The Upside Down World of Liberals

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) — Crying “Raise our taxes!” and “Show some guts!”, thousands of people rallied at the state Capitol on Wednesday to protest lawmakers’ inaction on a tax hike to fix a $13 billion deficit.

The secretary of state’s police estimated 15,000 people showed up, making it one of the largest rallies in Illinois Statehouse history.

Most of those participating in the “Save Our State” rally, organized by a coalition of more than 200 public-service organizations, marched in the streets around the Statehouse. They called for an income-tax increase to avoid deep budget cuts that would hit education, law enforcement and services for young children, the elderly, the handicapped and the homeless.

Legislators were in session at the time, even as hundreds finished the march by crowding into the Capitol, filling three floors of the rotunda.

“It gives me goose bumps,” said Lisa Lafrank of Collinsville, a second-year special education teacher who is bracing for a second round of layoff notices at her school district. “You realize there are so many other organizations facing the same cuts and have the same problem.”

Speakers at the rally pleaded for a House vote on a measure, approved by the Senate last year, that would increase the personal tax rate by two-thirds. House Democrats have been reluctant to vote on it without support from minority Republicans, who call for spending reductions.

Gov. Pat Quinn has offered his own tax proposal, calling for a one-third increase, but there is no sign that lawmakers are interested in voting on that idea either. Even if a tax increase were to pass, the deficit is so large that some spending and service cuts are likely.

Amid signs that read, “Cut the bull, not the budget” and “Wanted: Responsible legislators,” was 18-year-old Meliqua Page of Chicago, now a college student who has benefited from a youth homeless program that was cut by more than $1 million last year.

“We came out here,” Page said, “to show that the little people do matter.”

Yes, folks, it’s public sector Liberals protesting that our taxes are not high enough to pay for their pensions, benefits, and entitlements.

And yes, they are lobbying Democrats to raise taxes.

Lobbying them.

Think about that one.

Raising Taxes is as natural as breathing to Liberals.

But these are largely not private sector employees. These are public and government sector employees who know that union pensions are going south so they want you to pay more for their pensions and entitlements.

Most of the rest are people who don’t want their entitlement drugs cut.

It’s all about them.

Now that is a Liberal trait.

But a Pro-Tax Increase Rally!!!

The world is truly upside down and backwards!

Van Jones, disgraced White House “green” Czar (he was only an avowed Communist and 9/11 Truther) said recently, “There are way more jobs putting up solar panels, building smart batteries, making wind turbines, putting them up, than we will ever have again in America in the coal lines. Period.”

Currently, solar panels cost around $70,0000 for a full on run of them apparently.

Yeah, I have that, no problem… 😦

Then there’s “Cash for Caulkers”, Stimulus money for weatherizing homes.

Weatherization really does save money–but the government sucks at making it happen:

The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, which prior to the Obama administration had an annual weatherization budget of $13 million, committed to spending $327 million in stimulus funds to weatherize 56,000 homes by 2012.

The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs had only managed to weatherize 47 homes with its 50-fold budget as of the Sept. 30, 2009, stimulus reporting deadline. According to CNN, the stipulations surrounding stimulus spending are so complex that Texas “had to set up training academies to teach people how to manage the federal money,” which drastically slowed the weatherization process.

So, Texas can’t weatherize efficiently with a 50x-larger budget, and solar panels are still prohibitively expensive, and Van Jones calls subsidizing both a “fiscally conservative” energy policy? (Daily Caller)

So waste billions on re-inventing the wheel that isn’t better than or less expensive than the current model and call that “fiscally conservative”, now if that’s not upside down logic what is?

That’s like a lot of Liberalism, when you’re broke, Spend Even More!

And Now for a Little Humor: The Gecko Got Fired!!

Or at least his voice did.

A voice-over actor — best known for telling viewers they can save 15 percent or more on car insurance — says he lost his gig doing Geico commercials after leaving a voicemail with a group that organizes Tea Party events to ask how many of its employees are “mentally retarded.”

Los Angeles actor Lance Baxter aka D.C. Douglas in a press release said he was dropped from the upcoming Geico “Shocking News” campaign after leaving a message with the press shop at FreedomWorks, a Washington-based organization led by former Republican leader Dick Armey that has been at the forefront of the Tea Party movement.

“I called as a private citizen to make a complaint,” Douglas said of the message he left with FreedomWorks. “Racism and homophobia are my Achilles heal, but unfortunately my message included inappropriate words and I am sorry for that. However, telling their members to harass my employer to get me fired is an egregiously disproportionate response to my actions.”

FreedomWorks Chief Executive Matt Kibbe posted audio of the phone call online. In the message, Douglas claimed to be working on a written piece, and said he wanted to know the percentage of “mentally retarded” employees at FreedomWorks. He also asked its policy on how they will spin the news when “your members actually kill someone.”

Geico has since held auditions to replace Douglas voice on the commercials, he said. He said he has “consulted with several Los Angeles attorneys and has been advised that FreedomWorks’ actions were questionable.”

In the release, Douglas says he doesn’t plan to spend any money to sue FreedomWorks, but he’d like to find an attorney to sue pro-bono for him. (Daily Caller)

The message: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAB0-0Vbff0

Yeah, he’s mad, but he wants his payback for it for free!

Maybe they can save him 15% on his next gig…Or maybe he can team up with Tiger Woods! 🙂

Take VAT America!

Before deciding what revenue options are best for dealing with the deficit and the economy, Obama said in an interview with CNBC, “I want to get a better picture of what our options are.”

For days, White House spokesmen have said the president has not proposed and is not considering a VAT.

“I think I directly answered this the other day by saying that it wasn’t something that the president had under consideration,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters shortly before Obama spoke with CNBC.

After the interview, White House deputy communications director Jen Psaki said nothing has changed and the White House is “not considering” a VAT. (yahoo)

Translation: it’s coming, we just haven’t figured out what color lipstick to put on this pig.

He said his first priority “is to figure out how can we reduce wasteful spending so that, you know, we have a baseline of the core services that we need and the government should provide. And then we decide how do we pay for that.”

Reduce Wasteful Spending??

REDUCE WASTEFUL SPENDING??!!!!

$%&*^$%#@$^*%#!@!@#^!!!!!!!

Now juxtapose this comment against: Health Care, Bailiouts, GM, Chrysler, AIG, Cap & Trade, Global Warming,Wall Street Demonization and Financial Reform and you just have to conclude they are either the most aethical people who just say whatever the hell they want to at that moment and expect you to believe it, or that they believe wholeheartedly that you really are mind numbingly stupid!

Ask almost anyone — economists, politicians, entrepreneurs, average Americans — and they’ll tell you a value-added tax is a bad idea. So why does the White House continue to consider it?

After hearing VAT opponents smeared as anti-government radicals and worse, we decided to poll Americans on the issue. What our IBD/TIPP poll found was surprising: Not only is the VAT unpopular, but it’s unpopular across the board, regardless of political affiliation.

Overall, Americans oppose a VAT by 73% to 22%. Republicans, as might be expected, feel the strongest: 83% against, 14% for. But even Democrats oppose it 65% to 27%. Independents stand somewhere in between (see chart).

We’re not surprised. A VAT would be a huge new tax on all levels of income, including the poor and the middle class. That, even as Americans have made it clear in poll after poll that they feel overtaxed — and that government spending is the problem.

And they’re right. To eliminate expected deficits of $12 trillion over the next 10 years, the VAT would have to be enormous.

It’s been estimated that a 5% VAT would generate $250 billion in annual revenues. So to get rid of the $1 trillion annual deficits expected through 2020 would require a value-added tax of 20%. And that’s in addition to all the taxes we already pay at every level of government. Such a tax burden would kill innovation, jobs and economic growth. Our economy would be more like those of the stagnant, debt-ridden European Union, where the VAT averages close to 20%.

A Chamber of Commerce study suggests that spending in countries with a VAT grows 45% faster than in non-VAT countries. A VAT, it seems, emboldens money-drunk politicians to spend even more on expanding the welfare state.

That’s why, as unpopular as it is, Democratic politicians in the White House and Congress can’t quite let go of the idea.(IBD)

The idea of cutting spending is not even a wisp of an after-thought with these guys.

It’s about how do we spend even more.

Which means we have to raise money money to cover it.

And does absolutely nothing for the debt and deficit we already have.

But damn it feels good to spend like there’s no tomorrow.

And for a Government that wants to take over everything and everybody, that’s a lot of money.

But they haven’t come up with the used car salesman pitch yet.

And most likely, the demon to polarize it with.

So what if it’s unpopular even with Democrats.

It’s not like they really care what anyone things outside of the Capital area.

It’s not hard to figure out why. According to the American Institute for Economic Research, federal tax revenues in 2009 shriveled by $400 billion from the year before to the lowest level of taxes as a share of GDP — 15% — since 1950.

That’s a huge revenue hole, and it comes at a time when total federal spending through 2020 is expected to surge nearly 70% to $45 trillion. To fill the hole, Washington wants more of your money.

And considering Medicare projection of it’s first 25 years were off by 900% that makes Health Care a country buster in the next generation.

So unless we all want to work for our Feudal Lord Democrat and pay more in taxes than you earn regardless of income level,  the drug addicts in Washington have to go the Spending Patch and their has to be a Voter/Taxpayer Intervention  and we need to ween them and us off dependency and return to self-reliance and fiscally sound policies.

OR ELSE!

The Democrat Convenience Store

Alinsky Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it.

Obama and The Democrats want to control the Financial Sector next. Or at the very least, scare them or scar them into compliance.

So the Next great Boogeyman has emerged from the Democrats.

First (and still champ) was George W. Bush.

Then it Halliburton.

Then it was The Banks.

Then it was the Insurance Industry.

Now it’s Wall Street.

Specifically Goldman Sachs.

Obama and The Democrats have their target.

But they also have some real problems.

Rep. Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight committee, is demanding a slew of documents from the Securities and Exchange Commission, asserting that the timing of civil charges against Goldman Sachs raises “serious questions about the commission’s independence and impartiality.”

Issa’s letter, addressed to SEC Chairwoman Mary Schapiro and signed by eight other House Republicans, asks whether the commission had any contact about the case, prior to its public release, with White House aides, Democratic Party committee officials, or members of Congress or their staff.

“[W]e are concerned that politics have unduly influenced the decision and timing of the commission’s controversial enforcement action against Goldman,” Issa writes.

Issa implied that the timing was a bit too convenient, saying President Barack Obama’s push on Wall Street reform “neatly coincided with the commission’s announcement of the suit.”

And if that wasn’t enough, Obama took nearly a million dollars in campaign contributions from Goldman Sachs, and a former White Aide is now a lawyer for Goldman Sachs!

(Former White House counsel Greg Craig has just signed on as an institutional Sherpa for Goldman Sachs, the iconic financial firm facing fraud charges from the Securities and Exchange Commission.)

“The Goldman litigation … has been widely cited by Democrats in support of the financial regulatory legislation currently before the United States Senate,” Issa writes. “The American people have a right to know whether the commission, or any of its officers or employees, may have violated federal law by using the resources of an independent regulatory agency to promote a partisan political agenda.

…“[T]he events of the past five days have fueled legitimate suspicion on the part of the American people that the commission has attempted to assist the White House, the Democratic Party, and Congressional Democrats by timing the suit to coincide with the Senate’s consideration of financial regulatory legislation, or by providing Democrats with advance notice.”

The Democrats would never stoop to that level of intimidation and misuse of government power, now would they…..

In fact, the aggressive campaign by Democrats in support of the legislation neatly coincided with the Commission’s announcement of the suit. For example:

–The Commission approved the Goldman suit in a vote that spit along party lines – a rare occurrence for approvals of enforcement litigation.

–Before the Commission had released its announcement, the New York Times published on its website a story describing the suit.

–Less than half an hour after the Times story’s publication, Organizing for America, the successor organization to Obama for America and now a project of the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”), sent millions of supporters an e-mail message from President Obama urging support for “Wall Street Reform.”

–Within hours, the Democratic National Committee had purchased AdWords advertising from Google, Inc. The DNC’s Google campaign fundraising advertisement, headed “Fight Wall Street Greed,” appeared whenever a user ran a Google search for the phrase “Goldman Sachs SEC.” It read, “Help Pres. Obama Reform Wall Street and Create Jobs. Families First!” and included a link to http://www.BarackObama.com, the website of Organizing for America.

–Democrats in Congress and the Administration have heralded the Commission’s suit against Goldman as a welcome boost to their case for the legislation.

–Members of the media have already begun to question the timing of the Commission’s suit and the actions of the Democratic National Committee.

As supported by the Commission’s canons of ethics, and as frequently reiterated by you and other Commissioners, the unqualified independence of financial regulators is crucial to the health of the financial system and the U.S. economy. For this reason, doubts about whether the Commission has scrupulously guarded its independence from the Administration’s partisan political agenda and concerted efforts to manipulate Congressional action are very serious, and should be addressed with full transparency.

Transparency, oooh there’s that word again… 🙂

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are promising a climactic clash with Wall Street, but there’s a complication in their battle plan: The Democratic Party is closer to corporate America — and to Wall Street in particular — than many Democrats would care to admit. (or the Media for that matter)

Former House Democratic leader Dick Gephardt lobbies for Goldman Sachs, Visa and the coal industry. Former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle — Obama’s first choice to head Health and Human Services — is an adviser for a lobbying firm that represents Charles Schwab, Comcast, Lockheed Martin, Verizon and a host of other corporate interests.

Attorney General Eric Holder once lobbied for Global Crossing — sometimes described as the Democratic Enron — and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel made eight figures in a little more than two years as the Chicago-based managing director at Wasserstein Perella & Co. between jobs as a senior aide in President Bill Clinton’s White House and as the congressman representing Illinois’s 5th District.

And the Democrats rode to their majorities in the House and the Senate on a wave of cash Emanuel and New York Sen. Chuck Schumer helped them raise from Wall Street. Earlier this month, a hedge fund manager at the center of the Goldman Sachs fraud case held a fundraiser for Schumer in New York. (Politico)

Whoops!

Let’s Make sure the Ministry of Truth Media buries that!!

Goldman Sachs and its employees and family members gave $5.9 million to candidates in the 2007-2008 election cycle, the Washington-based center’s data shows. Three-quarters of that went to Democrats, the non-partisan group said. (Bloomberg)

The SEC filed a civil suit on April 16 alleging the firm failed to tell investors in a 2007 collateralized debt obligation that hedge fund Paulson & Co., which planned to bet against the CDO, helped select the underlying assets.

Goldman Sachs has denied the SEC’s accusations and Greg Palm, co-general counsel, told analysts on a conference call today that the firm didn’t intentionally mislead anyone.

Wall Street provided three of Obama’s seven biggest sources of contributors for his presidential bid. In 2007 and 2008, Goldman Sachs employees and family members gave him $994,795, Citigroup Inc. $701,290, and JPMorgan Chase & Co. $695,132.

The only friends of  Democrats are friends of convenience.

“Every day we don’t act, the same system that led to bailouts remains in place, with the exact same loopholes and the exact same liabilities,” President Obama says. “And if we don’t change what led to the crisis, we’ll doom ourselves to repeat it.”(IBD)

Sound Familiar??

And rest assured, you will hear it over and over…

It’s convenient.

Playing The System

Democrats claim their newly passed health insurance reform will eventually provide health coverage for more than 30 million uninsured people. Don’t bet on it.

I doubt they are betting on it, it just sounded good. After all, as I have said, the Health Care Reform bill wasn’t about covering people and lowering costs, it was strictly about Government control of who lives and who dies. Control of Life itself.

Eventually.

The poison in the bill has to have time to kill off Private Industry first.

The key to achieving that goal, Democrats believe — along with expanding Medicaid and subsidies for buying coverage — is the individual mandate, which requires individuals to have health insurance or pay a fine. The mandate is supposed to push nearly everyone into the pool to minimize free-riding on the system. But what if millions of Americans decide it’s a better deal to pay the fine and remain uninsured until they need coverage?

And they will. And so will companies.

That is, when the government catches up to them.

There was a guy on the radio last week who has lives in Socialist Utopia of Massachusetts that has had no health insurance since the law was passed 4 years ago.

He hasn’t received an letters about fines until now, 4 years later.

He still can’t afford the insurance, even in Massachusetts…

Imagine that Nationwide.

Sure, the IRS is hiring new people, but not to go after you for Health Insurance…right….

It appears that’s exactly what’s happening in Massachusetts, which passed its own ObamaCare-like reform with an individual mandate in 2006.

Last year, Charles Baker, former CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, one of Massachusetts’s largest health plans, noticed some health insurance brokers posting comments on his widely read blog. They were suspicious that people were applying for health coverage after a medical condition developed, got the care they needed, and then dropped the coverage.

Coverage for an individual, noted Mr. Baker, now a Republican candidate for governor, might be $2,000 to $3,000 a year, while the penalty was only about $900. So he asked his finance people to see if they noticed any discernible patterns. Boy, did they.

From April 2008 to March 2009, 40% of the individuals who applied to Harvard Pilgrim stayed covered for less than five months. Yet claims were averaging about $2,400 a month, about six times what one would expect.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts has now confirmed it is experiencing similar problems. The company says that in 2009, 936 people signed up for three months or less and ran up claims of more than $1,000.

The disparity between the cost of expensive coverage and the fine for not getting it encourages individuals buying their own coverage — i.e., those not in an employer plan — to game the system by paying the fine and remaining uninsured until they need coverage.

Insurers have long recognized this problem, known as “adverse selection,” which is why every type of insurance normally restricts people from obtaining coverage after an incident has occurred. Someone can’t, for example, buy a homeowners policy for a house that is already on fire. But Democrats have decided to do away with that basic actuarial principle with regard to health insurance.

And they did it because, to do otherwise would not get them to their goal: Total control of who lives and who dies.

Remember, this “reform” was not about reform the Private sector, it was about destroying it, so the Government–a Liberal Government– could step and save you from the evil capitalists and control you.

Screw actuarial principles.

After all, when the government controls everything what actuarial principle will be left??

If they need more money they will either print it, borrow it or just raise taxes.

It’s not like you’ll have a choice by then.

That means it’s all about the penalties. Under the existing Massachusetts law, Bay Staters face a penalty of perhaps a half to a third of the cost of the premium. And yet, as Mr. Baker indicates, there appears to be a lot of gaming going on.

ObamaCare, by contrast, has a minimum individual penalty of $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, rising up to 2.5% of income (or $2,085 maximum) per family in 2016. So the first-year spread between the penalty and the cost of coverage for an individual may be 20-to-1 or 30-to-1. Think that might encourage even more gaming than they are seeing in Massachusetts?

In supporting the individual mandate, Democrats frequently cite the fact that nearly every state requires drivers to purchase auto insurance. But that mandate hasn’t gotten everyone insured. Auto insurance mandates usually have fairly low penalties, and they are often sporadically enforced. And so people game that system, too.

And then there’s the fact that if you don’t have an auto, you are not required to have insurance.

Whoops!

Indeed, the problem of uninsured drivers is so bad that many states require drivers to buy uninsured motorist coverage to protect them from all of those drivers who are required to have auto insurance but don’t.

The growing adverse selection problem has some Massachusetts officials considering other options; the governor has proposed legislation for a semi-annual open-enrollment period. That’s where people would have a limited time to enter the system or change health plans. Open enrollments don’t solve all the problems, but they help.

To be sure, the higher penalties in Obama-Care’s out years will discourage some gaming of the system, but they won’t eliminate it — not as long as there is a gap between the cost of coverage and a penalty. And that’s only if Congress keeps the current penalty schedule.

The Congressional Budget estimates the government will collect $17 billion in penalties from individuals over 10 years. But members of Congress don’t like penalizing their constituents, and there will be a lot of pressure to delay or reduce the penalties, just as there was when the 2003 Medicare prescription drug benefit was being implemented.

But then the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was never about creating an actuarially or financially sound health care system; it was about creating a new entitlement where everyone has coverage — when they need it. (IBD)

Regardless.

It sounds “fair”

And the Government gets to save you from the evil capitalists when this unsound economics drives them to raise premiums so much that they are driven out of business.

Then the Government owns your health.

And there is no one left to game, but The IRS.

Good Luck with that. 😦

Thank you, Mr Golfer

On a cool but sun-drenched Sunday, the president and three golfing companions went to Andrews Air Force Base to play 18 holes. It is the 32nd time Mr. Obama has played golf since taking office Jan. 20, 2009, according to CBS Radio’s Mark Knoller.

He says he could go to the Polish president’s funeral because of the volcano in Iceland.

But He also can’t seem to find the Polish Embassy in Washington D.C. either

Mr. Obama has not gone to the Polish Embassy in Washington since the accident, but Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. both have. There, they signed a condolence book.

But then again, the Polish are not Muslim or a Dictatorship he wants to grin and bow to so i guess they aren’t that important.

Mr. Obama has played golf far more often than former President George W. Bush. In his eight years in office, Mr. Bush played just 24 times. His last time as president was Oct. 13, 2003. (or nearly 3 years).

And Our dear President was mock offended by the Tea Parties last week when we didn’t bow down and kiss hiss ring because he has cut our taxes, according to him.

The truth as usual is something else entirely…

IBD: As the Associated Press reported Thursday, the president said he was “amused” by the Tea Party faithful gathering in cities across America to protest soaring government spending, ballooning debt and the explosion in taxes that will be needed to pay for it all.

“You would think they’d be saying thank you,” he said.

And why should they be thankful? As the president himself said on his weekly radio address a week ago, “one thing we have not done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000; that’s another promise we kept.”

In fact, that wasn’t his promise at all.

Here’s what candidate Obama really said in September of 2008: “Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”

Got that? “Not any of your taxes.” The claim of no tax hikes on those below $250,000 as a result of the current administration’s policies is completely and utterly false.

A report from the House Ways & Means Committee’s GOP members notes that, since January 2009, Congress and the president have enacted $670 billion in tax increases. That’s $2,100 for each person in America. At least 14 of those tax hikes, the report says, break Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000. Roughly $316 billion of the tax hikes — 14 increases in all — hit middle-class families, the report says.

This comes in addition to recent data from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office showing U.S. spending and indebtedness growing at an alarming rate. Government spending now totals 25% of GDP, a quarter above its long-term average. By 2035, it will hit 34% of GDP at current trends — a 70% increase in the real size of government in just 25 years.

More spending means more debt. In 2008, total federal publicly held debt was about $8.5 trillion — an amount Uncle Sam took 220 years to accumulate. By 2020, that will soar to $20.3 trillion, a 139% jump. No surprise the Government Accountability Office last week said the U.S. is on “an unsustainable long-term fiscal path.”
So let’s see: The administration and its allies in Congress pass what can only be called the most financially irresponsible series of bills in our nation’s history, imposing a crushing tax burden on our children and our children’s children, while lowering all Americans’ standard of living, and we should thank them for it?

This is the delusional thinking that’s led to the Tea Party Movement’s soaring popularity. The hundreds of thousands that turned out around the country on April 15 were objecting to the systematic ruin and loss of liberty that massive fiscal irresponsibility brings.

Given all this, no one should be shocked that 52% of Americans in a recent New York Times/CBS Poll said President Obama’s policies are moving the U.S. towards socialism. It’s that serious.

The president can belittle people all he wants. That’s his prerogative. But he ignores Tea Partyers at his own political peril. They will not go away or be mollified by the usual prevarications.

Democrats ridicule Tea Party followers as yahoos, racists and illiterates, a mob willing to be led. They are anything but. Indeed, they have shown their seriousness by putting out their own “Contract From America.”

It’s a common sense document, proposing 10 concrete steps to bring sanity back to our government and make it accountable once again. Sadly, the mainstream media won’t cover it. But if you’re interested, go to http://www.thecontract.org, and see if you don’t agree.

Or you could just go play some golf…

Get your Fannie and Freddie Here

The Obama administration says it wants to “reform” Fannie and Freddie. But it won’t propose legislation to revamp the mortgage companies until next year, if even then. And in testimony last week, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan circled the wagons around the “affordable housing mandates” that pushed Fannie and Freddie into the risky subprime market.

“As we work to reform our housing finance system, it is essential to keep in mind our broader housing policy goals,” he said. “A reformed housing finance system should ensure broad access to mortgage credit for minorities.” Here we go again.

Fannie and Freddie over the decades have facilitated “an important democratization of credit,” Donovan said. Yes, and they’re now hit hardest by foreclosures from this failed social experiment.

Never mind that. Donovan asserted that “ensuring that homeownership opportunities are available to members of these communities should remain a priority.”

aka “poor” and “minority” (aka Democrats)

It’s plain that Donovan, like other housing-rights activists, has not learned any lessons from the subprime scandal. He’s also in denial about HUD’s role in it, arguing that the affordable housing goals it foisted on Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of their collapse.

Rather, he claims, the mortgage giants underwrote risky subprime loans and securities simply to increase profits.

But officials with both firms swear their hands were forced by HUD. They testified they had to lower their underwriting standards and absorb substantial costs to meet HUD’s political mandates. That, of course, is no way to make a profit.

In fact, HUD in 2000 required Fannie and Freddie to underwrite fully half of their mortgages for lower-income, higher-risk borrowers — a quota that remained in effect for the rest of the decade.

Starting in 1997, Fannie began offering a 97% loan-to-value mortgage — well above the standard 80% LTV. And by 2001, it was offering mortgages with no down payment at all, along with other deficiencies.

The promised reforms of these failed government-sponsored enterprises are a farce. Democrats are not going to relinquish control of Fannie and Freddie. They’ll remain wholly owned subsidiaries of the Democratic Party.

The federal government — which shouldn’t be involved in the mortgage business at all — now controls virtually 100% of the secondary mortgage market. This is outrageous considering the government caused the failure of Fannie and Freddie, not the market.

If the government owns Fannie and Freddie, politicians will run it for their political clients, not shareholders, like their own personal piggy banks.

You mean like the IOU’s in Social Security?

Nah, they’d never do that… 🙂

And use control of this industry for their own gain, nah, Democrats would never ever do that… 🙂

There motives are as pure as the driven snow… 🙂

The government own car companies GM and Chrysler.

It owns an Insurance giant AIG.

It owns the secondary Mortgage Market.

It wants to own Health Insurance through it’s slow acting poison of a Health Care Reform Bill.

But their not socialists…. 🙂

Next Up, Wall Street and Energy…

But their not socialists….

The government used the congressionally chartered mortgage giants — who together control over half of all mortgages — for political purposes, such as helping questionable low-income borrowers and boosting minority homeownership.

As a result, they made bad economic decisions that sank the entire mortgage industry, destroyed homeowner equity and cost taxpayers $400 billion (and counting). (IBD)

The damage from the politically motivate Health Care may not be known for years. Just like the manipulations of the Mortgage market started in the 1990s and took over 10 years to crash.

But remember, according to them it wasn’t their fault. They regulated it into failure, but it wasn’t their fault.

It was Wall Street . Those damn evil capitalist and their derivatives.

And just when Obama and Co want to pass sweeping new reforms.

Funny how that worked out.

“Never let a serious crisis go to waste…it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.” – Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel

Even if you have to lay it on your opponent first. Then claim it’s a crisis.

It’s their fault!

Boo Hiss! Boo!!  🙂

Alinsky Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

Hmmm…Like, to you for instance…

Words Matter

Former President Bill Clinton warned of a slippery slope from angry anti-government rhetoric to violence like the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, saying “the words we use really do matter.”

Like “Hope and Change”??

“That depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is??”

“Oversees contingency Operation”??

“Terrorism”??

“Terrorist”??

“Racist”??

“Homophobe”??

“Extremist”??

“Ignorant hick”

Yes, Mr. Former President words do matter, but these matter to Liberals. They are meant to be censored, downplayed, discredited, and/or pissed on.

CBS/NYT wants to dismiss the people with “white, highly educated, rich people” but yet they are also “ignorant, racist hicks” according to the media.

Because, like Bill said, words matter. And to Liberals the word matters as a weapon to be used to destroy, obfuscate, or deny their opposition the ability to speak clearly and properly.

At least that’s the goal.

It’s Orwell time again.

Newspeak : In the novel by Orwell, it is described as being “the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year”.

One character, Syme, says admiringly of the shrinking volume of the new dictionary: “It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”

The destruction of thought. If you can’t think in opposition, you can’t be in opposition.

Duckspeak is a Newspeak term meaning literally to quack like a duck  or to speak without thinking. Duckspeak can be either good or “ungood” (bad), depending on who is speaking, and whether what they are saying is in following with the ideals of Big Brother. To speak rubbish and lies may be ungood, but to speak rubbish and lies for the good of “The Party” may be good. In the appendix to 1984, Orwell explains:
“     Ultimately it was hoped to make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving the higher brain centres at all. This aim was frankly admitted in the Newspeak word duckspeak […]. Like various words in the B vocabulary, duckspeak was ambivalent in meaning. Provided that the opinions which were quacked out were orthodox ones, it implied nothing but praise, and when the Times referred to one of the orators of the Party as a doubleplusgood duckspeaker it was paying a warm and valued compliment.

Crimethink is the Newspeak word for thoughtcrime  (thoughts that are unorthodox, or are outside the official government platform), as well as the verb meaning “to commit thoughtcrime”. Goodthink, which is approved by the Party, is the opposite of crimethink.
In the book, Winston Smith, the main character, writes in his diary:
“Thoughtcrime does not entail death: thoughtcrime IS death.”

Doublethink: The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them….To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda  effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind (if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

Any of this sound familiar??

If not, you’re in the wrong blog…

President Obama on Thursday said he was “amused” by the tax day protests going on around the country to commemorate the IRS deadline for tax returns, and said the Tea Party movement’s protests of his policies were misguided.

“I have been amused a little over the past couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes,” Obama said.

I’m glad you find this funny, because we sincerely hope your still laughing when you’re planning your 50-foot monolith to yourself in Chicago in 2013 because you’re not the President anymore.

“We sort of have to assume we’re running into a headwind,” Kaine said.

The president’s remarks came at the second fundraiser of the night, at Miami’s Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, which about 1,000 people paid between $250 and $1,250 to attend.

The night’s first fundraiser was the more glitzy affair, held at the home of Gloria and Emelio Estefan, where a smaller group of donors paid $30,400 per couple to attend.

(gee, no “middle class” people there. Just evil rich people…) 🙂

The DNC expected to raise $2.5 million from the events, a DNC official told a reporter traveling with the president.

*The president’s quotes were originally provided to the entire White House press corps by a pool reporter traveling with the president in Miami and were updated when TV footage of his speech was aired. The quote originally read: “‘So I’ve been amused in recent days by these people having rallies,’ Obama said.”

November is Coming, Mr. President.

NOVEMBER IS COMING!