Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Once You Go Conservative Black, You Better Watch Your Back by Ann Coulter 11/30/2011

Once You Go Conservative Black, You Better Watch Your Back by Ann Coulter 11/30/2011 221 Comments With the mainstream media giddily reporting on an alleged affair involving Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, how long can it be before they break the news that their 2004 vice presidential candidate conceived a "love child" with his mistress, Rielle Hunter? The left is trying to destroy Cain with a miasma of hazy accusations leveled by three troubled women. Considered individually, the accusations are utterly unbelievable. They are even less credible taken together. This is how liberals destroy a man, out of nothing. After the first round of baseless accusations against Cain, an endless stream of pundits rolled out the cliche -- as if it were the height of originality -- "This isn't he said-she said; it's he-said, she-said, she-said, she-said, she–said." Au contraire: We had two "shes" and only one "said." Remember? Only two women were willing to give their names. And as soon as they did, we discovered that they were highly suspicious accusers with nothing more than their personal honor to support the allegations. Only one of the two would even say what Cain allegedly did. The first one was Sharon Bialek, who claimed that Cain grabbed her crotch in a car. Then we found out Bialek was in constant financial trouble, had been involved in a paternity lawsuit, was known as a "gold digger," had a string of debts and had twice filed for personal bankruptcy. Also, she admitted she knew Obama's dirty tricks specialist, David Axelrod, from living in the same building with him. Her personal history is relevant because she produced no evidence. We had to take her word. (Which was not helped by seeing her standing with Gloria Allred.) The second one, Karen Kraushaar, made unspecified allegations of a "hostile environment" when she was working for Cain, but refuses to say what those allegations were. This despite the fact that the National Restaurant Association waived her confidentiality agreement, thus allowing her to go public. That's one "she," but no "said." Cain said he had once told Kraushaar she was as tall as his wife -- which would be one of the more worthy sexual harassment claims settled by an American company in recent years. Why won't she say? We're not talking about rape. Kraushaar can't say, "I don't want to relive being told I was the same height as his wife!" With all the nonsense that passes for a "hostile environment," either Kraushaar tells us what Cain allegedly did, or her blind accusation is worth less than nothing. As if that weren't enough, then it turned out that Kraushaar had also filed a complaint at her next job just three years later, charging that a manager had circulated a sexually explicit joke email comparing computers to men and women. She demanded a raise and the right to work at home. Maybe Kraushaar is the most unlucky woman in the world. But the simpler explanation is that she is not a credible witness on the workplace atmosphere. And now we have Ginger White stepping forward to claim that she had a 13-year affair with Cain. Cain admits he was friends with White, but he categorically, adamantly denies having an affair with her. White has the whole combo-platter of questionable accuser attributes: She's another financially troubled, twice-divorced, unemployed single mother, who has claimed sexual harassment in the past, declared bankruptcy once, was accused of stalking and had a libel judgment entered against her just this year. So far in 2011, she's had nine liens put on her property. But we're supposed to ignore all of that because she's the third woman of questionable character to make an implausible allegation. Liberals say there's a pattern, but the only pattern is of their making far-fetched accusations of a sexual nature against Cain. White's proof that she had a 13-year affair is that she has two of Cain's books signed by him -- one with the incriminating inscription, "Friends are forever! Everything else is a bonus," and the other, "Miss G, you have already made a 'big difference!' Stay focused as you pursue your next destination." (I know -- filthy!) If that's proof of an affair, I've had thousands of them without even realizing it. Also, White produced evidence that Cain had texted or called her cell phone 61 times during four non-consecutive months -- but did not reveal what those texts said. ("Would you please return my lawn mower?") Again, if that's proof of an affair, I'm having hundreds of them at this very moment. This is the sort of evidence you get with an actual sexual predator: Bill Clinton's accusers had gifts, taped phone conversations with him and a semen-stained dress. Gennifer Flowers produced taped telephone calls with Clinton totaling thousands of words between them, with him counseling her on how to deny their affair: "If they ever hit you with it, just say no, and go on. There's nothing they can do ... But when they -- if somebody contacts you, I need to know ... All you got to do is deny it." Paula Jones had multiple same-day witnesses -- including the state troopers who worked for Clinton and had already told the press about a "Paula" they brought to Clinton's hotel room. And that was for a single incident. Monica Lewinsky had lots of gifts from Clinton, including a hat pin, two brooches, a marble bear figurine, a T-shirt from Martha's Vineyard and Walt Whitman's "Leaves of Grass," all of which she mysteriously placed with Clinton's secretary, Betty Currie, during the investigation, as well as a semen-stained dress, which Monica kept. Ginger White claims she had a 13-year affair with Cain -- and all she has are two books with inscriptions that could have been written to an auto mechanic who waited in line at a Cain book signing. Even her business partner during the alleged affair says White never mentioned Cain's name. These women are like triple-A ball players with the stats being: number of bankruptcies, smallest bank account, number of liens, most false claims, number of children out of wedlock, degrees of separation from David Axelrod, total trips to human resources and so on. That wouldn't be dispositive -- except for the fact that their only evidence is their word. But this is how liberals dirty you up when they've got nothing: They launch a series of false accusations, knowing that Americans with busy lives won't follow each story to the end and notice that they were all blind alleys. The liberal media is an old story, but it's still a big story when it comes to creating the impression of scandal out of thin air. Most people say, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." I say, "Where there's smoke around a conservative, there are journalists furiously rubbing two sticks together."

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

China to end non job getting degrees AWESOME I have long said end non science education its BS fluff

The Root Cause of Market Failure In Higher Education By Bill Frezza A little noticed Associated Press news story last week reported that China now plans to phase out college majors that consistently produce unemployable graduates. Any program in which 60% of the graduates failed to find work for two consecutive years would face funding reductions until supply was brought back into balance with demand. This Chinese hand may not be invisible, but it would be one that Adam Smith would recognize. Isn't it amazing that even self-identified communists are figuring out that markets only work when adjustment mechanisms act to reduce surpluses and shortages? Destroy those mechanisms and unemployable college graduates pile up as fast as unsold electric cars. The back story is a simple one illustrating the old adage: He who pays the piper calls the tune. In a world turned upside down, China's rulers want to make sure the young cadres they educate at the people's expense actually find jobs in the private economy. Here in the U.S., where outstanding government guaranteed student loans have recently passed the $1 trillion mark, education policy is geared not toward maximizing the employability of graduates, but toward garnering votes for politicians. How so? After years of cultural bombardment, a college education has gone from being a means to an end - a successful career - to an end in itself. Parents who don't send their children to college lose status. American kids feel both entitled and pressured into getting a college education regardless of whether they have the intellectual capacity to profit from it, the work ethic to manage it, or the money to pay for it. Alternative means of career training, like apprenticeship in trades that remain in demand - because, after all, you can't fly in Chinese plumbers - get no social respect. This despite the fact that skilled plumbers, with a little hustle, can out-earn most liberal arts majors. Countless politicians now call college education a "right," alongside food, housing, and medical care. They pander to the education establishment, promising to deliver diplomas no matter how much of other people's money they have to spend. Meanwhile, the intelligentsia looks askance when college students are encouraged to choose a major based on practical expectations of future employment, suggesting instead that students should follow their muse. To finance this so-called "right" to a college education a Government Sponsored Entity known as Sallie Mae, originally the Student Loan Marketing Association, was created in 1972 to issue below market rate student loans guaranteed by the federal government. Like its cousin Fannie Mae in the home mortgage business, lending practices were guided by political considerations, not sound economics. Just as Fannie Mae fueled an unsustainable housing bubble, Sallie encouraged runaway college tuition increases. And just as the federal government was forced to nationalize Fannie Mae when the bubble bust, Uncle Sam has now nationalized the college loan business with an eye on disguising the coming tsunami of student loan defaults. Such policies have consequences. Too many aspiring young museum curators can't find jobs? The pragmatic Chinese solution is to cut public subsidies used to train museum curators. The free market solution is that only the rich would be indulgent enough to buy their kids an education that left them economically dependent on Mommy and Daddy after graduation. The progressive American solution is to seek increased public funding to build more museums. When such make-work spending fails - as it must during periods of fiscal belt tightening - do progressives encourage maleducated kids to look around, see what needs doing, and start businesses of their own? No. They urge them to take to the streets to bang drums and chant slogans. The system is nearing breakdown, which will come when student loan defaults finally push the federal agency that guarantees such loans into bankruptcy. At that point, we will have to face the fact that capping off adolescence with a four-year party at taxpayer expense is a luxury we can no longer afford. College participation rates will have to go back down to historical norms. Slots will have to be reserved for students that can actually profit from them, restoring graduation rates to where they were before colleges were flooded with people who don't belong there, including illiterate freeloaders. Selection will have to be based on merit, not social engineering. Loans will have to be restricted to majors that confer capacity to pay the loans back. Dead-end programs used to train the next generation of professors - whose only skill will be to teach more such dead-end programs - will have to be limited, funded not by taxpayers but by ideological philanthropists with a hankering for fineries like literary criticism and gender studies. This may seem like common sense to most people, but it strikes horror into the hearts of the liberal professoriate. After years of feathering their nests so they can produce students trained only to bite the hand that feeds them, perhaps it's time to serve up a few helpings of horror. We can no longer afford to take the snobbery of academics seriously. Taxpayers just don't have the money to keep them or their young acolytes on the dole. Bill Frezza is a fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and a Boston-based venture capitalist. He can be reached at If you would like to subscribe to his weekly column, drop a note to or follow him on Twitter @BillFrezza.

someone just shoot barney frank in the face

Congress Will Be a Better Place When Barney Frank Is Gone By Karl Rove Published November 29, 2011 | Print Email Share Comments Tweet It was because he was going to retire anyway, lost a favorite port town in redistricting and had a tough race last time. Was this really why Congressman Barney Frank announced today he’s retiring from the House of Representatives? Perhaps another reason was he’s no longer chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and like a lot of bullies, Mr. Frank found it’s not easy to be stripped of the power to torment and humiliate others. Related Video What Prompted Barney Frank Retirement? Panel on controversial lawmaker Related Stories Why I'll Miss Barney Frank Brilliant, but acid tongued and generally unpleasant, Mr. Frank ruled with an iron gavel, ran over critics with delight and treated committee members and especially Republican colleagues as lesser forms of life. Mr. Frank’s departure in January 2013 will remove from the House one of its more offensive members. Until then, this petulant, abrasive and downright nasty Congressman will keep making his presence known. However, it is unlikely that Mr. Frank is leaving for the reason he should depart Congress: out of shame for all he did to stop reform of Fannie and Freddie while there was still time to avert the disaster that almost took down the American economy. In 2003, he called Fannie and Freddie “fundamentally sound financially” and accused the Bush Administration of trying to “exaggerate a threat of safety… [to] conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see." A year later, he said talk of financial problems at Fannie and Freddie were “an artificial issue created by the administration...I don't think we are in any remote danger here." In 2007, as Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and just as Fannie and Freddie – overleveraged and stuffed to the gills with risky mortgages they’d encouraged and facilitated – were about to go over the cliff, Mr. Frank attacked President George W. Bush’s call for reform as “inane.” Yet when Fannie and Freddie went belly up in the fall of 2008, Mr. Frank voted for the same Bush Administration reforms that could have averted the bankruptcies of Fannie and Freddie. Why did Mr. Frank oppose giving these two gigantic financial institutions the same scrutiny as a local bank, a neighborhood savings and loan or a community credit union? Fannie and Freddie provided “grease” for the Democratic political machine through hundreds of millions in charitable contributions to left wing community and advocacy groups that are critical to Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts. Fannie and Freddie hired vast armies of influence peddlers – admittedly from both parties, but mostly Democrats – to forestall any efforts at reasonable regulation. Fannie and, to a lesser extent, Freddie, were led by Democratic political power brokers, masquerading as mortgage bankers while advising Democratic presidents, vetting Democratic running mates, and plumping the election hopes of Congressional Democrats. Mr. Frank is incapable of feeling shame, regret or a sense of personal responsibility. These are emotions for lesser beings. He’s leaving because of redistricting or to avoid having to raise money or facing those nasty little voters every two years. The House will be a better place for his departure. Karl Rove is a former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush. He is a Fox News contributor and author of "Courage and Consequence" (Threshold Editions, 2010).

dumped windows xp for archlinux and myth2 and skype now work

awesome as hell!

so dems why guna vote for obama over ron paul?

please give point by point

Friday, November 25, 2011 iowahawk AWESOME

eat the rich LOL

bird schooling jordan

michael jordan a scam

The fed is treasonous

The fed is treasonous and any who want it to stay are terrorists.

nuclear power is good go sarkozy fuck the communists

Thursday, November 24, 2011

350 pound black guy beats strip club customer lil white guy, GOES JAIL YAAA lol

0 debt is law

04:40 < shevy> in your system, who controls the printing of money? 04:40 < gavino> congress 04:40 < gavino> per le con sti tut tione 04:41 < gavino> fed gone 04:41 < gavino> 0 debt is law 04:41 < gavino> anything gov does must be paid for by tax 04:41 < gavino> irs gone 04:41 < gavino> pub education gone 04:41 < gavino> freedom to start business there 04:41 < gavino> oh yeah!! 04:41 < gavino> video tape lecturers 04:41 < gavino> private bus n trains 04:42 < gavino> legal sex for money 04:42 < gavino> freedom 04:42 < shevy> who will you vote for in 2012? 04:42 < gavino> ron paul 04:42 < gavino> or whoever the rep nominees ends up 04:42 < gavino> after i vote for ron in primary 04:42 < gavino> anything to defeat obama 04:42 < shevy> you know ron paul will never make it 04:43 < shevy> he is at best always ~4th rank 04:43 < gavino> he will be president if most people vote for him 04:43 < gavino> people are pissed off 04:43 < gavino> sick of socialism 04:43 < gavino> and debt 04:43 < shevy> perhaps if he would be the main candidate but he won't 04:43 < gavino> no ron tied in some polls with romney 04:43 < shevy> yeah, internet polls ... :P 04:43 < gavino> no 04:43 < gavino> real polls 04:44 < gavino> how old are you shevy 04:44 < gavino> ? 04:45 < shevy> ron paul does not have the support of Fox News 04:45 < shevy> <-- he will win 04:46 < gavino> so? 04:46 < gavino> lol 04:47 < gavino> your buddy obama is guna lose 04:47 < gavino> and lose big 04:47 < gavino> and if the republicans can take the senate 04:47 < gavino> wooo weeee guna be some fun 04:47 < gavino> democrats have run country into the ground 04:47 < gavino> and its time for cleanup

estonia lessons for usa 0 debt and flat tax!!

So parallel Haskell is around 60x Python here, and 150x faster than Ruby. And there was basically no difference in development effort required. Which high level language would you choose?

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

mila kunis is a 4 of 10

skinny boy body yuck

and face gakked by thsoe huge cheek impants

thin lips

good eye is about it

jew girl with bad genetics all jobbed up

skinny is not hot yekk

halle aniston beyonce slut from italian job are 3 of 10 compared to this

heinlein is highly overrated author and not libertarian really

His mushy attempts at interesting scifi always get wakky and unbelievable and always have insane stapled on romance in the middle fo otherwise interesting action. Rought tuff athletic men do not have sappy i wana marry you thoughts. They think of how nice girl be in bed and then her friend too. His characters are liek nijas until 1 hot chick comes around and then of cours eonly 1 hot chick in whole book not 1000s as there are in normal life. Plus his stuff is in the future when marraige willbe gone and people will have mature sex encouters nonstop wilt chamberlain style.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

cnn nbc cbs all hardcore democrat, funny to hear bitching about moderate fox news

cnn nbc cbs all hardcore democrat, funny to hear bitching about moderate fox news

cnn nbc cbs all hardcore democrat, funny to hear bitching about moderate fox news

fox news never mentions real capitalist measures

ending public school
privatizing police n firemen
ending all government bonds
allowing start of medical school at 16
training / mass producing hospitals/docs in the 1000s
commodify and mass produce is how you lower price
reducing lawyer fees by replacing lawyers with software
ending most building codes to allow mass produced housing in many forms including plastic forms filled with concrete
legalizing prostitution
ending all alimony
ending all foriegn wars

Donald Trump would be an awesome president

judge napolitano truthin small gov means all rich

Monday, November 21, 2011

jews steal from old lady heiresse

How Huguette Clark, reclusive copper heiress, spent her fortune
By Zachary Roth | The Lookout – 4 hrs ago


Huguette Clark in 1930 (AP Photo)

It's amazing how fast you can run through $170 million these days, all without leaving your hospital room.

Court documents filed in a legal battle over the $400 million estate of Huguette Clark shed light on how the reclusive and eccentric mining heiress--who died in May at 104 after spending the last 22 years of her life in a hospital--spent her fortune. Clark's relatives--the descendants of her father, William Clark, a copper and banking tycoon and U.S. senator who was born before the Mexican War of 1840--are expected soon to challenge her will, which cut out her family entirely.

Among the revelations in the court documents, MSNBC reports:

• Since 1996, $170 million--or $1 million a month--was spent from Clark's personal account or from an account controlled by her lawyer and accountant, who held legal power of attorney during that period. Both the attorney, Wallace Bock, and the accountant, Irving Kamsler, are reportedly being investigated by law enforcement for their handling of the fortune.

• Au Nain Bleu, a doll and toy shop in Paris, was paid $2.5 million between 1997 and 2006. A friend of Clark's said her dolls were "her closest companions."

• Theriault's, an auctioneer of dolls, received $729,000 between 1997 and 2009.

• Clark paid a combined $60 million to the IRS and in New York state income taxes, since 1996.

• A charity that built a controversial security system for Jewish settlers in the West Bank received $1.85 million in donations. Bock's daughter lives in the settlement protected by the system.

• Bock's law firm received around $250,000 a year, and Kamsler around $90,000. If Clark's will is allowed to stand, both men would receive much more--more than $8 million--as beneficiaries and as executors of the estate.

• Clark's private nurse, Hadasah Peri, received a $5 million lump-sum payment, and around $131,000 a year.

• Beth Israel Medical Center in New York, where Clark lived even though for most of that time she wasn't sick, received about $4.9 million since 1997, or around $1,000 a day.

• Clark's closest friend, Suzanne Pierre, who served as her social secretary, received almost $12 million.

• Clark spent $3.75 million on taxes and co-op fees to maintain her unoccupied 15,000-square-foot Fifth Avenue apartment. She also paid more than $100,000 a year on property taxes for her New Canaan, Conn. country home.

Both Bock and Kamsler have declined to comment on their management of their accounts, but their representatives have said the men acted honorably in complying with Clark's wishes.

Want more of our best national affairs stories? Visit The Lookout or connect with us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

How about a man who earned the highest rating ever given by the National Taxpayers Union, who has never voted for an unbalanced budget or a tax increa

American Politicians Should Copy Canada’s Leftist Government of the 1990s and Cap Spending November 21, 2011 by Dan Mitchell

there is no such thing as renewable energy its a daydream


forgive student debt si giving tons of $$$ to shitty universities

why do that?

why economically give transfer payment from tax payer to university

go ralf nader!!!

ralf nader!!!

mila kunis is not an 8 let alone a 10

get real

newt torches OWS

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Throw Them All Out on O’Reilly: Unusual Monday Features Author Schweizer with Steve Kroft of CBS by Publius

Throw Them All Out on O’Reilly: Unusual Monday Features Author Schweizer with Steve Kroft of CBS
by Publius

Monday night’s episode of The O’Reilly Factor, the number one show in cable news, features an unusual collaboration between FOX and CBS as Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes joins Throw Them All Out author and Breitbart editor Peter Schweizer to discuss insider trading in Congress.

In less than a week, Schweizer’s book–which documents suspicious trades by members and leaders of both parties has upended Washington, DC, prompting hearings to be scheduled in both the Senate and House and shining public scrutiny on a previously hidden avenue of potential corruption and political self-enrichment.

Schweizer’s book is currently among the top ten bestsellers on

once the subsidies and the wind run out, these 20-story high Cuisinarts are de-bladed and retired. This means more bats and migratory birds will live.

14,000 abandoned wind turbines
November 19, 2011 by Don Surber

As Jimi Hendrix may have put it: “And the wind cries bankrupt…”

Minnesotans for Global Warming report that in the last 30 years, the United States has had 14,000 wind turbines abandoned. Apparently, once the subsidies and the wind run out, these 20-story high Cuisinarts are de-bladed and retired. This means more bats and migratory birds will live.

From Minnesotans for Global Warming: “The symbol of Green renewable energy, our savior from the non existent problem of Global Warming, abandoned wind farms are starting to litter the planet as globally governments cut the subsidies taxes that consumers pay for the privilege of having a very expensive power source that does not work every day for various reasons like it’s too cold or the wind speed is too high.”

Andrew Walden of American Thinker explored nearly 2 years ago the demise of the 37-turbine wind farm at Kamaoa Wind Farm in Hawaii: “Built in 1985, at the end of the boom, Kamaoa soon suffered from lack of maintenance. In 1994, the site lease was purchased by Redwood City, CA-based Apollo Energy. Cannibalizing parts from the original 37 turbines, Apollo personnel kept the declining facility going with outdated equipment. But even in a place where wind-shaped trees grow sideways, maintenance issues were overwhelming. By 2004 Kamaoa accounts began to show up on a Hawaii State Department of Finance list of unclaimed properties. In 2006, transmission was finally cut off by Hawaii Electric Company.California’s wind farms — then comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity — ceased to generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000 turbines were simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills.”

When an honest history of this period in the United States is written, it will no be kind to the corporate cronyism that preyed upon public ignorance of earth science to create a crisis — global warming — to exploit and loot the Treasury.

Marxists are not intellecual. They are dreamers.

Marxist ideas have proven good in theory only.

Why can't I major in free market capitalism?

why not?

can major in poetry? history? political science? english?

Welcome to the amazing world of Common Lisp, the programmable programming language.

socialism failing before our eyes: EU
[18:51] sorry:
[18:54] == pooryorick [] has joined #tcl
[18:55] socialism failing before our eyes
[18:55] 0 reporting from commy news
[18:55] ah the comedy

should have video game where waste communist academics and students and fed reserve members and commy congresspeople [18:44] rat a t

should have video game where waste communist academics and students and fed reserve members and commy congresspeople
[18:44] rat a tat tat

gavino> stop voting democrat if u want less government and corruption [18:43] more middle class

gavino> stop voting democrat if u want less government and corruption
[18:43] more middle class

hot milfs

if government would simply stop doing things economy would rocket

school loan
just let people do what want stop making rules stealing money

gary johnson awesome!


Government should cease subsidizing or giving favorable treatment to Internet service providers and content-creators. 'Net Neutrality' leads to a government role in the Internet that can only lead to unwanted regulation.
The FCC should not be allowed to create rules regulating content, Internet speeds, and pricing for services. The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers in the content marketplace. The Internet should remain independent, accessible and market-based.
Internet 'kill switch' legislation should be scrapped completely. No person or group of people should be able to turn off the Internet.

Don't Tax the Internet

The Internet has flourished and society has benefited immeasurably because it has remained relatively free of taxation. The moratorium on access and service taxation must be made permanent.
Every scheme to impose a global Internet tax should be opposed.

Keep the Internet Free & Safe

Political speech should in no way be censored.
Online gaming should be legal for adults.
Crimes committed online should be investigated and treated identically as crimes committed offline. This includes fraud and child pornography.

why do dumb niggers call themselves mixed? no your brown

got it?

hot girl

gary johnson almost as good as ron paul

gary johnson looks fucking awesome

should pick kuchinich as vp

this is a hot gal: not jen aniston or halle or ugymugs like that

scott walker for president

love that guy

see the communists scream when take thier fat godies away from thier non working asses

they flip out

opportunity cost 120$ get ho pushups squats situps chins sprints what color pussy i want today and how do i want my steak?

opportunity cost
120$ get ho
pushups squats situps chins sprints
what color pussy i want today and how do i want my steak?

U.S. Box Office: $119,078,393 farenheight 9/11

U.S. Box Office: $119,078,393

peter schiff kicks ass

Saturday, November 19, 2011

happstack lite

end fannie freddy fed

Where’s the Outrage Over Millionaires’ Mortgage Subsidies?

Friday, 18 Nov 2011 10:22 AM

By John Berlau
More . . .
A A |
Email Us |
Print |
Forward Article


On Wednesday, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held a hearing on the granting of nearly $13 million in bonuses for executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The day before, all but four member of the House Financial Services Committee voted to strip these bonuses for the failed government-sponsored enterprises and subject them to the federal payscale. (Horror of horrors, the Fannie executives wouldn’t be able to make more than the vice president’s salary of $230,000!)

But when it comes to aiding millionaires, Americans should be doubly outraged at Fannie and Freddie and at their enablers in Congress. Some of the very same members of Congress expressing outrage about the bonuses were the chief cheerleaders for a provision that would enlarge the government’s role in the housing market and at the same time increase government subsidies to millionaire owners of McMansions.

As I wrote in National Review last month, the Democrat-controlled Senate and a handful of Republicans voted to hike the conforming loan limit for mortgages that Fannie and Freddie can buy and the Federal Housing Administration can insure to $729,750. And on Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a “minibus” appropriations bill that increased these limits for the FHA.

In the National Review article I wrote, “If this increased loan limit becomes law, it would mean that purchasers of these expensive homes — millionaires and near-millionaires almost by definition — could save thousands of dollars from below-market interest rates thanks to government guarantees.”

Although there were fiscally conservative members of the House, such as Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., who fought against this proposed welfare for the rich, the House unfortunately decided to go along with these McMansion subsidies.

As a Wall Street Journal editorial page noted, “While cable TV is chasing the trivia of Fannie and Freddie bonuses, the real news is that late Monday a bipartisan Congressional committee announced an agreement to increase FHA’s maximum mortgage limits to $729,750 from $625,500 through Dec. 31, 2013.”

Ironically, the same Democrats who rail against tax cuts for “the 1 percent” fellow Democrats — as well as self-proclaimed socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders — voted unanimously in the Senate to protect subsidies for millionaires’ mortgages. Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., who chastised Republicans as “not interested in asking millionaires and billionaires to pay a half a penny on the dollar for the sake of the future of our children and communities” was the chief champion for government backing of mortgages for McMansions.

Menendez proclaimed that Congress must raise the limit back to almost three-quarters of a million dollars in order to save the “middle class.”

Not raising the limit “makes it harder for middle class homebuyers to get credit when credit is tight,” Menendez told Reuters. But this definition of middle class is pretty, shall we say, rich. As a Wall Street Journal editorial noted, “the average sales price for existing homes in September was $212,700.” And even in Menendez’s home state of New Jersey, the median sale price of homes was only $303,100 in August, as calculated by, a prominent real-estate website. This amount is less than half of the $729,750 limit Menendez and the other Democrats said was necessary to protect the “middle class.”

When President Obama likely signs this bill, it will mean that purchasers of these expensive homes — millionaires and near-millionaires almost by definition — could save thousands of dollars from below-market interest rates thanks to government guarantees. And taxpayers will once again be on the hook, as Fannie, Freddie, and the FHA still have not reformed their reckless ways that led to the financial crisis.

Yet so far, there have been few if any condemnations of this government privilege for the wealthy from groups involved in the supposedly populist Occupy Wall Street.

And this — as well as the movement’s general silence on the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie and Freddie’s outsized role in the financial crisis — exposes the stink of hypocrisy (on top of the many other reported scents) from much of the movement and its allies.

CEI had signed a coalition letter with groups such as Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Tax Reform and housing scholars such as Peter Wallison and Edward Pinto of the American Enterprise Institute calling on Congress to oppose raising the loan limits in the looming “minibus” appropriations bill.

The 99 percent, or at least the 53 percent who pay federal income taxes, should definitely make their voices heard.

© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Read more on Where’s the Outrage Over Millionaires’ Mortgage Subsidies?
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

newslfash to hollywood : indian chix n black chix are butt ugly


Larry Sinclair: I did drugs with Obama and performed oral sex on him in a limo.

capitalism is awesome and fun and makes poor rich

unlike rest

capitalism is fucking the best

remember jfk was a moron who got usa into viet nam and caused cuban missle crisis

a total moron

Barney Frank - Gay, Fat, Obnoxious, Liar, Thief, Incompetent, & Far Left Lib « on: November 17, 2011, 11:56:56 AM

Barney Frank - Gay, Fat, Obnoxious, Liar, Thief, Incompetent, & Far Left Lib
« on: November 17, 2011, 11:56:56 AM »

Rep. Barney Frank: Republicans Are Trying To "Blame Us"

"It's part of a pattern in which the Republicans who were the ones responsible for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during the bad times incredibly tried to blame us. Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the House in 1995 through 1998, for four years. during that period, he never moved anything to restrain Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. His fellow Republicans continued to control Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac until the end of the 2006. George Bush tried to get Congress to do something about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, although he was contradictory there and the Republicans refused. Nothing happened to restrain those two entities from doing things they shouldn't have been doing until Chris Dodd became chair of the committee," Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) told MSNBC.


Charlie Cook: GOP set to win huge in 2012 and take over WH and Senate « on: November 17, 2011, 12:21:16 PM »

Charlie Cook: GOP set to win huge in 2012 and take over WH and Senate
« on: November 17, 2011, 12:21:16 PM »

Charlie Cook Sees GOP Winning Big in 2012
US News and World Report's Washington Whispers ^ | November 17, 2011 | Tierney Sneed

Republicans may be heading toward complete control of Washington—maintaining the House, taking the Senate, and likely capturing the White House—if Election Day 2012 unfolds as Charlie Cook, acclaimed vote counter, predicts.

Sure that the former Gov. Mitt Romney will clinch the GOP nomination, Cook says President Obama faces an uphill battle to be re-elected, and the election will be a referendum on his presidency and the dire economic situation he now "owns."

Even if Obama did manage to hold on to the presidency, he will face a Republican-controlled legislature that will likely shut down his agenda entirely.

Cook sees House Republicans losing some of their majority, perhaps five to 10 of the seats he calls "exotic and problematic" that rode the wave in 2010 midterm elections. But he believes that Democrats stand no chance of winning enough seats to gain control.

For similar reasons in the Senate, he sees Democrats losing some of the seats that they gained in their own wave in 2006. "Best-case scenario" for the Democrats, says Cook, is that they lose only three of their 23 seats that are up for grabs. More likely however, they will lose at least six of the 10 most at risk, tipping the Republicans into a slight majority.

As for the Republican nomination, there is no doubt in Cook's mind that it will be Romney. Herman Cain might have passion, Newt Gingrich intellect, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry money, but, "Romney is the only guy with the whole package."

For Cook, "The $64,000 questions is, 'Is it going to be quick and clean or long and messy?'" If Romney gains the support of his party early, he will pick a vice presidential candidate who appeals to the center. If issues like his faith or his Massachusetts healthcare plan continue to disrupt his path for nomination, he may have to do some "awkward ticket balancing" like Sen. John McCain did in his choice of former Gov. Sarah Palin for vice president, explains Cook.

Either way, Cook says, Obama, quoting the president himself, "faces an uphill battle." Cook adds that the only chance he has is to borrow moves from former President Bush's 2004 playbook and "marginalize" Romney just as Bush's team tried to marginalized Sen. John Kerry.

Cook, who spoke at an event last night hosted by Prism Public Affairs and C. Fox Communications, also says that the Gallup presidential approval poll is the best indicator of president's chances for re-election. "Don't pay attention to the horse race figures," he says.

Most tellingly, he adds, Obama has only 39 percent approval among independents—only 32 percent among the "pure independents" who do not lean left or right—and they will be the ones who decide the election.

2010 like tsunami against the communists is in the making.

whiny fags in uniform should be booed


larry elder schools shithead lefty chris matthews

Networks Hit Cain Story 50 Times in Less Than Four Days; Ignored Clinton Scandals By Scott Whitlock | November 03, 2011

Networks Hit Cain Story 50 Times in Less Than Four Days; Ignored Clinton Scandals
By Scott Whitlock | November 03, 2011

Over a period of just three and a half days, NBC, CBS and ABC have developed an insatiable hunger for the Herman Cain sexual harassment story, devoting an incredible 50 stories to the allegations since Monday morning. In contrast, over a similar period these networks mostly ignored far more substantial and serious scandals relating to Bill Clinton.

This pattern continued on Wednesday night and into Thursday as the evening newscasts and morning shows highlighted the story 19 times. On Good Morning America, Brian Ross offered innuendo and slung gossip, recounting, "But behind the scenes, several of the campaigns are still urging reporters to continue to dig, George, saying, there's more to be found in the private life of Herman Cain." [See video below. MP3 audio here.]

Without offering facts, Ross described Cain's time as head of the National Restaurant Association: "It fits with the kind of culture we were told that existed there, with young women who had been, sort of, lobbyists for the restaurant association, working with various states. They were the new ones, the young ones. And they say that's where Cain often socialized."

GMA's George Stephanopoulos trumpeted the latest: "Another woman. Herman Cain facing new allegations that he was aggressive and inappropriate to a third employee, inviting her back to his corporate apartment." "Is the pressure finally getting to the front-runner," inquired the former Democratic operative turned journalist.

On the November 3 Today, Lisa Myers, with no sense of irony, declared the story "a feeding frenzy." She trumpeted, "For Herman Cain, this story is quickly going from bad to worse."

In comparison, over a similar three-day period these same programs were far less interested in charges against Democrat Bill Clinton. After Paula Jones held a public press conference in February of 1994, there was only one report on her allegations.

Following Kathleen Willey's July 1997 claims of being groped by the President, there were a mere three reports. For Juanita Broaddrick, who came forward in February of 1999 to say Clinton raped her, only three stories followed charges appearing in the Wall Street Journal.

It should also be pointed out that all these women offered their names. They weren't anonymous. Additionally, the accusations of assault and rape go far beyond what's being mentioned with the Cain scandal.

Yet, on CBS's Early Show, Chris Wragge piled on, saying of a third possible Cain accuser, "That pretty much takes care of any hope he might have had to see this story fade any time soon."

The nightly newscasts offered a similar tone. Both Evening News anchor Scott Pelley and Nightly News' Brian Williams led their shows by exclaiming, "Under pressure."

Williams added, "Herman Cain fights to stay on his game as reporters swarm and questions swirl about accusations of sexual harassment. Tonight, one of his accusers wants to talk, but can she go public?"

In a follow-up segment, Williams spun the story as a reminder of the seriousness of sexual harassment: "This, of course, is just the latest entry in a long list of similar situations, stories that have made headlines and come and gone over the years and a lot of people are wondering not only what really happened here but where the line is where the rules of the workplace are concerned."

The morning shows, Good Morning America, Today and Early Show, devoted 12 stories to the scandal on Thursday. Wednesday's evening newscasts, Nightly News, World News and Evening News, offered another six. ABC's Nightline also had one.

. . . .

Corruption on a scale never seen before. obama bud Larry Summers Co. got $115M Loan

Corruption on a scale never seen before. Larry Summers Co. got $115M Loan
« on: November 17, 2011, 02:52:49 PM »

80% of ‘Green Energy’ Loans Went to Top Obama Donors
by Wynton Hall

With Energy Secretary Steven Chu set to testify Thursday before the House Energy and Commerce Committee about the government’s $573 million loan to failed solar panel maker Solyndra, an explosive new list of energy loan amounts to President Obama’s top fundraisers, bundlers, and supporters has been released by Breitbart editor Peter Schweizer, author of Throw Them All Out.

As the list reveals, 80 percent of all $20.5 billion in Department of Energy loans went to President Obama’s top donors. Furthermore, some of those dwarf in size those given to Obama bundler George Kaiser, owner of the now defunct Solyndra.

The list—which features the likes of Google owners Larry Page and Sergey Brinn, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Ted Turner, John Doerr, and Al Gore—raises new questions about the procedures used to administer the now-controversial DOE loans.

Obama Bundlers_ Large Donors_ and Supporters fixed pdf

Schweizer’s list stands in sharp contrast to President Obama’s promise that the allocation of all federal “stimulus” monies would be nonpartisan and fair: “Let me repeat that: Decisions about how Recovery money will be spent will be based on the merits. They will not be made as a way of doing favors for lobbyists,” Obama said in 2009.

But as Schweizer’s charges in his book, Throw Them All Out, [link] the Obama Administration may be guilty of “the greatest—and most expensive—example of crony capitalism in American history.”

Quote from Free Republic describes the liberal posters on this board perfectly

Quote from Free Republic describes the liberal posters on this board perfectly
« on: November 18, 2011, 06:54:28 AM »

It seemed to start with little things: not reporting that Obama was a smoker, refusing to mention his middle name, refusing to mention he grew up in a Muslim country, refusing to report his campaign promise of skyrocketing electricity prices, then they attacked Joe the Plumber for daring to ask Obama a question that unmasked their chosen candidate as a Marxist, bought a house from crooked realtor and slum lord Tony Rezko in a sweetheart deal, they downplayed his 20-year membership in a hate church, poo-poohed his friendship and working relationship with terrorist Bill Ayers and his terrorist wife. The Obamas even spoke against the American dream, calling it “Middle-Classism”.

He was never vetted during the campaign, the media even chose not to report certain things and even attacked and maligned anyone who dared question him. (remember Joe the Plumber) Since getting in the White House Obama has literally given away a trillion dollars to friends and allies (so-called “stimulus”) and expects to get a billion dollars back for his campaign coffers. This is probably the biggest crime in history and its apparently not newsworthy. His administration has given guns to Mexican druglords, people have literally died-including Americans from those very guns. His “Obamacare” threatens to bankrupt the country while rationing out less but ever-more expensive healthcare to the people. He decries those who “don’t pay their fair share” while his top corporate allies, like GE, pay no taxes at all. He decries CEO’s “excessive salaries” while ignoring the salaries of top union officials, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who walked away with millions as those institutions crashed to the ground and demanded bailouts.

But hey if a Republican pauses for 20 seconds to think about a question from a hostile reporter, that must be condemned as the end of his campaign. Yes, what media bias?

remember krugman is a moron and fed with 1000 krugmans failed in 08 98 1921

fail fail fail

democrats dont want to balance the budget SCUM

US House Rejects Balanced Budget Proposal

Friday, 18 Nov 2011 03:06 PM


More . . .
A A |
Email Us |
Print |
Forward Article


WASHINGTON — The House has rejected a proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to require a balanced budget, seen by many as the only way to force lawmakers to hold the fiscal line and reverse the flow of federal red ink.

The 261-165 vote was 23 short of the two-thirds majority needed to advance a constitutional amendment. Democrats, swayed by the arguments of their leaders that a balanced budget requirement would force Congress to make devastating cuts to social programs, overwhelmingly voted against it.

Deval Patrick is a stupid nigger

who do we let dumb niggers into politics?

Thursday, November 17, 2011

tcl script to make html page of live links from a file of links

$ cat makelinks.tcl
set infile [open "links1" r]
set data [read -nonewline $infile]
close $infile
set eachlink [split $data "\n"]
set outfile [open "links1.html" w]
set n 1
puts $outfile href line with quotes escaped, blogger sucks ass
incr n
close $outfile

socialism AKA communism AKA fascism FAILING in EUROPE no one calling spade a spade

why no one decrying facims/communism/socialism FAIL?

Tom Brady wins first EVER NFL UNANIMOUS MVP....

Tom Brady wins first EVER NFL UNANIMOUS MVP.... « on: February 06, 2011, 01:54:06 PM » Grin Cool Hell yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DALLAS (AP) New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady on Sunday became the first unanimous choice for The Associated Press NFL Most Valuable Player Award since the AP began using a nationwide panel of media members who cover the league. He surpassed himself, too: In 2007, when Brady won his first MVP, he got 49 votes; one voter went for Brett Favre. "It is always flattering to be chosen for such a prestigious award," Brady said. "But I also look at it as a team award, as nothing in football gets accomplished without the mental toughness and determination of every player and coach associated with that team. "I am very humbled to be a part of an organization where winning comes first, and our goals are based around the success of the team." Those successes, including three Super Bowl titles in the last 10 years, are in great part due to Brady's excellence. Although he didn't set nearly as many passing marks as in '07, Brady by far was the league's top performer in leading New England to a 14-2 record, best in the NFL. He had a record streak of 355 throws without being intercepted, and passed for 36 touchdowns with only four picks. Not that the 33-year-old Brady would compare this season's Patriots to any others. "Every team every year is different," he said, "and over the course of 100 practices and many games a team establishes its identity. Players change, schemes change, opponents change, which is why the game is so exciting year in and year out. "The fact that 32 teams start out each year with the same goal is why the popularity of the sport is at an all-time high. The great part about our sport is that nothing comes easy, and wherever you stand at the end of the year is the exact place that you deserve to be." Individually, Brady stands above all others. The only Patriot to win the award, he and Peyton Manning, his rival for the NFL's best quarterback, have split the last four MVPs. Brady followed his previous MVP trophy with a lost season, tearing left knee ligaments in the first half of the 2008 opener. His return in 2009 was solid, although hand and rib injuries slowed him. This year, even with a sore right foot that required postseason surgery, Brady was simply dynamic. He twice threw for four touchdowns in a game and four times had three. Twelve times, he had a passer rating of at least 100. And he guided a young team in transition to 14 victories. "Brady is so special because he's such a great leader and all the players can relate to him," team owner Robert Kraft said. "These kids (rookies) who come in live in awe of him, but the nice thing is he treats them well. "He works very hard, he studies very hard," Kraft added. "Being a great quarterback isn't just being very skilled. It's being able to process information quickly, to make the adjustments, and I think he's fabulous at that." As fabulous as he might have been, Brady, not surprisingly, has some regrets about 2010. "When the season is over, 31 teams are disappointed about the outcome," he said. "There is only one champion, and nobody plays this game for second place. The desire and hunger is about winning, which to me never gets old. The motivation to get up and work every day for that goal is something that challenges us all. "Our team has very high expectations, and our team will come back this year with the same purpose," he said. "Whether or not that leads to a championship season will be determined by the commitment each player makes to do their job as best as they possibly can."

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

larry bird 1987 kicking jordans ASS

Norquist: Democrats Sabotaging Supercommittee to Help Obama

Norquist: Democrats Sabotaging Supercommittee to Help Obama Wednesday, 16 Nov 2011 07:45 PM By Paul Scicchitano and Kathleen Walter Share: More . . . A A | Email Us | Print | Forward Article inShare Conservative activist Grover Norquist, who invented the “anti-tax increase” tax pledge embraced by Republicans, tells Newsmax that he is convinced Democrats are planning to torpedo any possible deal in the supercommittee to further the re-election plans of President Barack Obama. “His (Obama's campaign) narrative has got to be the Republican Congress is the problem,” said Norquist in an exclusive interview on Wednesday. “Therefore, I believe the Democrats will sink the supercommittee in order to say that the Republicans were unreasonable.” Pressure is mounting for both parties to come together on a plan by the end of the week so the committee can vote by its Nov. 23 deadline. Failure to enact a debt-cutting plan of at least $1.2 trillion this year would force $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts beginning in 2013. Democrats are opposing reductions in entitlement programs such as Medicare, as sought by Republicans, unless Republicans agree to large increases in tax revenue. Democrats on the supercommittee are weighing whether to reduce to about $800 billion their demand for new tax revenue, a Democratic aide told Bloomberg News this week. Last week, Democrats proposed a plan that would include $1 trillion in new revenue, $1 trillion in spending cuts and $300 billion from interest savings. A second Democratic aide told Bloomberg the spending cuts in any new proposal also would be smaller, without giving an amount. Some lawmakers had hailed Republicans’ offer last week for $300 billion in tax increases as a breakthrough demonstrating new support in the party for higher taxes. After Democrats rejected the plan, talks stalled. Norquist, the Harvard-educated president of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), says that America’s difficult economic situation has only worsened under Obama’s leadership. “So he (Obama) can’t with a straight face say everything was going fine until Republicans took over and stopped letting him do what he wanted to do," Norquist said. "Everything was going to Hades up until the Republicans took over and they’ve improved a little bit since then actually.” Norquist started soliciting signers to the no-tax-increase pledge from state capitols to Capitol Hill in 1986 with the passage of the landmark Tax Reform Act. ATR currently has signatures from 238 House representatives, 41 Senators, 13 governors, and all of the GOP presidential candidates except former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman. Even as the national debt hit an all-time high of $15 trillion and continued rising this afternoon, most Americans also were skeptical that the congressional supercommittee could reach a deficit reduction agreement by its Thanksgiving eve deadline. “The Republicans could dance around naked and throw flowers out at them (Democrats) — and promise them their first born — and they would still reject it and vote no,” says Norquist of supercommittee Democrats. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid blames the no-tax hike pledge for stymying progress in the supercommittee, something which does not sit well with Norquist. “Harry Reid wants to raise taxes rather than reduce spending,” Norquist declares. “The taxpayer protection pledge that most members of the House of Representatives have signed, and 40 Republican senators have signed, is a commitment by the congressmen and the senators to their voters that they won’t raise taxes. It’s an important commitment and Harry Reid finds that commitment to voters to get in the way of his plans to trick the Republicans into raising taxes rather than cutting spending.” A failure of the 12-member supercommittee to reach an agreement by Nov. 23 would trigger an automatic $1.2 trillion in across-the-board spending cuts starting in 2013, evenly divided between defense and non-defense spending. To the average American, the $1.2 trillion in across-the-board cuts would have little or no impact, but would be the equivalent of $60 billion per year in reductions over 10 years. “It is a fraction of a fraction,” says Norquist of total government spending. “Now, are there more elegant ways to cut spending then simply across the board? Absolutely, but I’d rather cut spending $1.2 trillion across the board than not cut it at all. I’d certainly rather do that then raise taxes.” While some Republicans have made overtures to suggest that they would be willing to extend an olive branch to Democrats in the form of targeting certain tax breaks for millionaires and considering new net tax revenues, Norquist fully expects Republicans to keep their no-tax pledge. “These are public promises not private promises,” Norquist insists. “I think it would be difficult to imagine a Republican House of Representatives voting to enact a tax, not just voting for a tax increase. Every dollar of tax increase would be enacted in order to avoid reducing spending so you would have to actively say, ‘let me undermine the effort to reduce spending’ in order to increase taxes. I don’t know how many votes there are for that.” He says that Republicans have been “showing a little ankle on taxes in order to get radical tax reform” but such overtures have been soundly rejected by Democrats, who want to raise takes by $1 trillion, increase spending and count the expected savings from pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq in their total. “Now present plans by the government are not to occupy Iraq for the next decade so that’s hardly a real reduction in spending,” counters Norquist. “Since the Democrats’ position is so radically out of line with anything that Republicans could support, I don’t think we’re going to have an agreement.” Norquist also says that he would not support any deal to make the Bush-era tax cuts permanent if it provides a net increase in taxes. While some Republicans may have seemed “unreasonably open” to a tax increase, he says that Republicans ultimately must know that their Democratic colleagues are not truly open to reaching consensus within the supercommittee. “I find it a little hard to get in my heart mad at the Republicans for showing a little ankle when they know that this is a Kabuki operation because the Democrats plan to run out of the room screaming that they were mistreated,” he says. “You could make them tea and they’d run out of the room saying that you were beating them to death.” Norquist also broke ranks with Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn on the issue of a possible new form of alternative minimum tax for taxpayers earning more than $1 million per year. “Coburn’s plan is one for dramatic tax increases indefinitely into the future even though he would tell you, ‘I’m just going to kill this fly with the dynamite. It won’t affect anybody else in the building.’” © Newsmax. All rights reserved. Read more on Norquist: Democrats Sabotaging Supercommittee to Help Obama Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Obama and Pelosi deep in communist insider payoffs

Sen. Feinstein Loaded up on Biotech Stock Just Before Company Received $24 Million Gov’t Grant

While I agree that Wall Street deserves a lot blame, not all of it, these clowns down there are nothing but mostly hippies, socialists, communists, leftist dweebs, brooklyn hipsters, dopers, druggies, etc.

Why not privatize police and fire?

Minn. town to replace police with private security force By Kari Petrie and Kirsti Marohn, USA TODAY Updated 2d 9h ago Comments 66 Reprints & Permissions The central Minnesota town of Foley tried having its own police department and contracting with the county sheriff's department for law enforcement. Benton County Sheriff's Deputy Garth McFadden walks back to his car in October after making a traffic stop. Currently the City of Foley contracts with Benton County to provide policing services. By Kimm Anderson, St. Cloud (Minn.) Times Benton County Sheriff's Deputy Garth McFadden walks back to his car in October after making a traffic stop. Currently the City of Foley contracts with Benton County to provide policing services. Enlarge By Kimm Anderson, St. Cloud (Minn.) Times Benton County Sheriff's Deputy Garth McFadden walks back to his car in October after making a traffic stop. Currently the City of Foley contracts with Benton County to provide policing services. Ads by Google Police SchoolsRequest free Information from Police Training Schools Near You! Become A Security GuardEarn Your Homeland Security Degree For New Opportunites. Start Now! Police OfficerPolice Officer with an Online Phoenix Univ. Degree! Now, in an effort to save money, the city with a population of 2,600 is making a controversial move few others have done: Starting in January, it plans to employ a private security company to patrol its streets. Foley is believed to be the first town in Minnesota to replace its police force with private guards, according to the Minnesota attorney general's office. Nationwide, other cities have supplemented their traditional police with contracted officers, said John Firman, director of research for the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Firman said an entirely private security force is a new approach, and his organization hasn't gotten many calls from communities considering the idea. But as cities across the USA struggle with the economic downturn, more will look at innovative ways of providing public safety, Firman said. "For the first time in our history … police are no longer immune from budget cuts," he said. In Minnesota, 59 police departments have been dissolved or combined with other departments since 2000, according to the League of Minnesota Cities. Since it disbanded its police department in 2003, Foley has contracted with the Benton County Sheriff's Office to have three deputies patrol the city, providing coverage for about 17 hours a day. This year, the city paid $24,694 a month for the contract. After cuts in state aid and uncertainty about future funding, the Foley City Council started looking at options to save money on policing. The city decided to contract with General Security Services Corp. to provide 24-hour coverage starting in January for about $16,000 a month. GSSC has been in operation for 65 years, Vice President Jackson Hall said. The company has 3,800 employees securing 244 federal courthouses in 44 states. Bill Leoni, director of northern regions, said the company has had a number of contracts with cities to provide specific services. Foley is the first city that GSSC will provide a "full spectrum" of services, he said. Leoni said GSSC security officers go through extensive training comparable to police officers. They will carry firearms for their own protection and not to enforce laws, he said. The security officers will provide routine patrols and preventive work, things police don't always have time to do anymore, Leoni said. "They will provide a highly visible presence," he said. State and county officials say they have questions about how the security officers will operate and what the impact will be. In an Oct. 25 letter, Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson warned that the city is opening itself up to "financial exposure." She cited the potential for lawsuits for false imprisonment as one example. Swanson wrote that private security employees may carry a firearm but can use it only in self-defense. Private guards do not have the authority to make arrests other than citizens' arrests, cannot pursue fleeing suspects, make DWI arrests or even traffic stops. There's also the issue of whether self-incriminating statements or evidence taken from a suspect by a security officer could be used in court, she wrote. The IACP doesn't take a position on different policing models, but it does advise cities to plan ahead and not make rushed decisions, Firman said. What appears to be an immediate cost-saving measure may not save any money in the long run, he said. "What's driving it is the money, but what we're concerned about is the money doesn't hide the principal issues, which are officer safety and public safety," Firman said. Minnesota Sheriff's Association Executive Director James Franklin said the move raises basic questions on who pays for public safety. Because sheriff's departments are responsible for law enforcement throughout a county, Foley residents will have the benefit of deputies who will respond to emergencies and investigate crimes. Since cities use more police services than rural residents, it's a question of who should be paying for those services, Franklin said. "Are the rest of the taxpayers subsidizing the city of Foley?" Franklin said. "That's for the taxpayers to decide." Petrie and Marohn report for the St. Cloud (Minn.) Times.

