Political Truth and Fact

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Congress rejects “bailout” – stocks plummet

Pelosi accused of killing bill by a bitter, partisan, mean street speech prior to the vote

Pelosi couldn’t deliver Democrat votes needed to pass bailout proposal

Politicians on Capitol Hill huddle today to craft a follow up plan.  Rumors suggest the left wing slush funds might make a comeback as Democrats revise their strategies

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080929/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown

As market tanks, the dollar rises worldwide

Around the world, central banks scurry to pump money into banking systems

Oil prices dip too – though the dip may not be felt at the pump for weeks

Britain’s banking problems led the world wide panic in financial circles.  Fat cats take a serious hit as regular people wait and see.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/article4844255.ece

ACORN – hiding a political scam under an acronym

A left wing plot designed to have government pay for the registration of Democrat voters – many of them totally fictitious and fraudulent – was to have benefited by being arrogantly slipped into the bailout bill along with other left wing groups by Democrats.

ACORN is under investigation for fraud in a dozen states and indictments have been filed in some.

La Raza – a radical Hispanic group – also would have joined in reaping the rewards of what would have been a left wing bonanza had Republicans not succeeded in cutting them out of the bill..

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/acorn_obama_and_the_mortgage_m.html

Opinion:
Where we are vs where we ought to be

So the bailout tanked.

Fingers are being pointed and most are directed at the shrill and shrieking House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi.  Don’t blame Pelosi, she’s from Frisco and cant help being that way – those people don’t think like real Americans on many issues.

No one will ever be certain why Pelosi took to the floor just to deliver a spleen-venting diatribe – but she did.   Pelosi contributed mightily to the defeat of the bill and many Americans are not sorry the bill failed and actually enjoyed seeing Pelosi demonstrate what a total void in political leadership she represents.

The final version of the bill had been shorn of some of the more odious applications earlier versions had included.

It would take a ton of research to find a more outrageous and downright criminal provision than that which would have provided an incredible slush fund for left wing extremist organizations such as the radical ACORN and La Raza.  All America must be on guard lest liberal Democrats again try to include that slush fund provision is whatever follow up “bailouts” are presented.

The stock market tanked, but the global financial crisis led to a huge jump in the value of the dollar, and in decreasing the price of oil by a very significant amount.  Not everything was bad news – not by a long shot.

Pelosi was not the real reason the bill failed – other than very stupidly making Republicans angry for no good reason --  the bill was on failing life support before her senseless tirade.

Defeat of the bailout package goes back to last week when Secretary of the Treasury Paulson first began pushing for it. (Paulson literally went to his knees to beg for passage)

The bill actually failed because people in Washington forgot about the people elsewhere in this country – real people.  Normal Americans who have trouble grasping the technical financial language or understanding the maneuvering.

Even in its early days, the bailout had problems in perception.  At one point  the first week end, rumors spread that Congress had been stiff armed by the White House, Treasury and the Senate.  Word spread that the three page draft of the bill was only a front and that a 20 plus version existed somewhere in the arcane alleyways of the Washington political jungle.

It was only a rumor, but the ferocity with which it spread reflects the underlying problem.

Paulson presented his case to the Senate and to Congressional leadership - -but he ignored the American people.  That omission was fatal to the bill – and it was stupid as Hell.

Politicians in Washington still haven’t gotten the message sent them by the American people when the amnesty bill was defeated.  No matter how sophisticated the process has become – people at the grass root level still have a voice.

In fact, they have a greater voice than they have had in generations.  Washington is limited by public opinion – opinion that is not only a product of the mainscream media – dominated by the left wing for decades – but also by the Internet.

In some congressional offices, angry calls opposing the bailout bill were often running close to 90%.  Call in radio reflected similar anger and rejection of the bill.

Paulson had presented an answer, but he failed to play it straight with the American people.  Surely he and others have gotten the message, but don’t count on it.  Those people in Washington are arrogant and dismissive of public opinion.

We can expect anther bailout bill to be crafted within days and presented again for approval.  Hopefully it will be a decent bill – especially one that has no tinge of the ACORN-like corruption of the first versions of its predecessor.

Expect a lot of recrimination today.  Barney Frank will fume and mumble, trying to cover up the fact that his “significant other” stands to benefit – and that Barney himself failed to bring along many Democrat members of the Financial Services Committee he heads.  Barney hoped he could help enrich his “friend” – yet failed to even get his own people to join him.

Killing such bills through public outrage is an encouraging thing to see.  When they finally get the message and comprehend its meaning, it will force Washington to pay more attention to the people themselves.  That’s’ a possibility now as never before. It is possible, it is not guaranteed.

It’s no longer just a matter of “them” – its also a matter of “us”.  Keep those cards and letters coming folks.

Buddy

 As the Washington Times sees it:

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/sep/30/the-bailout-that-wasnt/

EDITORIAL: The bailout that wasn't

The American taxpayer was done a great service yesterday when the House voted 228-205 against the Bush administration's $700 billion bailout. The tally was 133 Republicans and 95 Democrats.
Although the media inundated the public with conflicting polls on Americans' support for the measure, sources on the Hill said that calls coming in from constituents were as much as 100-1 against the bailout.

Republicans could easily have taken credit for killing the bill. But instead they blamed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "The speaker gave a very partisan voice to this that poisoned our side," said House Minority Leader John Boehner. Other Republican leaders followed suit, including Minority Chief Deputy Whip Eric Cantor, who held up Mrs. Pelosi's speech to the cameras.

But Mrs. Pelosi's speech was not part of the bill. Many Republicans were adamant that taxpayers should bail out Americans who have failed to pay their mortgages, student loans, credit card debt and car loans. And her speech certainly did not cause 40 percent of her party to oppose it. "I do not believe that we have explored or exhausted all possible options to directly ease the pressure on financial markets without causing an undue burden to taxpayers. This legislation just does not provide enough relief and protection for the hardworking men and women who are trying to make ends meet," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, Maryland Democrat.

If Congress and the White House are genuinely interested in fixing some of the structural problems behind the mortgage meltdown, here are three things that could actually help the situation:
n Cut or eliminate corporate income taxes. Instead of spending $700 billion to bail out the mortgage industry and banks, give the economy a real boost by cutting corporate tax rates. The United States has the second-highest corporate-income-tax rates among industrialized countries. This tax steals money from IRAs, 401k plans and workers' pension plans. Cutting the tax would send a message to the private sector that Washington will reward productive, entrepreneurial activity instead of throwing good money after bad.

n Cut the capital gains tax. This tax is a monument to liberalism's perverse interest in redistributing wealth and penalizing "the rich" - even if it destroys economic growth and jobs in the process. Dating back to 1969, the federal government has repeatedly increased the capital-gains tax, losing money virtually every time. On the other hand, when the tax was cut, revenues increased. As with the income tax, cutting capital gains would be one of the best things Congress and the president can do for the economy (and for those in the banking industry and housing industrial complex who would sulk at the loss of "their" $700 billion).

n Carefully examine the link between illegal immigration and the mortgage mess. Columnist Michelle Malkin writes on her blog that many of the areas hardest hit by the foreclosure wave, among them Loudoun County, Va., happen to be some of the largest illegal-alien sanctuaries. She points out that amnesty-promoting groups like the National Council of La Raza have received millions in federal funds to counsel their clients on obtaining mortgages with virtually no money down, and Mrs. Malkin has reported how major banks like Wachovia and Bank of America have launched campaigns soliciting business from illegal aliens.

If the Treasury Department is allowed to buy bad mortgages as part of a security bond, it will own 1.4 million foreclosed homes. Many of these properties are resort-type homes and condominiums in Florida, California and Texas representing failed investments. Such properties have troubling cost offsets, including the high insurance premiums for fire, hurricanes and flooding based on geography, annual maintenance and management. The investors abandoned them because their income from the properties wasn't enough to cover the mortgage. Is the government going to spend taxpayer money on those necessary investment costs on top of the purchase price of the mortgage? Let us not forget that there have already been two hurricanes in the Gulf region that will cost billions in recovery expenses. Many of these properties may already be essentially worthless.

Some financial analysts maintain that the administration has substantially underestimated the real cost of the package, which could cost as much as $1.4 trillion. Taxpayers had other reasons to lodge complaints with Congress. First, the federal government left taxpayers exposed in a Bear Stearns bailout. Earlier this month, there was the $85 billion bailout of the AIG insurance company. Shortly afterward, the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were bailed out at a cost of $200 billion. And quietly, over the weekend, Congress passed and sent to the president legislation providing $25 billion in loan guarantees for General Motors, Chrysler and Ford. That's more than $300 billion in bailout money since the beginning of September (not including the announcement by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. last week that it may need $150 billion). But early Sunday morning, House and Senate negotiators announced that they had reached agreement on the mother of all bailouts - at least for the month of September.

John McCain and Barack Obama have endorsed it - sort of - while giving themselves plenty of wiggle room to denounce the $700 billion monstrosity if Congress can't reach a deal. In the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other leading Democrats, as well as the Republican leaders, are still hoping to reach a deal, despite the fact that both caucuses are deeply divided. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan, chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee, spoke for many conservatives when he denounced the agreement, objecting in particular to the pressure for negotiators to meet an arbitrary deadline for passage of the bill: "The irresponsible desire to meet a deadline solely for the sake of meeting a deadline will produce an agreement that does not protect taxpayers from this bailout." Mr. McCotter predicted that Republicans would oppose an "irresponsible, anti-taxpayer agreement," and they did.

For now the bill is dead, but not the plan.

When Congress returns, lawmakers would be wise to consider dismissing the notion that a bailout deal is in the best interest of Americans. It should focus on solutions that they know can help solve this "crisis": free enterprise, deregulation and tax cuts.

 
 
.

Monday, September 29, 2008

Congress faces morning vote on $700 billion bailout

President Bush urges quick passage

Substantial opposition remains despite removal of provisions that would have provided massive slush funds for extreme liberal groups – one facing serious investigations and persecutions for voter fraud.

Public opposition to the proposal is measured at two to one against the bail out

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/29/AR2008092900623_pf.html

Rush Limbaugh becomes a key voice for McCain

Once an opponent, now Limbaugh is having a major impact on McCain’s campaign – or at least seems to.

Given the Palin selection, Limbaugh says he is firmly in the McCain camp

Democrats longed for a split between McCain and conservatives – that threat is gone.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-chafets29-2008sep29,0,1444137.story

McCain – controlling the debate agenda and flow

McCain proved he could fulfill his Senate duties and obligations, and still handle the debate.

Obama is seen as having been more like a professor – less like a leader

McCain’s answers were strong, Obama was more pedantic

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/09/mccain_controlled_agenda_in_fi_1.html

Opinion:
The pending vote

The House vote is predicted to be close and maneuvering by the power that be suggest this will be the case.

Some momentum seems moving toward passage:

Several changes are important:

The slush fund for left wing extremist groups has been eliminated.

