Archive for the ‘Congress’ Category

Obama pushing ACORN to do census and an Afghan ‘out’?

February 8, 2009

The answer to the census question may be decided by the Supreme Court, but watch Obama’s clandestine maneuvers to assign “responsibility” for the census from the Secretary of Commerce to the White House. 

Here’s the law:

The Congress, by law directed that:

“The Secretary [of Commerce] shall perform the functions and duties imposed upon him by this title, may issue such rules and regulations as he deems necessary to carry out such functions and duties, and may delegate the performance of such functions and duties and the authority to issue such rules and regulations to such officers and employees of the Department of Commerce as he may designate.”

Credit those folks over at Samizdata ….

As I read it, the Director of the Census must, by law, be within the Department of Commerce and under the direction of the (Senate approved) Secretary of Commerce who then reports to the president. Am I missing something?
Correction: From reading through Title 13, Chapter 1 it appears obvious to me that the POTUS has no role in the census whatsoever beyond, with Senate approval, selecting the Secretary of Commerce and, also with Senate approval, selecting the Director of the Census who shall perform such duties as may be imposed upon him by law, regulations, or orders of the Secretary.” Hhmmm… No president mentioned.

The Secretary of Commerce is the only authority the law recognizes. Since as commenter Laird points out, the Constitution did not place the census function in Article II – the Executive branch but in Article I – the Legislative branch, it is not at all within the President’s reach unless the legislature places it there.

And watch for Obama to still try and put ACORN in charge of the census …. 

Any question about WHY there are so many Obama-watch sites on the web???

More blurbs from the blogs:

—  Stimulus Plan (Porkarama) updates are here ….

Biden: Ignore the voters

 HERE’S  a good question:  why doesn’t Obama tell us specifically HOW this money will resolve his “now or never” crisis?   We won’t see any jobs outta this political payback package for years. 

—  Obama has again voted “present” on this bogus stimulus plan.   How to hype a crisis in two steps ….  So where exactly is the change we (?) hoped for???  Forget it.  It’s the same ole way with a Chicago twist ….

—  BREAKING:  Obama tells Gates to “stand down” on the troop surge in Afghanistan ….. 

Is he looking for ‘out‘ in Afghanistan???

—  World opinion on Obama is fading …. 

From London to America:  What have you done?

Pakistan to the US:  Show us the money!!!

Russia forms Alliance with six central Asian nations:  Take THAT, America.

Ecuador expels US Embassy official:  South America rejects the “Chicago way” …

USS Cole mom is disgusted with Obama …. article and video 

Pending:  More and more parents and (retired) naval personnel are speaking out about the way the killers of their loved ones are being released ….

more pending …..

.

Are Pelosi and Obama on the same page?

November 8, 2008

Speaking from behind a new seal of “The Office of the President Elect” (what the heck is that?), BHO proclaimed:

The No. 1 priority, Obama said, is to get Congress to approve an economic stimulus plan that would extend jobless benefits, send food aid to the poor, dispatch Medicaid funds to states and spend tens of billions of dollars on public works projects. If the plan is not approved this month, in a special session of Congress, Obama said that “it will be the first thing I get done as president of the United States.”

Hold on.  Is this the same two-step stimulus package being promoted by Nancy Pelosi?

The big question is what kind of a tax cut is it?  Is it an actual broad cut in income tax rates?  Or is it an Obama-style “tax cut” that’s really a tax hike on Americans already paying the most taxes and a check in the mail for those already paying nothing?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she wants to hurry up and enact a stimulus package of between $60 billion and $100 billion, and then establish a permanent, direct tax cut early next year to help the flailing U.S. economy.

“Let’s see if we can’t do something, working together now, that gives us a two month jump,” she told The Wall Street Journal on Thursday.

The tax cut would not include a capital-gains cut and Pelosi doesn’t want a tax rebate like before. Instead, she favors an adjustment to tax withholding tables that would put more money in workers’ pockets immediately.

Pelosi’s aides later said any decision would be linked to both payroll and incomes taxes.