Ghetto Thug Parasite/Street Leech Obama says American Businesses are lazy.

tcl matool configuration management vs puppet chef cfengine with monitoring and backup as a bonus to boot!

Yup, too many Obama nuthuggers on this board.

obama give bialout to kennedy to billions

Obama gave RFK, Jr. $1.4 Billion bailout for his solar company. WTF!!!

Obama gave RFK, Jr. $1.4 Billion bailout for his solar company. WTF!!! « on: Today at 10:08:58 AM » Robert Kennedy, Jr.’s ‘Green’ Company Scored $1.4 Billion Taxpayer Bailout by Wynton Hall President John F. Kennedy’s nephew, Robert Kennedy, Jr., netted a $1.4 billion bailout for his company, BrightSource, through a loan guarantee issued by a former employee-turned Department of Energy official. It’s just one more in a string of eye-opening revelations by investigative journalist and Breitbart editor Peter Schweizer in his explosive new book, Throw Them All Out. The details of how BrightSource managed to land its ten-figure taxpayer bailout have yet to emerge fully. However, one clue might be found in the person of Sanjay Wagle. Wagle was one of the principals in Kennedy’s firm who raised money for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. When Obama won the White House, Wagle was installed at the Department of Energy (DOE), advising on energy grants. From an objective vantage point, investing taxpayer monies in BrightSource was a risky proposition at the time. In 2010, BrightSource, whose largest shareholder is Kennedy’s VantagePoint Partners, was up to its eyes in $1.8 billion of debt obligations and had lost $71.6 million on its paltry $13.5 million of revenue. Even before BrightSource rattled its tin cup in front of Obama’s DOE, the company made it known publicly that its survival hinged on successfully completing the Ivanpah Solar Electrical System, which would become the largest solar plant in the world, on federal lands in California. In its Securities and Exchange Commission filings, BrightSource further underscored the risky nature of the Ivanpah venture and, more broadly, the company’s viability: Our future success depends on our ability to construct Ivanpah, our first utility-scale solar thermal power project, in a cost-effective and timely manner… Our ability to complete Ivanpah and the planning, development and construction of all three phases are subject to significant risk and uncertainty. Ironically, in 2008, Kennedy wrote a CNN article praising Obama as reminiscent of his famous father and uncle. The article, titled “Obama’s Energy Plan Would Create a Green Gold Rush,” proved prophetic. However, the “green gold rush” came in the form of $1.4 billion of taxpayers’ money flowing into the pet projects of rich venture capital investors like Kennedy, not average citizens. What’s more, BrightSource touted the Ivanpah project as a green jobs creator. Yet as its own website reveals, the thermal solar plant will only create 1,400 jobs at its peak construction and 650 jobs annually thereafter. Even using the peak estimate of 1,400 jobs, that works out to a cost to taxpayers of $1 million per job created. As Schweizer writes in Throw Them All Out, “A billion dollars in taxpayer money being sent to wealthy investors to bail them out of risky investments—does this sound familiar to anyone?”

iliad web framework for smalltalk

Ann Coulter kicking ass again: Romney is best to defeat obama, newt took fannie cash

If Not Romney, Who? If Not Now, When? by Ann Coulter 11/16/2011 121 Comments So now, apparently, we have to go through the cycle of the media pushing Newt Gingrich​. This is going to be fantastic. In addition to having an affair in the middle of Clinton's impeachment; apologizing to Jesse Jackson​ on behalf of J.C. Watts -- one of two black Republicans then in Congress –- for having criticized "poverty pimps," and then inviting Jackson to a State of the Union address; cutting a global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi​; supporting George Soros​' candidate Dede Scozzafava in a congressional special election; appearing in public with the Rev. Al Sharpton​ to promote nonspecific education reform; and calling Paul Ryan​'s plan to save Social Security "right-wing social engineering," we found out this week that Gingrich was a recipient of Freddie Mac political money. (Even I will admit, however, that Newt was great when he was chairman of GOPAC back in the '90s with Gay Gaines at the helm.) Although Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- the institutions most responsible for the nation's current financial crisis -- were almost entirely Democratic cash cows, they managed to dirty up enough Republicans to make it seem like bipartisan corruption. Democrats sucked hundreds of millions of dollars out of these institutions: Franklin Raines​, $90 million; Jamie Gorelick​, $26.4 million; Jim Johnson, $20 million. By contrast, Republicans came cheap. For the amazingly good price of only $300,000 apiece, Fannie and Freddie bought the good will of former Reps. Vin Weber​, R-Minn., Susan Molinari, R-N.Y., and Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.* Former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, R-N.Y., was even cheaper at $240,000. [*Correction: After Gingrich admitted last week to receiving $300,000 from Freddie, we found out this week that it was actually closer to $1.6 million.] So now conservatives shy away from denouncing these crooked organizations for fear of running into Vin Weber at a cocktail party. Sorry, guys -- on the plus side, you're millionaires, but on the downside, you've earned the contempt of your fellow man. The mainstream media keep pushing alternatives to Mitt Romney​ not only because they are terrified of running against him, but also because they want to keep Republicans fighting, allowing Democrats to get a four-month jump on us. Meanwhile, everyone knows the nominee is going to be Romney. That's not so bad if you think the most important issues in this election are defeating Obama and repealing Obamacare. There may be better ways to stop Obamacare than Romney, but, unfortunately, they're not available right now. (And, by the way, where were you conservative purists when Republicans were nominating Waterboarding-Is-Torture-Jerry-Falwell-Is-an-Agent-of-Intolerance-My-Good-Friend-Teddy-Kennedy-Amnesty-for-Illegals John McCain​-Feingold for president?) Among Romney's positives is the fact that he has a demonstrated ability to trick liberals into voting for him. He was elected governor of Massachusetts -- one of the most liberal states in the union -- by appealing to Democrats, independents and suburban women. He came close to stopping the greatest calamity to befall this nation since Pearl Harbor by nearly beating Teddy Kennedy in a Senate race. (That is when he said a lot of the things about which he's since "changed his mind.") If he had won, we'd be carving his image on Mount Rushmore​. He is not part of the Washington establishment, so he won't be caught taking money from Freddie Mac or cutting commercials with Nancy Pelosi. Also, Romney will be the first Republican presidential nominee since Ronald Reagan​ who can talk. Liberals are going to have to dust off their playbook from 30 years ago to figure out how to run against a Republican who isn't a tongue-tied marble-mouth. As we've known for years, his negatives are: Romneycare and Mormonism. We look forward with cheery anticipation to an explosion of news stories on some of the stranger aspects of Mormonism. The articles have already been written, but they're not scheduled for release until the day Romney wraps up the nomination. Inasmuch as the Democrats' only argument for the big-eared beanpole who's nearly wrecked the country is that you must be a racist if you oppose Obama, one assumes a lot of attention will be lavished on the Mormon Church's historical position on blacks. Church founder Joseph Smith​ said blacks had the curse of Cain on them and banned blacks from the priesthood, a directive that was not revoked until 1978. There's no evidence that this was a policy fiercely pushed by Mitt Romney. To the contrary, when his father, George Romney, was governor of Michigan, he was the most pro-civil rights elected official in the entire country, far ahead of any Democrat. No one is worried Romney will double-cross us on repealing Obamacare. We worry that Romneycare will make it harder for him to get elected. But, again, Romney is the articulate Republican. He's already explained how mandating health insurance in one particular wealthy, liberal Northeastern state is different from inflicting it on the entire country. Our Constitution establishes a federalist system that allows experimentation with different ideas in the individual states. As governor, Romney didn't have the ability to change federal laws requiring hospital emergency rooms to treat every illegal alien, drug dealer and vagrant who walked in the door, then sending the bill to taxpayers. (Although David Axelrod, Michelle Obama​, Eric Whitaker and Valerie Jarrett​ did figure out a way to throw poor blacks out of the University of Chicago Medical Center.) The Heritage Foundation, a leading conservative think tank, supported Romneycare at the time. The biggest warning sign should have been that Gingrich supported it, too. Most important, Romney has said -- forcefully and repeatedly -- that his first day in office he will issue a 50-state waiver from Obamacare and will then seek a formal repeal. Romney is not going to get to the White House and announce, "The first thing I'm going to do is implement that fantastic national health care plan signed by my pal, Barack!" Unlike all other major legislation in the nation's history, Obamacare was narrowly passed along partisan lines by an aberrationally large one-party majority in Congress. (Thanks, McCain supporters!) Not one single Republican in Congress voted for it, not even John McCain. Obamacare is going to be repealed -- provided only that a Republican wins the next presidential election. If a Republican does not win, however, it will never be repealed. Recall that, in order to boast about the amazing revenue savings under Obamacare, Democrats had to configure the bill so that the taxes to pay for it start right away, but the goodies don't kick in until 2014. Once people are thrown off their insurance plans and are forced to depend on the government for "free" health care, Obamacare is here to stay. (And Newt Gingrich will be calling plans to tinker with it "right-wing social engineering.") Instead of sitting on our thumbs, wishing Ronald Reagan were around, or chasing the latest mechanical rabbit flashed by the media, conservatives ought to start rallying around Romney as the only Republican who has a shot at beating Obama. We'll attack him when he's president. It's fun to be a purist, but let's put that on hold until Obama and his abominable health care plan are gone, please.

