The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) produced the most-recent version of it’s periodic report on the state of the nation’s economy. The report was as dreadful as expected: debt rising and tax receipts going down, but you knew that already. What’s different is how they are either lying to candy coat how bad things are going to get, or they are simply telling us that our personal situations .. are about to get much, much worse.
As a numbers geek, I read these things.. the whole thing to find those things that really mean something. The report starts out sounding kind of rosy.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the federal budget deficit for 2010 will exceed $1.3 trillion—$71 billion below last year’s total and $27 billion lower than the amount that CBO projected in March 2010, when it issued its previous estimate.
Great, so the deficit isn’t as bad as the CBO thought it might be a few months ago, but still terrible. We hear this stuff on the evening news, in the car, in the paper .. to the point that we’ve become numb to it. That’s why they bury this little nugget “below the fold” or in other words, late in the article after you’ve already tuned out (emphasis mine).
In CBO’s baseline, total revenues climb sharply in the next few years, from 14.6 percent of GDP in 2010 to 17.5 percent in 2011 and 18.7 percent in 2012. That increase is attributable in part to the scheduled expiration of tax provisions originally enacted in 2001, 2003, and 2009 (including temporary relief from the AMT, which expired at the end of December 2009) and in part to the anticipated economic recovery.
The parenthetical mention of the expiration of AMT relief is almost a confused negative , kind of like “jobs created or saved”. It took me several reads and some prodding from a CDN staff member to focus on the intent of this paragraph: this economic outlook is based on the assumption that ALL of the Bush Tax Cuts will expire (not just the ones for the top 1%) and that tens of millions of Americans will no longer be given “relief” from the AMT provision of tax law – that could mean YOU!
In the past, most of us have not made enough to have been affected by AMT, or, the alternative minimum tax.
The original idea behind this tax was to prevent people with very high incomes from using special tax benefits to pay little or no tax. The AMT has increased its reach, however, and now applies to some people who don’t have very high income or who don’t claim lots of special tax benefits. Proposals to repeal or reform the AMT have languished in Congress for years, but effective action does not appear to be on the horizon. Until Congress acts, almost anyone is a potential target for this tax.
The reason that most of us have not paid attention to this tax on the wealthy is that it does not impact middle-class America (thanks to interventions from our beloved Congress) as this Tax Policy Center Post makes clear.
It has become a regular stop on Washington’s fiscal merry-go-round: Congress patches the Alternative Minimum Tax for a year or two, but leaves future fixes for mañana. For instance, the Senate Budget Committee’s new fiscal blueprint makes room to fix the AMT for one year only and assumes money will be found from somewhere to pay for future patches.
The good news – even folks like you and me are now considered wealthy. AMT was never indexed for inflation or anything else so over time, more median-income families will be pulled into what is quickly becoming the middle-class tax. This graph illustrates how, with the CBO’s proposed expiration of the AMT relief, an alarming number of Americans will find themselves subject to the supposed wealth tax.
The good news is we’re wealthy – the bad news.. Obama is promising to raise taxes on, that’s right, the wealthy. You and I, and everyone that works and struggles to make ends meet .. is going to meet head-on with an ugly tax bill in years to come. Here’s a situation illustrated by MSN.com that you or I could easily find ourselves in the middle of.
Marile Robinson, 52, had just bought her dream home a few years ago when her accountant gave her a nasty shock: She owed an unexpected $290,000 in taxes.
Robinson, who earns $75,000 a year as a human resources director at Intel, had no choice but to sell the house and take out a loan to pay off the tax bill. Im starting from scratch, and Im in my 50s, Robinson said. Her monthly take-home pay is equivalent to the monthly interest on her loan.
It turns out that Robinson, like more and more middle-income folks each year, got slapped with the alternative minimum tax, a tax system thats separate from the regular income tax and comes with its own rates and rules. By 2010, the Internal Revenue Service estimates, more than 35 million taxpayers will be subject to the tax.
That’s a single person making $75,000 .. the same applies to a family.
The news gets no better if you continue to read between the lines of the CBO report.
Revenues will also be boosted by provisions of the recently enacted health care legislation (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010), which are estimated to increase receipts by growing amounts over the next few years
Ah, so Health Care reform was more about collecting taxes than doing much else – not much of an aha moment actually. Unfortunately, those revenues.. come from medical equipment manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies.. you know.. employers. At best, this adds to the causes of stagflation where prices need to go up to pass on the costs of government greed, but can’t because of deflationary pressures (no one can afford more expensive drugs, or insurance companies force lower price compensation due to government regulation).
Stagflation.. scary.. that’s what we had during Carter’s catastrophe of a Presidency. Oddly enough .. Paul Volcker was leading the economic direction then too..
The CBO report does discuss inflation, or the lack thereof.
Inflation in the prices of consumer goods and services (calculated using the price index for personal consumption expenditures, or PCE) is projected to be about 1 percent in 2010 and 2011, when measured on a fourth-quarter-to-fourth-quarter basis. Core inflation, which excludes the prices of food and energy, is also projected to be about 1 percent this year and next. CBO projects that inflation will pick up moderately thereafter but remain below 2.0 percent from 2012 through 2014.
While the report somehow makes the possible 1% price growth a positive thing, we all know that with the aforementioned fallacies in-mind that’s not even a reasonable assumption. Deflation is going to be the order of the day for the foreseeable future. The CBO is able to ignore the possibility by simply pretending that Congress will act a certain way (kill 100% of Bush tax cuts and expose 30 Million middle-class Americans to AMT AND assume economic recovery.. yeah that’s happened). Perhaps Congress will do those things, but if they do .. consumers, who make up 70% of GDP will be left with much less to spend- deflation is all that can result.
If Congress acts in the way that the CBO presumes, middle-class families will have to cough up an additional $500 Billion over ten years. The only way the CBO sees to balance the budget is to raise taxes, odd how a non-partisan Government agency is no more frugal than the partisan ones.The flip side is what if they don’t?
If Congress does what they’ve done for years, the budget deficit and the national debt will increase to alarming levels (ok ok , even more alarming levels). This report demonstrates that they are counting on the expiration of all of the Bush tax cuts, no fix for AMT, light inflation, and a perceivable recovery. It is very realistic to assume that the Bush tax cuts will be extended for all but the top 1 or 2% of earners, that the AMT fix will be put back in, the we might see severe deflation and that the recovery won’t be this year. The debt picture gets downright dark if the fairy-tales in the economic report don’t come true.
I will be as financially distressed as many of you by the actions Congress will take to match this outlook. It’s coming, it’s nasty and it’s real. This CBO report is about you, to you, and affects .. you.
I pray November comes fast enough: “Silence has gotten us nowhere so it’s once again time for our collective voice to make a simple yet powerful demand .. Don’t Tread on Me” –Glenn Beck
You read about The New Deal (circa 1933 – 1938) in high school, but did you ever think you would get to live through it? They say that those who do not learn from history… you know the rest. In a nutshell, we are the doomed in this case. Just how closely is Obama and his band of merry morons resurrecting The New Deal? Let’s refresh ourselves on FDR’s version first:
FDR’s New Deal was a response to the economic downturn of the Great Depression. The stated purpose of the over one hundred new agencies created during this period was the “3 Rs”: relief, recovery and reform. (Sounding familiar yet?) . With the creation of The New Deal came a change to the country’s leadership and lawmakers, too: a Democratic majority and Democratically held White House. This is getting a little eerie. Probably just coincidence. Let us move on.
The initial phase of FDR’s New Deal dealt with large portions of the GDP, the money makers at the time: banks, railroads, farming and industry. These large entities were all struggling to get out from under the Depression and demanding aid. The second phase was enacted to promote labor unions, create Social Security, and regulate agricultural trade and work practices (including fair working conditions, wages and hours regulations).
This massive endeavor led to an expansive increase in the size of the government, and an unprecedented increase in cost of running the country. To put this in perspective, realize that the First Hundred Days mark for measuring a President’s advancement of his agenda came about because of what FDR managed in HIS first hundred days in office. Congress granted FDR’s EVERY request in those first 100 days of lawmaking.
FDR’s New Deal was met with opposition from Republicans. It was either vehemently opposed, or pieces accepted with promises to make it efficient. The opposition continued between 1933 and 1938, with little to show, since Democrats controlled both the White House and Congress. The opposition consisted mainly of what is known as the “Old Right” – made up of politicians, intellectuals, writers, and newspaper editors of various philosophical persuasions including classical liberals, and conservatives, both Democrats and Republicans. (Anyone for Tea?)
Though the initial phase of The New Deal showed sound economic growth, an economic downturn in 1937- 1938, coupled with the failure of many of its programs caused many to question just how effective the measure was overall. In 1939, Gallup asked ‘Do you think the attitude of the Roosevelt administration toward business is delaying business recovery?’. The reply, by a two to one margin was “Yes”. Unemployment was back down to dangerous levels and America was in debt to the extent that she had never been before.
Among the opposition to the New Deal were charges of Communism, Fascism, and Utopianism along with “a missed opportunity to do away with Capitalism”. FDR’s New Deal had its fingers in pies ranging from banking, healthcare, housing development and ownwership,agriculture, unions, welfare, alcohol, art, music and redistribution of wealth via severely progressive taxes and levies. In the end, FDR’s New Deal shaped a new political ideal – Progressive Liberalism – that went on to help shape the next experiment in social reform: The New Left of the 1960’s.
Move ahead to 2008 and the election of Barack Obama, or better yet.. go back to the beginning and read from there. I don’t see the point in re-hashing it in writing, since we have reached the second phase of Obama’s Not So New Deal.
Obama has previouly stated the he has pulled the economy back from the brink. This is far from truth and quite the opposite. Obama’s economic policies are instead pushing us off the economic cliff. The 13 trillion dollar National Debt is just one of a number of unprecedented warning signs pointing toward an economic collapse. The National Debt is very important, but not the most important on it’s own. There are several other factors that you need to be aware of as well, and here are a few.
Gallup’s measure of underemployment hit 20.0% on March 15th. That was up from 19.7% two weeks earlier and 19.5% at the start of the year.
According to RealtyTrac, foreclosure filings were reported on 367,056 properties in the month of March. This was an increase of almost 19 percent from February, and it was the highest monthly total since RealtyTrac began issuing its report back in January 2005.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in March the national rate of unemployment in the United States was 9.7%, but for Americans younger than 25 it was well above 18 percent.
It is being reported that a massive network of big banks and financial institutions have been involved in blatant bid-rigging fraud that cost taxpayers across the U.S. billions of dollars. The U.S. Justice Department is charging that financial advisers to municipalities colluded with Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Lehman Brothers, Wachovia and 11 other banks in a conspiracy to rig bids on municipal financial instruments.
The Mortgage Bankers Association recently announced that more than 10 percent of all U.S. homeowners with a mortgage had missed at least one payment during the January-March time period. That was a record high and up from 9.1 percent a year ago.
The official U.S. unemployment number is 9.9%, although the truth is that many economists consider the true unemployment rate to be much, much higher than that.
The six biggest banks in the United States now possess assets equivalent to 60 percent of America’s gross national product.
The total number of banks that have been shut down this year in the United States to a total of 78.
According to a study published by Texas A&M University Press, the four biggest industries in the Gulf of Mexico region are oil, tourism, fishing and shipping. Together, those four industries account for approximately $234 billion in economic activity each year. Now those four industries have been absolutely decimated by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and will probably not fully recover for years, if not decades.
A massive “second wave” of adjustable rate mortgages is scheduled to reset over the next two to three years. If this second wave is anything like the first wave, the U.S. housing market is about to be absolutely crushed.
The bottom 40 percent of all income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation’s wealth.
