Obama's 30 Minute Ad: Something Reeks

And I didn't need an economist to tell me, that the stink was the dump truck full of cow patties that B. Hussein Obama more or less exactly failed to mention in it. Oh yeah, Farrakhan's messiah has spoken indeed. His own words prophecy of what is to come. His legions of media withhold the damning. His mindless minions march forth under the banners of "hope & change," whilst Barry does a song and dance for 30 minutes that told us, well, nothing.

At least, told us nothing of the details about his plans.

And that's not just me saying that. That's the Associated Press in an article by Calvin Woodward. The article, "Obama's prime-time ad skips over budget realities." Skips over budget realities? In times like this, is it a good thing to just "skip over" budget realities? If your B. Hussein Obama, YES, it is a very good time to omit the budget realities. Had he actually mentioned them, even his minions might start to re-think their allegiance.

One of the first things brought up by Woodward is; Obama's assertion that "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond" the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by "eliminating programs that don't work" masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are — beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Well? Obama? Care to elaborate? Or do you wanna just keep us guessing at what those programs are that don't work?

Woodward hits a few of the issues Barry spoke of in his infomercial, while systematically tearing them up as well. Here's a couple of them, starting with Health Care;

THE SPIN: "That's why my health care plan includes improving information technology, requires coverage for preventive care and pre-existing conditions and lowers health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year."

THE FACTS: His plan does not lower premiums by $2,500, or any set amount. Obama hopes that by spending $50 billion over five years on electronic medical records and by improving access to proven disease management programs, among other steps, consumers will end up saving money. He uses an optimistic analysis to suggest cost reductions in national health care spending could amount to the equivalent of $2,500 for a family of four. Many economists are skeptical those savings can be achieved, but even if they are, it's not a certainty that every dollar would be passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums.

I'm interested here as to WHICH PROVEN DISEASE management programs he's referring to? Will we see billions go to embryonic stem cell research, which DOESN'T work, or adult stem cell research which DOES work?

THE SPIN: "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost."

THE FACTS: Independent analysts say both Obama and Republican John McCain would deepen the deficit. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Obama's policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years — and that analysis accepts the savings he claims (even though we don't what they are) from spending cuts. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, whose other findings have been quoted approvingly by the Obama campaign, says: "Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next 10 years." The analysis goes on to say: "Neither candidate's plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified."

There's more to read at Woodward's article. I recommend popping on over to give it a look.

Campaign Expense Hypocrisy: Palin And Obama

"The RNC Spent $150k on clothes for Palin!" the headlines screamed in one form or another. "The Empresses new clothes!" is pretty much what the media's cry amounted to. Yeah, the Republican National Convention did in fact spend about $148K, in new designer clothes for Gov. Sarah Palin. Supposedly, to dress her up a bit for the campaign since her personal wardrobe is a bit modest. I guess that can happen when your a REAL person, and not a puppet of the moneybags on the left.

And as usual, there's rarely a mention of the intended "after use" of these expenditures, when viewing the articles you find across the web. Or from the major media outlets themselves. Oh, they might make a passing mention of she won't be keeping them. Or a casual aside about charities. Most like to allude to her having to pay the tax on the "gifts." But yes, Gov. Palin will be donating the clothes purchased for her (and her family) by the RNC, to charities after the election. No, since the clothes technically are "owned" by the RNC and were not a gift, as they will be returned, there shouldn't be any tax liability involved.

But I must admit, I'm not gonna circle the wagons here and try to justify the clothing expense. I'm a bit disappointed to be honest. I don't think it was necessary to spend that much on clothing for her. She really didn't need it. Personally, I actually think she may have done better "without" the new wardrobe. Or at least, a more moderate expenditure for it.

But while we're on the topic of "excess campaign expenditures," I came across this article the other day. As it turns out, "Barry" likes to blow money too. A LOT more money.

The article is on NewsMax, by Ronald Kessler titled "Obama’s Hawaii Trips Cost More Than Palin’s Clothes." As it turns out, Obama has spent quite a bit of campaign cash on his trips to Hawaii. A few times. Although, to his mindless minions there's no expense he (B. Hussein Obama) could make that is unforgivable. Regardless of what it is. Barry could go buy a Porn-Video Production company, and they would justify it as "promotion of the arts" or some crap. As for me, Okay, I'll forgive him the recent trip, to see his ailing grandmother. Kind of. He still could have flown commercial like the rest of the real world. But for this one trip, I'll let him off the hook.

But what about his other trips? Like his vacations there in Hawaii? According to Brad Blakeman, who was the guy who did the scheduling for Bush, a Boeing 757 costs about $20K an hour to operate. That's for fuel, crew, maintenance, everything. As it stands, a trip to Hawaii (from Chicago) is about 10 hours. So a round trip to Hawaii and back? Do the math. THAT'S $400K...! $400K of campaign cash. Yet, no outrage over that? Not a peep from the media? Go figure.

There was another interesting side note about Obama's vacation trip that Blakeman brought up. That Obama's vacation was "In the summertime, when gas was soaring and Americans were having to pinch their pennies, this guy gets on his campaign plane and goes to Hawaii on vacation. He did a couple campaign stops in a state that is not a swing state and is a guaranteed win for Obama. That was clearly to cover the tracks of this vacation."

So, in retrospect, yeah Palin could and probably should have gone the less pricey route. But if the media is going to report on "Campaign funds expenditures," perhaps they should report on ALL of the expenditures.

Does The New "No On Prop. 8" Ad LIE? Looks Like It Might

So, we have the back and forth banter of whether there should or should not be same-sex marriage in California. One side says they should be allowed. The other side, which had already spoken once when it passed Proposition 22 (by over 61% I might add,) says it shouldn't be allowed. With an amazing display of legalistic agendized acrobatics, the California courts overturned the will of the people, and went ahead with allowing same sex-marriages.

So much for NOT legislating from the bench, eh?

Okay, so now what? So now, we have Proposition 8. A million or so people signed a petition to have it put on the ballot. This one, being an actual amendment to the California State Constitution, which calls for the state to recognize ONLY traditional marriages. That being a man and a woman. Well, it's only been that way for a couple thousand years, why would it need to be changed anyways? The same-sex groups already had all the rights afforded to married couples via civil unions in California. Was it really necessary to change it?

To them, yes. Very necessary. Something about "legitimizing their status" or some such. In basic speak, forced acceptance. I won't even bother with getting into all the stuff San Francisco Mayor Newsom has been conjuring up. In a way, with a good bit of what they've been pushing for, it equates almost to an elevation of elite status over everyone else. I say almost as it depends on your perspective. Comments of "don't judge me" or "homophobes" for anything that doesn't agree with their ideals. Or my personal favorite, of which was actually used against me at one time, "homochromophobe." It had to do with my article about a transgender guy hiding his male orientation (in the guise of a female) from a convicted felon he became involved with, and ended up being murdered. I hope that killer fries for that. Ooooooo, but the crowd hated me for not idolizing that murdered teen. Make sure you read the comments for that article.

So along comes the barrage of "for & against" ads. We've all seen them. Vote yes on 8. Vote no on 8. Bumper stickers. Window acrylics. Supported by this group or opposed by that group. Yadda, yadda, yadda. But what of this NEW ad being put out by the NO on 8 crowd? It lays claim that the Pro-8'ers are "fear mongering" and that "same-sex marriage will be taught in schools" is a lie. Is it really a lie I wonder? Grab a shovel, we'll be doing some excavating.

According to California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell who is featured in this new NO on 8 ad, marriage isn't taught in California Public Schools. Period. Thereby negating the entire fear mongering of same-sex marriage being introduced to K-12 students. Shovel, shovel, shovel. Hmmm, looks like there might be a problem with Mr. O'Connell's statement. According to the California Education Code, Section 51930.(b).(2)... marriage IS taught in public schools as part of sexual health education;

(2) To encourage a pupil to develop healthy attitudes concerning adolescent growth and development, body image, gender roles, sexual orientation, dating, marriage, and family.

Uh, oh. This may not bode well for Mr. O'Connell either. It looks like this same statement is found RIGHT ON the California Department of Education website as well. Mr. O'Connell has some explaining to do. Now, it is true that schools are not "required" to teach about sex-education. But if they do, (of which 96% do, see page 5) they must adhere to the ENTIRE curriculum. Education Code (EC) 51933 specifies that school districts are not required to provide comprehensive sexual health education, but if they choose to do so, they shall comply with all of the requirements listed below. ".........Instruction shall encourage communication between students and their families and shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships."

So, if same-sex marriage is legalized, doesn't all of the above mean that it must be taught? I think it does. So, who is really lying here? The only way that Prop. 8 could eventually be considered a lie, is if EVERY school in California were to simultaneously end every form of sexual health education. No more. Nada. Zip. Zilch. We'll no longer be teaching ANYTHING about the topic, to prevent ever having to teach (normalize) same-sex marriage. But, we all know that won't happen.

Any comments Mr. O'Connell?

Politico Explains Why McCain Is Getting Hosed In The Press: Too Funny

I swear, I was laughing so hard, I practically feel out of my chair when I read this article. What started with an explanation of McCain's troubles with the press, quickly turned into a "media's self pronouncement" of unilateral non-partisanship. Or in other words, "We journalists aren't biased... nyah!" You've really got to read the article for the full comedic effect.

The article, "Why McCain is getting hosed in the press" is written by Jim VandeHei and John F. Harris. It starts out innocently enough, describing a few e-mail exchanges about McCain being handled a bit rougher than Obama. And quickly dips in and out of a Pew Research Poll's findings. That there's at least a tad bit of bias. After mentioning a few numbers, like 6 of 10 Stories about McCain since the RNC have been negative, with Obama getting more than double McCain's positive stories.

Amazingly enough, the authors did manage to come up with a truism of their own accord, before it all goes downhill. "OK, let’s just get this over with: Yes, in the closing weeks of this election, John McCain and Sarah Palin are getting hosed in the press, and at Politico. And, yes, based on a combined 35 years in the news business we’d take an educated guess — nothing so scientific as a Pew study — that Obama will win the votes of probably 80 percent or more of journalists covering the 2008 election." Very good guys. You've come to the realization of what the rest of us were already aware of. Glad your keeping up with the masses.

After that... it's a free fall nose-dive. I'll list a few choice statements right from their own article;

"As it happens, McCain’s campaign is going quite poorly and Obama’s is going well. Imposing artificial balance on this reality would be a bias of its own." And to ignore important campaign issues about a candidates character or background is UN-biased? Such as Obama's refusal to provide/release requested documents like his Harvard thesis. A lack of investigation/reporting on affiliations with shady characters and organizations like Ayers-Wright-Rezko-ACORN? Obama's financial benefactoring of the Chicago slum-lords? Omitting stories about critical issues like this makes an outlet any less biased?

