Categories

sitemeter

November 13, 2008

Hillary Would Have Beaten McCain By Wider Margin

              (Image from committedtoromney.com)

At http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/11/12/politics/horserace/entry4596620.shtml?source=search_story.

This CBS article examines exit polls and finds that if the election had been between Hillary Clinton and John McCain:

  • 52 percent said they would have backed the former Democratic candidate; 41 percent would have voted for McCain, wider than Obama’s 7-point margin over McCain. :
  • 16 percent of McCain voters said they would have voted for Clinton
  • , the Democrat, if she had been her party’s nominee.
  • These voters valued experience over change. 47% said experience was their top candidate quality and 32% said a candidate who shares their values. Just 10% picked change. But like voters overall, the economy was the top issue for these voters.  (All emphases added.)

While 85% of Obama voters said they would have voted for Clinton had she been the Democratic candidate, 13% would not have supported her including 6% who said they would have backed McCain and 7% who said they would not have voted.

But you should see the whole article.

November 04, 2008

"With Malice Toward None..."

NBC: OBAMA WINS // File photo of Sen. Barack Obama (© Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

                          (Image from msnbc.com)

I was for the other guy.  But... "with charity toward all"...Once again America has changed leaders without riots or assasinations.  Once again, the system worked.

There on the screen, in the crowd standing in front of Barack Obama just now, stood Jesse Jackson,  trying without success to stop his eyes from weeping and his lips from trembling.  Congratulations, Jesse.  A great night, for so many people. 

This is an historic landmark fot this country, and for the world that watches closely while the most powerful country in history elects a young black man to be its President.  Overwhelmingly.   It is a new opening in outlook for African-Americans, many of whom will only now begin to believe that they have the same chance as anyone else.

So as Lincoln finished saying.."let us strive on to finish the work we are in, ...to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."

America is my country.  I have questioned and criticiaed Obama as much as anyone.  But Barack Obama will be my new President.  While I may criticize sometimes, I will support both my country and my President.

Congratulations, President-Elect Obama!  May God bless you, and the United States of America.

It's Not Over! Pray! Fast! Call On Friends To Pray!

                                 (Image from family.lets-travel-australia)

This was sent by a beloved pastor.  It has been edited for greater brevity.

Dear Friends in Christ,

Are you sensing that ther is something different about this election?  This election is far more serious than those in the recent past.   Something in my spirit is very uneasy.  I have never felt so strongly the urge to pray, and pray fervently, for an election.

I truly believe that if the wrong person is elected this nation will be changed forever.  We may not be able to undo the things that will be unleashed during an Obama presidency.

My concern about an Obama presidency is not based on politics, but on righteousness.  Look at any of the major moral issues (abortion, homosexuality, etc.) and you will find Obama on the wrong side, and Palin and McCain on the right side.  The Obama team has raised far more money than McCain/Palin, and the media is unabashedly supporting Obama with every story and headline.

McCain/Palin is behind in the polls and having a very difficult time.  Some in the media suggest that the race is over and McCain cannot change the outcome.  Oh how wrong they are!

Recently I read in 2 Samual, Chapter 5.  David had just become king of Israel and the Philistines went up to wage war against him.  So David inquired of the Lord and said, "Shall I go and attack the Philistines?  Will you hand them over to me?"  The LORD said, "Yes, I will surely hand them over to you."  So David went and defeated them.  He said, "As waters break out, the LORD has broken out against my enemies before me."

After suffering a great loss, the Philistines must have thought they knew David's defense strategy and they would be ready for him the next time, because the Philistines came back to attack David.  So once again David inquired of the LORD, but this time the Lord said to David, "Do not go straight up, but circle around behind them and attack them in front of the balsam trees.  As soon as you hear the sound of marching in the tops of the balsam trees, move quickly because that will mean the LORD has gone out in front of you to strike the Philistine army."  David obeyed the Lord and was victorious.

This story holds a very important lesson for us at this time.  In most presidential elections a frontal assault, a face-to-face battle, is what is needed.  But this is no ordinary election.  McCain is trying all the normal tactics, but he is not prevailing.  It seems no matter what he says or does, it is not effective.

I'm convinced this election CANNOT be won using normal methods.  Just as the Lord told David to go around behind the enemy and attack him there, so we must go around the face of this election and wage war where the battle is truly raging...in the spiritual realm!  The fact that the normal physical methods are not effective this time should tellus that this is a very important spiritual battle and we can only win by using spiritual methods.  Prayer!

What about the sound of marching in the treetops?  What is that?  I have read on the internet several accounts of fellow Christians being stirred up in their spirits to pray.  Many have been drawn into times of deep prayer and weeping as they intercede for Palin and McCain.  Some have waked up in the middle of the night and sensed a great need to pray.

Others have told that when they heard about Sarah Palin being chosen as VP, something came over them and they wept and felt a need to pray for her and McCain.  Many others are feeling the calling and urging of the Spirit to enter into a time of fervent prayer and fasting for Palin and McCain and our nation.

What is this unusual stirring that is occurring?  I believe it is the Sound of the Lord marching in the trees, calling his children to act quickly to pray and fast for Palin and McCain.  Think about this: what would the marching have sounded like to David?  It may have sounded like the rustling of leaves as when wind blows through the trees.  But this time something was different and out of the ordinary.  Maybe it was like the sound of the great wind when the Spirit moved on the day of Pentecost.  Also, God's people are referred to as Trees of Righteousness in Isaiah 61.  So the sound of the Lord marching in the treetops in David's time is a portrait of the Spirit of the Lord moving among and stirring up his children today.

So what are we to do when we sense this stirring of the Spirit?  Two things.  First we are to take it as the sign that the Lord is moving out in front of us.  When Joshua returned from spying out Jericho, the Lord gave him insight to see that the Lord had removed Jericho's protection so Israel could defeat them.  When the Lord calls us into battle, he goes ahead of us, removes the enemy's protection, and fights for us to give us the victory.

Secondly, the Lord tells us when we sense the stirring of the Spirit we are to act quickly and join Him in the battle (through prayer, fasting, praise and obedience.)  This election is by no means lost!  For God would not be stirring up his children across this nation and indeed around the world, to pray, if he did not want to give us the victory in this election.  And he wants us to join him in the battle.