I don’t think the federal government can afford to be sending out any more checks, and certainly the economic impact of the last round of stimulus checks was short-lived.  At best.

The tax cuts interest me though.  Could tax rate cuts be in the works?  And if so, how do Democrats plan on cutting tax rates without *gasp* giving tax cuts for the rich?  The people who pay the highest rates and the most taxes?

The only way you can give the people Democrats define as not being rich a tax cut is by eliminating their tax burden altogether or sending them a check in the mail.  Which isn’t so much a tax cut as welfare.

This middle class American says “no, thanks.”  We’ve had enough stimulus …. The checks we received earlier this year didn’t work.  Let the first bailout package work itself out and give Wall Street an opportunity to heal itself.

Meanwhile … it appears that we may have the beginnings of a power struggle between the Office of the President Elect and the Office of the Speaker of the House Elect!!!

 

 

Obama: Socializing America — one “idiot” at a time

October 5, 2008

Rather than being the tip of the iceberg, a well-bankrolled underground movement began more than four years ago when George Soros — via his hatred of George Bush and conservatism — funded a plethora of radical, activist groups to garner the vote of the “idiot” classes (their words — not mine) in America:  “minorities, drop outs and GED’s.”  

And now Soros’ Democracy Alliance has a prime candidate to bear his mantle of socialism:  Barack Obama — the consummate “community organizer” who personally trained and provided legal counsel to the minions (ACORN) who forge the swords of class warfare, dissent and the destruction of the American economic base — who has more than his “fair share” of questionable associations,  stealth with anti-American and socialist underground movements and “mysterious” domestic and foreign campaign donations

Obama Formerly Represented ACORN, Taught Classes For Future Leaders Of ACORN, And They Endorsed His 2008 Presidential Campaign:
Obama Directed Project Vote And Later Taught Classes For “Future Leaders Identified By ACORN And The Centers For New Horizons.” “He [Obama] says he is drawn to politics, despite its superficialities, as a means to advance his real passion and calling: community organization. … In 1992 Obama took time off to direct Project Vote, the most successful grass-roots voter- registration campaign in recent city history. Credited with helping elect Carol Moseley-Braun to the U.S. Senate, the registration drive, aimed primarily at African-Americans, added an estimated 125,000 voters to the voter rolls — even more than were registered during Harold Washington’s mayoral campaigns. ‘It’s a power thing,’ said the brochures and radio commercials. … Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons on the south side.” (Hank De Zutter, Op-Ed, “What Makes Obama Run?” ChicagoReader, 12/8/95)
Obama Was Part Of Team Of Lawyers Who Represented ACORN In A Suit Against The State Of Illinois. “Obama was part of a team of attorneys who represented the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois in 1995 for failing to implement a federal law designed to make it easier for the poor and others to register as voters.” (Mike Robinson, “Obama Got Start In Civil Rights Practice,” The Associated Press, 2/20/07)
ACORN’s Political Action Committee Endorsed Obama. “[A]CORN’s political action committee endorsed Barack Obama for President. … The endorsement reflects a belief that Obama — who worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago — understands that change must come from the ground-up, as part of a working coalition, rather than from position papers.” (Katrina Vanden Heuvel, Op-Ed, “ACORN: Obama Gets It,” The Nation, 2/23/08)
Obama’s Campaign Paid Over $800,000 To ACORN For Get-Out-The-Vote Efforts, But “Mistakenly Misrepresented” Their Work To The FEC:
Obama’s Campaign “Paid More Than $800,000” To ACORN For Get-Out-The Vote Efforts; The Campaign Originally “Misrepresented” The Group’s Work To The FEC. “U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign paid more than $800,000 to an offshoot of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now for services the Democrat’s campaign says it mistakenly misrepresented in federal reports. An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc. — a subsidiary of ACORN — worked in ‘get-out-the-vote’ projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary.” (David M. Brown, “Obama To Amend Report On $800,000 In Spending,” Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 8/22/08)
While Serving On The Board Of Directors Of The Woods Fund, ACORN Received Thousands Of Dollars Of Grants From The Organization:
The Chicago ACORN Received Grants Of $45,000 (2000), $30,000 (2001), $45,000 (2001), $30,000 (2002), And $40,000 (2002) From The Woods Fund. (Donors Forum Website, ifs.donorsforum.org, Accessed 6/10/08)  — MarketWatch

