.7 trillion until October 1991, according to historical Treasury data that reaches back to 1791.

Geithner, who reportedly may step down from his position soon, has overseen the accrual of more federal debt (in only 2.5 years) than every Treasury secretary combined from Alexander Hamilton to Nicholas Brady, who was Treasury secretary in October 1991 when the national debt reached $3.7 trillion.

Since then, the federal debt has increased by historically large amounts under each Treasury secretary since Brady but not to the level it is today under Geithner. The debt increases under those secretaries are presented below.

Nicholas Brady (9/15/88-1/17/93): $1,564,862,000,000.00

Lloyd Bentsen (1/20/93-12/22/94): $559,880,257,144.59

Robert Rubin (1/11/95-7/2/99): $815,560,432,731.13

Lawrence Summers (7/2/99-1/20/01): $109,651,004,604.88

Paul O’Neill (1/20/01-12/31/02): $677,930,718,549.89

John Snow (2/3/03-6/30/06): $2,040,609,369,491.81

Henry Paulson (7/10/06-1/20/09): $2,218,644,118,047.16

*** But he did pay his taxes right? Anyone? I mean once he was confirmed, he paid his taxes.. This is the same guy who wants to raise taxes on small business. Nice..

*** Oh well, but remember, AARP is looking out for you.. And your wallet. They supported this joke that will now have their own members suffering. Nice work.

AP - Jan. 19, 2011: Senior citizens do physical therapy at the Glendale Gardens Adult Day Health Care center in Glendale, Calif.

WASHINGTON — Older adults of the same age and income with similar medical histories would pay sharply different amounts for private health insurance due to what appears to be an unintended consequence of the new health care law.

Aware of the problem, the administration says it is exploring options to address a potential disparity that could mean added controversy for President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. The law expands coverage to more than 30 million uninsured people and would require most Americans to carry insurance.

The glitch mainly affects older adults who are too young for a Medicare card but have reached 62, when people can qualify for early retirement from Social Security. Sixty-two is the most common age at which Americans start taking Social Security, although their monthly benefit is reduced.

As the health care law is now written, those who take early retirement would get a significant break on health insurance premiums. That’s because part or all of their Social Security benefits would not count as income in figuring out whether they can get federal subsidies to help pay for coverage until they become eligible for Medicare at 65.

“There is an equity issue here,” said Robert Laszewski, a former health insurance executive turned policy consultant. “If you get a job for 40 hours a week, you’re going to pay more for your health insurance than if you don’t get a job.”

The Obama administration says it is working on the problem.

*** Ya„, I’m sure you are.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/30/older-workers-could-face-cost-disparities-in-health-law-glitch/#ixzz1Qo81Fzy6

Malia Obama, top, and Sasha Obama, right, were embraced by children last week on a trip to South Africa.

WASHINGTON — They grow up so fast. But not that fast, Mr. President.

In a news conference Wednesday, President Barack Obama twice referred to his oldest daughter, Malia, as being 13 years old.

Not quite. She’s 12.

Perhaps the president was already thinking ahead to Malia’s approaching birthday: She turns 13 on July 4.

Obama spoke about both of his daughters as he characterized congressional Republicans as procrastinators who only get work done at the last minute. The president is prodding Republicans to reach a deal on raising the national debt limit before the government taps out its borrowing ability on the expected date of Aug. 2.

“You know, Malia and Sasha generally finish their homework a day ahead of time,” Obama said. “Malia’s 13, Sasha’s 10.”

*** Tee Hee, now let’s pretend it was Sara Palin or GW who said this about their kids.. Love how the MSM covers for him.

A quick search on Google for Beck Ratings returns the following results:

Why is Glenn Beck so angry? Ratings.‎

Glenn Beck’s Ratings Collapse

HELLO AMERICA? Glenn Beck Posts Biggest Ratings Drop Of Any Cable…

Glenn Beck’s Ratings Have Dropped by 50% in One Year

Glenn beck’s ratings fall again; he invades poland

Glenn Beck Ratings Tumble vs. Last October

Glenn Beck Limps Into 2011 With Falling Ratings

The latest Glenn Beck ratings collapse‎

The truth about Glenn Beck’s TV ratings: They’re down

Did Glenn Beck just post a new ratings low for 2010?‎

How low (in the ratings) can Glenn Beck go?‎

This is soooooo weird.  I had the impression that Glenn was moderately successful in the ratings.  But, no.  Clearly his ratings have been in a state of utter collapse at essentially every moment of his entire television career.  The last headline is my favorite, considering it came from July 31, 2007.  Solid prediction guys.