WH Scrambles to Sneak Fix for 'Major Glitch' in Obamacare

WH Scrambles to Sneak Fix for 'Major Glitch' in Obamacare Wednesday, 16 Nov 2011 12:50 PM By Andra Varin Share: More . . . A A | Email Us | Print | Forward Article inShare A “major glitch” in President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare legislation could derail Obamacare, and the administration is trying desperately to sneak a fix into the package without going through Congress, according to an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal. The problem surrounds “premium assistance,” which gives tax credits and subsidies to households that buy insurance through new health insurances exchanges, Jonathan H. Adler and Michael F. Cannon write in the Op-Ed. “This assistance was designed to hide a portion of the law's cost to individuals by reducing the premium hikes that individuals will face after Obamacare goes into effect in 2014,” Adler and Cannon write. The law encourages states to form these health insurance exchanges but says the federal government can institute them if the states don’t. The premium assistance is authorized only for state-run exchanges, not federal ones. “In other words, states that refuse to create an exchange can block much of Obamacare's spending and practically force Congress to reopen the law for revision,” the authors write. In an attempt to “avoid that legislative debacle,” the administration has proposed an Internal Revenue Service rule that would allow premium assistance for both state and federally funded insurance exchanges. That won’t fly, Adler and Cannon contend, arguing: “The text of the law is perfectly clear. And without congressional authorization, the IRS lacks the power to dispense tax credits or spend money.” Read more on White House Scrambles to Sneak Fix for 'Major Glitch' in Obamacare Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

tired old hags with boob jobs trying be hot still lol all poor n cheap

to the post office: cut pay and end pensions

U.S. Postal Service loses $5.1 billion in fiscal 2011 inShare Share this Email Print Analysis & Opinion Cutting the ratings agencies the tiniest bit of slack Medicare Part B premium hike will be smaller than expected Related Topics U.S. » Postal Clerk Barry Johnson, 54, joins postal workers in a national day of protest against plans to close thousands of post offices, eliminate Saturday delivery, close mail processing facilities, cut service, and lay off 120,000 employees, in Los Angeles, California September 27, 2011. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson WASHINGTON | Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:26pm EST (Reuters) - The U.S. Postal Service, recording a net loss of $5.1 billion for its 2011 year, warned on Tuesday that it could run out of cash by the end of fiscal 2012 if Congress did not offer relief. The rise of e-mail and online bill payments combined with the recession drove total mail volume down 3 billion pieces, or 1.7 percent, from 2010, the agency said in a statement. Operating revenue for the 2011 fiscal year ended September 30 was $65.7 billion, down 2.1 percent from 2010. A key reason for the decline is that revenue from First Class Mail, the Postal Service's most profitable product, fell 5.8 percent, overwhelming gains in shipping services and Standard Mail. Officials said during a Postal Service Board of Governors meeting on Tuesday that the agency could run out of cash by the end of fiscal year 2012. "To return to profitability, we must reduce our annual costs by $20 billion by the end of 2015," Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe said in a statement. "We continue to take aggressive cost-cutting actions in areas under our control and urgently need Congress to do its part to get us the rest of the way there," Donahoe said. The agency's total expenses for 2011 were $70.6 billion, much lower than $75.4 billion in 2010. The agency is reviewing 3,700 post offices and hundreds of processing facilities for possible closure and pausing biweekly payments into a federal retirement program, and it announced a one-cent boost in stamp prices starting in 2012. Officials have asked lawmakers to let it end Saturday mail delivery, spin off its retirement and health programs, and renegotiate union contracts. But the agency says it has limited ability to restructure and may need to cut more than 220,000 more workers by 2015, many through layoffs. The agency's loss reported on Tuesday did not include a $5.5 billion payment to prefund retiree health benefits, which was extended by Congress to November 18 to help conserve cash. Donahoe has said the agency will default on the payment if it is not extended again. A stopgap bill proposed this week to fund the federal government for another month would give the agency until mid-December to make the payment, a congressional staffer said on Tuesday. (Reporting by Emily Stephenson; editing by Philip Barbara)

“The argument is: If government controlled fewer things, this would happen less often. There’d be fewer opportunities for these people to profit at government’s expense.

Breitbart’s Big House The conservative media firestarter opens up shop in Washington with a major story to sell. By David Weigel|Posted Monday, Nov. 14, 2011, at 7:15 PM ET 26 Is this a break from the usual Big Government/Big Journalism method? That’s a question for Joel Pollak, a former Republican candidate for Congress, the editor of the Big blogs since September. (Breitbart is the sites’ publisher.) He made the rounds at the house party, passing on little hints of what the site will do next, why it’s all-in on the Schweizer stories. “It’s bipartisan but conservative,” explained Pollak. “The argument is: If government controlled fewer things, this would happen less often. There’d be fewer opportunities for these people to profit at government’s expense. I think this book can start a debate on those terms. Look, it doesn’t shy away from attacking Republicans. If anything, it kind of taps into some of the fervor that should be motivating Occupy Wall Street. This is corruption at the highest level.” Before 60 Minutes started, Breitbart gave a couple of reporters a tour of the house. The spacious guest room at the front has a massive, well-lit painting of the 16th president, so it’s naturally become the “Lincoln bedroom.” The walls in the living room are painted with a pretty Mediterranean scene; they blend nicely with a photo of a soldier deployed in Iraq, posing in one of Saddam Hussein’s vacant thrones. (It’s Steve Bannon’s daughter.) Past the kitchen is a carriage house that Breitbart plans to use. Advertisement “This is where I’m going to do my tweeting,” he said. When the show started, so did Breitbart’s MacBook Air. There’s footage of 60 Minutes reporter Steve Kroft grilling Nancy Pelosi at a press conference. The Kroft story didn’t hit on everything Breitbart, Schweizer, and the rest of the Big editors plan to use. It did enough. “Damning, damning!” laughed Breitbart when footage of a frustrated Nancy Pelosi came onscreen. Kroft went into the Bachus story, detailing some of the options the congressman traded during the 2008 meltdown. In the carriage house, Breitbart moved his computer so that reporters could see his latest tweet. Step down, Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Al)! You are a disgrace. MORE DETAILS COMING AT @BIGGOVT Breitbart kept the computer open, tweeting and retweeting, trying to build a critical mass of followers who agree with him. It has worked before. Back in the main house, Schweizer was politely accepting kudos, as low-key as Breitbart isn’t. 60 Minutes “did a good job,” he said. “I wish that they’d gone into more detail on the Bachus stuff, but they only had so much time.” He later left for New York, where he was on the Monday morning shows on CBS, ABC, and NBC. The rest of Breitbart’s team stuck around the house, phones and MacBooks open, working the story.

White House opposes balanced-budget amendment Nov 15 04:17 PM US/Eastern

White House opposes balanced-budget amendment Nov 15 04:17 PM US/Eastern By JIM ABRAMS Associated Press Comments (2) Email to a friend Share on Facebook Tweet this Bookmark and Share WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration says it strongly opposes a balanced-budget amendment heading for a House vote this week, saying it could result in job losses and severe cuts to essential programs such as Medicare and Social Security. The White House, in a statement, says a balanced-budget amendment would force the government to raise taxes and cut spending during economic downturns, accelerating job losses. The House is to vote by the end of the week on a proposed constitutional amendment barring Congress from spending more than it receives in revenues. The vote is expected to be close in the House, but faces a tougher road in the Senate. Amendments must be approved by two-thirds majorities in the House and Senate and be ratified by three-fourths of state legislatures.

November 15, 2011 Solyndra Emails Show The Administration Pushed Them To Keep Layoffs Quiet Until After 2010 Elections

November 15, 2011 Solyndra Emails Show The Administration Pushed Them To Keep Layoffs Quiet Until After 2010 Elections I Question The Timing. We are the corrupt hacks we've been waiting for. The Obama administration urged officers of the struggling solar company Solyndra to postpone announcing planned layoffs until after the November 2010 midterm elections, newly released e-mails show. ... Solyndra’s chief executive warned the Energy Department on Oct. 25, 2010, that he intended to announce worker layoffs Oct. 28. He said he was spurred by numerous calls from reporters and potential investors about rumors the firm was in financial trouble and was planning to lay off workers and close one of its two plants. But in an Oct. 30, 2010, e-mail, advisers to Solyndra’s primary investor, Argonaut Equity, explain that the Energy Department had strongly urged the company to put off the layoff announcement until Nov. 3. The midterm elections were held Nov. 2, and led to Republicans taking control of the U.S. House of Representatives. “DOE continues to be cooperative and have indicated that they will fund the November draw on our loan (app. $40 million) but have not committed to December yet,” a Solyndra investor adviser wrote Oct. 30. “They did push very hard for us to hold our announcement of the consolidation to employees and vendors to Nov. 3rd – oddly they didn’t give a reason for that date.” That's bad enough. It would be even worse if that second loan was made with the expectation Solyndra was going to fail, and the administration knew it would lose the money, but loaned another $75 million only for purposes of pushing off the bankruptcy until after the election. Steven Chu is being questioned by Congress on Thursday. Thanks to Slublog. Jonathan Altar Hardest Hit: rockmom is laughing at Altar's recent piece about how Obama's managed to stay so untainted by scandal. And how he dismissed Solyndra as not a scandal at all, so suck on that, wingers.

