Rush Strikes Back at 'Turncoat' Colin Powell
Tuesday, December 16, 2008 12:07 PMBy: Phil Brennan
Talk show legend Rush Limbaugh wasted no time in answering Colin Powell after the former secretary of state said on CNN that the Republican Party should stop listening to the radio host.
On Monday, Rush told his 20 million listeners that what Powell was doing was telling the GOP to throw them under the bus.
"I think Powell's premise is all wrong," Rush said. "The Republican Party needs to stop listening to me. Basically, what that means is the Republican Party's gotta throw you overboard. The Republican Party can't win as long as it is defined by people like you and me, those of you in this audience."
Powell is a bit late in telling his party to stop listening to him, Rush said, noting that the party had already stopped listening to him.
"The simple fact of the matter is, folks, what makes this funny to me is that the Republican Party's not listened to me in the last two years," he explained. "And you might even say in matters of policy and so forth, the Republican Party hasn't been listening to me for the last six years.
"And you might even say that the Republican Party is in the situation it's in precisely because of the people like Colin Powell and John McCain and others who have devised this new definition and identity of the party which is responsible for electing Democrats all over this country."
After recalling that Powell voted for Barack Obama, Rush charged that the Bush's administration's first secretary of state was upset because he said that Powell's endorsement of Obama was about race, and he is not supposed to say those things. "These things are supposed to go unsaid," Rush said
Rush also took aim at GOP presidential candidate Sen. John McCain.
"The Republican Party nominated Powell's perfect candidate. The guy's going after moderates, independents, Democrats, a guy who is not conservative at all, McCain, didn't stand up for much conservative [principles], and he's out there now saying he won't support Palin if she seeks the presidency again, or he might not."
Turning back to Powell, Rush said that Powell "insists that conservatives and Republicans support candidates who will appeal to minorities like I guess McCain who led the effort for amnesty. He insists that conservatives and Republicans move to the center like McCain, who calls himself a maverick for doing so.
"General Powell insists that conservatives and Republicans provide an open tent to different ideas and views, like I guess McCain, who repeatedly trashed Republicans and made nice with Democrats. I mean, their tent's big, they just don't want us in it."
Having been what Rush described as Colin Powell's ideal candidate, after McCain won the GOP at the last moment Powell switched sides.
"Once McCain was nominated as the Republican candidate, largely by independents and Democrats voting in Republican primaries, Colin Powell waited 'til the last minute, when it would do the most damage to McCain and the Republicans and endorsed Obama. And when I said it was largely about race, that's what set 'em all off, you're not supposed to say these kinds of things. This is supposed to go unspoken.
"Let me get this straight," Rush said. "The guy who has supported the Republican candidate for president should be thrown out of the party. That would be me. But the guy who bolted and sabotaged the Republican nominee by endorsing the Democrat candidate should stay in and be part of the team that determines what the Republican Party is going to be. The turncoat, General Powell, is the one who the party is gonna listen to? McCain's a moderate. I supported McCain. Powell, who wants a moderate, did not support McCain
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Palins Church Torched.... This stuff can't be tolerated.
ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's home church was badly damaged by arson, leading the governor to apologize Saturday if the fire was connected to "undeserved negative attention" from her campaign as the Republican vice presidential nominee.
Damage to the Wasilla Bible Church was estimated at $1 million, authorities said. No one was injured in the fire, which was set Friday night while a handful of people, including two children, were inside, according to James Steele, the Central Mat-Su fire chief.
He said the blaze was being investigated as an arson. Steele said he didn't know of any recent threats to the church, and authorities did not know whether Palin's connection to the church was relevant to the fire.
"It's hard to say at this point. Everything is just speculation," he said.
Pastor Larry Kroon declined to say whether the church had received any recent threats.
Palin was not at the church at the time of the fire. She stopped by Saturday, and her spokesman Bill McAllister said in a statement that the governor told an assistant pastor she was sorry if the fire was connected to the "undeserved negative attention" the church has received since she became the vice presidential candidate Aug. 29.
"Whatever the motives of the arsonist, the governor has faith in the scriptural passage that what was intended for evil will in some way be used for good," McAllister said.
The 1,000-member evangelical church was the subject of intense scrutiny after Palin was named Sen. John McCain's running mate. Early in Palin's campaign, the church was criticized for promoting in a Sunday bulletin a Love Won Out conference in Anchorage sponsored by Focus on the Family. The conference promised to "help men and women dissatisfied with living homosexually understand that same-sex attractions can be overcome."
The fire was set at the entrance of the church and moved inward as a small group of women worked on crafts, Steele said. The group was alerted to the blaze by a fire alarm.
Damage to the Wasilla Bible Church was estimated at $1 million, authorities said. No one was injured in the fire, which was set Friday night while a handful of people, including two children, were inside, according to James Steele, the Central Mat-Su fire chief.
He said the blaze was being investigated as an arson. Steele said he didn't know of any recent threats to the church, and authorities did not know whether Palin's connection to the church was relevant to the fire.
"It's hard to say at this point. Everything is just speculation," he said.
Pastor Larry Kroon declined to say whether the church had received any recent threats.
Palin was not at the church at the time of the fire. She stopped by Saturday, and her spokesman Bill McAllister said in a statement that the governor told an assistant pastor she was sorry if the fire was connected to the "undeserved negative attention" the church has received since she became the vice presidential candidate Aug. 29.
"Whatever the motives of the arsonist, the governor has faith in the scriptural passage that what was intended for evil will in some way be used for good," McAllister said.
The 1,000-member evangelical church was the subject of intense scrutiny after Palin was named Sen. John McCain's running mate. Early in Palin's campaign, the church was criticized for promoting in a Sunday bulletin a Love Won Out conference in Anchorage sponsored by Focus on the Family. The conference promised to "help men and women dissatisfied with living homosexually understand that same-sex attractions can be overcome."
The fire was set at the entrance of the church and moved inward as a small group of women worked on crafts, Steele said. The group was alerted to the blaze by a fire alarm.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
I wonder how well he knows this guy too?
Blagojevich Scandal: What Did Obama Know, and When Did He Know It?
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 7:04 PMBy: David A. Patten
Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich wanted “something big” from the Obama administration in return for naming its preferred candidate to fill Obama’s Senate seat — and he delivered an expletive-filled tirade when Obama’s representatives apparently refused to go along.
Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, were arrested Tuesday on charges that they tried to “sell” the U.S. Senate seat that Obama recently vacated. Under Illinois law, naming a replacement falls to Blagojevich.
The FBI says it taped Blagojevich complaining that Obama advisers were telling him that he had to “suck it up . . . and give this mother----er [the President-elect]] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”
Obama briefly addressed the arrests Tuesday afternoon, telling the media, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so I was not aware of what was happening. It’s a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate to comment.”
The criminal complaint was announced Tuesday by federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who came to national prominence during the investigation that led to the conviction of Scooter Libby on charges related to the Valerie Plame case.
Fitzgerald stated Tuesday that “there is no allegation in the complaint that the president-elect was aware of it and that is all I can say,” according to ABCNews.com.
The 76-page criminal complaint refers to the president-elect and his representatives at least 40 times, however.
Item No. 99 in the document states that Blagojevich and Harris spoke on Nov. 7 with “Adviser B,” a Washington, D.C.-based consultant presumably working on behalf of the Obama transition team.
During the call, Blagojevich indicated that he would appoint a person the complaint identifies only as “Senate Candidate 1” -- presumably a candidate preferred by the Obama administration -- in return for Blagojevich being appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services by Obama.
Candidate 1 is generally believed to be Obama insider Valerie Jarrett, who has been mentioned as among the favorites to replace Obama in the Senate.
Harris stated “we wanted our [request] to be reasonable and rather than . . . make it look like some sort of selfish grab for a quid pro quo.
During the call, Blagojevich stated he was hurting “financially.” And Harris said the “financial security” of the Blagojevich family was an issue. At one point, Blagojevich stated outright, “I want to make money,” according to the indictment.
Also discussed during that conference call was a “three-way deal” between the SEIU union, Blagojevich, and Obama. The deal was that Blagojevich would appoint Obama’s preferred candidate, and in return Obama would help Blagojevich win the SEIU appointment to head an organization called “Change to Win.”
ChangetoWin.org describes itself as an organization created by “seven unions and six million workers” to “restore the American Dream of the 21st Century.”
Harris said the three-way deal would give Obama a “buffer so there is no obvious quid pro quo for [the appointment of Senate Candidate 1]. The criminal complaint states, “Adviser B said that he liked the idea of the three-way deal.”
Three days later, the indictment said, Blagojevich told Harris it was unlikely that Obama would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services, or appoint him to be an ambassador, due to the investigation looming over him.
The complaint states that Adviser B and another consultant are believed to have participated in a call during which Blagojevich said they were telling him to “suck it up” for two years, and give this “motherf---er [the President-elect] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”
Next, states the complaint, Blagojevich says he would appoint another candidate, Senate Candidate 4, “before I just give f---ing [Senate Candidate 1] a f---ing Senate seat and I don’t get anything.”
Senate Candidate 4, the complaint states, is a deputy governor of the State of Illinois. Dean Martinez, Bob Greenlee, and Louanner Peters currently serve as deputy governors.
During the conversations with Obama’s representatives, Blagojevich repeatedly made it clear he would not agree to name “Senate Candidate 1” to fill the position without a quid pro quo from the White House, if only indirectly, according to the complaint. Blagojevich stated he wanted to make $250,000 to $300,000 annually.
The criminal complaint indicates Blagojevich and his staff were confident they could exact something from at least one candidate for the seat, Senate Candidate 5. Senate Candidate 5 is not identified.
Based on the complaint, it remains unclear whether any close Obama associate knew that Blagojevich was seeking monetary gain in return for the Senate appointment. It is possible that having such knowledge without reporting it to authorities in a timely way could raise serious legal issues.
If nothing else, the complaints represent an embarrassment to Obama given his support for Blagojevich’s gubernatorial reelection bid.
The RNC responded to the indictments in part by circulating an Associated Press report from August 2006 in which Obama stated, “We’ve got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois.”
Also, RNC Chairman Robert M. “Mike” Duncan released a statement calling Obama’s reaction to the arrests “insufficient at best.”
He added, “Given the President-elect’s history of supporting and advising Gov. Blagojevich, he has a responsibility to speak out and fully address the issue.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 7:04 PMBy: David A. Patten
Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich wanted “something big” from the Obama administration in return for naming its preferred candidate to fill Obama’s Senate seat — and he delivered an expletive-filled tirade when Obama’s representatives apparently refused to go along.
Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, were arrested Tuesday on charges that they tried to “sell” the U.S. Senate seat that Obama recently vacated. Under Illinois law, naming a replacement falls to Blagojevich.
The FBI says it taped Blagojevich complaining that Obama advisers were telling him that he had to “suck it up . . . and give this mother----er [the President-elect]] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”
Obama briefly addressed the arrests Tuesday afternoon, telling the media, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so I was not aware of what was happening. It’s a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate to comment.”
The criminal complaint was announced Tuesday by federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who came to national prominence during the investigation that led to the conviction of Scooter Libby on charges related to the Valerie Plame case.
Fitzgerald stated Tuesday that “there is no allegation in the complaint that the president-elect was aware of it and that is all I can say,” according to ABCNews.com.
The 76-page criminal complaint refers to the president-elect and his representatives at least 40 times, however.
Item No. 99 in the document states that Blagojevich and Harris spoke on Nov. 7 with “Adviser B,” a Washington, D.C.-based consultant presumably working on behalf of the Obama transition team.
During the call, Blagojevich indicated that he would appoint a person the complaint identifies only as “Senate Candidate 1” -- presumably a candidate preferred by the Obama administration -- in return for Blagojevich being appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services by Obama.
Candidate 1 is generally believed to be Obama insider Valerie Jarrett, who has been mentioned as among the favorites to replace Obama in the Senate.
Harris stated “we wanted our [request] to be reasonable and rather than . . . make it look like some sort of selfish grab for a quid pro quo.
During the call, Blagojevich stated he was hurting “financially.” And Harris said the “financial security” of the Blagojevich family was an issue. At one point, Blagojevich stated outright, “I want to make money,” according to the indictment.
Also discussed during that conference call was a “three-way deal” between the SEIU union, Blagojevich, and Obama. The deal was that Blagojevich would appoint Obama’s preferred candidate, and in return Obama would help Blagojevich win the SEIU appointment to head an organization called “Change to Win.”
ChangetoWin.org describes itself as an organization created by “seven unions and six million workers” to “restore the American Dream of the 21st Century.”
Harris said the three-way deal would give Obama a “buffer so there is no obvious quid pro quo for [the appointment of Senate Candidate 1]. The criminal complaint states, “Adviser B said that he liked the idea of the three-way deal.”
Three days later, the indictment said, Blagojevich told Harris it was unlikely that Obama would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services, or appoint him to be an ambassador, due to the investigation looming over him.
The complaint states that Adviser B and another consultant are believed to have participated in a call during which Blagojevich said they were telling him to “suck it up” for two years, and give this “motherf---er [the President-elect] his senator. F--- him. For nothing? F--- him.”
Next, states the complaint, Blagojevich says he would appoint another candidate, Senate Candidate 4, “before I just give f---ing [Senate Candidate 1] a f---ing Senate seat and I don’t get anything.”
Senate Candidate 4, the complaint states, is a deputy governor of the State of Illinois. Dean Martinez, Bob Greenlee, and Louanner Peters currently serve as deputy governors.
During the conversations with Obama’s representatives, Blagojevich repeatedly made it clear he would not agree to name “Senate Candidate 1” to fill the position without a quid pro quo from the White House, if only indirectly, according to the complaint. Blagojevich stated he wanted to make $250,000 to $300,000 annually.
The criminal complaint indicates Blagojevich and his staff were confident they could exact something from at least one candidate for the seat, Senate Candidate 5. Senate Candidate 5 is not identified.
Based on the complaint, it remains unclear whether any close Obama associate knew that Blagojevich was seeking monetary gain in return for the Senate appointment. It is possible that having such knowledge without reporting it to authorities in a timely way could raise serious legal issues.
If nothing else, the complaints represent an embarrassment to Obama given his support for Blagojevich’s gubernatorial reelection bid.
The RNC responded to the indictments in part by circulating an Associated Press report from August 2006 in which Obama stated, “We’ve got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois.”
Also, RNC Chairman Robert M. “Mike” Duncan released a statement calling Obama’s reaction to the arrests “insufficient at best.”