There are those who want to “blame Bush” and subsequently, Republicans, but the reality is, George Bush attempted to rein in housing horses, but was repelled by Democrats (as was John McCain on two separate occasions).   President Clinton aptly pointed this out last week:

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: “I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

It’s not that we weren’t forewarned about the dangers of government-subsidized mortgages

And the road to this financial hell has not been paved with good intentions ….

Take, for example, Barack Obama’s ACORN group, rift with its intimidation tactics against the lending industry, the middle class and its abuse of election law and fraud in voter registration.  Enter their targets, the “idiots” who are locked at the bottom of the socialist caste system: the “minorities, drop outs, GED’s.” 

ACORN was the leader in “protesting” social agencies and later intimidating banks:

ACORN is a group of community organizers, probably the most militant group of community organizers. ACORN grew out of something called the National Welfare Rights League which was another militant group in the Sixties. They used to flood into welfare offices, kind of shut them down with protests and demand a great expansion of welfare coverage. And in recent decades that has morphed into ACORN. And ACORN leaders see themselves as unreconstructed far leftist, unafraid to use radical and militant tactics. They follow Saul Alinsky’s direct action, which is another name for these intimidation tactics.

For example, if ACORN wants a bank to start making these high-risk loans, they might break into the office of a banker and flood it with protestors and basically scare the heck out of the guy trying to get him to change the bank’s loan policy. They will even go and protest at the homes of bankers, scare their families. They’ll flood protestors into the lobby of a bank, scare the customers away and, of course, in that way intimidate the banks into doing what they want. And so ACORN uses these Alinsky-ite intimidation tactics. Of course, those are tactics that were studied by Obama, and Obama has had a very close relationship with ACORN for many, many years.

….

Back in the late Eighties when Obama was doing his initial organizing work in Chicago, well, he worked for another group called the developing communities project which was part of the Gamma Leo Foundation, which is yet another radical Alinsky-ite group which used very similar tactics and also deployed them against banks. But in the course of his work for that group, he ran into a woman named Madeline Talbott. Madeline Talbott at that time was a high official of ACORN and eventually became the head of Chicago ACORN, and Madeline Talbott had first viewed Obama as sort of a competitor from another community organizer group, but as she got to know him, she became impressed. She saw him as a partner and she invited him to train her personal staff. So then Obama went away, went to law school and he came back from law school to Chicago. And at that time Talbott remembered him, remembered the good work he had done training her staff and that is why ACORN approached Obama to start doing some of its legal work. Not only the case you were mentioning but the work for ACORN on the motor voter bill that Obama did and —

… an ACORN organizer put out an article in a journal called Social Policy. Her name was Tony Foulkes. And she — the whole article described how ACORN was able to register voters and get them to the polls to elect Barack Obama as state senator and then senator, but she had to frame the whole article very carefully because technically that would all be illegal. ACORN’s not supposed to be supporting any particular politician and, in fact, it’s very shaky because when Obama was on some of these foundation boards, he was channeling money to ACORN. So it would have been quite illegal for ACORN to become his precinct workers. So they pretend they are acting as individuals rather than as representatives of ACORN. But what you have here is kind of very shady nexus that even if it ends up being just the edge of what’s legal verges on conflict of interest for Obama when he was on his foundation boards channeling money to ACORN which would then go out and register voters that they thought would vote for Obama, pass out literature.

Take, as another example, the men (and women) who currently advise Obama — Frank Raines and Jim Johnson — who cooked the books and walked away with millions of dollars as CEO’s of federally subsidized Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae agencies.

And take, as a third example, the Congressional perps, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Barack Obama, et al, who accepted money from both Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and affiliates — then turned their collective heads when others questioned the oversight of federal housing agencies. 