Here is another list compilation posted on July 20, 2010 by TheTruthWins.com titled “40 Bizarre statistics that reveal the horrifying truth about the US Economy”
A recent Pew Research survey found that 55 percent of the U.S. labor force has experienced either unemployment, a pay decrease, a reduction in hours or an involuntary move to part-time work since the recession began.
There are 9.2 million Americans that are unemployed but that are not receiving an unemployment insurance check.
Most of the circumstances in these lists have only gotten worse since being posted.
Bank failures this year have hit 109 via FDIC‘s Failed Bank List
According to EconomicPolicyJournal.com in May 2010 32 States were so bankrupt that they had “Borrowed from the Federal Government to make unemployment payments”
MSNBC reports that “The average rate for 30-year fixed loans fell this week to 4.42 percent”
The Congresional Budget Office (CBO) released a very bleak Report on “The Budget and Economic Outlook.” The report is hiding some facts and our editor and fellow blogger Rich Mitchell takes it apart here.
Today’s Department of Labor Report on unemployment benefits showed the number filing for initial claims jumped 12,000 to 500,000.
A Department of Treasury Report shows that in May China got rid of $33 billion worth of US Treasuries. As well as the Oil Exporters & Japan dropping $8.8 billion. This brings China’s total amount of US Treasuries to it’s lowest level since June 2009.
We also have to take note of the actions of George Soros, the Communist billionaire that is known as The man whomade a billion dollars by ” breaking the Bank of England” and has strong ties to Obama.
Far Left billionaire, democratic donor and Obama supporter, George Soros is bailing out of the US stock market. The value of billionaire investor George Soros’s hedge fund dropped by 42% to $5.1 billion at the end of the second quarter. Economic Policy Journal reported, via Free Republic:
Billionaire trader and political manipulator,George Soros, is clearly not optimistic. The latest SEC filings are out on the Soros hedge fund, Soros Fund Management.
Between the end of March and the end of June, Soros lowered his stock investments from $8.8 billion to $5.1 billion in the fund, Soros Fund Management.
He sold most of his positions (over 95%) in Wal-Mart, J.P. Morgan Chase and Pfizer.
His biggest position at the end of June was in the gold ETF which accounted for 13% of his equity portfolio at $638 million.
This means that George Soros does not have confidence in the US stock market and instead is buying gold to hedge inflation. In my opinion he is preparing for the economic collapse of the US economy, but not all currency and the gold holdings can be used to buy any surviving currency, or a new global currency.
A bigger warning sign that the market is near collapse is the “Hindenburg Omen” which has preceded previous stock market crashes and been recently observed. The Hindenburg Omen is a collection of statistics, that if observed twice within 32 days have always predicted disaster within the Stock Market.
Heres a video explaining the Hindenburg Omen posted in October of 2007
Named after the zeppelin disaster that took place over Lakehurst, N.J., in 1937, the pattern is a “rare but potent” sell signal, said Jay Shartsis, director of option trading at R.F. Lafferty & Co.
For this to be activated, it requires at least 2.2 percent of the market to reach new 52-week highs and 52-week lows on the New York Stock Exchange on the same day, which happened Thursday, suggesting a lack of conviction among investors.
However, it also needs to happen in a rising market, based on certain indicators, including a 10-week moving average of the NYSE Composite, which has to be rising.
Shartsis said the indicator “speaks for itself,” noting that when confirmed by a second occurrence within 36 days, “every crash (since 1985) was preceded by such a signal.”
Other strategists said they hadn’t heard of the indicator, which has been discussed on financial blogs during Friday’s trading.
Today we got our first Hindenburg Omen confirmation. The number of new highs was 136, and new lows was at 69 (per the traditional WSJ source). Granted this particular criteria set was a little weak as the 69 is precisely on the borderline for confirmation (the 2.2%), and the new highs number was not more than double the new lows (although it was close). Less gating were the McClellan oscillator which was negative at -83.6, and the 10 week MVA, which rose, which were the two remaining conditions. The first omen was spotted on August 12 – a week later the H.O has been confirmed. The more confirmations, the scarier it gets from a technical perspective, not to mention the conversion into a self-fulfilling prophecy (like every other technical indicator).
Even though, on June 3rd 2009, Ben Bernanke stated to Congress that the Federal Reserve had no plans to monetize the debt, the Federal Reserve has begun to do just that. The Monetization of the debt is the scariest factor pointing to economic collapse and I cannot stress enough how terrible the outcome of this can be. Even left-wing Huffington Post was taken aback by this move from the Federal Reserve in this post “Federal Reserve Begins Massive Monetization of US Government Debt” (Emphasis mine)
In a step that will be one of the markers on the road to economic and financial catastrophe, the Federal Open Market Committee (otherwise known as the FOMC) of the Federal Reserve, made a bombshell policy decision on August 10, 2010, one fraught with dangerous long-term consequences for the American and global economy.
In a policy being dubbed QE2, the Federal Reserve’s FOMC conceded that the so-called U.S. economic recovery has “slowed,” and required more stimulus from the Fed. However, with federal funds interest rates now effectively at zero, the only aspect of monetary policy left is money printing. Thus, the Federal Reserve, in effect, will use its printing press to buy long-term U.S. government debt.
Of course, that is not how the FOMC is positioning this major escalation in quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve. In the dry, obtuse language that the obscurantists of the Federal Reserve love to engage in, the committee’s official statement said:
“To help support the economic recovery in a context of price stability, the Committee will keep constant the Federal Reserve’s holdings of securities at their current level by reinvesting principal payments from agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in longer-term Treasury securities. The Committee will continue to roll over the Federal Reserve’s holdings of Treasury securities as they mature.”
In its first bout of heavy quantitative easing, in the wake of the implosion of the major Wall Street investment banks in the fall of 2008, Ben Bernanke, utilizing his printing press, purchased $1.25 trillion in mortgage-backed securities, and an additional $200 billion in debts owed by so-called government-sponsored enterprises, primarily Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
This massive explosion in the Fed’s balance sheet has thus far failed to stimulate economic activity and retard a persistent deflationary recession. All that Bernanke has accomplished has been to create a new asset bubble, this time on Wall Street, with equities exploding in price far beyond their post-crisis lows.
Beyond the Dow Jones index, however, the impact of Bernanke’s balance sheet expansion has been impotent in the face of economic realities, particularly a collapsing labor market and the contraction in consumer demand. The erosion in the M3 money supply, a statistic the Federal Reserve no longer publicly discloses, attests to the failure of its policies.
Now that the Federal Reserve admits, though in its typically obscure linguistic constructs, that a double-dip recession is becoming increasingly likely, Bernanke is going to enter a buying binge of long-term U.S. Treasuries. The hope is that this will stabilize financial markets, and somehow force liquidity into the economy. That, at least is the hope. Given Ben Bernanke’s track record, I would not bank on hope in the infallible judgement of the Federal Reserve and its FOMC.
What is likely to result from the QE2 phase of the Federal Reserve’s disastrous policymaking? In time, sovereign wealth funds will recognize Bernanke’s maneuver for what it is: monetization of the U.S. national debt. When that happens, Treasury auctions will begin to fail, and yields will advance.
This will all put added pressure on the Fed to print even more dollars, and monetize an increasing proportion of the federal government’s debt. This will unquestionably inject liquidity into the U.S. economy. But this Federal Reserve monetary injection will be as beneficial as money printing was in Weimar Germany in the early 1920s, or Zimbabwe more recently.
In deciding on a process that will lead to an ever-growing proportion of the U.S. national debt and yearly budget deficits being monetized by its printing press, the Federal Reserve, under the leadership of itschairman, Ben Bernanke, has taken a fateful step towards irredeemable economic and financial ruin, ultimately convulsing America with a savage, hyperinflationary depression. And, as history teaches us, severe economic depressions bring along other unanticipated consequences, often leading to political and social turmoil and even global war.
The Huffington Post is telling you that this move will destroy our economy in eventual Hyper-Inflation. Again, this is left-wing Obama loving Huffington Post. Monetizing the debt can dire circumstances in the best of times and is outright apocalyptic in the worst. Add all these factors together and our economy is on the road to ruin. We have a president who has no intention of ever stopping or slowing down the spending in accordance with the Cloward-Piven Strategy. The Stock Market is predicted to fold around October by the Hindenburg Omen. Foreign Nations instead of buying our Debt are beginning to sell it off. When they no longer buy our debt, our Credit Rating will be downgraded and the Federal Government will default. The Fed will continue printing money anyway and we will see hyper-inflation like the Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe. Hope for the best but prepare for the worst is the only recommendation I can give.
See Today’s other Conservative Daily News articles for more perspective on the economy:
Continuing our look into Obama’s radical czar’s we come to Ron Bloom. Ron Bloom is yet another Union shill within the Obama administration as well as a Maoist.
First up, Official title and duties from WhiteHouse.gov: Sept 7th 2009
President Obama Names Ron Bloom Senior Counselor for Manufacturing Policy
WASHINGTON, DC – Today, President Obama will announce that Ron Bloom will serve as the Administration’s Senior Counselor for Manufacturing Policy. Working closely with the National Economic Council, Bloom will provide leadership on policy development and strategic planning for the President’s agenda to revitalize the manufacturing sector. He will work with departments and agencies across the administration – including the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, Energy, and Labor – to integrate existing programs and develop new initiatives affecting the manufacturing sector.
Bloom will retain his role as Senior Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury assigned to the President’s Task Force on the Automotive Industry.
President Obama is committed to a next-generation manufacturing agenda by partnering with the private sector to spur innovation, invest in the skills of American workers, and help our manufacturers prosper in the global marketplace by promoting exports.
President Obama said, “Last week we learned that our manufacturing sector expanded for the first time in 18 months and had the highest monthly output in two years. It’s a sign that we’re on the right track to economic recovery, but that we still have a long way to go. That’s why I’ve asked Ron Bloom to help coordinate my Administration’s manufacturing policy. Distinguished by his extraordinary service on the Auto Task Force and his extensive experience with both business and labor, Ron has the knowledge and experience necessary to lead the way in creating the good-paying manufacturing jobs of the future. We must do more to harness the power of American ingenuity and productivity so that we can put people back to work and unleash our full economic potential.”
Ron Bloom said, “A strong manufacturing sector is a cornerstone of American competitiveness and a critical part of President Obama’s economic strategy. As we meet the challenges of globalization and technological change, it is vital to have a concerted effort across the Administration to support an innovative, vibrant manufacturing sector.”
President Obama on Monday announced his selection of Ron Bloom as senior counselor for manufacturing policy.
Speaking at an AFL-CIO picnic in Cincinnati, the president introduced Bloom, who has been a senior adviser to Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner as part of the auto industry task force since February. Bloom, a Harvard Business School graduate, previously advised the United Steelworkers union and worked as an investment banker.
“As my new point person on manufacturing, he’s going to help us craft the policies that will create the next generation of great manufacturing jobs and ensure American competitiveness in the 21st century,” Obama said.
Bloom will work with the National Economic Council to develop and plan policy for Obama’s efforts to revitalize U.S. manufacturing, the White House said. He will retain his position on the auto task force.
The U.S. manufacturing industry has lost hundreds of thousands of jobs in recent years to overseas competition as some U.S. businesses have relocated abroad to take advantage of cheaper labor. Bringing an invigorated manufacturing base back to the United States was a campaign pledge Obama made last year.
Bloom will be charged with reviewing U.S. competitiveness in the global economy. His job will include coordinating with the departments of Commerce, Treasury, Energy and Labor to integrate current programs with new initiatives.
Bloom’s appointment follows news that the U.S. manufacturing sector had expanded for the first time in 18 months and had the highest monthly output in two years.
“It’s a sign that we’re on the right track to economic recovery, but that we still have a long way to go,” Obama said in the announcement, issued Sunday.
Bloom said in the statement that a strong manufacturing sector is a cornerstone of American competitiveness.
