The Stimulus - Simply Explained

Hysterical :-)

FBI raids Obama's new computer chief's office

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An aide to President Barack Obama is on leave from his White House job after the FBI raided his old District of Columbia government office Thursday, arresting a city employee and a technology consultant on corruption charges, a White House official said.

The charges were lodged against the two men at a federal court hearing as the FBI finished searching the city's technology office, which was led until recently by Obama's new computer chief, Vivek Kundra.

Read the whole thing.

Obama wants vets to pay for their own injuries!!!

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama administration is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance, but was told by lawmakers that it would be "dead on arrival" if sent to Congress.

Read the whole thing!

Wall Street swindler Bernie Madoff gave hundreds of thousands to Democrats

...none of whom are returning calls from the press. Prosecutors are going to try to recoup as much of Madoff's money as possible to give back to his victims. But, it sure doesn't look like any of these Democrats are going to be giving back the money!

While the mainstream media have given considerable coverage to the Madoff scandal, few reporters mention Madoff was a Democrat with a history of thousands of dollars in contributions to Democratic Party candidates.

According to Federal Election Commission records, among Madoff's dozens of contributions to Democrats were the following:

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.: $2,000 in 2002, $6,000 in 2004 and another $2,000 in 1998;

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.: $1,000 in 2000

House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt, D-Mo, presidential campaign: $2,000 in 2003;

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y.: $1,000 in 2001; $1,000 in 1998;

Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.: $10,200 in 2007; $1,000 in 2004;

Gov. Jon Corzine, D-N.J.: $1,000 in 1999.

Madoff appears to have gotten around rules limiting campaign contributions.

Read the whole thing

Pray for recovery

Recession is when your neighbor loses his job.



Depression is when you lose your job.



Recovery is when Obama loses his job!

A profile in hypocrisy

"Do we operate under a system of equal justice under law? Or is there one system for the average citizen and another for the high and mighty?" --Senator Ted Kennedy, 1973

AP explains where some of that "well done" earmark moula Obama just authorized will end up (and it's not in your pocket):

BOSTON – More than one out of every five dollars of the $126 million Massachusetts is receiving in earmarks from a $410 billion federal spending package is going to help preserve the legacy of the Kennedys.

The bill includes $5.8 million for the planning and design of a building to house a new Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the Senate. The funding may also help support an endowment for the institute.

Wow. Wonder if it'll include all this stuff?

Surely not this: ...the State Police Detective-Lieutenant (George Killen) who investigated the accident, said that Senator Kennedy "killed that girl the same as if he put a gun to her head and pulled the trigger."

BREAKING: Obama has blown it!

By PHIL IZZO

U.S. President Barack Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner received failing grades for their efforts to revive the economy from participants in the latest Wall Street Journal forecasting survey.

Their assessment stands in stark contrast with Mr. Obama's popularity with the public, with a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll giving him a 60% approval rating. But a majority of the 49 economists polled is dissatisfied with the administration's economic policies.

On average, they gave the president a mark of 59 out of 100, and although there was a broad range of marks, 42% of respondents graded Mr. Obama below 60. Mr. Geithner fared even worse, with an average grade of 51. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke scored better, with an average 71.

"The Obama team has blown it," said David Resler of Nomura Securities.

Obama, Geithner Get Low Grades From Economists

Warning

Phony Mortgage Plan
By Dick Morris (former advisor to Bill Clinton)
Posted: 03/10/09 04:46 PM [ET]

President Obama and his big spenders are moving quickly, to the relief of those who are facing foreclosure on their mortgages. But the program they are offering will do nothing for those most in need.

In the fine print, Obama’s plan provides no relief for any homeowner whose mortgage exceeds the total value of his home. But these folks are the ones who have been conned into taking sub-prime mortgages so loaded with brokerage commissions, interest rate subsidies, bank fees and lawyer and title-company charges that the amount of the mortgage has ballooned. These high mortgage amounts, coupled with declining property values, have turned about 20 percent of American mortgages upside down, so that the debt exceeds the value of the property.