Please, Politico is one of the most referred outlets that guest hosts on CNN. That should tell anyone, anything and everything they need to know.

Here's another good one; "Responsible editors would be foolish not to ask themselves the bias question, especially in the closing days of an election. But, having asked it, our sincere answer is that of the factors driving coverage of this election — and making it less enjoyable for McCain to read his daily clip file than for Obama — ideological favoritism ranks virtually nil. The main reason is that for most journalists, professional obligations trump personal preferences. Most political reporters (investigative journalists tend to have a different psychological makeup) are temperamentally inclined to see multiple sides of a story, and being detached from their own opinions comes relatively easy."

Hey, I'm gonna pull a Biden here. "Your Joking right?" You see what I mean about the humorous nature of the article? I guess that means that Keith Olbermann will be getting reinstated, along with Chris Matthews. And you Bill Maher, according to this article, your wrong. There is no Obama lovefest.

This one should start the floor rollin' maneuvers; "It is not our impression that many reporters are rooting for Obama personally. To the contrary, most colleagues on the trail we’ve spoken with seem to find him a distant and undefined figure." Words escape me. Simply watch the video again in the above link.

I'll give ya one last one before I close this out: "Then there is the bend-over-backward bias. This is when journalists try so hard to avoid accusations of favoritism that it clouds critical judgment." You need to HAVE judgment, before it can be clouded. And it doubt the media is even bothering to "avoid" accusations of bias in this election anyways. Judging by the hate-fest that Barbra West is receiving (much of which coming from other media outlets) because of her hard balling Biden the other day, the media for the most part is pretty open about their support for Obama.

And some people wonder how the press has managed to garner even lower approval ratings than Congress. Go figure.

With All That's Out There I Can't Believe That People Are Still FOR Obama

It's truly amazing really. How a guy like Obama could con so many people into believing, in the well-worn spiel of "change." It's surprising that something like the promise of "change," coming from a politician, and had been used not 50 years ago by Fidel Castro, still works. Yeah, I hate to have to break it to you, but Castro preached the same ideal's to the masses. Free education, free health care, etc., etc., etc. Cuba is such a lovely place these days. Or so I hear.

And socialism? It's stupefying that there is a large amount of people in existence, both inside and outside of our own borders, that have seen first hand how badly the socialist ideal fails. And they actually want the country to move in that same failed direction? Can you believe this? I can't. Please tell me they haven't already white-washed the "former U.S.S.R." out of the text books already. People can't be that stupid to have already forgotten the fall of the Bear... can they?

I don't own any guns. I intend to purchase some, someday. I CAN pass a background check, mental facilities, etc., with no problem. So can many others. Why would you want to elect someone who makes statements like "clinging to god and guns?" You've got to know that more BS restrictions are on the way, from anyone who spews drivel like this. By the way, you are aware that the Supreme Court BACKED UP the 2nd Amendment just recently, right? That private gun ownership is okay? Here's a hint, without private firearm ownership, we'd still be part of England.

What truly throws me into a tailspin of disbelief, is black folks who are still going to vote for Obama. Knowing full well how much the Dem's have kept them down. Or perhaps they don't. That's a legitimate excuse I suppose. Okay, okay. If you 'wanna stick wit da brutha' or whatever, okay, I get it. It's a racial thing. It's BS, but I get the race thing. But damn, why would you vote the very people into power, that have been keeping you down for decades? Dem's haven't given the black community anything worthy of your vote. Unless your counting the mass pandering via food stamps, welfare and the like. And I don't think the KKK, which was a Dem organization counts as a positive thing really. Jim Crow wasn't one of their best contributions either. But Republicans HAVE been doing for you for ages. Lincoln sent thousands of people to die to free you. Eisenhower ended segregation in the military. And sent troops to make sure you could go to school. Reagan signed MLK jr. day into law as a national holiday. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican by the way, and your Dem. messiah high jacked that day for his OWN purposes.

Hmm.. a healthy dose of BS pandering keepin' ya down in the victim hood mentality... or a party that's been trying to lift you up?

I heard a humorous analogy the other day by a brutha in a YouTube post. Which in part, generally explains why there's still folks in the Obama camp. It had to do with shellfish. Crabs, to be more specific. It was mentioned that you could put a bunch of crabs in a bucket, and you wouldn't have to put a lid on it to keep them from getting out, or getting away. Why? Because when one of the crabs starts making it's way towards the top of the pile, one of the other crabs will grab it, and pull it right back down with the rest of them. Misery loves company, maybe?

Thomas Sowell, a black man by the way, had an interesting comment in an article just recently that sums it all up pretty well, "Some people who see the fraud in what Obama is saying are amazed that others do not. But Obama knows what con men have long known, that their job is not to convince skeptics but to enable the gullible to continue to believe what they want to believe. He does that very well." Indeed he does. And the rest of us are going to be paying for it.....

******************
UPDATE!!!!
I got this link as a response to the article, left in comments on another site. Has something to do with Obama using mass-hypnosis. It's 67 pages long. Still reading.. Interesting...
http://www.pennypresslv.com/Obama%27s_Use_of_Hidden_Hypnosis_techniques_in_His_Speeches.pdf

Skinheads Plot To Assassinate Obama Stopped By The ATF

It's a good thing too. Or else we'd never hear the end of it. I'm real damn glad these losers got caught. Serves them right. Important tip here skin-heads. You don't assassinate Presidential nominees, regardless if they are black or not. You don't even try to assassinate them if they manage to win the Presidency. It's punks like this that give people (especially white people) the bad rap they have with minorities. And give actual bigoted losers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson something to legitimately make noise about.

Then again, these two nub-tards were only 18 and 20 years old. So it's not like they were particularly "blessed" with a full life of intelligence either.

Oh, don't get me wrong. Personally, I think Obama needs to be dragged out back of the wood shed and have a serious whoopin' dropped on his a$$. Noooooooo, NOT because he's black. Because he's a SOCIALIST bastard, and trying to implement MARXISM into our democracy. I think he needs a good beatin', noooooo, NOT because he's black, but because he voted FOUR FREAKIN' TIMES to deny newborns, who managed to survive an abortion, medical intervention. I think Obama needs a serious pimp-slappin', noooo, not because he's black, but for all the B.S. he's fed the American public during his campaign. So when we dig and do find the truth, (which we're finding out more and more about) he lies about that. Smack-it-down on him for that stuff.

But, DO NOT, under ANY circumstances, kill the bastard. THAT... IS... WRONG. Period.

So what do we have here? These two outstanding geniuses of society, planned to go on a cross country tour. Killing and decapitating black people on the way to Obama. Apparently, the numbers they were hoping to get, were 88 blacks killed with 14 of those blacks decapitated. Those numbers are supposed to be important I guess, in the neo-dirt bag community. Something about Hitler I found out while writing this, and securing a white future. Apparently, there were also plans to do some home invasion robberies to "fund" their little escapade, as well as knock up a gun store for more weapons, ammo, etc.

Their whirl-wind tour, was supposed to culminate by them dressing up in white tuxedos, and while pulling off some modern day Jesse James kinda crap, firing from the vehicle windows maneuver, drive as fast and hard as they could at Obama while blazing away in an attempt to kill him.

Yeah dudes. That'll work. Play GTA San Andreas much?

Anyways, there's more info and details HERE. Feel free to dive in for some more goodies on this idiotic duo's brainstorming results. And how it ended before it even started. Good riddance.

"Joe The Career Politician" Biden Gets Owned By WFTV Reporter Barbra West

Out-Freaking-Standing! Yes, it actually happened! Someone forewent the candy-a$$ed softballing of the anointed one's campaign! Not that it surprises any of us really. No wonder the Obama Camp keeps this guy under wraps. He truly is "The Mobile Gaffe Machine" that we expected. Obam-ites can say all they want about "Joe the Plumber." Stuff about his taxes. Stuff about him not being a licensed plumber. He was a GOP plant. Yadda, yadda, yadda. Guess what?

It's... All... IRRELEVANT!

You could dig up anything on this Joe the Plumber you want. It won't change the facts though. He caught Obama in an unscripted, non-teleprompter supported moment. And exposed him for the Socialist he is. And that's gotten an awful lot of people talking. So much so, that one television channel, WFTV, in Florida no less, dared to delve into forbidden waters. And the reporter taking the risk was none other than Barbra West. I think a nice round of applause is in order for Mrs. West, for being the only reporter out of thousands, to go the distance of NOT being a 527 for Obama. West is no "noobie on the block" reporter either, as you can read a short Bio about her HERE. There's also a link available to send her a nice "Thank You" note for her work.

So where's the beat-down? I'm glad you asked. On WFTV recently, Barbra West was interviewing Sen. Joe Biden and stuck it to him on Obama's Socialist positions regarding the "spread the wealth" and other issues. Well, better I let you view it for yourself. Not only did Mr. Gaffe, erm, I mean Biden stumble through the four minute interview, but he blatantly lied through it. Or perhaps it wasn't lies, and he was just "unaware" of the $830K given to an ACORN front group by the Obama campaign in Ohio. Perhaps he just "missed" Joe the Plumber, asking Obama about wealth re-distribution, and Obama confirming it. Or just vapor-locked and decided to revert back to the age old (and extremely worn out) excuse, blame Bush. Etc, etc, etc.

The Obama camp was so infuriated over the interview, (more likely, that a media outlet exists that ISN'T in the messiah's pocket) that his campaign has BANNED WFTV from conducting ANY further interviews. This includes an upcoming interview with Jill Biden that was scheduled to happen. As found in the statement given to WFTV, "This cancellation is non-negotiable, and further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best, for the duration of the remaining days until the election," wrote Laura K. McGinnis, Central Florida communications director for the Obama campaign.

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

Please send Mrs. West a note of appreciation, for digging into the issues that DO MATTER to Americans this election season. I'm sure she would appreciate it.

*****************
UPDATE!

Barbra West wasn't the only one climbing all over Biden's butt. Looks like this station has been baned TOO!! Found this over on D=S! Enjoy the laughs.. the gaffes...and the flat out LIES! Biden's kid DID found the mentioned firm!

Buh-Bye Global Warming: We Have Better Things To Do Like Generate Heat

I expect that Al Gore will most likely, again vanish into the hills to regrow the mountain-man image he sported for a bit. And in 30+ years, attempt a return of the king moment to rekindle the "warming" issue. When temperatures might actually be going up. Until then, we might as well enjoy what's left of the warmth. Because it's likely gonna be getting a might bit cooler for a while.

