Don't get caught up in the "bailing out Wall Street" hype. As I said before, unfortunately, we all must assume some responsibility for this crisis. If for no other reason, but because "we" all were inadvertently implicit.
Once we elect these officials into office, we disconnect from the political process. Honestly, a majority of us find the political spectrum boring, until something sensational happens, and believe me; the politicians took notice a long time ago.
Had the nation spoke out, and inundated members of the House, and Senate, when lax regulation was being signed into law, we could very well have prevented this calamity.
If you listen to the media spin, you would swear both parties revolted against this bill for the same reasons. Fact is, the Senate majority, Paulson and the White House came together to try to stop the bleeding, and begin the healing process.
Now here's where the politics come in.
At first, The White House and Paulson wanted:
1. A blank check, with limited oversight, and no guarantees.
At first, The Democrats wanted:
1. Guarantees the taxpayer would be protected, in the event profits were made.
2. Strict regulation, and oversight.
3. Consumer protectionism. Which would allow judges to arbitrate the loan terms of individuals on the brink of bankruptcy.
4. A market correction. Which would bring the value of these assets down to their realistic values.
5. A cap on Executive compensation.
The revolting Republicans still want:
1. To let private investors obtain the bad assets (most likely at a discounted price), then repackage and place those assets back on the market, at their current valuation. In the hope of letting the market correct itself.
2. Limited Gov't funding, intervention, and oversight.
3. No cap on Executive compensation.
*** There are more talking points, but I wanted to point out the issues that speak to a majority of Americans ***
Faced with possibility of a crisis, the Senate majority, the White House, Paulson, and members from both sides of the aisle, ratified the bill, and made concessions, in order to stabilize our markets sooner, rather than later.
Herein lies the reason for the stalemate. The negotiating parties made concessions, because they wanted a version of the bill they believed would receive bi-partisan support. Both parties made sacrifices in the hopes of starting the healing process.
The bill is not perfect, but it would have set the wheels in motion. But, revolting members from both parties are adamant about their positions, and refuse to budge.
Basically, the consumer protectionism provisions were scaled down, to appease the Republicans, and the Executive compensation limits were added to appease the Democrats. As before, it gets more complicated, but this is the basis for the revolt people.
You could look up the bill yourself, but basically, the Republicans want to limit control on big business, claiming free market enterprise principles. The Democrats feel the best way to get it done, is by giving some of us who qualify, the opportunity to restructure our loans, and keep them to term.
Now you can argue principles all day. I strongly believe in the free market enterprise, but I do believe the middle class needs to be protected from greed.
In my area, property values have been grossly inflated. Some properties have nearly triple in value, in about as many years, before the market got tight. This was a result of the markets run amok.
It's almost like economic cleansing has been waged in some neighborhoods. Once the prices started getting out of control, people were coerced into taking loans they could not afford, with the hopes of renting out units in order to make their mortgage payments, or more refinancing down the road.
I am familiar with both situations, because I briefly worked for a mortgage company who targeted middle/low income applicants, utilizing predatory methods. I also briefly entertained the thought of purchasing a home, but by that time the median home prices had clearly jumped out of my range, but although I came to grips and abandoned thoughts of pursuing the "dream" for now, I was also aggressively targeted by the real estate agents, and they tried to get me to buy using the same deceptive practices.
Although I had the presence of mind to resist, I could see how many people were lured into this fatal financial decision. They made it seem so easy. They said things like, "the Gov't backed loans were easy to get", and "median home prices would continue to boom".
Now, you could take the position of "I don't want to bail out Wall Street", but the fact of the matter is, we all WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS MESS.
I happen to side with the Democrats. Although I do not believe in "socialism", "corporate socialism", or any form thereof, I don't think a little regulation, oversight, accountability, and a taxpayer guarantee is necessarily a bad thing.
We all know that absolute power corrupts, and that's exactly what allowed this travesty to occur. Everybody was getting in on the frenzy, but as people were being laid off, companies were outsourcing, and everybody had their hand in the pot, the disposable incomes of Middle Class Americans were decreasing or stagnant, at best, the cost of living continued to spiral out of control, oil prices caused more trauma, we started importing more, and producing less, and we are engaged in a War.
All of these factors are direct contributors to our markets demise. But now is not time for finger pointing. I hope Congress could look past their political affiliations, and get some form of the bill passed quickly, but not without regulation, oversight, CEO compensation limits, and some form of a guarantee for the taxpayer.
In my opinion, the Republicans are protecting big business, and although businesses need incentives in order to create jobs, it's obvious that wasn't happening.
If you could increase the spending capacity of a majority of Americans, and greatly reduce the number of future foreclosures, the market will rebound. Trickle up is pretty much guaranteed. If not, a lot of us will continue to suffer.
A great many of us will take hits with our incomes, investment portfolios, jobs, etc, but the Wealthy will not lose.
When you write your elected officials in protest of the bail out, learn the facts, think about how this affects you, and argue your positions first.
A robust Middle Class, will always keep their pockets fat anyway. We have to give Trickle Up economics a shot. The financial industries that survive will see their money come back, with INTEREST.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
REAL TALK
This is Exactly what I have been talking about. They have the little people feeling as though "we would be saving the fat cats", or "bailing out millionaires"..... No, we're saving ourselves.!!!!!!!!
The fat cats have engorged their bank accounts over the past 8 years of Bush. Some CEO's left with golden parachutes. Some rich people moved their money to safer investments (energy/oil/precious stones+metals) and left the financial institutions in tatters.
Your little money, job, and investments are in danger, but believe me, their loot is "SECURED", and they will gladly sit on the sidelines while the markets go up in flames. Once the market hits rock bottom, all of the retirement accounts go bankrupt, real estate assets continue to lose value, and all the little people get squeezed out of the game, they will come back in and buy up everything for pennies on the dollar. And when the markets rebound, their investments will jump a hundred fold, and you'll have to buy your way back into their game, starting all over from scratch.
This will affect us all, but mainly, the Middle & Poor classes. The truly Rich could care less, they never lose anyway.Don't buy into the hype, we need a responsible bill, that will hold the financial industry accountable, enforce regulation, have independent oversight, limit CEO payouts, and, will guarantee the tax payers a return on their investment, before they start eating the profits again.
All four of the past Presidents in office, have used Social Security to shore up the economy, or balance the budget. We're spending about a trillion dollars on Iraq. Why can't we use some taxpayer dollars to save ourselves??? It only makes $en$e.....
Cramer on BloggingStocks: This defeat hurts us all
Posted Sep 30th 2008 9:15AM by Jim CramerFiled under: Market matters, Citigroup Inc. (C), Bank of America (BAC), Federal Natl Mtge (FNM), Amer Intl Group (AIG), Wachovia Corp (WB), Cramer on BloggingStocks, Financial Crisis
TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says the rejected bill was about rescuing credit markets, not rescuing Wall Street. So what if the plan would have benefited some fat cats? Everything's always going to benefit fat cats. That's how things work, unless you want a Leninist or Maoist society.
What people needed to care about were the 90 million families who own stocks and the millions of people who are about to get kicked out of their homes who had a hope to be able to refinance with someone from the government rather than a collection agency.
You want bailout? Fannie(NYSE: FNM) (Cramer's Take) and Freddie(NYSE: FRE) (Cramer's Take) were bailed out. AIG(NYSE: AIG) (Cramer's Take) was bailed out. Those directly helped some of the wealthiest people and nations in the world. The AIG bailout could cause the U.S. government hundreds of billions of dollars, because of credit default swaps. Those were bailouts.
This package was about stopping home price depreciation before it hit 40%, 50%, 60%. It was about the private sector being able to buy failed banks, not the public sector, which is what will now have to happen.****
**** I believe we will wind up using taxpayer money to bail out the markets because when they reconvene, if the Republicans are still playing hardball, the Democrats are going to ratify the bill, and put back all of the consumer protectionisms, in order to get the rest of the Democratic party on board, then put the pressure on the White House to pass it. It would be more political theatre, but if it works, it would benefit Middle class Americans tremendously. ********
I can see how people might think, wait a second, now we can just let the FDIC handle it. The depositors get their money, and the fat cats who work at the banks get lost. But the good banks needed a place to be able to put their bad loans so they can free up capital and lend again, and now we don't have a place for it. That, again, was what this bill was about. Without it, who is to say that Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) (Cramer's Take) makes it if housing keeps going down in price? What makes people think that Citigroup(NYSE: C) (Cramer's Take) doesn't go down, now that it has to pay not just for Wachovia's (NYSE: WB) (Cramer's Take) deposits but for its debt?
I am furious about all of this, because of all the boneheaded things I have seen Congress do, the giveaways for the farmers, the foreign aid to Iraq and so many other places, the hundreds of billions spent for weapons systems that the generals and admirals don't even want and the money spent on FNM and FRE and AIG, this was the one plan that might have been a real win for the American people. And now it is gone. Disgraceful. And trillions will now be lost in the credit markets, the stock market and in housing net worth.
Maybe the purists and puritansbelieve that this is right. But for everyone who has ever saved a dime and worked hard and invested in a home or a stock, this is a disaster of unimaginable proportions that it will take as long as the Great Depression did for us to get over.
The fat cats have engorged their bank accounts over the past 8 years of Bush. Some CEO's left with golden parachutes. Some rich people moved their money to safer investments (energy/oil/precious stones+metals) and left the financial institutions in tatters.
