Biden Slips, Suggests FDR Was President When Market Crashed

Biden Slips, Suggests FDR Was President When Market Crashed - America’s Election HQ

WASHINGTON — Vice presidential candidate Joe Biden says today’s leaders should take a lesson from the history books and follow fellow Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt’s response to a financial crisis.

“When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened,”‘ Barack Obama’s running mate recently told the “CBS Evening News.”

Except, Republican Herbert Hoover was in office when the stock market crashed in October 1929. There also was no television at the time; TV wasn’t introduced to the public until a decade later, at the 1939 World’s Fair...

Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism On Schools

Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism On Schools - WSJ.com

Despite having authored two autobiographies, Barack Obama has never written about his most important executive experience. From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists.

The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama's first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers's home.

The Obama campaign has struggled to downplay that association. Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC. Those archives are housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago and I've recently spent days looking through them.

The Chicago Annenberg Challenge was created ostensibly to improve Chicago's public schools. The funding came from a national education initiative by Ambassador Walter Annenberg. In early 1995, Mr. Obama was appointed the first chairman of the board, which handled fiscal matters. Mr. Ayers co-chaired the foundation's other key body, the "Collaborative," which shaped education policy.

The CAC's basic functioning has long been known, because its annual reports, evaluations and some board minutes were public. But the Daley archive contains additional board minutes, the Collaborative minutes, and documentation on the groups that CAC funded and rejected. The Daley archives show that Mr. Obama and Mr. Ayers worked as a team to advance the CAC agenda.

AP Photo

One unsettled question is how Mr. Obama, a former community organizer fresh out of law school, could vault to the top of a new foundation? In response to my questions, the Obama campaign issued a statement saying that Mr. Ayers had nothing to do with Obama's "recruitment" to the board. The statement says Deborah Leff and Patricia Albjerg Graham (presidents of other foundations) recruited him. Yet the archives show that, along with Ms. Leff and Ms. Graham, Mr. Ayers was one of a working group of five who assembled the initial board in 1994. Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval.

The CAC's agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers's educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism. In the mid-1960s, Mr. Ayers taught at a radical alternative school, and served as a community organizer in Cleveland's ghetto.

In works like "City Kids, City Teachers" and "Teaching the Personal and the Political," Mr. Ayers wrote that teachers should be community organizers dedicated to provoking resistance to American racism and oppression. His preferred alternative? "I'm a radical, Leftist, small 'c' communist," Mr. Ayers said in an interview in Ron Chepesiuk's, "Sixties Radicals," at about the same time Mr. Ayers was forming CAC.

CAC translated Mr. Ayers's radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with "external partners," which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn).

Mr. Obama once conducted "leadership training" seminars with Acorn, and Acorn members also served as volunteers in Mr. Obama's early campaigns. External partners like the South Shore African Village Collaborative and the Dual Language Exchange focused more on political consciousness, Afrocentricity and bilingualism than traditional education. CAC's in-house evaluators comprehensively studied the effects of its grants on the test scores of Chicago public-school students. They found no evidence of educational improvement.

CAC also funded programs designed to promote "leadership" among parents. Ostensibly this was to enable parents to advocate on behalf of their children's education. In practice, it meant funding Mr. Obama's alma mater, the Developing Communities Project, to recruit parents to its overall political agenda. CAC records show that board member Arnold Weber was concerned that parents "organized" by community groups might be viewed by school principals "as a political threat." Mr. Obama arranged meetings with the Collaborative to smooth out Mr. Weber's objections.

The Daley documents show that Mr. Ayers sat as an ex-officio member of the board Mr. Obama chaired through CAC's first year. He also served on the board's governance committee with Mr. Obama, and worked with him to craft CAC bylaws. Mr. Ayers made presentations to board meetings chaired by Mr. Obama. Mr. Ayers spoke for the Collaborative before the board. Likewise, Mr. Obama periodically spoke for the board at meetings of the Collaborative.

The Obama campaign notes that Mr. Ayers attended only six board meetings, and stresses that the Collaborative lost its "operational role" at CAC after the first year. Yet the Collaborative was demoted to a strictly advisory role largely because of ethical concerns, since the projects of Collaborative members were receiving grants. CAC's own evaluators noted that project accountability was hampered by the board's reluctance to break away from grant decisions made in 1995. So even after Mr. Ayers's formal sway declined, the board largely adhered to the grant program he had put in place.