He added, “Given the President-elect’s history of supporting and advising Gov. Blagojevich, he has a responsibility to speak out and fully address the issue.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Friday, December 5, 2008
AL "FRANKENSTEIN" is a real S/H
Franken Battles Coleman Over Missing Ballots
Friday, December 5, 2008 12:17 PMBy: David A. Patten
Despite warnings to keep politics out of Minnesota’s contentious Senate recount, the state’s Democratic secretary of state has granted Minneapolis an extension to continue its recount, following news that 133 ballots are missing.
The voting discrepancy has outraged supporters of Democrat Al Franken to the point that they have suggested authorities should conduct an intensive search of a local church to locate the missing ballots.
The 133 ballots in question were cast Nov. 4 at a church polling place near the University of Minnesota, where voters were thought to heavily favor Franken. Election officials supervising the recount on Wednesday counted 133 fewer votes than had been tallied there the night of the election. Assuming those 133 ballots conform to overall voting trends, their absence is costing Franken a significant number of votes.
According to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Franken’s chief recount attorney, Marc Elias, urged state officials to “move heaven and earth” to locate the AWOL ballots.
On Thursday, lead Coleman recount attorney Frederic W. Knaak sent a letter to Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie charging that Franken seeks “a systematic forensic search of the church that served as a polling place, any vehicle used to transport ballots or other elections materials, [and] the warehouse where the ballots were stored.”
Knaak charged that “the Franken campaign has reached a new level of belligerency in their efforts to ‘unearth’ votes they believe they ‘lost’ in Minneapolis.”
In a separate statement Thursday, Knaak asked that Ritchey “refrain from any activity or action that can be perceived as partisan or supportive of the Franken campaign’s overblown rhetoric about missing ballots, and the need to ‘raid’ churches in the City of Minneapolis.”
That did not dissuade Ritchey from granting a recount extension to Minneapolis to give it extra time to locate the missing ballots.
Ritchey also dispatched his assistant, deputy Secretary of State Jim Gelbmann, to assist in the search and to act as an official observer.
The latest official vote count shows Coleman leading by 251 votes. That total, however, does not include the more than 6,000 votes that have been challenged during the recount process. Franken’s campaign has been keeping an unofficial tally of those votes, and maintains that Franken actually has a narrow lead in the recount despite the official figures being reported by election authorities.
The State Canvassing Board is scheduled to meet on Dec. 16 to determine the fate of those ballots and to certify a winner.
Friday, December 5, 2008 12:17 PMBy: David A. Patten
Despite warnings to keep politics out of Minnesota’s contentious Senate recount, the state’s Democratic secretary of state has granted Minneapolis an extension to continue its recount, following news that 133 ballots are missing.
The voting discrepancy has outraged supporters of Democrat Al Franken to the point that they have suggested authorities should conduct an intensive search of a local church to locate the missing ballots.
The 133 ballots in question were cast Nov. 4 at a church polling place near the University of Minnesota, where voters were thought to heavily favor Franken. Election officials supervising the recount on Wednesday counted 133 fewer votes than had been tallied there the night of the election. Assuming those 133 ballots conform to overall voting trends, their absence is costing Franken a significant number of votes.
According to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Franken’s chief recount attorney, Marc Elias, urged state officials to “move heaven and earth” to locate the AWOL ballots.
On Thursday, lead Coleman recount attorney Frederic W. Knaak sent a letter to Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie charging that Franken seeks “a systematic forensic search of the church that served as a polling place, any vehicle used to transport ballots or other elections materials, [and] the warehouse where the ballots were stored.”
Knaak charged that “the Franken campaign has reached a new level of belligerency in their efforts to ‘unearth’ votes they believe they ‘lost’ in Minneapolis.”
In a separate statement Thursday, Knaak asked that Ritchey “refrain from any activity or action that can be perceived as partisan or supportive of the Franken campaign’s overblown rhetoric about missing ballots, and the need to ‘raid’ churches in the City of Minneapolis.”
That did not dissuade Ritchey from granting a recount extension to Minneapolis to give it extra time to locate the missing ballots.
Ritchey also dispatched his assistant, deputy Secretary of State Jim Gelbmann, to assist in the search and to act as an official observer.
The latest official vote count shows Coleman leading by 251 votes. That total, however, does not include the more than 6,000 votes that have been challenged during the recount process. Franken’s campaign has been keeping an unofficial tally of those votes, and maintains that Franken actually has a narrow lead in the recount despite the official figures being reported by election authorities.
The State Canvassing Board is scheduled to meet on Dec. 16 to determine the fate of those ballots and to certify a winner.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
At Least Bush can actually say He didn't sell out!
Bush Didn't Sell His Soul For Politics
President Bush recently sat down with his sister, Doro Bush Koch, and gave her an insightful interview on the impact his faith has made on his family and his presidency. Bush also discussed his hopes for his legacy. See LifeSite News.
"I would like to be a person remembered as a person who, first and foremost, did not sell his soul in order to accommodate the political process," Bush told his sister. "I came to Washington with a set of values, and I'm leaving with the same set of values. And I darn sure wasn't going to sacrifice those values; that I was a President that had to make tough choices and was willing to make them."
Bush wants to be remembered for liberating Iraqis from dictatorship and for advancing health care at home and abroad. He also said he wanted to be known for being a president that "focused on individuals rather than process; that rallied people to serve their neighbor," and that he "came to Washington, D.C., with a set of political statements and worked as hard as I possibly could to do what I told the American people I would do."
I have previously blogged about the disgraceful treatment of President Bush, especially during the last four years of his presidency here. Bush has received ridicule, derision and contempt from many people on the left and the right. No matter what happened - hurricanes, floods, global warming, terrorism, etc., it was all Bush's fault. Deepak Chopra even blames Bush for the terrorist attack in India. See FOX News.
The length Bush's attackers and critics will go to evidently knows no bounds. Just this morning I was reading about a Seattle artist named Deborah Lawrence, who had the privilege of being asked to decorate an ornament for the White House Christmas tree. Each representative chooses an artist and commissions them to create an ornament, and Lawrence was selected by her representative Jim McDermott. However, instead of being honored by the chance to create a beautiful ornament celebrating Christmas, Ms. Lawrence instead created an impeachment ornament which congratulated McDermott on his support for a Bush impeachment resolution. See The Washington Post. I suppose that there is no inappropriate or unsuitable time to show partisanship and bad manners for a Bush hater.
However, Bush is obviously not going to let his detractors affect him negatively, and credits his Christian faith for keeping him strong. "I've been in the Bible every day since I've been the President, and I have been affected by people's prayers a lot," he said. "I have found that faith is comforting, faith is strengthening, faith has been important." It is this very faith that his critics despise the most, but Bush says that those who hate his faith and what he stands for " . . . should recognize - as (at) least I have recognized I am a lowly sinner seeking redemption, and therefore have been very careful about saying '(accept) my faith or you're bad.'" Bush added that the freedom of religion is of paramount importance – a freedom that any president must "jealously protect, guard, and strengthen."
Partial excerpts of President Bush's interview have been released by the White House, and the complete interview will be archived in the Library of Congress.Please log in to comment on this story.-->
President Bush recently sat down with his sister, Doro Bush Koch, and gave her an insightful interview on the impact his faith has made on his family and his presidency. Bush also discussed his hopes for his legacy. See LifeSite News.
"I would like to be a person remembered as a person who, first and foremost, did not sell his soul in order to accommodate the political process," Bush told his sister. "I came to Washington with a set of values, and I'm leaving with the same set of values. And I darn sure wasn't going to sacrifice those values; that I was a President that had to make tough choices and was willing to make them."
Bush wants to be remembered for liberating Iraqis from dictatorship and for advancing health care at home and abroad. He also said he wanted to be known for being a president that "focused on individuals rather than process; that rallied people to serve their neighbor," and that he "came to Washington, D.C., with a set of political statements and worked as hard as I possibly could to do what I told the American people I would do."
I have previously blogged about the disgraceful treatment of President Bush, especially during the last four years of his presidency here. Bush has received ridicule, derision and contempt from many people on the left and the right. No matter what happened - hurricanes, floods, global warming, terrorism, etc., it was all Bush's fault. Deepak Chopra even blames Bush for the terrorist attack in India. See FOX News.
The length Bush's attackers and critics will go to evidently knows no bounds. Just this morning I was reading about a Seattle artist named Deborah Lawrence, who had the privilege of being asked to decorate an ornament for the White House Christmas tree. Each representative chooses an artist and commissions them to create an ornament, and Lawrence was selected by her representative Jim McDermott. However, instead of being honored by the chance to create a beautiful ornament celebrating Christmas, Ms. Lawrence instead created an impeachment ornament which congratulated McDermott on his support for a Bush impeachment resolution. See The Washington Post. I suppose that there is no inappropriate or unsuitable time to show partisanship and bad manners for a Bush hater.
However, Bush is obviously not going to let his detractors affect him negatively, and credits his Christian faith for keeping him strong. "I've been in the Bible every day since I've been the President, and I have been affected by people's prayers a lot," he said. "I have found that faith is comforting, faith is strengthening, faith has been important." It is this very faith that his critics despise the most, but Bush says that those who hate his faith and what he stands for " . . . should recognize - as (at) least I have recognized I am a lowly sinner seeking redemption, and therefore have been very careful about saying '(accept) my faith or you're bad.'" Bush added that the freedom of religion is of paramount importance – a freedom that any president must "jealously protect, guard, and strengthen."
Partial excerpts of President Bush's interview have been released by the White House, and the complete interview will be archived in the Library of Congress.Please log in to comment on this story.-->
Thank God for Small favors....
Chambliss Sweeps to Victory in Georgia
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 7:22 AM
Article Font Size
ATLANTA — Relieved Republicans celebrated a resounding win in Georgia's hard-fought U.S. Senate runoff, a victory that denied Democrats a filibuster-proof majority and cemented the state's reputation as a GOP bastion.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss trounced Democrat Jim Martin Tuesday night, winning his second term by a margin of more than 10 percentage points. The race dashed Democrats' hopes of a 60-seat majority immune to Senate filibusters, which would have given President-elect Barack Obama a stronger hand moving his agenda.
A Martin victory was a longshot in Georgia. A Democrat hasn't won an open statewide seat since 1998.
Martin hoped to capitalize on excitement surrounding Obama but was unable to get many of the president elect's voters back to the polls one month after the general election. Obama never came to the state to campaign for Martin, although he recorded automated phone calls and a radio ad for the former state lawmaker from Atlanta.
Chambliss revved up the state's vaunted GOP turnout operation and kept a parade of ex-GOP presidential candidates traipsing through the state to whip up enthusiasm. He brought in Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the former candidate for vice president, as his closer. She headlined four rallies for Chambliss across the state Monday that drew thousands of party faithful.
Minnesota - where a recount is under way - now remains the only unresolved Senate contest in the country. But the stakes there are significantly lower now that Georgia has put a 60-seat Democratic supermajority out of reach.
With 99 percent of the precincts reporting, Chambliss captured 57 percent of votes to Martin's 43 percent. It was a rare bright spot for Republicans in a year where they lost the White House, along with several House and Senate seats.
Martin called Chambliss to concede before 10 p.m., then emerged to tell supporters as his voice cracked: "For me and my family and campaign team and all of you this is a sad moment.
Chambliss portrayed himself as a firewall against Democrats in Washington getting a blank check.
"You have delivered a message that a balance in government in Washington is necessary and that's not only what the people of Georgia want, it's what the people of America want," Chambliss told 500 cheering supporters at a victory rally in Cobb County.
Martin, 63, made the economy the centerpiece of his bid, casting himself as a champion for the neglected middle class.
With most precincts reporting, turnout stood at about 35 percent. That's higher than the 20 percent predicted by a spokesman for Secretary of State Karen Handel, but it's far less than the 65 percent who voted in last month's general election.
The runoff between the former University of Georgia fraternity brothers was necessary after a three-way general election prevented any of the candidates from getting the necessary 50 percent.
Chambliss came to the Senate in 2002 after defeating Democratic Sen. Max Cleland in a campaign that infuriated Democrats. Chambliss ran a TV ad that questioned Cleland's commitment to national security and flashed a photo of Osama bin Laden. Cleland is a triple amputee wounded in the Vietnam War.
He was a loyal supporter of President Bush and, as a freshman, rose to become chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. The former agriculture lawyer from Moultrie has been the ranking Republican on the panel since Democrats won control of the Senate.
Some 3.7 million people cast ballots in this year's general election, and both sides have since tried to keep voters' attention with a barrage of ads and visits by political heavy-hitters.
Former President Bill Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore both stumped for Martin.
GOP nominee John McCain, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee hit the stump for Chambliss.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 7:22 AM
Article Font Size
ATLANTA — Relieved Republicans celebrated a resounding win in Georgia's hard-fought U.S. Senate runoff, a victory that denied Democrats a filibuster-proof majority and cemented the state's reputation as a GOP bastion.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss trounced Democrat Jim Martin Tuesday night, winning his second term by a margin of more than 10 percentage points. The race dashed Democrats' hopes of a 60-seat majority immune to Senate filibusters, which would have given President-elect Barack Obama a stronger hand moving his agenda.
A Martin victory was a longshot in Georgia. A Democrat hasn't won an open statewide seat since 1998.
Martin hoped to capitalize on excitement surrounding Obama but was unable to get many of the president elect's voters back to the polls one month after the general election. Obama never came to the state to campaign for Martin, although he recorded automated phone calls and a radio ad for the former state lawmaker from Atlanta.
Chambliss revved up the state's vaunted GOP turnout operation and kept a parade of ex-GOP presidential candidates traipsing through the state to whip up enthusiasm. He brought in Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the former candidate for vice president, as his closer. She headlined four rallies for Chambliss across the state Monday that drew thousands of party faithful.
Minnesota - where a recount is under way - now remains the only unresolved Senate contest in the country. But the stakes there are significantly lower now that Georgia has put a 60-seat Democratic supermajority out of reach.
With 99 percent of the precincts reporting, Chambliss captured 57 percent of votes to Martin's 43 percent. It was a rare bright spot for Republicans in a year where they lost the White House, along with several House and Senate seats.
Martin called Chambliss to concede before 10 p.m., then emerged to tell supporters as his voice cracked: "For me and my family and campaign team and all of you this is a sad moment.
Chambliss portrayed himself as a firewall against Democrats in Washington getting a blank check.
"You have delivered a message that a balance in government in Washington is necessary and that's not only what the people of Georgia want, it's what the people of America want," Chambliss told 500 cheering supporters at a victory rally in Cobb County.
Martin, 63, made the economy the centerpiece of his bid, casting himself as a champion for the neglected middle class.
With most precincts reporting, turnout stood at about 35 percent. That's higher than the 20 percent predicted by a spokesman for Secretary of State Karen Handel, but it's far less than the 65 percent who voted in last month's general election.
