Posts
The latest from Sharron Angle, highlighting Harry Reid's - and virtually the entire left wing MSM's - attempt to paint her as an extremist.
Given that Harry Reid and Crazy Nancy have overseen the most far reaching pull to the left in our nation's history, and all with predictably devastating consequences, I think America would be well served by a heavy dose of Angle's "extremism."
Showing posts with label Harry Reid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Harry Reid. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Extremists In Nevada?
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
"Dirty Harry" Reid On Birthright Citizenship & Illegal Aliens
This from Dirty Harry back in 1993, when he still held to his convictions and before he was thoroughly corrupted by Washington.
(H/T Legal Insurrection)
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Hola, Amigos - Señor Reid Says Its Time To Get Back On The Plantation
There is nothing like demanding mindless loyalty and obeisance on the basis of race, ethnicity or nationality. That is, after all, the Democrat's way. And likewise, its the Democrat's way to demonize anyone who strays from their plantation.
Amazingly, someone in the MSM must have choked on this, because they actually called up Señor Reid's office and said, yes, he really does need to say more. The response:
“Sen. Reid’s contention was simply that he doesn't understand how anyone, Hispanic or otherwise, would vote for Republican candidates because they oppose saving teachers’ jobs, oppose job-creating tax incentives for small businesses, oppose investments in job-creating clean energy projects, and oppose the help for struggling, unemployed Nevadans to put food on the table and stay in their homes,” read the statement.
Let's pull those apart.
"Oppose saving teachers jobs."
The "civil rights issue of our generation" is education. Some 25% of blacks and a significant number of Hispanics are mired in a vicious cycle of poverty, the only cure for which is improved education in lower income enclaves. The Democrats are wholly on the wrong side of that issue.
The Democrats are wedded to money from the Teachers' Unions - entities that are all about money and the number of teachers (and thus increasing union dues). The teachers' unions are the enemy of increasing the quality of education in America. For a detailed explanation - see here. Recall that one of the first acts of the Obama Administration was to cancel, at the urging of the NEA, a wildly successful voucher program benefiting inner city poor in the nation's most underperforming school system, Washington D.C. public schools. Obama's kids attend private school in D.C.. But the poor of all races in D.C. no longer have the option to send their children to the same school as Obama's kids.
Does that sound like a good reason to stay on the Democrat's plantation?
"Oppose job-creating tax incentives for small businesses."
This is a joke, right. There has never been, in our history, a Congress or an administration more anti-business. From massive government spending on everything but the expansion of small business to the vast expansion of entitlements and regulations, all of which portend to increase the costs to business, Obama is, in the words of one small business owner, Wayne Allen Root, "The Great Jobs Killer."
With his massive spending and tax hikes -- rewarding big government and big unions, while punishing taxpayers and business owners -- Obama has killed jobs, he has killed motivation to create new jobs, he has killed the motivation to invest in new businesses, or expand old ones. With all this killing, Obama should be given the top spot on the FBI's Most Wanted List.
Indeed, to quote Mort Zuckerman:
We are, without question, in a period of decline, particularly in the business world, . . . The real problem we have…are some of the worst economic policies in place today that, in my judgment, go directly against the long-term interests of this country. [Zuckerman added that he detects in the Obama White House] hostility to the very kinds of [business] culture that have made this the great country that it is and was. I think we have to find some way of dealing with that or else we will do great damage to this country with a public policy that could ruin everything.
Does that sound like a good reason to stay on the Democrat's plantation?
"Oppose investments in job-creating clean energy projects."
Reid and the Democrats absolutely refuse to allow America to exploit its natural resources - which, if opened up, would see the greatest expansion of jobs in America than at any other time in our history. The government wouldn't have to subsidize anything. It would just need to stand out of the way of private business. Instead, Reid and the left are pushing massively subsidized projects that create few permanent jobs and do so at great cost. Moreover, in the long run, these efforts will only contribute to much higher costs of energy.
Does that sound like a reason for Hispanics to stay on the Democratic plantation?
"Oppose the help for struggling, unemployed Nevadans to put food on the table and stay in their homes."
Lollllllllllllllllllll . . . . This coming from the flaming ass who just funded a multi-billion dollar pay-off to Teachers' Unions by cutting billions from the nations food stamps program?
Does that sound like a good reason to stay on the Democrat's plantation?
Marco Rubio's response to Señor Harry's wildly racist rants are worth a listen:
My suggestion. Run. Escape Señor Reid's plantation. If you are a black-American, White-American, Hispanic-American, or whatever American, and you want to enjoy the opportunities and freedoms of America, drop the hypen and run like the wind.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
The Buck Stops Where?
Since Democrats gained control of the entire Congress, our national debt has gone from $200 billion to $1.8 trillion and now is on a rapid upward trajectory. These same Democrats have added the mother of all entitlement programs with Obamacare - and that as Social Security is forecast to explode in the near future. So when Erskine Bowles, the Co-Chair of Obama's Budget Commission, makes a public appearance and states that our debt is a "cancer" that will "destroy the country from within," can there be any other response than "No kidding, Sherlock?"
The Constitution charges Congress with taxing and spending authority and the President with the power to approve or veto their appropriations; the Constitution makes no provisions for a Budget Commission. The budget commission was created by Obama so that he and the Pelosi-Reid Congress could shirk their Constitutional duties and try to disclaim responsibility for increasing taxation. Truman was famed for saying "the buck stops here." Obama and the Democratic Congress are demonstrating the polar opposite mindset. They are passing the buck as fast as their fat little fingers can move it. Is it any wonder that the Washington Post reports today:
Public confidence in President Obama has hit a new low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll. Four months before midterm elections that will define the second half of his term, nearly six in 10 voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country, and a clear majority once again disapproves of how he is dealing with the economy.
I said two years ago that this joker would leave us pining for the good old days of the merely incompetent Jimmy Carter. I am feeling more and more prescient by the day.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Landra Reid's Horrible Accident - & Dan Riehl's Inexcusably Poor Judgement
I have no respect for Harry Reid as a Senator or Majority Leader. That said, I hold no animus towards him as a person and, even if I did, my heart would still go out to he and his family following a horrible traffic accident yesterday that left his wife of 41 years, Landra Reid, with a broken back and neck. I could see no one of normal human emotions responding to this news on either side of the political aisle with anything other than expressions of heartfelt sympathy and best wishes.