God will hear the cries of his children if we will only cry out to him with fervent, earnest prayers for this election and this nation.  If those who are being drawn to prayer by the Spirit will indeed enter into a time of prayer and seeking His face, then God will have mercy on America and spare us from having an ungodly leader.  I'm sure of it.!

One more thought: after the last debate, so-called "conservative" David Brooks gushed about Obama:

I thought Obama had the night he needed to have.  You know, through this whole 20-month marathon, I think what struck me is how incredibly even he is.  And how frankly reassuring he is.  It is like you are camping, and you wake up in the morning, and there is a mountain.  And then the next morning, there is a mountain, and the next morning, there's a mountain.  Obama is just the mountain.  He is just there.  He is always the same, he doesn't hurt himself.  McCain can sometimes lob a cannonbell at the mountain, but the mountain doesn't move, and the mountain doesn't care.  And so I think his steadiness, his temperament has been the dramatic theme of this campaign, dramatic in being undramatic.  And it was on display tonight.  And the good part of the mountain is that he is reassuring and reliable.

I'm really glad he used the word "mountain" to describe Obama.  It caused me to remember what Jesus said about unmovable mountains.  Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move.  Nothing will be impossible for you."  And it only takes a little faith!

This election can only be won by going around the face of the election and attacking the enemy where he is vulnerable - through prayer, fasting and praise.  If you hear the sound of the Lord marching in the treetops - that is, if you feel the stirring of the Spirit calling you to pray - then move quickly into a time of prayer, for God is moving ahead of you at that time to give us the victory.  May God give us ears to hear the marching!

Together with you in the battle,

Scott Whitley

Scottwhitley5486643@yahoo.com 

November 03, 2008

I'm Voting Democrat

                            (Image from images.cafepress.com)

(Are you surprised?)  See why at http://www.verticalblu.com/.  3 minutes.

(Hat Tip to Barb Bucklin)). 

Somebody It's OK To Hate

                                    (Image from oregonlive.com)

During my 7 1/2 years in prison, one of the most tiresome things to deal with was the high hostility levels radiating from some of the inmates.  It was not at all unusual, standing in the breakfast line, to see someone come up to another person, get almost nose-to-nose, hands on hips, and snarl "I-hate-your-guts!"  It left you thinking wearily, wouldn't it be nice just to hear them say "good morning" instead?  No matter how they felt?  It soured everyone's day, for sure.

One of the things most of them seemed to need was someone it was OK to hate.  (Well, that applies to many of us outside of prison too.)  I even wrote a ditty called "Everybody Needs Somebody It's OK To Hate."  We have those feelings, but are embarrassed to admit it - unless there is someone everybody agrees that it's OK to hate.  Like, say, Hitler or Stalin or Mao or Pol Pot.  Usually a genocidal mass murderer. 

Tomorrow being election day, it is pretty safe to predict that come Wednesday, about half of the U.S. population is going to be very, very unhappy.  Some will cry for days.  Some will be enraged.  There will be drunkenness.  Not to mention widespread anger, depression and grief.   Millions will give up.  There will be loss of friendships and marriages.

Let's don't let hate be a part of it.  Hate, like resentment, harms the hater more than the hated, as a rule.  Besides, we can lose without hating the victors - and without being hateful.  The winners are not Hitler, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot.  Or even Charlie Manson. (Come on now - admit it!)  In this democracy, there is always another day to try again.  There is the protection of the world's oldest constitutional democracy, for minorities and for losers.  We are rich in hope.

Most of all, there is ourselves.  Jesus said "Don't be angry without a cause."  And "Love your enemies."  We may fall short of that, but we don't need to embarrass ourselves!

Just remember -  whoever the winners are, they are going to need our prayers.  In these times, governing is going to be, well, hellish.  Hopefully, the winners will not come to envy the losers.

Anyhow, cheer up.  If you lost, you have four years of it's not being your fault!

143 Days

                             (Image from 165photobucket.com)

You couldn't become a surgeon, then become chief of surgery in a big hospital after just 143 days.

You couldn't get a job as a teacher and become superintendent after just 143 days.

You couldn't get a job as a reporter and become nightly news anchor after just 143 days.

You couldn't join the military and become a colonel after just 143 days.

Heck, you couldn't even get a job at McDonald's and become the manager after just 143 days!

But after just 143 working days in the Senate, Obama felt experienced enough to start trying to become U.S. President.  With little to no accomplishments to show for all his time in public office, he felt ready.  He felt his capablity, wisdom and experience was great enough to run the most powerful country in the world.  With no executire experience, he felt competent to be Chief Executive.  To be Commander in Chief.  To be leader of the free world. 

Yet he had no previous work experience or track record to show as evidence that he was able to do a small fraction of that.  

His resume was mostly empty.

True,  he had glowing words. But that was about all.

Has anyone ever come to feel so competent to be promoted so far, so fast, in just 143 days?  Based on so little?  And been so self-assured about it?

Does anyone out there see anything wrong here?

(Hat Tip to Joan Archibald)

November 02, 2008

Obama Says Willing To Bankrupt Coal Industry

                        (Image from britannica.com)

At http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/hi   dden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry.html?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

In a taped radio interview in San Francisco not released until today, Obama states clearly that he is willing to bankrupt the coal industry.

            "NewsBusters' Tom Blumer has found out that the San Francisco Chronicle story published on January 18 based upon this January 17 interview did not include any mention of Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry which you can hear on the audio. You can read the story here when you scroll down to the "In His Own Words" section. Way to cover up for The One, SF Chronicle!"

October 31, 2008

Understanding Obama: Urgent


 

At http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html.  I urge you to see this video and read this article.  This should be considered very, very carefully before voting next Tuesday.   Following the link should not be postponed..

obama arrogance

 

 

obama_sneer

 

 

 

 

October 28, 2008

Obama Says at Length That He Wants to Redistribute Wealth

                                (Image from eonline.com)

See Video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck.  4 minutes.  From 2001 radio interview.  He describes his beliefs on redistrubuting wealth in some detail..

October 27, 2008

Dems Will Turn Meltdown Into Catastrophe

                          (Image from meidner.com)

With scant elegance, nuance or tact, this "bird's-eye view" is a rough picture of what will happen if we go over this particular cliff at this, "our moment" in history, and why we may never regain what will be lost if we do.

The problem is not only with the presidency.  Increasingly, Congress is the problem.  Congress has much more power than the President now.  If the Democrat majority grows, it will have still more power over the new President, whether Obama or McCain.  What will that mean for the future, and especially for this meltdown?