This bill will be funded by Wall Street, rather than by taxpayers.

We are now advised by the president and others that  taxpayers may realize a net profit.

Many congressmen are wavering back and forth – while public opinion seems hardened against the bail out.

Financial experts predict that if the bailout is not passed, a global depression will ensue.  Some say that dire prediction will become true even if the bill is passed.  Thus the bill becomes one of the more serious milestones of Congressional action – one only the future happenings can illustrate.

Buddy

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/the_financial_mess_how_we_got.html
 
The Financial Mess: How We Got Here
By Abraham H. Miller
 
"How can you vote Republican when they so messed up the economy?" a liberal friend screams at me with such vehemence that I had to put the phone a full arms length from my ear.  Of course, my friend never heard of the Community Reinvestment Act.  He is one of those mindless liberals who thinks that George Bush and the Republicans are responsible for everything from Global Warming to Hurricane Katrina to the attempted genocide of the entire black population of New Orleans. 
He claims to be informed but he doesn't remember those dire warnings going back nine years ago that the Community Reinvestment Act would eventually cause a major financial and banking crisis in this country.  

The Community Reinvestment Act was pushed hard by Bill Clinton, although it originated under Jimmy Carter.  Asked about it the other day on one of the morning TV talk shows, Clinton said times back then were different. Fannie and Freddie had lots of money and he (in his infinite wisdom) decided that the money should not go to shareholders or to executive compensation, but should be used to put the poor into homes. 

As you can imagine, wonderful things happen when the government strong arms corporations as to how they should spend their money and, better yet, how they should assess the qualifications of home buyers.  So the country's biggest buyers of mortgages were pressured into lowering the qualifications of applicants, in order to increase the percentage of poor that got mortgages. 
 
By 2006, 30% of all mortgages went to people who in any other circumstances wouldn't qualify.

Now the political left would like you to know that the CRA-controlled institutions did not lend the largest percentage of sub-prime mortgages. But that's information by deception, because the mortgage business is a competitive business.  If the government strong arms one part of the business, the other part will respond.  And strong arm was what the Clinton administration did, even using the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to pressure banks to lend more money to the disadvantaged. Caught in the act, a spokesman for the office noted that its abuse of power was "for the best of intentions:" the same inclination used to pave the road to hell.

In the short run, all sorts of money was to be made by lowering standards and processing sub-prime loans for the poor. The Wall Street Journal raised concerns about Fannie's and Freddie's capital requirements.  Senator Phil Gramm  (R, TX) raised issues about community pressure groups, such as Barack Obama's ACORN, extorting money from banks by holding their feet to the CRA fire, and threatening to militate against mergers and acquisitions unless the banks entered into preferential agreements with community groups.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act cut down on CRA reporting requirements and upped the ante for groups such as ACORN, forcing them to disclose their relationships with local banks.

Fannie and Freddie became big contributors to the Democratic Party.  The sub-prime business paid off-at least while the bubble was growing. And the Kerry, Hillary and Obama campaigns have numbered among the leading recipients of the largess of the two mortgage lenders.

Franklin Raines, the Fannie Mae C.E.O. from 1999 to 2004, had been budget director in the Clinton administration.  The left would not like you to be reminded that Raines has been a consultant to the Obama campaign, according to the Washington Post, and that Freddie and Fannie number among the top 5 contributors to Obama's run for the presidency.  Raines is being sued for the recovery of 50 million in compensation acquired by the alleged manipulation of Fannie's books. Now, that's not change we can believe in.  That's Washington as we have come to know and "love" it. 

The Bush administration in 2003 tried to change the system, to no avail. Congressman Barney Frank, (D, MA ) was in the forefront of stopping the Bush proposal to take control out of Fannie and Freddie and put it into a third overseeing organization.  Frank too has emerged in the current crisis as one of the major critics of the administration. 

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan continued to raise the alarm over Fannie's and Freddie's weak capitalization.  His concerns were ignored.

Former Congressman Michael Oxley (R,OH), then chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and  co-author of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, introduced a bill in 2005 in response to the growing problem, but Fannie and Freddie put their lobbyists to work and the bill died.

Democratic Senator Chris Dodd, who is now Chairman of the Banking Committee and who appears along side  Majority Leader Harry Reid on television to discuss the current bailout negotiations, has had harsh words for the Bush administration for its alleged role in the crisis.

But the rest of us should have some harsh words for Senator Dodd.  After all, the Bush administration in 2003 and Senator Phil Gramm even earlier, in 1999, had been working to change the system.  Dodd, like Obama, has been a big recipient of campaign funds from  Fannie and Freddie, organizations that Dodd oversees. 
 
Dodd has apparently been more consumed with campaign contributions from the mortgage giants than the responsibilities of oversight.

When I point out the long trail of  Obama's  corruption stretching back to his days in the Illinois legislature, my liberal friends invoke moral equivalence, "They're all corrupt." 

There is no shame among the left.  When they think Bush is responsible for the collapse of the banking system, they scream at you.  When you point out that the Community Reinvestment Act created a pattern of abuse that now threatens the entire financial system, without hesitation liberals say, "They're all corrupt."

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation even has a web site so you could see how well your bank is meeting its obligations under the CRA.  Those of you who had money in Washington Mutual, which just went belly up, will be happy to know that WaMu, over the five individual reporting periods, had almost exemplary ratings on its commitment to CRA. That should give WaMu depositors great joy, to compensate for the financial mess they may be in.  If WaMu had been less responsive to the CRA and more responsive to the market, maybe it wouldn't be insolvent.        

I am not suggesting that the CRA by itself led to the current crisis, but the CRA was the first and most important part of the food chain.  The CRA caused the expansion in the number of questionable loans that lending institutions made, but Wall Street and insurance underwriters were all to willing to package these loans, enhance their ratings through convenient exercises in fantasy, sell them, and insure them with reserves that were more inadequate than the incomes of the people who got the loans in the first place..

The best thing that can emerge from the current financial crisis is the realization that the government needs to stop directing economic decision making.  In a sense, the government is putting out a fire it started when it both created the CRA and assessed lending institutions by how well they were doing in response to the program. When Clinton decided, in his usual arrogance, that he knew better than the market how banks should lend money, the seeds were sown for the current financial disaster.

If you want to blame Bush for the current crisis, it might make you feel good, reinforce your sense of how the world works, enable you to find a meeting of the minds when you next engage your liberal friends over wine and quiche, but like so many things you believe and which make you feel good, it has no correspondence to reality. 

Abraham H. Miller is emeritus professor of political science, University of Cincinnati.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

Sunday, September 28, 2008

“Tentative” agreement reported on bailout bill

Notably, Republican Congressional members are not mentioned in article covering the meetings that ran into the night.

Democrat efforts to fund slush funds for left wing extremist groups such as Obama’s own ACORN (not under investigation in at least a dozen states for voter registration fraud) seem to have been defeated by Republicans.

Financial Services’s top GOP member – Cong. Spencer Bacush of Alabama – pushes for a requirement that any legislation must be published 24 hours before any vote to allow careful study, analysis, and input and commentary from American voters.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122257682963083173.html

Thursday’s White House session: What really happened. – Rush Limbaugh

Cutting through the fog of politics and liberal claims designed to minimize the leadership of John McCain – here’s what really happened in the discussions…discussions that ended in reported hostility.

Democrats are desperate to infer leadership potential for their candidate who has zero experience in any aspect of Presidential activity.

Information, details, and truth that will never be provided by the mainscream media – totally corrupted and working hard in the interests of the Obama campaign.

www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_092608/content/01125107.guest.html

Even in Boston, Barney Frank’s left wing fingerprints are recognized as being all over the “bailout” proposal
 
Frank says -- the country is in dire straits today "thanks to a conservative philosophy that says the market knows best." And that philosophy goes "back to Ronald Reagan, when at his inauguration he said, 'Government is not the answer to our problems; government is the problem.' "

Frank admits a commitment to left wing ideology and a view that socialism is not all that bad.  But only voters in his own district have a chance to express views of such extremist politics and policy.

Frank mirrors the persistent anti free enterprise mindset of the extreme left in this country on any issue...a view that should not be trusted by normal America

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/28/franks_fingerprints_are_all_over_the_financial_fiasco/

Opinion:
The bailout and the American people

A new proposal to deal with the financial crisis is due to be voted on tomorrow.  It is a product of late night bargaining and discussion.  Republicans, led by Congressman Spencer Bachus, who is the top Republican on the Financial Services Committee, has demanded any legislation be published 24 hours before a vote to allow adequate time for consideration and to allow the American people an opportunity to express themselves on the provisions.

One of the most heatedly opposed Democrat provisions have been those that would have provided what can be described as nothing other than a slush fund for extreme left wing political groups such as Obama’s own ACORN.  For the record, ACORN is under investigation in at least a dozen states and indictments have been filed in several of them.  ACORN has been nailed for illegal voter registration actions.

Progress on this aspect of the bill, at least, is said to have addressed this matter.

<<Provisions removed by House Republicans include:

•         Provision to provide unions and other activist groups with proxy access for corporate boards

•         Provision to mandate shareholder votes on compensation issues (union priority)

•         Diversion of funds into a housing fund to support left-wing activist groups like ACORN

•         A provision to allow trial judges to arbitrarily adjust mortgages, creating bonanza for trial lawyers

•         A provision to require the government to sell to state and local governments at a discount homes the government acquires as a result of foreclosure>>

I have no adequate report on the other provisions.

However, if the demands of Congressman Bachus are honored, we should have at least 24 hours to read, digest, and analyze the latest version.

Americans are not rushing to embrace the concept and many are skeptical of just how great this financial threat really might be.  To say the issue has not been handled well by those within the financial community, is a huge understatement.

Government is not dealing for the moment from a position of strength.  Neither the White House nor Congress has the approval of a third of all Americans polled.  That’s a major weakness to begin with.

Next, a Secretary of the Treasury whose name less than 5% of the American public could have recalled this time last week – demands dominion over what will almost certainly become a trillion dollars – and be allowed to spend it as his whim without oversight or control.

Huh?

Not smart.  Most parents wouldn’t buy such a concept if it were teen agers asking for a few thousand dollars to spend on their own.  Secretary Paulson asked for a trillion.  I trust my teen agers and their judgment far more than I do any cabinet member, and I still wouldn’t give my consent without a lot of further explanation and control by me.

This is not a matter of teen age responsibility, but we are also talking about a trillion dollars – that’s a lot of money – even by Washington standards.

They say without an agreement we face a potential financial disaster unless we agree with the bailout provisions.  Maybe, maybe not.  How can those out here in flyover terrain be sure?

Buddy

(We are indebted to Harry Becker for highlighting this key insight -- Normal Americans need to understand we are all in this together and must take personal initiative)

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis
By James Simpson

America waits with baited breath while Washington struggles to bring the U.S. economy back from the brink of disaster. But many of those same politicians caused the crisis, and if left to their own devices will do so again.

