Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for September, 2008

Today in the Wall Street Journal there is an Op-Ed piece from Hillary Clinton that shows us how if we had listened to her this situation might not be so bad right now for the markets or for the homeowners involved.

Unlike Obama or McCain she had a concrete plan that would have stabilized the mortgage market by a measurable degree. Set up a Home Owners’ Loan Corporation to help home owners refinance their homes at a fixed rate they can afford allowing millions more to stay in their homes and keeping foreclosure rates lower and allowing the markets time to adjust and correct. Sounded like a good plan to me when she first proposed it almost two years ago and it still sounds like a good plan to me now.

 

Hillary Clinton: Let’s Keep People in Their Homes

By Hillary Rodham Clinton

There is a broad consensus that Congress must act to stave off deeper turmoil on Wall Street. Irrespective of the final agreement yet to be reached, there are several principles that must be part of a broader reform effort that begins this week and continues in the coming months.

This is not just a financial crisis; it’s an economic crisis. Therefore, the solutions we pursue cannot simply stabilize the markets. We must also deal with the interconnected economic challenges that set the stage for this crisis — and reverse the failed policies that allowed a potential crisis to become a real one.

First, we must address the skyrocketing rates of mortgage defaults and foreclosures that have buffeted the economy and ignited the credit crisis. Two million homeowners carry mortgages worth more than their homes. They hold $3 trillion in mortgage debt. Nearly three million adjustable-rate mortgages are scheduled for a rate increase in the next two years. Another wave of foreclosures looms.

I’ve proposed a new Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC), to launch a national effort to help homeowners refinance their mortgages. The original HOLC, launched in 1933, bought mortgages from failed banks and modified the terms so families could make affordable payments while keeping their homes. The original HOLC returned a profit to the Treasury and saved one million homes. We can save roughly three times that many today. We should also put in place a temporary moratorium on foreclosures and freeze rate hikes in adjustable-rate mortgages. We’ve got to stem the tide of failing mortgages and give the markets time to recover.

The time for ideological, partisan arguments against these actions is over. For years, the calls to provide borrowers an affordable opportunity to avoid foreclosure as a means of preventing wider turmoil were dismissed as government intrusion into the private marketplace. My proposals over the past two years were derided as too much, too soon. Now we are forced to reckon with too little, too late.

As a result, the home-mortgage crisis slowly eroded the value of debt instruments upon which Wall Street firms were depending. That is how this house of borrowed cards began to fall. If we do not take action to address the crisis facing borrowers, we’ll never solve the crisis facing lenders. These problems go hand in hand. And if we are going to take on the mortgage debt of storied Wall Street giants, we ought to extend the same help to struggling, middle-class families.

Second, American taxpayers should have a voice and a stake in the resolution of this market crisis. If the Treasury proposal is enacted in its current form, the American government would assume enough financial risk to become the majority shareholder in the companies rescued by taxpayer dollars.

The American people are bearing the risk and therefore deserve to reap the rewards of a shared equity model. And mortgage securities bought by taxpayers must be valued accurately at prices disclosed in real time, with checks and reporting requirements to prevent abuse.

Third, taxpayers are being asked to bear an unparalleled degree of financial risk. We cannot allow taxpayers to take on this burden so that Wall Street and the Bush administration can hit the “reset button.” This historic intervention demands a historic shift in priorities: an end to the broken culture on Wall Street, and the broken economic policies in Washington.

Corporations that will benefit must be held accountable, not only to large shareholders but also to the American people, who are rightly tired of business as usual: short-term profit at the expense of long-term viability; lax oversight and regulation; obscene bonuses and golden parachutes regardless of performance; reckless risk-taking that has placed the markets in jeopardy; rewards for foreclosing on middle-class families and selling mortgages designed to fail; and outsourcing good jobs to serve short-term stock prices instead of America’s long-term economic health.

This is a sink-or-swim moment for America. We cannot simply catch our breath. We’ve got to swim for the shores. We must address the conditions that set the stage for the turmoil unfolding on Wall Street, or we will find ourselves lurching from crisis to crisis. Just as Wall Street must once again look further than the quarterly report, our nation must as well.

Mrs. Clinton, a Democrat, is a senator from New York.

You know there is a lot of talk and anger (rightly so) about the bailing out of the big Wall Street Investors and the irresponsible people who took loans they could not afford. The fact is a lot of the blame here also lies with some lenders who out of greed made loans that they should have known were high risk at best.

