Truth

There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.

Arizona

Arizona

Saturday, July 3, 2010

The Philadelphia 86ers

In the final days of the Bush administration, three Black Panthers —  Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson — were charged in a civil complaint with violating the Voter Rights Act in November 2008 by using coercion, threats and intimidation at a Philadelphia polling station — with Shabazz brandishing what prosecutors called a deadly weapon.

Imagine, multiple witness, including a Well-Respected Democrat Civil Rights Activist hearing “Now you know what it will be like to be ruled by a black man, Cracker!”
Cracker, for the uninitiated is a racial slur for white people. But since it’s is not politically incorrect no one actually cares that it’s a racial slur.
Imagine, a tall Black man with a knight stick and his buddies outside a Philadelphia polling place.
Imagine, They called people “white devils”. They menaced, they tapped their baton. They tried to stop people from entering the polls.
And it is all on tape!!
But since the Ministry of Truth and the Liberal Spin machine will dismiss it as a “republican” ploy enter Lifelong Democrat, and Civil Rights Advocate Bartle Bull.
He’s a long time Robert F. Kennedy civil rights activist, worked in Mississippi in the ’60s. He said it was the worst case of voter intimidation he has ever seen in his 40 years of practicing civil rights laws.
He was There.
He also alleges that ACORN registered at least 400,000 people in the last election that were fraudulent also.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/america-live/index.html#/v/4267253/civil-rights-attorney-on-accusations-vs-doj/?playlist_id=87651
So you have voter fraud and voter intimidation allegations from a Diehard Liberal Democrat!
“But I do know already that the President of the United States has violated his oath of office to enforce the laws of the United States. Because he is not enforcing the Voting Rights Act. Which he swore to do.’ – Bartle Bull.
Text of the Interview with Former DOJ Attorney: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,595683,00.html
Excerpts:
KELLY (FOX): Ok, so you bring the case against these four defendants. The two guys we see on camera, the party and the head of the party. And what happens next?
J Christian ADAMS (Former DOJ): Well you cruise along. The defendants didn’t even appear, they didn’t even answer, the just ignored the charges.
KELLY: They didn’t bother to defend it in any way?
ADAMS: No, it’s like ignoring a speeding ticket. They just blew it off. They didn’t show up for court, they didn’t file any papers, they didn’t do anything.
KELLY: So you get something that’s called a default judgment, meaning a judgment because they didn’t bother to defend it and the judge says to you at the Department of Justice, OK, write up an order and tell me whether you want to make this final essentially.
ADAMS: Yeah, the court had already found and entered the fault against the defendants. It was done. All we had to do is tell the judge what we wanted for punishment.
KELLY: OK, but instead of doing that, something changed at the Department of Justice. What happened?
ADAMS: Well, the case was dismissed on May 15. All the charges were dropped against three of the defendants and the final order against one of the defendants was a timid restraint.
KELLY: So, the only person who wound up facing any punishment was the guy with the baton. And instead of having a permanent injunction, which is what you guys wanted, never let this guy near a polling station to do this, to do this kind of thing again, he got what?
ADAMS: He’s stopped from appearing at the polls with a weapon only in the city of Philadelphia and only for a couple more years.
KELLY: And the other three defendants?
ADAMS: Nothing. They’re dismissed from the case completely.
KELLY: Ok, so what happened at the Department of Justice to get you to the point where you literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory?
KELLY: So, but what was the reason? That’s what I’m trying to get at. You, the trial attorneys, the career lawyers at DOJ said we have a victory. We think this case has merit. And you were told what?
ADAMS: Dismiss the case. That the facts and the law don’t support this. I can’t explain it.
KELLY: What was really going on?
ADAMS: Well, I mean, there is a pervasive hostility to bringing these sorts of civil rights cases. I’ve worked on other ones at the Justice Department. I’ve worked on cases in Mississippi. I’ve represented both black victims of racial discrimination and Hispanic victims and in this case a white victim of racial discrimination. There is a pervasive hostility within the civil rights division at the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases.
KELLY: Do you believe that the DOJ has a policy now of not pursuing cases if the defendant is black and the victim is white?
ADAM: Well, particularly in voting. In voting that will be the case over the next few years, there’s no doubt about it.
KELLY: There isn’t?
ADAM: None, I mean, instructions were, if you had all the attorneys that worked on this case I am quite sure that they would say the exact same thing. And that other attorneys gave instructions that the voting section would not be pursuing these sorts of cases.
Response: The department “is committed to comprehensive and vigorous enforcement of both the civil and criminal provisions of federal law that prohibit voter intimidation. We continue to work with voters, communities, and local law enforcement to ensure that every American can vote free from intimidation, coercion or threats,” Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler Schmaler said.
There’s that word again, “comprehensive”. And could you be a little more political and platitude-y in your response please. :(
But Adams told Fox News that the department’s decision to dismiss the case reeked of racial politics and corruption.
“I don’t think the department or the fine people who work there are corrupt, but in this particular instance, to abandon law-abiding citizens and abet wrongdoers constitutes corruption,” he said.
Adams said he quit last month after the department ordered attorneys to ignore a subpoena from the commission.
“After being ordered not to comply with the lawful subpoena, after hearing the lies that are being said about the case, after the corruption that we had witnessed in the case, I just said that’s it, that I resign and now I’m no longer there,” he said.
Adams also said the department has been caught lying about the case, including the assertion that the decision to dismiss the charges was made only by Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division.
Citing a Washington Times article, Adams said Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli, the No. 3 official in the department, was responsible for the decision. He also said a written response from the department to the commission revealed that Attorney General Eric Holder was also briefed on the case.
“The initial statements of the department are being proved in hindsight to be false,” he said.
When asked whether Holder signed off on the decision to dismiss the case, Adams said, “I can’t answer that. We were just doing our job. We didn’t even know these things. We thought we had a good case. We thought it’s all going to be over with soon and we’re going to win. And then it wasn’t.”
But Adams noted that a former Justice Department official testified to the commission that it would be “unheard of” for a decision like this to be made without the attorney general’s blessing.
Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez provided false testimony in May to the United States Commission on Civil Rights, which is investigating the department’s decision to drop charges against three members of the radical group in a case that the government won.
Perez told the commission that the facts and the law didn’t support the case against the group.
“I know about the truth…and I know what the truth is and I know to say the facts and law don’t support the Black Panther case is not true,” Adams said, adding that Perez ignored his warnings not to provide false testimony.
“We made it very clear that continuing to say that the facts and the law don’t support this case would not be consistent with the truth,” he said.
Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler called Adams’ allegations “baseless.”
So you catch several Blank Panther radicals brandishing weapons and yelling racial epithets and intimidating people at the polls.
You win the case. It’s a Slam Dunk. It’s all on Tape. You have multiple credible witnesses.
Then your new boss says drop it.
Why?
Because,“the facts and law do not support  the case”, they say.
It’s ON TAPE! Slapping you in the face with a 2X4!
So what they are are the power now (Democrats) and they decided what laws are to be enforced and when.
And this was not going to be enforced.
Racism requires the perpetrator to be in a position of power. Obama comes from a “church” of black liberation theology (Rev. Wright). Holder is no newcomer to controversy and the politics of race. Obama holds the office of President of the United States and Eric Holder holds the office of Attorney General of the United States.
Who has the power?
We are from the government and we are here to serve you.
TO SERVE MAN.
“It’s a Cook Book! It’s A Cook Book!” :)

