Video: Obama Admits His Ads are Unrelated to the Issues
In the following video you will hear Obama admit that when it comes to running negative ads that have nothing to do with the issues, he beats McCain hands down.
I think that I know what he was trying to say, although he said the opposite. It is pretty amusing to hear him talk without a teleprompter. No wonder why he is now taking the teleprompter out on normal campaign stops.
Hat tip: Stuck on Stupid
Charlie Rangel Finally Pays his Taxes
Tax Cheat
After weeks of claiming that he did nothing wrong Charlie Rangel finally paid the IRS the back taxes, (he didn’t pay any penalties, will see if he does, I doubt it), that he was trying to cheat them out of. Charlie Rangel still insists he did nothing wrong and blames the fact that he got caught stealing from the government on a Republican guerrilla war being waged against Democrats.
Republicans have stepped up from the vague “vast right wing conspiracy” in to an all out guerrilla war according to Charlie Rangel. He is shifting blame here, he is turning himself into the victim when if he hadn’t done anything wrong he would never have been in this situation.
Even as he writes checks to the cover back taxes he owes he claims that it wasn’t his fault. And Democrats must agree for he is not going to have to resign from the house Ways and Means Committee. That would be an admission that something illegal happened, as if his writing the checks wasn’t admission enough.
This no accountability for your actions, everybody is a victim mentality has crept into every aspect of American life, so it is not surprising that Charlie Rangel feels that he is a victim for committing a crime. It is equally unsurprising that he faces no repercussions. It is to be expected.
Barack Obama Doesn’t Give Women Campaign Staffers Equal Pay
Barack Obama has made a point about talking about equal pay for woman during this campaign. Nothing wrong with that, people who can do the same job and are just as productive should earn the same amount. But I just found an interesting tidbit about the women on BaracK Obama’s campaign staff.
Barack Obama has said that it is unfair for women to receive an average pay that is only 77% of that of men who perform the same job as them. He is correct about that and now Barack Obama has done something about it. He pays his women staff workers 78% of what he pays his men. Kudos to Obama for upping their average pay in relation to men’s pay one penny compared to the national average.
Again we find out that while publicly Barack Obama has one stance on an issue, privately he doesn’t quite practice what he preaches. The women on John McCain’s campaign on the other hand earn 24% more than those on Obama’s campaign. This means that the women on McCain’s staff receive equal pay to the men on his staff, and it can be realistically assumed that the women on McCain’s staff receive about the same as the men on Barack Obama’s staff.
We all remember Obama’s condescending remark to a female reporter, “hold on there one second, sweety.”, so it isn’t suprising that maybe Barack Obama does feel as though he needs to pay the women on his staff the same as men.
And yet Obama is attacking John McCain in a television commercial about McCain’s policies on equal pay for women. It makes no sense.
Joe Biden Says That Paying Higher Taxes is Patriotic
As you have probably heard by now, Joe Biden recently claimed that paying higher taxes is patriotic. He is using patriotism to justify a socialistic system of government.
I really don’t want to spend to much time on this idiotic statement but I do have a couple of points that I want to make. The first one is, wasn’t it taxes that led to the American revolution? From the Stamp act to the Tea tax, to taxation without representation, it was over taxation that led to rebellion.
Second, did Joe Biden mention this idea to tax cheat Charlie Rangel? According to Joe Biden, Charlie Rangel must be an unpatriotic American because not only is he unwilling to pay higher taxes he is not even paying the taxes he already owes.
Vermont AG Candidate Promises to Prosecute President Bush for Murder
One of the moonbat capitals of the country is Vermont and this is more proof of why. Charlotte Dennett is running for attorney general of Vermont and she has promised to bring charges against President Bush for murder.
She is even going to hire the man who prosecuted Charlie Manson (Vincent Bugliosi) to handle the investigation.
Now the way I understand it it is the job of the attorney general of a state to prosecute state cases, I don’t understand how a federal “murder” case would fall within her jurisdiction. She would be better off in my opinion worrying about the state of Vermont.
Somebody needs to remind the far left, radical moonbats that there is no need to run against George W. Bush, he isn’t going to be on the ballot.
Barack Obama tells Supporters to Get in The Face of Non-Supporters
This is the man who will unite the country? This is the man who offers hope? This is the man who offers change? This is the man who will transcend party lines? This is the man that will heal America? This is the man who will heal our souls? This is the man who will lower the sea levels? This is the man who will forgive our sins and give us everlasting life?
Barack Obama has claimed that he wants to change the tone in Washington, he has said that we need to end partisan politics as usual. What he really means by this is that it is time for Republicans to shut up and agree with him. His record shows a complete lack of bi-partisanship, so how does he propose we unite the country?
I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face,”
By asking his supporters to argue and bully non-supporters to his side. To bicker and quarrel with opponents. This doesn’t sound like a new tone to me. Don’t tell us you are going to be different when you offer more of the same. His message of hope has been replaced by politics as usual.
This is Barack Obama’s community organizer skills on full display here.
Latest New Hampshire Polls (09/18/08)
Well the latest New Hampshire polls are out and it isn’t good.
John McCain leads Barack Obama 48 t0 45 percent, that is about the same as it has been. This is going to be a very close race down to the end. But the reason I say that the latest polls don’t look good is based on the local New Hampshire polls that have just come out.
ARG has Shaheen leading Sununu 52 to 40 percent with 8 percent undecided.
In August, ARG had Shaheen ahead, 52 to 41 percent and Rasmussen Reports had her ahead, 50 to 41 percent.
There was one poll earlier in the Summer that showed John Sununu almost tied with the woman that instituted the statwide property tax, but that seems to have vanished. New Hampshire is prepared to send a tax and spend liberal to the senate.
And then there is the race for governor, or lack thereof.
Gov. Lynch leading his Republican challenger, Kenney, 62 to 31 percent.
It might be nice if, oh I don’t know, Joe Kenney actually decided to campaign and advertise for the job that he claimed he wanted. This man has been a no show and quite frankly it is pissing me off. First the excuse was that the state GOP was spending money on the candidates during the primary but now the primary is over and not a word has been heard from Joe Kenney.
If you weren’t up for the challenge Joe you should have stepped aside, perhaps Frank Guinta would have been.
All of the results can be seen here.
The Truth Behind the “Wall Street Crisis”
Barack Obama calls the “Wall Street crisis” a direct result of failed Bush policies and claims that John McCain will continue those same policies. However a simple look at the time lines and facts prove otherwise. The New York Post had an article today, that can be read here, that sheds a little light on the subject.
Back in 1999, Congress opened the door to the subprime mortgage crisis when it repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, the 66-year firewall between commercial banks and investment houses.
Though sponsored by two Republicans and supported by the GOP majority in Congress, it was signed into law by then-President Clinton and enthusiastically endorsed by both his Treasury secretary, Robert Rubin, and then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan.
I bipartisan bill signed by Bill Clinton was the beginning of the end. Sure the bill was sponsored by Republicans but many prominent Democrats loved this bill also.
New York’s Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer hailed passage of the bill as “a historic day,” and its promoters included Sen. Christopher Dodd
The problem started because lending restrictions were loosened and people who had no business qualifying for mortgages were suddenly being approved for them.
the repeal also encouraged banks to make intemperate high-risk loans and to create exotic new financial products.
When more and more individuals who took loans they could not afford suddenly couldn’t make their monthly payments, the mortgage holders looked to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which guaranteed the mortgages.
All the way up until the recent failure Charlie Schumer was trying to make loans even easier for low income families to get. President Bush was against this idea.
Yet even as both agencies were feeling the strain, Democrats like Schumer were pushing – over the Bush White House’s objections – to increase available mortgage funding and increase the size of mortgages Fannie and Freddie could purchase in high-risk areas. And they did so right up until the recent government bailout.
And, all along, Democrats have been particularly supportive of the Community Reinvestment Act, which pushed banks into making more home loans to those with low and moderate incomes – and disproportionately risky credit.
So the problem doesn’t reflect failed Bush policies after all, it reflects more failed liberal policies. As for Barack Obama trying to tie John McCain into the Frannie Mae, Freddie Mac failure, John McCain tried to stop this before it ever became a problem.
“For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – known as government-sponsored entities or GSEs – and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market,” McCain said on the floor of the Senate in 2005, speaking in favor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005.
So what happened?
The bill passed the House but was never brought up for a vote in the Senate, largely because of Democratic opposition to change in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulatory structure that remained in place until the Treasury takeover two weeks ago.
But wait, there’s more.
As evidenced by the failure to pass the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, the Democrats in Congress have repeatedly fought back Republican Party efforts to reform the two mortgage banking giants.
Why have the Democrats been against it? A look at the top three people to receive political donations from the companies might provide a few answers.
Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400 $48,500 $116,900
Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349 $6,000 $120,349
Kerry, John S MA D $111,000 $2,000 $109,000
But Barack Obama’s involvement goes even deeper as he is now employing three former Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac employees on his campaign staff. They are Franklin Raines, James Johnson, and Jamie Gorelick.
Here is what we know about these three.
Johnson earned $21 million in just his last year serving as Fannie Mae CEO from 1991 to 1998; Raines earned $90 million in his five years as Fannie Mae CEO, from 1999 to 2004; and Gorelick earned an estimated $26 million serving as vice chair of Fannie Mae from 1998 to 2003, according to author David Frum, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
All three have been involved in mortgage-related financial scandals.
In 1998, according to the Washington Post, Gorelick, as Fannie Mae vice chairman, received a bonus of $779,625, despite a scandal in which employees falsified signatures on accounting transactions to manipulate books to meet 1998 earning targets. The moves, in turn, triggered multi-million-dollar bonuses for top executives.
According to the Associated Press, Raines and several other Fannie Mae top executives were ordered in a civil lawsuit to pay nearly $31.4 million for manipulating Fannie Mae earnings over a period of six years to trigger their massive bonuses.
Raines was also forced in the settlement to give up Fannie Mae stock options valued at $15.6 million.
We also know that Frank Raines is Barack Obama’s economic adviser. Once again I call in question Barack Obama’s judgement. While he tries to throw the blame solely on George Bush there is much more blame to go around. And the last person Obama should be trying to blame is McCain who tried to do something about it three years ago only to be denied action by Democrats who were in bed with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Barack Obama likes to call himself the agent of change but he is no different. He is in bed with the lobbyists also. While his latest commercial attacks John McCain for having lobbyists on his staff, Barack Obama does also. This man is a fraud.
Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer’s Role in the Fannie Mae Failure
Below is an editorial that appeared in the New Hampshire Union Leader that talks about Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer and their roles in the failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Here is the editorial in it’s entirely:
One month from tomorrow, U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., will be the keynote speaker at the New Hampshire Democratic Party’s annual Jefferson-Jackson dinner. It is a coveted and high-profile role previously filled by such notables as Hillary Clinton and Al Gore. The Democrats’ choice of House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank is, therefore, very revealing.
The party announced Frank as the keynote speaker on Sept. 11 — three days after the U.S. government took control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, costing taxpayers untold billions. That takeover probably could have been prevented had Frank not worked to thwart every attempt to limit the risks taken on by the two government-sponsored mortgage giants.
For 16 years reformers in Congress have tried to improve oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and prevent the government-chartered companies from putting the housing market and the whole economy at risk. All that time, Frank was involved in efforts to block those attempts, and in the last eight years he was a leader of those efforts.
In 2002, shortly before accounting irregularities were exposed at both companies, Frank said, “I do not regard Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as problems,” The Wall Street Journal reported. After the Freddie Mac accounting scandal in 2003, Frank said, “I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis.”
But there was a crisis, thanks in large part to Frank, Sen. Charles Schumer and others on the leash of these companies. In Congress, they made sure there was no additional oversight, no additional limit on executive behavior and compensation, and no further restraint on the growth of the companies’ mortgage-backed-securities portfolios, among other changes.
(All of these needed reforms, by the way, have been championed for years by Sen. John Sununu.)
In fact, Frank & Co. made matters worse by pushing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to take on greater risk. They wanted more loans to people who might not qualify for traditional bank financing. And, as The Wall Street Journal has pointed out, Frank “pressured regulators to ease up on their capital requirements — which now means taxpayers will have to make up that capital shortfall.”
Even now, after the government took the companies over (which Frank repeatedly said over the years was not a possibility), Frank opposes limits on the amount of money they can risk on mortgage backed securities — the one reform that might have done the most to prevent the current meltdown and probably would do the most to keep it from happening again.
Barney Frank is the very symbol of Washington’s deliberate refusal to prevent the collapse — the predicted collapse — of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And this is the guy the New Hampshire Democratic Party showcases at its most prestigious annual event. That ought to tell you a lot right there.
Besides their total ignorance about the troubles that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were headed towards is the fact that these two men, and other Democrats, helped to make the problem worse.
In fact, Frank & Co. made matters worse by pushing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to take on greater risk. They wanted more loans to people who might not qualify for traditional bank financing. And, as The Wall Street Journal has pointed out, Frank “pressured regulators to ease up on their capital requirements
These companies were forced to loan money to people who couldn’t afford it in the interest of “being fair.” Rules were relaxed and money was loaned and predictably low income families defaulted on loans that they never had any business getting in the first place and now you and I have to pay for it.
Another liberal policy and another liberal failure. And now we must all pay for it. But hell, they meant well. Visit our website often and we will expose more and more liberal flaws and they will keep coming as they don’t make a short supply of it.
UK May Fine Drivers for Letting Their Cars Idle While Stuck in Traffic
If you still believe that global warming is not just about government control, government regulations, taxes and fines than just read this article. If you have already been sucked into this scam reading the article probably won’t change your mind, but I have to try anyway. It’s too important not to.
The UK is going to try out the idea of fining people who are stuck in traffic for not shutting off their cars while they are stuck. As if in the dead of Winter you are not miserable enough stuck in traffic, you are now expected to shut off your car and also be cold and miserable. If you do not you will be fined. Once again the government is getting more of your money under this plan in the name of global warming.
The plan is only in the trial stages but if it “proves successful” than the program will expand. Define successful to the government as profitable. I think we all know how that one will turn out.
All of the plans to solve this “problem” require either more government intrusion or more money being taken from the people. Both actually, with regulation comes fines, fees, and taxes.
All of the leading voices on the global warming front are politicians, not scientists. That should be a red flag right there.
This may start off in the UK but it will only be a matter of time before it makes it to America. We need to rise up and stop this big government repression of our liberties before it is too late.