Mr. Ayers's defenders claim that he has redeemed himself with public-spirited education work. That claim is hard to swallow if you understand that he views his education work as an effort to stoke resistance to an oppressive American system. He likes to stress that he learned of his first teaching job while in jail for a draft-board sit-in. For Mr. Ayers, teaching and his 1960s radicalism are two sides of the same coin.

Mr. Ayers is the founder of the "small schools" movement (heavily funded by CAC), in which individual schools built around specific political themes push students to "confront issues of inequity, war, and violence." He believes teacher education programs should serve as "sites of resistance" to an oppressive system. (His teacher-training programs were also CAC funded.) The point, says Mr. Ayers in his "Teaching Toward Freedom," is to "teach against oppression," against America's history of evil and racism, thereby forcing social transformation.

The Obama campaign has cried foul when Bill Ayers comes up, claiming "guilt by association." Yet 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.

Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Yeah, right.

Do Barack Obama and Joe Biden speak to each other?

A nice collection of stories today that have Joe Biden directly contradicting the Obama campaign on a few different issues. I guess this is how you please everybody: If you like "clean coal" - Obama's your guy, if not - Biden's got you covered. If you want the government to bail out AIG - Obama's with you, if not - Biden's got you covered. If you think it's ok to pick on a man because he can't physically use a keyboard due to war injuries - Obama agrees, if not - Biden's got you covered.

Obama on Biden's Initial Opposition to AIG Bailout: "Joe Should Have Waited"

"What has been clear during this entire past ten days is John McCain has not had clarity and a grasp on the situation," Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told NBC's Matt Lauer in an interview that ran this morning.

Lauer was talking about how Obama hit Sen. McCain for flip-flopping on the AIG bailout -- saying he opposed it one day then announce he supported it the next day.

But, as Lauer pointed out, scarcely three minutes after McCain said he opposed the AIG bailout last week, "in an interview with Meredith Vieira, Joe Biden, your running mate was asked the exact same question, 'should the federal government bailout AIG?' And he said, 'No, the federal government should not bailout AIG. And I think that in that situation," Obama said, "I think Joe should have waited as well."

Biden Says Ad Mocking McCain Was ‘Terrible’

WASHINGTON — Barack Obama’s running mate says a campaign ad that mocked Republican presidential candidate John McCain as an out-of-touch, out-of-date computer illiterate was “terrible” and would not have been done had he known about it.

...Asked about the negative tone of the campaign, and this ad in particular, during an interview broadcast Monday by the “CBS Evening News,” Obama’s running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, said he disapproved of it.

“I thought that was terrible, by the way,” Biden said.
Asked why it was done, he said: “I didn’t know we did it and if I had anything to do with it, we’d have never done it.”

Biden: "We're not supporting clean coal"

“No coal plants here in America. Build them, if they’re going to build them, over there. Make them clean. We’re not supporting clean coal.”

That's strange, Obama seems to feel differently, this is DIRECTLY from the Obama campaign web site.

Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology

• Obama’s Department of Energy will enter into public private partnerships to develop five “first-of-a-kind” commercial scale coal-fired plants with clean carbon capture and sequestration technology.

Of course, it all depends on your audience. Telling them what they want to hear is a great way to get votes but a lousy way to lead a country.

Biden: ‘It’s Nice To Be Back In Coal Country’

CASTLEWOOD, Va. – In his first visit to Southwest Virginia, Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden, speaking at the United Mine Workers’ annual fish fry here on Saturday, was quick to tout his ties to coal.

“I hope you won’t hold it against me, but I am a hard-coal miner, anthracite coal, Scranton, Pa.,” Biden said. “It’s nice to be back in coal country. … It’s a different accent [in Southwest Virginia] … but it’s the same deal. We were taught that our faith and our family was the only really important thing, and our faith and our family informed everything we did.”

All things to all people - how can you lose?

Smear videos against Palin linked to Obama campaign

National Defense Examiner: Smear videos against Palin linked to Obama campaign

A series of videos designed to spread lies about the Republican Vice Presidential nominee, Governor Sarah Palin has been connected to a professional Public Relations firm. Those videos also share production qualities used in pro-Obama videos produced by Obama media campaign strategist David Axelrod.

...also compared the smear videos to videos known to have been produced by David Axelrod's media company in support of the Obama campaign. The Jawa Report presents strong evidence that the female voice-over used in the smear videos is the same voice used in all of the Obama campaign videos from Axelrod's company. In addition, the investigators who routinely review jihadist videos for clues have determined that the video and production quality of the smear videos was high and likely done by a professional production company, not a “grassroots” effort.

...Based upon the evidence it appears that Axelrod likely orchestrated the smear campaign providing his media company resources to create the smear videos for the PR firm which launched the viral campaign. It was all meant to look like it came from some where other than the Obama campaign, a prime example of “astroturfing”.

Update: With in minutes of the revelation of this information at The Jawa Report  the smear videos were taken down by the poster on Youtube. Anticipating this, the Jawans made a copy and reposted it.

Evil Republicans' Risky Scheme...

I thought I'd take a shot at doing some analysis of how people would have fared if they had the opportunity to invest their hard-earned social security money in the evil, risky, Republican scheme known as "privatization".

Surely, after recent events, this would show the problems with the plan and how the Democrats "saved" retirement for millions of Americans.

So I entered some data in a spreadsheet (many of you know what a numbers geek I am) and plotted out what has happened since this plan could have taken effect back when President Bush's first fiscal budget when into effect October 1st, 2001.

My calculations involved investing the employee's share (6.2% of their income) for someone making $50,000 per year in an S&P 500 Index fund (considered by many to be representative of "the market"). I did not perform any calculations for the employer's share (another 6.2%) and assumed this would stay in the current social security system. This makes the total "risk" no more than 50% of the funds contributed.

After enduring the "worst economy since Hoover", rising unemployement, an "illegal and expensive war", the collapse of the real estate market and the total failure of some of the biggest financial companies in the world, I was certain that all of this perosn's money would have been flushed down the drain.

What I found was nothing short of amazing. From October 1, 2001 to today's market open, this hypothetical person would have contributed $21,958.33 to their personal account. Their balance today would have been $23,679.20 - a GAIN of $1,720.87. Not much of a gain, mind you - but the amazing thing is this:

This paltry gain in one of the worst economic and stock market environments in our country's history still BEAT the gain that this worker received through the "safe and protected" current version of the Social Security system.

How bad does the current system have to be in order to actually perform WORSE than money invested in the stock market during these horrific events?

Click the graph below for a larger image.

The 5 Richest Senators

The 50 Richest Members of Congress - Roll Call

I'm confused. This can't be right. As I scan the list of the richest Senators, I am somewhat taken a back by the fact that the partyo fo "the working man" seems to be filled with ultra-rich elitists. Someone needs to recalculate.

The 50 Richest Members of Congress

September 22, 2008, 12:00 a.m.
By Paul Singer, Jennifer Yachnin and Casey Hynes
Roll Call Staff

---

..Roll Call’s annual attempt to rank the riches of Members of Congress is hampered by one fundamental flaw: It is based on the lawmakers’ financial disclosure forms, which are extraordinarily unreliable sources of information.

The disclosure rules allow Members to report assets in broad categories, so there is no way to tell the difference between a $20 million investment and a $5 million investment. The top category on the Members’ forms is “over $50 million,” so it is impossible to accurately account for anything worth more than that — like a professional sports team, for example. There is also a gaping loophole for assets owned by the Members’ spouse or dependent children; anything worth more than $1 million in value can be reported as “over $1 million.” There is no way to tell whether that is $1.2 million or $1.2 billion.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)
$230.98 million

The Massachusetts Senator claims the mantel of richest Member in the 110th Congress. Kerry’s actual holdings, however — including those of wife Teresa Heinz Kerry, widow to ketchup heir Sen. John Heinz (R-Pa.) — are likely much greater.

In an April 2008 article, Forbes.com estimated Heinz Kerry’s net worth at $1 billion.

Kerry’s disclosure forms list the value of more than 180 assets — including Heinz family trusts and investment funds — only as “over $1 million,” rather than the more specific ranges including $1 million to $5 million. Senators are allowed to list assets in the “over $1 million” category only if the items are held independently by a spouse or dependent child.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)
$80.40 million

A descendant of oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller, the West Virginian’s vast assets remained stable in 2007, as his net worth increased by a little more than 1 percent.

Rockefeller’s fortunes are stored primarily in three blind trusts with JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wachovia Corp. and United National Bank, valued at more than $50 million, $25 million to $50 million, and $5 million to $25 million, respectively.

Another family trust is listed at simply “over $1 million.”

The Senator lists at least $5.5 million in debt on two loans, down from $6.5 million in 2006, when he listed an additional $1 million loan from United National Bank in Charleston, W.Va.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.)
$55.33 million

Lautenberg, who made millions from the payroll processing company he created five decades ago, reported that his total minimum assets jumped about 24 percent, from $45 million in 2006, but that number is still not very revealing. Lautenberg’s two biggest assets are two blind trusts that he set up for himself, each worth $5 million to $25 million. Together they count for $10 million of his assets for this list, though they could be worth five times that amount.

The major increase over last year appears to be in his wife’s assets. She has several family trusts in her name, mostly holding real estate, and between 2006 and 2007 she received additional assets from her mother, Lautenberg’s office said.

So in 2006, Lautenberg reported that through an entity called LCBS Corp. his wife held “over $1 million” of Mira Loma Associates, a company holding residential real estate in Riverside, Calif. In 2007, Mira Loma was listed twice at “over $1 million” — once as part of LCBS and once as a separate asset in Bonnie Englebardt Lautenberg’s name. Several of her family trusts also purchased real estate and other assets worth more than $5 million in 2007.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
$52.34 million

Together with her husband, financier Richard Blum, Feinstein claims a diversified portfolio that grew by $1.8 million, or an increase of just under 4 percent, since 2006.

The Californian lists assets with her husband that include ownership of all or part of numerous limited partnerships.

Among those, the Blum Family Partners, owned entirely by Blum, claims “over $1 million” in stock in RAE Systems, a manufacturer of chemical and radiation detection equipment. The fund also includes “over $1 million” in a real estate investment trust.

In addition, Feinstein lists a $5 million to $25 million investment in Carlton Hotel Properties in San Francisco and owns condos in both Tahoe City, Calif., and on Kauai in Hawaii, both valued at $1 million to $5 million.

Feinstein also lists at least $2 million in debt to Bank of America for two loans made to Blum Capital Partners.

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.)
$47.62 million

Much of Kennedy’s wealth stems from family trusts, and the Massachusetts Senator reported almost no change in 2007, with an increase of less than 1 percent.

Kennedy lists one family trust valued from $25 million to $50 million, as well as four trusts worth at least $5 million each and a blind trust totaling at least $1 million.

The Bay State lawmaker also owns a rental property in Hyannisport, Mass., valued at at least $1 million and lists a plot of undeveloped land in Lafayette, La., owned by his wife, worth from $500,000 to $1 million.

Kennedy lists $1 million in mortgage debt from Northern Trust Co. for his Hyannisport property.

The End of a Lie

FrontPage Magazine

With Morton Sobell's recent admission that both he and his comrade Julius Rosenberg were Soviet spies, “the end has arrived for the legions of the American left wing that have argued relentlessly for more than half a century that the Rosenbergs were victims, framed by a hostile, fear-mongering U.S. government.” For decades, the Left has painted the Rosenbergs, along with Alger Hiss and other Soviet spies, as martyrs for civil liberties, sentenced only for their political beliefs and opposition to the bi-partisan Cold War anti-Soviet foreign policy. This is not an issue out of the distant past; rather, the fight over whether they were innocent or guilty is “a crucial part of the ongoing dispute between right and left in this country.”

This is a long read but well worth it for those who would like to learn what the lunatic left has done to this country in its defense of people like these traitors.

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis

Bloomberg.com: News by Kevin Hassett

...For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

Different World

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.

That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: ``It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.''

Mounds of Materials

Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing.

But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years.

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.

Clinton, the 12th-ranked recipient of Fannie and Freddie PAC and employee contributions, has received more than $75,000 from the two enterprises and their employees. The private profit found its way back to the senators who killed the fix.

There has been a lot of talk about who is to blame for this crisis. A look back at the story of 2005 makes the answer pretty clear.

Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.

I'm puzzled (not really) by the mainstream media's lack of coverage of these massive campaign contributions to Barack Obama from the folks that created this monumental mess.

Obama steps in it...AGAIN!!!

You just have to love it when you put out an ad criticizing John McCain for saying something and then the person you claim knows more McCain and should be trusted says EXACTLY the same thing! He'll never learn - the way to lead is to lead, not stand by, do nothing and criticize the real leaders.

Paulson voices confidences in U.S. fundamentals

Palin draws crowd of 60,000 in The Villages

Palin draws crowd of 60,000 in The Villages | news-press.com | The News-Press

Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin told wildly cheering, flag-waving, chanting supporters that John McCain is "the only great man in this race" and promised Sunday he will fix the nation's economy if voters give the GOP four more years in the White House.

Can someone please explain...

...how Sarah Palin can draw a crowd of 60,000 people to an appearance and the press photographers present can't get a single picture of the crowd???

Click here to see what they managed to get. You would think since Joe Biden is averaging 2,000 people, that someone would want a picture of 60,000!!! Guess not.

Wonder why?

Obama Is Stoking Racial Antagonism - WSJ.com

This is what happens when you skim through everything you can find, trying to sling mud at your opponent. You get caught taking things, obviously out of context, and trying to tie them to racism. Will he pull the ads? Of course not - and the media will never call him on it.

Obama should be ashamed - but that's not possible when you have no shame...

Obama Is Stoking Racial Antagonism - WSJ.com Op-Ed by Rush Limbaugh

I understand the rough and tumble of politics. But Barack Obama -- the supposedly postpartisan, postracial candidate of hope and change -- has gone where few modern candidates have gone before.

Mr. Obama's campaign is now trafficking in prejudice of its own making. And in doing so, it is playing with political dynamite. What kind of potential president would let his campaign knowingly extract two incomplete, out-of-context lines from two radio parodies and build a framework of hate around them in order to exploit racial tensions? The segregationists of the 1950s and 1960s were famous for such vile fear-mongering.

Here's the relevant part of the Spanish-language television commercial Mr. Obama is running in Hispanic communities:

"They want us to forget the insults we've put up with . . . the intolerance . . . they made us feel marginalized in this country we love so much."

Then the commercial flashes two quotes from me: ". . . stupid and unskilled Mexicans" and "You shut your mouth or you get out!"

And then a voice says, "John McCain and his Republican friends have two faces. One that says lies just to get our vote . . . and another, even worse, that continues the policies of George Bush that put special interests ahead of working families. John McCain . . . more of the same old Republican tricks."

Much of the media that is uninterested in Mr. Obama's connections to unrepentant 1970s Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers and Rev. Jeremiah Wright have so far gone along with the attempt to tie me to Mr. McCain. But Mr. McCain and I have not agreed on how to address illegal immigration. While I am heartened by his willingness to start by securing the borders, it is no secret that we have fundamental differences on illegal immigration.

And more to the point, these sound bites are a deception, and Mr. Obama knows it. The first sound bite was extracted from a 1993 humorous monologue poking fun at the arguments against the North American Free Trade Agreement. Here's the context:

"If you are unskilled and uneducated, your job is going south. Skilled workers, educated people are going to do fine 'cause those are the kinds of jobs Nafta is going to create. If we are going to start rewarding no skills and stupid people, I'm serious, let the unskilled jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do -- let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work."

My point, which is obvious, was that the people who were criticizing Nafta were demeaning workers, particularly low-skilled workers. I was criticizing the mind-set of the protectionists who opposed the treaty. There was no racial connotation to it and no one thought there was at the time. I was demeaning the arguments of the opponents.

As for the second sound bite, I was mocking the Mexican government's double standard -- i.e., urging open borders in this country while imposing draconian immigration requirements within its own borders. Thus, I took the restrictions Mexico imposes on immigrants and appropriated them as my own suggestions for a new immigration law.

Here's the context for that sound bite: "And another thing: You don't have the right to protest. You're allowed no demonstrations, no foreign flag waving, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies. You're a foreigner: shut your mouth or get out! And if you come here illegally, you're going to jail."

At the time, I made abundantly clear that this was a parody on the Mexican government's hypocrisy and nobody took it otherwise.

The malignant aspect of this is that Mr. Obama and his advisers know exactly what they are doing. They had to listen to both monologues or read the transcripts. They then had to pick the particular excerpts they used in order to create a commercial of distortions. Their hoped-for result is to inflame racial tensions. In doing this, Mr. Obama and his advisers have demonstrated a pernicious contempt for American society.

So, which party does OPEC like more??

Take a look at this graph of the history of the price of oil for the past ten years and then tell me which party has better policies for controlling the price of gasoline.

(click on the image for a larger version)

Democratic Congress May Adjourn, Leave Crisis to Fed, Treasury

Bloomberg.com: News

The Democratic-controlled Congress, acknowledging that it isn't equipped to lead the way to a solution for the financial crisis and can't agree on a path to follow, is likely to just get out of the way.

Lawmakers say they are unlikely to take action before, or to delay, their planned adjournments -- Sept. 26 for the House of Representatives, a week later for the Senate. While they haven't ruled out returning after the Nov. 4 elections, they would rather wait until next year unless Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, who are leading efforts to contain the crisis, call for help.

One reason, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said yesterday, is that ``no one knows what to do'' at the moment...

...House Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the decision of Congress to adjourn. Lawmakers can always be recalled to Washington ``if there is a need to do so,''

This pretty much says it all. "We don't know what to do so we're going home". I happen to agree that the best thing for Congress to do is stay out of this mess BUT the time for them to stay out of it was years ago when they CREATED this mess. You don't get to muck up the entire economy based on some pipe dream 'big houses for everyone' and run out of town when it hits the fan.

In the last three months, this DEMOCRAT controlled congress has faced down two major crises, the need for offshore drilling and the mortgage meltdown, by doing what Democrats do best - cutting and running - they went home.

If only we could get them to stay there...

Biden: Wealthy Americans Must Pay More Taxes to Show Patriotism

Biden: Wealthy Americans Must Pay More Taxes to Show Patriotism - America’s Election HQ

WASHINGTON — Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden said Thursday that paying more in taxes is the patriotic thing to do for wealthier Americans...

...“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” Biden said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Noting that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more, Biden said: “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”

Here we go...

I have a question. If it so "patriotic" for wealthy Americans to pay higher taxes, why isn't Biden calling on everyone to be patriotic?

Biden says what he means without really meaning to. "We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people.” Take from the rich and give to the poor. Robin Hood all over again, except, let's be more accurate. It's STEAL from the rich...

Another 'progessive' once said "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". That was Karl Marx, author of The Communist Manifesto and father of Communism.

Get Your Class War On

Get Your Class War On - WSJ.com

Consider the current economic catastrophe, which has been building for a year. Just as it has taken down Countrywide, Bear Stearns, Indymac, Freddie, Fannie, Lehman, Merrill and Lord knows who else in the weeks to come, it has also pulverized the reigning conservative shibboleths of the past 28 years.

There is simply no way to blame this disaster, as Republicans used to do, on labor unions or over-regulation. No, this is the conservatives' beloved financial system doing what comes naturally. Freed from the intrusive meddling of government, just as generations of supply-siders and entrepreneurial exuberants demanded it be, the American financial establishment has proceeded to cheat and deceive and beggar itself -- and us -- to the edge of Armageddon.

This was a very disappointing article for me to read as it appeared in the Wall Street Journal. I felt compelled to write the columnist and share my thoughts. I've posted them here if you care to see them:

Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:35 PM
To: 'thomas@wsj.com'
Subject: Get Your Class War On

Mr. Frank,

As I was reading your article, I was thinking to myself “here’s a guy that almost gets it but doesn’t know he gets it” and then I ran into this statement:

“...this is the conservatives' beloved financial system doing what comes naturally. Freed from the intrusive meddling of government, just as generations of supply-siders and entrepreneurial exuberants demanded it be, the American financial establishment has proceeded to cheat and deceive and beggar itself -- and us -- to the edge of Armageddon.”

I am very disappointed that the Wall Street Journal would employ someone who so poorly understands what has been happening in the financial services industry. Greed, corruption and multi-million dollar CEO packages are a problem, but they are not THE problem. If the problem was in the millions, Wall Street would barely notice and business would continue as usual. But this is not the case.

The downfall of these organization was caused, not by being “free from the intrusive meddling of government”, but BECAUSE of the intrusive meddling of government. Billions and billions of dollars of loans that should not have been made to people who were not qualified to receive them. Loans that would have NEVER been made if the government wasn’t forcing the financial institutions to make unwise loans or face the public outcry of racism and not supporting the ‘working class’ of America.

For decades, centuries even, banks have done just fine when they are allowed to assess their own risks and take responsibility for the risks they choose to expose themselves to. It wasn’t until these government-forced, low-income, variable rate, subprime loans started defaulting that we ran into the problems we have today. No, the government didn’t invent the loans – but it created the environment that forced the banks to invent something that would allow people who wouldn’t normally qualify for a mortgage to get through the process.

Do the banks share some of the responsibility? Absolutely, and a good portion of it. But the problem arose when problems like these always do – when government sticks its nose into something it knows nothing about and makes decisions based on votes rather than sound financial judgment.

You got it partially right, Mr. Frank, this is due to a class war, you are just wrong about by whom that war is being fought.

Sincerely,

Author :)

Obama-Biden Reservations Confirmed - STANDING BY THE STORY

The American Spectator

The Obama campaign spent more than five hours on Monday attempting to figure out the best refutation of the explosive New York Post report that quoted Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari as saying that Barack Obama during his July visit to Baghdad demanded that Iraq not negotiate with the Bush Administration on the withdrawal of American troops. Instead, he asked that they delay such negotiations until after the presidential handover at the end of January.

The three problems, according to campaign sources: The report was true, there were at least three other people in the room with Obama and Zebari to confirm the conversation, and there was concern that there were enough aggressive reporters based in Baghdad with the sources to confirm the conversation that to deny the comments would create a bigger problem.

Instead, Obama's national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi told reporters that Obama told the Iraqis that they should not rush through what she termed a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of U.S. forces until after President Bush left office. In other words, the Iraqis should not negotiate an American troop withdrawal.
According to a Senate staffer working for Sen. Joseph Biden, Biden himself got involved in the shaping of the statement. "The whole reason he's on the ticket is the foreign policy insight," explained the staffer.

This is disgusting behavior from someone who wants to be my President...

The Left’s Trillion $ ‘Housing’ Shakedown

Another column from the winter of 2000. Notice the comments of the Senate Committee chairman. Isn't he the "clueless" McCain economic advisor who got run off the campaign for speaking the truth? Seems like a pretty smart guy to me.

The Left’s Trillion $ ‘Housing’ Shakedown Sweetness & Light

This is a highly prescient article from the Winter 2000 edition of the The Manhattan Institute’s City Journal:

A member of the Boston Mayor’s Foreclosure Intervention Team (FIT) posts a sign on a foreclosed and boarded-up property in the Roxbury neighborhood of Boston, May 13, 2008.

The Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown That Bodes Ill for Cities

The Community Reinvestment Act funnels billions to left-wing activists, while threatening to destabilize lower-middle-class neighborhoods.

Howard Husock

The Clinton administration has turned the Community Reinvestment Act, a once-obscure and lightly enforced banking regulation law, into one of the most powerful mandates shaping American cities—and, as Senate Banking Committee chairman Phil Gramm memorably put it, a vast extortion scheme against the nation’s banks. Under its provisions, U.S. banks have committed nearly $1 trillion for inner-city and low-income mortgages and real estate development projects, most of it funneled through a nationwide network of left-wing community groups, intent, in some cases, on teaching their low-income clients that the financial system is their enemy and, implicitly, that government, rather than their own striving, is the key to their well-being.

Bush, McCain Tried To Reform Freddie Mac

This is another STELLAR discovery by the folks at Sweetness & Light regarding what the Bush Administration proposed FIVE YEARS AGO!!!

Bush, McCain Tried To Reform Freddie Mac Sweetness & Light

September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios...

And what does our wonderful Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi have to say about Congress' actions during this time:

Pelosi: Dems bear no responsibility for economic crisis

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when asked Tuesday whether Democrats bear some of the responsibility regarding the current crisis on Wall Street, had a one-word answer: “No.”

Pelosi (D-Calif.) ripped President Bush’s “mismanagement” of the economy and a lack of regulation that led to the current situation.
“I think the American people have had it with this situation where the middle-income people in our country are not protected from the ramifications of the risk-taking and the greed of these financial institutions,” Pelosi told MSNBC.
When asked whether the Democrats “deserve some responsibility” regarding the economic crisis, Pelosi responded: “No.”

CNN’s Jack Cafferty: Obama: Race a factor?

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time CNN’s Jack Cafferty « - Blogs from CNN.com

Race is arguably the biggest issue in this election, and it's one that nobody's talking about.

The differences between Barack Obama and John McCain couldn't be more well-defined. Obama wants to change Washington. McCain is a part of Washington and a part of the Bush legacy. Yet the polls remain close. Doesn't make sense…unless it's race.