Friday, July 2, 2010

Sound and Fury Signifying Demogoguery

Before I get started, I just have to mention one of the STUPIDEST comments in the history of mankind and it comes from that grand lady of Progressive Liberalism. Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
Unemployment benefits are creating jobs faster than practically any other program, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday.
Talking to reporters, the House speaker was defending a jobless benefits extension against those who say it gives recipients little incentive to work. By her reasoning, those checks are helping give somebody a job.
“It injects demand into the economy,” Pelosi said, arguing that when families have money to spend it keeps the economy churning. “It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name.”
Pelosi said the aid has the “double benefit” of helping those who lost their jobs and acting as a “job creator” on the side.
“It’s impossible to think of a situation where we would have a country that would say we’re not going to have unemployment benefits,” Pelosi said.
So the best way to create jobs is to have more unemployed!!
Orwell would be applauding. No better Doublespeak has even been uttered.
And by that standard President Obama is one of the most successful Presidents since The Great Depression!!
*****************************
Vice President Biden is out  with an alarmed e-mail cash appeal warning that the GOP will mount a  blitzkrieg against Democrats in the fall.
Comparing GOP tactics to the fast-striking forces of  Nazi Germany,  Biden warns in a message sent by the DCCC today: As things heat up, you  can expect House Democrats will be hit with a GOP blitzkrieg of vicious  Swift-Boat-style attack ads, Karl Rove-inspired knockout tactics,  thinly veiled attempts at character assassination and tea party  disruptions. And while the GOP is mounting a blitzkrieg, Democrats  are the allies.
Our Democratic allies in the House need your help,  and the President  and I hope we can count on you to come to their defense so we can hold  onto our Democratic Majority and continue moving American forward in a  new direction, Biden writes in the appeal.

Subtle? Not so much.
************************************
“There are those who argue that we should not move forward with any other elements of reform until we have fully sealed our borders,” he said. “Our borders are just too vast for us to be able to solve the problem only with fences and border patrols. It won’t work.”
While Arizona lawmakers defend their law as necessary to patrol the border, Obama described it as “unenforceable” and a vehicle for civil rights abuse.
“So, despite the forces of the status quo, despite the polarization and the frequent pettiness of our politics, we are confronting the great challenges of our times.  And while this work isn’t easy, and the changes we seek won’t always happen overnight, what we’ve made clear is that this administration will not just kick the can down the road.”
<>
“But it is also ill conceived.  And it’s not just that the law Arizona passed is divisive -– although it has fanned the flames of an already contentious debate.  Laws like Arizona’s put huge pressures on local law enforcement to enforce rules that ultimately are unenforceable. “

So the rule of law is unenforceable??
The locals can’t possible enforce it, so leave it up to Big Brother to ignore it for you. Be Happy.
Don’t you just feel better now? :)
Gee, that’s “Hope” and “Change” for ya….
“These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound. And as other states and localities go their own ways, we face the prospect that different rules for immigration will apply in different parts of the country -– a patchwork of local immigration rules where we all know one clear national standard is needed.”
Still hasn’t read it has he! :)
Beat that Race Card over their heads!
STRIKE FEAR IN THEIR HEARTS!!!!
“That’s why businesses must be held accountable if they break the law by deliberately hiring and exploiting undocumented workers.  We’ve already begun to step up enforcement against the worst workplace offenders.”
Has anyone told Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, who was airing a PSA asking Illegals to call her if they are being exploited by businesses so they can go after the business?? :(
“And, yes, this is an emotional question, and one that lends itself to demagoguery.  Time and again, this issue has been used to divide and inflame -– and to demonize people.”
And he’s the Alinsky Master Sith Lord of it!
So the bottom line is this:  The southern border is more secure today than at any time in the past 20 years.
<<>
“I’m ready to move forward, the majority of Democrats are ready to move forward, and I believe the majority of Americans are ready to move forward,” Obama said.
They are, with Border Enforcement FIRST!
But that’s not on THE AGENDA.

The president blamed Republicans for exacerbating the problem. He suggested places like Arizona are unilaterally taking up the issue because GOP senators backed away from immigration reform following the debate several years ago led by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. Obama blamed political posturing and “demagoguery” for Washington’s inability to deal with the problem, pressing Republicans to step up.
“The fact is without bipartisan support, as we had just a few years ago, we cannot solve this problem,” Obama said at American University in Washington, D.C. (You mean Amnesty?)