Besides, the only real heat we have to deal with currently, is the financial fiasco. As a matter of fact, the markets issue has gotten so "warm" in Europe, that they've pretty much halted the "carbon reduction" goals they had been dead set on. As found in the National Post article by Benny Peiser, "To prevent a financial crisis from turning into an economic calamity, the European Union has pulled the emergency brake on green policies. At last week’s EU summit in Brussels, seven eastern and central European countries, together with Italy, threatened to veto the Union’s climate pact. The rebel governments claimed that the originally agreed goal of cutting the EU’s CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020 was too expensive; economic turmoil and rising unemployment meant that implementing the CO2 goal was no longer affordable." Right there in black and white folks. A significant portion of Europe saying global whining can go piss up a rope. Join the Kyoto what?

But Europe of course, aren't the only ones feeling a market pinch. We here in America have been feeling a little tightening of the belt as well. Well, a strangling by belt I think would be a more accurate description. And as such, both WIND and SOLAR are feeling the sting. Which I must admit, kinda sucks for solar. I still think that of all the renewables, solar will be the better one to go with. The thought of a bad wind storm ripping a few propeller blades off, or faulty construction does not comfort me in the slightest.

Also feeling the pinch are some of the major energy investment companies. GE is one of the first of such entities to "throw in the towel" on clean energy. Simply put, the hoax that is global warming, has taken a back seat to the market crisis. If global whining truly were such a serious issue, the "consensus" if you will, companies of this size would be pressing forward, regardless of the crunch.

Speaking of consensus, it appears the few, measly numbers of UN conspirators that lauded Gore's mock-u-mentary, are now becoming vastly outnumbered. More and more scientists, with GENUINE research, (not the pre-designed outcomes of a computer model) are stepping up to the plate. REAL science, is already showing the uber-detrimental temperature increase the world has felt since 1979, seems to have vanished in the last four years. Hmmm... I wonder where it went? But hey, don't take my word for it. I'd prefer you took the word of the satellite guys with the Intel. I mean hey, those satellites only take 300k temperature readings a day, which shows 'the heat be gone.' South America has had some issues with the situation as well it seems.

But hey, it's not to be all wine and roses. ICECAP had to go ahead and put a damper on the celebration. I guess it's a damper unless of course, you like cross country skiing. Seems the record low snow and ice, well, is now a record HIGH snow and ice. Yeah, as we already knew, ice melts, ice reforms. Well, it's just reforming a bit faster than it can melt.

Anyone for sno-cones?

OPEC Cuts Oil Production: Can We Drill Now? PLEASE?

Even though the 1.5 million barrel oil production cut agreed on by OPEC during an "emergency" meeting failed to stabilize the plummeting cost, the intent is clear. To suck the worlds (especially Americas) economies dry, through price manipulation of a world required product. Unfortunately for OPEC, the current demand for oil, or extreme lack there of, outweighs the regimes that be. Good thing for us I suppose. At least for now.

Can we please start drilling now? Before these type of actions DO get a grip on our wallets? We're already showing that it can in fact be profitable. Let's get moving shall we?

But we'll start with local news, displaying the manipulation ideal. Reuters had a piece yesterday afternoon, about everybody's favorite communist teddy bear. Hugo it seems, wants to return to the days of fixing, or "price banding" oil. And of course, the cost he calls for is about $10 a barrel above what will sustain his grip over the populace. Hugo, the cuddly bastard that he is, says his regime would of course survive at almost any price. He went so far as to say $7 a barrel he could survive. I say "let's find out." Start drilling here and see what happens to him. Oops, we didn't even have to drill yet to see pressure already mounting against him.

Let us now go for a swim, across the pond to the chaps in England. The Telegraph.uk also had a bit to say on the situation. And seeing how they pay considerably more than we do for fuel, they have a real interest in the overall outcome. Well what do you know? They also noticed that even though Iran and Venezuela were demanding a 3 million barrel cut, oil prices continued to plummet. Saudi Arabia was one of the few countries with at least a resemblant head on thier shoulders that mentioned massive cuts "will be self-defeating and only reduce demand from the major consuming nations in Europe and America." For how long we can only guess. Start drilling here, and keep the low oil cost pressure on.

How about China? They're a major consumption nation these days. What do they have to say about this? Well I'm glad you asked. Xinhuanet also had something on it. Guess what, they also noticed the fact that cutting oil production, more or less exactly failed in every way, shape and form, to stop the plummeting cost of oil. (That collar feelin' a little snug there yet Hugo? Is that steam rising?) They mention that OPEC has had three major oil cuts over the last decade. Those being in in 1998, 2001 and 2006. None of which generated any significant or immediate price rebounds. Start drilling. Imagine the money America could add to it's GDP by outdoing OPEC, by selling specifically to China at say, $25 a barrel?

Russia anyone? They've become an entity of note again. What do they think? Boy, you folks are on a roll for asking the right questions today. Because sure enough, ITAR-TASS does have a short piece on it. They mention that even though OPEC did agree to cut production by 1.5 million barrels, no one really cared. People are more concerned with the market. They even mentioned one analysts thoughts, which echoes pretty much everyone elses thoughts that, "OPEC’s decision merely demonstrated to the market how very weak the demand for crude really is." BINGO! And before that demand strengthens, what say we start drilling to outpace a renewed demand?

Even India had something to say. As you know, India has seen a bit of growth lately, and has become a part of the crude demand. But they acknowledged that OPEC's cut failed to perform an even marginally desired outcome. They had at least a more rosy picture for OPEC, mentioning that the oil cost will probably bottom out around $58-65 a barrel. (Hugo, you can go change your shorts now.) Except, we already dropped below the higher end of that bracket, having settled in at close around $61 a barrel.

I'm enjoying seeing some of these bastards sweat a bit. Let's pile on some more fun by drilling here and drilling now. I'd love to see what kinda crap these OPEC-ers pull outta their butts next?

Michael Bloomberg's New York Throne: A Third Term Dictatorship?

Okay, let's hear it you tyranny minded liberal nub-tards. Just try and say we aren't headed for the inevitable Socialistic utopia you've been dreaming of for ages. Marx would be proud of your efforts. Your cohorts have now completely subverted the will of the people, and opened the door to one-person rule.

Thanks a whole hell of a lot for that!

I'm really starting to feel the seething ire of Americans begin to boil over. And I think the rebellions onset may start in New York. The City Council there in New York City has decided to repeal, overturn if you will, the existing TWO-TERM-Limit law. William Warren on ALG's site, has done up an article about this which can be found HERE. And as he so eloquently notes, "This was predominately and most obviously done so that Mayor Michael Bloomberg can seek and serve a third term. Well, hail Caesar!"

Hail Caesar is right. There have already been two public referendums on this subject. One in 1993, and another in 1996. Both of which resulted in the populace in New York saying TWO TERMS are the limit. How much more clarity is required to make the point stick? And as Warren points out in Chapter 50 of the New York City Charter; “No person shall be eligible to be elected to or serve in the office of mayor, public advocate, comptroller, borough president or council member if that person had previously held such office for two or more full consecutive terms so that elected representatives are ‘citizen representatives’ who are responsive to the needs of the people and are not career politicians."

Is that clear enough?

Apparently not clear enough for the 29 idiots that approved of the new royal edict. So which state shall be next I wonder? Pop over to Warren's article to see what 89% of New Yorkers recently had to say about term limits. Can you hear the torches being lit now too?

Anderson Cooper 360°: Top 10 Culprits Of The Collapse

Anderson, Anderson, Anderson. What are we going to do with you? I hold such high hopes for a guy like you. I don't think your a bad person. I don't even think you an idiot, even though your in the employ of CNN. But you seem to be "guided" (forced possibly) by something that's causing you a tad bit of, shall we say, embarrassment. While your "Top 10" list does contain a number of people that are to be rightly considered responsible for our economic collapse, you failed to mention several of the MAIN players in our mess.

I suppose, in some far flung hyper spatial fashion, that it's okay to just sort of "forget" to include the heavy hitters of the mess. But for those of us who KNOW differently, it just gives us reason to chuckle at the anality of today's media. And some actually wonder how the media attained an even lower approval rating than Congress? So, please allow me to assist you with the names of a few people and organizations that had a direct hand in, and should be held accountable for, the financial fiasco. Feel free to plug them into your list were you see fit;

1.) Jimmy Carter - While Carter was a complete bumbling idiot, I can't beat down too hard on the guy for his part. Even though it was he that originally opened the door to today's problems. Carter, with his desire to help make people feel equal, generated the "Community Reinvestment Act" in 1977. Normally, I skip using wiki as a reference. But for general info, I find it okay here. It was to help minorities and other low incomes families get into home ownership. A noble gesture in it's own right. And not a terrible thing, when it's done right. Unfortunately, those that follow, hadn't the foggiest idea how to do it right, hence, the meltdown clock begins to tick.

2.) Bill Clinton - (1995 portion of the CRA link above.) Perhaps fueled by campaign donations, pressure from some people or groups, Clinton expanded the CRA with supernatural powers. The sub-prime market and market securities begins to take hold. (Before this, sub-prime and securities didn't exist.) Lenders that were not previously predatory, start to become predatory under the expanded powers of the revised CRA. Lenders that attempted to stave off what was rightly considered "high risk" loans, were penalized with hefty fines. Even sued in some cases for supposed "redlining." Some suits were already taking place by this time, as witnessed below.

3.) Sen. Barack Obama & ACORN - Lending entities that continued to try and resist partaking of high risk, by this time now officially deemed as sub-prime loans, were harassed by ACORN entities, and SUED by then lawyer Obama. Just as Citibank in 1994 and other lending institutions found out. Refer to the extensive list of suits near the end of the article. It should also be noted that, Obama is one of the top recipient of contributions from GSE's like Fannie Mae.

4.) Rep. Barney Frank (D-mass.) - The openly gay, HBC chairman, who at the time was listed as #3 in campaign contributions from GSE Fannie Mae, was romantically involved with a gay executive INSIDE Fannie Mae. (Conflict of interest?) This relationship continued on for years, as Frank openly defended the GSE from any wrong doings. Thereby enabling them to continue to "cook the books" as it were, and rake in nice sums of campaign cash in return.

Now, several Lib's I've encountered over the last many months have attempted, albeit in vain, to try and blame the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act as being responsible for today's market mess. I rightly say in vain, as the only basis they have as reason to shout this to the heavens, is that is was the Republicans that made it. Unfortunately, GLB didn't become law until November of 1999. A full four years after Clinton's adjustments to the CRA.

There's some really good info in this self made YouTube video titled "Burning Down The House: What caused our economic crisis?" And just like the producer of the video recommends throughout, GOOGLE IT! I was able to find everything in the video with ease. You Anderson, should have no problem doing it either.

9/11 A Peabody, Massachusetts Paid Holiday: Not Sitting Well With Me

I can't put my finger on it, but the thought of 9/11 being converted into a paid holiday just isn't registering well in my mind. Something about turning a disaster of the magnitude it had, into something of financial gain, irks me. Perhaps it's the "sounds like a form of exploitation" alarm going off in my head. Or maybe, just a "that isn't right" feeling. Whatever it is, I think I need to explore it a bit.

The Washington Times (as well as many other outlets) carried an article yesterday, that shows that there are some others (besides me,) that also don't think it's a good idea either. And some City council members intend to strike it down. Good for them in my opinion. At least, until it can be delved into a bit more deeply. I have to side with the City council dissenters on this for now. Especially, with what the nation-wide effect may be in the end, of making a holiday out of 9/11.

Here are a few things that pop into my head on this issue:

First off, should 9/11 become an honest to goodness national holiday, who really gets glorified in this? Sure, I think it a great thing to honor our hero's. Wish we could do it even more. But in our honoring them, does it also become recognition to those who would perpetrate further similar actions? "Hey, America now recognizes and celebrates our freedom fighters as martyrs! Let us do it again!" Doesn't it, in a matter of speaking, give rise and reason for further attempts?

Secondly, how many other incidents in our history would be prompted to become holidays? When you consider that we did loose around 2,400 or so American lives on Dec. 7th, 1941, will this become a national holiday as well? How about the Tet Offensive? Beirut? The Alamo? The Depression? Oklahoma City Bombing? The 1938 "War of the Worlds" radio broadcast? We don't have enough days in the year to convert EVERY bad thing that has happened in or to America, into a holiday.

Lastly, the exploitation aspect. While I think it a grand idea to want to honor our fallen, when does it pass from honoring to exploitation? In the case of the Peabody, Mass. Police Dept. from where this issue arises, this Dept. did NOT loose any Officers in the WTC attacks of 9/11. In fairness, I WILL mention that several Officers from this Police Dept. DID in fact, go to New York afterwords to assist with the recovery efforts. But exactly what, would merit this particular Police Dept. receiving extra pay for this incident? As mentioned in the Wash. Times article above, "Even the New York City police department, which lost 23 officers at the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, does not recognize the anniversary as a paid holiday."

As I mentioned in the list of incidents above, honoring the fallen and Pearl Harbor. Now that I think of it, just about every (if not every) wall calendar I've had, always put "Pearl Harbor Day," or at least "Pearl Harbor" in the Dec. 7th space. A marker of "recognition." If anything, I personally believe it would be more appropriate to do similar for 9/11. An official day of Recognition, rather than a national holiday.

Perhaps I'll add more later on this, but for now, I'd prefer it remain NOT being a national holiday.

E-mail: Liberal Media's Anti - Palin - Ism Spin

Got this from a co-worker the other day. And while it's intent is solid humor, it effectively highlights the overt. That the media (as well as the rest of the liberal establishment) fears Palin. So much so, that regardless of the situation, they will drop any story of her in the jumbo-tronic white washer, and hit uber-spin. They just don't like her, for the simple fact that her mere presence threatens to upset the "status quo."

Never would have thought the media would fear a solitary female political figure so badly.

Then again, they do fear Hillary like a demon from Hell. (But that's probably because they know all too well, that she'd pull the trigger on any one of them herself.)

So without further embellishment, the anti-Palin-ism;

Subject: Liberal Press

The Pope was visiting Washington D.C., and Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin takes him out for an afternoon boat tour on the Potomac. They're admiring the sights when, all of a sudden, the Pope's hat blows off his head and out into the water. Secret service agents scramble like mad and begin to launch a boat to recover the pontiff's cap. Unperturbed, Palin simply waves them off, saying "Wait, wait. I'll take care of this. Don't worry about it." With that, Palin steps out of the boat and onto the surface of the water and saunters out to the Holy Father's little hat. She kneels down, picks the hat up and walks back to the boat where she hands the hat to the Pope amid stunned silence. The next morning, the Washington Post, NY Times, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, and CNN carry a story, complete with photos of the event. The banner headline reads:

(Are you ready for this........?)

(You sure........?)

(Your gonna love this....)

"Palin Can't Swim!"

Like I said. This woman, no matter what she would/will do, will never get a fair deal from the media. But I'm sure she's okay with that, having seen the "fair & balanced" deal they've given Bush over the last several years.

The "Global Fireball" Initiative: Al Qaeda's Worldwide Disaster Plan

Just caught a snippet of this news this morning, and boy does it cause me to hate myself for being right so often. I don't mean the arrogant, conceited, turned-up nose, always right kind of right. I mean the "man, I wish I could guess wrongly once in a while," kind of right. If what I guessed a while back is true, as is being evidenced as correct, then it may be an interesting summer that approaches.

Almost a year ago, I tapped out an article during the San Diego Fires, where believe it or not, terrorism was actually considered as a cause. I know, one of the fires was actually started by a kid playing with ignitables. But many that "sprang-up," simultaneously and distant from each other gave rise to the notion. Even one of the Fire Battalion Chiefs made the comment of "Whoever Did This Knew What They Were Doing." While that doesn't itself scream terrorism, the ideal exists. Especially when one considers that shortly before the San Diego fires, Greece had been ravaged by a whooping 80 or so arson-caused fires, causing considerable damage. Both emotionally and economically. And a considerable portion of those were in fact set by extremist groups.

Mass arson is something I've long considered as a viable terrorist act, due to it's enormous overall effect. Not only are we talking about the economic and emotional effect, as mentioned above. But the resource hog that a fire is. Hundreds of emergency resources are brought to bear on even the most routine of wildfires. Be it arson or otherwise. And as I had mentioned in my previous article, the catastrophic effect that could be had in a densely populated area, whilst the bulk of those important resources are engaged elsewhere, could be devastating. And as also noted in that article, one of the detainee's had in fact spoken of a plot utilizing wildfires.

Now here's where the scary, almost prophetic, wish I was wrong part enters the mix. British intelligence MI6 units, have just recently recovered documents along a remote region of the Pakistan border. In which, "Osama bin Laden wants al-Qaida to launch a "global fireball" by lighting forest fires in Europe, the United States, Australia and South America," as found on the WND.com site. The full report requires a subscription, which I do not have at this time. But the following given excerpts from the article are enough I think;

The documents,.... have been described by experts in that agency as "the most worrying [plot] that the world is facing." The catastrophic wildfires would not only produce an environmental disaster but would stretch emergency services often beyond their limit and leave insurance companies facing multi-billion-dollar claims for damages that could effectively destroy the already shattered economies of a number of countries.

Australia, gripped by years of drought that has left tinderbox conditions as summer now approaches, regards the threat as "terrifying." The country's attorney general, Robert McClelland, warned there is "a most urgent need for renewed vigilance against a very real and present danger."

The FBI has issued a high priority warning that "such a terrorist plan could devastate states like California." Spain, France and Germany -- all with vast forests -- are "vulnerable," MI6 warned the intelligence services of those countries. "The Amazon Basin, and other forests which supply the world with wood, is another prime target," the warning added.

I think your getting the picture now of why I say, I really wish I could be wrong once in a while.

Iranian Dirty Bomb Attack: Foiled By... Pirates?

Got this just a few minutes ago from the American Congress for Truth. Thanks go to them for bringing this news to our attention. It appears that just about everyone, and I mean EVERYONE is staying mum on the subject. Except Russia. Which is where most of the info available thus far has come from. Apparently, Iran was eager to throw the first punch at Israel, during the Yom Kippur. I guess Iran just didn't expect a batch of Somali pirates to be the proverbial "thorn in the side."

All credit goes to "Drillanwr" at PatDollard.com for this article. I'm posting but a few relevant snippets of this important story.

On August 21st, 2008, the MV Iran Deyant, 44,458 dead weight bulk carrier was heading towards the Suez Canal. As it was passing the Horn of Africa, about 80 miles southeast of al-Makalla in Yemen, the ship was surrounded by speedboats filled with members of a gang of Somalian pirates who grab suitable commercial ships and hold them and their cargo's and crews for ransom. The captain was defenseless against the 40 pirates armed with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades blocking his passage. He had little choice other than to turn his ship over to them. What the pirates were not banking on, however, was that this was no ordinary ship.

The MV Iran Deyanat is owned and operated by the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) - a state-owned company run by the Iranian military that was sanctioned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury on September 10, shortly after the ship’s hijacking. According to the U.S. Treasury, this company, IRISL regularly falsifies documents and shipping manifests to hide cargo's that it's actually carrying.

The MV Iran Deyanat was brought to Eyl, a sleepy fishing village in northeastern Somalia, and was secured by a larger gang of pirates - 50 on board and 50 onshore. The Somali pirates attempted to inspect the ship’s seven cargo containers but the containers were locked. The crew claimed that they did not have the “access codes” and could not open them. After some cell conversations, and a few lies about what was in the containers, the pirates broke open one of the containers and discovered it to be filled with packets of what they said was “a powdery fine sandy soil” ….

Within a period of three days, those pirates who had boarded the ship and opened the cargo container with its gritty sand-like contents, all developed strange health complications, to include serious skin burns and loss of hair. And within two weeks, sixteen of the pirates subsequently died, either on the ship or on shore.

There's mention of word reaching various government seats, and envoys dispatched to investigate. As well as various entities, including Iran and the U.S. offering $7 million to board the ship.

Although American intelligence and government sources are maintaining a strictly observed silence, the same does not apply to the Russians and so it is that we learn the real story of the MV Iran Deyanat. She was an enormous floating dirty bomb, intended to detonate after exiting the Suez Canal at the eastern end of the Mediterranean and in proximity to the coastal cities of Israel. The entire cargo of radioactive sand, obtained by Iran from China (the latter buys desperately needed oil from the former) and sealed in containers which, when the charges on the ship are set off after the crew took to the boats, will be blasted high into the air where prevailing winds will push the highly dangerous and radioactive cloud ashore.

This ship was nothing more nor less than the long-anticipated Iranian attack on Israel. Not the expected rocket attacks (which could be intercepted by the Israelis) but an even more deadly and unexpected attack by sea.. It is very interesting to note that the Israeli government has in the past few weeks, been loudly demanding that the United States establish a naval blockade of Iran.

For the more detailed specifics and further reading, I highly recommend a visit to the original article at PatDollard.com.

Obama's Illegal Campaign Funding: If Only The World Could Vote

Looks like Obama is pulling in some serious campaign dollars. Over $600 million so far. Most of which, seems to be coming from "small" contributors. Under $200 a pop batches. It takes an awful lot of people to do that. Perhaps, as is being considered, more people than are actually in the Obama camp here in America. At least, of the 2.5 million contributors the Obama camp claims to have, it's released the info of less than 371,000 of them.

As campaign funding rules go, FEC regulations only require that campaigns disclose the names of donors who have given a total of $200 or more. So all those under $200's get a pass. Also, $4,600 is the maximum contribution any one person can give to a candidate. Anything above that must be returned. That includes multiple donations from the same individual. Sadly, that seems to be something the Obama campaign forgot about, as sizable numbers of max contributors have yet to see refunds for their over sized contributions. Even after months of the donations being made.

It's also illegal to accept donations from foreigners. That includes purchases from a campaign, such as an online store. The Obama campaign had to shut down it store a short while back as large purchases were being made by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and other areas. Another interesting issue, is the amount of contributions made in "unrounded" totals. One explanation was given for this by Ken Boehm, the chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center. Boehm said, “Of course this is odd. They are obviously converting from local currency to U.S. dollars.” Which means foreign contributions. That is illegal.

There's much more about this HERE.

But none of this should really surprise anyone. The MRC had it's piece on this. According to Reporter Dawna Friesen for NBC Nightly News. Friesen, reporting from Istanbul, Turkey Friday night, gave America an "ominous warning" perhaps? After lamenting about how terrible the U.S. is looked upon by the rest of the world, gave us her vision of America; "Here in Turkey, as in much of the world, people want to turn a page on the Bush years. In fact, polls show the image of the U.S. has improved slightly this year simply because President Bush is leaving. And, that if the world had a vote, Barack Obama would win in a landslide. Regardless of who wins, the world is clamoring for a new America in 2009."

Fear not Dawna. As it's probably true. Thanks to all the "outside" influence and the media banding together as one to become a giant 527 for Obama, your messiah as Mr. Farrakhan insists, will probably win.

More Free Money: Another Round Of Stimulus Payments?

Oh this is not good. Far be it from anyone in Washington D.C. to show they have any operable mental facilities remaining. Now, we get talk of yet another round of "stimulus checks." News Flash people, you do know you have to pay-that-money-back in the end, right? Now not only are we in the tank for the first $600 to however much per person stim-package. And an $850Billion bailout plan that did nothing more than open the door to more socialism. But now were about to have another $150Billion+ lead brick tossed in the taxpayers proverbial pack to carry?

Fan-freaking-tastic.

Adding more debt, does not a financial recovery make.

I'm thinking I am now fully in the camp of "Dump Bernake," and the rest of the financial gurus.

In an attempt to save the economy (and more likely his job,) Bernake is giving his approval to another round of stimulus payments, as he believes the economic problems could last for some time. Well, at least he was right on something. This economic nosedive will last a while. It will just fail to be improved for more than a small spurt (just like the last stimuli) by handing out more taxpayer burdened funds. Bernake thinks it will in fact help.

"With the economy likely to be weak for several quarters, and with some risk of a protracted slowdown, consideration of a fiscal package by the Congress at this juncture seems appropriate," Bernanke testified before the House Budget Committee. When asked about how big the stimulus package should be, he suggested that, that was up to Congress to decide, but that it should be "significant."

Great Bernake. Not only are you giving Congress the keys to the car, but you handed them the bottle of Jack Daniels and told them to go as fast as they wanted as well. You've seen our Congress, with it's lowest approval ratings in history. They can't differentiate between their own A$$ and a hole in the ground. Don't tell them to go ahead and spend as much of our money as they want.

Unfortunately, Bush it seems, has reversed his previous outlook towards this, and advises he is "open" to it. So likely, we'll be receiving another check in the mail after while. The amount is thus far unknown.

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

UPDATE!

There's more about a possible upcoming Stimulus payment HERE at CNN-Money. The numbers vary between $150Billion to $300 Billion. There's an aisle-split by both parties as to what measures should be included. More tax cuts, or more money handouts. Bush admin says it would need to SEE the packacge before jumping on board.

Bakken Is Sizzling: Record Oil Recoveries In America

This will be relatively short and to the point, Thar be OIL in them thar hills! And in a nutshell, any politician who even hints at renewing "energy bans," should rightly be labeled, branded, slandered, etc, with the title of "commie-social-marxi-UN American-NUBtard," from this point forward. I won't discount a bit of the 'ol tar 'n featherin' either.

HERE's the link from ALG with the basic info along with the kick-off quote;

"According to the Energy Information Administration, this single domestic oil field, stretching from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada contains an estimated 503 billion barrels in total (that includes discovered, undiscovered, and not yet technically recoverable oil reserves). That’s enough crude oil to fully fuel the American economy for 41 straight years. And because this is light, sweet oil, those billions of barrels could cost Americans as little as $16 per barrel.”

$16 a barrel? Hmm... I can dig paying $1.30 or less a gallon. Forty-one years worth? Sounds like plenty of time to perfect and move into new energies. If this kind of reserve is being pulled from a single source, I just wonder at what America could do with the MULTIPLE sources that exist here? Perhaps renegotiate some of our National Debt?

Here are some of the numbers (in barrels) they've been pulling up;

The latest oil production numbers are out.

”In July Mountrail County became the top oil producing county in North Dakota by producing 1,401,216 barrels of oil.

”Bowman County who has been the top oil producing county for a longtime produced 1,385,286 barrels in July.

”This has been an amazing ride on the Bakken Express. Prior to the first Bakken well in May 2006 Mountrail County was producing less than 20,000 barrels per month.

”But wait, there is more:

”The preliminary August 2008 numbers are showing that Mountrail County produced 1,548,705 barrels.

”Another record has been broken!!!”

Also interesting, was an article on the Telegraph.UK site about this area. North Dakota it seems, with it's new influx of revenue generated by the drilling, is one of only THREE U.S. States that are "in the black." And one last important factor mentioned in the article. JOBS! As taken from the article itself;

"All this oil activity has generated tremendous economic growth for our state. The oil industry anticipates over 12,000 new workers will be needed in North Dakota over the next four years to get the job done."

I wonder how many jobs nationwide could be created, just by drilling?

As they say over at AmericanSolutions.com; Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay LESS! So Let's get drilling, shall we?

Here is the link for the Bakken Shale site itself.

European Union Calls For NEW Bretton Woods Agreement: This Can't Be Good

Fee Fie Foe Fum, I smell, well ... Marxism. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown is throwing his "full weight" behind a revamped Bretton Woods style agreement. Okay, so what's so horrible about that? It is a bit outdated, being that it was generated in 1944. That doesn't bother me. What does bother me was some of the words and phrases he all to happily tossed out in making this call.

For those who don't know, Bretton Woods was an agreement generated in 1944 by the 44 allied nations in regards to an International Monetary Fund and a General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. What it basically did, was obligate each country to back it's own currency, within a 1-2% margin, with Gold. What we think of as the "gold standard." Plus a few other factors, such as the "Keynesian economics" that we're "supposed to be" running on, but aren't. Keynesian economics says it's okay to go into deficit spending to "GET OVER THE HUMP" essentially. But return to responsible fiscal policy, once the "hump" is done. And the gold standard was never really feasible, as there was never enough gold to really back 98-100% of the US stock of paper money anyways.

I usually refrain as of late, from wiki as a resource, but in this instance I think it would be okay.

I did an article about this (gold standard) a short while back. You may find the "modern gold standard" proposed in it, interesting.

But back to the story. I found this Bretton Woods story in the TimesOnline.UK. titled "Fresh impetus behind call for 'new Bretton Woods'." Here are a couple of the phrases that "bothered" me a little. Well, a lot really. The bothersome portions in italics;

Gordon Brown today threw his weight behind calls for "a new Bretton Woods" agreement to set the rules and direction for global trade and finance in the 21st century. “Around us we must build a new Bretton Woods - a new financial architecture for the years ahead."

(A new financial architecture? Exactly WHAT architecture are we speaking of? A global monetary unit? Embracing Sharia Finance?)

Referring to the original conference, where the British economist John Maynard Keynes wielded immense influence, Mr Brown said today: “With the same courage and foresight of their founders, we must now reform the international financial system around agreed principles of transparency, integrity, responsibility, good housekeeping and cooperation across borders.

(Agreed principles. Agreed on by whom and by what standard? Majority rule? Unanimous decision? And cooperation across borders. A Global Government upgrade of the U.N.? Erasing borders?)

He went on: “We will not stop at immediate measures to stabilise the system. We also need measures to reshape the global financial system to make it fit for purpose for the future. This work is important for building confidence and this work must start today.

(We will not stop at immediate measures? You have two days to comply with the rest of the international community. Reshape the global financial system? See above. Fit for the purpose of the future? What future? What purpose?)

“And just as we need new global coordination to deal with the waves of change that are defining the new global age from energy supply to climate change, so we need enhanced global cooperation to monitor and then supervise financial flows that know no borders."

(New Global Age? That says it all right there. Climate change? Yeah, have to jeopardize those economies even more to save the Botswanan Butt-Fly. Supervise financial flows that know no borders. Again, see above.)

Don't get me wrong here folks. I'm for some revamping of old agreements like Bretton Woods. I even agree a bit with PM Brown's mentioning of the transparency and integrity points. But fully amending Bretton Woods to be a completely unresemblant document, with no guarantee the U.S. won't be screwed further than we already are? Well, that just worries me a bit.

Obama Thug-O-Nomics: Lufkin, Texas Woman Questioned By Secret Service

Welcome to the Obama-Reich! Home of the "Don't you dare speak badly about my messiah or else," jack-boot wearing, mindless minions who've now resorted to thug-o-nomics, in support of their chosen one. I guess they really want this Socialist bastard to win somethin' fierce, eh? I suppose the newest "mandatory reading" after his coronation will be "mein Kampf (als Obama!)"

Okay, okay. Yeah, I'm being facetious.

Well, no. Not really.

As it looks, this is now not far from the truth really as a Lufkin, Texas woman found out. It appears that she received an unsolicited phone call on her cell-phone from an Obama campaign volunteer. That alone wouldn't make me a very happy camper either, to be honest. So I can understand her response. The volunteer, is a member of the Obama Volunteers of Texarkana.

As taken from Chron.com; “She asked if I was an Obama supporter, to which I replied, ‘No, I don’t support him. Your guy is a socialist who voted four times in the state Senate to let little babies die in hospital closets; I think you should find something better to do with your time.’ (And then) I hung up.”