Your little money, job, and investments are in danger, but believe me, their loot is "SECURED", and they will gladly sit on the sidelines while the markets go up in flames. Once the market hits rock bottom, all of the retirement accounts go bankrupt, real estate assets continue to lose value, and all the little people get squeezed out of the game, they will come back in and buy up everything for pennies on the dollar. And when the markets rebound, their investments will jump a hundred fold, and you'll have to buy your way back into their game, starting all over from scratch.
This will affect us all, but mainly, the Middle & Poor classes. The truly Rich could care less, they never lose anyway.Don't buy into the hype, we need a responsible bill, that will hold the financial industry accountable, enforce regulation, have independent oversight, limit CEO payouts, and, will guarantee the tax payers a return on their investment, before they start eating the profits again.
All four of the past Presidents in office, have used Social Security to shore up the economy, or balance the budget. We're spending about a trillion dollars on Iraq. Why can't we use some taxpayer dollars to save ourselves??? It only makes $en$e.....
Cramer on BloggingStocks: This defeat hurts us all
Posted Sep 30th 2008 9:15AM by Jim CramerFiled under: Market matters, Citigroup Inc. (C), Bank of America (BAC), Federal Natl Mtge (FNM), Amer Intl Group (AIG), Wachovia Corp (WB), Cramer on BloggingStocks, Financial Crisis
TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says the rejected bill was about rescuing credit markets, not rescuing Wall Street. So what if the plan would have benefited some fat cats? Everything's always going to benefit fat cats. That's how things work, unless you want a Leninist or Maoist society.
What people needed to care about were the 90 million families who own stocks and the millions of people who are about to get kicked out of their homes who had a hope to be able to refinance with someone from the government rather than a collection agency.
You want bailout? Fannie(NYSE: FNM) (Cramer's Take) and Freddie(NYSE: FRE) (Cramer's Take) were bailed out. AIG(NYSE: AIG) (Cramer's Take) was bailed out. Those directly helped some of the wealthiest people and nations in the world. The AIG bailout could cause the U.S. government hundreds of billions of dollars, because of credit default swaps. Those were bailouts.
This package was about stopping home price depreciation before it hit 40%, 50%, 60%. It was about the private sector being able to buy failed banks, not the public sector, which is what will now have to happen.****
**** I believe we will wind up using taxpayer money to bail out the markets because when they reconvene, if the Republicans are still playing hardball, the Democrats are going to ratify the bill, and put back all of the consumer protectionisms, in order to get the rest of the Democratic party on board, then put the pressure on the White House to pass it. It would be more political theatre, but if it works, it would benefit Middle class Americans tremendously. ********
I can see how people might think, wait a second, now we can just let the FDIC handle it. The depositors get their money, and the fat cats who work at the banks get lost. But the good banks needed a place to be able to put their bad loans so they can free up capital and lend again, and now we don't have a place for it. That, again, was what this bill was about. Without it, who is to say that Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) (Cramer's Take) makes it if housing keeps going down in price? What makes people think that Citigroup(NYSE: C) (Cramer's Take) doesn't go down, now that it has to pay not just for Wachovia's (NYSE: WB) (Cramer's Take) deposits but for its debt?
I am furious about all of this, because of all the boneheaded things I have seen Congress do, the giveaways for the farmers, the foreign aid to Iraq and so many other places, the hundreds of billions spent for weapons systems that the generals and admirals don't even want and the money spent on FNM and FRE and AIG, this was the one plan that might have been a real win for the American people. And now it is gone. Disgraceful. And trillions will now be lost in the credit markets, the stock market and in housing net worth.
Maybe the purists and puritansbelieve that this is right. But for everyone who has ever saved a dime and worked hard and invested in a home or a stock, this is a disaster of unimaginable proportions that it will take as long as the Great Depression did for us to get over.
Monday, September 29, 2008
THE HATER DIATRIBE
Hater/ By Maya Angelou
A hater is someone who is jealous and envious and spends all their
time trying to make you look small so they can look tall.
They are very negative people to say the least. Nothing is ever
good enough!
When you make your mark, you will always attract some haters...
That's why you have to be careful with whom you share your
blessings and your dreams, because some folk can't handle seeing
you blessed...
It's dangerous to be like somebody else... If God wanted you to be
like somebody else, He would have given you what He gave them! Right?
You never know what people have gone through to get what they
have...
The problem I have with haters is that they see my glory, but they
don't know my story...
If the grass looks greener on the other side of the fence, you
can rest assured that the water bill is higher there too!
We've all got some haters among us!
Some people envy you because you can:
a) Have a relationship with God
b) Light up a room when you walk in
c) Start your own business
d) Tell a man / woman to hit the curb
(if he / she isn't about the right thing)
e) Raise your children without both parents being
in the home
Haters can't stand to see you happy.
Haters will never want to see you succeed.
Most of our haters are people who are supposed to be
on our side.
How do you handle your undercover haters?
You can handle these haters by:
1. Knowing who you are & who your true friends are
*(VERY IMPORTANT!!)
2. Having a purpose to your life: Purpose does not
mean having a job. You can have a job and still be
unfulfilled.
A purpose is having a clear sense of what God has called you to be.
Your purpose is not defined by what others think about you.
3. By remembering what you have is by divine
prerogative and not human manipulation.
Fulfill your dreams! You only have one life to live...when its your
time to leave this earth, you 'want' to be able to say, 'I've lived my
life and fulfilled 'my' dreams,... Now I'm ready to go HOME!
When God gives you favor, you can tell your haters, 'Don't look at
me...Look at Who is in charge of me...'
Pass this to all of your family & friends who you know are
not hating on you including the person who sent it to you.
If you don't get it back, maybe you called somebody out!
Don't worry about it, it's not your problem, it's theirs..
Just pray for them, that their life can be as fulfilled as
yours! Watch out for Haters...BUT most of all don't become
a HATER!
'A woman's heart should be so hidden in Christ that a man
should have to seek Him first to find her.'
Maya Angelou
A hater is someone who is jealous and envious and spends all their
time trying to make you look small so they can look tall.
They are very negative people to say the least. Nothing is ever
good enough!
When you make your mark, you will always attract some haters...
That's why you have to be careful with whom you share your
blessings and your dreams, because some folk can't handle seeing
you blessed...
It's dangerous to be like somebody else... If God wanted you to be
like somebody else, He would have given you what He gave them! Right?
You never know what people have gone through to get what they
have...
The problem I have with haters is that they see my glory, but they
don't know my story...
If the grass looks greener on the other side of the fence, you
can rest assured that the water bill is higher there too!
We've all got some haters among us!
Some people envy you because you can:
a) Have a relationship with God
b) Light up a room when you walk in
c) Start your own business
d) Tell a man / woman to hit the curb
(if he / she isn't about the right thing)
e) Raise your children without both parents being
in the home
Haters can't stand to see you happy.
Haters will never want to see you succeed.
Most of our haters are people who are supposed to be
on our side.
How do you handle your undercover haters?
You can handle these haters by:
1. Knowing who you are & who your true friends are
*(VERY IMPORTANT!!)
2. Having a purpose to your life: Purpose does not
mean having a job. You can have a job and still be
unfulfilled.
A purpose is having a clear sense of what God has called you to be.
Your purpose is not defined by what others think about you.
3. By remembering what you have is by divine
prerogative and not human manipulation.
Fulfill your dreams! You only have one life to live...when its your
time to leave this earth, you 'want' to be able to say, 'I've lived my
life and fulfilled 'my' dreams,... Now I'm ready to go HOME!
When God gives you favor, you can tell your haters, 'Don't look at
me...Look at Who is in charge of me...'
Pass this to all of your family & friends who you know are
not hating on you including the person who sent it to you.
If you don't get it back, maybe you called somebody out!
Don't worry about it, it's not your problem, it's theirs..
Just pray for them, that their life can be as fulfilled as
yours! Watch out for Haters...BUT most of all don't become
a HATER!
'A woman's heart should be so hidden in Christ that a man
should have to seek Him first to find her.'
Maya Angelou
TRANSPARENCY
Greetings All,
Apparently, Palin's bomb of an interview (again) last week finally has the GOP nervously walking on eggshells. Even many GOP political analysts are now questioning her intelligence, qualifications, and McCain's health, in regards to the potential of his demise and her becoming the Commander in Chief.
I thank GOD, intelligent people, on both sides of the aisle, are beginning to ask the right questions, and stop being swept away by the campaign rhetoric/sensationalism/distractions, this party has mastered, in order to sway the popular/uninformed vote.
They were running on the "Experience" platform, but in order to drum up enthusiasm for his ticket, he picked a "pretty" face with ultra conservative values, and adopted the "Change" slogan, hoping the Clinton supporters and independents would support her blindly, because she is a woman, and she represents "small town America".. Whatever!!! Her policies sure don't represent the Middle Class, at all.
They keep saying an Obama/Biden ticket will raise taxes on "everyone". Although that is not makeup of his current tax plan, in light of the unprovoked war (well over $1 trillion), the current President got us into, the Economic meltdown ($700 billion+++), infrastructure (billions), our public school system (billions), the out of control Healthcare industry(billions), Social Security (billions), and reduced tax revenue all around (trillion $ deficit), just who is going to pay for all of this? Our great great great grandchildren????
Chris Rock said it best, "John McCain has no right to be making decisions for the future, when he is not going to be here". All jokes aside, his policies are "fundamentally wrong" for a majority of Americans. We're not going to be able to DRILL our way into Energy Independence.
Free trade is good in theory, but as with the Financial markets, there must be fairness, and oversight. We must begin agressively developing alternative energy, and we BETTER start putting Americans back to work NOW!!!!! The "Made in America" slogan has virtually gone by the wayside. That's the main factor causing our economic demise, and I seen it coming a mile away. Fact is, we all are going to bear the brunt of the excessive greed on Wall Street, and Main Street's naivety, but going forward, we must ensure the middle class is given the tools it needs to once again, bring this nations commerce back to good standings.
Exactly what kind of judgement did McCain demonstrate when he, picked Palin as his running mate, and when he called for a "suspension of his campaign" in order to weigh in on an "Economic" matter, to which he has contributed absolutely "NO SUBSTANTIVE INPUT", and, is an admitted novice!!! It was political grandstanding at it's best, but America is starting to take notice. Again, THANK GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By: Blaq Ops Visit My Blogs @: http://www.myspace.com/reciprok8
http://blaqops.blogspot.com/
SEE 4 URSELF Couric's Palin interview.......http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/09/25/more-nonsensical-palin/
McCain Under FireByDavid KnowlesSep 29th 2008 9:39AM Filed Under:eJohn McCain, Featured Stories, 2008 President, Polls, Sarah Palin
Nearly every poll conducted in the wake of our nation's financial meltdown has been bad news for John McCain. His numbers began to drop early last week, when news of the $700 billion bailout started to sink in. Clearly, McCain's week-old pronouncementthat "the fundamentals of our economy are strong," wasn't meshing with the facts. If, as McCain's financial adviser, Phil Gramm insists, this recession is all in our heads, then why do the taxpayers need to pay nearly a trillion dollars in therapy bills?
When McCain's pollsters let their man know of the ominous trend, the Arizona Senator did what he does best, he hastily formed an ill-advised plan to save the day. As with his last-minuteselection of Sarah Palin, McCain figured a shake-up was in order. Something big and bold, to shock and awe the nation. So, he stepped to the mic and told America he was "suspending his campaign." He declared that the first presidential debate should be postponed. It was a calculated, high-stakes gamble. And for a nano-second, some observers thought he'd made a brilliantmove. He's doing his job, they declared. Hooray! But by the time McCain arrived in DC, the infusion of presidential politics effectively squashed whatever momentum Congress had built up. McCain, the brave leader, sat silently for 40-minutesin the big meeting with Obama, their fellow legislators and all the president's men, only mumbling a non-committal line or two toward the end of the dismal session. Tail between his legs, McCain did show for Friday's debate in Mississippi. Though the bailout deal lay in tatters, McCain must have realized he was doing more harm than good, so, once again, he put country first got on a plane, and ditched the rescue effort that he'd portrayed as more important that a silly old debate.
If you read the commentary at places like the National Review, you might be inclined to think McCain won the debate. If you read the findings of virtually every reputable polling institution in the country, you'll find otherwise. In short, McCain's "suspension bridge to nowhere," as Frank Rich put it, was as big a backfire with independent voters as his choice of Palin as a running mate. It shows a self-possessed man who is apt to make rash decisions, and those characteristics are scaring conservatives as well as liberals. So what will McCain's new gambit be?
Many right wing commentatorsare calling for McCain to take the muzzle off of Sarah Palin (maybe Campbell Brown was right!). In fact, to hear them tell it there's only one way McCain can save his presidential aspirations: Let her go wild on stage with Biden. Red meat, red meat. U-S-A! U-S-A! That's right, McCain's political future now rests in the hands of the woman who conducted this interview.
Indeed, many fans of Obama were also upset that he didn't attack McCain more viciously. With all due respect to my friends on the left and the right, this kind of behavior won't play well with independents. They know we're in a fix. They're not looking for a cage match, they want calm, reasoned leadership. And that's the underlying reason McCain has plummetedin the polls.
Here's a test. The word "hothead," which candidate does that describe, McCain or Obama? To borrow George Will's phrase, "It is not Barack Obama." In a time of uncertainty, when the country wants to be reassured, the last thing people want is an unpredictable guy who is clearly making it up as he goes along.
The ironic closure to this news cycle? The story that McCain and his campaign are in deep with the gambling industry. No, that's not a metaphor this time.
Apparently, Palin's bomb of an interview (again) last week finally has the GOP nervously walking on eggshells. Even many GOP political analysts are now questioning her intelligence, qualifications, and McCain's health, in regards to the potential of his demise and her becoming the Commander in Chief.
I thank GOD, intelligent people, on both sides of the aisle, are beginning to ask the right questions, and stop being swept away by the campaign rhetoric/sensationalism/distractions, this party has mastered, in order to sway the popular/uninformed vote.
They were running on the "Experience" platform, but in order to drum up enthusiasm for his ticket, he picked a "pretty" face with ultra conservative values, and adopted the "Change" slogan, hoping the Clinton supporters and independents would support her blindly, because she is a woman, and she represents "small town America".. Whatever!!! Her policies sure don't represent the Middle Class, at all.
They keep saying an Obama/Biden ticket will raise taxes on "everyone". Although that is not makeup of his current tax plan, in light of the unprovoked war (well over $1 trillion), the current President got us into, the Economic meltdown ($700 billion+++), infrastructure (billions), our public school system (billions), the out of control Healthcare industry(billions), Social Security (billions), and reduced tax revenue all around (trillion $ deficit), just who is going to pay for all of this? Our great great great grandchildren????
Chris Rock said it best, "John McCain has no right to be making decisions for the future, when he is not going to be here". All jokes aside, his policies are "fundamentally wrong" for a majority of Americans. We're not going to be able to DRILL our way into Energy Independence.
Free trade is good in theory, but as with the Financial markets, there must be fairness, and oversight. We must begin agressively developing alternative energy, and we BETTER start putting Americans back to work NOW!!!!! The "Made in America" slogan has virtually gone by the wayside. That's the main factor causing our economic demise, and I seen it coming a mile away. Fact is, we all are going to bear the brunt of the excessive greed on Wall Street, and Main Street's naivety, but going forward, we must ensure the middle class is given the tools it needs to once again, bring this nations commerce back to good standings.
Exactly what kind of judgement did McCain demonstrate when he, picked Palin as his running mate, and when he called for a "suspension of his campaign" in order to weigh in on an "Economic" matter, to which he has contributed absolutely "NO SUBSTANTIVE INPUT", and, is an admitted novice!!! It was political grandstanding at it's best, but America is starting to take notice. Again, THANK GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By: Blaq Ops Visit My Blogs @: http://www.myspace.com/reciprok8
http://blaqops.blogspot.com/
SEE 4 URSELF Couric's Palin interview.......http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/09/25/more-nonsensical-palin/
McCain Under FireByDavid KnowlesSep 29th 2008 9:39AM Filed Under:eJohn McCain, Featured Stories, 2008 President, Polls, Sarah Palin
Nearly every poll conducted in the wake of our nation's financial meltdown has been bad news for John McCain. His numbers began to drop early last week, when news of the $700 billion bailout started to sink in. Clearly, McCain's week-old pronouncementthat "the fundamentals of our economy are strong," wasn't meshing with the facts. If, as McCain's financial adviser, Phil Gramm insists, this recession is all in our heads, then why do the taxpayers need to pay nearly a trillion dollars in therapy bills?
When McCain's pollsters let their man know of the ominous trend, the Arizona Senator did what he does best, he hastily formed an ill-advised plan to save the day. As with his last-minuteselection of Sarah Palin, McCain figured a shake-up was in order. Something big and bold, to shock and awe the nation. So, he stepped to the mic and told America he was "suspending his campaign." He declared that the first presidential debate should be postponed. It was a calculated, high-stakes gamble. And for a nano-second, some observers thought he'd made a brilliantmove. He's doing his job, they declared. Hooray! But by the time McCain arrived in DC, the infusion of presidential politics effectively squashed whatever momentum Congress had built up. McCain, the brave leader, sat silently for 40-minutesin the big meeting with Obama, their fellow legislators and all the president's men, only mumbling a non-committal line or two toward the end of the dismal session. Tail between his legs, McCain did show for Friday's debate in Mississippi. Though the bailout deal lay in tatters, McCain must have realized he was doing more harm than good, so, once again, he put country first got on a plane, and ditched the rescue effort that he'd portrayed as more important that a silly old debate.
If you read the commentary at places like the National Review, you might be inclined to think McCain won the debate. If you read the findings of virtually every reputable polling institution in the country, you'll find otherwise. In short, McCain's "suspension bridge to nowhere," as Frank Rich put it, was as big a backfire with independent voters as his choice of Palin as a running mate. It shows a self-possessed man who is apt to make rash decisions, and those characteristics are scaring conservatives as well as liberals. So what will McCain's new gambit be?
Many right wing commentatorsare calling for McCain to take the muzzle off of Sarah Palin (maybe Campbell Brown was right!). In fact, to hear them tell it there's only one way McCain can save his presidential aspirations: Let her go wild on stage with Biden. Red meat, red meat. U-S-A! U-S-A! That's right, McCain's political future now rests in the hands of the woman who conducted this interview.
Indeed, many fans of Obama were also upset that he didn't attack McCain more viciously. With all due respect to my friends on the left and the right, this kind of behavior won't play well with independents. They know we're in a fix. They're not looking for a cage match, they want calm, reasoned leadership. And that's the underlying reason McCain has plummetedin the polls.
Here's a test. The word "hothead," which candidate does that describe, McCain or Obama? To borrow George Will's phrase, "It is not Barack Obama." In a time of uncertainty, when the country wants to be reassured, the last thing people want is an unpredictable guy who is clearly making it up as he goes along.
The ironic closure to this news cycle? The story that McCain and his campaign are in deep with the gambling industry. No, that's not a metaphor this time.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
RIGHT WING SCAPEGOATING
I subscribe to this Right Wing editorial, just so I can judge for myself, how they SPIN every crisis to benefit their agenda (i.e. 911/ the War- The Patriot Act - The Bush Doctrine - Tax Cuts for the Rich - etc, etc). Now it's the "unqualified minorities" fault for the Economic crisis?????
True, the Clinton administration worked with Fannie and Freddie to make loans more accessible to middle class Americans, because, at the time our financial markets were flourishing, and there was plenty of capital to go around.
The plan was a smashing success, with more middle income families realizing the American dream, finally owning a home, and incomes were steadily rising. But in comes the current Administration, with their "less Gov't" mantra, deciding to loosen regulations, and letting the financial companies run amok, artificially driving up the costs of real estate, oil, etc, etc, WITHOUT CONTROLS.
Meanwhile they outsourced jobs (for the sake of profit), and hundreds of thousands of middle class Americans lost their ability to "consume"the way we have in the past. Last week, I learned that the "uptick" rule, which prohibited short sellers from betting against certain stocks, was lifted. Even though the writing was on the wall.
Also, new bankruptcy laws were enacted which only benefitted the "Rich/Wall Street" and not Main Street (contrary to current posturing on the campaign trail). For example, if you only owned one home, a judge would have a diminished ability to arbitrate your case, but a developer, or someone who owned multiple homes, would still have protections in place, in the event of hardship. Sound likes ELITISM to me.
How the hell did median home prices go up so fast, so quickly, everyone knew this was eventually lead to a big problem. How did oil go from $1.79 to nearly $5.00, in 4 years? They were manipulating the markets for PROFIT, and with limited ("less Gov't) oversight, they got wreckless with it. But guess who they need to rescue America now, that's right, the tax payer.
Unfortunately, I do believe Congress needs to bail out Wall Street, but the bill must have "strict"regulation, oversight, provisions for the taxpayers, and the homeowners on the brink of foreclosure. No windfall profits/bonuses should be distributed to shareholders or CEO's, until the taxpayers are reimbursed every penny, first.
Once people are working, and have greater disposable incomes, Wall Street will be back again, with a vengeance. We must rebuild confidence in our economy from the BOTTOM UP. We already tried it from the TOP DOWN, and it obviously does not work. When will they learn? Wealth distribution, and a strong workforce, will only lead to a healthier economy, which will help to keep inflation down, and keep our disposable incomes trickling up into the financial markets and the tax coffers.
This is by far more of a National Security concern than Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan, etc, etc. McCain's knee jerk reaction to announce the "suspension of his campaign" appears Patriotic to the naive, but exactly what Economic expertise does McCain bring to the table? NONE!!!!!!!!!!
After all, he has consistently said "Economics is not his strong suit, and that he needs to be educated on the topic", and up until last week, he believed that the"fundamentals of the Economy were strong". What a difference a dip in the polls make....
Now all of the sudden, a week later, you do a complete 360 and portray yourself as a "Maverick", putting your campaign on hold, and going to Washington to resolve the Economic crisis. PLEASE!!!!!
Leave it to the ECONOMIC EXPERTS, Congress, and the current "COMMANDER in Chief", who's policies got us into this mess in the first place, to bring about some resolution, and start healing the COUNTRY. The next Commander in Chief will be sworn in soon enough, and he will have a boatload of crap to deal with.PM A.K.A. BLAQ OPS
http://blaqops.blogspot.com/
http://www.myspace.com/reciprok8
They Gave Your Mortgage to a Less Qualified Minority
by Ann Coulter
09/24/2008
On MSNBC this week, Newsweek's Jonathan Alter tried to connect John McCain to the current financial disaster, saying: "If you remember the Keating Five scandal that (McCain) was a part of. ... He's really getting a free ride on the fact that he was in the middle of the last great financial scandal in our country."McCain was "in the middle of" the Keating Five case in the sense that he was "exonerated." The lawyer for the Senate Ethics Committee wanted McCain removed from the investigation altogether, but, as The New York Times reported: "Sen. McCain was the only Republican embroiled in the affair, and Democrats on the panel would not release him."So John McCain has been held hostage by both the Viet Cong and the Democrats.
Continued
Sponsored Links:
Barack Obama Exposed! A Human Events Special Report
REVEALED: The real vs. the politically-correct Constitution
BRIC Investor Report: Brazil, Russia, India & China stocks
Breaking News: Over 2,000 Failing Mutual Funds to Dump Right Now!
Alter couldn't be expected to know that: As usual, he was lifting material directly from Kausfiles. What is unusual was that he was stealing a random thought sent in by Kausfiles' mother, who, the day before, had e-mailed: "It's time to bring up the Keating Five. Let McCain explain that scandal away."The Senate Ethics Committee lawyer who investigated McCain already had explained that scandal away -- repeatedly. It was celebrated lawyer Robert Bennett, most famous for defending a certain horny hick president a few years ago.In February this year, on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes," Bennett said, for the eight billionth time:"First, I should tell your listeners I'm a registered Democrat, so I'm not on (McCain's) side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five. ... And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him."It's bad enough for Alter to be constantly ripping off Kausfiles. Now he's so devoid of his own ideas, he's ripping off the idle musings of Kausfiles' mother.Even if McCain had been implicated in the Keating Five scandal -- and he wasn't -- that would still have absolutely nothing to do with the subprime mortgage crisis currently roiling the financial markets. This crisis was caused by political correctness being forced on the mortgage lending industry in the Clinton era.Before the Democrats' affirmative action lending policies became an embarrassment, the Los Angeles Times reported that, starting in 1992, a majority-Democratic Congress "mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains."Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.Instead of looking at "outdated criteria," such as the mortgage applicant's credit history and ability to make a down payment, banks were encouraged to consider nontraditional measures of credit-worthiness, such as having a good jump shot or having a missing child named "Caylee." (More racist/elitist rants.... No surprise)Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact. When Democrats controlled both the executive and legislative branches, political correctness was given a veto over sound business practices.In 1999 (before the housing market went biserk), liberals were bragging about extending affirmative action to the financial sector. Los Angeles Times reporter Ron Brownstein hailed the Clinton administration's affirmative action lending policies as one of the "hidden success stories" of the Clinton administration, saying that "black and Latino homeownership has surged to the highest level ever recorded."Meanwhile, economists were screaming from the rooftops that the Democrats were forcing mortgage lenders to issue loans that would fail the moment the housing market slowed and deadbeat borrowers couldn't get out of their loans by selling their houses.A decade later, the housing bubble burst and, as predicted, food-stamp-backed mortgages collapsed. Democrats set an affirmative action time-bomb and now it's gone off.In Bush's first year in office, the White House chief economist, N. Gregory Mankiw, warned that the government's "implicit subsidy" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, combined with loans to unqualified borrowers, was creating a huge risk for the entire financial system.Rep. Barney Frank denounced Mankiw, saying he had no "concern about housing." How dare you oppose suicidal loans to people who can't repay them! The New York Times reported that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were "under heavy assault by the Republicans," but these entities still had "important political allies" in the Democrats.Now, at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars, middle-class taxpayers are going to be forced to bail out the Democrats' two most important constituent groups: rich Wall Street bankers and welfare recipients.Political correctness had already ruined education, sports, science and entertainment. But it took a Democratic president with a Democratic congress for political correctness to wreck the financial industry.
True, the Clinton administration worked with Fannie and Freddie to make loans more accessible to middle class Americans, because, at the time our financial markets were flourishing, and there was plenty of capital to go around.
The plan was a smashing success, with more middle income families realizing the American dream, finally owning a home, and incomes were steadily rising. But in comes the current Administration, with their "less Gov't" mantra, deciding to loosen regulations, and letting the financial companies run amok, artificially driving up the costs of real estate, oil, etc, etc, WITHOUT CONTROLS.
Meanwhile they outsourced jobs (for the sake of profit), and hundreds of thousands of middle class Americans lost their ability to "consume"the way we have in the past. Last week, I learned that the "uptick" rule, which prohibited short sellers from betting against certain stocks, was lifted. Even though the writing was on the wall.
Also, new bankruptcy laws were enacted which only benefitted the "Rich/Wall Street" and not Main Street (contrary to current posturing on the campaign trail). For example, if you only owned one home, a judge would have a diminished ability to arbitrate your case, but a developer, or someone who owned multiple homes, would still have protections in place, in the event of hardship. Sound likes ELITISM to me.
How the hell did median home prices go up so fast, so quickly, everyone knew this was eventually lead to a big problem. How did oil go from $1.79 to nearly $5.00, in 4 years? They were manipulating the markets for PROFIT, and with limited ("less Gov't) oversight, they got wreckless with it. But guess who they need to rescue America now, that's right, the tax payer.
Unfortunately, I do believe Congress needs to bail out Wall Street, but the bill must have "strict"regulation, oversight, provisions for the taxpayers, and the homeowners on the brink of foreclosure. No windfall profits/bonuses should be distributed to shareholders or CEO's, until the taxpayers are reimbursed every penny, first.
Once people are working, and have greater disposable incomes, Wall Street will be back again, with a vengeance. We must rebuild confidence in our economy from the BOTTOM UP. We already tried it from the TOP DOWN, and it obviously does not work. When will they learn? Wealth distribution, and a strong workforce, will only lead to a healthier economy, which will help to keep inflation down, and keep our disposable incomes trickling up into the financial markets and the tax coffers.
This is by far more of a National Security concern than Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan, etc, etc. McCain's knee jerk reaction to announce the "suspension of his campaign" appears Patriotic to the naive, but exactly what Economic expertise does McCain bring to the table? NONE!!!!!!!!!!
After all, he has consistently said "Economics is not his strong suit, and that he needs to be educated on the topic", and up until last week, he believed that the"fundamentals of the Economy were strong". What a difference a dip in the polls make....
Now all of the sudden, a week later, you do a complete 360 and portray yourself as a "Maverick", putting your campaign on hold, and going to Washington to resolve the Economic crisis. PLEASE!!!!!
Leave it to the ECONOMIC EXPERTS, Congress, and the current "COMMANDER in Chief", who's policies got us into this mess in the first place, to bring about some resolution, and start healing the COUNTRY. The next Commander in Chief will be sworn in soon enough, and he will have a boatload of crap to deal with.PM A.K.A. BLAQ OPS
http://blaqops.blogspot.com/
http://www.myspace.com/reciprok8
They Gave Your Mortgage to a Less Qualified Minority
by Ann Coulter
09/24/2008
On MSNBC this week, Newsweek's Jonathan Alter tried to connect John McCain to the current financial disaster, saying: "If you remember the Keating Five scandal that (McCain) was a part of. ... He's really getting a free ride on the fact that he was in the middle of the last great financial scandal in our country."McCain was "in the middle of" the Keating Five case in the sense that he was "exonerated." The lawyer for the Senate Ethics Committee wanted McCain removed from the investigation altogether, but, as The New York Times reported: "Sen. McCain was the only Republican embroiled in the affair, and Democrats on the panel would not release him."So John McCain has been held hostage by both the Viet Cong and the Democrats.
Continued
Sponsored Links:
Barack Obama Exposed! A Human Events Special Report
REVEALED: The real vs. the politically-correct Constitution
BRIC Investor Report: Brazil, Russia, India & China stocks
Breaking News: Over 2,000 Failing Mutual Funds to Dump Right Now!
Alter couldn't be expected to know that: As usual, he was lifting material directly from Kausfiles. What is unusual was that he was stealing a random thought sent in by Kausfiles' mother, who, the day before, had e-mailed: "It's time to bring up the Keating Five. Let McCain explain that scandal away."The Senate Ethics Committee lawyer who investigated McCain already had explained that scandal away -- repeatedly. It was celebrated lawyer Robert Bennett, most famous for defending a certain horny hick president a few years ago.In February this year, on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes," Bennett said, for the eight billionth time:"First, I should tell your listeners I'm a registered Democrat, so I'm not on (McCain's) side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five. ... And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him."It's bad enough for Alter to be constantly ripping off Kausfiles. Now he's so devoid of his own ideas, he's ripping off the idle musings of Kausfiles' mother.Even if McCain had been implicated in the Keating Five scandal -- and he wasn't -- that would still have absolutely nothing to do with the subprime mortgage crisis currently roiling the financial markets. This crisis was caused by political correctness being forced on the mortgage lending industry in the Clinton era.Before the Democrats' affirmative action lending policies became an embarrassment, the Los Angeles Times reported that, starting in 1992, a majority-Democratic Congress "mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains."Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.Instead of looking at "outdated criteria," such as the mortgage applicant's credit history and ability to make a down payment, banks were encouraged to consider nontraditional measures of credit-worthiness, such as having a good jump shot or having a missing child named "Caylee." (More racist/elitist rants.... No surprise)Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact. When Democrats controlled both the executive and legislative branches, political correctness was given a veto over sound business practices.In 1999 (before the housing market went biserk), liberals were bragging about extending affirmative action to the financial sector. Los Angeles Times reporter Ron Brownstein hailed the Clinton administration's affirmative action lending policies as one of the "hidden success stories" of the Clinton administration, saying that "black and Latino homeownership has surged to the highest level ever recorded."Meanwhile, economists were screaming from the rooftops that the Democrats were forcing mortgage lenders to issue loans that would fail the moment the housing market slowed and deadbeat borrowers couldn't get out of their loans by selling their houses.A decade later, the housing bubble burst and, as predicted, food-stamp-backed mortgages collapsed. Democrats set an affirmative action time-bomb and now it's gone off.In Bush's first year in office, the White House chief economist, N. Gregory Mankiw, warned that the government's "implicit subsidy" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, combined with loans to unqualified borrowers, was creating a huge risk for the entire financial system.Rep. Barney Frank denounced Mankiw, saying he had no "concern about housing." How dare you oppose suicidal loans to people who can't repay them! The New York Times reported that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were "under heavy assault by the Republicans," but these entities still had "important political allies" in the Democrats.Now, at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars, middle-class taxpayers are going to be forced to bail out the Democrats' two most important constituent groups: rich Wall Street bankers and welfare recipients.Political correctness had already ruined education, sports, science and entertainment. But it took a Democratic president with a Democratic congress for political correctness to wreck the financial industry.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
YOU ARE THE BOSS.... WHICH TEAM WOULD YOU HIRE????
Although Obama may lack experience compared to, I dare say, George Bush, what he brings to the table in terms of intelligence/brilliance/oratory skills, is unparalleled. Not to use race as a crutch, but if it were not for the color of his skin, this election would have been a foregone conclusion already. And the mainstream is in DENIAL about it. We're being extremely disingenuous/naive if we continue to dismiss this FACT.
They lambasted Obama's inexperience, yet, they propped up a far less experienced (National issues/ Washington/ Foreign relations) candidate, in the twelfth hour of the campaign no less!! This was a carefully crafted strategy, in order to poach the female/independent/undecided/or the ignorant, vote. Palin does not represent the interests of the majority of Americans feeling the financial squeeze, or, the interests of women who supported Hillary. She is hell bent on overturning Roe vs Wade, she is a staunch Gun rights advocate, she advocates a continuation of Bush's policies, the Bush doctrine, and, she could "see Russia from Alaska" (I kid you not!!!).
** Check out what McCain had to say about "experience" earlier in the primaries ***
McCain: Mayors, Govs Don't Have Nat'l Security Experience
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzhFDQIgGSg
Just to think, with McCain's advanced age, and frail physical health, Palin would be one heartbeat away from being commander in chief. The GOP specializes in pandering to your fears. Whenever they are unable to properly justify a position, they invoke the name of God, as if the GOP="GOD's will". Whenever someone chooses to oppose their position, they label you Un-Patriotic, God-less, or Liberal, without compromise, or the slightest desire to do so.
To stand by and not question your government when you inherently believe we are on the wrong track is SERVILE, and it is one of the most Un-Patriotic positions you can take as a responsible/concerned citizen. Check your history and see what the founding fathers had to say about it.
***Palin: Iraq war = God's will - Again, I kid you not ***
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H-btXPfhGs
It never fails, the GOP specializes in distracting voters from the real issues affecting our everyday lives. How about telling us how you plan on paying for the war, fixing the PUBLIC school system, developing alternative energy sources (see: http://www.asylum.com/2008/09/12/super-fuel-efficient-car-to-run-on-air/) , reinvesting in our infrastructure, regulating the out of control financial market, HEALTH CARE 4 ALL, or, most importantly, putting Americans back to work. If a majority of Americans are not gainfully employed, earning LIVABLE wages, our markets will continue to suffer, and ultimately, continue to fail. But, oh yeah, they have no intentions of reversing the current trend.
According to Obama: "For eight years, we've had policies that have shredded consumer protections, that have loosened oversight and regulation, and encouraged outsized bonuses to CEOs while ignoring middle-class Americans," the Illinois Democrat said during a rally in Grand Junction, Colorado. "The result is the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression."
According to McCain, "Our economy -- I think still, the fundamentals of our economy are strong -- but these are very, very difficult times. And I promise you we will never put America in this position again."
Who has a firmer grasp on the state of the economy, how we got there, and how we'll get out of it going forward?? Do the math yourself, before you endorse either candidate. Take current events for instance. Bush has drastically cut taxes for the wealthiest 1%, but the benefits have not trickled down to the ordinary Joe's. Jobs continue to be exported for the sake of short term profits, the cost of living continues to spiral out of control, our financial market is on the verge of collapse, yet, under performing CEO's continue to receive lucrative severance packages (see attached), at the taxpayer's expense no less, while thousands are laid off, and their retirement accounts/deposits in excess of $100K, are left unprotected.
***** LOOK BELOW PEOPLE ****** If you think this is liberal propaganda, show me a different analysis of their projected tax policies, and I will gladly retract my criticism.
What they'll do to your tax bill
McCain and Obama want to change the bottom-line effects of the tax code. Here's a dollars-and-cents breakdown of what their plans could mean for you.
BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS
Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.
** REPOSTED FOR EMPHASIS ***
MCCAIN OBAMA
Income Avg. tax bill Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M -$269,364 +$701,885
$603K and up -$45,361 +$115,974
$227K -$603K -$7,871 +$12
$161K-$227K -$4,380 -$2,789
$112K-$161K -$2,614 -$2,204
$66K-$112K -$1,009 -$1,290
$38K-$66K -$319 -$1,042
$19K-$38K -$113 -$892
Under $19K -$19 -$567
Source:The Tax Policy Center
The GOP just wants you to believe they are doing God's work, because you know, THE GOP=GOD'S WILL, McCain's family understands war better than any other American family, McCain/Palin loves America more than the other candidates, and McCain has "the scars to prove it" (WhateverTF that means)...................
The Tuskegee airmen, Buffalo soldiers, and countless other minorities fought and died for this country, and they weren't even given equal rights, as a human beings. The Tuskegee airmen weren't even officially recognized until recently, although, they fought valiantly, had the most kills, and didn't lose a single aircraft during the war, but they still couldn't share the same quarters as their white counterparts. Now that's love of your country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Check the blogs, I have been following, closely, all along... http://blaqops.blogspot.com/
http://www.myspace.com/reciprok8
WE CANNOT AFFORD MORE OF THE SAME, VOTE OBAMA/BIDEN NOT PALIN/McCAIN!!!
*** Sorry guys, but your boy got me started, LOL *** Hope all is well.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 7:38 am
Subject: You are The Boss... which team would you hire?
You are The Boss... which team would you hire?
With America facing historic debt, multiple war fronts, stumbling
health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population,
skyrocketing Federal spending, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures,
etc. etc., this is an ***unusually critical*** election year.
Let's look at the educational background of your two options:
Obama:
Occidental College - Two years.
Columbia University - B.A. political science with a specialization in
international relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
& Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
vs.
McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899
& Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism
Now, which team are you going to "hire" ?
They lambasted Obama's inexperience, yet, they propped up a far less experienced (National issues/ Washington/ Foreign relations) candidate, in the twelfth hour of the campaign no less!! This was a carefully crafted strategy, in order to poach the female/independent/undecided/or the ignorant, vote. Palin does not represent the interests of the majority of Americans feeling the financial squeeze, or, the interests of women who supported Hillary. She is hell bent on overturning Roe vs Wade, she is a staunch Gun rights advocate, she advocates a continuation of Bush's policies, the Bush doctrine, and, she could "see Russia from Alaska" (I kid you not!!!).
** Check out what McCain had to say about "experience" earlier in the primaries ***
McCain: Mayors, Govs Don't Have Nat'l Security Experience
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzhFDQIgGSg
Just to think, with McCain's advanced age, and frail physical health, Palin would be one heartbeat away from being commander in chief. The GOP specializes in pandering to your fears. Whenever they are unable to properly justify a position, they invoke the name of God, as if the GOP="GOD's will". Whenever someone chooses to oppose their position, they label you Un-Patriotic, God-less, or Liberal, without compromise, or the slightest desire to do so.
To stand by and not question your government when you inherently believe we are on the wrong track is SERVILE, and it is one of the most Un-Patriotic positions you can take as a responsible/concerned citizen. Check your history and see what the founding fathers had to say about it.
***Palin: Iraq war = God's will - Again, I kid you not ***
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H-btXPfhGs
It never fails, the GOP specializes in distracting voters from the real issues affecting our everyday lives. How about telling us how you plan on paying for the war, fixing the PUBLIC school system, developing alternative energy sources (see: http://www.asylum.com/2008/09/12/super-fuel-efficient-car-to-run-on-air/) , reinvesting in our infrastructure, regulating the out of control financial market, HEALTH CARE 4 ALL, or, most importantly, putting Americans back to work. If a majority of Americans are not gainfully employed, earning LIVABLE wages, our markets will continue to suffer, and ultimately, continue to fail. But, oh yeah, they have no intentions of reversing the current trend.
According to Obama: "For eight years, we've had policies that have shredded consumer protections, that have loosened oversight and regulation, and encouraged outsized bonuses to CEOs while ignoring middle-class Americans," the Illinois Democrat said during a rally in Grand Junction, Colorado. "The result is the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression."
According to McCain, "Our economy -- I think still, the fundamentals of our economy are strong -- but these are very, very difficult times. And I promise you we will never put America in this position again."
Who has a firmer grasp on the state of the economy, how we got there, and how we'll get out of it going forward?? Do the math yourself, before you endorse either candidate. Take current events for instance. Bush has drastically cut taxes for the wealthiest 1%, but the benefits have not trickled down to the ordinary Joe's. Jobs continue to be exported for the sake of short term profits, the cost of living continues to spiral out of control, our financial market is on the verge of collapse, yet, under performing CEO's continue to receive lucrative severance packages (see attached), at the taxpayer's expense no less, while thousands are laid off, and their retirement accounts/deposits in excess of $100K, are left unprotected.
***** LOOK BELOW PEOPLE ****** If you think this is liberal propaganda, show me a different analysis of their projected tax policies, and I will gladly retract my criticism.
What they'll do to your tax bill
McCain and Obama want to change the bottom-line effects of the tax code. Here's a dollars-and-cents breakdown of what their plans could mean for you.
BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS
Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.
** REPOSTED FOR EMPHASIS ***
MCCAIN OBAMA
Income Avg. tax bill Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M -$269,364 +$701,885
$603K and up -$45,361 +$115,974
$227K -$603K -$7,871 +$12
$161K-$227K -$4,380 -$2,789
$112K-$161K -$2,614 -$2,204
$66K-$112K -$1,009 -$1,290
$38K-$66K -$319 -$1,042
$19K-$38K -$113 -$892
Under $19K -$19 -$567
Source:The Tax Policy Center
The GOP just wants you to believe they are doing God's work, because you know, THE GOP=GOD'S WILL, McCain's family understands war better than any other American family, McCain/Palin loves America more than the other candidates, and McCain has "the scars to prove it" (WhateverTF that means)...................
The Tuskegee airmen, Buffalo soldiers, and countless other minorities fought and died for this country, and they weren't even given equal rights, as a human beings. The Tuskegee airmen weren't even officially recognized until recently, although, they fought valiantly, had the most kills, and didn't lose a single aircraft during the war, but they still couldn't share the same quarters as their white counterparts. Now that's love of your country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Check the blogs, I have been following, closely, all along... http://blaqops.blogspot.com/
http://www.myspace.com/reciprok8
WE CANNOT AFFORD MORE OF THE SAME, VOTE OBAMA/BIDEN NOT PALIN/McCAIN!!!
*** Sorry guys, but your boy got me started, LOL *** Hope all is well.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 7:38 am
Subject: You are The Boss... which team would you hire?
You are The Boss... which team would you hire?
With America facing historic debt, multiple war fronts, stumbling
health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population,
skyrocketing Federal spending, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures,
etc. etc., this is an ***unusually critical*** election year.
Let's look at the educational background of your two options:
Obama:
Occidental College - Two years.
Columbia University - B.A. political science with a specialization in
international relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
& Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
vs.
McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899
& Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism
Now, which team are you going to "hire" ?
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Tax Policy: Exhibit A
**** Research for yourself and spread the word ***** Next I will compare their Healthcare policies.....
While they are busy distracting the masses from the real ISSUES, here are the numbers to show the differences with the candidate's tax policies. I can't stand to see them turning this campaign into a debate about gender, race, or even worse, lipstick. AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Where was the outrage before we sent our men and women to fight an unprovoked war, which is costing the American tax payer over $1Billion dollars a month? Where was the outrage when Katrina hit New Orleans, when our veterans come home damaged mentally, physically, and unable to find employment? Where is the outrage when CEO's leave firms with enormous severance packages, only to see the Co. fail a short time thereafter, leaving shareholders and retirement funds devastated? ENOUGH with the fake outrage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The conservatives loathe giving tax breaks to the lower classes, but when a majority of the population's disposable income rises, guess what, businesses flourish, people $pend more, and EVERYONE benefits. What a novel idea. Sound elitist to you?? Not unless you're ignorant, and don't realize that it is an Elitist attempting to sway you into voting against your own interests, while millions continue to lose their jobs to overseas markets, the cost of living continues to skyrocket, our bridges/roads/or infrastructure as a whole, continues to crumble, healthcare costs are ridiculous, and THEY KEEP BAILING OUT WALL STREET WITHOUT BATTING AN EYELASH.
Why do you think so many rich people are supporting Obama. They know their welfare is contingent on consumption. If people cannot afford to spend, their bottom lines are decimated, and their ability to post profits is severely impacted, negatively. See the graph below for yourself, and you do the math. What percentage of the working population is in the $0-$112K income bracket, and, what is the quintessential difference in approach by the two candidates? I think it's obvious, one is for ALL PEOPLE, and the other serves the privileged. But see for yourself, the choice is yours. We cannot afford more of the same, vote Obama not McCain.........
Sincerely,
Blaq Ops
***Source: CNN - Anderson Cooper 360
What they'll do to your tax bill
McCain and Obama want to change the bottom-line effects of the tax code. Here's a dollars-and-cents breakdown of what their plans could mean for you.
BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS
Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.
BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS
Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.
MCCAIN OBAMA
Income Avg. tax bill Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M -$269,364 +$701,885
$603K and up -$45,361 +$115,974
$227K-$603K -$7,871 +$12
$161K-$227K -$4,380 -$2,789
$112K-$161K -$2,614 -$2,204
$66K-$112K -$1,009 -$1,290
$38K-$66K -$319 -$1,042
$19K-$38K -$113 -$892
Under $19K -$19 -$567
Source:The Tax Policy Center
Taxes: McCain vs. Obama
More Videos
• Trade gap surges to $62 billion
• Stocks poised to drop
• Stocks edge up on Lehman news
Issue #1: America's Money - Everyday on CNN
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- John McCain and Barack Obama have starkly different philosophies about tax policy - how to raise the revenue needed to support government programs, spur growth and ensure economic fairness.