Despite the mass media news blackout, a series of books, talk radio and the blogosphere have managed to expose Barack Obama's connections to his radical mentors -- Weather Underground bombers William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis and others. David Horowitz and his Discover the Networks.org have also contributed a wealth of information and have noted Obama's radical connections since the beginning.

Yet, no one to my knowledge has yet connected all the dots between Barack Obama and the Radical Left. When seen together, the influences on Obama's life comprise a who's who of the radical leftist movement, and it becomes painfully apparent that not only is Obama a willing participant in that movement, he has spent most of his adult life deeply immersed in it.

But even this doesn't fully describe the extreme nature of this candidate. He can be tied directly to a malevolent overarching strategy that has motivated many, if not all, of the most destructive radical leftist organizations in the United States since the 1960s.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis

[ http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6967 First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.    HB]

In an earlier post, I noted the liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress - with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?

Why?

One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.

I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent - the failure is deliberate. Don't laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.

The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:

"Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)

Newsmax rounds out the picture:

Their strategy to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation's wealth.

In their Nation article, Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of "crisis" they were trying to create:

By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.

No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:

1.    The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
2.    The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
3.    The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.

Capitalizing on the racial unrest of the 1960s, Cloward and Piven saw the welfare system as their first target. They enlisted radical black activist George Wiley, who created the National Welfare Reform Organization (NWRO) to implement the strategy. Wiley hired militant foot soldiers to storm welfare offices around the country, violently demanding their "rights." According to a City Journal article by Sol Stern, welfare rolls increased from 4.3 million to 10.8 million by the mid-1970s as a result, and in New York City, where the strategy had been particularly successful, "one person was on the welfare rolls... for every two working in the city's private economy."

According to another City Journal article titled "Compassion Gone Mad":

The movement's impact on New York City was jolting: welfare caseloads, already climbing 12 percent a year in the early sixties, rose by 50 percent during Lindsay's first two years; spending doubled... The city had 150,000 welfare cases in 1960; a decade later it had 1.5 million. 

The vast expansion of welfare in New York City that came of the NWRO's Cloward-Piven tactics sent the city into bankruptcy in 1975. Rudy Giuliani cited Cloward and Piven by name as being responsible for "an effort at economic sabotage." He also credited Cloward-Piven with changing the cultural attitude toward welfare from that of a temporary expedient to a lifetime entitlement, an attitude which in-and-of-itself has caused perhaps the greatest damage of all.

Cloward and Piven looked at this strategy as a gold mine of opportunity. Within the newly organized groups, each offensive would find an ample pool of foot soldier recruits willing to advance its radical agenda at little or no pay, and expand its base of reliable voters, legal or otherwise. The radicals' threatening tactics also would accrue an intimidating reputation, providing a wealth of opportunities for extorting monetary and other concessions from the target organizations. In the meantime, successful offensives would create an ever increasing drag on society. As they gleefully observed:

Moreover, this kind of mass influence is cumulative because benefits are continuous. Once eligibility for basic food and rent grants is established, the drain on local resources persists indefinitely.

The next time you drive through one of the many blighted neighborhoods in our cities, or read of the astronomical crime, drug addiction, and out-of-wedlock birth rates, or consider the failed schools, strapped police and fire resources of every major city, remember Cloward and Piven's thrill that "...the drain on local resources persists indefinitely."

ACORN, the new tip of the Cloward-Piven spear

In 1970, one of George Wiley's protégés, Wade Rathke -- like Bill Ayers, a member of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) -- was sent to found the Arkansas Community Organizations for Reform Now. While NWRO had made a good start, it alone couldn't accomplish the Cloward-Piven goals. Rathke's group broadened the offensive to include a wide array of low income "rights." Shortly thereafter they changed "Arkansas" to "Association of" and ACORN went nationwide.

Today ACORN is involved in a wide array of activities, including housing, voting rights, illegal immigration and other issues. According to ACORN's website: "ACORN is the nation's largest grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people with over 400,000 member families organized into more than 1,200 neighborhood chapters in 110 cities across the country," It is perhaps the largest radical group in the U.S. and has been cited for widespread criminal activity on many fronts.

Voting

On voting rights, ACORN and its voter mobilization subsidiary, Project Vote, have been involved nationwide in efforts to grant felons the vote and lobbied heavily for the Motor Voter Act of 1993, a law allowing people to register at motor vehicle departments, schools, libraries and other public places. That law had been sought by Cloward and Piven since the early1980s and they were present, standing behind President Clinton at the signing ceremony.

ACORN's voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy:

•    1. Register as many Democrat voters as possible, legal or otherwise and help them vote, multiple times if possible.
•    2. Overwhelm the system with fraudulent registrations using multiple entries of the same name, names of deceased, random names from the phone book, even contrived names.
•    3. Make the system difficult to police by lobbying for minimal identification standards.

In this effort, ACORN sets up registration sites all over the country and has been frequently cited for turning in fraudulent registrations, as well as destroying republican applications. In the 2004-2006 election cycles alone, ACORN was accused of widespread voter fraud in 12 states. It may have swung the election for one state governor.

ACORN's website brags: "Since 2004, ACORN has helped more than 1.7 million low- and moderate-income and minority citizens apply to register to vote." Project vote boasts 4 million. I wonder how many of them are dead? For the 2008 cycle, ACORN and Project Vote have pulled out all the stops. Given their furious nationwide effort, it is not inconceivable that this presidential race could be decided by fraudulent votes alone.

Barack Obama ran ACORN's Project Vote in Chicago and his highly successful voter registration drive was credited with getting the disgraced former Senator Carol Moseley-Braun elected. Newsmax reiterates Cloward and Piven's aspirations for ACORN's voter registration efforts:

By advocating massive, no-holds-barred voter registration campaigns, they [Cloward & Piven] sought a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C. that would re-distribute the nation's wealth and lead to a totalitarian socialist state.

Illegal Immigration

As I have written elsewhere, the Radical Left's offensive to promote illegal immigration is "Cloward-Piven on steroids." ACORN is at the forefront of this movement as well, and was a leading organization among a broad coalition of radical groups, including Soros' Open Society Institute, the Service Employees International Union (ACORN founder Wade Rathke also runs a SEIU chapter), and others, that became the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. CCIR fortunately failed to gain passage for the 2007 illegal immigrant amnesty bill, but its goals have not changed.

The burden of illegal immigration on our already overstressed welfare system has been widely documented. Some towns in California have even been taken over by illegal immigrant drug cartels. The disease, crime and overcrowding brought by illegal immigrants places a heavy burden on every segment of society and every level of government, threatening to split this country apart at the seams. In the meantime, radical leftist efforts to grant illegal immigrants citizenship guarantee a huge pool of new democrat voters. With little border control, terrorists can also filter in.

Obama aided ACORN as their lead attorney in a successful suit he brought against the Illinois state government to implement the Motor Voter law there. The law had been resisted by Republican Governor Jim Edgars, who feared the law was an opening to widespread vote fraud.

His fears were warranted as the Motor Voter law has since been cited as a major opportunity for vote fraud, especially for illegal immigrants, even terrorists. According to the Wall Street Journal: "After 9/11, the Justice Department found that eight of the 19 hijackers were registered to vote..."

ACORN's dual offensives on voting and illegal immigration are handy complements. Both swell the voter rolls with reliable democrats while assaulting the country ACORN seeks to destroy with overwhelming new problems.

Mortgage Crisis

And now we have the mortgage crisis, which has sent a shock wave through Wall Street and panicked world financial markets like no other since the stock market crash of 1929. But this is a problem created in Washington long ago.  It originated with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), signed into law in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter. The CRA was Carter's answer to a grassroots activist movement started in Chicago, and forced banks to make loans to low income, high risk customers. PhD economist and former Texas Senator Phil Gramm has called it: "a vast extortion scheme against the nation's banks."

ACORN aggressively sought to expand loans to low income groups using the CRA as a whip. Economist Stan Leibowitz wrote in the New York Post:

In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of "redlining"-claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.

In fact, minority mortgage applications were rejected more frequently than other applications-but the overwhelming reason wasn't racial discrimination, but simply that minorities tend to have weaker finances.

ACORN showed its colors again in 1991, by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA. Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively.

As a New York Post article describes it:

A 1995 strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to find ways to provide mortgages to their poorer communities. It also let community activists intervene at yearly bank reviews, shaking the banks down for large pots of money.

Banks that got poor reviews were punished; some saw their merger plans frustrated; others faced direct legal challenges by the Justice Department.

Flexible lending programs expanded even though they had higher default rates than loans with traditional standards. On the Web, you can still find CRA loans available via ACORN with "100 percent financing . . . no credit scores . . . undocumented income . . . even if you don't report it on your tax returns." Credit counseling is required, of course.

Ironically, an enthusiastic Fannie Mae Foundation report singled out one paragon of nondiscriminatory lending, which worked with community activists and followed "the most flexible underwriting criteria permitted." That lender's $1 billion commitment to low-income loans in 1992 had grown to $80 billion by 1999 and $600 billion by early 2003.

The lender they were speaking of was Countrywide, which specialized in subprime lending and had a working relationship with ACORN.

Investor's Business Daily added:

The revisions also allowed for the first time the securitization of CRA-regulated loans containing subprime mortgages. The changes came as radical "housing rights" groups led by ACORN lobbied for such loans. ACORN at the time was represented by a young public-interest lawyer in Chicago by the name of Barack Obama. (Emphasis, mine.)

Since these loans were to be underwritten by the government sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the implicit government guarantee of those loans absolved lenders, mortgage bundlers and investors of any concern over the obvious risk. As Bloomberg reported: "It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit."

And if you think Washington policy makers cared about ACORN's negative influence, think again. Before this whole mess came down, a Democrat-sponsored bill on the table would have created an "Affordable Housing Trust Fund," granting ACORN access to approximately $500 million in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac revenues with little or no oversight.

Even now, unbelievably -- on the brink of national disaster -- Democrats have insisted ACORN benefit from bailout negotiations! Senator Lindsay Graham reported last night (9/25/08) in an interview with Greta Van Susteren of On the Record that Democrats want 20 percent of the bailout money to go to ACORN!

This entire fiasco represents perhaps the pinnacle of ACORN's efforts to advance the Cloward-Piven Strategy and is a stark demonstration of the power they wield in Washington.

Enter Barack Obama

In attempting to capture the significance of Barack Obama's Radical Left connections and his relation to the Cloward Piven strategy, I constructed following flow chart. It is by no means complete. There are simply too many radical individuals and organizations to include them all here. But these are perhaps the most significant.

 

The chart puts Barack Obama at the epicenter of an incestuous stew of American radical leftism. Not only are his connections significant, they practically define who he is. Taken together, they constitute a who's who of the American radical left, and guiding all is the Cloward-Piven strategy.

Conspicuous in their absence are any connections at all with any other group, moderate, or even mildly leftist. They are all radicals, firmly bedded in the anti-American, communist, socialist, radical leftist mesh.

