Monday, September 29, 2008

Obama is benefiting from the financial crisis, in more ways then one!



Obama has benefited from the financial crisis, swapping polling figures and for what reasoning? In 2007 alone President George Bush warned the Congress 17 times, and that doesn’t count all the years previous. In 2003 President Bush recommended an overhaul of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. A report by outside investigators in July 2003 concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not
adequately hedge against rising interest rates.
Are they laughing at us?
House democrats had the following statements;

”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.” Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed. ”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.

Senator John McCain explained his stance in early 2006 as follows;

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal. The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac. The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay. I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole. I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.
The Democrats killed this measure in Committee preventing the full Senate Vote.
As you can see from the articles, President Bush and Senator McCain were over- ridden by house democrats, and yet the democrats are the ones who are benefiting?

Check this link http://cbs2chicago.com/business/fannie.mae.franklin.2.703253.html for some interesting facts about the aforementioned Franklin Raines, former CEO of Fannie Mae, or just Google him. According to Wiki, Raines is currently employed by Barack Obama’s Presidential Campaign as an economic adviser. Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008 Top Three:
Dodd, Christopher J
S
CT
D
$165,400


Obama, Barack
S
IL
D
$126,349


Kerry, John
S
MA
D
$111,000


See the greedy hands that took the graft: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html
This explains it all!
http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/2008/09/busted-video-of-fannie-mae-ceo-in-2005.html

Barack Obama is relying on the fact that voters in America are stupid! He relies on the fact that we can’t research all the facts of his involvement, while all the time thumbing his nose at the Republicans.

If I were a senator I'd be demanding the removal of Chris Dodd and Barney Frank as part of the bail out, the head people who said there was NO problem..........leave them in?........when can it happen again?
send this video to all your friends, it's long but well worth it!
Burning down the House: what really caused the housing crisis


In the words of Pastor Jeremiah Wright......." the chickens have come home to roost!"

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Bumbling Joe and his economic plan,……….. god help us!






“Joe Biden isn’t backing down from his startling claim last week that raising taxes on the rich is the ‘patriotic’ thing to do. [In fact,] he upped the ante, thundering that he also has Jesus in his corner. ‘Catholic social doctrine as I was taught it is, you take care of people who need the help the most,’ Mr. Biden preached to a group of union supporters... We won’t get into a theological debate with Mr. Biden, except to say that Biblical tax rates tended to run around 10%, not the 39.6%-plus that Barack Obama’s tax plan calls for. As for patriotism, maybe the young Joe Biden missed school the day the Boston Tea Party was being taught. There’s also the point that if you want to finance a war, you need a strong enough economy to throw off the tax revenues to pay for it. As we learned in the 1980s under Reagan, lower taxes that help an economy grow can finance a defense buildup that helps win the Cold War. By that standard, cuts in marginal income tax rates deserve to be called patriotic. Regarding taxes and social justice, the issue is whether the high taxes that Mr. Biden favors promote economic growth and prosperity, not least for America’s poorest citizens. There he doesn’t have evidence on his side. Studies from around the world, including the annual Wall Street Journal-Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom, conclusively indicate that countries that keep taxes low tend to have the least amount of poverty. As for fairness, we’d note that today the top 1% of taxpayers pay twice as large a share of income taxes (39%) at a 35% rate than they did in 1980, when they were taxed at a rate of 70% yet paid only 19% of income taxes. In that sense, the tax code is more ‘progressive’ now. By the way, Mr. Biden and his wife recently released their tax returns, and they reported an average of $380, or 0.2% of their income, in annual charitable contributions over a 10-year period. The national average was about 2% of income.” —The Wall Street Journal

Friday, September 26, 2008

Joe Biden does it AGAIN!





With the ugliness of a financial crisis looming, and the actions that seem to be bi-partisan so far for the common good of our country. Leave it to Joe Biden, voted second largest “windbag” of the senate, by his peers, to climb over the dead bodies in the wake to grab all the money he can. It appears Senator Biden ignored all pleas to not have any earmarks until we are finished with the bailout. He brazenly requested 51.5 million dollars for his home state of Delaware, while the country hangs in the balance. Evidently HE has no problem multi-tasking, does he really see this as an opportunity to make money for his state, while voting for the bail out?

People need to wake up when blatant actions like this happen and get brushed under the carpet.
Gaffees this week by the Senator from Delaware
“I guarantee you Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns, so don’t buy that malarkey... If he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem.” —Joe Biden on Obama, who recently said, “Even if I want to take them away, I don’t have the votes in Congress.”

“I am so sick and tired of this phoniness. The truth of the matter is that we are in trouble, and the people who do not need new tax cuts should be willing as patriotic Americans to understand the way to get this economy back up on their feet is to give middle class taxpayers a break.” —Joe Biden, defending his patriotic tax remarks from last week.

“When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on television...” —Joe Biden **Uh, Joe, Roosevelt wasn’t president in 1929 and TV’s weren’t commercially available until the late 1930s.

Letter to the Editor, Wall Street Journal


Letter to the Editor, Wall Street Journal

by Q.D. Thompson



                                            
Dear Editor:

As a retired U.S. Naval Reserve Officer who served eight years of active duty, five during WWII and then recalled for three more years during the Korean Conflict, it was heart-sickening
to read the Wall Street Journal (no doubt the fairest and most balanced newspaper in the country) editorial, "No Vote for the Troops", Sept. 20-21, '08. It is quite evident the reputation of the 2007-08 do nothing Congress with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi leading the charge continues to enhance this reputation by their negative actions which definitely reflect their self-center political hopes and desires that the U.S. will fail in their engagement in Iraq in order to strengthen their position with the public and to block a vote on a bipartisan resolution "recognizing the strategic success of the troops in Iraq" and thanking our men and women in uniform for their efforts.

For their selfish short-sighted leadership and their failure to support all phases of this world conflict, as was needed in order to win WWI & WWII, to guarantee success for our survival, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi, who seems incapable of putting two comprehensive sentences together, should be indicted as traitors to their country and brought to trial.

Something needs to be done immediately to entice all of our politicians to work in concert to assure the salvation of our civilization.

Quinton D. Thompson

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Is it a shock that we lose business abroad?



It has been the “catch phrase” in America to label us as hip and declare with open arms a WORLD ECONOMY! What we don’t understand is as our own inflationary country; any country that has a similar economy is at a disadvantage. Disadvantage you say? Of course we are, as inflationary influences, (i.e. oil prices, that affect every product we sell, minimum wage increases, increased social –programs, wasteful earmarks, mortgage company bailouts, etc.), drive up our cost of doing business. If a third world nation can introduce a college graduate into the business world who is used to making say $2000 a year, and if his quality of education is higher then a fresh out of college student from America, wouldn’t a company be crazy NOT to hire the student who will work for less?

We have this grandiose idea that we are the most intelligent, best-educated country in the world, when in fact that is NOT true. When say a communist country like China sends a child to school, they do so 14 hours a day, 7 days a week, year round. When they graduate from High School they have to go through testing for DAYS to find the brightest, most intelligent stars, to see who goes to college. Yes the government pays it for, but THEY chose who goes on.

We have increased our bottom line or if you would like to call it “our cost of doing business” to the point that we are now a non-competitive country in which to do business. We charge companies the second highest taxes in the WORLD! Does this shock you? Does this scare you? It should, because we have allowed it. Every time a senator gets an “earmark” for a million dollars, where do you think it comes from? Yes it comes from us but……….it adds once again to the bottom line of the cost of doing business, putting us that much farther in the hole. Are the inflated salaries of the workers in our country and the bottom line of doing business conducive to a successful world economy?

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Spinning silk from a sow’s ear





If anyone had a question about what the Democratic Party stands for, it was most assuredly answered during the Democratic National Convention in Denver. If a party was campaigning on “Change,” why would they ever parade shamed Presidents of the past? President Carter, who most recently traveled to meet Hamas and divulge the secrets of how many nuclear weapons Israel has, or maybe President Bill Clinton, only the second President to be impeached in American history. Clinton blamed all the obvious problems of today on President Bush, even though he had a personal hand in at least 6 of the things he blamed Bush for, but once a liar always a liar. The lead off speech by Nancy Pelosi, talking head of the House of Representatives, that almost put everyone to sleep. Al Gore, the self- professed global warming expert who has no scientific credentials. John Kerry, Mr. Swift boat himself, who conducted treasonous, acts against the Viet Nam war. Howard Dean, the screaming idiot of the party. Ted Kennedy, who appeared to receive recognition of his years in service in the Senate. Joe Biden, the newly named Vice Presidential pick, and the source of all new comedy material for late night show hosts, for his numerous verbal gaffes.



If the purpose of the convention was to congratulate each other on failed policies, and appeal to the dissatisfaction of their members, it was certainly an overwhelming success. If the purpose was to attack the Republicans and offer hope for the future, with logical and specific ideas then it was a resounding flop.



No “change” was shown to me, just looks like more of the same, just in a different wrapper.

Monday, September 22, 2008

More lies from the liberals


I received this email from a democrat, as did a lot of my friends. I don't know why it inflamed me the way it did, but I researched every false claim and fired it right back at the sender, you have my permission to do the same when it is sent to you. The original email is in normal type while my replies are in red and italics.........





OK......How bad does it have to get before we see the light?????????????



I ' m a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....



If you grow up in Hawaii , raised by your grandparents, you're

"exotic, different."

However, grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, you're a quintessential American story.



Two entirely different stories, Obama himself was the one who has labeled himself “exotic and different” Remember the comment about the pictures on the treasury bills? I can find that video if you would like. Nobody that I’m aware of labeled the Palin Family as “quintessential” unless you are including this letter of course.



If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic "Muslim" (who, by the way, is a Christian).

However, name your kids Willow , Trig and Track, you're a "maverick".

Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

However, attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.



Barack is a derivative of an Arabic word Barik. We know he’s a Christian by the way! The next comment is pretty offensive, just because the Palin’s haven’t named their children “conventional names” you consider then mavericks. What does that say about Obama’s parents who named him Barack? The next statement goes on the assumption that Obama attended only Harvard. He attended Occidental College, Columbia University, and THEN Harvard. So in your line of reasoning, You see Obama more grounded because he attended two less schools of higher learning? Senator John McCain attended 20 some schools in his youth, does that make him somehow more uneducated?





If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer,



Let’s dissect your claim; better still let’s use Obama’s own words and the people who worked with him:

According to Mike Kruglik, a fellow organizer at that time, Obama was the best student he had ever had in his 10 years of training organizers. "He was a natural, the undisputed master of agitation, who could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid-fire Socratic dialogue, nudging them to admit that they were not living up to their own standards. He could be aggressive and confrontational. With probing, sometimes personal questions, he would pinpoint the source of pain in their lives, tearing down their egos just enough before dangling a carrot of hope that they could make things better." Although being involved in the Developing Communities Project as President, Obama admits in a 2007 inverview that, “"For the most part I would say I wasn’t wildly successful," The victories that we achieved were extraordinarily modest: you know, getting a job-training site set up or getting an after-school program for young people put in place." Obama was also involved in a group called Gamaliel Foundation which, provides training and consultation and develops national strategy for its affiliated congregation-based community organizations.













become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters



These statements are true….



12 years as a Constitutional Law Professor,

Not true I’m afraid, he did work 12 years for the University of Chicago Law School, but this is where the truth ends. Of his teachings in law, in only one class did he teach anything relating to “constitutional law”. The New York Times reported his classes as such:



“According to research conducted by the New York Times and published on July 30, 2008, Obama is described as having taught three courses. These included a Voting Rights class which, "traced the evolution of election law, from the disenfranchisement of blacks to contemporary debates over districting and campaign finance...he taught districting as a racially fraught study in how power is secured." He also taught a class on Due Process and Equal Protection and, "His most original course, a historical and political seminar as much as a legal one, was on racism and law."





His title was not professor but that of “Senior Lecturer,” he was however offered a professorship to keep him from Leaving the University of Chicago Law School after his first run for state congress after his 2 to 1 loss.



spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with


over 750,000 people,



True



become chairman of the state Senate's Health and

Human Services committee,



True, but his two terms in the state senate were far from illustrious, as he was only personally responsible for 3 pieces of legislature, racial profiling guidelines, video taping of homicide suspects, and death penalty reform. In reality, Barack Obama was just 1 of 59 State senators in Illinois, a rather small fish in a big pond.



spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing

a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the

Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs

Committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.


In Senator Obama’s first two years in the US Senate he had the ability to vote on 200 bills before him.This caring individual, a self- appointed spokesman for the “little guy”, and the downtrodden has had been recorded as a NO VOTE 143 times. So important was this position to him, and yet he was either absent or it was his choice not to vote 71.5% of the time,thereby shirking his responsibility of the job he has been paid to do. In a move of arrogance, he has chosen to introduce or co-introduce 573 bills of his own, showing that he believes his legislation to be more important then any one else’s. Senator Obama was “installed” in these committees by powerful Democratic leaders to groom him for his run for the Presidency; personally I’d like to see how many meeting of these committees he actually attended. The population of Illinois is 12,419,293, so again an exaggeratation, divide that in half because Illinois has two US Senators, and we see he now speaks for 6,200,000 people and not 13 million.

However, if your total resume is: local weather girl,


This statement has been made to belittle Sarah Palin’s journalism degree; unfortunately this is where most in TV start. I'm sure Obama didn't start trying cases when he first started with his law firm.

4 years on the city


council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people,


Wassilla, AK has a population of 9780 people, and this minimalistic statement does come close to describing her total single handed commitment to ridding her state of corruption by her own party.


20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're

qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive and next in

line behind a man in his eighth decade of life.

Hardly worth replying to

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising

2 daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real

Christian.


John McCain has now been married to Cindy McCain for 28 years, and have adopted 7 children from different nationalities, all with physical disabilities, showing their “deeds by example” of their pro-life, pro-humanity stance. Being Protestant certainly doesn’t give you the moral high ground. Alliance to the Trinity United Church of Christ is at this point a totally indefensible position; let’s not EVEN venture there!


However, if you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and then left

your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a

true Christian.


McCain’s extra-marital affair wasn’t with his now wife Cindy, and as reported he had an affair in 1976 and didn’t meet Cindy until 1979. McCain’s “disfigured wife” was actually diagnosed as disabled, and got that way from a car accident in 1969 (while McCain was a POW) to which, The settlement included two houses, and financial support for her ongoing medical treatments due to her 1969 car accident; they would remain on good terms. John McCain remains a Southern Baptist, much the same as Bill Clinton does.


If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including


the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.


When questioned about age appropriate, Obama replied that it would include younger children, the interviewer asked “kindergarten?” He laughed at first but then said he wouldn’t take anything off the table, non-committal to say the least.


However, if, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no

other option in sex education in your state's school system while your

unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible

This is untrue, she is Christian and pro-life, but also a supporter of birth control: she's a member of Feminists For Life (FFL), an anti-abortion, pro-contraception organization. In 2002, she wrote a letter to FFL stating that she had "adamantly supported our cause since I first understood, as a child, the atrocity of abortion." She supports the teaching of creationism in public schools, alongside evolution.


If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in

a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city

community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values

don't represent America 's.


In 2002, Michelle began working for the University of Chicago Hospitals, first as executive director for community affairs and, beginning May, 2005, as Vice President for Community and External Affairs. She still holds the position, though she is working part time in order to devote more time to being a mother.Just a few months before he joined the presidential race, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) co-sponsored a little-noticed proposal to require the Pentagon to spend $2 million on brain trauma research for soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. The beneficiary of the Aug. 2, 2006, earmark from him and Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) was undeniably close to home: the University of Chicago, where his wife, Michelle, worked as the university hospital's vice president for community and external affairs. According to NPR, Michelle Obama was promoted to a vice president at the University of Chicago Hospitals; her salary nearly tripled, from $122,000 to $316,000 a year for a part time job. I’ve never know ANYONE who gets that much money for a part time job but I would suppose that once a person gets that sort of raise I believe she can “donate her time” to worthwhile projects. To be honest what does this have to do with anything? She isn’t running for office right?





However, if your husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI


conviction and no college education

At LEAST? Todd Palin had one DWI conviction, and spent more time in jail for that violation then Edward Kennedy did for his responsibility in death of Mary Jo Kopechne. Todd Palin did take college courses but never graduated with a degree. Barack Obama's father died from a car accident while driving drunk.


who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA


From 1995 to 2002 he was registered to vote as a member of the Alaskan Independence Party.Yes the AIPwhen first started avocated Cessation from the US but that was in 1958, long before Todd palin was even born. Now the party is a viable third party with real candidates, and values. Since that time Todd has registered as “uncommited.” And this man is running for what office?


your family is extremely admirable.

In my own opinion, Barack Obama, his wife, his family, or his campaign, have shown me nothing to be admired. His arrogant conceited books show me nothing but contempt for the very country he says he loves, but has shown no proof to that effect. His career has been constructed entirely around this run for the Presidency that he is involved in right now. His actions show the true “Audacity of HIS Hope,” and not his dream for America’s hope or future.


OK, much clearer now.


Actually once we have the FACTS things become clearer still! Anyone with a computer can verify what I have through, Wikipedia, and all the normal news sources. The problem with America is that not many take the time to do it, and trash emails like this continue to circulate, that is why this needed to be nipped in the bud!


If anyone wishes to ask for resources on any of my rebuttal info I will gladly comply just email me directly, unlike the person that made all these wild claims, and outright lies.




acrittersr@verizon.net






























Only his supporters believe his words aren’t mean spirited.




Obama’s latest mean spirited jabs at the McCain/ Palin show his frustration at a campaign that is faltering. Who other then his true blue supporters believe that the “lipstick on the pig” comment wasn’t aimed at Sarah Palin, and the “stinking fish” comment wasn’t aimed at McCain? Then he tried to turn the whole thing around by accusing McCain of “swift boating” him, and refusing to associate the comments to people and to only the administration.



The very fact that Palin used the word lipstick in her speech at the RNC convention, and the very fact that Obama picked that word to use in the same sentence with the word pig, is way too much of a coincidence to be a non-intended analogy.



Obama then put out an ad stating that John McCain is out of touch because he doesn’t use a computer, or even how to send an email. Obama’s campaign knows about his time as a POW, and they also know that his Viet Nam captors tortured him to the point of tearing his shoulder joints up so badly, that he can’t even raise his arms past mid body. He has never been able to type because of his physical limits, so why would he need to know how to email? So Obama makes the connection of a physical disability to “being out of touch” with society? Bill Clinton, nor Hillary Clinton know how to type, did that keep him from becoming President or her from running?



They clearly know what they are doing, and yet continue to hit below the belt. Clearly it shows that the Obama campaign is in frustration mode, and is lashing out at anything he can, even to the point of looking like the schoolyard bully!


Even Senator Biden said the ad about McCain not knowing how to type was horrible, and if he had anything to do with it, the ad wouldn't have run. Interestingly after a period of a few hours Senator Obama's must have reminded Sen Biden that he is only along for the ride and he need to recant his earlier statement, toy which he said......."Well I haven't actually seen the ad"..........Nice Gaffee Joe! anything else you would like to tell us? Oh...other then asking that man in the wheelchair to stand up and be recognized.......once again, good move Joe! Your replacement is reportedly waiting in the wings



Friday, September 19, 2008

Typical hot head Thomas V Mike Miller


Maryland State Senate President, Thomas V Mike Miller was never content to keep his opinions to himself. The very person that referred to past Lt. Governor Michael Steele as an “uncle tom,” has put his foot in his mouth again, this time aiming the frustration and poor judgment of Governor Martin O’Malley’s administration, against Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot. Franchot a democrat, as raised the hair on Miller’s back by not “falling in to line” with O’Malley and Miller’s view of their kingdom.

Miller’s back biting is nothing new in this state, and this time is no exception. His decision to make this latest personal battle public just might come back to bite him. Miller has yet to make the decision of whether or not run for re-election in 2010, but this arrogant and demeaning letter to Franchot, can do nothing but reduce his standing in many peoples eyes.

Although Miller has been in office for over thirty years, Franchot is hardly a new comer to the political scene, serving over 20 years himself. Regardless of that fact Miller has chosen to demean him in public.

Miller and O’Malley believe their view of the fiscal condition of the State of Maryland, is the only one. Announced this week was a reported $432 million shortfall that could blossom to $1 billion by next fiscal year. Clearly the tax increases haven’t worked the way the administration hoped they would, but Miller won’t open his closed mind to any new ideas. I guess Franchot should thank god he’s a democrat, I can only IMAGINE the letter’s contents if he was a Republican…………..maybe Mike Miller should just slither the way of Parris Glendening come 2010.



September 10, 2008



Comptroller Peter Franchot

Comptroller of Maryland

80 Calvert Street

P.O. Box 466

Annapolis, MD 21404-0466



Dear Peter:

I have worked with many statewide elected officials during my tenure in the Maryland General Assembly, and I have watched each deal differently with the mantle of statewide leadership. I was most impressed by those who understood the truism: “What got you here won’t get you there.” They knew they had to grow beyond the experience they brought with them into office, which helped them thrive in their statewide leadership role. These successful officials served our State well, and they earned the respect and gratitude of the citizens of Maryland.

Regrettably, as you stumble through your second year in the Comptroller’s Office, it is evident you do not understand that what got you into statewide office will not ensure success as a statewide official. Rather than growing into your role, you are clinging to the worst habits of a novice elected official – preening for the press, repackaging old ideas and calling them new, expanding your budget, while criticizing others for bloat in theirs, offering policy alternatives one day that are incongruous with your positions from the day before, and criticizing others for leading while offering nothing to the debate.

Your letter of September 8 is the latest example of your obsession with the press, and your disregard for the relationships you need to be an effective leader. I received requests from reporters for comment before I received the letter. Your decision to leak the letter before delivering it can only lead to a conclusion that your goal is to gain media exposure for yourself – not to raise concerns in the spirit of good faith or good government. Your tactics are not becoming of a statewide elected official – they are stunts better left to backbench lawmakers. After making a career for twenty years as an Annapolis insider, you should know better.

In your letter, you recycled an old idea and offered it up as new. That mistake is usually reserved for someone with far less institutional knowledge and experience than you. You called your proposal for a blue ribbon commission “fresh” and “truly worthwhile” – when, in reality, a blue ribbon commission
is a bridge to nowhere in State government. During your time in the General Assembly, State leaders assembled at least four commissions to assess the State’s finances. Surely you remember the Butta, Linowes, Puddester and Mandel Commissions. If not, I would be happy to ask the Department of Legislative Services to send you copies of their reports.

You also promised a list of “spending reforms” you will implement – I believe you referred to it as “leading by example.” I welcome such initiative, but I would be remiss if I failed to point out that if we had followed your example for the last two years, our State’s fiscal situation would be far worse.

Since becoming Comptroller, you have expanded your executive office’s budget by an average of 9.4% annually – as compared to an average of 3.8% annual growth in the Governor’s Office, 5.6% annual growth in the legislature, and 6.5% annual growth across all other state agencies. Ironically, the Governor and the General Assembly have done a better job of controlling State spending than you have done controlling your own executive office’s growth. While I doubt your ability to match our fiscal discipline, I commend you for realizing that instead of simply criticizing others, you can be a part of the solution to the challenges we face.

Your letter of September 8 offers an example of your propensity to offer positions today that are incongruous with your record in the past. Sadly, you are the first statewide officeholder I have watched change positions with such ease. To wit, you wrote that “we cannot tax, or gamble, our way out of fiscal and economic distress” – yet, lest anyone forget, you passionately advocated for those options as a member of the House of Delegates. You sponsored legislation to bring slot machine gambling to Maryland in 1998 and 2001. You also voted for:

_ A 1% increase in the State sales tax,

_ Expanding the sales tax to property management services,

_ Expanding the sales tax to health and fitness clubs,

_ Imposing a five-year income tax surcharge of 6% on net taxable income over $150,000 for single filers and $200,000 for joint filers,

_ Controlling interest legislation, and

_ A 1% increase in the vehicle titling tax.

You are on the record voting in favor of $1 billion in new taxes, and you sponsored legislation to raise the gas tax and to tax food – regressive options which would have disproportionately affected the working families all fight to protect. More recently, you have advocated for more spending on biotechnology, while opposing any revenue increases and advocating for “belt-tightening” in State government. You make heart-felt pleas for more school construction dollars in Baltimore County, while opposing changes to our debt ratios or the video lottery program which would ensure public school funding in future fiscal years.

By offering a chameleon-like approach to public policy, you have become a practitioner of the “politics as usual” that you criticize. Your ever-shifting positions are intellectually irreconcilable and beneath the station you hold in State government. After twenty years of steadfast advocacy for liberal causes and progressive taxation in the General Assembly, I am disappointed to watch you pander to the citizens of Maryland.

Your letter offers another example of your tendency to criticize from the sidelines while others are leading. This Monday-morning quarterbacking is more appropriate behavior for the minority party – not for a statewide official who could exercise influence over public policy in the State of Maryland.

Your insinuation that last fall’s special session lacked “transparency and meaningful citizen input” has me concerned that you are spending too much time listening to talk radio. To the contrary, lawmakers sat in hour after hour of public hearings, listening to ordinary Marylanders voice their support for and concerns about the Governor’s proposal to address our State’s structural deficit.

Lawmakers held public – and often heated – debates and ultimately took publicly recorded votes. Our process, though not always pretty, was certainly public.

I want to correct your more egregious misconceptions about the past two years. Working together, Governor O’Malley and the General Assembly have cut $1.8 billion from the State budget. We have provided full funding to our public schools and invested a record sum in school construction and renovation – without raiding Program Open Space or transportation funds. We have broadened healthcare coverage for working families, and we have renewed our investment in Chesapeake Bay restoration. We have emphasized accountability with the Governor’s StateStat and BayStat programs, and we have increased transparency in State spending. Like many states, we have fallen victim to a sluggish national economy. At least 29 states are facing a total budget shortfall of $48 billion in FY 2009, and lawmakers around the country are preparing to make difficult decisions to shore up their State budgets. The Governor is going to make hard choices this fall as he cuts from FY 2009 and crafts his FY 2010 budget.

While you have endured a rocky start to your statewide service, I believe there is time for you to restore faith and credibility with the citizens of Maryland. As you consider your role in the statewide arena, I encourage you to get back to the basics.

Take a look at your own website if you need guidance. It reads, in part: “The principal duty of this office is to collect taxes… Acting as Maryland’s chief accountant, the comptroller pays the state’s bills, maintains its books, prepares financial reports, and pays state employees.” You are the “chief accountant” – but none of your tax collection duties make you the “chief fiscal officer of the State.” That role is and has always been held by the Chief Executive of the State of Maryland the Governor. More than ever, Maryland needs a Comptroller who is focused on the fundamentals, so that we can weather this financial crisis without wondering whether revenue was left uncollected.

You ended your letter with the hope of collaboration, and I will end mine on the same note. I share your hope to work collaboratively, but I remain skeptical of your ability to work in partnership with other state officials. Your bad habits have diminished your standing and reduced your effectiveness as Comptroller. I encourage you to work on the fundamentals so you can restore your reputation and help all of us achieve great things for the people of Maryland.

Moreover, I hope that one day you are able to fulfill the potential that existed when you were elected. If you should ever wish to speak to me about substantive issues relating to the duties of your office, please do not hesitate to call me.


Very truly yours,

Thomas V. Mike Miller, Jr.

Voting for this man, only encourages his behavior, and furthers the idea that he is untouchable........
Al




Thursday, September 18, 2008

Poor poor misunderstood Obama

In reply to a blogsite that had an article about Obama throwing his Grandmother under the bus…….I can’t say it better myself Joshua!


Barack Obama with his grandparents

poor poor misunderstood Obama...



"Some of what he has said about his mother seems tinged with a mix of love and regret. He has said his biggest mistake was not being at her bedside when she died."



He just couldn't get by his mother's bedside? He writes about his father's lies, excuse me, dreams and waxes poetically with fictional characters in his book, but he can't find the time to be by his evil white mothers side?



hmmm, figures...



We all make mistakes in life. We all have experienced irrational hatred, or bad decisions in life growing up. We all have experienced prejudice and hatred from others in one form or another.



But, most of us grow up, mature and see the immaturity of such thoughtless positions.



The problem, or major error, is in not correcting it, or continuing to stand by people of hatred. Not having the guts to speak up, or leaving bad people behind in life that perpetuate stereotypes and profess hatred. You have to leave those people behind for good or they end up "TAINTING" you with their evil views in life.



When I grew up, there were only a few bad apples that were racist. My friends and I all flipped them off and gave them the cold shoulder. We didn't hang with them. We let them know we would not stand for their behavior. Heck, we were kids and knew better than to hang around hate idiots.



What the adult Mr. Obama is doing is hanging with hatred and a racist spewing bitter man for 20 years. It shows he is not truly in touch with Christ, that he has not matured and let go of hatred in his own heart and he cannot be trusted to make good decisions as an adult. He seems to think the world owes him.



Guess what. It owes you nothing! Especially not based upon color. The true world we live in especially by materialist, marxist ideas put forth an idea of survival and uncaring, unloving life, nihilistic ways.



If Mr. Obama cannot disassociate himself from that church immediately, he deserves to lose everything in politics. Not just the Dem nomination, but his senate seat as well.



If a large number of blacks feel this way, then the time to have this conversation in the public needs to happen, but not at the cost to the country by an inexperienced man, who looks upon "white greed" only and looks down his nose at all others not of his "race." Whatever it is today. He seems to forget his white side, his white mother.



There are true leaders that come around in times of destiny when a country or times call for it. A Republican, Abraham Lincoln came at the right time. He sacrificed hundreds of thousands of white families and lives to free the slaves and he ultimately sacrificed himself. He was a true leader.



Obama? He is not a leader. He is a phony. He is a made up story, fictional story that he writes for himself in his books omitting truths. Playing off of sympathy and victims, painting himself as a victim.



When in fact he went to an expensive prep school, living in one of our most beautiful states, given all the opportunities of a kind, gentle America for free. He then turns around, blames America and points fingers at everyone, except of course himself, or the so-called victims. Christ never told his followers to act like victims, nor to whine, nor to complain, but instead, he teaches us the opposite!



He teaches us to have joy! During times of oppression, praise! So, where is Christ in Obama? Where in this church?



Anyone in America today can make for themselves whatever they want to be in life. There are no more excuses for anyone not to succeed.



Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Bill Cosby, Michael Jordan, Jackson, Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Beyonce, Snoop Dog, etc., etc., and the list goes on from BET TV owner to Oprah, from Jamie Fox to Spike Lee, from lawyers to congressmen, senators and governors, inventors, and scientist...



African Americans have had more success in this nation than any other nation on earth. And they didn't do it like many of the evil tyrants in Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Congo, Chad, Liberia, Sudan, etc., murdering and killing millions.



They were set free long before many of the nations in Africa.



Maybe, just maybe God knows best?

And just maybe Wright should be thankful to God that his ancestors were brought here?



The Jews went thru hell too. They rejected God. They were conquered and spread out all over this world. They experienced hell on earth, torture, holocaust. And now, they live again in Israel. Most Christians rejoice for the Jews again.



Does Obamas minister go by the Bible in regards to Israel? Or by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhans judgement against the Jews?



What is wrong with this picture? Did Christ say that Islam would one day rule the earth? And that Israel would never exist again? Why does Obama associate with Syrian crooks? And why does his church announce Hamas terrorist?



Maybe the lesson we all need to learn is to be thankful to God. Otherwise, we can all always be shipped off to nations of unbelievers, whether in Africa, China, Russia, where millions have died, hundreds of millions, where poverty still exist far above anything we have experienced since the great depression.



This is not a black/white issue in the end. In the end, it is a spiritual issue. And Obama's minister failed terribly at preaching the true word of God.



Obama has failed as a follower of Christ in not rebuking his minister fully and in associating with Syrian crooks, sending his security advivor Brezinski to Syria for talks before he's even nominated.



The same dimwitted one world government man that worked for the loser, Carter.



People need to open their eyes.



Joshua



http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/barack-throws-his-ailing-grandmother.html

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Sub-Prime loans explained to the average person

Back by popular demand....recently google searches want to know about sub-prime loan failures so here we go so the people who want to know don't have to search for it



My cousin was a local bank president before he passed two years ago, and he told me at that time that banks were going to feel the brunt of this long before it actually happened. He was infuriated that everything he learned in college, and from his banking experience was about to be defeated by a President Carter era law. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 that claimed to prevent “redlining” (denying mortgages to black borrowers), by pressuring banks to make loans in poor to moderate income neighborhoods. Every time my cousin had to endure government audits and defend his position on the granting of what he considered to be “bad loans” his mood was somber to say the least. As he told me, “I was hired to make good decisions and make money for my investors, and yet the government is making the decisions on a certain number of loans, in trade for a silly rating system instituted by the government. During the Clinton era this act was made even more stringent through his “Welfare Reform Act”. Loyola College economist Thomas DiLorenzo said that, to insure that banks got a high government rating, they had to issue increasingly riskier loans to people who wouldn’t normally have even qualified for a mortgage. This combined with an over-inflated housing market (land and property), has now attributed to the tumbling of the house of cards of “sub-prime” loans. The rules are ridiculous by anyone with a shred of common sense…..lax underwriting standards, no down payment, no verification of income, interest only payment plans, and weak or non existent credit history. The housing bubble has now burst, mortgage lenders are going bankrupt, and thousands of sub-prime borrowers are loosing their homes. Senators Obama and Clinton demand now that the government bail out the borrowers. Although not blaming the Bush administration directly, the insinuation is there. This is normally the answer from the democrats, “let’s throw money at it, and it will go away”. Neither of the democrats has suggested repealing this act to fix the problem. Clinton doesn’t because her husband was part of the problem; Obama doesn’t because he believes not only in the Act but also in “affirmative action”. The problems of our country will never be fixed unless bad laws are repealed. But they should remember when they point a finger at someone that four more are pointing back at them.


“One has to wonder just how much more Democrats will milk class-warfare politics before people wake up to their deception. No matter what economic problems we face, Democrats always find a way to blame them on the ‘rich’ and the Bush tax cuts. Why? Because it rallies their base and—they hope—will alienate enough others against evil Bush Republicans to give Democrats a prohibitive advantage on domestic issues. Joe Biden even blamed the current mortgage crisis on the Bush tax cuts. He said: ‘We should try to correct the problems that caused this... [which are] the profligate tax cuts to the very, very wealthy that John [McCain] wants to continue.’ Never mind that low- and middle-income earners received greater tax rate reductions than the highest-income earners; that doesn’t fit within the Democrats’ class-envy template. Forget the reckless legislation forcing financial institutions to lend money to people who probably couldn’t pay it back—to satisfy the liberals’ obsession with looking compassionate and pandering to minorities. Forget that Obama was the second-highest recipient of campaign cash from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (according to the Center for Responsive Politics), cash aimed at keeping congressional regulators off their backs... Despite the Democrats’ destructive practice of blaming every economic woe—from Enron to rising oil prices—on the Bush tax cuts, the tax cuts had nothing to do with those problems, including the mortgage crisis.” —David Limbaugh


video that explains it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o&eurl=http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/joe-curl/2008/Sep/26/whos-blame-crisis/

Charlie Gibson's Gaffee

Charlie Gibson's Gaffee
by Charles Krauthammer                                                                     

"Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of `anticipatory self-defense.'" -- New York Times, Sept. 12

WASHINGTON -- Informed her? Rubbish.

The Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.

There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today.

He asked Palin, "Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?"

She responded, quite sensibly to a question that is ambiguous, "In what respect, Charlie?"

Sensing his "gotcha" moment, Gibson refused to tell her. After making her fish for the answer, he grudgingly explained to the moose-hunting rube that the Bush doctrine "is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense."

Wrong.

I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term. In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of The Weekly Standard titled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism," I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush doctrine.

Then came 9/11, and that notion was immediately superseded by the advent of the war on terror. In his address to Congress nine days later, Bush declared: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." This "with us or against us" policy regarding terror -- first deployed against Pakistan when Secretary of State Colin Powell gave President Musharraf that seven-point ultimatum to end support for the Taliban and support our attack on Afghanistan -- became the essence of the Bush Doctrine.

Until Iraq. A year later, when the Iraq War was looming, Bush offered his major justification by enunciating a doctrine of pre-emptive war. This is the one Charlie Gibson thinks is the Bush doctrine.

It's not. It's the third in a series and was superseded by the fourth and current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of Bush foreign policy and the one that most distinctively defines it: the idea that the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world. It was most dramatically enunciated in Bush's second inaugural address: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world."

This declaration of a sweeping, universal American freedom agenda was consciously meant to echo John Kennedy's pledge that the United States "shall pay any price, bear any burden ... to assure the survival and the success of liberty." It draws also from the Truman doctrine of March 1947 and from Wilson's 14 points.

If I were in any public foreign policy debate today, and my adversary were to raise the Bush doctrine, both I and the audience would assume -- unless my interlocutor annotated the reference otherwise -- that he was speaking about Bush's grandly proclaimed (and widely attacked) freedom agenda.

Not the Gibson doctrine of pre-emption.

Not the "with us or against us" no-neutrality-is-permitted policy of the immediate post-9/11 days.

Not the unilateralism that characterized the pre-9/11 first year of the Bush administration.

Presidential doctrines are inherently malleable and difficult to define. The only fixed "doctrines" in American history are the Monroe and the Truman doctrines, which came out of single presidential statements during administrations where there were few conflicting foreign policy crosscurrents.

Such is not the case with the Bush doctrine.

Yes, Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Gibson. And at least she didn't pretend to know -- while he looked down his nose and over his glasses with weary disdain, "sounding like an impatient teacher," as the Times noted. In doing so, he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes' reaction to the phenom who presumes to play on their stage.



Monday, September 15, 2008

Let’s remember that…….

The Left media and the Democrats, (one in the same), would like you to believe that Bush bailed out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae because he started the situation. Now let’s look at it logically, the original law that made the failures possible were caused by President Carter. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, that claimed to prevent “redlining” (denying mortgages to black borrowers), by pressuring banks to make loans in poor to moderate income neighborhoods. This act enabled a reinforcement, and as a result, during the Clinton era this act was made even more stringent through his “Welfare Reform Act”. Loyola College economist Thomas DiLorenzo said that, to insure that banks got a high government rating, they had to issue increasingly riskier loans to people who wouldn’t normally have even qualified for a mortgage. This combined with an over-inflated housing market (land and property), has now attributed to the tumbling of the house of cards of “sub-prime” loans. The rules are ridiculous by anyone with a shred of common sense…..lax underwriting standards, no down payment, and no verification of income, interest only payment plans, and weak or non-existent credit history.



Don’t confuse my alliance with any President, and I have to admit that I voted for Bush, but today my views hardly mirror his, but he refuses to place blame on past presidents, (unlike the democrats that preceded him.) He did the only thing he could, and that was to support the two federally supported home housing lenders, and sign the law for the bail outs.



What I have problems with is the original law that enabled them to begin with! Everyone wants to blame President Bush but NOBODY, Democrats or Republicans wants to rescind the law that allowed it in the first place! So after the bail out at a price between 200 billion to half a TRILLION dollars we still have no protection in the future?



I’m sorry but I don’t understand this. Ok so a President made a mistake, it’s not the first time , nor will it be the last time, but why can’t we rescind a law? The law was asinine to begin with. Let’s change it and move on…..why?…because of the most elementary emotion in humanity……nobody wants to admit a wrong choice. Ok, Ok, let’s forget the originator of the act, and do what is right.



Please write to your senator and rescind this law so it can’t happen again!

UPDATE:

Obama... blamed the shocking new round of subprime-related bankruptcies on the free-market system, and specifically the ‘trickle-down’ economics of the Bush administration, which he tried to gig opponent John McCain for wanting to extend. But it was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the balance sheets of many of Wall Street’s most revered institutions. Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound business practices had previously guarded against making. It was either that or face stiff government penalties. The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority homeownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky subprime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but ‘predatory.’ Yes, the market was fueled by greed and overleveraging in the secondary market for subprimes, vis-a-vis mortgaged-backed securities traded on Wall Street. But the seed was planted in the ‘90s by Clinton and his social engineers.” —Investor’s Business Daily

Saturday, September 13, 2008

One Fool’s Opinion


One Fool’s Opinion
By: Kevin Bryant



I must admit, I have been called a racist before, actually twice before. Both times I was in the navy and was brought up on charges of racism and in both circumstances, the charges were levied against me by individuals who worked for me and I wrote up for dereliction of duty, absence without authorization from appointed place of duty and failure to follow both direct and lawful orders repeatedly. They were such a lovely pair. The charges against me were dismissed.



In my 20 years of active duty, I wrote up 7 people. 4 were white, 2 were black and one of some Asian decent. All 7 were found to be guilty of the charges I brought against them. I tell you this to let you know that I treated everyone the same and held each responsible for their own actions regardless of race.



Recently, I was driving from my home just outside Kansas City to my hometown in Arkansas. I stopped along the way to get some gas and there just happened to be a bus there stopped to let people off to get drinks and snacks and so forth before they too set back out headed to Arkansas.



At the check out counter I struck up a conversation with what I thought was going to be a rather charming elderly woman and asked her where they were headed. She told me that the people riding the bus were coming back from Denver and headed to Little Rock. I told her that I was originally from Arkansas and asked her if they had been sight seeing and she told me that they had gone to Denver to be at the convention of the next President of the United States. At this point, I had paid for my stuff and told her to have a safe trip, not wanting to get into a political conversation, I started for the door.



Out of nowhere, I hear “You must be one of those racist McCain people”. I turned around …..looking for the idiot who pulled this woman’s chain to get her to bark that loudly…..and told her “No, I’m not racist, just a conservative, you have a safe trip”, and I walked out the door.



This lady followed me outside and I remember clearly what she was yelling at me. She said, “It’s racist white pigs like you that are wrong with this country. Your kind gives the decent people of Arkansas a bad name”. She said a few other things that I couldn’t quite make out after I had reached my truck and was getting in.



I guess this means that all white people that do not vote for Obama are racist pigs. If this is true, then I must be a racist.



Oh, the woman yelling at me was white.

Friday, September 12, 2008

Finally MSNBC gets a muzzle

It seems that sponsors have made a dent in the far left leaning media of MSNBC. The far left wing of the normally left leaning NBC has made a statement about their crazy pitbull commentators Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann. It seems they violated a promise that they made to their bosses at MSNBC, that they could provide an “unbiased” commentation on the Republican Nation Convention. Their very nature runs contrary to that statement, and true to form they couldn’t hold their collective tongues.



The deep end of Olbermann’s career was shown as he criticized MSNBC’s showing of a paid commercial prepared by the RNC during their broadcast. Although MSNBC had defended the two commentators, they abandoned their support after comments by Olbermann on the false comments about Sarah Palin’s past. His comments included; "We'll see if people feel sorry for unfounded rumors on the Internet." "If that's the case, Senator Obama's probably standing up and cheering and waiting for people to feel sorry for him."

Perhaps most embarrassing, Joe Scarborough was discussing positive developments in John McCain's campaign at one point when Olbermann was heard on an offstage microphone saying: "Jesus, Joe, why don't you get a shovel?"

Obviously advertisers made a statement loud and clear that the left leaning pitbulls won’t be supported any longer.

I only hope that the advertisers on Olbermann’s individual show will show the same intelligence that that all his past employers have shown and send him and Chris Matthews packing!



Thursday, September 11, 2008

Lawsuit filed against Obama

A Pennsylvania attorney filed for declaratory and injunctive relief against Barack Obama and the DNC this week in Philadelphia. The main thrust of the suit deals with questions about Obama’s citizenship, an item that has been heating up under the surface of late. Some excerpts from the suit: “Obama committed Fraud upon Plaintiff and the American Citizens by running for President claiming to be eligible knowing he was not eligible as a result of his failure to regain his United States Citizenship and by maintaining multi citizenships with Kenya and Indonesia.”

It continues, “Obama attempted to defraud Plaintiff and the American people by allowing an altered and forged Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) to be placed on his campaign website. Obama was well aware the Government issued COLB was altered and forged...” And finally, “Obama further attempted to defraud Plaintiff and the American People by claiming to be a United States Citizen, knowing this information to be false.” There are questions regarding Obama’s mother’s citizenship as well, and evidence that when he traveled to Pakistan in 1981, Obama used his Indonesian passport. It will be interesting to see what comes of this legal action.

Reprinted from the Patriot Post (http://www.patriotpost.us/)

Update 10/03/08
Philip Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney and a Democrat, filed for declaratory and injunctive relief against Barack Obama and the DNC claiming that Obama’s birth certificate and citizenship are in question and demanding sufficient proof. Rather than just produce the documents, however, Obama’s legal team is trying to get the suit dismissed. As we have noted in the past, part of Obama’s trouble comes via his associations and this case is another indictment itself. One of the attorneys Obama hired is Joe Sandler, an attorney for CAIR, a.k.a. the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Leftist “civil liberties” group that specializes in stifling free speech. We’re sure there’s nothing to it, but...

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

The next flags you see from the dems should be white!

I’m sure you have heard about the “adopt a flag” situation that the McCain/ Palin campaign instituted from “leftover trash” found outside the Democratic convention in Denver. It seems that when the convention was done with the free flags they handed out, they not only placed used flags in with normal garbage to be disposed of in landfills, but made a decision to also throw out the unused ones in large garbage bags placed around the dumpsters.



In an effort to cover themselves on a rather foolish decision they LIED about the flags. They claimed that the flags were scheduled to be returned to the manufacturer, and the Republicans had stolen them! It’s so stupid of them to make such a claim, because in today’s age of verification, they had to know this would be checked up on.
Pictures courtesy of Radarsite

Pictures surfaced to dispute the Democrats claim on http://www.radarsite.blogspot.com/ to show how the flags had been disposed of. In the very least, all flags that can no longer be displayed have to ironically be destroyed by burning, not by disposal in landfills. Secondly, the dems after claiming theft never had made out a police report, nor have they produced a document showing any return authorization from the flag manufacturer. Thirdly you don’t place unused flags in trash bags and then place them next to dumpsters, outside in the elements if you intend to return them.


The Democrats show once again their ignorance of proper etiquette of an Icon of America, and then told a tall tale to cover their collective butts!

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Climate change this week: Sunspots disappear

picture courtesy of NASA


For the first time in almost a century, an entire month has passed without a single sunspot being visible on the sun’s surface. The event is significant because sunspots are caused by solar magnetic activity, and solar magnetic activity is increasingly believed by climatologists to be one of the primary factors influencing the earth’s climate. It is not uncommon to see 100 or more sunspots in a single month, but during the first seven months of 2008, the sun averaged only three spots, followed by the total disappearance of spots last month.

The disappearance of sunspots has caught most astronomers by surprise and defied almost all predictions, though one observatory seems to have gotten it right. In 2005, a pair of astronomers from the National Solar Observatory (NSO) in Tucson wrote a paper predicting that within 10 years, sunspots would disappear entirely. But their peers laughed at the two astronomers, and Science refused to publish their paper on the grounds that it was too controversial. In the end, “consensus” stifled scientific debate, and the NSO astronomers were ignored.

The scientific community is paying attention now, however. Some climate scientists believe that the sun’s “dynamo” (the process that creates its magnetic field) might be idling. As the sun’s dynamo slows and sunspot activity decreases, the sun’s magnetosphere is reduced, affecting cloud formation and climate modulation on earth. A long absence of sunspots has happened three times in the past 1,000 years: the Dalton, Maunder and Sporer Minimums. The Maunder Minimum coincided with the 400-year Little Ice Age, during which Europe and North America endured bitterly cold winters that devastated agriculture.

If we are indeed entering another solar minimum on the scale of the Maunder Minimum, we can expect severe global cooling to follow, stressing both the agriculture and energy industries. The practice of harvesting corn for use as fuel ethanol will likely become a distant memory, and the United States’ short-sighted energy policies could mean there won’t be enough heating oil, natural gas and electricity to go around in the severest of winters. We hope it won’t come to that, but if it does, at least Al Gore will be where he belongs: out in the cold.



Reprinted from the Patriot Post (http://www.patriotpost.us/)

Monday, September 8, 2008

Is everyone as tired of T. Boone Pickens’ ads as I am?


He may be a billionaire, he may be a famous oilman, but his simplistic and naive view on how to change America’s dependence on oil is getting on my nerves! I wonder how much he paid to be on Fox News’s coverage of the Republican Convention during prime time. He twitched in his seat appearing to be annoyed with commentators, when they had to interrupt him when speakers came to the floor, somehow giving the impression that his message was far more important then the very Convention he picked to invade!



He talks about CNG (compressed natural gas) as being the answer to our renewable transportation fuel needs. To begin with natural gas IS a fossil fuel, (Nancy Pelosi doesn’t know that), and it is a by-product (usually comes in with an oil well hit.)



Right now we import 15% of the natural gas we have in our country. If we increase our demand by some thousand-fold, by powering our cars with it, wouldn’t the amount we import increase accordingly?



Some sources report that right now CNG costs approximately a comparable .89 per gallon. This in no way does not address the cost of additional infrastructure to set up fueling stations, nor does it address federal, and state road taxes either. Now add the cost for additional imported CNG from the same countries that already hold us hostage.



Now for the other side of the Pickens’s plan……wind power. This almost makes me laugh; yes he is correct that America is in the largest wind belt in the world. What makes this funny is the very same argument that keeps nuclear power plants, refineries, oil drilling, garbage dumps, and other projects from being built. It’s called NOT IN MY BACK YARD!



The very groups that are closely tied to the Democratic Party and masquerade as “eco groups” to avoid scrutiny by the general public, are the ones who lobby against these sorely needed projects.



I say, If you can get the permits Mr. Pickens, knock yourself out and make all this money on electric power generation yourself, but be aware they will fight you tooth and nail, look how Ted Kennedy fought wind power off the coast of his Kennedy family compound.



Please hawk your wares and your book elsewhere, I’m tired of it!

Friday, September 5, 2008

Obama speaks on O'Reilly


In an interview that was intended to bolster his position after Palin's speech last night. It's clear to see that his party was hurting last night, so his position was to make people understand he's not a wimp on national security. He stated his position on Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran, as being that of an adversarial position.


So let me understand, if America is tired of war, why should we switch or war in Iraq (one country) to add two more countries to our "hit list"?


Ok I'm sold...................he's a war monger! It's funny that his party's position on war is that of a hawks, and yet he tries to get cross over votes from Republicans. When are the voters going to get the message?


Last night Sarah Palin held her own, and then some, against Joe Biden, whom by the way NEVER ran ANY government post, and Obama saw it as a severe threat to their run for the White House.


Obama admitted (finally) that the surge did in fact work, although he fought Bill O'Reilly about the wording!


We finally have a stronghold in the Muslim world (Iraq), in a stand against terrorism, and we have eliminated the WMD threat in Iraq (yellowcake uranium) that had been accumulated by Saddam Hussien, and was captured by OUR troops!


The left is scared to death of Sarah Palin, and they damn well should! This is a woman who endears herself to almost every woman in th country. Her struggles to balance family and career have stuck a chord with America. She is the quintessential mother, she has problems, but so does every woman in this great country. She shows everyone something they can associate with.


The left is finally on the run, and it's about damn time!

The feeding frenzy continues…..





I want to know how the loony left and the loony left media thinks it’s ok to question the motives of people who aren’t even involved in the Presidential campaign, ie: Sarah Palin’s husband, and her 17 year old daughter. Sarah Palin’s husband was found guilty of a DUI at the VERY same time Barack Obama admitted that he used cocaine, and they are grilling her about that? How about the fact that her 17 year old daughter is pregnant, but yet Sarah was so determined to bring a Down Syndrome child to full term? What is wrong with these two groups? Barack Obama has yet to explain his connections with Bill Ayers, and Joe Biden has to answer his connections to MBNA, DuPont, and his campaign contributions.



Has Joe Biden rid his state of corruption? Has Joe Biden stood on his convictions to the point of making personal choices that support them? Has Joe Biden removed corruption from Delaware rather then adding to it? Has Joe Biden beaten two corrupt incumbents?



The left sees Sarah Palin as a threat plain and simple, she is a woman who stands on her principles, and has rid her state of shady politics. She believes in religion, gun rights, drilling in Alaska for oil, pro-life, and she comes from a blue collar real working family! In fact her husband works in the oil fields, and not just in management. Her family has endured hardship, just like Joe Biden’s but she chose to beat the system and not just be part of the problem, or to continue the existing problem!

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Who is Sarah Palin?



This is what we just received from our very savy friend, Judy, who lives in Florida. She has a friend, Deb, who lives in Alaska and she asked what Deb's take was on Sarah Palin. We were so worried before we saw her speech today...and so impressed afterwards...very strong and confident. This makes us feel confident McCain made the right decision. I hope it will ease your minds, too.


Judy, Sarah Palin is the US’s answer to Margaret Thatcher! Anyone who thinks she cannot handle the job or deal briskly and efficiently with ANY issue, including foreign governments … well, they haven't met our Sarah .

As an Alaskan resident as well as a resident of Wasilla, AK, where Sarah Palin was at one time Mayor , I can speak with confidence. Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska is exactly what she portrayed during her introduction this morning and exactly what our US Government needs. She is ethical to a fault (if there is such a thing), a refreshing change to the status-quo and as smart and determined a PERSON (gender really isn’t an issue here as far as I’m concerned) as anyone could ask for at the head of government.

Sarah is no naïve small town mayor, she just *started out* there. Btw, as Mayor of Wasilla, she brought this small town through a lot of GOOD changes and left it at the end of her term having grown to the 4th largest CITY in Alaska, a lot of growth and a stronger economic base than ever before.

She has EXECTUTIVE experience *running a government* (something NONE of the other candidates can actually boast, even John McCain ) as Governor of Alaska and got there by defeating the *incumbent* Republican Governor, who was definitely part of the old school and who WAS very much in the pocket of the big oil companies. We in Alaska wanted change and we got it in the person of Sarah Palin!

Sarah Palin is everything she looks to be and more. Her approval rating as Governor of Alaska has been as high as 95% and is currently leveled out consistently in the upper 80 percentile throughout the state (and in both parties) - the HIGHEST approval rating of ANY sitting Governor.

Sarah has been turning around corruption in the Legislature of Alaska - turning things on their ear for that matter; cutting spending in spite of the increased income the state is currently receiving due to the high oil prices - she has insisted on putting a huge amount of the 'windfall' into savings for the future rather than spending, spending, spending - and has insisted from the get-go on what she refers to as 'honest, ethical and transparent governing' - no more closed door meetings and dealings - the big oil companies thought she would be a pushover and have learned better to their chagrin.

She understands the 'real people' and the economic issues we all face (Alaskans along with the rest of the country) - she was one of 'us' not long ago. Rather than passing useless 'laws' or throwing money at pet projects, she (most recently) temporarily suspended the state gas tax (on gasoline at the pumps, fuel oil and natural gas for homes, etc.) and has ordered checks issued to ALL residents of Alaska this fall in an attempt to assist with the burden of high fuel costs for the upcoming winter. I could go on and on, but that's enough for now . She isn't doing these things to be popular , she is doing it because her constituents are HURTING financially and she can help.

She became Governor of Alaska by defeating the Incumbent Republican Governor and doing it *without* the money or the support of the Republican Party, which was amazing in itself - and she won by a landslide. The 'powers that be' at that time totally underestimated Sarah and learned better the hard way. She has done exactly what she claimed she was going to do and is just as popular today as the day she was elected - perhaps more so since even the Democrats up here seem to like her - she works well with both sides in the Legislature here.

Sarah 'belongs' to us (Alaskans) ... and although we are going to be terribly sorry to see her leave before she finishes the job she started here (two years ago) straightening out OUR State ... we understand she is needed for a bigger purpose and hopefully her Lt. Governor will be able to fill her shoes here and continue the job.

As for worrying about what would happen if McCain were to die or step down or whatever ... Theta, up here in AK we've only been wondering how long we would be able to KEEP Sarah in Alaska and have seen her as our first woman President of the USA from the start. It's always been a matter of whether she would wait until the end of her TWO terms as Governor (no doubt at ALL that she would be re-elected if she ran for a second term at the end of her current term) ... or end up in Washington sooner. She could do the job TODAY.

Personally, I feel a lot better about McCain now that I know he has someone as savvy, as strong, as ethical and as steady as Sarah at his back. She will be an excellent Vice President ... and my guess is will be our US Republican Presidential candidate in four years - AND by then the country will KNOW her , will love and respect her as we do here - and she'll win by as much of a landslide as she did here in Alaska. I only wonder if McCain has a clue what he is unleashing on the US of A . She is going to be a fresh wind, but also a strong wind.

Is that enough of an endorsement? If not, I'll add this ... Jerry and I have for many years felt the best 'vote' was to vote for the lesser of two 'evils' and hope they didn't do too much damage. Two years ago during our State Governor's race was the first time EVER that we actually asked for not just a little sign to put in our yard showing our support of our candidate (something we've never felt the desire to do at all before) - we asked for a full 4' x 8' 'SARAH PALIN FOR GOVERNOR!' sign and were proud to have it. She hasn't let us or Alaska down. She will do the same for the USA if given the opportunity.