Remember how this meltdown started.  It was from the Democrat party, and from their mis-handled compassionate desire to help minorities and poor people own their own homes.  The motive was laudable.  The result was ruinous.  We need to assess blame in order to know what not to do, and who not to put in charge next time.

To recap:  President Carter started the CRA, which pushed banks to make sub-prime mortgages to people who could not afford them.  ACORN pushed banks into making sub-prime mortgages that they were forbidden to make, by law and by prudent practice.  ACORN pushed Congress into forcing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into accepting more of such mortgages than they wanted.  Then Congress forced Fannie/Freddie to make 50% of all its mortgages be sub-prime mortgages.  Then President Clinton's Justice Department under Janet Reno actively threatened any banks who did not comply.  (Clinton has recently acknowledged his mistake.)* 

Madness!  The house of cards started its free-fall when the price of housing started down, and the "housing bubble" burst.  But that house of cards was built, first to last, by the Democrats.  To understand our future, that fact must be remembered at every turn.  Because we must move from Left to Right to have any semblance of a good future.

Why?  Because this meltdown will take years to work out, even if we do everything right.  (Much worse, if we do not do everything right.)  That is because this meltdown is a "perfect storm."  More than one crisis is going on, and more will come.  They will be worse than this one, because this one, at least, has some underlying equity behind the bad debt in the form of property.  The oncoming crises do not.  And these crises will all feed on each other.

The housing crisis will be followed quickly by the Social Security crisis and the Medicare crisis.  It Democrats are elected this time, there will also be the nationalized health care crisis.

Why will they be crises?  Because they are all Ponzi Schemes.  None of them are sustainable.  Each one is a bubble, waiting to burst.  Each one is built on debt.  Sooner or later, debts have to be paid.  If not, there is default on the debts.  Then the bubble bursts.  Then there is a meltdown, like this one - or worse.

Each of these future meltdowns will rapidly become international, world-wide.  Why?  Because the U.S. has become the lynchpin, the cornerstone, that keeps the world economy functioning.  Why?  It is the major market in the world.  Everyone wants to sell to the U.S.  It is also the major "safe haven" for investment money.  Why?  Because money is less likely to be stolen or lost here than anywhere else.  And because it is the U.S. military  - supported by U.S. prosperity - that is the primary guarantor of however much safety and stability there is in the world.

Another more long-term, underlying trend must be factored in.  It is demography (population studies.)  All countries have had declining birth rates for several decades now.  At the same time, life-expectancy and life-spans have also been increasing in all countries.  This has caused a "gray overhang."  That is, the older population percentage has been growing while the younger population percentage has been shrinking.  This means there are fewer and fewer young workers to support more and more older non-workers.  This will ruin retirement schemes all over the world.  Not to mention universal health-plans, which are heavily impacted by the old.  This trend also invisibly underlies many other economic/political problems and will help drive them into crises.  Now that the retirement of the huge Boomer generation has arrived, these crises will not delay long.

But what of the prosperity we have had since WWII?  It cannot last, without drastic changes - toward the Right.  Our prosperity has mostly been based on debt - the promise to pay in the future what we borrow and spend today.  Such promises eventually must be paid, or see the whole system collapse.  The Asian countries save money.  The West saves little.  The U.S., nationally, does not save at all.  Everything, all our prosperity, is based on debt.  (For instance, our Social Security has no "lockbox".  There are no funds, no actual savings there.  Congress spends every dime, in "off-budget" spending.  This "Ponzi  Scheme" has assumed that taxes from younger workers would always pay retirement for the older non-workers.  Our declining birth rates and growing survival rates have destroyed that possibility.)

All over the world, savings from retirement plans have been invested  in the U.S. for security and safe returns.  So when we crash, they crash too.  And we will crash, because we are built on debt.

What can we do?  First, when we are in a hole, we have to stop digging.  So for a long time, we have to stop electing Democrats.  Why?

Democrats want to help people.  At least, some of the people. And they want to do it on a new, much larger scale  To do that, they want to use force.  That is, they want to force part of the population to support the other part.  With what force?  Government.  Government is defined primarily as the ultimate coercive power - the highest power that can force people to do things.  And Democrate, bless them, want to help people in the only way they know - through government.

To spend what they must in order to do what they plan, they must build government debt to great new levels.  Why?  Because there is no way they can spend that much out of current U.S. income.

What can we do?  Don't let them spend what they plan.  How can we stop them?  Don't elect them.  Don't vote for them.

Whatever other preferences we may have doesn't change the equation.  We cannot afford the Democrat way.  We cannot survive this, and the other coming crises, by making it worse.

I'm truly sorry.  And I do realize and acknowledge that the Republicans have many, many problems of their own.  But voting Democrat, at this time and probably for a long time, is to say "Bring it on!" to catastrophe.  I'm sorry.  But I can't argue with facts anymore than you can.**

__________________

* Congress is pushing mightily to shift blame from itself to Wall Street fat cats - who are not without fault here.  But the truth is that it was Democrats in office who pushed Wall Street (through the banks who were forced into making bad mortgages) into accepting toxic debt.  This meltdown belongs to Democrats in office.

**Helping the poor and disadvantaged must not be abandoned.  But we must find ways to help them apart from government.  Fortunately, there are many other ways, with good, less-ruinous track records.

October 24, 2008

Q&A About Sarah Palin

             (Image from gov.state.ak.us)

This is about Governor Sarah Palin's experience as Commander-in-Chief and at keeping secrets:

Question: What is America 's first line of missile interceptor defense that protects the entire United States ?

Answer: 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard.

Question: What is the ONLY National Guard unit on permanent active duty?

Answer: 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard

Question: Who is the Commander in Chief of the 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard?

Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska

Question:  What U. S. governor is routinely briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counter terrorism?

Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska

Question: What U. S. governor has a higher classified security rating than either candidate of the Democrat Party?

Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska 

According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used to keeping secrets.

She can be entrusted with our national security, because she already is.

(Hat Tip to Jeffrey Foxworthy.  Also see http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2108388/posts)

October 18, 2008

Hockey Moms And Capital Markets

              (Image from extrememortman.com)

By Spengler on 10-7-08 in Asian Times at http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JJ07Dj07.html.

Why do Asian investors depend on American capital markets? Given the near breakdown of key sectors of the American market, one might expect Asians to bring their money home. Quite the opposite has happened:..Asian capital markets cannot absorb Asia's savings.