The fourth example includes our supposedly objective media.  Their latest whitewash for Obama is this scamp about his “non-relationship” with terrorist Bill Ayers — an anonymously collected “recall” to refute this documented article from the Wall Street Journal. 

The debacle we now face is frequently defined as beginning in the 1990’s with Carter’s Community Re-Investment Act, which expanded affirmative action housing and under Clinton, who enacted an easing of credit markets to further promote home-ownership among lower-income Americans …..

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Biden addressed the authority of Bankruptcy courts to adjust interest rates and principal owed on homes:  -“Number two, with regard to bankruptcy now, Gwen, what we should be doing now — and Barack Obama and I support it — we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you’re paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe.”

Tip of the iceberg indeed …. one “idiot” at a time ….

Obama’s autobiography contains the initial hints of his socialist leanings, as he describes the Dreams from My Father …. Obama wants to almost double the capital gains tax.  He wants to strip the FICA tax cap off every worker making more than $97,500. He wants to increase the dividend tax. He wants to let the Bush tax cuts expire – giving almost every American family an automatic tax increase.  And there is more to illustrate Obama’s socialist leanings ….  Obama’s One World philosophy ….

In spite of our nation’s current financial debacle, Obama has called for more than $800 billion in new spending programs.  In addition, he has projected additional programs to be administered by the U.N. using taxpayer monies for a Global Poverty Fund,  Global Climate Fund and Global Economic Development funds …. He backed driver’s licenses for illegal aliens – even though such a move would allow potential terrorists to move freely inside the United States.  He has defined himself (without evidence) as an initiator and leader in every facet of global affairs and national security … from running Hezbollah out of Lebanon to invading Pakistan to find Bin Laden to being the first to suggest a troop surge in a war he does not support.

…. one “idiot” at a time ….

He is one of the most outspoken pro-abortion candidate in the history of the country. Two of his closest pro-abortion allies are Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi — both Catholics — whose stances have prompted a Vatican office to label the Democrat party as “the party of death.”   In 2001, as a state legislator in Illinois, he opposed a bill to protect-live born children.  He was the only Illinois senator to speak against the bill opposing infanticide.

He opposes gun rights. He has long history, beginning as a state legislator, of trying to deny ordinary citizens access to guns — even within their homes.  He originally backed Washington D.C.’s total ban on private handguns – a ban he knew would be overturned. The NRA rated him an “F” on gun positions and says he is one of the most dangerous anti-gun politicians in the nation.

Though he has never released his college transcripts or identified the source of his (non)scholarship funds (which Michelle stated were only “recently repaid” — though not reported on their income tax declarations), Obama is a Harvard-educated elitist, considered by a recent British envoy as “aloof and insensitive.”   To Obama, we Americans are simply “bitter” — he has mocked us saying “[they] cling to their guns and their religion.”  

if Barack Obama were to be elected, all “idiot” Americans might consider replacing that “chicken in every pot” mantra with an “idiot’s delight” nut-dependent ACORN diet ….  one “idiot” at a time ….

And this is one “idiot” who is mad as hell.

Obama and Libs “Own” the Wall Street Crisis

September 30, 2008

Possibly, House Republicans and the 90+ Democrats who voted against the $700 billion bail out bill today simply recognized that the bill, in its current form, wasn’t what the nation needed (regardless of what Wall Street said “they” needed). 

Possibly, they wanted a better, more realistic solution.   Possibly they simply voted as 80% or more of their constituents WANTED them to vote. 

Possibly, those who voted “nay” either did not believe in the urgency of the crisis (in the free market, banks and businesses fail every day) or in the sudden push toward nationalizing the mortgage industry

Possibly, they prefer (as I do) a “plan B” which emphasizes — not an arbitrary, unfettered spending spree by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson — but a regulated safety net of loans, based on actual market values and administered by the FDIC.