Saul Alinsky

Most people are unaware that Barack Obama received his training in "community organizing" from Saul Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation. But he did. In and of itself that marks his heritage and training as that of a radical activist. One really needs go no further. But we have.

Bill Ayers

Obama objects to being associated with SDS bomber Bill Ayers, claiming he is being smeared with "guilt by association." But they worked together at the Woods Fund. The Wall Street Journal added substantially to our knowledge by describing in great detail Obama's work over five years with SDS bomber Bill Ayers on the board of a non-profit, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, to push a radical agenda on public school children. As Stanley Kurtz states:

"...the issue here isn't guilt by association; it's guilt by participation. As CAC chairman, Mr. Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb 40 years ago."

Also included in the mix is Theresa Heinz Kerry's favorite charity, the Tides Foundation. A partial list of Tides grants tells you all you need to know: ACLU, ACORN, Center for American Progress, Center for Constitutional Rights (a communist front,) CAIR, Earth Justice, Institute for Policy Studies (KGB spy nest), National Lawyers Guild (oldest communist front in U.S.), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and practically every other radical group there is. ACORN's Wade Rathke runs a Tides subsidiary, the Tides Center.

Carl Davidson and the New Party

We have heard about Bomber Bill, but we hear little about fellow SDS member Carl Davidson. According to Discover the Networks, Davidson was an early supporter of Barack Obama and a prominent member of Chicago's New Party, a synthesis of communist CPUSA members, Socialists, ACORN veterans and other radicals. Obama sought and received the New Party's endorsement, and they assisted with his campaign. The New Party also developed a strong relationship with ACORN. As an excellent article on the New Party observes: "Barack Obama knew what he was getting into and remains an ideal New Party candidate."

George Soros

The chart also suggests the reason for George Soros' fervent support of Obama. The President of his Open Society Institute is Aryeh Neier, founder of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). As mentioned above, three other former SDS members had extensive contact with Obama: Bill Ayers, Carl Davidson and Wade Rathke. Surely Aryeh Neier would have heard from his former colleagues of the promising new politician. More to the point, Neier is firmly committed to supporting the hugely successful radical organization, ACORN, and would be certain to back their favored candidate, Barack Obama.

ACORN

Obama has spent a large portion of his professional life working for ACORN or its subsidiaries, representing ACORN as a lawyer on some of its most critical issues, and training ACORN leaders. Stanley Kurtz's excellent National Review article, "Inside Obama's Acorn." also describes Obama's ACORN connection in detail. But I can't improve on Obama's own words:

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. - Barack Obama, Speech to ACORN, November 2007 (Courtesy Newsmax.)

In another excellent article on Obama's ACORN connections, Newsmax asks a nagging question:

It would be telling to know if Obama, during his years at Columbia, had occasion to meet Cloward and study the Cloward-Piven Strategy.

I ask you, is it possible ACORN would train Obama to take leadership positions within ACORN without telling him what he was training for? Is it possible ACORN would put Obama in leadership positions without clueing him into what his purpose was??

Is it possible that this most radical of organizations would put someone in charge of training its trainers, without him knowing what it was he was training them for?

As a community activist for ACORN; as a leadership trainer for ACORN; as a lead organizer for ACORN's Project Vote; as an attorney representing ACORN's successful efforts to impose Motor Voter regulations in Illinois; as ACORN's representative in lobbying for the expansion of high risk housing loans through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that led to the current crisis; as a recipient of their assistance in his political campaigns -- both with money and campaign workers; it is doubtful that he was unaware of ACORN's true goals. It is doubtful he was unaware of the Cloward-Piven Strategy.

Fast-forward to 2005 when an obsequious, servile and scraping Daniel Mudd, CEO of Fannie Mae spoke at the Congressional Black Caucus swearing in ceremony for newly-elected Illinois Senator, Barack Obama. Mudd called, the Congressional Black Caucus "our family" and "the conscience of Fannie Mae."

In 2005, Republicans sought to reign in Fannie and Freddie. Senator John McCain was at the forefront of that effort. But it failed due to an intense lobbying effort put forward by Fannie and Freddie.

In his few years as a U.S. senator, Obama has received campaign contributions of $126,349, from Fannie and Freddie, second only to the $165,400 received by Senator Chris Dodd, who has been getting donations from them since 1988. What makes Obama so special?

His closest advisers are a dirty laundry list of individuals at the heart of the financial crisis: former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson; Former Fannie Mae CEO and former Clinton Budget Director Frank Raines; and billionaire failed Superior Bank of Chicago Board Chair Penny Pritzger.

Johnson had to step down as adviser on Obama's V.P. search after this gem came out:

An Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) report[1] from September 2004 found that, during Johnson's tenure as CEO, Fannie Mae had improperly deferred $200 million in expenses. This enabled top executives, including Johnson and his successor, Franklin Raines, to receive substantial bonuses in 1998.[2] A 2006 OFHEO report[3] found that Fannie Mae had substantially under-reported Johnson's compensation. Originally reported as $6-7 million, Johnson actually received approximately $21 million.

Obama denies ties to Raines but the Washington Post calls him a member of "Obama's political circle." Raines and Johnson were fined $3 million by the Office of Federal Housing Oversight for their manipulation of Fannie books. The fine is small change however, compared to the $50 million Raines was able to obtain in improper bonuses as a result of juggling the books.

Most significantly, Penny Pritzger, the current Finance Chairperson of Obama's presidential campaign helped develop the complicated investment bundling of subprime securities at the heart of the meltdown. She did so in her position as shareholder and board chair of Superior Bank. The Bank failed in 2001, one of the largest in recent history, wiping out $50 million in uninsured life savings of approximately 1,400 customers. She was named in a RICO class action law suit but doesn't seem to have come out of it too badly.

As a young attorney in the 1990s, Barack Obama represented ACORN in Washington in their successful efforts to expand Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) authority. In addition to making it easier for ACORN groups to force banks into making risky loans, this also paved the way for banks like Superior to package mortgages as investments, and for the Government Sponsored Enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to underwrite them. These changes created the conditions that ultimately lead to the current financial crisis.

Did they not know this would occur? Were these smart people, led by a Harvard graduate, unaware of the Econ 101 concept of moral hazard that would result from the government making implicit guarantees to underwrite private sector financial risk? They should have known that freeing the high-risk mortgage market of risk, calamity was sure to ensue. I think they did.

Barack Obama, the Cloward-Piven candidate, no matter how he describes himself, has been a radical activist for most of his political career. That activism has been in support of organizations and initiatives that at their heart seek to tear the pillars of this nation asunder in order to replace them with their demented socialist vision. Their influence has spread so far and so wide that despite their blatant culpability in the current financial crisis, they are able to manipulate Capital Hill politicians to cut them into $140 billion of the bailout pie!

God grant those few responsible yet remaining in Washington, DC the strength to prevent this massive fraud from occurring. God grant them the courage to stand up in the face of this Marxist tidal wave.

Jim Simpson is a former White House staff economist and budget analyst. His writings have been published in American Thinker, Washington Times, FrontPage Magazine, DefenseWatch, Soldier of Fortune and others. His blog is Truth and Consequences..

 
 
 

.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Friday, September 26, 2008

House Republicans balk on Paulson bailout plan

White House meeting called one of the most contentious in memory

Both McCain and Obama rush back to attend the meeting as Obama heeds the challenge from McCain

Paulson comes to Capitol Hill in a failed attempt to attain agreement.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13918.html

Americans worry Washington will be too concerned about election as they craft a financial solution

Bush has rejected assigning blame in asking lawmakers to reach a solution

Democrats have desperately struggled to blame McCain after the GOP candidate succeeded in demonstrating leadership even as Obama continued “campaigning as usual”

Early signs on Wall Street are suggesting bad day for stock prices.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0925edit3sep25,0,3267576.story
http://drudgereport.com/

In the midst of dire crisis, up is down and down is up

The usual political calculus is out the window in this weeks’ crisis

McCain offered a dramatic strategy by suspending his own campaign to return to Washington to deal with the crisis.

A Key Reagan speech writer provides unique insight

http://drudgereport.com/

Opinion:
A crisis for which no one seems certain of an answer

In the combined confusion of crisis and presidential politics, Washington insiders scramble for position.

McCain tossed a Hail Mary pass by suspending his campaign and returning to Washington to help find a solution.  Democrats were desperate mid day in claiming agreement had been reached – a ploy designed to blunt the McCain strategy.

However, the top Republican on the House Financial Services Committee – Rep Spencer Bachus of Alabama, destroyed the Democrat claims by announcing no agreement had been reached at all.

Democrats did all they could to prove Bachus wrong, but eventually had to concede his position.  Bachus was right, the Democrat rumors were not.  In a highly charged political environment, truth survived.

However, in the end, there was also no agreement on how to escape the financial trap and extricate America from the quicksand and mire.

Another Alabama lawmaker, Senator Richard Shelby, offered an overall assessment of the crisis:

“I believe Congress can address the liquidity issue by increasing the combined resources of the Federal Reserve System and the Treasury.  By enhancing the Federal government’s existing lending facilities and guarantee programs, we can help stabilize money market funds and provide loans to troubled financial institutions without exposing taxpayers to massive losses.”
 
“Thereafter, we must determine how to address the troubled assets on the books of financial institutions and continue the process of dealing with declining home values.  This will likely be a long and difficult process.  We must recognize that now.”
 
“Even if the Paulson plan works perfectly, which many doubt, including nearly two hundred economists, it will not stimulate new lending, stop de-leveraging, help distressed home owners, or jump start the economy.”
 
“The next Congress is going to have to do more to address this crisis and we have not made this clear to the American people. 

As a member of Congress, I’m concerned that we are being asked to ratify the Secretary’s plan without having given meaningful consideration to any alternatives.  This I can not support.”
Friday dawned with Washingnton in apparent disarray – ending the week with an answer yet to be crafted.

Stay tuned.

Buddy

 Economyincrisis.org - America's Economic Report - Daily 
 
America's New Declaration of Dependence
Paul Craig Roberts, former Secretary of the U.S. Treasury

Editor's note: The U.S. is no longer the superpower that we once were. We no longer generate enough wealth internally and are dependent on loans from other countries to function. If these loans were pulled or not renewed our government could conceivably be shut down.

Remember the good old days when the economic threat was mere recession? The Federal Reserve would encourage the economy with low interest rates until the economy overheated. Prices would rise, and unions would strike for higher benefits. Then the Fed would put on the brakes by raising interest rates. Money supply growth would fall. Inventories would grow and layoffs would result. When the economy cooled down, the cycle would start over.

The nice thing about 20th century recessions was that jobs returned when the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates and consumer demand increased. In the 21st century, jobs that have been moved offshore do not come back. More than three million U.S. manufacturing jobs have been lost while Bush was in the White House. Those jobs represent consumer income and career opportunities that America will never see again.

