Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Hollyweird Nut Rob Reiner: Ignore our relentless push for repressive, centralized, authoritarian government! Conservatives are the real Nazis!

Gee, this is quite a shocking turn of events. Interviewed on Bill Maher's "show", Rob "Meathead" Reiner stated that Constitutional conservatives are Nazis.

"[Hitler] wasn’t a majority guy, but he was charismatic and they were having bad economic times – just like we are now – people were out of work, they needed jobs and a guy came along and rallied the troops. My fear is that the Tea Party gets a charismatic leader, because all they're selling is fear and anger and that's all Hitler sold. "I’m angry and I’m frightened and you should hate that guy over there."

Let's compare and contrast:

• Who wants more centralized, authoritarian government like Hitler assembled? That would be Reiner and the left.

• Who wants to eradicate the Constitution as it was written, as Hitler did when he took power? Reiner and the left.

• Who wants to confiscate more and more private property, just as Hitler did? Yes, Reiner and his gang of useful idiots.

• Who suppresses freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of the press, just as Hitler did? Reiner and the left.

• Who wants to confiscate the citizens' firearms, just as Hitler did? Reiner and the left.

• Who despises individual liberties for all citizens, irrespective of race, religion, creed or color -- like Hitler? That would be Reiner and the left.

In fact, a retrospective look at the history of Nazism would find far more similarity to today's "progressive socialists" than any other segment of society. Of course, the pond algae named Maher and the corpulent loon named Reiner know more about Lindsey Lohan's latest run-in with the law than they do of history, economics and philosophy.

And let's remember. The Nazi Party was an acronym for National Socialist Democrats. And we're not the guys who ran a charismatic demagogue for President and who was accompanied everywhere by his own creepy, personal iconography.


Paid moonbat activist who lunged at Rand Paul: I wasn't running at the candidate, I was simply trying to escape those evil Nazi teabaggers

I think it safe to say that this election cycle has proven we can leave the real news reporting to the likes of new media superstars Jim Hoft and Michelle Malkin.

Hoft was among the very first to report today that the extremist crackpot who lunged at Rand Paul is none other than a MoveOn contractor who specializes in leftist rabble-rousing.

MoveOn.org contract employee Lauren Valle stalked and lunged at Rand Paul outside the final debate last night...

The media will make this far left activist out to be a martyr today. We already know that... It certainly was over the line to put a shoe on her shoulder or head... But, Lauren knew exactly what she was doing. She’s had plenty of practice. She’s a professional leftist activist.

Here's Valle vandalizing a ship earlier this year.

In fact, the Lafourche Parish Sheriff's office published mugshots of seven Greenpeace moonbats arrested on May 24, 2010:

...the seven had boarded a vessel at Port Fourchon and painted messages with an unknown substance on different areas of the ship. The messages were directed to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. A representative for Salazar was at Port Fourchon this morning while other dignitaries congregated in Galliano with Secretary Salazar and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano regarding the ongoing oil spill impacting the Louisiana coastline...

The seven had been seen in the area for the past week and had been repeatedly warned by law enforcement not to hamper clean up operations and not to trespass. Greenpeace is known for pre-planning and coordinating similar protests to bring attention to environmental issues. Pictures of the vandalism appeared on the Greenpeace website within minutes of the arrest of the activists.

Valle was charged with a felony.

Just moments ago, the left's favorite propaganda outlet, The Muffington Coast, published Valle's version of her run at Rand.

I have been at a bunch of events before, the previous debate, and the Rand Paul campaign knows me and they have expressed their distaste for my work before. What happened last night was that about five minutes before Rand Paul's car arrived they identified me and my partner, Alex, who was with me. They surrounded me. There was five of them. They motioned to each other and got behind me. My partner Alex heard them say 'We are here to do crowd control we might have to take someone out.'

When Rand Paul's car arrived a couple of them stepped in front of me so I stepped off the curb to get around them to get back out front. At that point they started grabbing for me and I ran all the way around the car with them in pursuit. The footage is after I've run all the way around the car and I'm in front of the car and that is when they took me down. One or two people twisted my arms behind my back and took me down... It was about two-to-three seconds after that that another person stomped on my head. And I lay there for 20 seconds or so and my partner Alex came and got me up and that's the point where there is the media clip of me speaking.

Why are paid stooges of George Soros running at Rand Paul? The Associated Press describes the back-story.

Supporters of Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul wrestled a woman to the ground and one stepped on her head after she tried to confront the candidate in Kentucky...

Lauren Valle of liberal group MoveOn.org, told Louisville station WDRB she was trying to give Paul a fake award when his supporters took her to the ground... Television footage shows Valle’s blonde wig being pulled off before she’s pinned to ground. A man then puts his foot down on her head. Valle said the incident left her with "a bit of a headache."

I wonder what would have happened if she had tried a similar stunt on, say, the President? Or the Speaker of the House? I'm guessing something a lot worse than a "bit of a headache".

These totalitarian Marxist-Leninists are completely out of control.


Hat tip: Memeorandum.

Larwyn's Linx: Voter fraud watch: They’re at it again

Have a great link you'd like me to review? Drop me an email. Bloggers: you can install a Larwyn's Linx blog widget!

