Who Does Your Shopping For You?

Imagine if the government decided that it was going to buy all of your
groceries for you. This is to make sure that everyone gets the amount of
food that government decides you need. It's to make sure that nobody does
without, regardless of their income. Such a noble, compassionate idea, and
only the cold-hearted rich could oppose such an idea.
But wait. In this program, just to make sure that everyone got groceries of
equal quality and freshness and nutritional value, the government will pick
out the fruit and vegetables, as well as the brand of cereal and milk, and
the size of the eggs. They'll even decide whether you get jumbo,
farm-raised, free range, etc. In short, as a part of that program, Uncle Sam
will make all of those decisions for you. And if anyone else tries to sell
you groceries, Uncle Sam will use the power of Congress to make sure that
those questionable grocers obey every regulation that can be squeezed into a
two thousand page document. You'll be able to use any grocer that you want,
but rest assured that your grocer won't sell anything that Uncle Sam doesn't
approve, or charge less for your groceries than Uncle Sam charges. If the
private grocer steps out of line, don't worry. Uncle Sam will take care of
them. Oh, and don't be foolish enough try to stay out Uncle Sam's grocery
plan. Because if you don't go with someone's plan, you could actually get
fined more than the price of a years' worth of groceries. Never mind that
Uncle Sam doesn't have the legal right (which by law MUST be specified in
the Constitution) to require you to subscribe to a grocery plan, they're
going to do it anyway.
This is obviously ridiculous. Nobody would allow the government (which
couldn't run a grocery store), to pick out their groceries for them, nor
would they want the government to put smaller, more efficient, less
expensive grocery stores out of business. I mean, when was the last time the
government ran a business better than the private sector?

The Executive Czar

I used to think that 'our friends on the left' just had a different idea of
how best to take our country into the future, and in fact, in the eighties,
I think they did. Oh, they were desperately wrong even then, but we all
lived in the same country, and we all believed that the bedrocks of our
country, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, were
important and inviolable. They meant something, and even though we disagreed
on how best to support and defend the Constitution, we all loved and
respected it. Those were the good old days.
Now we have an administration that treats the Constitution like an old
novel. Quaint, interesting. Certainly worthy of study, (Mister Obama did
study constitutional law), but not really practical. Not relevant. Maybe
they think it's due a reboot. Witness the plague of un-elected, un-confirmed
and un-answerable czars that Mister Obama has visited upon us. They are now
dictating how companies can compensate executives. While I understand that
since the government is in the business of bailing out (swallowing up, or
'Chavezing') private businesses, the case could be made for dictating how
they spend the investor's money. Except that the czar making the decision
was not elected by the taxpayers who actually supplied the money. Nor was he
confirmed by the senate. So we have a crony. A bit of an appointed cossack
who decides how much someone in a now state-run business can be compensated.
I suppose when you put it like that, well, it doesn't necessarily sound
better, but at least it sounds familiar. It almost makes sense. If you're in
the Kremlin, and your last name is Putin. Or Stalin.
But that's just the start. Next, Mister Obama is going to grant himself the
power to break up large companies that he deems are 'too powerful'. See,
that line about governments "deriving their just powers from the consent of
the governed", well, that was okay for the Founding Fathers, (just like the
Second Ammendment might have meant something back then, but not now), but
hey, this is the 21st century. Fortunately, we seem to have a 'progressive'
executive czar who seems to derive his power from the just consent of...
himself.
Mister executive czar Obama may belong to the same esteemed club as Al Gore,
Jimmy Carter and Yasser Arafat, but the difference is that they are either
dead or irrelevant. Mister Obama still has a few years to warp the country
to his 'progressive' model.

Go Ask Harry!

Just a little note. The same 'man' who complained about sweaty tourists stinking up the capital (uh, Harry, you actually work for those people, by the way) was asked about Afghanistan, and angrily and dismissively told the reporter to "Ask Tiger Woods". Mister Reid, your attitude is elitist and ill-mannered, and inconsistent with the behavior of someone who wants to keep his job. But please, don't change on my account. I'm sure you'll do fine in whatever your next job is.

More Derailments on the Hope and Change Express

One of the moments I've been waiting for since Barack Hussein Obama was appointed... I mean, elected, (Well, not really. Ballots were never counted at the Democratic National Convention) has finally arrived, and he did not disappoint. With two wars on, there just had to come a point when the Commander in Chief would have to pretend that he represents the interests of the entire country. He would be forced to give the impression of being tough on the war front to satisfy anyone with a lick of common sense while properly serving the political bosses responsible for getting him appointed... er, elected. And he bobbled it like a master. But then I suppose that something like that is bound to happen when you make decisions beyond your pay grade without a teleprompter. I'm not talking about the 30,000 versus 40,000 debate. That is a decision, that while a mistake in my opinion, could be considered an honest difference in judgement. What I'm talking about is the month that he spent dithering about it, and then the naive, senseless and dangerous time table of 18 months, as well as the vow not to win, but rather to end the war. Tell me, Mister Obama, will we see you posing in front of a "Mission Accomplished" sign in your reelection campaign spots? Or is that timing just a coincidence? Nobody, not even his liberal overseers are willing to publicly endorse the foolish notion of an arbritary time table. Chris Matthews... yes, Chris Matthews even questioned it. Chris Matthews, who seems to get a shiver down his leg everytime Obama enters the conversation. It's almost like someone having the sense and courage to walk out on a deranged, racist preacher rather than sit listening obediantly for twenty years, until election time comes up. This was the moment I knew had to get here, and while I am pleased to see Mister Obama show his incompetence, I fear for us. He has four years to do incalculable damage to the country and the world, and Ronald Reagan is, sadly, no longer available to rescue us.

I, Barack Hussein Obama do solemnly swear or affirm to fundamentally change the United States of America

"I, Barack Hussein Obama do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Just so we have that straight. That's an oath, not above his pay grade, that he took. In public. Well, once in public, and once, correctly, in private. But it is a legally binding oath. So some might start to privately wonder just what he meant when he announced his intention to fundamentally change the United States of America. Preserve. Protect. Defend. Fundamentally change. It would pay to be wary of someone who can say both with a straight face. But it goes deeper than that. If he signs a piece of legislation entitling Congress to do something for which it has no constitutional authority, can he really say that he has preserved, protected and defended the constitution? And if he knowingly takes an action (by signing that legislation) that violates that oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution, could the case be made that he commited perjury, thereby opening himself up for impeachment?

Just saying....

Recession Depression Beaters

I wrote something quite a while ago about recession depression beaters.
Making up simple, free games at home. Like making a basketball hoop out of a
metal clothes hanger. Well, with my wife's help, I've created a card for us
to play. Pretty simple rules, mainly resulting in having to practice basic
math skills, preferably in your head. And again, it's simple and free.

If anyone reading this is curious, I'd be happy to pass on details. But I'd
also like to invite you to post, through the 'comment' feature, your own
recession depression beaters.

Highway Robbery

I was in the grocery store the other day when I saw a lady (and I use the
term loosely) looking at a package of hotdogs that was like $1.49 or
something like that. Now take note that this lady shows up to buy things
only in the first week of the month, using her "EBT" food stamp card. She
saw the price, tossed it back in the wrong place, and said, derisively,
"Highway robbery." And I'm thinking, "No, highway robbery is what you live
on from the first of the month... to the first of the month." I didn't say
it, because I would suddenly be a racist (to finish painting the picture),
and probably get shot and/or arrested. The same person who on the first of
the month buys only T-bone steaks and soda and potato chips, and by the last
of the month is shoplifting. All the while tapping away on her i-phone.
Lady, buy some ground beef and canned vegetables, and kool aid. Sell your
i-phone. And if you think grocery prices are too high, stop stealing
groceries. Stop taking perishable items from their section and dropping them
somewhere else. Every time the store loses a product that they paid for
because of your thoughtlessness, they lose money. When they lose too much
money they're forced to raise prices. And then someone either steals it or
destroys it. What you and people like you are doing is highway robbery.

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness: Not Your Typical Conservative Christian Opinion on Gay Marriage

I live in a state where civil unions have recently been legalized, and it's
turned my thoughts toward the subject of gay marriage. I have gay friends
who live in other countries, married and committed and very happy. For a
time, I had an internal debate, or maybe just a denial. I am a conservative,
as is obvious from my other rants. I have, for as long as the question
existed, sided against gay marriage. Not because I didn't want gays to have
the same rights, but because I honestly felt that marriage, as an
institution, was defined as being between a man and a woman. I thought it
was sort of like a man wanting to use the ladies room. Why not use your own?
I thought that civil unions should be the gay marriage. I didn't really get
that I was doing a 'separate but equal' thing. So what changed my mind?
Strangely enough, getting to know God changed my mind. And it's not that I
used to think it was bad and now I think it's good. I've never thought it
was bad, just unnecessary. But it isn't about necessary or unnecessary. It's
about allowing a group of people to do something (that really threatens
nobody) that makes them feel happy and fulfilled in their life. I mean, the
declaration of independence talks about all people being endowed by their
creator with certain inalienable rights, amongst them the right to life,
liberty, and the pursuit if happiness. It doesn't specify heterosexual
people, nor does it, for that matter, require that those people believe that
their creator exists. If someone has a right, endowed by another, then who
are we to regulate or refuse that right? The argument that is routinely
raised against it from a biblical sense is that it is a sin. Well, last time
I checked, it was God's business to pass judgement on sinners. Now, I
haven't read the whole Bible, so maybe I don't know all I need to know. But
I do know that God didn't put me here to whack people with lightning bolts.
If He feels the need to, He will. I have enough to worry about with my own
scorecard. I'm not trying to make light of this, honestly. I just don't
think God needs me to point out everything to Him. And whether or not my
neighbor might be doing something that annoys God, well, that's between my
neighbor and God. I do know that my gay friend loves her wife, and I just
don't see that being a bad thing.
The other argument is that somehow gay marriage is going to destroy the
fabric of the country. Tell me please, how two people being married and
having a family is going to destroy the country. They won't stop straight
people from doing the same, they won't stop kids from dreaming, or
fullfilling those dreams. They might like different things, they may do
things that you find distasteful, but as long as they work and live honestly
and don't invade people's privacy, then they do no more harm to the country
than anyone else. It is popular these days among conservatives to look to
the Founding Fathers for inspiration. Well, the Founding Fathers were
concerned with throwing off oppressive governments and letting people pursue
their happiness without a despot deciding who was entitled to those God
given rights. So maybe they would have agreed with me.

Words From The Gipper

Quoted from The Patriot Post Monday Brief

September 14, 2009
Vol. 09 No. 37

"We warned of things to come, of the danger inherent in unwarranted government involvement in things not its proper province. What we warned against has come to pass. And today more than two-thirds of our citizens are telling us, and each other, that social engineering by the federal government has failed. The Great Society is great only in power, in size and in cost. And so are the problems it set out to solve. Freedom has been diminished and we stand on the brink of economic ruin. Our task now is not to sell a philosophy, but to make the majority of Americans, who already share that philosophy, see that modern conservatism offers them a political home. We are not a cult, we are members of a majority. Let's act and talk like it. The job is ours and the job must be done. If not by us, who? If not now, when? Our party must be the party of the individual. It must not sell out the individual to cater to the group. No greater challenge faces our society today than ensuring that each one of us can maintain his dignity and his identity in an increasingly complex, centralized society. Extreme taxation, excessive controls, oppressive government competition with business, galloping inflation, frustrated minorities and forgotten Americans are not the products of free enterprise. They are the residue of centralized bureaucracy, of government by a self-anointed elite. Our party must be based on the kind of leadership that grows and takes its strength from the people." --Ronald Reagan

 

 

House Abukoff: Services, Affordable Books and Curios, and Opinions http://houseabukoff.blogspot.com
The Place for Affordable Books (hard to find and others), DVD's, and General Treasures http://abukoffbooksandcurios.blogspot.com
The Internet's Only Reliable Blog http://kapactsrant.blogspot.com
Not Just a Game, It's a Star Trek Experience http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

KrIstaK Fleet Emblem

This is my KrIstak Fleet Emblem....

 

 

 

Kapact

"flag@whitehouse.gov"

I'm actually happy to see the fights and arguments breaking out all over the country about the healthcare bill. Recall that during the (most recent) Bush administration, our liberal friends were quick to remind us of the importance and inherent patriotism of dissent. When we see people shouting at each other in a town hall meeting, or confronting a suddenly, and for the first time in his life, silenced senator, what we see is discussion rather than indoctrination. The Obama administration and its congressional allies have already forced an historically expensive spending bill on us, intentionally not allowing time to even read it. They would have happily done it again if the Republican minority hadn't stood up and slowed the liberal rubber stamp machine of Reid/Pelosi. Now they are facing questions and challenges from the people who will pay the bills and cast the votes.

I also find it quite ironic that the same people who were insisting that we slow down and talk while the Bush administration was going its own way in Iraq now suddenly tell us that there isn't time, if we wait too long we're doomed, don't read it, just sign it. Well, I say what a growing number of voting Americans say: How are you going to pay for it? Or better yet, how am I going to pay for it? Even worse than the "Don't take the time to read this thing that you're great grandchildren will be paying for" bill is the idea that the White House wants you to listen and report... not on potential terrorists, as that might violate their civil rights, but your email friend who passes something on to you that wasn't reported by the mainstream media, or by a coworker who heard Glenn Beck talk about this thing that we're supposed to pay for somehow without reading through. Sound paranoid? This is from Linda Douglass, the communications director for the White House's Health Reform Office: "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for some help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

There's a little thing called the first ammendment, Mister Obama and Miss Douglas. It allows us to disagree and dissent and argue and even question our government without fear of being regulated by government czars. It might sound fishy, but it's there, and you can't change it. And if that's too vague and old-fashioned for this 'progressive' White House, there's this: "According to 5 U.S.C. § 552a, United States agencies, including the Executive Office of the President, shall 'maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Ammendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to an authorized law enforcement agency."

For the moment, sir, unless and until you manage to change it, even that law applies to you.

Real Strength

I used to think that in order to be strong I had to be cool and tough and cynical. I'd heard about 'the meek shall inherit the earth', but I thought that it was more an empty promise than anything else. I thought that the strong and the rich and the cynical would really inherit the earth. Ah, but I was wrong. At least in a way. The strong really will inherit the earth, but the strong aren't the people with the biggest sticks. Real strength doesn't come in a weapons locker or a gym, or a smart comment, for that matter, and meek doesn't mean you let everyone push you around.

 

Meek, in this sense means humble. Deeds rather than words. A person who feels the need to blow their own trumpet and brag about everything they do, or even shout others down because they think that's the only way they can make a point is not really strong. That person is really afraid that what they have to offer isn't good enough to stand on its own. Real strength means working hard or doing the right thing even when it isn't easy. It means showing people what you can do rather than padding your resume. People who can do that really will inherit the earth.

Fear and Manipulation From the Left

I talked last time (a long, long time ago) about fear and manipulation from the right, which in fact does nothing to promote a good, honest conservative movement. Now I'll touch on the same from the left. This goes back quite a ways, but I'll try to focus on a few notable and recent instances,

 

Watching recent left-sponsored ads selling the socialized health-care package, I see that we are being told how bad things will be if we don't hand over control of yet another aspect of our lives to the government. Rather than saying what good it will do, the ad brings forth actors who will suffer this or that tragic fate. Rather than selling it (which in fact they don't have to... they own two out of three branches of government and control the purse strings) with positive arguments and benefits, they have to use fear. We know what is best for you. We will spend the money from that shadowy evil 'rich' to save you from the right. Oh, and be afraid of the 'rich'. Don't think about the fact that they employ us and buy big ticket items that we build in order to bring a paycheck home. They are also people who take a chance opening businesses that can get people off of unemployement. But the left doesn't want you to think about that. They need you to fear the 'rich' because otherwise their agenda would be exposed. And what is that agenda? The power of the state over the individual. I could use some labels here, like communism or fascism, but I'd rather just talk about them and let you draw your own conclusions. Welfare, which is a program of the left, is ostensibly a safety net, but has become a way for the state to control what the individual has and can do. They actually encourage you to stop working, stop creating wealth, stop defining your goals and aspirations. Stop trying to improve yourself. Stop trying to become independent. The idea that our rights and powers as individual come from the state, and that the state is the only entity wise enough to hand out our allowances... to distribute the wealth, as it were, runs contrary to everything that our country was founded on. But really, their ads will never speak in such clear language. They never publicly admit these things, for obvious reasons, but they never really counter them either. No, they cannot use facts and truth to sell their agenda, so they use fear and manipulation.

Be Prepared For Life's Hummingbirds

Taking a break from the rant idea for just a second. I am a pretty spiritual person. I believe in my Lord and Savior, and I know that He believes in me. But faith is a pretty personal thing, and I'm not going to try to tell anyone else how or what they should believe. This doesn't have to have anything to do with that.

The other day, I was walking to work, thinking about my dreams and goals and knowing that if I live my life as the best person I can and work hard and pursue my dreams and prepare for their fullfillment (in fact, I thank God for granting them before I see them because I know He will), then they'll happen. God doesn't give you gifts that he doesn't intend for you to use. Just think of the bit from the first Superman movie. Pa Kent tells Clark that he was here for a reason, and he didn't think it was for kicking field goals. My gifts are great, I love 'em, and I love the Lord for giving them to me. Anyway, I'm walking down the road thinking about this, and from out of nowhere, a hummingbird appears, hovers about six feet from me, looking straight at me, and then shoots away.
Okay, now it'd be easy to say it was just a hummingbird. The weather is right for hummingbirds. No big deal. Ah, but no. I don't believe in accidents. I believe in gifts. I choose to believe that the hummingbird was a smile from the Lord. It was a message. I have accepted the Lord as my savior, and as a great friend who never gives up on me. So I also accept the fact that He is prepared to reach down and hand me gifts once in a while.
So am I telling you to do the same thing? No. As I said, faith is a personal thing. Believe as you choose. I would just respectfully suggest that you sometimes accept good things put in your path not as accidents, but as gifts. Even if they're just pretty things that brighten your day for a second. I happen to believe that if you are prepared to do that, you'll find that they become more and more commonplace. Be prepared for life's hummingbirds.

Fear and Manipulation Part One

It's been a long time since I've written a rant, due to various and sundry RL issues. Not that there hasn't been plenty to rant about. But I also think that there are plenty of angry bloggers on both side of the great partisan schism that has really paralyzed our country. I think I've got a good voice and a fairly balanced viewpoint, but I also have to question the value of any single angry rant. So I'll talk not specifically about the wrongs perpetrated by all of our politicians (because we all know about them anyway) from a partisan standpoint, but hopefully from a non-partisan point of view. I mean, as much as I think we were safer when George W Bush left office than when he came in, there is really no question that he was ineffectual domestically. There are others more responsible for our current economic mess than he, but he played a part.

I'd actually like to talk about the role that fear plays in how politicians manipulate us. Politicians have since the dawn of time used fear to control their subjects, and our government today is no change. The extreme right makes us fear things like gay marriage and alternate lifestyles, really things that we may think is wrong, but don't in fact threaten the country. I believe myself that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I don't feel threatened by people who feel otherwise, and I don't think that the government needs to weigh in on the subject. I also don't like the idea of abortion, unless in case of rape or if the life of the mother is threatened, and I don't want my tax dollars going to fund abortions. But I also don't care for the government weighing in on the matter with its clumsy hands. It's a complex issue, for sure, because there is no question that a fetus is alive. It has a heartbeat, it moves and it kicks. If that is the case, then abortion, killing it, is murder. So maybe the debate we need to have and resolve is not whether or not women should have the right to choose, but whether or not they should have the right to choose to murder the lifeform that they helped to create. Maybe the debate should be at what point the fetus is entitled to protection under the law. There are serious rights and wrongs there, and again, the issue is not simple. A person's right to choose is vital to a free nation, and any restriction of that right needs to be undertaken only after the most careful deliberation. On the other hand, at what point is abortion murder? It is a fiendishly complicated issue, but it is also a weapon used by extreme far right politicians to manipulate the public. We must fear, and therefore put a stop to these evil people who are destroying the moral fibre of the country.

The far right, however, is not alone in using fear to manipulate the public. I'll talk about that next time.




Repeating From Last Time:


The housing meltdown which is at the heart of our crisis started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. No question that both sides ignored the problem but got rich off the over-inflated bubble, but it started under Bill Clinton. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:


From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."


From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)


Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)


YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)


YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)


YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)


Now I'll repeat what I said last week. First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.

O.B.A.M.A. (Oh Boy Another Mistake A$S&\#@)

I'm finding it harder and harder to support our President, and I'm really trying. Despite the good that George W Bush tried to do, nobody can really say that he left the country in better shape after eight years in office. Safer, yes, though it cost thousands of lives and billions of dollars. But he is no more a fiscal conservative than Hillary is. Just as you can't tax your way to prosperity, you also can't spend your way there. And Bush spent irresponsibly. Compassionate Conservativism, as Bush tried it, was just fiscal liberalism. Real conservativism, which is compassionate by definition, knows that the government that does least is the government that does best. Every time government tries to improve something by getting its big, clumsy, greedy hands into it, it just makes a mess. And yet, compared to Obama, George W was a dream. Obama embarrasses us at home and abroad in front of foreign leaders. (If you don't believe that, google Obama and Churchill bust, Obama and HMS Resolute, Obama and speaking Austrian, and Obama bowing to Saudi King). Not only that, but he has done wise things like refusing to let some banks pay back stimulus money. No kidding. He says he has no interest in the government running private businesses until a business tries to get out from under the Obama boot. Several banks have tried to pay money back to the government, but the government has refused. Kind of like when a mob 'invests' a little cash into a small mom and pop store as a way of taking it over. The main difference is that the mob isn't taxpayer funded and supposed to be representing mom and pop. And of course, the mob would be more honest. Mr. Obama talks a very good game when he has a teleprompter, but I'm predicting that he's nothing but Jimmy Carter with a socialist bent. I just hope that we're blessed with another Reagan to pick up the pieces in four years.

Repeating From Last Week:

The housing meltdown which is at the heart of our crisis started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. No question that both sides ignored the problem but got rich off the over-inflated bubble, but it started under Bill Clinton. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:


From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."


From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)


Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)


YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)


YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)


YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)


Now I'll repeat what I said last week. First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.






Fleet Action. Head-To-Head Bare Knuckles Naval Combat. Boarding Party Action. Solid Interactive Storytelling Like No Commercial Game Can Offer. How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
The Only Rebel Underground Star Trek PBEMMMORPG

What Mr Obama's Gift Will Cost You

Like most people, I've found a little extra money in my paycheck this week, thanks to Mister Obama. Well, not really. See, the extra cash isn't there because the fat cats in DC decided that they didn't need to get rich for creating and then exploiting crises. And don't try to pretend that they don't exploit crises. Hillary herself said "Don't let a good crisis go to waste." No, this extra cash in my paycheck actually comes from..... me! And you. And every other taxpayer. The Federal government doesn't have any money that we don't give it. So before you fall down on your knees and thank Mister Obama for giving you money, stop. He just did what liberals have been telling us for years is a bad idea. He's letting us keep more of our money. But don't think that he's changed into a conservative. He's just taking money from one hand and putting it in another. He's spending your money to give it to you. By "taxing the rich" he is taking money from corporations, just like the one that issued the check that had the tax cut on it. The same one that will have to raise its prices and/or lay people off and/or cut hours to make up the difference. So when you pump your fist in the air and chant "OBAMA!" like a true believer, think about what that is going to cost you. And hope and pray that it doesn't push your groceries out of your price range, or cost you the hours you need to survive on, or even your job.

And don't cry about giving Obama a chance. The two years that Obama spent in Congress were used to help create this problem and to run for President. They were used to condone the disposal of 'failed abortions' (live babies thrown in the garbage in Chicago hospitals), and to take in more money from unions and lobbyists than most other legislators have in a lifetime of exploiting crises. He spent the time voting 'present' and deciding which issues were above his paygrade. He's had plenty of time to fix the problem.



Repeating From Last Week:


The housing meltdown which is at the heart of our crisis started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. No question that both sides ignored the problem but got rich off the over-inflated bubble, but it started under Bill Clinton. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:


From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."


From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)


Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)


YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)


YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)


YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)


Now I'll repeat what I said last week. First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.






Fleet Action. Head-To-Head Bare Knuckles Naval Combat. Boarding Party Action. Solid Interactive Storytelling Like No Commercial Game Can Offer. How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
The Only Rebel Underground Star Trek PBEMMMORPG

Which Weekly "News" Magazine Wiped Israel Off the Map?

I've always had a pretty low opinion of the weekly "news" magazines, and Newsweek has just helped to keep that opinion low. In its recent issue telling us that Radical Islam is a fact of life that we have to learn to live with, they featured a world map online that labeled the country of Israel as "Palestinian Territory". After the appropriate uproar from everyone except for the mainstream liberal propamedia (propaganda media), Newsweek quietly changed it. No apology, no explanation, no comment. Just a quick rewrite. Now, I have to assume that Newsweek actually knows that the state of Israel exists, and where it is, so the only alternative is that part of Newsweek's plan to 'learn to live with Radical Islam" is remove Israel from the map. Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe despite the evidence presented by the picture, the editorial position of Newsweek magazine isn't anti-semitic. I don't see how, but it could be. Oh, and if you believe that the 9/11 attack was an act of war by Radical Islam, then Newsweek has not only declared that we've lost the war, they could be seen as giving aid and comfort to the enemy by means of propaganda.

Here's another foodstamp horror story. Just a brief one really, that needs no explanation. Two girls, maybe twenty years old, picking out steak, soda, and potato chips to buy with their EBT foodstamp card while chatting on their I-Phone. As far as I know, the I-Phone costs about a hundred dollars a month to run. So please, sell your fancy phone and stop stealing my tax dollars.

Repeating From Last Week:

The housing meltdown which is at the heart of our crisis started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. No question that both sides ignored the problem but got rich off the over-inflated bubble, but it started under Bill Clinton. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:

From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."

From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)

Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)

YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)

YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)

YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)

Now I'll repeat what I said last week. First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.

Fleet Action. Head-To-Head Bare Knuckles Naval Combat. Boarding Party Action. Solid Interactive Storytelling Like No Commercial Game Can Offer. How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
The Only Rebel Underground Star Trek PBEMMMORPG

If Bush Had Done It... Dissing the British

There are things that our new president is doing that definitely fall under the 'if-Bush-had-done-it' category that somehow the liberal media somehow manages to miss. Did you know, for example, that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown recently visited the Obamas? Yes, he did. First off, Obama decides that there would be no British flags anywhere in the White House when they met. Okay. Not an outright insult, but certainly a lack of diplomacy. But it gets worse. As a gift,  He was kind enough to bring with an amazing gift, a pen made from wood from the HMS Resolute. I'll tell you about the HMS Resolute. The Resolute was one of their warships in the 1850's, and it went with another ship into the Arctic Circle. Both ships got stuck in the ice. The other ship made it out, but the Resolute didn't. The Captain of the Resolute ordered his crew to board the other ship to get home. When he got home, he was court-martialed for abandoning his ship. When the ice finally started to break up, America went up and pulled the Resolute out of the ice and sailed it to England. The point was that we were trying to make a gesture of reconciliation with England after the Revolution and the War of 1812. It was a way of showing that we were brothers. This is a big thing. A historic thing. So when the Resolute was decommissioned, Queen Elizabeth decided to have two desks made from the wood of the ship. One was for her, and the other she gave to the President. This, again, is really significant. It is a symbol of the close relationship we share. And now, Gordon Brown comes over and gives Barack Obama a pen made from the wood of the HMS Resolute. So what does our President give him in return? He gives him a basket... seriously, a basket filled with 25 DVD's of American movies. Rather than something special that says something about the close and special relationship between this country and its greatest ally, Obama gives Gordon Brown 25 DVD's that, unless Brown has a multizone DVD player, he won't be able to play anyway. It's cheap and low-class. Ah, but we're not finished.

Mrs. Brown has brought children's clothing from the best designer in England for the kids, and Michelle goes downstairs and grabs a couple of boxes of Marine One helicopter models and hands them to Mrs. Brown, saying, "Here, this is for you." Is this hatred for England? Could be. Michelle Obama wrote in a term paper that England was just a linchpin for slavery. This, remember, is our greatest, most stalwart ally. But that still is not the worst. Here's the worst.

Something else that England has done in two's. There are two famous busts of Winston Churchill. One was given to the President after 9/11 as a way of saying that they stand with us. So what does Obama do with this gift? When Gordon Brown visits, Obama puts the bust in a box and tells Brown we don't want it anymore. Brown says, "No, Mr President, this wasn't a loan, it was a gift. If you don't want it in the White House, put it in a musuem. Mister Obama just says "No, we don't want it anymore." I'd say that we aren't yet into the 'rebuilding our image abroad' phase, because this was an embarrassment that the British media and people went nuts over, but Brian Williams et al just seemed to have missed. If it Bush had done it....

Repeating From Last Week:

The housing meltdown which is at the heart of our crisis started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. No question that both sides ignored the problem but got rich off the over-inflated bubble, but it started under Bill Clinton. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:

From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."

From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)

Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)

YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)

YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)

YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)

Now I'll repeat what I said last week. First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.




Fleet Action. Head-To-Head Bare Knuckles Naval Combat. Boarding Party Action. Solid Interactive Storytelling Like No Commercial Game Can Offer. How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
The Only Rebel Underground Star Trek PBEMMMORPG

Headlines From The Edge: Feb 28 2009

Obama Proposes Starfleet as Part of Stimulus

President Barack Obama revealed an ambitious part of his stimulus plan today, ordering the construction of twelve Constitution Class starships. "This is just the sort of bold thinking we need to take us into the next several centuries," he said. "And don't worry about the price tag. You've seen Star Trek. By the time our Starfleet is finished, money won't exist anyway. It's a win-win proposition. And this should put an end to the talk about me changing the constitution. C'mon. They're called 'Constitution Class' for a reason."

Increase in Alien Visitors Due to Recession

Alien Ambassador #@")€¥123007 spoke before a joint session of Congress today, making the case for alien university students. He explained that the world-wide recession is a boon for students in his home galaxy. He said, through an interpreter, that students would typically have trouble abducting subjects for their research projects, but with times so tough on Earth, a few dollars or a can of pork and beans have volunteers lining up for miles. The ambassador added that any attempt to ease the recession could set the study of humans back by at least fifty years.

Man Literally Laughs All the Way to the Bank

A man who refused to identify himself left his small house in Americus, Georgia and walked to a local Bank of America branch, literally laughing all the way to the bank. Witnesses said that he was laughing when he stepped out of his house, and kept laughing as he walked down the sidewalk. He safely crossed three intersections and then a full city block, and was still laughing when he walked into the bank. There was noone walking with him, and the local CTU (Counter-Terrorism Unit) office reported that he was not using a cellphone or mobile device of any kind. Whether he is actually off his rocker, or might be the bank CEO is still a matter of speculation.



How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Hope You Enjoy Your Change

I saw a curious thing at the grocery store the other day, and it really just speaks to something I see often and try not to be bothered by. That's a person using their EBT card at the store (that's what they get so they can feel better about using foodstamps, and so its harder to trade them for booze and cigarettes), proudly wearing an Obama t-shirtt. People can have their opinions and beliefs. I don't care. But it is just so perfectly summed up when they get their expensive deli meat, swiss cheese, french fries, chips, and soda on my tax dollar, and are then reminded that they can't use it for the Red Bull. Well, sorry, Obama supporter. Hope he can change that for you. On my tax dollar. I can't afford expensive deli meat, swiss cheese, french fries, chips, and soda, because I'm busy paying for yours. Enjoy.

Repeating From Last Week:

The housing meltdown which is at the heart of our crisis started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. No question that both sides ignored the problem but got rich off the over-inflated bubble, but it started under Bill Clinton. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:

From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."

From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)

Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)

YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)

YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)

YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)

Now I'll repeat what I said last week. First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.




How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

We Know What's Best, Even When We're Wrong

I'm talking this week about the wisdom of government making snap decisions, the most glaring and life-changing of which is the trillion-dollar rushed-through-congress, unexamined, unstudied, don't-read-it-just-sign-it bailout bill. There is no question that we need jobs, and creating them by fixing our infrastructure seems like a good idea. There is also no question that we still need a middle-class tax break. But being a student of American history, I have to say that I have trouble finding an instance where a hastily conceived and rammed-down-our-throats massive government program ever really provided a sustainable solution to an entrenched and serious problem. Here's a good example of liberal reporting on one such knee-jerk, over-the-top government solution to a "problem", taken from the New York Times website.

By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: September 30, 1999

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.

Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.

In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent.

Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.

In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.

The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

While I was never a fan of Bill Clinton, I will admit to appreciating the fact that he studies relentlessly. He does his homework. While he has the morals of an alley cat, he is without a doubt a very clever, hard-working person. He has a big, usually out-of-control mouth, but he also has a high IQ. But he blew it big that time. His short-sighted pandering to low-income voters (in an attempt, no doubt, to buy the election for Al Gore), stuffed this country but good, and now Obama has sold us a trillion dollar bottle of snake oil/magic elixir to cure the problem that Bush is supposed to have caused. Bush sure as heck let it grow, but Clinton started it.

It's the same kind of shoved-down-our-throats solution to the on-again, off-again, depends-on-who-you-ask issue of climate change. And you note we don't hear 'global warming' nearly as much, since 2008 was globally the coolest year in more than a decade. No, it's 'climate change' now. Just like 'liberal' is now 'progressive'. Folks, call it what you want, a cr@p sandwich by any other name would smell as bad. I even heard local meteorologist Kevin Janison say that global warming didn't actually refer to the temperature, but to weather instabilitty. I guess that depends on what the meaning of the word "warming" is. Come on Kevin, get with the times. It isn't global warming, it's climate change. I'll just say something about meteorologists. Discounting what I think about Weather Channel Chief Stormtrooper Heidi Cullen, I find it interesting that these supposed experts think nothing of repeatedly getting it wrong on a daily basis, explaining that it's just a forecast, and things can always change. But they still call themselves experts and think that they can tell us what's going to happen thirty years from now. Forgive me Heidi and Kevin, but if you can't say what's going to happen three days from now, how can you say with authority what will happen a year from now, much less thirty years from now. I don't have a problem with cleaning the air and/or getting off of fossil fuels. We need to do both. I don't even mind an honest debate on climate change. What I have a problem with is, again, a decision made by a few elite liberal stormtroopers who use their jackboots to crush the necks of anyone who dares to debate the issue. Not even disagree, but just debate. Dissent is healthy, even when liberals are making the decision.

Mark my words, we will be told in the next four years that questioning the decrees of the Obama administration is unpatriotic. Big Brother just got bigger. They're from the government and they're here to help. And may God have mercy on your soul.


Now here are my weekly reminders of who got us in our current mess:


The housing meltdown which is at the heart of our crisis started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. No question that both sides ignored the problem but got rich off the over-inflated bubble, but it started under Bill Clinton. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:

From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."

From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)

Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)

YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)

YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)

YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)

And my weekly comments on P'resident Obama:

First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.




How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Read The Fine Print

It's pretty easy to take shots at crooked politicians not paying taxes, with no penalty for most but a minor dip in poll ratings. But that's because they make it easy. How in the heck can you gang of thugs so easily spend tax dollars on huge ideas that you hope will work but refuse to pay your fair share. Here's an idea. Gamble your own money on this idea and see how it works before you waste mine. Forgive me, but your record so far doesn't inspire any confidence. And I'll tell you something else. It wasn't long ago when the liberals were reminding us that dissent and discussion are healthy. Now, according to them, we don't have time to question or examine a trillion dollars being spent in the hopes that this idea will work. Anytime a salesman tells you that you don't have time to think about buying something, that's when you should find the time. This problem has been brewing since Bill Clinton was president. It can wait another week or two while WE THE PEOPLE read the fine print.

Here's another reason to love our politicians. You all see these heroes insisting that execs accepting taxpayer dollars now be subject to salary caps. Well here's a thought. How about you taking a salary cap? I know that we couldn't live without you, and it just tortures you to have to vote yourselves endless unjustified raises, but how about some of that responsibility and transparency that you're demanding from people taking taxpayer dollars? I mean, it's just that, well, you accept taxpayer dollars, don't you? Here's a thought. How about merit pay for politicians? If your next paycheck depended on your results, how do you think you would do? Would you have to worry about your financial future like most people in this country do?

I watched the president's first press conference with interest. I know that President Obama does poorly when he's unscripted. This didn't seem to be any different. There seemed to be nothing but softball questions that the president already magically had prepared five-minute speeches for. Hardly surprising. But the memorable moment, the payoff for the hour was Helen Thomas (who has outstayed her welcome and outlived her legitimacy by at least a decade) referring to the Taliban and Al Qeada as 'so-called terrorists'. Kind of like saying that Hitler was a so-called killer.

I'll finish this off with a reminder of where this problem started:

This problem started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:

From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."

From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)

Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)

YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)

YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)

YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)


Now I'll repeat what I said last week. First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.


How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Three Rants and a Note About Our President

I have three subjects to talk about, with a note at the end about our new President and the economic crisis he has pledged to solve.

I was fascinated to watch unrepentant crook and Chicago politics posterboy Rod Blagojevich 'make his case' without actually making a case. He was all defiant righteous anger and indignation, telling us just how much he's done for the state, and how the people elected him twice. And even having the nerve to warn the people of the dangers of a legislature removing a governor without a trial. Well, mister blagojevich, your actions have in every case spoken louder than your words. You have shown the danger of government not caring about the wishes of the people. You demonstrated a contempt for the rule of law with your own taped words, interspersed with more vulgarity than HBO spouts on a Saturday night, talking about how much this power is worth, and how much you want for it, and what you think of those not willing to pay your price. You need to understand, mister blagojevich, that public office is not a prize, it's a responsibility. A duty. An honor. You don't buy or sell or win your office, you are granted stewardship over it, and the condition in which you leave it says a great deal about you. You have managed to embarrass, with the depth of your graft and arrogance, a criminal machine that puts the mafia to shame. You managed to make a den of criminals look angelic by comparison.

I'm frightened. Truly I am. President Obama signed into law good legislation designed to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work. That is good and just and way overdue. So, yes, I'm frightened that Obama has done something else that I agree with. However, I must take slight exception to remarks that he made during the accompanying photo-op. He said that he doesn't want to limit his daughters' dreams. On the surface, that is a good, sensible, honorable thought. But it doesn't bear close examination. Because just as Joe the Plumber is limited in his dreams of small business ownership, so must the Obama girls if they ever try the same thing. In a way, mister obama, we're all your children. You took an oath to make sure that none of our dreams are limited. So remember that as you are redistributing our success.

I saw a very sad story on the news the other day, about a 93 year old World War Two veteran dying in his Michigan home during a winter storm because the power company had put a power limiter on his house. He was said to be a thousand dollars behind on his power bill. Well, I'll just say that the power company is not in business to lose money. Bills are serious things, and have to be paid. Let's be honest. The bill didn't get that big overnight. (You'd have to be Al Gore to use that much electricity in a month). I'm not dishonoring this hero. I''m telling the truth, and the truth never dishonored anyone. At the same time, sometimes numbers and bottomline must give way to compassion, and according to the story, nobody took the time to explain to him how the power limiter worked So both parties share responsibility here. But there is more responsibility to go around. That is, and most glaringly to the family that is suddenly so concerned with this deceased hero. Where were you before he died? Where were the phone calls to check on him during the winter storm that killed him? I don't doubt the complicity of the power company that cared more about money than people, and I don't doubt that his family loved him and cared about him. But where were you before he died? According to reports he had enough money to pay his bill, and he may have had dementia. So tell me, indignant family, did you know he had dementia? If so, again, where were you before he died? How long had it been since you checked on him? I'm not trying to be cruel here. I know that good, caring, honorable people make mistakes. I'm not saying it's your fault. I'm just saying that people are often better at appointing blame than taking responsibility. We're all guilty of that. Nobody's perfect. But it's also true that we'll never improve before we acknowledge that.

I'm going to add something here about President Obama and our  economy, and I plan on repeating this in every rant. First and foremost, this economic crisis has roots in the Clinton administration. Clinton ordered that home loans be given to families that could not pay them. Granted, Bush should have seen the meltdown coming, but it's a time bomb that Bill Clinton planted under the house. It's up to President Obama to set the tone and the course to rebuild our house. We all share responsibility for doing the hard work, but the President is the boss. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And speaking of the Oval Office, I have to admit that I have liked a fair amount of what I've seen of our new President. Words are cheap, and politicians are good at saying things people want to hear. At the same time, we need this presidency to be successful, and he can't succeed without our support. So while I'll be quick to point out everything that I see him do wrong, I'll also try my hardest to point out everything that I see him do right. I saw him talking to Matt Lauer just before the Superbowl, and he looked, unlike candidate Obama, like a man with humor and compassion and an appreciation for the humanity of the people that make up this country. He was funny and self-deprecating and seemingly unscripted. That man will have my support for as long as he occupies the White House. When he stops being that man, I'll stop supporting him.


How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Mister Obama's First Week

I don't want to sound like I'm beating up on Mister Obama just barely a week into his administration, and in fact I cautiously agree with more than one decision he's made. The country is nowhere near ready for the switch to digital television. Guantanamo needs to be closed as a prison facility, but we need a real credible plan for what to do with the inmates. We need to remember that the inmates are there because they deserve to be there. They aren't innocent, nor are they victims. They are unapologetic terrorists. Mister Obama is also right to reach out to Republicans, if in fact he's not lying about that. It might cost him liberal friends, but he's supposed to represent the whole country. If he wants the whole country to support him, he's going to have to support them. I don't like Mister Obama, and I don't trust him. I think he's a crook and a marxist. But he is our President, and we need him to be a strong one. We can't afford another weak President. Now for the negative column. Crook. Liar. Marxist. Racist. (Remember the whole 'they'll try to make you afraid of me because of the way I look' thing?) Elitist. (Remember the whole 'bitterly clinging to guns and religion' thing?) The treasury secretary who evades taxes and has a liberal immigration policy. Joe Biden. William Ayers. Jeremiah Wright. (I know those last two are in the past, but it shows his poor judgement) The $600 million to 'prepare' the country for socialized medicine, er, um, universal healthcare. The conciliatory tone towards our enemies. The pretentious, 'everyone watch me make history' attitude. Above all, people in power need humility. Otherwise they forget that they work for WE THE PEOPLE.


How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Enjoy The Party

Tempting as it may be to talk about the coronation of Barack Obama.... no, sorry, I mean the inauguration of Barack Obama, I'll leave it alone for the most part. There is no question that the country needs a fresh start and a reason to celebrate something. I simply continue to question whether Mr Obama is that fresh start and cause for celebration. Regardless of my opinion of the man, it is an historic occasion, and certainly, if for only that reason, a good thing for the country. Of course, unlike the liberal elite, now rescued from the need to flee the country in protest (much like their draft-dodging peers from the past), I am not dancing and singing, nor am I blind to the questionable people Mr Obama has surrounded himself with, from Mr Biden down. You are far from change. You are old-school liberal/fascist/state-run politics in a new suit. Enjoy the party America, you need one. Liberals, don't strain your voices singing protest songs, and don't strain your arms patting yourself on the back. But still, enjoy the party. If John McCain had won, I don't imagine Bruce Springsteen, Mary J Blige and Beyonce would be singing. But enjoy, because after you've sobered up, slept off the hangover and paid some illegal (sorry... undocumented worker) to wash the smell of pot out of your Armani suit, you'll have to either fix the country or find someone else to blame. You've got a liberal Congress, a liberal President, and a liberal press. You don't want to look too hard at the greedy rich on Wall Street, because most of them have members of Congress (and the new president) in their pockets. The mortgage meltdown has Bill Clinton at its roots, and liberals have already run Congress for two years. So you'll have to work hard to blame someone else. So really, seriously, enjoy yourselves. Then surprise me. Do something right.



What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Hurting Me, Hurting You

I have a friend in his mid to late fifties who is going through a bit of depression. He's in a rut, he doesn't have too much money, and really, he just kind of needs direction in his life. He's even acknowledged this. The thing is, he's now planning to try to get disability from the government for a mental disability. He's not mentally disabled. He's in a rut. He's forgotten how to pick himself up and push himself through life. He's even stopped shaving. But the fact that he wants to convince some civil servant that he's mentally disabled so he can pad his budget is dangerous, and is a perfect example of the kind of attitude that is killing our society. I told him, as a friend, that not only would he be taking money from people who actually need it, but that the money that he's scamming for (which he is) comes from taxpayer dollars, which comes from me, and I simply don't have the money to give to him. I can't afford to give him mental disability money that he doesn't need. And that really is something that lots of people should think about. These days, when most are struggling to just get by, think before you find a way to take money from the government that you don't deserve. That money is there for a reason, for people who need it, and it's provided by real people who look at a paystub and see how much money Uncle Sam takes off the top from the wages they earn. There is a disconnect in this country between the idea of taking every cent we can from the government, and the fact that those cents actually come from WE THE PEOPLE rather than some miracle of government. If you pay taxes, you are cheating yourself when you cheat the government. If you work in a store of any kind, you would know that if you stole something from that store, you would actually be hurting yourself by diminishing the financial health of the company that provided your livelihood. If you removed panes of glass from your own house, you wouldn't be surprised to get wet the next time it rained. It's the same with tax dollars. If you remove them from the treasury when you shouldn't, they won't be there when you need them.


What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Food Stamp Fraud and Who Runs the Media?

Working in a supermarket, you meet a wide variety of people. I'll just relay one experience to you. A mother, daughter, and (I'm presuming) granddaughter came in the other day, and loaded up a shopping cart with meat, chips, soda, etc. Very little baby food or baby products. They pay with an 'EBT' card, which is the little debit card replacement for food stamps. The card is supposed to reduce food stamp fraud, but also to ease the ego-bruising that food stamp users suffer. That method of ego stroking is not as efficient as, say, earning a living, but I suppose since the government (and most often the liberal government) doesn't want people to try to be self-sufficient, being dependents of the government (and just coincidentally hard-working, tax-paying wage earners) means that a pat on the head and the occasional table scrap from big brother is all we can really depend on. Anyway, my point here is that these people tried to buy two starbucks double shots and a Best Buy gift card with their food stamp allotment. And when they were turned down they had the nerve to be insulted. And finally, as their total came up, I saw that it was more than a hundred dollars higher than the previous week's paycheck that I had worked my butt off for. These people were young and healthy and fit enough to work for a living, but they were taking everything they could from their food stamps that I work to provide. And quite honestly, that simply infuriates me. I understand people sometimes need help. I've needed help. But I took only what I needed for as long as I needed it, and didn't count among my necessities two starbucks double shots and a Best Buy gift card.

Rant Number Two. Just a short one. Considering that Hamas has lobbed more than 6,000 missiles into Israel in the last year, why have there been no protests in the street until Israel started fighting back? The media has been nearly silent on the subject until now, and now they're 'shocked, shocked'. The old ignorant liberal rant, generally best represented on men's room walls, that "Jews own the media" has never been so obviously and patently ridiculous.



What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com