Nancy giving assurances that there will not be a 'witch hunt' for those responsible for the fannie/freddie mess.
Further, according to House Oversight Committee staff, Emanuel has received assurances from Pelosi that she will not allow what he termed a "witch hunt" to take place during the next Congressional session over the role Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac played in the economic crisis.
Emanuel apparently is concerned the roles former Clinton Administration members may have played in the mortgage industry collapse could be politically -- or worse, if the Department of Justice had its way, legally -- treacherous for many.
They sure have no problem having a witch hunt over nothing in the scooter libby case - but on something that results in the partial collapse of the financial system?? nah, no biggie. Business as usual.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
bailout politics
Once again Thomas Sowell knocks the ball out of the park..
Some highlights:
Among the Congressional "leaders" invited to the White House to devise a bailout "solution" are the very people who have for years created the risks that have now come home to roost.
Five years ago, Barney Frank vouched for the "soundness" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and said "I do not see" any "possibility of serious financial losses to the treasury."
Moreover, he said that the federal government has "probably done too little rather than too much to push them to meet the goals of affordable housing."
Earlier this year, Senator Christopher Dodd praised Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for "riding to the rescue" when other financial institutions were cutting back on mortgage loans. He too said that they "need to do more" to help subprime borrowers get better loans.
In other words, Congressman Frank and Senator Dodd wanted the government to push financial institutions to lend to people they would not lend to otherwise, because of the risk of default.
The idea that politicians can assess risks better than people who have spent their whole careers assessing risks should have been so obviously absurd that no one would take it seriously.
If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were free market institutions they could not have gotten away with their risky financial practices because no one would have bought their securities without the implicit assumption that the politicians would bail them out.
read the whole thing - the more Thomas Sowell you read, the smarter you will be.
Some highlights:
Among the Congressional "leaders" invited to the White House to devise a bailout "solution" are the very people who have for years created the risks that have now come home to roost.
Five years ago, Barney Frank vouched for the "soundness" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and said "I do not see" any "possibility of serious financial losses to the treasury."
Moreover, he said that the federal government has "probably done too little rather than too much to push them to meet the goals of affordable housing."
Earlier this year, Senator Christopher Dodd praised Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for "riding to the rescue" when other financial institutions were cutting back on mortgage loans. He too said that they "need to do more" to help subprime borrowers get better loans.
In other words, Congressman Frank and Senator Dodd wanted the government to push financial institutions to lend to people they would not lend to otherwise, because of the risk of default.
The idea that politicians can assess risks better than people who have spent their whole careers assessing risks should have been so obviously absurd that no one would take it seriously.
If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were free market institutions they could not have gotten away with their risky financial practices because no one would have bought their securities without the implicit assumption that the politicians would bail them out.
read the whole thing - the more Thomas Sowell you read, the smarter you will be.
secret, foreign money floods in to obama campaign
What would you say if I told you that there is no reporting on campaign contributions under $200.. you'd say, yeah, that makes sense. Why would we want to track contributions under $200?? I mean, really.. that seems like a waste of time. Is it?
What would you say if I told you that obama has raised over $222 MILLION from contributions of $200 or less.. ? of which only $36.9 million has come from donors the campaign has identified.
With closer scrutiny - it appears as if there is widespread fraud in the obama camp concerning their campaign contributions.
From Newsmax
In a letter dated June 25, 2008, the FEC asked the Obama campaign to verify a series of $25 donations from a contributor identified as “Will, Good” from Austin, Texas.
Mr. Good Will listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You.”
A Newsmax analysis of the 1.4 million individual contributions in the latest master file for the Obama campaign discovered 1,000 separate entries for Mr. Good Will, most of them for $25.
In total, Mr. Good Will gave $17,375.
Similarly, a donor identified as “Pro, Doodad,” from “Nando, NY,” gave $19,500 in 786 separate donations, most of them for $25. For most of these donations, Mr. Doodad Pro listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You,” just as Good Will had done.
Again, if you want a picture of what an obama administration would look like - you really don't have to look far. obama is a proven asset - he befriends corrupt people, has a blatant racist as his mentor and he views the united states as the biggest problem in the world.
When light shines in his dark places, he renounces his friendships and claims 'i have many friends.'
The problem with many today is that they like their ears to be tickled with vapid rhetoric so that they can set aside their own guilt and emptiness. They set aside reason to embrace a feeling, a lie.
Just look at obama's ties to acorn -
a group tied to widespread voter fraud. (i could literally link to articles on this all day)
If you want to know the true measure of a man, look at what he does, not what he says. When you apply that test to obama, you see an empty shell of a soul. A self serving, 'populist' marxist who practices the politics of corruption and favor trading. There is nothing new whatsoever.
He embodies everything wrong with politics but has packaged it in a pretty wrapper and fooled millions.
What would you say if I told you that obama has raised over $222 MILLION from contributions of $200 or less.. ? of which only $36.9 million has come from donors the campaign has identified.
With closer scrutiny - it appears as if there is widespread fraud in the obama camp concerning their campaign contributions.
From Newsmax
In a letter dated June 25, 2008, the FEC asked the Obama campaign to verify a series of $25 donations from a contributor identified as “Will, Good” from Austin, Texas.
Mr. Good Will listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You.”
A Newsmax analysis of the 1.4 million individual contributions in the latest master file for the Obama campaign discovered 1,000 separate entries for Mr. Good Will, most of them for $25.
In total, Mr. Good Will gave $17,375.
Similarly, a donor identified as “Pro, Doodad,” from “Nando, NY,” gave $19,500 in 786 separate donations, most of them for $25. For most of these donations, Mr. Doodad Pro listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You,” just as Good Will had done.
Again, if you want a picture of what an obama administration would look like - you really don't have to look far. obama is a proven asset - he befriends corrupt people, has a blatant racist as his mentor and he views the united states as the biggest problem in the world.
When light shines in his dark places, he renounces his friendships and claims 'i have many friends.'
The problem with many today is that they like their ears to be tickled with vapid rhetoric so that they can set aside their own guilt and emptiness. They set aside reason to embrace a feeling, a lie.
Just look at obama's ties to acorn -
- http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/datelinedc/s_488184.html
- http://michellemalkin.com/2008/08/22/acorn-watch-pt-ii-obama-hid-800000-payment-to-acorn-through-citizen-services-inc/
- http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/02/opinion/main4145761.shtml
- http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45&pid=289192
- http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=302914868143810
- http://clintondems.com/2008/09/obama-and-acorn-voter-fraud/
a group tied to widespread voter fraud. (i could literally link to articles on this all day)
- http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009189
- http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/09/15/more-acorn-vote-fraud-attempts/
- http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/crl-testimony-acorns-voter-fraud/story.aspx?guid=%7B573B31D0-6AB7-4353-B8E7-91300F4DFF81%7D&dist=hppr
- http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003806904_webvotefraud26m.html
- http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/08/cuyahoga_board_probes_voter_re.html
- http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20080925/pl_usnw/crl_testimony_on_acorn_s_voter_fraud
- http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/5030
If you want to know the true measure of a man, look at what he does, not what he says. When you apply that test to obama, you see an empty shell of a soul. A self serving, 'populist' marxist who practices the politics of corruption and favor trading. There is nothing new whatsoever.
He embodies everything wrong with politics but has packaged it in a pretty wrapper and fooled millions.
Monday, September 29, 2008
pelosi rains on her own parade..
nancy.. oh nancy.. after you 'lead' the house to get all of the votes lined up you need, you then launch in to your self serving diatribe to try to lift your approval ratings from the gutter and pander to your moveon.org buddies.. now, there is no deal. As 'Rome' burns, you fiddle.. you play your sad San Francisco tune.
so now, we wait and watch.. it should be no surprise that the do-nothing congress will sit back and once again succeed in doing nothing.
I think it's clear that the American public is not interested in empowering government, the entity responsible for this mess, to take taxpayer money to fix something that should have never happened to begin with. It's not difficult to understand why we as taxpayers are not interested in giving more to those who failed in the first place.
Why not look at some regulatory changes to create liquidity ? Why not reduce the capital gains tax to 0%. Why not change income tax laws and corporate tax laws to create more liquidity ?
The interesting thing to see is whether inaction will actually result in stabilization after the initial shock. Will the markets weather this storm losing 10-15% and then recover without a bailout ? Will we see a total collapse based on zero liquidity in the credit markets? Time will tell.
I think it's obvious that overinvolvement from the government has resulted in this mess. Adding more government to the equation makes me squeemish.. as a great man once said:
"That government is best which governs least."
so now, we wait and watch.. it should be no surprise that the do-nothing congress will sit back and once again succeed in doing nothing.
I think it's clear that the American public is not interested in empowering government, the entity responsible for this mess, to take taxpayer money to fix something that should have never happened to begin with. It's not difficult to understand why we as taxpayers are not interested in giving more to those who failed in the first place.
Why not look at some regulatory changes to create liquidity ? Why not reduce the capital gains tax to 0%. Why not change income tax laws and corporate tax laws to create more liquidity ?
The interesting thing to see is whether inaction will actually result in stabilization after the initial shock. Will the markets weather this storm losing 10-15% and then recover without a bailout ? Will we see a total collapse based on zero liquidity in the credit markets? Time will tell.
I think it's obvious that overinvolvement from the government has resulted in this mess. Adding more government to the equation makes me squeemish.. as a great man once said:
"That government is best which governs least."
the obama gestapo
Can I say that obama's true colors are showing without being called a racist ?? I'll give it a try. obama is doing his best to create his own state police force to monitor 'truth' in the election. Mind you, he has no concern about the truth of his own campaign, just the 'truth' that doesn't flatter the secular messiah.
Remember - obama has already called for a state run police force with equal capabilities to the miliatary. he says, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in orderto achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
watch it for yourself..
NOW- obama is using police state tactics in Missouri - sparking outrage from the governor.
Just like the good marxist he is, obama is showing his true colors..
Remember - obama has already called for a state run police force with equal capabilities to the miliatary. he says, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in orderto achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
watch it for yourself..
NOW- obama is using police state tactics in Missouri - sparking outrage from the governor.
Just like the good marxist he is, obama is showing his true colors..
more evidence of dem responsibility for the financial crisis...
this is from hot air
--------------------------
Highlights of this eight-minute video:
Maxine Waters: Through nearly a dozen hearings, we were frankly trying to fix something that wasn’t broke. Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin Raines. [Raines would barely avoid prosecution for fraud.]