Dan Riehl is a conservative blogger I have followed for some time. His post today on the situation with Harry Reid and Reid's wife, Isn't It Time To Euthanize Reid's Wife?, makes among its points that "[i]t sounds to me like [Landra Reid's] pretty well used up and has probably been living off the taxpayers for plenty of years to begin with." It is utterly vile, despicable and beyond excuse. Riehl does not have the judgement to understand that there are times when playing politics is inappropriate, let alone engaging in this type of toxic diatribe. I am deeply embarrassed that this low rent S.O.B. occupies the same end of the political spectrum as do I.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Brown & The Jobs Bill
There is a lot of needless wailing and gnashing of teeth going on over the fact that Scott Brown, along with a handful of the other usual suspects, crossed party lines to vote with the Democrats to pass Harry Reid's scaled down $15 billion "jobs bill." It in fact was scaled down from a "bi-partisan" $85 billion bill that had far more tax cuts negotiated between Senators Baucus and Grassley.
What is left is essentially a cosmetic bill consisting of a . . .:
$13 billion program allowing companies to avoid paying Social Security taxes for the remainder of 2010 on new hires who have been unemployed for at least 60 days. Employers would also receive a $1,000 tax credit for each new worker who stays on the job for at least a year. Democrats tout the plan as a simple way to create tens of thousands of new jobs, though some experts dismiss it as too narrow to make a significant dent in the nation's unemployment rate.
The jobs bill also includes a one-year reauthorization of the Highway Trust Fund, a provision allowing companies to write off equipment purchases as business expenses, and an expansion of the Build America Bonds program, which helps state and local governments finance infrastructure projects. . . .
It is doubtful that this bill will create many new jobs, but at least it is mostly aimed at the private sector. That is a first for the Obama administration. I applaud them.
Let's put this, and Scott Brown's vote, in perspective. Just a month ago, Obama was asking for a jobs bill that would include $79 billion to fund more infrastructure projects even though an analysis of the near $79 billion already spent on infrastructure projects in the original stimulus shows it had "no effect" on local unemployment. Just as a reminder, of the original $786 stimulus, only 2.6% was directed towards small business loans - even though small businesses are responsible for over 80% of all the new job creation in America. Then there is Crazy Nancy and the House which passed a version of the "jobs bill" last week that would spend $150 billion on a wide variety of things - just not private sector jobs. The House bill has only $354 million - yes, million - going to small business loans. That is less than one quarter of one percent of their "jobs" bill. These people are insane.
Scott Brown never claimed to be a conservative ideologue. He may be center or center right, but if he were too much further to the right then he is, I wonder whether he could have gotten elected in blue Mass. He has already declared that he intends to hold the line on Obama care and the War on Terror. That is a lot. Besides, the reaity is that we are never going to see a better deal coming out of this Congress than a jobs bill that only spends $15 billion and at least points that money in the direction of small business. That's the zenith of what we can expect to see coming from a Congress that is redefining the terms "profligate spending" and "misplaced priorities." In truth, I would have voted for it just as a prophylactic against an alternative to something many times worse. Thus, I find those today complaining about Scott Brown either aren't paying attention or they are ideologoues engaging in a bit of counterproductive chest thumping melodrama.
The bottom line is that Obama threatens our nation in many ways. We have health care and reconcilliation staring us in the face. Cap and trade, like the theory of man made global warming itself, may be dead, but we have the EPA warning that it will start issuing binding regulations to limit carbon emissions within the next twelve months. Obama is still pushing a major overhaul of our financial system that will force race based lending standards into our financial system at a level never before seen. There are major battles to be fought between now and November and perhaps beyond if the right doesn't recapture the House or the Senate. My suggestion to those who are, like me, quite concerned with all of this - give Scott Brown a pass on this one. Scott Brown is part of the solution, not the problem. Keep your eyes on the left, because there is the real threat to our nation.
Monday, January 25, 2010
The Washington Post's Primal Scream
The Washington Post is the latest paper to do a liberal primal scream over the failure of Obama to destroy capitalism and enact a full transition to socialism in his first year in office. They find multiple people and acts to blame, but topping the list is . . . wait for it, . . . Republican obstructionism. Who could have guessed that the party holding a minority in the House and with too few seats in the Senate to filibuster could be the cause of Obama's epic failure in 2009? Coming in second for WaPo's opprobrium was Harry Reid and disloyal Senate Democrats:
For House Democrats, who enjoy a 256 to 178 majority, the main obstacle in 2009 was not Republicans, but the Senate. Even with 60 Democrats, Reid was unable to advance the climate-change and student loan bills that the House approved last summer. The Senate regulatory-reform bill is still in the banking committee.
One might think that with this admission, the authors would realize that it exposes the lie of their headline theory of Republican obstructionism. But it seems that one of the great achievements of the modern far left is their ability to hold a belief in the truth of two or more diametricaly opposed thoughts at the same time.
No matter. According to Wapo, the problem was that Republicans unreasonably refused to take any part in Obama's "remaking of America." Obama's proposals amounted to a vast expansion of government, massive increases in deficit spending, and new taxes, whether directly or indirectly on every American. Yet WaPo seems mystefied why Republicans should object to any of that on substantive grounds. Their alternative take on it is that "[s]ome of the bills . . . were perhaps too unwieldy for voters to digest and too easy for GOP opponents to demagogue." Of course, that's it. There's nothing wrong with any of the legislation. It is just Republicans taking partisan advantage of an electorate that is too stupid to understand the great things Obama was doing for America. The arrogance and hubris of the far left knows no bounds.
WaPo also seems to have a dim memory of the facts reported in their paper over the past year. From the very start - indeed, within three days of taking office, Obama told Republicans who attempted to engage and have input into bipartisan legislation - specifically the Stimulus - that "I won." So much for bipartisanship. Facts are such inconveinient things for the left - unless you are very selective about them of course.
The left, from Obama through Reid and Pelosi, felt no need to engage in bipartisanship other than for some minimal political cover. And indeed, when one looks at the internal problems that Democrats had in 2009, the fact is that Pelosi and Reid treated most Congressional Democrats the same way they treated Republicans. Radical legislation was drafted behind their closed doors, only to be unleashed on Republicans and many Democrats alike vitrually on the eve on which they were to be voted. It was not merely bipartisanship that Obama and the Democratic leadership felt no need to consider, it was deliberative democracy itself. And indeed, the reason for that is the that the legislation, from cap and trade to health care to financial regulation, was so over reaching that even moderate Democrats blinked at the degree of the radical changes proposed by Obama-Pelosi-Reid.
WaPo concludes looking at what 2010 holds in store.
Before the Massachusetts loss, the White House officials touted 2009 as the most productive legislative year in decades. Prodded before Tuesday's election whether Obama and his team would change anything about its Hill strategy, Axelrod replied, "I've thought about that and I don't see how."
Lawmakers expect Obama to set a course for 2010 on Wednesday, in his State of the Union speech. Democrats want the focus on one issue: jobs. But on Friday in Ohio, given a few days to digest Brown's upset, Obama defended and promoted the same long to-do list he brought with him to office.