The call was made by the Obam-ite on Wednesday, Oct. 1st. By Thursday, the Secret Service was already at her door to question her about an alleged "death threat" she made against Sen. B. Hussein Obama. Two federal agents arrived at Jessica Hughes’ home Thursday to ask her if she said, “I will never support Obama and he will wind up dead on a hospital floor.” Hughes said her words were deliberately twisted by a volunteer who was apparently unhappy Hughes was rude during a phone conversation.

From what's been reported, it appears the volunteer workers DON'T record their unsolicited calls. This pleased Hughes to know, none at all as she wants to file a counter-complaint against that volunteer.

Additionally, there is an e-mail circulating at this time, with commentary attributed to a Connie Wells, of Lufkin, Texas. It mentions she is a neighbor of Jessica Hughes. It also includes dialogue from Jessica Hughes herself, which grants additional info not found in the Chron.com article found above. Connie simply notes about an interesting and scary incident having occurred recently to one of her neighbors. Jessica elaborates the incident in more detail. Here are a few snippets from of Jessica's story. Her (written) words are in italics;

The phone # she (the Obamessiah volunteer) called from was 903-798-6020 which lists as 'Obama Volunteers of Texarkana' (Texas).

It was one male and one female agent that showed up on Oct. 2nd. From the info given, it sounds as if the Female agent is an Obamite as well. I gave them my actual quote. The woman asked insolently 'Oh? Well why would she make that up?' I replied that I supposed she wasn't happy about what I said about her candidate and the Agent said 'That's right, you were rude!'

I have the same thought as Jessica has here. The last time I checked being rude wasn't a crime in America. Bravo Jess.

Luckily the big file they had gathered on me didn't indicate mental instability or a past life of stalking/crime, however they did want to know how I felt about Obama. That was my limit. I told the Agent in no uncertain terms that my thoughts were not pertinent to their investigation, that this was America and the last time I checked I was allowed to think whatever I wanted without being questioned by the Secret Service.

Is this getting eerie yet to any of you?

I asked them if there was a tape of the call and they said no. I said, 'So on the word of a ticked off Obama supporter you are on my porch with no other evidence and you want to question me about my THOUGHTS!?' They informed me that there was no evidence she was an Obama supporter someone calling from his campaign.

Erm, SS peeps, she did have the phone number I believe...

I was not allowed to know the name of my accuser at which point they informed me that it wasn't like I was in a court of law, YET, as if this was a good thing. I told them I would happily go to court since I did nothing wrong and at least then my accuser would have to face me rather than sending the thought police to my house.

Sensing a pattern here?

They then said they were trying to do me a favor, that they came to me first before 'embarrassing you by going to all your neighbors and family.' I told them to be my guest and talk to whomever they wanted but they weren't going to investigate my thoughts on my porch.

Maybe were not allowed to THINK is why they came...

The fact that the volunteer lied, the fact that the Secret Service came to my house to question me about my thoughts and feelings and threaten to embarrass me to my neighbors and go to court if I didn't cooperate is not really the tragedy here. Because that girl on the phone doesn't have the pull to send the Secret Service to my home. Someone high in the ranks of a campaign working for a man who may be the next President of the United States of America felt comfortable bringing the force of the Federal Government to bear on a private citizen on nothing but the word of a partisan volunteer.

Yeah, when do the death camps start getting erected I wonder...

I want to file a counter complaint that false charges were made, that a false report was given to a peace officer. The Secret Service told me I cannot because they will protect the identity of the complainant. I also want the file they have on me destroyed and I want to know that my phone isn't tapped, etcetera. I am hearing a lot of 'Out of my Jurisdiction'.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
--Edmund Burke

CNN iReport: "Joe The Plumber" Wins Presidential Debate

Now this was amazing to see in its own right. Especially since it actually played on CNN. Never in a million years (as if I'd actually live that long, right) would have believed they would allow a video of this nature to air on their network. But sure enough, it did. It had to have been some sort of goof-up. Or they must not have previewed the video before airing it.

But CNN iReporter cosmomcqueen gave his contribution, to whom he believed won the Presidential debate last night. And it wasn't McCain. Although, McCain could essentially benefit from it. Nor was it Obama. No, Cosmomcqueen's pick as the winner of the third Presidential debate was...

Drum roll Please.........

"Joe the Plumber!"

Now, I know that's not all that spectacular in any sense to most of you. Nor is it to me. Although, I did think it appropriate. No, the part that actually shocked me that Cosmomcqueen's video made it on air was for what he said after having congratulated "Joe the Plumber" on his win. He said, and I quote right from the video;

"Joe the Plumber, your my hero. And your America's hero tonight. You won that debate tonight. You single handedly debunked Barack Obama and exposed him for the Socialist he is..." Video continues.

Yeah, that's great and all... Wait... WHAT?

Did Cosmomcqueen? Just call Obama? A SOCIALIST? In his video?

Why yes, yes he did.

And CNN... actually PLAYED IT? ........On air?

Why yes, yes they did.

OUT-FREAKIN'-STANDING!!!!!

Well, not for the poor sap at CNN, who will probably lose his job for this faux pas. But Daaaaaaaammmnnnn!

Yeah. I thought that would rattle a few cages out there. I know, I was in utter shock and amazement as well when I saw it play. And not only did they play it just the once. It aired NUMEROUS times during the Morning Express with Robin Meade. Now, of course, this iReport was intended to be used by CNN as part of a segment about how many times "Joe the Plumber" had been mentioned during the debates. I believe the grand total was around eleven times. But that's an aside here. The main point of contention here, is that CNN actually allowed a NEGATIVE Obama comment to be aired.

Imagine that...

RICO action filed against ACORN

OMG! There was no way I could just pass up this article I just happened across, without bringing attention to it. The Buckeye Institute in Columbus Ohio, has filed State RICO charges against ACORN! For those who aren't fully aware of what RICO is, it's something they would normally use to go after/prosecute ORGANIZED CRIME!

Thanks and ALL credit goes to Maggie Thurber of "Thurber's Thoughts" for this fantastic article!http://thurbersthoughts.blogspot.com/2008/10/buckeye-institute-files-rico-suit.html

I'll only be posting a few snippets from Maggie's article. Please visit her site for the full article.

*****
RICO action filed against ACORN
This press release just in:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Maurice Thompson, (614) 224-4422
Tuesday, October 14, 2008

BUCKEYE INSTITUTE FILES STATE RICO ACTION AGAINST ACORN
Think Tank Represents Two Warren County Voters

COLUMBUS – The Buckeye Institute, a Columbus-based think tank, today filed a state RICO action against the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) on behalf of two Warren County voters. The action filed in Warren County Court of Common Pleas alleges ACORN has engaged in a pattern of corrupt activity that amounts to organized crime. It seeks ACORN’s dissolution as a legal entity, the revocation of any licenses in Ohio, and an injunction against fraudulent voter registration and other illegal activities.

Plaintiffs Jennifer Miller of Mason, Ohio and Kimberly Grant of Loveland, allege that ACORN's actions deprive them of the right to participate in an honest and effective elections process. They allege fraudulent voter registrations submitted by ACORN dilute the votes of legally registered voters.

(Maurice Thompson, Director of the Buckeye Institute’s 1851 Center for Constitutional Law).

In the complaint, Thompson cites an accumulation of evidence showing numerous instances of admitted fraud by ACORN employees, as well as individuals solicited by ACORN.

In addition, the complaint cites conduct by ACORN in Colorado, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

A full copy of the complaint is available online at http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/acorn.pdf.
*****

It's good to know there are still at least SOME sane folks in the world.

Again, a big thanks to Maggie for this terrific article and news.

A New Political Craze? Ethics Probes For Everyone Perhaps?

Or at least it's beginning to look that way. We seem to have kicked this election seasons scandals off with a $100k ethics violation probe into VP nominee Sarah Palin's alleged misuse of power. This by the way, more or less exactly failed to produce anything of substance. Other than vindicating her of actual misuse. And it's important to note, that the protagonist of that probe, Sen. Hollis French (D-Alaska) hand picked the investigator, Stephen Branchflower who is now facing lawsuits because of it. Then we have good 'ol openly gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass). Who rightly deserves to be investigated for his "intimate involvement" over a period of 10 years, with a Fannie Mae Executive, while Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) was serving on the HBC.

I'd say probed rather than investigated but he, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) might actually enjoy that.

And now we have another politician, Florida Democratic Congressman Tim Mahoney, who is asking to have HIMSELF investigated by the ethics committee. Democratic Congressman Tim Mahoney is calling for the probe due to an ABC report that alleges he's had an affair with a staff member. Mahoney expects to be vindicated by such an inquiry.

Well what the heck. Why don't we just get it all over and done with, and just dig through ALL our political representatives backgrounds at once. (As we probably should have done in the first place.) And at every level; Local, state, Federal.. you name it. Ethics probes for everyone then? Let's just get everything out on the table and up front, so we'll all really get to see just how corrupt our leadership has become over the years. And I mean EVERYTHING! School disciplinary records, juvenile court records, ANY form of criminal activities, parking tickets, involvements in/with corrupt organizations, ties to Domestic terrorists... you name it!

There shouldn't be ANYTHING omitted from the list. Including their families. Kid smokes pot and goes for a 100mph romp down the freeway in a Toyota Prius and gets caught? It goes on the list.

And why shouldn't we be provided this "right to know?" I mean after all, they are asking us to trust them in an elected office. To responsibly use our tax dollars. We should have that right to know everything there is to know about them. Both past and present, about their character, their decision making abilities, to better determine what course they plan to take our country. They are vying amongst themselves for the position, we deserve to know. Perhaps we could demand some form of PRE-election scorecard of a sort. Something that clearly states exactly where they stand on the issues. None of this "it's above my pay grade.." crap. Some sort of report about the candidate that must be submitted PRIOR TO ever running for any office.

And for those who feel they are displeased with the attack ads, the smears and such, this could potentially eliminate those, as we'd already know everything about them.

But hey, I'm juss ziss crazy wingnut you know.

*********************
UPDATE!!!

There are new reports that Florida Democratic Congressman Tim Mahoney was involved in an affair with a SECOND woman, at the same time as he was allegedly involved with the first woman. More HERE from the AP!

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass): Conflict Of Interest Or Major Ethics Violation?

With all the turmoil and hoopla circulating in regards to Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin's unremarkable and unsurprising ethics probe results, I find it fitting to mention an ACTUAL ethics violation that the media is remaining silent on. An ethics violation worthy of reporting, yet sadly, but not unexpected, we'll never hear about this from our "fair & balanced" media. After a fashion it could be said, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) was doing favors for BOTH his gay lover AND Fannie Mae over the course of many years. Literally.

Openly gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) was intimately involved it seems with one Herb Moses. Moses was an executive with Fannie Mae (the assistant director for product initiatives) during the same time that Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) was serving on the House Banking Committee. Which I might add, he is now the head of. The HBC and OFHEO essentially hold the control over government-sponsored enterprises. This ethics violation was over the course of the entire 10 years they were together. It's also important to note that Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) has also been the recipient of over $40,000 in campaign donations from Fannie Mae since 1989. Funny how that works, eh? I "do" you... You "do" me?

Talk about a serious conflict of interests.

No wonder Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) has been such an adamant crusader for the GSE's. And has been at the forefront of blocking every attempt at legislation of the two biggies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Bush tried it. McCain tried it. Bush tried again shortly thereafter. BLOCK! BLOCK! BLOCK! It would have jeopardized his "way of life." He had the best of both worlds. Exceptional campaign contributions. A live-in lover who was an executive at the time, in his prized GSE's.Heck no he wasn't gonna let that go. At least, until a couple months after Moses parted ways from Fannie Mae, which is when Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Herb Moses split the sheets, as it were.

What could prove remarkably interesting, is to get a good long look at Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) personal finance records. Just to see, since Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Moses were so cozy, if there was any "insider trading" involved. Such as, in regards to our current financial crisis perhaps? Did Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) possibly off-load a significant portion of his portfolio of certain companies, just before the they went belly-up? If so, not only would that be a conflict of interest issue for Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass), but wouldn't that also constitute "jail time?" I mean, we did put Marta Stewart behind bars for a descent stint, for a less significant trading scandal, didn't we?

All in all, the media will never report this. And unless people actually start demanding action on atrocities like this, we most likely never will see anything become of it. Nah, they're more concerned with a VP nominee not violating ethics rules, than a firmly entrenched Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) who does pose a continuing conflict of interest by retaining both his seat on the HBC, but in the House as well.

Sad really.

There's much, much, much more on this issue HERE.

E-Mail: Do you know how to catch wild pigs? A.K.A. Socialism

I'm sure the vast majority of us have seen this e-mail. The one that describes how to catch wild pigs. Not by hunting or some such. But by continually giving them free stuff until they're so used to it, they don't see the gate close behind them. At least, until it's too late. There's been many forms of this e-mail. The last version I recalled getting was attributed to a migrant to America describing how his freedoms disappeared in his homeland. Which is why he came to America.

But this last version had a different spin to it. A spin that I think we all, who've become fed up with our tax dollars going to new social programs on a daily basis can appreciate.

So here's the message;

Do you know how to catch wild pigs?'

'You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground. The pigs find it and begin to come everyday to eat the free corn. When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming. When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence. They get used to that and start to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in The last side. The pigs, who are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat, you slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd.

Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn. They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.

This is exactly what is happening to America . The government keeps pushing us toward socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc. while we continually lose our freedoms - just a little at a time.

One should always remember: There is no such thing as a free Lunch! A politician will never provide a service for you cheaper than you can do yourself.

If you see all of this wonderful government 'help' is a problem confronting the future of democracy in America , you might want to send this on to your friends. If you think the free ride is essential to your way of life then you will probably delete this email, but God help you when the gate slams shut!

In this "very important" election year, listen closely to what the candidates are promising you - just maybe you will be able to tell who is about to slam the gate on America .

And with a certain candidates self titled alignment of being the "Party of Jefferson," I'd think Jefferson might have a little bit to say on that note. Oh wait.... he DID!

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." --Thomas Jefferson

AIG $500K Party After Bailout: WANTS $38B More?

So, we got sold a bill of goods, forced on us is a more accurate description I think. And even though the public en masse said NO, we ended up getting put on the hook for more billions of dollars than I care to recite. Actually, I think were hedging on the Trillion margin now. And just how does AIG put that TAXPAYER money to use? How else? They throw an almost half million dollar party! In California no less.

Yeah, a mere week after AIG got handed a pass on collapse, with an $85Billion taxpayer funded bailout that just had to happen because, "they're to big to fail," they were hard at work squandering it. As taken from the Chicago Tribune; "Here's the tab: $139,375.30 for rooms. $147, 301.71 for "banquets." $1,488 for the Vogue Salon, which features manicures, pedicures and hairstyling. $6,939.09 on golf. $2,949 for tips. $5,016.32 at the Stonehill Tavern. $3,064.71 for in-room dining and the lobby lounge. That's part of the $440,000 bill from a recent weekend bash that an AIG Inc. subsidiary threw for its top performers at the posh St. Regis resort, on a bluff overlooking the Pacific Ocean. Sounds like they had fun."

Top performers? Were those the ones that LOST the least money for the company?

And then, to top it off, flip over to the Washington Post, and it turns out that the $85Billion apparently wasn't enough? They need $38Billion more? And they are going to get it? As taken from the WashPost; "Turns out the $85 billion bailout loan for AIG wasn't enough. The company's survival apparently requires another $38 billion in cash, and yesterday the Federal Reserve authorized loaning that much more to the struggling insurance giant."

Got any more brilliant ideas or insight as to how important it is to save such companies?

What's that? The government thinks that taking "partial ownership" of companies and banks they bailout will do the trick? Yeah, I'll get right on board with that one. As Rich Galen on TownHall.com so aptly described that boneheaded idea, "I Don't Want to Own This Junk!" I don't think I could have said it any better. But just like I've been harping, Galen says the same. LET... THEM...FAIL!

Catching Up With The American Congress For Truth And ACT For America

I must rightfully plead guilty on this charge. That I have not been keeping up with the important information being brought forth by two great sites. Sisters of each other really. Those being The American Congress for Truth, and ACT for America. Both founded and inspired by the work of Brigitte Gabriel. A survivor as a child, of the islamic onslaught into (the formerly most Christian nation in the middle east,) Lebanon.

I guess seeing your own homeland torn to shreds by islamism can give rise to anyone to want to NOT see it happen in their new homeland.

The work that Brigitte Gabriel, and the many members of the two sites organizations, has been worthy of recognition by all. And has been crucial in bringing to light, the myriad of problems and issues brought against Americans, by islamofascism. Everything from law suits against Americans free speech by terror-supporting individuals, that have resulted in legislation that ultimately defends our speech. In example, H.R. 6146 also known as Rachel's Law for journalist Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld. To the "on-line jihad" that America faces, as been uncovered by the work of Joseph Shahda and others in the ACT circles.

There's much more to note, and I feel a bit dejected that I haven't done so sooner. For instance, Brigitte has a new book out entitled "They Must Be Stopped" and was recently featured in an hour long interview with Andrea King. Kenneth Timmerman, a 2006 Nobel Peace Prize nominee and board member for the American Congress for Truth, has been delving into the "suspect" campaign funds the Obama campaign has been receiving. To the tune of multi-millions, which has caused the FEC to indeed take action.

The FBI is currently attempting to avoid another "Phoenix Memo" catastrophe, by investigating Americans that have recently traveled abroad to, and returned from countries like Pakistan. Brigitte had recently done an interview with the New York Times, in which she had been labeled a "radical islamophobe." So far, only FrontPageMag had picked up Brigitte's response to such labeling. And I'd have to say in all honesty, by the definition she gives of an islamophobe, count me in. Just as many "experts" have stated, regardless of who wins in November, we're likely to see another attack in the US. Just to "test" the President.

Other newsletters from ACT for America and American Congress for Truth have highlighted recently, moves by Legislators. One notable one is found on the MuslimsAgainstSharia site, which lists Tom Tancredo's proposal to create an Anti-Sharia measure. And yet another e-letter takes note of the anti-jihad.org article, citing the growing surrender of America's counter-terrorism community.

These are but a few examples of the work that ACT for America, and American Congress for Truth has been hard at work at. Whether you agree with their stance or not is completely irrelevant, and a non-issue. What is relevant, is the information our fair and balanced media continually passes over, is brought to your attention. Thereby providing you, the opportunity for scrutiny.

Videos: Brit's On The Subprime Market Crisis And What Caused Our Crisis?

I found this on YouTube, completely by accident, and I'm ever so glad I did. These two British gents have the subprime market crisis nailed down pat. The video was uploaded by user kerviel88888 and is titled Bird and Fortune - Subprime Crisis. The portrayers in the mock interview are John Bird and John Fortune (referred to as the Long John's) on The Last Laugh. It's complete Satire, and more so, completely accurate as to how the 'subprime' market works.

The video winds down with, exactly how it ends up "affecting" you and me. Well, not me really. I dumped my stocks, 401k's, etc., years ago. But my friends mom (as well as many others have I'm sure) lost several thousands from the Lehman and Bear/Sterns debacles. How about you?

Enjoy.

While your at it, (watching videos that is,) you can hoot, holler, complain and point fingers at whomever you wish regarding the current financial meltdown. But we KNOW how it started. We KNOW who promulgated it. We KNOW who defended it's build up. We KNOW how it all came to be. And after watching this video, you'll ALL KNOW everything you'll ever want to know about crashing markets. This video was uploaded by YouTube user TheMouthPeace, and is titled Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?

In the video it mentions throughout to "Google It!" I suggest that you do. You'll see that it's all there. Attempts have been made (by whom?) to get the video 'banned.' But it keeps re-emerging.

Seen enough about the markets yet?

What Happened To Global Warming: Doom And Gloom Goes 'Back Of The Bus'

I know I can't be the only person who has noticed lately, the more or less extreme failure for there to be any reports on Global Warming as of late. I mean what happened to all the "it'll be the end of the world as we know it!" stuff we were being force fed by the (fair and balanced) media on a daily basis? Exactly how did Global whining, just simply cease to exist? Did Mother Nature just decide one day to halt the doom and gloom forecast in its tracks? Or has enough of America essentially had enough of the crap?

Doom and gloom, as it were, seems to have taken a back seat to issues that actually affect Americans.

Could it be, just maybe, that it never really was an issue in the first place? Regardless of the hype. And that perhaps real, genuine crisis' like the current financial meltdown, actually merit our attention? And people DID in fact pay attention to their finances, and what the government was doing with it. Our Rep's saw this, in the form of the outpouring of concern to their respective offices. To bad it wasn't enough to subdue the second round of votes. About the only related mention to climate I even see anymore, is an occasional T.V. commercial of some institution offering "green" interactions. Like paperless banking or some such.

If you wanna live a green life, that's fine by me. I don't know how many times I've said, sure we should be better stewards of the planet. It only makes sense to do so. And it looks as if more and more are beginning to feel the same. As the endless stream of evidence continues to mount against global fleecing, something that the average person saw as unalterable in the first place, folks have buckled down their own actions naturally. Not under the forced compliance of the green-police.