The runoff between the former University of Georgia fraternity brothers was necessary after a three-way general election prevented any of the candidates from getting the necessary 50 percent.
Chambliss came to the Senate in 2002 after defeating Democratic Sen. Max Cleland in a campaign that infuriated Democrats. Chambliss ran a TV ad that questioned Cleland's commitment to national security and flashed a photo of Osama bin Laden. Cleland is a triple amputee wounded in the Vietnam War.
He was a loyal supporter of President Bush and, as a freshman, rose to become chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. The former agriculture lawyer from Moultrie has been the ranking Republican on the panel since Democrats won control of the Senate.
Some 3.7 million people cast ballots in this year's general election, and both sides have since tried to keep voters' attention with a barrage of ads and visits by political heavy-hitters.
Former President Bill Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore both stumped for Martin.
GOP nominee John McCain, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee hit the stump for Chambliss.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
WHY DO PEOPLE TURN INTO ANIMALS OVER STUPID SALES...
I remember the days when Cabbage Patch dolls came out or the Tickle Me Elmos when people were trampling eachother and getting into fist fights to get their kid the over priced, understocked toys.... Walmart makes the news every year for people getting trampled or killed at their Black Friday Specials. I think they need to come up with a better plan. I like Walmart, well not in general but I do like their low pricing. The problem is it attracts the lowest of the low elements of humanity also and people that are camping out in parking lots over night for a 50 inch TV they really shouldn't have in the first place (Cause there isn't room in the single wide for it) have that mentality that anything goes and they dont' care who they hurt to get what they want. Very sad and one reason I haven't or won't be shopping on Black Friday, ESPECIALLY at Walmart.
NEW YORK — Officials are combing through surveillance tape of a post-Thanksgiving shopper stampede that killed a Wal-Mart worker in New York to identify individual shoppers who may be responsible, but they say it could be difficult to bring criminal charges.
"We are reviewing film of all places from individual cell phones, from cameras that are in place in the store, trying to identify, if in fact we can identify, people that are culpable in this," Nassau County Police Commissioner Lawrence Mulvey told FOX News. "And it is difficult because a lot of people in the front of the line were pushed forward, and it’s difficult for us to decipher who is more responsible in all of this."
Click here for photos.
Mulvey conceded the case would be "very difficult ... for us to make."
The brutal death of the employee rattled shoppers even as they flocked to the Valley Stream store a day later.
"It felt a little freakish," customer Ellie Berhun, 48, told the Daily News. "Some man lost his life because a VCR was on sale? Please. It's just too sad for words."
Police said the temporary worker, Jdimytai Damour, was mowed down as about 2,000 bargain-hunters surged into the store at Friday's 5 a.m. opening, leaving a metal portion of the door frame crumpled like an accordion.
Related
Stories
Police Reviewing Video to Identify Shoppers in Wal-Mart Stampede That Killed Worker
Wal-Mart Worker Dies When Shoppers Break Down Doors
Photo Essays
Black Friday Death
Other workers were knocked to the ground as they tried to rescue Damour, and customers simply stepped over him and kept shopping even as the store announced it was closing because of the death, police and witnesses said.
At least four other people, including a woman eight months pregnant, were taken to hospitals for observation or treatment for minor injuries. The store, about 20 miles east of Manhattan, closed for several hours but reopened Friday afternoon.
The day after Thanksgiving is known as Black Friday because it has traditionally marked the point when a throng of shoppers pushes stores into profitability for the year.
Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart said it added staffers and outside security workers and put up barricades to try to prepare for the crush. But police spokesman Detective Lt. Michael Fleming said Friday that security was inadequate for a scene he called "utter chaos."
Criminal charges are possible, but identifying anyone in the store's videos may prove difficult, Fleming said.
Damour, 34, came from a temporary agency and was doing maintenance work at the store, Wal-Mart said.
A woman reported being trampled by overeager customers at a Wal-Mart opening Friday in Farmingdale, about 15 miles east of Valley Stream, Suffolk County police said. She suffered minor injuries but finished shopping before filling the report, police said.
Items on sale at the Valley Stream Wal-Mart included a Samsung 50-inch Plasma HDTV for $798, a Bissel Compact Upright Vacuum for $28, a Samsung 10.2 megapixel digital camera for $69 and DVDs such as "The Incredible Hulk" for $9.
Click here for more from MyFOXNY.com
NEW YORK — Officials are combing through surveillance tape of a post-Thanksgiving shopper stampede that killed a Wal-Mart worker in New York to identify individual shoppers who may be responsible, but they say it could be difficult to bring criminal charges.
"We are reviewing film of all places from individual cell phones, from cameras that are in place in the store, trying to identify, if in fact we can identify, people that are culpable in this," Nassau County Police Commissioner Lawrence Mulvey told FOX News. "And it is difficult because a lot of people in the front of the line were pushed forward, and it’s difficult for us to decipher who is more responsible in all of this."
Click here for photos.
Mulvey conceded the case would be "very difficult ... for us to make."
The brutal death of the employee rattled shoppers even as they flocked to the Valley Stream store a day later.
"It felt a little freakish," customer Ellie Berhun, 48, told the Daily News. "Some man lost his life because a VCR was on sale? Please. It's just too sad for words."
Police said the temporary worker, Jdimytai Damour, was mowed down as about 2,000 bargain-hunters surged into the store at Friday's 5 a.m. opening, leaving a metal portion of the door frame crumpled like an accordion.
Related
Stories
Police Reviewing Video to Identify Shoppers in Wal-Mart Stampede That Killed Worker
Wal-Mart Worker Dies When Shoppers Break Down Doors
Photo Essays
Black Friday Death
Other workers were knocked to the ground as they tried to rescue Damour, and customers simply stepped over him and kept shopping even as the store announced it was closing because of the death, police and witnesses said.
At least four other people, including a woman eight months pregnant, were taken to hospitals for observation or treatment for minor injuries. The store, about 20 miles east of Manhattan, closed for several hours but reopened Friday afternoon.
The day after Thanksgiving is known as Black Friday because it has traditionally marked the point when a throng of shoppers pushes stores into profitability for the year.
Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart said it added staffers and outside security workers and put up barricades to try to prepare for the crush. But police spokesman Detective Lt. Michael Fleming said Friday that security was inadequate for a scene he called "utter chaos."
Criminal charges are possible, but identifying anyone in the store's videos may prove difficult, Fleming said.
Damour, 34, came from a temporary agency and was doing maintenance work at the store, Wal-Mart said.
A woman reported being trampled by overeager customers at a Wal-Mart opening Friday in Farmingdale, about 15 miles east of Valley Stream, Suffolk County police said. She suffered minor injuries but finished shopping before filling the report, police said.
Items on sale at the Valley Stream Wal-Mart included a Samsung 50-inch Plasma HDTV for $798, a Bissel Compact Upright Vacuum for $28, a Samsung 10.2 megapixel digital camera for $69 and DVDs such as "The Incredible Hulk" for $9.
Click here for more from MyFOXNY.com
OPRAH took MONEY FROM THE MESSIAH'S ENEMIES
Oprah Took Millions From Obama Foe Tom, Katie, Erica Kane Do Tina
Oprah Took Millions From Obama Foe
With Oprah Winfrey, the intersection of politics and education is making for strange bedfellows. Federal tax returns and other reports confirm that she’s accepted at least $5 million for her self-named South African girls’ school from perhaps Barack Obama’s single greatest political enemy.
Oprah is probably the most well-known celebrity to back Senator Barack Obama’s bid for the presidency. She threw him a lavish launch party, endorsed him on her show, stumped for him in the early primaries, and cried — as captured by photographers — in a Chicago park when he won the election. Her loyalty seemed fierce.
But it turns out that Winfrey is very close friends with Dallas billionaire named Harold Simmons, a leading Republican donor and supporter of John McCain.
Related
Column Archive
Oprah Took Millions From Obama Foe
'Reader' Director Targeted for Smear
Sir Elton Winehouse?
Is Mariah Carey Expecting?
Carly Simon's Jailhouse Rock
Full-page Fox411 Archive
This past August it was revealed that Simmons was the single donor to a 527 committee called American Issues Project. Its only issue: to run ads linking Obama to William Ayers, the political activist who was once part of the Weather Underground. Simmons paid $2.9 million to try and make Ayers the Obama campaign’s “Swift Boat,” an issue that might have sidelined permanently the Illinois senator’s chances and advance John McCain — Simmons’s candidate — to the White House.
Nevertheless, Winfrey has cultivated her friendship with Simmons on many social fronts since 2001, resulting in his being second only to her in donating funds to her Leadership Academy in Johannesburg, South Africa.
According to the 2006 federal tax filing for the Oprah Winfrey Operating Fund, Winfrey accepted a $1 million donation to the school from Simmons. That amount, The Dallas Morning News reported in 2007, was only part of a $5 million pledge to the Academy. Simmons is considered Dallas’s leading philanthropist to worthy causes. In this case, though, it might have been unnecessary, since Winfrey herself has donated over $60 million to the school.
It’s not like Simmons is a new Republican donor. He gave over $100,000 in the 2007-2008 election cycle to Republican candidates, separate from his Ayers campaign. He has always been an active Republican. In 2004 he was a major donor to the Swift Boat Veterans, the group credited with destroying the campaign of John Kerry for president.
Winfrey has long been close friends with Simmons and his wife Annette. She’s their neighbor in Montecito, California, having bought the estate next to them in 2001. As recently as two weeks ago, Oprah mentioned the couple on her show during a telephone discussion of the Montecito fires with another neighbor, actor Rob Lowe.
(Winfrey was not available for comment, according to her representative. Simmons, who doesn’t have a press representative, did not return our call.)
The Dallas Morning News—thanks to the dogged byline of Alan Peppard — is full of stories over the years documenting Oprah’s friendship with the Simmonses. They are often at each others’ homes and parties. When Oprah’s significant other, Steadman Graham, spoke to a group in Dallas, it was noted that he dined with the Simmonses. In April, 2006 — two years after the Swift Boat scandal was revealed — Oprah sent a camera crew to a Dallas luncheon hosted by Annette Simmons showcasing the thousands of tulip bulbs surrounding the lake on her property.
It’s unlikely though that the Simmonses were at Oprah’s house next door on September 9, 2007. That’s when she hosted an all-star fundraiser for Obama with Stevie Wonder and guests like Halle Berry, Will Smith, and other A-list Hollywood names. One can only imagine what Simmons thought as the sound of “Ain’t No Stoppin’ Us Now” blared over the loudspeaker system.
Interestingly, that was the last time either Oprah or Graham, for that matter, contributed any money either to the Obama campaign or to the Democratic Party. While they could have each made donations to Obama’s presidential bid, they gave just for the primary. And neither of them showed any interest in the Party itself, which funneled money to Obama.
Simmons, on the other hand, is a regular and constant Republican donor. And it’s not like the Obama campaign hasn’t taken notice of him. On August 21st and 25th, Robert Bauer, general counsel for Obama for America, wrote letters to John C. Keeney, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, concerning the American Issues Project.
On the 25th Bauer wrote: “New facts have come to light that underscore the patently illegal nature of AIP’s formation and operation, and also demonstrate a knowing and willful violation of law on the part of its contributor, Howard Simmons [sic].” Bauer then attaches the Federal Election Committee filing by AIP that states its sole purpose: to defeat Barack Obama. Contran Corporation, owned by Simmons, is listed as AIP’s owner.
Bauer finishes his letter demanding Simmons’s prosecution: “We reiterate our request that the Department of Justice fulfill its commitment to take prompt action to investigate and to prosecute the American Issues Project, and we further request that the Department of Justice investigate and prosecute Howard [sic] Simmons for a knowing and willful violation of the individual aggregate contribution limits.”
Simmons, Bauer complained, had exceeded his personal donation limit because he’d given $2.88 million — roughly $2.7 million more than was allowed by FEC guidelines that state only $42,700 may be given to organizations other than candidate committees or party committees.
It wasn’t the first time Simmons had had trouble with political donations. In 1993, the FEC fined him just under $20,000 for exceeding limits in donations from 1988 and 1989. According to the New York Times, Simmons’s Swift Boat group was fined almost $300,000 for illegally spending $20 million to influence the election. Another Simmons-backed anti-Kerry group, Progress for America, was fined $750,000. They’d spent $31 million.
Simmons’ contentiousness is not limited to the backing of the Swift Boat Vets and the Ayers campaign to smear Obama. In December 1997, according to reports in the New York Times and elsewhere, Simmons was sued by two of his four daughters for abusing his powers in controlling millions of dollars he placed in trust funds for them. A jury agreed that he’d breached his financial duty as guardian of their inheritance, but were undecided on other issues. The case ended in a mistrial. Unusually, the case had been catalyzed when Simmons served her legal papers on one of the daughters by dropping them in her baby’s crib. The child had been born premature and was susceptible to infection, according to the New York Times and other reports.
Tom, Katie, Erica Kane Do Tina
Say this about the magnificent Tina Turner at age 69: she has no vertigo. Her 50th anniversary show pulled into Madison Square Garden last night for one show, and it was quite the show stopper. Or rather, she was the show stopper, with those hot legs and a body most 39 year olds would die for. And vertigo? No sign of it as she climbed a mammoth cherry picker that swung out over the first section of the floor audience. She dangled over it, danced up and down its armature, in stiletto heels no less. Tina Turner is the one of the world's greatest wonders.
There were plenty of celebs in the audience including Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, whom Turner spotted and gave shout outs to. Susan Lucci — the famed Erica Kane from "All My Children" — was picked up in a video sweep. Anne Hathaway, with her dad, was tucked away just above us. Al Roker and Deborah Roberts Roker slipped into the crowd. And so on. Tina Turner coming to New York is an event.
The show is just under three hours long including a lengthy intermission. There's also some instersitial stuff with breakdancers, acrobats, and powerful backup singer Lisa Fischer. But make no mistake, it's Tina's show. She sings the whole thing, without any help, from beginning to end. Madonna would be embarrassed and run away if she saw this performance. Turner is, yes, 20 years older, and dances up a storm while singing "What's Love Got to Do with It," "Better Be Good to Me," "Acid Queen," "Simply the Best," and all her hits with gusto and verve, and a rock contralto voice that has lost none of its dynamic power.
Some things don't work. Resurrecting the set from "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" so Tina can sing her hit theme song is a mistake. At least Tina drop the wig. It's like King Tut meets Colin Farrell from "Alexander." Yikes.
Everything simple and easy worked so well. When Act II opens, Turner is sitting on a stool, surrounded by musicians, dressed in shiny black spandex. With aplomb she delivers her covers of "Help!" and "Let's Stay Together" that revived her career in 1984. It's soul music at its finest. When later she's rocking out to a Rolling Stones medley, or her old signature hit, "Proud Mary," she's the whole Rock and Roll Hall of Fame from A to Z.