PICKET: New book shows how Soros set up and financially benefited from '09 stimulus

PICKET: New book shows how Soros set up and financially benefited from '09 stimulus 3 Comments and 0 Reactions|ShareTweet|Email|Print| ← return to Water Cooler By Kerry Picket Published on November 14, 2011, 01:01PM Peter Schweizer, a Hoover Institution fellow, explores in his new book, "Throw Them All Out" how Capitol Hill lawmakers financially benefit from their own legislation and manage to sidestep insider information laws. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is under fire for allegedly buying $1 million to $5 million of Visa stock during the credit card company's initial public offering (IPO) phase and later blocked credit card legislation reform two years later. As a result, her investment took off 203 percent. Big Government's Wynton Hall writes: Despite Pelosi’s consistent railing against credit card companies, on March 18, 2008, the Pelosis bought between $1 million and $5 million (politicians do not have to report the exact amounts, only ranges) worth of Visa stock at the IPO price of $44 per share. Two days later, the stock price rocketed to $65 per share, yielding a 50% profit. The Pelosis then bought Visa twice more. By their third purchase on June 4, 2008, Visa was worth $85 per share. How did Nancy Pelosi snag one of the most coveted initial public offerings in history? The facts are still emerging. Yet according to Schweizer, corporations that wish to build congressional allies will sometimes hand-pick members of Congress to receive IPOs. Pelosi received her Visa IPO almost two weeks after a potentially damaging piece of legislation for Visa, the Credit Card Fair Fee Act, had been introduced in the House. If passed, the bill would have cut into Visa’s profits substantially by lowering so-called “interchange fees,” the 1% to 3% charge retailers pay Visa when customers use Visa cards for purchases. Interchange fees are a critical source of revenue for the four credit card companies–$48 billion in 2008, to be exact.If the Credit Card Fair Fee Act had been passed into effect, it would have amended antitrust laws to require credit card companies to enter negotiations with merchants over interchange fees, and it would have given the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission the power to arbitrate if the two sides failed to come to an agreement. For that reason, Visa and the other credit card companies strongly opposed the bill. It is not just the lawmakers on Capitol Hill who can make a killing. Their rich and powerful cronies can also financially benefit from intel they receive from Washington D.C. politicians. According to Schweizer's book, George Soros made his way into the Obama White House by becoming one of candidate Obama's "first big catches." Mr. Soros donated more than $60,000 to Obama's 2004 Senate campaign and helped build the Obama 2008 war chest substantially. Soros gained amazing access to the president and the president's economic agenda immediately after the 2008 election, according to Schweizer, who writes in his book: "Days after President Obama was elected, Soros was helping to set the agenda. Soros had regular meetings with senior White House officials. He met with Obama’s top economist, Larry Summers,on February 25, 2009. He also had meetings in the Old Executive Office Building with senior officials on March 24 and 25 asthe stimulus was being forged. He was later involved in private discussions concerning widespread financial reform." "Soros was also a financial backer of the Center for American Progress, which functioned as Obama’s think tank. John Podesta,who headed CAP, was Obama’s transition director. Several CAP policy ideas became part of Obama’s agenda. Soros said at the time, 'I think we need a large stimulus package, which will provide funds for state and local government to maintain their budgets, because they are not allowed by the constitution to run a deficit. For such a program to be successful, the federal government would need to provide hundreds of billions of dollars. In addition, another infrastructure program is necessary. In total, the cost would be in the 300 to 600 billion dollar range.'” Schweizer found that after "tens of billions" of tax payer dollars were invested in the Democrat backed 2009 stimulus package, in the first quarter of 2009, Soros made a financial windfall by investing in stimulus winners like: Hologic, a maker of diagnostic equipment, which gained from federal funding of medical systems, Emulex, a government contractor that designs fiber channels and software products, and EMC, a data storage company. I spoke with Schweizer on Sunday night about his book and asked about how the rich and powerful can legally obtain insider information from insider Capitol Hill activity and financially benefit. Schweizer calls the scheme that Steve Eisman, Warren Buffett, and Soros use the "Baptist and bootlegger strategy." "What a lot of these guys do like Buffett and Soros or Eisman, in the case of for-profit education, is present themselves as reformers. They present these grand ideas and they're sort of statesman who are just interested in improving the situation in our country, but the reality is, as I point out in the book, at the same time, they're often aggressively trading stocks," Schweizer said. As I have covered in previous Water Cooler posts, Steve Eisman, a New York hedge fund manager, was brought forth to Capitol Hill to testify before Senator Tom Harkin’s Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee to support the Department of Education's Gainful Employment (GOE) rule. Supporters of the GOE rule and of Eisman will say he was needed at the hearings, because Eisman provided valuable warnings and insight about the mortgage crisis. Many said Mr. Eisman was only trying to help the country stave off another financial crisis that would stem from the student loan defaults in the for profit school industry. His participation in the hearings have been severely questioned, though, as the education regulation would financially cripple for profit schools. Evidence that the D.C. based organization CREW found showed that Mr. Eisman was short-selling for-profit schools. If these schools failed he would financially profit. Congressman Darrell Issa, California Republican, and Senator Mike Enzi, Wyoming Republican, urged the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) to probe into whether or not there were any laws broken, but the SEC has yet to act. "The Senate confirms the SEC commissioner and they set the budgets for the SEC," says Schweizer who thinks the model of having the SEC investigate such matters is unworkable. "Warren Buffett, for example during the financial crisis, helped establish the public-private partnership and at the same time, that was going to bail out banks and he helped design it. As he was doing it, he was buying billions of shares in bank stocks," Schweizer added. Schweizer also explained that Buffett financially profited off the bank stock investments, and it was completely legal, "because for some reason if you do this with government money or with government institutions it's okay. But were he to do that in a scenario with a merger taking place, he would face insider trading laws."

Wisconsin’s Thompson Is Tea Party’s Top GOP Target

Wisconsin’s Thompson Is Tea Party’s Top GOP Target Tuesday, 15 Nov 2011 03:10 PM By Newsmax Wires Share: More . . . A A | Email Us | Print | Forward Article inShare The tea party has made former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson its top Republican target of the 2012 Senate races, The Hill reports. Many grass-roots conservatives are backing GOP Rep. Mark Neumann’s campaign against Thompson. So far, tea partyers haven’t been able to find strong like-minded challengers to run against moderate incumbent GOP senators such as Olympia Snowe of Maine, Bob Corker of Tennessee, Orrin Hatch of Utah, and Dick Lugar of Indiana. Neumann may represent conservatives’ best hope to defeat a heavyweight Republican who doesn’t hew closely enough to the conservative line. Tea partyers are perhaps most upset with the fact that Thompson supported early versions of President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform effort. However, several tea party groups haven’t come out for Neumann yet. Read more on Wisconsin’s Thompson Is Tea Party’s Top GOP Target Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Rolling out a plan to overhaul Washington, the Texas governor also calls for requiring a two-thirds vote in Congress for any tax increases. He also would halt all proposed federal regulations.

Perry Calls for Government Overhaul Tuesday, 15 Nov 2011 11:30 AM Share: More . . . A A | Email Us | Print | Forward Article inShare BETTENDORF, Iowa — Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry says if elected he would end lifetime appointments for federal judges and slash the pay for members of Congress in half. Rolling out a plan to overhaul Washington, the Texas governor also calls for requiring a two-thirds vote in Congress for any tax increases. He also would halt all proposed federal regulations. Perry claims his plan is far more aggressive than any of the other Republicans who are challenging him for right to go up against President Barack Obama next November. Editor’s Note: Rick Perry Is Fed Up, Find Out Why. He says his plan would jumpstart the economy. Perry discussed his ideas at a heating and cooling company in Iowa on Tuesday. © Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Read more on Perry Calls for Government Overhaul Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Newt 2012Yesterday in Des Moines, Iowa, Speaker Gingrich lambasted the concept of the super committee as a “maniacally stupid” idea.

Dear Friend and Supporter, Newt 2012Yesterday in Des Moines, Iowa, Speaker Gingrich lambasted the concept of the super committee as a “maniacally stupid” idea. “We should reject any effort to blackmail us into accepting a dumb idea on the grounds that in July we accepted an even dumber idea.” The current model, with the prospect of $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts if no agreement is reached, will lead to really bad and destructive decisions. It is as though someone said: "I will be forced to shoot you in the head unless you let me cut off your leg." Speaker Gingrich is in a unique position to criticize the super committee because during his tenure as Speaker, the federal government balanced the budget for four straight years, paid off more than $400 billion in publicly held debt, reformed welfare, and lowered taxes to stimulate economic growth. This fiscal discipline and government reform liberated the American people to create 11 million new jobs. Furthermore, after four years of Newt’s leadership, the 10-year projected deficit of $2.7 trillion turned into a projection of $2.3 trillion in surplus! Speaker Gingrich’s bold plan will tackle the budget crisis through growth and innovation and includes five substantive policies: Block Granting Means-Tested Welfare Programs to the States: Block granting Medicaid and other means-tested welfare programs to the states could save up to $3.25 trillion for the federal government and $1.4 trillion for the states over the next decade. New Revenue from Oil and Natural Gas Development and Opening Up Federal Lands for Development: A study released by Wood Mackenzie notes that increasing access to American oil and natural gas could bring in over $800 billion in new government revenues by 2030. Save Billions by Reforming the FDA and Investing in New Research: In the 21st Century Contract with America, Speaker Gingrich outlined this plan to reform the FDA to expedite the time it takes a medical breakthrough to reach a patient, as well as giving a new emphasis to researching and understanding how the human brain works. Independent estimates find that the combined public and private cost of Alzheimer's alone will reach $20 trillion dollars over the next four decades. Making investments today that could delay the onset of the disease by only five years could save between $5 and $10 trillion in both private and public spending between now and 2050. Save $5 Trillion Over Ten Years through Lean Six Sigma: Lean Six Sigma is a management technique utilized by companies like Motorola and Boeing to streamline and improve efficiency in their manufacturing processes. If applied across the entire federal government, some estimate it could save $500 billion a year or $5 trillion over a ten-year period. Attack Fraud in Medicare and Medicaid: The Center for Health Transformation estimates there is between $70 and $120 billion in fraud annually in Medicare and Medicaid. By employing fraud detection techniques utilized by credit card companies, we could save between $700 billion and $1.2 trillion in the next ten years. This plan is far more thorough and sophisticated than anything proposed by any other candidate for president, and it's exactly what America needs at this very moment. With the very real problems this country faces, we need a president with the knowledge, experience, and leadership to enact a plan to restore some sanity to the government's budgetary process! That's why I'm asking you to stand with Newt today. Please, invest in this campaign - and the future of America - by making a generous contribution today. We know that every contribution is a sacrifice, and all of us at Newt 2012 are humbled daily by your continued support. Thank You, RC Hammond Press Secretary Newt 2012