Gregory Meeks: … I’m just pissed off at OFHEO [the regulators trying to warn Congress of insolvency at the GSEs], because if it wasn’t for you, I don’t think we’d be here in the first place. … There’s been nothing that indicated that’s wrong with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac has come up on its own … The question that then comes up is the competence that your agency has with reference to deciding and regulating these GSEs.
Lacy Clay: This hearing is about the political lynching of Franklin Raines.
Barney Frank: I don’t see anything in this report that raises safety and soundness problems.
Take a good look through this video in 2004, and ask yourself who on this panel wanted more regulatory oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and which members spent their time attacking the regulators. When Barack Obama talks at debates about how the past eight years of regulatory laissez-faire created the problem, he may want to review the transcripts of these hearings and note that Democrats repeatedly undermined regulators and called them everything from incompetent to bigoted in their rush to keep the status quo at Fannie and Freddie.
In 2005, Fortune published a lengthy anaylsis of the impending crash of Fannie Mae, and included this altercation between OFHEO and
--------------------------
Highlights of this eight-minute video:
Maxine Waters: Through nearly a dozen hearings, we were frankly trying to fix something that wasn’t broke. Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin Raines. [Raines would barely avoid prosecution for fraud.]
Gregory Meeks: … I’m just pissed off at OFHEO [the regulators trying to warn Congress of insolvency at the GSEs], because if it wasn’t for you, I don’t think we’d be here in the first place. … There’s been nothing that indicated that’s wrong with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac has come up on its own … The question that then comes up is the competence that your agency has with reference to deciding and regulating these GSEs.
Lacy Clay: This hearing is about the political lynching of Franklin Raines.
Barney Frank: I don’t see anything in this report that raises safety and soundness problems.
Take a good look through this video in 2004, and ask yourself who on this panel wanted more regulatory oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and which members spent their time attacking the regulators. When Barack Obama talks at debates about how the past eight years of regulatory laissez-faire created the problem, he may want to review the transcripts of these hearings and note that Democrats repeatedly undermined regulators and called them everything from incompetent to bigoted in their rush to keep the status quo at Fannie and Freddie.
In 2005, Fortune published a lengthy anaylsis of the impending crash of Fannie Mae, and included this altercation between OFHEO and
Friday, September 26, 2008
dems <3 voter fraud..
the party of voter fraud takes bold new steps to win ohio..
Buckeye State or Banana Republic?
Ever since Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner was elected following the near-Democratic sweep of statewide offices in November 2006, she has worked steadily to give her party the edge it needs to win the White House in 2008.
Knowing that no Republican has ever won the presidency without Ohio, and that the Buckeye State gave George W. Bush his electoral margin of victory in 2004, Brunner has turned a blind eye to massive voter fraud throughout the state by Democratic party-aligned groups like ACORN. She is also flagrantly violating Ohio election law and pulling out all the stops for her man, Barack Obama, in this battleground state.
The most critical issue might be decided within the next few days. Secretary Brunner has unilaterally opened a one-week window, from September 30-October 6, for absentee voters to register and cast a ballot on the same day, with only the last four digits of th Social Security number needed to vote. No ID, no problem.
This method, of course, opens up the system to massive voter fraud. Not only that, but state law requires that voters be registered 30 days in advance of when they vote — a provision of the law that Brunner’s week-long window openly flouts. The Ohio GOP filed a lawsuit with the Ohio Supreme Court earlier this month to put a stop to the practice.
Then on Thursday, the ACLU jumped into the fray by filing their own lawsuit in federal court in support of Brunner’s plan, claiming that following the 30 day advance registration law could disenfranchise voters. Thus, the Ohio Supreme Court, which could rule at any moment on the matter, may end up being overruled by an unelected federal court judge. This reverses the scenario seen in 2000, when Democrats complained that the U.S. Supreme Court intervened against the Florida Supreme Court’s attempts to erase Bush’s razor thin victory there. Democrat complaints about federal intervention in state elections appear to depend on whose ox (invariably the GOP’s) is getting gored.
Secretary Brunner’s same-day registration and voting plan only scratches the surface of the partisan warfare she has waged to ensure Ohio swings for Barack Obama and her fellow Democrats on November 4.
In a move to actively suppress GOP absentee voting, Brunner has directed county election boards to reject potentially thousands of Republican applications for absentee ballots prepared by the McCain campaign, which sent out more than 1 million applications. The applications include a check box to note that the applicant is a qualified voter. Brunner, however, has stated that if the box isn’t checked, the application must be rejected.
...
And then there is the blind eye that Brunner has been turning to flagrant election fraud through bogus voter registrations submitted by ACORN. The Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) Board of Elections is currently investigating 75,000 ACORN registrations, with multiple registrations under the same name, different birth dates, and non-existent addresses. The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported just a few weeks ago:
Board employees are unsure how many of the cards are fraudulent. But the voter registration department received so many suspicious cards that it began compiling a binder with evidence. The binder grew to be an inch-thick.
Numerous reports of bogus registrations submitted by ACORN and other Democratic Party-aligned organizations have surfaced statewide, and yet no action has been taken by the secretary of state. Added to her overlooking systematic voter fraud by Democratic Party allies, Jennifer Brunner’s flagrant ignoring of election laws, suppressing Republican voters, and stacking local election boards represent an unparalleled corrupting of Ohio’s election system.
Thus, Obama’s chances to win the White House have improved dramatically by having one of his own as Ohio’s highest election official. But the price of his victory might be for Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to turn the Buckeye State into banana republic.
Buckeye State or Banana Republic?
Ever since Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner was elected following the near-Democratic sweep of statewide offices in November 2006, she has worked steadily to give her party the edge it needs to win the White House in 2008.
Knowing that no Republican has ever won the presidency without Ohio, and that the Buckeye State gave George W. Bush his electoral margin of victory in 2004, Brunner has turned a blind eye to massive voter fraud throughout the state by Democratic party-aligned groups like ACORN. She is also flagrantly violating Ohio election law and pulling out all the stops for her man, Barack Obama, in this battleground state.
The most critical issue might be decided within the next few days. Secretary Brunner has unilaterally opened a one-week window, from September 30-October 6, for absentee voters to register and cast a ballot on the same day, with only the last four digits of th Social Security number needed to vote. No ID, no problem.
This method, of course, opens up the system to massive voter fraud. Not only that, but state law requires that voters be registered 30 days in advance of when they vote — a provision of the law that Brunner’s week-long window openly flouts. The Ohio GOP filed a lawsuit with the Ohio Supreme Court earlier this month to put a stop to the practice.
Then on Thursday, the ACLU jumped into the fray by filing their own lawsuit in federal court in support of Brunner’s plan, claiming that following the 30 day advance registration law could disenfranchise voters. Thus, the Ohio Supreme Court, which could rule at any moment on the matter, may end up being overruled by an unelected federal court judge. This reverses the scenario seen in 2000, when Democrats complained that the U.S. Supreme Court intervened against the Florida Supreme Court’s attempts to erase Bush’s razor thin victory there. Democrat complaints about federal intervention in state elections appear to depend on whose ox (invariably the GOP’s) is getting gored.
Secretary Brunner’s same-day registration and voting plan only scratches the surface of the partisan warfare she has waged to ensure Ohio swings for Barack Obama and her fellow Democrats on November 4.
In a move to actively suppress GOP absentee voting, Brunner has directed county election boards to reject potentially thousands of Republican applications for absentee ballots prepared by the McCain campaign, which sent out more than 1 million applications. The applications include a check box to note that the applicant is a qualified voter. Brunner, however, has stated that if the box isn’t checked, the application must be rejected.
...
And then there is the blind eye that Brunner has been turning to flagrant election fraud through bogus voter registrations submitted by ACORN. The Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) Board of Elections is currently investigating 75,000 ACORN registrations, with multiple registrations under the same name, different birth dates, and non-existent addresses. The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported just a few weeks ago:
Board employees are unsure how many of the cards are fraudulent. But the voter registration department received so many suspicious cards that it began compiling a binder with evidence. The binder grew to be an inch-thick.
Numerous reports of bogus registrations submitted by ACORN and other Democratic Party-aligned organizations have surfaced statewide, and yet no action has been taken by the secretary of state. Added to her overlooking systematic voter fraud by Democratic Party allies, Jennifer Brunner’s flagrant ignoring of election laws, suppressing Republican voters, and stacking local election boards represent an unparalleled corrupting of Ohio’s election system.
Thus, Obama’s chances to win the White House have improved dramatically by having one of his own as Ohio’s highest election official. But the price of his victory might be for Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to turn the Buckeye State into banana republic.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
deceptive polling..
i think everyone knows this is the deal - but just in case you don't, it's important you do. polls are biased. you can get whatever result you want by skewing the audience demographics. this is why democrats cry so much when they lose elections.. all the polls say they're ahead, but none of the voters agree.
this from pj media.
Bogus Poll Intended to Boost Obama
The recent Washington Post-ABC poll is a textbook example of how partisan media outlets manipulate "news."
As we enter into the final month of the election, we will be bombarded with all sorts of information intended to sway our votes. We will, of course, be inundated with television commercials, direct mail pieces, radio ads, and automated phone calls. But we will also be subjected to numerous polls, many of which will be just as partisan as the political propaganda the candidates are relying upon.
A disturbing trend in recent elections has been the intentional use of skewed polling by the media to promote their ideological bent rather than to report the news. We got another dose of this biased effort to twist the news to the liking of the media giants just this week with the latest Washington Post-ABC poll, which “revealed” that Barack Obama has moved to a nine-point lead over John McCain in the presidential race. The mainstream media breathlessly reported this information as indicative of McCain’s loss of campaign steam after the post-convention bounce and the recent euphoria over Sarah Palin.
But what the news outlets failed to report in their coverage about the Washington Post-ABC poll was the fact that 38% of the individuals who made up the poll identified themselves as Democrats, while only 28% identified themselves as Republicans. (See poll question #901.) Not surprisingly, a poll of mostly Democrats revealed that most of them wanted Democrat Barack Obama to be president rather than Republican John McCain. (Last month, the same poll used a 13-point edge for the Democrats among likely voters to produce similar results heading into the conventions.) The heavily skewed partisan nature of the poll is the real story, not the bogus numbers produced as a result of what is essentially a “push poll.”