What does America have that Asia doesn't have? The answer is, Sarah Palin - not Sarah Palin the vice presidential candidate, but Sarah Palin the "hockey mom" turned small-town mayor and reforming Alaska governor. All the PhDs and MBAs in the world can't make a capital market work, but ordinary people like Sarah Palin can. Laws depend on the will of the people to enforce them. It is the initiative of ordinary people that makes America's political system the world's most reliable.

America is the heir to a long tradition of Anglo-Saxon law that began with jury trial and the Magna Carta and continued through the English Revolution of the 17th century and the American Revolution of the 18th. Ordinary people like Palin are the bearers of this tradition.

Outside of the United States, the young governor of Alaska has become a figure of ridicule - someone who did not own a passport until last year and who quaintly believes that her state's proximity to Russia gives her insights on foreign policy. How, my European friends ask, was it possible for such an an ignorant bumpkin to become a candidate for America's second-highest office? They don't understand America.

Provincial America depends on the initiative of ordinary people to get through the day. America has something like an Education Ministry, but it has little money to dispense. Americans pay for most of their school costs out of local taxes, and levy those taxes on themselves. In small towns, many public agencies, including fire protection and emergency medical assistance, depend almost entirely on volunteers. People who tax themselves, and give their own time and money for services on which communities depend, are not easily cowed by the federal government or by large corporations.

Palin's career may look like a poor imitation of a Preston Sturges script, but films such as Hail the Conquering Hero (1944) struck a chord with Americans precisely because the character type of the ordinary man or woman who takes on entrenched interests is instantly recognizable in America.

Palin really did take on the American oil companies and turn the scoundrels out of office. Her predecessor, Frank Murkowski, appointed her to the state oil and gas commission in the apparent belief that a small-town mayor and former beauty queen would rubber-stamp corrupt deals between the state and the Big Oil companies.

Shades of Jimmy Stewart in Mr Smith Goes to Washington, Palin ran against Murkowski and took his job. That does not qualify her to be president, to be sure, but it does show cunning and strength of character. Palin is qualified for high office by temperament if not by education, and is preferable to candidates whose education has made no improvement on their characters.

The fact that ordinary people safeguard their rights and have the means to challenge established interests does not exclude the possibility of fraud on a grand scale.

Asian investors were cheated by a conspiracy of the financial industry and the ratings agencies, which sold them ostensibly low-risk securities that turned out to be toxic. The just-approved US$700 billion support package for American banks sets America back to a regime of oligarchy, according to New York Times columnist David Brooks. Despite this fraud and its attendant humiliation, and despite the deterioration of governance in American markets, Asian investors are putting more rather than less money into America, judging from the decline of Asian currencies against the dollar in the course of the crisis.

One doesn't see demonstrations by wronged peasants in the small towns of America. There never were peasants - American farmers always were entrepreneurs - and the locals avenge injury by taking over their local governments, which have sufficient authority to make a difference. At the capillary level, school boards, the Parent Teachers' Association, self-administered religious organizations and volunteer organizations incubate a political class entirely different from anything to be found in Asia. There are tens of thousands of Sarah Palins lurking in the minor leagues of American politics, and they are the guarantors of market probity.

"Hockey Moms," to be sure, may not be the optimal promoters of America's future. One for one, the "Piano Moms" of China are cleverer people and produce smarter offspring. China's 30 million students of classical piano are one of the two great popular movements in the world today: the other is the House Church movement in Chinese Christianity. Children who play hockey will grow up to get coffee for children who study piano. As a pool of talent, nothing compares with the educated segment of the East Asian population that has embraced and mastered Western culture. Nonetheless, Asia still can't invest its own money at home, and seems farther than ever from that objective.

It is true that Asian economies depend on American consumers and an American recession is bad for Asian currencies. But why don't Asians consume what they produce at home? The trouble is that rich Asians don't lend to poor Asians in their own countries. Capital markets don't work in the developing world because it is too easy to steal money. Subprime mortgages in the US have suffered from poor documentation. What kind of documentation does one encounter in countries where everyone from the clerk at the records office to the secretary who hands you a form requires a small bribe? America is litigious to a fault, but its courts are fair and hard to corrupt.

Asians are reluctant to lend money to each other under the circumstances; they would rather lend money in places where a hockey mom can get involved in local politics and, on encountering graft and corruption, run a successful campaign to turn the scoundrels out. You do not need PhDs and MBAs for that. You need ordinary people who care sufficiently about the places in which they live to take control of their own towns and states when required. And, yes, it doesn't hurt if they own guns. Popular gun ownership places a limit on the abuse of state power. 

...That is why Asia's retirement money must look for a home overseas...The trouble (is that)...the derivative securities created out of the inedible scraps of the mortgage market - were subject to monstrously large demand from a world of aging savers (see The monster and the sausages, Asia Times Online, May 20, 2008). (All emphases added.)

October 13, 2008

30,000 Ineligible Ex-Con Registered Voters in Florida

    (Image from newsimg.bbc.co.uk)

And Florida is a crucial swing state!

See article at Florida's Sun Sentinel at http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-flbfelons1012sboct12,0,3762352.story1.

Many convicted felons remain on voter rolls, according to Sun Sentinel investigation. Thousands who should be ineligible are registered to vote

October 12, 2008

Hillary-Dems' Case that Obama Stole Primary Election

                      (Image from topnews.in)

"We Will Not Be Silenced" is a new film by supporters of Hillary Clinton.  It documents their case that Obama's troops stole the primary elections from Hillary voters on a massive scale, mainly in the caucus meetings after the primary votes.  They complain of caucuses being flooded with operatives with "thuggish" tactics, coming out of the Chicago political machine.  See this extraordinarily detailed account in a series of four  8-minute videos at http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/video/index.htm.  (The full-length film will not come out until January.)

Then read Hillary supporters' statements at http://www.wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/index.htm and http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/261063

Also read the stunning things Hillary supporters say in the running updates on this story at their "Hillbuzz" at http://hillbuzz.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/clinton-supporters-sharing-evidence-for-rico-case-against-obama-campaign/.  They write of polls being faked-up to show false results favoring Obama, and of ongoing, nation-wide  investigations coming to a possibly-RICO crescendo soon.  Startling stuff.

I had not heard any trace of any of this before.  News to me!  (If true.)  But then I don't get around much in Hillary-supporter circles.  Has anyone else out there heard anything?

October 09, 2008

Most Ex-Felons Should Not Vote

    (Image from newsimg.bbc.co.uk)

By ex-felon Gerry Charlotte Phelps (7 1/2 years in prison)

Most ex-felons are still criminals.  They are career criminals, and have not changed.  Most became habitual criminals in their youth, entered the justice system as juvenile delinquents, have been imprisoned more than once, and are likely to go to prison again.  Most had an average of 15 arrests before their most recent imprisonment, and another 3 arrests within 3 years of their release.  They also typically committed many more crimes than the ones for which they were actually arrested.

Since most do not stop being criminals, they can be expecteed to vote as criminals.  Since around 75% of recidivists (repeaters) are thieves of various kinds, they are likely to vote in ways that professional thieves would vote.

What problems would arise from giving more than 3,000,000 ex-felons the vote?  A minor effect is that since most would vote Democrat, the actual balance of power in the United States could be affected.  The more important effect is that they would vote to support those candidates more likely to weaken law enforcement.  This could be expected to cause crime rates to rise.  The continual decrease in crime rates in recent years is due to the fact that more criminals are locked up than before.  If this changes, crime naturally would increase again.  Ex-falons who are still criminals would like to see that happen.  That is how they would vote.

Some argue that it is wrong to put limits on voting by ex-felons, that many have abendoned criminality and have become upstanding citizens, so they should not be denied the vote.  But that needs to be documented.  Before restoring voting rights, first there should be some years of a verifiable track record of no crime, of employment and of being a productive, law-abiding citizen.  Such a verifiable track record is a must.  Since most ex-felons are among the best con artists in the world, we should not rely on their own self-reporting.  We also should not rely much more on references from individuals, since most people can be persuaded into giving a good referral.

Only police and parole or probation records, together with such things as employment and credit records, should be considered.

Until such a verifiable track record of good citizenship has been maintained for years, voting rights should not be restored.  There is too much risk that the ex-felon is still a criminal, and would vote contrary to the interests of law-abiding citizens.

Some argue that the ex-felon has earned the vote, once the imprisonment or parole or probation is over and the "debt to society has been paid."  But there is no such "debt to society."  What the ex-felon has "earned" by serving the time, in prison or in completing parole or probation, is no longer having to be in prison or on parole or probation!  It is regaining freedom of movement and freedom from supervision.  The restoration of civil rights lost, such as the right to vote or bear arms, should depend on proof that the ex-felon has permanently abandoned being a criminal.

Some also argue that if the vote is not restored, it gets in the way of rehabilitating ex-felons.  But that argument is so weak as to be silly.  There is zero evidence that voting has ever rehabilitated any criminals whatsoever.

Rehabilitation is a great thing.  But the rehabilitation of felons is one of the most difficult and resistant of all tasks.  They are the "hard core of the hard core."

Many would-be prison reformers have listened all too well to what felons themselves say.  Felons typically claim that they are criminals because they never had a chance to be anything else.  That lack of education, or racial discrimination, or high unemployment rates, etc., made it impossible for them to earn a living except by crime.

Because of such assumptions, most rehabilitation in prisons is based on education.  Clearly education should happen in every prison.  But studies have shown that education in prison has had no detectable effect on recidivism rates, which are the best measure of any reform or lack of it.  Sadly, despite the many benefits of prison education programs, most prisoners they educate simply become, well, better educated criminals.

So is there no hope for reform programs?  There is, but only when they can be shown to have results.  What does it take to turn an habitual criminal away from crime?  There is only one answer.  That is that nothing will work except for the criminal to make a decision never to commit crime again.  That means completely turning his or her life around.

Some criminals make that decision, then relapse.  But not one criminal ever reforms without making a life-changing "U-turn" decision.

In 7 1/2 years in prison, I observed that a few fellow prisoners were cured of criminalilty just by going to prison, then resolving never to risk that again.  But most who were rehabilitated, however, went through a religious committment first.  Yet even some of those relapsed.

The best results for reform of criminals that I saw came from a life-changing religious experience that does not go away.  That kind of reform program is not well-suited to efforts by governments.  But when they let religious groups come in to have such programs in prisons, theirs are almost the only programs showing much in the way of lasting rehabilitation.

Even then, a religious conversion, in prison or not, is no guarantee of the reformation of any given criminal.  Sometimes it brings no reform at all.  Or there can be a reform, then a relapse.  Or sometimes a felon fakes a conversion, to help beat the case against him or her, or to help make parole.  Many felons do fake it.  Other prisoners decide who is faking it by watching the "convert" for a long time.  They know to watch for actions, not just words.

That kind of guarded attitude is also  the best guarantee for society.  The ex-felon should be watched for actions, not just words.  Society should watch  a long time, looking for concrete, verified, long-term proof that the ex-felon is no longer a criminal.  Only then is it safe for society to restore the right to vote.

_________________

Sources:

"Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994," U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, at ojp.gov/bjs/abstract/rpr94.htm .

OCE/CEA Three State Recidivism Study, Sept. 30, 2001, Steurer, Smith and Tracy, at ceanational.org/documents/3StateFinal.pdf..

“FBI: Violent Crime Fell 3 Percent in 2003,” Associated Press, www.foxnews.com, Oct. 25, 2004.

“The Inner Change Freedom Initiative,” Johnson and Larson, Manhattan Institute and Univ. of Pennsylvania, manhattaninstitute.org/innerchange.pdf.

Research suggests that ex-felons of all races lean toward the Democratic Party  http://www.sptimes.com/News/021901/State/Blacks__Allow_ex_felo.shtml

ACORN, Obama and The Meltdown

_

_

(I’ve been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work. — Barack Obama, Speech to ACORN, November 2007.  [Project Vote is a subsidiary of ACORN.]  At http://www.newsmax.com/politics/obama_voter_fraud/2008/09/22/133091.html )

      (Image from blog.nola.com)

_

ACORN was at the core of the meltdown.   

(At http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjRjYzE0YmQxNzU4MDJjYWE5MjIzMTMxMmNhZWQ1MTA=&w=MA==, "Planting Seeds of Disaster: ACORN, Barack Obama and the Democratic Party," Stanley Kurtz, National Review, 10-7-08.)

