Showing posts with label Pelosi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pelosi. Show all posts

Friday, January 08, 2010

By their own calculations, Democrats risking 25 million American lives

Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D-Lame Duck) and President Barack Obama like to claim that 14,000 U.S. citizens lose their health care insurance each and every day.

On a rare Saturday session of the Senate in November of 2009, Senator Judd Gregg (R-NV) called out the fraud inherent to the Democrat health care bill.

[Democrats] continue to claim this bill costs about $800 billion... [but] that is a totally dishonest number... The way that number was arrived at was that they don’t start spending money on this bill until the fourth or the fifth year. They couldn’t get the score they wanted from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), so they changed the starting point. They moved back another year in the ten-year cycle. They went from four years to five years as to the starting point of most of the spending in this bill...

What they don’t tell the American people is they’re not spending anything in the first four or five years of the bill... They do cut Medicare throughout the ten-year period. But they don’t spend the money. They don’t start the spending programs until the year 2014, when this bill is fully phased in, when all these new programs, these massive expansion of entitlements are created, these brand-new entitlements. When all this new spending occurs, this bill will cost $2.5 trillion over that ten-year period.

Bernard Madoff would be proud.

The question any rational person would ask is this: if health care reform is so urgent that 14,000 people a day are risking death for lack of health insurance, why would Democrats wait five years to begin the program, thereby putting 25 million Americans at risk?

Oh -- I can answer that question. Because they lie. Incessantly, continually and habitually. They lie about everyone and everything. Because if they told the truth, they could no more win public office than Michael Moore could endorse SlimFast.

 

Tuesday, January 05, 2010

Welcome to CaliCare

Due to its lax immigration policies and easy access to welfare -- factors that indisputably increase crime rates -- California now spends more on its prisons than on the entire ten campus University of California system.

In 2001, California spent $680 million on medical services for its prisoners.

In 2004, California spent in excess of $1 billion for prisoners' health care services.

Last year, California spent $3 billion on health care for its prisoners.

In other words, over the last eight years, health care costs for California's single-payer prison system have more than quadrupled.

Yet in a June speech, President Obama justified a government takeover of the entire health care system with an observation on rising costs. He stated, "...more and more Americans are forced to worry about not just getting well, but whether they can afford to get well. Millions more wonder if they can afford the routine care necessary to stay well. Even for those who have health insurance, rising premiums are straining family budgets to the breaking point—premiums that have doubled over the last nine years..."

Compare and contrast: over the last eight years, costs for California's single-payer prison health care system -- controlled by Democrats for decades and heavily laced with unions at every level of government -- have increased more than four times.

The costs of premiums for the private health care system -- with all of its innovation and access to the latest drugs, diagnostic tests, advanced equipment and research, have only doubled in nine years.

Government can't possibly run things better than the free market. And California's prison health care system is just a microcosm of what we can expect.

And something else for seniors to consider: the costs for their care will compete with the health care costs of the federal prison system. And, if California is any indication, the prisoners' medical will come before seniors. There's only so much of taxpayers' money to go around.

Welcome to CaliCare. It's the Democrat Utopia of California translated to the entire freaking United States.

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Which kind of infrastructure is most important?

As the government contemplates trillions in new bailout spending, it is worth considering real infrastructure projects. And there is no infrastructure quite as important as that which undergirds the two-parent family.

Consider that, of 23 peer-reviewed U.S. studies since 2000, 20 found that family structure directly affects crime and/or delinquency.

"[R]esearch strongly suggests both that young adults and teens raised in single-parent homes are more likely to commit crimes, and that communities with high rates of family fragmentation (especially unwed childbearing) suffer higher crime rates as a result."

For example, a 23-year study found that nearly 90% of the change in violent crime rates can be attributed to the change in percentages of out-of-wedlock births (divorce rates, on the other hand, had no relationship with crime).

In The Atlantic Monthly, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead noted that the "relationship [between single-parent families and crime] is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shows up time and again in the literature. The nation's mayors, as well as police officers, social workers, probation officers, and court officials, consistently point to family break up as the most important source of rising rates of crime."

In addition, the statistical link between the availability of welfare and out-of-wedlock births is conclusive. There have been dozens of studies that link the availability of welfare benefits to out-of-wedlock birth.

One study found that a 50 percent increase in the value of AFDC and foodstamp payments led to a 43 percent increase in the number of out-of-wedlock births.

Research for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services showed that a 50 percent increase in the monthly value of combined AFDC and food stamp benefits led to a 117 percent increase in the crime rate among young black men.

In 1995 Dr. Patrick Fagan wrote a seminal summary of the situation: "Over the past thirty years, the rise in violent crime parallels the rise in families abandoned by fathers... High-crime neighborhoods are characterized by high concentrations of families abandoned by fathers... The rate of violent teenage crime corresponds with the number of families abandoned by fathers... Neighborhoods with a high degree of religious practice are not high-crime neighborhoods... Even in high-crime inner-city neighborhoods, well over 90 percent of children from safe, stable homes do not become delinquents. By contrast only 10 percent of children from unsafe, unstable homes in these neighborhoods avoid crime... Criminals capable of sustaining marriage gradually move away from a life of crime after they get married."

But what caused the breakdown of the American family? There are certainly many factors, but the welfare system; glorification of the single-parent household; and ill-conceived legislation are among the chief culprits.

Welfare: In 1994 the Maryland NAACP published a report that concluded "the ready access to a lifetime of welfare and free social service programs is a major contributory factor to the crime problems we face today."

Author Robert Rector argued that "[f]or thirty years, the welfare system has paid for non­work and non­marriage and has achieved massive increases in both." Rector noted that when New Jersey began denying increases in cash welfare benefits to single mothers who have additional children while on welfare, out-of-wedlock births decreased 10% with no increase in abortions.

Glorification of single-parent households: During a 1994 commencement address at George Washington University First Lady Hillary Clinton stated, "If it ever did, [the American family] no longer does consist of two parents, a dog, a house with a white picket fence, and a station wagon in the driveway."

In 1992 Vice President Dan Quayle ignited a media kerfuffle by criticizing the character of Murphy Brown for raising a child out of wedlock without any discernible father figure. Though mocked for months in the press, Quayle's words now seem prescient: It doesn't help matters when primetime TV has Murphy Brown, a character who supposedly epitomizes today's intelligent, highly paid professional woman, mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice.

Furthermore, "Feminist" organizations have long opposed measures to reduce single-parent families and revamp welfare accordingly.

But even more important than Hollywood, the media and feminist efforts to glorify single-parent households, legislation played a critical role in the breakdown of the family.

Legislation: Tax law hits married couples directly in their wallets. Studies have determined that the "marriage penalty" disincentivizes both marriage and labor, since "[the] best approach to appear to have a lower family income is to not have an employed spouse in the home."

Research shows that tax and transfer programs have a direct effect on marital stability. Financial stress contributes heavily to family problems, including marital difficulties that can lead to divorce. Therefore, tax policies that penalize married couples by increasing their tax liabilities, contribute directly to the breakdown of families.

Tax policies of the 1940s provided a family-oriented tax structure which preceded the sustained prosperity and social stability of the 1950s and early 1960s. During this time period, the rate of divorce actually declined.

Social researcher Allan Carlson proposed a variety of pro-­family tax policies, saying "a tax code recognizes that tax structure does influence human behavior. It would help children and strengthen families."

Other experts have offered a series of legislative proposals that strengthen the family, including: (a) identifying every child's father, by having states ensure that a document exists at birth to identify the name and social security number of both parents; (b) forcing fathers to take responsibility for their children through programs like Charles Ballard's National Institute for Responsible Fatherhood, in which fathers are strongly encouraged to legitimate their children, attend school, and find gainful employment; (c) rescind no-­fault divorce laws for parents with children; and (d) eradicate the destructive incentives of the welfare system.

Put simply, Congress can pave the way through intelligent legislation based on data, not opinion. If government is going to spend hundreds of billions on "infrastructure projects", no infrastructure is as important as that which underpins the two-parent American family.


Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Is that a Hockey Stick in your graph, or you just happy to see me?

Legacy media has relentlessly marketed the incipient recovery, the end of the recession and the successful culmination of Democrat austerity measures. That last part was a joke. No better evidence of these campaigns are today's headlines highlighting "stable" housing prices:

WaPo: ...U.S. home prices were unchanged in October, according to the widely watched Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller indexes released on Tuesday, indicating stabilization in the hard-hit housing sector...

LAT: "On a month-to-month bases, we are certainly slowing down in terms of the numbers we had seen previously," said Michael D. Larson, a housing analyst with Weiss Research. But "the story remains the same: Housing is not in some huge epic rebound, but nor is it falling apart anymore -- stabilization is clear."

Of course, it takes a special kind of journalistic prowess to omit and ignore the real story of the day.

Fannie Mae: Delinquencies Increase Sharply in October

Fannie Mae reported today that the rate of serious delinquencies - at least 90 days behind - for conventional loans in its single-family guarantee business increased to 4.98% in October, up from 4.72% in September - and up from 1.89% in October 2008.


Now that right there is whatcha call a real hockey stick.
...Just more evidence of the growing delinquency problem, although it is important to note these stats do include Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) loans in trial modifications (and the trial modification periods have been extended again).

What this really means is that the various central-planning efforts of the big government Democrats -- from Fannie Mae, to the FHA, to HAMP -- represent a stunning series of increasingly costly failures that our children and grandchildren will have to somehow pay off. With interest.

As for analysis, you need not wait for legacy media to catch up. In short, the biggest predictor of mortgage defaults is negative equity. The more underwater you are on your loan, the better chance you have of walking away from the home. The fact that more loans (even in HAMP) are going late indicates a deflationary housing spiral is still underway. Foreclosures hurt home values; lower valuations lead to more folks underwater; which leads to more foreclosures... ad infinitum.

And despite all of these many and varied failures, legacy media looks askance while helping to sell the same big government, Politburo-style plans to nationalize one-sixth of the economy. I can't wait for the Harvard Case Study on the death of the liberal media. At this rate, it could be ready by the fall semester of 2011.


Monday, December 28, 2009

Judicial Watch Announces Most Corrupt Politicians of 2009 Awards (Rangel Quote: 'You Like Me, You Really Like Me!')

Judicial Watch has announced its prestigious Most Corrupt Politicians of 2009 Awards and, disappointingly for Howard Dean, Democrats only batted 90%. The top ten:

1. Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT):  This marks two years in a row for Senator Dodd, who made the 2008 “Ten Most Corrupt” list for his corrupt relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and for accepting preferential treatment and loan terms from Countrywide Financial, a scandal which still dogs him.  In 2009, the scandals kept coming for the Connecticut Democrat.  In 2009, Judicial Watch filed a Senate ethics complaint against Dodd for undervaluing a property he owns in Ireland on his Senate Financial Disclosure forms.  Judicial Watch's complaint forced Dodd to amend the forms.  However, press reports suggest the property to this day remains undervalued.  Judicial Watch also alleges in the complaint that Dodd obtained a sweetheart deal for the property in exchange for his assistance in obtaining a presidential pardon (during the Clinton administration) and other favors for a long-time friend and business associate.  The false financial disclosure forms were part of the cover-up.  Dodd remains the head the Senate Banking Committee.

2. Senator John Ensign (R-NV):  A number of scandals popped up in 2009 involving public officials who conducted illicit affairs, and then attempted to cover them up with hush payments and favors, an obvious abuse of power.  The year’s worst offender might just be Nevada Republican Senator John Ensign.  Ensign admitted in June to an extramarital affair with the wife of one of his staff members, who then allegedly obtained special favors from the Nevada Republican in exchange for his silence.  According to The New York Times:  “The Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee are expected to conduct preliminary inquiries into whether Senator John Ensign violated federal law or ethics rules as part of an effort to conceal an affair with the wife of an aide…”  The former staffer, Douglas Hampton, began to lobby Mr. Ensign's office immediately upon leaving his congressional job, despite the fact that he was subject to a one-year lobbying ban.  Ensign seems to have ignored the law and allowed Hampton lobbying access to his office as a payment for his silence about the affair.  (These are potentially criminal offenses.)   It looks as if Ensign misused his public office (and taxpayer resources) to cover up his sexual shenanigans.

3. Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA):  Judicial Watch is investigating a $12 million TARP cash injection provided to the Boston-based OneUnited Bank at the urging of Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank.  As reported in the January 22, 2009, edition of the Wall Street Journal, the Treasury Department indicated it would only provide funds to healthy banks to jump-start lending.  Not only was OneUnited Bank in massive financial turmoil, but it was also "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses, including owning a Porsche for its executives' use."  Rep. Frank admitted he spoke to a "federal regulator," and Treasury granted the funds.  (The bank continues to flounder despite Frank’s intervention for federal dollars.)  Moreover, Judicial Watch uncovered documents in 2009 that showed that members of Congress for years were aware that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were playing fast and loose with accounting issues, risk assessment issues and executive compensation issues, even as liberals led by Rep. Frank continued to block attempts to rein in the two Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs).  For example, during a hearing on September 10, 2003, before the House Committee on Financial Services considering a Bush administration proposal to further regulate Fannie and Freddie, Rep. Frank stated:  "I want to begin by saying that I am glad to consider the legislation, but I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis.  That is, in my view, the two Government Sponsored Enterprises we are talking about here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not in a crisis. We have recently had an accounting problem with Freddie Mac that has led to people being dismissed, as appears to be appropriate.  I do not think at this point there is a problem with a threat to the Treasury."  Frank received $42,350 in campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac between 1989 and 2008.  Frank also engaged in a relationship with a Fannie Mae Executive while serving on the House Banking Committee, which has jurisdiction over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

4. Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner:  In 2009, Obama Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner admitted that he failed to pay $34,000 in Social Security and Medicare taxes from 2001-2004 on his lucrative salary at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), an organization with 185 member countries that oversees the global financial system.  (Did we mention Geithner now runs the IRS?)  It wasn’t until President Obama tapped Geithner to head the Treasury Department that he paid back most of the money, although the IRS kindly waived the hefty penalties.  In March 2009, Geithner also came under fire for his handling of the AIG bonus scandal, where the company used $165 million of its bailout funds to pay out executive bonuses, resulting in a massive public backlash.  Of course as head of the New York Federal Reserve, Geithner helped craft the AIG deal in September 2008.  However, when the AIG scandal broke, Geithner claimed he knew nothing of the bonuses until March 10, 2009.  The timing is important.  According to CNN:  “Although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told congressional leaders on Tuesday that he learned of AIG's impending $160 million bonus payments to members of its troubled financial-products unit on March 10, sources tell TIME that the New York Federal Reserve informed Treasury staff that the payments were imminent on Feb. 28.  That is ten days before Treasury staffers say they first learned ‘full details’ of the bonus plan, and three days before the [Obama] Administration launched a new $30 billion infusion of cash for AIG.”  Throw in another embarrassing disclosure in 2009 that Geithner employed “household help” ineligible to work in the United States, and it becomes clear why the Treasury Secretary has earned a spot on the “Ten Most Corrupt Politicians in Washington” list.

5. Attorney General Eric Holder:  Tim Geithner can be sure he won’t be hounded about his tax-dodging by his colleague Eric Holder, US Attorney General.  Judicial Watch strongly opposed Holder because of his terrible ethics record, which includes:  obstructing an FBI investigation of the theft of nuclear secrets from Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory; rejecting multiple requests for an independent counsel to investigate alleged fundraising abuses by then-Vice President Al Gore in the Clinton White House; undermining the criminal investigation of President Clinton by Kenneth Starr in the midst of the Lewinsky investigation; and planning the violent raid to seize then-six-year-old Elian Gonzalez at gunpoint in order to return him to Castro’s Cuba.  Moreover, there is his soft record on terrorism.  Holder bypassed Justice Department procedures to push through Bill Clinton’s scandalous presidential pardons and commutations, including for 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican terrorist group that orchestrated approximately 120 bombings in the United States, killing at least six people and permanently maiming dozens of others, including law enforcement officers.  His record in the current administration is no better.  As he did during the Clinton administration, Holder continues to ignore serious incidents of corruption that could impact his political bosses at the White House.  For example, Holder has refused to investigate charges that the Obama political machine traded VIP access to the White House in exchange for campaign contributions – a scheme eerily similar to one hatched by Holder’s former boss, Bill Clinton in the 1990s.  The Holder Justice Department also came under fire for dropping a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party.  On Election Day 2008, Black Panthers dressed in paramilitary garb threatened voters as they approached polling stations.  Holder has also failed to initiate a comprehensive Justice investigation of the notorious organization ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), which is closely tied to President Obama.  There were allegedly more than 400,000 fraudulent ACORN voter registrations in the 2008 campaign.  And then there were the journalist videos catching ACORN Housing workers advising undercover reporters on how to evade tax, immigration, and child prostitution laws.  Holder’s controversial decisions on new rights for terrorists and his attacks on previous efforts to combat terrorism remind many of the fact that his former law firm has provided and continues to provide pro bono representation to terrorists at Guantanamo Bay.  Holder’s politicization of the Justice Department makes one long for the days of Alberto Gonzales. 

6. Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)/ Senator Roland Burris (D-IL):  One of the most serious scandals of 2009 involved a scheme by former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich to sell President Obama’s then-vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder.  Two men caught smack dab in the middle of the scandal:  Senator Roland Burris, who ultimately got the job, and Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr.  According to the Chicago Sun-Times, emissaries for Jesse Jackson Jr., named "Senate Candidate A" in the Blagojevich indictment, reportedly offered $1.5 million to Blagojevich during a fundraiser if he named Jackson Jr. to Obama's seat.  Three days later federal authorities arrested Blagojevich.  Burris, for his part, apparently lied about his contacts with Blagojevich, who was arrested in December 2008 for trying to sell Obama’s Senate seat.  According to Reuters:  “Roland Burris came under fresh scrutiny…after disclosing he tried to raise money for the disgraced former Illinois governor who named him to the U.S. Senate seat once held by President Barack Obama…In the latest of those admissions, Burris said he looked into mounting a fundraiser for Rod Blagojevich -- later charged with trying to sell Obama's Senate seat -- at the same time he was expressing interest to the then-governor's aides about his desire to be appointed.”  Burris changed his story five times regarding his contacts with Blagojevich prior to the Illinois governor appointing him to the U.S. Senate.  Three of those changing explanations came under oath.

7. President Barack Obama:  During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration.  However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House.  Consider just a few Obama administration “lowlights” from year one:  Even before President Obama was sworn into office, he was interviewed by the FBI for a criminal investigation of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s scheme to sell the President’s former Senate seat to the highest bidder.  (Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and slumlord Valerie Jarrett, both from Chicago, are also tangled up in the Blagojevich scandal.)  Moreover, the Obama administration made the startling claim that the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House. The Obama White House believes it can violate the privacy rights of American citizens without any legal consequences or accountability.  President Obama boldly proclaimed that "transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," but his administration is addicted to secrecy, stonewalling far too many of Judicial Watch's Freedom of Information Act requests and is refusing to make public White House visitor logs as federal law requires.  The Obama administration turned the National Endowment of the Arts (as well as the agency that runs the AmeriCorps program) into propaganda machines, using tax dollars to persuade "artists" to promote the Obama agenda.  According to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, the idea emerged as a direct result of the Obama campaign and enjoyed White House approval and participation.  President Obama has installed a record number of "czars" in positions of power.  Too many of these individuals are leftist radicals who answer to no one but the president.  And too many of the czars are not subject to Senate confirmation (which raises serious constitutional questions).  Under the President’s bailout schemes, the federal government continues to appropriate or control -- through fiat and threats -- large sectors of the private economy, prompting conservative columnist George Will to write:  “The administration's central activity -- the political allocation of wealth and opportunity -- is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.”  Government-run healthcare and car companies, White House coercion, uninvestigated ACORN corruption, debasing his office to help Chicago cronies, attacks on conservative media and the private sector, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, perks for campaign donors – this is Obama’s “ethics” record -- and we haven't even gotten through the first year of his presidency.

8. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):  At the heart of the corruption problem in Washington is a sense of entitlement.  Politicians believe laws and rules (even the U.S. Constitution) apply to the rest of us but not to them.  Case in point:  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her excessive and boorish demands for military travel.  Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Pentagon in 2008 that suggest Pelosi has been treating the Air Force like her own personal airline.  These documents, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, include internal Pentagon email correspondence detailing attempts by Pentagon staff to accommodate Pelosi's numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker's 11th hour cancellations and changes.  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also came under fire in April 2009, when she claimed she was never briefed about the CIA's use of the waterboarding technique during terrorism investigations.  The CIA produced a report documenting a briefing with Pelosi on September 4, 2002, that suggests otherwise.  Judicial Watch also obtained documents, including a CIA Inspector General report, which further confirmed that Congress was fully briefed on the enhanced interrogation techniques.  Aside from her own personal transgressions, Nancy Pelosi has ignored serious incidents of corruption within her own party, including many of the individuals on this list.  (See Rangel, Murtha, Jesse Jackson, Jr., etc.) 

9. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) and the rest of the PMA Seven:  Rep. John Murtha made headlines in 2009 for all the wrong reasons.  The Pennsylvania congressman is under federal investigation for his corrupt relationship with the now-defunct defense lobbyist PMA Group.  PMA, founded by a former Murtha associate, has been the congressman's largest campaign contributor.  Since 2002, Murtha has raised $1.7 million from PMA and its clients.  And what did PMA and its clients receive from Murtha in return for their generosity?  Earmarks -- tens of millions of dollars in earmarks.  In fact, even with all of the attention surrounding his alleged influence peddling, Murtha kept at it.  Following an FBI raid of PMA's offices earlier in 2009, Murtha continued to seek congressional earmarks for PMA clients, while also hitting them up for campaign contributions.  According to The Hill, in April, "Murtha reported receiving contributions from three former PMA clients for whom he requested earmarks in the pending appropriations bills."  When it comes to the PMA scandal, Murtha is not alone.  As many as six other Members of Congress are currently under scrutiny according to The Washington Post.  They include:  Peter J. Visclosky (D-IN.), James P. Moran Jr. (D-VA), Norm Dicks (D-WA.), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), C.W. Bill Young (R-FL.) and Todd Tiahrt (R-KS.).  Of course rather than investigate this serious scandal, according to Roll Call House Democrats circled the wagons, "cobbling together a defense to offer political cover to their rank and file.”  The Washington Post also reported in 2009 that Murtha’s nephew received $4 million in Defense Department no-bid contracts:  "Newly obtained documents…show Robert Murtha mentioning his influential family connection as leverage in his business dealings and holding unusual power with the military.”

10. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY):  Rangel, the man in charge of writing tax policy for the entire country, has yet to adequately explain how he could possibly "forget" to pay taxes on $75,000 in rental income he earned from his off-shore rental property.  He also faces allegations that he improperly used his influence to maintain ownership of highly coveted rent-controlled apartments in Harlem, and misused his congressional office to fundraise for his private Rangel Center by preserving a tax loophole for an oil drilling company in exchange for funding.  On top of all that, Rangel recently amended his financial disclosure reports, which doubled his reported wealth.  (He somehow “forgot” about $1 million in assets.)  And what did he do when the House Ethics Committee started looking into all of this?  He apparently resorted to making "campaign contributions" to dig his way out of trouble.  According to WCBS TV, a New York CBS affiliate:  “The reigning member of Congress' top tax committee is apparently ‘wrangling’ other politicos to get him out of his own financial and tax troubles...Since ethics probes began last year the 79-year-old congressman has given campaign donations to 119 members of Congress, including three of the five Democrats on the House Ethics Committee who are charged with investigating him.”  Charlie Rangel should not be allowed to remain in Congress, let alone serve as Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, and he knows it.  That’s why he felt the need to disburse campaign contributions to Ethics Committee members and other congressional colleagues.

Hopefully Judicial Watch won't sue me for copying the entire article. If so, I'll just claim Eric Holder told me to do it.


Friday, December 25, 2009

The Illustrated Obamaconomy

Marla at Zero Hedge relays photographs of the bustling holiday shopping season at Los Angeles' tony Beverly Center and Westfield Century City.

Beverly Center is located smack dab in the middle of Beverly Hills while WCC is a few miles west in, well, Westwood.

Let's check out the parking lot for the Beverly Center the day before Christmas: hopefully we can find a spot!

Neat! Plenty o' spots left!

Behold: the power of Schwarzenomics!


You could should a pellet gun in random directions and only wound mannequins.

Nothing spells "bargain" like a going-out-of-business sale!

If we could only find the Beverly Center's Dollar Store, I'll bet we could spot the crowds!

Fortunately lots more folks showed up while we were shopping!

Let's head over to Westwood's Westfield mall!

Jam-packed with shoppers enjoying the immense value creation of the Obamaconomy!

You can barely wedge yourself into Macy's.

Ditto the Apple Store.

Thank heavens the $787 billion Stimulus package kicked in when it did. We could have been suffering from a real malaise without the astute economic stewardship of Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Precipice

I want you to think about the Revolutionary War.

I want you to think about the Civil War.

I want you to think about World War II.

I want you to think about the Korean War.

I want you to think about the Vietnam War.

I want you to think about all the wars.

What if we had a Commander-in-Chief like this, who doesn't desire victory?

A President who is kneecapping our soldiers with confused dictates like granting Miranda rights to terrorists captured on the battlefield; who is kneecapping our soldiers while they try to defeat this enemy; who is kneecapping our soldiers who have a dangerous, complicated and difficult enough task as it is.

I want you to think about how this President has dumbed-down the War on Terror by calling it other things, giving it bureaucratic titles.

I want you to think about how this President has traveled to Europe, Latin America and the Middle East -- and condemned his own country, apologized for it, and laid blame for all sorts of calamities at its feet.

I want you to think about the massive spending spree this President has unleashed; the greatest amount of spending of any country, ever. A President who has incurred more debt in one year than all the prior 233 years combined.

And yet when it comes to defense -- including missile defense, he slashes it.

Yes, we have a force in the Oval Office. A force for danger.

The question is whether all the good works done by all the Presidents before him, all the Commanders-in-Chief, all the excellent Attorneys General, all the excellent CIA Directors, all the troops and intelligence and law enforcement personnel, all the people who have worked so long and so hard, over the many decades...

...the question is whether what they have built will last under this President. Consider the massive debt, the crushing despotism of Iran's insane leaders, or the rise of radical extremism through the world -- this president is AWOL, other than to lobby Congress for more debt, more taxes, more government regulation, more government oversight of the economy.

Despite an unblemished series of failures -- the Post Office, Social Security, the "War on Poverty", Fannie Mae, Medicare, Freddie Mac, the Federal Reserve, Medicaid... all bankrupt, all catastrophic failures -- the Democrats now want to nationalize one-sixth of the economy. To take over the entire health care system, when the country is headed for bankruptcy.

The liberals like to say they care about humanity. About the children. I have yet to see them prove it.



Based upon: Mark Levin, 6/10/2009.