Nice touches, too. With the ghastly but musically innovative Ike Turner safely dead, Turner shows a video montage of their days togehter with her own hit, "I Don't Want to Fight No More," playing in the background. At the very end of the show, when the audience has stopped chanting her name, Turner runs a video with credits of all the crew. She's got legs, and she's a mensch. What else do you need?
Tina, come back to the Garden soon. You could have played five shows with no trouble!
Monday, December 1, 2008
OBAMA to Announce Clinton as S. O. S. (Aren't there rules preventing this?)
President-elect Barack Obama plans to announce his picks for top administration jobs on Monday, including Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as his secretary of state, transforming a once-bitter political rivalry into a high-level strategic and diplomatic partnership.
Obama will name the New York senator to his national security team at a news conference in Chicago, a person close to Clinton confirmed to FOX News.
Obama's announcements include members of his national security team and beyond, completing the nominations for one-third of his Cabinet as he moves quickly to assemble the country's new leadership in times of war and a troubled economy.
His selections include some of his most loyal campaign advisers and notably some who were not, including Democratic primary rival Clinton and President Bush's defense secretary, Robert Gates, staying in his current post.
Obama will also name Susan Rice as UN ambassador, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano as homeland security chief and Eric Holder as attorney general, Democratic officials told FOX News. They requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly for the transition team.
Last week, he named key members of his economic team, including Timothy Geithner, president of Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as treasury secretary. Obama is not yet ready to name his intelligence advisers, one Democratic official said.
To clear the way for his wife to take the job, former President Bill Clinton agreed to disclose the names of every contributor to his foundation since its inception in 1997. He'll also refuse donations from foreign governments to the Clinton Global Initiative, his annual charitable conference, and will cease holding CGI meetings overseas.
Bill Clinton's business deals and global charitable endeavors were expected to create problems for the former first lady's nomination. But in negotiations with the Obama transition team, the former president agreed to several measures designed to bring transparency to his post-presidential work, including:
-- to volunteer to step away from day-to-day management of the foundation while his wife is secretary of state.
-- to submit his speaking schedule to review by the State Department and White House counsel.
-- to submit any new sources of income to a similar ethical review.
"It's a big step," said Sen. Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who said he plans to vote to confirm Clinton.
Lugar said there would still be "legitimate questions" raised about the former president's extensive international involvement.
"I don't know how, given all of our ethics standards now, anyone quite measures up to this who has such cosmic ties, but...hopefully, this team of rivals will work," Lugar said.
The Clinton pick was an extraordinary gesture of goodwill after a year in which the two rivals competed for the Democratic nomination in a long, bitter primary battle.
The two clashed repeatedly on foreign affairs during the 50-state contest, with Obama criticizing Clinton for her vote to authorize the Iraq war and Clinton saying that Obama lacked the experience to be president. She also chided him for saying he would meet with leaders of rogue nations like Iran and Cuba without preconditions.
The bitterness began melting away in June after Clinton ended her campaign and endorsed Obama. She went on to campaign for him in his general election contest against Republican Sen. John McCain.
Advisers said Obama had for several months envisioned Clinton as his top diplomat, and he invited her to Chicago to discuss the job just a week after the Nov. 4 election. The two met privately Nov. 13 in Obama's downtown transition office.
Clinton was said to be interested and then to waver, concerned about relinquishing her Senate seat and the political independence it conferred. Those concerns were largely ameliorated after Obama assured her she would be able to choose a staff and have direct access to him, advisers said.
Remaining in the Senate also may not have been an attractive choice for Clinton. Despite her political celebrity, she is a relatively junior senator without prospects for a leadership position or committee chairmanship anytime soon.
Some Democrats and government insiders have questioned whether Clinton is too independent and politically ambitious to serve Obama as secretary of state. But a senior Obama adviser has said the president-elect had been enthusiastic about naming Clinton to the position from the start, believing she would bring instant stature and credibility to U.S. diplomatic relations and the advantages to her serving far outweigh potential downsides.
Clinton, 61, a Chicago native and Yale Law School graduate, practiced law and served as the first lady of Arkansas during her husband's 12 years as governor of the state, from 1979-81 and 1983-1992.
Clinton was the nation's first lady from 1993 to 2001. The same year George W. Bush defeated Al Gore to succeed her husband in the White House, Clinton ran for the Senate as a New York Democrat. She won re-election in 2006 and was widely regarded as the favorite for her party's nomination for president in 2008.
In the Senate, Clinton served on the Armed Services Committee, the Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
Obama will name the New York senator to his national security team at a news conference in Chicago, a person close to Clinton confirmed to FOX News.
Obama's announcements include members of his national security team and beyond, completing the nominations for one-third of his Cabinet as he moves quickly to assemble the country's new leadership in times of war and a troubled economy.
His selections include some of his most loyal campaign advisers and notably some who were not, including Democratic primary rival Clinton and President Bush's defense secretary, Robert Gates, staying in his current post.
Obama will also name Susan Rice as UN ambassador, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano as homeland security chief and Eric Holder as attorney general, Democratic officials told FOX News. They requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly for the transition team.
Last week, he named key members of his economic team, including Timothy Geithner, president of Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as treasury secretary. Obama is not yet ready to name his intelligence advisers, one Democratic official said.
To clear the way for his wife to take the job, former President Bill Clinton agreed to disclose the names of every contributor to his foundation since its inception in 1997. He'll also refuse donations from foreign governments to the Clinton Global Initiative, his annual charitable conference, and will cease holding CGI meetings overseas.
Bill Clinton's business deals and global charitable endeavors were expected to create problems for the former first lady's nomination. But in negotiations with the Obama transition team, the former president agreed to several measures designed to bring transparency to his post-presidential work, including:
-- to volunteer to step away from day-to-day management of the foundation while his wife is secretary of state.
-- to submit his speaking schedule to review by the State Department and White House counsel.
-- to submit any new sources of income to a similar ethical review.
"It's a big step," said Sen. Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who said he plans to vote to confirm Clinton.
Lugar said there would still be "legitimate questions" raised about the former president's extensive international involvement.
"I don't know how, given all of our ethics standards now, anyone quite measures up to this who has such cosmic ties, but...hopefully, this team of rivals will work," Lugar said.
The Clinton pick was an extraordinary gesture of goodwill after a year in which the two rivals competed for the Democratic nomination in a long, bitter primary battle.
The two clashed repeatedly on foreign affairs during the 50-state contest, with Obama criticizing Clinton for her vote to authorize the Iraq war and Clinton saying that Obama lacked the experience to be president. She also chided him for saying he would meet with leaders of rogue nations like Iran and Cuba without preconditions.
The bitterness began melting away in June after Clinton ended her campaign and endorsed Obama. She went on to campaign for him in his general election contest against Republican Sen. John McCain.
Advisers said Obama had for several months envisioned Clinton as his top diplomat, and he invited her to Chicago to discuss the job just a week after the Nov. 4 election. The two met privately Nov. 13 in Obama's downtown transition office.
Clinton was said to be interested and then to waver, concerned about relinquishing her Senate seat and the political independence it conferred. Those concerns were largely ameliorated after Obama assured her she would be able to choose a staff and have direct access to him, advisers said.
Remaining in the Senate also may not have been an attractive choice for Clinton. Despite her political celebrity, she is a relatively junior senator without prospects for a leadership position or committee chairmanship anytime soon.
Some Democrats and government insiders have questioned whether Clinton is too independent and politically ambitious to serve Obama as secretary of state. But a senior Obama adviser has said the president-elect had been enthusiastic about naming Clinton to the position from the start, believing she would bring instant stature and credibility to U.S. diplomatic relations and the advantages to her serving far outweigh potential downsides.
Clinton, 61, a Chicago native and Yale Law School graduate, practiced law and served as the first lady of Arkansas during her husband's 12 years as governor of the state, from 1979-81 and 1983-1992.
Clinton was the nation's first lady from 1993 to 2001. The same year George W. Bush defeated Al Gore to succeed her husband in the White House, Clinton ran for the Senate as a New York Democrat. She won re-election in 2006 and was widely regarded as the favorite for her party's nomination for president in 2008.
In the Senate, Clinton served on the Armed Services Committee, the Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
GOD I HOPE THIS FRANKEN LOSER DOESN'T WIN
Fight Over Absentee Ballots Continues in Franken-Coleman Race
Wednesday, November 26, 2008 8:30 AM
ST. PAUL, Minn. -- When it comes to votes in Minnesota's drawn-out Senate election, five are particularly crucial.
That's how many people sit on the state Canvassing Board, which was to gather Wednesday to decide what to do about Democrat Al Franken's request to count absentee ballots his campaign says were wrongly rejected by poll judges.
Republican Sen. Norm Coleman's team is arguing that the board lacks the power to include those ballots in the high-stakes recount.
Coleman entered the recount guarding a 215-vote lead out of 2.9 million ballots cast. Through Tuesday night, state figures showed his lead stood at 238 votes when Nov. 4 tallies are compared with new counts in precincts where the recount is done.
That doesn't factor in the nearly 3,600 challenges that will get sorted out later, meaning the absentee fight could prove critical.
Franken's advisers say they know of more than 6,400 disqualified absentee ballots. Not all of the ballots would be fair game if the Franken push prevails.
Many were turned away because the voter wasn't properly registered. Other voters showed up in person after submitting a mail ballot, canceling the first ballot.
The Franken campaign has been pressing hardest for information on voters whose absentee ballots didn't count because there were problems with their signature or where possible clerical errors occurred.
The attorney general's office - run by a Democrat - has recommended against opening the rejected absentee ballots as part of the recount.
Both campaigns offered legal arguments to the canvassing board, which is made up of the secretary of state, two Supreme Court justices and two district judges.
Lawyers for Franken, an ex-"Saturday Night Live" personality, are citing a 1962 Supreme Court decision to argue that ballots should not be excluded because of technical mistakes or "an innocent failure" to comply with voting statutes.
His lead attorney, Marc Elias, said Tuesday he hopes the board will approve the counting of votes where the ballot rejection is debatable.
"It has the opportunity to do that and it has the authority and indeed I would say it has the obligation to do so," Elias said.
But Coleman's campaign sees its case as bolstered by 1858 and 1865 decisions by the Minnesota Supreme Court that discuss the "purely ministerial" role of canvassing boards in disputed elections.
"Boards of canvassers have no authority to pass upon the regularity of an election or the qualifications of persons voting thereat," reads the 1858 opinion in a disputed state Senate race.
Fritz Knaak, Coleman's lead recount lawyer, said including the rejected absentees would be "an unprecedented step, one that has never been done before in Minnesota and one that we believe undermines the legitimacy of the overall process that's been created."
Knaak said it's also unclear who would analyze those ballots and decide on them if they were included. He said the issue is best left to a lawsuit that could follow the recount if the losing party contests the result.
© 2008 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008 8:30 AM
ST. PAUL, Minn. -- When it comes to votes in Minnesota's drawn-out Senate election, five are particularly crucial.
That's how many people sit on the state Canvassing Board, which was to gather Wednesday to decide what to do about Democrat Al Franken's request to count absentee ballots his campaign says were wrongly rejected by poll judges.
Republican Sen. Norm Coleman's team is arguing that the board lacks the power to include those ballots in the high-stakes recount.
Coleman entered the recount guarding a 215-vote lead out of 2.9 million ballots cast. Through Tuesday night, state figures showed his lead stood at 238 votes when Nov. 4 tallies are compared with new counts in precincts where the recount is done.
That doesn't factor in the nearly 3,600 challenges that will get sorted out later, meaning the absentee fight could prove critical.
Franken's advisers say they know of more than 6,400 disqualified absentee ballots. Not all of the ballots would be fair game if the Franken push prevails.
Many were turned away because the voter wasn't properly registered. Other voters showed up in person after submitting a mail ballot, canceling the first ballot.
The Franken campaign has been pressing hardest for information on voters whose absentee ballots didn't count because there were problems with their signature or where possible clerical errors occurred.
The attorney general's office - run by a Democrat - has recommended against opening the rejected absentee ballots as part of the recount.
Both campaigns offered legal arguments to the canvassing board, which is made up of the secretary of state, two Supreme Court justices and two district judges.
Lawyers for Franken, an ex-"Saturday Night Live" personality, are citing a 1962 Supreme Court decision to argue that ballots should not be excluded because of technical mistakes or "an innocent failure" to comply with voting statutes.
His lead attorney, Marc Elias, said Tuesday he hopes the board will approve the counting of votes where the ballot rejection is debatable.
"It has the opportunity to do that and it has the authority and indeed I would say it has the obligation to do so," Elias said.
But Coleman's campaign sees its case as bolstered by 1858 and 1865 decisions by the Minnesota Supreme Court that discuss the "purely ministerial" role of canvassing boards in disputed elections.
"Boards of canvassers have no authority to pass upon the regularity of an election or the qualifications of persons voting thereat," reads the 1858 opinion in a disputed state Senate race.
Fritz Knaak, Coleman's lead recount lawyer, said including the rejected absentees would be "an unprecedented step, one that has never been done before in Minnesota and one that we believe undermines the legitimacy of the overall process that's been created."
Knaak said it's also unclear who would analyze those ballots and decide on them if they were included. He said the issue is best left to a lawsuit that could follow the recount if the losing party contests the result.
© 2008 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
BAD CHOICE FOR OBAMA ADMIN?
Napolitano Bad Pick as Security Chief, Minutemen Say
Arizona Governor Napolitano has been nominated for Barack Obama's new White House administration. She is criticized on illegal immigration by the Minutemen. Napolitano vetoed a border wall and ending tuition aid for illegals.
Monday, November 24, 2008 6:29 PM
By: Dave Eberhart
Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano pushed into law the nation’s harshest penalty for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But that’s not a good enough credential for her to lead the Department of Homeland Security — at least for the border guard watch group Minuteman Civil Defense Corps.
Minuteman President Chris Simcox doesn’t hesitate to lambaste Napolitano, who reportedly is president-elect Barack Obama’s top choice to head homeland security.
“I’m dubious at best," Simcox said. "This is a situation where you might as well put Barney the purple dinosaur in charge of homeland security.”
Simcox contends that problems associated with illegal immigration and drug smuggling pose the greatest threats to America’s security. But Napolitano, he says, hasn’t done nearly enough as governor of a state bordering Mexico to combat them. She would not be any more proactive as homeland security chief, he says.
“Miss Napolitano has no credentials when it comes to security, national security issues, military or law enforcement,” Simcox said during a report on KOVA-TV in Tucson.
On the other hand, Napolitano's signature law is a harsh measure that would take away the business license of a company on its second violation.
At the time of its passage last year, the second-term governor referred to it as the “business death penalty.” She also took the opportunity to slam the federal government for failing to act on rigorous immigration reform.
“The states will take the lead, and Arizona will take the lead among the states,” she said at the time.
Napolitano, who was Arizona’s attorney general and also U.S. attorney for the state, faces skepticism from the zero-tolerance Minutemen because of her willingness to compromise on items considered sacred icons by the border watch group.
For instance:
She vetoed a bill in 2005 that would have cut off in-state tuition aid to students who are in the country illegally. “This bill goes too far by punishing even longtime residents of this state who were brought here as small children by their parents,” she said, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times.
She vetoed bills that would have required the local police to enforce the immigration laws by arresting people in the state illegally.
She has not supported the border fence that is being constructed: “You show me a 50-foot wall, and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder,” she has said.
She also proposed a temporary worker program that would help employers fill quotas for workers. “Foreign labor should not be a substitute for U.S. workers, but it is critical that we bring foreign workers out of the shadows, put the clamps on the underground labor market and bring greater stability to our workforce,” she has said.
Yet, along the way, she has been unrelentingly tough as well, according to the LA Times. Consider:
Last year, she outlined a series of measures to control immigration, including an enhanced national employer verification system that would use Social Security data.
She has advocated a streamlined visa process and “tamper-proof immigration documents” that would reduce the use of fraudulent identifications.
She was the first governor to call for stationing the National Guard along her state’s 376-mile border with Mexico.
But Brett Farley, executive director of the Arizona-based Minuteman PAC, said his organization has its own calculus, and Napolitano fails.
“Obama’s selection of Janet Napolitano as homeland security secretary could be the biggest attack on our security and sovereignty in our nation’s history,” Farley said.
“The only worse pick for such a position would have been John McCain. This is a slap in our faces.”
Farley lists some of the perceived grievous trespasses perpetrated under Napolitano’s administration. Under her watch, he said, Arizona has:
Become ground zero for illegal trafficking of drugs, weapons, humans, and money.
Seen a spike in violent crime and gang warfare.
Become the headquarters for an international crime syndicate run through Venezuela, Cuba, and Russia.
Seen the highest influx of illegal immigrants along the southern border.
Become known to the criminal world as the “open gate” to the U.S.
In any event, if Napolitano passes the Obama vetting process and runs the gauntlet through Senate confirmation, the 50-year-old will be taking charge of the nation’s third biggest department. She will be responsible for a whole host of security hot spots such as aviation and maritime security, disaster response, protecting the president. She’ll be in charge of a virtual army composed of the Coast Guard, Secret Service, Border Patrol, Transportation Security Administration and Federal Emergency Management Agency, according to a report in USA Today.
“The fact that she is a governor from a border state is extremely important,” says Randall Larsen, a terrorism and homeland security expert and former National War College professor.
But Farley rejects the border-state governor argument, as he and his organization maintain that she has abused that very position.
“Janet Napolitano has spent more time in Mexico coddling the Mexican government and working deals for amnesty than she’s spent working with the legislature in her own state!” Farley said.
“Never mind that, as a state governor, Napolitano has no — zip, zilch, nada — constitutional authority to negotiate with foreign governments on behalf of the United States.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Print Page
Forward Page
E-mail Us
Arizona Governor Napolitano has been nominated for Barack Obama's new White House administration. She is criticized on illegal immigration by the Minutemen. Napolitano vetoed a border wall and ending tuition aid for illegals.
Monday, November 24, 2008 6:29 PM
By: Dave Eberhart
Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano pushed into law the nation’s harshest penalty for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But that’s not a good enough credential for her to lead the Department of Homeland Security — at least for the border guard watch group Minuteman Civil Defense Corps.
Minuteman President Chris Simcox doesn’t hesitate to lambaste Napolitano, who reportedly is president-elect Barack Obama’s top choice to head homeland security.
“I’m dubious at best," Simcox said. "This is a situation where you might as well put Barney the purple dinosaur in charge of homeland security.”
Simcox contends that problems associated with illegal immigration and drug smuggling pose the greatest threats to America’s security. But Napolitano, he says, hasn’t done nearly enough as governor of a state bordering Mexico to combat them. She would not be any more proactive as homeland security chief, he says.
“Miss Napolitano has no credentials when it comes to security, national security issues, military or law enforcement,” Simcox said during a report on KOVA-TV in Tucson.
On the other hand, Napolitano's signature law is a harsh measure that would take away the business license of a company on its second violation.
At the time of its passage last year, the second-term governor referred to it as the “business death penalty.” She also took the opportunity to slam the federal government for failing to act on rigorous immigration reform.
“The states will take the lead, and Arizona will take the lead among the states,” she said at the time.
Napolitano, who was Arizona’s attorney general and also U.S. attorney for the state, faces skepticism from the zero-tolerance Minutemen because of her willingness to compromise on items considered sacred icons by the border watch group.
For instance:
She vetoed a bill in 2005 that would have cut off in-state tuition aid to students who are in the country illegally. “This bill goes too far by punishing even longtime residents of this state who were brought here as small children by their parents,” she said, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times.
She vetoed bills that would have required the local police to enforce the immigration laws by arresting people in the state illegally.
She has not supported the border fence that is being constructed: “You show me a 50-foot wall, and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder,” she has said.
She also proposed a temporary worker program that would help employers fill quotas for workers. “Foreign labor should not be a substitute for U.S. workers, but it is critical that we bring foreign workers out of the shadows, put the clamps on the underground labor market and bring greater stability to our workforce,” she has said.
Yet, along the way, she has been unrelentingly tough as well, according to the LA Times. Consider:
Last year, she outlined a series of measures to control immigration, including an enhanced national employer verification system that would use Social Security data.
She has advocated a streamlined visa process and “tamper-proof immigration documents” that would reduce the use of fraudulent identifications.
She was the first governor to call for stationing the National Guard along her state’s 376-mile border with Mexico.
But Brett Farley, executive director of the Arizona-based Minuteman PAC, said his organization has its own calculus, and Napolitano fails.
“Obama’s selection of Janet Napolitano as homeland security secretary could be the biggest attack on our security and sovereignty in our nation’s history,” Farley said.
“The only worse pick for such a position would have been John McCain. This is a slap in our faces.”
Farley lists some of the perceived grievous trespasses perpetrated under Napolitano’s administration. Under her watch, he said, Arizona has:
Become ground zero for illegal trafficking of drugs, weapons, humans, and money.
Seen a spike in violent crime and gang warfare.
Become the headquarters for an international crime syndicate run through Venezuela, Cuba, and Russia.
Seen the highest influx of illegal immigrants along the southern border.
Become known to the criminal world as the “open gate” to the U.S.
In any event, if Napolitano passes the Obama vetting process and runs the gauntlet through Senate confirmation, the 50-year-old will be taking charge of the nation’s third biggest department. She will be responsible for a whole host of security hot spots such as aviation and maritime security, disaster response, protecting the president. She’ll be in charge of a virtual army composed of the Coast Guard, Secret Service, Border Patrol, Transportation Security Administration and Federal Emergency Management Agency, according to a report in USA Today.
“The fact that she is a governor from a border state is extremely important,” says Randall Larsen, a terrorism and homeland security expert and former National War College professor.
But Farley rejects the border-state governor argument, as he and his organization maintain that she has abused that very position.
“Janet Napolitano has spent more time in Mexico coddling the Mexican government and working deals for amnesty than she’s spent working with the legislature in her own state!” Farley said.
“Never mind that, as a state governor, Napolitano has no — zip, zilch, nada — constitutional authority to negotiate with foreign governments on behalf of the United States.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Print Page
Forward Page
E-mail Us
Monday, November 24, 2008
More on MEDIA BIAS in Support of Obama
Disgusting' Bias for Obama, Time Writer Admits
Sunday, November 23, 2008 5:40 PM
The mainstream media's support for Barack Obama's presidential campaign was so biased that even major insiders are now admitting they were shocked by its depth and depravity.
Last week, Time magazine's Mark Halperin called the media's performance during the campaign simply "disgusting."
Halperin told a panel of media analysts at the Politico/USC conference on the 2008 election, "It's the most disgusting failure of people in our business since the Iraq war."
He added, "It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage."
According to the Web site Politico, Halperin, who edits Time's political site "The Page," zeroed in on two New York Times articles near the end of the campaign that profiled both Cindy McCain and Michelle Obama.
"The story about Cindy McCain was vicious," Halperin said. "It looked for every negative thing they could find about her and it cast her in an extraordinarily negative light. It didn't talk about her work, for instance, as a mother for her children, and they cherry-picked every negative thing that's ever been written about her."
But the Times gave Michelle Obama red carpet treatment, "like a front-page endorsement of what a great person Michelle Obama is."
Halperin, a former ABC News political director, allowed that some of the press coverage simply reflected the extreme efficiency of Obama's presidential campaign.
"You do have to take into account the fact that this was a remarkable candidacy," Halperin said. "There were a lot of good stories. He was new."
Obama also had a lot of money and outspent Republican John McCain by more than 2 to 1.
The press never bothered to hold Obama accountable for reneging on his promise to use public financing. McCain kept his promise to do so.
During the campaign, conservatives criticized the pro-Obama coverage, but it had little effect.
Columnist David Limbaugh noted: "Never has that been clearer than in the 2008 presidential election, during which they are covering up rather than covering Barack Obama's shady past and alliances, his knee-deep involvement in corrupt practices threatening the very core of our democratic system, and his many policy misrepresentations."
Limbaugh noted that the press went into a tizzy over Sarah Palin's wardrobe, but ignored extravagances like Obama's "obscenely idolatrous million-dollar Greek coliseum mirage."
Now that the election is over, Halperin is not alone in admitting the bias. The Washington Post's ombudsman recently conceded that the paper’s coverage was skewed strongly in favor of Obama and against the McCain-Palin ticket.
[Editor's Note: See "Washington Post Admits Bias for Obama, Against McCain, Palin."]
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Sunday, November 23, 2008 5:40 PM
The mainstream media's support for Barack Obama's presidential campaign was so biased that even major insiders are now admitting they were shocked by its depth and depravity.
Last week, Time magazine's Mark Halperin called the media's performance during the campaign simply "disgusting."
Halperin told a panel of media analysts at the Politico/USC conference on the 2008 election, "It's the most disgusting failure of people in our business since the Iraq war."
He added, "It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage."
According to the Web site Politico, Halperin, who edits Time's political site "The Page," zeroed in on two New York Times articles near the end of the campaign that profiled both Cindy McCain and Michelle Obama.
"The story about Cindy McCain was vicious," Halperin said. "It looked for every negative thing they could find about her and it cast her in an extraordinarily negative light. It didn't talk about her work, for instance, as a mother for her children, and they cherry-picked every negative thing that's ever been written about her."
But the Times gave Michelle Obama red carpet treatment, "like a front-page endorsement of what a great person Michelle Obama is."
Halperin, a former ABC News political director, allowed that some of the press coverage simply reflected the extreme efficiency of Obama's presidential campaign.
"You do have to take into account the fact that this was a remarkable candidacy," Halperin said. "There were a lot of good stories. He was new."
Obama also had a lot of money and outspent Republican John McCain by more than 2 to 1.
The press never bothered to hold Obama accountable for reneging on his promise to use public financing. McCain kept his promise to do so.
During the campaign, conservatives criticized the pro-Obama coverage, but it had little effect.
Columnist David Limbaugh noted: "Never has that been clearer than in the 2008 presidential election, during which they are covering up rather than covering Barack Obama's shady past and alliances, his knee-deep involvement in corrupt practices threatening the very core of our democratic system, and his many policy misrepresentations."
Limbaugh noted that the press went into a tizzy over Sarah Palin's wardrobe, but ignored extravagances like Obama's "obscenely idolatrous million-dollar Greek coliseum mirage."
Now that the election is over, Halperin is not alone in admitting the bias. The Washington Post's ombudsman recently conceded that the paper’s coverage was skewed strongly in favor of Obama and against the McCain-Palin ticket.
[Editor's Note: See "Washington Post Admits Bias for Obama, Against McCain, Palin."]
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
SOMETHING FROM NEWT....
Crony Capitalism, Predatory Politicians, and the Detroit Three
By Newt Gingrich
There's a term that's commonly applied to the economic systems of some Asian and Latin American countries. It's "crony capitalism."Crony capitalism is when government controls significant parts of the economy. Under this kind of bureaucratic micromanagement, politicians - not the free market - call the shots. And that means that the decisions that control the economy are of necessity political decisions, not economic ones.Crony capitalism is bad for government. Economic power in the hands of politicians breeds corruption.Crony capitalism is bad for democracy. Individuals and businesses outside favored industries have an unequal voice in self-government.Crony capitalism is bad for business. Politicians wedded to the status quo stifle growth and innovation.And there's one more thing about crony capitalism: It's come to America.
OUTRAGE!! Billion-dollar drug company hides astounding discovery of a natural cancer killer.
One pharmaceutical company actually made the 'discovery of the century' - a miracle breakthrough that could save you or someone you love from the ravages of cancer. But...
They hid the secret for SEVEN FULL YEARS...with no plans to tell anyone about it ever! Why? Because the substance they found is completely natural... so they couldn't take out a patent on it. Until one brave researcher came forward to break the silence-and tell the world about this true cancer cure. Click here to read the full story
Predatory Politicians Practicing Crony Capitalism Created the Economic CrisisIt's the nature of crony capitalism to expand; for government to acquire more and more of the economy.The agents of this expansion are elected officials. Call them "predatory politicians."Crony capitalism practiced by predatory politicians is at the root of the current financial meltdown.In exchange for campaign cash and support for favored constituents, predatory politicians aided and abetted the government-backed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as they created and fed the subprime mortgage market
By Newt Gingrich
There's a term that's commonly applied to the economic systems of some Asian and Latin American countries. It's "crony capitalism."Crony capitalism is when government controls significant parts of the economy. Under this kind of bureaucratic micromanagement, politicians - not the free market - call the shots. And that means that the decisions that control the economy are of necessity political decisions, not economic ones.Crony capitalism is bad for government. Economic power in the hands of politicians breeds corruption.Crony capitalism is bad for democracy. Individuals and businesses outside favored industries have an unequal voice in self-government.Crony capitalism is bad for business. Politicians wedded to the status quo stifle growth and innovation.And there's one more thing about crony capitalism: It's come to America.
OUTRAGE!! Billion-dollar drug company hides astounding discovery of a natural cancer killer.
One pharmaceutical company actually made the 'discovery of the century' - a miracle breakthrough that could save you or someone you love from the ravages of cancer. But...
They hid the secret for SEVEN FULL YEARS...with no plans to tell anyone about it ever! Why? Because the substance they found is completely natural... so they couldn't take out a patent on it. Until one brave researcher came forward to break the silence-and tell the world about this true cancer cure. Click here to read the full story
Predatory Politicians Practicing Crony Capitalism Created the Economic CrisisIt's the nature of crony capitalism to expand; for government to acquire more and more of the economy.The agents of this expansion are elected officials. Call them "predatory politicians."Crony capitalism practiced by predatory politicians is at the root of the current financial meltdown.In exchange for campaign cash and support for favored constituents, predatory politicians aided and abetted the government-backed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as they created and fed the subprime mortgage market
Friday, November 21, 2008
Folks facing foreclosure get Holiday Hail Mary from Lenders
Holiday Gift From Fannie, Freddie: Foreclosure Halt
Kathryn Glass
The holidays could spell relief for many troubled homeowners, as two mortgage giants have decided to keep people in their homes a little longer.
Mortgage giants Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) have announced they will suspend foreclosures between November 26 and January 9. The government-sponsored entities will use the time to determine if borrowers are eligible for a loan modification plan.
The loan modification program restructures mortgage loans so that primary payments do not exceed 38% of borrowers’ monthly income before taxes.
The program applies to homeowners whose loans are held by Fannie and Freddie that are at least three months behind on their mortgage payments, in an effort to slow the increasingly dire mortgage crisis
Kathryn Glass
The holidays could spell relief for many troubled homeowners, as two mortgage giants have decided to keep people in their homes a little longer.
Mortgage giants Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) have announced they will suspend foreclosures between November 26 and January 9. The government-sponsored entities will use the time to determine if borrowers are eligible for a loan modification plan.
The loan modification program restructures mortgage loans so that primary payments do not exceed 38% of borrowers’ monthly income before taxes.
The program applies to homeowners whose loans are held by Fannie and Freddie that are at least three months behind on their mortgage payments, in an effort to slow the increasingly dire mortgage crisis
Their hearts are certainly in the right place...
BESMAYA RANGE COMPLEX, Iraq, Nov. 20, 2008 –
A group of Iraqi soldiers stepped up to help California residents victimized by recent wildfires raging throughout the state.
Iraqi army Col. Abbas Fadhil, Besmaya Range Complex commander, and his team of “Abbas’ Eagles” raised $500 for wildfire relief.
“We want to send a message to the American president and the American people,” Abbas said.
“We feel that we are a family — one body. When one part of the body suffers, the other parts suffer, too.”
This is the fourth donation the soldiers of Besmaya have sent to the American people recently. In September, they raised $1,500 for victims of hurricanes Gustav and Ike. The Eagles also donated $500 to the National Sept. 11 Memorial.
A group of Iraqi soldiers stepped up to help California residents victimized by recent wildfires raging throughout the state.
Iraqi army Col. Abbas Fadhil, Besmaya Range Complex commander, and his team of “Abbas’ Eagles” raised $500 for wildfire relief.
“We want to send a message to the American president and the American people,” Abbas said.
“We feel that we are a family — one body. When one part of the body suffers, the other parts suffer, too.”
This is the fourth donation the soldiers of Besmaya have sent to the American people recently. In September, they raised $1,500 for victims of hurricanes Gustav and Ike. The Eagles also donated $500 to the National Sept. 11 Memorial.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Prop 8 opponents.... extremely bad behavior
My Stance on this issue is... there is no reason to be changing the traditional terminology and meaning of marriage. Same sexers have the same RIGHTS already that heterosexuals do regarding marriage. They can marry anyone of the opposite sex. They are free to live with and protect whoever they pick as a partner legally already. To change Marriage in name in Tradition is wrong. Many states this year passed Marriage protection laws because of liberal judges overstepping their boundaries and giving Gays the right to call their Relationships "MARRIAGES"
Before Election Day, national media handwringers forged a wildly popular narrative: The right was, in the words of New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, gripped by "insane rage." Outbreaks of incivility (some real, but mostly imagined) were proof positive of the extremist takeover of the Republican Party. The cluck-cluckers and tut-tutters shook with fear.
But when the GOP took a beating on Nov. 4, no mass protests ensued; no nationwide boycotts erupted. Conservatives took their lumps and began the peaceful post-defeat process of self-flagellation, self-analysis and self-autopsy.
In fact, in the wake of campaign 2008 there's only one angry mob gripped by "insane rage": left-wing same-sex marriage activists incensed at their defeat in California. Voters there approved Proposition 8, a traditional marriage initiative, by 52 percent to 48 percent.
Instead of introspection and self-criticism, however, the sore losers who opposed Prop. 8 responded with threats, fists and blacklists.
That's right. Activists have published on the Internet an "Anti-Gay Blacklist" of Prop. 8 donors. If the tables were turned and Prop. 8 proponents created such an enemies list, everyone in Hollywood would be screaming "McCarthyism" faster than you could count to eight.
A Los Angeles restaurant whose manager made a small donation to the Prop. 8 campaign has been besieged nightly by hordes of protesters who have disrupted business, intimidated patrons and brought employees to tears. Out of fear for their jobs and their lives, workers at El Coyote Mexican Cafe pooled together $500 to pay off the bullies.
Scott Eckern, the beleaguered artistic director of California Musical Theatre in Sacramento, was forced to resign over his $1,000 donation to the Prop. 8 campaign. Rich Raddon, director of the Los Angeles Film Festival, is next on the chopping block after the anti-Prop. 8 mob discovered that he had also contributed to the "Yes on 8" campaign. Calls have been pouring in for his firing.
Over the last two weeks, anti-Prop. 8 organizers have targeted Mormon, Catholic and evangelical churches. Sentiments like this one, found on the anti-Prop.8 website "JoeMyGod," are common across the left-wing blogosphere: "Burn their [expletive] churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers."
Thousands of gay-rights demonstrators stood in front of the Mormon temple in Los Angeles shouting "Mormon scum." The Mormon headquarters in Salt Lake City received threatening letters containing an unidentified powder. Religion-bashing protesters filled with hate decried the "hate" at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif. Vandals defaced the Calvary Chapel in Chino Hills, Calif., because church members had collected Prop. 8 petitions. One worshiper's car was keyed with the slogans "Gay sex is love" and "SEX." Another car's antenna and windshield wipers were broken.
In Carlsbad, Calif., a man was charged with punching his elderly neighbors over their pro-Prop. 8 signs. In Palm Springs, Calif., a videographer filmed unhinged anti-Prop. 8 marchers who yanked a large cross from the hands of 69-year-old Phyllis Burgess and stomped on it.
In San Francisco, Christians evangelizing in the Castro District needed police protection after the same-sex marriage mob got physical and hounded them off the streets. Enthusiastically shooting themselves in the foot, anti-Prop. 8 boycotters are now going after the left-wing Sundance Film Festival because it does business in Mormon-friendly Utah.
Also targeted: Cinemark Theaters across the country. The company's CEO, Alan Stock, donated just under $10,000 to the traditional marriage measure. Never mind that Cinemark theaters are hosting the new biopic about gay icon Harvey Milk. They must pay for the sins of the company head who dared to exercise his political free speech.
Corporate honchos, church leaders and small donors alike are in the same-sex marriage mob's crosshairs, all unfairly demonized as hate-filled bigots by bona fide hate-filled bigots who have abandoned decency in pursuit of "equal rights." One wonders where Barack Obama -- himself an opponent of Proposition 8 -- is as this insane rage rages on. Soul-Fixer, Nation-Healer, where art thou?
NOT THE PLACE FOR TEACHER'S PERSONAL OPINION
'Browbeating' teacher still employed
Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 11/20/2008 8:55:00 AM
School officials in Fayetteville, North Carolina, have completed their investigation of a teacher following a classroom incident captured on film.
The Independent Women's Forum says the video shows an elementary school teacher browbeating a student for her support of John McCain in the school's mock presidential election. (See previous article)
"What do you all know about that war in Iraq? Talk to me because your daddy's in the military; talk. It's a senseless war," the teacher says on the video. "And by the way, Kathy, the person that you are picking for president said that our troops could stay in Iraq for another hundred years if they need to, so that means that your daddy could stay in the military for another hundred years."
Following outcry and media coverage of the incident, Cumberland County School Superintendent William Harrison launched an investigation. School officials refused to give OneNewsNow any details of the investigation results, citing a law that protects teachers in cases like this. But officials did say that the teacher, Diantha Harris, is still employed as a teacher in the Cumberland County School district.
According to media reports, the school district has received hundreds of phone calls about the incident, and the teacher involved has also received dozens of phone calls at home concerning the video. The Associated Press reported that Harris has said she regrets making the comments and that the student involved, along with her parents, has expressed support for the teacher.
Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 11/20/2008 8:55:00 AM
School officials in Fayetteville, North Carolina, have completed their investigation of a teacher following a classroom incident captured on film.
The Independent Women's Forum says the video shows an elementary school teacher browbeating a student for her support of John McCain in the school's mock presidential election. (See previous article)
"What do you all know about that war in Iraq? Talk to me because your daddy's in the military; talk. It's a senseless war," the teacher says on the video. "And by the way, Kathy, the person that you are picking for president said that our troops could stay in Iraq for another hundred years if they need to, so that means that your daddy could stay in the military for another hundred years."
Following outcry and media coverage of the incident, Cumberland County School Superintendent William Harrison launched an investigation. School officials refused to give OneNewsNow any details of the investigation results, citing a law that protects teachers in cases like this. But officials did say that the teacher, Diantha Harris, is still employed as a teacher in the Cumberland County School district.
According to media reports, the school district has received hundreds of phone calls about the incident, and the teacher involved has also received dozens of phone calls at home concerning the video. The Associated Press reported that Harris has said she regrets making the comments and that the student involved, along with her parents, has expressed support for the teacher.
Is this what is in Store for other Large liberal Cities?
SAN FRANCISCO GOING TO POT? HOPE NOT BUT WITH THE "ANYTHING GOES " LIBERAL attitude and Agenda, this is where we are headed. NO THANKS! I like rules and regulations better.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
HOW OBAMA GOT ELECTED...
AS the informed people already know cause we voted for McCain... Stupid people voted for Obama because they were misinformed or uninformed about him through the media. He was promoted as their SAVIOR... The man who is going to save our ailing country.
Because obviously interviewing a relative handful of Obama voters, while interesting, is hardly scientific proof of anything, we also commissioned a Zogby telephone poll which asked the very same questions (as well as a few others) with similarly amazing results.
Zogby Poll
512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points
97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates
Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions
57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)
81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)
82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)
88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)
56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).
And yet.....
Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes
Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter
And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!
Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.
Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)
Because obviously interviewing a relative handful of Obama voters, while interesting, is hardly scientific proof of anything, we also commissioned a Zogby telephone poll which asked the very same questions (as well as a few others) with similarly amazing results.
Zogby Poll
512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points
97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates
Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions
57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)
81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)
82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)
88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)
56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).
And yet.....
Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes
Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter
And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!
Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.
Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)
A Grilling for the Treasury Secretary... I should hope so.
WASHINGTON — The two top salesmen for a $700 billion financial bailout are in for a grilling by Capitol Hill lawmakers just one week after the administration officially ditched the original strategy behind the rescue.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson are expected to provide greater insights into the shift when they testify Tuesday before the House Financial Services Committee.
In a profile published Tuesday in The Washington Post, Paulson, who is overseeing the bailout program for the Bush administration, said he was also working on a proposal that would allow the government to take over a wide range of financial institutions — not just banks — that are in danger of collapse.
Last week, Paulson changed course and announced that the government would not use any of the $700 billion to buy rotten mortgages and other bad assets from banks. That had been the centerpiece of the plan when Paulson and Bernanke originally pitched it to lawmakers.
"Our assessment ... is that this is not the most effective way" to use the bailout money, Paulson said at that time.
In an op-ed published Tuesday in The New York Times, Paulson wrote: "If we have learned anything throughout this year, we have learned that this financial crisis is unpredictable and difficult to counteract. We decided it was prudent to reserve our (Troubled Asset Relief Program) money, maintaining not only our flexibility, but also that of the next administration."
Still, Paulson said that "recovery will happen much, much faster than it would have had we not used TARP to stabilize our system."
Paulson said last week the department would focus on rolling out a capital injection program to pour $250 billion into banks in return for partial ownership stakes in them. In the Times on Tuesday, he explained that "stronger capitalization is essential to increasing lending, which is vital to economic recovery."
Treasury would also search for new ways to boost the availability of auto loans, student loans and credit cards, which have been become harder to get due to the credit crisis, he said earlier.
Specifically, the department, along with the Federal Reserve, is exploring using some of the bailout money to bankroll a new loan facility. The aim: helping companies that issue credit cards, make student loans and finance car purchases.
The idea behind the capital injection program is for banks to use the money to rebuild reserves and lend more freely to customers. However, banks do have the leeway to use the money for other things, such as buying other banks or paying dividends to investors. That has touched a nerve with some lawmakers.
Locked-up lending is a prime reason why the United States is suffering through the worst financial crisis since the 1930s. All the fallout from the housing, credit and financial crises have badly hurt the economy, which is almost certainly in recession, analysts say.
The administration, however, has remained opposed to using some of the bailout money to help troubled U.S. automakers or to provide guarantees for mortgages at risk of falling into foreclosure, another huge source of distress for the economy.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the panel, has been tapped by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to draft an aid package for Detroit. The auto companies are seeking $25 billion for emergency loans.
In a break with the administration stance, Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., who also will testify Tuesday, recently proposed using $24 billion of the bailout money to help some American households avoid foreclosure.
So far, Treasury Department has pledged $250 billion for banks and has agreed to devote $40 billion to troubled insurer American International Group— its first slice of funds going to a company other than a bank. That leaves just $60 billion available from Congress' first bailout installment of $350 billion.
Congressional officials said Paulson indicated he is unlikely to tap the remaining $350 billion before the administration leaves office on Jan. 20. That would mean the incoming Obama administration would decide whether and how the money should be spent. The congressional officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to disclose the developments.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson are expected to provide greater insights into the shift when they testify Tuesday before the House Financial Services Committee.
In a profile published Tuesday in The Washington Post, Paulson, who is overseeing the bailout program for the Bush administration, said he was also working on a proposal that would allow the government to take over a wide range of financial institutions — not just banks — that are in danger of collapse.
Last week, Paulson changed course and announced that the government would not use any of the $700 billion to buy rotten mortgages and other bad assets from banks. That had been the centerpiece of the plan when Paulson and Bernanke originally pitched it to lawmakers.
"Our assessment ... is that this is not the most effective way" to use the bailout money, Paulson said at that time.
