The Path

Facing a billion-dollar budget shortfall, the Chicago Public Schools’ plan to close 54 schools, mostly in black and low-income neighborhoods, forces many students to cross gang boundaries to get a mediocre education.

Shuffling children around like so many deck chairs on a sinking ship, the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) announced the closings as a cost-cutting move, with CPS officials arguing that money being spent to keep underutilized schools open could be better used to educate students elsewhere as the district deals with a $1 billion budget deficit.

About 30,000 students will be affected by the plan, with about half that number moving into the remaining schools. CPS claimed the plan could “save the district $560 million over 10 years in capital costs and an additional $43 million per year in operating costs.”

That’s about 100 million a year. The debt is a billion a year. Fascinating liberal math as always…

Yet the suddenly cost-conscious CPS caved to the Chicago Teachers Union’s demands in a recent strike.

John Tillman of the Illinois Policy Institute notes Chicago’s unemployment rate is just under 11% and that the average Chicagoan makes just $30,203 compared to the average teacher’s salary of $71,000, even before benefits are included.

So your average teacher makes MORE THAN twice what the average worker makes. Gee, are they “the rich”? 🙂

And unlike parents who go to work each day to be judged on their productivity fearing each day might be their last, dismissing a bad teacher is harder than spinning straw into gold.

The Associated Press notes, “many of the schools identified for closure are in high-crime areas where gang violence contributed to a marked increase in Chicago’s homicide rate last year.” These schools are in “overwhelmingly black and in low-income neighborhoods.”

Wait a minute. Weren’t cold-hearted budget-cutting Republicans supposed to be the mortal enemies of the poor, minorities and children? How could this be happening in the heart of liberal progressivism, President Obama’s hometown run by his former White House chief of staff, Mayor Rahm Emanuel?

This is not the hope and change we were promised, lament local residents, who say the planned closings smack of racism. “I don’t see any Caucasians being moved, bussed or murdered in the streets as they travel along gang lines, or stand on the steps of a CPS school,” said activist Wendy Matil Pearson as opponents of the school closing plans protested outside a school in Chicago’s Austin neighborhood.

Such complaints and concerns are well-founded.

Recently Janay McFarlane, 18, was killed just hours after her younger sister was among a group of teens who were onstage as President Barack Obama gave a speech in Chicago on gun violence. Destini McFarlane, 14, sat just feet away as the president spoke of a similar murder of Hadiya Pendleton.

Chicago’s murder rate of 15.65 per 100,000 people looks nothing like the American 4.2, the Midwest’s 4.5 or Illinois’ 5.6 murder rates, despite the strictest gun regulations in the country. Up to 80% of Chicago’s murders and shootings are gang-related, according to police. By one estimate, the city has 68,000 gang members, four times the number of cops.

Yet Mayor Emanuel preaches even stricter gun control over gang control, including “universal” background checks to which Chicago gangs won’t submit. He opposes Illinois’ imminent concealed carry law, which would allow Chicago parents to protect themselves and their children from such thugs.

Emanuel also opposes genuine school choice even while saying he doesn’t want Chicago kids trapped in failing and dangerous schools.

He opposes giving parents a voucher allowing their children to escape such schools and the gang violence that often surrounds them.

Such are the fruits of liberal progressivism in Chicago.

Budgets are balanced on the backs of poor and minority children in a town in which gangs run rampant while its mayor puts the blame on inanimate objects called guns. Some in Chicago are calling it racism.

Or how about incompetence,greed, and political failure. All the hallmarks of a liberal 🙂

Immigration reform depends on a secure border. Nearly every lawmaker pushing reform, and certainly every Republican, stresses that the border must be proved secure before millions of currently illegal immigrants can be placed on a path to citizenship.But how do you measure border security? For years, the government estimated the number of miles of the border that were under “operational control” and came up with various ways to define what that meant.

Then the Department of Homeland Security threw out the concept of operational control, which Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano called “archaic.” The administration promised to create something called the Border Condition Index, or BCI, which would be a “holistic” (and a far better) measure of border security.

Time passed, with no BCI. “Nearly three years later, the department has not produced this measure, so at this hearing, we will be asking for a status of the BCI, what measures it will take into account and when it might be ready,” subcommittee Chairwoman Rep. Candice Miller, a Republican, said before Wednesday’s testimony. Getting BCI up and running is particularly important now, Miller added, because comprehensive immigration reform cannot happen without a reliable way to assess border security.

So imagine everyone’s surprise when Mark Borkowski, a top Homeland Security technology official, told Miller that not only was BCI not ready, but that it won’t measure border security and was never meant to.

“I don’t believe that we intend, at least at this point, that the BCI would be a tool for the measurement that you’re suggesting,” Borkowski told Miller. “The BCI is part of a set of information that advises us on where we are and, most importantly, what the trends are … It is not our intent, at least not immediately, that it would be the measure you are talking about.”

Miller appeared stunned and practically begged Borkowski, along with two other Homeland Security officials who were testifying, to tell her what she wanted to hear. “I’m just trying to let this all digest” she said. “We’re sort of sitting here, as a Congress … At what point will you be able to give us something?”

She never got an answer.

Even Democrats who oppose tying immigration reform to border security realized they were being played. “I would say to the department, you’ve got to get in the game,” said a frustrated-sounding Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee. “At some point, we’re going to have to have DHS work with us more concretely about the confidence of the security of the border.”

Rep. Ron Barber, the Democrat who replaced Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona, noted, “The Border Patrol rolled out last May a new strategy that didn’t have goals, didn’t have metrics, didn’t have a process for evaluation”. That’s not really a plan, is it?

Miller, the chairwoman, reminded the officials that the Department of Homeland Security could end up being the “stumbling block” to immigration reform. But the hearing ended with no hint that any answers might come soon.

A related issue: As reform supporters often point out, a large number of illegal immigrants — more than 40 percent — did not cross the border illegally. Rather, they came legally, with a visa, and then never left. Members of the Senate “Gang of Eight” are promising tough new measures to deal with so-called visa overstays.

But like the case of border security, Congress has passed law after law, going back to 1996, requiring the executive branch to crack down on overstays. The promised enforcement has never happened.