“As we meet the challenges of globalization and technological change, it is vital to have a concerted effort across the administration to support an innovative, vibrant manufacturing sector,” Bloom said.
Prior to joining the Obama administration, Bloom was a special assistant to the president of the United Steelworkers. His responsibilities included the union’s collective bargaining program.
Before joining the Steelworkers, Bloom was one of the founding partners of Keilin and Bloom, an investment banking firm, where he was involved in numerous transactions on behalf of the Steelworkers, United Auto Workers, Teamsters, Air Line Pilots Association and other unions.
Born in 1956, Ron Bloom was raised in Swarthmore, Pennsylvania. During his childhood, he was deeply involved with Habonim — “a progressive Labor Zionist youth movement that emphasizes cultural Judaism, socialism and social justice.” Bloom’s experience with this movement had a major influence on his personal development and worldview. Many years later, in 2009, when accepting a post in the Barack Obama administration, Bloom noted that the lessons he had learned from Habonim – “identifying with the underdog, and … observing the world through a lens [of] people who don’t have as much and aren’t as lucky” — remained “part of what I try to do in my work life.” “That’s one of the things that made me want to work for Obama,” he elaborated.
After graduating from Wesleyan University in 1977, Bloom took a job as an organizer, negotiator, and research specialist for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). While at SEIU, he observed that many union negotiators lacked the skills necessary for bargaining effectively with management:
“Unions were being backed into corners by companies and couldn’t understand on a sophisticated level, the company’s arguments … Labor needed to be armed with the equivalent skills.“
After his stint with SEIU, Bloom went on to work as Executive Director of the Massachusetts Coalition for Full Employment; then as New England Regional Director of the Jewish Labor Committee.
In 1996 Bloom joined the United Steel Workers (USW) union as a special assistant to the president. At that time, the USW president was George Becker, a co-founder of the Campaign for America’s Future. Bloom retained his position as special assistant when Becker was replaced by Leo Gerard (who today serves as a board member of the Apollo Alliance) in 2001. Both Becker and Gerard have close ties to the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Both have been honored by Chicago’s DSA chapter, for their “leadership in building working class solidarity across borders”; their “advocacy of fair trade over free trade”; and their “commitment to finding a better way to run the economy for working people everywhere.”
In June 2006 Bloom was a featured speaker at the metal industry’s Steel Success Strategies XXI conference in New York, where he said:
“The Steelworkers have some advice for industry execs on how to make sure there’s plenty for both shareholders and workers. The theme of this advice will be really quite simple — be hard-headed and pragmatic capitalists — run the companies and actively participate in the political process on the basis of what is good for your shareholders — and not based on outmoded nostrums about unions, free enterprise, deregulation, free markets and free trade.
“In today’s world the blather about free trade, free markets and the joys of competition is nothing but pablum for the suckers. The guys making the real money know that outsized returns are available to those who find the industries that get the system to work for them and the companies within those industries that dominate them.”
Bloom supports federal-government control of the American health care system (“Management must support universal single-payer national health care”). He also believes the government should be authorized to regulate the production and provision of all forms of energy (“It is time to support a comprehensive national energy program”).
At a 2008 “distressed investors” forum, Bloom said:
“Generally speaking, we get the joke. We know that the free market is nonsense. We know that the whole point is to game the system, to beat the market. Or at least find someone who will pay you a lot of money, ’cause they’re convinced that there is a free lunch. We know this is largely about power, that it’s an adults-only, no-limit game. We kind of agree with Mao, that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun.”
On July 13, 2009, Bloom replaced Steven Rattner as head of the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry (a position popularly known as “Car Czar”). This position was created by Barack Obama to oversee federal bailouts of failing automobile manufacturers and the restructuring of General Motors and Chrysler. On September 8, 2009, President Obama appointed Bloom to an additional post — Senior Counselor to the President for Manufacturing Policy (a position popularly known as “Manufacturing Czar”).
Ties to Socialism indeed. He wrote an article for their paper Democratic Left “The magazine for the Democratic Socialists of America” in the Fall of 2006 Within it he advocates for Socialist principles such as universal healthcare and more:
The Steelworkers have some advice for industry execs on how to make sure there’s plenty for both shareholders and workers. The theme of this advice will be really quite simple – be hard-headed and pragmatic capitalists – run the companies and actively participate in the political process on the basis of what is good for your shareholders – and not based on outmoded nostrums about unions, free enterprise, deregulation, free markets and free trade.
In today’s world the blather about free trade, free-markets and the joys of competition is nothing but pablum for the suckers. The guys making the real money know that outsized returns are available to those who find the industries that get the system to work for them and the companies within those industries that dominate them.
The starting point is that companies need to get along with the union. Companies that establish a constructive partnership with their unions do far better for their shareholders than those that do not.
The first is one where conflicts between labor and management do still exist, and that is health care. On that issue, however, given the fact that the shareholders want us to get along, the answer is to get it out of collective bargaining and into the public sphere. That means that management must support universal single-payer national health care.
The simple fact is that America’s current health care system places those companies that manufacture in the U.S. at a tremendous competitive disadvantage against those who manufacture anywhere else in the developed world. A universal single-payer system, whether financed through general revenue or even a payroll tax, would result in significantly higher profits for the steel industry.
And if that were not enough, one could finally add the huge corrupting and corrosive distortions that petro-politics bring to our nation. Irrespective of where one sits on the various divides in our country, no one defends our “addiction” to foreign energy as healthy for our democracy.
Once again, a vital sector of the economy is being run for the benefit of its producers, not its consumers. And while we can waste time arguing about whether to drill in Alaska’s North Slope, real relief will come only from increasing supply and reducing demand, through huge investments in conservation, clean coal, and renewables – all of which will consume lots of steel and none of which will be done by the guys who today are profiting so handsomely from the status-quo. The steel industry and manufacturers in general need to stop worrying about offending their business school classmates, political soul mates, and friends at the country club and to stand up for their owners. It is time to support a comprehensive national energy program.
To convey the dangers of a trade deficit left unreined, let me quote two well-known radicals.
The first one said the following:
I think we are skating on increasingly thin ice. On the present trajectory, the deficits and imbalances will increase. At some point, the sense of confidence in capital markets that today so benignly supports the flow of funds to the United States and the growing world economy could fade…. I don’t know whether change will come with a bang or a whimper, whether sooner or later. But as things stand, it is more likely than not that it will be financial crises rather than policy foresight that will force the change…. Altogether the circumstances seem to me as dangerous and intractable as any I can remember…. What really concerns me is that there seems to be so little willingness or capacity to do much about it.
And the second:
A country that is now aspiring to an “Ownership Society” will not find happiness in – and I’ll use hyperbole here for emphasis – a “Sharecropper’s Society.” But that’s precisely where our trade policies, supported by Republicans and Democrats alike, are taking us….
The first radical that I quoted was Paul Volker; the second, Warren Buffet. And if you don’t believe them, let’s look at where the most cold-blooded and unemotional capitalists of all – currency traders – are putting their money.
While it may be true that they read the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, cluck endlessly at cocktail parties about Eurosclerosis and make contributions to the CATO Institute, during the day they go short the dollar and long the Euro. In the last three and a half years, the Euro is up 40 percent versus the dollar, meaning those whose livelihood depends on an honest assessment of our economy have voted with their feet.
No one seriously believes that the U.S.’s current profligacy will end other than badly, but neither the steel industry nor any other sector of the business community appears willing to stand up and say that the emperor has no clothes. Each year we are selling almost a trillion dollars of our seed corn and mortgaging forever our future so that we can dance the night away while our poor go hungry and our roads and bridges crumble.
The growth of China and India can be a great opportunity. But not if we, as Lenin so aptly put it, sell them the rope with which to hang us. Steel industry managers need to repudiate the race-to the bottom model of globalization. We need world trade that brings the bottom up, not the top down, and we need to tell the American government to do what every one of its trading partners does – stand up for those who operate on their soil.
So here is Ron Bloom writing in a Socialist Paper advocating for Socialist policies in 2006, you’ll see later he continues the energy policy, but under the guise of Climate Change. You can also see the elements of class warfare, attacking of the free market, and a quote from Lenin, how nice. He has managed to stay out of the spotlight since being appointed but there is a scandal that can be tied to, if not him, his agenda. What factors were used to determine which dealerships were closed by GM?
Stuart Varney explaining Ron Bloom’s extreme Union bias in a debate with Mike Papantonio
News report about Ron Bloom being called to testify before the Senate Banking Committee
Here’s Senator Hutchinson questioning Ron Bloom after the takeover of General Motors on why were certain auto dealers closed
And what do we know now? One condition for the closures of dealerships, according to Inspector General Neal M. Barofsky of TARP was consideration race and gender.
From his Report: ” Factors affecting the decisions of General Motors and Chrysler to reduce their dealership networks”
GM officials attributed these inconsistencies primarily to a desire to maintain coverage in certain rural areas where they have a competitive advantage over import auto companies that are not typically located in rural areas, although ultimately close to half of all of the GM dealerships identified for termination were in rural areas. Other dealerships were retained because they were recently appointed, were key wholesale parts dealers, or were minority- or woman-owned dealerships.Page 22
Is this Obama manufacturing policy being carried out through Ron Bloom? Protect minorities but fire everyone else?
Here is Ron Bloom advocating for a Green Agenda in a “Clearn Energy Economy Forum”
“The White House has put together this forum because your work in the lab, on the factory floor, in the board rooms and in the halls of government is going to be a big part of the solution to both of those problems.”
“And if the success of the recent Tesla IPO is any indication, we might need even more. In case you haven’t heard, Tesla executed a successful IPO a couple of weeks ago; first by an American auto company in more than 50 years. Given our modest ownership stake in a couple of other car companies, I will confess that we are hoping that it won’t be quite so long until the next one.“
“That is why the administration supports a comprehensive approach to energy policy that includes significant investment in all kinds of clean energy technology. The house of representatives has already passed a truly visionary energy and climate bill. And there is currently a plan in the Senate that would achieve the same goals. We know our friends at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue are working hard to resolve their differences and come to a bipartisan compromise.”
So your typical Global Warming fearmongering and cries for a Green Agenda which mirrors his 2006 stance on Energy Reform. Also that the “halls of government” will be a big part of the solution says quite alot coming from this administration. After his comment on the “ownership stake” he goes on to claim that Govt wants to get out of the way. Actions speak louder than words. The Obama Government has no intention of ever getting out of the way, their goal is control.
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) is, was and still is a very large radical Left-wing group operating throughout the country. They also have a very long history you may not realize. You can read a detailed many page history at Discover the Networks: Here are some key points:
Was the largest radical group in America, with more than 400,000 dues-paying member families and more than 1,200 chapters in 110 U.S. cities
Was implicated in numerous reports of fraudulent voter registration, vote-rigging, voter intimidation, and vote-for-pay scams during recent election cycles
Pressured banks to lend money to underqualified minority borrowers
Maintains close ties to organized labor
Calls for more government control over citizens and the economy
Favors a government monopoly in healthcare
Advocates an open-door immigration policy
Announced in March 2010 that it would officially disband as a national entity on April 1 of that year, but it continued thereafter to pursue its agendas under various names at the state level.
In this report on ACORN I am focusing on their involvement with Obama and voter fraud during his election.
ACORN has had a long, friendly relationship with Hillary Clinton, who was a featured guest speaker at the organization’s 2006 national convention. During her address, the Senator lauded ACORN for working “with people who want to organize unions in order to have a better chance to bargain collectively for pay and benefits.”
Notwithstanding its affinity for Mrs. Clinton, ACORN has even closer, more longstanding ties to Barack Obama. Thus on Feb. 21, 2008, the organization officially endorsed Obama for U.S. President. This endorsement came at the very height of Obama’s hard-fought Democratic primary battle against Hillary Clinton. Welcoming the endorsement, Obama told an audience of ACORN workers and supporters: “I’ve been fighting alongside ACORN on issues that you care about my entire career.”