The same people have been trying to prove the same thing, idiotically, every day since then.  Seriously, if Glenn has been collapsing in the ratings for this long—how do you even know who he is?

Since the final show has finally come, let’s look at the truth.  To be thorough, we’ll examine every conceivable way that you could measure ratings success.  Whenever possible, I’ll use January 2011/1^st quarter numbers, because they offer the least favorable comparisons for us.   This is insanely lengthy, but I figured I’d do it once and get it over with.

1–Beck vs previous show airing on network in time slot

Glenn has increased the ratings of the 5pm time slot at Fox by 131% compared to the programming airing before his start. In case you don’t know how to read percentages, that’s doubling the ratings, plus another 31%.

2–Beck vs Lead-in on network

How did Glenn do in comparison to his lead in hour?  He increased the ratings by about 95%.

3–Beck vs competition in time slot

This one is so easy that it’s probably not worth spending too much time on. We’ll use the quarterly ratings.

FOXN Beck 462

CNN Situation Room 210

(These numbers are in the thousands, and are the ‘demo’ ratings most utilized by advertisers.  Basically it’s just adults between the ages of 25-54.)

Note: it appears that the ratings I’m using include Situation Room’s 6pm hour which slightly increased the average.  This was also a very good quarter for CNN with events like Egypt and the Tsunami where they excel.

That being said—even using their inflated numbers, Glenn Beck beats its closest competition by 120%.

Remember, when Glenn took over the 5pm slot, both MSNBC and CNN were very close to winning that time slot, particularly through the election.  In fact, in January ’09 on the days before Glenn took over, CNN actually tied Fox.  Ummm…that didn’t happen afterwards.

**It should be noted here, that with the possible exception of legendary hit programs like American Idol, no show on television is judged by any standard other than #1, 2, or 3 on this list.

4–Beck vs Everyone else at 5pm combined

FOXN Beck 462

CNN Situation Room 210

MSNBC Hardball 168

HLN Showbiz 78

Note: Along with the note above on Situation Room, these numbers include Hardball’s 7pm rerun, which raised its average significantly.  Still, Glenn Beck defeated all other cable news shows combined at 5pm, even in a supposedly terrible quarter.

As a TV executive I was speaking with recently told me: “Glenn Beck is the highest rated regularly scheduled show in the history of cable news at 5pm.”

5–Beck vs Everyone else at every other network regardless of time

This measure puts Glenn against all of the prime time programming of all of the competing networks, even though his show does not air in prime time (it’s 2pm on the west coast remember).

There’s a measure in TV ratings called the HUT level (households using television). To boil it down, for every million households with a TV, about 400,000 are watching something during our time slot.  During prime time that number is more like 640,000, in other words 60% more available households watching television.  That makes it a lot harder to get an audience at 5pm than in prime time.

Regardless, Glenn Beck on Fox News still trounced everybody.

FOXN Beck 462

CNN Cooper 318

CNN Morgan 302

MSNBC Maddow 295

Despite the fact that 5pm has far fewer available people to watch TV, Glenn still beat every single show on every competing network by a minimum of 45%.

6—Beck vs Everyone else on Fox News regardless of time

This matches Glenn up against the entire lineup of Fox News Channel, regardless of time.  Again, even though there are larger available audiences in prime time, Glenn performed very well. Throughout our run at FNC, and possibly since the beginning of time, Bill O’Reilly basically slaughtered everyone in the ratings.  After that, Glenn, Brett Baier, Shep, Hannity and Greta bounced back-and-forth between 2^nd and 6th.  That quarter Glenn finished 4^th.

7–Glenn Beck vs Glenn Beck

When you have a show this successful, the only way to argue its failure is to compare it to itself.  So, the media took the peak of our ratings, usually January of 2010, and compared it against everything else.  In April 2010, our ratings were supposedly collapsing as compared to January 2010.  In November 2010, they were supposedly collapsing as compared to January 2010. Then, they were supposedly collapsing in January 2011 as compared to January 2010. Then, the quarter including January 2011 supposedly collapsed as compared to the quarter including January 2010.

Yup, the first quarter of 2010 was a great quarter in the ratings.  Health care was at its fever pitch, and Scott Brown was on the scene to (almost) save the day.  That’s why January of 2011 was a down month for basically every single cable news show in comparison (there might be an exception or two among shows that no one watches.) We also aired our highest rated episode of our entire time on television during January 2010.

So, left-leaning blogs and media reported that our ratings had dropped by 46%.  But, knowing the how the news cycle works (they don’t schedule news events annually so that news channels can fairly compare ratings) does that number actually mean anything?

The first question you must ask to find out, which a few did, was how did other shows on Fox News do?  Well, every one of them was down.  Bret Baier and Shep Smith dropped by percentages in the mid-20’s, O’Reilly dropped by 30%, Hannity 38%, and Greta 47%.  Does that mean these shows suddenly started sucking?  No.  It was all about the news cycle.

But—wait—doesn’t this show that Glenn dropped as much or more than everyone else?  To know if that’s significant or not you have to ask—what did he drop from? You see—Glenn dropped more than other shows, because he had GAINED more than other shows during the previous year.  Here’s a graph to show what I’m talking about.  These are the ratings changes on primetime shows on Fox not including Glenn in Jan 2009-11.

As you can see, all shows on Fox showed a bump from 2009 to 2010, followed by a drop back to the norm in 2011.   Now, let’s insert 5pm pre-Glenn Jan 2009, and bring it to Jan 2011.

As you can see, the 5pm hour spiked much, much higher than other shows between 2009-10—and despite the following years fall, still increased ratings by 60% in the two year period, despite most Fox shows being around flat.

Despite the nonsense that his political opponents and haters attempt to spew, Glenn Beck on Fox News is one of the biggest ratings successes in the history of the format.  This follows another triple digit percentage ratings increase on our previous show on Headline News.  Next up-GBTV.

Join us for the next chapter.

Of all the details surrounding the liberal mob attack on Glenn Beck and his family in New York’s Bryant Park last Monday night, one element stands out. “No, it won’t be like that, Dad,” his daughter said when Beck questioned the wisdom of attending a free, outdoor movie showing in a New York park.

People who have never been set upon by a mob of liberals have absolutely no idea what it’s like to be a publicly recognizable conservative. Even your friends will constantly be telling you: “Oh, it will be fine. Don’t worry. Nothing will happen. This place isn’t like that.”

Liberals are not like most Americans. They are the biggest pussies on Earth, city-bred weaklings who didn’t play a sport and have never been in a fight in their entire lives. Their mothers made excuses for them when they threw tantrums and spent way too much time praising them during toilet training.

I could draw a mug shot of every one of Beck’s tormentors, and I wasn’t there.

Beck and his family would have been fine at an outdoor rap concert. They would have been fine at a sporting event. They would have been fine at any paid event, mostly because people who work for the government and live in rent-controlled apartments would be too cheap to attend.

Only a sad leftist with a crappy job could be so brimming with self-righteousness to harangue a complete stranger in public.

A liberal’s idea of being a bad-ass is to say vicious things to a conservative public figure who can’t afford to strike back. Getting in a stranger’s face and hurling insults at him, knowing full well he has too much at risk to deck you, is like baiting a bear chained to a wall.

They are not only exploiting our lawsuit-mad culture, they are exploiting other people’s manners. I know I’ll be safe because this person has better manners than I do.

These brave-hearts know exactly what they can get away with. They assault a conservative only when it’s a sucker-punch, they outnumber him, or he can’t fight back for reasons of law or decorum.

Liberals don’t get that when you’re outnumbering the enemy 100-1, you’re not brave.

But they’re not even embarrassed. To the contrary, being part of the majority makes liberals feel great! Honey, wasn’t I amazing? I stood in a crowd of liberals and called that conservative a c**t. Wasn’t I awesome?

This is a liberal’s idea of raw physical courage.

When someone does fight back, liberals transform from aggressor to victim in an instant, collapsing on the ground and screaming bloody murder. I’ve seen it happen in a nearly empty auditorium when there was quite obviously no other human within 5 feet of the gutless invertebrate.

People incapable of conforming to the demands of civilized society are frightening precisely because you never know what else such individuals are capable of. Sometimes — a lot more often than you’ve heard about — liberals do engage in physical violence against conservatives … and then bravely run away.

That’s why not one person stepped up to aid Beck and his family as they were being catcalled and having wine dumped on them at a nice outdoor gathering.

No one ever steps in. Never, not once, not ever. (Except at the University of Arizona, where college Republicans chased my assailant and broke his collarbone, God bless them.)

Most people are shocked into paralysis at the sight of sociopathic liberal behavior. The only ones who aren’t are the conservative’s bodyguards — and they can’t do anything without risking a lawsuit or an arrest.

My hero Tim Profitt is now facing charges for stopping a physical assault on Senate candidate Rand Paul by a crazed woman disguised in a wig.

But the disturbed liberal whose assault Profitt stopped faces no charges — she instigated the entire confrontation and then instantly claimed victim status. In a better America, the cop would say, “Well, you provoked him.”

Kentucky prosecutors must be very proud of how they so dutifully hew to the letter of the law (except in the case of Paul’s assailant).

Maybe they wouldn’t be such good little rules-followers if they ever, just once, had to face the liberal mob themselves. But if Beck’s own daughter can’t imagine the liberal mob, I suppose prosecutors can’t be expected to, either.

Michael Moore and James Carville can stroll anywhere in America without risking the sort of behavior the Beck family experienced. But all recognizable conservatives are eternally trapped in David Dinkins’ New York: Simply by virtue of leaving their homes, they assume a 20 percent chance of being assaulted.

Bullying is on the rise everywhere in America — and not just because Obama decided to address it. It’s because no one hits back. The message in our entire culture over the last two decades has been: DON’T FIGHT!

There were a lot fewer public confrontations when bullies got their faces smashed.

Maybe it’s time for Beck to pony up some of those millions of dollars he’s earned and hire people to rough up the liberal mob, or, at a minimum, to provide a legal defense to those like Profitt who do.

These liberal pukes have never taken a punch in their lives. A sock to the yap would be an eye-opening experience, and I believe it would do wonders.

They need to have their behavior corrected. It’s a shame this job wasn’t done by their parents. It won’t be done by the police.

As long as liberals can’t be normal and prosecutors can’t be reasonable, how about a one-punch rule against anyone bothering a stranger in public? Then we’ll see how brave these lactose-intolerant mama’s boys are.

Believe me, liberal mobbings will stop very quickly after the first toilet-training champion takes his inaugural punch.

The London-based World Energy Council says Israel’s Shfela Basin, a half-hour drive south of Jerusalem, holds 250 billion barrels of recoverable shale oil, possibly making the energy-vulnerable country (as expressed by The Wall Street Journal) “the world’s newest energy giant.” With reserves of 260 billion barrels, Saudi Arabia would remain the world’s No. 1 oil country – though not, perhaps, for long. Howard Jonas, CEO of U.S.-based IDT Corp., the company that owns the Shfela Basin concession, says there is much more oil under Israel than under Saudi Arabia: Perhaps, he says, twice as much.

Even with a mere 250 billion barrels, the Shfela Basin (or 238 square kilometres of it) would make Israel the third-largest holder of shale reserves in the world – right behind the U.S. with 1.5 trillion barrels and China with 355 billion barrels. Assuming for the moment that Mr. Jonas is correct in his calculations, the U.S. and Israel would together hold shale reserves in excess of two trillion barrels: Enough oil to fuel these two countries (at combined consumption of eight billion barrels a year) for more than 200 years.

And the discovery of further vast energy reserves in the United States and Israel progresses at an accelerated (and now often frenzied) pace. With shale, everything depends on technology – and the prospects are encouraging. In the Texas shale play known as Eagle Ford, for example, 12 companies will drill 3,000 wells in the next year, all of them within spitting distance (as The New York times put it) “of a forsaken South Texas village” notable only for its derelict gas stations and rusting warehouses. Elsewhere in the country, thousands more wells will be drilled with new technology that cuts drilling time, per well, to 25 days from 65.

According to the Times, 20 of these shale oil plays could increase U.S. oil production by 25 per cent in the next 10 years. “This is very big and it’s coming fast,” says U.S. energy expert Daniel Yergin, chairman of the energy research company IHS CERA. “This is like adding another Venezuela or another Kuwait – except that these fields are in the U.S.”

The U.S. now produces nine million barrels of oil a day. It consumes 18 million barrels. The American oil gap, thus, is nine million barrels. Assuming that shale oil production increased overall crude production by 25 per cent (2.2 million barrels), this gap would fall to 6.8 million barrels.

But North America is a single market for oil and gas – and Canadian petroleum producers expect to increase production in the next five years by 1.3 million barrels a day (to 4.7 million barrels). Add this increased supply to the North American market and the U.S. oil gap falls to 5.5 million barrels.