The fact remains though that not every family facing foreclosure is in this situation because they were irresponsible or because they fraudulently acquired credit they could not afford. Are there some who did that? Yes. Are all of them in this situation for those reasons? No.

A lot of people went out to buy homes and they could afford a payment and the maintenance on said home. They work hard and pay their bills like most everybody but then the lenders said “With rates this low you can afford so much more and you can just re-finance before the rate goes up.” And then oil went to record breaking highs and the prices of gasoline and groceries and heating bills went higher and higher. People who could afford their payments suddenly found themselves in a crunch.

Enter the lenders who expected to win either way and the rates go up, the payments go up and with the other expenses rising people began feeling more than a crunch. They were now caught in a vise. The lenders figured either way they would win because the families would either continue to pay with the higher interest rates or they would re-finance giving the lenders another chance to make a nice chunk of change for that.

What they didn’t count on was all the other economic factors, the inflation, the Wall Street crowd suddenly waking up to the fact that some of the loans that were packaged and sold were not going to pan out and should never have been made in the first place. Then suddenly we have a tightening of credit standards (better late than never?) and the people who were told to refinance suddenly can’t qualify.

The payments continue to go up, other expenses go up and the number of options available to them goes down. It seems to me that the average, working, responsible homeowner is now caught in a very bad situation not (at least not entirely) of their own making.

Now enter the Congress and Bush who decide we need to stop the bleeding in the market but where is the help for the homeowner who wants to be responsible? They want to keep thier homes and pay for them.

Look at it this way if we do not help those homeowners by giving them an option that allows them to stay in their homes we have more foreclosures and the very families that get ousted will now have to spend the money they would have paid on a mortgage on rent! They will not be better off in fact they will be far worse off and at the mercy of the rental market. At that point they no longer have any chance of hedging against inflation in their housing. They are at the completely and truly screwed. They will still be buying a house just for someone else.

Maybe there are some who willingly entered into risky deals that should then pay the price for bad decision making but we cannot hold every borrower responsible for the rouges. It is in our best interest to allow as many people to stay in their homes as we can and have them paying those mortgages rather than turning homeowners into a money machine for the investor class and thereby increasing the size of the lower-middle and lower classes. Rather than lifting them up and promoting healthy economic growth it will simply place a lower ceiling on it. Rather than empower the average American it will empower the wealthy investors who need no help to grow.

Hillary knows what we need to do to turn this crisis around and she knows how deep it runs for all those involved. She’s not just worried about Wall Street and the markets. She’s worried about the average Joe or Jane and she’s working to see that they don’t get forgotten.

Obama has yet to come up with any plan economic or otherwise that he didn’t steal from someone wiser and more savy. It’s what he does. He plagerizes speeches and he takes others’ ideas, tweaks them just a bit and tries to grab the credit. This guy wouldn’t know a solution if it hit him in the ass!

He’s not the President but he plays one and he just knows he could do it! “Come on! Howard, Donna and Nancy promised it was MY turn!”

Can we please have Hillary back now?

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

I haven’t watched The View for quite a while now. Since the became all about the Obama love. However since it is Bill I’ll make an exception.

In Part 1 he talks about whether or not Hillary wanted to be VP, complex reasons that people vote and the need to respect that as well as sexism in society and in the election. You only have to listen to him for a quick minute and you suddenly remember why they call him the Big Dawg! This man could talk for days and you’d be content to listen.

Part 2 is all about the economy, the mortgage crisis and the bailout that is in the works. Bottom line is he thinks this is necessary but not enough. We should have gone with Hillary’s plan to creat a system to refinance peoples’ mortgages so they could afford them and the end result could actually have made a profit in the long run. Boy that hillary is smart. Can we have her back now?

Part 3 he says Barbara reminded him that a year ago he said McCain would be the republican nominee because he is the only republican that could win. He also says Obama will win but in the same breath said wonderful things about John McCain. Hmmmm. I have to wonder what there is that he didn’t say but might have wanted to? Plus you gotta say he brings out the best in people. Whoopie even wore a dress!

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Citizen Wells has a new post with some very revealing information about the vetting process where it concerns elected officials.

We have received a lot of question asking “How did Obama get this far, he must have had background checks as he is a U.S. Senator.”

However, this is inaccurate according to Special Agent-in-Charge: C. Frank Figliuzzi of the Cleveland FBI. Background checks are not performed on those elected, once elected they work for Congress and are handed a secret clearance. See below:

This is a conversation between the Special Agent-in-Charge: C. Frank Figliuzzi of the Cleveland FBI and Mike Trivisonno on the Mike Trivisonno Show, WTAM 1100, 7/02/08, Hr. 2.