Nation

Voter fraud watch: They’re at it again: Malkin
Maddening: DOJ Gives Illinois ‘Pass’ on MOVE Act : JustPiper
Eight Days: Toldjah

Aide to Harry Reid Tied to Terror Investigation: WZ
Tancredo supported by African Immigrant Leaders: LATL
For Congress: One Grimm Marine for NY-13 (Staten Island): Ace

Boxer ensnared in ethics scandal in last days: Simon
Mi Familia Vota, SEIU, and the illegal alien swing vote: Malkin
Gov. Candidate Sink (D-FL) Caught Cheating During Debate: GWP

Economy

Yes, Nancy, We Give You ALL The ‘Credit’ : Babalu
Union Bosses Blow Millions More in Dues Money: Malkin
Equal funding for charter schools is next frontier in D.C.: WashExam

Is the U.S. the new Weimar Republic?: RWN
NJ Teachers Union: 'Black Kids Are N******, Let's F*** With Kids': GWP
Public Pensions Spell Certain Doom for California: RWN

Climate & Energy

Is the EPA just protecting the ethanol lobby?: WashExam
A Quick Note to Pennsylvania Voters: CBullitt

Media

Juan Williams and the ObamaCare Death Panels: AT
Obama’s turnout pitch to Latinos: Get out there and punish your “enemies”: Hot Air
Hilarious: 'Obama May Focus On Deficit Over The Next Two Years': RWN

Protecting Military Voting: A Blue Star Mom Speaks Out: PJM
Voter Fraud Watch: Allegations of Poll Worker Misconduct in Harris County, Texas: PJM
A Third-Party Vote Is a Vote for Democrats: RWN

Comedy Gold: Blithering Nutcase Joy Behar Calls Media Matters 'Objective': JWF
ACORN’s October Surprise: Vadum
Media Death Spiral: Newspaper Circulation Continues to Crater: JWF

NPR's Vivian Schiller Once Worked as a Tour Guide Inside the Soviet Union: AT
Moonbattery on Citizens United Reaches New Level: Impeach Justice Roberts!: Patterico
Remembering Searchlight: My Rendezvous with Harry Reid’s ‘Eggmen’: Breitbart

World

Maine: Woman may have been target of chemical bomb outside mosque: Creeping Sharia
The Curse of the Welfare State: AT
Iran Releases Top al-Qaeda Terrorist Saif al-Adel, Now Back in North Waziristan: WZ

SciTech

Firesheep: CodeButler
Stuxnet: An Amateur's Weapon: Dark Reading
Google is not the enemy: ZDNet

Cornucopia

Last Chance to Be the Wave: Ace
Staff Sergeant Joshua J. Cullins, RIP: Patterico
Obama Uses “Slurpee” Line For 32nd Time: WZ

Image: People's Cube via Your Crazy Uncle.
Today's Larwyn's Linx sponsored by: Support Allen West for Congress!

QOTD: "Obama believed, at the time I met him, this was probably around Christmas time in 1980. I'd flown out on Christmas break from Cornell, where I was in grad school. And Obama was looking forward to an imminent social revolution, literally a movement where the working classes would overthrow the ruling class and institute a kind of socialist Utopia in the United States...

...When ever he talks about taxing the richest two-percent? I think he knows that will harm the economy. To him, the redistribution of wealth is extremely important. And he never took economics or science like I did. He went straight to law school, never had any business experience, never had a payroll to meet. And I think he's locked in a very dangerous mindset, where if he didn't fight to redistribute the wealth that he'd be violating [his] ideology." -- Dr. John Drew, President Obama's friend at Occidental College


Monday, October 25, 2010

Headline o' the Day

Doug Powers, writing at Michelle Malkin's site, wins today's prize of three cans of old paint from my garage for his "Turnout for Bill Clinton’s Detroit Rally: It Depends on What Your Definition of 'Anemic' Is."

It’s certainly not a good sign, at least for 20-point-down governor wannabe Virg Bernero here in Michigan, when you have a rally in a high school gym featuring a former president in a city that allegedly loves him — a week before a major election — and the turnout is horrendous... "While the crowd hoisted signs that stated Virg Surge,' the turnout at the rally was anemic. More than 500 people came to the rally, but the gym at Renaissance High School was only about one-third full, even though Clinton used to command full houses wherever he went, especially in Detroit.

Fortunately, Cub Reporter Biff Spackle was able to smuggle a shot out of the huge rally:

The full measure of Clinton's legacy is best described as an oral history.


Is the Negative Campaign Ad Useful or Destructive? [Amalaur]

Guest Post by Correspondent Amalaur:

The issues surrounding political campaign advertisements are numerous and often verge on the complex and convoluted. From Citizens United v. the FEC to the DISCLOSE Act, campaign funding and the ads it produces are the subject of intense scrutiny inside and outside of the Beltway. But within this controversial realm comes the most divisive issue of all: negative and personal attacks – and the question of their effectiveness . Seen in every level of every political race, especially in desperate times as a desperate measure, negative ads and personal attacks possess the very backbone of what defines politics: drama, questionable truth and evasive tactics. But are negative ads and personal attacks necessary in order to win a race? When used, do they guarantee a jump in polls or a win?

To answer this question, the history of political advertising in America and its statistical effectiveness must be analyzed. The United States is well known for its intricate campaign finance laws, and many have been changed or drastically amended throughout the years. In 1971, Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), which limited the impact that wealthy individuals and corporations could have on election outcomes via monetary donations, regulated campaign spending, and made mandatory the disclosure of funding. In 1974, an amendment to FECA created the Federal Election Commission (FEC), a powerful agency that regulates and enforces campaign and election law. Additional amendments to FECA were also made in 1976 and 1979.

It was in this era that the campaign finance laws that we are familiar with were established. However, as political advertising became more popular, so did negative and personal ads. According to Advertising and Societies: Global Issues by Katherine Toland Frith and Barbara Mueller, campaign ads can be classified into one of three categories: attack, advocacy or contrast. Attack ads focus on negative aspects of the opposing candidate’s history or personal flaws. Advocacy ads emphasize the candidate’s positive positions and viewpoints, while contrast ads are essentially a combination of both.

Throughout the mainstream media and the blogosphere, writers and pundits are all too happy to voice their viewpoints on the issue. Peggy Noonan of the Wall Street Journal says, “Negative advertising tears everything down. It contributes to the cynicism of the populace, especially the young." On the other hand, Mark Penn of Politico notes that “clever negative advertising works. That is reality." Regardless of professional opinion, negative ads and personal attacks do happen, and show no signs of stopping soon. According to ThisNation.com, “voters seem to be increasingly turned off by negative campaign ads and mudslinging, but that hasn't deterred political candidates from using these tactics.” Using a bipartisan study conducted in 2000 by the Project on Campaign Conduct, ThisNation attempted to analyze voter sentiment towards negative campaign advertisements. The data points to long-standing voter dissatisfaction with the political establishment and questioning of the techniques that politicians use to draw voters to the ballots.

• 59% believe that all or most candidates deliberately twist the truth.
• 39% believe that all or most candidates deliberately lie to voters.
• 43% believe that most or all candidates deliberately make unfair attacks on their opponents. Another 45% believe that some candidates do.
• 67% say they can trust the government in Washington only some of the time or never.
• 87% are concerned about the level of personal attacks in today's political campaigns.
(from the Project on Campaign Conduct - 2000)

More recently, several studies were done analyzing the psychological and physiological affects that negative advertising has on viewers. In 2007, researchers Bradley, Angelini and Lee determined that viewers watching attack ads experienced eye movements that mimicked fight-or-flight symptoms seen in primal fear reactions. Although the unconscious action associated with this reaction is to move away, the ads were not perceived as life threatening, thus allowing the viewers time to absorb the information and remember them more clearly.

In regard to effectiveness, negative advertisements seem to leave a memorable mark on the viewer. In a study done by Garramone (1984), viewers were able to remember details of a negative advertisement 60 percent of the time. The results of similar research done in 1989 show that most respondents were able to remember and recall at least one negative political ad. Overall, multiple studies point to the fact that attack advertisements are more easily recalled than the more positive advocacy advertisements.

This data seems eerily familiar, especially in the political climate of the 2010 midterm elections. With Democrats distancing themselves from a controversial agenda and facing losses in Congress, negative political advertisements are packing a particularly brutal punch this year. Races are close and last-ditch tactics are being drawn out on both sides in an effort to gain crucial independent votes. In her op-ed, Noonan notes that desperate or downtrodden political parties tend to resort to negative ads in the final stretch before the elections. This strategy is especially timely for 2010. “At this point in history, with America teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, negative advertising is even more destructive, more actually wicked, than it was in the past,” writes Noonan.

Adrienne Washington of the Washington Times in 2008 also presented a unique viewpoint regarding the negative ads in that crucial election year. “Still, the larger question is how this mudslinging with expensive negative campaign advertisements will affect the election outcome and at what cost, not only to the candidates but also to the electorate they aim to sway?” she says. “Replaceable dollars? Irreplaceable values?” The effectiveness of these ads is constantly analyzed by liberal and conservative punditry alike, and each year the parties have something different to show for it. The reliability of negative advertisements and personal attacks in regard to winning an election is clearly not static, as evidenced by constant turnover of parties in the White House and within Congress.

With the advent of the Tea Party and more candidates running in the primaries than ever before, sheer diversity across party lines was grounds for easy attacks in 2010. In the race between Republican Senate candidates in Delaware, incumbent Congressman Mike Castle used negative campaign advertisements against his conservative Tea Party foe Christine O’Donnell. He lost with 47% of the vote compared to O’Donnell’s 53%. Although many do not believe that O’Donnell can beat her Democratic challenger in November 2010, the fact that she won the primary race seemingly contradicts the data regarding the power of negative advertising.

Immediately following O’Donnell’s bid for office, Mike Castle’s campaign released the website RealChristine.com. The site highlighted O’Donnell’s past financial troubles regarding her campaign and evidenced her “reckless and hypocritical behavior”. Castle supporters were even encouraged to tweet about O’Donnell, specifically the sentence that “Christine O’Donnell has been hopelessly irresponsible with her own finances, not to be trusted w/ ours."

Additionally, Castle ran a TV ad depicting O’Donnell as a mixed-up puzzle, claiming that she owed $11,744 in back taxes and penalties, was sued by Fairleigh Dickinson University for unpaid expenses, defaulted on her mortgage, ran up huge campaign staff and left vendors and staff unpaid, and used campaign donations to pay her rent.

These personal attacks are creative marketing techniques used to put doubt in the minds of Republican voters that might have considered O’Donnell. In the end, though, we know that they were not as effective as Castle hoped for them to be. Although these claims are not direct lies and some can even be proven to be true, why did knowing this not prevent the citizens of Delaware from voting for O’Donnell? Was all this information overkill? Some pundits say that hard-pressed citizens voted for O’Donnell for just the opposite reason – they identified with her money struggles and saw themselves in her mistakes.

O’Donnell responded to the criticism by saying “Of course in this economy I've fallen on hard times. But I worked hard. I sacrificed. I made the decision that I needed to make things right".

Regardless of whether or not she wins in the general election, O’Donnell proved a crucial point when she beat out the Republican establishment in the primaries. She simply proved that negative advertising and knowledge of candidate’s flaws does not always work. Although it may be effective and certainly created in-fighting within the establishment GOP (O’Donnell was supported by Sarah Palin but not Karl Rove), its effectiveness may depend on the time and place of the election as well as the candidates involved.

Interestingly, there are studies that support this idea. Out of 143 democracies in the world, the United States ranks 139th in regard to voter turnout . The reason for this feeble turnout has been attributed to negative advertising by some researchers. Although it usually accomplishes its goal of turning people off from a candidate, it also turns citizens off from the entire electoral process as a whole. Thus, a large number of voters decide not to exercise their constitutional right.

A study conducted at the University of California, Los Angeles, found that “negative advertising made voters significantly less likely to feel that their opinions mattered, or that elections made any difference, and most important, made them disinclined to vote (positive ad campaigns had exactly the opposite effect)".

However, Barack Obama used negative campaign advertisements heavily in his 2008 run for president, and not only won but spurred the largest voter turnout since the elections of Kennedy, Eisenhower and Johnson in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Despite this and his ultimate success, though, Obama fought Sen. John McCain’s negative campaign against him by launching a "Fight the Smears" micro-site on his campaign website. Clearly, negative advertisements (whether true or not) pose problems in the eyes of the candidates.