Tracing ACORN’s historical ties to Obama, columnist Mona Charen writes:
“ACORN attracted Barack Obama in his youthful community organizing days. Madeline Talbott [a Chicago activist who led the aforementioned ACORN effort to storm the Chicago City Council in July 1997] hired him to train her staff — the very people who would later descend on Chicago’s banks as CRA shakedown artists. [Obama] later funneled money to [ACORN] through the Woods Fund, on whose board he sat, and through the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, ditto. Obama was not just sympathetic — he was an ACORN fellow traveler.”
The New York Postreports the following about ACORN’s links to Obama:
“Chicago ACORN sought out Obama’s legal services for a ‘motor voter’ case and partnered with him on his 1992 ‘Project VOTE’ registration drive. In those years, he also conducted leadership-training seminars for ACORN’s up-and-coming organizers. That is, Obama was training the army of ACORN organizers who participated in Madeline Talbott’s drive against Chicago’s banks. More than that, Obama was funding them. As he rose to a leadership role at Chicago’s Woods Fund, he became the most powerful voice on the foundation’s board for supporting ACORN and other community organizers. In 1995, the Woods Fund substantially expanded its funding of community organizers — and Obama chaired the committee that urged and managed the shift.
“The Woods Fund report makes it clear Obama was fully aware of the intimidation tactics used by ACORN’s Madeline Talbott in her pioneering efforts to force banks to suspend their usual credit standards. Yet he supported Talbott in every conceivable way. He trained her personal staff and other aspiring ACORN leaders, he consulted with her extensively, and he arranged a major boost in foundation funding for her efforts.
“And, as the leader of another charity — the Chicago Annenberg Challenge — Obama channeled more funding Talbott’s way, ostensibly for education projects but surely supportive of ACORN’s overall efforts.
“In return, Talbott proudly announced her support of Obama’s first campaign for state Senate [in 1996], saying, ‘We accept and respect him as a kindred spirit, a fellow organizer.’”
In November 2008 Matthew Vadum revealed how ACORN, after news of its implication in voter-fraud began to surface during Obama’s 2008 presidential bid, tried to protect the Democratic candidate by covering up its own ties to him:
“In early October , as media coverage of ACORN election fraud scandals intensified, ACORN removed a smoking gun from one of its websites. This was an article that linked Obama to ACORN and to Project Vote and made clear that the two entities were joined at the hip.
“The 2004 article was by Toni Foulkes, a Chicago-based member of the ACORN national board and now a Chicago alderman, and it appeared in Social Policy, a publication of ACORN’s American Institute for Social Justice. Extolling Obama’s political organizing abilities, Foulkes described the close connections between ACORN and its affiliate, Project Vote. She wrote that ACORN ‘invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and, as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office.’ So it was only ‘natural for many of us to be active volunteers in his first campaign for State Senate and then his failed bid for U.S. Congress.’ The upshot? ‘By the time he ran for U.S. Senate, we were old friends.’”
Lets look into some video connections and then look into the voter fraud allegations
“You know you’ve got a friend in me. I definately welcome ACORN’s input, you don’t have to ask me about that. I’m going to call you even if you didn’t ask me.”
“We are going to be calling all of you in to help shape the agenda”
Here’s CNN on the Obama connections to ACORN
And now the tapdance
Now, how about that voter fraud, lets look at some reports, and then the whistleblowers accounts.
CNS News: “ACORN Submitted ‘Thousands and Thousands of Phony’ Voter Registrations, County Registrar Says” Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Matthew Henderson, ACORN’s regional director for Southwest Nevada, however, said that a few duplicate and falsified forms may have slipped through ACORN’s vetting. But the group turned in between 3,000 and 4,000 tagged registration forms, Henderson said, and there is little evidence to support Lomax’s allegations that they missed “thousands.”
The Associated Press reported Friday that the New Mexico GOP found 28 people who voted fraudulently in Albuquerque during the June Democratic primary by absentee ballot. One of the ballots was cast from someone named “Duran-Duran”
The GOP’s review was conducted in House District 13 and only included 92 ballots. That means roughly a third of the ballots examined found by the GOP were fraudulent. The New Mexico GOP released 10 of their suspect ballots. They ballots did not contain required identification information such as Social Security numbers, drivers license numbers or birthdates.
PajamasMedia: “The Complete Guide to ACORN Voter Fraud” October 14, 2008
This year there have been several accusations of fraud against ACORN. Over a dozen states are investigating the organization already. Here is a complete list of the ongoing investigations:
North Carolina — State Board of Elections officials have found at least 100 voter registration forms with the same names over and over again. The forms were turned in by ACORN. Officials sent about 30 applications to the state Board of Elections for possible fraud investigation.
Ohio — The New York Post reported that a Cleveland man said he was given cash and cigarettes by aggressive ACORN activists in exchange for registering an astonishing 72 times. The complaints have sparked an investigation by election officials into the organization, whose political wing has supported Barack Obama. Witnesses have already been subpoenaed to testify against the organization.
Nevada — Authorities raided the headquarters of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now on Tuesday October 7, 2008, after a month-long investigation. The fraudulent voter registrations included the Dallas Cowboys starting line-up.
Indiana — More than 2,000 voter registration forms filed in northern Indiana’s Lake County filled out by ACORN employees turned out to be bogus. Officials also stopped processing a stack of about 5,000 applications delivered just before the October 6 registration deadline after the first 2,100 turned out to be phony.
Connecticut — Officials are looking into a complaint alleging ACORN submitted fraudulent voter registration cards in Bridgeport. In one instance, an official said a card was filled out for a 7-year-old girl, whose age was listed as 27. 8,000 cards were submitted in Bridgeport.
Missouri — The Kansas City election board is reporting 100 duplicate applications and 280 with fake information. Acorn officials agreed that at least 4% of their registrations were bogus. Governor Matt Blunt condemned the attempts by ACORN to commit voter fraud.
Pennsylvania — Officials are investigating suspicious or incomplete registration forms submitted by ACORN. 252,595 voter registrations were submitted in Philadelphia. Remarkably, 57,435 were rejected — most of them submitted by ACORN.
Wisconsin — In Milwaukee ACORN improperly used felons as registration workers. Additionally, its workers are among 49 cases of bad registrations sent to authorities for possible charges, as first reported by the Journal Sentinel.
Florida — The Pinellas County Elections supervisor says his office has received around 35 voter registrations that appear to be bogus. There is also a question of 30,000 felons who are registered illegally to vote. Their connections with ACORN are not yet clear.
Texas — Of the 30,000 registration cards ACORN turned in, Harris County tax assessor Paul Bettencourt says just more than 20,000 are valid. And just look at some of the places ACORN was finding those voters. A church just next door is the address for around 150 people. More than 250 people claim a homeless outreach center as their home address. Some listed a county mental health facility as their home and one person even wrote down the Harris County jail at the sheriff’s office.
Michigan — ACORN in Detroit is being investigated after several municipal clerks reported fraudulent and duplicate voter registration applications coming through. The clerk interviewed said the fraud appears to be widespread.
New Mexico – The Bernalillo County clerk has notified prosecutors that some 1,100 fraudulent voter registration cards were turned in by ACORN.
CLEVELAND — A national organization that conducts voter registration drives for low-income people has curtailed its push in Cuyahoga County after the Board of Elections accused its workers of submitting fraudulent registration cards.
The board is investigating the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Results of the inquiry could be turned over to the county prosecutor.
Board employees said ACORN workers often handed in the same name on a number of voter registration cards, but showing that person living at different addresses. Other times, cards had the same name listed, but a different date of birth. Still another sign of possible fraud showed a number of people living at an address that turned out to be a restaurant.
ACORN is currently under investigation for fraudulent voter registration and related activities in at least 11 key battleground states.
Election officials in several states have said that 50 percent of ACORN voter registrations are fictitious.
Just last week, for example, ACORN’s offices in Nevada were raided by state law enforcement officials after reports that ACORN had registered the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys to vote in Las Vegas.
In Connecticut, a 7-year-old girl was found to have been registered to vote by ACORN, which changed her age to 27.
Local News: Drug Raid turns up ACORN worker and 7 voter registration forms
The FBI is investigating its voter registration efforts in several states, amid allegations that almost a third of the 1.3 million cards it turned in are invalid. And yesterday, a former employee of Acorn testified in a Pennsylvania state court that the group’s quality-control efforts were “minimal or nonexistent” and largely window dressing. Anita MonCrief also says that Acorn was given lists of potential donors by several Democratic presidential campaigns, including that of Barack Obama, to troll for contributions.
The Obama campaign denies it “has any ties” to Acorn, but Mr. Obama’s ties are extensive. In 1992 he headed a registration effort for Project Vote, an Acorn partner at the time. He did so well that he was made a top trainer for Acorn’s Chicago conferences. In 1995, he represented Acorn in a key case upholding the constitutionality of the new Motor Voter Act — the first law passed by the Clinton administration — which created the mandated, nationwide postcard voter registration system that Acorn workers are using to flood election offices with bogus registrations.
Ms. MonCrief testified that in November 2007 Project Vote development director Karyn Gillette told her she had direct contact with the Obama campaign and had obtained their donor lists. Ms. MonCrief also testified she was given a spreadsheet to use in cultivating Obama donors who had maxed out on donations to the candidate, but who could contribute to voter registration efforts. Project Vote calls the allegation “absolutely false.”
She says that when she had trouble with what appeared to be duplicate names on the list, Ms. Gillette told her she would talk with the Obama campaign and get a better version. Ms. MonCrief has given me copies of the donor lists she says were obtained from other Democratic campaigns, as well as the 2004 DNC donor lists.
In her testimony, Ms. MonCrief says she was upset by Acorn’s “Muscle for Money” program, which she said intimidated businesses Acorn opposed into paying “protection” money in the form of grants. Acorn’s Brian Kettering says the group only wants to change corporate behavior: “Acorn is proud of its corporate campaigns to stop abuses of working families.”
Ms. MonCrief, 29, never expected to testify in a case brought by the state’s Republican Party seeking the local Acorn affiliate’s voter registration lists. An idealistic graduate of the University of Alabama, she joined Project Vote in 2005 because she thought it was empowering poor people. A strategic consultant for Acorn and a development associate with its Project Vote voter registration affiliate, Ms. MonCrief sat in on policy-making meetings with the national staff. She was fired early this year over personal expenses she had put on the group’s credit card.
She says she became disillusioned because she saw that Acorn was run as the personal fiefdom of Wade Rathke, who founded the group in 1970 and ran it until he stepped down to take over its international operations this summer. Mr. Rathke’s departure as head of Acorn came after revelations he’d employed his brother Dale for a decade while keeping from almost all of Acorn’s board members the fact that Dale had embezzled over $1 million from the group a decade ago. (The embezzlement was confirmed to me by an Acorn official.)
“Anyone who questioned what was going on was viewed as the enemy,” Ms. MonCrief told me. “Just like the mob, no one leaves Acorn happily.”
“There’s no quality control on purpose, no checks and balances,” says Nate Toler, who worked until 2006 as the head organizer of an Acorn campaign against Wal-Mart in California. And Ms. MonCrief says it is longstanding practice to blame bogus registrations on lower-level employees who then often face criminal charges, a practice she says Acorn internally calls “throwing folks under the bus.”
Gregory Hall, a former Acorn employee, says he was told on his very first day in 2006 to engage in deceptive fund-raising tactics. Mr. Hall has founded a group called Speaking Truth to Power to push for a full airing of Acorn’s problems “so the group can heal itself from within.”