But voters really want to know one thing: How would the presidential candidates' views trickle down to their tax bills? A report released Wednesday by a nonpartisan policy group in Washington, D.C., takes a big first step toward answering that question.
According to the Tax Policy Center's findings, the common assumptions most people make about the plans of McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, and Obama, the Democrats' pick, are not wildly off-base.
McCain: The average taxpayer in every income group would see a lower tax bill, but high-income taxpayers would benefit more than everyone else.
Obama: High-income taxpayers would pay more in taxes, while everyone else's tax bill would be reduced. Those who benefit the most - in terms of reducing their taxes as a percentage of after-tax income - are in the lowest income groups.
Under both plans, all American taxpayers could pay a price for their tax cuts: a bigger deficit. The Tax Policy Center estimates that over 10 years, McCain's tax proposals could increase the national debt by as much as $4.5 trillion with interest, while Obama's could add as much as $3.3 trillion.
A closer look
But those in the lowest income groups would only see their after-tax income rise by less than 1% (or between $19 and $319). By contrast, the highest-income households - those with incomes of at least $603,000 - would see a boost in after-tax income of 3.4%, or more than $40,000.
Obama's plan would keep the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts in place for everyone except those making more than roughly $250,000, and he would increase the capital gains tax.
Obama would also introduce new tax breaks for lower and middle-income groups. Such breaks include expanding the earned income tax credit, giving those making less than $150,000 a $500 tax credit per person on the first $8,100 in income, giving those making under $75,000 a 50% federal match on the first $1,000 of savings, and exempting seniors making less than $50,000 from having to pay income tax.
Like McCain, Obama would lessen the bite of the estate tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax, but to a lesser degree.
The net result: compared with their tax bill today, taxpayers on average would see their tax bill cut by nearly $160 under Obama's plan. That means their after-tax income would rise by 0.3%.
But those in the lowest-income groups would enjoy the biggest after-tax income rise as a percentage of income - between 2.4% and 5.5% (worth between $567 and $1,042). By contrast, the highest-income households - those with at least $603,000 in income - would see a dramatic decline in their after-tax income - a drop of 8.7%, or $116,000.
The campaigns respond
Jason Furman, a newly appointed senior economic adviser to Obama, said his preliminary response is that the report's findings bear out what Obama's campaign has been saying: that he's for the middle class.
"Middle-class families get tax cuts that are three times larger from Obama than from McCain," Furman said. "And the McCain plan gives nearly one-quarter of its benefits to households making more than $2.8 million annually - the top 0.1%."
First Published: June 11, 2008: 10:31 AM EDT
The economy: McCain vs. Obama
While they are busy distracting the masses from the real ISSUES, here are the numbers to show the differences with the candidate's tax policies. I can't stand to see them turning this campaign into a debate about gender, race, or even worse, lipstick. AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Where was the outrage before we sent our men and women to fight an unprovoked war, which is costing the American tax payer over $1Billion dollars a month? Where was the outrage when Katrina hit New Orleans, when our veterans come home damaged mentally, physically, and unable to find employment? Where is the outrage when CEO's leave firms with enormous severance packages, only to see the Co. fail a short time thereafter, leaving shareholders and retirement funds devastated? ENOUGH with the fake outrage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The conservatives loathe giving tax breaks to the lower classes, but when a majority of the population's disposable income rises, guess what, businesses flourish, people $pend more, and EVERYONE benefits. What a novel idea. Sound elitist to you?? Not unless you're ignorant, and don't realize that it is an Elitist attempting to sway you into voting against your own interests, while millions continue to lose their jobs to overseas markets, the cost of living continues to skyrocket, our bridges/roads/or infrastructure as a whole, continues to crumble, healthcare costs are ridiculous, and THEY KEEP BAILING OUT WALL STREET WITHOUT BATTING AN EYELASH.
Why do you think so many rich people are supporting Obama. They know their welfare is contingent on consumption. If people cannot afford to spend, their bottom lines are decimated, and their ability to post profits is severely impacted, negatively. See the graph below for yourself, and you do the math. What percentage of the working population is in the $0-$112K income bracket, and, what is the quintessential difference in approach by the two candidates? I think it's obvious, one is for ALL PEOPLE, and the other serves the privileged. But see for yourself, the choice is yours. We cannot afford more of the same, vote Obama not McCain.........
Sincerely,
Blaq Ops
***Source: CNN - Anderson Cooper 360
What they'll do to your tax bill
McCain and Obama want to change the bottom-line effects of the tax code. Here's a dollars-and-cents breakdown of what their plans could mean for you.
BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS
Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.
BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS
Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.
MCCAIN OBAMA
Income Avg. tax bill Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M -$269,364 +$701,885
$603K and up -$45,361 +$115,974
$227K-$603K -$7,871 +$12
$161K-$227K -$4,380 -$2,789
$112K-$161K -$2,614 -$2,204
$66K-$112K -$1,009 -$1,290
$38K-$66K -$319 -$1,042
$19K-$38K -$113 -$892
Under $19K -$19 -$567
Source:The Tax Policy Center
Taxes: McCain vs. Obama
More Videos
• Trade gap surges to $62 billion
• Stocks poised to drop
• Stocks edge up on Lehman news
Issue #1: America's Money - Everyday on CNN
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- John McCain and Barack Obama have starkly different philosophies about tax policy - how to raise the revenue needed to support government programs, spur growth and ensure economic fairness.
But voters really want to know one thing: How would the presidential candidates' views trickle down to their tax bills? A report released Wednesday by a nonpartisan policy group in Washington, D.C., takes a big first step toward answering that question.
According to the Tax Policy Center's findings, the common assumptions most people make about the plans of McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, and Obama, the Democrats' pick, are not wildly off-base.
McCain: The average taxpayer in every income group would see a lower tax bill, but high-income taxpayers would benefit more than everyone else.
Obama: High-income taxpayers would pay more in taxes, while everyone else's tax bill would be reduced. Those who benefit the most - in terms of reducing their taxes as a percentage of after-tax income - are in the lowest income groups.
Under both plans, all American taxpayers could pay a price for their tax cuts: a bigger deficit. The Tax Policy Center estimates that over 10 years, McCain's tax proposals could increase the national debt by as much as $4.5 trillion with interest, while Obama's could add as much as $3.3 trillion.
A closer look
But those in the lowest income groups would only see their after-tax income rise by less than 1% (or between $19 and $319). By contrast, the highest-income households - those with incomes of at least $603,000 - would see a boost in after-tax income of 3.4%, or more than $40,000.
Obama's plan would keep the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts in place for everyone except those making more than roughly $250,000, and he would increase the capital gains tax.
Obama would also introduce new tax breaks for lower and middle-income groups. Such breaks include expanding the earned income tax credit, giving those making less than $150,000 a $500 tax credit per person on the first $8,100 in income, giving those making under $75,000 a 50% federal match on the first $1,000 of savings, and exempting seniors making less than $50,000 from having to pay income tax.
Like McCain, Obama would lessen the bite of the estate tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax, but to a lesser degree.
The net result: compared with their tax bill today, taxpayers on average would see their tax bill cut by nearly $160 under Obama's plan. That means their after-tax income would rise by 0.3%.
But those in the lowest-income groups would enjoy the biggest after-tax income rise as a percentage of income - between 2.4% and 5.5% (worth between $567 and $1,042). By contrast, the highest-income households - those with at least $603,000 in income - would see a dramatic decline in their after-tax income - a drop of 8.7%, or $116,000.
The campaigns respond
Jason Furman, a newly appointed senior economic adviser to Obama, said his preliminary response is that the report's findings bear out what Obama's campaign has been saying: that he's for the middle class.
"Middle-class families get tax cuts that are three times larger from Obama than from McCain," Furman said. "And the McCain plan gives nearly one-quarter of its benefits to households making more than $2.8 million annually - the top 0.1%."
First Published: June 11, 2008: 10:31 AM EDT
The economy: McCain vs. Obama
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Chivalry is dead..........
There are many contributing factors to global warming, but the facts are not being debated openly, and that's the problem. Fact is, there are a multitude of alternative ways to harness energy. Drilling is not the ONLY solution. Did you hear them chanting "Drill NOW" at the convention last night? You would swear drilling is a cure-all for our energy crisis.
The right wingers always want to take the high moral ground, but when ish happens to them, they classify the situation as "normal" American Family issues. Remember how they grilled Clinton on the Monica issue?? How many GOP'ers were caught with their pants down recently (Rep. M. Foley/ Sen. Craig/ Rev. Haggard/ etc). It doesn't surprise me at all, because those who are quick to judge are usually the most deviate behind closed doors.
I would have loved to see what would have happened, if someone else won the Democratic nomination, then pulled Barack Obama out of their @$$, the day after the Republican Convention. They would have been screaming bloody murder. Palin has been National for a week, and now she is the best thing to happen to the GOP since Evangelicals+NRA. Then she comes out swinging, but watch what happens the first time Obama or Biden hit her with some harsh criticism, they will be saying they are pigs for "picking" on a woman. In my book, once you punch me in the face, you forfeit all of your chivalrous privileges.
