Economic Terrorism And this Election

(Cross posted at MyFoxDFW.com)
Imagine if instead of bombs and weapons, if terrorists used our own economy against us? What would be the outcome? Jimmy Carter lost an election because of overt terrorist actions. The Twin Towers were bombed out of existence as the result of overt terrorist actions. But what if terrorists, rather than loading planes with suicide bombers intent on a paradise complete with 72 virgins, instead focused on the grease that runs us, and by that I mean money.

There have been signs before, but we didn't grasp them. The precipitous rise in oil prices when the supplies were adequate. The strange altering of the international economic landscape as the EU tried to circle the wagons and much of Asia, especially China, used fire sale prices to entrench themselves in the American economy through purchasing corporations outright or making them partners with factories in less expensive Asian locations. Who benefits from this?

On one hand, you can say that stockholders benefit because they see return on their investments. But if you undercut the value of dollars, then you shortchange the value of the return. CEO's might get a golden parachute, but if their worth is based in corporate stocks, then their parachute could crash and burn just as easily as the average worker with a 401K.

The push of the federal government as far back as the Clinton years to make home loans to underserved communities is documented fact. There is no argument over that. The way they were implemented and the type of Congressional manipulation that put these funds into play in risky, often unqualified loans is part of the story. Franks, Dodds and other do not want that story out in the press. So what better way to distract the American public than to create a diversion. In this case, it's a pretty catastrophic diversion.

But who would have the economic leverage to pull of such a stunt? And why would they do it? My money is on George Soros and his like. They want to push America to a socialist reality at all costs. And they mean to force us if we won't go willingly. By pulling money for no particularly good reason from the stock market, they create the type of emotional response that makes other less financially solid stockholders leave as well. And if you force the market lower, you can come back in and buy the same doggone stocks at fire sale values. If in addition, you can to stage manage the economic views of the media to support your candidate, then you can shape the vote. If that's not warping the intent of the freedom of Americans to vote, then I don't know what is.

Mark my words-you heard it here first. If the day after an Obama election, the market soars to 14000, the you will know that we have been had, that our votes were bought and that our legislators have sold out to the highest bidder. Don't believe me? Then read on...
Story #1
Story #2
Story #3
Story #4

The VP Debates: The Media Chooses, You Lose

So once again our mainstream media has weighed in with what they think is best for all of us. See, we, the American public, are too stupid and ignorant and attached to our religion and guns to really know what's what. Frankly, it's a wonder we can feed ourselves. You may think I am over the top on this, but there are countless blogs, wikis and other media out there who not only think we are wrong to support conservative ideals, but that it is the result of a mental deficiency. So the Media, in their gracious benevolence, has once again chosen for us. They have decided that Joe "I'm An Average Guy" Biden won. Frankly, I don't think either candidate did a bang-up job, but the constant self-congratulatory tone of the Obama campaign has worn thin.

But more than that attitude thing, I am truly wondering if the mainstream media has given up all pretenses of impartiality. The choosing of Ifill for the moderator was questionable considering her worshipful attitude towards all things Obama. But the way the media has chosen to ignore some very worrisome and possibly disastrous economic attitudes on the part of Joe Biden, is frightening.
To quote "Average Guy at the Home Depot" Joe, "

"we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you're paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe. That would keep people in their homes, actually help banks by keeping it from going under"

Excuse me? Banks are businesses. They run on the money they make from LENDING MONEY. That's known as INTEREST. The interest is set by the government not to exceed certain rates, but there is a great deal of leeway and consumers are more than welcome to shop around for better rates. Herein lies the problems. Congress literally forced lenders to make loans available to what is termed "underserved populations." The reason Congress did this was , according to them, to get rid of the vestiges of redlining and racism in the system. Instead, what really happened is that borrowers who could not prove income, had horrible credit history or who didn't have the financial stability to afford the lower interest rates of a conventional 30 year fixed loan, were leveraged into loans that had balloons that would rise after a certain amount of time or loans that were interest only. The stated reason for these types of loans to even exist was to help subprime borrowers improve their credit and possible refinance at better rates. Instead many of these borrowers went for the maximum amount they could acquire and when the balloons went up, they couldn't pay the mortgage. Now while this is sad, it's not like this was foisted on them by jackbooted thugs in dark alleys. These were free American adults signing contracts where all of the details are laid out in copious minutae. Every payment, every escalation, every interest rate is spelled out in writing. Why is it that only the people that PAY THEIR LOANS ARE GETTING SCREWED?

In the end, it's popular now to picture CEO's with golden parachutes getting the largest portion of the bailout. And maybe to a certain extent that's true. But what's really happening is that this is keeping the lights on at the bank on the corner and making payroll for the tellers and loan officers who don't have those cushy jobs. It's easy to blame some guy who gets away with a cushy retirement, but why is it that the media doesn't want to place the blame where it really belongs, on borrowers that didn't pay for their loans.

And this is why Joe Biden and Barak Obama should scare you silly. They have no intention of shoring up the banks for longevity. They simply want them shored up for now. They intend to allow judicial fiat to rip profits from banks. That means that people who actually put money into banks could see their interest and deposits dwindle as more people discover that paying out a loan is foolish when the government will bail you out. And what about retirees who have stock in bank corporations? They will also see their stocks value erode. This isn't the first time this has happened. My parents lost $200K when the savings and loans went belly up thirty years ago. There are still a few people around who should remember that. Unfortunately, none of them are running for president this year. Watch your pockets-these guys are NOT your friends.

Here's What a "Community Organizer" Does

There's been a great deal of debate over the role of community organizer in one's resume. In most cases, I assumed it was the role of volunteering to tutor in reading with the local library, coaching children's sports teams or doing something such as leading a Scout troop. But evidently, I couldn't be more wrong because in some cases "community organizing" means setting up programs to indoctrinate young people into the PC mode of performance. Here's a quote from the article linked below. I would warn you, if this is what is meant by the activation of America on the part of the Left, then we are in huge trouble here.
Full story here
Excerpts:
"Our alumni are more than twice as likely as 18-34 year olds to . . . engage in protest activities," Public Allies boasts in a document found with its tax filings. It has already deployed an army of 2,200 community organizers like Obama to agitate for "justice" and "equality" in his hometown of Chicago and other U.S. cities, including Cincinnati, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, New York, Phoenix, Pittsburgh and Washington. "I get to practice being an activist," and get paid for it, gushed Cincinnati recruit Amy Vincent..."

"..."If you commit to serving your community," he pledged in his Denver acceptance speech, "we will make sure you can afford a college education." So, go through government to go to college, and then go back into government..."

"...Not all the recruits appreciate the PC indoctrination. "It was too touchy-feely," said Nelly Nieblas, 29, of the 2005 Los Angeles class. "It's a lot of talk about race, a lot of talk about sexism, a lot of talk about homophobia, talk about -isms and phobias."

One of those -isms is "heterosexism," which a Public Allies training seminar in Chicago describes as a negative byproduct of "capitalism, white supremacy, patriarchy and male-dominated privilege...."

Now tell me again how the role of a community organizer is beneficial in the role of president. Tell how a "community organizer" will govern. Is this not an attitude of imposing ones individual socio-economic and political views onto someone else using the pressure of the office? And why are more people not concerned about the prospect of a very real erosion of the freedoms we hold? Right now, I know people who will not publicly state their personal conservative views for fear of retribution. And the Left says conservatives are fascists? I hate to be a gloom and doom deathsayer, but if Obama wins, watch the courts flood with cases of alleged discrimination based on the most tenuous evidence. While real racism should be rooted out and destroyed, too many people will see this as a chance to get a free paycheck on the taxpayers dole. And that along with all the other freebies Obama is promising should warn you off immediately.

While you are at it, you may also want to ponder where a young Barak Obama got the funding to attend Harvard. Here's a link that illuminates that aspect of his past and should make you wonder a little bit about the types of international alliances he would forge. It should also make you curious about where his campaign money originates and how it is being handled.

Story here.

I Am Sarah Palin.

I am Sarah Palin.

Like her I work for a living. I have kids, which I love very much. I married my high school boyfriend. I went to college outside the Ivy League. I worked for the issues in my church, in my community and at my job that I felt were important. I am outspoken and I am intelligent in a way that an Ivory Tower advocate cannot be. I have screamed my head off at soccer games, football games. I have argued with teachers and principals. I have had many successes in life and with my family.

I have also had those failures that prove I am human. And what is more, I am not alone. I am every woman who ever bounced a check, had a fight with her husband, embarrassed her kids or dented a fender. I am also the woman who gloried in the successes of her children-no matter how insignificant. I am the woman who defended her loved ones even when the outside world sought to tear them down. I have dried tears from my children's broken hearts. I have helped type essays. I have called on the phone to get people to vote. I have done all that and more.

Sarah Palin, her life, her experiences and her honesty speak to me far more than the ramblings of someone who has never really had to work to make their way in the world. And those words that she speaks may seem like political rhetoric to those who do not and cannot understand. But she speaks for me, to me and people like me.

I am Sarah Palin.

I Said It Was Time For A Woman

I had said all along that time was way overdue for a woman to be in the upper levels of power in our nation. But I didn't want it to be the conventional liberal women such as Pelosi or Clinton. I wanted a strong woman with convictions and values. I think we have that in Sarah Palin. I am so excited by her nomination for VP.

What I have found appalling is how the usual suspects in the liberal media are already on the path of character assassination and slander regarding Palin's resume. They have claimed that her youngest child is actually her grandchild. This assertion not only wounds her, but both of her daughters. The "proof" was the oldest child holding the baby-something that happens in families-but I guess liberals wouldn't have a clue about that. Secondly, the liberals at The Daily Kos and Moveon.org and Arianna Hufflepuffle's site are putting down her college education because she's just from Idaho. Excuse me? Do they not get in the least how freaking SNOBBISH they sound? It's like a meeting of the Atlanta Junior League! Then there's the downgrading of her professional experience as a *gasp* reporter. I bet the Fourth Estate is not too happy to have someone who knows their tricks of the trade. And finally, the Neo-marxists are denigrating her political experience as a mayor, then governor in Alaska. Both of those roles involve balancing budgets, implementing reform and producing position outcomes-somthing that the Congress-approval level at 9%-hasn't been able to do.

So what is the problem with Palin and why are the liberals screaming? Maybe its because they know in their hearts that this could be what changes the political tide for the Right.

Obama is Just Scary

And just what, pray tell Mr. Obama, is the mission of the "civilian force" you propose? Are you going to enforce your socialist liberal values upon those who chose to oppose you? Will knocks at the door in the night signal your opponents precipitous demise? Frankly, having read history, this sounds like a little group that terrorized German Jews in the 1930's. So is that the kind of starry future you propose? I used to think at least that you were reasonable, but it has become obvious that the hubris from public acclaim and the money of those who want to control the United States from behind the scenes has led to into a very dark place indeed. Be afraid, America, be VERY afraid.

Whither Obama?

The linked blog brings up some of the doubts that are arising the longer this campaign persists. While there are some issues presented with McCain, Obama has been so hyped by the Democrats that the idea that he has weaknesses is almost alien. I think that's why you are seeing such shock demonstrated in the media regarding his recent statements.

Your Democrat Congress @ Work

Last time elections rolled around, there was the overall feeling by the voters that they needed to cast off the Republican party. They didn't do it because things were bad, but instead because the media and the DNC told the American public they were bad. In the two years since the Democrats have taken the reins of Congress, precious little has been done in the way of creating progress. Pelosi is bottling up legislation that could make domestic drilling possible which in turn would eventually lower some of the cost of living. Instead, they are promoting only alternative sources for power. Never mind that the social elite, like the Kennedys, don't want their scenic horizons marred by wind generators. Instead they want them invisible, which of course means, out west. I am not sure how they are going to reconcile PETA's designation of wind turbines as detrimental to bird life. Likewise, we cannot use nuclear because of a move twenty years ago. We can't use hydroelectric power generation because of environmental PAC's that don't like it. Instead we are supposed to use the fluctuation nuances of wind power-which dies in the afternoon during peak usage, and solar, which isn't potent enough to generate power for more than an incremental amount of what we use. As for those electric cars, still limited by battery capacity and the hybrids still use gasoline. Here's what the Democrats have done for you. They have forced corn based ethanol, using bad science from Brazil's sugarcane based ethanol. They have bought votes from key farm states via subsidies. The results are that animal feed is higher, meaning all animal products from meat to dairy are also higher. Don't kid yourself, this isn't accidental. Part of the world wide green intiative is to cut meat consumption. I have even heard lectures on the news about how we are supposed to consider how much water it takes to produce food before we buy it.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I AM PRETTY SICK OF RICH, SELF-CENTERED IDEOLOGUES

TRYING TO RUN MY LIFE!!!!!

"...The percentage of voters who give Congress good or excellent ratings has fallen to single digits for the first time in Rasmussen Reports tracking history. This month, just 9% say Congress is doing a good or excellent job. Most voters (52%) say Congress is doing a poor job, which ties the record high in that dubious category.

Last month, 11% of voters gave the legislature good or excellent ratings. Congress has not received higher than a 15% approval rating since the beginning of 2008....:

Full Article Here

Scandal Brewing OR Who's Under the Bus This Week

The media has given a free pass to the Democrats by and large because the president and Republicans in general were a more popular target for venom and ridicule. So here we have this economic situation fueled largely by dropping dollars from the mortgage "crisis" (did you ever notice how every liberal issue is a "crisis"?) Anyway, where is the outcry in the media about these stories? They go very high up in the DNC echelon and hardly anyone is giving them page one treatment. Where's the angst folks? Where's the accusations and calls for censure? Pay special attention to the very close alliance between current and former Countrywide executives and the Obama campaign. Heck, one of them is vetting potential VP candidates. *pensive" Do you think that the views potential candidates have toward litigation of the folks involved with subprime loans will play into who is chosen? Just wondering
Story One
Story Two
Story Three
Story Four

Who Is Making Money On High Fuel Costs?

It would seem that Hillary Clinton let the cat out of the bag by trying to get Congress to pass a fuel tax holiday. While the margin of profit that oil companies make has been pretty consistent at around 8%. Granted that's better than some companies, but much less than say, Google, which had a 25% profit. To quote from CNN-which is not usually an apologist for big oil companies-

"...Even though many oil companies are reporting record profits, many people forget just how expensive it is for energy companies to engage in the oil business.

The average net profit margin for the S&P Energy sector, according to figures from Thomson Baseline, is 9.7%. The average for the S&P 500 is 8.5%. So yes, energy companies are more profitable than many others...but not by an inordinate amount.

Google, for example, reported a net profit margin of 25% in its most recent quarter. Should we have an online advertising windfall profit tax?..."

CNN Money April 29, 2008

So exactly which entities have the most to lose if gas taxes are cut? Not the oil companies, their taxes are paid before it hits the pump. But local taxing umbrellas such as counties, states and even the federal government have a great deal to lose if such a tax holiday were passed. The Obama camp is trying to rally union opposition by citing the possibility of losing construction jobs. But then again, is this real shrinkage of the domestic job market, or will it give construction companies the incentive to stop hiring people who are not here legally? And when it comes to tax dollars going into Washington D.C. , Texans are only getting about seventy five cents or so for every dollar we send. So where's the rest of the money? We could go into the scenario from "It's a Wonderful Life" where the function of the savings and loan is explained, but the simply matter is that the money Texans don't get back in the form of projects is political payola for things like ethanol support subsidies, pet projects and celebrity endorsed programs which due to their cost only help the already wealthy. In short, while there's a noticeable reluctance to address the issue, the federal government, state governments and local towns and cities are reaping a bountiful harvest of sales taxes that become exponentially higher when they are based on per dollar sales. Everyone wins, except the consumer. Maybe someone should read them the story about the Goose that Laid the Golden Egg before all of our gooses are cooked.

When Barry Became Barack

I found this article from Newsweek very interesting because if we are going to continue with what amounts to a rush to coronation, we must know what makes this man tick. I am not faulting his early years or his upbringing-all kids want to "fit in" and be part of the crowd. What I found a bit disturbing was this segment in which Mr. Obama's memory of the situation differs greatly with that of his friend. And this detail gives us a little insight into how awkward and how much Mr. Obama's African American heritage plays into his political spiel. The story itself is linked to the headline above.
Excerpt:
"Back in Hawaii in the 1970s, it could seem that everyone was some kind of a minority. The fact that Obama was half-black and half-white didn't matter much to anyone but Obama, Kakugawa says: "He made everything out like it was all racial." On one occasion, Obama thought he'd gotten a bad break on the school basketball team because he was black. But Kakugawa recalls his father's telling the teenager, "No, Barry, it's not because you're black. It's because you missed two shots in a row." (Here, Kakugawa's memory is different from Obama's. The Ray character in the book is the one obsessed with being discriminated against.)....."