The poll tweaked the numbers in Obama’s favor in other ways as well. Even the so-called “independents” that comprised the poll were actually more partisan than independent. When asked towards which political party they “lean,” the independents who replied “Democrat” outnumbered those who responded “Republican” by an 18% margin! (See poll question #904.) That’s not a lean; that’s a landslide — yet it only produced a nine-point lead for Obama.
Also, the poll questioned a lot more women than men. In fact, the gender gap was eight points. Women are expected to vote in slightly larger numbers than men this year, but not by a 54 to 46 margin! Because Democrats have consistently enjoyed a bit of a gender advantage with women voters, this margin gives Obama’s poll numbers a significant boost.
The poll also admits to “over-sampling” the percentage of black voters. With Obama pulling about 95% of the black vote, do you think that might help his numbers a bit? All of these tweaks and subtle nudges of the numbers were intended to produce a desired result, rather than providing voters with an accurate snapshot of public opinion.
The Washington Post-ABC poll is a textbook example of how mainstream media outlets driven by ideological zeal and a pro-Obama bias can “create” the news and then “report” it. It is also a good reminder that voters should be extremely wary of almost all polling that will be reported during the coming weeks.
this from pj media.
Bogus Poll Intended to Boost Obama
The recent Washington Post-ABC poll is a textbook example of how partisan media outlets manipulate "news."
As we enter into the final month of the election, we will be bombarded with all sorts of information intended to sway our votes. We will, of course, be inundated with television commercials, direct mail pieces, radio ads, and automated phone calls. But we will also be subjected to numerous polls, many of which will be just as partisan as the political propaganda the candidates are relying upon.
A disturbing trend in recent elections has been the intentional use of skewed polling by the media to promote their ideological bent rather than to report the news. We got another dose of this biased effort to twist the news to the liking of the media giants just this week with the latest Washington Post-ABC poll, which “revealed” that Barack Obama has moved to a nine-point lead over John McCain in the presidential race. The mainstream media breathlessly reported this information as indicative of McCain’s loss of campaign steam after the post-convention bounce and the recent euphoria over Sarah Palin.
But what the news outlets failed to report in their coverage about the Washington Post-ABC poll was the fact that 38% of the individuals who made up the poll identified themselves as Democrats, while only 28% identified themselves as Republicans. (See poll question #901.) Not surprisingly, a poll of mostly Democrats revealed that most of them wanted Democrat Barack Obama to be president rather than Republican John McCain. (Last month, the same poll used a 13-point edge for the Democrats among likely voters to produce similar results heading into the conventions.) The heavily skewed partisan nature of the poll is the real story, not the bogus numbers produced as a result of what is essentially a “push poll.”
The poll tweaked the numbers in Obama’s favor in other ways as well. Even the so-called “independents” that comprised the poll were actually more partisan than independent. When asked towards which political party they “lean,” the independents who replied “Democrat” outnumbered those who responded “Republican” by an 18% margin! (See poll question #904.) That’s not a lean; that’s a landslide — yet it only produced a nine-point lead for Obama.
Also, the poll questioned a lot more women than men. In fact, the gender gap was eight points. Women are expected to vote in slightly larger numbers than men this year, but not by a 54 to 46 margin! Because Democrats have consistently enjoyed a bit of a gender advantage with women voters, this margin gives Obama’s poll numbers a significant boost.
The poll also admits to “over-sampling” the percentage of black voters. With Obama pulling about 95% of the black vote, do you think that might help his numbers a bit? All of these tweaks and subtle nudges of the numbers were intended to produce a desired result, rather than providing voters with an accurate snapshot of public opinion.
The Washington Post-ABC poll is a textbook example of how mainstream media outlets driven by ideological zeal and a pro-Obama bias can “create” the news and then “report” it. It is also a good reminder that voters should be extremely wary of almost all polling that will be reported during the coming weeks.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
quote of the day:
Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good. In area after area - crime, education, housing, race relations - the situation has gotten worse after the bright new theories were put into operation. The amazing thing is that this history of failure and disaster has neither discouraged the social engineers nor discredited them. - Thomas Sowell
russia + iran = love
I remember talking with one of my Russian friends about the eventual Russian participation in an invasion of Israel. She was rather stunned and taken aback that Russia would have anything to do with that whatsoever.. why would Russia care about Israel, she asked. Interestingly, the Russian/Syrian/Iranian alliance is leading toward two eventualities - the total destruction of Damascus and the invasion of Israel led by a Russian/Iranian axis. Those war clouds are gathering.. Israel will not stand by and allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.. by taking action they will be de facto targeting Russian engineers, military and equipment..
From DEKBAfile
Russia jilts six-power sanctions front against Iran’s nuclear defiance
DEBKAfile Special Report
September 24, 2008, 1:54 PM (GMT+02:00)
Russian Tor-M1 batteries delivered to shield Iran's nuclear sites
Moscow’s actions spoke louder than the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s anti-Semitic, anti-American rantings at the UN General Assembly Tuesday, Sept. 23 - despite the applause he won in the chamber.
A foreign ministry spokesman in Moscow said that Russia will not attend the meeting called for Thursday of the five UN Security Council permanent members’ foreign ministers plus Germany to approve more sanctions against Iran for its nuclear defiance. Using blunt, undiplomatic words, the ministry said: “We do not see any fire that requires us to toss everything aside and meet to discuss Iran's nuclear program in the middle of a packed week at the United Nations General Assembly.”
Reflecting the post-Georgian conflict frictions besetting Russian-US relations, the statement harshly criticized Washington, saying: “It would be very desirable for Washington to finally decide what it wants in its relations with Moscow. If it wants to punish Russia, this is one thing. If it agrees we have common interests… that is another. To use the words of Condoleezza Rice, you can’t have it both ways.”
DEBKAfile’s political sources report that Moscow’s action has buried the hopes publicly entertained by President George W. Bush and Israel’s Shimon Peres that a joint international diplomatic front would persuade Iran to give up its military nuclear aspirations and obey UN resolutions.
The Russians are consistent in their new policy of promoting their influence in the anti-American sector of the Middle East. Saturday, Sept. 19, official spokesmen did not rule out the sale to Iran of advanced S-300 anti-air missiles, having just completed the delivery to Iran of 29 Tor-M1 missile batteries for deployment at its nuclear sites.
Early Wednesday, Ahmadinejad proclaimed at the UN General Assembly: “The Zionist regime is on a definite slope to collapse” and “The American empire in the world is reaching the end of its road.”
The Iranian president delivered his outrageous speech to the world, safe in the knowledge that his Islamic regime is backed by Russia.
At the opposite end of the moral spectrum stood Argentine president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, who demanded in her UN speech that Iran extradite five ex-officials to stand trial for the 1994 bombing of the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires. The attack killed 85 people, left 150 injured. Among the terrorists accused of the violent attack are
ex-president Hashem Rafsanjani and a member of the Lebanese Hizballah, a group which Tehran uses for its anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish terrorist operations.
From DEKBAfile
Russia jilts six-power sanctions front against Iran’s nuclear defiance
DEBKAfile Special Report
September 24, 2008, 1:54 PM (GMT+02:00)
Russian Tor-M1 batteries delivered to shield Iran's nuclear sites
Moscow’s actions spoke louder than the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s anti-Semitic, anti-American rantings at the UN General Assembly Tuesday, Sept. 23 - despite the applause he won in the chamber.
A foreign ministry spokesman in Moscow said that Russia will not attend the meeting called for Thursday of the five UN Security Council permanent members’ foreign ministers plus Germany to approve more sanctions against Iran for its nuclear defiance. Using blunt, undiplomatic words, the ministry said: “We do not see any fire that requires us to toss everything aside and meet to discuss Iran's nuclear program in the middle of a packed week at the United Nations General Assembly.”
Reflecting the post-Georgian conflict frictions besetting Russian-US relations, the statement harshly criticized Washington, saying: “It would be very desirable for Washington to finally decide what it wants in its relations with Moscow. If it wants to punish Russia, this is one thing. If it agrees we have common interests… that is another. To use the words of Condoleezza Rice, you can’t have it both ways.”
DEBKAfile’s political sources report that Moscow’s action has buried the hopes publicly entertained by President George W. Bush and Israel’s Shimon Peres that a joint international diplomatic front would persuade Iran to give up its military nuclear aspirations and obey UN resolutions.
The Russians are consistent in their new policy of promoting their influence in the anti-American sector of the Middle East. Saturday, Sept. 19, official spokesmen did not rule out the sale to Iran of advanced S-300 anti-air missiles, having just completed the delivery to Iran of 29 Tor-M1 missile batteries for deployment at its nuclear sites.
Early Wednesday, Ahmadinejad proclaimed at the UN General Assembly: “The Zionist regime is on a definite slope to collapse” and “The American empire in the world is reaching the end of its road.”
The Iranian president delivered his outrageous speech to the world, safe in the knowledge that his Islamic regime is backed by Russia.
At the opposite end of the moral spectrum stood Argentine president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, who demanded in her UN speech that Iran extradite five ex-officials to stand trial for the 1994 bombing of the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires. The attack killed 85 people, left 150 injured. Among the terrorists accused of the violent attack are
ex-president Hashem Rafsanjani and a member of the Lebanese Hizballah, a group which Tehran uses for its anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish terrorist operations.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
liberal environmentalist cry..
what happens when a 72 year old man drives by a high school and sees a hummer parked out front ?? the 72 year old man stops, gets out and keys the hummer. this is what liberal environmentalists are reduced to.
it's funny to think that a 72 year old man should take some maturity lessons from a high school student.. sad really. it's sad to see the mental illness of environmentalism taken to such extremes.
after getting busted by the camera footage, the man - a member of the sierra club and greenpeace - turns himself in and notes that not only has he keyed this hummer, he's keyed many more. why?? because the carbon footprint is too big.
the irony? the car he drives only gets 1-2 mpg more than the hummer.. factor in the amount of driving he's doing to find hummers to key and the paint used to repaint the hummers -- this old guy prolly needs to go before the world court and beg for forgiveness from the green gods.
Monday, September 22, 2008
town changes name to 'obama'
seriously? the skinny - this town looks real nice from the outside, but once you get inside the town limits, there is nothing but hot air. should be a great vacation spot.
only in california..