In an op-ed published Tuesday in The New York Times, Paulson wrote: "If we have learned anything throughout this year, we have learned that this financial crisis is unpredictable and difficult to counteract. We decided it was prudent to reserve our (Troubled Asset Relief Program) money, maintaining not only our flexibility, but also that of the next administration."
Still, Paulson said that "recovery will happen much, much faster than it would have had we not used TARP to stabilize our system."
Paulson said last week the department would focus on rolling out a capital injection program to pour $250 billion into banks in return for partial ownership stakes in them. In the Times on Tuesday, he explained that "stronger capitalization is essential to increasing lending, which is vital to economic recovery."
Treasury would also search for new ways to boost the availability of auto loans, student loans and credit cards, which have been become harder to get due to the credit crisis, he said earlier.
Specifically, the department, along with the Federal Reserve, is exploring using some of the bailout money to bankroll a new loan facility. The aim: helping companies that issue credit cards, make student loans and finance car purchases.
The idea behind the capital injection program is for banks to use the money to rebuild reserves and lend more freely to customers. However, banks do have the leeway to use the money for other things, such as buying other banks or paying dividends to investors. That has touched a nerve with some lawmakers.
Locked-up lending is a prime reason why the United States is suffering through the worst financial crisis since the 1930s. All the fallout from the housing, credit and financial crises have badly hurt the economy, which is almost certainly in recession, analysts say.
The administration, however, has remained opposed to using some of the bailout money to help troubled U.S. automakers or to provide guarantees for mortgages at risk of falling into foreclosure, another huge source of distress for the economy.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the panel, has been tapped by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to draft an aid package for Detroit. The auto companies are seeking $25 billion for emergency loans.
In a break with the administration stance, Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., who also will testify Tuesday, recently proposed using $24 billion of the bailout money to help some American households avoid foreclosure.
So far, Treasury Department has pledged $250 billion for banks and has agreed to devote $40 billion to troubled insurer American International Group— its first slice of funds going to a company other than a bank. That leaves just $60 billion available from Congress' first bailout installment of $350 billion.
Congressional officials said Paulson indicated he is unlikely to tap the remaining $350 billion before the administration leaves office on Jan. 20. That would mean the incoming Obama administration would decide whether and how the money should be spent. The congressional officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to disclose the developments.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Example of Barack's Inaugural Address
FEEL FREE TO ADD YOUR OWN. I WILL COPY AND PASTE FROM COMMENTS AND PLACE THEM ON THE BLOG.
The following was my version of Barack's speech.
My Fellow Americans. My Black Brothers and Sisters who overwhelmingly voted for me just because I am half black, and to white stupid, rich supporters... Please do not riot and burn down your neighborhoods but.... I cannot accept the office of the Presidency of the US. I wanted to see how far I could actually go with this. The "Rumors" you have heard about me... (if you watch Fox and not the mainstream media) are true. I was not born in the US. I was born in Kenya. I Still have poverty stricken relatives there but do not help them in anyway. I took illegal funding. I thought this would have been discovered, but the media just gave me a free pass pretty much. I took loads of illegal funds which aren't even tracable. I am good buddies with William Ayers. Playing that relationship down just seemed like a smart thing to do. If I actually took over as President I would appoint him as my secretary of State. I cannot be your President and nearly all of the Democrats in Congress will be going to jail with me for taking bribes and being in everyone's pockets for years now. The Country will be freed and handed back into the Capable Republican Hands of John McCain. The American people however will help him chose his VP. IT won't be Sarah Palin. America isn't ready for her.
It is with great Sadness and relief that I step down now and turn myself into authorities.
Thank you for the Opporunity to pull off this enormous Fraud. It's been real.
The following was my version of Barack's speech.
My Fellow Americans. My Black Brothers and Sisters who overwhelmingly voted for me just because I am half black, and to white stupid, rich supporters... Please do not riot and burn down your neighborhoods but.... I cannot accept the office of the Presidency of the US. I wanted to see how far I could actually go with this. The "Rumors" you have heard about me... (if you watch Fox and not the mainstream media) are true. I was not born in the US. I was born in Kenya. I Still have poverty stricken relatives there but do not help them in anyway. I took illegal funding. I thought this would have been discovered, but the media just gave me a free pass pretty much. I took loads of illegal funds which aren't even tracable. I am good buddies with William Ayers. Playing that relationship down just seemed like a smart thing to do. If I actually took over as President I would appoint him as my secretary of State.
It is with great Sadness and relief that I step down now and turn myself into authorities.
Thank you for the Opporunity to pull off this enormous Fraud. It's been real.
SHOWDOWN IN CONGRESS OVER AUTO BAILOUT PLANS
WASHINGTON — Hardline opponents of an auto industry bailout branded the industry a "dinosaur" whose "day of reckoning" is near, while Democrats pledged Sunday to do their best to get Detroit a slice of the $700 billion Wall Street rescue in this week's lame-duck session of Congress.
The companies are seeking $25 billion from the financial industry bailout for emergency loans, though supporters of the aid for General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC have offered to reduce the size of the rescue to win backing in Congress.
Senate Democrats intended to introduce legislation Monday attaching an auto bailout to a House-passed bill extending unemployment benefits; a vote was expected as early as Wednesday.
A White House alternative would let the car companies take $25 billion in loans previously approved to develop fuel-efficient vehicles and use the money for more immediate needs. Congressional Democrats oppose the White House plan as shortsighted.
Majority Democrats will need at least a dozen GOP votes in the Senate to prevent opponents from blocking their measure — assuming all Senate Democrats support it. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky questioned whether there was sufficient Democratic support for an auto bailout in a statement released Sunday.
"The silence from the Democrat rank and file on this matter has been deafening," McConnell said.
So far two Republicans publicly have voiced support for the idea. Several others, included Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman on Sunday, have indicated they might accept a rescue under strict conditions.
Sens. Richard Shelby of Alabama and Jon Kyl of Arizona said it would be a mistake to use any of the Wall Street rescue money to prop up the automakers because a bailout would only postpone the industry's demise.
"Companies fail everyday and others take their place. I think this is a road we should not go down," said Shelby, the senior Republican on the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. "They're not building the right products," he said. "They've got good workers but I don't believe they've got good management. They don't innovate. They're a dinosaur in a sense."
Added Kyl, the Senate's second-ranking Republican: "Just giving them $25 billion doesn't change anything. It just puts off for six months or so the day of reckoning."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said over the weekend the House would aid the ailing industry, though she did not put a price on her plan. "The House is ready to do it," said Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. "There's no downside to trying."
Frank's committee has scheduled a Wednesday hearing on an auto bailout.
It is a more difficult fight in the Senate, given the Democrats' slim edge and President George W. Bush's opposition. Bush wants to speed the release of $25 billion from a separate loan program intended to help the automakers develop fuel-efficient vehicles and have that money go toward more urgent purposes as the companies struggle to stay afloat. The loan program was approved by Congress last year, but more legislation would be necessary to change its purpose.
"That should be done this week," Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said. He said reopening the Wall Street bailout and including automakers could attract other industries looking for bailouts.
"If you start that, where do you stop?" he asked. "There's a line of companies of industries waiting at Treasury just to see if they can get their hands on those $700 billion."
The disagreement raises the possibility that any help for automakers will have to wait until 2009, when President-elect Barack Obama takes office and the Democrats increase their majority in the Senate.
At least two Republican senators support an automaker bailout — George Voinovich of Ohio and Kit Bond of Missouri. But if the Republicans are seen as neglecting an industry that inevitably collapses, they risk lasting political problems in Midwestern industrial states that can swing for either political party.
Obama won most of the manufacturing states in the presidential race, including Ohio, a perennial battleground, and Indiana, which had not voted for a Democrat for president since 1964. Obama easily won Michigan after Republican John McCain publicly pulled out weeks before Election Day.
Former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich said young voters, who overwhelmingly supported Obama over Republican John McCain in the presidential election, could get turned off by expensive corporate bailouts that they will eventually have to pay for.
If "those 20-year-olds and 30-year-olds start to figure out they're going to pay the taxes, they're not getting the billions, I think you might find a lot of dissatisfaction by next summer," Gingrich said.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said automakers are working to adapt to a changing consumer market, but they need immediate help to survive the current economic crisis. "This is a national problem," Levin said. "The auto industry touches millions and millions of lives."
The companies are lobbying lawmakers furiously for an emergency infusion of cash. GM has warned it might not survive through year's end without a government lifeline.
"It's not the General Motors we grew up with. It's a General Motors that is headed down this road to oblivion," said Shelby. "Should we intervene to slow it down, knowing it's going to happen? I say no, not for the American taxpayer."
United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger would not flat-out reject further concessions by members on top of the two-tiered wage system and other concessions the union gave the automakers last year, but he bristled at calls for further sacrifices by his members.
"Let's go to AIG, Bear Stearns, active and retired workers: Did anybody go in and ask them to give back wages and benefit levels?" Gettelfinger said on WDIV-TV in Detroit. "What about the bond traders? Did anybody ask them? What about the cleaners in the building? Why would the UAW be any different?"
"We made an agreement, and we made major concessions," he said. "So how can you blame the autoworkers?"
Obama said he believes aid is needed but that it should be provided as part of a long-term plan for a "sustainable U.S. auto industry" — not simply as a blank check.
"For the auto industry to completely collapse would be a disaster in this kind of environment," Obama said in a "60 Minutes" interview airing Sunday night on CBS. "So my hope is that over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all of the stakeholders coming together with a plan — what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like?"
Lawmakers opposed to the bailout say Chapter 11 might be a better option than government loans and they cite the experience of airlines that have gone through the process of reorganization.
But GM CEO Rick Wagoner, also appearing on Detroit's WDIV, said: "This idea that you just go into Chapter 11 and hang around for three months ... this is a fantasy. This is not going to work. Most important to what is going to happen is most people will stop buying the cars of a bankrupt company."
Shelby and Levin were interviewed on NBC's "Meet the Press" and Shelby also appeared with Frank on CBS' "Face the Nation." Kyl spoke on "Fox News Sunday" and Gutierrez was on "Late Edition" on CNN.
The companies are seeking $25 billion from the financial industry bailout for emergency loans, though supporters of the aid for General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC have offered to reduce the size of the rescue to win backing in Congress.
Senate Democrats intended to introduce legislation Monday attaching an auto bailout to a House-passed bill extending unemployment benefits; a vote was expected as early as Wednesday.
A White House alternative would let the car companies take $25 billion in loans previously approved to develop fuel-efficient vehicles and use the money for more immediate needs. Congressional Democrats oppose the White House plan as shortsighted.
Majority Democrats will need at least a dozen GOP votes in the Senate to prevent opponents from blocking their measure — assuming all Senate Democrats support it. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky questioned whether there was sufficient Democratic support for an auto bailout in a statement released Sunday.
"The silence from the Democrat rank and file on this matter has been deafening," McConnell said.
So far two Republicans publicly have voiced support for the idea. Several others, included Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman on Sunday, have indicated they might accept a rescue under strict conditions.
Sens. Richard Shelby of Alabama and Jon Kyl of Arizona said it would be a mistake to use any of the Wall Street rescue money to prop up the automakers because a bailout would only postpone the industry's demise.
"Companies fail everyday and others take their place. I think this is a road we should not go down," said Shelby, the senior Republican on the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. "They're not building the right products," he said. "They've got good workers but I don't believe they've got good management. They don't innovate. They're a dinosaur in a sense."
Added Kyl, the Senate's second-ranking Republican: "Just giving them $25 billion doesn't change anything. It just puts off for six months or so the day of reckoning."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said over the weekend the House would aid the ailing industry, though she did not put a price on her plan. "The House is ready to do it," said Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. "There's no downside to trying."
Frank's committee has scheduled a Wednesday hearing on an auto bailout.
It is a more difficult fight in the Senate, given the Democrats' slim edge and President George W. Bush's opposition. Bush wants to speed the release of $25 billion from a separate loan program intended to help the automakers develop fuel-efficient vehicles and have that money go toward more urgent purposes as the companies struggle to stay afloat. The loan program was approved by Congress last year, but more legislation would be necessary to change its purpose.
"That should be done this week," Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said. He said reopening the Wall Street bailout and including automakers could attract other industries looking for bailouts.
"If you start that, where do you stop?" he asked. "There's a line of companies of industries waiting at Treasury just to see if they can get their hands on those $700 billion."
The disagreement raises the possibility that any help for automakers will have to wait until 2009, when President-elect Barack Obama takes office and the Democrats increase their majority in the Senate.
At least two Republican senators support an automaker bailout — George Voinovich of Ohio and Kit Bond of Missouri. But if the Republicans are seen as neglecting an industry that inevitably collapses, they risk lasting political problems in Midwestern industrial states that can swing for either political party.
Obama won most of the manufacturing states in the presidential race, including Ohio, a perennial battleground, and Indiana, which had not voted for a Democrat for president since 1964. Obama easily won Michigan after Republican John McCain publicly pulled out weeks before Election Day.
Former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich said young voters, who overwhelmingly supported Obama over Republican John McCain in the presidential election, could get turned off by expensive corporate bailouts that they will eventually have to pay for.
If "those 20-year-olds and 30-year-olds start to figure out they're going to pay the taxes, they're not getting the billions, I think you might find a lot of dissatisfaction by next summer," Gingrich said.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said automakers are working to adapt to a changing consumer market, but they need immediate help to survive the current economic crisis. "This is a national problem," Levin said. "The auto industry touches millions and millions of lives."
The companies are lobbying lawmakers furiously for an emergency infusion of cash. GM has warned it might not survive through year's end without a government lifeline.
"It's not the General Motors we grew up with. It's a General Motors that is headed down this road to oblivion," said Shelby. "Should we intervene to slow it down, knowing it's going to happen? I say no, not for the American taxpayer."
United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger would not flat-out reject further concessions by members on top of the two-tiered wage system and other concessions the union gave the automakers last year, but he bristled at calls for further sacrifices by his members.
"Let's go to AIG, Bear Stearns, active and retired workers: Did anybody go in and ask them to give back wages and benefit levels?" Gettelfinger said on WDIV-TV in Detroit. "What about the bond traders? Did anybody ask them? What about the cleaners in the building? Why would the UAW be any different?"
"We made an agreement, and we made major concessions," he said. "So how can you blame the autoworkers?"
Obama said he believes aid is needed but that it should be provided as part of a long-term plan for a "sustainable U.S. auto industry" — not simply as a blank check.
"For the auto industry to completely collapse would be a disaster in this kind of environment," Obama said in a "60 Minutes" interview airing Sunday night on CBS. "So my hope is that over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all of the stakeholders coming together with a plan — what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like?"
Lawmakers opposed to the bailout say Chapter 11 might be a better option than government loans and they cite the experience of airlines that have gone through the process of reorganization.
But GM CEO Rick Wagoner, also appearing on Detroit's WDIV, said: "This idea that you just go into Chapter 11 and hang around for three months ... this is a fantasy. This is not going to work. Most important to what is going to happen is most people will stop buying the cars of a bankrupt company."
Shelby and Levin were interviewed on NBC's "Meet the Press" and Shelby also appeared with Frank on CBS' "Face the Nation." Kyl spoke on "Fox News Sunday" and Gutierrez was on "Late Edition" on CNN.
Friday, November 14, 2008
ED Koch on the Botched Bailout (long but a good read)
Bailout Bunk: We've Been Had
Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:07 AM
By: Edward I. Koch
The more I think about it, the more I believe we were had when the federal government proposed that $700 billion bailout to primarily deal with the liquidity crisis.
At the time, nobody seemed to know what to do. When Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke jointly proposed the bailout in an attempt to avoid a repeat of the Great Depression, nearly everyone threw up their hands and concluded there was no alternative.
At first, some members of Congress — both Republicans and Democrats — balked at the huge bailout package. They said at the very least there should be some minimal safeguards since the legislation was drawn to give the secretary of the Treasury what appeared to be total power to determine how the bailout would be structured.
These concerns were addressed to some extent in the revised bailout bill which, among other things, staggered the bailout payments and provided for some congressional lending oversight for half of the $700 billion rescue package. Congress apparently assured that having waited and then passing the legislation on the second time it was presented to the House, it was in fact improved and would prevent our being ripped off by Wall Street for a second time.
We were told over and over by the experts in the news media and government that the real problem was in fact liquidity — banks were just not willing to lend, even to creditworthy applicants. I decided to write a letter to both Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke stating my concerns about the use of the federal guarantees and loans.
The letters follow:
October 9, 2008
Henry M. Paulson, Jr. SecretaryDepartment of the Treasury1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20551
Ben S. BernankeChairmanFederal Reserve System20th & Constitution Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20220
Gentlemen:
As you have pointed out, the meltdown occurring in the United States is taking place in large part because of a lack of available liquidity, meaning that lenders — commercial banks in the lead — are not lending to applicants seeking to borrow in order to purchase housing, cars and other big ticket items that the economy relies on to flourish, as well as denying loans to small businesses and local governments seeking to borrow to pay their bills with municipal bond markets largely closed to them.
One of the purposes of the $700 billion recently made available as a result of legislation enacted by the Congress is to give additional liquidity to commercial banking institutions so that they can once again perform their leading raison d’etre — lending money.
The major reason for lack of liquidity — availability of loans — is fear, as you have stated, fear that the money will not be repaid either by individuals, governments or institutions, e.g., other banks.
Again, as you have stated, another reason offered by the banks for not lending monies is that much of their assets are now labeled “toxic.” It is these assets which, as a result of your efforts, the newly-enacted legislation addresses, freeing the banks of them by having the federal government buy them at a price below their original value, substituting cash to the banks.
If I have accurately stated the facts, why not by order of the United States Treasury and Federal Reserve direct the commercial banks to immediately commence loaning money to “creditworthy” applicants and at a scale comparable to loans individual banks entered into last year?
If the banks refuse to abide by such order, they would not be eligible among other punitive measures to sell their “toxic” securities to the Treasury. If the banks require a definition of “creditworthy,” your offices will supply it for the various situations that apply.
If the proposal makes sense, it can immediately be implemented and provide the credit needed. If it does not, I would appreciate knowing the reasons why.
All the best.
Sincerely,
Edward I. Koch
Chairman Bernanke’s response, dated Oct. 16, is as follows:
Dear Mr. Koch:
I am responding to your letter of October 9, 2008, in which you recommended that the Treasury or bank regulators direct commercial banks to lend to creditworthy borrowers. You further suggested that banks that did not comply with such a directive would be ineligible to participate in the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).
We at the Federal Reserve firmly agree that an unfreezing of financial markets and a resumption of lending activity is essential. Credit is the lifeblood of an economy, and continued economic growth will require that substantial credit flows be restarted.
But requiring directly that banks extend specified amounts of credit to creditworthy borrowers would entail many complications.
For example, bank regulators would need to create an objective definition for determining which borrowers were creditworthy.
Moreover, because the volume of banks’ credit activities can fluctuate over time for a variety of reasons, including those over which they have no control (such as the rate of economic growth in their geographical regions), determining appropriate targets for individual banks’ lending activities would be complex and potentially arbitrary.
In addition, because of the very large number of banking institutions in the country — ore than 8,000 — administering such a program would be extremely resource intensive.
However, we believe that the plans recently announced by the U.S. Treasury, the FDIC, and the Federal Reserve to bolster the capital of banking institutions and to guarantee certain liabilities of banking firms will be effective in strengthening the banking system and in fostering the extension of credit to sound borrowers.
The purchases of mortgage-related assets under the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program will also contribute to a recovery of the credit intermediation process by reducing the amount of opaque and difficult-to-value assets from the balance sheets of financial institutions.
Moreover, the Federal Reserve continues to provide large amounts of liquidity to the financial system through its standard lending program as well as through a wide range of new liquidity facilities, and these activities should further support credit intermediation.
To be sure, even with these substantial actions by the government, the recovery of our financial markets will take time.
Strains on financial markets and institutions are likely to remain considerable and will act as a drag on economic growth for the foreseeable future.
However, I believe that the government has now put in place an important array of tools that will enable us to address over time some of the most significant difficulties in our financial system.
As a result, with continued focus and effort to resolve these issues, we can look forward to a gradual restoration of lending activities and sustainable economic growth. I hope these comments are helpful.
Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Chairman Bernanke responded, but Secretary Paulson has not. On Nov. 7, The New York Times, in its masterful style, published an article authored by Steven Erlanger and Katrin Bennhold putting into context the problems we and other countries are facing.
The article states, “But there is a fundamental problem that is not easily solved by the usual economic policy tools: how to persuade rattled banks to start lending again — an essential first step to restoring economic health.”
It was shocking to learn, “Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. had to gather the chief executives of the nine biggest American banks and cajole them into accepting about $25 billion each in new capital. But having pleaded with the banks to take the money, and putting no government officials on bank boards, the government had little power to tell them how to spend it. Treasury officials also refused to tell banks to reduce their dividends or to increase their lending by any specific amounts.”
I find it incredible that this is happening and no one is calling foul.
Where are all the hotshots who supported Paulson in his psyching us all out by conveying that if we did not follow his plan, we would find ourselves in another Great Depression?
Why aren’t they at the very least denouncing what is now happening? We are keeping alive, in addition to banks, other institutions that have done a terrible job and were greedy.
Those companies should be permitted to declare bankruptcy so that someone in the private sector can buy them at a discount, if they are worth purchasing.
Everyone is lining up to get their federal handout.
AIG has come back for more and is to receive a total of $150 billion. The three American car companies, General Motors, Chrysler and Ford, have received $25 billion and want another $25 billion of taxpayers’ money.
Why not let them be bought by others in bankruptcy? There are those who say we are bailing out companies in order to prevent massive layoffs. In my view, those layoffs will come sooner or later anyhow because those companies are run by incompetents and no longer able to compete, while foreign companies like Toyota, manufacturing their cars in the U.S., are selling them and not seeking to be bailed out.
They make cars Americans want to buy.
In the meanwhile, the vast majority of Americans have lost upwards of 50 percent of their savings including in the stock market and their 401(k)s. Particularly heartbreaking are the financial futures of those already in retirement who are dependent on their now lost or greatly reduced savings, as well as the millions more who hoped to retire soon.
Plans should be made to bring to Washington hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans? We should carry pitchforks to scare the hell out of government, particularly the newly-elected members of Congress as well as all of those re-elected recently, for failing us so miserably.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:07 AM
By: Edward I. Koch
The more I think about it, the more I believe we were had when the federal government proposed that $700 billion bailout to primarily deal with the liquidity crisis.
At the time, nobody seemed to know what to do. When Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke jointly proposed the bailout in an attempt to avoid a repeat of the Great Depression, nearly everyone threw up their hands and concluded there was no alternative.
At first, some members of Congress — both Republicans and Democrats — balked at the huge bailout package. They said at the very least there should be some minimal safeguards since the legislation was drawn to give the secretary of the Treasury what appeared to be total power to determine how the bailout would be structured.
These concerns were addressed to some extent in the revised bailout bill which, among other things, staggered the bailout payments and provided for some congressional lending oversight for half of the $700 billion rescue package. Congress apparently assured that having waited and then passing the legislation on the second time it was presented to the House, it was in fact improved and would prevent our being ripped off by Wall Street for a second time.
We were told over and over by the experts in the news media and government that the real problem was in fact liquidity — banks were just not willing to lend, even to creditworthy applicants. I decided to write a letter to both Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke stating my concerns about the use of the federal guarantees and loans.
The letters follow:
October 9, 2008
Henry M. Paulson, Jr. SecretaryDepartment of the Treasury1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20551
Ben S. BernankeChairmanFederal Reserve System20th & Constitution Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20220
Gentlemen:
As you have pointed out, the meltdown occurring in the United States is taking place in large part because of a lack of available liquidity, meaning that lenders — commercial banks in the lead — are not lending to applicants seeking to borrow in order to purchase housing, cars and other big ticket items that the economy relies on to flourish, as well as denying loans to small businesses and local governments seeking to borrow to pay their bills with municipal bond markets largely closed to them.
One of the purposes of the $700 billion recently made available as a result of legislation enacted by the Congress is to give additional liquidity to commercial banking institutions so that they can once again perform their leading raison d’etre — lending money.
The major reason for lack of liquidity — availability of loans — is fear, as you have stated, fear that the money will not be repaid either by individuals, governments or institutions, e.g., other banks.
Again, as you have stated, another reason offered by the banks for not lending monies is that much of their assets are now labeled “toxic.” It is these assets which, as a result of your efforts, the newly-enacted legislation addresses, freeing the banks of them by having the federal government buy them at a price below their original value, substituting cash to the banks.
If I have accurately stated the facts, why not by order of the United States Treasury and Federal Reserve direct the commercial banks to immediately commence loaning money to “creditworthy” applicants and at a scale comparable to loans individual banks entered into last year?
If the banks refuse to abide by such order, they would not be eligible among other punitive measures to sell their “toxic” securities to the Treasury. If the banks require a definition of “creditworthy,” your offices will supply it for the various situations that apply.
If the proposal makes sense, it can immediately be implemented and provide the credit needed. If it does not, I would appreciate knowing the reasons why.
All the best.
Sincerely,
Edward I. Koch
Chairman Bernanke’s response, dated Oct. 16, is as follows:
Dear Mr. Koch:
I am responding to your letter of October 9, 2008, in which you recommended that the Treasury or bank regulators direct commercial banks to lend to creditworthy borrowers. You further suggested that banks that did not comply with such a directive would be ineligible to participate in the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).
We at the Federal Reserve firmly agree that an unfreezing of financial markets and a resumption of lending activity is essential. Credit is the lifeblood of an economy, and continued economic growth will require that substantial credit flows be restarted.
But requiring directly that banks extend specified amounts of credit to creditworthy borrowers would entail many complications.
For example, bank regulators would need to create an objective definition for determining which borrowers were creditworthy.
Moreover, because the volume of banks’ credit activities can fluctuate over time for a variety of reasons, including those over which they have no control (such as the rate of economic growth in their geographical regions), determining appropriate targets for individual banks’ lending activities would be complex and potentially arbitrary.
In addition, because of the very large number of banking institutions in the country — ore than 8,000 — administering such a program would be extremely resource intensive.
However, we believe that the plans recently announced by the U.S. Treasury, the FDIC, and the Federal Reserve to bolster the capital of banking institutions and to guarantee certain liabilities of banking firms will be effective in strengthening the banking system and in fostering the extension of credit to sound borrowers.
The purchases of mortgage-related assets under the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program will also contribute to a recovery of the credit intermediation process by reducing the amount of opaque and difficult-to-value assets from the balance sheets of financial institutions.
Moreover, the Federal Reserve continues to provide large amounts of liquidity to the financial system through its standard lending program as well as through a wide range of new liquidity facilities, and these activities should further support credit intermediation.
To be sure, even with these substantial actions by the government, the recovery of our financial markets will take time.
Strains on financial markets and institutions are likely to remain considerable and will act as a drag on economic growth for the foreseeable future.
However, I believe that the government has now put in place an important array of tools that will enable us to address over time some of the most significant difficulties in our financial system.
As a result, with continued focus and effort to resolve these issues, we can look forward to a gradual restoration of lending activities and sustainable economic growth. I hope these comments are helpful.
Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Chairman Bernanke responded, but Secretary Paulson has not. On Nov. 7, The New York Times, in its masterful style, published an article authored by Steven Erlanger and Katrin Bennhold putting into context the problems we and other countries are facing.
The article states, “But there is a fundamental problem that is not easily solved by the usual economic policy tools: how to persuade rattled banks to start lending again — an essential first step to restoring economic health.”
It was shocking to learn, “Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. had to gather the chief executives of the nine biggest American banks and cajole them into accepting about $25 billion each in new capital. But having pleaded with the banks to take the money, and putting no government officials on bank boards, the government had little power to tell them how to spend it. Treasury officials also refused to tell banks to reduce their dividends or to increase their lending by any specific amounts.”
I find it incredible that this is happening and no one is calling foul.
Where are all the hotshots who supported Paulson in his psyching us all out by conveying that if we did not follow his plan, we would find ourselves in another Great Depression?
Why aren’t they at the very least denouncing what is now happening? We are keeping alive, in addition to banks, other institutions that have done a terrible job and were greedy.
Those companies should be permitted to declare bankruptcy so that someone in the private sector can buy them at a discount, if they are worth purchasing.
Everyone is lining up to get their federal handout.
AIG has come back for more and is to receive a total of $150 billion. The three American car companies, General Motors, Chrysler and Ford, have received $25 billion and want another $25 billion of taxpayers’ money.
Why not let them be bought by others in bankruptcy? There are those who say we are bailing out companies in order to prevent massive layoffs. In my view, those layoffs will come sooner or later anyhow because those companies are run by incompetents and no longer able to compete, while foreign companies like Toyota, manufacturing their cars in the U.S., are selling them and not seeking to be bailed out.
They make cars Americans want to buy.
In the meanwhile, the vast majority of Americans have lost upwards of 50 percent of their savings including in the stock market and their 401(k)s. Particularly heartbreaking are the financial futures of those already in retirement who are dependent on their now lost or greatly reduced savings, as well as the millions more who hoped to retire soon.
Plans should be made to bring to Washington hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans? We should carry pitchforks to scare the hell out of government, particularly the newly-elected members of Congress as well as all of those re-elected recently, for failing us so miserably.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
