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
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
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
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
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
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
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
Sunday, February 01, 2009
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
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
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
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
How Much Star Trek Can You Handle?
Fantasy Trek. Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Monday, January 19, 2009
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
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
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
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Sunday, January 04, 2009
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
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
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
The Job Warrior: My Experience Losing a Job and Getting Another During a Hiring Freeze
I walked into my job a few weeks ago and was informed that I was unemployed. Pretty much that was it. Merry Christmas and good luck paying rent and buying groceries. Without getting into particulars, I went from being the top salesman to being a former employee. Not an easy thing to walk home and tell my wife when just about the entire country is on a hiring freeze. The first thing I did... in fact, the same day, I went to see my previous employer, a man who had not wanted me to leave in the first place. In fact, the only reason I left was because I was working both jobs at the same time, and the assistant manager making the schedule couldn't or wouldn't reconcile the two schedules. But what I did was leave on good terms with plenty of notice, and I kept in touch and on friendly terms with the previous employer. Granted, it was easy, because the previous job was in a supermarket. But my wife and I talked to the manager, a great guy named Matthew, like a friend. Sometimes it was no more than a greeting, a 'How are things, Matthew?', but my wife and I both kept him in our orbit. Part of the family. We genuinely like Matthew, and he has always been a friend regardless of the job. At the same time, I knew that my first responsibility when faced with unemployment was to get another job. And the obvious first move was to go back to the man who said that he'd love to have me back. So I put on some smart clothes (as my wife really taught me well, put your best foot forward. Dress for what you want to be) and went to see Matthew. I didn't try to BS Matthew. I didn't beat around the bushes. I told him I needed a job. He said that the company had a district-wide hiring freeze, but that he would see what he could do. He said I should come back in a few days and talk to him. At that point I have to admit I was let down. I'd walked in figuring I'd walk out with a job. Then I had to assumed that the hiring freeze would be non-negotiable. So I went home (I even stopped on the way home to try to pick up an application. No dice. This place that had a help wanted sign wouldn't even let me apply because they weren't hiring) and got onto Monster.com. I updated my resume and started searching for jobs that I am qualified. 'Retail' and 'customer service' were my keywords. That's because for the last 18 years I've been in the retail/customer service trenches. I have extensive experience in that arena, and most of those 18 years in fastfood, which is, to my experience, the most challenging customer service arena. My wife and I even considered leaving town while we had some savings to work with, but we were also concerned that we wouldn't find the job situation any better where we went. We settled on giving our town a week or two before we gave up on it and left. With that in mind, I opened up my job search parameters for some places we considered moving to. With all of that in mind, I set about applying for jobs via Monster.com. I should note that before I started job hunting, I got up early, had a good breakfast, showered, shaved, and dressed as if I was going to work. I thought it was important to approach the job search as a job itself. It might be tempting to sleep in and give up shaving and sit around in sweat pants and a ratty old shirt, but that is too much vacation mode for the serious work of job hunting. I also set a minimum of four applications filled out each day before I stopped. Discipline was vitally important for my motivation and mindset, and was necessary to get another job quickly. And I knew that I had to get another job quickly. And something else. I was told by many friends that I should apply for unemployment. Maybe I should have, but to be honest, I didn't want to ask for any kind of financial assistance unless I absolutely needed it, and at that moment I didn't think we did. I was paid for vacation time that I had coming (almost a week), plus a paycheck, plus a bit of savings. If we hadn't had that, or if it had taken too long to get another job, it would have been different. But I thought that to apply for unemployment would also have been bad in a motivational sense. And, to be honest, pride got in the way. It wouldn't have remained in the way for long, but it was there at that point. I didn't want to see myself on the news as part of the huge number of jobless claims making headlines.So, on to the job search. Monster.com showed (what was for me) a surprising lack of opportunity for retail/customer service specialists. What I had failed to take into account was that one of the hardest hit sectors of our economy is retail. People are simply less and less encouraged to go out and spend money if they don't have to. And of course, especially close to the end of the year, companies don't tend to hire full-time, permanent people. I did get a quick response from a local advertising firm, and dressed up nicely and took 3 buses to get to their office for an interview. It turned out that they were hiring people to sell things from booths (I won't get any more specific, as I don't want to identitfy the firm in question) on a strictly commission basis. That is okay for some, and they said that people could make quite a bit of money doing it, but I have regular bills and a family that depends on me. I need a regular paycheck that I can depend on. But the point is, I tried. I put my best foot forward. I went to a bit of effort.At this point, the few days that Matthew had said to wait had gone by. I called the supermarket to make sure he was in, and dressed nicely again and went to see him. Then the really bad news. Matthew said that the hiring freeze was still on. He couldn't hire me. I was pretty disappointed at that point, but I thanked him for trying and tried to not show my disappointment. That was really the worst moment of the job search, because I'd put a lot of hope in getting that job back. Ah, but then two days later, I found out that Matthew hadn't given up. He went to bat for me with human resources and managed to arrange to bring me back as a rehire rather than a new hire. To start, I would actually have to take an almost 4 dollar an hour pay cut, but after the first of the year there should be a departmental manager position opening that needed to be an in-house promotion. It was just important that I get my foot in the door. I took the offer without hesitation, and my job search that really had me scared only lasted one week. I was very lucky. I know that people have spent six months or more looking for work and not found any. I know that there are lessons to be learned from my situation. First and foremost, don't burn your bridges. Give plenty of notice, treat employers with respect, and don't be afraid to go back to them. Treat your job search like a job, not a vacation. Listen to your spouse. They are intelligent and resourceful, and can help you. I know mine helps me. I wouldn't take this world on without her. Don't dismiss jobs that you think are below you. There is no such thing as a bad job if it is honest and supports your family. For example, I was prepared to go back to fastfood if I had to. I wasn't enthusiastic about the possibility, but I was prepared to do it anyway. Pride is important, but you can't support a family on pride. In fact, Matthew was concerned that I might not want to take the pay cut and come back as a courtesy clerk (among other things, we bag groceries and retrieve shopping carts). My wife and I both said that I'd take anything. I'm happy to have it. And one other thing. If you have the opportunity to go to college, take it. Get yourself a degree in a subject that interests you but that is also marketable. I was in the military, but failed to sign up for the G.I. Bill, and I have regretted it ever since. I'm not saying that my professional life would be better if I had a degree (because there are plenty of unemployed college graduates), but I certainly would have had more opportunities.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Rewarding Poor Performance
With a frighteningly bad economy, Congress has voted itself a raise. Rather like the CEO of a nearly bankrupt corporation begging for money one day, then granting himself a bonus the next. Yes, unbelievable as it is, with our economy in the tank, a seven trillion dollar rescue package that just didn't work (and, yes, it really is $7 trillion. Even the mainstream media is starting to admit that), a debt spiralling faster than hurricane Katrina, Federal lawmakers have given themselves a raise that will give each of them $4700 more next year, with a price tag of $2.5 million.
I'm not going to talk about their unforgivable audacity, because it has become so commonplace, it would be like complaining about the sun coming up. Really, what can be said that hasn't been said a thousand times before? We know how bad they really are, and how little they obviously care about the people they're supposed to represent, or the state of the country as a whole.
Granted, $4700 a year equals out to just $90.38 a week, but the point is that they don't need it and they certainly don't deserve it. Taking the math a little further, that price tag of $2.5 million dollars divided by the $4700 a week (and this all comes from Fox News, which I trust more than the networks or CNN), comes to 531.9. I won't speculate as to who the '.9' is, :) but really, what they're doing to reward themselves for running the country into the ground is taking the equivalent of $90 a week out of the household budgets of 531 families. So come on, Brian Williams, tell the people about it. Mister President-elect, where is your outrage? Mister Reid, Ms Pelosi, where are the hearings? Why isn't Wolf Blitzer talking about it?
I'd really like to see a public, national referendum approve every raise that our so-called representatives give themselves. If it is so important that the snakes can spend $2.5 million when we're in debt up to our eyeballs, then certainly it's worth the trouble of asking the people who are forced to pay for it.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
I'm not going to talk about their unforgivable audacity, because it has become so commonplace, it would be like complaining about the sun coming up. Really, what can be said that hasn't been said a thousand times before? We know how bad they really are, and how little they obviously care about the people they're supposed to represent, or the state of the country as a whole.
Granted, $4700 a year equals out to just $90.38 a week, but the point is that they don't need it and they certainly don't deserve it. Taking the math a little further, that price tag of $2.5 million dollars divided by the $4700 a week (and this all comes from Fox News, which I trust more than the networks or CNN), comes to 531.9. I won't speculate as to who the '.9' is, :) but really, what they're doing to reward themselves for running the country into the ground is taking the equivalent of $90 a week out of the household budgets of 531 families. So come on, Brian Williams, tell the people about it. Mister President-elect, where is your outrage? Mister Reid, Ms Pelosi, where are the hearings? Why isn't Wolf Blitzer talking about it?
I'd really like to see a public, national referendum approve every raise that our so-called representatives give themselves. If it is so important that the snakes can spend $2.5 million when we're in debt up to our eyeballs, then certainly it's worth the trouble of asking the people who are forced to pay for it.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Thursday, December 18, 2008
The Twelve Trek Days of Christmas
Folks, there is a project I've been associated with for a few months now, called "The Twelve Trek Days of Christmas". Rather than trying to explain it myself, I am going to paste a release of sorts that the organizer Kirok of House L'Stok wrote.
The Twelve Trek Days of Christmas has started for a second year, when we celebrate the traditional Season of Goodwill by giving away twelve "presents" from the Star Trek fan production community. In a way it's Christmas all year round for them since fan productions are only allowed by the copyright owners if they are provided to the public for free. Accept them as our tribute to the original actors, writers and production crews, to maintain interest in the originals, build support for future professional productions and extend on the Star Trek universe with our own creative visions.
On the first day of Christmas, Star Trek gave to me ... a Fan-Made Audio Book! <http://www.twerponline.net/12days2008/day01.html>
The present for The First Trek Day of Christmas is "Fatherhood", the second episode from the audio book series, "Tales of Death and Honour". Designed as a trilogy, the series started off earlier this year with "Motherhood", an original tale of love and loss on the Klingon homeworld, and this episode extends on that life and death struggle with a rescue from an unexpected source! It is produced by Silvertongue Productions, the audio productions group of The House of L'Stok, an experimental multimedia production house for the creation of fan and smallscale Indie productions. For more information about this and other productions of the House of L'Stok, checkout the website at http://lstok.blogspot.com
Unfortunately, in the best tradition of fan productions it's late! But by way of an apology for keeping you waiting, and to wet your whistle
for the new episode, we offer you the new series trailer for Tales of Death and Honour which is available on the TrekUnited Audio Centre
at ... <http://www.scifitube.com/trekunited/audio/DAH-Teaser1.1b.mp3>
On the first day of Christmas, Star Trek gave to me ... a Fan-Made Audio Book! <http://www.twerponline.net/12days2008/day01.html>
The present for The First Trek Day of Christmas is "Fatherhood", the second episode from the audio book series, "Tales of Death and Honour". Designed as a trilogy, the series started off earlier this year with "Motherhood", an original tale of love and loss on the Klingon homeworld, and this episode extends on that life and death struggle with a rescue from an unexpected source! It is produced by Silvertongue Productions, the audio productions group of The House of L'Stok, an experimental multimedia production house for the creation of fan and smallscale Indie productions. For more information about this and other productions of the House of L'Stok, checkout the website at http://lstok.blogspot.com
Unfortunately, in the best tradition of fan productions it's late! But by way of an apology for keeping you waiting, and to wet your whistle
for the new episode, we offer you the new series trailer for Tales of Death and Honour which is available on the TrekUnited Audio Centre
at ... <http://www.scifitube.com/trekunited/audio/DAH-Teaser1.1b.mp3>
I have two submissions..... One (On Day Ten) is a Fan-Made game called Fantasy Trek that you can preview at http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com/
The other (On Day Eleven) is an ebook of three "Enterprise Virtual Season" episodes... and they can be previewed at http://startrekenterprisevirtualseasons.blogspot.com/
The other (On Day Eleven) is an ebook of three "Enterprise Virtual Season" episodes... and they can be previewed at http://startrekenterprisevirtualseasons.blogspot.com/
KBF-Kapact
IKS tIQghoB
"Surrender or be des-"
{sound of explosion}
Klingon Black Fleet
"...laughing, undefeated..."
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com/
http://houseabukoff.blogspot.com
http://kapactsrant.blogspot.com/
http://startrekenterprisevirtualseasons.blogspot.com/
Sunday, December 14, 2008
It's Still Country First
Talking about the Auto Bailout, I'd like to say that I don't like bailouts.
I think they're anti-capitalism and essentially therefore unAmerican. I
don't think they'll solve the problem, and I think that as always, our
supposed representatives don't in fact care about the Big Three, the jobs to
be saved or lost, or just incidentally, the billions of tax dollars from WE
THE PEOPLE that these vampires in suits push around like pawns on a
chessboard. I find it quite funny in fact that most of these tin-plated
dictators helped to cause the problem that they're using to humiliate CEO's
and dupe WE THE PEOPLE into thinking that they serve a purpose and deserve
to be anywhere but in prison. Given all that, we need to stop the Big Three
from going into bankruptcy because if they go out of business then not only
do their workers go on unemployment, but the companies who supply parts to
them go out of business too. And then all of those workers go on umployment
too. Quite honestly, we can't afford that. And really, Senate Republicans
showed us again why they were so humiliated in the elections. They have been
so blinded by ideology that common sense plays no part in their
decision-making process. I know that a huge part of the problem facing the
Big Three is the strangle-hold that labor unions have on the automakers. And
in fact, all the money in the world won't solve the Big Three's problems
until people can actually start buying their cars. But we still need to keep
all of those people from being put out of work. That is something we simply
can't afford.
I think they're anti-capitalism and essentially therefore unAmerican. I
don't think they'll solve the problem, and I think that as always, our
supposed representatives don't in fact care about the Big Three, the jobs to
be saved or lost, or just incidentally, the billions of tax dollars from WE
THE PEOPLE that these vampires in suits push around like pawns on a
chessboard. I find it quite funny in fact that most of these tin-plated
dictators helped to cause the problem that they're using to humiliate CEO's
and dupe WE THE PEOPLE into thinking that they serve a purpose and deserve
to be anywhere but in prison. Given all that, we need to stop the Big Three
from going into bankruptcy because if they go out of business then not only
do their workers go on unemployment, but the companies who supply parts to
them go out of business too. And then all of those workers go on umployment
too. Quite honestly, we can't afford that. And really, Senate Republicans
showed us again why they were so humiliated in the elections. They have been
so blinded by ideology that common sense plays no part in their
decision-making process. I know that a huge part of the problem facing the
Big Three is the strangle-hold that labor unions have on the automakers. And
in fact, all the money in the world won't solve the Big Three's problems
until people can actually start buying their cars. But we still need to keep
all of those people from being put out of work. That is something we simply
can't afford.
Now... what can I say about Rod Blagojevich? He typifies the arrogance and
crookedness that is really at the heart of the Chicago machine that has now
bought and engineered two presidential elections. And the Obama aide who
lied about whether or not the President-elect consulted with the governor on
November 5th. He also typifies the arrogance and crookedness that is so much
at the heart of most politicians. What did the president-elect know, and
when did he know it? The snake of a governor simply isn't worth more time or
energy.
All of this really comes down to the idea of Country First, because the
validity of that concept didn't change on November 5th. When you look at all
these senators and representatives hanging billions of dollars of taxpayer's
money in front of panhandling CEO's, and the network cameras, showing us how
important they are, and how much we need them to solve our problems,
(despite the really rotten job they've done so far), do you really think
that they're thinking Country First? When you hear a corrupt liberal
governor talk about how much he's going to sell a senate seat for, do the
words Country First come into it anywhere? We've got a president looking the
other way while American citizens living on the southern border are
kidnapped by invading Mexican druglords, or refusing to pardon two border
patrol guards who were arrested for shooting a Mexican druglord in the rear,
and I just don't see Country First coming into the decision-making process.
There are only two professions where you can be consistently wrong and still
call yourself an expert. One is being a weather person (and I never believe
them anyway). The other is being a politician.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
The American Inquisition or: I Wonder If They'd Approve Waterboarding In This Case
I've been watching as much as I can stand of the CEO's of the Big Three
automakers groveling before Congress with expensive hats in hand, begging
for scraps (and not actually from the people who will end up paying). The
first time they came begging, Congress, the media, and the blinded public
didn't question why they needed the money or exactly what they planned to do
with it, or in fact why we should believe it would actually make a
difference. No, all that anyone noticed was that these three rich
panhandlers flew to the inquisition in private jets. Forget that Al "It's
easy being green" Gore does the same as he lectures us about not pumping
filth into the atmosphere. Yes, it was stupid and insensitive, and they
shouldn't have. But we've suddenly forgotten that the smug, sactimonious
tin-plated dictators doing the interrogating are in fact responsible for the
mess that we're in. Mister Dodd. Mister Frank, et al. So what happens? They
send them away and take a vacation.
automakers groveling before Congress with expensive hats in hand, begging
for scraps (and not actually from the people who will end up paying). The
first time they came begging, Congress, the media, and the blinded public
didn't question why they needed the money or exactly what they planned to do
with it, or in fact why we should believe it would actually make a
difference. No, all that anyone noticed was that these three rich
panhandlers flew to the inquisition in private jets. Forget that Al "It's
easy being green" Gore does the same as he lectures us about not pumping
filth into the atmosphere. Yes, it was stupid and insensitive, and they
shouldn't have. But we've suddenly forgotten that the smug, sactimonious
tin-plated dictators doing the interrogating are in fact responsible for the
mess that we're in. Mister Dodd. Mister Frank, et al. So what happens? They
send them away and take a vacation.