In the 21st century the U.S. economy has produced net new jobs only in low paid domestic services, such as waitresses, bartenders, hospital orderlies and retail clerks. The kind of jobs that provided ladders of upward mobility into the middle class are being exported abroad or filled by foreigners brought in on work visas. Today when you purchase an American name brand, you are supporting economic growth and consumer incomes in China and Indonesia, not in Detroit and Cincinnati.

In the 20th century, economic growth resulted from improved technologies, new investment, and increases in labor productivity, which raised consumers’ incomes and purchasing power. In contrast, in the 21st century, economic growth has resulted from debt expansion.

Most Americans have experienced little, if any, income growth in the 21st century. Instead, consumers have kept the economy going by maxing out their credit cards and refinancing their mortgages in order to consume the equity in their homes.

The income gains of the 21st century have gone to corporate chief executives, shareholders of offshoring corporations and financial corporations.

By replacing $20 an hour U.S. labor with $1 an hour Chinese labor, the profits of U.S. offshoring corporations have boomed, thus driving up share prices and “performance” bonuses for corporate CEOs. With Bush/Cheney, the Republicans have resurrected their policy of favoring the rich over the poor. John McCain captured today’s high income class with his quip that you are middle class if you have an annual income less than $5 million.

Financial companies have made enormous profits by securitizing income flows from unknown risks and selling asset backed securities to pension funds and investors at home and abroad.

Today recession is only a small part of the threat that we face. Financial deregulation, Alan Greenspan’s low interest rates, and the belief that the market was the best regulator of risks, have created a highly leveraged pyramid of risk without adequate capital or collateral to back the risk.

Consequently, a wide variety of financial institutions are threatened with insolvency, threatening a collapse comparable to the bank failures that shrank the supply of money and credit and produced the Great Depression.

Washington has been slow to recognize the current problem. A millstone around the neck of every financial institution is the mark-to-market rule, an ill-advised “reform” from a previous crisis that was blamed on fraudulent accounting that over-valued assets on the books. As a result, today institutions have to value their assets at current market value.

In the current crisis the rule has turned out to be a curse. Asset backed securities, such as collateralized mortgage obligations, faced their first market pricing in panicked circumstances. The owner of a bond backed by 1,000 mortgages doesn’t know how many of the mortgages are good and how many are bad. The uncertainty erodes the value of the bond.

If significant amounts of such untested securities are on the balance sheet, insolvency rears its ugly head. The bonds get dumped in order to realize some part of their value. Merrill Lynch sold its asset backed securities for twenty cents on the dollar, although it is unlikely that 80 percent of the instruments were worthless.

The mark to market rule, together with the suspect values of the asset backed securities and collateral debt obligations and swaps, allowed the short sellers to make fortunes by driving down the share prices of the investment banks, thus worsening the crisis. With their capitalization shrinking, the investment banks could no longer borrow. The authorities took their time in halting short-selling, and short-selling is set to resume on October 3 or thereabout.

If the mark-to-market rule had been suspended and short-selling prohibited, the crisis would have been mitigated. Instead, the crisis intensified, provoking the U.S. Treasury to propose to take responsibility for $700 billion more in troubled financial instruments in addition to the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG bailouts. Treasury guarantees are also apparently being extended to money market funds.

All of this makes sense at a certain level. But what if the $700 billion doesn’t stem the tide and another $700 billion is needed? At what point does the Treasury’s assumption of liabilities erode its own credit standing?

This crisis comes at the worst possible time. Gratuitous wars and military spending military spending in pursuit of U.S. world hegemony have inflated the federal budget deficit, which recession is further enlarging. Massive trade deficits, magnified by the offshoring of goods and services, cannot be eliminated by U.S. export capability.

These large deficits are financed by foreigners, and foreign unease has resulted in a decline in the U.S. dollar’s value compared to other tradable currencies, precious metals, and oil.
The U.S. Treasury does not have $700 billion on hand with which to buy the troubled assets from the troubled institutions. The Treasury will have to borrow the $700 billion from abroad.

The dependency of Treasury Secretary Paulson’s bailout scheme on foreign willingness to absorb more Treasury paper in order that the Treasury has the money to bail out the troubled institutions is heavy proof that the U.S. is in a financially dependent position that is inconsistent with that of America’s “superpower” status. The U.S. is no longer a superpower.

Washington still hasn’t learned this. American hubris can lead the administration and Congress into a bailout solution that the rest of the world, which has to finance it, might not accept.

A less appreciated feature of Paulson’s bailout plan is his demand for freedom from accountability. Congress balked at Paulson’s demand that the executive branch’s conduct of the bailout be non-reviewable by Congress or the courts: “Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion.” However, Congress substituted for its own authority a “board” that possibly will consist of the bailed out parties, by which I mean Republican and Democratic constituencies. The control over the financial system that the bailout would give to the executive branch would mean, in effect, state capitalism or fascism.

If we add state capitalism to the Bush administration’s success in eroding both the US Constitution and the power of Congress, we may be witnessing the final death of accountable constitutional government.

The U.S. might also be on the verge of a decision by foreign lenders to cease financing a country that claims to be a hegemonic power with the right and the virtue to impose its will on the rest of the world. The U.S. is able to be at war in Iraq and Afghanistan and is able to pick fights with Iran,

akistan and Russia, because the Chinese, the Japanese and the sovereign wealth funds of the oil kingdoms finance America’s wars and military budgets. Aside from nuclear weapons, which are also in the hands of other countries, the U.S. has no assets of its own with which to pursue its control over the world.

The U.S. cannot be a hegemonic power without foreign financing. All indications are that the rest of the world is tiring of U.S. arrogance.

If the US Treasury’s assumption of bailout responsibilities becomes excessive, the US dollar will lose its reserve currency role. The minute that occurs, foreign financing of America’s twin deficits will cease, as will the bailout. The U.S. government would have to turn to the printing of paper money as did Weimar, Germany.

For now this pending problem is hidden from view, because in times of panic, the tradition is to flee into “safety,” that is, into U.S. Treasury debt obligations. The safety of Treasuries will be revealed by the extent of the bailout.

Let the candidates know your take on this topic:

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Florida Democrat Congressman slanders Palin with bald faced lies

Congressman Alcee Hastings attempts to sway Florida voters by claming Palin is anti Black and Anti Jew.

The charges are absurd and pure slander, but then Alcee Hastings is a Democrat Congressman who was ousted as a Federal Judge on charges involving bribery.

The outrageous smears demonstrate how badly Palin’s selection has impacted the Obama vote potential.  Hastings’ extremism illustrates Democrat fears.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/florida-congres.html

Obama yields to McCain leadership and heads back to Washington to talks on the financial crisis

After a running display of political bantering, Obama joins McCain in returning to the Capitol to participate in talks designed to reach agreement.

Some liken the financial crisis dimension as close to that “of Pearl Harbor”.

Obama has wavered – trying to ascertain his best political response while McCain unflinchingly concentrates on doing his duty as a US Senator.  Obama doesn’t understand such duty it seems.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080925/D93DM4G00.html

Claims and charges in debate over arcane financial matters few average American can even begin to grasp

Some experts are saying taxpayers may ultimately reap major rewards from the bail out proposals

Predictions are cheap, the bailout costs are not.

“Desperation” seems the order of the day, yet some experts say things may be far better than assumed.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122230704116773989.html

Opinion:
McCain and his “Hail Mary” tactic

“"Fearing a political backlash against Democrats," Roll Call reported, "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has told the White House that it must serve up support from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) if it hopes to ensure bipartisan backing for a massive economic bailout package by week's end."

A strange position for Harry Reid since his reaction to John McCain’s call for Obama to join him in suspending the presidential campaign in order to return to their duties as US Senators and work to solve the financial crisis.

Needless to say, Obama will refuse the challenge -- he is trapped in that and has no alternative.  Of course his failure provides more proof that such matters as “duty” are not among the character traits Obama possesses.  Having never held a real job, much less having never served in our military, Obama hasn’t had such training, direction, or motivation.

Certainly, his mentor, the extreme left wing radical – the notorious Saul Alinski would sneer at such a value – just as he would sneer at honor, duty and country in any other context.  No wonder Obama doesn’t have a clue about such matters and such actions.

After all, he’s only spent a mere 143 days actually serving in the job to which the people of Illinois elected him.  Duty is simply not an Obama sort of thing.

We have to assume Obama’s pretended insistence the debates continue as scheduled to be a mask hiding an actual feeling of fear and trembling over the prospect of having to debate a far more experienced and far smarter opponent on live TV.

Obama fell on his face quite badly in his last debate outing way back in the days of the Democrat primary.  As a result, he ran from any additional debates in the primary.  None of us can blame him for that.

Now he is shirking a basic duty as an elected US Senator in working to solve the incredible crisis posed by the financial mess.  We are told the crisis – if not solved – could result in a major financial melt down, even a depression.

Yet Obama refuses to return to duty and Harry Reid desperately rushes to give him cover.  Expect the media to do the same.  After all, from the New York Times through all the over-the-air network news operations, are openly striving to see Obama elected president.  Their attacks on McCain’s current tactic will be relentless.  Count on it, but don’t be fooled by it.

There is a lot to hate in the proposed legislation designed to solve our financial crisis.  We are far from having a solution that can generate support from a majority of the American people (no matter how few actually understand any of these things)

At least McCain is doing his duty.  McCain has a history of doing just that again and again.  Obama, on the other hand, cant be bothered.

Buddy
 
http://townhall.com/Columnists/FloydandMaryBethBrown/2008/09/25/mccain_should_say_no_to_bush_and_senate_democrats_on_wall_street_bailout
 
McCain Should Say No to Bush and Senate Democrats on Wall Street Bailout 
 
  by Floyd and Mary Beth Brown 
 
"Fearing a political backlash against Democrats," Roll Call reported, "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has told the White House that it must serve up support from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) if it hopes to ensure bipartisan backing for a massive economic bailout package by week's end."

Falling for this trick by Sen. Reid and the other Obama supporters in the U.S. Senate could severely damage Sen. McCain's campaign. McCain should reject the plan and use the issue to draw a distinction between himself and President Bush for good policy reasons.

Wall Street is in trouble because of misplaced bets on derivatives and other financial instruments. It is not the purpose of tax dollars to limit the damage to multi-millionaires for trading mistakes they have made.

The hyper-ventilation of New York hedge-fund operators reminds us that "masters of the universe" can make big mistakes. The media can laud the supposed great work of Paulson and Congress for diverting the economy from a new version of the Great Depression, but America isn't buying it. The only depression is in the suites of these traders' offices.

Average Americans should be concerned -- concerned they are being taken again. Any plan crafted by the pro-business, Wall Street veteran Paulson will be dramatically changed as it runs the gauntlet of the anti-business House of Representatives. Who knows what the plan will contain when it emerges from the halls of this rightly unpopular institution.