It's Going To Be a Bumpy Year

I am a Fred Thompson supporter. I think he's the only candidate in the race who plans on using the Constitution as the basis for his presidency. I have been leery of most of the other Republicans. McCain is too old, Romney too wooden and stiff, Giuliani is too jokey and insincere, and Ron Paul is just weird. Thompson is all we have ....
But things are starting to get contentious as shown in this video

Texan of the Year?

The Dallas Morning News, a BELO publication, has decided to select the Illegal Immigrant as the Texan of the Year. Now maybe I am just naive, but it seems that someone who is here illegally isn't really a part of the fabric of the society. I am tired of the naivete that fuels this politically correct rhetoric and I think we should all DEMAND that the candidates address this issue. If you think this doesn't impact you, let me clue you into a few facts.
-Illegal immigrants use public health facilities, often giving bogus names for services. This means that if they use false ID, the people with the real identity end up having to deal with the mess. In a 20/20 episode last year, people who crossed the border were bombarded with offers for fraudulent documentation before they had even left sight of the border.
-The average live birth costs $7K. Dallas' Parkland Hospital has the highest live birth rate in the country with upwards of 70% being to women who are undocumented. How many of those bills do you think get paid? And if the users don't pay, who do you think gets stuck with the bill? (Hint: Taxpayers)
-City and county taxes pay for infrastructure, education and services based on the total number of residents in existing housing. When you have older properties managed by absentee landlords, you end up with multiple families living in single family homes. So the rate for supporting things like police, streets, water and schools are divvied up where they actually pay less per person than the other residents. Add to that the fact that having multiple families in single family homes drives down home values making taxes rise just to cover current expenditures. Now add to that the fact that these are often in older communities where retirees count on their home as their main asset. Can you imagine the double heartbreak of seeing sinking values and rising taxes?
-Security is perhaps the most serious issue. In state public schools every teacher, every volunteer is required to have a criminal background check. Yet school districts seek to save money by contracting services for food, tranportation and maintenance. The service companies allegedly do checks, but who is monitoring this? And even if they do checks, I have heard many of the hired staff at my school discussing how they avoid being caught by ICE. This isn't secure or safe.

In short, this is an issue that the candidates want to go away. Tancredo is out, but I still have hopes for Thompson, who seems to be the only guy interested in holding people to some standards. Mark my words, there are going to be activists pushing for illegals to vote simply because they are here.

Primary Season: Strange Days Indeed

Part of the primary process is the winnowing of many candidates down to a few. This is becoming a truly odd primary for several reasons. First of all, Iowa and New Hampshire, for all their small town charm, no longer represent the vast middle American political spectrum. Back in the day when we were largely a rural economy with manufacturing centers, the combination of having largely rural Iowa and New Hampshire primaries calling the shots made sense. In a period when most of us live in or around large cities, the views of these small and most homogenous states don't reflect the concerns that hound most of us. What does an Iowa farmer know about the influx of illegal immigration on the economy of border states? What does a New Hampshire resident understand about the increasing need for improved infrastructure throughout regions that would swallow their small state in size? We are a federation of states, each supposedly with our own needs but with fair representation, allegedly, in Congress. So why then do we continue to put such blind faith in the caucus process in states that have so very little to do with the larger problems of urban centers that are remote to them? A better case could be made for having California or Florida as the first primary because at least there the mix of voters would better represent the nation as a whole. Instead what will happen is that candidates will gather and attempt to appease the voters in these two small states. In doing so, they will address things like education, healthcare and social justice-all areas in which these two states express a great deal of interest. Very little will be said regarding the war, taxation, spending or the other bugaboos that haunt states later in the primary season. After these first primaries, it is expected that candidate will drop out. I have my own ideas about that. As I see it, Obama wins Iowa and Clinton wins New Hampshire. The Republicans are a toss-up, with Giuliani being the compormise candidate. I am kind of curious if someone like Thompson might make it a floor fight OR possibly break from the party and run as an independent. Wouldn't it be interesting to see Thompson/Leiberman ticket? Now that would tick off both major parties, but at the same time could throw the election to Congress. I don't think that's a hot potato they want to handle because the ensuing political fallout will make Gore's hissy fit look like a hiccup. Strange days indeed.

And Now....A Candidate for All Seasons

Here's a candidate we can all support because like all good candidates, he stands for everything and says nothing of substance.