Possibly, the House revolted against Nancy Pelosi’s revelation (yesterday) that the bail out would permit “the government to purchase troubled assets from pension plans (errrr… wait a minute), local governments (WHAT?), and small banks (you mean, all of them???) ….”    Here is the prevailing assessment of that statement:

So in addition to rewarding irresponsible lenders and borrowers, we taxpayers are now to be “protected” by buying the toxic debt of states, cities and municipalities.  It’s one thing to throw a life-line to the credit industry; local governments, by contrast, have the ability to cut spending drastically or raise taxes if their inhabitants want government services.  Elected politicians are then accountable for runaway spending and mismanagement.  If Detroit or Chicago is sinking because of big-government policies, that’s what the citizens of those cities asked for by voting for Democrats year in and year out.  Why should the rest of us be on the hook for that? 

Possibly, some House members revolted against the speech Speaker Pelosi made today — blaming Republicans and President Bush — for the current financial distress.   

Possibly, her speech was simply a reflection of her failure as Speaker of the House.  Why would she, in a year of legislative failures, have called a vote for a bill she knew did not have sufficient votes to pass?  

Something is fishy, though ……  Why would Pelosi’s personal appointments and political associates vote AGAINST the bail out?   Did she purposefully “set up” a sympathy backlash for a second vote?  Did she orchestrate an “out” for democrats facing re-election to vote their constituents’ preference?  Did she open the door for the Democrats “October surprise” in which Barack Obama will miraculously rally the votes to “save” Wall Street?   HA!

Regardless, it’s back to the political ouija drawing board ….

Before they vote on Wednesday, will the Senate consider that the (arbitrary) $700 billion price tag for “saving” Wall Street may be an unrealistic goal, may not be the unilateral responsibility of the federal government, or may actually be a political smoke screen for pushing Main Street AND Wall Street down that slippery slope toward socialism ???? (Note the video of Congressman Jeb Hensarling’s speech).

 But will there be a deal?  Yes (even if this includes an “October surprise,” — as promised by democrats).   And credit institutions will likely continue to face the same regulations and legislative pressures which brought on this disaster to begin with.

Will Congress be able to finally demonstrate their concern for the American taxpayer?  Sorta — but only after protecting their cronies who’ve caused and benefited from this debacle. 

Will it be done as an a bipartisan effort?  Ummm …. probably not.  Pelosi and Frank and Reid will attempt again to take credit for themselves and democrats.

Will the deal punish the perpetrators of this fiasco?  Unlikely.  It would take an act of God (forget Congress) to convince Congress that their private support base also assume part of the bail out costs.  Unless, of course,  you’re of the opinion that taxpayers actually are responsible for Wall Street failures. 

Meanwhile, corruption and mismanagement on Wall Street will continue; special-interest legislators who have a “vested” interest in promoting said corruption and mismanagement will continue to do so …. 

So who is responsible?    In reality, all the likely parties on both sides of the aisle and in each arm of government are responsible.

Who owns the problem?   If you mean by “own,” who will pay the bill (or part of it), it’s going to be taxpayers.   If you mean by “own,”  who created this scenario, several names come to mind ….
 
Let’s look at the foundations beneath the crisis: 

1) the corruption behind the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — those federally-funded low income housing authorities — includes a “who’s who” list of former and present legislators, Presidents, CEO’s who operated the system for personal and political gain, rather than low-income opportunities, and Congressional regulations that precipitated the calamity.

2) the role ACORN played — beyond a) it’s push to register the youth, the homeless, the sheltered elderly or the ineligible voter class, b) it’s voter intimidate tactics, and, c) it’s history of voter fraud — in promoting “class warfare” and home ownership for poverty-level citizens (including the undocumented “residents” who recently glutted low-income mortgages and credit card markets).  

How does this relate to Barack Obama?  Why is he called the most radical politician to ever get close to the White House?  Read on.

There are compelling issues addressing why Barack Obama must be defeated on November 4:  A) his identity with his father’s dreams to form the “perfect” socialist society, B) his rise through community-based special interest groups and his role as a community organizer and activist-attorney who thrived in the mob-mentality of Chicago, C) his identity with anti-American activists who mentored his youth and formative years and with whom he worked in Chicago, D) his dubious performance as a part-time legislator in the Illinois State Senate, and E) his failure to demonstrate legislative leadership as a U.S. Senator (serving approximately 143 days since 1994). 