Marin County Town Changes Name To 'Obama'
OLEMA (AP) ― Motorists entering the quaint, woodsy town of Olema near the sea in Marin County may notice a subtle change as they enter: it appears the burg's name has been changed to ''Obama.''
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama supporter and bed and breakfast owner Kelly Emery created a perfect mirror of the green sign people read as they enter the town's limits.
Now people unfamiliar with the area may think they are entering the town of Obama, population: 55.
Emery's sign has created little fuss in this politically liberal area, but the county said there are laws regulating such behavior. Marin County senior planner Curtis Havel said county code allows for political signs on one's residence or place of business not more than 45 days prior to an election.
© 2008 The Associated Press
only in california..
Marin County Town Changes Name To 'Obama'
OLEMA (AP) ― Motorists entering the quaint, woodsy town of Olema near the sea in Marin County may notice a subtle change as they enter: it appears the burg's name has been changed to ''Obama.''
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama supporter and bed and breakfast owner Kelly Emery created a perfect mirror of the green sign people read as they enter the town's limits.
Now people unfamiliar with the area may think they are entering the town of Obama, population: 55.
Emery's sign has created little fuss in this politically liberal area, but the county said there are laws regulating such behavior. Marin County senior planner Curtis Havel said county code allows for political signs on one's residence or place of business not more than 45 days prior to an election.
© 2008 The Associated Press
the vision of the left
ok, so i have a man crush on thomas sowell - but he has such a command of the philosophy that is in my head, it's impossibly to deny his genius :D
----------------------------------------------
The Vision of the Left
Conservatives, as well as liberals, would undoubtedly be happier living in the kind of world envisioned by the left.
Very few people have either a vested interest or an ideological preference for a world in which there are many inequalities.
Even fewer would prefer a world in which vast sums of money have to be devoted to military defense, when so much benefit could be produced if those resources were directed into medical research instead.
It is hardly surprising that young people prefer the political left. The only reason for rejecting the left's vision is that the real world in which we live is very different from the world that the left perceives today or envisions for tomorrow.
Most of us learn that from experience — but experience is precisely what the young are lacking.
"Experience" is often just a fancy word for the mistakes that we belatedly realized we were making, only after the realities of the world made us pay a painful price for being wrong.
Those who are insulated from that pain — whether by being born into affluence or wealth, or shielded by the welfare state, or insulated by tenure in academia or in the federal judiciary — can remain in a state of perpetual immaturity.
Individuals can refuse to grow up, especially when surrounded in their work and in their social life by similarly situated and like-minded people.
Even people born into normal lives, but who have been able through talent or luck to escape into a world of celebrity and wealth, can likewise find themselves in the enviable position of being able to choose whether to grow up or not.
Those of us who can recall what it was like to be an adolescent must know that growing up can be a painful transition from the sheltered world of childhood.
No matter how much we may have wanted adult freedom, there was seldom the same enthusiasm for taking on the burdens of adult responsibilities and having to weigh painful trade-offs in a world that hemmed us in on all sides, long after we were liberated from parental restrictions.
Should we be surprised that the strongest supporters of the political left are found among the young, academics, limousine liberals with trust funds, media celebrities and federal judges?
These are hardly Karl Marx's proletarians, who were supposed to bring on the revolution. The working class are in fact today among those most skeptical about the visions of the left.
Ordinary working class people did not lead the stampede to Barack Obama, even before his disdain for them slipped out in unguarded moments.
The agenda of the left is fine for the world that they envision as existing today and the world they want to create tomorrow.
That is a world not hemmed in on all sides by inherent constraints and the painful trade-offs that these constraints imply. Theirs is a world where there are attractive, win-win "solutions" in place of those ugly trade-offs in the world that the rest of us live in.
Theirs is a world where we can just talk to opposing nations and work things out, instead of having to pour tons of money into military equipment to keep them at bay. The left calls this "change" but in fact it is a set of notions that were tried out by the Western democracies in the 1930s — and which led to the most catastrophic war in history.
For those who bother to study history, it was precisely the opposite policies in the 1980s — pouring tons of money into military equipment — which brought the Cold War and its threat of nuclear annihilation to an end.
The left fought bitterly against that "arms race" which in fact lifted the burden of the Soviet threat, instead of leading to war as the elites claimed.
Personally, I wish Ronald Reagan could have talked the Soviets into being nicer, instead of having to spend all that money. Only experience makes me skeptical about that "kinder and gentler" approach and the vision behind it.
----------------------------------------------
The Vision of the Left
Conservatives, as well as liberals, would undoubtedly be happier living in the kind of world envisioned by the left.
Very few people have either a vested interest or an ideological preference for a world in which there are many inequalities.
Even fewer would prefer a world in which vast sums of money have to be devoted to military defense, when so much benefit could be produced if those resources were directed into medical research instead.
It is hardly surprising that young people prefer the political left. The only reason for rejecting the left's vision is that the real world in which we live is very different from the world that the left perceives today or envisions for tomorrow.
Most of us learn that from experience — but experience is precisely what the young are lacking.
"Experience" is often just a fancy word for the mistakes that we belatedly realized we were making, only after the realities of the world made us pay a painful price for being wrong.
Those who are insulated from that pain — whether by being born into affluence or wealth, or shielded by the welfare state, or insulated by tenure in academia or in the federal judiciary — can remain in a state of perpetual immaturity.
Individuals can refuse to grow up, especially when surrounded in their work and in their social life by similarly situated and like-minded people.
Even people born into normal lives, but who have been able through talent or luck to escape into a world of celebrity and wealth, can likewise find themselves in the enviable position of being able to choose whether to grow up or not.
Those of us who can recall what it was like to be an adolescent must know that growing up can be a painful transition from the sheltered world of childhood.
No matter how much we may have wanted adult freedom, there was seldom the same enthusiasm for taking on the burdens of adult responsibilities and having to weigh painful trade-offs in a world that hemmed us in on all sides, long after we were liberated from parental restrictions.
Should we be surprised that the strongest supporters of the political left are found among the young, academics, limousine liberals with trust funds, media celebrities and federal judges?
These are hardly Karl Marx's proletarians, who were supposed to bring on the revolution. The working class are in fact today among those most skeptical about the visions of the left.
Ordinary working class people did not lead the stampede to Barack Obama, even before his disdain for them slipped out in unguarded moments.
The agenda of the left is fine for the world that they envision as existing today and the world they want to create tomorrow.
That is a world not hemmed in on all sides by inherent constraints and the painful trade-offs that these constraints imply. Theirs is a world where there are attractive, win-win "solutions" in place of those ugly trade-offs in the world that the rest of us live in.
Theirs is a world where we can just talk to opposing nations and work things out, instead of having to pour tons of money into military equipment to keep them at bay. The left calls this "change" but in fact it is a set of notions that were tried out by the Western democracies in the 1930s — and which led to the most catastrophic war in history.
For those who bother to study history, it was precisely the opposite policies in the 1980s — pouring tons of money into military equipment — which brought the Cold War and its threat of nuclear annihilation to an end.
The left fought bitterly against that "arms race" which in fact lifted the burden of the Soviet threat, instead of leading to war as the elites claimed.
Personally, I wish Ronald Reagan could have talked the Soviets into being nicer, instead of having to spend all that money. Only experience makes me skeptical about that "kinder and gentler" approach and the vision behind it.
quote of the day:
"'Entitlement' is not only the opposite of achievement, it undermines incentives to do all the hard work that leads to achievement. It is the people who were born and raised in the welfare state atmosphere who seem to have great difficulty finding jobs."
-Thomas Sowell
-Thomas Sowell
How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis
this from bloomberg's kevin hassett-
Sept. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The financial crisis of the past year has provided a number of surprising twists and turns, and from Bear Stearns Cos. to American International Group Inc., ambiguity has been a big part of the story.
Why did Bear Stearns fail, and how does that relate to AIG? It all seems so complex.
But really, it isn't. Enough cards on this table have been turned over that the story is now clear. The economic history books will describe this episode in simple and understandable terms: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exploded, and many bystanders were injured in the blast, some fatally.
Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves.
In the times that Fannie and Freddie couldn't make the market, they became the market. Over the years, it added up to an enormous obligation. As of last June, Fannie alone owned or guaranteed more than $388 billion in high-risk mortgage investments. Their large presence created an environment within which even mortgage-backed securities assembled by others could find a ready home.
The problem was that the trillions of dollars in play were only low-risk investments if real estate prices continued to rise. Once they began to fall, the entire house of cards came down with them.
Turning Point
Take away Fannie and Freddie, or regulate them more wisely, and it's hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened.
It is easy to identify the historical turning point that marked the beginning of the end.
Back in 2005, Fannie and Freddie were, after years of dominating Washington, on the ropes. They were enmeshed in accounting scandals that led to turnover at the top. At one telling moment in late 2004, captured in an article by my American Enterprise Institute colleague Peter Wallison, the Securities and Exchange Comiission's chief accountant told disgraced Fannie Mae chief Franklin Raines that Fannie's position on the relevant accounting issue was not even ``on the page'' of allowable interpretations.
Then legislative momentum emerged for an attempt to create a ``world-class regulator'' that would oversee the pair more like banks, imposing strict requirements on their ability to take excessive risks. Politicians who previously had associated themselves proudly with the two accounting miscreants were less eager to be associated with them. The time was ripe.
Greenspan's Warning
The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn't be foreseen, yet in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''
What happened next was extraordinary. 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.
Sept. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The financial crisis of the past year has provided a number of surprising twists and turns, and from Bear Stearns Cos. to American International Group Inc., ambiguity has been a big part of the story.
Why did Bear Stearns fail, and how does that relate to AIG? It all seems so complex.
But really, it isn't. Enough cards on this table have been turned over that the story is now clear. The economic history books will describe this episode in simple and understandable terms: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exploded, and many bystanders were injured in the blast, some fatally.
Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves.
In the times that Fannie and Freddie couldn't make the market, they became the market. Over the years, it added up to an enormous obligation. As of last June, Fannie alone owned or guaranteed more than $388 billion in high-risk mortgage investments. Their large presence created an environment within which even mortgage-backed securities assembled by others could find a ready home.
The problem was that the trillions of dollars in play were only low-risk investments if real estate prices continued to rise. Once they began to fall, the entire house of cards came down with them.
Turning Point
Take away Fannie and Freddie, or regulate them more wisely, and it's hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened.
It is easy to identify the historical turning point that marked the beginning of the end.
Back in 2005, Fannie and Freddie were, after years of dominating Washington, on the ropes. They were enmeshed in accounting scandals that led to turnover at the top. At one telling moment in late 2004, captured in an article by my American Enterprise Institute colleague Peter Wallison, the Securities and Exchange Comiission's chief accountant told disgraced Fannie Mae chief Franklin Raines that Fannie's position on the relevant accounting issue was not even ``on the page'' of allowable interpretations.
Then legislative momentum emerged for an attempt to create a ``world-class regulator'' that would oversee the pair more like banks, imposing strict requirements on their ability to take excessive risks. Politicians who previously had associated themselves proudly with the two accounting miscreants were less eager to be associated with them. The time was ripe.
Greenspan's Warning
The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn't be foreseen, yet in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''
What happened next was extraordinary. 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.
honor killing of the week..
this from jihadwatch.org
this is just sick.. and frankly people need to get a grasp of what it means to live under sharia.. the uber liberals who champion the cause of islam in their deranged obsession with multi-culturalism need to understand that they would be first on the list to enjoy these fruits of their labor..
Jordan: father repeatedly stabs daughter, crushes her head with rock
Unknown to the English speaking world, another grisly apostate/honor killing recently took place in the Muslim world, namely, Jordan. On August 28, 2008, days before her 21st birthday, Rana Riad Muhammad Siwahra, wife and mother of two girls (aged 3 and 5) was murdered by her father. After stabbing her with a knife five-six times in the stomach and chest, he smashed her skull in with a large rock. Afterwards, he washed his hands and went to the market where he was later arrested.
why did this happen ??
because her husband embraced Christianity!!
Her husband, Sultan Muhammad Siwahra, however—himself on the run and in hiding—was recently interviewed on the Arabic satellite program, Su’al Jar’i (“Daring Question”), where he insisted that his wife was murdered specifically because of Islam and the culture it breeds.
According to Sultan, he grew up in an average Muslim household; yet, when he was a teenager, he was lured to the call of jihad, eventually going to Iraq in order to fight the American infidels and gain entrance into a voluptuous paradise (he asserted that, as a teenager, one of his greatest motivations to go on the jihad was the promise of 72 “unearthly” women in paradise).
To make a long story short, he eventually embraced Christianity (in part due to watching Father Zakaria’s show) and abandoned the jihad. When her family found out that he had apostatized, they renounced him, razed his house, reclaimed their daughter, and, according to sharia, which does not permit Muslim women to marry infidels, concluded that Rana’s marriage to Sultan was null and void. In the meantime, he went in hiding in Syria.
In the meantime, Rana and her daughters were under “house arrest” at her father’s home, who absolutely forbade her seeing her husband, insisting that doing so is tantamount to adultery, as his apostasy had by default annulled their marriage.
Rana eventually fled to where Sultan was residing, telling him that she just wants to be with him, and that’s its best for them to flee Jordan, from both their families, and go live anywhere else. When Sultan asked her about his conversion, she told him that she too was prepared to go to a church and convert to Christianity—but that they had better act quick before her father caught up with them.
That same day, while Sultan was away, her father, having ascertained where they were, arrived at their place, greeting his daughter with a knife-stab to the heart and, for the grand finale, pounding her head open with a rock
this is just sick.. and frankly people need to get a grasp of what it means to live under sharia.. the uber liberals who champion the cause of islam in their deranged obsession with multi-culturalism need to understand that they would be first on the list to enjoy these fruits of their labor..
Jordan: father repeatedly stabs daughter, crushes her head with rock
Unknown to the English speaking world, another grisly apostate/honor killing recently took place in the Muslim world, namely, Jordan. On August 28, 2008, days before her 21st birthday, Rana Riad Muhammad Siwahra, wife and mother of two girls (aged 3 and 5) was murdered by her father. After stabbing her with a knife five-six times in the stomach and chest, he smashed her skull in with a large rock. Afterwards, he washed his hands and went to the market where he was later arrested.
why did this happen ??
because her husband embraced Christianity!!
Her husband, Sultan Muhammad Siwahra, however—himself on the run and in hiding—was recently interviewed on the Arabic satellite program, Su’al Jar’i (“Daring Question”), where he insisted that his wife was murdered specifically because of Islam and the culture it breeds.
According to Sultan, he grew up in an average Muslim household; yet, when he was a teenager, he was lured to the call of jihad, eventually going to Iraq in order to fight the American infidels and gain entrance into a voluptuous paradise (he asserted that, as a teenager, one of his greatest motivations to go on the jihad was the promise of 72 “unearthly” women in paradise).
To make a long story short, he eventually embraced Christianity (in part due to watching Father Zakaria’s show) and abandoned the jihad. When her family found out that he had apostatized, they renounced him, razed his house, reclaimed their daughter, and, according to sharia, which does not permit Muslim women to marry infidels, concluded that Rana’s marriage to Sultan was null and void. In the meantime, he went in hiding in Syria.
In the meantime, Rana and her daughters were under “house arrest” at her father’s home, who absolutely forbade her seeing her husband, insisting that doing so is tantamount to adultery, as his apostasy had by default annulled their marriage.
Rana eventually fled to where Sultan was residing, telling him that she just wants to be with him, and that’s its best for them to flee Jordan, from both their families, and go live anywhere else. When Sultan asked her about his conversion, she told him that she too was prepared to go to a church and convert to Christianity—but that they had better act quick before her father caught up with them.
That same day, while Sultan was away, her father, having ascertained where they were, arrived at their place, greeting his daughter with a knife-stab to the heart and, for the grand finale, pounding her head open with a rock
palin's speech she wasn't allowed to give..
it's pretty pathetic when partisan politics get in the way of standing up against one of the greatest threats of our time.. but that's exactly what happened when sarah palin wasn't allowed to speak at rally to protest the arrival of mahmoud ahmadinejad in new york.
from the ny sun..
Governor Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president, was scheduled to speak today at a rally in Dag Hammarskjold Plaza to protest the appearance here of President Ahmadinejad of Iran. Her appearance was canceled by rally organizers who sought a nonpolitical event. Following are the remarks Mrs. Palin would have given:
I am honored to be with you and with leaders from across this great country — leaders from different faiths and political parties united in a single voice of outrage.
Tomorrow, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will come to New York — to the heart of what he calls the Great Satan — and speak freely in this, a country whose demise he has called for.
Ahmadinejad may choose his words carefully, but underneath all of the rhetoric is an agenda that threatens all who seek a safer and freer world. We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator's intentions and to call for action to thwart him.
He must be stopped.
The world must awake to the threat this man poses to all of us. Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever took place. He dreams of being an agent in a "Final Solution" — the elimination of the Jewish people. He has called Israel a "stinking corpse" that is "on its way to annihilation." Such talk cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a madman — not when Iran just this summer tested long-range Shahab-3 missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv, not when the Iranian nuclear program is nearing completion, and not when Iran sponsors terrorists that threaten and kill innocent people around the world.
The Iranian government wants nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran is running at least 3,800 centrifuges and that its uranium enrichment capacity is rapidly improving. According to news reports, U.S. intelligence agencies believe the Iranians may have enough nuclear material to produce a bomb within a year.
read it all
the closing:
Senator McCain has made a solemn commitment that I strongly endorse: Never again will we risk another Holocaust. And this is not a wish, a request, or a plea to Israel's enemies. This is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to test us. It is John McCain's promise and it is my promise.
from the ny sun..
Governor Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president, was scheduled to speak today at a rally in Dag Hammarskjold Plaza to protest the appearance here of President Ahmadinejad of Iran. Her appearance was canceled by rally organizers who sought a nonpolitical event. Following are the remarks Mrs. Palin would have given:
I am honored to be with you and with leaders from across this great country — leaders from different faiths and political parties united in a single voice of outrage.
Tomorrow, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will come to New York — to the heart of what he calls the Great Satan — and speak freely in this, a country whose demise he has called for.
Ahmadinejad may choose his words carefully, but underneath all of the rhetoric is an agenda that threatens all who seek a safer and freer world. We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator's intentions and to call for action to thwart him.
He must be stopped.
The world must awake to the threat this man poses to all of us. Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever took place. He dreams of being an agent in a "Final Solution" — the elimination of the Jewish people. He has called Israel a "stinking corpse" that is "on its way to annihilation." Such talk cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a madman — not when Iran just this summer tested long-range Shahab-3 missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv, not when the Iranian nuclear program is nearing completion, and not when Iran sponsors terrorists that threaten and kill innocent people around the world.
The Iranian government wants nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran is running at least 3,800 centrifuges and that its uranium enrichment capacity is rapidly improving. According to news reports, U.S. intelligence agencies believe the Iranians may have enough nuclear material to produce a bomb within a year.
read it all
the closing:
Senator McCain has made a solemn commitment that I strongly endorse: Never again will we risk another Holocaust. And this is not a wish, a request, or a plea to Israel's enemies. This is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to test us. It is John McCain's promise and it is my promise.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
the wright stuff
lets once again remember the real story about the reverend wright & obama relationship, not the one obama wants you to believe...
Friday, September 19, 2008
Palin Hacker’s Identity is Revealed
as if this was any big surprise to anyone.. democrats are socialist control freaks and are not bound by any sense of morality due to their belief that there is no right and wrong in the world -- only shades of gray and a wink and a nod to what will deliver more power in to their hands. it's no secret why marxists don't like Christianity - Christianity doesn't make the citizen reliant on the state and by that fact takes power away from the government... not to mention it has very clear distinctions on what is right and what is wrong.. but i digress.
a kid of a democratic state rep in tennesse is the culprit according to the tennessean.. i'm linking an article from pj media by richard minter.
-------------------
The hacker is David Kernell, the 20-year old son of Mike Kernell, a Democrat and elected state representative in Tennessee, according to Nashville’s largest newspaper, the Tennessean.
I predict that the same crowd that said that Palin should have been able to control her 17-year old daughter will defend the 2o-year old hacker by saying no one can control their kids. At least they will be right once.
If State Rep. Kernell refuses to cooperate with the investigation, the story will get more interesting.
Still, it will be interesting to see what hacker David Kernell has to say for himself. Why did he do it? What did he think he would find? Does he think he did something wrong? Who introduced him to the Associated Press, which ran with the story? And why did they protect him, even after his father was willing to give him up?
There is a lot more to this story than has emerged so far. Hopefully some enterprising blogger will dig it out…
UPDATE: Terry Frank has screen shots of his facebook pages. Seems there might be a connection to the Obama campaign.
(note - it's worth going to look at terry frank's posting)
SECOND UPDATE: A well-informed Tennessee radio host Steve Gill told me this about the hacker’s dad: “He is an extremely left-wing Representative from Memphis who has been in the legislature 32 years and has never had any job other than professional politician.”
Makes you wonder what the dad’s role was, if any…
a kid of a democratic state rep in tennesse is the culprit according to the tennessean.. i'm linking an article from pj media by richard minter.
-------------------
The hacker is David Kernell, the 20-year old son of Mike Kernell, a Democrat and elected state representative in Tennessee, according to Nashville’s largest newspaper, the Tennessean.
I predict that the same crowd that said that Palin should have been able to control her 17-year old daughter will defend the 2o-year old hacker by saying no one can control their kids. At least they will be right once.
If State Rep. Kernell refuses to cooperate with the investigation, the story will get more interesting.
Still, it will be interesting to see what hacker David Kernell has to say for himself. Why did he do it? What did he think he would find? Does he think he did something wrong? Who introduced him to the Associated Press, which ran with the story? And why did they protect him, even after his father was willing to give him up?
There is a lot more to this story than has emerged so far. Hopefully some enterprising blogger will dig it out…
UPDATE: Terry Frank has screen shots of his facebook pages. Seems there might be a connection to the Obama campaign.
(note - it's worth going to look at terry frank's posting)
SECOND UPDATE: A well-informed Tennessee radio host Steve Gill told me this about the hacker’s dad: “He is an extremely left-wing Representative from Memphis who has been in the legislature 32 years and has never had any job other than professional politician.”
Makes you wonder what the dad’s role was, if any…
Thursday, September 18, 2008
the decline of britain
when you think about the long and storied history that the british empire has painted across the world, it's somewhat sad to see a once great nation hollowed out by and left listless at sea by a secular humanist agenda being forced on the people. the young lions are but mangy cats headed to a unremarkable ending with the path they have taken.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3522
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3522
latest offerings from the religion of peace..
Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace
"He who fights that Islam should be superior fights in Allah's cause"
9/17/2008 (Sanaa, Yemen) - Women and children are among the casualties when al-Qaeda militants stage a coordinated attack on the US embassy.
9/17/2008 (Yala, Thailand) - A father and son are brutally gunned down by Religion of Peace militants.
9/17/2008 (Mindanao, Philippines) - Moro Islamists attack a group of local soldiers, killing one.
9/17/2008 (Magas, Ingushetia) - Four local security personnel are ambushed and killed by Muslim radicals.
9/17/2008 (Srinagar, India) - Fifteen pedestrians are injured when Islamic terrorists toss a grenade into the street outside a shopping center.
9/16/2008 (Ain el-Helweh, Lebanon) - Four people are killed when Sunnis and Shia clash over their differences.
"He who fights that Islam should be superior fights in Allah's cause"
9/17/2008 (Sanaa, Yemen) - Women and children are among the casualties when al-Qaeda militants stage a coordinated attack on the US embassy.
9/17/2008 (Yala, Thailand) - A father and son are brutally gunned down by Religion of Peace militants.
9/17/2008 (Mindanao, Philippines) - Moro Islamists attack a group of local soldiers, killing one.
9/17/2008 (Magas, Ingushetia) - Four local security personnel are ambushed and killed by Muslim radicals.
9/17/2008 (Srinagar, India) - Fifteen pedestrians are injured when Islamic terrorists toss a grenade into the street outside a shopping center.
9/16/2008 (Ain el-Helweh, Lebanon) - Four people are killed when Sunnis and Shia clash over their differences.
red state economic conditions far better than blue states..
ever wonder how well the economy will work under democratic policy and control.. look no further than the differences between red and blue states.
from tom blumer:
-------------------------------------------------
Baseball may be the national pastime, but the national obsession, at least among our media and political elite, is declaring that we’re either on the brink of a recession or in one. Never mind the evidence.
Politicians, pundits, and prognosticators galore have gotten into the act, some for several years:
Democratic presidential candidate Barack “Talk and Tax the Economy Down” Obama declared that there was “little doubt we’ve moved into recession” in July. Obama is one of the three Democratic architects of our current tax-threatened, oil-starved POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) economy.
After the first-quarter economy grew a bit, MarketWatch’s Rex Nutting, seemingly disappointed, told us that we could have a recession even if growth never goes negative.
As if to trump Nutting, after adjusted second-quarter economic growth came in at an annualized 3.3%, David Wyss, chief economist with Standard & Poor’s, told a CNNMoney.com writer that the recession “started in the fourth quarter of 2007.”
The CNN writer himself brazenly added that “several economists say they are certain the United States is in recession, and that no one should be fooled into thinking otherwise by a strong second-quarter GDP report.”
Associated Press writers have penned dozens of economic articles with references to an imminent or already-existing recession during 2007 and 2008. Some “downturn” references go back to 2005 and 2006, years in which growth came in at 2.9% and 2.8%, respectively. The all-time topper was AP reporter Jeannine Aversa’s April 5 assertion that “it’s no longer a question of recession or not. Now it’s how deep and how long.”
Trend Macroanalytics Chief Investment Officer Don Luskin had the perfect response to the recession obsession in Sunday’s Washington Post (reproduced at his blog), when he noted that second-quarter growth was “virtually the same as the 3.4 percent average growth rate since — yes — the Great Depression.” He also added, based on a working paper by UCLA economist Edward Leamer, that:
Anyone who says we’re in a recession, or heading into one — especially the worst one since the Great Depression — is making up his own private definition of “recession.” And probably for his own political purposes.
But for the moment, let’s humor the critics and allow for the possibility that the economy as a whole has somehow slipped into recession during the current quarter. If so, where have the stumbles occurred?
Certainly not in red states Texas, Florida, or Arizona (though the Grand Canyon State has a Democratic governor, it went solidly for Bush in 2004, and has relatively conservative GOP legislative majorities). As Phil Gramm and Mike Solon noted in their weekend Wall Street Journal column (HT to Alo at Brain Shavings for the heads-up), those states created one-third of all U.S. jobs in the past 10 years, and their per-capita income growth far outpaced the national averages.
Most other red states have until very recently done very well. Some are still doing just fine. For example, the seasonally adjusted July unemployment rates in Utah, North Dakota, South Dakota, Idaho, Nebraska, and Oklahoma averaged well below 4%.
If you’re looking for troubling times, visit the blue states. You’ll find plenty.
Looking for high unemployment?
First, go to California (Kerry by 10% in 2004, Democrat-dominated legislature, and might-as-well-be-Democratic governor). Its seasonally adjusted August unemployment rate was 7.3%, up from just 5.4% a year ago.
Then go east to Michigan, where things have gone from bad to really bad during Democrat Jennifer Granholm’s tenure. Wolverine State July unemployment was 8.5%.
Move on to Ohio, which went from pseudo-red under Bob Taft toblue in 2006, with the election of a Democratic governor, who has been aided and abetted by a mostly complacent GOP legislature. July unemployment: 7.2%.
Finally, skip over red state Indiana, which is still holding its own, and you’ll get to Obama’s home state of Illinois, whose Democratic governor, legislature, big-city mayor, and U.S. senators have all played a part in creating the Land of Lincoln’s 7.3% July unemployment rate.
For decidedly Democrat-driven government bailout situations like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae — referred to as “Barney’s Rubble” in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal — visit true-blue Metro DC.
To find brokers, bankers, and insurers taking unjustified risks with depositors’ and others’ money, go to the blue-state triumvirate of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, and its Democrat-heavy investment banking industry.
Within certain states, the red-blue contrast is stark. In Ohio, if you want out-of-control foreclosures and general economic doldrums, visit bluer-than-blue Cleveland, Akron, Canton, Youngstown, Toledo, and Dayton. If you want areas that are largely holding their own, stick with Cincinnati and Columbus, especially the GOP-dominated rings around each city. The same holds for economically distressed southeastern Michigan vs. the rest of that state, and Chicagoland vs. most of the rest of Illinois.
So if there is indeed a recession taking place, blame it on the blue states and blue regions, with their high-tax, high-regulation, high-giveaway environments. The lower-tax, more economically free red states and the red regions within otherwise blue states are certainly not the culprits.
from tom blumer:
-------------------------------------------------
Baseball may be the national pastime, but the national obsession, at least among our media and political elite, is declaring that we’re either on the brink of a recession or in one. Never mind the evidence.
Politicians, pundits, and prognosticators galore have gotten into the act, some for several years:
Democratic presidential candidate Barack “Talk and Tax the Economy Down” Obama declared that there was “little doubt we’ve moved into recession” in July. Obama is one of the three Democratic architects of our current tax-threatened, oil-starved POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) economy.
After the first-quarter economy grew a bit, MarketWatch’s Rex Nutting, seemingly disappointed, told us that we could have a recession even if growth never goes negative.
As if to trump Nutting, after adjusted second-quarter economic growth came in at an annualized 3.3%, David Wyss, chief economist with Standard & Poor’s, told a CNNMoney.com writer that the recession “started in the fourth quarter of 2007.”
The CNN writer himself brazenly added that “several economists say they are certain the United States is in recession, and that no one should be fooled into thinking otherwise by a strong second-quarter GDP report.”
Associated Press writers have penned dozens of economic articles with references to an imminent or already-existing recession during 2007 and 2008. Some “downturn” references go back to 2005 and 2006, years in which growth came in at 2.9% and 2.8%, respectively. The all-time topper was AP reporter Jeannine Aversa’s April 5 assertion that “it’s no longer a question of recession or not. Now it’s how deep and how long.”
Trend Macroanalytics Chief Investment Officer Don Luskin had the perfect response to the recession obsession in Sunday’s Washington Post (reproduced at his blog), when he noted that second-quarter growth was “virtually the same as the 3.4 percent average growth rate since — yes — the Great Depression.” He also added, based on a working paper by UCLA economist Edward Leamer, that:
Anyone who says we’re in a recession, or heading into one — especially the worst one since the Great Depression — is making up his own private definition of “recession.” And probably for his own political purposes.
But for the moment, let’s humor the critics and allow for the possibility that the economy as a whole has somehow slipped into recession during the current quarter. If so, where have the stumbles occurred?