"I didn't run for president to turn away from these challenges," he said. "I didn't run for president to kick them down the road. I ran for president to confront them -- once and for all."
It would seem that Obama and his administration have as tenuous a grasp on reality as do the WaPo authors - though Democrats seeking reelection in 2010 seem to be grasping it well enough. I think it safe to say that we will be hearing primal screams from the left for at least the next few years. No matter to me, at least, as I find them oddly comforting.
Monday, January 11, 2010
So Has Harry Reid Gone KKK?
The odious Harry Reid is at the center of a tempest in a tea pot with the publication of a book, Game Change in which Reid is quoted as saying some distinctly up-p.c. things
[Reid] was wowed by Obama’s oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama — a “light-skinned” African American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,” as he said privately. Reid was convinced, in fact, that Obama’s race would help him more than hurt him in a bid for the Democratic nomination.
If you define racism as a belief in the inate superiority of one's race over another or hatred of another based upon their race, then I see nothing that smacks of racism in the above statement. What I see is "leftism."
I defined leftism in some length in a prior post. To summarize from that post - the alpha and omega of the left wing is identity and grievance politics. They look to define people as victims and then use claims of "victimhood" to advance their, the left's, political interests. They use charges of racism and sexism to shut down debate and demonize their opponents. [See Chart at bottom of post] If someone on the left actually engages in racism or sexism aimed at another leftie, it is forgiven and forgotten. If it is aimed at someone on the right, then it is simply accepted and ignored, if not supported. The sexism aimed at Palin, Jesse Jackson's Hymie-town comment, and Rev. Wright's vile reverse racism are just a few of the countless examples that come to mind.
So now to pull apart Reid's comments:
"He was wowed by Obama’s oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate,"
Hmmm, I was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate this past election also, just not Obama for all the tea in China.. Get Thomas Sowell in there and I'll make like an "acorn" - I'll vote early and often for him. To continue . . .
". . . especially one such as Obama — a “light-skinned” African American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,” . . ."
If this were a conservative making this statement, the left would be throwing race cards at light speed. The words uttered by Reid would be reinterpreted in front of every microphone as evil, racist, conservative code for outlandish racial animus. Is there anyone who doubts that the left would conduct a lynching in the media that would not end until the person who said it was hounded out of public life? That is hypocrisy writ large - and par for the course for our modern left.
But it seems clear that Reid was not displaying racial animus. He was merely coldly calculating the reality and advantages of Obama's race in purely political terms. Nothing could more cleary show the left wing mindset than Harry Reid's comments - including even the cynical thought that Obama could adopt or discard a "Negro dialect" as the need arose. One, that technique has been used before in Democratic politcs. We saw Hillary Clinton on several occasions break into "a singsong Southern twang before . . . black audiences" during the campaign. The Youtube video is here. It would seem highly offensive to me if I were in the audience, but then again, I don't think like the left. Two, this is the same Harry Reid who tried, in 2007, to surrender in Iraq on behalf of America after attacks by four al Qaeda suicide bombers. That was a raw, naked grab for political power which, for Reid, took priority over America's national security. With that in mind I think it impossible to underestimate Reid's capacity for partisanship and cynicism. If he could sell out his country for political power, he can certainly ponder Obama making use of a "Negro dialect" for the same purpose.
It is incontrevertible that a unique speech pattern and inflection identifiable with some communities of African Americans does exist, so Reid was merely being honest about that. As to "skin color," it is well known that people are hardwired to initially respond best to others who look like themselves. I refuse to get into arguments here about subconscious racism - something that I think highly superficial in any event. Regardless, it seems apparent that Reid, in making these statement, was just doing leftwing political calculus.
As to Reid's use of the word Negro, that just dates Reid as over age 60 He was raised in an era before "black" became p.c. and long before the left came up with "African American." No racism there.
It does pain me to defend, of all people, Harry Reid. But I gots to calls 'em as I sees 'em. The guy is wholly without a shred of intellectual honesty and he values political power all else. He is the paragon of the left wing mindset, but not a racist.
Update: Pillage Idiot provides us with a Racist Remarks flow chart that is precisely accurate. Click on it to enlarge:
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Sen. Jim DeMint's Christmas Gift To America
The procedural rules of Congress are nothing if not byzantine - and thus are the they a double edged sword to be exploited by both sides. And it may just be that Sen. Jim "Santa" DeMint, exploiting the rules, has put a present under the tree of every American. He has put a huge monkey wrench into Harry Reid's bum's rush of our country towards national suicide health care. This from Red State:
When Senator DeMint engineered, and Republican Leader McConnell actually objected to the appointment of the conferees, he was really handing the ball off to the left wingers — progressives if you will — and now they have their shot to either hold their own clan members who are against the Senate compromises and force them to vote No, or have their policy demands be ignored and take the crumbs from Senator Nelson’s and Senator Lieberman’s table.
Now, because of the Senator DeMint’s objection, unless the House votes for the Senate bill unchanged — which is highly unlikely (see below) — then the Senate ObamaCare bill must be amended on the House floor to gain the votes they need to pass it on the House floor. And because of Senator DeMint’s objection to the appointment of the conferees, there will be no conference, or conference report.
If the House amends the Senate bill, they then have to send the amended bill back to the Senate — where all the 60 vote margin cloture votes still apply — cloture on the motion to proceed, and cloture to end the filibuster and cloture on any amendment.
Do I believe that this objection to the appointment of the conferees will kill ObamaCare? Yes, if the progressives or those 64 House Democrats who voted for the Stupak amendment do not roll over and play dead.
This monkey wrench may explain why the White House is putting out the word that it wants the health care bill to pass the House after the State of the Union, in February.
You all can decide whether the DeMint objection could be the kiss of death to ObamaCare, but I offer the following to convince you that it is . . .
Do read the rest of the post. This ought to make for a brighter Christmas Day.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
The Democrats' Assault On Deliberative Democracy
"Democracy go to hell" - that's the message from our far left Democrats today. The latest comes from Harry Reid's insidious machinations in the Health Care Bill. According to Hot Air, buried deep within the bill is a provision that would require a supermajority of 67 votes in the Senate " to overrule the bill’s rationing board, the Independent Medical Advisory Board, whose purpose (stated on page 1001) is to “reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending.” In legalese, this is known as "entrenchment" - i.e., placing a condition within legislation to make it more difficult for the same body acting in the future to amend or repeal a provision. It is of dubious constitutionality.
A supermajority is only constitutionally required for four things: to override a Presidential veto (Art I, Sec. 7); to make binding a treaty signed by the President (Art I, Sec. II); as part of the process of amending the Constitution (Art. 5); and to declare a President disabled and unable to discharge his duties (Amendment 25). At no other place in the Constitution is anything other than a simple majority authorized or required.
U.S. Const. Art. I Sec. 5 provides "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings . . ." The Senate has formed its rules into a book called "The Standing Rules Of The Senate." It provides at rule 22 that to end a filibuster requires three fifths of the Senate (60 votes) "except on a measure or motion to amend the Senate rules, in which case the necessary affirmative vote shall be two-thirds [67] of the Senators present and voting . . ."
Reid wants to insure that when the backlash to our far left socialists comes starting with next year's election, that the Health Care bill remains a 'bridge too far' to amend or repeal by the normal democratic process. He seeks to accomplish this by changing a Senate Rule. Yet because he cannot possibly get 67 votes for his proposed change, he has slipped it into the Healthcare bill which will likely soon pass by a simple majority vote.
This is a patent violation of Senate Rule 22. Yet you can listen to the video below as the Democrats take the position that the change proposed in the Healthcare Bill is only to "procedure," not to a "rule." In so doing, they create a distinction utterly without a difference and continue their destruction of deliberative democracy in America. Moreover, since Senate rules are Constitutionally obliged, Harry Reid's unilateral negation of the rules ought to be unconstitutional. That said, given our Supreme Court's penchant for rewriting the Constitution per their whim, its constitutionality must remain an open question.
I look back to the Bush days when the far left charged the right with destroying the Constitution. In each instance, the basis for the charge was that the Bush Administion did not agree with the far left's radical reinterpretation of Constitutional provisions. The MSM provided the far left with constant repetition of their message, while the right responded weakly and, even then, was given little play in the media. Looking back on that time with the benefit of a comparison to what the far left is doing today, even a blind man could see what an utter canard that was. There is no force on this earth more inimical to democracy and the text of the Constitution than Obama and the far left who hold the reins of power in America today. And in their effort, the far left continues to enjoy near unanimous support of the MSM.
I do hope Republicans are paying close attention. The far left is playing for keeps. If Republicans listen to the MSM noise machine and do not fight these anti-democratic socialists with equal ferocity and utter ruthlessness, America will lose. Bipartisanship under the Obama administration is naught but an empty concept used by Democrats to beat conservatives over the head for failing to fully acquiesce to the far left's blueprint for American national suicide. We are in a zero sum war for the future direction of this country, if not its very soul.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Just What Is In Their Job Description?
When we vote for someone to go to the U.S. Congress, we expect them to read bills before they vote on them. But the Democrats have apparently redlined that from the job description of our Representatives.
CNS is reporting that they asked the No. 2 Democrat in the House, Steny Hoyer, "whether he supported a pledge that asks members of the Congress to read the entire [health care] bill before voting on it and also make the full text of the bill available to the public for 72 hours before a vote." Apparently, he found that humorous:
"House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Tuesday that the health-care reform bill now pending in Congress would garner very few votes if lawmakers actually had to read the entire bill before voting on it.
“If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn’t read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes,” Hoyer told CNSNews.com at his regular weekly news conference.
. . . In fact, Hoyer found the idea of the pledge humorous, laughing as he responded to the question. “I’m laughing because a) I don’t know how long this bill is going to be, but it’s going to be a very long bill,” he said
Hoyer went on to state that staff's review bills, but the truth with this administration, as we've seen with cap and trade and the stimulus, is that bills are being pushed through with major midnight changes and not a single Congressman aware of what was in the entire bills prior to the vote. Reid and Pelosi rushing votes is a deliberate tactic designed to limit debate and prevent opposition from coalescing. It is a complete end around principles of democracy. I wish we had this one on YouTube.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Boondogles On The Taxpayer Dime
Gateway Pundit nails this one:
As [tax fraud and still Ways and Means Chairman, Dem. Rep.] Charlie Rangel demonstrates, spending all of your money and your children's money is exhausting work. Even Congress needs a little vay-cay every once in awhile.
Remember--- This is not a Shared Sacrifice Recession.
The Pelosi-Reid Congress is not only spending more of your money and giving themselves raises and bonuses they are also spending more on exotic excursions than ever before.
Do read the whole post. Gateway Pundit goes on to quote from a The Wall Street Journal article that documents that tax-payer funded junkets have risen by an amazing 50% - to over $13 million on overseas travel - now that the left controls our national check book. The fact finding trips to Iraq and Afghanistan are one thing. The fact finding trips to "Jamiaca, the Virgin Islands and Australia's Great Barrier Reef" are another entirely. Just more water in the swamp Pelosi told us she would drain in 2006.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
The Left's Social Security Time Bomb
President Bush, from the moment he came into office, set as a priority for his domestic agenda fixing the time bomb of our entitlement programs, Medicare and Social Security - as, at some point, they will completely overwhelm the budget. That agenda was consumed by 9-11 in his first term. He trotted out Social Security reform in his second term, first arguing for privitization, then opening up the floor, saying he was willing to consider all Democratic suggestions. With Harry Reid leading the way, Democrats utterly refused to cooperate in the process, arguing that there was no crisis. Ultimately, they won through an absolute blitz in the MSM. And indeed, you can see these perfidious people applauding their victory during President Bush's State of the Union speech in 2006. [T]he war over Social Security is a war of words, with the White House trying to convince Americans that the system is in crisis and Democrats trying to convince them that it is not. If Mr. Bush prevails and persuades the nation that the cure is private investment accounts, Democrats will have ceded one of their core issues to Republicans - and with it a core constituency, the elderly, who are already voting Republican in bigger numbers than ever. A gift, eh? Once again, as with the war in Iraq, the left was willing to sacrifice a critical interest of the nation in order to get political power. In February, as the Treasury’s own website makes clear, we took in $54.5 billion and paid out $55.7 billion, for a deficit of $1.25 billion. In March that recovered to gain a $2.7 billion profit, but the first red ink has already been spilled, and it’s not going to stay black again for very long. This from Plum Bob Blog puts it into historical perspective: Social Security starts being a net negative to the federal budget within 7 years. Medicare is already a net negative to the budget, and will be broke within 8 years. Oh, and that “giant trust fund” they mention? It doesn’t help anything; it’s pretty much nothing but federal T-bonds, not real assets (basically, the government holds a big IOU to itself,) which means that when Social Security starts eating it 7 years from now, the government will have to start paying down it’s debt to Social Security out of the general revenues. Do read the whole post. He also cites to a paper by the Heritage Foundation from 1988 that warns of precisely the scenario in which we find ourselves now.
(H/T Gateway Pundit)
What in essence the left did yet again was lie to the American people (either lie or again adopt as reality whatever they wanted it to be) in order to try to extend their own political power. This 2005 article from the NYT spells out their motivation explicity:
"If we let the president successfully convince people there's a crisis in Social Security, when in fact there is no crisis at all, then shame on us," said Senator Byron L. Dorgan of North Dakota, who as chairman of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee presided over Friday's hearing. "We've got to fight on this issue, and we've got to wage an aggressive fight."
On that score, Democrats have been getting some help from Republicans, who are hardly united over the White House plan. Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, who is in charge of getting more Democrats elected to the Senate in 2006, says he hopes to exploit those divisions all the way to the polls.
"I think the feeling among Democrats," Mr. Schumer said, "is we've been handed a gift."
Well, reality is upon us. Social Security has been run since the start of the Clinton Administration as a ponzi scheme, and like all such schemes, its going broke. The date on which it occurs has been moved up a few years by our current fiscal crisis and, according to Ed Morrisey, is not merely seven years away, but upon us now. According to Ed:
Keep in mind that about half of the famous surpluses of the Clinton years were due to a simple shift in how the government counted Social Security revenues. Before Clinton, they were kept separate from the budget, and Congress borrowed from it on the record. Starting I think in 1993, Social Security revenues were considered part of the general revenue, for which reason Congress didn’t have to borrow it in order to spend it. The great excess of receipts over expenditures in the Social Security system, which was never counted as revenue to the government before 1993 (and never should have been,) is roughly half of the reason for those nice-looking surpluses. This is one of the reasons I think of President Clinton as a sham and a failure; he had an opportunity to fix Social Security, and he chose instead to use it for a smoke-and-mirrors game to enhance his own image. . . .
Let's see. The left is at the heart of the current fiscal crisis. They are at the heart of the crisis in entitlements. They came with an inch of handing victory to al Qaeda and Iran in Iraq. Is there a single thing that they have done that is of benefit to our nation over the past three decades?
Monday, May 11, 2009
The Limits of Humor
Some honest humor from Irishman and CBS Sports Analyst David Feherty, who wrote in a Dallas magazine about his perception of the intersection between the Iraq War, our soldiers, and how they view the actions of our Congressional Democratic leadership:
From my own experience visiting the troops in the Middle East, I can tell you this though, despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death.
Unfortunately, he was made to apologize for that comment. He should have been warned, what with Obama in power, all tongue in cheek statements can only refer to killing conservatives. Do compare to the post below.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Some Things Should Never Be Forgotten
It was two years ago yesterday that we approached a turning point in the Iraq War. The counterinsurgency plan, the initial phase of which had begun in February, was just coming to full implementation in April 2007. As we pushed into al Qaeda safe havens, al Qaeda pushed back with all the brutality they could muster.
In the days leading up to April 19, 2007, four members of al Qaeda did suicide bombing runs in Baghdad leading to tremendous loss of innocent civilian life. This was not an attack on our soldiers - it was directed at our political class, many of whom wanted nothing more than an American defeat in Iraq for their own purposes, irrespective of the tremendous damage such a loss would work on America's future, nor the galvanizing effect such a surrender would have had on al Qaeda and radical Islam.
It almost worked.
It was two years ago yesterday that Senator Harry Reid seized on these of acts of terrorism to proclaim the Iraq War lost and our military defeated.
As I noted at the time, this was a defining moment for the far left and "Give 'Em Surrender Harry". It was the moment all pretenses dropped to reveal in stark relief the far left's naked grab for political power at whatever cost to our nation. It is obscene that they have as yet paid no price for their craven and traitorous acts. To the contrary, they now hold all of the political power they desired.
That said, for all intents and purposes, we have won the Iraq war. Though V-I Day will await the pronouncement of historians, it clearly arrived some months ago - likely with the Iraqi Army's breaking of Sadr's strongholds in Basra. Iraq now has a nascent and functioning democracy. Normalcy has returned to much of the country as security continues to improve. There are still the major hurdles that Iraq must overcome - Kurdish seperatism and Iranian meddling top the lengthy list. But for today, those issues are not tearing the country apart.
History, if written with honesty, will note this hard won victory. History will note that we won because of the brilliance of our commanders, the quality of our soldiers, and the moral courage of President Bush to hold fast in the face of a massive push by the far left to declare the Iraq War a defeat for America. You'll never hear that from Obama, Reid or the radical left. They today are holding an eraser to the history books. But please don't forget it. History, if it is to teach us anything, must be honestly recorded. And there really must be a reckoning. For both of those reasons, please never forget.
[H/T Gateway Pundit]
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Resolution Of The Initial Problems Caused By The Subprime Crisis - Time For Investigation & Resolution
Congressional leaders and the Bush administration reached a tentative agreement early Sunday on what may become the largest financial bailout in American history, authorizing the Treasury to purchase $700 billion in troubled debt from ailing firms in an extraordinary intervention to prevent widespread economic collapse. There is more detailed information at the WSJ: “Mark to market” is an accounting measure that took effect last year, which forces companies to disclose information about the immediate market value of their assets. Gingrich says it has forced a “spiral” of devaluation; supporters of the practice say that it forces businesses to reveal poor investments, and is a mere scapegoat in the current debate. You can find a detailed explanation of the accounting rule and the problems it has created in a tightening and risk averse market at the Washington Post. Changing this accounting rule might, by itself, radically effect the current subprime crisis.
If you hear any of the above individuals utter the words "affordable housing" or "Democrats bear no responsibility" or "Democrats have cleaned up the mess," should a brick you are carrying mysteriously leave your hand and, guided by mystical forces, become lodged in the mouth of the speaker, pray that I am on your jury. You can be assured that you will not be convicted.
The Rogues Gallery pictured above is from the NYT front page story announcing an agreement on the main points of a bailout plan. While the individuals pictured above, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Harry Reid, appear happy and smug, there is not a single taxpayer who should feel anything but all consuming anger and a desire for 700 billion pounds of flesh.
From the few details of the bailout plan that are leaking out, this deal still appears problematic. Some of the provisions may well have longterm, unintended consequences. Or they may in fact be reasonable, we will have to wait for the final legislation and read it line by line. At least most of the poison pill provisions added by the left to benefit their far left constituency have apparently been removed thanks to House Republicans. Regardless, this is just a first step. There are many things missing from the above plan that are desperately needed in the wake of this crisis.
This from the NYT:
Officials said that Congressional staff members would work through the night to finalize the language of the agreement and draft a bill, and that the bill would be brought to the House floor for a vote on Monday.
The bill includes pay limits for some executives whose firms seek help, aides said. And it requires the government to use its new role as owner of distressed mortgage-backed securities to make more aggressive efforts to prevent home foreclosures.