Human Events: “ACORN Whistleblowers Produce Shocking Testimony on Capitol Hill” 03/23/2009
Late last week, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary, called for a hearing to investigate ACORN. You read that right. At a Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties subcommittee hearing entitled “Lessons Learned from the 2008 Election” last Thursday, witness testimony not only drew Conyers to the subcommittee hearing but events led to Conyers strongly urging that subcommittee chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) conduct a full hearing on ACORN, calling allegations made at the hearing “serious.”
Testimony also revealed ACORN’s unofficial “Muscle for the Money” program directed at fundraising from corporations. Allegations were made of payments from Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to ACORN’s D.C office to harass The Carlyle Group and specifically David Rubenstein, a founder of the company. Even though ACORN D.C. had no interest in The Carlyle Group, they were allegedly paid by SEIU to go break up a banquet and protest at Rubenstein’s house.
It was called “Muscle for the Money” because they would go “intimidate people and protest.” Targets of the protests included Sherwin-Williams, H&R Block, Jackson Hewitt, and Money Mart among others, testimony revealed. The apparent purpose was to get money from the targeted entities for ACORN.
Perhaps the most controversial accusation revealed by whistleblower testimony was the scheme by which ACORN and Project Vote are paid by foundations per voter registered and the submission of copies of actual voter registration cards to the foundations, which is a violation of federal law.
I spoke with whistleblower Anita MonCrief at the hearing. “ACORN itself is sometimes paid by foundations per registration and, in some case,s they would send copies of the voter registration cards straight to the funder,” MonCrief said. “Workers are improperly trained. … They are trained to never ask, ‘Are you registered to vote?’ because if the person says ‘Yes,’ they have to move on. They ask, ‘Did you vote in the last election,’ and if the person says ‘No,’ they register them again. This is how they duplicate registrations and flood the offices.”
Given the political situation the country is currently facing today, the American Conservative Union puts forth the questions of what are we [America] going to be facing this fall, and further, what role will ACORN play?
ACORN is a community organizing group which was found to have forged thousands of voter registration cards in dozens of states. Former employees of ACORN claimed that almost half of their company’s registrations were fraudulent, and their forged submissions in the previous Presidential election add up to nearly 600,000.
Whistleblower Anita Moncrief on Fox
Heres some witness/accomplice testimony reports
The ACORN fell from a poisinous Socialist tree and grew into one of it’s own. Obama had no problem associating with them, working for them, training them, and using their fraud to get elected.
We’ve defined Entitlism as basically gaining favor with the ruling class in order to get .. favors. Now, do me a favor, quit asking for them .. from them. We shouldn’t be dependent on them, they aren’t supposed to be doing them and no one believes that they are doing them for anyone but .. them.
Certainly performing acts of kindness for someone from whom you never expect a return is moral and good – even if it is a politician. It gets dicey that when you do something expecting something or do something for someone important, to be made someone important.
Rod Blagojevish envisioned himself a President in 2016. He had big plans and ideas. In order to fill then Senator Obama’s seat in the Illinois legislature, Blagojevich wanted to make sure he gotsomething for giving something. As he put it, “I’ve fot this thing and it’s f***ing golden .. I’m not just giving it up for f***ing nothing.” Blago believed something was owed to him, he deserved it and was willing to do a favor for Obama to get it.
Of course, Blagojevich not only felt he deserved things he didn’t he also felt others owed him things they didn’t. He was working to shake down a Children’s hospital for campaign dollars if they wanted their governmentdollars. Maybe the hospital is starting to figure out what a lot of us already know – depending on the government for money will leave you just .. depending on the government.
Unless you’ve been under a rock, you are also aware of the offer to Sestak that rocked the media. From MSNBC
Last summer, I received a phone call from President Clinton. During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background. He said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a Presidential Board while remaining in the House of Representatives. I said no. I told President Clinton that my only consideration in getting into the Senate race or not was whether it was the right thing to do for Pennsylvania working families and not any offer. The former President said he knew I’d say that, and the conversation moved on to other subjects.
The White House released a memo that supported this claim and Bill Clinton backed them up. Then Slick Willie said he didn’t, while Obama said he did and now no one knows who said or did what.
Last we find that the Mayo Clinic has taken the return back scratch to a whole new level – they tried to give a man life itself. Not any ordinary man, a man who had given them at least $1 Million as this article in the Dallas Morning News states.
In 2002, Baron was diagnosed with multiple myeloma. By October 2008, his doctors at the Mayo Clinic were telling him he had just days to live.
They also offered a glimmer of hope. Over the years, the couple had donated about $1 million to Mayo. The staff was especially diligent, Blue said. They tested an arsenal of drugs and finally discovered that Baron’s cancer responded surprisingly well, in the lab, to a drug called Tysabri.
Mayo had an ample supply, but the drug was – and still is – approved only for treatment of multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease. The manufacturer, Biogen Idec, refused to give permission, even under special “compassionate use” rules that protect a drug-maker from a black mark in case of an adverse outcome.
One can and should argue that Baron may not have given all that money in the hopes of getting special treatment in the end, but he certainly got it. Guess who also jumped in to help:
Somehow – Blue (Baron’s wife) still isn’t sure how – Pelosi cajoled the FDA to find a legal justification that let Mayo administer the drug, even without Biogen’s consent.
“Nancy figured out a way,” she said.
The drug beat back the cancer for a few days, but not enough.
Blue has no illusion that a typical family could pull such strings.
I’m fairly certain I can’t. And that is disturbing. These real-life instances of the ruling class deciding who gets what should be especially concerning. If only the “deserving” are given the special things, the better goods, the privileged services, where will individual freedom be left?
Our elitist ruling class has taken even more power amongst itself with Health Care and Finance reform. No more are all the decisions in our hands. We will become dependent upon the grace of the aristocracy for things as common as Health Care. We will soon become the less equal of the animals at Manor Farm.
I recently read aTime Magazine article on youth indoctrination involving privately held utility companies and their involvement in teaching the importance of private ownership in public school via propaganda and donations. Accusations of youth indoctrination have been around since the dawn of time, but have you ever really looked up the definition? In definition, indoctrination differs from education in that those being supplied with information via indoctrination are not to question that information. Education, on the other hand, is supposed to encourage thought and even discourse. But, “indoctrination” is such an ugly word! There is another. Perhaps you have heard it. Maybe in your children’s school as they are parting out classes. That word, the one so much more accepted, is “socialization”.
At some point, education moved from an imparting of history, practical knowledge, mathmatics, and scientific fact and theory and the concept of self thought to a culture of socializing information to shape the community view of children. A role that was previously held by family, neighbors, churches and real life experiences. Now, you can expect that your child will be offered, from the very beginning of their formal education, nearly endless opportunities to “improve their school” and “help their community” in ways that do not offer individual growth or viewable results, but by participating in some form of “peace” ritual to solve school yard disputes and in fundraising to “help the poor”.
Parents who argue for this type of socialization in schools often do so because they are too busy to take on the job themselves. Imparting problem solving skills, confidence, compromise, and a love for community were all once the heart of family life and establishing a place in the community. It is easy to argue that some of the role of parenting needed to be handed off to school since economy often “requires” the absence of both parents to the workplace, but it would be a justification for relinquishing the most basic of parental obligations. The “socialization” of information via the public education system has created a much bigger monster than anyone could have ever imagined : the complete dependence of entire generations on each other, on the common good, and the lack of individual voice in the face of wrongs done in the same of the very same “common good”. In other words, a lack of individual importance, ability and individual priorities and a sense of guilt to any child who thinks in terms of self or personal achievement.
Imagine, if you have a moment, the six year old who comes home with a brochure touting her school’s commitment to helping the poor. Imagine her gathering her pennies from her piggy bank and asking her parents for all that they can spare. Imagine that little girl, who has spent an hour in assembly listening to her educators tell her of her importance in helping these destitute masses who have not enough food, or clothing, and most certainly no toys and her innocent drive to donate the MOST pennies! And then, imagine her guilt when her parents must tell her that she must not donate her pennies and that there are none to spare from her parents because it went to her own family’s food, or home, or education fund for her future. Imagine her shame when she returns to school with no pennies, when the teacher proudly calls each student to turn in their donations and she has none. Now that you can see this eager child crushed and ashamed, imagine it happening every month, every week. Imagine each fundraiser she cannot participate in because there is no money at home, or because the money that is there has gone to other family priorities. Imagine the ice cream parties she misses and the class movies that do not happen because she did not help her class raise the most money or bring in the most canned goods. Imagine, at six, that she carries the weight of the poor, the disappointment of a classroom, and the feeling of not being able to help ANYONE, when so many need her.. already.. at the age of six.
By the way, the Time article I mentioned, was from 1928. The only thing that has changed is the word, because “indoctrination” is such an ugly one. “Socialization” sounds so much more… important and helpful to all.
Attempting to Naturalize as many new Americans as possible for votes is nothing new to the Democratic Party. Though it looks like the Obama Administration may conduct this goal through a blanket amnesty, the Clinton Administration tried to create more Democrats a different way, by taking advantage of a program called Citizenship USA.
Heres a little background. In 1995 the INS decided it was overwhelmed with a backlog of Citizenship applicants and decided to form an program called Citizenship USA to speed the process up from a 3 year wait, to a 6 month wait. Meaning an applicant could become an American Citizen within 6 months of turning in paperwork. The Clinton White House sought to take advantage of this program and to turn these new American Citizens into instant Democrat Voters.
As detailed throughout this report, naturalization processing before CUSA already suffered from systemic weaknesses. INS lacked standards for the consistent evaluation of an applicant’s “good moral character” and other qualifications for citizenship. INS had become reliant on the use of temporary files, thus preventing adjudicators from learning as much as possible about an applicant’s background, including information concerning possible grounds for disqualification. Applicant criminal history checks were poorly administered.
Adjudicators were trained and instructed to concentrate primarily on the minimal statutory criteria. In addition, their inquiries were limited by the frequent unavailability of the crucial tools of naturalization processing: applicant criminal history checks and permanent files. The procedures on which INS relied to make these tools available to adjudicators, clerical and automated processes, experienced even greater strain as production expectations increased. As a result of all these factors, naturalization processing integrity was compromised during CUSA.
We found that INS was willing to take these risks primarily because the agency had long tolerated a degree of error in its processes. As we described earlier in this report, INS managed the fingerprint check according to an analysis that balanced flaws in the system against the resources required to redress them, and thereby accepted a certain level of error. In view of the use of this approach in administering one of the most significant checks in the naturalization system—the check against the possibility of bestowing citizenship on someone with a disqualifying criminal record—it was no surprise that a similarly tolerant perspective informed INS’ remaining safeguards, particularly when the rate of processing was increased.
Thus, implicit in the idea of backlog reduction was a general acceptance of the status quo in naturalization processing. We found that it was not an ignorance of the problems so much as an acceptance of them. As Commissioner Meissner told the OIG when discussing why INS moved forward with its plans for CUSA knowing of the problems that then existed in making applicants’ permanent files available to naturalization adjudicators, “the assumption was this: . . . we have been doing it this way for years and years and years, and things need to improve. But they are not going to—you know, we are not going to create an entirely new system in a flash, and so we will do the best we can with what we have.”
Furthermore, before the implementation of CUSA those vulnerabilities had not been the subject of widespread public outcry, and thus there was no outside stimulus for INS to mend its ways. What was of immediate concern to the public and to Congress were the unconscionable delays in processing naturalization applications, and it was on those delays that INS singlemindedly focused its attention.
We’re hearing similar arguments today about a legal immigration process that takes too long, is too cumbersome and is unmanageable.
However, of greatest concern is the fact that INS has not made progress toward developing and implementing adjudicative standards, including the standards for English testing and the evaluation of good moral character. INS recognized before CUSA that such standards were missing and that their absence diminished the quality of naturalization processing during CUSA.
Obviously the program was designed to do nothing but quickly Naturalize Americans. Any flaws already in the INS process were escalated by the need to process individuals within the time frame of the program. Now lets look into the Clinton White House’s involvement and the drive for new Democrats.
From the Report’s section on White House/NPR (National Performance Review program under direct supervision of Vice President Al Gore) Involvement in the CUSA Program:
Two distinct themes emerge from the allegations raised by members of Congress with respect to the CUSA initiative. First, that the quality of naturalization adjudications was compromised during CUSA. Second, that these compromises resulted from political pressures engineered by the White House. Previous chapters in this report have addressed the first issue; in this chapter, we examine allegations concerning White House pressure on INS and its CUSA program.
As we discuss in earlier sections of this report, our investigation found that the poorly managed CUSA program was initiated by INS (without White House input) as a legitimate response to a growing backlog of naturalization applications. White House officials became involved in CUSA in early 1996— before INS had made significant inroads into its naturalization backlog—by making the program a target of aggressive “reinvention” efforts by the National Performance Review (NPR).2 During an approximately 6-week period in
March and April 1996, NPR officials visited the INS Key City Districts and attempted to shake up INS bureaucracy by suggesting changes to INS’ hiring procedures.
We found that this White House/NPR interest in CUSA added to the significant pressure that already existed on INS to meet the ambitious backlog reduction and case processing goals it had set for itself and publicized widely. INS’ single-minded focus on processing cases to meet these goals, in turn, led to a series of mistakes, shortcuts, and mismanagement that adversely affected the quality of naturalizations conducted during the CUSA program as discussed throughout this report.
As part of our investigation, we examined the reasons for the White House/NPR involvement in CUSA. We found evidence that White House officials were interested in INS’ naturalization program for a variety of reasons, including “political” reasons that related to the November 1996 election, but from the evidence available we did not find that those interests resulted in any improper actions. We describe both the evidence that we found that relates to the reasons for the White House and NPR involvement in CUSA as well as White House officials’ explanations for their actions.
Although he says he found nothing improper, I’ll let you decide. First their findings:
One of the most pointed criticisms of the CUSA program made by Members of Congress was that the White House created or influenced CUSA in order to increase the number of Democratic voters. The White House strongly denied this allegation, arguing that its involvement in CUSA was motivated by a desire to assist INS to deliver on promises it made to individuals who were entitled to better services. As part of this investigation, we identified events and communications that pertain to the allegation, and we set them forth here because of the seriousness of the charge and the interest in the question. Given our finding that the involvement of the White House had little direct negative impact on CUSA, the propriety of the motivations behind this involvement is a political question beyond the scope of the OIG’s inquiry.
To what extent, if any, did this heightened White House involvement reflect a desire to increase the Democratic turnout at the 1996 general election? Certainly the possibility that White House involvement in CUSA could be perceived as improper occurred to many people, including Commissioner Meissner, who recalled having voiced her concerns to (Rahm)Emanuel and to both Attorney General Reno and Deputy Attorney General Gorelick.
We found several pieces of evidence showing that the White House was aware of and interested in the connection between naturalization, voting, and the 1996 election. The evidence includes:
· The September 26, 1995, memorandum from Deputy Attorney General Gorelick, drafted by Gerri Ratliff, to Kevin O’Keefe at the White House. The memorandum discussed INS naturalization initiatives and included a page entitled “Talking Points Re Voter Registration” that discussed INS’ limited role in facilitating voter registration at naturalization ceremonies. The memorandum noted that due to INS’ limited resources, it would have to rely on partnerships with other organizations to expand voter registration opportunities.
· A 1-page cover letter dated September 28, 1995, from O’Keefe to Ickes forwarding Ratliff’s memorandum. The cover letter included two paragraphs on voter registration, including the statement that “the pace of naturalization will limit the number of new voters.”
· Statements that INS employees in New York said Lyons made specifically referencing the November 1996 election.
· Farbrother’s March 28, 1996, e-mail to the Vice President noting that INS was not going to be able to “produce a million new citizens before election day.”
· Kamarck’s April 4, 1996, memorandum to the Vice President stating that “[o]nly by working 7 days a week and longer hours can we hope to make a significant enough dent in the backlog that it will show up when it matters.”
We also found evidence that more specifically refers to, or could be interpreted as referring to, the potential benefit to the Democratic Party of naturalizing a million new citizens in FY 1996.
· The March 13, 1996, O’Keefe memorandum to Ickes discussing that Skinny Sheahan, “our best field organizer,” was trying to figure out how to handle voter registration at a large naturalization ceremony in Chicago.
· A conversation between Farbrother and Kamarck in which, according to Farbrother, Kamarck spoke of the President’s desire to involve NPR because of his belief that the large number of people in California waiting for naturalization represented likely votes for him in the 1996 election.
· The memorandum written for Ickes by Stephen Warnath of the DPC expressing the Hispanic Caucus’ prospective view that “faster naturalization means more potential Democratic voters in the next election.”
· The letters written by Daniel Solis and Father Vega to various White House officials that included comments about how enhanced naturalization efforts could increase the number of potential Democratic voters in the 1996 election.
The timeline of events within the report exposes quite alot of evidence as well, here is one excerpt:
Daniel Solis, head of United Neighborhood Organization (UNO) in Chicago,7 told the OIG that he attended a September 1994 Democratic Party fundraiser in Chicago and was seated near the President at the dinner afterwards. In the course of an approximately 10-minute conversation about naturalization, Solis said he told President Clinton that there were approximately 5.5 million potential new citizens in the United States. Solis told the OIG that the President commented that there should be an effort to register these people to vote, to which Solis responded that they had to be naturalized before they could vote. Solis said that he told the President that research showed that newly naturalized citizens tended to vote at a higher rate than other citizens and also tended to vote for incumbents. Solis said President Clinton asked him to send information about this issue to Deputy Chief of Staff Harold Ickes, who was also attending the Chicago event.
The report also greatly details Rahm Emanuel’s involvement in the program and dismay at his refusal to answer the IG’s inquiry:
Whether Emanuel’s interest was real and reflected political acumen or merely politeness is a question that his refusal to be interviewed has made more difficult to answer.
Now for some statements from outside the investigation. WorldNetDaily Reports:
A former INS official who attended meetings with Rahm Emanuel when Emanuel was a White House aide says the hard-charging Democrat relaxed rules to naturalize even criminal immigrants and secure their votes for President Clinton ahead of the 1996 presidential election.
Emanuel coordinated with Hispanic community organizers in Chicago to rubberstamp immigrants for citizenship, the INS official said in an exclusive interview with WND.
It turns out the long-time Chicago political operative was the behind-the-scenes catalyst for Citizenship USA, a project run out of then-Vice President Al Gore’s office.
“Rahm was doing it under the guise of Al Gore’s Reinventing Government program,” said the official, who helped direct INS security policy. “He was definitely the point man and was past his neck in the scandal at INS.”
Emanuel, now caught up in the corruption scandal involving Democrat Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, refused to cooperate with an investigation into the citizenship project by the Justice Department Inspector General.
“He got every rule changed in the hiring of adjudicators so they could naturalize more Mexican nationals to vote for Bill Clinton, not to mention getting the rules changed to naturalize anyone,” regardless of their criminal background, said the official, who’s still employed by the federal government and requested anonymity to avoid reprisals.
“They had immigration ceremonies at stadiums with DNC (Democratic National Committee) staff registering them as voters right there,” he added.
At one Chicago ceremony held inside Soldier Field, some 11,000 new citizens were sworn in.
Another former INS official, William Carroll, said Emanuel “took midnight trips to INS headquarters to meet with (Commissioner) Doris Meissner about Citizenship USA.”
He said that in March 1996 he and other INS district directors were given “marching orders” by headquarters to push through as many new citizens as possible ahead of the election, even if no criminal and national security background checks were completed.
INS deportation officer Tom Conklin said that he and other agents were pressured to rubberstamp immigrants “with two or three arrests for crimes like burglary.”
According to a November 1993 interview with Mother Jones magazine, Emanuel began pushing Clinton to be proactive on the issue of immigration right after he took office, and years ahead of the 1996 re-election campaign.
“I just wanted to be ahead of this issue and have our staff on it, defining it constantly,” Emanuel said, eyeing Texas and California, two key states in 1996 where immigration was a hot issue.
If Democrats can be this dirty on Immigration, is a blanket amnesty in order to get Democrat Votes that much of a stretch. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had a direct involvement in this travesty of justice, and I’m sure, he has no problem trying it again.
Here is Obama’s speech on Immigration Reform
“The politics of who is and who is not allowed to enter this country, and on what terms, has always been contentious, and that remains true today. And it’s made worse by a failure of those of us in Washington to fix a broken immigration system.”
“In fact because we don’t do a very good job of tracking who comes in and out of the country as visitors large numbers avoid Immigration Law simply by overstaying their visas. The result is an estimated 11 million Undocumented Immigrants in the United States.”
“More fundamentally the presence of so many illegal immigrants makes a mockery of all those who are going through the process legally.”
“For example there are those in the Immigrants Rights Community who have argued, passionately, that we should simply provide those who are illegally with legal status or, at least ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until, we have better laws. And often this argument is framed in moral terms, Why should we punish people who are just trying to earn a living? I recognize the sense of compassion that drives this argument but I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair.”
“The 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable. Now if the majority of Americans are skeptical of a blanket amnesty, they are also skeptical that it is possible to round up and deport 11 million people. They know its not possible. Such an effort would be logistically impossible and wildly expensive. Moreover, it would tear at the very fabric of this nation. Because immigrants who are here illegally are now intricately woven into that fabric.”
“Finally we have to demand responsibility from people living here illegally. They must be required to admit that they broke the law, they should be required to register, pay their taxes, pay a fine, and learn English. They must get right with the law before they can get in line and earn their citizenship.”
“We can create a pathway for legal status that is fair, reflective of our values, and works.”
Obama has no intention of deporting the illegal immigrants, and his administrations policy on ICE’s Silent raids confirms this. Instead of rounding up and deporting the illegal immigrants working at different businesses, the illegals are instead fired by their employer and left with either welfare or crime to sustain themselves.
SUBJECT: Administrative Alternatives to Comprehensive Immigration Reform
This memorandum offers administrative relief options to promote family unity, foster economic growth, achieve significant process improvements and reduce the threat of removal for certain individuals present in the United Slates without authorization. It includes recommendations regarding implementation timeframes and required resources.
You already have the Obama Administration looking for ways to change regulations in order to keep Illegal Immigrants in the United States if Congress does not tackle Immigration Reform, you have ICE’s Silent Raids forcing illegal immigrants out of a job but not deportating them. And you have Rahm Emanuel as the White House Chief of Staff and his philosophy of “Never waste a crisis.” Amnesty is quite possible and so is a Democrat voter drive: is immigration another crisis that we must not waste?
Hey, Barry! Does your Beano Cook? Huh? You don’t understand the question? Well, let me put it to you another way. Why does Barney get unlimited Franking privileges? And why doesn’t he have to give up the cheap satisfaction of the radical pose for the deep satisfaction of the radical ends? Is that why you kept voting pleasant all those years? And how come you light up your Hairy Reid but consistently end up burning the Bush? Think you’re Moses? Well, of course, your Pharaohness, there certainly are similarities. Moses floated down the Nile and you most certainly are also in denial. And then there’s the money thing, too. Egyptus? Hell, you gyptus! Crap, you plan to keep on gypting us From Here To Eternity (which explains your obsession with Hawaii, doesn’t it!)
But, I digress. I think I have you figured out. As far as your perverted quest for power is concerned, if Genghis Kahn, yes, you most certainly Kahn too! Kenya see it now? Yeah, I know, I know. The pain in Spain flies mainly on your plane. But now you’re the one who’s digressing. Let’s get back to the point. You’re hurting us. What? Well of course it hurts! We’re getting screwed by a Jackass! Oh right, we’ll all just take two pain pills and call you in the morning. Yes, it’s true. You are a cereal killer. Thanks to you, we’re the only banana republic that has to import its bananas. So, you see, we don’t want to call you in the morning. We’re all staring at a leveraged bowl of Captain Kickass, minus the bananas, and just can’t get all excited about picking up the phone and giving you a ring. My apologies to your nose, but rings cost money, don’t cha’ know? At least Carter knew whose ass to kick – poor rabbit.
So, here we find ourselves, 19 months into the making of the Foundation of your Empire, and what are the major news items of the day? Well, let’s see…there’s your unbridled enthusiasm for building a mosque at Ground Zero (Go figure, the site is named after you.). And, of course, Blago’s jury is well-hung – unlike you, according to Sarah Palin. But who needs to ask Palin’s opinion when Jesse Jackson already offered a while back to help you sing a couple of octaves higher? Yeah, I heard about the squirrel too. But, you know? It never would have starved to death if you hadn’t let it run up your leg. Your alleged manhoodlessness is a national joke, Barry. Wasn’t it about two years ago when we all heard the rumor that if Hillary Clinton gave you one of her acorns, you’d both have two? Which brings us to the mom jeans – whose mom? And who’s genes? And that tingle Chris Matthews had down his leg? Don’t worry about it. It dried up. On the bright side, Vera Baker notwithstanding, at least you seem to have learned from Bill Clinton to keep your rod out of your staff…which brings us right back to David Axelrod. Not a bad name for a cheesy little squirt who gives us the entire shaft. Well-oiled? 10-40, Good Buddy!
Anyway, back to the news. Seems Charlie Wrangle and Maxipad Waters have no ethics. “Ethics? We don’t need no stinkin’ ethics! Besides, it’s Bush’s fault, that friggin’ Cracka”. Would you like some cheese on that Cracka, Maxine? Or, are you on a diet and want to cut the cheese? Either way, Maxine stinks, Barry, and you know it. Reminds me of a song I learned as a young Cracka, Barry. Listen up while I sing you the tune…
Well, I stuck my head in a little skunk’s hole.
And that little skunk said, “Well, bless my soul!”
“Take it out, take it out, take it out, take it out…
Well, I didn’t take it out, and I didn’t take it out.
And that little skunk said, “If you don’t take it out…
You’ll wish you had, take it out, take it out…
Pshhhhhhhhh….I removed it!
Pshhhhhhhhh, Barry. That’s the sound of November 2nd, 2010. You stink. The nation is going to collectively pull your head out of the hole. I won’t water it down for you. To tell you the truth, Maxine stinks. So does Barney’s Frank. And Axel’s rod. And he ain’t heavy, he’s my Hairy Reid.
Believe it or not, I sympathize with your situation. Let’s look at it objectively. You’ve really got it bad. Your Chief of Staff has a history of sending dead fish to people in the mail. Gives a whole new meaning to snail mail – it just might be! And then there’s your personal assistant, Valerie Jarrett, the local slum lord. And Baghdad Bob…geez, what were you drinking the day you hired that gas bag? I bet his Beano doesn’t Cook, either. And let’s not forget your love child, Nancy Pelosi. You can read about her in the Bible – in Genesis, to be precise. God took a rib from Adam and made the first loudspeaker. That’s why her face is so tight – loudspeakers don’t work unless the woofer is uptight, out-of-sight, and in the groove.
So what’s your plan to get out of this mess, Barry? Go on vacation? Golf? Spend other people’s money? I gotta tell you, buddy. You’re in it too deep. George Sore Ass can’t save you this time. You are such a shallow thinker that your mental masturbation ain’t going to buy you love. I admit it was a stroke of genius to redirect NASA to kiss up to Islam, but really, all you are going to do is end up with a bad case of peegret. That’s what happens when you split the bar without first dumping the lemonade. Next time try vodka – an Absolut Zero. That’s your only hope. You’re not THE ONE. All you are is the Zero. Absolut Zero. Cheers.
Time to look at the White House staff to get a clearer picture of what’s behind the policies of this administration. First up, White House Chief of Staff Rahm “deadfish” Emanuel. We will get into the deadfish later. First here’s the WhiteHouse.Gov bio:
Rahm Emanuel is the White House Chief of Staff. Prior to joining President Barack H. Obama’s administration, Emanuel served in the House of Representatives, representing the fifth district of Illinois, and was Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus. As an advocate for Chicago’s working families, Emanuel served on the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees taxes, trade, Social Security, and Medicare issues.
Appointed by then House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Emanuel served as Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for the 2006 cycle. Under his leadership, Democrats gained 30 seats in the House without losing a single incumbent, and ushered in a new Democratic majority for the first time in more than a decade.
In January 2007, the new majority elected Emanuel to serve as Democratic Caucus Chair, the fourth-highest-ranking member of the House Democratic Leadership. As Chair, Emanuel led the Democratic Caucus in fulfilling its campaign promise to pass legislation reflecting the values and priorities of the American people.
Before being elected to Congress, Emanuel worked at the Chicago investment bank Wasserstein Perella. He was a core member of the Clinton White House from 1993 to 1998, starting as the national finance director for the 1992 campaign and eventually becoming Senior Adviser to the President for Policy and Strategy. In 1989, Emanuel was a senior adviser and chief fundraiser for Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley’s campaign. He also played an important role in Paul Simon’s 1984 campaign for the Senate.
Emanuel graduated from Sarah Lawrence College in 1981 and received a Master’s Degree in Speech and Communication from Northwestern University in 1985. He and his wife, Amy Rule, have three children, Zach, Ilana, and Leah.
Oh my, Why he’s a Paragon of Democratic Party Knighthood. Yea ok, lets look deeper. From Discover The Networks:
Emanuel’s interest in politics began when, as a college undergraduate, he worked on the congressional campaign of Chicago Democrat David Robinson. He proceeded thereafter to work as a fundraiser for a number of successful Illinois candidates before being drafted by the presidential campaign of Arkansas governor Bill Clinton in 1991.
Emanuel proved to be a shrewd tactician for Clinton, urging the latter, during the 1992 New Hampshire primary race, to focus more on fundraising efforts than on campaigning. The money Clinton collected would enable him to run an effective ad campaign aimed at countering the emerging controversies about the candidate’s past adulterous relationships and his draft-dodging activities during the Vietnam War.
Emanuel’s aptitude for fundraising continued to help the Clinton campaign throughout the primaries and into the general election. Of notable importance was Emanuel’s ability to connect with Jewish donors, who contributed heavily to Clinton’s then-unprecedented $72 million war chest. According to political consultant Steve Rabinowitz, “[Emanuel] schmoozed many, many millions all over the country, including money from traditional Democratic Party givers, who are disproportionately Jewish, and new Democratic givers.”
On November 4, 1992 — the night after Clinton had been elected President — Emanuel and other campaign aids convened for a celebratory dinner. At one point in the evening, the discussion turned to the topic of certain individuals who, in the estimation of Emanuel and his cohorts, had somehow betrayed the Clinton cause. One such person was Nathan Landow, a fundraiser who had backed the candidacy of Clinton’s Democrat rival Paul Tsongas. Another was William Donald Schaefer, the Democrat governor of Maryland who had endorsed Republican incumbent George H.W. Bush. In a fit of anger, Emanuel, wielding a steak knife, stood up amidst his dinner companions and proceeded to stab the table repeatedly, screaming: “Nat Landow! Dead!… Bill Schaefer! Dead!…”
During Clinton’s first five years in the White House, Emanuel continued to serve as an aid to the President. Perhaps his most high-profile assignment was as choreographer of the 1993 Rose Garden ceremony following the Oslo Accord, an event that featured the famous handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat.
Shortly after Clinton’s electoral victory in 1992, Emanuel began pushing the new President to exploit the issue of immigration for his political advantage. Heeding Emanuel’s advice, in September 1994 Clinton met with Daniel Solis, president of the Chicago-based United Neighborhood Organization (UNO), a Hispanic advocacy group. Solis told Clinton that if he could somehow swiftly naturalize the ever-growing number of non-citizen immigrants residing in the U.S., he would have a “great opportunity” to increase the pool of potential voters who might support his re-election bid in 1996. Clinton instructed Solis to stay in contact with Emanuel on this matter; Solis and Emanuel soon coordinated a scheme — which was titled “Citizenship USA” and was headquartered in Vice President Al Gore’s office — to fast-track the naturalization process for both legal and illegal immigrants before the 1996 election. According to one INS security official:
“The goal was to speed up the process and turn as many legal residents and illegals into Clinton voters as possible…. Rahm was doing it under the guise of Al Gore’s Reinventing Government program. He [Emanuel] was definitely the point man and was past his neck in the scandal at INS…. He got every rule changed in the hiring of adjudicators so they could naturalize more Mexican nationals to vote for Bill Clinton, not to mention getting the rules changed to naturalize anyone [regardless of their immigration status or criminal history]…. They had immigration ceremonies at stadiums with DNC (Democratic National Committee) staff registering them as voters right there.”
At one Chicago ceremony held inside the Soldier Field football stadium, approximately 11,000 new citizens were sworn in en masse.
A former INS district director, William Carroll, stated that in March 1996 he and his colleagues had been given “marching orders” to naturalize as many new citizens as possible in advance of the November election, even in the absence of criminal and national security background checks of the applicants.
INS deportation officer Tom Conklin concurred that he and other agents had been pressured to approve the citizenship applications of immigrants “with two or three arrests for crimes like burglary.”
Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine subsequently conducted an investigation of Emanuel’s role in the citizenship scheme. Fine concluded that “the INS had compromised the integrity of naturalization adjudications as a result of its efforts to process applicants more quickly and meet a self-imposed goal of completing more than a million cases by the end of fiscal year 1996.” According to Fine, the Clinton administration had followed “inadequate procedures for checking criminal histories and fingerprints.” Fine added that Emanuel had refused his request for an interview.
In 1998 Emanuel left his advisory position at the White House to work as an investment banker at the firm of Wasserstein Perella, where he earned $16.2 million during a two-and-a-half-year stint.
In 2000 Emanuel was again called upon by Bill Clinton, this time to serve on the Board of Directors for the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac). During his tenure on the Board, Freddie Mac was plagued by such major scandals as accounting fraud and illegal campaign contributions to congressional candidates. Emanuel resigned from the Board in 2001.
In 2002 Emanuel ran for public office and was elected as the Democrat Representative for Illinois’ 5th congressional district, easily defeating Republican opponent Mark Augusti.
In January 2005 Emanuel was named Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for the 2006 election season. Such was his success in engineering important victories for the Democratic Party in that year’s mid-term elections, that Illinois Republican Representative Ray LaHood said of Emanuel: “He legitimately can be called the golden boy of the Democratic Party today. He recruited the right candidates, found the money and funded them, and provided issues for them.”
Emanuel’s strategy in 2006 was to focus not only on fundraising, but also on an aggressive propaganda campaign deriding Republicans for such transgressions as their mismanagement of the Iraq War, their allegedly inadequate response to Hurricane Katrina, and their scandals involving figures like Mark Foley, Tom DeLay, and Jack Abramoff. Most notably, Emanuel recruited numerous moderate and conservative Democrat candidates — a number of whom were military veterans — to run for election in Southern and Midwestern districts where doctrinaire leftists would have stood little chance of winning.
As a result of the foregoing strategies, Democrats in 2006 gained 30 congressional seats, there by seizing control of the House of Representatives and setting the stage for Nancy Pelosi to become Speaker of the House.
Emanuel was elected Chairman of the Democratic Caucus, making him the fourth highest ranking member of the Democratic leadership in the House.
Emanuel went on to become a close advisor to Senator Barack Obama, particularly during the latter’s run for the White House in 2008. On November 6, 2008, President-elect Obama named Emanuel to serve as his White House Chief of Staff.
Shortly before Obama’s November 4, 2008 election victory, Emanuel had conversations with Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s Chief of Staff John Harris about who would fill Obama’s vacant Senate seat if Obama were to win the presidency. According to one source, Emanuel gave Harris a list of candidates who would be “acceptable” to Obama. The names on the list included Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, Illinois Veterans Affairs director Tammy Duckworth, state Comptroller Dan Hynes, and U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois—all Democrats. Sometime shortly after the election, Emanuel telephoned John Harris to add the name of Democratic Attorney General Lisa Madigan to the approved list.
In December 2008 it was revealed that Blagojevich, who was authorized by Illinois law to name a successor to Obama, had been secretly taped telling political confidantes that he was aiming to sell the Senate seat in exchange for campaign cash, a lucrative job, an ambassadorship, or a Cabinet post. After these charges against Blagojevich became public, Emanuel refused to respond to reporters’ questions about any involvement he may have had with the governor’s office over the Senate pick.
In December 2008 it was reported that Emanuel, cognizant of the fact that the economic recession in which America was mired presented an opportunity for the Democratic Party to enact sweeping legislation under the guise of an economic recovery plan, had said the following in a candid moment: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste — and what I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”
In February 2009 it was learned that Emanuel had lived rent-free for years in the Capitol Hill townhouse of Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro — and that he had failed to make mention of that fact on any of his financial-disclosure forms, as congressional ethics rules require for such arrangements (which are classified by the IRS as gifts that are subject to taxes).
Following is an overview of Emanuel’s congressional voting record from 2003 through 2008, as per key pieces of legislation covering a wide array of issues.
In February 2004 Emanuel voted against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which proposed to make it an added criminal offense for someone to injure or kill a fetus while carrying out a crime against a pregnant woman.
In April 2005 and September 2006, Emanuel voted against the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, whose purpose was to prohibit the transportation of a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion without a parent’s (or a legal guardian’s) consent.
In December 2006 Emanuel voted against the Abortion Pain Bill, which mandated that abortion providers, prior to performing an abortion on a fetus older than 20 weeks, inform the mother that: (a) the fetus might feel pain during the procedure, and (b) the use of some pain-reducing drugs may have health risks associated with them.
As a result of his unwavering support for the unrestricted right to abortion-on-demand under any and all circumstances, Emanuel has consistently received ratings of 100 percent from NARAL and Planned Parenthood. These ratings indicate that Emanuel’s votes and stated positions on abortion-related matters have mirrored, literally without exception, the positions of these organizations. Indeed, since at least 1995 Emanuel has supported the agendas of Planned Parenthood 100 percent of the time.
In September 2004 Emanuel voted against a bill that would have prohibited same-sex marriage. In July 2006 he voted against a proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage in America exclusively as the union of one man and one woman.
TaxesIn May 2003 Emanuel voted against a $350 billion tax cut. This bill contained, among other things, a provision to eliminate the so-called “marriage tax penalty” by making the standard deduction for married couples twice that of a single filer.
In May 2004 he voted against a proposal to extend the alternative minimum tax relief that had been available in 2003 and 2004.
Also in May 2004, he voted against a proposal to make the $1,000-per-child tax credit permanent rather than letting it decline to $700 in 2005. Four months later he voted against another bill calling for a five-year extension on the $1,000 child tax credit.
In October 2004 he voted against a ten-year, $145 billion tax cut for domestic manufacturers and small corporations.
In April 2005 he voted against a proposal to permanently repeal the estate tax.
In November 2005 he voted against a bill calling for a $49.91 billion reduction in federal spending over a five-year period. Twelve months later he voted against a similar five-year proposal for $56.1 billion in federal spending reductions; that bill also called for the retention of a reduced tax rate on capital gains and dividends.
In May 2006 he voted against $69.96 billion in tax cuts and credits through 2010, including reductions of 15 percent on capital gains taxes and 5 percent on dividends taxes.
In June 2006 he voted against a proposal to reduce estate taxes beginning in 2010; that proposal would have set the new rates at 15 percent for estates worth up to $25 million, and 30 percent for estates valued at more than $25 million.
The most notable exception to Emanuel’s generally doctrinaire espousal of high taxation occurred in January 2008, when he voted in favor of a bill giving single taxpayers a tax credit of up to $600, and joint filers a tax credit of up to $1,200.
In May 2006 Emanuel voted against a proposal to provide funds for offshore oil exploration along the Outer Continental Shelf; instead, he favored a continuation of President Clinton’s 1998 moratorium on oil drilling.
MortgagesIn September 2007 Emanuel voted in favor of a bill calling on money lenders “to use risk-based pricing to more effectively reach underserved borrowers.” In other words, he was endorsing subprime loans to under-qualified borrowers—the very practice that eventually would lead to the cataclysmic collapse of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the mortgage industry.
Emanuel has received a 100 percent rating from ACORN, the political cult that for many years has played a major role in pressuring banks to make subprime loans.
Military CommissionsIn September 2006 Emanuel voted against a bill authorizing the President to establish military commissions to try enemy combatants captured in the war on terror. In Emanuel’s view, such tribunals trample on the civil rights and liberties of defendants who, he contends, should be entitled to all the rights and protections afforded by the American criminal court system—where the standards that govern the admissibility of evidence are considerably stricter than the counterpart standards in military tribunals.
Counter-Terrorism & Homeland Security
In July 2005 Emanuel voted in favor of reauthorizing the post-9/11 anti-terrorism measure known as the Patriot Act.
In September 2006 he voted against an amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978; this amendment called for allowing the government to use electronic surveillance to investigate suspected terrorist operatives.
In August 2007 he voted against a bill permitting the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General to monitor foreign electronic communications which are routed through the United States—provided that the purpose of such monitoring was to obtain “foreign intelligence information” about suspected terrorists. In June 2008 he voted in favor of a bill specifically prohibiting this type of surveillance.
The Center for Security Policy, which is committed to “promoting international peace through American strength,” has given Emanuel ratings ranging, over the years, from 17 percent to 35 percent.
In June 2006 Emanuel voted against a resolution which stated that it was not in America’s national security interest to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal of its troops from Iraq, and that a better course of action would be to withdraw the troops only upon the “completion of the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure and united Iraq.”
In February 2007 he voted to disapprove of President Bush’s decision to move ahead with the so-called troop “surge”—the deployment of some 21,500 additional U.S. soldiers in an effort to quell the violent insurgents in Iraq.
In May 2007 Emanuel voted in favor a proposal to expedite the transfer of all prisoners currently being held in the Guantanamo Bay detention center, most of whom are, as Gordon Cucullu writes in The American Enterprise, “not innocent foot soldiers” but rather “Islamic fundamentalists from across the Middle East, rabid jihadists who have dedicated their lives to the destruction of America and Western civilization.”
That same month, Emanuel voted in favor of an amendment to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 90 days.
In July 2007 he voted to begin dramatically reducing the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq by April 1, 2008.
In June 2008 he voted in favor of exploring the possibility of impeaching President Bush on grounds that he had lied about U.S. intelligence on Iraq so as to justify the March 2003 American invasion.
Heres Rahm Emanuel advocating for negotiations with Iran with Bill Maher
In May 2004 Emmanuel voted “No” on requiring hospitals to report (to the federal government) illegal aliens who receive emergency medical treatment.
In February 2005 he voted against the Real ID Act, which proposed to: set minimal security requirements for state driver licenses and identification cards; require asylum applicants suspected of affiliating with terrorist groups to prove that they are indeed seeking to escape persecution in their homeland; and ensure that physical barriers to prevent illegal immigration would be expeditiously constructed where needed along the U.S.-Mexico border.
In December 2005 he voted against a bill calling for: the construction of some 700 miles of fencing along America’s southern border; the establishment of a system requiring business owners to verify the legal status of all their employees; the detention of any person attempting to enter the U.S. illegally after October 1, 2006; an increase in the penalties on anyone attempting to smuggle illegal aliens into the U.S.; the annual provision of $250 million to pay state and local police agencies for their assistance in enforcing federal immigration laws; and funding for a program to deport “removable criminal aliens” in prison following the completion of their sentences, rather than releasing them into American communities.
In June 2006 Emanuel voted in favor of an amendment prohibiting the U.S. government from tipping off Mexican officials as to the whereabouts of operatives working for the Minuteman Project, a nonviolent organization of American citizens who alert the U.S. Border Patrol to the presence of unauthorized border-crossers in the Southwestern states.
In September 2006 Emanuel again voted against a bill authorizing the construction of 700 miles of double-layered fencing between the U.S. and Mexico.
That same month, he voted against a proposal to grant state and local officials the authority to investigate, identify, and arrest illegal immigrants.
The U.S. Border Control, which “is dedicated to ending illegal immigration by securing our nation’s borders and reforming our immigration policies,” gives Emanuel a rating of 8 percent.
In April 2003 and again in October 2005, Emanuel voted “No” on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers as punishment for violence that is committed with guns.
Already you can see much of Obama’s political stances and policies in agreement with Rahm Emanuel. The attack on Arizona’s SB1070 seems to be inviting Emanuels previous Immigrant scheme for Democratic voters. He served on the Board of Fannie/Freddie, who are conveniently exempt from Financial Reform and continue to ask for, and recieve, taxpayer funded bailouts. The voting record is also extremely similar.
Here is Rahm Emanuel talking about a mandatory service plan, something Obama also advocated for during his campaign.
So I’d say Rahm Emanuel is a hot headed radical. Tick him off, and if he’s not stabbing the table with a knife chanting your name and die, he just might mail you a decomposing fish. Regardless of your wishes, or your family needs, you will be forced to serve under a mandatory service plan. Illegal Immigrant? No Problem! Just vote Democrat. You can see why Obama has Emanuel as his Chief of Staff, they have similar views, and not one of those views is good for America or Freedom.
Making the rounds through numerous news sources one theme popped out: Obama is planning a back door approach to getting his extreme agenda implemented even once the overwhelming majority in Congress is lost. Of course, a few other random bits thrown in as well.
At Jacksonsun.com there is a post that describes a back-door approach to cap-and-trade.
President Obama is insisting on changing the tax laws so the IRS can collect double the income tax on energy producers. His budget plan, if approved, would essentially give foreign oil and natural gas companies – like BP – an advantage over domestic companies because they would pay less in income taxes.
At about.com we learn that the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management is scarfing up public land by naming them monuments.
..having the president pull an end run around Congress by unilaterally naming areas as national monuments “should the legislative process not prove fruitful” and to use the agency’s internal land-use planning process to accomplish the bureau’s goals for managing “conservation values” when those other two efforts fail.
As the rounds continued, I find Ariana Huffington suddenly concerned about the deficit, but she clearly doesn’t get it at all.
Turns out the Republicans were against raising the deficit until they were for it — at least when it comes to extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans .. This reveals a total lack of understanding about how jobs are — and aren’t — created. Hint: it has nothing to do with the personal tax rate of the people running the business. It has everything to do with demand — from consumers, advertisers, government contracts, etc.
Sure, because the wealthy are the ones that actually invest, taking more from them will magically cause investment, jobs and therefor demand?
This website makes it incredibly easy to locate local groups that match your personal preferences. I have used it to join a few local Conservative groups, find local event I didn’t even know existed and attend them. I am not interested in uniting everyone. What is important is building a Conservative community that discusses, debates and acts.
We are individuals, but individuals must from time-to-time come together to defend individual freedoms.
Go to http://meetup.com, search on Conservative in your zip code and get involved. If there isn’t a group in your area, start one. I will help you, no matter where you are.