ACORN did far more to cause the meltdown than merely intimidating local banks into making bad housing loans.  ACORN was getting resistance from local bankers because Freddie/Fannie's rules kept them from accepting most such loans.

So what did ACORN do?  It got Freddie/Fannie's rules changed.  ACORN successfully pressured Congress into changing those rules.  Before then, Freddie/Fannie had been rejecting most bad housing loans.  Then ACORN used its expensive lobbyists and Democratic friends in the Senate and Congress to change those rules.  The new rules forced Freddie/Fannie to accept such loans.

Thus began the Great Meltdown.

Freddie/Fannie bundled the bad loans - which Congress forced them to accept - and sold them on the market.  The market took off.  The bubble swelled.  And swelled and swelled.  Until the price of houses stopped rising.  Then the bubble burst.

What was Obama's role in this?

Back in 1995 ACORN was struggling to generate more sub-prime housing loans under CRA rules, and running desperate ads like this one in April 1995 in the Chicago Sun Times, saying:

"You’ve got only a couple thousand bucks in the bank. Your job pays you dog-food wages. Your credit history has been bent, stapled, and mutilated. You declared bankruptcy in 1989. Don’t despair: You can still buy a house.”

The article directed such prospects to a group of far-left community organizers called ACORN for assistance. 

What was Obama's connection to ACORN then?*  Kurtz continues:

At the time, however, that 1995 Chicago newspaper article represented something of a triumph for Barack Obama. That same year, as a director at Chicago’s Woods Fund, Obama was successfully pushing for a major expansion of assistance to ACORN, and sending still more money ACORN’s way from his post as board chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Through both funding and personal-leadership training, Obama supported ACORN. And ACORN, far more than we’ve recognized up to now, had a major role in precipitating the subprime crisis.  (Emphasis added.)

Just who is ACORN?

In one of the first book-length scholarly studies of ACORN, Organizing Urban America, Rutgers University political scientist Heidi Swarts describes this group, so dear to Barack Obama, as “oppositional outlaws.” Swarts, a strong supporter of ACORN, has no qualms about stating that its members think of themselves as “militants unafraid to confront the powers that be.” “This identity as a uniquely militant organization,” says Swarts, “is reinforced by contentious action.” ACORN protesters will break into private offices, show up at a banker’s home to intimidate his family, or pour protesters into bank lobbies to scare away customers, all in an effort to force a lowering of credit standards for poor and minority customers. According to Swarts, long-term ACORN organizers “tend to see the organization as a solitary vanguard of principled leftists...the only truly radical community organization.”

ACORN's outside-inside strategy:

Yet ACORN’s entirely deserved reputation for militance is balanced by its less-well-known “inside strategy.” ACORN has long employed Washington-based lobbyists who understand very well how the legislative game is played. ACORN’s national lobbyists may encourage and benefit from the militant tactics of their base, but in the halls of congress they play the game with smooth sophistication. The untold story of ACORN’s central role in the financial meltdown is about the one-two punch to the banking system administered by this outside/inside strategy.

Using its expensive lobbyists and its friends in Congress, ACORN even got the government to fund it massively, with tens of millions of dollars a year!  Along with other "housing experts" like La Raza.

That was why Democrate put into the $700 billion Bailout Bill the part about ACORN and La Raza getting some 20% of the total!  The rationale - to use ACORN as its representative with sub-prime borrowers.  Imagine how that would have worked out!  Fortunately, public outrage got that part of the Bailout stopped.

Obama's present links with ACORN? 

Well, for one thing, he hired one of their subsidiaries to help with voter registration and turnout.  Perhaps a small matter - even though ACORN's past and present problems with voter fraud are not small matters!  But it does illustrate that Obama's ACORN connections have not ended.

But please - read both the above articles for yourself.

________

* Upon his return to Chicago after Harvard Law School, Obama provided legal representation for ACORN and for Tony Rezko (recently convicted of bribery and money laundering), who was Obama’s main money man during his years in the Illinois State Senate. Rezko had helped the Obamas purchase a home in Chicago’s politically correct Hyde Park. Obama sat on the boards of the philanthropic Woods Foundation and the Joyce Foundation, both of whom funneled millions of dollars to ACORN.  (At http://www.newsmax.com/politics/obama_voter_fraud/2008/09/22/133091.html )

October 07, 2008

CNN's Anderson Cooper On Obama-Ayers Issue

See video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvROBLortBQ or YouTube.com>   6 minutes.  You may be surprised at how seriously he takes the strength of the linkage between Obama and Ayres.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/anchors_reporters/images/cooper.anderson.b.jpg

                   (Image from cnn.com)

September 30, 2008

Who Worked To Avoid This Meltdown?

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/news/cartoon1(9).jpg

                                        (Image from koreatimes.co.kr)

This news broadcast video simply shows who worked to avoid the meltdown, how and when.  At http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM.  4 minutes.  Short, simple, factual.

(Hat Tip to Robert Martin)

September 29, 2008

Jack Welch On What Is To Come

http://www.nelsonconsulting.co.uk/Articles/jack

          (Image from nelsonconsulting.co.uk)

Here's what fabled Jack Welch, former CEO of GE, has to say on CBN about the aborted Bail-Out bill today, and what he thinks is about to happen to the economy.  At  Video: Welch on GE, Wall Street bailout.  Helpful.  Excellent..

(Heck. I can't make the link work.  Try going to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26946382/page/2/, then click on " Video: Welch on GE, Wall Street bailout at the bottom of the (2nd) page.  The type is in red.)

ACORN's Role In Meltdown

http://www.investorsgroup.com/english/aboutUs/careers/consultant/mgrWords/images/talbot.jpg

ACORN's Madeline Talbott

(Image from investorsgroup.com)

This from NY Post: "O's Dangerous Pals," by Stanley Kurtz, 9-29-08, at http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09292008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_dangerous_pals_131216.htm

WHAT exactly does a "community organizer" do? Barack Obama's rise has left many Americans asking themselves that question. Here's a big part of the answer: Community organizers intimidate banks into making high-risk loans to customers with poor credit.

In the name of fairness to minorities, community organizers occupy private offices, chant inside bank lobbies, and confront executives at their homes - and thereby force financial institutions to direct hundreds of millions of dollars in mortgages to low-credit customers.

In other words, community organizers help to undermine the US economy by pushing the banking system into a sinkhole of bad loans. And Obama has spent years training and funding the organizers who do it.

THE seeds of today's financial meltdown lie in the Commu nity Reinvestment Act - a law passed in 1977 and made riskier by unwise amendments and regulatory rulings in later decades.

CRA was meant to encourage banks to make loans to high-risk borrowers, often minorities living in unstable neighborhoods. That has provided an opening to radical groups like ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) to abuse the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in "subprime" loans to often uncreditworthy poor and minority customers.

Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA - and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN.

In fact, intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion have enabled ACORN to extract hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and contributions from America's financial institutions.

Banks already overexposed by these shaky loans were pushed still further in the wrong direction when government-sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac began buying up their bad loans and offering them for sale on world markets.

Fannie and Freddie acted in response to Clinton administration pressure to boost homeownership rates among minorities and the poor. However compassionate the motive, the result of this systematic disregard for normal credit standards has been financial disaster.

ONE key pioneer of ACORN's subprime-loan shakedown racket was Madeline Talbott - an activist with extensive ties to Barack Obama. She was also in on the ground floor of the disastrous turn in Fannie Mae's mortgage policies.

Long the director of Chicago ACORN, Talbott is a specialist in "direct action" - organizers' term for their militant tactics of intimidation and disruption. Perhaps her most famous stunt was leading a group of ACORN protesters breaking into a meeting of the Chicago City Council to push for a "living wage" law, shouting in defiance as she was arrested for mob action and disorderly conduct. But her real legacy may be her drive to push banks into making risky mortgage loans.

In February 1990, Illinois regulators held what was believed to be the first-ever state hearing to consider blocking a thrift merger for lack of compliance with CRA. The challenge was filed by ACORN, led by Talbott. Officials of Bell Federal Savings and Loan Association, her target, complained that ACORN pressure was undermining its ability to meet strict financial requirements it was obligated to uphold and protested being boxed into an "affirmative-action lending policy." The following years saw Talbott featured in dozens of news stories about pressuring banks into higher-risk minority loans.

IN April 1992, Talbott filed an other precedent-setting com plaint using the "community support requirements" of the 1989 savings-and-loan bailout, this time against Avondale Federal Bank for Savings. Within a month, Chicago ACORN had organized its first "bank fair" at Malcolm X College and found 16 Chicago-area financial institutions willing to participate.

Two months later, aided by ACORN organizer Sandra Maxwell, Talbott announced plans to conduct demonstrations in the lobbies of area banks that refused to attend an ACORN-sponsored national bank "summit" in New York. She insisted that banks show a commitment to minority lending by lowering their standards on downpayments and underwriting - for example, by overlooking bad credit histories.

By September 1992, The Chicago Tribune was describing Talbott's program as "affirma- tive-action lending" and ACORN was issuing fact sheets bragging about relaxations of credit standards that it had won on behalf of minorities.

And Talbott continued her effort to, as she put it, drag banks "kicking and screaming" into high-risk loans. A September 1993 story in The Chicago Sun-Times presents her as the leader of an initiative in which five area financial institutions (including two of her former targets, now plainly cowed - Bell Federal Savings and Avondale Federal Savings) were "participating in a $55 million national pilot program with affordable-housing group ACORN to make mortgages for low- and moderate-income people with troubled credit histories."

What made this program different from others, the paper added, was the participation of Fannie Mae - which had agreed to buy up the loans. "If this pilot program works," crowed Talbott, "it will send a message to the lending community that it's OK to make these kind of loans."

Well, the pilot program "worked," and Fannie Mae's message that risky loans to minorities were "OK" was sent. The rest is financial-meltdown history.

IT would be tough to find an "on the ground" community organizer more closely tied to the subprime-mortgage fiasco than Madeline Talbott. And no one has been more supportive of Madeline Talbott than Barack Obama.

When Obama was just a budding community organizer in Chicago, Talbott was so impressed that she asked him to train her personal staff.

He returned to Chicago in the early '90s, just as Talbott was starting her pressure campaign on local banks. Chicago ACORN sought out Obama's legal services for a "motor voter" case and partnered with him on his 1992 "Project VOTE" registration drive.

In those years, he also conducted leadership-training seminars for ACORN's up-and-coming organizers. That is, Obama was training the army of ACORN organizers who participated in Madeline Talbott's drive against Chicago's banks.

More than that, Obama was funding them. As he rose to a leadership role at Chicago's Woods Fund, he became the most powerful voice on the foundation's board for supporting ACORN and other community organizers. In 1995, the Woods Fund substantially expanded its funding of community organizers - and Obama chaired the committee that urged and managed the shift.

That committee's report on strategies for funding groups like ACORN features all the key names in Obama's organizer network. The report quotes Talbott more than any other figure; Sandra Maxwell, Talbott's ACORN ally in the bank battle, was also among the organizers consulted.

MORE, the Obama-supervised Woods Fund report ac knowledges the problem of getting donors and foundations to contribute to radical groups like ACORN - whose confrontational tactics often scare off even liberal donors and foundations.

Indeed, the report brags about pulling the wool over the public's eye. The Woods Fund's claim to be "nonideological," it says, has "enabled the Trustees to make grants to organizations that use confrontational tactics against the business and government 'establishments' without undue risk of being criticized for partisanship."

Hmm. Radicalism disguised by a claim to be postideological. Sound familiar?

The Woods Fund report makes it clear Obama was fully aware of the intimidation tactics used by ACORN's Madeline Talbott in her pioneering efforts to force banks to suspend their usual credit standards. Yet he supported Talbott in every conceivable way. He trained her personal staff and other aspiring ACORN leaders, he consulted with her extensively, and he arranged a major boost in foundation funding for her efforts.

And, as the leader of another charity, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Obama channeled more funding Talbott's way - ostensibly for education projects but surely supportive of ACORN's overall efforts.

In return, Talbott proudly announced her support of Obama's first campaign for state Senate, saying, "We accept and respect him as a kindred spirit, a fellow organizer."

IN short, to understand the roots of the subprime-mort gage crisis, look to ACORN's Madeline Talbott. And to see how Talbott was able to work her mischief, look to Barack Obama.

Then you'll truly know what community organizers do.

Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, DC.

September 28, 2008

Why The Crisis Is Like A Kidney Stone

http://www.tommitsoff.com/images/pain2.jpg

   (Image from tommitsoff.com)

By the inimitable, Irreplaceable Bill Whittle.  Short.  See it at http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWE1YTg0N2I5OTQ1ZWNkYjFmYTNjZjQ2ZmMzYmM5ZjA=. 

Samples:

(I had) no health insurance. Why? A preexisting surgery made me tough to insure, but the fact is, I had gotten away with it yesterday, and the day before, and the day before that. So I was trusting to luck for a while. And I had been lucky — for a while.

Next thing I know I’m bent over in the hallway, waiting for the car to come around — hands on my knees like I’d run a marathon. And then — BAM! I’m kneeling in front of the couch, arms wrapped around the cushion, making sounds like frying grease . . . little pops and grunts and hisses. Ten minutes in and I was beneath language already.

After the stone was gone,

Do you want to know what my honest-to-God first thought was when the pain got manageable enough to be able to hold a thought? I tell you: I thought of John McCain. And I’ll tell you what hit me the hardest: not his pain lasted for five years when mine lasted for four hours. But to add to that raw fear, lying in filth and knowing that those footsteps in the hall would bring not relief but more pain . . . my God! When I think about those men on those fields from Bunker Hill to Baghdad, lying there for hours, awaiting rescue and relief that often simply never came . . . I end up — and I don’t expect any of you to actually believe this — I end up grateful for those few hours.

His thoughts:

Here was my second thought: I would like to kiss the hand of those evil, greedy, horrible KKKorporations that made and tested Demerol and Dilaudid and the ultrasound sensor and clean needles and sterile IV bags and all the rest of it. I know they’re the villains of courtroom novels and Michael Moore movies and thus are wicked, greedy, soulless Nazis — but if I met a single one of them I would kiss their hands and feet in gratitude. And it did not elude me, when that blinding light finally went out and I felt good again, that my Moral Superiors who protest and vilify these companies at every turn have not — in point of fact — ever done a single thing to relieve my pain or anyone else’s. Nor could any of those murdering, Seventh-century barbarians we are fighting do so much as carve a block of wood to look like that ultrasound sensor. No, pain has been here forever, and when you strip all the plasma TV’s and jet travel and iPhones away you are left with the brass tacks: It takes civilization to remove pain, and Western Civilization to actually fix what’s causing it, more often than not. And that is another thing I try never to forget.

"And I had a final thought"

My dad suffered from kidney stones his whole life...And yet, the only time I ever saw that man cry was when he talked about the Depression, and how it felt to watch your neighbors eat out of garbage cans.

I don’t want that experience. Just about any remedy, no matter how horrible, would be better than that. But I have re-negotiated my new job to include health insurance. Why today and not three years ago? Because I just came through a world of hurt. I don’t ever want to go through that again.

And this is my concern about the $700 billion kidney stone the economy is trying to pass. It seems to me that if we are going to change behaviors then the people who got us into this mess need to feel a little pain. 

Is that too much to ask of this mess? That from whatever pain we have to endure, we can perhaps learn enough from it so that we don’t go through this again?

September 27, 2008

Scam That Caused The Crisis

http://discuss.epluribusmedia.net/files/images/stockxpertcom_id5291721_size1.jpg

_

_              (Image from epluribusmedia.net)

Take 8 minutes to see this video of Congress pooh-poohing the Fannie/Freddie problem just a few short years ago, at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs.  Sad and shocking. 

Especially see former President Clinton's frank, rueful comments at the end. 

September 26, 2008

Video: What Caused Financial Crisis?

                        (Image from e-watchman.co.uk)

This video shows better, quicker and more understandably how all this came about than anything I have seen.  At http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o.  9 minutes.

(This video came from The Drudge Report.  In the last minute it turned out to be a McCain ad.  But the first 8 minutes summarize the facts from most of the better articles on the roots of this crisis.  The value of this video is that it presents the major facts graphically and all in one place.  That makes it a very helpful summary of the relevant information..)

September 25, 2008

Bailout Could Make Money For Taxpayers

http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/ArtAndPhoto-Fronts/BUSINESS/080331/g-080331-biz-henry-paulson-10a.hmedium.jpg

                (Image from msnbcmedia1.msn.com)

In the Wall Street Journal today, Andy Kessler writes at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122230704116773989.html:

In 1992, hedge-fund manager George Soros made $1 billion betting against the British pound. In 2007, John Paulson's Credit Opportunities fund correctly bet against subprime mortgages, clearing $15 billion for the year and $3.7 billion for him. Warren Buffett is now hoping to make big money on Goldman Sachs.

But these are small-time deals. My analysis suggests that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (a former investment banker, no less, not a trader) may pull off the mother of all trades, which could net a trillion dollars and maybe as much as $2.2 trillion -- yes, with a "t" -- for the United States Treasury.  (Emphasis added.)

You should read the rest of this fascinating article, at the link above. 

In support of Kessler's article, Warren Buffet has already profited by his large investment, hours ago, in Goldman Sachs.  There is already a profit of about $783 million on his $5 billion investment in just hours.   (See http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article4821506.ece)

There is a fire sale going on!  Reputable old companies with huge assets but no cash, who are dying for cash, will pay a lot to get cash..  If this bail-out goes through, it could help pay something toward Social Security, health care or tax cuts. 

It could be profit time, as well as reform time, for the U.S. government with Paulson's deal.

September 24, 2008

Democrats Responsible for Financial Crisis

                               (Image from swamppolitics.com)

At Bloombergs today see "How Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" by Kevin Hassett, at http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

This crisis seems so complex, but really, it isn't.

Enough cards on this table have been turned over that the story is now clear. The economic history books will describe this episode in simple and understandable terms: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exploded, and many bystanders were injured in the blast, some fatally.

Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves.

Their large presence created an environment within which even mortgage-backed securities assembled by others could find a ready home.

But all this worked only as long as real estate prices stayed high.

Once they began to fall, the entire house of cards came down with them.

Turning Point

Take away Fannie and Freddie, or regulate them more wisely, and it's hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened.

It is easy to identify the historical turning point that marked the beginning of the end. 

Back in 2005, Fannie and Freddie were...on the ropes...enmeshed in accounting scandals.  At one telling moment in late 2004...the SECs chief accountant told disgraced Fannie Mae chief Franklin Raines that Fannie's position on the relevant accounting issue was not even ``on the page'' of allowable interpretations.

Than a movement in Congress emerged to create a "world-class regulator" to oversee Fannie and Freddie.  It would impose...

...strict requirements on their ability to take excessive risks. Politicians who previously ha