In some cases, the government would receive an equity stake in companies that seek aid, allowing taxpayers to profit should the rescue plan work and the private firms flourish in the months and years ahead.
The White House also agreed to strict oversight of the program by a Congressional panel and conflict-of-interest rules for firms hired by the Treasury to help run the program. . . .
1. The first $250 billion will be available immediately with other funds being made available as needed based on Congressional authorization.
2. The legislation "will expand the range of firms that can sell troubled assets to the government to include pension plans, local governments and community banks serving 'low- and middle-income families.'"
3. The government "would be able to receive warrants it could hold until maturity from financial firms on assets received either through auctions or through direct purchases."
4. The legislation "would institute new executive compensation requirements for participating companies, including "no multi-million dollar golden parachutes," limits on compensation generally, and the ability to recover "bonuses paid based on promised gains that later turn out to be false or inaccurate."" This could be problematic indeed. Punishing Wall St. seems to me something that could have many undesirable unintended consequences, from keeping firms from participating to driving financial services overseas.
5. The plan provides for "the federal government to recoup money for taxpayers if the asset-purchase program isn't making money after a certain amount of time. A House leadership aide said early Sunday morning that details were not immediately available. But the general concept was to provide Congress with a mechanism that would be triggered perhaps within five years to allow lawmakers to offset some, if not all, of the bailout costs." While I am all for repayment of taxpayer funds, I wonder how much uncertainty this will cause, either now or in five years. Further, I would like to see funds recouped from those who violated laws and regulations at all levels rather than a general plan to target the market as a whole.
6. Democrats have agreed "to drop a proposal to devote 20% of potential profits to an affordable housing fund . . ." This was the far left organization/ACORN full employment plan. It was - and should have been - a deal killer.
7. The legislation includes "requirements that Treasury seek to mitigate and reduce foreclosures where possible. . . [T]he legislation would allow the Treasury to work with cash-strapped homeowners whose mortgages are purchased by the federal government to refinance into a more affordable mortgage." I have real problems with this. This has the potential to be another boondoggle and redistribution program, particularly with Chris Dodd and Barney Frank riding herd on oversight. I want to see how this is written into the legislation.
8. "Other foreclosure-prevention measures include an extension of the tax holiday for homeowners who face foreclosure, as well as a tax break for community banks that held shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The rescue plan will allow affected banks to take an immediate tax deduction on losses from investments in the two firms, which were taken over by the federal government earlier this month." This sounds palatable.
9. "It also includes a bipartisan oversight board appointed by members of both parties in Congress, an inspector general to monitor Treasury decisions, and regular audits from the Government Accountability Office. Treasury will also have to post publicly and online transactions made through the troubled asset program." I appreciate the transparency provision. I have real problems with an oversight board that will no doubt be populated by the same Democrats whose economic ignorance and desire to redistribute wealth got us into this mess in the first place. If the board provides for proportional representation rather than equal representation, it should be a non-starter.
10. "[T]he tentative agreement reached Saturday allows for judicial review of Treasury decisions." This sounds like a bone to the plaintiff's bar. This is an invitation to add billions to the costs of this program and to slow down its complete implementation by years.
Hot Air informs us that the far left's attempt to load up the bill with goodies for their constituencies - beyond the ACORN Lifetime Funding provision discussed above - have also been removed from the bill:
- Provision to provide unions and other activist groups with proxy access for corporate boards
- Provision to mandate shareholder votes on compensation issues (union priority)
- 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
Perhaps most importantly, Hot Air tells us that the new legislation "also suspends mark-to-market rules and requires a study on their effects on the collapse."
This from the AJC:
All of these are but a single step along a long road. There needs to be much more.
I. We need a true non-partisan, non-Congressional commission to investigate the causes of this meltdown. This crisis begins and ends with the socialist left in Congress. In the middle are mortgage brokers and Wall St. The story needs to be told from beginning to end. It will not happen under Congress, but there is nothing stopping President Bush from appointing such a commission the day after the above legislation is passed.
This is a crisis that, on a fiscal scale, dwarfs 9-11. And it exposes fundamental problems in both our political and financial worlds that we fail to identify at our own peril. How our best financial minds ended up purchasing this toxic debt needs to be thoroughly investigated. The system used by Wall St. to analyze and value the now worthless securities needs to be pulled apart with the detail a post mortem. And our regulatory scheme needs to be overhauled. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has been calling for this for some time. Now seems an opportune moment to redo and streamline a regulatory system built for the last century. I have no faith, however, in the current Democratic Congress to carry this out in good faith.
II. The Community Reinvestment Act and all Clinton-era rules relating to subprime borrowing need to be revised to end government mandates for this scourge. There is nothing wrong with a government program to work with low and middle income folks to repair any credit problems. And I would support a program for such people to invest in a tax free fund in order to build up funds for a down payment. That is a market based approach. We know how the socialist approach works.
III. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and indeed, the whole concept of Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE's) that so distort the marketplace need to be scrapped.
IV. There needs to be criminal investigations of those involved in the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac fiasco. This has begun - years too late. Nothing is clearer than the individuals who ran these institutions cooked the books. Franklin Raines should still be in jail following his conviction in 2004. His cell mates should be Chris Dodd, Janet Reno and Jamie Goerlock.
V. And lastly, I think that we really should seriously consider Charles Krauthammer's suggestion of public executions as regards this subprime crisis.
Other posts related to Subprime Crisis (from oldest to newest):
1. McCain, The Fannie and Freddie Crisis, and Obamafuscation - Obama and the entire Democratic Party are trying to blame Republicans for the subprime crisis. But this crisis was created by Bill Clinton and protected against Republican efforts to reign it in over a decade – until it failed, nearly pulling out entire economic system into a depression.
2. A Washington Post Front Page Hack Job - The Washington Post does a hit job on McCain, grossly distorting his record on regulatory matters and ignoring his cosponsoring of legislation to establish much stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
3. Dodging a Depression - The NYT and WSJ document just how serious is the subprime crisis. Quite literally it brought us to the point of a complete and catastrophic stoppage of our financial systems. This was not a stock market crash, it was a lending and credit crash. The WSJ describes the events of the week leading up to the crisis point.
4. Obama & The "Family" Of Fannie Mae - Documenting Obama’s relationship to Fannie Mae.
5. The Origins – And Foreseeability – Of the Subprime Crisis - A 1999 article in the NYT describes the Clinton Administration forcing subprime loans onto America and also forecasts that this will create a house of cards that will fall apart in a down market.
6. Covering The Left’s Fannie - The NYT tries to play up old ties of a McCain campaign worker with Fannie Mae while minimizing the fact that McCain himself, in 2005, co-sponsored legislation that may well have prevented the fiscal crisis we are in now.