But further still: High oil prices and low natural gas prices imply substantial substitution of gas for oil – most easily in oil-fired production of electricity. U.S. energy analyst Irfan Chaudhry calculates that this kind of substitution could reduce U.S. oil consumption by two million barrels a day. (Mr. Chaudhry says $26 worth of coal now produces as much electricity as $100 worth of oil – as does $24 worth of natural gas.) Subtract this gas-for-oil substitution from the U.S. oil gap and it falls to 3.5 million barrels a day.

It will take years – probably decades – for Israel to reach maximum production from its vast reserves of shale oil. But odds are that the Shfela Basin will change the global balance of power long before then. Indeed, it will effectively change the balance of power the day it exports its first barrel of oil. This shouldn’t take long. With such investors as Lord Rothschild (the banker and philanthropist), Rupert Murdoch (the media magnate) and Dick Cheney (the politician), Israel should be pumping oil within three or four years. Also on board is Shell Oil’s remarkable top scientist, Harold Vinegar, who says the Shfela oil is not only abundant but premium quality as well: “The equivalent of Saudi extra-light.”

Israel knows the perils of relying on tyrants for oil: Russia suspended its delivery of oil to Israel during the country’s 2006 war with Hezbollah. Israel needs first to secure its own energy independence. But one day – count on it – Israel will match Canada in oil exports to the U.S. and thus free its long-time friend from needing to deal with tyrants.

*** Yeah, let’s throw Israel under the bus..

The “only adult in the room,” as Obama’s new campaign theme goes, wants to pretend that repealing his own tax break on a microscopic economic input like corporate jets is just what the doctor ordered to fix a $1.7 T deficit per year, and rising.

One of President Barack Obama’s 2012 themes will likely revolve around what his aides call “the contrast” — a portrayal of Obama as a responsible, moderate adult harassed by infantile Republicans who favor the wealthy.

You know what’s infantile? Pretending that a budget item that’s counted in the millions of dollars has a damn thing to do with a $1.7 Trillion deficit (and rising).

Obama, you know the rule when you do your <’s and >’s, right? The hungry crocodile turns towards the bigger meal.

…

The girls, he said at the end of an otherwise sleepy session, “generally finish their homework a day ahead of time,” unlike the grousing Hill Republicans he described as dragging their feet in striking a deal on reducing the deficit and extending the debt ceiling.

“Leaders are going to lead, … that’s why they are called leaders,” he added, making an unmistakable reference to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), who withdrew from the negotiations with Vice President Joe Biden last week.

Yeah you said it buddy, leaders should lead.

Wait, you said that?!

You’re leading the sh%t on this microscopic repeal of your own “stimulus” tax break for corporate jets, I concede.

“It’s time for the president to stop lecturing and start doing his job,” responded Cantor spokesman Brad Dayspring.

Another GOP aide was more blunt. “It’s counterproductive schoolyard crap. … [It’s] awfully childish for the ‘adult in the room,’” the aide told POLITICO.

The article goes on to say that this is aimed at bringing the public around to his side in the debt ceiling brinksmanship.

He needs a lot of help— the public is pretty firmly against any more debt. They are against him. They want spending cut.

And not just “tax expenditures” cut.

Update: Oh My. Senator Thune: Best way to meet Obama is to set up a tee time.

The vote was 94-0, with six Members not voting. Here is the roll call.

The Baltimore Sun reports:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Senate Thursday voted overwhelmingly to confirm General David Petraeus, currently commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, to be the new director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

The vote was 94-0, making Petraeus the second senior nominee for President Barack Obama’s national security team to win Senate confirmation unopposed this month. The other was Leon Panetta, who is leaving the CIA director’s job to become Pentagon chief.

Petraeus is expected to complete his command in Kabul in July, then hang up his military uniform and start his new civilian job at the CIA in September. Until then, the CIA’s deputy director Michael Morell will serve as acting director of the intelligence agency.

Petraeus, hailed for his role in the Iraq war, faces daunting challenges at the CIA: providing accurate intelligence on trends in Afghanistan; tracking and neutralizing militants on multiple continents; and tracking issues as diverse as climate change and the political effects of global economic upheaval.

Before the vote, the 58-year-old Petraeus was lauded as “among the finest military officers and strategic thinkers of his generation,” as Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, put it.

He is credited with salvaging the U.S. effort in Iraq, where he led the 2007 surge of U.S. forces, and improving the security situation in Afghanistan during the U.S. military surge there in the past year. Throughout his career of 37 years in the military, he also has earned a reputation for brains and political savvy.

*** Am I the only one who doesn’t understand this? Can someone explain it to me?