So what exactly is the effect of the negative advertisement and personal attack, and do they really work? All of the studies discussed provide viable feedback, but are contradictory in the claimed effect on the voter. Examples throughout history also provide convincing but oppositional evidence regarding negative advertisements. Because negative advertisements incite anxiety and concern from the viewer, engagement and attention can soon follow, leading the citizen to care more deeply about the issues and vote.

On the other hand, this same anxiety can scare voters away, leading them to believe that their viewpoints do not matter and that regardless of who wins, the negativity and flaws seen in each ad will still exist.

In the end, the question remains answerable but perplexing because data exists to support both sides of the argument. Mike Castle’s negative advertising did him no good, while Barack Obama attack ads won him the presidency. Negative advertising is more easily remembered, but also makes voters feel more helpless. All of this information makes it clear that in order for negative advertising and personal attacks to work, the time, place and candidates must be right. There is no formula, but there are certainly circumstances that can either excite or inhibit potential voters. The biggest hurdle for candidates is simply taking advantage of them.


That figures: looks like MSNBC ripped off, eh, borrowed a 2004 DNC video contest winner for its wicked cool new 'Lean Forward' branding campaign

MSNBC recently introduced a wicked cool new slogan and branding campaign called Lean Forward .

Now commenter G tips us off to a report that MSNBC (or its ad agency) likely ripped off borrowed a 2004 DNC video contest winner which concludes, oddly enough, with the watchword "Forward".

If you have been watching MSNBC lately, you have seen the new "LEAN FORWARD" ad campaign directed by Spike Lee... "We talked about all the attributes that make MSNBC what it is," MSNBC president Phil Griffin told TVNewser. "It is active, it is positive, it is about making tomorrow better than today, a discussion about politics and the actions and passions of our time"...

Turns out, the campaign's kick off ad "Declaration of Forward",  looks strikingly like the 2004 Democratic National Committee video contest winner...

..."Americas Party" created by Adam Klugman and Jefferson Smith and funded by the Democratic Party Of Oregon... Also seen here is the debut of the video at the 2004 National Democratic Convention...

...We will let you be the judge (especially the last several seconds of each), but MSNBC and the ad agency that created "Lean Forward" (Minneapolis ad agency mono) should explain how an objective news organization  uses a concept  suspiciously like that from a national political party video to brand itself...

To help distinguish MSNBC's ad campaign from the earlier DNC version, I've created a new poster to help reestablish the network's unique persona.

Joe Scarborough could not be reached for comment at press time.


Murkowski, Crist and Specter -- Birds of a Foul Feather

If you're looking for poster children representing the very worst of our political class, look no further than Lisa Murkoskotciewcz and Charlie Crist (D? R?).

To be sure, they may not be Marxist-Leninists -- as President Obama and Speaker Pelosi appear to be -- but, then again, I don't consider those two politicians so much as enemies of the Constitution. Yes, I said it: you can't take an oath to uphold the Constitution and then state your plain intention to steal private property and redistribute it, like some sort of sixties-vintage Politburo member.

But at least Obama and Pelosi are consistent in their Cloward-Piven-inspired plot to remake America. They're ideological purists. And no amount of history, facts, logic and economic ruin will convince them. No matter how catastrophic for their party these elections turn out to be, neither Pelosi or Obama will change their core philosophies even one iota.

But Murskotwitz and Crist are an altogether different breed. They seek personal aggrandizement, irrespective of ideology. They shift positions, parties and principles like Beltway chameleons in the focused pursuit of wealth, fame and power.

As Dan Riehl stated earlier today, they represent the very ugliest of politics.

Alaskans should reject Murasdowekas, handed a Senate seat by her father as if it were some sort of family heirloom. You can do so by supporting Joe Miller in this critical last week.

Likewise, Floridians should disregard Charlie Crist, an unprincipled hack whose core principles are no more anchored than is a weathervane. Marco Rubio is someone very special indeed, perhaps a once-in-a-generation candidate who could be destined for very great things indeed.

The time for action is now.


Linked by: Michelle Malkin and Memeorandum. Thanks!

Larwyn's Linx: I'm Doubling Down on My Top Ten

Have a great link you'd like me to review? Drop me an email. Bloggers: you can install a Larwyn's Linx blog widget!

Nation

I'm Doubling Down on My Top Ten: LegalIns
Why the Democrat Party Must Be Rebuked: Hewitt
ACORN-Style Vote Fraud Discovered in AZ and CO: GWP

The Importance of Our Military Vote Monitoring Project: PJM
'Cloward-Piven strategy' vs. 'bumbling incompetence-narcissism': ProWis
You're not safe from the P.C. police--even in Church: BlogProf

7 Days Out: Looking at All the Key Senate Races: RWN
Clinton Stumps in Detroit -- to Half-Empty Gym: GWP
This Means We Get To See Obama's Records, Right?: LegalIns

Economy

Accelerating Towards the Abyss: the Real Story of FY 2010: Blumer
Charter Schools: The Life-Changing Lottery: CityJournal
Pro-union study twists stats, takes public for saps: SFExam

The Shibboleth of Fixing Income 'Inequality' RCM
At Berkeley, the progressives are studying us: Revo
Rent's too damn low: Post

Former ACORN worker prevents pledge of allegiance at debate: RWN
Cali slashes 37,000 state jobs; many more to come: Mish
Niall Ferguson destroys Krugman and his Keynesians: ZH

Climate & Energy

The Super La Nina and the Coming Winter: PJM
On Climate Change, Tea Partiers Get It, Fish Wrap Doesn’t: BigJournalism
NPR: The AGW Propaganda You Paid For: CBullitt

Media

The Idiot’s Guide to Driving off a Cliff : Dewey
NPR: Spending Our Money Promoting Lady Gaga: MagNote
Headline in Boston Herald: 'Muslims fear Juan William’s ouster will fan hostility': MoneyRunner

Comparing Jews to Nazis Meets NPR's 'Editorial Standards and Practices': AT
Tea Baggin': W.C. Varones
The Knives Are Out for Christine Amanpour: JWF

15 Minutes Into the Future: Driscoll
Report: Obama at Occidental Looked Forward to a "Social Revolution": NewsReal
CBS' finds silver lining to forced abortions in China: Greenroom

World

Obama's Special Envoy Holbrooke Doing His Best to Crush Morale Among U.S. Forces in Afghanistan: WZ
The Wikitruth About Iranian Murder of Americans: Ledeen
It’s come to this: Scottish Halal Hairdressing: WZ

U.S. Rabbi Joins EDL in Rally to Defend Israel: Atlas
Iran to Restrict ‘Western University’ Subjects: WZ
Is “Palestinian-killer” the new “Christ-killer”?: Kesler

SciTech

Top 10 Security Threats in IT: Silicon India
Discovery News: Do Intelligent People Drink More Alcohol?: Revo
Hot conditions may have killed U.S. swimmer: Maktoob

Cornucopia

Suspended Animation: Adrienne
Only in New York: Styleite
The ‘Miss me?’ George Bush pumpkin: RedState

Image: Atlas Shrugs
Today's Larwyn's Linx sponsored by: Hand Pelosi's Handmaiden Ike Skelton a Pink Slip: Support Vicky Hartzler

QOTD: "Imagine a society in which politically connected individuals enrich themselves by giving money to politicians in return for earmarked dollars extracted from taxpayers. Imagine political entrepreneurs displacing market entrepreneurs by weaving fantastic tales of energy independence and a green tomorrow, sucking down billions in taxpayer loan guarantees for businesses that cannot possibly achieve economic sustainability. This is how crony Capitalism works.

Imagine a handful of executives earning hundreds of millions of dollars selling toxic mortgage bonds pyramided on low cost government-guaranteed capital made available by key Congressional committee chairmen who got special mortgage deals. Imagine a revolving door between reckless Wall Street derivative gamblers selling fraudulent unbacked insurance products and the regulatory agencies that bail them out using unlimited quantities of fiat currency printed up by unelected bureaucrats. This is how Washington works." -- Bill Frezza


Sunday, October 24, 2010

Party of Locusts: a Roundup of Fiscal Destruction Wrought by Democrats in Their Awesome Utopias of California, Illinois and New York

Rhetorical question: Why aren't Democrats running on their accomplishments?

Rhetorical answer: Because they're like locusts, destroying state after state after state; running from one to the other and leaving a trail of destruction.

And they have now controlled Congress for four long years. The nation is trembling.

California: State unemployment benefits fund billions in debt
California's now-resolved $19 billion budget shortfall got plenty of attention in recent months, but a state report released Wednesday highlights the state's other massive deficit - in the unemployment insurance fund, which will be $10.3 billion in the hole by year's end.

The report by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office warns of dire consequences if California's leaders do not tackle the fund's insolvency: The federal government could impose steep taxes on California businesses beginning in 2012, and the state could lose $400 million in federal dollars annually.

The deficit is the result of the state paying out more in unemployment benefits than it collects. The shortfall is offset by federal loans, but the state must begin paying interest on those loans next year.

The report warns that the only way for the crisis to be resolved without drastic change, such as tax increases, is for the state's unemployment rate to drop to 4 percent - a near impossibility...

Illinois: 'Illinois' financial situation is worse than any other state in the country'
Illinois' financial situation is worse than any other state in the country according to a study by the National Conference of State Legislatures. The state ended Fiscal Year 2010 in worse shape than any other state (the state’s general fund balance was the lowest it has ever been at negative $4.7 billion) and the state's budget situation has been called "tenuous at best."

...State employee layoffs are not part of the plan due to a deal earlier this year in which the AFSCME agreed to defer part of its scheduled pay raises in exchange for a guarantee of no layoffs or facility closures through June 30, 2011. The study by the National Conference of State Legislatures reported in its study that the state plans to boost spending for FY2010 by 15.1%.

Illinois has a total state debt of $120,743,173,392 when calculated by adding the total of outstanding debt, pension and OPEB UAAL’s, unemployment trust funds and the 2010 budget gap as of July 2010...

New York: State faces budget gaps of $37B in next three years
The state faces budget gaps of at least $37 billion over the next three years, and state spending is far outpacing revenue.

County and city governments are proposing budgets with layoffs and service cuts — on top of the ones they've already made. Upstate is suffering from population losses, struggling urban cores and a dwindling manufacturing base.

Meanwhile, the cost of living in New York continues to rise, putting further strain on its population and economic base. The Tax Foundation last month showed that Monroe County has the highest percentage of taxes paid compared with home values in the country...

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

It's up to all of us next Tuesday. To stop the spread of the Locust Party. Vote the straight Republican ticket. While the Republicans aren't perfect, most of them also aren't locusts destroying our society from within.


Hat tip: Mark Levin.

Deroy Murdock's Three Charts To Make Your Blood Boil

Deroy Murdock nails it. He presents three jaw-dropping illustrations that should infuriate every taxpayer in America.

Number 3: Who got stimulated by the Stimulus bill?

This graph’s whiff of Marie Antoinette should boil every patriot’s blood. While the American people live increasingly ascetic lives, and even city halls and statehouses have displayed some restraint, Washington, D.C., increasingly resembles Versailles — an out-of-touch, extravagant, and callous place that fuels little beyond the nation’s disgust, fury, and organized rebellion.

Number 2: The rich (by that I mean: the public sector workers) get richer.

These nauseating numbers show federal employees earning 201 percent of the average private worker’s compensation. Federal benefits equal 395 percent of private-sector benefits.

Number 1: This is your brain on Obamacare.

Staff members at the Congressional Joint Economic Committee “spent four months, night and day, and weekends” assembling this amazing graphic, Rep. Kevin Brady (R., Texas) tells me by phone. “They vetted it based on all 2,801 pages of the Obamacare legislation. They captured this new law’s stunningly complexity... "

[But the JEC] personnel could not fit all of this new law’s boards, commissions, mandates, and other elements onto this chart, [therefore] 151 additional items within Obamacare do not appear individually on this diagram. As Representative Brady explains, "If we included all of these units, this chart would be three times larger."

...The JEC’s 25-megabyte creation is difficult to transmit via email. However, a convenient link opens a PDF that allows readers to zoom in and explore this chart in amazing and shocking detail...

Even those who believe that government actively should heal the American people must wonder if that goal really required something this staggeringly convoluted.

Read the whole thing. And forward the link today to your entire mailing list. The time for action grows very short indeed.


Hat tip: Adrienne.

Open Thread: What Are Your Top Five Races to Watch?

I knew I'd forgotten something all these years. Open threads -- dammit!

Anyhow, what are your five most important races next Tuesday (pick from Senate, House, Gubernatorial)?

Bob Belvedere, Dr. John, Jim - PRS, Joan of Argghh!, John Ruberry, Juandos, Nahanni, Reliapundit and The Bad -- we want to hear from you. And of course we want to hear from everyone else as well. And by "we", I mean Cub Reporter Biff Spackle and I.


Image: FreedomWorks' DiverseTea Blog via iOwnTheWorld.

How George W. Bush Destroyed the Economy In Only Eight Short Years

The conventional wisdom among the denizens of the left is that George W. Bush took a surplus and destroyed the economy in only eight short years. The following illustrated story shows just how he pulled off this difficult task.

In 1997 President Clinton's HUD secretary, a man named Andrew Cuomo, claimed Fannie Mae had exhibited "racial discrimination" and proposed that 50 percent of the GSEs' (Fannie and Freddie) mortgage loan portfolio be made up of loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers by 2001.

In August of 2008, Wayne Barrett at the Village Voice wrote, "[Clinton appointee] Andrew Cuomo... made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country's current crisis. He took actions that... helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration...into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded 'kickbacks' to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans."

At the time, Cuomo said "GSE presence in the subprime market could be of significant benefit to lower-income families, minorities, and families living in underserved areas."

As the housing market unravelled thanks to these policies, even The New York Times' Paul Krugman admitted that, "homeownership isn't for everyone," adding that "as many as 10 million of the new buyers are stuck now with negative home equity... So many others have gone through foreclosure that there's been a net loss in home ownership since 1998."

From 2001 to 2008, the Bush administration tried more than 18 times to bring Fannie and Freddie under heel.

For example, Richard Banker opened testimony on October 6, 2004 in the House Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises with an almost unbelievable summary of a report entitled, "Allegations of accounting and Management Failure at Fannie Mae."

"[This] is indeed a very troubling report... it is a report of extraordinary importance [to] the taxpayers of this country who would pay the cost of cleanup. ....[the report questions] the validity of previously reported financial results, the adequacy of regulatory capital, the quality of management supervision, and the overall safety and soundness of the Enterprise..."

"We all know that the Enterprise is very thinly capitalized, but the potential effect of requiring a responsible capital level would be to adversely affect earnings per share, and consequently make the payment of bonuses [to Fannie executives] much less likely...

...I also wish to inform members of the Committee of another troubling incident... About a year ago, I corresponded with the Director’s office making inquiry about the levels of executive compensation at the enterprise for the top twenty executives...

...Now I understand why the Enterprise [Fannie Mae] was so anxious not to have public disclosure of compensation of an entity that was created by the Congress, and supported by the taxpayer... As a direct result of abhorrent accounting practices, executives have been able to award themselves bonuses they did not earn and did not deserve."

In 2003, the effort to rein in Fannie began in earnest with a GOP bill ("H.R. 2575—THE SECONDARY MORTGAGE MARKET ENTERPRISES REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT ACT"). The bill would have strengthened an independent regulator that did not have to kowtow to the political establishment. Like most efforts aimed at reformation of Fannie, the committee votes were typically on the straight party line.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): "I think it is clear that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are sufficiently secure so they are in no great danger... I don't think we face a crisis; I don't think that we have an impending disaster. ...Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac do very good work, and they are not endangering the fiscal health of this country."

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA): "I have sat through nearly a dozen hearings where, frankly, we were trying to fix something that wasn't broke. [sic] ...These GSEs have more than adequate capital for the business they are in: providing affordable housing. As I mentioned, we should not be making radical or fundamental change... If there is anything to fix or improve, it is the [regulators]."

Rep. David Scott (D-GA): "...affordable housing goals for both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae require that 50 percent of units should be built for low-and moderate-income home buyers, and 20 percent for very low-income families... Yet, from 1998 to 2002, African-American home ownership rates only rose from 45.6 percent to 47.3 percent, less than 2 percent compared with the white average increase from 72 percent to 74.5 percent, huge gap remains. Clearly, the mission of Freddie Mac, and especially Fannie Mae, is to close that gap..."

Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY): "...I have to go to another hearing, I will try to be just real quick... I am just pissed off at [the regulator] because if it wasn't for you I don't think that we would be here in the first place. ...we are faced with is maybe some individuals who wanted to do away with GSEs in the first place, you have given them an excuse to try to have this forum [to change the] mission of what the GSEs had, which they have done a tremendous job... There has been nothing that was indicated is wrong, you know, with Fannie Mae... The question that then presents is the competence that your agency has with reference to deciding and regulating these GSEs."

Franklin Raines, former Clinton official and then-Chairman and CEO of Fannie Mae: "...In 1994, we launched our trillion-dollar commitment, a pledge to provide $1 trillion in financing for 10 million underserved families before the decade was over... In 2000... we launched a redoubled new pledge... to provide $2 trillion for 18 million underserved families before this decade is over. ...we are one of the best capitalized financial institutions in the world, when compared to the risk of our business... ...these assets are so riskless that their capital for holding them should be under 2 percent."

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): "I don't see any financial crisis."

Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL): "A concern that I have... is you are making very specific... broad and categorical judgment about the management of this institution, about the willfulness of practices that may or may not be in controversy. You have imputed various motives to the people running the organization... That sounds to me as if you have gone from being a dispassionate regulator to someone who is very much involved and has a stake in this controversy... And I will follow up on Ms. Waters's point because I think it is very well taken: Her observation is that the political context surrounding your investigation was that serious doubts were being raised about OFHEO... In fact, frankly, doubts were raised about your leadership of OFHEO. And all of a sudden, the response to that is to produce an enormously critical report."