7. The Left’s Subprime Meltdown - A post by the Anchoress discusses this subprime crisis as a creation of the left and a system that was protected to the end by the left. She adds additional sites, quotes and links to explain the mosaic.
8. Fannie & Freddie, McCain & Obama, Subprime & Wall St.The WSJ discusses both how the subprime loan market came about and how Democrats, including Obama, were both the cause of the problem and the roadblock to a solution that would have averted this catastrophe. Dafydd at Big Lizard's explains how Mortgage Backed Securities worked on Wall Street.
9. A Doddering Fool & Charlatan - Chris Dodd is up to his ears in the subprime crisis. With our economy teetering on an actual depression due to the Fannie/Freddie/subprime loan crisis, it was not merely surreal to watch Senator Chris Dodd chair an emergency hearing of the Senate Banking Committee to evaluate the Treasury's proposed rescue plan, it was obscene.
10. Finally – Oversight - The FBI has finally announced criminal investigations at Fannie and Freddie.
11. When Will They File As A 527 – The NYT continues its wholly biased reporting on the subprime crisis, refusing to report on the genesis of the crisis and instead, reporting on the relationship between Fannie Mae and Rick Davis of McCain’s campaign team.
12. McCain The Chessmaster - Opining on the potential risks and rewards of McCain's decision to cancel campaigning, return to Washington to take part in negotiations over a response to the subprime crisis, and tentatively cancel the Friday debate.
13. The President Addresses The Nation - Bush explains the stakes involved for America with the subprime crisis.
14. McCain The Chessmaster Part II - McCain was responding to a 3 a.m. phone call in returning to Washington. He is given political cover and support by Bill Clinton.
15. A Spotlight On The Left's Subprime Crisis - A video summary of the origins of the subprime crisis with lots of footage of Rep. Barney Frank and others protecting Fannie Mae from regulation by the Bush Administration and McCain.
16. WaMu Swallowed Up In The Left's Subprime Swamp - Washington Mutual goes under because of toxic mortgage debt.
17. Great Moments In Leadership - Obama phones it in on the subprime crisis.
18. The "No Deal" - McCain Responds - The left is blaiming McCain for failure of a deal on the subprime crisis. McCain answers in a memo.
19. Dodd, ACORN, and the Penultimate Screwing of the Taxpayers - The left, the people responsible for the subprime crisis, proposed a deal that would have used the return on rehabilitated investments not for the benefit of taxpayers but to fund progressive advocacy organizations that are fundamentally corrupt.
20. Krauthammer On The Subprime Crisis: Time For A Return To Public Executions - America is livid over this fiscal crisis and wants a pound of flesh to satiate its cravings before beginning the job of putting our financial house back in order. Krauthammer things we should give it to them and suggests a return to the auto de fe, this time as a reality show.
21. The Subprime Crisis, Dems, Obama & McCain - a great video giving the history of the subprime crisis.
22. Subprime Crisis: Spin versus C-Span - a video of 2004 hearings in which the House Democrats heaped scorn on the idea that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were a disaster waiting to happen and fighting tooth and nail to preven any further regulation of Fannie and Freddie.
23. Thomas Sowell On The Subprime Crisis & Proposed Bailout - Economist Thomas Sowell weighs in on the need for the proposed bailout to stabilize the market and the politics at the root of this fiscal crisis.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Losing The Message Wars
For every ten Democrats I have heard baldly blame the Republicans for the subprime crisis, and for every Democrat I have heard speak against McCain's presence in the negotiations, I have heard maybe one Republican speak to the contrary. Some of the worst was last night, listening to CNN, listening to Paul Begala heap scorn on Republicans for the subprime crisis while the token Republican on the panel remained silent in the face of complete falsehoods. Further, I just listened to Harry Reid and Chris Dodd - two people up to their eyes in direct responsiblity for this subprime crisis - hold a news conference giving their CYF (Cover Your Fannie) story on all of this, including with blame for McCain, with no corresponding attempt by Republicans to respond in kind.
The Republicans are pristine in comparison to Democrats as regards the subprime crisis that has brought our economy to the brink of depression. Republicans also have good reason to revolt against Democrats - and their enablers such as Tennessee Senator Bob Corker - who have turned this bailout not into protection for consumers, but into a continuing funding resolution for the most corrupt of Democratic progressive advocacy organizations. For Republicans to cede the narrative on this is the height of incompetence. Unless and until they become absolutely vociferous in getting out their message, the left will ever increase their stanglehold on America, much to America's detriment.
Other posts related to Subprime Crisis (from oldest to newest):
McCain, The Fannie and Freddie Crisis, and Obamafuscation - Obama and the entire Democratic Party are trying to blame Republicans for the subprime crisis. But this crisis was created by Bill Clinton and protected against Republican efforts to reign it in over a decade – until it failed, nearly pulling out entire economic system into a depression.
A Washington Post Front Page Hack Job - The Washington Post does a hit job on McCain, grossly distorting his record on regulatory matters and ignoring his cosponsoring of legislation to establish much stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Dodging a Depression - The NYT and WSJ document just how serious is the subprime crisis. Quite literally it brought us to the point of a complete and catastrophic stoppage of our financial systems as institutions lost confidence in their fellow institutions. This was not a stock market crash, it was a lending and credit crash. The WSJ describes the events of the week leading up to the crisis point.
Obama & The "Family" Of Fannie Mae - Documenting Obama’s relationship to Fannie Mae.
The Origins – And Foreseeability – Of the Subprime Crisis - A 1999 article in the NYT describes the Clinton Administration forcing subprime loans onto America and also forecasts that this will create a house of cards that will fall apart in a down market.
Covering The Left’s Fannie - The NYT tries to play up old ties of a McCain campaign worker with Fannie Mae while minimizing the fact that McCain himself, in 2005, co-sponsored legislation that may well have prevented the fiscal crisis we are in now.
The Left’s Subprime Meltdown - A post by the Anchoress discusses this subprime crisis as a creation of the left and a system that was protected to the end by the left. She adds additional sites, quotes and links to explain the mosaic.
Fannie & Freddie, McCain & Obama, Subprime & Wall St.The WSJ discusses both how the subprime loan market came about and how Democrats, including Obama, were both the cause of the problem and the roadblock to a solution that would have averted this catastrophe. Dafydd at Big Lizard's explains how Mortgage Backed Securities worked on Wall Street.
A Doddering Fool & Charlatan - Chris Dodd is up to his ears in the subprime crisis. With our economy teetering on an actual depression due to the Fannie/Freddie/subprime loan crisis, it was not merely surreal to watch Senator Chris Dodd chair an emergency hearing of the Senate Banking Committee to evaluate the Treasury's proposed rescue plan, it was obscene.