Certainly not in red states Texas, Florida, or Arizona (though the Grand Canyon State has a Democratic governor, it went solidly for Bush in 2004, and has relatively conservative GOP legislative majorities). As Phil Gramm and Mike Solon noted in their weekend Wall Street Journal column (HT to Alo at Brain Shavings for the heads-up), those states created one-third of all U.S. jobs in the past 10 years, and their per-capita income growth far outpaced the national averages.
Most other red states have until very recently done very well. Some are still doing just fine. For example, the seasonally adjusted July unemployment rates in Utah, North Dakota, South Dakota, Idaho, Nebraska, and Oklahoma averaged well below 4%.
If you’re looking for troubling times, visit the blue states. You’ll find plenty.
Looking for high unemployment?
First, go to California (Kerry by 10% in 2004, Democrat-dominated legislature, and might-as-well-be-Democratic governor). Its seasonally adjusted August unemployment rate was 7.3%, up from just 5.4% a year ago.
Then go east to Michigan, where things have gone from bad to really bad during Democrat Jennifer Granholm’s tenure. Wolverine State July unemployment was 8.5%.
Move on to Ohio, which went from pseudo-red under Bob Taft toblue in 2006, with the election of a Democratic governor, who has been aided and abetted by a mostly complacent GOP legislature. July unemployment: 7.2%.
Finally, skip over red state Indiana, which is still holding its own, and you’ll get to Obama’s home state of Illinois, whose Democratic governor, legislature, big-city mayor, and U.S. senators have all played a part in creating the Land of Lincoln’s 7.3% July unemployment rate.
For decidedly Democrat-driven government bailout situations like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae — referred to as “Barney’s Rubble” in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal — visit true-blue Metro DC.
To find brokers, bankers, and insurers taking unjustified risks with depositors’ and others’ money, go to the blue-state triumvirate of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, and its Democrat-heavy investment banking industry.
Within certain states, the red-blue contrast is stark. In Ohio, if you want out-of-control foreclosures and general economic doldrums, visit bluer-than-blue Cleveland, Akron, Canton, Youngstown, Toledo, and Dayton. If you want areas that are largely holding their own, stick with Cincinnati and Columbus, especially the GOP-dominated rings around each city. The same holds for economically distressed southeastern Michigan vs. the rest of that state, and Chicagoland vs. most of the rest of Illinois.
So if there is indeed a recession taking place, blame it on the blue states and blue regions, with their high-tax, high-regulation, high-giveaway environments. The lower-tax, more economically free red states and the red regions within otherwise blue states are certainly not the culprits.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
gawker publishes sarah palin's e-mail
so hacking e-mail an acceptable journalistic practice ?? palin derangement syndrome has reached new levels. seriously, hacking a vp candidate's e-mail, posting the contact list and personal e-mails is a certain sign of panic on the left.
black hats everywhere.. i'd love to see anonymous hack obama's e-mail. i'm sure that would be far more damning than 'we're praying for you sarah.'
the link
black hats everywhere.. i'd love to see anonymous hack obama's e-mail. i'm sure that would be far more damning than 'we're praying for you sarah.'
the link
josh howard does politics
it's difficult to imagine such intellect from a basketball player, but we must respect greatness when we see it.
obama '08 and all that shat..
financial collapse tied to obama ??
looks like he had plenty of dirty money funding his campaign - this is in from ed morrissey @ hot air..
-----------------------
Open Secrets has the list of Congressmen who have benefited from Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac largesse since 1989 (inclusive). Remarkably, after only serving less than four of those 20 years, Barack Obama has vaulted to the #2 position on Capitol Hill. Only Dodd outstripped him. He took more than six times the amount that McCain received in a 20-year period.
-----------------------
mccain actuall tried to fix fannie mae and freddie mac in 2005
more from ed morrissey:
In this speech, McCain managed to predict the entire collapse that has forced the government to eat Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with Bear Stearns and AIG. He hammers the falsification of financial records to benefit executives, including Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson, both of whom have worked as advisers to Barack Obama this year. McCain also noted the power of their lobbying efforts to forestall oversight over their business practices. He finishes with the warning that proved all too prescient over the past few days and weeks.
what happened to the bill ??
It never made it out of committee. Chris Dodd, then the ranking member of the Banking Committee and now its chair, was in the middle of receiving preferential loan treatment from Countrywide Mortgage, one of the companies gaming the system in the credit crisis. Meanwhile, Barack Obama took hundreds of thousands of dollars from the lobbyists McCain mentions in this speech, making him the #2 recipient of Fannie/Freddie money
-----------------------
Open Secrets has the list of Congressmen who have benefited from Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac largesse since 1989 (inclusive). Remarkably, after only serving less than four of those 20 years, Barack Obama has vaulted to the #2 position on Capitol Hill. Only Dodd outstripped him. He took more than six times the amount that McCain received in a 20-year period.
-----------------------
mccain actuall tried to fix fannie mae and freddie mac in 2005
more from ed morrissey:
In this speech, McCain managed to predict the entire collapse that has forced the government to eat Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with Bear Stearns and AIG. He hammers the falsification of financial records to benefit executives, including Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson, both of whom have worked as advisers to Barack Obama this year. McCain also noted the power of their lobbying efforts to forestall oversight over their business practices. He finishes with the warning that proved all too prescient over the past few days and weeks.
what happened to the bill ??
It never made it out of committee. Chris Dodd, then the ranking member of the Banking Committee and now its chair, was in the middle of receiving preferential loan treatment from Countrywide Mortgage, one of the companies gaming the system in the credit crisis. Meanwhile, Barack Obama took hundreds of thousands of dollars from the lobbyists McCain mentions in this speech, making him the #2 recipient of Fannie/Freddie money
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Monday, September 15, 2008
change you can believe in.....?
it looks like fannie mae and freddie mac had a lot of 'change' on hand... and they gave a lot of that change to barack obama... to the tune of $126k of political money from the failed institutions.
When the federal government announced two months ago that it would prop up mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, CRP looked at how much money members of Congress had collected since 1989 from the companies. On Sunday the government completely took over the two government-sponsored enterprises, and we've returned to our data to bring you the updates, this time providing a list of all 354 lawmakers who have gotten money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (in July we posted the top 25). These totals are based on data released electronically from the FEC on Sept. 2 and include contributions to lawmakers' leadership PACs and candidate committees from the floundering companies' PACs and employees. Current members of Congress have received a total of $4.8 million from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, with Democrats collecting 57 percent of that. This week we also wrote about how much money lawmakers had invested of their own money in the companies last year--a total of up to $1.7 million.
All Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
1. Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400
2. Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349
For those of you not aware, obama was elected to the senate in 2004. so, in 4 years, he's racked up the 2nd most money taken from those failed institutions of anyone in the last 10 years. you do the math.
the link
UPDATE
from politico:
Obama has raised a full $395,574 from employees and PACs of the now-bankrupt Lehman brothers, second only to Hillary Clinton.
Chris Dodd and Chuck Schumer did quite nicely, too; McCain is seventh among the firm's favorite pols (though its favorite Republican), having raised $145,100, according to OpenSecrets.org.
When the federal government announced two months ago that it would prop up mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, CRP looked at how much money members of Congress had collected since 1989 from the companies. On Sunday the government completely took over the two government-sponsored enterprises, and we've returned to our data to bring you the updates, this time providing a list of all 354 lawmakers who have gotten money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (in July we posted the top 25). These totals are based on data released electronically from the FEC on Sept. 2 and include contributions to lawmakers' leadership PACs and candidate committees from the floundering companies' PACs and employees. Current members of Congress have received a total of $4.8 million from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, with Democrats collecting 57 percent of that. This week we also wrote about how much money lawmakers had invested of their own money in the companies last year--a total of up to $1.7 million.
All Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
1. Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400
2. Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349
For those of you not aware, obama was elected to the senate in 2004. so, in 4 years, he's racked up the 2nd most money taken from those failed institutions of anyone in the last 10 years. you do the math.
the link
UPDATE
from politico:
Obama has raised a full $395,574 from employees and PACs of the now-bankrupt Lehman brothers, second only to Hillary Clinton.
Chris Dodd and Chuck Schumer did quite nicely, too; McCain is seventh among the firm's favorite pols (though its favorite Republican), having raised $145,100, according to OpenSecrets.org.
God bless sarah palin
one sure sign i know she'll be great ?? i can tell by the people who don't like her...
so far, we have the likes of matt damon, critical thinker.
randy rhodes,, north and south pole savvy
chevy chase, the 'decimator'
frank rich, stage IV palin derangement syndrome
bill maher, erudite oracle
ABC news, who edited out key parts of the interview to make her look less flattering..
US magazine, the deliberate deceivers..
now we have lindsey lohan, beacon of insight.
adding: roger ebert, master debater on all things film
i know there are more, this is just a quick list of the best and brightest the left has to offer... i love watching the bleeding hearts melt!
so far, we have the likes of matt damon, critical thinker.
randy rhodes,, north and south pole savvy
chevy chase, the 'decimator'
frank rich, stage IV palin derangement syndrome
bill maher, erudite oracle
ABC news, who edited out key parts of the interview to make her look less flattering..
US magazine, the deliberate deceivers..
now we have lindsey lohan, beacon of insight.
adding: roger ebert, master debater on all things film
i know there are more, this is just a quick list of the best and brightest the left has to offer... i love watching the bleeding hearts melt!
Friday, September 12, 2008
newt gingrich makes another speech
this is from hot air - but it is very well written by ed morrissey
------------------------------------------
The former Speaker and current American Solutions chair Newt Gingrich received the most enthusiastic welcome of the conference. He started off by attacking Charles Gibson for his rather dumb question about Sarah Palin’s reference to God’s will, the second speaker to do so today. Gingrich uses it to make an argument about how disengaged from American culture the mainstream media has become.
Gingrich talked about the fundamental ties between the idea of a Creator and individual, inalienable freedoms. He also recalled the words of John Kennedy and Franklin Delano Roosevelt in tying liberty to a faith in God. Gingrich asked the crowd how the media would react if Palin merely quoted Kennedy in his exhortation to America that we strive to do God’s will, or his emphasis that our liberties come “from the hand of God”. Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address also emphasized the role of God 14 times and quotes the Bible — twice.
Imagine doing that today.
Why have the media lost that fundamental understanding? Gingrich blames it on educators who have attempted to minimize the role of faith in the formation of the nation and its Declaration of Independence and Constitution. It would take a Harvard professor, Gingrich says, to take God out of history.
Somewhere in the 1960s, the Left took a turn away from American tradition, rejecting the cultural norms and attempted to eliminate them. That’s why they have attacked Palin so savagely, Gingrich says. “It’s as though McCain traveled to Mars and brought back an alien.” They have lost touch with mainstream America to the point where they can no longer relate to most of their own countrymen.
Gingrich gave another example of how badly the Left understands religion in the lives of Americans. The Democratic Representative who stood on the House floor and compared Barack Obama to Jesus Christ had no idea how offensive that statement would be to Christians. He probably doesn’t realize that the comparison of Palin to Pontius Pilate is less offensive.
Palin poses two threats to the Left. The first is existential; she shatters the ability of hard-Left political feminism to define the boundaries of women in the public sphere. The second comes from Obama’s decision to go for Joe Biden rather than Hillary Clinton. He showed he could be intimidated, first by the Clintons, and now by Palin herself. Obama blew off 18 million voters because the Clintons threatened his status as party leader.
Gingrich sounded much more positive about this election than at any time over the past two years. He has been sounding a bit Cassandra-ish, but the Palin selection — and the Obama collapse — has him energized.
------------------------------------------
The former Speaker and current American Solutions chair Newt Gingrich received the most enthusiastic welcome of the conference. He started off by attacking Charles Gibson for his rather dumb question about Sarah Palin’s reference to God’s will, the second speaker to do so today. Gingrich uses it to make an argument about how disengaged from American culture the mainstream media has become.
Gingrich talked about the fundamental ties between the idea of a Creator and individual, inalienable freedoms. He also recalled the words of John Kennedy and Franklin Delano Roosevelt in tying liberty to a faith in God. Gingrich asked the crowd how the media would react if Palin merely quoted Kennedy in his exhortation to America that we strive to do God’s will, or his emphasis that our liberties come “from the hand of God”. Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address also emphasized the role of God 14 times and quotes the Bible — twice.
Imagine doing that today.
Why have the media lost that fundamental understanding? Gingrich blames it on educators who have attempted to minimize the role of faith in the formation of the nation and its Declaration of Independence and Constitution. It would take a Harvard professor, Gingrich says, to take God out of history.
Somewhere in the 1960s, the Left took a turn away from American tradition, rejecting the cultural norms and attempted to eliminate them. That’s why they have attacked Palin so savagely, Gingrich says. “It’s as though McCain traveled to Mars and brought back an alien.” They have lost touch with mainstream America to the point where they can no longer relate to most of their own countrymen.
Gingrich gave another example of how badly the Left understands religion in the lives of Americans. The Democratic Representative who stood on the House floor and compared Barack Obama to Jesus Christ had no idea how offensive that statement would be to Christians. He probably doesn’t realize that the comparison of Palin to Pontius Pilate is less offensive.
Palin poses two threats to the Left. The first is existential; she shatters the ability of hard-Left political feminism to define the boundaries of women in the public sphere. The second comes from Obama’s decision to go for Joe Biden rather than Hillary Clinton. He showed he could be intimidated, first by the Clintons, and now by Palin herself. Obama blew off 18 million voters because the Clintons threatened his status as party leader.
Gingrich sounded much more positive about this election than at any time over the past two years. He has been sounding a bit Cassandra-ish, but the Palin selection — and the Obama collapse — has him energized.
ike thinks galveston is tina..
ALL NEIGHBORHOODS... AND POSSIBLY ENTIRE COASTAL COMMUNITIES... WILL BE INUNDATED DURING THE PERIOD OF PEAK STORM TIDE. PERSONS NOT HEEDING EVACUATION ORDERS IN SINGLE FAMILY ONE OR TWO STORY HOMES WILL FACE CERTAIN DEATH. MANY RESIDENCES OF AVERAGE CONSTRUCTION DIRECTLY ON THE COAST WILL BE DESTROYED. WIDESPREAD AND DEVASTATING PERSONAL PROPERTY DAMAGE IS LIKELY ELSEWHERE. VEHICLES LEFT BEHIND WILL LIKELY BE SWEPT AWAY. NUMEROUS ROADS WILL BE SWAMPED...SOME MAY BE WASHED AWAY BY THE WATER. ENTIRE FLOOD PRONE COASTAL COMMUNITIES WILL BE CUTOFF. WATER LEVELS MAY EXCEED 9 FEET FOR MORE THAN A MILE INLAND. COASTAL RESIDENTS IN MULTI-STORY FACILITIES RISK BEING CUTOFF. CONDITIONS WILL BE WORSENED BY BATTERING WAVES. SUCH WAVES WILL EXACERBATE PROPERTY DAMAGE... WITH MASSIVE DESTRUCTION OF HOMES...INCLUDING THOSE OF BLOCK CONSTRUCTION. DAMAGE FROM BEACH EROSION COULD TAKE YEARS TO REPAIR.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
church of oprah...?
i just got wind of this yesterday.. i'm sure you are shocked that i am not an oprah watcher/reader/participator. but this, production value aside, was eye opening to me. i will grant you that the producers have tricked this up a little bit to sell a book, but aside from that - listen to what oprah says. listen up, because it is very important.
oprah is dangerous when she says she is a Christian and then goes on to say there are many paths to 'god.' to be certain, ALL roads end up at the feet of Jesus. remember - ever knee shall bow and every mouth confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. you will want to make sure you are at his feet during the bema seat conversation and not during the white throne judgement.
oprah is selling eternal death in shiny packaging today.. she is telling you that there is no sin, therefore there is no need for salvation. this is terribly dangerous.. there is only one path to salvation - that is through the blood of Jesus Christ.
this reminds me of one of my favorite verses in the Bible from 2 Timothy..
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. - 2 Timothy 4:3-4
looming wmd attack on us
on the heels of my last post, newsmax has an article today discussing the prospects of a wmd attack on the us. marvin j. cetron says that an attack using a wmd is inevitable during the next 4-5 years. his estimation is that the attack could come in as little as 2.5 - 3 years from now.
Cetron, who startled and embarrassed the intelligence community with his study
“Terror 2000,” has let the genie out of the bottle again with his latest report,
“55 Trends Now Shaping the Future of Terrorism.”
When Newsmax asked how the expert and founder of Forecasting International Inc. (FI) can be so sure of the impending disasters, he said he needed to guard his classified sources. “Let me put it this way: We have so many good sources of signals intelligence and human intelligence that lets us know what doesn’t show up in the press,” he said.
FI, which produced “55 Trends” has conducted an ongoing study of the
forces changing our world for almost half a century in support of clients
ranging from General Motors to the YMCA, and from the Central Intelligence
Agency to the White House.
“Terror 2000,” another FI project that was done for the Department of Defense in 1994, warned that terrorists were planning to use commercial aircraft as guided bombs to strike against a major landmark in the New York City area. It also warned that terrorists could hijack a commercial airliner, fly it down the Potomac, and crash it into the Pentagon. Tragically, the report was filed and forgotten.
remember 9-11-01
while many in this country argue to not show the images of 9-11, i think it's critically important to remember the feeling of that day. our country has come a long way from the mantras of 'remember the alamo' and 'remember pearl harbor.' today, we seem to want to forget 9-11 and stick our heads in the sand when it comes to the reality of that day. since 9-11, we have spent plenty of time talking about who was responsible.. was it an inside job..? was it the jews.. ? the 'smart' people want to blame the united states for bringing this on ourselves. the hysterical delusionists want you to believe it was george bush who did this.. the dumbest president of all time pulled off the biggest consipracy of all time. yes, excellent.
this nation will forget 9-11 at it's own peril. treating terrorists as criminals to be handled via the legal system is a recipe for disaster. as newt gingrich said.. one day, we will wake up and we will have lost a city. all of the bleeding hearts who cry a river over the patriot act will see their civil rights absolved overnight if this were to happen. the best defense against terror is a committed, sustained offense which strikes at its core around the world. if one day we awake to find a city or two gone in a nuclear terror attack, all bets are off. the paradigm will have shifted beyond what we will be capable of dealing with with our current governmental structure.
the next president will be tested..
do we want a corrupt community organizer who has to turn from his mentor and friends due to their corrupt, anti-american viewpoints or do we want a war hero with the experience and courage to make tough decisions.
obama can't show good judgement on the simple issues such as friendship. if he can't make good decisions with the simple stuff, he will be a disaster with the important stuff
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Monday, September 8, 2008
obama's muslim faith..
it looks like barry is having a hard time dealing with not being ahead in the polls. do i think barack is a muslim? no. as far as i can tell, he doesn't seem to be interested in submitting to that allah guy.. his wife and daughters are way too immodest.. i mean, really.. i'm pretty sure muslim women aren't supposed to speak at all. i don't see him facing east 5 times a day, but i don't watch him that much. one thing is for sure, obama appears to be wilting under the pressure of the campaign.. he's a great front runner, lets see what happens when he's not fulfilling the role of ordained secular messiah. it should be a fun fall
UPDATE: from newsmax "iranians hoping for 'muslim' obama victory..
Iran’s leadership has expressed “great pleasure” at the prospect of a Barack Obama victory in November, according to Menashe Amir, the Iranian-born head of Radio Israel’s Persian language service.
But Iranian President Ahmadinejad has said he doubts that the American establishment “will allow” Obama to win.
“One of the Iranian religious leaders said if Obama will enter the White House, then Islam will conquer the heart of the American nation,” Amir told Isracast.com.
The Iranian leadership likes Obama “mainly because he is a Muslim,” according to Amir. His first name, Barack, comes from “al-baraq,” which is the name of the horse that Muslims believe Muhammad rode on his way to paradise.
His middle name Hussein is also a Muslim name, and he was “born in a Muslim family,” said Amir.
In fact, Obama is a Christian. His deceased father was a Muslim, and though Obama attended a Muslim school in Indonesia, he never pursued the Muslim faith of his early childhood. While some commentators have suggested that this qualifies him as an apostate — a “crime” punishable by death according to Islamic sharia law — Menashe Amir disagreed.
“If he wins the election, Muslims will be very proud of such a conquest, such a win. He didn’t convert [to Christianity] after he was 18. It happened much, much before,” so the sharia law judgment does not apply.
perception is reality is perception?
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