Caller – Do they perform background checks on candidates and fellows who are in Congress and the Senate and perhaps potential presidential candidates?.

FBI – The short answer is no, no we don’t, but they’re given top secret clearances because they’re members of Congress, or Senators, or even higher ranking officials.

Host – Time out. There are no background checks from the FBI on the people that lead the country, the United States of America?.

FBI – Let me emphasize, elected officials. This is a democracy, the people have elected an official to represent them in Washington, and we do not routinely run background checks on those people.

Host – Even people running for president of the United States of America?.

FBI – That’s correct.

Host – That’s a little weird

FBI – Well, its part of democracy, its part of what the American people want, they want to be able to vote for somebody to represent them in Washington and they don’t want us to get in the way of that and we have no predilection to get in the way of that.

Host – Yeah, but what if they’re voting for a bad person and they don’t know that person is bad, do you follow me?. I’m saying, if the guy’s got a background and maybe he’s involved with some people that he shouldn’t be involved with, shouldn’t we know that as voters?.

FBI – Well, I think you’d agree that the American political process is about as rigorous as you’ll ever see and if there’s dirt back there, probably the opponent is gonna get it out probably before anyone else will.

Host – Now I know why you’re the head of the FBI, they’re good, aren’t they?.”

Read the whole post for more here.   http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/09/20/philip-j-berg-lawsuit-obamacrimescom-colb-update-comments-insights-fbi-response-special-agent-in-charge-background-checks-elected-officials-american-political-process-berg-website-comments/

Now isn’t that an interesting little tidbit? Nobody does background checks or vetting in an official capacity on elected officials even candidates for President of the United States!

They figure it’s the discretion of the voters and that political campaigns will expose and vet candidates potential problems. In other words the people voted for them it’s up to them to make sure of who and what they really are.

So all the people out there saying the Birth Certificate thing is a non issue because he would have been checked out before running I guess that’s not the case at all. I suppose next they will “justify” why Obama should not have to show proof that he’s eligible for the job.

McCain faced similar questions and had at least the consideration for his supporters, the country and his own reputation to show proof and put the matter to rest. Will Obama do the same? Or will he continue to show us the fake COLB on his website even though it’s been examined and shown to be a forgery. Yet another crime that is going unpunished and “justified”!

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

 A few words about justice and justification.

People can find a way to justify pretty much anything. The only requirement is the ability to momentarily (or in some cases permanently) suspend reality. It’s like a different facet of denial in that way.

Consider this, Al Capone, notorious mobster, murderer, breaker of the law, considered himself to be a misunderstood and persecuted individual who , in his own words, was a “great benefactor to the people”.

I guess he thought that his running of the gambling, prostitution and illegal liquor establishments was somehow a humanitarian effort. All those murders committed by him and at his request were obviously acts of “public service” and he should have gotten the keys to the city!  

Apparently to Capone the law and it’s enforcers were unfairly and unjustly persecuting him because they expected him to obey the laws of the land and they intended to stop him and prosecute him for not doing so. I suppose every criminal in the prison system probably thinks the same way. It’s part of their make up. If they admitted to themselves, or anyone for that matter, that they were in the wrong they might be forced to really think about their actions and the repercussions of them. Thus to them they are innocent and wronged by the system.

The Justice system sees things quite differently indeed. If you break the law you will pay the price. Message: Don’t break the law and you won’t have a problem.

We’ve seen an awful lot of this in the last 19 months. It seems lots of law breaking has been “justified” and gone unpunished.

A prime example is the recent hacking into the personal email account of Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. It’s old news to anybody who surfs the net and it’s starting to get some exposure on MSM. Her personal email account was hacked, password changed and screen shots of her emails, contact list, photos of her family and email addresses and cell phone numbers of her family were published on the web by the hacker.

I have heard time and again from Obama supporters that the hacker was supposedly justified because there were reports she might be using her personal email to hide work related things she doesn’t want the public to see. Bullshit! Even if that were the case it is for officials and law enforcement to find out not some snot-nosed college punk who proudly calls himself an Obamacrat.

We are not allowed to take the law into our own hands in this country for a reason. So even if the allegations were true (the hacker himself admitted there was nothing incriminating in the emails) it is not the “job” of non-professionals to break the law to find out.

I have also heard that Sarah Palin supposedly “deserved” it or that this should prove she is incapeable of being VP because her email was hacked. First off who deserves to have their privacy invaded? Second how in the hell is that her fault or does it prove that she is not up for the job? Someone broke the law and invaded her privacy but we’re told that this makes her unqualified?