Among the measures: The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996; the Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 2000; the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001; the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002; and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. All directed the executive branch to stop visa overstays, but the problem remains.

A look at the recent House hearing, as well as at the long-standing overstay problem, highlights a major obstacle to comprehensive immigration reform. The executive branch has the authority to enforce border and visa security. But these days, it appears the executive branch, particularly the Department of Homeland Security, doesn’t want to do the job.

Why would passing a new comprehensive immigration reform measure change that? (Townhall)

It won’t. But THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA and the Agenda says they must do have Amnesty for all those new Democrats.

ALSO…

Fifteen members of Congress have written a letter to the Department of Homeland Security demanding to know why the federal agency is buying so many rounds of ammunition. We’d like to know too.

A good portion of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition are being purchased by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal government’s second-largest criminal investigative agency. Yes that’s the same ICE that is releasing detained criminal illegal aliens onto our streets because of sequestration cuts.

Jonathan Lasher, the Social Security Administration’s assistant inspector general for external relations, explained the purchase of 174,000 hollow-point bullets by saying they were for the Social Security inspector general’s office, which has about 295 agents who investigate Social Security fraud and other crimes.

When they say they’re cracking down on waste, fraud and abuse, they apparently mean it.

However, as former Marine Richard Mason told reporters with WHPTV News in Pennsylvania recently, hollow-point bullets (which make up the majority of the DHS purchases) are not used for training because they are more expensive than standard firing range rounds .

“We never trained with hollow points, we didn’t even see hollow points my entire 4-1/2 years in the Marine Corps,” Mason said.

LaMalfa offers one theory that’s less sinister than some: The federal government is simply trying to corner the market on ammo and restrict what’s available to the American people as part of its gun control efforts.

“The extraordinary level of ammunition purchases made by Homeland Security seems to have, in states such as my own, created an extreme shortage of ammunition to the point where many gun owners are unable to purchase any,” LaMalfa wrote in the letter.

While lower-level officials talk to the press, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano apparently doesn’t want to tell Congress herself the reasons for these purchases.

“They have no answer for that question. They refuse answer that,” Congressman Timothy Huelskamp (R-Kan.) told reporters recently, adding, “They refuse to let us know what is going on, so I don’t really have an answer for that. Multiple members of Congress are asking those questions.”

Homeland Security has acquired a number of Mine Resistant Armored Protection (MRAP) vehicles which have been retrofitted for possible service on the streets of the U.S. They were formerly used for counterinsurgency in Iraq. These vehicles are specifically designed to resist mines and ambush attacks.

As we noted in a recent editorial, DHS is also seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56-by-45-millimeter NATO “personal defense weapons” — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians.

If there are plausible explanations for all this, some congressmen would like to hear them.

Maybe DHS can answer Congress’ questions in a series of bullet points. (IBD)

🙂

Or maybe their Mexican Drug Cartel buddies will know…

Your Role

From the man who made “never let a crisis go to waste”, Rahm Emanuel former White House Chief of Staff comes what we all knew in our hearts.

The Democrats claim, even now, that the Republicans obstructed them and that they sought “bi-Partisanship” on Health Care Reform and the President even said he’d listen to ideas from Republicans.

We all knew that was bullhockey (and when he repeated the same lines in his speech right after the election…)

Well, in a book, Rahm has admitted as much.

In a new book, Rahm claims he privately argued to Obama that he shouldn’t pursue bipartisan support for health reform, because it would take too much time, instead insisting that the lesson of Clinton’s failure to pass reform was that it was imperative to put a premium on getting it done quickly. That cuts strongly against the image of Rahm as the chief internal advocate of the White House’s strategy of deal-making and accommodation with Republicans.

Rahm makes the claim in interviews with journalist Richard Wolffe, in his new book, “Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House,” which was released today. From page 102:

Unlike his boss, Emanuel wasn’t interested in looking reasonable with Republicans; he wanted to look victorious. He didn’t care much for uniting red and blue America; he wanted blue America to beat its red rival…

Obama was prepared to sacrifice time and political capital to make his policy bipartisan and more ambitious; Emanuel believed Obama did not have that luxury. “Time is your commodity. That answers everything,” Emanuel said. “But a lot of us thought we didn’t have the amount of time that was being dedicated. If you abandon the bipartisan talks you get blamed. He still wanted to try to achieve it that way. But that’s one of a series of things you can look back on and be a genius about.

“My job as chief of staff is to give him 180-degree advice. He hired me, as he asked, to learn from the past, or to use my knowledge from my time in Congress and in the Clinton administration. Watching ’94, watching ’97 when we did kids’ health care, and then studying Medicare, what were the lessons? The lesson about time as a commodity is not mine, it’s Lyndon Johnson’s. You got X amount of time; you gotta use it.”

The decision to waste time chasing bipartisan support for health reform was clearly one of the mistakes that led to health care being such a big political liability for Dems. It extended the whole mess by months and months, which gave opponents more time to demagogue the bill and scare voters and helped turn the public against the process. Rahm seems to be suggesting here that he foresaw something like this happening, and argued against the futile quest for bipartisan support, which is certainly not the view of his legacy in the White House that has endured.(WP)

Gee, I’m shocked….And he was always portrayed as “the Moderate Voice” in the White House.

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid!

Then Big Sis Janet Napalitano when asked about the government gropes at airports,“It’s all about security,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said. “It’s all about everybody recognizing their role.” (Reuters)

Your role as always is to sit down and shut up because the government is better, stronger, more powerful and just plain better than you.

They want to take care of their serfs. And don’t want you little people to be bothered by thinking how you’re being exploited.

Your Lord and Masters have spoken. Shut up, sit down, and know your place.

Oh, and there will be “death panels” despite how the left mocked people for suggesting it and got all frothy and pit bullish crazy ever time someone mentioned it.

Ever notice that when Leftists get really made about a characterization of them it usually ends up being true? 🙂

The left’s favorite economist, who condemned others for saying ObamaCare would require death panels, now admits they are real and necessary. The way to control costs, he says, is death and taxes.