By excluding these homeowners from help, Obama is guilty of a holier-than-thou hypocrisy. Was it not Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that encouraged such over-mortgaged properties? Was it not the Democrats in Congress who passed legislation urging Fannie and Freddie to weaken the standards to allow more low- and lower-middle-income families to buy homes?

How can Obama suddenly pretend to be so shocked — shocked — that about 20 percent of America’s home mortgages are now worth more than the property they finance? It was the insistence of liberal Democrats that made it so. When Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros demanded that Fannie and Freddie invest 42 percent of their assets in buying low- and lower-middle-income mortgages, and when his successor Andrew Cuomo raised the quota to 50 percent, what did they think would happen? When they explicitly told Fannie and Freddie not to insist on down payments in the mortgages they purchased, how did they think the purchase would be funded? Obviously, if you don’t require the borrower to put money down, the full purchase price must be covered by the mortgage. To now, piously, refuse to come to the rescue of those who fell for your party’s seeming generosity and bought homes on the terms it suggested is hypocritical at best.

But it is not only the over-mortgaged whom Obama will ignore, but those who have lost their jobs! If you do not make enough money such that your mortgage payments come to 31 percent of your income, you can’t get your mortgage refinanced. If your income has dropped to a point where your monthly payments on your loan consume a greater part of your earnings than 31 percent, you are stuck.

So we have Obama rushing to the aid of those who have been hurt in this bad economy, but exempting from his proposed relief anyone who has lost his job and seen a cut in income or whose property values have dropped below the amount of his mortgage. In other words, he’ll help anyone but those most in need.

And, once again, Obama would limit his aid to those who make below $200,000 a year. While he doesn’t specify this limit in his proposal, he does limit his intervention to mortgages of less than $720,000. At standard mortgage interest rates, such a loan would call for $60,000 or so in payments a year. To qualify for relief, your mortgage payment can’t be larger than 31 percent of your income — or about $200,000. Once more, Obama makes it clear that he is not the president of anyone who makes that much money or more. He is only the president of the other people.

Obama, of course, forgets — or doesn’t care — that those making over $200,000 account for almost a third of the total national spending and that you cannot stimulate an economy while constantly cutting off those people from any consideration in any government program. But Obama is determined to try.

Morris, a former adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Outrage. To get all of Dick Morris’s and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by e-mail or to order a signed copy of their new best-selling book, Fleeced, go to dickmorris.com.

Every Obama campaign promise comes with an expiration date

First the "no lobbyists" promise...now the "no earmarks" promise...down the shit-hole called Obama's presidency. Now he says that earmarks are OK if "done right." Right. - Just Another Tax And Spend Liberal

New movie: Brothers At War

BROTHERS AT WAR is an intimate portrait of an American family during a turbulent time.  Jake Rademacher sets out to understand the experience, sacrifice, and motivation of his two brothers serving in Iraq. The film follows Jake’s exploits as he risks everything—including his life—to tell his brothers’ story.  Often humorous, but sometimes downright lethal, BROTHERS AT WAR is a remarkable journey where Jake embeds with four combat units in Iraq. Unprecedented access to U.S. and Iraqi combat units take him behind the camouflage curtain with secret reconnaissance troops on the Syrian border, into sniper "Hide Sites" in the Sunni Triangle, through raging machine gun battles with the Iraqi Army.  Ultimately, the film follows his brothers home where separations and life-threatening work ripple through their parents, siblings, wives and children.  BROTHERS AT WAR provides a rare look at the bonds and service of our soldiers on the frontlines and the profound effects their service has on the loved ones they leave behind.

WATCH THE TRAILER HERE

Win $500 by expressing your concerns about all the big government spending

Despite overwhelming public opposition, the so-called "stimulus" was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama. As a result, your portion of the national debt increased by $9,400, Congress created more than 30 new federal programs and spent lavishly on non-stimulative projects, including $650 million alone on digital television converter box subsidies. This takes money out of the pockets of regular Americans to pay for more wasteful spending.

What's your biggest frustration about the government's appetite for more spending in the midst of the tough economic climate?

Find out how to speak up, make a difference, and win $500.

http://stopspendingourfuture.org/

Sponsored by The Heritage Foundation and Americans for Prosperity Foundation

The Press: Double Standard

The press in the United States has long sinced ceased being a watchdog for the people. For years, and most blatantly in the 21st Century, they have marched to the liberal drumbeat as an arm of the Democratic Party:

The press never reported that Democratic strategist James Carville said he wanted President Bush to fail before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. But a feeding frenzy ensued when radio host Rush Limbaugh recently said he wanted President Obama to fail.

Read the whole thing

Justice Scalia says: "Bring the case, I'll hear it!"

Excerpt from today's article in WorldNetDaily:

She [Orly Taitz] said, "I told Scalia that I was an attorney that filed Lightfoot v. Bowen that Chief Justice Roberts distributed for conference on Jan. 23 and now I represent nine state reps and 120 military officers, many of them high ranked, and I want to know if they will hear Quo Warranto and if they would hear it on original jurisdiction, if I bring Hawaii as an additional defendant to unseal the records and ascertain Obama's legitimacy for presidency."

Taitz said she had some worries asking the question.

"I have to say that I prepared myself to a lot of boo-ing, knowing that Los Angeles trial lawyers and entertainment elite are Obama's stronghold, however there was no boo-ing, no negative remarks," she said. "I actually could see a lot of approving nods, smiles, many gasped and listened intensely. I could tell, that even Obama's strongest supporters wanted to know the answer.

"Scalia stated that it would be heard if I can get four people to hear it. He repeated, you need four for the argument. I got a feeling that he was saying that one of these four that call themselves constitutionalists went to the other side," Taitz said.

"He did not say that it is a political question, he did not say that it is for the legislature to decide. For example, right after me another attorney has asked him about his case of taxing some Internet commerce and right away Scalia told him that he should address it with the legislature. He did not say it to me. He did not say that Quo Warranto is antiquated or not appropriate. No, just get four," she said.

She then bought Scalia's book and waited in line to get it autographed.

"I gave him the books to sign and asked, 'Tell me what to do, what can I do, those soldiers [her plaintiffs] can be court-martialed for asking a legitimate question, who is the president, is he legitimate.' He said, 'Bring the case, I'll hear it, I don't know about others.'"

Read the whole thing!

British Cabinet Secretary on U.S. Government: "There's nobody there!"

Gosh, aren't you much more reassured about everything now that Obama's president???

Britain’s most senior civil servant [UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown] claimed it was hard to find anyone to speak to at the US Treasury. Sir Gus O’Donnell, cabinet secretary, blamed the “absolute madness” of the US system where a new administration had to hire new officials from scratch, leaving a decision-making vacuum.

“There is nobody there. You cannot believe how difficult it is,” he told a conference of civil servants.

Atlantic stimulus rift grows

One hell of a theory!

Re: Obama' refusal to provide ANY personal records (birth, medical, educational).

Finally, there is an explanation of "how all of this ties together from Hawaiian welfare fraud, Occidental College student finance fraud and Barack Obama currency fraud defrauding the American public of funds and places of education for it’s own citizens...This is really a large issue of global scale and Barack Obama is the tip of the felony iceberg."

Read the whole amazing thing here.

H/T: Investigating Obama

Call to action: The WHY Initiative

There once existed a “fringe movement” comprised of people who were publicly ridiculed for their specific and firmly held conviction—a conviction that ran counter to the generally held beliefs of their time. As staunchly as they embraced what they knew to be truth, it seemed no less than futility trying to sway the vast majority to accept, or even consider, that knowledge. The institutions that controlled the dissemination of public information condemned these “truth bearers” as unworthy of the slightest civility. It even became dangerous to attempt to convince the masses that these contentions were, in fact, truth—so dangerous that one of the group’s leaders was eventually imprisoned for openly sharing his viewpoint, and then placed under house arrest for the remainder of his years.

Is this how history will recall us—the “birthers” of the early 21 century? If it is, then it will likely be part of the account describing America’s demise. This portrayal certainly looks accurate regarding what we’ve experienced, except for the leader’s imprisonment. But, the “leader” to whom I am referring was Galileo Galilei, and the fringe movement of his day was the heliocentrists—those who believed the earth orbited the sun, and not the other way around. Just because society considers beliefs that run counter to the understandings of the gullible masses to be “fringe” or “conspiracy theories,” doesn’t mean that those beliefs are not true. The earth continues to orbit the sun.

There is a group of people, who rely on us to retain their jobs, who have still not provided truthful, informed answers to our questions about Mr. Obama’s eligibility to be president—the members of Congress. While a very nasty bug has kept me pretty silent for more than a couple weeks, I feel I have now recovered enough to once again remember just how angry it makes me that these folks have arrogantly dismissed us as lunatics—and they are supposed to be working FOR us!

So, The WHY Initiative is now being implemented in full force. Citizen Wells and I finalized it today, and we are ready to begin a new barrage of inquiries into the offices of our elected officials in Congress.

Here’s what we’re asking you to do: call, write, email, and/or visit the U.S. Representatives and Senators in YOUR state only. Believe me, since they view getting re-elected as their most important job, they are really only concerned with keeping their constituents happy. It does very little for someone in Ohio to contact an elected official in Kentucky—there’s no vote involved there, so the Ohioan means nothing to the Kentucky official.

We’re NOT asking for them to send you an answer to your request—we’ve already been sickened enough by their moronic lies. No, all we’d like you to request of them is to enter into a dialogue with the representatives of our movement. Citizen Wells and I will determine who will speak with any of them who appear willing. In that dialogue, the question to which we’ll be trying to obtain an answer will be “Why didn’t you ask for proof that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen?” We know they just HAD to have had a reason. We’d now like to know what it was.

Here is a sample letter you can cut and paste, or you can take the specifics of it and write your own letter.


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

Dear [Elected Official]

As you undoubtedly know, there are many people across the country who are aware and disturbed that Barack Obama has refused to provide proper documentation to prove he is a natural born citizen as required by our Constitution. After the general election, many of your constituents communicated with you asking that you request a proper investigation into the matter, but you chose not to.

I am not asking you to provide more of the same debunked misinformation and deception with which many representatives and senators chose to reply to those previous requests; they were lies then, so they’ll continue to be lies. What I am asking is for you merely to have a brief dialogue with the representatives of our movement to answer a simple question: Why didn’t you ask for the proof that so many of your constituents expected to be provided? Why did you think Barack Obama was constitutionally eligible to be president? Did you rely on the media for your decision? Did you just trust snopes.com and factcheck.org? Did you just believe that nobody could have ever been elected president without being properly vetted at some point in the process? Were you threatened? Were you provided with some communication directing you to ignore the inquiries?

Through this initiative, The WHY Initiative, those in our ever-growing movement are committed to two things regarding the elected officials who will not provide honest answers to their constituents: we will refuse to financially support any of their efforts, and we will work to see that those officials are removed from office through the election process. That would seem a steep price for you to pay when the alternative would be such an easy thing to do. And, we are not interested in speaking with any of your staffers. These answers should be answered by only you.

I don’t know about any of the other members of Congress, but I have confidence that you will be able to provide a legitimate answer to that question. In fact, I have such confidence in you that I am expecting you to do so.

To make arrangements to provide your answers, please make contact at either of these email addresses:

Citizen Wells: citizenwells@gmail.com

Dean Haskins: dhaskins@restoretheconstitutionalrepublic.com

Or call: 434.525.1479

Thanking you in advance for your timely and forthright response.

Sincerely,

[NAME]

[CITY, STATE]

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


Here is an online resource with contact information for each state: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Next, we’d like you to keep us posted about the contacts you are making, but rather than trying to keep up with, and categorize, countless emails, please keep us updated by posting your progress on our forum: http://www.restoretheconstitutionalrepublic.com/forum/index.php. If you haven’t registered, please do so—it’s quick and painless. There is a board on the forum labeled “Individual State Boards.” Once there, you’ll see your state’s individual board. Please post your updates there. If you would be interested in being a coordinator for your state, please let us know.

I would just like to express my gratitude for the many kind sentiments I’ve received while I’ve been ill. I cannot ever remember being so sick for so long. I am profoundly encouraged by how many of you are choosing to remain steadfast in this battle, and it is your mettle that gives me the desire to step back into the ring and fight for all I’m worth.

We WILL be heard!!!

God bless each of you.

Dean Haskins

Chairman, Restore the Constitutional Republic

Orly Taitz needs your help

After the meeting with Justice Scalia, I realized that he never heard about my case Lghtfoot v Bowen or any other cases brought to the Supreme Court about Obama's lack of eligibility for presidency. Supreme Court gets some 80,000 cases and hears only about 80. So, they hear only about 0.1% of the cases brought to them. I believe the nefarious clerks that are actually running the show, are advising them about the importance and the strength of the cases, summarize the cases for them. I need to know if the other Justices have a clue about the cases. At the meeting Scalia told that they pick the cases based on importance. At the time they had a conference on my case Lightfoot v Bowen and didn't find eligibility of president to be important, they found litigation on light cigaretes to be important. Either this is a complete insanity, or the clerks have never shown the case to them.

The Justices of the Supreme Court travel around the Country all the time and give lectures and sell their books. Please, let me know, when those justices come to your area. Either I will come or you have to demand answers from them: Why didn't they forward from the conference to the open court argument my case Lightfoot v Bowen? or any other cases on this issue? Don 't they think legitimacy of president is as important as litigation on light cigarettes. American citizens deserve a clear answer from them, why didn't they hear the case and what will it take for them to hear the case in open court and subpoena Obama's records. If you have a date and time, call me 949-683-5411

Posted by Dr. Orly Taitz at 3/10/2009 11:15 AM

Newsweek: Obama still has the approval of the people, but the establishment is beginning to mumble that the president may not have what it takes.

Howard Fineman tries hard to be nice, but someone should tell Nimrod: the writing is on the wall.

The myth of Obama's so-called moderate Taliban

UPDATE (3/10/09):KABUL (Reuters) - Afghanistan's Taliban on Tuesday turned down as illogical U.S. President Barack Obama's bid to reach out to moderate elements of the insurgents, saying the exit of foreign troops was the only solution for ending the war.Taliban say Obama's call on moderates "illogical"

Besides it being, very simply, an oxymoron, here are two real life examples...from someone who really knows what he is talking about.

Farewell To Britain

The irony of the evident distancing from Britain by the Obama administration is that Brown's government is pursuing policies that Barack Obama seemingly espouses. The U.S. taxpayer now owns most of AIG and Citigroup, two companies massively engaged in Shariah-compliant transactions, at odds with our constitutional separation of church and state.

In this and other ways, Mr. Obama is effectively acquiescing to Islamists' demands to establish here as in the U.K. their own, "parallel" society observing Shariah rules, not the laws of the land. Among the concessions in the works appears to be bans on so-called "hate speech" that defames Islam, an idea implicit in the President's injunction to use "respectful language" towards Muslims.

Last week, moreover, Hillary Clinton effectively promised a whopping $900 million charitable contribution from the U.S. taxpayer to Hamas - or at least a future Hamas-Fatah "unity" government. This is a part of the President's determination to reset Mideast diplomacy by forging what might be called "special relationships" not only with Syria and Iran but the major terrorist organizations they sponsor, Hamas and Hezbollah.

As the Free World increasingly engages in submission to Shariah, it appears the special U.S. tie to the U.K. that served to block the global ambitions of successive totalitarian ideologies will no longer operate. Under President Obama, the question increasingly is: Will the U.S. perform that vital role alone, or succumb as Britain is doing to what Islam scholar Robert Spencer calls the "Stealth Jihad" now being mounted against every freedom-loving country?

Read the whole thing