So what about when Obama’s, Hillary’s and McCain’s passport info was accessed illegally?  (by people connected with the Obama campaign no less) Wouldn’t that make Obama unqualified too by those standards? I mean if it makes Palin unqualified how come Obama was just a “victim” when it happened to him? Answer: because according to Obama and the Obamacrats he is ALWAYS the victim in any circumstance. It’s just a given.

When ever there is any question they automatically give the points to their guy just like the RBC meeting in May when the DNC gave Obama the uncommitted delegates and then the gave him 4 delegates that Senator Clinton earned even though his name wasn’t even on the ballot. Yup! And they broke their own sunshine rules to do it with a secret vote during their 2 1/2 hour lunch break.

Oh but they were “justified” in doing so because, well, because they wanted Obama to win. We’re up to here with their “justification”.

This is far from the first time Obama and his supporters have broken the law. Hillary supporters have been hacked, threatened, had their blogs shut down, been kicked off of previously democratic web sites that are nothing more than Obama shills now and the list goes on and on. Alot of these activities are illegal but we’re told that the Bots are justified and if we didn’t have the sites there they wouldn’t be able to hack them. It’s our own fault according to these people because we won’t just shut up and go away.

So I guess in their view if you speak out against them or speak out for what is right you are standing in their way and according to them that is a crime. I have news for them it is not a crime to refuse to vote for someone. It is not a crime to speak out for what you beleive is right. In fact is the opposite. Speaking out against corruption and evil is a civil duty of the highest order!

Then we have the fact that the hacker in question turns out to be the 20 year old son of a Democratic Senator from Tennessee. According to one MSM source he says “he was just playing around” and there are supposedly no charges being filed? That’s what I heard on CBS last night anyway.

I don’t care if he was playing around or not it is a crime to access someone’s personal correspondence and it should be treated as such. Plus they said he was the son of a “prominent democrat” but failed to mention just how prominent. Just one more example of how Obama has the media in his pocket.

If this was my email account, or yours, or anybody else’s they would be steaming mad and rightly so. Why is it only a crime if it’s against Obama but not when it’s against his opponents? This kid should be prosecuted for breaking the law and the media should be honest about the fact this is a crime and who his father really is. We are tired of them protecting the politicians they want to protect and crucifying the ones they don’t.

Actually we are tired of the media as a whole period. They should just go find jobs as hot dog vendors or carnival workers and leave the news to real journalists with scruples and ethics.

What about the crime Obama committed by trying to stall the troops withdrawal from Iraq for his own political gain? It is a crime. It is a felony. He violated the Logan Act. It is treason.

Thanks to Shtuey at http://ohmyvalve.blogspot.com/ for the excellent video!

Not to mention the fact it’s about as phony and hypocritical as you can get to campaign on the whole “Stop the war and bring our troops home” all the while wheeling and dealing behind the scenes to manipulate the public.

I suppose IF we hear anything about it from the MSM it will be somehow “justified” too. I suppose Obama is “justifying” any deaths that occur because of the delays caused by his meddling as a sacrifice that must be made in order for him to gain control and therefore “save” us! Pfffft! Don’t even get me started on that one!

Every single one of the soldiers serving overseas is worth more than a hundred Obamas! Every single one of them is out there fighting to protect the rights Obama would bargain away at the drop of a hat and issue some lame “justification” afterwords. He is not worth the spit they shine their boots with!

On a lighter note I found this on http://harddriller.wordpress.com/2008/09/20/new-nickel-design/ while tag surfing!

It was just too funny not to steal!

 

Oh such sweet truth!

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Bud White has an excellent post this morning about the three stages of panic. It explains in detail the reactions we’ve been seeing from Obama supporters and what to expect as time goes on. As the inevitable approaches we PUMAS need to be ready. There is much to do in the future.

http://budwhite.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/the-three-stages-of-panic/

During the primaries and up until the convention, many Obama supporters pushed the narrative that Hillary supporters had to go through the classic stages of grief before we accepted Obama. On Correntewire, Lambert writes that Josh Marshall and others:

started running the “stages of grief” trope on Hillary supporters way back in February—you know, from anger, through denial, bargaining, depression, to acceptance. It’s an easy riff to run, even for bad writers, so it’s been all over the Obama blogs

Of course this “stages of grief” narrative oozed with sexism and condescension. The subtext implied that Hillary’s female supporters, emotional at the loss, had to be given post-partum recovery time, but then they would come around and, for those hold-outs, a few reminders about Roe v. Wade would get them in line. That was the strategy throughout the summer.