He chose this candidate strictly to detract buzz from Obama's brilliant convention speech last week, and, to lure the disgruntled P.U.M.A's (Party Unity My @$$). But if they vote for McCain strictly because he put a woman on the ticket, that opposes every issue the party is trying to change/address/ratify, then they are IGNORANT, and we are doomed to see the divide between the rich and poor get wider and wider.
Palin promotes an "abstinence" only approach to sex education, lot of good it did her own daughter. She would have been better served teaching her how to put on a hat. In addition to her bun situation, check out the drinking/gun flicks that surfaced. It happens with kids, but before you throw stones, you should always make sure you have moved out of the glass house. I'm just saying.
If I was Obama, I wouldn't debate her on the trivial stuff, I would let that pass, and grill her @$$ when it comes to issues that are affecting a MAJORITY Americans like, exporting our jobs overseas, tax loop holes for the rich, the BILLIONS we're spending on war, the nations infrastructure, our public schools, health care, and all the other social issues plaguing our society. All they know is Religion, Guns, and lower taxes, and their followers swallow it hole. All I know is, if you're not worth 50 million or more, you better vote Democratic!!!
You need to know this information! Please register everyone you can by October 4th. No response necessary but please get to work!
Dear MoveOn member,
Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.
Huh?
Who is Sarah Palin? Here's some basic background:
She was elected Alaska 's governor a little over a year and a=2 0half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage . She has no foreign policy experience.1
Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.2
She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. 3
Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.4
She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.5
She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.6
How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.7
This is information the American people need to see. Please take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family.
We also asked Alaska MoveOn members what the rest of us should know about their governor. The response was striking. Here's a sample:
She is really just a mayor from a small town outside Anchorage who has been a governor for only 1.5 years, and has ZERO national and international experience. I shudder to think that she could be the person taking that 3AM call on the White House hotline, and the one who could potentially be charged with leading the US in the volatile international scene that exists today. —Rose M., Fairbanks , AK
She is VERY, VERY conservative, and far from perfect. She's a hunter and fisherwoman, but votes against the environment again and again. She ran on ethics reform, but is currently under investigation for several charges involving hiring and firing of state officials. She has NO experience beyond Alaska . —Christine B., Denali Park , AK
As an Alaskan and a feminist, I am beyond words at this announcement. Palin is not a feminist, and she is not the reformer she claims to be. —Karen L., Anchorage , AK
Alaskans, collectively, are just as stunned as the rest of the nation. She is doing well running our State, but is totally inexperienced on the national level, and very much unequipped to run the nation, if it came to that. She is as far right as one can get, which has already been communicated on the news. In our office of thirty employees (dems, republicans, and nonpartisans), not one person feels she is ready for the V.P. position.—Sherry C., Anchorage , AK
She's vehemently anti-choice and doesn't care about protecting our natural resources, even though she has worked as a fisherman. McCain chose her to pick up the Hillary voters, but Palin is no Hillary. —Marina L., Juneau , AK
I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK
So Governor Palin is a staunch anti-choice religious conservative. She's a global warming denier who shares John McCain's commitment to Big Oil. And she's dramatically inexperienced.
In picking Sarah Palin, John McCain has made the religious right very happy. And he's made a very dangerous decision for our country.
In the next few days, many Americans will be wondering what McCain's vice-presidential choice means. Please pass this information along to your friends and family.
Sources:
1. "Sarah Palin," Wikipedia, Accessed August 29, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin
2. "McCain Selects Anti-Choice Sarah Palin as Running Mate," NARAL Pro-Choice America, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17515&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=1
3. "Sarah Palin, Buchananite," The Nation, August 29, 2008
http://www. moveon.org/r?r=17736&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=2
4. "'Creation science' enters the race," Anchorage Daily News, October 27, 2006
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17737&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=3
5. "Palin buys climate denial PR spin—ignores science," Huffington Post, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17517&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=4
6. "McCain VP Pick Completes Shift to Bush Energy Policy," Sierra Club, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17518&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=5
"Choice of Palin Promises Failed Energy Policies of the Past," League of Conservation Voters, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17519&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=6
"Protecting polar bears gets in way of drilling for oil, says governor," The Times of London, May 23, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17520&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=7
7 "McCain met Palin once before yesterday," MSNBC, August 29, 2008
The right wingers always want to take the high moral ground, but when ish happens to them, they classify the situation as "normal" American Family issues. Remember how they grilled Clinton on the Monica issue?? How many GOP'ers were caught with their pants down recently (Rep. M. Foley/ Sen. Craig/ Rev. Haggard/ etc). It doesn't surprise me at all, because those who are quick to judge are usually the most deviate behind closed doors.
I would have loved to see what would have happened, if someone else won the Democratic nomination, then pulled Barack Obama out of their @$$, the day after the Republican Convention. They would have been screaming bloody murder. Palin has been National for a week, and now she is the best thing to happen to the GOP since Evangelicals+NRA. Then she comes out swinging, but watch what happens the first time Obama or Biden hit her with some harsh criticism, they will be saying they are pigs for "picking" on a woman. In my book, once you punch me in the face, you forfeit all of your chivalrous privileges.
He chose this candidate strictly to detract buzz from Obama's brilliant convention speech last week, and, to lure the disgruntled P.U.M.A's (Party Unity My @$$). But if they vote for McCain strictly because he put a woman on the ticket, that opposes every issue the party is trying to change/address/ratify, then they are IGNORANT, and we are doomed to see the divide between the rich and poor get wider and wider.
Palin promotes an "abstinence" only approach to sex education, lot of good it did her own daughter. She would have been better served teaching her how to put on a hat. In addition to her bun situation, check out the drinking/gun flicks that surfaced. It happens with kids, but before you throw stones, you should always make sure you have moved out of the glass house. I'm just saying.
If I was Obama, I wouldn't debate her on the trivial stuff, I would let that pass, and grill her @$$ when it comes to issues that are affecting a MAJORITY Americans like, exporting our jobs overseas, tax loop holes for the rich, the BILLIONS we're spending on war, the nations infrastructure, our public schools, health care, and all the other social issues plaguing our society. All they know is Religion, Guns, and lower taxes, and their followers swallow it hole. All I know is, if you're not worth 50 million or more, you better vote Democratic!!!
You need to know this information! Please register everyone you can by October 4th. No response necessary but please get to work!
Dear MoveOn member,
Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.
Huh?
Who is Sarah Palin? Here's some basic background:
She was elected Alaska 's governor a little over a year and a=2 0half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage . She has no foreign policy experience.1
Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.2
She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. 3
Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.4
She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.5
She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.6
How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.7
This is information the American people need to see. Please take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family.
We also asked Alaska MoveOn members what the rest of us should know about their governor. The response was striking. Here's a sample:
She is really just a mayor from a small town outside Anchorage who has been a governor for only 1.5 years, and has ZERO national and international experience. I shudder to think that she could be the person taking that 3AM call on the White House hotline, and the one who could potentially be charged with leading the US in the volatile international scene that exists today. —Rose M., Fairbanks , AK
She is VERY, VERY conservative, and far from perfect. She's a hunter and fisherwoman, but votes against the environment again and again. She ran on ethics reform, but is currently under investigation for several charges involving hiring and firing of state officials. She has NO experience beyond Alaska . —Christine B., Denali Park , AK
As an Alaskan and a feminist, I am beyond words at this announcement. Palin is not a feminist, and she is not the reformer she claims to be. —Karen L., Anchorage , AK
Alaskans, collectively, are just as stunned as the rest of the nation. She is doing well running our State, but is totally inexperienced on the national level, and very much unequipped to run the nation, if it came to that. She is as far right as one can get, which has already been communicated on the news. In our office of thirty employees (dems, republicans, and nonpartisans), not one person feels she is ready for the V.P. position.—Sherry C., Anchorage , AK
She's vehemently anti-choice and doesn't care about protecting our natural resources, even though she has worked as a fisherman. McCain chose her to pick up the Hillary voters, but Palin is no Hillary. —Marina L., Juneau , AK
I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK
So Governor Palin is a staunch anti-choice religious conservative. She's a global warming denier who shares John McCain's commitment to Big Oil. And she's dramatically inexperienced.
In picking Sarah Palin, John McCain has made the religious right very happy. And he's made a very dangerous decision for our country.
In the next few days, many Americans will be wondering what McCain's vice-presidential choice means. Please pass this information along to your friends and family.
Sources:
1. "Sarah Palin," Wikipedia, Accessed August 29, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin
2. "McCain Selects Anti-Choice Sarah Palin as Running Mate," NARAL Pro-Choice America, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17515&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=1
3. "Sarah Palin, Buchananite," The Nation, August 29, 2008
http://www. moveon.org/r?r=17736&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=2
4. "'Creation science' enters the race," Anchorage Daily News, October 27, 2006
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17737&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=3
5. "Palin buys climate denial PR spin—ignores science," Huffington Post, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17517&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=4
6. "McCain VP Pick Completes Shift to Bush Energy Policy," Sierra Club, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17518&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=5
"Choice of Palin Promises Failed Energy Policies of the Past," League of Conservation Voters, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17519&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=6
"Protecting polar bears gets in way of drilling for oil, says governor," The Times of London, May 23, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17520&id=13661-7741281-fzAOqEx&t=7
7 "McCain met Palin once before yesterday," MSNBC, August 29, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