Sounds like demagoguery to me. :)
He knows he has no chance of passing it in an election year like this. So he’s just pandering to his base, and to the Hispanics.
He wants them to turn out this fall to vote against the “racists”.
He knows it.
He doesn’t care.
It’s all a political calculation. Nothing more.
All sound and Fury, signifying nothing other than pure political theatre of the crass.
*****
Mexico gets its a say in one of the lawsuits challenging Arizona’s immigration enforcement law.
A federal judge on Thursday granted Mexico’s request to be allowed to file a legal brief supporting the challenge. That means the judge will consider the brief Mexico submitted previously.
Mexico says it wants to defend its citizens’ rights and that the law would lead to racial profiling and hinder trade and tourism. It also says the law would hinder work against drug trafficking and related violence.
A Foreign country gets a say…But we’re the racists?
America, what a country! :(
Amnesty International recently issued a report claiming illegal immigrants in Mexico — typically from Central America — face abuse, rape and kidnappings, and that Mexican police do little to stop it. When illegal immigration was a criminal offense in Mexico, officials were known to seek bribes from suspects to keep them out of jail.
But Mexico said it has a legitimate interest in defending its citizens’ rights and that Arizona’s law would lead to racial profiling, hinder trade and tourism, and strain the countries’ work on combating drug trafficking and related violence.
IBD editorial:
The president’s immigration address was little more than a cynical bid to sugarcoat amnesty for illegals as his polls sag. Maybe that’s because he’s not doing his real job: fostering jobs and enforcing the border.
In a speech Thursday that oozed Emma Lazarus-like treacle, the president distilled the current crisis facing states — from Arizona’s massive kidnapping rate and loss of control of territory, to California’s bankrupt state hospitals and schools, to Texas’ near-catastrophic destruction of a dam and cartel violence spillover — as merely an issue of Americans disliking immigrants, as if there were no difference between legal and illegal.
“These (immigrants) and men and women like them across this country, remind us that immigrants have always helped to build and defend this country — and that being an American is not a matter of blood or birth,” President Obama said, apparently forgetting that the people he was describing were legal immigrants.
His inability to admit this is a sign that he’s adopted the narrative of the politically muscular open-borders lobby. As his popularity fades and November’s midterm election approaches, he’s now pandering for Latino votes.
It’s clear enough by his past statements: He declared last April 30 that amnesty had zero chance of passing in Congress and wasn’t worth the political effort. “I don’t want us to do something just for the sake of politics that doesn’t solve the problem,” he said then.
But as his popularity fell, he told Arizona Sen. John Kyl on June 18, in words heard by others, that Arizona’s border security would be held a political hostage to amnesty.
“The problem is … if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support ‘comprehensive immigration reform,’” Kyl explained at a meeting held in an Arizona border town.
And even in Thursday’s speech, the president admitted that his proposals for immigration reform “cannot pass without Republican votes,” which he knows he won’t get.
So Obama’s sudden interest in what’s euphemistically called “comprehensive immigration reform” can only be one thing: a bid to shore up poll numbers as elections near. A Rasmussen poll showed 32% of voters strongly approving of Obama when he vowed not to pursue immigration reform. Today it’s about 26%.
With trouble like that, it’s not surprising to see him looking to energize special interest groups, even with a bill he knows can’t pass.
The problem is, placing electoral politics above governing amounts to a diversion from his own responsibilities as president.
In characterizing Americans who only want existing laws enforced as racists, attention gets diverted from the fact that the president isn’t doing his job of protecting our borders.
In his speech, the president set up his straw men and knocked them down.
He then set out his own idea — amnesty, with a few wrist-slaps for those who break the law — as a reasonable compromise between a pure amnesty and a systematic roundup of 12 million illegals.
It’s a false choice, because there are no advocates of full amnesty outside the extreme academic left, and nobody seeks mass deportation. The real issue is that existing federal laws, passed and on the books, are being ignored. That’s why Arizona made a law to ensure that the state enforces them. And other states are following.
The president denounced Arizona’s new immigration law, falsely claiming as the amnesty lobby does that Arizona police could stop anyone on the basis of skin color alone. Not true.
It all points to a political agenda whose main aim is to win votes for the president’s party. It reeks of politics — and that politics, awfully enough, comes at the expense of the most basic governing leadership required of a president.
*****
So sleep soundly America, knowing that the government says securing the border is impossible and if you try to do it yourself you’re a racist and it’s unenforceable.
So let the government ignore it for you.
We are from the government and we are here to protect you. :)

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Covering Their Fannie (and Freddie)

Keep in Mind that the Financial Reform Bill, which is now in some trouble, is written largely by Sen. Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. The people who brought you the subprime mess to begin with their insistence on subprime mortgages for people who couldn’t even afford those.
But we were discriminating against the poor!
Oh No! We can’t have that!
Everyone must be equal! :)
Subprime Scandal: Missing from stories about finance reform is what Democrats left out of it: a fix for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which continue to bleed billions.
Nor has it been explained why the two mortgage giants at the heart of the housing crisis were excluded. A little research, however, provides answers. Many of the Senate and House conferees who assembled the final overhaul bill are among the biggest recipients of cash from Fannie and Freddie, which over the years have been plagued by Democrat cronyism and corruption.
Some of the Hill’s biggest protectors of the toxic twins and their market-distorting “affordable housing” mission landed key positions as conferees on the panel that wrote the final draft of the bank reform legislation. For example, conference committee leaders Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., respectively raked in more than $133,000 and $40,000 in donations from Fannie and Freddie, Federal Election Commission records show.
The two lawmakers, in turn, have been the congressional chartered companies’ staunchest defenders. Leading up to the housing meltdown, Dodd insisted time and again — despite growing evidence to the contrary — that Fannie and Freddie were “fundamentally strong” and “in good shape.”
Frank maintained that “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not facing any kind of financial crisis.” “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies,” Frank griped, “the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
To satisfy such politically mandated lending goals, Washington-based Fannie and Freddie loaded up on subprime and other high-risk home loans. Their exposure was greater than all the major Wall Street players combined. And now they’re insolvent, with taxpayers potentially on the hook for as much as $1 trillion.
Already Fannie and Freddie’s $160 billion government bailout has topped that spent on AIG, Citigroup and other Democrat poster boys of the crisis, making their rescue the mother of all bailouts.
We can’t think of two entities more deserving of overhaul. Yet the Dodd-Frank Act doesn’t even try to reform them. This means nothing will change except the size of government’s hand in the economy. By not addressing Fannie and Freddie, economist Brian Wesbury noted “the government is taking no blame for the subprime crisis and is demanding more power over the U.S. financial system.”
Several other conferees instrumental in keeping Fannie and Freddie exempt from the new financial rules also show up among the top beneficiaries of Fannie and Freddie campaign cash (see table).
President Obama and top aide Rahm Emanuel also ranked among top recipients of Fannie and Freddie gifts when they were in Congress. From the White House, they lobbied Congress for a financial overhaul and got 90% of what they asked — including a pass for Fannie and Freddie, where Emanuel once served as director.
Their private piggy bank for “social justice” — which they used to provide high-risk loans that otherwise were out of reach for constituents — remains safe from promised “sweeping reform.”
In the ultimate insult, the two lawmakers most deserving of blame for the financial crisis carry the name of the legislation that supposedly will deliver us from financial crisis. The villains are, according to the media, the white knights riding in to save us from the havoc they caused. A more sinister script could not have been written. (IBD)

Unless you’re an elitist Democrat who has complete contempt for “the people” and are only out there to push your agenda and nothing else.
But don’t worry, we’re from the government and we are here to help you!! :)
UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE: A PREVIEW
Anyone wanting a preview of Obama-Care need just focus on Massachusetts, the state that provided the blueprint for Obama’s plan. It makes a great case for making haste in repealing ObamaCare.
In Massachusetts, health care prices are out of control, emergency rooms are overcrowded, the government is at war with itself and private insurers are running in the red, refusing to enter critical markets on the government’s unrealistic terms.
The party line now is that the Bay State’s reform was not about cost control but rather expanding access to care. The program’s backers claim that the price spiral they find themselves in was expected, anticipated, even if they didn’t actually have a plan for it.
That’s a revisionist’s tale. In early 2006, the plan’s backers — led by then Republican Gov. Mitt Romney — adamantly asserted that his plan would in fact control costs, provide universal coverage and improve the quality of care. (If this sounds familiar, it’s because Obama’s team borrowed the marketing scripts.)
Disinterested outsiders predicted that both prices and total costs would most likely increase under the government-dominated system, since massive new demand, reimbursed at the lowest prices, would be forced on a fixed supply. They were shouted down by insiders vested in getting the reform passed.
Guess who was right? :)
Three years prior to reform, insurance premiums for employers were increasing 3.7% more slowly in Massachusetts than in the rest of the country.  Today, the opposite is true.  Prices in Massachusetts are increasing 5.7% more than in other states. In Boston, prices for employer-provided family plans are increasing 8.2% faster than in other large metropolitan areas.
“Because the plan’s main components are the same as those of the new health reform law,” the study’s authors note, “the effects of the plan provide a window onto the country’s future.”
But it’s “fair”. :)
******
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION & BORDER SECURITY
While President Obama was meeting at the White House with The Congressional Hispanic Caucus and other Hispanic activists, he sent a Power Point presentation that said virtually nothing to Gov. Brewer.
Now he’s going to make a Campaign Speech tonight on it.
I know I’m excited! :(
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama hopes to rally new momentum behind the push for an immigration overhaul by explaining why he thinks a comprehensive approach is the only way to fix what he and others say is a system badly in need of repair.
(aka Sen. Jon Kyl’s “hostage” comment) Do it my way, that benefits me or not at all.

Obama was laying out his rationale in a {Campaign} speech Thursday, his first as president on the issue.
Obama wasn’t expected to announce any new proposals or policy changes. But feeling pressure from a range of supporters, he was aiming to jump-start the effort he had promised to make a priority in his first year and which advocates had hoped would be completed by now.
aka “Amnesty”.

The speech follows up on back-to-back meetings Obama had with advocates and lawmakers at the White House this week.
Gov. Brewer got 20 minutes crammed into the schedule at the last minute and then a Power Point presentation nearly a month later. :(

Obama has said a comprehensive solution means “accountability for everybody” — from the U.S. government meeting its obligation to secure the border, to businesses facing the consequences of knowingly employing illegal immigrants, to those who enter the country illegally owning up to their actions before they can begin the process of becoming citizens.
Has anyone told Labor Secretary Hilda Solis who a week ago put out a PSA saying if your Illegal and being treated or paid unfairly to giver her a call and The US Dept. of Labor would help you out??

Recent developments on immigration influenced his decision to give a speech, White House officials say, most notably Arizona’s enactment of a tough anti-immigrant law and protests across the country against it.
“He thought this was a good time to talk plainly with the American people about his views on immigration,” spokesman Bill Burton said.
Talk Plainly, Obama? Now that’s a novel idea.
Is he even capable of that?
NO.
Oh, and there’s that pesky LAWSUIT against SB1070. You know the one where we are “racists” and “misguided”. :(
So this is a campaign ploy.
As everything else is.
He looks tough.
He panders to his base.
The Ministry of Truth slobber all over him.
Liberal go all mushy.
Then nothing happens.
But it looks good.
And he wants “to do something”. Or at least look and sound like it.
Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing!  (Richard III)

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Get Your Exemption Card Here!!

Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
So it’s time for a little something this president understands, Quid Pro Quo.

“This card a tangible reminder that Obama has deliberately broken his central campaign promise not to raise any form of taxes on Americans earning less than $250,000. The last President to break his tax pledge – Bush 41 – served only one term.” – Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform
Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card
Back of the Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card
You may have noticed that President Obama has broken his central campaign promise – a “firm pledge” that Americans making less than $250,000 would not see “any form of tax increase.” He first broke this pledge sixteen days into his presidency when he signed a 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco. And Obamacare contains 21 tax increases – several of which violate his “firm pledge”.
To protect you from these tax hikes, Americans for Tax Reform presents the “Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card”. The card fits neatly in your wallet and contains a list of the tax hikes signed into law by President Obama that violate his tax pledge, as well as a few other taxes that have been threatened: a European-style Value-Added Tax, Cap and Trade taxes, and even a federal soda tax.
Fill out the form below to get your Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card
How to use the card:
Step 1: Present the card to merchants, employers, and tax authorities.
Step 2: If challenged, pleasantly ask: “Are you calling President Obama a liar?”
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”
–Candidate Barack Obama, Sept. 12, 2008
“If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.”
Read more: https://www.atr.org/obama-tax-hike-exemption-card-a5140##ixzz0sLFjN4tF
TheTax on Indoor Tanning Services takes effect July 1, 2010: This provision of Obamacare imposes a new 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons.  The tax was tucked into the bill behind closed doors at the last minute, replacing the previous “Bo-Tax” – a proposed tax on plastic surgery.  The 30 million Americans who visit tanning facilities are getting a lesson in the petty, nanny-state nature of Obamacare – every time they walk through the door.  Not to mention the business owners and employees who are threatened by the tax.  (Page 373 of Manager’s amendment/$2.7 billion)
The “Medicine Cabinet Tax” takes effect Jan. 1, 2011: Thanks to Obamacare, Americans will no longer be able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin).  (Page 1997/Sec. 9003/$5 billion)
The “Special Needs Kids Tax” takes effect Jan. 1, 2011: This provision of Obamacare imposes a cap on flexible spending accounts (FSAs) of $2500 (Currently, there is no federal government limit).  There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children.  There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education.  Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year.  Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.  (Page 1999/Sec. 9005/$14 billion)
The HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike takes effect Jan. 1, 2011: This provision of Obamacare increases the additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.  (Page 1998/Sec. 9004/$1.3 billion)
TheMedical Itemized Deductions Cap takes effect Jan. 1, 2013: Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction if the total cost if the expenses reduces the filer’s income by 7.5%.  This provision of Obamacare imposes a threshold of 10%.  This new tax will most adversely affect early retirees and the catastrophically ill.  (Page 2034/Sec. 9013/$15.2 billion)
The Obamacare Individual Mandate Excise Tax takes effect Jan. 1, 2014: Anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following (page 71 of manager’s amendment updates Reid bill): (Page 324/Sec. 1501)

Single 2 People 3+ People
2014 $95/1.0% AGI $190/1.0% AGI $285/1.0% AGI
2015 $325/2.0% AGI $650/2.0% AGI $975/2.0% AGI
2016+ $695/2.5% AGI $1390/2.0% AGI $2085/2.5%/AGI
The Obamacare Medical Prosthetics and Devices Tax took effect in January of 2010:
This Obamacare tax raises the price of all medical prosthetic devices, such as pacemakers and artificial limbs. Consumers of these devices will end up paying more for these life-saving items.  ($20 billion)
The Obama Tobacco Tax Hike took effect April 1, 2009
Obama first broke his tax pledge sixteen days into his presidency when he signed into law a 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco.  At that time, Obama was rightly called out by Calvin Woodward of the Associated Press in a piece titled “Promises, Promises: Obama Tax Pledge Up in Smoke” Use your Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card – or else be prepared to pony up an extra 62 cents per pack of cigarettes.
Potential Obama Tax Hike to Watch Out For:  A Federal Soda Tax
In an interview with Men’s Health published in September of 2009, President Obama said that a tax on soda and sugar-laden beverages was “an idea that we should be exploring.”  So, keep your Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card handy at all times!  With this President, you never know when the other shoe will drop!

And we haven’t included the Bank Tax (that you’ll end up paying)  in the now troubled, but ultimately will pass-I believe-Financial Reform Bill.
Then we Have the Cap & Trade Bill with it’s 19th Century outrage for the Industrial Revolution which will now be the “We Hate BP” bill.
The 2011 Tax increase (previously outlined) in my blog “2011“
The whole salt thing and what about taxing foods that are bad for you?
The moratorium on drilling that the President is fighting, so gas prices can skyrocket and INCREASE our dependency on foreign Oil because all the 60′s pie-in-sky bovine fecal matter will not change reality.
So you have to use the card as a discount for that $7.00 gas you may get saddled with.
So you may need multiple copies!

Monday, June 28, 2010

Can I have My "Hope and Change" back, Mr. President?

But first, see this video by Gov. Brewer on the Obama Administration response to her meeting with them:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=remz27VJjH4

President Obama at the G20, where the European Socialists told him to piss off about more spending.
President Obama on controlling the debt: “Somehow people say, why are you doing that, I’m not sure that’s good politics. I’m doing it because I said I was going to do it and I think it’s the right thing to do. People should learn that lesson about me because next year when I start presenting some very difficult choices to the country, I hope some of these folks who are hollering about deficits and debt step-up because I’m calling their bluff. We’ll see how much of that, how much of the political arguments that they’re making right now are real and how much of it was just politics.”
So Hope and Change is now Fear & Threat. :)
“Yes He Can”
But what’s really telling also is the statement that I’m doing it because I said I would. And he did say he would.
But the Mainstream Media/Ministry of Truth shouted down anyone who dared to challenge him on it in the campaign.
You were a “racist” a “moron”, an “idiot”, etc.
Now, he’s run up the debt to the point of countrywide bankruptcy and now just wait, in 6 months, the hard work begins!
OOOOOHHHH!!! Scary!
Likely by then he’ll have a Republican Congress that he claim it all on.
But that’s next year.
He still has to pass Cap & Trade and Amnesty if he can before that.
The government already owns Health Care, slowly but surely, that starts accelerating next year too.
As do all the new tax increase, which, what do you bet the Liberals and the Media will blame that on the Republicans.
I’m Mr. Tough Guy! :)


Alinsky Rules for Radicals Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

He’s well aware of the political price and he wants the Republicans to take the blame for it.
And he wants your anger at the Democrats to make it so.
Perverse isn’t it?
Which means we do it in spades and then we pass the tax cuts, the pro-growth measures and it works and then He can try and run on it’s success in 2012 but the Democrats will be left out in the cold. It’s not like their leftist base will be smart enough to “get it”.
They’ve been waiting generations for this guy.

So he’s going to make “tough decisions” next year. What about the last 18th months?
He’s going to wait 2 years to make “tough decisions”??
I Guess 3 Stimulus, 18 months of Unemployment spending, Taking over GM,Chrysler,AIG,Banks, Health Care, and now Wall Street and Private Businesses was the easy part. :)
Making you pay for it, that’s the “tough decision”.
But since it’s likely to be a Republican Congress that will have to pull the trigger, it will be their fault.
It was their fault he had to everything he has done. So trying to undue it must therefore be their fault too!! :)
because if they were hard choices why doesn’t he make them now?
Oh, right this Congress wouldn’t dare.
Alinsky Rules for Radicals Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
The Ministry of Truth will surely pound them them 24/7 so hard it will be the only thing they talk about for the next 2 years.
The 2012 campaign continues. (It never stopped).
But all those who want wanted “Hope & Change”, got “Despair and Socialist Change”.
Now you get “Fear and Change”.

Obama has proposed freezing spending on an array of domestic programs for the next three years and has named a special commission to recommend ways to curb spiraling debt and deficits. The panel is to report back by December 1. Obama will review the recommendations and decide how to go forward sometime early next year.
So when the “commission” recommends massive tax hikes and crushing regulations his hands will be clean and he’ll just do what they advised.
But it won’t come out until AFTER the election.
And this was the stated reason for the Democrats not passing a Budget.
“We’ve got to look at a tax system that is messy and unfair in a whole range of ways,” Obama said. (reuters)
Aka, screw the rich.
After all nearly 50% of the people don’t pay any taxes, so he has to hit the ones who do even harder.

“A strong and durable recovery also requires countries not having an undue advantage,” he said. “As I told (Chinese) President Hu Jintao yesterday, the United States welcomes China’s decision to allow its currency to appreciate in response to market forces. We will be watching very closely in the months ahead.”
Everyone is equal. None is better than anyone else.
Sound familiar?

Leaders of 20 major industrial and developing countries generally sided with cutting spending and raising taxes, despite warnings from President Barack Obama that too much austerity too quickly could choke off the global recovery.
“Serious challenges remain,” they cautioned in a closing statement. “While growth is returning, the recovery is uneven and fragile, unemployment in many countries remains at unacceptable levels, and the social impact of the crisis is still widely felt,” according to the document from the Group of 20 major industrial and developing nations.
Obama told a news conference he was satisfied with the outcome, saying he recognized that countries had to proceed at their own pace in either emphasizing growth or budget austerity.
“We can’t all rush to the exits at the same time,” Obama said after three days of economic summitry.
Boy, don’t you wish you could show him the exit sooner! :)

Sunday, June 27, 2010

You Can Lie with Spin

Government these days isn’t about making the hard choices. It’s about making the choice that will sell, either to “your base” (thus ignoring everyone else) or by spin (which is inevitably deceitful) because it will benefit you or one of your “sides” interests.
They write 2000+ bills they won’t read. But expect everyone to follow.
They can’t be bothered to read SB1070, at a minimalist 16 pages.
Much easier to just play on people fears, anxiety,biases, and divide and conquer.
And when that doesn’t work, just lie.
Then there’s the politician favorite phrase these days, “I misspoke”.
No, we have it on tape or audio.
But they “misspoke”.
Then you get stuff like this:
President Barack Obama, fresh from a win on a sweeping overhaul of Wall Street regulations, on Saturday urged Congress to take up his proposal for a $90 billion, 10-year tax on banks as the next step in reform.
Obama wants to slap a 0.15 percent tax on the liabilities of the biggest U.S. financial institutions to recoup the costs to taxpayers of the financial bailout.
“We need to impose a fee on the banks that were the biggest beneficiaries of taxpayer assistance at the height of our financial crisis — so we can recover every dime of taxpayer money,” Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address.
He does realize that a tax on business is passed onto the consumer right?
He doesn’t care. It sounds good.
It plays to his anti-capitalist base and the “wall street” anger that has been ginned up.
The fact that Congress in the 1990′s set up the roots of this problem and the Government agency in charge of monitoring them were too busy with Porn is not a matter for discussion.
And one of the biggest players in this whole mess, Fannie and Freddie were and are  ignored should be a sign.
Alinsky, Rules for Radicals:
Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”
Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself.
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it.
Daniel Foster at the conservative National Review Online argues that the bill is filled with unnecessary or useless measures.
“There is much in the bill that has nothing to do with ‘Wall Street’ or the root causes of the crisis (i.e. debit card and interchange fee rules),” Foster writes. “There is little in it that will ‘reform’ too big to fail or change the incentives for the kind of behavior that led to the crisis (implicit subsidies and bailout authority galore); and it was a ‘compromise’ mostly between Democrats.”

Then you have VP Joe Biden, a one man gaffe machine:
VP Biden ran into an ice cream shot owner (in his shop) who aked him to lower the taxes and he called the guy a “smartass”
And it gets better:
Vice President Joe Biden gave a stark assessment of the economy Friday, telling an audience of supporters, “there’s no possibility to restore 8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession.”

Appearing at a fundraiser with Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) in Milwaukee, the vice president remarked that by the time he and President Obama took office in 2008, the gross domestic product had shrunk and hundreds of thousands of jobs had been lost.
“We inherited a godawful mess,” he said, adding there was “no way to regenerate $3 trillion that was lost. Not misplaced, lost.” (CBS)
Andrew Langer, The Daily Caller:

Ultimately, with election victory comes the responsibility of governance. That responsibility requires grappling with the excruciating problem of making tough choices. This is something all elected officials face at some time or another, and it is the caveat for anyone interested in pursuing a political career. Problems ensue when political leaders abdicate their responsibilities—and a case can be made that such abdication is an abuse of the public trust. And when it comes to domestic policy, there is no more important issue than the creation of a government’s annual budget.
For the past three years, there has been a disturbing trend of federal legislators essentially punting their responsibilities—whether it comes to oversight of federal agencies, understanding the constitutional implications of legislation, or, at its most basic, actually reading legislation being voted upon. This seemingly fundamental misunderstanding of the role of legislators in our republic has resulted in an unprecedented outpouring of public ire, from Tea Parties to very public “dressing downs” of congressmen at Town Hall meetings.
Congress should have gotten the message, yet as proof they are deaf to their constituencies, leaders in the House have recently done—or not done—something stunning. Congressional leaders have decided that they are unable to even propose, let alone pass, a federal budget this year.
They have ostensibly done this while they await the decision of President Obama’s “Deficit Commission,” a convenient fiction created to give cowardly Democrats the “cover” necessary for a tax increase following the 2010 elections. It is not their fault, they will argue when they eventually do propose a budget. They were forced to do this because of the recommendations of the commission.
It is an excuse that doesn’t hold water. Congress has the responsibility for the budget, which means that the majority party has the responsibility for getting it prepared and shepherded through the system and passed. It is, in fact, statutorily mandated. But without any consequences, the law has about as much real power as a Las Vegas illusionist: it’s great theatre, but it really doesn’t do what it claims.
The problem is that more and more government entities (including state and local governments) are shifting these powers to unelected commissions. While some might call it mere “punting”—moving the power to some other group of individuals—it’s more accurately a form of political surrender; the functional equivalent of throwing in the towel because, well, the job is just too darn hard, and, in an election cycle, these guys want the title but they don’t want the responsibilities to go along with it.
Spending and size of government are the two top issues going into this fall election, with healthcare reform playing a role in both. Voters not only are fed up with out-of-control spending, they’re genuinely fearful of the potential economic instability runaway spending creates. Controlling that spending is infinitely more complicated when government officials refuse to release a budget detailing just how that money is being spent. It was, interestingly enough, the continued secrecy of national budgets that brought Gorbachev to power as the Soviet Union’s last premier—and opening up those budgets to greater scrutiny one of the hallmarks of his Perestroika program. How ironic, then, that more than two decades later, America is moving in that direction—an entirely wrong direction—when it comes to budgets.
Americans are tired of cowardly politicians. They are tired of being lied to, of having polls say one thing and do quite the opposite. They are hungry for real leaders—leaders who mean what they say and say what they mean. Leaders who are willing to make the tough choices, like Gov. Chris Christie in New Jersey.
Whether it’s trying to shift responsibility or surrendering to the difficulties of governance, either way the result is the same: Americans’ government grows larger without anyone exercising fiscal restraint. Political leaders raise taxes to try and pay for their inability to control spending. Overall we all suffer. Unfortunately, in this case, waiting until January 2011 might just be too late.
  • Entitlements lead to Tax Increases  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • The deficit will reach a stunning $1.5 trillion this year. Even after the recession ends, trillion-dollar deficits will persist, causing the national debt to double by 2020.
  • Excessive spending—not low revenues—accounts for 92% of deficits by 2014 and 100% by 2017.
  • Solutions that “split the difference” between tax hikes and spending cuts doesn’t really address the source of the problem: spending.
  • Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest costs will surge by nearly $2 trillion by 2020. By comparison, the cost of extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts is 85% less at $404 billion.
Tax Increases Are Not the Solution
  • Raising federal income taxes to pay for entitlement spending would require rates to double by 2050 and continue to rise thereafter.
  • Balancing the budget with tax increases alone would increase the tax burden from an average of 18% of the economy to 30% by 2055.
  • Layering on a value added tax (VAT)—a new national sales tax—would create a huge drag on the economy and family budgets.
  • A VAT would cause the price of everything to rise by 15–20%. By 2019, 44 cents of every dollar would go to the federal government, compared to 15 cents today.
Tax Hikes Have Harmful Economic Consequences

  • Tax increases take money from families and businesses, lowering savings and investment and killing jobs. This is especially harmful in the current economic climate.
  • Future generations—who can’t yet vote—will be stuck paying the higher taxes and inheriting lower standards of living that go with it.
  • Any new federal income taxes would be on top of state and local taxes, such as income, property, excise, fuel, and sales taxes.
  • A VAT would become a cash cow for Congress to fund new spending and open the door for continued, stealthy rate increases.
  • Twenty of 29 developed economies with a VAT have increased rates since passage. Denmark leads, having increased their VAT from 15 to 25% since it was enacted.
Congress has been mismanaging taxpayer dollars for decades. Can Washington really be trusted to use new revenues to close the deficit gap, or would they just spend the money on new programs? (heritage.org)

I would say no.
When you can just “misspeak” or “The previous administration…” or “the party of no” or just demonize someone else, why bother.
It is much easier to spend than to be responsible.
After all, it’s not the politician’s money.
It’s yours.
And you’ll always be there for them so why should they worry. :)

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Getting in Touch with Your Inner Banana

I will explain the title in due course.  So bear with me. there’s a bit of a set up needed.
Timothy “Tax Cheat” Geithner:  US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has told the BBC that the world “cannot depend as much on the US as it did in the past”.
He said that other major economies would have to grow more for the global economy to prosper.
We are now declare The United States Not to be a Super Power and a World Leader, so piss off!
Yes, that’s the demoralizing sound of the White House spreading more malaise.
Welcome to Carter Malaise II: The Intentional Sequel.
In other words, don’t expect the engine that has been the driver for the world economy for over a century to keep up the pace.
This fits with President Obama’s conviction that the U.S. is no more extraordinary than any other country.
We’re nothing special. We are just another country of many. Nothing to see here, move along…
Everyone is equal and no one is better than anyone else.

“I believe we must each start by setting out plans for getting our national finances under control,” New UK Prime Minister David Cameron.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was tossed out this week BY HIS OWN LABOR PARTY.
He was replaced by his deputy Julia Gillard, who became the story of the day by becoming Australia’s first woman prime minister.
It was a bad fall for the man dubbed Australia’s Barack Obama.
Like the latter, the youthful Rudd initiated costly health care, home weatherization, entitlement, and global warming pork barrel projects. In the process, he blew out the Australian budget.
When the time came to pay the bill, he effectively committed political suicide by calling for a 40% tax on Aussie mining companies.
Those firms form the backbone of Australia’s dynamic economy, accounting for half of its exports. As Rudd imagined that it was he who kept Australia out of financial crisis, the reality was it was private firms like these that created the value and jobs for Australians.
When news of Rudd’s tax hikes suggested a bid to expropriate companies’ profits, the stock market took a beating.
To pay for his own bloated government programs, Rudd claimed — as his union supporters did — that he only wanted companies to pay their “fair share.” Unions themselves added to the fantasy by claiming these taxes would create jobs. Rudd echoed that, absurdly claiming the tax would be good for the economy.
“It is important to pay emphasis on the independent modeling of Treasury who’s put all the factors together and projects this industry will grow by 6.5% over five to 10 years,” Rudd told incredulous mining executives from BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Fortescue last May as stocks fell. “As a result of (this 40% tax) we will see a better and more dynamic mining industry in the future.” (IBD)


Beginning to sound familiar??
The Full on Socialist German State:
German leader Angela Merkel believes that the massive spending President Obama is advocating is not right for her country to undertake. Merkel, sounding and parroting the familiar refrain of Conservative Republicans, is a proponent, at this juncture, of curtailing spending and sees merit in the German engaging in more savings. President Obama on the hand wants the major economies like that of Germany (ranked number 4) to emulate the profligate spending him and the U.S. lawmakers – at least the Democrats – have contributed to the world money supply. President Obama also wants Germany to curtail its forays into exports and focus it fiscal policies on consumer spending so as to spur economic growth.
Chancellor Merkel may not be operating on her own accord concerning the fiscal policies that she is currently championing like any astute politician, Merkel may be listening to her people’s voice on this matter. Much of the German people did not support the bailout (110 billion Euros) provided for Greece and (750 billion for the European safety net).
This posture by the German people of disagreeing on their version of bailouts mirrors the angst felt by the Tea Partiers in America.
So the Socialists have had enough of full-on socialism, and what does Obama want?
Full on Socialism.
You have to wonder why European Socialists are worried about debt and spending and Obama is not.
Add in Timothy “We are no longer a Super Power” Geithner’s comments and you start to see where I’m going with this.
I hope. :)
German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble has added his voice to the growing discussion about the United States’ recession spending spree.  In a response to President Obama’s call for further international recession spending, Schäuble stated “governments should not become addicted to borrowing as a quick fix to stimulate demand. Deficit spending cannot become a permanent state of affairs.”

As if there were any doubt about the United States’ spending addiction, Heritage budget expert Brian Riedl explains, “the annual federal budget deficit is projected to reach 8.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2020—more than three times the historical average.”
This means that if the US wanted to balance the budget by 2020, one-third of all spending would need to be eliminated or taxes would need to increase by 50 percent.
The Congressional Budget Office has just released its assessment of the administration’s budget outlook. The numbers are shocking. Under the president’s policies the federal deficit will exceed $700bn (€520bn, £467bn) in every year over the next decade. The sea of red ink will more than double the national debt to more than $20,000bn. The upshot is that in 2020, the deficit is projected to be $1,200bn, of which more than $900bn is borrowing to pay interest on previous debt. It is a sorry state of affairs.

So Obama and The Democrats want Financial “reform”.
They want to punish Wall Street!  Those evil, corrupt Capitalist Bastards!
But just like the Health Care “reform” that was more about stealth tactics to eventually kill off the private industry and have you dependent on the government, this too is not about Finances and Wall Street and just another polarized Alinsky tactic.
The upshot: no downgrade in our status as a AAA  Credit nation until interest equals 14 per cent of revenues. (and when it is downgraded the cost of the 13+ Trillion dollar debt goes up!)

Let’s party ‘til 2014 because in the Obama administration budget, D-Day (Downgrade Day) is 2015 when the magic number reaches 14.8 per cent. Moreover, the plan is not merely to flirt with modest deterioration in creditworthiness. In 2020, the ratio reaches 20.1 per cent. The US is on track for a junk-bond bonanza.
Just after 2014 when all the Health Care taxes come into full force and by then private health plans will likely be near extinction.
Coincidence?
I think not.
It’s just another takeover, but in the 2000+ plus throw the frog in cold water and then boil him slowly to death kind of way these Democrats seem to prefer.
Hell, they don’t even READ their own damn bills!
And it’s brought to you by Barney Frank and the retiring Chris Dodd, the guys who created the Mortgage mess!!
So the fox is going to save the chickens in the chicken coop!
Some Highlights
The Power to Unwind:
The FDIC would have the authority to liquidate failing firms while the Treasury Department fronts the money to do so. There would also be a repayment plan so that taxpayers are guaranteed to get the money back (and where does the government get the money??? You’re looking at his computer!).
So if the government “deems” you failing, you get taken over and sold off.
Gee, that can’t be abused at all can it! :(
Financial Stability Oversight Council:
The council would monitor systemic risk across the entire financial system and make recommendations to the Federal Reserve to alleviate that risk. The ten-member council would include the heads of the federal financial agencies.
Corporate America’s Sith Overload. What do you bet they will be political appointees?
Just like the Oil Spill Investigation commission that has a bunch of left wing environmentalists and not one Engineer or Oil Businessperson!
They would never use any of those Chicago tactics on them, now would they… :(
The government also gets to decide what is a “financial” firm. Does GM, which makes loans, fall into that category? How about Wal-Mart, which issues its own credit cards?
In effect, this lets the government seize and dismantle the assets of almost any company — and then force others to pay for it.
Fannie/Freddie:
Republicans biggest beef with the whole bill is that it does nothing to address the problems, and sustainability, of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
For instance: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were in arguably at the heart of the financial crisis, and which have already cost U.S. taxpayers $146 billion (with hundreds of billions more on the way), aren’t addressed in this bill at all.
The major reason for the collapse in the first place gets ignored!
Wonder Why?
Oh, that’s right, it’s government owned, heavily in debt, and guaranteed to be bailed out! (by you of course!)
Just Like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security!
No problems there! :)
No Resolution Fund:
The House wanted to create a $150 billion fund to pay for any future bailouts. The fund would be paid for by the banks. This provision was gutted. Conferees agreed that this could only be created after a massive collapse. This is the fund that Republicans successfully painted as a permanent bailout fund when Democrats in the Senate tried to include a similar, but only $50 billion, fund.
And the Republicans were right. Can you say, slush fund!
Any bank that runs into trouble can still walk up to Uncle Sam’s borrowing window and, hand outstretched, ask for money. And if the bank is politically connected or very large, it will get it.
The bill also creates a new agency inside the Federal Reserve that will have extensive power over consumer lenders. Hold the applause, because likely new limits on checking account fees and interest on credit cards will mean less access to credit, not more.

So you have less credit available, you have new regulations and new taxes, an Oversight committe that can swoop in and shut you down, and Health care cost are going to skyrocket under ObamaCare.
Sounds like a great business climate to me. Sign me up. :)
US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has told the BBC that the world “cannot depend as much on the US as it did in the past”.
Because the Government is going to intentionally, “for your protection” get in the way of business even more now than before.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The economic recovery won’t be catching fire any time soon.
Businesses and governments are likely to reduce spending in the second half of the year. Consumers, who drive most economic growth, aren’t expected to take up the slack.
The Commerce Department said Friday that the economy grew at an annual rate of 2.7 percent in the first quarter, offering its third and final estimate for the period. It was slower than initially thought because consumers spent less and imports rose faster that previously calculated.
Economists anticipate even slower growth ahead as companies bring their stockpiles more in line with sales. Factory output has climbed this year. But it was driven more by businesses replenishing their warehouses after the recession and less by consumer demand.
“The economy is growing, but still at a disappointingly slow pace,” said Zach Pandl, an economist at Nomura Securities. Take away businesses restocking their inventories and “you still have a lukewarm recovery,” he said.
Other factors could hold back growth. Federal government stimulus spending is expected to fade. The European debt crisis could slow U.S. exports and world trade. And state and local governments are likely to rein in spending and raise taxes as they struggle to close budget gaps.
“This is still the weakest and longest economic recovery in U.S. postwar history,” said Paul Dales, U.S. economist with Capital Economics.
High unemployment and tight credit have kept consumers from ramping up their spending as in past recoveries. The housing industry has played a big role after previous recessions. But this time it is slumping and subtracting from economic growth.
Most economists expect the unemployment rate, currently at 9.7 percent, to remain above 9 percent through the end of the year.
The economy has grown for three consecutive quarters after shrinking for four straight during the recession — the longest contraction since World War II.
And Stimulus III is on the way. After all, the previous ones were a roaring success!! So let’s do it again! and again! and again!!
Another part of the bill, and one that’s gotten little attention, makes changes to the amount of capital banks must keep to back up their loans. Banks eventually will be forced to raise more capital, or to reduce their lending. It also gives the government oversight over the $600 trillion derivatives market, without telling us what the rules will be. That, no doubt, will be left to bureaucrats. (IBD)

And they do a bang up job of it, always.

Add in that the Government has taken over Banks, Car Companies,Insurance Companies, and now wants to micromanage the financial sector.
So they want to decide who lives and who dies (Health Care)
Who is employed, by who whom and how that company operates. And if they don’t like it, they will swoop in “for your own protection” and save you from the evil capitalist exploiters.
Unions, especially Government Unions get special perks, deals and exemptions.
They are actively trying to destroy the Oil Industry (the moratorium) so they can take that over because “it’s too big and too important fail”. But if we help it fail, that’s ok.
Medicare and Medicaid  and Social Security are bankrupt. Fannie and Freddie are a bottomless pit.
The Congress wants an Internet “kill switch” for cyber-terrorists (terrorists being Right-wingers according to Homeland Security Secretary Napalitano last year)
Taxes are going up in 2011 by large amounts.
New taxes from ObamaCare start in 2011.
Unemployment may permanently be around 10% some economist are saying if everything remains as is.
50% of the people don’t even pay taxes.
The only sector of jobs that’s growing is the Public, government sector.
They want “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” aka Amnesty. And will not settle for less.
They are going to sue Arizona for wanting to protect itself.
That’s the Government’s job! :)
And if you don’t like the fact that they aren’t and don’t care to, tough bovine fecal matter!
We are the Power. Not You!
So they want to control your Energy, you Job, your Boss, your security, your Medical Care, Your Health, your retirement, and your how you make money.
So what does this all mean?
It means we have a President who willfully and with ideological malice wants to downgrade America to not only  ‘just another country’ but a banana 2nd or third tier one to boot. Nothing special.
What our country needs today is an inspirational leader, one who gets what makes the U.S. unique and who’ll boldly lead the nation out of its slide toward despair as he invites the world to climb with us.
What we have is a Banana Republic Dictator Wannabe.
He wants to throw the American People (the frog) in the cold water and boil them to death slowly.
To take over your life completely.
He want’s to “know whose ass to kick”.
Yours.
So he’s in touch with his Inner Banana (Dictator that is!). :)