There are also reasons why Barack Obama supported the government take-over of low income mortgages — one being that he (as did other top Democrat leaders) benefited from a “super super jumbo” low interest loan rate for his Chicago home: 

Shortly after joining the U.S. Senate and while enjoying a surge in income, Barack Obama bought a $1.65 million restored Georgian mansion in an upscale Chicago neighborhood. To finance the purchase, he secured a $1.32 million loan from Northern Trust in Illinois.

The freshman Democratic senator received a discount. He locked in an interest rate of 5.625 percent on the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, below the average for such loans at the time in Chicago. The loan was unusually large, known in banker lingo as a “super super jumbo.” Obama paid no origination fee or discount points, as some consumers do to reduce their interest rates.

Obama’s attempts to hide his ties to ACORN — and subsequently the current Wall Street crisis — are beginning to emerge in mainstream media: 

It would be tough to find an “on the ground” community organizer more closely tied to the subprime-mortgage fiasco than Madeline Talbott. And no one has been more supportive of Madeline Talbott than Barack Obama.

When Obama was just a budding community organizer in Chicago, Talbott was so impressed that she asked him to train her personal staff.

He returned to Chicago in the early ’90s, just as Talbott was starting her pressure campaign on local banks. Chicago ACORN sought out Obama’s legal services for a “motor voter” case and partnered with him on his 1992 “Project VOTE” registration drive.

In those years, he also conducted leadership-training seminars for ACORN’s up-and-coming organizers. That is, Obama was training the army of ACORN organizers who participated in Madeline Talbott’s drive against Chicago’s banks.

More than that, Obama was funding them. As he rose to a leadership role at Chicago’s Woods Fund, he became the most powerful voice on the foundation’s board for supporting ACORN and other community organizers. In 1995, the Woods Fund substantially expanded its funding of community organizers – and Obama chaired the committee that urged and managed the shift.

That committee’s report on strategies for funding groups like ACORN features all the key names in Obama’s organizer network. The report quotes Talbott more than any other figure; Sandra Maxwell, Talbott’s ACORN ally in the bank battle, was also among the organizers consulted.

MORE, the Obama-supervised Woods Fund report acknowledges the problem of getting donors and foundations to contribute to radical groups like ACORN – whose confrontational tactics often scare off even liberal donors and foundations.

Indeed, the report brags about pulling the wool over the public’s eye. The Woods Fund’s claim to be “nonideological,” it says, has “enabled the Trustees to make grants to organizations that use confrontational tactics against the business and government ‘establishments’ without undue risk of being criticized for partisanship.”

Hmm. Radicalism disguised by a claim to be postideological. Sound familiar?

The Woods Fund report makes it clear Obama was fully aware of the intimidation tactics used by ACORN’s Madeline Talbott in her pioneering efforts to force banks to suspend their usual credit standards. Yet he supported Talbott in every conceivable way. He trained her personal staff and other aspiring ACORN leaders, he consulted with her extensively, and he arranged a major boost in foundation funding for her efforts.

And, as the leader of another charity, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Obama channeled more funding Talbott’s way – ostensibly for education projects but surely supportive of ACORN’s overall efforts.

In return, Talbott proudly announced her support of Obama’s first campaign for state Senate, saying, “We accept and respect him as a kindred spirit, a fellow organizer.”  — from Stanley Kurtz via Powerline

Recall that Obama had to revise his campaign financial report to show a payment to ACORN this past year:

Obama understood what ACORN does very, very well.  He had started off as a “community organizer” from the same tradition, and he remains committed to that tradition — as his $800,000 campaign payment for ACORN’s services showed.

Obama addressed ACORN in a 2007 speech:  “I’ve been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career (emphasis added). Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.”

Obama’s not alone, however.  Several Congressmen have been in denial about the problems in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years — in spite of pleas by George Bush and John McCain ….

Michelle Malkin keeps multiple open threads on the Bail Out Boondoggle, noting that 27 subpoenas have now been issued to F-F administrators and other failed lending organizations (you may want to check the campaign contribution records to assess how much these failed organizations supported Obama).  

Other bloggers are weighing in —- comparing the Freddie-Fannie fiasco AND the role of it’s key players [including Barack Obama’s current advisors, Raines and Johnson and his finance chair Penny Pritzker] as bad a reflection on Democrats as was the Enron debacle on Republicans. 

As I recall Raines was the one who, following the Enron scandals, gave public lectures about corporate responsibility and CEO honesty. And as one begins to read about Raines, James Johnson, Jamie Gorelick, and Leland Brendsel at Freddie Mac, one begins to understand their modus operandi. Freddie and Fannie were landing pads for former Democratic insiders, who milked the agencies for millions in bonuses as they covered their tracks by donations to Congressional candidates and pseudo-racial-populism of helping minorities buy homes with little down. Their careers are every bit as nauseating as anything at Enron — and yet the press strangely does not go after them in the manner we learned of Ken Lay’s deceit. God help us all.

Preposterous ideas?  

Let’s look more closely at Obama’s economic plans.  I don’t want US taxes being distributed to or administered by the United Nations as a Global Poverty Fund or to a Global Climate Change Fund or some Global Initiative Fund.  I don’t want to allow Barack Obama to literally ride the backs of low income Americans to achieve his father’s “dreams” of socialism — including but not limited to tax-funded “incentive” checks, mortgage supplements, infratructure reinvestment funds, and higher taxes on small businesses.  I don’t want the economy being “driven” by a large government bureaucracy; I want it driven by a free and competitive market that rewards hard work and innovation — not cronyism and regulations.

Grab your favorite beverage and get comfortable.  Read the links above.  Learn more about this critical issue and what is at stake for this nation on November 4.

Then pick up the phone; talk with neighbors in the supermarket, at Walmart, after church.  Tell them why our nation can neither survive nor progress under the self-serving ambitions of Barack Obama.   Ask them to support John McCain’s effort to REFORM the government agencies which have negligently allowed our financial system to fall to its current level. 

Because if you don’t — the free market principles by which this nation thrives, the small businesses that provide our jobs and benefits, the local banks that are constantly pressured to make high-risk loans, the obligations we and our government have for fiscal accountability  — will be sacrificed to further the graft and collusion associated with the financial crisis we now face.  At the heart of these sacrifices will be the freedoms of citizens who support this nation.  

At a time when global and national security challenges confront our nation, taxpayers should not be further subjugated by a system already saturated with greed and corruption.  At a time when we need proven leadership that puts America first —  we don’t need a proponent of the philosophy that  usurps democracy — we need a leader who respects and supports it.   That leader is John McCain.

Let Loose the Barracuda!

September 29, 2008

from Perish the Thought:

James Lewis has it right:  To win this election, John McCain must let Sarah Palin unfurl the flag of REFORM in her debate vs Joe Biden on Friday night. 

Mr. Lewis is correct:

This crisis is not financial — it is politicalIt’s not a market failure. It’s a decades-long robbery by the Left, finally exposed for what it is.
 
The Democrats deserve the wrath of the voters this time.
 
To allow Barack Obama and the liberal democrat machine to continue steam-rolling taxpayers into funding their self-serving projects is a fatal disservice to the integrity of this nation, its credibility, its security and its future.
 
The taxpayers are now on the hook for a trillion dollars, if you add the failed 300 billion dollar rescue package from two weeks ago to the 700 billion dollar Paulson package  This is a trillion dollar scam, and all the politicians in Congress, the ACORN mafiathe people who played the market on unsecured mortgages, and the scam artists who were hired by Freddie and Fannie — they all knew it.  In case you haven’t been watching, that includes all of Barack Obama’s “home mortgage advisors” — Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson and Jamie Gorelick. It includes Senate Banking Committee members like Chris Dodd It includes House members like Barney Frank. Watch this video and you can see them strutting their stuff when the US watchdog agency criticized Fannie and Freddie in 2003.

 

They knew exactly what was going on.
 
It’s time John McCain and Sarah Palin stood up and let taxpayers know this as well.