Late in 2008, even ex-President Clinton admitted that the Democrats were guilty of destroying Fannie and Freddie... and responsible for the current crisis that has left the entire U.S. economy on the brink of depression: "I think that the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by the Republicans and the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

And who were the top recipients of Fannie Mae's money-dispensing leaf-blower? The top three were Chris Dodd (D-CT), Barack Obama (D-IL) and John Kerry (D-MA).

And where are these Fannie Mae executives -- all former Clinton administration officials -- now? Are they serving time in prison as they likely deserve? No. They're enjoying their riches:
  • Franklin Raines ($90 million in compensation): Democrat adviser and one-time adviser to Barack Obama
  • Jamie Gorelick ($26 million): left-wing lawyer and Democrat fundraiser
  • James Johnson ($21 million): Democrat adviser and one-time adviser to Barack Obama
These Democrat crony capitalists -- and their friends in Congress -- greased each others' palms in a series of scandals, accounting frauds, and skulduggery that would make Bernie Madoff blush. When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac collapsed thanks to their actions, AIG and Lehman Brothers soon followed, their portfolios undergirded by investments in the "ultra-safe" GSEs.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Oh, on second thought, the title of this piece is incorrect. Bush didn't cause the economic meltdown. In fact, he tried to fight it -- on at least 18 separate occasions.

More importantly, the conventional wisdom among liberals -- the dishonest talking points -- are completely and utterly wrong. That is, if you rely upon history, facts, logic and reason. Which appears to be a stretch for many liberals.

No matter your political affiliation, if you value the truth you will vote next Tuesday to fire these Democrats, these career politicians who destroy everything they touch.



Hat tips: Naked Emperor News, Ann Coulter, Barking Moonbat, Country Store ("Jamie Gorelick: the pinup girl for Democrat foolishness strikes again") and Gateway Pundit.

Larwyn's Linx: They Hate Our Guts

Have a great link you'd like me to review? Drop me an email. You can also install a Larwyn's Linx blog widget.

Nation

They Hate Our Guts: Ace
Time for Heads to Roll In New Black Panther Case: Adams
A.G. Conway's Brother Lied to Police, Got Off Easy: WashExam

Learn Your Lincoln, Mr. President: Hands Off Texas
'We Have Put the Fear of God into the Republican Party': Greenroom
Pledge of Allegiance is Off Limits at Debate: GWP

It's Come To This: Enfranchising Non-Citizens: TAB
'Harry Reid Is Not Closing Strong': JWF
A Break for 'Mob Banker': Feds Delay Report 'Til After Election: RWN

Economy

What Happens When Everybody's Smart?: Ric's Rulez
No more bailouts for Fannie or Freddie: WashExam
CBO Confirms: ObamaCare Will Crush Employment: IBD

10 Reasons ObamaCare is Unravelling: WashExam
MI: losing billions due to forced unionization: BlogProf
Voldemort, CPA: Democrats Believe in Magical Accounting: Times

Media

Pics from the Front: WZ
C’Mon, Feel the Hate: Driscoll
Purging NPR: MoneyRunner

Cliff Kincaid Confronts Dohrn and Ayers: AmPower
WikiLeaks Confirms: Iran Waging War on U.S. for Years: LegalIns
WikiLeaks Reveals Troops Did Find WMD In Iraq: Ace

NPR Doubles Down on Juan Williams – Says He’s “Unethical”: GWP
Why Soros gave his $1.8 million NPR grant: AT
Late Night Drudgtaposition: Althouse

Clarice's Pieces: Fox and Hens (A Terrible Week for the Media): AT
Krauthammer Directly Challenges Totenberg on NPR’s ‘Hypocrisy’: NewsBusters
“Where Did Shakespeare Take His Courses in Creative Writing?”: RWN

World

Koch and Senor sign joint letter supporting Phillips against Hinchey: Matzav
Obama Books Entire Taj Mahal Hotel – Teleprompter Junkie Fears Missiles And Spiked Food: SHN
Report: Michelle Obama to Meet With Commercial Sex Workers in India: Malkin

Furia Francese -- 21st-Century Version: AT
Is Cash-Strapped Britain Losing the Will to Defend Itself?: PJM
Tower Hamlets Becomes a Tiny Islamic Republic: TAB

Taliban Suicide Bomber Suffers From Premature Detonation Syndrome While Riding Motorcycle: WZ
Indict Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: AT
Report: American, Australian forced killed in the Stan after Dutch helicopters refused support: Telegraph

SciTech

Was Moore's Law Inevitable?: Instapundit
2010 Tech Industry Graveyard: NetWorld
What We Know About the Mac App Store: CNet

Cornucopia

Could It Be? Our Fate is Sealed?: MOTUS
Sunday Book Thread: Ace
Anybody Looking for an Apartment?: RWN

Image: Convicted Shrew-slash-Terrorist Bernardine Dohrn, courtesy American Power
Today's Larwyn's Linx sponsored by: Fire Crazy Alan Grayson -- Elect Daniel Webster

QOTD: "This is not an election on November 2. This is a restraining order." -- P.J. O'Rourke


Saturday, October 23, 2010

Justice in the Time of Obama

Dan from New York:

Dispute over New Black Panthers case causes deep divisions


This blockbuster story in the Washington Post today exposes the reverse racism that has engulfed our Justice Department since Obama took office and appointed Eric Holder his Attorney General.

The Post's revelations are so shocking, even a conservative like Andrew Breitbart was startled:

"So the Post does what nobody has been able to do – obtain deep sourcing inside the Department confirming what Adams and Coates have been saying for months. This is a devastating piece of work by the Washington Post. This is a rare moment where the old print media has returned to the higher standards of years past, and reported facts. A week from an election, it couldn’t have come at a worse time for Eric Holder."

Let's Take Our Country Back While There's Still Time.
It's November or Never, America.

Except in Obama's America, "Lady Justice is... depicted wearing a blindfold. The blindfold represents objectivity, in that justice is (or should be) meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of identity, money, power, or weakness; blind justice and blind impartiality."


Cartoon: Christian Science Monitor.

Coinkadink: Feds Abandon Construction of Border Fence; 13 Kids Shot Dead At Border Town Birthday Party

Just hours after news broke that the Obama administration has dropped any pretense at protecting the border comes word that 13 youths were shot dead at a birthday party just a few miles south of El Paso, Texas.

Gunmen stormed a party in the border city of Ciudad Juarez and opened fire, killing at least 13 people and wounding 14 others, authorities said Saturday... The Friday night shooting carried grim echoes of an attack on a Juarez teen party in January that left 15 people dead and raised a national outcry.

In the latest case, authorities said a group of men armed with assault rifles burst into the party, which was being held in two adjacent homes in a neighborhood called Horizontes del Sur... Investigators found signs of more than 70 shots having been fired.

The victims who had been identified were between 16 and 25. A 9-year-old boy was among the wounded... one of the party-goers managed to flee, but was chased down and shot dead between a pair of parked cars.

Officials did not immediately offer a possible motive for the attack, the second time in a week that gunmen have fired upon a house party in Juarez. On Oct. 17, seven people were killed when attackers stormed a home near the city's airport.

Better still, the border which "is as secure as it's ever been" will now be left wide open thanks to the pro-illegal immigration lackey known as Janet NapoliReno.

The Obama administration is preparing to scrap plans to extend the high-tech "virtual" border fence along vast stretches of the 1,969-mile U.S.-Mexico border...

...Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, a former governor of Arizona keenly familiar with the technical problems afflicting the project, first signaled plans to scrub the "invisible fence" with a series of internal decisions in recent weeks that shifted the year-to-year contract with the prime contractor to a month-to-month contract due to expire on Nov. 21.

Gee, this may sound crazy, but perhaps an administration truly concerned with protecting Americans would build something known as a "real fence".

The failed narco-terror state next door is quickly descending into full-blown civil war. And NapoliReno, her boss, and the rest of the Democrat leadership doesn't care how many American are destined to die.

After all, building a fence would prevent illegals from voting -- and electioneering -- for Democrats in this crucial election.


Related:
So It Begins: DHS implements 'Backdoor Amnesty' and other startling immigration stories our beloved legacy media forgot to report
Car Bombs -- With Texas License Plates -- Detonating in Mexico; White House Reaction? More Open Borders!
• Reuters: Gunmen kill 13 at birthday party in Mexico (Image credit)

Shocka: New York Times and WikiLeaks Organize Al Qaqaa II (i.e., Yet Another Desperate October Surprise Intended to Swing the Elections)

Problem is: the illegal immigrants, felons, dead people, government dependents and union bosses -- the Democrats' core constituencies -- don't read the Times, so it's unlikely that Al Qaqaa II will have the same kind of impact as version one.

Why do I call this latest Halloween Surprise "Al Qaqaa II"?

A few months after the 2004 presidential election, Jonah Goldberg dredged up the long since forgotten dirty trick pulled by the New York Times-Fishwrap, which was clearly designed to swing last-minute support to John "D-Student" Kerry.

On Monday, October 25, 2004, the New York Times published a 2,600-word front page story headlined “Huge Cache of Explosives Vanished From Site in Iraq.” Written by three Times journalists [alleged that] 380 tons of very high explosives–munitions that could be used by Iraqi insurgents to attack American troops–were missing, and had probably been looted, from Iraq’s Al Qaqaa weapons-storage facility.

The story, published eight days before the presidential election, caused an immediate uproar. Aides to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry quickly arranged a conference call with reporters that Monday morning to push the Times’s findings...

Despite questions raised by critics about the story’s accuracy, completeness and timing, in the days that followed the Times mounted the journalistic equivalent of a full-court press on Al Qaqaa. On October 26, the paper ran a front-page article on Kerry’s quick pickup of the issue... That same day, Times columnist Paul Krugman charged that the administration’s handling of Al Qaqaa was part of a “culture of coverups.” ...The next day, October 27, the Times published two stories on the subject... Columnist Maureen Dowd also mentioned Al Qaqaa in an article entitled “White House of Horrors.”

The paper published two more stories mentioning Al Qaqaa on October 29 (one was another Krugman column), then two more on October 30, then two more on October 31, and then two more on November 1, the day before Election Day. Each day Kerry, who abandoned much of his planned final-week strategy to concentrate on Al Qaqaa, tried to capitalize on the latest reports. In all, in the eight days from October 25 to November 1, the Times published 16 stories and columns about Al Qaqaa, plus seven letters to the editor (all of which were critical of the Bush administration).

...And then, abruptly, it stopped. In the four months since the election, the Times appears to have simply dropped the Al Qaqaa story, publishing nothing about the munitions dump and the supposedly critical issues it raised about the Bush administration’s handling of the war in Iraq...

Simple: it was thinly disguised agitprop, designed to sway the masses the way Julius Streicher might have: by using "The Big Lie". And, yes, I'm using Nazi allusions because (a) they're accurate; and (b) I'm sick of the liberals constantly referring to those who love the Constitution as Nazi extremists, when it is they who constantly advocate for bigger government and for more centralized control without any limits whatsoever! But I digress...

Six years later, basically to the day, the Times will run a sensationalistic Sunday hit-piece designed to: (a) swing the elections; (b) undermine our troops; (c) hurt our allies; and (d) salvage six wavering subscribers.

And all of it will have the same impact as Al Qaqaa I. Which is to say: bupkis.

And they wonder why no normal American trusts the media. Get out on Tuesday morning with the other patriots. Line up thousands strong with your neighbors, family and friends. And help crush the liberal-progressive-Statist-Marxist machine. This time, we really are doing it for the children.


Hat tip: Memeorandum.