Time For Americans To Say "NO!"

Laura Hollis began her most recent column with a quote from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Would you like to read it? Here it is:

I saw that there comes a point, in the defeat of any man of virtue, when his own consent is needed for evil to win – and that no manner of injury done to him by others can succeed if he chooses to withhold his consent. I saw that I could put an end to your outrages by pronouncing a single word in my mind … The word [is] ‘No.’” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

Why is this so significant? Because we are on our way to a disaster known as socialism, against our wills apprently. And it is looking like the only way we can forstall this transition is to say "No."

How hard is it to say "No?" Pretty hard for most people. Mostly for two reasons: 1) they are not fully informed about what is being done in their name and 2) they rely on the old saying "to get along you have to go along." Wrong. Going along means simply that you have become a sheep and are willing to be led around by the nose, even if it means going in a direction that you don't want to go.

The current economic situation underscores my point. The American taxpayer did not cause any of the current conditions. Government did beginning with the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act. But, the taxpayer is being made to pay for it with things like the recent $1.3 trillion pork-spending package that more than doubled our deficit. And Obama and his socialist allies in Congress are betting on the "go along to get along" mentality to get away with squandering our children's and grandchildren's futures without being called to account on it.

This is where we say "No!"

Read on:

We are having hundreds of billions of our hard-earned tax dollars taken from us and given to the same organizations that got us in this mess, under the advice and counsel of the same irresponsible and deceitful politicians like Barney Frank and others who ignored warnings about the bad lending practices in the first place. And those same politicians now see fit to lecture us about patriotism and fiscal responsibility? This is a travesty so appalling that it should be prompting protests in the streets. As hardworking, tax-paying Americans have watched this Obamadrama play out, they have become increasingly distressed, saying, “But what do we do?” We start saying NO. Obama’s campaign mantra was “Yes, we can.” Here’s the new mantra for the American taxpayer: “No, we won’t.”

And we keep saying "No" right up to the 2010 elections and beyond. We let our government know that we will not go quietly into the night and we will not allow them to destory the American Dream with socialist policies that have failed every single time they were implemented. They failed in the former Soniet Union, they failed in Eastern Europe, they failed in Western Europe and they will fail here too. History is replete with such lessons and we, the people, must remind the government of such lessons by saying "No."

We also need to let the elitists in Congress know that we see through their hypocrisy:

More:

Where’s the “shared sacrifice” if you’re cutting back to make your mortgage payment, and the government hits you up to pay some stranger’s mortgage as well? And it’s hard to call for belt-tightening when Congress clamors to sign the bill within hours of receiving it so that Nancy Pelosi can jet off to Rome for a private audience with the Pope, and President Obama can ride a taxpayer-funded 747 back to Chicago to take Michelle out for a romantic Valentine’s Day dinner. (What, there aren’t any restaurants in D.C.?)

You see, the elistes like Obama and Pelosi believe that they are entitled to whatever they want and we, the plebian class, must pay for it, even if it means taking resources away from our own families.

But, we shouldn't have to take it, and we won't.

You take a page out of the civil rights playbook. Protest. Picket. Storm your representatives’ offices. Use the legal system. Go straight to your county or federal courthouse and file for a temporary restraining order, and then a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the law or regulation. If you are fined, do not pay it. Make the government defend civil litigation in every city and every state across the country. The government cannot possibly do this, anymore than it can possibly shut down every single Christian, conservative, right-wing, Republican or Libertarian show and/or station in the country. More to the point, they won’t want the country to see them try. If you think Santelli’s rant generated public outrage, imagine how the public would react to footage of government agents coming into your studio or station and forcing you to shut down. Imagine that happening all over the country. When blacks marched peacefully through the streets of the south in the 1960s, and they had the water hoses turned on them, and attack dogs unleashed on them, the rest of America saw those governments for what they were. This government is depending upon our complicity in its takeover. Not anymore. This time, we are saying, “No.”

You can access the complete column on-line here:

The Taxpayers' Mantra: No We Won't
Laura Hollis
TownHall.com
February 24, 2009

The Big Media Lie: Mortgage Crisis Is Bush's Fault

Bush derangement syndrome goes far beyond January 20, 2009. Remember that day? When Democrats very disrespectfully and derisively sang "Nan-na-na-na! Hey! Hey! Good-bye!" when the outgoing President and Vice-President came out? Well, a part of that reason is because Old Media would cherry-pick information that was politically expedient for Democrats and use that limited information to write stories for print. In other words, Old Media would deliberately withhold facts that might have painted the Bush Administration in a positive light.

Fortunately, the Internet does not have a "memory hole" like the one used in George Orwell's novel 1984.

One of the lies that Old Media is perpetuating, and Barack Obama is trying to underscore in order to sell his $100 million mortgage bailout plan, is that the current housing mortgage crisis is the fault of George W. Bush. That is simply not true. The current mortgage crisis has its roots in the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act.

In fact, it is the uber-liberal New York Times that debunks this lie with its own archive of stories. In fact, it validates my earlier blog entry about how Barney Frank lied about the who was responsible for the collapse of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

From a New York Times article that was published September 11, 2003:

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago. Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry. ... The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

Clearly, the Bush Administration knew that there was a big problem with Freddie and Fannie. The New York Times proves this with the above referenced article.

So, why didn't anything get done about it? Because the Democrats, that is the same Democrats who are falsely blaming Bush, stopped it. In fact, the Democrats were saying that there was nothing wrong with Freddie and Fannie while they were failing.

Read this:

Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing. "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed. "I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing," Mr. Watt said.

Let me repeat what Barney Frank told the New York Times in 2003: "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis." He said this at a time when the Bush Administration was trying to fix the system and avoid the very problem we are facing today! And Barney Frank is one of those trying to Blame Bush!

But, Old Media will never admit the truth. Instead, despite what the archival evidence is, Old Media would rather repeat the lie.

You can access the original New York Times article on-line here:

New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae
Stephen Labaton
New York Times
September 11, 2003

Socialism? The Current Proposal From The Democrats Is Outright Marxism!

You are not going to believe this, but read it for yourself:

Congress will consider legislation to extend some of the curbs on executive pay that now apply only to those banks receiving federal assistance, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said. “There’s deeply rooted anger on the part of the average American,” the Massachusetts Democrat said at a Washington news conference today. He said the compensation restrictions would apply to all financial institutions and might be extended to include all U.S. companies.

Yes, if you read all the way to the end of that clip, you saw the words: "to include all U.S. companies."

That's right. The Dems are now proposing Soviet-style control on how much money you could potentially make.

Think this is just some leftist idle chat? Read on:

Mr. Frank seems to be in synch with the Obama administration in his plans for executive compensation. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said last month that he might try to extend to all U.S. companies a restriction that prohibits bailout banks from taking a tax deduction of more than $500,000 in pay for each executive. The Troubled Assets Relief Program legislation enacted in October seeks to give companies receiving aid under the $700 billion bailout a number of incentives to curb what it calls excessive executive pay. Mr. Geithner said he would consider “extending at least some of the TARP provisions and features of the $500,000 cap to U.S. companies generally.”

Yes, our current tax-evading Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, said that.

Any of you libs out there still want to whine about the Dems being referred to as "socialists?" Maybe you are right. This latest proposal puts them in league with the Marxists.

There is an old saying: "With the first link, the chain is forged."

This idiotic proposal the Dems are making is that first link.

Wake up, America!

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Barney Frank: TARP's Comp Curbs Could Be Extended To All Businesses
Neil Roland
Financial Week
February 3, 2009

Democrats Force Higher Energy Costs On America: Ban Exploration Of Oil Rich Lands

Get ready for higher energy costs courtesy of the Democrat-controlled Congress. The Senate voted 66-12 to ensure that we Americans remain dependent on foreign oil to satisfy the needs of our economy. What is even worse is that now, we will be at the mercy of OPEC more than ever before in our history.

For those of you from Virginia, you'll note that the very first legislative action of Senator Mark Warner was to ensure that we Virginians are paying higher prices for our energy needs. You'll also noted that Jim Webb voted that way as well.

Writing for Town Hall, Amanda Carpenter has this to say:

The 1200-page, pork-laden, $10 billion proposal locks up millions of acres of energy-rich property by designating it as environmentalist-friendly “federal wilderness” area where not even as much as a bicycle would be permitted to travel across the land. Many of these areas recently became available when the ban on domestic drilling in Western states expired last fall and the liberal left couldn’t muster the courage to keep it in place due to rising energy prices. Now Democratic leaders are using different legislative strategies to put a new kind of ban in place.

The Dems have deluded themsleves into believing that some form of alternative energy is going to come to our rescue within the next four years. Don't hold your breath over it. Oil is still the most economical energy source we have and no matter how much money we put into solar or wind or pixie dust, alternative energy sources will not be able to make up for the amount of energy we will be losing because of this land grab.

More:

For example, one piece of the bill that has drawn the ire of the Wall Street Journal is a provision sponsored by Rep. Barney Frank (D.-Mass.). He’d like to make a robust, container shipping port located in his district’s Taunton River into a scenic tourist destination. This would have the liberally convenient side effect of killing a proposal to create a terminal to import liquefied natural gas.

Again, this will have the effect of forcing energy prices higher. But will Barney Frank, Jim Webb and Mark Warner care? No! They have all the perks they need as members of Congress and no reason to care about the needs of Joe and Jane Average American.

And no bill shoved through Congress using the new Democrat rules that bar Republicans from offering alternative legislation or bringing in testimony from opposing viewpoints would be complete without loads of pork.

Read on:

Then, as to be expected in an omnibus bill, there’s the pork. California Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D.) is requesting $461 million to legally settle a dispute over the San Joaquin River with the environmentalist group Natural Resources Defense Council. The money would be used for a water project that has the “minimum goal” of restoring 500 salmon to the river. (That’s nearly $1 million per fish!) Montana Sen. Jon Tester (D.) wants $5 million to fund a “Wolf Compensation and Prevention Program” to assist property owners use “non-lethal” measures to prohibit wolves from killing their livestock.

Didn't Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid promise fiscal responsibility when they took over in 2006? Weren't they complaining that the Republicans were waiting resources and pushing energy prices higher?

The Dems lied to us back in 2006 and again in 2008. We are in for some very long years ahead, possibly even a new Great Depression and the Democrats will only have themselves to blame for it.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Harry Reid’s Land Grab
Amanda Carpenter
TownHall.com
January 10, 2009

To see how they voted, click here:

How They Voted On S. 22
United States Senate
January 11, 2008

The Leftist Double-Standard Against The Jews

If leftists didn't have double-standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all. The typical leftist (socialist, communist, Democrat, etc.) usually holds very low standards for their own kind while holding their political opponents to much higher standards. For example, leftists were all over Florida Rep. Mark Foley for the lewd text massages he was exchanging with Congressional pages, but felt that there was absolutely nothing wrong when Rep. Barney Frank ran a gay prostitution ring out of his Washington D.C. apartment.

That's a prime example of the double-standard.

The latest example of left-wing hypocrisy comes from Hamas firing rockets that deliberately targeted Israeli civilians for which Israel had to act in self-defense and target Hamas sites in Gaza.

Writing for the Wall Street Journal, Rabbi Marvin Hier spells out clearly and conscisely exactly what the double-standards are and show how arrogant those leftists are who hold them. From his column:

Just look at the spate of attacks this week on Jews and Jewish institutions around the world: a car ramming into a synagogue in France; a Chabad menorah and Jewish-owned shops sprayed with swastikas in Belgium; a banner at an Australian rally demanding "clean the earth from dirty Zionists!"; demonstrators in the Netherlands chanting "Gas the Jews"; and in Florida, protestors demanding Jews "Go back to the ovens!" ... At the U.N., no surprise, this double-standard is in full force. In response to Israel's attack on Hamas, the Security Council immediately pulled an all-night emergency meeting to consider yet another resolution condemning Israel. Have there been any all-night Security Council sessions held during the seven months when Hamas fired 3,000 rockets at half a million innocent civilians in southern Israel? You can be certain that during those seven months, no midnight oil was burning at the U.N. headquarters over resolutions condemning terrorist organizations like Hamas. But put condemnation of Israel on the agenda and, rain or shine, it's sure to be a full house.

Exactly. The leftists in the U.N. are perfectly okay with the terrorist organization Hamas launching rockets at Israeli civilians, but will not tolerate Israel defending itself from such terrorist attacks.

More:

Red Cross officials are all over the Gaza crisis, describing it as a full-blown humanitarian nightmare. Where were they during the seven months when tens of thousands of Israeli families could not sleep for fear of a rocket attack? Where were their trauma experts to decry that humanitarian crisis? There have been hundreds of articles and reports written from the Erez border crossing falsely accusing Israel of blocking humanitarian supplies from reaching beleaguered Palestinians in Gaza. (In fact, over 520 truck loads of humanitarian aid have been delivered through Israeli crossings since the beginning of the Israeli counterattack.) But how many news articles, NGO reports and special U.N. commissions have investigated Hamas's policy of deliberately placing rocket launchers near schools, mosques and homes in order to use innocent Palestinians as human shields?

That is the hallmark of an Islamic terrorist: no concern for anyone's safety, not even their own people. Hamas has no interest in defending Palestinians. Their only interest is gaining power for themselves, even if it means doing that which will kill their own.

Does the rest of the world see this? No! They only feel their own hatred for Israel and the Jews. So much so, that they will make every effort to ensure that Israel's enemies have the time and resources to rest and re-arm for the next round of terrorist strikes.

Rabbi Hier goes on:

And then there are the clarion calls for a cease-fire. These words, which come so easily, have proven to be a recipe for disaster. Hamas uses the cease-fire as a time-out to rearm and smuggle even more deadly weapons so the next time, instead of hitting Sderot and Ashkelon, they can target Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. The pattern is always the same. Following a cease-fire brought on by international pressure, there will be a call for a massive infusion of funds to help Palestinians recover from the devastation of the Israeli attack. The world will respond eagerly, handing over hundreds of millions of dollars. To whom does this money go? To Hamas, the same terrorist group that brought disaster to the Palestinians in the first place.

Blame for the Gaza crisis rests solely and squarely on the heads of Hamas. Were it not for their irrational hatred of the Jews and their brazen terrorist attacks against innocent civilians, it would not have been necessary for Israel to rise in defense of herself.

As Golda Meir once said: ""There will be peace in the Middle East when the Arabs love their children more than they hate the Jews"."

You can access the complete article on-line here:

The Jews Face A Double Standard
Rabbi Marvin Hier
The Wall Street Journal
January 8, 2009

Jim Webb Thinks We Virginians Are Stupid

Well, we've seen the effects of the bailout that both Senators Webb and Warner voted for to the tune of $905 billion. Stock markets are crashing. They would have crashed anyway, but now we are paying an extra $905 billion for it.

Before the Senate vote, I faxed letters to my Senators about my opposition to the bailout (as did about 80% of the rest of America). And Jim Webb responded with an email. Here is a portion of what he wrote to me:

For many years, I have said that the current Administration has failed to exercise appropriate oversight of the nation's banking and corporate sectors, and has promoted policies that reward Wall Street at the expense of Main Street. The Administration's actions are largely responsible for our current economic crisis, which resulted in President Bush's September 2008 proposal to help restore soundness to U.S. credit markets.

Now, either Webb is completely ignorant of recent history or he is deliberately lying to me hoping that I am too stupid to see through the lie.

The truth is that several times since 1999, the Republicans have tried to enact reform of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. You can read my earlier blog posts about how people like Senator Chris Dodd and Representative Barney Frank have stonewalled those efforts by saying that they saw no problem at all.

Democrats Will Not Talk About Freddie Or Fannnie
84rules
October 7, 2008

Pelosi Declares Hearngs On Housing Crisis: Barney Frank To Co-Chair
84rules
October 3, 2008

Crony Capitalism Is The Root Cause Of Freddie And Fannie Troubles: Democrats At The Center Of It All
84rules
September 27, 2008

And a more in depth look at Barney Frank's statements about Freddie and Fannie over the past several years:

Barney Frank: Lies And Damned Lies About Freddie And Fannie
84rules
September 24, 2008

And he also wrote this little tidbit:

I opposed the original hastily-written and woefully inadequate financial sector bailout bill proposed by President Bush. In the nearly two weeks after the President's proposal, the U.S. Congress radically changed the original bill to better protect taxpayers and to ensure greater Congressional oversight. I am pleased that the bipartisan compromise legislation to stabilize our nation's economic system (H.R.1424), which the Senate passed on October 1, 2008 by a bipartisan vote of 74-25, bore no resemblance to the original Bush proposal.

Now, the only real difference between the original bill and the one Webb voted for was over $150 billion in earmarks and pork. Thus, if we follow Webb's own words, the only reason he voted for the second version was because it contained so much irresponsible spending! Look at all the wooden arrows Webb voted for! Look at all the Rum from Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands Webb voted for! Webb voted to give Hollywood a $500 million tax break for making movies! Those are among the the differences between the original bill and the bill that the Senate passed!

So, Senator Webb either has the most incompetent research staff in the Senate, or he is deliberately lying to us Virginians about the true causes of the current financial crisis and the true reasons he voted for it. Or another theory is that he is simply toting the Democrat Party line because that is what he was told to do by his political masters even if it means going against the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Anyway you cut it, he must really think that we Virginians are stupid.

We need to make sure that he is a one-term Senator and then elect someone who will actually represent Virginia rather than the interests of the Democrats.

Voting Against Obama Does NOT Make One A Racist

One thing that infuriates me more than anything else is when someone falsely accuses me of something. Most recently, I, and several million other Conservatives, have been accused of being racist because we are not going to vote for a black candidate.

Well, here's a news flash folks. I am not a racist. I am voting against Barack Obama because he is a leftist Socialist and his policies will wreck the American economy. There is absolutely nothing racial in that point of view at all. So, please dispense with the false accusations and save them for the real cases of racism, okay?

The new charges of racism stem from the fact that Barack Obama has a relationship with domestic terrorist William Ayers. Apparently, the Obama camp wants us to take the stance that mentioning this relationship is somehow racist.

Glenn Beck penned a column that captures my feelings on the subject. Writing for CNN, he notes the following about the Obama campaign and Democrats in general:

The defense on Ayers from the Obama camp is that they're not friends -- Ayers was "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," as Obama said. This strikes me as a strange argument from the same campaign that ran Spanish-language ads attempting to disparage McCain by highlighting his "Republican friends" like Rush Limbaugh. Besides the fact that Rush isn't a terrorist and had to be completely taken out of context in the attempt to smear him -- Limbaugh and McCain are best known for their adversarial relationship. Rush has spent the better part of a decade mocking him, most recently on the specific stance that was the focus of the commercial, immigration reform. If Rush qualifies as McCain's friend, then William Ayers might as well be Barack Obama's fiancé. But as The Associated Press claimed, even mentioning the association with Ayers, as Sarah Palin did in a speech earlier in the week, signifies a hidden "racial tinge." Is anyone else getting tired of this? Any and every time a question of Obama's history or record is asked, there is always someone to blame it on racism. Remember, William Ayers is a pasty white guy like me. Shouldn't the fact that Palin is criticizing a white terrorist show that it's not his color -- but his terrorism -- that she's not fond of? Instead, the AP tries to make the case that voters will think Obama is "not like us" since "terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims." Right, because nothing dredges up visions of radical Muslims with box-cutters like a guy named Bill. ... Charges of racism have even entered the financial meltdown. One recent criticism by conservatives has surrounded the Community Reinvestment Act. This act, passed in 1977 under Jimmy Carter and then strengthened by Bill Clinton, pressured mortgage companies to lend to those with poor credit and lower income. You might think that putting the government's endorsement of the loosening of lending standards under the microscope in the middle of a global financial crisis would be a no-brainer. Well, not to House Financial Services Committee chair Barney Frank: "The bizarre notion that the Community Reinvestment Act ... somehow is the cause of the whole problem, [conservatives] don't mind that. ... They're aware that the affordable-housing goals of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac [and] the Community Reinvestment Act [aim to help] poor people. And let's be honest, the fact that some poor people are black doesn't hurt either from their standpoint." I guess when you're on record in July of this year saying "I think this is a case where Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound, that they are not in danger of going under," the only thing you can do is play the race card.

Voting against Obama is not racist. It's American.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Commentary: Voting Against Obama Doesn't Make You A Racist
Glenn Beck
CNN
October 9, 2008

Democrats Will Not Talk About Freddie Mac Or Fannie Mae In Their Sham Hearings

HAT TIP TO HOT AIR!

Man! Did we predict this or what? In an earlier post, I speculated that Pelosi and Company would not be bringing people like Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and Franklin Raines before Congress to answer questions about their roles in the Freddie and Fannie meltdown. I was right. She won't.

In fact, the Dems will only being before Congress the Wall Street CEOs, despite the fact that these CEOs did everything they could to obey the law under the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act and it was trying to stay within that law that led to the current sistuation we are in. Will the Dems acknowledge this? No! They are trying to deflect the blame elsewhere.

From Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air:

Democrats have begun a search for the culprit in the financial collapse in a manner somewhat akin to the OJ Simpson search for Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman’s murderer. The Hill reports that Henry Waxman’s Oversight Committee hearing grilled Lehman Brothers executives over CEO pay and “deregulation”, but never mentioned the names Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Republicans found that more than a little strange.

Here is what The Hill is reporting:

Democrats aimed their harshest attacks at deregulation and CEO pay, using former Lehman Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Richard Fuld as an example during a recess hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) also released internal documents showing Lehman’s compensation committee recommended $20 million in “special payments” to three departing executives on Sept. 11, four days before the firm filed for bankruptcy. Republicans, for their part, launched a campaign to pin the financial meltdown on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and attacked Waxman for not holding a hearing to dig into the now-nationalized mortgage giants. “Any hearing on oversight that does not begin with Fannie and Freddie and [former Fannie Mae CEO] Franklin Raines will be a sham,” said Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.). “This is like investigating a train robbery and only talking to the dining car stewards.”

And check out this video of Chris Shays ripping into Congress for its own part in the Freddie/Fannie mess:

Video From C-SPAN Here

you can access the orginal Hot Air entry on-line here:

Democrats Refuse To Talk About Fannie, Freddie In Oversight Hearing
Ed Morissey
Hot Air
October 7, 2008

Pelosi Declares Hearings On Housing Crisis: Barney Frank To Co-Chair

Immediately after the Wall Street Bailout bill passed the House and went to the Oval Office for Presidential signature, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that there would be hearings on the subject.

According to CNN:

She said Congress will shine a new "light of scrutiny and accountability" on the nation's financial system to try to prevent a replay of the problems that plunged the nation into a financial crisis. Reps. Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts, and Henry Waxman, D-California, plan to hold hearings to increase scrutiny of the financial system, Pelosi added. "We want to take our country in a new direction for the middle class," Pelosi said. Frank told reporters Friday that starting in January, Congress will "have a major role." "We have to rewrite housing in America. ... It would be highly irresponsible if we were to stop here," he said. "Now we have to perform more serious reform."

Yet, she mentions nothing about the accountability of people like Sen. Chris Dodd, or Franklin Raines or Jamie Gorelick, the latter two having made millions off of Fannie while the organization itself was sliding into government conservatorship.

And what about Barney Frank Co-Chairing these hearings? Will anyone get him to answer questions about the way he blocked reform of Freddie and Fannie over the past several years? Will Pelosi demand accountability and transparency from him? No. She is nothing more than a partisan hack who just managed to cram through the biggest socialist package in American history.

Something else that should be looked into: Barney Frank's relationship with a former Fannie executive named Herb Moses.

From Fox News:

Unqualified home buyers were not the only ones who benefitted from Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank’s efforts to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990s. So did Frank’s partner, a Fannie Mae executive at the forefront of the agency’s push to relax lending restrictions. Now that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie’s assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie. Both Frank and Moses assured the Wall Street Journal in 1992 that they took pains to avoid any conflicts of interest. Critics, however, remain skeptical. "It’s absolutely a conflict," said Dan Gainor, vice president of the Business & Media Institute. "He was voting on Fannie Mae at a time when he was involved with a Fannie Mae executive. How is that not germane? "If this had been his ex-wife and he was Republican, I would bet every penny I have - or at least what’s not in the stock market - that this would be considered germane," added Gainor, a T. Boone Pickens Fellow. "But everybody wants to avoid it because he’s gay. It’s the quintessential double standard." A top GOP House aide agreed. "C’mon, he writes housing and banking laws and his boyfriend is a top exec at a firm that stands to gain from those laws?" the aide told FOX News. "No media ever takes note? Imagine what would happen if Frank’s political affiliation was R instead of D? Imagine what the media would say if [GOP former] Chairman [Mike] Oxley’s wife or [GOP presidential nominee John] McCain’s wife was a top exec at Fannie for a decade while they wrote the nation’s housing and banking laws." Frank’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Of course they didn't immediately respond. They need time to think up a way of spinning out of it.

You can access these articles on-line here:

Pelosi: After Bill Passage, Hearings Set To Begin
CNN.com
October 3, 2008

Lawmaker Accused Of Fannie Mae Conflict Of Interest
Bill Sammon
Fox News
October 3, 2008

Congress Passes Legislation That Hands American Taxpayers The Largest Bill In History

All the scaremongers said that it was necessary to avert a credit crisis.

Credit crisis?

Where? I was still getting credit card offers through the mail. A 20-year-old friend of mine just got approved for a car loan. Student loans are still being approved. Small businesses are still able to get loans. Exactly where is the "credit crisis?"

Only on Wall Street. And Congress has now authorized the President to screw the American Taxpayer with over $805 billion in responsibilities. Maybe our children will be able to pay this off, but those of us living on Main Street just got served notice that the Federal Government cares more about the people who make big campaign donations than they do about the American people.

From the Associated Press:

The final vote, 263-171 in the House, a comfortable margin that was 58 more votes than it garnered on Monday. The vote capped two weeks of tumult in Congress and on Wall Street, punctuated by daily warnings that the country confronted the gravest economic crisis since the Great Depression if lawmakers failed to act. Bush was poised to make a statement on the historic vote. "We all know that we are in the midst of a financial crisis," House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio, said shortly before casting his vote for government intervention in private capital markets that was unthinkable only a month ago. "And we know that if we do nothing, this crisis is likely to worsen and to put us into an economic slump like most of us have never seen."

And this bailout is going to put us in a situation like none of us have ever seen!

Here is what I see:

- Wall Street Big Wigs and the Congressional recipients of their donations are stuffing my tax dollars into their pockets.
- Numerous recipients of earmarks and pork stuffing my tax dollars in their pockets.
- My gasoline prices going up because some idiot inserted a carbon tax into the bill my and stupid fool Senators (Webb and Warner) and Representative (Wolf) completely missed it!

Here is what I don't see:

- Accountability from those who caused this mess.
- I don't see Chris Dodd (D-CT) or Barney Frank (D-MA) being hauled before a Congressional committee to give account of how they blocked Republicans from enacting the reform that could averted this whole mess and saved us $805 billion dollars.
- I don't see Franklin Raines being hauled before a Congressional committee to explain how he made $90 million while Fannie was losing money.
- I don't see that the progenitor of this whole thing, the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act, has been repealed which means that banks and lending institutions are still being forced to make bad loans.

Let's see who the big winners really were:

Sec. 101. Extension of alternative minimum tax relief for nonrefundable personal credits.
Sec. 102. Extension of increased alternative minimum tax exemption amount.
Sec. 103. Increase of AMT refundable credit amount for individuals with longterm unused credits for prior year minimum tax liability, etc.
Sec. 201. Deduction for State and local sales taxes.
Sec. 202. Deduction of qualified tuition and related expenses.
Sec. 203. Deduction for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers.
Sec. 204. Additional standard deduction for real property taxes for nonitemizers.
Sec. 205. Tax-free distributions from individual retirement plans for charitable purposes.
Sec. 206. Treatment of certain dividends of regulated investment companies.
Sec. 207. Stock in RIC for purposes of determining estates of nonresidents not citizens.
Sec. 208. Qualified investment entities.
Sec. 301. Extension and modification of research credit.
Sec. 302. New markets tax credit.
Sec. 303. Subpart F exception for active financing income.
Sec. 304. Extension of look-thru rule for related controlled foreign corporations.
Sec. 305. Extension of 15-year straight-line cost recovery for qualified leasehold improvements and qualified restaurant improvements; 15-year straight-line cost recovery for certain improvements to retail space.
Sec. 306. Modification of tax treatment of certain payments to controlling exempt organizations.
Sec. 307. Basis adjustment to stock of S corporations making charitable contributions of property.
Sec. 308. Increase in limit on cover over of rum excise tax to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
Sec. 309. Extension of economic development credit for American Samoa.
Sec. 310. Extension of mine rescue team training credit.
Sec. 311. Extension of election to expense advanced mine safety equipment.
Sec. 312. Deduction allowable with respect to income attributable to domestic production activities in Puerto Rico.
Sec. 313. Qualified zone academy bonds.
Sec. 314. Indian employment credit.
Sec. 315. Accelerated depreciation for business property on Indian reservations.
Sec. 316. Railroad track maintenance. Sec. 317. Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facility.
Sec. 318. Expensing of environmental remediation costs.
Sec. 319. Extension of work opportunity tax credit for Hurricane Katrina employees.
Sec. 320. Extension of increased rehabilitation credit for structures in the Gulf Opportunity Zone.
Sec. 321. Enhanced deduction for qualified computer contributions.
Sec. 322. Tax incentives for investment in the District of Columbia.
Sec. 323. Enhanced charitable deductions for contributions of food inventory.
Sec. 324. Extension of enhanced charitable deduction for contributions of book inventory.
Sec. 325. Extension and modification of duty suspension on wool products; wool research fund; wool duty refunds.
Sec. 401. Permanent authority for undercover operations. v Sec. 402. Permanent authority for disclosure of information relating to terrorist activities.
Sec. 501. $8,500 income threshold used to calculate refundable portion of child tax credit.
Sec. 502. Provisions related to film and television productions.
Sec. 503. Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children.
Sec. 504. Income averaging for amounts received in connection with the Exxon Valdez litigation.
Sec. 505. Certain farming business machinery and equipment treated as 5-year property.
Sec. 506. Modification of penalty on understatement of taxpayer's liability by tax return preparer.
Sec. 512. Mental health parity.
Sec. 601. Secure rural schools and community self-determination program.
Sec. 602. Transfer to abandoned mine reclamation fund.
Sec. 702. Temporary tax relief for areas damaged by 2008 Midwestern severe storms, tornados, and flooding.
Sec. 703. Reporting requirements relating to disaster relief contributions.
Sec. 704. Temporary tax-exempt bond financing and low-income housing tax relief for areas damaged by Hurricane Ike.
Sec. 706. Losses attributable to federally declared disasters.
Sec. 707. Expensing of Qualified Disaster Expenses.
Sec. 708. Net operating losses attributable to federally declared disasters.
Sec. 709. Waiver of certain mortgage revenue bond requirements following federally declared disasters.
Sec. 710. Special depreciation allowance for qualified disaster property.
Sec. 711. Increased expensing for qualified disaster assistance property.
Sec. 712. Coordination with Heartland disaster relief.
Sec. 801. Nonqualified deferred compensation from certain tax indifferent parties.

And don't forget Sec. 117. The carbon tax. Now the Feds can royally screw our economy just like the governments in Europe are screwing theirs!

At least I can say one thing that is a bit of a relief. This bailout is going to ultimately fail and the economy is going to crash (we cannot keep the markets artificially inflated like this) and it looks like Barack Obama is going to win this election. The crash will happen on his watch and he will have no one to blame except himself and the Democrat-controlled Congress.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Congress OKs Historic Bailout Bill
Julie Hirschfeld and David Espo
Associated Press via Breitbart
October 3, 2008

An Open Letter To Rep. Frank Wolf Concerning The Wall Street Bailout

Frank Wolf
241 Cannon Building
Washington, DC 20515

Subj: Emergency Economic Stabilization Act

Mr. Wolf,

As you already know, Senators Warner and Webb have voted “Yes” to bailing out the Wall Street Banks and Institutions that got themselves into a serious mess by engaging in extremely poor business practices. This bailout amounts to the Federal Government using my hard earned money to give a huge payday to a group of Wall Street executives while completely failing to hold accountable any of the people who caused this whole situation to begin with.

Further, this bill is being shoved down our collective throats since there have been no hearings, no debates and no investigations into the exact cause of the problem.

I recommend that at least four people be brought before Congress and put under oath to explain their exact roles in this matter. These four are Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), Franklin Raines, who made $90 million in personal income off of Fannie and Jim Johnson who made over $20 million. I, for one, would like to know how these last two made money while everyone else lost money.

Beyond all of this is the pork that has been tacked onto this bailout. Main Street is going to bail out Wall Street for some Puerto Rican Rum and maybe some NASCAR tracks? How about that “Wool Research?” God knows we can never have too much of that now, can we? And what about those “Wooden Arrows designed for use by children?” Maybe we can line the Wall Street CEOs up against the wall and shoot them with the arrows!

This $700 billion legislation just went up to $850 billion, and now the House is talking about tacking even more pork onto this!

It doesn’t matter whether this bill is 3 pages or 3000 pages. It is still a socialist bailout that will saddle me and my children with bills that will take decades to pay off, if we can even pay them off at all.

Perhaps you should take the time to read through the entire bill before voting to require the American Taxpayer to handle more debt than we can afford.

Also, you should know that the contributions made to you in gratitude for your “Yes” vote on the original bill have not gone unnoticed. To wit:

Securities brokers & investment companies: $28,150
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate: $27,250
Commercial banks & bank holding companies: $21,700
Credit Unions: $13,250
Investment banking: $11,800
Credit agencies & finance companies: $11,250
Private Equity & Investment Firms: $7,800
Venture capital: $7,500
Banks & lending institutions: $6,000
Stock exchanges: $1,950
Savings banks & Savings and loans: $400
Commodity brokers/dealers: $250

The total you received from entities who support this bailout is $137,300. That is how much you have effectively been paid to hand me and my children this huge debt of at least $850 billion plus whatever other pork you and your peers decide to put into this thing. The latest estimate I saw was a final bill of $905 billion.

There is a reason these banks and lending institutions are failing. It is because the market is dictating that the fail. Once they do, businesses that engage in wiser practices will step up and take their place.

Please do the right thing and vote “No” on this bailout bill, or if you cannot do that, please explain to me why I have to provide a huge payday to Wall Street while those who got us into this mess get to walk away with no accountability and at the same time, are shoving my money into their pockets.

Thank you.

'Crony' Capitalism Is Root Cause Of Fannie And Freddie Troubles: Democrats At The Center Of It All

Terry Jones at the Investor's Business Daily has a nice, clean, concise and accurate description of what happneed at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and why we taxpayers are being cajoled into paying for it.

The truth is that depspite the shrill calls from Barack Obama, Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank that it is "all the Republicans fault," it has been the Democrats at the center of the maelstrom. It was the Democrats who, at least twelve times, derailed Republican efforts at reforming Freddie and Fannie and as we showed in a previous blog post, Barney Frank was one of those opposed that reform very ferociously.

So, why did the Dems opposed the reform of Freddie and Fannie? Money. That's it. That's the whole reason.

Here is the history in a nutshell:

It all started, innocently enough, in 1994 with President Clinton's rewrite of the Carter-era Community Reinvestment Act. Ostensibly intended to help deserving minority families afford homes — a noble idea — it instead led to a reckless surge in mortgage lending that has pushed our financial system to the brink of chaos. ... Fannie and Freddie, the main vehicle for Clinton's multicultural housing policy, drove the explosion of the subprime housing market by buying up literally hundreds of billions of dollars in substandard loans — funding loans that ordinarily wouldn't have been made based on such time-honored notions as putting money down, having sufficient income, and maintaining a payment record indicating creditworthiness. With all the old rules out the window, Fannie and Freddie gobbled up the market. Using extraordinary leverage, they eventually controlled 90% of the secondary market mortgages. Their total portfolio of loans topped $5.4 trillion — half of all U.S. mortgage lending. They borrowed $1.5 trillion from U.S. capital markets with — wink, wink — an "implicit" government guarantee of the debts. This created the problem we are having today. As we noted a week ago, subprime lending surged from around $35 billion in 1994 to nearly $1 trillion last year — for total growth of 2,757% as of last year. No real market grows that fast for that long without being fixed.

And the part about money for the Dems? Read on:

Fannie and Freddie became huge contributors to Congress, spending millions to influence votes. As we've noted here before, the bulk of the money went to Democrats. ... Meanwhile, Fannie and Freddie also became a kind of jobs program for out-of-work Democrats. Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson, the CEOs under whom the worst excesses took place in the late 1990s to mid-2000s, were both high-placed Democratic operatives and advisers to presidential candidate Barack Obama. Clinton administration official Jamie Gorelick also got taken care of by the Fannie-Freddie circle. So did top Clinton aide Rahm Emanuel, among others.

And yet, despite the fact that the Dems are in the middle of this whole fiasco, Obama, Dodd and Frank are insistent that it is a Republican problem. Unfortunately, their surrogates in the media are spreading this misleading (or outright false) message.

But, do you remember all those campaign ads by Barack Obama about how their were lobbyists on John McCain's staff? Well, Obama should change his campaign slogan of "Change we can believe in" to "Hypocrisy for our own cause." Here is how Obama deals with those lobbyists:

Over the span of his career, Obama ranks No. 2 in campaign donations from Fannie and Freddie, taking over $125,000. Dodd, head of the Senate Banking panel, is tops at $165,000. Clinton, ranked 12th, has collected $75,000. ... It emerged that Clinton aide Raines, who took Fannie Mae's helm as CEO in 1999, took in nearly $100 million by the time he left in 2005. Others, including former Clinton Justice Department official Gorelick, took $75 million from the Fannie-Freddie piggy bank.

Today, Raines is a top advisor for the Obama campaign.

So, the next time somone accuses the Republicans of this Freddie and Fannie mess, ask the accuser what happened to all the money that the Dems made off of Freddie and Fannie and ask when was the last time the Dems tried to reform them.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

'Crony' Capitalism Is Root Cause Of Fannie And Freddie Troubles
Terry Jones
Investor's Business Daily
September 22, 2008

Barney Frank: Lies And Damned Lies About Freddie And Fannie

So, what does a left-wing socialist do when confronted with a financial crisis caused by the government? He incorrectly blames it on the private sector.

That is precisely what Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) did when he blamed the current Wall Street crisis on the free market. Here is exactly what he said:

"The private sector got us into this mess… The government has to get us out of it. We do want to do it carefully."

Now, there is no spinning this nor is there any taking it out of context. Rep. Frank was clear and unambiguous in what he said.

But, he is making false accusations. In fact, he is either deliberately lying or he has the worst memery in the history of the House of Representatives.

On September 9, 2008, the Wall Street Journal published an excellent article which details Frank's history of comment and action on the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae meltdowns. Here is the history:

In 2000, then-Rep. Richard Baker proposed a bill to reform Fannie and Freddie's oversight. Mr. Frank dismissed the idea, saying concerns about the two were "overblown" and that there was "no federal liability there whatsoever."

Apparently, Frank doesn't seem to think that they are "overblown" now.

Two years later, Mr. Frank was at it again. "I do not regard Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as problems," he said in response to another reform push. And then: "I regard them as great assets." Great or not, we'll give Mr. Frank this: Their assets are now Uncle Sam's assets, even if those come along with $5.4 trillion in debt and other liabilities. Again in June 2003, the favorite of the Beltway press corps assured the public that "there is no federal guarantee" of Fan and Fred obligations. A month later, Freddie Mac's multibillion-dollar accounting scandal broke into the open. But Mr. Frank was sanguine. "I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis," he said at the time.

I don't believe that anyone even remotely familiar with the situation as it exists today would deny that this was "any kind of crisis."

More:

Three months later he repeated the claim that Fannie and Freddie posed no "threat to the Treasury." Even suggesting that heresy, he added, could become "a self-fulfilling prophecy." In April 2004, Fannie announced a multibillion-dollar financial "misstatement" of its own. Mr. Frank was back for the defense. Fannie and Freddie posed no risk to taxpayers, he said, adding that "I think Wall Street will get over it" if the two collapsed.

Good! Then we don't need this bailout nor do we need any Federal oversight, now do we?

Frank wasn't done yet. Read on:

By early 2007, Mr. Frank was in charge of the House Financial Services Committee, arguing that he had long favored some kind of reform. "What blocked it [reform] last year," Mr. Frank said then, "was the insistence of some economic conservative fundamentalists in the Bush Administration who, to be honest, don't think there should be a Fannie Mae or a Freddie Mac." What really blocked it was Mr. Frank's insistence that any reform be watered down and not include any reduction in their MBS holdings. In January of last year, Mr. Frank also noted one reason he liked Fannie and Freddie so much: They were subject to his political direction. Contrasting Fan and Fred with private-sector mortgage financers, he noted, "I can ask Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to show forbearance" in a housing crisis. That is to say, because Fannie and Freddie are political creatures, Mr. Frank believed they would do his bidding. And this is exactly what Mr. Frank attempted to prove when the housing market started to go south. He encouraged the companies to guarantee more "affordable" mortgages, thus abetting their disastrous plunge into subprime and Alt-A loans. He also pushed for, and got, an increase in the conforming-loan limits to allow Fan and Fred to securitize and guarantee larger mortgages. And he pressured regulators to ease up on their capital requirements -- which now means taxpayers will have to make up that capital shortfall. But the biggest payoff for Mr. Frank is the "affordable housing" trust fund he managed to push through as one political price for the recent Fannie reform bill. This fund siphons off a portion of Fannie and Freddie profits -- as much as $500 million a year each -- to a fund that politicians can then disburse to their favorite special interests.

Ahh! Now we are getting to the real truth here. As long as special interests were getting a good share of the profits, all the mismanagement by Rep. Frank & Co. was okay. But once that mismanagement culminated in a financial crisis, it was all the fault of the "private sector," or so Barney Frank claims.

They always say to give credit where credit is due. Well, Barney Frank certainly deserves his share of the credit for helping to bring about the current financial crisis.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Fannie Mae's Patron Saint
The Wall Street Journal Op-Ed
September 9, 2008

Are You Better Off Than You Were Two Years Ago?

I’ve been away for a bit. I spent an extended weekend in Virginia Beach with my wife. This trip represents our “babymoon” since this will probably be the last time we have a chance to get away before our new baby is born in December.

Anyway, I know there is plenty out there to talk about right now. There is Troopergate and the fact that Todd Palin is refusing to testify. I applaud Todd for this. After all, we have already shown how Troopergate is nothing more than a partisan witch hunt. Todd did the right thing in saying "no" to the partisan efforts of Democrats Hollis French and Ken Elton.

Then there is the bailout being considered by Congress. It is becoming known as the “Mother of all Bailouts” and it is a very bad idea. It will allow companies and firms who engaged in bad business practices to survive those bad decisions rather than allowing them to fail as the market dictates and thus allowing companies and firms who practice wiser and sounder business policies to step in and take over. That is what should have happened.

But I think a good place to start this week is by asking the question: “Are you better off than you were two years ago?” I think we can all answer: “No.”

Ever since the Democrats took over Congress, they have done nothing but allow or cause more damage to the American people. How can I say this? Easy. Check out the most recent Mullings column by rich Galen:

Just to review the bidding. On January 5, 2007 (just about the time Nancy Pelosi and her cronies took control of the House): - The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at about 12,400. - The New York-based Conference Board said its consumer confidence index was at 110.3. - The Bureau of Labor Statistics had the unemployment rate at 4.6% - According to CNN gasoline a gallon of gasoline, in January 2007, averaged about $2.20.

That is where we stood. Now, this is where we are:

- Last Thursday at about 1 pm Eastern, the Dow had hit a bottom of about 10,500 before Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke intervened. That is a drop of about 15% in the Dow from two years ago. - The Conference Board's latest take on the pulse of consumer confidence had it at a very thready 56.9 in August - a drop of about 48% - The unemployment rate in August was reported at 6.1% by the BLS an increase of 33%. - Gasoline prices are at about $3.70 a whopping 68% jump.

So, why blame Congress rather than the Bush Administration? Because, Congress is supposed to have oversight power. But rather than use that power to tackle real problems head-on, the Dems instead used it for pushing their own agendas, trying to grab and consolodate power and trying to embarrass the President. All of this happened to the detriment of the American people.

In fact, Congressional hearings were held to determine whether or not Major Laegue Baseball players were using steroids at the same time as a housing and mortgage crisis was brewing. They've held vote after vote of resolutions to surrender in Iraq at the same time that energy prices were going higher and higher.

I don't know very many Americans who are more interested in steroids and surrendering than they are in where they are going to live and how much it will cost to have transportation for their familes. The only ones I can think of at the moment are the Democrats in Congress.

So what changed in 2007 that helped to facilitate all of this? Read on:

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Ma) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Ct) took control of the House and Senate Banking Committees. Rep. George Miller (D-Ca) and Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Ma) took over their respective Labor Committees. Rep. John Dingell (D-Mi) and Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) became chairs of the Energy Committees.

If you read that closely, you will notice that all of the above chairmen have D's after their names.

The Democrats have been more interested in wrecking President Bush's foreign policy rather than working on the problems that they are required to work on under the Constitution. As a result, the American people have been suffering and will continue to do so as long as power-hungry Democrats who are willing to do anything, including hurting the American people, in order to gain and maintain power are in office.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Are You Better Off ...
Rich Galen
Mullings.com
September 22, 2008