When they came back, driving all the way in what we're told are energy
efficient cars... and I put it that way because we're not always told the
truth. Like we were told that ethanol was going to solve our problems,
rather than put another hole in the economy. They forgot to take a train.
They neglected to car pool. They didn't hitch a ride with Al Gore. But since
they acknowledged the importance of symbolism over substance, the
inquisitors suddenly saw the urgency of the situation (and coincidentally,
failed to consider the stranglehold that their masters the labor unions have
over the auto industry) and are pushing for a quick passage. Michael Moore
says that capitalism is dead, and he's celebrating that (hence the worldwide
shortage of greasy french fries and peanut brittle this past week). Well,
the alternative is already up and operating. Ever hear of that economic
powerhouse called Cuba? How about North Korea? Yeah. Amazing. Well,
capitalism succeeds when badly run businesses go out of business and make
room for well run businesses. Pumping more money into the Big Three, so that
they can continue to pay ransom to the unions is like pumping more donuts
into Michael Moore in the vain hope that he'll start to lose weight. Odds
are, when they've used up everything you've given them, they'll still run
just as well as they do now.
I know that the Big Three are basketcases, and I know that it was really
stupid for them to fly private jets to beg for hand-outs. But you in
Congress really make yourselves look like petty schoolyard bullies
humiliating the weaker kid when you make people jump through hoops for
scraps. Scraps that come from the hard-earned money of WE THE PEOPLE.
I wonder if they'd approve waterboarding in this case.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Thanksgiving
A little late here, but I wanted to talk just briefly about Thanksgiving Day. I am glad that our Canadian friends celebrate Thanksgiving, even if it's on a different date. While the circumstances behind the holiday are myth-prone and clouded, and we're now told how horrible an effect that Europeans had on the new world. I'm not going to try to defend what happened, but at the same time, the natives (and even they truly were no more native than I am. Their ancestors migrated from China, across the land bridge that used to connect North America to Russia) were not entirely peaceful and prosperous. They warred with each other, suffered from disease, and were, by some reports, in decline as a civilization. But forget all that. What I'm really talking about is the idea of setting a day aside to reflect on all that we really have to be thankful for. We live with more freedom and prosperity than many other countries, even in these days of crisis. We have an issue of too many people wanting in, as opposed to the throngs of refugees in many countries. We have just elected someone from an middle class family of mixed race in a peaceful if passionate election. We can rest assured that once in office, Mister Obama will not seek to change the law to lengthen his term of office.
While many families are in the midst of crisis unseen in this country in years, somehow people still find a way to give what they can for those in more desperate need, and the spirit of optimism and dignity is as evident across the land as ever. We have problems, we know, but we also have great blessings, and we know that. The day after Thanksgiving, I spoke with a couple in the laundromat who lived in a two-room tent, but were washing work-clothes and enjoying each other's company. I'm not trying to say we don't have problems. Not by a long shot. But this country has never failed to rise to challenges, and we always end up better off in the long run. And the fact is that we still have lots to be thankful for. And I might just add that I hate hearing people call Thanksgiving "Turkey Day". That turns the holiday into nothing more than just another excuse to take a long weekend, eat too much, drink too much, and fall asleep in front of the television. That's like changing Christmas to "Present Day".
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
While many families are in the midst of crisis unseen in this country in years, somehow people still find a way to give what they can for those in more desperate need, and the spirit of optimism and dignity is as evident across the land as ever. We have problems, we know, but we also have great blessings, and we know that. The day after Thanksgiving, I spoke with a couple in the laundromat who lived in a two-room tent, but were washing work-clothes and enjoying each other's company. I'm not trying to say we don't have problems. Not by a long shot. But this country has never failed to rise to challenges, and we always end up better off in the long run. And the fact is that we still have lots to be thankful for. And I might just add that I hate hearing people call Thanksgiving "Turkey Day". That turns the holiday into nothing more than just another excuse to take a long weekend, eat too much, drink too much, and fall asleep in front of the television. That's like changing Christmas to "Present Day".
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Not That We Don't Love You, But....
I've only met about five Canadians I didn't like. Considering that I don't make it through a week without meeting five Americans that annoy me, five annoying Canadians in a lifetime isn't bad. But here's a serious beef. I met a traveling Canadian who not only told me that their entire country was celebrating obama's election (I didn't ask if that included the conservative pm), but that literally tens of thousands of canadians had come down to the states to volunteer to help obama get elected. Smiling politely, I just said 'Yeah! People from all over the world helped him get elected.'
What I was thinking was get out of my country and get out of my election. I realize that other countries have more of a stake in our election than we do in theirs (primarily I think, because much as the rest of the world likes to spit on us and look down their noses at us, they still depend on us more than they like to admit), and I realize that they think that every American capable of stringing together two syllables must be a liberal (that's what stephen king teaches us, remember.... the same guy who thinks that our soldiers are all illiterate), and I also realize that conservatives don't have feelings (for example, in New Zealand, where they also just elected a conservative pm, I was told that all Americans would have had to have had a lobotomy... because George W Bush was elected). But here's a newsflash from the illiterate unfeeling conservative American Patriot. I would never presume to interfere in your election, and much as I generally like you and your country, I'd like to ask that from now on you stop interfering in our elections. If those tens of thousands of volunteers would maybe try instead to patch up your sieve of a border, we'd have fewer problems. And when you come back (and really, you are welcome. I forgive your ill manners and thoughtless mouth), please don't assume that I agree with your radical and/or ignorant politics. When in doubt, keep your unwanted opinions to yourself.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
What I was thinking was get out of my country and get out of my election. I realize that other countries have more of a stake in our election than we do in theirs (primarily I think, because much as the rest of the world likes to spit on us and look down their noses at us, they still depend on us more than they like to admit), and I realize that they think that every American capable of stringing together two syllables must be a liberal (that's what stephen king teaches us, remember.... the same guy who thinks that our soldiers are all illiterate), and I also realize that conservatives don't have feelings (for example, in New Zealand, where they also just elected a conservative pm, I was told that all Americans would have had to have had a lobotomy... because George W Bush was elected). But here's a newsflash from the illiterate unfeeling conservative American Patriot. I would never presume to interfere in your election, and much as I generally like you and your country, I'd like to ask that from now on you stop interfering in our elections. If those tens of thousands of volunteers would maybe try instead to patch up your sieve of a border, we'd have fewer problems. And when you come back (and really, you are welcome. I forgive your ill manners and thoughtless mouth), please don't assume that I agree with your radical and/or ignorant politics. When in doubt, keep your unwanted opinions to yourself.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Friday, November 14, 2008
Our Duty as Americans
I was almost surprised to find Glenn Beck almost supporting Barack Obama the other day, in response to a caller who refused to admit or accept that Obama was going to be our next president. Now, I am not (as you may have guessed), a fan of Obama, and I am in fact convinced that the election was bought and paid for illegally, and it was determined early on that Obama was to be our next president. The facts may never come out, and most likely we are stuck with him for at least four years. But we are indeed stuck with him, and like it or not, it is our duty as Americans to support him as our president (Something most of the fringier liberals never really figured out with George W Bush). Having said that, it is also our duty as Americans to keep an eagle eye on our new employee-in-chief. Obama has skated along for his entire career by keeping just far enough away from the filthy crooks and general scumbags who are behind his power to avoid being seriously linked with them. It requires quite an imagination to not link him to these people (Ayers, Wright, Fannie, Freddie to name a few), but obviously enough first-time (and probably last-time) voters have just that. Well, Mr Obama, you may find that sometime over the next four years, you might just have to commit yourself to something. Granted, most decisions you'll be called upon to make are probably above your paygrade, but you may just find that people like Putin and Ahmedinejad are not as impressed by that as Bart Simpson, Daffy Duck, and "Will, Good" of Austin, Texas were.
So yes, real Americans... those patriots that you scoffed at, bitterly clinging to guns and religion, they'll support you, probably better than you'll support them. But they'll also be watching you very closely. Just like I will. You actually work for us, Mister Obama, and if you don't do the job right we'll fire you in four years.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
So yes, real Americans... those patriots that you scoffed at, bitterly clinging to guns and religion, they'll support you, probably better than you'll support them. But they'll also be watching you very closely. Just like I will. You actually work for us, Mister Obama, and if you don't do the job right we'll fire you in four years.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Why This Is A Good Thing...
Without preamble, except to say that I am very happy that this historically expensive and ugly campaign is over. What an ugly time it's been. If only I believed that it couldn't get worse. I shudder to think what the next one will be like.
So why is this a good thing for conservatives and bad news for liberals? Well, it is simple. Liberals will run the White House and both houses of Congress. If they fix things, then anyone who truly believes in "Country First" will be happy. Me included. If they make things worse, which I am convinced they will, they'll have nobody else to blame. Congress has been largely liberal for two years and has accomplished nothing but allowing the mortgage and credit meltdown and attaining historically dismal ratings. Now it looks as though they'll have filibuster-proof control. Fine. You promised bipartisanship and delivered partisan hatred unseen in this country in years. Now you've promised change. You'll be held accountable. At the same time, the republican party had six years of control over three branches of government and failed miserably. They lost because they deserved to lose. I can only hope that the next lot that gets in thanks to the democrats' failure will do better.
So in a nutshell, this is why I am so happy with the way the election turned out. (And a big shout-out and thanks to Tony Romo and the gang for registering to vote in Las Vegas, and to Daffy Duck, Bart Simpson, and all the other community organizers for buying those untracable prepaid credit cards, from wherever in the wide world they got them:) ! ).
The Republicans who failed so miserably to justify our votes and our support can go home and not come back.
The Democrats will have no one else to blame when their flawed policies fail. And maybe, just maybe, Pelosi and Reid and all the other liberal vipers will get the boot for good.
And mister obama... well, for one thing, you've just demonstrated that 'Affirmative Action' is no longer needed in this country. You've got your chance to 'change' things. If you do, you'll either fix or break this country. If you fix it, fine. I'll vote for your second term. If you break it, well, you'll get rewarded for that too. On the other hand, if you do as you've done before and break your promise, well, we have your promise on tape, and we'll play it endlessly at every opportunity. But think about what 'change' entails. You have two alternatives. You can continue the hand-outs to minorities, you know, the instutionalized slavery called welfare, and change nothing and continue to make the country safe and free for lazy gang-banging crack smoking pimps who probably shot themselves full of speed just so they could crawl to a voting booth and vote for you. That is where we're at now, and Joe the Plumber is working for a living so these particular breed of small business owners can sit on their aspens and fry their brains. So if you want to retain the crackhead vote, don't change too much. On the other hand, if you really do change the status quo, you are likely to lose the support of all of the cartoon characters, pro NFL players and gang-bangers who elected you.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
So why is this a good thing for conservatives and bad news for liberals? Well, it is simple. Liberals will run the White House and both houses of Congress. If they fix things, then anyone who truly believes in "Country First" will be happy. Me included. If they make things worse, which I am convinced they will, they'll have nobody else to blame. Congress has been largely liberal for two years and has accomplished nothing but allowing the mortgage and credit meltdown and attaining historically dismal ratings. Now it looks as though they'll have filibuster-proof control. Fine. You promised bipartisanship and delivered partisan hatred unseen in this country in years. Now you've promised change. You'll be held accountable. At the same time, the republican party had six years of control over three branches of government and failed miserably. They lost because they deserved to lose. I can only hope that the next lot that gets in thanks to the democrats' failure will do better.
So in a nutshell, this is why I am so happy with the way the election turned out. (And a big shout-out and thanks to Tony Romo and the gang for registering to vote in Las Vegas, and to Daffy Duck, Bart Simpson, and all the other community organizers for buying those untracable prepaid credit cards, from wherever in the wide world they got them:) ! ).
The Republicans who failed so miserably to justify our votes and our support can go home and not come back.
The Democrats will have no one else to blame when their flawed policies fail. And maybe, just maybe, Pelosi and Reid and all the other liberal vipers will get the boot for good.
And mister obama... well, for one thing, you've just demonstrated that 'Affirmative Action' is no longer needed in this country. You've got your chance to 'change' things. If you do, you'll either fix or break this country. If you fix it, fine. I'll vote for your second term. If you break it, well, you'll get rewarded for that too. On the other hand, if you do as you've done before and break your promise, well, we have your promise on tape, and we'll play it endlessly at every opportunity. But think about what 'change' entails. You have two alternatives. You can continue the hand-outs to minorities, you know, the instutionalized slavery called welfare, and change nothing and continue to make the country safe and free for lazy gang-banging crack smoking pimps who probably shot themselves full of speed just so they could crawl to a voting booth and vote for you. That is where we're at now, and Joe the Plumber is working for a living so these particular breed of small business owners can sit on their aspens and fry their brains. So if you want to retain the crackhead vote, don't change too much. On the other hand, if you really do change the status quo, you are likely to lose the support of all of the cartoon characters, pro NFL players and gang-bangers who elected you.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Good News!
Just a quick note before work. Tomorrow I'll tell you why the election news is good news for conservatives and bad news for liberals.....
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Saturday, November 01, 2008
Another NewsMax special.... "Obama Positions Run Against Grain of Voters"
I don't want you all to think I'm gettiing lazy, but here is another important gem from Newsmax. Ted, who commented last time, I have bad news. That lawsuit has been dismissed. Apparently a single person can stop a Christmas tree from being put up in a mall, but a single person cannot stop someone who is ineligable from running from president. As long as that person is a liberal. Have no fear. If mister barack hussein obama does manage to buy this election, I will declare this blogsite to represent the interests of the American government-in-exile, and maintain a close eye on the government of the Peoples Republic of America.
Obama Positions Run Against Grain of Voters
For the first time in modern political history, American voters appear to be on the verge of electing a president they profoundly disagree with on a stunning array of issues.
Indeed, on subject after subject - ranging from gun ownership, to partial-birth abortion, to English as a national language, to driver's licenses for illegals, and even to raising taxes - voters sharply disagree with Sen. Barack Obama, who some in the mainstream media portray as a virtual shoo-in to win the presidency.
Why would voters flirt with electing a president whose views contradict their own? Blame the economic meltdown on Wall Street, experts say.
"The dramatic downturn in the fortunes of the financial sector in the last month has driven all other issues into the basement," pollster John Zogby of Zogby International told Newsmax.
Almost 65 percent of Americans now say the economy is the No. 1 issue, Zogby said. By comparison, the No. 2 issue on voters' minds, the war on terror, is cited by just 9 percent of voters.
"We almost never get a response like that when we ask about the most important issue facing voters," Zogby said.
So voters are so frustrated over the economy, pollsters say, that they might put a candidate in the White House whose views drastically contradict their own. Consider:
* On political philosophy, National Journal has identified Obama as the most liberal member of the Senate. Year in and year out, a solid 60 percent of Americans identify themselves as "somewhat" or "very" conservative.
* Obama openly advocates income "redistribution." A June 27 Gallup poll asked 1,625 U.S. adults what approach government should take to fix the economy. By an 84 percent to 13 percent gap, respondents disagree with Obama and oppose redistribution of wealth. (In fact, even 77 percent of Democrats opposed it.)
* Obama has been an outspoken supporter of bilingual education. In fact, he got in trouble during the primaries by leaving the impression that he might favor mandatory bilingual education for American kids. Here's how U.S. voters feel: 85 percent of Americans believe that English should be designated the language of the United States, according to a June 2006 Rasmussen poll of 1,000 adults.
* On the right to bear arms, Obama says he supports an individual's right to own guns. But in 1996, he stated on a questionnaire that he opposed the sale, manufacture, and possession or firearms. At a Milwaukee news conference this year, he said cities should be able to enact gun control "to deal with gang-bangers and random shootings." The NRA awarded Obama an "F" grade on protecting Second Amendment rights. On that issue, Obama would appear to be seriously at odds with the average voter. A June 4-5 CNN poll of 1,035 adults nationwide showed that 87 percent oppose "Preventing all Americans from owning guns." Similarly, a Feb. 8-10 Gallup survey of 1,016 adults found that 73 percent agree that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own firearms.
* During the Democratic primary, Obama repeatedly voiced support for granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, describing it as a public safety issue. Yet 77 percent of Americans oppose giving driver's licenses to illegals, compared with just 16 percent who favor it, according to a Nov. 6, 2007, Rasmussen Reports survey. Even 68 percent of Democrats thought driver's licenses for illegals is a bad idea.
* Obama has pledged that 95 percent of Americans will actually get a tax cut under his proposals-quite a feat considering that more than a third of American adults currently pay no taxes at all. Promises aside, an August 26 Gallup poll of 1,023 adults shows 53 percent expect Obama to bring higher taxes. A September Rasmussen poll of 1,000 likely voters gave voters a choice: Fewer government services and lower taxes; or more government services and higher taxes. By a 57 to 31 percent margin, voters preferred lower taxes -- even at the cost of fewer government services.
* On partial-birth abortion, Obama said during an April 26, 2007, Democratic primary debate that he trusts women to decide for themselves if they want them. Obama stated that he strongly disagreed with a Supreme Court decision last year upholding a ban on partial-birth abortions, because it provided no exception provided for a pregnant woman's health. Given such an exception, Obama said he would consider limits on late-term abortion. In August, he said that the question of when a baby qualifies for human rights is "above my pay grade." NARAL, the pro-abortion rights advocacy organization, gives him a perfect 100 pro-choice rating. But 68 percent of voters disagree with Obama and favor a ban on partial-birth abortions, according to a November 2003 Gallup poll of 1,036 adults.
There's no secret to Obama's popularity in the polls despite his unpopular stance on many key issues.
"These are important issues that may drive individual voters away from Obama," Zogby said, "but they are not by a long shot the most important issues in this campaign."
Larry J. Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, isn't at all surprised at Obama's strength, as reflected in many surveys.
"When an incumbent president is at 25 percent in the polls, when 91 percent of Americans say the country is off on the wrong track, and when the economy is very rocky, it is virtually impossible for the White House party to get a third term," he told Newsmax. "I've been studying this subject for 38 years. It really is that simple."
All of which raises the possibility of a country at war electing the candidate widely viewed as less capable of protecting the country.
"McCain is seen far and away as a better commander in chief," Zogby said, "but nobody's thinking about that right now."
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Obama Positions Run Against Grain of Voters
For the first time in modern political history, American voters appear to be on the verge of electing a president they profoundly disagree with on a stunning array of issues.
Indeed, on subject after subject - ranging from gun ownership, to partial-birth abortion, to English as a national language, to driver's licenses for illegals, and even to raising taxes - voters sharply disagree with Sen. Barack Obama, who some in the mainstream media portray as a virtual shoo-in to win the presidency.
Why would voters flirt with electing a president whose views contradict their own? Blame the economic meltdown on Wall Street, experts say.
"The dramatic downturn in the fortunes of the financial sector in the last month has driven all other issues into the basement," pollster John Zogby of Zogby International told Newsmax.
Almost 65 percent of Americans now say the economy is the No. 1 issue, Zogby said. By comparison, the No. 2 issue on voters' minds, the war on terror, is cited by just 9 percent of voters.
"We almost never get a response like that when we ask about the most important issue facing voters," Zogby said.
So voters are so frustrated over the economy, pollsters say, that they might put a candidate in the White House whose views drastically contradict their own. Consider:
* On political philosophy, National Journal has identified Obama as the most liberal member of the Senate. Year in and year out, a solid 60 percent of Americans identify themselves as "somewhat" or "very" conservative.
* Obama openly advocates income "redistribution." A June 27 Gallup poll asked 1,625 U.S. adults what approach government should take to fix the economy. By an 84 percent to 13 percent gap, respondents disagree with Obama and oppose redistribution of wealth. (In fact, even 77 percent of Democrats opposed it.)
* Obama has been an outspoken supporter of bilingual education. In fact, he got in trouble during the primaries by leaving the impression that he might favor mandatory bilingual education for American kids. Here's how U.S. voters feel: 85 percent of Americans believe that English should be designated the language of the United States, according to a June 2006 Rasmussen poll of 1,000 adults.
* On the right to bear arms, Obama says he supports an individual's right to own guns. But in 1996, he stated on a questionnaire that he opposed the sale, manufacture, and possession or firearms. At a Milwaukee news conference this year, he said cities should be able to enact gun control "to deal with gang-bangers and random shootings." The NRA awarded Obama an "F" grade on protecting Second Amendment rights. On that issue, Obama would appear to be seriously at odds with the average voter. A June 4-5 CNN poll of 1,035 adults nationwide showed that 87 percent oppose "Preventing all Americans from owning guns." Similarly, a Feb. 8-10 Gallup survey of 1,016 adults found that 73 percent agree that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own firearms.
* During the Democratic primary, Obama repeatedly voiced support for granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, describing it as a public safety issue. Yet 77 percent of Americans oppose giving driver's licenses to illegals, compared with just 16 percent who favor it, according to a Nov. 6, 2007, Rasmussen Reports survey. Even 68 percent of Democrats thought driver's licenses for illegals is a bad idea.
* Obama has pledged that 95 percent of Americans will actually get a tax cut under his proposals-quite a feat considering that more than a third of American adults currently pay no taxes at all. Promises aside, an August 26 Gallup poll of 1,023 adults shows 53 percent expect Obama to bring higher taxes. A September Rasmussen poll of 1,000 likely voters gave voters a choice: Fewer government services and lower taxes; or more government services and higher taxes. By a 57 to 31 percent margin, voters preferred lower taxes -- even at the cost of fewer government services.
* On partial-birth abortion, Obama said during an April 26, 2007, Democratic primary debate that he trusts women to decide for themselves if they want them. Obama stated that he strongly disagreed with a Supreme Court decision last year upholding a ban on partial-birth abortions, because it provided no exception provided for a pregnant woman's health. Given such an exception, Obama said he would consider limits on late-term abortion. In August, he said that the question of when a baby qualifies for human rights is "above my pay grade." NARAL, the pro-abortion rights advocacy organization, gives him a perfect 100 pro-choice rating. But 68 percent of voters disagree with Obama and favor a ban on partial-birth abortions, according to a November 2003 Gallup poll of 1,036 adults.
There's no secret to Obama's popularity in the polls despite his unpopular stance on many key issues.
"These are important issues that may drive individual voters away from Obama," Zogby said, "but they are not by a long shot the most important issues in this campaign."
Larry J. Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, isn't at all surprised at Obama's strength, as reflected in many surveys.
"When an incumbent president is at 25 percent in the polls, when 91 percent of Americans say the country is off on the wrong track, and when the economy is very rocky, it is virtually impossible for the White House party to get a third term," he told Newsmax. "I've been studying this subject for 38 years. It really is that simple."
All of which raises the possibility of a country at war electing the candidate widely viewed as less capable of protecting the country.
"McCain is seen far and away as a better commander in chief," Zogby said, "but nobody's thinking about that right now."
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Saturday, October 25, 2008
From "Newsmax": 'Smears' About Obama Largely True
I don't often do a copy and paste job, mainly because unlike Joe Biden and barack hussein obama, I have integrity. But this piece of fantastic work by Lowell Ponte at Newsmax is so important that it has to get out. The left wing liberal drive-by media doesn't want you to know what a danger obama is, but there are truths that have to get out. Truths that show what obama is, what he believes in, what he has done, and the shocking associations he has kept. Guilt by association? When the history is as long and consistent as obama's, you bet. Because at the very least, they show judgement that is frightening. At the most, they show someone who is too dangerous to take a chance on. Not in the world we face today. What Mister Ponte has done has exposed the lies, half-truths, and machiavellian extremes that obama will go to get elected. Just to be completely honest and upfront, the following is not my work. I had nothing to do with it. I am simply sharing it.
'Smears' About Obama Largely True
Monday, October 20, 2008 9:32 PM
By: Lowell Ponte
The Obama campaign says its candidate is a victim of smears and has even created a Web site to fight such attacks.
But a Newsmax investigation finds many of the so-called smears are largely based in truth and the Obama campaign uses half-truths, clever language, and ad hominem attacks to spin the facts.
Obamas www.FightTheSmears.com focuses mainly on anti-Obama messages being repeated on the Internet and talk radio, the only media where Obama's ideological allies are not dominant.
These "smears" and the Obama rebuttals are often framed in lawyerly language that leaves much wiggle room in the candidate's answers.
FightTheSmears.com also makes no attempt at objectivity, describing Obama's critics as pushing misleading research and distorted claims because they are ideologues busy spreading a pack of lies about Barack.
In a section of the site titled, 'Who's Behind the Smears?' visitors can see a chart naming seven groups and six individuals with lines that suggest multiple, sinister connections between them.
The people and groups named are real and are members of Washington's small but conservative sphere of power and influence. The Obama conspiracy chart links all of these conservative individuals and groups back to the critics who dogged the Clinton 1992 Campaign.
This may come as something as a surprise to Hillary Clinton, as many of the smears against Obama first surfaced during her heated primary contest with him.
Newsmax reviewed 10 random claims and related rebuttals posted on Obama's ever-changing FightTheSmears.com to gauge their veracity. Here's what we found:
Claim No. 1: Obama's campaign is funded by the rich, big corporations and foreigners.
Barack Obama was the only major presidential candidate this year to completely reject contributions from The Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs that have dominated our politics for years, the Obama site says of the persistent online criticisms of its fundraising.
Instead, this campaign has been owned by the more than 3.1 million everyday Americans who have donated in small amounts.
Not so, according to campaign finance records. Nearly half of the $600 million raised by Obama to date has come from wealthy donors and special interests. Obama's allies months ago dropped their ad linking Republican rival Exxon John McCain to Big Oil after it came to light that Obama had taken far more money from Exxon-Mobil than McCain.
The Obama campaign has complied fully with federal election law, claims the Obama site, including donor eligibility and contribution disclosure requirements.
However, one giant loophole the politicians wrote into the law allows contributions in amounts of $200 or less with no donor identification. Obama claims that $300 million in campaign funds was given by these small donors, and he won't release their names and addresses.
McCain has released his whole donor database, including those who have contributed less than $200.
Critics argue that the other half of Obama's campaign haul the part not raised from big corporate donors and special interests came in a small flood of anonymous donations that might be foreign or corrupt, or both.
Claim No. 2: Obama has had a close, ongoing relationship with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.
The Obama site acknowledges that its candidate and Ayers served on the board of an education-reform organization in the mid-1990s, but maintains most stories about the links between Obama and Ayers are phony or exaggerated.
It does not mention that Obama and Ayers worked together on the board distributing millions of dollars with the aim of radicalizing Chicago schoolchildren.
Nor does the site acknowledge that Obama kicked off his first political campaign in the living room of Ayers, the former Weather Underground leader. (Obama is currently saying it was not the first event. There is no dispute that one of Obama's first political events in his first run for public office was held in Ayers' home.)
There is also no dispute the Weather Underground bombed the Pentagon the Capitol, the home of a New York Supreme Court justice, and a police station, among other targets. FBI agent Larry Grathwohl, who infiltrated the group, has recounted Ayers teaching him how to make bombs and saying, 'In the revolution, some innocent people need to die.'
Smear groups and now a desperate McCain campaign are trying to connect Barack to William Ayers using age-old guilt by association techniques . . .� says the Obama Web site.
Actually, McCain and Obama critics are questioning why Obama would continue to associate with a man who, as recently as 2001, said he did not do enough and wished he had bombed more.
Conservatives also note that if Ayers had bombed abortion clinics, the liberal media would brand him a pariah forever. What does it tell us about the liberal media's and Obama's judgment and values that they see nothing wrong with embracing unrepentant terrorist Ayers today?
Claim No. 3: Obama takes advice from executives of troubled mortgage backer Fannie Mae.
John McCain started smearing Obama about non-existent ties to Fannie Mae in some of his deceptive attack ads, says FightTheSmears.com. The site downplays connections between Obama and two former heads of the giant mortgage-backing institution James A. Johnson and Franklin D. Raines whose corruption played a key role in the current financial crisis.
But an editorial in the Aug. 27, 2008, Washington Post described Johnson and Raines, as members of Mr. Obama's political circle.
Raines advised the Obama campaign on housing matters. Obama chose Johnson to select his vice presidential running mate. But because neither are advising Obama today, this Web site's present-tense claim that he 'doesn't [not didn't] take advice from Fannie Mae execs' is technically, if deceptively, true.
Johnson also reportedly helped raise as much as $500,000 for Obama's campaign.
And despite Obama's lack of seniority in the U.S. Senate, he pocketed more than $105,000 in political contributions, the third-highest amount given to any lawmaker, directly from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Obama's Web site leaves all this unmentioned.
Claim No. 4: Obama has close ties with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), a group suspected of massive voter registration fraud.
Obama's site says the candidate was never an ACORN employee and that ACORN 'was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive [Obama] ran in 1992.'
In defending Obama, the site resorts to smearing former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell calling him a 'discredited Republican voter-suppression guru' for daring to fight the vote fraud so often associated with operatives of ACORN, among the largest radical groups in the United States.
As Newsmax has documented in ["Clever Obama Tries To Bury ACORN Past,"] Obama's Web site is attempting to deceive when it says Obama was never 'hired' to work as a trainer for ACORN's leaders. In fact, he did the work for free from at least 1993 until 2003.
ACORN spokesman Lewis Goldberg acknowledges in the Oct. 11, 2008, New York Times that Obama trained ACORN leaders. And Obama worked as a lawyer for ACORN.
As to heading up Project Vote in Illinois, Obama said during a speech to ACORN leaders last November, "[When] I ran the Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack-dab in the middle of it."
Veteran journalist Karen Tumulty described Project Vote in the Oct. 18, 2004, issue of Time magazine as 'a nonpartisan arm of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now' after interviewing its national director.
The co-founder of ACORN, former Students for a Democratic Society official Wade Rathke, described Project Vote as one of ACORN's 'family of organizations.'
Over the years, ACORN and its front groups, like the one Obama ran in Illinois, have registered more than 4 million voters. When authorities in Virginia checked ACORN registrations, it found that 83 percent were fraudulent or had problems. This, in theory, could mean ACORN may have created the opportunity for stealing more than 3.3 million votes in this November's election, a margin far wider than that by which Obama is likely to win.
Claim No. 5: Obama has shown only wavering support for individual gun-ownership rights.
"During Barack's career in the Illinois and United States Senates, he proudly stood to defend the rights of hunters and sportsmen," says Obama's Web site, "while doing everything he could to protect children" including his own two daughters "from illegal gun violence."
But the National Rifle Association, it continues, "is distributing a dishonest and cowardly flyer that makes confrontational accusations and runs away from verifying them."
Actually, the NRA does a meticulous job of laying out documentation, as Newsmax reported in September ["NRA to Fight Obama Over Gun Rights Flip-Flops,"] to show that Obama has supported handgun confiscation; the handgun ban in Washington, D.C.; a virtual ban on high-powered rifle ammunition; and many other draconian restrictions on Second Amendment rights.
If elected, wrote the NRA, Obama 'would be the most anti-gun president in American history.'
Claim No. 6: A fervent supporter of abortion rights, Obama supports late-term and partial-birth abortions.
The Obama Web site dismisses such criticism as the work of 'radical anti-abortion ideologues running ads against Barack.'
But as an Illinois state senator, Obama voted repeatedly against legislation to protect infants who, during a late-term abortion, were 'born alive.' Such protection, he has argued, already exists in Illinois; it does, but is subject to the abortionist's decision whether such an infant has a good likelihood of survival.
Nurses have reported instances in which surviving aborted babies were left by abortionists to die without water, food, or warmth.
Obama's Web site notes that even the Republican author of one of these bills, former state Sen. Rick Winkel, has written that 'none of those who voted against [his bill] favored infanticide.'
True, but Obama's site does not quote the rest of Winkel's statement: '[T]heir zeal for pro-choice dogma was clearly the overriding force behind their negative votes rather than concern that my bill would protect babies who are born alive.'
Obama has a 100 percent pro-choice voting record according to NARAL Pro-Choice America; his rating from the National Right to Life Committee is zero.
How extreme is Obama on this issue? In the U.S. Senate, he has voted against bills that would prohibit minors from crossing state lines for abortion without parental notification.
"Look, I got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old," Obama has said. "I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."
Claim No. 7: Obama showed little interest or support for American combat troops during his overseas visits.
Doubts about Obama's true support for the military cropped up during a campaign trip to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Europe.
A widely circulated e-mail, penned by Army Capt. Jeffrey S. Porter, described Obama's visit to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan: "As the Soldiers lined up to shake his hand, he blew them off . . . He again shunned the opportunity to talk to soldiers to thank them for their service . . . I swear we got more thanks from the NBA basketball players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from [Obama]."
Porter later recanted, sending a follow-up e-mail that said, in part: "After checking my sources, information that was put out in my e-mail was wrong." He did not specify which information was wrong, leading Obama skeptics to suspect that this officer has been disciplined by his superiors.
Heading home, Obama touched down in Germany, where he was scheduled to visit the American hospitals at Ramstein and Landstuhl. But as The Washington Post reported, Obama canceled the trips after being told by Pentagon officials that he could only visit in his official capacity as a senator, not as a candidate and could not have his visits with hospitalized soldiers videotaped by the media.
Prominent liberal mainstream media reporters such as NBC's Andrea Mitchell rushed to defend Obama, saying that the press had never planned to cover his visits to military sickbeds. But Obama canceled both visits and used his free time instead to shoot hoops, with the media recording his best shots.
Claim No. 8: Barack Obama is a Muslim.
FightTheSmears.com states bluntly that Obama is a Christian, not a follower of Islam.
In fact, Barack Hussein Obama's Kenyan father was raised Muslim, though he reportedly was not religious.
His mother divorced and remarried another man, a Muslim from Indonesia. As a youngster in Indonesia, Barack Obama attended two schools and was registered at both as a Muslim. He received religious instruction in both schools as a Muslim, including studying the Quran. According to a childhood friend, Obama occasionally attended services at a local mosque.
Obama's Muslim upbringing has been detailed in a 2007 Los Angeles Times report (reprinted in The Baltimore Sun) headlined "Islam an Unknown Factor in Obama Bid." Middle East expert Daniel Pipes has studied the question of Obama's Muslim faith and says he is 'lying' when he says he was never a Muslim.
It's important to note that Obama's Web site does not say he was never a Muslim. But in the past, Obama's site and FightTheSmears.com did make the claim Obama was never a Muslim. Since that claim is obviously false, it is no longer used.
Obama says he became a Christian in his late 20s. He now describes himself as Christian. Until recently, he spent two decades as a member of a Chicago United Church of Christ congregation that embraces Black Liberation theology. Somewhat like the Roman Catholic liberation theology of Latin America, the Chicago UCC church preaches elements of neo-Marxist class warfare. It combines these radical socialist elements with black racialism.
Claim No. 9: As president, Obama would raise taxes dramatically for most Americans.
Millions of Americans recognize that Obama is likely to raise taxes. But like a good conjurer, who tricks you into watching his right hand while doing things with his left, the Obama Web site assures readers with a red herring.
The Illinois senator will not tax your water, as claimed in some fringe e-mails, FightTheSmears.com maintains.
What Obama will do, however, is tax businesses and capital gains more heavily, even though America already has the world's second-highest business taxes.
"Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases" said former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson at the 2008 Republican National Convention. "They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they're just going to tax businesses! So unless you buy something from a business, like groceries or clothes or gasoline . . . or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small business, don't worry. It's not going to affect you."
During his campaign, Obama has promised to raise various taxes that will fall on most economic classes, including the dividend tax, the FICA tax cap, the capital gains tax, the estate tax, and new taxes on gasoline.
He also called for the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, which will automatically raise taxes on most Americans. By letting the Bush cuts expire, Obama would produce a $2 trillion tax increase that some economists predict will rumble through the already weakened economy like an earthquake.
Claim No. 10: Obama was born outside the United States and is ineligible for the presidency.
The Obama Web site dismisses the claim that the candidate was born anywhere but in the United States as 'completely false' and 'groundless.'
As proof, the Obama's campaign has produced a 'certificate of live birth' from Hawaii indicating that Barack Hussein Obama II was born Aug. 4, 1961. Critics, however say the document could have easily been forged and is not a substitute for a certified birth certificate.
No reporter has been allowed to see the original certificate of live birth or its certificate number, which is blacked out on copies of it on the Obama site.
Skeptics note that Obama's 'Father's Race' is identified on this document as 'African,' a geographic and modern politically correct term rather than a 1961 racial designation. The standard term used on American birth certificates until the U.S. Census changed it in 1980 would have been 'Negro.'
Former deputy attorney general of Pennsylvania, Philip J. Berg, a Democrat with mixed credibility (he has supported conspiracy theories involving 9/11), has filed a lawsuit to force Obama to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate. According to Berg, Obama's paternal grandmother has said she was present at his birth in Kenya, after which his mother promptly returned with her baby to the United States.
If that is true, Obama could be constitutionally ineligible to be president.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
What is Fantasy Trek?
More Than Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
'Smears' About Obama Largely True
Monday, October 20, 2008 9:32 PM
By: Lowell Ponte
The Obama campaign says its candidate is a victim of smears and has even created a Web site to fight such attacks.
But a Newsmax investigation finds many of the so-called smears are largely based in truth and the Obama campaign uses half-truths, clever language, and ad hominem attacks to spin the facts.
Obamas www.FightTheSmears.com focuses mainly on anti-Obama messages being repeated on the Internet and talk radio, the only media where Obama's ideological allies are not dominant.
These "smears" and the Obama rebuttals are often framed in lawyerly language that leaves much wiggle room in the candidate's answers.
FightTheSmears.com also makes no attempt at objectivity, describing Obama's critics as pushing misleading research and distorted claims because they are ideologues busy spreading a pack of lies about Barack.
In a section of the site titled, 'Who's Behind the Smears?' visitors can see a chart naming seven groups and six individuals with lines that suggest multiple, sinister connections between them.
The people and groups named are real and are members of Washington's small but conservative sphere of power and influence. The Obama conspiracy chart links all of these conservative individuals and groups back to the critics who dogged the Clinton 1992 Campaign.
This may come as something as a surprise to Hillary Clinton, as many of the smears against Obama first surfaced during her heated primary contest with him.
Newsmax reviewed 10 random claims and related rebuttals posted on Obama's ever-changing FightTheSmears.com to gauge their veracity. Here's what we found:
Claim No. 1: Obama's campaign is funded by the rich, big corporations and foreigners.
Barack Obama was the only major presidential candidate this year to completely reject contributions from The Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs that have dominated our politics for years, the Obama site says of the persistent online criticisms of its fundraising.
Instead, this campaign has been owned by the more than 3.1 million everyday Americans who have donated in small amounts.
Not so, according to campaign finance records. Nearly half of the $600 million raised by Obama to date has come from wealthy donors and special interests. Obama's allies months ago dropped their ad linking Republican rival Exxon John McCain to Big Oil after it came to light that Obama had taken far more money from Exxon-Mobil than McCain.
The Obama campaign has complied fully with federal election law, claims the Obama site, including donor eligibility and contribution disclosure requirements.
However, one giant loophole the politicians wrote into the law allows contributions in amounts of $200 or less with no donor identification. Obama claims that $300 million in campaign funds was given by these small donors, and he won't release their names and addresses.
McCain has released his whole donor database, including those who have contributed less than $200.
Critics argue that the other half of Obama's campaign haul the part not raised from big corporate donors and special interests came in a small flood of anonymous donations that might be foreign or corrupt, or both.
Claim No. 2: Obama has had a close, ongoing relationship with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.
The Obama site acknowledges that its candidate and Ayers served on the board of an education-reform organization in the mid-1990s, but maintains most stories about the links between Obama and Ayers are phony or exaggerated.
It does not mention that Obama and Ayers worked together on the board distributing millions of dollars with the aim of radicalizing Chicago schoolchildren.
Nor does the site acknowledge that Obama kicked off his first political campaign in the living room of Ayers, the former Weather Underground leader. (Obama is currently saying it was not the first event. There is no dispute that one of Obama's first political events in his first run for public office was held in Ayers' home.)
There is also no dispute the Weather Underground bombed the Pentagon the Capitol, the home of a New York Supreme Court justice, and a police station, among other targets. FBI agent Larry Grathwohl, who infiltrated the group, has recounted Ayers teaching him how to make bombs and saying, 'In the revolution, some innocent people need to die.'
Smear groups and now a desperate McCain campaign are trying to connect Barack to William Ayers using age-old guilt by association techniques . . .� says the Obama Web site.
Actually, McCain and Obama critics are questioning why Obama would continue to associate with a man who, as recently as 2001, said he did not do enough and wished he had bombed more.
Conservatives also note that if Ayers had bombed abortion clinics, the liberal media would brand him a pariah forever. What does it tell us about the liberal media's and Obama's judgment and values that they see nothing wrong with embracing unrepentant terrorist Ayers today?
Claim No. 3: Obama takes advice from executives of troubled mortgage backer Fannie Mae.
John McCain started smearing Obama about non-existent ties to Fannie Mae in some of his deceptive attack ads, says FightTheSmears.com. The site downplays connections between Obama and two former heads of the giant mortgage-backing institution James A. Johnson and Franklin D. Raines whose corruption played a key role in the current financial crisis.
But an editorial in the Aug. 27, 2008, Washington Post described Johnson and Raines, as members of Mr. Obama's political circle.
Raines advised the Obama campaign on housing matters. Obama chose Johnson to select his vice presidential running mate. But because neither are advising Obama today, this Web site's present-tense claim that he 'doesn't [not didn't] take advice from Fannie Mae execs' is technically, if deceptively, true.
Johnson also reportedly helped raise as much as $500,000 for Obama's campaign.
And despite Obama's lack of seniority in the U.S. Senate, he pocketed more than $105,000 in political contributions, the third-highest amount given to any lawmaker, directly from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Obama's Web site leaves all this unmentioned.
Claim No. 4: Obama has close ties with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), a group suspected of massive voter registration fraud.
Obama's site says the candidate was never an ACORN employee and that ACORN 'was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive [Obama] ran in 1992.'
In defending Obama, the site resorts to smearing former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell calling him a 'discredited Republican voter-suppression guru' for daring to fight the vote fraud so often associated with operatives of ACORN, among the largest radical groups in the United States.
As Newsmax has documented in ["Clever Obama Tries To Bury ACORN Past,"] Obama's Web site is attempting to deceive when it says Obama was never 'hired' to work as a trainer for ACORN's leaders. In fact, he did the work for free from at least 1993 until 2003.
ACORN spokesman Lewis Goldberg acknowledges in the Oct. 11, 2008, New York Times that Obama trained ACORN leaders. And Obama worked as a lawyer for ACORN.
As to heading up Project Vote in Illinois, Obama said during a speech to ACORN leaders last November, "[When] I ran the Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack-dab in the middle of it."
Veteran journalist Karen Tumulty described Project Vote in the Oct. 18, 2004, issue of Time magazine as 'a nonpartisan arm of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now' after interviewing its national director.
The co-founder of ACORN, former Students for a Democratic Society official Wade Rathke, described Project Vote as one of ACORN's 'family of organizations.'
Over the years, ACORN and its front groups, like the one Obama ran in Illinois, have registered more than 4 million voters. When authorities in Virginia checked ACORN registrations, it found that 83 percent were fraudulent or had problems. This, in theory, could mean ACORN may have created the opportunity for stealing more than 3.3 million votes in this November's election, a margin far wider than that by which Obama is likely to win.
Claim No. 5: Obama has shown only wavering support for individual gun-ownership rights.
"During Barack's career in the Illinois and United States Senates, he proudly stood to defend the rights of hunters and sportsmen," says Obama's Web site, "while doing everything he could to protect children" including his own two daughters "from illegal gun violence."
But the National Rifle Association, it continues, "is distributing a dishonest and cowardly flyer that makes confrontational accusations and runs away from verifying them."
Actually, the NRA does a meticulous job of laying out documentation, as Newsmax reported in September ["NRA to Fight Obama Over Gun Rights Flip-Flops,"] to show that Obama has supported handgun confiscation; the handgun ban in Washington, D.C.; a virtual ban on high-powered rifle ammunition; and many other draconian restrictions on Second Amendment rights.
If elected, wrote the NRA, Obama 'would be the most anti-gun president in American history.'
Claim No. 6: A fervent supporter of abortion rights, Obama supports late-term and partial-birth abortions.
The Obama Web site dismisses such criticism as the work of 'radical anti-abortion ideologues running ads against Barack.'
But as an Illinois state senator, Obama voted repeatedly against legislation to protect infants who, during a late-term abortion, were 'born alive.' Such protection, he has argued, already exists in Illinois; it does, but is subject to the abortionist's decision whether such an infant has a good likelihood of survival.
Nurses have reported instances in which surviving aborted babies were left by abortionists to die without water, food, or warmth.
Obama's Web site notes that even the Republican author of one of these bills, former state Sen. Rick Winkel, has written that 'none of those who voted against [his bill] favored infanticide.'
True, but Obama's site does not quote the rest of Winkel's statement: '[T]heir zeal for pro-choice dogma was clearly the overriding force behind their negative votes rather than concern that my bill would protect babies who are born alive.'
Obama has a 100 percent pro-choice voting record according to NARAL Pro-Choice America; his rating from the National Right to Life Committee is zero.
How extreme is Obama on this issue? In the U.S. Senate, he has voted against bills that would prohibit minors from crossing state lines for abortion without parental notification.
"Look, I got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old," Obama has said. "I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."
Claim No. 7: Obama showed little interest or support for American combat troops during his overseas visits.
Doubts about Obama's true support for the military cropped up during a campaign trip to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Europe.
A widely circulated e-mail, penned by Army Capt. Jeffrey S. Porter, described Obama's visit to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan: "As the Soldiers lined up to shake his hand, he blew them off . . . He again shunned the opportunity to talk to soldiers to thank them for their service . . . I swear we got more thanks from the NBA basketball players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from [Obama]."
Porter later recanted, sending a follow-up e-mail that said, in part: "After checking my sources, information that was put out in my e-mail was wrong." He did not specify which information was wrong, leading Obama skeptics to suspect that this officer has been disciplined by his superiors.
Heading home, Obama touched down in Germany, where he was scheduled to visit the American hospitals at Ramstein and Landstuhl. But as The Washington Post reported, Obama canceled the trips after being told by Pentagon officials that he could only visit in his official capacity as a senator, not as a candidate and could not have his visits with hospitalized soldiers videotaped by the media.
Prominent liberal mainstream media reporters such as NBC's Andrea Mitchell rushed to defend Obama, saying that the press had never planned to cover his visits to military sickbeds. But Obama canceled both visits and used his free time instead to shoot hoops, with the media recording his best shots.
Claim No. 8: Barack Obama is a Muslim.
FightTheSmears.com states bluntly that Obama is a Christian, not a follower of Islam.
In fact, Barack Hussein Obama's Kenyan father was raised Muslim, though he reportedly was not religious.
His mother divorced and remarried another man, a Muslim from Indonesia. As a youngster in Indonesia, Barack Obama attended two schools and was registered at both as a Muslim. He received religious instruction in both schools as a Muslim, including studying the Quran. According to a childhood friend, Obama occasionally attended services at a local mosque.
Obama's Muslim upbringing has been detailed in a 2007 Los Angeles Times report (reprinted in The Baltimore Sun) headlined "Islam an Unknown Factor in Obama Bid." Middle East expert Daniel Pipes has studied the question of Obama's Muslim faith and says he is 'lying' when he says he was never a Muslim.
It's important to note that Obama's Web site does not say he was never a Muslim. But in the past, Obama's site and FightTheSmears.com did make the claim Obama was never a Muslim. Since that claim is obviously false, it is no longer used.
Obama says he became a Christian in his late 20s. He now describes himself as Christian. Until recently, he spent two decades as a member of a Chicago United Church of Christ congregation that embraces Black Liberation theology. Somewhat like the Roman Catholic liberation theology of Latin America, the Chicago UCC church preaches elements of neo-Marxist class warfare. It combines these radical socialist elements with black racialism.
Claim No. 9: As president, Obama would raise taxes dramatically for most Americans.
Millions of Americans recognize that Obama is likely to raise taxes. But like a good conjurer, who tricks you into watching his right hand while doing things with his left, the Obama Web site assures readers with a red herring.
The Illinois senator will not tax your water, as claimed in some fringe e-mails, FightTheSmears.com maintains.
What Obama will do, however, is tax businesses and capital gains more heavily, even though America already has the world's second-highest business taxes.
"Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases" said former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson at the 2008 Republican National Convention. "They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they're just going to tax businesses! So unless you buy something from a business, like groceries or clothes or gasoline . . . or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small business, don't worry. It's not going to affect you."
During his campaign, Obama has promised to raise various taxes that will fall on most economic classes, including the dividend tax, the FICA tax cap, the capital gains tax, the estate tax, and new taxes on gasoline.
He also called for the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, which will automatically raise taxes on most Americans. By letting the Bush cuts expire, Obama would produce a $2 trillion tax increase that some economists predict will rumble through the already weakened economy like an earthquake.
Claim No. 10: Obama was born outside the United States and is ineligible for the presidency.
The Obama Web site dismisses the claim that the candidate was born anywhere but in the United States as 'completely false' and 'groundless.'
As proof, the Obama's campaign has produced a 'certificate of live birth' from Hawaii indicating that Barack Hussein Obama II was born Aug. 4, 1961. Critics, however say the document could have easily been forged and is not a substitute for a certified birth certificate.
No reporter has been allowed to see the original certificate of live birth or its certificate number, which is blacked out on copies of it on the Obama site.
Skeptics note that Obama's 'Father's Race' is identified on this document as 'African,' a geographic and modern politically correct term rather than a 1961 racial designation. The standard term used on American birth certificates until the U.S. Census changed it in 1980 would have been 'Negro.'
Former deputy attorney general of Pennsylvania, Philip J. Berg, a Democrat with mixed credibility (he has supported conspiracy theories involving 9/11), has filed a lawsuit to force Obama to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate. According to Berg, Obama's paternal grandmother has said she was present at his birth in Kenya, after which his mother promptly returned with her baby to the United States.
If that is true, Obama could be constitutionally ineligible to be president.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
What is Fantasy Trek?
More Than Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