Finally – Oversight - The FBI has finally announced criminal investigations at Fannie and Freddie.
When Will They File As A 527 – The NYT continues its wholly biased reporting on the subprime crisis, refusing to report on the genesis of the crisis and instead, reporting on the relationship between Fannie Mae and Rick Davis of McCain’s campaign team.
McCain The Chessmaster - Opining on the potential risks and rewards of McCain's decision to cancel campaigning, return to Washington to take part in negotiations over a response to the subprime crisis, and tentatively cancel the Friday debate.
The President Addresses The Nation - Bush explains the stakes involved for America with the subprime crisis.
McCain The Chessmaster Part II - McCain was responding to a 3 a.m. phone call in returning to Washington. He is given political cover and support by Bill Clinton.
A Spotlight On The Left's Subprime Crisis - A video summary of the origins of the subprime crisis with lots of footage of Rep. Barney Frank and others protecting Fannie Mae from regulation by the Bush Administration and McCain.
WaMu Swallowed Up In The Left's Subprime Swamp - Washington Mutual goes under because of toxic mortgage debt.
Great Moments In Leadership - Obama phones it in on the subprime crisis.
The "No Deal" - McCain Responds - The left is blaiming McCain for failure of a deal on the subprime crisis. McCain answers in a memo.
Dodd, ACORN, and the Penultimate Screwing of the Taxpayers - The left, the people responsible for the subprime crisis, proposed a deal that would have used the return on rehabilitated investments not for the benefit of taxpayers but to fund progressive advocacy organizations that are fundamentally corrupt.
Krauthammer On The Subprime Crisis: Time For A Return To Public Executions - America is livid over this fiscal crisis and wants a pound of flesh to satiate its cravings before beginning the job of putting our financial house back in order. Krauthammer things we should give it to them and suggests a return to the auto de fe, this time as a reality show.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Bastard
While the U.S. has turned its attention to getting this fiscal crisis sorted out, the utterly worthless Senate Majority Leader has used this opportunity to try and slip in a ban on shale oil exploration and mining by attaching to one of the bills about to pass through Congress.
Our fiscal problems are multi-fold. Clearly one of the problems is the exploding cost of energy. Our largest reserve of oil is in an estimated 2 trillion barrels of recoverable oil from oil shale. That is more oil than Saudi Arabia has reserves. Harry Reid is now trying to make sure America never has the chance to touch it.
The left is bound and determined to take power and remake America in accordance with their highly unrealistic, utopian paradigm. They do not care if they have to destroy Middle America in the process. As we see today, people like Harry Reid, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank who created this subprime mess and defended it against all attempts at reform, will, when the excrement hits the fan, blame the resulting perfect shit storm on the right. They are clear and present danger to our way of life. They are craven, hypocritical, and beyond shameless.
Tarring and feathering is too mild a response to all of this.
A Spotlight On The Left's Subprime Crisis
Watch BOTH of these videos:
My hat is off to Fox News. That is a superb seven minute summation. They need to add about two more minutes to it - adding in video of Schumer, Reid, and Dodd as they protected Fannie Mae, calling Republican efforts to reign in this mess before it exploded wrongheaded. And Fox needs to expand on McCain's speech predicting the dire consequences to our nation if Fannie and Freddie were not subject to much tighter controls. And then of course, they need to add in the latest from Bill Clinton, who now says that Congressional Democrats thwarted his attempts to reign this in. This from Newsbusters:
Bill Clinton on Thursday told ABC's Chris Cuomo that Democrats for years have been "resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac"
(video available here, relevant section at 2:45).
Other posts related to Subprime Crisis (from oldest to newest):
McCain, The Fannie and Freddie Crisis, and Obamafuscation - Obama and the entire Democratic Party are trying to blame Republicans for the subprime crisis. But this crisis was created by Bill Clinton and protected against Republican efforts to reign it in over a decade – until it failed, nearly pulling out entire economic system into a depression.
A Washington Post Front Page Hack Job - The Washington Post does a hit job on McCain, grossly distorting his record on regulatory matters and ignoring his cosponsoring of legislation to establish much stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Dodging a Depression - The NYT and WSJ document just how serious is the subprime crisis. Quite literally it brought us to the point of a complete and catastrophic stoppage of our financial systems as institutions lost confidence in their fellow institutions. This was not a stock market crash, it was a lending and credit crash. The WSJ describes the events of the week leading up to the crisis point.
Obama & The "Family" Of Fannie Mae - Documenting Obama’s relationship to Fannie Mae.
The Origins – And Foreseeability – Of the Subprime Crisis - A 1999 article in the NYT describes the Clinton Administration forcing subprime loans onto America and also forecasts that this will create a house of cards that will fall apart in a down market.
Covering The Left’s Fannie - The NYT tries to play up old ties of a McCain campaign worker with Fannie Mae while minimizing the fact that McCain himself, in 2005, co-sponsored legislation that may well have prevented the fiscal crisis we are in now.
The Left’s Subprime Meltdown - A post by the Anchoress discusses this subprime crisis as a creation of the left and a system that was protected to the end by the left. She adds additional sites, quotes and links to explain the mosaic.
Fannie & Freddie, McCain & Obama, Subprime & Wall St.The WSJ discusses both how the subprime loan market came about and how Democrats, including Obama, were both the cause of the problem and the roadblock to a solution that would have averted this catastrophe. Dafydd at Big Lizard's explains how Mortgage Backed Securities worked on Wall Street.
A Doddering Fool & Charlatan - Chris Dodd is up to his ears in the subprime crisis. With our economy teetering on an actual depression due to the Fannie/Freddie/subprime loan crisis, it was not merely surreal to watch Senator Chris Dodd chair an emergency hearing of the Senate Banking Committee to evaluate the Treasury's proposed rescue plan, it was obscene.
Finally – Oversight - The FBI has finally announced criminal investigations at Fannie and Freddie.
When Will They File As A 527 – The NYT continues its wholly biased reporting on the subprime crisis, refusing to report on the genesis of the crisis and instead, reporting on the relationship between Fannie Mae and Rick Davis of McCain’s campaign team.
McCain The Chessmaster - Opining on the potential risks and rewards of McCain's decision to cancel campaigning, return to Washington to take part in negotiations over a response to the subprime crisis, and tentatively cancel the Friday debate.
The President Addresses The Nation - Bush explains the stakes involved for America with the subprime crisis.
McCain The Chessmaster Part II - McCain was responding to a 3 a.m. phone call in returning to Washington. He is given political cover and support by Bill Clinton.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