Paul Krugman has long extolled the virtues of Britain’s National Health Service and its National Institute for Clinical Excellence with the Orwellian acronym of NICE. Krugman has been anything but nice to NHS critics and those who’ve said that what have been called its “death panels” would be brought to America via ObamaCare.

In a roundtable discussion on ABC’s “This Week,” the New York Times columnist said of what recently came out of the president’s deficit commission: “Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes.

“Medicare is going to have to decide what it’s going to pay for,” Krugman said. “And at least for starters, it’s going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all. In other words, (the deficit commission) should have endorsed the panel that was part of the health care reform.”

Krugman went right to his blog Sunday afternoon to “clarify” his comments. He explained, and we are willing to accept, that he was being derisive of the term and sarcastic. “I said something deliberately provocative on This Week,” Krugman wrote, “so I think I’d better clarify what I meant,” which is something he regularly denies to others.

He explained that “health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they’re willing to pay for — not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care.”

Whatever his intended use of the phrase “death panels,” what he describes are in fact “death panels.” A group of people will sit on a, er, panel, deciding what treatments are cost-effective and should be available and who should get them. That is called rationing and in cases of the “extreme care” he mentions, a life-and-death decision.

That’s a death panel.

We recall how Krugman savaged Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for warning what Krugman now says should happen might happen. Palin said: “The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”

Sharing Krugman’s belief that such a system is just fine is Dr. Donald Berwick, President Obama’s choice to head the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services. Berwick has said: “NICE is extremely effective and a conscientious, valuable and — importantly — knowledge-building system.” No, NICE is a system of rationing through a bureaucratic formula defining “cost-effectiveness” that has rushed untold numbers of Britons to an early grave.

“The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open,” is what Dr. Berwick told a National Institutes of Health publication when he was just president and CEO of the Institute for Health Care Improvement.

The Obama administration’s health care reform is all about cost and little about care. Dr. Berwick has opined: “We can make a sensible social decision and say, ‘Well, at this point, to have access to a particular additional benefit (new drug or medical intervention) is so expensive that our taxpayers have better use for those funds.’ ” In other words, the government will decide whether treating you and extending your life is worth it.

By any other name, that’s still a death panel. (IBD)

Welcome to Orwell’s…I mean Obama’s America.

Your role: Serf. Their Role: Master

If they want Death panels, they get death panels, you just can’t call them that and you can’t object. That’s not your role.

If you don’t want to be groped at airports like your a side of beef at local Strip Club, too bad! They have to play being serious about security (While ignoring 18-40 year old male Muslims).

That’s their role.

Now do you want some Hope and Change? 🙂

Obama’s Crisis Opportunity

“You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before”. Rahm Emanuel , White House Chief of Staff.

Keep this in mind over the next few months leading up to the November elections.

The Democrats know they have a deadline with destiny so it’s super cram down time.

And what better villain that BP and what better opportunity than the Gulf Oil Spill to push through the stalled Cap and Trade 19th Century “Global Climate Change” Energy program.

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

Although it won’t be his main point, President Obama plans to use his Oval Office address Tuesday night, the first of his presidency, to argue for a comprehensive new energy-climate law that goes beyond “spill bill” provisions designed to rein in the oil industry. A Senate Democratic leadership aide tells Playbook that the administration has told Sens. Kerry and Lieberman, who last month introduced an “American Power Act,” that an energy deal MUST include some serious effort to price carbon as a way to slow climate change. “No traditional ‘energy only’ bill meets their sense of what’s credible as a response to BP, or the president’s own 2008 rhetoric,” the official said.

In an Oval Office interview with POLITICO columnist Roger Simon on Friday, the president said: “[I]n the same way that our view of our vulnerabilities and our foreign policy was shaped profoundly by 9/11, indelibly by 9/11. I think this disaster is going to shape how we think about the environment and energy for many years to come. And one of the biggest leadership challenges for me going forward is going to be to make sure that we draw the right lessons from this disaster and that we move forward in a bold way in a direction that finally gives us the kind of future-oriented — or the kind of visionary energy policy that we so vitally need and has been absent for so long. … [N]ow is the time for us to start making that transition and investing in a new way of doing business when it comes to energy.”

DNC pollster Joel Benenson — in a series of League of Conversation Voters briefings for top Democrats that began Friday and continue this week — is making the case that SWING VOTERS strongly support an aggressive energy/carbon pollution bill. “Making BP Pay Isn’t Enough,” his briefing says. Joel’s recommended “Messaging Architecture”: 1) “Frame the opposition”: “Big Oil and corporate polluters who have blocked energy reform for decades” and “Politicians protecting the special interests that fund their campaigns.” 2) “Illustrate the costs of our dependence: … $1 billion a day on foreign oil … Oil spill destroying jobs and livelihoods.” 3) “Tap into deeply held values: “Put America back in control of our energy situation: Cut foreign oil spending in half. Invest in energy that’s made in America and creates millions of jobs for Americans.” (Politico)

Should be a hell of a Campaign Speech.

Hell for us, the American people, that is.

And then there’s the EPA.

Obama’s stormtroopers for Global Climate Change.

They have assumed the power over every aspect of your life by declaring CO2 a hazard to human life.

So stop exhaling!

12/7/2009: The Environmental Protection Agency formally declared Monday that carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels poses a threat to human health and welfare, a designation that set the federal government on the path toward regulating of emissions from power plants, factories, automobiles and other major sources.

Think about that one for a moment.

Power Plants.

That AC you’re running. Imagine if the plant supplying it was forced to go “green” or had massive new oppressive regulations  and the cost of it tripled.

That car you drive. What if it was deemed a “health hazard” because it’s emissions are too high or it’s gas mileage is too low. (And that would be the $8 a gallon gas from Obama’s Energy Bill by the way 🙂 )

The products still manufactured in factories, forced to go “green” and the costs go through the roof so they either raise their prices, lay people off, or go overseas.

All on the back of totally junk science, but under the pretext of the Oil Spill.

So break out the battery powered fans, your bike, and some candles, you’ll need them.

Oh, and your taxes are going up! 🙂

And starting soon the IRS will be in charge of Health Care enforcement of the Mandatory Enrollment.

Don’t worry, be happy.