And that's how it should have been in the first place.

Sad to say, but we may need to face a new crisis once this financial fiasco ends. Just so we can continue to NOT hear about Al Gore-acles dream again.

Shareholders Take On Bailout: EJECT! EJECT! EJECT!

As was expected (and at the same time, woefully dreaded) the House went ahead and passed the big-boom-bailout last Friday. Against the wishes of the populace majority I might add. I think quite a few politicians may be facing eviction after this. And as also expected, it more or less exactly failed to sate the global market. At all. This morning (Mon. Oct. 6th,) the U.S. market has already plunged well below the 10K threshold. And global markets are facing relatively the same nosedive, even though the taxpayer train-robbery that is the bailout was passed.

Utter shock and amazement here folks.

What the House had essentially did to get it through, was to tack on an extra almost $150B in "earmarks" (there's that word again,) to the already over inflated 400+ page, $700B bill to "BUY" the needed votes. Our (being the taxpayers that is,) money talks in a big way it seems, when it's being spent by D.C. And thus begins the continued march of Socialism into the American free-ish market. Well, more like a continued onslaught or incursion, rather than their first foray engagement.

Not to be outdone or ignored, and to show just how much the public appreciated the passage of this bill, (both last week and into today) a sizable number of people, namely the portion of the populace that opposed it, have shown their disdain for the bill approval. And they did this, by dumping their stocks. The clarion call of the shareholder, thanks to the "take-over," erm, I mean bailout, has become "EJECT! EJECT! EJECT!" Last week we had an unprecedented 800 point plunge. And today, we've already seen 400 points worth disappear by shortly after the opening bell on the stock market.

People just don't trust politicians anymore, with few exceptions. Our President is hanging at some of the lowest ratings of around 30-40%. Congress is single digits now at around 8-9% approval. And after this bill passage, why should it get any better? Americans aren't seeing their elected leaders acting in their best interests. And until their (the politicians) "seats" are usurped, why should they?

Sadly, I don't foresee the situation getting any better. At least for a while that is. At least (more hopefully) not until enough people get so fed up with the poli-trickery between the government and outlying entities, that they say ENOUGH! Until those people, who being fed up with the crap, take enough of the positions of authority to alter the financial course of the country, we should rightly expect, just more of the same-ol, same-ol.

Ifill Blows Media's Best Chance For Credibility Recovery

Well, at least in my opinion, by choosing to accept the position she did. But the choice by the Debate committee to utilize her as a moderator in the first place goes beyond all comprehension anyways. So what else is new, right?

But Ifill missed one of the best opportunities media has ever had, to restore what little fragments might remain of "credibility" in today's journalists.

The idea has even been submitted that media in all it's glory, change it's "fair and balanced" motto's, to "a bunch of Obama 527's." And if Bill Maher even stoops to make mention of the swooning, you know somethings gotta be changed.

And Ifill (so far, as I have yet to see a report saying otherwise,) has let this grand opportunity, slip right through her fingers. Then again, she does have an overbearing interest in aiding with an Obama win. What with her BOOK about Obama due to be released on Inauguration Day and all.

I guess money wins over integrity.

But consider this for a moment if you will. Mass media's approval ratings barely exceed that of our pathetic excuse for a (Dem. controlled) Congress. Both Congress and media are basking in SINGLE DIGIT ratings these days. No one trusts them anymore. No one believes them anymore. But what kind of an "integrity boost" would media have garnered, as a whole mind you, if Ifill had publicly turned down the VP Debate moderator position?

Aha! I can imagine those rusty gears between the talking heads ears beginning to turn.

This is what we should have heard from Ifill;

"I'd like to sincerely thank the Debate commission for both considering, and ultimately selecting me to moderate the critical and highly anticipated upcoming Vice Presidential debate. To me, I consider this to be an honor beyond measure. And am overwhelmed with the regard I must have been held in to achieve this distinction. But I deeply regret that, even though I would ardently strive to maintain neutrality, it is not in the best interest of the election process, for me to chair the position of moderator. Due to my personal affinity with regards to Sen. Obama's campaign, my status as a journalist, and my involvement as an author of a soon to be released book in respect to Sen. Obama, I must regretfully decline this estimable position. Again, I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to the Debate commission for the honor they have bestowed upon me. Thank you."

Well, at least something like that would have been good.

Money talks.... B.S. walks.

ALG's "Senator DeMint on the Floor Against the Bailout"

The uber-fantabulous- failure of a bailout, with it's equally nightmarish price tag was defeated a few nights ago, much to the pleasure of the American populace. Not willing to concede defeat, the House and Senate RE-took up the bailout banner and reworked the 100+ page plan, into an over 400+ page plan. I dunno. Did they maybe think that by adding more pages, it would be considered a good thing perhaps? And the new version HAS been passed in the Senate.

We await the dreadful news that the House has passed it too. (Kinda makes me feel like the Death Row inmate who's last appeal had been denied.) Now we're just waiting for the guy with the black cloak and scythe to show up.

But Senator Jim DeMint wasn't for it. And he said so in his speech. Thanks to ALG for making us aware of why DeMint said he was against the bill. Just as every other Senator SHOULD HAVE been. It's a relatively long dissertation, so I'll just post clips from it and recommend you read it in it's entirety over at ALG.

Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President,... We all want to do what is right for America, and I believe those who have crafted this plan had pure and noble motives. They want this country to succeed. They want prosperity. I just do not believe that this bill gets the job done. In fact, in the long term, I am convinced it will do more harm than good.

We are the Nation that has been called the bastion of freedom, and we are the Nation that has sacrificed blood and treasure to share that freedom with the world. We have fought communism, dictators, and tyranny..... Yet as the blood of our young men and women falls on foreign soil in the defense of freedom, our own Government appears to be leading our country into the pit of socialism.

We have seen this Government socialize our education system and make our schools among the worst in the world. We have seen this Government take over most of our health care system,... We have seen this Government socialize our energy resources ... And now we see this Congress yielding its constitutional obligations to a Federal bureaucracy, ... Americans understand this and they are angry. They are our judge and our jury. They are watching what we are doing, and they will render their verdict based on our actions.

If we were honest with the American people and explained the failures that have led to this financial crisis, we might have the credibility to ask our citizens to allow us to borrow another $700 billion in their name to try to fix this problem. But we are not being honest. This problem was not created by our free enterprise system. It was created by us, the Congress and the Federal Government.

With good intentions, we made a mess of things.... All of our good intentions are now blowing up in our face, and we are asking the American people to bail us out.

We have also squandered and wasted hundreds of billions of hard-earned tax dollars on unnecessary and ineffective Federal programs and thousands of wasteful earmarks. Last week, we passed a bill with the highest rate of pork spending in history....we are still spending money as if there is no tomorrow....

We know Americans are now the victim of our misguided good intentions, along with our free enterprise system that has been severely damaged and weakened....

I believe this Congress should admit its guilt, prove we have learned from our mistakes, and correct the bad policies immediately that have caused these problems....

We should reduce corporate and capital gains taxes to encourage capital formation and boost asset values. We should also repeal the section of Sarbanes-Oxley that has driven billions of dollars of capital overseas....

We should immediately adopt a freeze on non security discretionary spending and pass a moratorium on earmarks until we fix this wasteful and corrupting system. We should sacrifice our political pork as we ask taxpayers to sacrifice for our mistakes.

We have caused a terrible financial mess, and we must honestly tell the American people that whether we pass this huge bailout or not, there will likely be suffering and pain for our great country.... But we must tell Americans the truth.

Congress says it was deregulation and capitalist greed that has run wild and undermined our financial system....

We are telling people not to worry because we are going to rescue them with their own money....

But this Congress refuses to change our Nation's monetary policy that created the cheap money.... We refuse to repeal Sarbanes-Oxley, even though it hasn't worked and it has cost our economy billions....

None of these things are even on the table for discussion. We are telling the American people to hand over $700 billion or the world economy is going to collapse. This is why people are so upset. It is because Congress is being dishonest and arrogant. We are not being honest with them about how we got into this mess, and we are not being honest with them about what we need to get out of it.

I am deeply saddened by the tone of this debate....

Let me say again that I know every one of my colleagues is doing what they believe is right for America. But based on what I know, I cannot in good conscience support it. I know the Senate is going to pass it tonight, and I can only hope the House will defeat it so we can pursue better alternatives.

I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.

The sad part of this is, not only is DeMint right... But he was essentially preachin' to the choir. Thanks anyways Mr. DeMint, for saying what had to be said, to the people who NEEDED to hear it.

Government's $700B Bailout Or Dave Ramsey's Common Sense Fix?

Leave it to one of my upbeat co-workers, an outstanding Black Conservative Republican (just like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was,) to come through with a great post topic for today. In addition to an e-mail from ALG that I had originally intended to expound on. Somethings that everyone should see and consider, BEFORE they pick-up the phone to bite the heads off of their local Representatives.

Oh, have no doubts though. I'm still all for the biting the heads off of our Rep's, but at least you should have a very clear-cut reason to do so.

First off, we'll start with the original fiasco. Erm,... I mean bailout. Taxpayers being put on the hook for $700 Billion of bad debt, (that no one wants or needs) when they're already pushing the limits in many cases. And that's just to deal with their own expenses. Add to the mix, many people discovered that about 20% of any "profits" that might be had from this bailout, will go into a slush fund for groups like La Raza and ACORN. Part of the reason were in this mess in the first place.

Something that is missing from the bailout bill, as mentioned in the ALG article I brought up, is there is no call for an Amendment in the bill to "Repeal the CRA," or Community Reinvestment Act. Which coincidentally, is another big contributing part of how we got where we are today.

Take all that in, and it becomes pretty clear to all that being "for" bailouts is political suicide. But here we sit, awaiting our House and Senate, to approve or reject a "reworked" $700B bailout. What? Did they NOT get that this is NOT what we need the first time? It's really starting to sound more like the desperate gasps of a ginormous Socialistic ideal, straining to gain another foothold in a free-ish market economy.

But to the rescue, comes my buddy Henry. That Black Conservative Republican with a great article from the Dave Ramsey website. Instead of being saddled with $700B of pathetic and unnecessary bad debt, how does a mere $50B sound? Yeah, that's it. Ramsey has it laid out that this financial crisis can be dealt with, for approximately $50B. Dave's plan? "
The Common Sense Fix." The dollar amount involved pretty much had me from the start. After going through what it entails, I was sold!

Dave's ideas are a "must read." Even if you don't completely agree with him, there's no arguing that it holds water much more soundly, than an already earmark laden $700B nightmare that looms before us now.