So it all come down to this?  The mainstream media and the Democrats can't convince America that Obama should be anointed President so their only excuse has to be racism.  And this guy actually gets paid to think.

Nevermind the fact that Obama is simply a liberal with the same, worn out ideas that Al Gore and John Kerry brought to the fight in the last two elections.

Nevermind the fact that the exact same states that were in play in the last two elections are the ones in play for this election.

We must play the race card anytime a minority doesn't win against a white person.

Why is it racism when 55% of white people want a conservative in the White House and 45% want a liberal but it's not racism when 90% of African Americans are voting for the African American?

Maybe people outside of New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and the DC beltway just don't like Obama's ideas - did they ever think of that?  Of course not.

Prominent Clinton backer and DNC member to endorse McCain

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Prominent Clinton backer and DNC member to endorse McCain « - Blogs from CNN.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter and member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee, will endorse John McCain for president on Wednesday, her spokesman tells CNN.

...Forester did not hide her distaste for eventual Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.  “This is a hard decision for me personally because frankly I don't like him,” she said of Obama in an interview with CNN’s Joe Johns. “I feel like he is an elitist. I feel like he has not given me reason to trust him.”

This shows EXACTLY what's wrong with the media and Obama...

This is collection of one sound bite, one video and one news story. First listen to Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett Packard, answer a question from a radio host regarding Sarah Palin's qualifications to be a CEO. Listen to all 1:43 of it.

Then watch the video of Fiorina being interviewed about that statement.

And finally, check out the headline and story that CNN and the Obama campaign (I know, I know, redundant...) come out with.

Absolutely disgusting that they would take her words out of context and deliberately twist them for their purposes.

Isn't it also interesting that the Obama campaign believes that Carly Fiorina is intelligent enough to determine that Sarah Palin and John McCain wouldn't be qualified to be a CEO of a large corporation but they conveniently ignore that she said Obama's and Biden's name in the same sentence?

Sound file from radio show

Video of Interview

McCain adviser Fiorina: Palin not ready to run a corporation

(CNN) -- Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO turned top John McCain aide, said she doesn't think Sarah Palin is qualified to run a major corporation.

..."If John McCain's top economic adviser doesn't think he can run a corporation, how on Earth can he run the largest economy in the world in the midst of a financial crisis?" said Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor. "Apparently, even the people who run his campaign agree that the economy is an issue John McCain doesn't understand as well as he should."

Palin and the 'Experience' Canard

Global View - WSJ.com

If nothing else, the media meltdown over Sarah Palin's candidacy for the vice presidency has exposed the not-unsuspected truth that, when it comes to historical ignorance and political amnesia, our cultural panjandrums are in a class by themselves.

ABC's Charlie Gibson is only the latest to offer himself upon the altar of self-parody with his pop-quizzing of the Alaska governor during their interview last week.

Gibson: "Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?"

Palin: "In what respect, Charlie?"

Which was a sensible answer, given that no higher authority than Jacob Weisberg of Slate has counted six versions of the thing (including "absence of any functioning doctrine at all"). Further pressed on the subject, Gov. Palin explained that "what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism," which better sums up the gist of Bush policy than Mr. Gibson's cramped definition of the doctrine as "anticipatory self-defense."

 

 

 Ismael Roldan

Dems, media using lies to paint Palin

The Daily Star, Oneonta, NY - The Newspaper for the Heartland of New York - On The Right Side: Dems, media using lies to paint Palin

Can you believe how scared the cowardly left is about Sarah Palin?

Its petty, immature attempts to insult and demean her and her family seem to know no boundaries, and worse, its lackeys, the mainstream media, continue the lies.

Obama’s teleprompter hits the trail

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Obama’s teleprompter hits the trail « - Blogs from CNN.com

(CNN) — It appears Barack Obama's teleprompter is hitting the campaign trail.

The Democratic presidential nominee has never tried to hide the fact he delivers speeches off the device, though normally he doesn't use one at standard campaign rallies and town hall events.

But the Illinois senator used a teleprompter at both his Colorado events Monday — making for a particularly peculiar scene in Pueblo, where the prompter was set up in the middle of what is normally a rodeo ring.

In case you forgot what Obama looks like without his teleprompter, check this out from an earlier post.