But here is what we know so far. While the plan has been dubbed the "son of RTC", referencing the independent Resolution Trust Corporation which bought the assets of failed savings and loans in the 1980s, it will be very different from the RTC. The RTC took the assets of defunct savings and loans. Shareholders in these savings institutions were wiped out. However, the Paulson process is protecting Wall Street. The U.S. Treasury Department will seek to buy as much as $700 billion in toxic assets from institutions that are still solvent. This will protect those same current corporate titans who ran many of these firms into the ground with excess leverage and wayward trading.

Because this is being done by the government directly, the balance sheet of the U.S. Government is at risk for further deterioration of the assets. Treasury, by some accounts, plans to buy the assets through "reverse auctions". But the danger of naïve government functionaries buying assets they don't understand is scary for the taxpayer. Banks could sell the U.S. Treasury assets much shakier than currently anticipated. Since these bureaucrat buyers have no skin in the game as private buyers would have, the possibility of additional shell games mushrooms.

Also the plan includes the insuring of money-market funds with over $3.4 trillion in assets. This amounts to the nationalization by the U.S. Treasury of the commercial-paper market. Money-market funds are generally low-risk commercial paper, but with a government guarantee, the risks will climb and the due diligence of the buyers will fly out the window. Before long, Wall Street will be selling bad assets here. When risks are divorced from investments, you naturally have an increased opportunity for fraud.

Some press reports say that Congress is demanding equity in the firms that sell assets to the Treasury. This is direct nationalization similar to the warrants demanded by Treasury before they lent money to AIG. The wholesale nationalization of much of the mortgage market and many banks sets a bad precedent.

America has more than 200 years of bankruptcy law that should be governing these transactions. If managers who accumulated too much risk by not adequately qualifying lenders are allowed to continue in their jobs, we are doing a disfavor to the intelligent managers who accepted lower returns for more prudent lending practices. The shareholders and management at imprudent firms should be wiped out. This allows new managers and companies to fill the void. This type of creative destruction always strengthens the economy in the long run.

McCain should reject the logic of the Wall Street hedge funds and turn the tables on Obama, Bush and their Wall Street supporters. John McCain has an excellent opportunity to prove he is the real reformer.
 
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown are both bestselling authors and speakers. In 1988, working from their kitchen table, they formed Citizens United. 
 
 
 
 
.

 

Wednesdday, September 24, 2008

Liberals hacking on the WEB again – this time it's Bill O’Reilly

First, they hacked into Sarah Palin’s personal email account, now liberals have hacked Bill O’Reilly’s account and published personal information of people who subscribe.

Internet corruption is becoming a liberal tactic on a continuing basis...prosecutions are needed.

The kid caught hacking Palin’s email should be jailed – as should those who have attacked O’Reilly.  Such open criminality should not be allowed to become a part of political campaigning – after all, the heritage of Democrat theft and fraud in registration and vote counting is bad enough – and its been with us for generations.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1958

With Obama’s current growing weakness, his supporters insert racism into the campaign again

Unable to win on fact and truth, Democrats are forced to fall back on claims that anyone opposed to Obama is a racist…yet it is Obama and his Democrats who have unilaterally engaged in racism and attempted to invoke racial hatred.

The real racism in this campaign can be readily witnessed by playing any DVD or reading the magazine of Obama’s closest associate for many years, Jeremiah Wright.

“Obama – in our hearts, we know he’s Wright” – neither a slogan nor a bumper sticker – an absolute fact all voters should understand and heed.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_media_play_the_race_card_o.html

Mainstream media in the US – an integral, active arm, of the Obama campaign for president

That the media is totally in the tank and almost openlydedicated to the election of Barack Obama, should come as no surprise to anyone paying attention to the campaign or to the media.

Such outlets as the over-the-air network news operations, the NY Times and most all daily newspapers have been working hard to support Obama and his hapless running made, Joe Biden.

Forget journalistic ethics – the MSM abandoned that ideal decades ago.  Voters should read, listen, watch, and beware.  What you see, hear or read in the MSM should be considered suspect…highly suspect. 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_man_who_never_was.html

Opinion:
Obama and Biden – new extremes from the left -- a $50 billion giveaway scam for the UN

You read it right - $50 billions proposed as a giveaway to the UN!!!!

Given the facts of the horrific scandals generated by the “Oil for Food” program the UN managed, it seems impossible that any sane, responsible, even remotely intelligent candidate or office holder would seriously suggest generating another such inviting opportunity for scandal, corruption, and outright theft.

But Obama and his hapless running mate, Biden, have done just that.  Yet the media is quiet on the story.

No wonder.  It’s a stupid proposal – one that can be legitimately described as being “criminally irresponsible”.

The US dollars are real and the result of a legitimate economy that is the envy of the world.  The UN is  totally discredited institution rife with corruption and quite short on intellect, responsibility and
honesty.  Corruption is wide spread and it scan be expected that any delegate sent by his or her country to serve in the UN, arrives with an expectation of millions of dollars in under the table payoffs, or simply by sharing in the largesse of an organization that shows no capacity at all for responsible action.

Nothing in the UN history gives even the slightest encouragement that Obama and Biden’s  $50 billion
scam will do other than enrich another bunch of corrupt diplomats.  It’s predictable and no one with
even a remote understanding of the UN history would challenge that prediction.

The Obama give away program is an open invitation for the corrupt diplomats of the world to enjoy an unparalleled feeding frenzy – one catered with US dollars.  It’s not only absurd, it’s downright criminal  (I believe I have said as much already, but that fact cannot be repeated often enough)

Get this:  another Obama initiative in the Senate, provides taxing US taxpayers in the name of the UN and its mythical “poverty” initiatives.

There is one and only one real answer to poverty, and that’s the creation of jobs and producing a workforce capable of filling those jobs.  NO government can create real jobs, just as no government can create prosperity.  True, the citizens of one or two Arab oil states have been  given government hand outs that make them quite well off – but that’s only because oil, as a commodity, is salable on a world market.  There’s huge profit generated by a market environment and result.  Without the sales, there would be no largesse.

The UN has no basis for generating funding for such a hand out program.  What it DOES have in copious amounts are corrupt diplomats looking for a fast buck and riches with which to retire to some US locale while maintaining a pied-a-terre back home to keep up appearances.  After all, no need displaying corruption when enough can be stolen from idiotic programs such as the one Obama and Biden champion, to allow all sorts of big dollar payoffs and riches.

People have likened Obama to a rock star.  His plan to give away $50billion US dollars to fund what will be another UN invitation to theft, corruption and embezzlement, resembles the profligate spending of a rock star.  Plus Obama DOES have his own air plane (One from which he removed the American flag in favor of his own logo).

The Obama-Biden UN scam cannot be defended.  I invite anyone willing to try to take their best shot.  I
am here, waiting, and there are few things in life I enjoy more than kicking liberals in the rear – especially when they are willing to provide me with such an easy target.

This measure alone should generate massive voter uprisings and resentment.  The fact the MSM has tried to hide the proposal proves that point as much as anything I could say.  It’s real.  Its an actual fact.  They really do claim this is legitimate.

How much more evidence that Obama is unfit to serve (even in the Senate) do we need to provide?

Buddy

PS:  I offer another challenge to liberals – take your best shot at defining what the hell the UN can do with this Obama give away that in any remote sense will have the slightest impact on poverty – other than making corrupt UN diplomats incredibly rich.

I don’t expect any takers on that at all!

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09...verty-program/

Obama and Biden pledge $50 Billion to the UN

Barack Obama, who lamented Friday that “we have not managed our federal budget with any kind of discipline,” is nonetheless promising to spend $50 billion on a United Nations anti-poverty program that critics say will drive up American debt.

Obama and his running mate, Joe Biden, have pledged tens of billions in new spending on a U.N. program that promises cash to poor countries. The program is one of eight sweeping “Millennium Development Goals” the U.N. adopted in 2000.

“Obama and Biden will embrace the Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme poverty around the world in half by 2015, and they will double our foreign assistance to $50 billion to achieve that goal,” the candidates vow in their campaign platform.

Johns Hopkins professor Steve Hanke said such spending would merely drive up American debt, while doing almost nothing for the world’s poor.

It goes down a bureaucratic rat-hole, lining the pockets of people who are connected to the power
structure,” said Hanke, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. “It’s basically a system to redistribute income from middle class people in the United States to rich people in poor countries. It never reaches those people who are living on a dollar a day.”

Hanke said such expenditures are especially unwise in the wake of significant expansions of government and spending during President Bush’s tenure.

“We’ve been spending like drunken sailors and making obligations into the future like drunken sailors,” he said. “We’re on an unsustainable path in terms of the fiscal situation in the United States
because of massive spending growth and commitments.”

In December, Obama also sponsored the Global Poverty Act which, if passed, would require the president to commit to cutting global poverty in half by 2015. Critics say that would cost American taxpayers $845 billion.

Susan Rice, one of Obama’s top foreign policy advisers, says the U.S. should give 0.7 percent of its Gross Domestic Product to developing nations.

Bill Sammon is Washington deputy managing editor for FOX News Channel.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Obama’s high tax plan – socialism behind a mask

Obamas’ plan would give “refunds” to people who have paid no taxes at all.  Read, analyze, and beware.

Obama has fooled few people, over half of all Americans understand Obama will raise their tax burden in one way or another.

Obama has offered no solution to the economic problems and even fails to offer a cogent plan for reducing the price of gas at the pump.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/obamas_patriotic_tonic.html

Obama, Ayers, and their education system conspiracy.

Obama tries to separate himself from his close terrorist friend, but the facts are stubborn.  They are not only long time friends, but co-conspirators in educatioin.

Obama conspired with Ayers to hand over $100 million to “community organizers” and other radical groups and scams.

"I'm a radical, Leftist, small 'c' communist," Mr. Ayers said in an interview in Ron Chepesiuk's…he omitted the fact he is also among Obama’s closest confidantes.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html

Obama supporters threaten America with violent riots should their candidate be defeated

“If Obama loses, it’s because America is racist” is the current lie being pushed by liberals who are unsettled by Obama’s weak support in current polling.

“if Obama loses, liberal rage will focus on millions of fellow Americans and on American society.” Say liberals trying to intimidate Americans into voting for Obama.

Liberals try to cloud the issues because normal America doesn’t support the sort of racism and left wing extremism that is Obama’s very thin record.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/liberals_warnings_about_obama.html

Opinion:
Obama must be judged by his associates…after all, he has refused to be forthcoming about his background

The racist, hate-filled cult of Jeremiah Wright is a very valid and important issue in this campaign.  For a candidate whose background and resume remain (at best) quite fuzzy, we must use all the snippets of information available.

Jeremiah Wright IS a valid issue.  Obama embraced, endorsed, and supported Wright’s radical, racist extremism for 20 years.  When Obama says he didn’t know Wright’s extremism and racism, Obama is lying his head off.  Either he’s a bald faced liar, or a fool.

In either case, Obama is not qualified to be president.

Plus Obama has never held a real job.

Coming out of college, Obama claims he chose to join the radical leftist Saul Alinski by taking a job euphemistically called “Community Organizer” – in earlier days, the position was usually referred to as “bag man”.

Obama developed heavy bags for Alinski’s conspiracies – and for the conspiracies of domestic terrorist William Ayers.  These folks created a cabal that had access to millions of dollars with which to corrupt and assault normal Americans.

Obama shrugs off his convicted felon associate, Tony Rezko, and, of course, the Main Street media – long totally in the tank for Obama has provided unyielding cover for Rezko’s association with Obama.

Don’t expect an honest discussion of Obama’s background or his associates in any daily newspaper or on any over-the-air network news operations.  They would not dare intrude on reality – especially if that reality threatens their chosen candidate.

Meanwhile, Obama again and again reprises the left wing radical tactics of his patron, the infamous (now late) Saul Alinski.  Alinski had no positive inclinations regarding this country, his franchise was for disruption, riot, and confrontation.

Buddy

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306977141583041
 
How Obama Applies Alinsky's Rules
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Election '08: Barack Obama's mocking of John McCain, while urging his followers to "get in their face," are tactics right out of his radical hero Saul Alinsky's playbook: ridicule and agitation.

At a recent Las Vegas rally, Obama poked fun at Sen. McCain for what he described as bragging about "how as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, he had oversight of every part of the economy."

"Well, all I can say to Sen. McCain is, 'Nice job. Nice job,' " Obama said in a sarcastic tone. "Where is he getting these lines? It's like a 'Saturday Night Live' routine."

Then he belittled the 72-year-old McCain for vowing to take on the old boys network. "In the McCain campaign, that's called a staff meeting," he sneered.

The late Alinsky, a trench-warfare socialist who despised American capitalism, advised community organizers like Obama to "laugh at the enemy" to provoke "irrational anger."

"Ridicule," he said, "is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."

At another rally in Nevada, Obama called on the crowd of about 1,500 to join him in sharpening their elbows against McCain and his supporters. "I want you argue with them and get in their face," he said, in a naked attempt to "fan hostilities" in the tightening race, something Alinsky also advised from his bag of agitation tricks.

Obama doesn't look or talk like an angry radical. He speaks in measured tones and is rarely seen out of business attire. That, too, is borrowed from Alinsky's playbook. "Don't scare" the middle class, he guides urban revolutionaries in his 1970s manual, "Rules for Radicals" (which he dedicated to mankind's "first radical, Lucifer").

Instead, look like them, talk like them, act like them.

And work for radical change from the inside — "like a spy behind enemy lines," as Obama said in his first memoir. He wrote it before entering politics, while still working with hard-left Alinsky groups and training street agitators known as "community organizers."

As he wrote, he became a community organizer in 1983 because of "The need for change. Change in the White House, where Reagan and his minions were carrying on their dirty deeds."

That's when he set out to "organize black folks" for social revolution, first in Harlem, then the South Side of Chicago. Now he wants to do it on a "large scale." Though most average voters wouldn't know it, he's applying Alinsky's radical rules to achieve his goal.

Alinksy stressed that his rules be translated into real-life tactics responsive to the situation at hand — which right now happens to be something he never could have dreamed of: a disciple who would find himself in a viable battle for the most powerful job in the world.

Obama has already translated several of Alinsky's rules into battle tactics, including:

• Rule: "Rub raw the resentments of the people; search out controversy and issues." In the mortgage meltdown, for instance, Obama vows to prosecute "predatory lenders" for "abusing" minority borrowers. He's also stoking class resentment by painting Wall Street and other executives as villains.
• Rule: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." In an ad to woo Hispanic voters, Obama demonized Rush Limbaugh by falsely claiming he made racist statements against immigrants.
• Rule: "A mass impression can be lasting and intimidating." This explains why Obama moved his acceptance speech to a football stadium and bussed in 85,000 supporters. Alinsky's son was so impressed, he praised Obama for learning his father's "lesson well."
• Rule: "Multiple issues mean constant action and life" for the cause. This is why Obama never harps on one issue, as Hillary did with health care. His platform is packed with grievances from "economic justice" to "reproductive justice" to "environmental justice."
Obama is following almost to the letter the blueprint for socialist revolution drafted by the father of community organizing.

While Alinsky may help him behind the scenes, however, he becomes a liability when brought out of the shadows. Sarah Palin proved this in St. Paul when she ridiculed his community organizing. Within hours, Obama surrogates whined about how just bringing up the phrase was racist code for "black."

No, it's code for communist.

And McCain should make that point instead of legitimizing such radicalism, as he did recently when he said, "I respect community organizers; and Sen. Obama's record there is outstanding" — which contradicted his running mate.

There's nothing to respect about such anti-American radicals, even if they have traded their tie-dye for business ties.
 

Thursday, September 18, 2008

NOTE: we will be down until Monday as we re-format elements of the site to improve it for your use.  Please excuse the interruption.

Buddy

Obama Democrats, driven to desperation, caught hacking into Sarah Palin’s email

Apparently, there are no campaign tricks too dirty for Democrats who see the wheels coming off the Obama bandwagon.

The emails regard commentary and communications after Palin’s selection as McCain’s running mate.

The Mainstream media – long in the tank for Obama – proves that point again:  “The Secret Service contacted The Associated Press on Wednesday and asked for copies of the leaked e-mails, which circulated widely on the Internet. The AP did not comply”  Is anyone surprised the AP would be quite complicit in this crime?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D938QN880&show_article=1

Once again, the Pelosi Democrat Congress runs from dealing with a major crisis – will adjourn without dealing with the financial problem

Pelosi also bailed on solving the other economic crisis – the high cost of gas at the pump

Now Pelosi offers a total sham of an energy bill that accomplishes nothing and which she knows will not be passed by her inert associates in the Senate.

“Time to go home and campaign” is the theme as Pelosi and liberal Democrats beat another rapid retreat from their duty to the American people

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aVPBaUbYV_qQ

Barack Obama – totally unable to live up to the image his handlers tried to fashion

Bereft of the phony trappings (including his Greek columns) Obama stands in the naked light of reality and is revealed as just another extreme liberal politician and one void of viable experience or any real qualification for serving should he win.

Put to an extreme test of their own choosing, not even the corrupt politicians of the Chicago Democrat Machine could (to use a phrase) put lipstick on the pig named “Obama”

History shows Americans will tolerate a lot in candidates, but being so total a phony is not among those things.  Thus the current collapse of Obama.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/obama_proves_all_too_human.html

Opinion:
Desperation is leading Obama to extremes

While railing away at Wall Street and the current financial fiascos, Obama tries to hide the fact he was part and parcel of the problem.

Obama is one of the top beneficiaries of political contributions from the disgraced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac organizations.  Not that he received SOME contributions, Obama is right at the top.

Now he raises his elite nose in disgust and hypocritically points fingers at others

Of course telling the truth and being a stand up sort of guy has never been Obama’s practice.  His background (what we have been allowed to see of it) proves it.

After all, he is a product of a Communist organizer in Hawaii, a radical socialist in Chicago, and of the most corrupt political organization in the entire country – the Chicago Democrat Machine.

How could any reasonable person expect honesty or honest motives from such a candidate?  The answer is, none of us can or should and those who give him their trust are deceived or just plain foolish.  Either way, their actions are highly unlikely to be good for America, its future, and especially its people.

But that’s Barack Obama.  Shorn of the myths and disguises fashioned by his conspiratorial handlers in Chicago.  From his radical cult leading spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright to his close friends who still want to carry on their war of terror against America, Obama is a candidate no intelligent person would have ever imagined could have gotten this far.

It took the corruption of our mainscream media to cover his tracks and give him cover.

It also took his being able to run for the Democrat nomination against the most hated woman in American politics.

Fortune has smiled on Obama throughout.  He has been treated to an experience P.T. Barnum would admire.

He has even been able to successfully lie out of the fact he was a major supporter of an Illinois law exposing Kindergarten students to sex education.

Can I have a “nuff said” from the audience?

Buddy

Barack Obama's Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Connection
By John Gibson 
 
Lehman Brothers collapse is traced back to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two big mortgage banks that got a federal bailout a few weeks ago.
Freddie and Fannie used huge lobbying budgets and political contributions to keep regulators off their backs.

A group called the Center for Responsive Politics keeps track of which politicians get Fannie and Freddie political contributions. The top three U.S. senators getting big Fannie and Freddie political bucks were Democrats and No. 2 is Sen. Barack Obama.

Now remember, he's only been in the Senate four years, but he still managed to grab the No. 2 spot ahead of John Kerry — decades in the Senate — and Chris Dodd, who is chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

Fannie and Freddie have been creations of the congressional Democrats and the Clinton White House, designed to make mortgages available to more people and, as it turns out, some people who couldn't afford them.

Fannie and Freddie have also been places for big Washington Democrats to go to work in the semi-private sector and pocket millions. The Clinton administration's White House Budget Director Franklin Raines ran Fannie and collected $50 million. Jamie Gorelick — Clinton Justice Department official — worked for Fannie and took home $26 million. Big Democrat Jim Johnson, recently on Obama's VP search committee, has hauled in millions from his Fannie Mae CEO job.

Now remember: Obama's ads and stump speeches attack McCain and Republican policies for the current financial turmoil. It is demonstrably not Republican policy and worse, it appears the man attacking McCain — Sen. Obama — was at the head of the line when the piggies lined up at the Fannie and Freddie trough for campaign bucks.

Sen. Barack Obama: No. 2 on the Fannie/Freddie list of favored politicians after just four short years in the Senate.

Next time you see that ad, you might notice he fails to mention that part of the Fannie and Freddie problem.

 

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Desperate to explain Obama’s failure to date, yet another leftwing commentator claims its all racial

In truth, ALL racism in this presidential campaign has been spawned by Democrats – from Bill Clinton, to Obama supporters trying to find excuses for his continued lack of traction.

The most blatant racism in a presidential race has come from Obama’s spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright whose anti white bigotry set a tone.  Wright demonstrates a personal bigotry, and embraces known racists such as Louis Farrakhan – another extremist befriended by Obama.

CNN’s Jack Cafferty – never among the more salient commentators – struggles to find an excuse for Obama’s problems and falls back on a liberal “oldie but goodie” – when in doubt, call conservatives racist – the media will support such claims despite the evidence, the facts, or the reality.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/cafferty-obama-race-a-factor/

Obama and Hollywood millions – at $28,500 a nibble, it's hardly a taste of real America

Obama cavorts with Hollywood and raises $9 million from tickets that went for $28,500 a ticket for the dinner and a basement bargain price of just $2,500 for entertainment that followed.

Obama again finds himself quite comfortable with people who are hardly among those who clutch their bibles, revere their right to own guns, or who understand real Americans and their values.

Nine million dollars in one night is nothing to snort at, about, or during.  Of course the prying eyes of TV reportage was banned – no more “Frisco Fiascos” on this night.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080917/D93896FO0.html

The incredibly and unethical media feeding frenzy against Sarah Palin

Media corruption and outright bigotry is running full force in the media’s obsession with preventing Palin’s nomination from blocking their idol, Obama.

“…the pompous hostility of the press has served as a foil which Palin has used to increase her popular appeal…”

The media prides itself in being open minded – certainly not racist or gender bigoted – however, its treatment of Palin and Obama demonstrates just how huge that hypocrisy and outright dishonesty has become. Media corruption favoring the left is irrefutable – it’s been a reality for two generations, but the media vendetta against Palin is downright awe-inspiring in its open bigotry.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/palin_and_the_partisan_press.html

Opinion:
Obama may have one, isolated, potential for positive effect from his campaign

So massive and overwhelming has been the open corruption of our mainstream media in covering this campaign, that even those Americans who did not understand, now see the light.

For 40 years, at least, over-the-air network news operations and most all daily newspapers have been increasingly rabid in skewing the news toward the extreme left.  “Honest Journalism” is an oxymoron today.

I find that more than sad – it’s a real catastrophe. 

A free, unfettered, and honest media is crucial to the maintenance of freedom.  We have no such media today.  The corruption displayed in coverage of the Obama campaign provided an irrefutable “Exhibit A” proving that fact.

Of course, MSNBC has never been honest in its coverage, and the three primary networks have failed to do much better.  NBC today is openly left wing bigoted, ABC has been, and in judging CBS, two words say it all: “Dan Rather”.

That’s a shame.  Such pervasive corruption is immoral in itself, but it also opens the door to less than honest news and information sources that can muddle honest debate and discussion.

The Internet has done some of that as rumor after rumor runs rampant.  It would be interesting to see someone do a thesis explaining the dynamics of how stories and just plain old rumors, make their way to those who get the emails.  It’s got to be a complicated and tangled morass of confusion – but somewhere, there must be a pattern and someway real Americans could make use of it in combating the mainscream media that so corrupts and threatens our society today.

A force capable of confronting and effectively combating media corruption must be found if freedom is to survive.  That’s hardly an overstatement, and its actual potential is ominous indeed.

The state of our mainscream media today is everybit as threatening in its potential implication as our open borders and the illegal alien invasion, the war imposed on civilization by radical Islam, and the myths of global warming.

Take you pick.  Bundle them all.

Our media works at maliciously lying to us daily and makes no secret of its unrelenting obsession for leading us down pathways that are not those normal America would choose or which bode well for the future of our nation and its people.
Those of us who pay attention to real politics have come to take media corruption for granted.  As with death and taxes, it is always with us.  It doesn’t have to be the case, it shouldn’t be the case, and we cannot sit back and allow it to continue wreaking havoc with our lives, our fortunes, and the wellbeing of our country.

Buddy

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/mccains_big_advantage.html
 
McCain's Big Invisible Advantage
By Thomas Lifson
 
 
John McCain stands to benefit as a little-noted but significant change takes place in the way the American public forms its political preferences. Quite simply put, every four years, sometime between Labor Day and the end of the World Series, most of the American public starts paying attention to politics.

Politicians, activists, political junkies and journalists hate to admit it, but most people pay very little attention to politics, except for a month or so every four years. The political bickering among the cognoscenti is of no concern to the vast bulk of American humanity. What little they do know about politics is the product of headlines, photographs, TV news clips half-heard, and other fragmentary data, amounting to nothing more than background noise in their lives.

The overwhelmingly liberal media exercise their power in both blatant and subtle ways to convey a warm and fuzzy impression of Democrats. Photo editors at daily newspapers play a key role, selecting scowling pictures of Republicans and smiling pictures of Democrats, for instance. All of the television news outlets except Fox look for sound bites and visuals to reinforce a positive impression of Democrats whenever possible, and portray Republicans as mean, bigoted, white, male, awkward and stupid.

Only talk radio, among all media, favors conservatism. With its long form interactive discussions, talk radio allows ideas to be tested, illustrated, and critiqued. Thus, Democrats have not had much success with it and have, in fact, mostly invested their hope in demonizing talk radio to those who don't listen to it.

The Democrats know very well that their strength lies in voters' feelings rather than analysis, and so they choose slogans and labels aimed at creating fear of 'mean-spirited' Republicans or 'domestic spying' on ordinary Americans, and avoid directly addressing specifics of policies. They create positive images of the government "taking care of people,"  and, above all, reject close examination of the outcomes which could be expected given the realities of human nature. The very format of most television, with no room for rational back-and-forth discussion or critical analysis, enables the flinging of labels.

Republican conservatives have generally been far less sophisticated at this game.
 
By its very nature, conservatism is based on reflection and a due regard for the complexities of change and the flawed nature of the human creature.

As a result, Democrats and their allies have paid close attention to image management, and with the help of their friends in the entertainment industry, they have become extraordinarily skilled at it. In many ways, Barack Obama's candidacy, built mostly on image, and employing more expensive and large scale theatrics (a political rally with a location shoot in Berlin and 200,000 extras would make Cecil B. DeMille green with envy), is the apotheosis of this image strategy of political persuasion.
So, for conservatives and Republicans, forcing people to pay attention has become the key factor for political success. It is not easy, though. Most people regard politicians with suspicion, and would much rather follow the playoffs in college or professional sports, the love lives of celebrities, or the doings of friends and relatives than political discourse. "Leave us alone" is a familiar feeling, even for conservatives confronting politics.

However, when American politics enters what I earlier called attention season, Americans un-obsessed with politics begin to pay attention to actual arguments made by the candidates.
 
When there is an atmosphere of crisis, and voters have reason to believe their personal welfare and safety may be at risk, they ponder whom to believe, and talk about politics with others.

This radically different and comparatively infrequent mode of mass opinion formulation tends to favor Republicans in general, and John McCain in particular, this election season. His choice of plain-speaking Sarah Palin plays directly into the requirement of reaching people who haven't already made up their minds, who are bored with politics normally, and who decide that they had better make up their mind who is telling the truth and who is blowing smoke, whose policies make sense, and whose don't.

Obama's theatricality has already damaged his credibility with voters, starting with the failure of the expensive overseas tour culminating with the Berlin rally to help him in the polls. The Styrofoam Greek pillars of Invesco Field have now entered the realm of political legend, the butt of a joke at the most remarkable political speech in recent memory, one that sparked the massive turnaround in the fortunes of the two campaigns.

The emergence of an economic crisis only amplifies the quadrennial change in the public's mode of attention. If McCain/Palin are able to grab the initiative and convince the public that Clinton-era regulatory changes, including "anti-redlining" measures, are at the root of the current economic trouble, it can be turned to their advantage, despite the conventional wisdom  about economic conditions and the incumbent party.
 
The involvement of leading Democrats and Obama advisors in Fannie and Freddie helps McCain enormously, if he takes what has been set on his plate and makes a feast of it.

For their part, the Democrats are already arguing that unbridled capitalism is at fault, and besides everyone knows the Republicans are the party of Big Business, and that Bush = McCain. This is an image strategy, which often works when people aren't paying close attention, and also when the other side's argument cannot be heard.

Finally, the media's accelerating loss of credibility, exacerbated by the treatment accorded Sarah Palin, has engendered a level of public skepticism toward the media in even those paying little attention to politics. This factor also diminishes what is normally a slam dunk advantage for the Democrats.

If both Obama and McCain play to their strengths, as should be anticipated, McCain will do even better than expected in the remaining 7 weeks of the campaign.

Note: my thanks to Bookworm, who suggested that I revisit ideas in this earlier article, from which parts of this essay have been taken.

Thomas Lifson is editor and publisher of American Thinker. 
 
 
 
 
 
.
 
 
 

 

Monday, September 16, 2008

CBS predicting Palin will fade

As an integral and participating segment of the Obama campaign, CBS expresses its deepest desires – an end to the Palin phenomenon.

With unflattering, and absurd, comments about Palin’s impact to date, CBS desperately suggests the media will soon tire of her.

Is this a hint of a growing conspiracy?  After all, all over-the-air news operations and 90% or more daily newspapers are avidly on board and working hard for Obama,  Perhaps they have an unethical plan to combat Palin.  You think?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/15/business/marketwatch/main4448337.shtml

McCain cites bias on the part of a MSNBC news host

So, what else is new?  The entire NBC operation is totally in the tank for Obama

McCain accuses Mika Brzezinski of being an open supporter of Obama.

Ms Brzezinski denies the charge, but the evidence is clear, and she is hardly alone at all - -the entire American media (long totally corrupted by the left) has long been a cheering section for Obama – honest coverage is out the window.

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/television/mccain_accuses_mika_of_being_in_the_tank_for_obama_94583.asp

Polling reveals growing McCain strength

While current electoral votes still hold an 8 vote lead for Obama – McCain is shoring up his strength in red states and  rising rapidly in blue ones.

The past week has not been good for Obama.

The trend is one Obama must halt – the margin is even narrowing in states such as New York.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/09/15/swing-state-update.aspx

Opinion:
The trouble with Obama

These are not good days for the Obama campaign.  Were it not for the frenzied efforts by the media to shore up the sagging fortunes of their candidate, Obama would be nearing visible loss.
It will be quite hard for Obama to reverse the trend – not that it cant be reversed, after all, the mainscream media is a mighty force and has fooled the American people more than a few times in recent years.

The biggest challenge for those trying to salvage Obama’s woeful status, lies in their having so little to work with.  He has no success story to which he can point to demonstrate a potential for leadership, his resume lacks any training or experience in administration or management, and he hasn’t even ever held a real job.

No military record, of course, and heaven forbid anyone suggesting his family background provides any help at all – quite the contrary.

Among die-hard Hillary people, he has failed to prove to them he is even qualified and has raised eyebrows by being unwilling to prove he was actually born where he claims.  Democrat detractors claim there is a plaque in Kenya claiming the spot to be where he was delivered, and Democrat researchers have even opined Obama was born in Vancouver.  No one knows, but the question remains purely a Democrat one.

Now, his handlers have been forced to new extremes – they are using teleprompters where they have never been used before.  After his “pig and lipstick” gaffe, they realize “enough is enough” and are now dragging the bulky equipment to strange venues – one was recently said to have been set up in a rodeo arena – giving wags new material for anti Obama jokes.

The latest Internet rage involves Obama attempt to get the winding down of US efforts in the war on terror in order to allow him to get past the campaign.  In short, Obama was caught red handed trying to manipulate US military efforts purely for the sake of his own political interests.

Not since the anti War, anti American mobs following Jouhn Kerry and Jane Fonda, has politics been so openly injected into our prosecution of a war.  In the Vietnam War, such involvement prolonged the war by eight years, and cost thousands of our troops their lives.

Now we have Obama and his efforts to involve himself in our military strategy – an area in which he has zero experience, ability, or honest understanding.

But, hey, that’s Obama.  If he had to speak only on those matters on which he is informed, he would be rendered quite silent.

Buddy