McCain’s selection of Palin as vice president, exquisitely timed to halt Obama’s bounce, has dominated the news for more than two weeks. It has also radically re-shaped the race. By most reports, Obama is slightly behind McCain in national polls and, more importantly, McCain has taken the lead in the electoral college.

The panic from the Obamabots in palpable.

Let me suggest that there are 3 levels of panic.

Click on the link above to read the full article. It’s worth the time to see how Bud describes the psychology behind the crazies! 

I think the behaviour we’ve seen so far tells the tale of a campaign steeped in adolescence and a narcissistic sense of entitlement that Obama and his supporters seem to be committed to.

Take for instance the recent revelation that Obama supporters hacked into Sarah Palin’s personal yahoo email account. This is something Hillary supporters are used to. Sadly we have become almost numb to this stuff as we have seen pro-Hillary forums and Blogs hacked, shut down and over-run with Bots time and time again during the primaries and still it goes on now. Even Hillary’s official blog was hacked and re-directed several times.

Thing is nobody listened to us when we told them. They said we PUMAS were first of all mythical non-existent creatures and further we were just bitter, old hags who were complaining hysterically over nothing. We were just “typical, bitter, bible thumpers clinging to our guns and prejudices”, just “sore losers who wouldn’t get over it” so we were not to be believed.

The fact is that this kind of thing is illegal. Period. These people should be prosecuted.

Of course the “excuse” was they wanted to see if the Gov. was using her personal email to do business. First off I call bullshit on that one. They were looking for anything they could find to smear, discredit or otherwise exploit for their own gain. Bottom line it was/is illegal and they should be treated in a manner that reflects that.

Who has never sent a co-worker an email from your personal account? It was none of their business just like it was none of their business when they were hacking and harrassing pro-Hillary bloggers. These people have gone too far too many times. There needs to be some kind of example that this kind of win-at-all-costs-even-if-it’s-not-legal mentality is going to get people in serious trouble. Otherwise we can expect it to continue and to get worse.

I think it’s all part of the Three Stages of Panic that Bud wrote about.

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Thanks to DemKR at the Hillary Clinton Forum for the graphic!

Yup I think this is going to be very popular on breakfast menus everywhere! Not only is he cash strapped and begging Babs and her friends for $$$$ https://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/cash-strapped-obama/    now he’s losing high powered Democrats. More importantly he’s losing wealthy, well connected and firmly entrenched Democrats.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/prominent-clinton-backer-and-dnc-member-to-endorse-mccain/

Forester was a major donor for Clinton earning her the title as a Hillraiser for helping to raise at least $100,000 for the New York Democratic senator’s failed presidential bid.

So it would seem some party stalwarts are taking another look and deserting the sinking Obama ship. Why throw more money or effort into a losing proposition?

UPDATE: PROFILE OF LYNNE FORRESTER DE ROTHSCHILD:

http://www.fmwf.com/newsarticle4.php?id=399&cat=6

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Awww! That’s like so sad! Apparently The One, the Rock-Star-Money-Machine, Senator Barrack Obama himself is now cash strapped, fighting for his political life and is unable to support and stump for the
down-ticket Dems. I guess right about now he’s wishing he had stuck to that pledge on public financing.

Mark Impomeni writes about it here:  http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/09/16/cash-strapped-obama-turns-down-dem-senators/

Earlier this week, the Obama campaign announced that it raised $66 million in the month of August. That figure was hailed as a recordfor a single month in many media accounts. But left out of the analysis is the amount of money that Obama had to spend to raise that cash, known as the burn rate. At the end of July, the campaign reported having cash-on-hand of $66 million. Add in the $66 million the campaign raised in August, and the campaign would have $132 million available if it spent nothing. But the Obama campaign reported having $77 million in the bank at the end of August, meaning that it spent $55 million during that time frame. In other words, the campaign spent 83% of what it raised in August, netting only $11 million of that record total.

Hmmm… it seems the funds are drying up and the fundraising is now costing nearly the amount raised. How awful! I’m so sad! NOT!

In fact, quite the opposite is true. I find a smile on my lips and a sense of satisfaction in my heart. No wonder Barbara Streisand had to throw a big fundraiser for him! He’s going to need a lot more than Hollywood endorsements and over the top $28,500 a ticket parties to make it through the next 47 days!

CQ

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »