ACTION

You're protesting the wrong "Robber Barons"

As usual the liberal progressive socialist Marxist's have got it wrong. They are currently ranting and raving about bankers, investors, corporate CEO's, etc., who based on their performance and guidance, reap the rewards of their fiscal acumen. Most of these perceived "Robber Barons" are paid on the profitability of said corporations they run. They in essence get paid on the value of their work not the volume or lack there of like most of the unions thugs and Democratic politicians and communist idealists like the Hollywood crowd that now join their ranks.

The problem with the government educated useless idiots that "Occupy Wall Street" cannot be summed up in a few words, because they themselves, as all "useless idiots" are, are a mob with a mob mentality not a singular view point. Their anti-American progressive socialist behavior is too deeply rooted. It has been hammered into them by a corrupted education system that since the formation of the Dept. of Education by the Socialist Ruling Class Elites has focused entirely on indoctrinating this Nations youth into their dogma. They have spent the last 144 years creating it.

They have also created the greatest system of corrupted crony capitalism that has been intentionally ignored by the main sewer media and have profited by it, unfettered by legal restraint or legislative restrictions for BILLIONS of dollars. Yes that is correct there is no legal restraints on any member of congress or their staff or the White House and its staff from trading on information on pending legislation!

The following is a report by Securities Docket originally published by Compliance Week.

Closing the Congressional Insider Trading Loophole

March 11, 2009, 7:09 am

In the days leading up to Nov. 16, 2005, the stock prices and trading volumes of several companies with asbestos-related liabilities including USG Corp., W.R. Grace & Co., and Crown Holdings, began to spike up in an otherwise flat market. No publicly available news about these companies or the industry explained the increases in price and volume.

What the public did not yet know—but what was known to certain investors with political connections—was that on Nov. 16, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist would deliver a speech announcing new legislation to relieve companies such as USG Corp. and others of their liabilities in asbestos-related lawsuits.

The asbestos legislation is an example of the effect that Congressional action can sometimes have on a stock’s price, and also of the potential for insider trading based on that knowledge of non-public information. Notably, and to the surprise of most people, no laws or regulations prohibit members of Congress (or their friends, staff, neighbors, or other acquaintances) from trading freely on such material, non-public information about a public company.

Indeed, members of Congress and their staff currently do not owe any “duty of confidentiality” to Congress and can’t be held liable for insider trading based on congressional knowledge under the current laws. Nor is there anything at this time that would prohibit Congressional staffers and executive branch employees from sharing inside information obtained from Congress with their friends—potentially allowing the recipients of such information to use it to make huge trading profits or prevent big losses. That means trading on inside knowledge of upcoming Congressional action is today one of the few forms of legal, repeatable insider trading (see my December 2008 column for a list of the others).

An academic study released in 2004, as well as some other more recent developments, indicates that this Congressional loophole to the insider trading laws isn’t just theoretical. Georgia State University professor Alan Ziobrowski released a study showing that during the 1990s, senators’ stock picks (which must be publicly disclosed periodically) beat the market by 12 percentage points a year on average. By comparison, corporate insiders only beat the market by about 6 percentage points a year, and U.S. households underperformed the market by 1.4 percentage points.

Ziobrowski and his colleagues concluded their findings “suggest that senators are trading stock based on information that is unavailable to the public, thereby using their unique position to increase their personal wealth …” Ziobrowski later was quoted as stating that, in his opinion, “there is cheating going on.”

There were also published reports in the wake of the study that the Securities and Exchange Commission had reviewed the findings, but decided not to pursue the issue because such cases would be difficult to prove. Critics, however, observed that a more cynical explanation for the SEC’s decision to do nothing might lie in the fact that the U.S. Senate is responsible for approving SEC commissioners and the agency’s budget.

In September 2008, U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the House Financial Services Committee, drew criticism for his trading of short-term put and call options in 2007, including a single transaction on Dec. 10 that netted him $15,000. He’d held that particular investment for just two weeks, and sold it on the same day that the company’s stock price surged following its announcement that it would acquire a competitor. Bachus’ trading in 2007 reportedly allowed him to supplement his $165,200 annual congressional salary by $160,000 that year.

There’s more: Tony Rudy, a staffer for former House Minority Leader Tom DeLay, was suspected of consistently trading based on material, non-public legislative information. While a DeLay staffer, Rudy reportedly traded hundreds of thousands of shares of stock from his work computer in 1999 and 2000.

Failure and Reform

It’s hard to come up with any compelling reason why trading based on Congressional knowledge should remain legal, and quite easy to build the case against it. Still, despite a situation that cries out for legislation to end this loophole, recent efforts to pass a bill that would do just that have gone nowhere. In January, U.S. Reps. Louise Slaughter and Brian Baird introduced—for the third time—legislation intended to stop insider trading on Capitol Hill called the “Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act” (the STOCK Act). Slaughter and Baird also introduced similar bills in 2006 and 2007, without success.

Slaughter and Baird have persisted, however, and Baird recently stated that he considers the legislation to be more important than ever as the government prepares to direct billions of dollars into the economy through the Troubled Asset Relief Program. The STOCK Act of 2009 (H.R. 682) would, among other things, amend Section 10 of the Securities Exchange Act and Section 4(c) of the Commodities Exchange Act to:

• prohibit members of Congress, employees of Congress, or executive branch employees from buying or selling stocks, bonds, or commodities futures based on non-public information they obtain because of their status;
• prohibit those outside Congress from buying or selling stocks, bonds, or commodities futures based on non-public information obtained from within Congress or the executive branch;
• prohibit Congressmen and employees from disclosing any non-public information about any pending or prospective legislative action obtained from a member or employee of Congress for investment purposes; and
• require members of Congress and employees to report the purchase, sale, or exchange of any stock, bond, or commodities future transaction in excess of $1,000 within 90 days.

It would also require firms that sell “political intelligence” and obtain their information directly from Congress to register with the House and Senate, and to make disclosures much like lobbying firms are now required to do.

There are arguments against the STOCK Act, but none strike me as particularly strong. One is that the law is unnecessary because congressmen already have a duty preventing them from trading on inside information that derives from some combination of common law relationships, agreements to maintain information in confidence, and a history of sharing confidences. But it’s difficult to see this ill-defined and never-before applied “duty” serving as the basis of a future insider trading case against a congressman.

Another practical limit on Congressional insider trading may lie in the concept of “democratically accountability”—that Congressmen must publicly disclose their trading activity, and their constituents will take note and vote them out of office if they appear to be engaging in insider trading. This, too, seems like a weak argument. If we really want to deter insider trading flowing from Congressional knowledge, legislation seems like a much more effective and direct means of doing so.

If anything, the more interesting arguments against the STOCK Act are that it isn’t strong enough. While the STOCK Act amends the rules of the House of Representatives to prohibit disclosure of material, non-public information to others, for some reason it does not similarly amend the rules of the Senate. In addition, while corporate executives must publicly disclose their securities transactions within just two business days under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the STOCK Act gives members of Congress the luxury of a full 90 days to do so.

Finally, the STOCK Act places greater restrictions on federal employee insider trading than on congressional insider trading: While it broadly prohibits federal employees from trading securities based on material non-public information relating to the issuer of the securities, it only prohibits insider trading by Congressmen with respect to “any pending or prospective legislative action relating to such issuer …”

In short, a loophole currently allows members of Congress and their “tippees” to engage in legal insider trading based on what they learn from their elected positions. The only way to close this loophole is for the very people that benefit from the loophole to close it themselves.

So far, however, the efforts of Representatives Slaughter and Baird to end this loophole have gone nowhere, and there is nothing to indicate that Round 3 of their attempt to “Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge” will have any greater success. With hundreds of billions (if not trillions) of dollars of federal money poised to gush into the economy by the U.S. government, now seems like the perfect time to pass legislation such as the STOCK Act.

Originally published in Compliance Week. Reprinted with permission. © 2009 Financial Media Holdings Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Compliance Week can be found athttp://www.complianceweek.com. Call (888) 519-9200 for more information.

This is just one instance in what has been a carte blanche behavior that has led to the greatest wealth growth by percentile of any group of people in this country. While average households have lost money they have had returns of at least 185% above the net average. YES That is correct it is the net average increase of the figures below divided by the return timeline.

This is a trend analysis of the data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics using their average net worth calculations.

The total net worth increase from ’04-’08: $151,550,660.
The total net worth in 2009: $291,093,347

Here is the video report for the above information:

Here is the link to the full report with the list of the top 80 representatives who had the highest gains: http://governmentgonewild.org/thelist

And it is not just our elected officials who are prospering while we suffer, here is a copy of an article from the Wall Street Journal from Oct. 11, 2010 that goes into length on one individual who recently doubled his $3500 investment in a solar stock.

Congressional Staffers Gain From Trading in Stocks

So the Occupy Wall Street useless idiots are going after all the evil institutions with the support of the real thieves that besides the aforementioned personal gains through if not illegal, immoral behavior, are guilty of the single greatest act of outright theft in this countries history! Where is the 4.7 trillion dollars that was with interest, paid into the Social Security trust fund that they were entrusted to safeguard for the trustees?

The Democratic party with the use of the "Great Society" legislation stole every single cent plus all of the potential earned interest from said funds to create and fund the destruction of our Republic and its society. They used those funds to create the following bureaucracies and the entitlement programs which have not only failed the people they were "supposed" to help but instead enslaved them. Starting in 1965 and going forward they have used those "trust fund" dollars to create and fund the Dept. of Health and Human Services to create Medicaid which is bankrupting Medicare and almost every state in the union. The food stamp program which is overseen and funded by the Dept. of Agriculture where it is now 80% of their budget. The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development ( originally the Public Works Administration) which led to the great Housing Projects fiasco that many cities are still cleaning up, also the section 8 voucher program paying hundreds to thousands of dollars to individuals to subsidize or pay in full their rent. The Dept. of Energy and within it the low income utility subsidy for section 8 housing occupants. The list is so large that the subsidized programs created by Johnson and the Democrat party with this legislation would take up several hundred pages. In just the years since our government passed this legislation it has grown by 400% while our population has grown by 30% .

The Cronies who have been willful participants with the criminals factually identified in the information here today, and are just as guilty as the politicians who have benefited from their largess and contributions. They deserve to be punished as much as, if not more so then the politicians themselves, because they are even more duplicitous and create the fiscal opportunities by which the others have prospered. They have used their financial positions to subvert and subjugate this countries free market and replace it with a centrally planned economy run by a socialist autocracy where we have lost our freedom and created the useless idiots who now protest them.

The useless idiots that occupy Wall Street are being used and manipulated by the Democrat party and their co-conspirators because their whole agenda for America is being repudiated by overwhelming numbers and they are now in full damage control mode. They need a villain besides themselves and when your entire modus operandi is based on the Marxist socialist model, you use class and racial warfare to vilify your enemy and hide your fear. You identify a group or class and keep lying about them until you incite mob reaction and then foster that reaction with your thug army. You use your propaganda to create a false persona of the offensive behavior or action or completely repudiate and lie about the obvious actions or words from those you support. You infiltrate the mob with your manipulators to direct and focus the mob into following and implementing your agenda. You use your media personalities that can communicate your message without being eviscerated by the media. You continue to incite violence or rebellious behavior without overtly implicating yourself or your agenda.

This was used with great effect in 1917 to oust the last Monarchy from Russia and start the reign of communist rule with 80 million people paying the price with their lives.

This worked well in 1932 Germany and helped elect a little known former convicted political agitator by the name of Adolf Hitler.

I hope it does not come to this but as long as we have the criminals in this country untouched by the law and hiding behind the same Constitution that they are bent on destroying, then we must be ready to fight for our Freedoms and our lives if necessary.

In Freedom,

Dr. Keith C. Westbrook Ph.D.

This is a recent article from The Energy Tribune. The numbers are based on a new report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS). There are graphs and charts available at the link that did not transfer over which show the numbers more dramatically. By the way, the shale oil deposits that are not included in the numbers in this article are estimated to be over 800 Billion barrels, that is per the U.S. Department of Natural Resources.

U.S. Has Earth’s Largest Energy Resources

By Peter C Glover
Posted on Mar. 24, 2011

In case anyone missed it, let me repeat something that is of a magnitude of 10 on the scale of news-quakes for Joe Public USA: America’s combined energy resources are, according to a new report from the Congressional Research Service (CSR), the largest on earth. They eclipse Saudi Arabia (3rd), China (4th) and Canada (6th) combined – and that’s without including America’s shale oil deposits and, in the future, the potentially astronomic impact of methane hydrates.

The energy facts in the CRS report should be making front page news all over America. Mostly it isn’t. Given the devastating news from Japan and New Zealand, it may be right to postpone dancing in the streets. But something else is going on. Even though they are going to dominate global energy supply for decades to come the insidious war on vital fossil fuels continues apace.

Thus it perhaps falls to a friend of the US (i.e. me) to state that if the White House is in any way serious about impacting the economic Black H*** that is the burgeoning national debt, reinvigorating business big-time, creating real jobs and restoring ebbing national wealth, the best shot by a distance if you’re American ... well, you’re standing on it, or rather above it.

While love, spiritually speaking and in fiction, may make the world go around, it is energy – and mostly hydrocarbon energy – that actually drives it. As blockbuster thrillers sometimes put it, “Who will tell the President?”

Political pantomime

From over here, the lack of a comprehensive US energy policy and the incoherence of President Obama’s political take on energy, reminds me of a pantomime I saw last Christmas, Aladdin. The cave is full of energy riches, but ‘Emperor’ Obama – or is it Wishy-Washy? –refuses to allow the words “open sesame” to be spoken.

Senator Lisa Murkowski, Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and National Resources Committee, takes up the theme: “As we debate ways to reduce gas prices and provide relief to American families and businesses, this report should be required reading for every member of Congress.” How about for every American citizen too, Senator? Murkowski adds, “For the sake of our national security, our economy, and the world’s environment, we need to explore and develop more of our own resources.”

“The Obama administration has made a conscious policy choice to raise energy prices, accomplished in good measure by restricting access to domestic energy supplies.” So says Senator James Inhofe, a Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. He adds forthrightly, “We could help bring affordable energy to consumers, create new jobs, and grow the economy if the Obama administration would simply get out of the way so America can realize its true energy potential.”

Wow, heavy stuff. But then there’s much to be ‘heavy’ about.

While the US is often depicted as having only a tiny minority of the world’s oil reserves at around 28 billion barrels (based on the somewhat misleading figure of ‘proven reserves’) according to the CRS in reality it has around 163 billion barrels. As Inhofe’s EPW press release comments, “That’s enough oil to maintain America’s current rates of production and replace imports from the Persian Gulf for more than 50 years”. Next up, there’s coal. The CRS report reveals America’s reserves of coal are unsurpassed, accounting for over 28 percent of the world’s coal. Much of it is high quality too. The CRS estimates US recoverable coal reserves at around 262 billion tons (not including further massive, difficult to access, Alaskan reserves). Given the US consumes around 1.2 billion tons a year, that’s a couple of centuries of coal use, at least.

In 2009 the CRS upped its 2006 estimate of America’s enormous natural gas deposits by 25 percent to around 2,047 trillion cubic feet, a conservative figure given the expanding shale gas revolution. At current rates of use that’s enough for around 100 years. Then there is still the, as yet largely publicly untold, story of methane hydrates to consider, a resource which the CRS reports alludes to as “immense...possibly exceeding the combined energy content of all other known fossil fuels.” According to the Inhofe’s EPW, “For perspective, if just 3 percent of this resource can be commercialized ... at current rates of consumption, that level of supply would be enough to provide America’s natural gas for more than 400 years.”

See what I mean about an Aladdin’s Cave of untapped energy? Could America.........

To read the rest of the article and view the graphs and charts, go here;

http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm/6933/US-Has-Earths-Larges...

by: Trent Derr - American Exceptionalism

Progressive: “A person advocating or implementing liberal social reforms to destroy traditional societal values in stages, proceeding step by step.”

Progressive Cancer: “A disease that attacks the body by using abnormal cancerous cells to kill normal cells while incrementally spreading in stages through nearby tissues and then throughout the body through a process called metastases.”

Notice the two definitions are very similar.  One is a physical disease that incrementally destroys the body by killing good cells with bad ones, and the other is a social disease that destroys society by killing good values with bad ones.  That’s why when someone snobbishly professes they are a Progressive, my response is of course you are Progressive, like a cancer.

by: Trent Derr - American Exceptionalism

You can tell that someone feels threatened by you when they publicly degrade and poke fun at you.    Given that standard, the Tea Party has been under the skin of Democrats from the day that it sprung to life a little more than 2 years ago.  As recent as the current budget battle, Harry Reid blames the Tea Party for not allowing Republicans to compromise on the Federal budget and perpetuate the excessive government spending.   Thanks Harry.  That’s the nicest thing you’ve said about the Tea Party in recent memory.

But why does the Democratic leadership actually fear the impact of the Tea Party?  Yes the Tea Party is on the other side of the ideological spectrum from the Far Left wing of the Democratic Party.  Clearly the Tea Party is fiscally conservative, believes in constitutionally limited government, and favors free market solutions.   However those positions are an accurate description of most conservative voters’ beliefs so that isn’t what is under the Democratic leaders’ skin.

The average Tea Party member is over 35 years old.    That fact aligns with the  typical  conservative voting demographic that  includes individuals over 35 years of age with a skewing of the population to those 55 and older.   So the Left’s concern isn’t caused by the fact that the Tea Party is a threat to the Left’s hold on older voters.   The older voting population has always been split between the left and the conservatives.   The older Americans with a taker mentality are liberal, and those with a builder mentality are conservative.

From his Senate Conservatives Fund, Senator Jim DeMint wrote a detailed letter about the so-called 'compromise' to extend the Bush era tax rates. On the one side, it's Democrats as usual with their spend addiction and committed re-distribuion of wealth at the expense of our children and grandchildren, but the other side is the most disturbing of all - Republicans have not seen the error of their ways.

OBAMA'S "SWINDLE OF THE YEAR"
Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010. This is a defeat? http://bit.ly/ggPOcB

It stinks. The only satisfaction was watching a defeated president pout, blame and lie, while the über left self-destructed. The left has finally realized that they lost power, and it isn't pretty. But.... Obama has exposed his true ideological self -- more pluses.

PLAYING WITH THE TWO IMMUTABLE LAWS OF WASHINGTON.

This is a compromise that leaves both sides coming up short. http://bit.ly/guv7SB

”Trick me once, shame on you; trick me twice, shame on me!”

Will TEA Party-Inspired Victory

Again Go to Waste for Conservatives?

The man of the hour is House Speaker Designate John Boehner. On the face of it, it appears that the hopes of conservative America could hardly have been put in stronger hands. Mr. Boehner reportedly has never asked for nor taken an earmark in his twenty-year career. Yes, a man of principle is needed. But more than anything else, America needs John Boehner to be a man with an elephant’s fabled memory and an owl’s much lauded wisdom. Will the recent TEA Party-inspired victory at the polls go to waste for conservatives? Something even bigger along those lines happened in 1994 . . . it must NOT happen in 2010.

In 1994 the conservative standard-bearers, the Republican Party swept into control of both the House and the Senate netting 55 new house seats on the way. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and the Republicans had set the victory up by creating a “Contract for America” similar in many ways to the ideas propelling the TEA Party Contract from America and the Republicans Pledge to America, both offered up in 2010. This year things are different in three important respects from 1994:

1) From a conservative’s view point, the 2010 election result was broader but less conclusive. Many more governorships were seized; more U.S. House seats were gained; many more individual state House and Senate seats were won; but the gain of six U.S. Senate seats did not give the Republicans a majority in that chamber.

2) The clear inspiration for the Republican victory was the creation of the TEA Party grass roots fiscal- and Constitutional-conservative movement begun about February, 2009, shortly after Barack Obama, the Democrats and many Republicans passed the $787 Billion Obama stimulus.

3) Republicans running on religious-conservative or socially-conservative lines were uniformly defeated as the old “litmus- test” gave way to a type of conservativism that Independents embraced eagerly.

TEA Party Has Much to Learn;

Republicans, Even More, from 1994

So, what exactly does the TEA Party-inspired conservative victory mean for America?

A. Nothing, if the beneficiary of this Conservative victory (the Republican Party) ends up less than a party of principle and also opts to return to its old “litmus test” of social and religious issues

B. Everything, if the beneficiary of this victory ends up returning to its roots as the party of small government; accountable government; fiscal-conservativism; and Constitutional Conservativism, leaves the old litmus test behind and learns from the debacle of 1994 . . . .

In 1994, the Republican Party had a historic opportunity dropped into its lap and then blew it badly by playing small politics instead of honoring the will of the voters and standing up for Constitutional- and fiscal-conservativism. Back then the voters angered by the Democrats’ failed attempt at Hillarycare and other less than conservative efforts by Bill Clinton also rejected the Democratic Party at the ballot box. The G.O.P. picked up 55 seats in the House of Representatives for a majority there and even won the senate. Like now the Republicans back then had a document working for them, the “Contract for America.” John Boehner has the opportunity to learn from Newt Gingrich’s less than sterling efforts and begin the nation’s return to sanity, principle and fiscal-integrity. You see, Gingrich compromised repeatedly with that wily devil Bill Clinton. Boehner would do well to learn the lesson that only 100% principled bills need to be presented for a vote in the House, not 99% principled bills with one ear mark or one outrider; not 99.9% principled bills . . . but only 100% principled bills. Why?

ITEM: You will remember that it was only AFTER the Republican victory in 1994 that Bill Clinton was able to go from 36% approval to 65% approval (in January, 1998, just prior to his escapades with Monica Lewinsky in the so-called “tailgate” or “little blue-dress scandal” becoming the headline story for the next few months).

ITEM: You will remember that it was only AFTER the Republican victory in 1994 that Bill Clinton was able to pass three expansions of the Community Reinvestment Act (two in 1995 and the “steroid version” in 1998) which ACORN was able to exploit to turn Jimmy Carter’s ill-conceived CRA of 1977 into a nation-wrecking sub-prime lending crisis**.

Item: You will remember that whereas in 1976 only one in 404 mortgages was offered at less than 3% down payment; that by 1986 the Arkansas Community Organization for Reform Now (later to expand to become the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) had doubled the rate in the nation to one questionable loan in every 198 mortgages; which had really jumped to one bad loan in every 14 by 1996; and 34 questionable loans in 100 by 2006 and ignited our present financial crisis.

Item: You will remember that ACORN lawyer Barack Obama in Chicago played a key role in that area brow-beating and shaking down lenders to force them to comply with the evil CRA legislation.

Item: You will remember that after 1998’s steroid expansion of the CRA ’77, ACORN, without Barack Obama, discovered that it was now just as easy to put an ultra poor renter into a $450,000 home as it earlier had been to get him into a $150,000 one.

Item: You will remember that after 1998’s steroid expansion of CRA ’77 by Clinton, ACORN was able to get many loans not at 3% but at ZERO% down payments.

Item: You will remember that people without I.D.; people without jobs; people without anywhere close to decent credit ratings; people without even a rental history; people whose only “income” listed was food stamps; other welfare recipients; and even illegal aliens were being put into $350,000-$500,000 homes courtesy of ACORN’s “street warfare” against mortgage lenders required by law to make knowingly bad home loans.

Item: You will remember liberal news coverage in big cities of protests against banks “Unfair to the poor” or “racist banks” being carried on TV as crowds chanted on the lawn outside bank presidents’ and vice presidents’ homes.

Item: You will remember G.W. Bush trying to change this complex of laws in January, 2005, but progressives from both parties (particularly the Democrats) voting him down.

Item: You will remember G.W. Bush personally or via spokesmen talking to congress some 26 times about the financial problem these CRA laws were causing.

Item: You will remember finally 30 months after his first attempt to rein in this nightmare runaway train, the Bush administration and bi-partisan patriots passed a watered-down version of his original anti-CRA bill in July, 2007. It was, of course, way too little, way too late and the debacle was on us by October, 2007.

Item: You will remember that three months ago in August, 2010, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner praised Bush’s actions for stopping the recession from becoming truly deep and serious and from preventing a critical plummeting in home prices.

Item: You will surely remember that on at least 200 occasions, Barack Obama^^ has told us an analogy about a car in a ditch driven there by the previous administration.

Item: You will surely remember that Barack Obama claims his policies prevented another “Great Depression” caused by the prior Republican administrations and failures of the Free Market.

Item: You will surely remember Barney Frank saying, “Gee, the Free Market created another mess and now government has to come to the rescue . . . AGAIN!”

Item: You may not remember Rajjpuut telling you that the correct version of the “car in the ditch” story was that George W. Bush saw Obama, Clinton, ACORN and progressive politicians deliberately pushing the car (the economy) toward a 500-foot cliff (utter financial disaster) and jumped into the front seat, grabbed the wheel and slammed on the brakes, thus initiating a controlled skid that deposited the vehicle into the nearest friendly-looking ditch.

Item: You will surely remember Tuesday’s voting and that courtesy of the awareness created by the TEA Party, the Republicans now have a chance to make amends for their faulty oversight of the nation between 1994 and 2004.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

**How exactly did this disaster happen with Republicans owning a majority in both chambers?

How did Clinton like a Tae Kwan Do black belt use the power of the powerful House Republicans against them? It happened, just as the strike out of MIGHTY CASEY did, because “pride goeth before the fall.” Because when “politics is the art of the possible,” all is well; and when politics becomes "the art of the compromise for appearance-sake," all is surely wrong.