The Government is here to save you! 🙂

The Senate just claimed the title of the world’s most delusional body by refusing to strip unelected EPA bureaucrats of the power to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. This was the day freedom died.

One wonders why we have a Congress at all. The 53 profiles in cowardice that could not get a cap-and-tax bill through the U.S. Senate voted Thursday to let the Environmental Protection Agency keep the unprecedented power Congress did not expressly give it. It is power that the EPA arrogated to itself through regulation to control every aspect of the American economy and our very lives.

This country was born over anger at taxation without representation. Regulation without representation may spark another revolt come November. The Tea Party movement began precisely because of such arrogant disregard for the wishes of the American people. Unlike health care reform, this time the cowardly lions of the Senate couldn’t even do it themselves and ceded their authority to the EPA.

It was only a motion to proceed to consideration of Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s resolution (S.J. Res. 26) which, under a forgotten provision of the Contract With America, lets legislators veto a “major rule” by any regulatory agency within 60 days of publication. It needed just 51 votes; it got 47.

All 41 Republicans, including newbie Scott Brown of Massachusetts, voted not to shred the Constitution. The motion attracted, for various reasons, the votes of six Democrats — Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, the departing Evan Bayh and even Jay Rockefeller, who for once chose jobs over ideology.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin accused the Republicans of choosing “political science over the real science,” even after the EPA’s junk science based on the manipulation of data by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been exposed as a manufactured fraud.

The case for climate change has collapsed — a fact recognized, finally, by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who, with Democrat John Kerry and independent Joseph Lieberman, once hoped to work out some kind of compromise legislation with a token nod to domestic energy production.

Last week, Graham told reporters he would vote against the climate bill he helped author. “The science about global warming has changed,” Graham told reporters Wednesday on why he was backing an energy bill by Sen. Dick Lugar. “I think they’ve oversold this stuff, quite frankly. I think they’ve been alarmist and the science is in question.”

So it’s going to be a long, hot summer.

But at least the government is here to take care of you.

Trust in Big Brother Barack!

Crisis Inverted

He’s just so darn presidential. You better know who I’m talking about . . . because if you don’t, I know whose ass to kick.

In a recent interview with NBC’s “Today” show, President Obama said this: “I don’t sit around talking to experts because this is a college seminar. We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick.” Scoot over, Gettysburg Address. There’s a new No. 1 speech in town.

Some have been oddly surprised by the president’s unpresidential approach. Here are a few possible reasons why they’re so shocked:

1. They were asleep when Obama said this in July of 2009 with respect to the arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr.: “Now, I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts . . . But I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly. . . ” (So what if he didn’t have the facts! What’s next, people? Are you going to insist that he read laws before publicly condemning them? You right-wing extremists!)
2. They took their dog for a walk and missed Obama’s commentary in April of 2010 regarding Palin’s critique of his administration’s nuclear policy: “I really have no response to that. The last I checked, Sarah Palin is not much of an expert on nuclear issues.” (Translation: She’s no match for me. She may have run a state and been Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, but did she vote “present” nearly 130 times as a state senator? I think not.)
3. They were busy cooking and didn’t catch Obama saying this to John McCain at the health care summit in February of 2010: “Let me just make this point, John, because we’re not campaigning anymore. The election’s over.” (Translation: I won. You lost. Nani nani poo poo.)
4. They were enjoying a film at the corner theatre and missed Obama saying this in August of 2009: “ . . . I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them just to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess.” (In other words, hand over your money and shut the heck up.)
5. They were hanging out at a local café and didn’t hear our president’s complete (and disturbing, in my opinion) mischaracterization of the new Arizona immigration law in April of 2010: “ . . . you can imagine if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona, your great, great grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state. But now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed . . . ” (Translation: I don’t have to read pertinent documents. I went to Harvard. Enough said.)

If you’ve been paying attention since day one, Obama’s tone with respect to the oil spill shouldn’t be in the least bit shocking. I just wish he wasn’t so busy playing the role of big man on campus. Maybe then he would’ve had time this year to hear the majority of Americans oppose his health care law and/or support Arizona’s immigration law. But hey, with golf and Bush-hating Paul McCartney to fit in, let’s cut him some slack.

As an entertaining side note, Obama was recently asked to respond to comments made by BP CEO Tony Hayward, including “I’d like my life back” and “ . . . everything we can see at the moment suggests that the overall environmental impact will be very, very modest.” Hayward’s comments were distasteful at best, but check out what Obama had to say in reply: “He wouldn’t be working for me after any of those statements.” Culture of Corruption author Michelle Malkin must have enjoyed a full-on fit of laughter after that one.

Mr. President, it’s not presidential to make bold public statements based on assumptions, without taking the time to do your research. It’s not presidential to essentially tell a whole bunch of Americans to sit down and shut up. It’s not presidential to condescend to a war hero and long-standing American Senator. And while we’re at it, it’s not any more presidential to repeatedly blast Fox News than it was to have joked during the 2008 presidential campaign that, “I’ll put Mr. Burgess up against Sean Hannity. He’ll tear him up.”

Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but I’d like my president to act like one. Save the ass-kicking for someone else.(Jedediah Bila)

Didn’t he remind you of the nerdy kid trying to sound like the tough kid? Or of that bad actor who says his lines with no conviction whatsover?

Now next week, Obama has “summoned” the CEO of BP to his office for a dressing down so that he can look tough.

Problem is, I’ve seen better acting on Star Trek: Voyager (and anyone who knows me how much I hate that show!).

But the Ministry of  Truth will do their best to create Mr. Bad Ass. Mr Can Do. Mr I’m Involved and I Care.

But, like most things with this President, it will ultimately ring very hollow.

I’m not going to defend BP, but they sure as hell are doing more than this President about it.

I mean, this President has refused help from 13 countries! 13!!

President Obama is impeding clean-up efforts in the Gulf by kowtowing to unions and members of the American maritime industry, critics have charged in recent days. At issue is the president’s refusal to waive the Jones Act, a century-old law that effectively bars foreign-owned ships from moving between U.S. ports, a necessary component of participating in the cleanup effort.

When asked why President Obama hasn’t waived the Jones Act — which President Bush put on hold to facilitate Katrina rescue efforts — White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said a suspension wasn’t necessary.

Not Necessary!!!????!!!!

Well, we wouldn’t want to Obama to annoy they only people left who love him, Unions.

That’s vastly more important than actually do everything you can to solve the problem!

Heaven forbid you make the Unions mad at you! 😦

And then there was the enviromental impact study that the government had to take a month to do to study the effects of putting sand berms in the way of the advancing oil and when all was said and done approve less than  what the Governor of Louisiana asked for because of concerns over the long term impact.

Too little too late.

And these are the guys  you want running Health Care??!! 😦

Yeah, sand berms are far worse for the environment that raw crude oil by the millions  of gallons!! 😦

There was a manufacturer in Maine who makes oil booms. He has a million yards ready to go, but neither BP or Obama will buy them!

There was even a Science guy on FOX last night that showed a poly-blended cloth that if you pour oil and water through it it retains the oil and the water is strained out cleanly.

But no one wants to here from him.

Territorial  Political Testosterone at it’s finest.

So one has to conclude that the only reason Obama cares, or appears to at all, is because  of politics.

That’s it.

He doesn’t actually want to solve the problem.

That does not interest him at all.

But the Crisis, now that’s an opportunity!

Never Waste a Good Crisis. — Rahm Emmanuel 🙂

“Don’t be fooled by Obama’s ‘incompetence’,” warns Stu Tarlowe in a provocative post at the American Thinker blog. “If you think the Gulf oil spill spells trouble for Obama, you’re just not looking at as big a picture as he’s looking at, and you just don’t realize how much trouble we’re all in.”

Tarlowe cites the Cloward-Piven Strategy, which was developed by two Columbia University sociology professors as a way to use political and economic chaos to achieve their radical ends. When viewed through this lens, what the rest of the nation views as a political disaster for Obama could be an opportunity instead.

“…If the oil spill in the Gulf manages to destroy the fishing and tourist industries in that region, shut down oil drilling, raise the price of oil and of food all over the country, and bring more and more Americans to a financial breaking point and thus dependent on food stamps and other government programs, Obama and Co. will smile and nod at one another,” Tarlowe predicts.

Obama’s own behavior indicates that Tarlowe may be right. The president reiterated his cap-and-trade case yesterday, amid another pitch for ending tax breaks for Big Oil and giving them to Big Environmentalists Doing Alternative Energy Projects to push America back into the 19th century.

“…The only way the transition to clean energy will ultimately succeed is if the private sector is fully invested in this future — if capital comes off the sidelines and the ingenuity of our entrepreneurs is unleashed.  And the only way to do that is by finally putting a price on carbon pollution,” Obama said during a speech at Carnegie Mellon University.

“The House of Representatives has already passed a comprehensive energy and climate bill, and there is currently a plan in the Senate – a plan that was developed with ideas from Democrats and Republicans – that would achieve the same goal.  And, Pittsburgh, I want you to know, the votes may not be there right now, but I intend to find them in the coming months,” the president added.

If Obama is indeed following the Cloward-Piven game plan, he will use the BP oil spill crisis to his advantage by forcing the passage of the ruinous cap and trade bill through the Senate before the November elections. (washington examiner)

The end justifies the means.

Since Global Warming and Global Climate Change have crashed he needs a new champion cry to get Cap & Trade rammed down your throats!

OIL!! 🙂

The Agenda is The Agenda.

And they have to get as much done before November as they can.

Anything that puts a greater strain on government services — and the inability of those services, through incompetence and complex bureaucracy to actually improve things – advances the goals of Cloward-Piven. The more desperate and demoralized the American people become, and the more preoccupied we are with simple survival, the better our new “leaders” like it, and the closer they get to assuming total and complete control of every aspect of our lives.

It explains that even the patently unconstitutional laws and policies implemented by the Obama regime are a deliberate part of the strategy, because in addition to using financial crises to bring about the desired changes in our way of life, it is necessary to render our Constitution impotent and irrelevant. (American Thinker)

So when you are paying $8 for gas and your electric bill triples due to new regulations and taxes under the guise of “dealing with our dependence on fossil fuels”-oil specifically, you’ll be politically incorrect and shouted down as insensitive if you want to drill for our own oil off our own shores.

“Green energy” or Bust!

Because, then he has you, literally, over a barrel.

The implications of this are irrelevant. Because it’s all about the power.

And NOTHING ELSE.

Now, that’s Politics, The Chicago Way. 🙂

Updates

Mexican government officials have moved their satellite consular office from the Catalina Island Country Club to a Catholic Church – citing protection under the Vienna Convention – after it was discovered that they did not have the appropriate paperwork to issue the island’s illegal immigrants identification cards.

Since The Washington Examiner reported that the management of the club, on the island of Catalina, discovered that the event was not a multi-cultural celebration as they had been told and refused to allow the Mexican government to set up shop.

The Mexican officials will provide “matricular” card services to Mexican nationals at St. Catherine’s Church, on the island.

So the Mexican Government lied about what they were going to do and got the boot! And now they have retreated to a Church to seek sanctuary.

Notice, they aren’t doing it on Mexican Consular grounds…They know what they are doing.

But like all socialists and Leftist, they don’t care.

The end justify the means.

****

After Gov. Brewer hit-and-run meeting the President:

When asked if she thinks the president has read the law, Brewer only smiled. 🙂

In a written statement, the White House said Obama reiterated his concern over the law and how it could lead to a patchwork of different state immigration regulations that would interfere with the federal government’s response.

WHAT FEDERAL RESPONSE?

To sue us, call us “misquided” and let your cronies calls us Nazis and racists!?

Is that the response you’re referring to!?

“The president urged Gov. Brewer to be his partner in working in a bipartisan manner on comprehensive immigration reform to implement the type of smart, sensible, and effective solutions the American people expect and deserve from their federal government,” the White House said.

“Comprehensive Immigration Reform” all-or-nothing Amnesty, not border security.

Neither side wants anything less.

The Democrats want to pander to Latinos for potential voters.

Republicans want cheap laborers.

And the American People get the shaft in the meantime.

****

Sestak

The official White House position now that they got the Great Perjurer Bill Clinton to fall on the sword for them, but no one is letting up on them is ‘Talk to the hand’.

It’s all in the memo. 😦

We have nothing to hide. 🙂

Obviously the Sestak affair has no intention of going away, but what will make the difference between this turning out to be a bump in the road and a life-threatening wreck is whether Sestak-gate is an isolated instance of Chicago-style political corruption, or part of a visible pattern.

On top of the Sestak offer, the president is now fending off concerns about a similar but possibly more serious case of offering government jobs to yet another maverick Democrat to get him out of a primary race.

Colorado state Rep. Andrew Romanoff said Wednesday that the White House discussed the possibility of three different government jobs that “might be available” if he agreed not to follow through and challenge incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado’s Democratic primary. Bennet was appointed senator early last year by Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter to fill the seat vacated by Ken Salazar, Obama’s choice for interior secretary.

An e-mail from deputy White House chief of staff Jim Messina dated Sept. 11, 2009, alluded to two different posts with the U.S. Agency for International Development, as well as director of the U.S. Trade and Development Agency. That latter post ended up being filled by Leocadia Zak, who with her husband contributed more than $10,000 to the Obama campaign.

As if all that weren’t enough, the federal corruption trial of Illinois’ ousted Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich, accused of trying to sell the U.S. Senate seat once held by Obama, will most likely require the testimony of Emanuel.

The only way to get to the bottom of all this is to get those involved under oath, have a dispassionate prosecutor ask them pointed questions and compare the cast of characters’ answers. Attorney General Eric Holder will have to decide whom his ultimate boss is — a president interested in damage control or the American people.

In the meantime, the president has some answering to do, because Sestak-gate and Romanoff-gate won’t go away. He will be asked whether “Change We Can Believe In” was just a well-timed — and ultimately deceptive — slogan.(IBD)

I’m shocked and appalled! 🙂

Corrupt Chicago Politics!

Never! 🙂

So what’s next for the Campaigner-in-Chief, a new tour?

Maybe he can vacation in Miami with all those Latinos who will be covered in Oil! 🙂

President Obama: “I’m in charge of oil spill cleanup”

But he’s a community orginizer, a Chicago political machine thug, an agitator, intimidator, not a Leader.

He forces people to bend to his will, not lead.

And Mother Nature has spoken.

She rained on his Memorial Day Speech.

So I guess it’s time for a new Crisis  so we can pass our 19th Century solutions called Cap & Trade.

After all, never waste a good crisis.

Never Lead, either.

It’s a Tough Life

Reportedly, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napalitano spends lots of time at the Opera, in The President’s box. (WW)

It’s much better than reading The AZ immigration Law.

Or Securing the border AGAINST Illegal Aliens.

You just put out alerts that known islamic radical recruiters may try and cross the border.

Even when you can’t call them “radical islamists”, and barely utter the word “terrorist”.

And you aren’t planning on doing anything about it anyhow.

You give Obama the idea to make the same show piece “look ma, I’m doing something” move by sending 1,200 troops to sit around and do paperwork but make it look like your “securing” the border.

It worked, so you thought, when you were Governor. So why not do it again, but on a grander scale.

Kind of like the Opera.

After all, last year you said the terrorists you were worried about were “right wingers” and military people, OUR military people.

Who cares about actual terrorists.

Certainly not our Big Sis.

Then, the latest spin from the White House on the Joe Sestek case, that they took nearly 2 weeks after the primary (and 3 months after Sestak first said it) where he defeated Obama-backed Arlen Specter, to say that the offer they made to him which would have been a crime if it was quid pro quo goes like this, according to the White House…

Rahm “Never let a crisis go to waste” Emanuel, White House Chief of Staff, asked Bill Clinton to ask Joe Sestek if he’d be interested in an “non-compensated” Government promotion (of sorts).

And so, the report this morning that former President Bill Clinton was tasked by White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel to make such an approach to Rep. Joe Sestak — allegedly offering him an unpaid advisory role on an intelligence board in exchange for getting him to drop his primary bid against Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) — would not normally raise much of a stir in official Washington.

That the story has become a major controversy, a regular fixture on cable news chat shows and a momentum-killer for Sestak following his come-from behind victory against Specter in last week’s Pennsylvania primary is evidence of how the White House mishandled the controversy, according to conversations with several high-level Democratic strategists.

“How do you make something out of nothing?,” asked one such operative who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about the matter. “By acting guilty when you’re innocent.”

Another senior party official said that the White House “has a lot of egg on their face” and described the events as a “PR nightmare”.

So they couldn’t even handle this without screwing it up. And you want to trust The Supreme Court, Health Care, Congress, and the nations future to these nuckleheads?!

But you have to admire Obama for choosing Bill Clinton as the patsy. You have a President that was impeached (just not removed from office) for PERJURY as your star player!!

And, his biggest rival, Hillary, has another, “Oh, Bill…” moment to deal with.

Very savvy.

So I wonder what Bill Clinton got out of it?

So, no gentle readers, I don’t buy this lipstick on this pig.

If it was this <bleep>ing simple and you could off-load it onto Bill Clinton why the hell did you wait so long?

Why all the stonewalling?

Repeatedly.

Because they were working on this “explanation”. They had to manufacture it.

It had to sound plausible so that even the Liberal Media that was hounding them would buy it.

That’s why.

Kind of like the Administration protestation that they were on the Oil Spill from “Day One” but never mentioned it until Day 8.

And Never, to this day, have even acknowledged the 500-year flood in Tennessee.

Other than knowing it’s where Al Gore was from, do they even know where it is?

And why was that not a crisis?

Nothing to exploit, apparently.

So will Bill Clinton be behind the Oil spill and the Birth Certifcate also?

Ah, shucks… 😦

Allies of the White House argue that the Sestak situation was less PR blunder than conscious choice to accept some short term pain for long term gain (or at least less long term pain).

Their argument is that the White House could have pushed out an answer to the Sestak job controversy quickly but, in so doing, would have run the risk of not having all the facts of a relatively complex situation straight — making it a real possibility that they would be bludgeoned by the press if there was a mistake or inconsistency in the original statement.(Washington Post).

They had to get their story straight first, and hide the bodies and the evidence….:(

Kind like that fishy story of Obama going to see his “grandmother” very unexpectedly during the campaign when the Birth Certificate was a hot issue and then the Officials in Hawaii comes out says “there’s not thing see here!”

It’s smells rotten.

At Least Obama has one Clinton willing to throw down his “honor” for the cause though.

Hey Bill, Can I get you to…. <fill in the blank>

Aw, Shucks, Barack… 😦

Congressman Darell Issa (who has been pushing for a Special Investigator):

“The White House has offered a version of events that has important differences from what Congressman Sestak has been saying for months – that he was offered a ‘job’ by ’someone in the White House’ in exchange for leaving the Pennsylvania Senate race.

“I’m very concerned that…the White House has…worked to craft a story behind closed doors and coordinate with those involved.”

“The White House has admitted today to coordinating an arrangement that would represent an illegal quid-pro-quo as federal law prohibits directly or indirectly offering any position or appointment, paid or unpaid, in exchange for favors connected with an election.

“..Regardless of what President Clinton or Congressman Sestak now say, it is abundantly clear that this kind of conduct is contrary to President Obama’s pledge to change ‘business as usual’ and that his Administration has engaged in the kind of political shenanigans he once campaigned to end.”

Now, if only he could get BP, Illegal Aliens, and that “laser like focus on Jobs” to go away so he could enjoy his “vacation” in Chicago and then get back to taking over more industries and destroying more “greedy” capitalist!

Damn, he needs to play more Golf while Rome burns! 🙂

The Pot is Black

Remember the old saying, “That’s like the pot calling the kettle black”?

Well, you have outraged and falsely sanctimonious Democrats demagoging about the evils of Wall Street and BP (British Petroleum) but yet they are the one with their hands in the cookie jar.

Subprime Scandal: Democrats blame “greedy” Wall Street for the financial crisis, but Democratic operatives lined their own pockets throughout the mess.

Take Democrat Sen. Chris Dodd. The Senate Banking Committee chairman recently blew a gasket on the Senate floor over GOP opposition to his tougher financial regulations.

“You have to ask yourself: ‘Who benefits if this bill to rein in Wall Street or large financial institutions is strangled by a filibuster?'” he said. “Certainly no one can make the case that the American family would benefit. These families have seen millions of jobs lost, trillions in savings wiped out, because of the greedy few on Wall Street who gambled with money that didn’t even belong to them.”

But Dodd was one of the power brokers who played fast and loose with taxpayer-backed money at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

As late as July 2008, as the congressionally chartered mortgage giants buckled under the weight of HUD-mandated subprime loans, the banking panel chief insisted they were “viable, strong institutions.” Dodd asserted that there was no need to rein in their risky affordable-lending programs.

By suspending oversight, Dodd helped gamble away more than $400 billion — the current estimate of how much it will cost the Treasury to bail out Fannie and Freddie.

At the same time, Dodd personally took advantage of the easy credit scam that he and his affordable-housing cronies fostered. He received not one, but two sweetheart mortgages from subprime giant Countrywide Financial, which at the time was the darling of the affordable-housing movement. Points were shaved from the loans, and Dodd saved thousands of dollars.

Fannie CEO Franklin Raines also got special treatment from Countrywide, which became Fannie’s top client. Democrat Raines, who griped that homeownership was “unevenly distributed in society,” even held it up as the model for affordable lending.

After stepping down as White House budget director, Clinton installed him at the helm of Fannie where he proceeded to cook the books and pocket huge bonuses. By the time he left in early 2005 under an ethical cloud, Raines had looted Fannie for nearly $100 million in compensation. Other Clinton cronies padded their pockets with sums that make some Wall Street CEOs look like pikers.

Raines is now an informal housing adviser to President Obama. Obama maintains that “fat cat bankers” caused the mortgage meltdown. But it was HUD that encouraged Fannie and Freddie to take “reckless risks” to satisfy affirmative-lending quotas. And Democrats on the Hill looked the other way.

Dodd and others abdicated their oversight duties. In effect, they gave the mortgage giants a blank check and told them to make it out to uncreditworthy minority and low-income homebuyers, who could not afford to repay loans.

As long as Fannie and Freddie kept underwriting politically correct mortgages, Democrats turned a blind eye to the mounting risk. And they also ignored the book-cooking and looting going on there.

In turn, Fannie and Freddie paid them protection money in the form of generous political donations. In fact, Dodd and Obama were among the top recipients of their largesse in the Senate.

Then there is White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, an old Chicago crony of Obama. In 2000, after serving as a top White House aide, President Clinton appointed Emanuel to the Freddie Mac board, where he raked in a cool $320,000 in compensation.

Following his stint there, Emanuel hauled in millions of dollars working for a Chicago investment firm that backed — you guessed it — subprime mortgage lending firms.

Before demonizing greedy bankers on Wall Street, Democrats in Washington ought to take a long, hard look in the mirror. (IBD)

BP: Washington (CNN) — As petroleum giant BP comes under congressional scrutiny as its ruptured oil rig pumps thousands of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, its political contributions are being scrutinized, too.

The top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 presidential election was Barack Obama, who collected $71,000, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

When questioned about the donations Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs made a point of noting that the money came from employees and not the company itself.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt added that Obama wasn’t tied to big oil companies.

“This claim lacks one thing: credibility,” LaBolt said in a statement. “President Obama didn’t accept a dime from corporate PACs or federal lobbyists during his presidential campaign. He raised $750 million from nearly 4 million Americans. And since he became President, he rolled back tax breaks and giveaways for the oil and gas industry, spearheaded a G20 agreement to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and made the largest investment in American history in clean energy incentives.”

Where’s my barf bag?

He got it all from the little people…Bovine Fecal Matter!

IMMIGRATION:

The Al Sharpton road show was here over the last few days. It may still be here, but I doubt it.

His hit-and-run included such gems as:  “We Won’t Have True Social Justice Until Everything Is ‘Equal in Everybody’s House’ “

Now you wouldn’t call that socialism now would you?

Because, then you’d be a Racist….and you don’t want to be that now do you…. 😦

Then there was this little ditty from the liberal epicenter of the San Francisco Bay Area:

Freedom of expression or cultural disrespect on Cinco de Mayo?

On any other day at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, Daniel Galli and his four friends would not even be noticed for wearing T-shirts with the American flag. But Cinco de Mayo is not any typical day especially on a campus with a large Mexican American student population.

Galli says he and his friends were sitting at a table during brunch break when the vice principal asked two of the boys to remove American flag bandannas that they wearing on their heads and for the others to turn their American flag T-shirts inside out. When they refused, the boys were ordered to go to the principal’s office.

“They said we could wear it on any other day,” Daniel Galli said, “but today is sensitive to Mexican-Americans because it’s supposed to be their holiday so we were not allowed to wear it today.”

The boys said the administrators called their T-shirts “incendiary” that would lead to fights on campus.

“They said if we tried to go back to class with our shirts not taken off, they said it was defiance and we would get suspended,” Dominic Maciel, Galli’s friend, said.

The boys really had no choice, and went home to avoid suspension. They say they’re angry they were not allowed to express their American pride. Their parents are just as upset, calling what happened to their children, “total nonsense.”

“I think it’s absolutely ridiculous,” Julie Fagerstrom, Maciel’s mom, said. “All they were doing was displaying their patriotic nature. They’re expressing their individuality.”

But to many Mexican-American students at Live Oak, this was a big deal. They say they were offended by the five boys and others for wearing American colors on a Mexican holiday.

“I think they should apologize cause it is a Mexican Heritage Day,” Annicia Nunez, a Live Oak High student, said. “We don’t deserve to be get disrespected like that. We wouldn’t do that on Fourth of July.”

As for an apology, the boys and their families say, “fat chance.”

“I’m not going to apologize. I did nothing wrong,” Galli said. “I went along with my normal day. I might have worn an American flag, but I’m an American and I’m proud to be an American.”

The five boys and their families met with a Morgan Hill Unified School District official Wednesday night. The district released a statement saying it does not agree with how Live Oak High School administrators handled this incident.

The boys will not be suspended and they were told they can go back to school Thursday. They may even wear their red, white, and blue colors again, but this time, the day after Cinco de Mayo, there will be no controversy.

Ah, the politically correct.

So what’s next, are we going to be observing all Mexican and Latino holidays so as not to offend them?

After all, an American Flag (on an Old Navy shirt) is tantamount to racism you know…

Why is Obama vilifying FOX News? Why does Harry Reid push an immigration bill he knows can’t pass? Why won’t Schumer compromise on regulatory reform and why does he try to hang Goldman Sachs around the GOP? Why did Bill Clinton blame conservatives who oppose big government for the Oklahoma City bombing?

All share one motivation: To increase their base’s turnout in the off year elections of 2010. Going after FOX News stimulates a feeling of victimization on the left. The immigration bill and the new Arizona law catalyzes a Latino turnout. Goldman Sachs enrages liberal anti-Wall Street populists. By characterizing the Tea Party activists as dangerous, liberals are aroused to vote in November.

There are two way to win any election: energize the base or appeal to the center. Obama is, predictably, choosing the former, deliberately pushing policies that drive Independents into Republican arms as the price for generating passion on the part of his supporters. (Dick Morris)

So the great “unifier” is dividing people in order to try and save his party.

So the party that decries “fear tactics” is slopping it on like there’s no tomorrow.

And they are the victims.

And Me,  I’m still a racist…. 🙂

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…

It’s all in the Calculations

“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy…Health insurance reform is about jobs.  This legislation alone will create 4 million jobs, about 400,000 jobs very soon.
“We must have the courage, though, to get the job done. We have the ideas.  We have the commitment.  We have the dedication.  We know the urgency.  Now we have to have the courage to get the job done. So proud that President Obama is taking the message so forcefully to the American people! This is long overdue, a hundred years.”–Nancy Pelosi 3/9/2010

Politico:  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to stop assigning deadlines to Congress for finishing the health care reform bill.

In a House-Senate leadership meeting on health care Tuesday, she essentially told Emanuel to “cool it,” according to one Hill Democratic aide — an account confirmed by a second aide.

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman told reporters that lawmakers made it clear to Emanuel that “we don’t feel that we want any deadline assigned to us.”

“We want to pass the bill,” Waxman said. “We don’t feel we have to have any particular deadline.”

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has said that the president wants the House to pass the Senate health care bill by March 18, before he leaves for an overseas trip, and for the Senate to take up the reconciliation bill by Easter.

But those demands have been met with annoyance on the Hill, where Democrats have been unable to meet deadlines on health reform — and mocked by Republicans in the process.

“We need to give families and businesses more control over their own health insurance,” Obama said to an enthusiastic crowd of 1800 at Arcadia University outside Philadelphia. “And that’s why we need to pass health care reform; not next year, not five years from now, not 10 years from now, but now.”(ABC)

And a Government takeover is the perfect way to give families more control.

And Making it Mandatory will help also.

Sure…whatever… 😦

Campaign Mode Away!

But according to Obama it will save us Money and Pelosi says it will create jobs.

Utopia awaits!

WP: About 11.4 million out-of-work people now collect unemployment compensation, at a cost of $10 billion a month. Half of them have been receiving payments for more than six months, the usual insurance limit. But under multiple extensions enacted by the federal government in response to the downturn, workers can collect the payments for as long as 99 weeks in states with the highest unemployment rates — the longest period since the program’s inception.

The 14.9 million jobless Americans have been out of work an average of 29.7 weeks, just below January’s 30.2-week average. Those levels are the highest since the government began keeping those records in the 1950s.

So why isn’t the Administration interested in Jobs?

I say, because government dependence is the ultimate goal.

High unemployment is good for that.

And dependence breeds voting for Democrats.

Add in the Illegal Aliens who will get Amnesty probably before the election In November (to counter the angry peasant masses who will be mad at them).

Add in, if you have no job you must have the Government’s Health Care, thus you are dependent.

Add in that Obama doesn’t care what you think.

And you have a cold, calculation and need to do exactly what they are doing.

Which is, trying to take over your lives, while simultaneously trying to destroy it.

Now that’s Change They can Believe in!

Video : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c6wLToQUN8