The Republicans, you see were committed by Gingrich to passing legislation in the House in accord with their Contract with America. Since they had the majority, they could and did and included among their achievements was incredible Welfare Reform, all well and good. However, Gingrich went beyond the possible into the dirty world of compromise with the Devil (Clinton) and got smacked around like a schoolboy. It happened more or less because Gingrich’s pride could NOT accept passing a bill or several versions of a bill only to see Clinton veto it repeatedly after the senate sent it to him. His pride demanded that he ENACT legislation . . . something NOT in his power. Enter the fuzzy world of COMPROMISE . . . .

Gingrich’s pride would NOT allow him to pass a bill and call it a success, he must see it enacted . . . and there Clinton had him because Clinton was NOT facing a veto-proof congress. So the Republicans would set out and eventually pass a great piece of legislation, Constitutional and smart and Clinton would veto it. They would adjust a few things tinker with it here and there and get a few more Democratic votes and pass it again and again Clinton would veto it. Presumably if Gingrich had been content to keep passing good bills and been content with the few crumbs of success Clinton allowed to become law, much good would have done; the Contract with America would have been achieved (passing all the bills; not unfortunately enacting all of them); and Clinton’s approval rating would have dropped into the teens . . . instead because of his pride and compromising with Clinton . . . the Dems got credit for passing “monumental reform” legislation; and the Dems repeatedly snuck in little pieces of poison (like three CRA ’77 expansions) and so Clinton was resurrected and re-elected. “But, but, but HOW?” You ask.

After several vetoes of several versions of a particular bill, finally, the minority Democrats in the House would create virtually a twin of the most popular version of the same bill Clinton had just vetoed (with some teensy-teeny nasty progressive surprises such as the CRA ’77 expansions earlier mentioned in them dropped into the small print) . . . rather than standing upon principle and defeating the bill in the house, Gingrich and the Republicans went along with Clinton’s charade, time after time after time after time and helped Clinton go from 36% approval to about 65% approval by 1998 before Monica Lewinsky did him in. Yes, the G.O.P. did fulfill their Contract with America, but because of the wily Clinton the nation was much the worse for it . . . . And that is the lesson John Boehner must take from history as goes about meeting the Pledge to America. NO compromise with the Devil, please, Mr. Speaker!

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/pledgetoamerica.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_from_America

^^ This is an example of the two most well-known propaganda techniques: the Big Lie in conjunction with Unceasing Repetition.

Rajjpuut’s Predictions 2010

G.O.P. Dem Ind.

Governors 34 15 1

Senate 52 46 2

House of Reps 268 167 0

But Flynn let drive a single to the wonderment of all

And the much-despised Blakely tore the cover off the ball

And now the dust has lifted and they saw what had occurred

There was Blake SAFE! at second; and Flynn a-hugging third!

And from the gladdened MULTITUDE went up a joyous yell

It rumbled in the mountain tops, it rattled in the dell

It struck upon the hillside and rebounded on the flat

For Casey, MIGHTY CASEY, was advancing to the bat . . . .

Politics: The Art of the Possible

Rajjpuut memorized Ernest Lawrence Thayer’s marvelous poem Casey at the Bat, when he was eleven years old . . . there is something magical there (a proviso to the G.O.P. and presumably John Boehner as well) because, after all “MIGHTY CASEY” did strike out . . . If John Boehner “works with” President Obama he will succeed in repeating the debacle that Newt Gingrich encountered beginning in 1994. What happened there/then? The Republicans won 55 new house seats and also swept into controlling the senate . . . the G.O.P. owned both chambers of the Congress for the first time in several decades. The wily Bill Clinton facing-off against an optimistic Newt Gingrich who pledged to commanding the Republican horde into achieving their "Contract with America" . . . and Clinton . . . made Gingrich very, very sorry . . . and America much, much, much sorrier . . . .

History shows us that it was only after the 1994 midterm elections that Clinton was able to pass his two 1995 expansions of the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA ’77 which forced home lenders to make knowingly stupid home loans); and then the steroid expansion of that bill in 1998 which led to the financial debacle that began in August, 2007. To put things in perspective, in 1975, before CRA ’77 was passed just one in 404 home loans was granted at a questionable 3% down payment or less. After almost a decade of ACORN’s shenanigans mostly in Arkansas (it began as the Arkansas Community Organization for Reform Now in 1977 with the assignment from Cloward, Piven, and Wiley to ACORN creator Wade Rathke to shake things up in voter registration and housing) the national “questionable home loan rate” had doubled from 0.24% to 0.51 of home loans offered at 3% down or less. Clinton, himself beginning in 1993 had started “creating” law via regulatory edict upon CRA ’77 and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And then twice in 1995 with the Republicans guarding the switch Clinton expanded CRA ’77. When the dust had lifted in 1995, 14.1% of home loans were being offered at a highly questionable 3% down payment or less, many required zero down payment. (By 2005 34% of home loans were questionable and now ACORN was pushing for $400,000 homes not $150,000) How did this disaster happen?

How did Clinton like a Tae Kwan Do black belt use the power of the powerful House Republicans against them? It happened, just as the strike out of MIGHTY CASEY did, because “pride goeth before the fall.” Because when “politics is the art of the possible,” all is well; and when politics becomes "the art of the compromise for appearance-sake," all is surely wrong.

The Republicans, you see were committed by Gingrich to passing legislation in the House in accord with their Contract with America. Since they had the majority, they could and did and included among their achievements was incredible Welfare Reform, all well and good. However, Gingrich went beyond the possible into the dirty world of compromise with the Devil (Clinton) and got smacked around like a schoolboy. It happened more or less because Gingrich’s pride could NOT accept passing a bill or several versions of a bill only to see Clinton veto it repeatedly after the senate sent it to him. His pride demanded that he ENACT legislation . . . something NOT in his power. Enter the fuzzy world of COMPROMISE . . . .

Gingrich’s pride would NOT allow him to pass a bill and call it a success, he must see it enacted . . . and there Clinton had him because Clinton was NOT facing a veto-proof congress. So the Republicans would set out and eventually pass a great piece of legislation, Constitutional and smart and Clinton would veto it. They would adjust a few things tinker with it here and there and get a few more Democratic votes and pass it again and again Clinton would veto it. Presumably if Gingrich had been content to keep passing good bills and been content with the few crumbs of success Clinton allowed to become law, much good would have done; the Contract with America would have been achieved (passing all the bills; not unfortunately enacting all of them); and Clinton’s approval rating would have dropped into the teens . . . instead because of his pride and compromising with Clinton . . . the Dems got credit for passing “monumental reform” legislation; and the Dems repeatedly snuck in little pieces of poison (like three CRA ’77 expansions) and so Clinton was resurrected and re-elected. “But, but, but HOW?” You ask.

After several vetoes of several versions of a particular bill, finally, the minority Democrats in the House would create virtually a twin of the most popular version of the same bill Clinton had just vetoed (with some teensy-teeny nasty progressive surprises such as the CRA ’77 expansions earlier mentioned in them dropped into the small print) . . . rather than standing upon principle and defeating the bill in the house, Gingrich and the Republicans went along with Clinton’s charade, time after time after time after time and helped Clinton go from 36% approval to about 65% approval by 1998 before Monica Lewinsky did him in. Yes, the G.O.P. did fulfill their Contract with America, but because of the wily Clinton the nation was much the worse for it . . . . And that is the lesson John Boehner must take from history as goes about meeting the Pledge to America. NO compromise with the Devil, please, Mr. Speaker!

To Mr. Boehner, instead of saying “I wish you bluebirds in the spring,” Rajjpuut says, “I wish you gridlock for two years . . . a spine of steel to dull your tears . . . and most of all, when critics call, I wish you luck!”

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/pledgetoamerica.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_from_America

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

As the Nov 2nd elections are finally within reach, we are witnessing the onslaught of a herd of wolves in sheep's clothing. Suddenly the Democrats are talking like conservatives, but their voting records show these people are lying.

QUESTIONS FOR CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES

We look forward to the 2010 elections in the hope that we can decisively reject Barack Obama's plans to "fundamentally transform the United States." http://bit.ly/9NlrzD

“If the folks in the Gulf were angry about the six-month drilling moratorium Obama sent them, this is a permanent moratorium on Gulf oil drilling operations . . . did you even notice? Put down that %&$(*$@%)#$% remote! Our country is being sent down the toilet and you’re watching television?” Rajjpuut

Would you Vote to Give America Away to the U.N.?

For all those of you who just can’t believe that America and the American dream are expendable in progressive-Democratic** eyes, open your eyes NOW. The United States House of Representatives under Democratic control (specifically led by Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer) and only needing a simple majority to pass any bill just voted to put great chunks of our oceans, our coasts and our oil under control of the United Nations. Would you vote to do that? Would you authorize your representative to do that. The Senate will soon take this matter up for vote. Would you authorize your state’s senators to vote for this?

Yesterday in this Rajjpuut’s Folly blog . . . .

http://rajjpuutsfolly.blogtownhall.com/

http://rajjpuutsfolly.blogtownhall.com/2010/09/25/lacking_testicles,_republican_leaders_submit_to_obama_lies.thtml

we showed you a monstrous truth that apparently the Republican leadership hasn’t got the brains, guts or testicles to put out before you. Today’s truth about the so-called “CLEAR ACT” HR 3534 . . . .

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3534

shows you just exactly what happens when Americans are too busy watching their sit-coms and Irreality TV shows and too busy to pay attention to what the progressives (“we need to ‘progress’ beyond the outdated and flawed United States Constitution in order to bring about a Utopia here on earth”) in government are doing to us. In a nutshell . . . while most Americans are twiddling their thumbs and dipping their potato chips into unhealthy triple-cheese concoctions the global-thinking progressives in the House have just voted to give away our land, oceans and adjacent land masses and even the Great Lakes to an international body which will make us pay $900 million per year 2040. Would you vote for that? Would you authorize your rep to vote for that; or your senator to make it a law this coming week?

HR 3534 is designed to put America back into the year 1905. But it is far worse than that . . . . It is first of all: UNCONSTITUTIONAL. HR 3534 mandates membership in something called “the Law of the Sea Treaty” without the required two-thirds vote to ratify it in the U.S. Senate as is required of all treaties the country enters into. It creates permanent obstacles to normal American energy operations. It will be a permanent roadblock to American and drive American companies out of the Gulf permanently, delay future drilling, increase dependency on foreign oil, and will implement climate change legislation and youth education programs; but most important, it mandates membership in the Law of the Sea Treaty without the required two-thirds vote to ratify it in the U.S. Senate. If the folks in the Gulf were angry about the six-month drilling moratorium Obama sent us, this is a permanent moratorium on Gulf oil drilling operations . . . did you even notice? Put down that %&$(*$@%)#$% remote! Our country is being sent down the toilet and you’re watching television?”

http://www.boogai.net/top-story/breaking-us-house-puts-oceans-coasts-under-un-senate-vote-will-seal-the-deal/

We won’t dwell on how evil all this is, after all, you deserve it if you’re not paying attention and especially if you voted for progressives in the last three elections (about 85% of the Democrats and 10% of the Republicans in the House and Senate) . . . but, now that your eyes are open, are you going to let them pass this bill in the senate without a whimper from you?

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

** If you’ve been paying attention, you know that the progressive control of this country is now pushing 100% for Marxist aims . . . two months ago, a liberal think-tank did a poll in which 55% of Americans said the label “socialist” was fitting for Obama . . . well 90% of Americans haven’t paid attention. Obama is a Marxist and Marxists think globally (Workers of the world, UNITE!) and in their thinking, not just rich Americans but all Americans must “suffer a little” to redistribute wealth globally for the benefit of all (From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.) and if you haven’t the brains or guts to realize what’s happening, it’s called a “Fire Sale” on America.

MSM Leaves Out Two Little Details

Concerning Bell, California Scandal

When your small-town government officials vote to pay themselves four times the going rate for cities five times your town’s size, that’s a big story. When the town is going bankrupt by leaps and bounds the story is complicated. When unemployment floods the city, that’s more complicated. When the mainstream media chooses to omit two crucial details of the story that makes everything so much more intriguing, no?

The story broke at the start of the summer, no big deal but full of the human interest that drives so many stories during hard economic times. The city of Bell, California, a Los Angeles Country suburb of L.A. was suffering like virtually no small town in southern California had ever suffered . . . whatever the source of the joblessness and poverty growing upon Bell, public activism was NOT the preferred solution. You see, Bell’s problem might have arisen from voter apathy. Only 400 votes were cast in Bell’s 2005 election designating Bell as a charter city. An extra-large number of those 400 votes were suspicious absentee votes. Later in March of 2007, Bell held its first contested elections for city council in over a decade.

As Bell’s problems grew, nearby towns in Southern Cal were also suffering. In July 2010, when two L.A. Times reporters, Jeff Gottlieb and Ruben Vives, began investigating possible malfeasance in a neighboring city but got distracted when they discovered Bell city officials were receiving unusually large salaries, perhaps the highest in the nation. Indeed, the city payroll was swollen with six- to seven-figure salaries. City Manager Robert Rizzo received $787,637 a year (almost double the salary Obama receives. Including benefits, Rizzo received $1.5 million in the last year. His assistant Angela Spaccia, was earning $376,288 a year, more than the top administrator for all of L.A. Country. Police chief, Randy Adams, was paid $457,000, 33% more the Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck. The threesome resigned following initial news reports and a huge public outcry.

And then more facts came to light. All but one member of the Bell city council were receiving $100,000 for their part-time work, and all these salaries were SHOCK!! authorized by that 2005 special election, giving the city Charter status. Council members in cities of Bell’s size typically make less than $5,000 per year.

Ten days ago the California Attorney General's office filed a lawsuit against eight former and current employees, demanding return of "excessive salaries" and a reduction in pension benefits accrued as a result of those higher salaries. Apparently, the problem has only been getting worse since the 2005 Charter City election. Both the FBI and California Secretary of State’s office are investigating allegations about improprieties in the 2009 election and the city's ultra-high property taxes are also being investigated.

Apparently, virtually all of Bell’s residences and buildings were over assessed and overtaxed between 2007 and 2010. This week former city manager Robert Rizzo, Mayor Oscar Hernandez, former assistant city manager Angela Spaccia and council members George Mirabal, Teresa Jacobo, Luis Artiga, George Cole and Victor Bello were arrested and charged with misappropriation of public funds. Police Chief Randy Adams has resigned under pressure and been replaced. Of note, the media have had a field day kicking Bell around but two little details about the town’s plight have been conveniently missing from every MSM (mainstream media) story so far . . . only FOX News noticed that Bell calls itself “a proud sanctuary city” and that all eight of the problem officials were Democrats.

Interesting, just as they’ve left the party tag off Charlie Rangel (D) and Maxine Waters (D) and downplayed or omitted news about their scandals, the MSM seems to only believe (R) –Rated scandals require party mention.

So Bell, California, has been run for at least thirteen years by a Democratic machine; moved itself out of the umbrella of state law with a questionable charter city election; deliberately overburdened its systems by making itself a sanctuary city for illegal aliens and definitely got the progressive government it so-deserved with virtually no one going to the polls to keep their crooks honest. Sounds like Washington, D.C., eh?

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut