Did you play Monopoly when you were a kid? Did you play it alot? Do you remember how you felt initially about buying Boardwalk (Mayfair) and Park Place (Park Lane)? They were too expensive, right? What happens to the game when a new player enters who can set and change the rules in the middle of the game, play as many game pieces as they want, and print and issue money for any purpose in the game to their own whim? It is not good. Image Credit: allthings.tv

Free-Lunch Faith Vs The Reality Of Economics

On what is beginning to feel like a daily basis, the Obama Administration, with the unprecedented aid of the mainstream media (last night, ABC spent most of their broadcast time broadcasting directly from ... The White House), is attempting to sell the faith of a free-lunch to a hungry hoard of faithless people.

What is being sold to the American public is a cure to all process ills and an improvement in ones life if one would just let the Government take over and run everything from our Free Enterprise Manufacturing, Healthcare, and Energy systems (and this is just a start). The Obama Administration loves to cleave to the argument that with the Government becoming a "PLAYER" in an enterprise they are promoting competition by delivering an alternative approach to a marketplace but this logic is grossly flawed.

The reality of economics that derails this logic is the it is difficult for anyone to compete on a level playing field when one of the players is also the referee, and the body that makes the rules ... and prints the money upon which the game is played.

Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free "Chance" card. Image Credit: Ebay

Would anyone play a game on the board game, MONOPOLY (our cultural introduction to economics), with a person who had the ability to create game board pieces without a cost or penalty, print and issue money to himself without really having to tell anyone when he expects to use it during the game to purchase pieces and/or set up hotels and set the rules beyond what had been printed and distributed at the beginning of the game (example: this player has an unlimited supply of "Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free" cards)? The answer is NO!

In every human endeavor there is really NO Free Lunch, and the reality of economics always shows that when a corrupt and over influential force enters into the mix of a free enterprise system, the system becomes corrupted and tilted to the influence that has the ability to change the common sense rules that govern the system.

Homeschool Real World Math - Here is another fun addition of real world math. Firstly, we use and adore Math-U-See consistently throughout the year in our homeschool. There are days however, that I like to mix it up and do something a little playful to get them thinking about math in the real world. /// This morning we played a game of monopoly. We received the newest version of Monopoly: Here and Now the real World Edition for Christmas. It is a fun version that incorporates geography, world facts on the chance and community chest cards, and interesting games pieces that take the kids literally around the world in every game. /// Our youngest got to work on basic counting by moving the pieces and rolling the dice. Our middle worked on basic addition by adding everyone’s dice together and telling them how far they had to move the pieces and our oldest had to read out all of the chance and community chest cards for each player. We had a ton of fun. This particular edition, does not have money, but cards and a banker machine that you add and subtract money for each transaction made. By the end of the first game, they were working through place values in the millions, Large number addition and subtraction and how to work the key pad which is similar to a calculator and a keypad on the computer. I wont even get into the idea of money management and budgeting as more abstract ideas they begin to absorb through this game. /// All in all, I think I hid a little real world math by way of a game today. Give it a try it is easy and fun to do. /// Tomorrow, we will do a little more real world math, when they get to spend a few real dollars at the zoo to purchase a drink and choose a few animals they would like to feed. I will hand them each a zip lock bag of coins and they will have to count their way out of it. That should be a barrel full of monkeys…excuse the pun. Grace and Peace to all budding mathematicians in the real world! Caption & Image Credit: homeschool-diva.com

This excerpted and edited from Townhall.com

Tilting at Green Windmills
by George Will - Townhall.com - Thursday, June 25, 2009

The Spanish professor is puzzled. Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating "green jobs" in "alternative energy" even though Spain's unemployment rate is 18.1 percent -- more than double the European Union average -- partly because of spending on such jobs?

Calzada, 36, an economics professor at Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, has produced a report which, if true, is inconvenient for the Obama administration's green agenda, and for some budget assumptions that are dependent upon it.

Calzada says Spain's torrential spending -- no other nation has so aggressively supported production of electricity from renewable sources -- on wind farms and other forms of alternative energy has indeed created jobs. But Calzada's report concludes that they often are temporary and have received $752,000 to $800,000 each in subsidies -- wind industry jobs cost even more, $1.4 million each. And each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation -- sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency -- of capital. (European media regularly report "eco-corruption" leaving a "footprint of sleaze" -- gaming the subsidy systems, profiteering from land sales for wind farms, etc.) Calzada says the creation of jobs in alternative energy has subtracted about 110,000 jobs from elsewhere in Spain's economy.
----
What matters most, however, is not that reports such as Calzada's and the Republicans' are right in every particular. It is, however, hardly counterintuitive that politically driven investments are economically counterproductive. Indeed, environmentalists with the courage of their convictions should argue that the point of such investments is to subordinate market rationality to the higher agenda of planetary salvation.

Still, one can be agnostic about both reports while being dismayed by the frequency with which such findings are ignored simply because they question policies that are so invested with righteousness that methodical economic reasoning about their costs and benefits seems unimportant. When the president speaks of "new green energy economies" creating "countless well-paying jobs," perhaps they really are countless, meaning incapable of being counted.

For fervent believers in governments' abilities to control the climate and in the urgent need for them to do so, believing is seeing: They see, through their ideological lenses, governments' green spending as always paying for itself. This is a free-lunch faith comparable to that of those few conservatives who believe that tax cuts always completely pay for themselves by stimulating compensating revenues from economic growth.

Windmills are iconic in the land of Don Quixote, whose tilting at them became emblematic of comic futility. Spain's new windmills are neither amusing nor emblematic of policies America should emulate. The cheerful and evidently unshakable confidence in such magical solutions to postulated problems is yet another manifestation -- Republicans are not immune: No Child Left Behind decrees that by 2014 all American students will be proficient in math and reading -- of what the late Sen. Pat Moynihan called "the leakage of reality from American life."
Reference Here>>

Welcome to the free-lunch faith and evangelism due to the leakage of reality from American life delivered to us from the Obama Administration, here in Carter's Second Term!

Rosie O'Donnell, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and James von Brunn have a lot more in common than not. All have a problem with "Neocons" and two of the three are clear that they have a fear of the power of Jews ... and believe that 9/11/2001 was not the result of jetliners being hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center in New York City. Imagine that! Image Credit: Combined by Edmund Jenks (2009)

Of Rosie O'Donnell, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and James von Brunn ...

An odd observation and investigation shows intersections of thought and philosophy shared by these three people and it begins to suggest that they all were reading from the same prayer book.

The issues in common are quite startling in their common themes and the fact that few mainstream media outlets has gone out of its way to make this linkage.

Let us build out from the 88 year old center of this observation - as they say ... age before beauty.

James von Brunn (who Alumni relations at Washington University in St. Louis has confirmed they have record of a James Von Brunn who entered school there in 1938 and graduated in 1943 with a journalism degree) has as his MSM profile - is a hater of Jews, denies that the Holocaust ever happened, feels that the Neocon movement (neoconservative movement that gained strength after 9/11/2001) is nothing more than Jews trying to hijack our political system, and is a 9/11 "Truther" (the concept that passenger jetliners filled with passengers never happened and was a conspiracy by the Bush Administration to lead us into war in the Middle east).

This excerpted and edited from CBS News -

Von Brunn Charged In Holocaust Museum Slay
88-Year-Old White Supremacist Faces Murder Charges After Allegedly Shooting Security Guard
CBS News - WASHINGTON, D.C., June 11, 2009

Joseph Persichini, assistant director in charge of the Washington FBI field office, said authorities found a notebook in von Brunn's vehicle with names on it. Earlier, it was reported that he was found in possession of a list of Capitol Hill lawmakers.

In the notebook, von Brunn said that President Obama was "created by Jews" and "does what his Jew owners tell him to do," according the the criminal complaint filed Thursday.
----
The Homeland Security Department called the shooting a criminal incident and said it does not appear to have a connection to terrorism, according to a joint Homeland Security and FBI assessment issued Wednesday. The assessment, obtained Thursday by The Associated Press, said von Brunn is associated with right-wing extremism.
Reference Here>>

This excerpted and edited from Associated Content -

James Von Brunn Rampage Causes Media Firestorm
Crazed Conspiracy Nut Hated Blacks, Jews, Chistians, Bush, McCain, and "Neocons"
June 11, 2009 by Mark Whittington - Associated Content

The big problem is that the list of James Von Brunn's hatreds went somewhat beyond the stereotypical blacks and Jews that such people usually think are out to take over the world. Apparently James Von Brunn hated George W. Bush. John McCain, and "Neocons" according to a report in the Washington Examiner. James Von Brunn was a 9/11 "truther" (i.e., someone who thought 9/11 was the result on an inside conspiracy and not the act of 19 crazed Muslims.) James Von Brunn even hated Christians, according to Francis Beckwith, and blamed them for the fall of the Roman Empire and the decline of the "Aryan Race."

What emerges about James Von Brunn is a portrait of a disturbed old man with a variety of peeves that don't fit very neatly into the left/right spectrum.
Reference Here>>

It is widely known that Rosie O'Donnell believed as James von Brunn - i.e., someone who thought 9/11 was the result on an inside conspiracy and not the act of 19 crazed Muslims.

In March 2007, she said, "I do believe that it is the first time in history that fire has ever melted steel. I do believe that it defies physics for the World Trade Center Tower 7 … which collapsed in on itself. It is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved. … World Trade 1 and 2 got hit by planes; seven, miraculously, the first time in history, steel was melted by fire."

Also, Rosie has been known to rant on The View about the effect of Neocons (liberal speak for a pro-Israel foreign policy) on the Bush Administration years.

But this next news item about Reverend Jeremiah Wright is stunning in it's similarity to the statements of James von Brunn.

This excerpted and edited from the Daily Press -

Rev. Jeremiah Wright says "Jews" are keeping him from President Obama
By DAVID SQUIRES - 6:19 PM EDT, June 10, 2009

In an exclusive interview at the 95th annual Hampton University Ministers' Conference, Wright told the Daily Press that he has not spoken to his former church member since Obama became president, and he implied that the White House won't allow Obama to talk to him.

"Them Jews ain't going to let him talk to me," Wright said. "I told my baby daughter that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office. ...

"They will not let him to talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is. ... I said from the beginning: He's a politician; I'm a pastor. He's got to do what politicians do."

"Ethnic cleansing is going on in Gaza. Ethnic cleansing (by) the Zionist is a sin and a crime against humanity, and they don't want Barack talking like that because that's anti-Israel," Wright said.

Reactions to Wright's comments regarding Jews and Israel lit up Internet message boards and political blogs around the nation on Wednesday, and sparked national TV requests for an audio recording of the interview.
----
In the interview after a nighttime sermon Tuesday at the ministers conference, Wright offered that he has no regrets over the controversy that resulted in a severed relationship with Obama, a former member of the Chicago church of which Wright was the longtime pastor.

"Regret for what ... that the media went back five, seven, 10 years and spent $4,000 buying 20 years worth of sermons to hear what I've been preaching for 20 years?

"Regret for preaching like I've been preaching for 50 years? Absolutely none."

Wright said that when he went to the polls, he did not hold any grudge against Obama.

"Of course I voted for him — he's my son. I'm proud of him," Wright said. "I've got five biological kids. They all make mistakes and bad choices. I haven't stopped loving any of them.

"He made mistakes. He made bad choices. I've got kids who listen to their friends. He listened to those around him. I did not disown him."
Reference Here>>

Now we have to ask ... are the views stated by Reverend Jeremiah Wright above and the beliefs stated by Rosie O'Donnell those of any person associated with right-wing extremism?

Fear and hate has many faces here during Carter's Second Term.

"The Vigilante", a masked government agent, is assigned to investigate the case of the "100 Tears of Blood", a cursed string of rare blood red pearls sought by a gang led by the unknown "X-1" that may have been smuggled into the country. Image Credit: Columbia Pictures

Bond Vigilantes In The Age Of Obamanomics

In a free and open market society, many forces come forward to protect against bad decision making and the folly of idealism.

Bond Vigilantes are an economic force that are beginning to rise up and bring economic reality to the Obama Administration's Government expansion through spending policies and the printing of money.

If the public feels powerless to reel-in this one-party Big Government push to socialism ... free market Bond Vigilante forces just may step in and allow this process to take a breath here in Carter' Second Term.

"The Vigilante - Fighting Hero Of The West" Image Credit: Columbia Pictures

This excerpted and edited from LaissezFaireLounge.com -

A Giant Economic Boycott
Pia Varma, LaissezFaireLounge.com - Friday, May 29, 2009

In these turbulent times when the government is going on an unprecedented spending spree, raising money and increasing its involvement in the economy, many of us have been wondering...who is going to save the day? Enter bond vigilantes. The bond vigilantes are a group of international investors who demanded higher Treasury bond yields from the late 1970’s through the 1990’s whenever there were fears about inflation and hyperinflation. During the credit expansion, the bond vigilantes disappeared but now that the government has been printing, spending and borrowing money like crazy and flooding the economy with dollars to beat the recession, the vigilantes are back with a vengeance.

What essentially happens is the bond vigilantes will short or sell US Treasury Bonds, which will cause the US government to pay higher rates to borrow money, forcing it to rein in spending. This is what happened when Clinton first got into office with idealistic government plans and huge spending initiatives. The bond vigilantes staged an economic boycott or protest against these initiatives by shorting Treasuries.

But who are these bond vigilantes? They seem like a group of pirates scouring the coast looking for trouble. Or a band of cowboys keeping a watchful eye on the world. In reality, they are just a bunch of savvy investors who understand that unbridled spending leads to massive borrowing, which causes interest rates to increase.
Reference Here>>

California State Capitol building in Sacramento, January 2008 lit up for breast cancer awareness. After the vote to dispatch (reject) Propositions 1A-E by over a 60% margin on Tuesday, March 19, 2009 in a State mandated Special Election, the Capitol may just be pink with a hue of embarrassment. Image Credit: Media USA

When A Pay Cut, Is A Fake Pay Cut

This morning in Burbank, on the very day after the Special Election called to vote on Propositions that would increase taxes (again) for everyone, the board of the California Citizens Compensation Committee acted on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's wishes in a bigger way than anticipated. The Governor had been working on getting concessions in salary from the group(s) that represent the state elected officials and officers of about 10% ... he got 18%!

This may sound good ...

But the pay cuts the panel approved won't start to go into effect until December, 2010, because the California constitution prohibits state officer salaries from being cut in the middle of their terms.

The cut will drop the annual pay of a legislator from $116,208 to $95,291.

So, when is a pay cut a FAKE pay cut? When it does not take effect for about one and one-half years from the time the decision is made. There is plenty of time between now and December 2010 for this ruling to change, or be overturned!


This excerpted and edited from the Sacramento Bee -

Commission slashes state officials' pay
By Peter Hecht, Sacramento Bee - Wednesday, May. 20, 2009 - 10:55 am

Declaring that elected officials must share the pain of California's fiscal crisis, an independent commission voted today to impose an 18 percent pay cut for statewide elected officials and all members of the Legislature.

The California Citizens Compensation Committee, which sets salaries for state officers, earlier voted in favor of a more modest 10 percent pay cuts in an April 29 meeting in Sacramento. But the action couldn't stand because the seven-member board lacked the required four votes.

But today the commission voted 5-1 to make a deeper reduction in elected officials' salaries because of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's announced plans to lay off 5,000 state workers.

They also said they were influenced by voters' overwhelming approval of Proposition 1F - a ballot measure that will ban increases in lawmaker salaries - in any budget deficit year.
Reference Here>>

NO American citizen should allow the Federal Government to move in and take-over the States as they have the Banks and Automobile industry.

Look, on the Federal level, this is all about CONTROL - not help or assistance - and they do not care what it takes to allow them to do this. Take taxpayer money that THEY do not have to pay back, and print as much money they feel they will need (about one Trillion dollars to date) in order to pull off this PONZI scheme of central, and socialist CONTROL.

Don't let Washington D.C. bail out any state, especially one as large as California. The politicians in California should be allowed to fail or correct themselves here during this ... Carter's Second Term.

 

The National Debt Roadtrip - A graphic illustration on the proportion of Federal Government spending under Barack Obama, his Administration and the current U.S. Congress [Crtl-Click image to launch video]. Image Credit: PDF Conversion by Edmund Jenks (2009)

Driving The Debt Car During Carter's Second Term

How did the national debt get so big? How do the Obama deficits compare with past presidents?

This video attempts to illustrate the answer to those questions by looking at the debt as a road trip and seeing how fast different administrations have been traveling.

A common reaction many of us hear who are upset and concerned with the huge expansion of federal spending and thus a dramatic increase in the national debt is, "What about W's [George W. Bush] rampant spending!" To which us fiscal conservatives will say, "We didn't like that either, and said so at the time." (NOTE: Barack Obama as a Senator, voted for and approved the rampant spending of the Bush Administration)

Many "PROGRESSIVES" dismiss this, mistakenly assuming fiscal conservatives believe and behave the same as the Republican members in Congress. To be honest, this issue of debt accumulation and spending is neither Conservative or Liberal ... but it is Progressive.

This brief YouTube video does a superb job of showing why most level headed citizens are so upset over the fiscal policies of the Obama Administration and Congress (started under Bush last fall). The expansion of Federal Government and the massive spending passed over the first 100 days of the 44th Presidency is historic, and not necessarily in a good way.



This excerpted and edited from PoliticalMath -

The National Debt Road Trip – Complaint 1
May 16, 2009

I had a commenter for the National Debt Road Trip call BS on some of my numbers, so I wanted to run some sample numbers to make sure that I’m being as transparent as possible.

Complaint: “Obama’s projected to add about 9 trillion. That isn’t three times as much as Bush’s nearly 5 trillion.”

First of all, let’s get the numbers right. In raw unadjusted dollars, Bush increased the debt from $5.674 trillion to $10.024 trillion. That is $4.35 trillion, not five. And Obama has projected that he will increase it from $10.024 trillion to $20.004 trillion, which is $9.979 trillion … far closer to $10 trillion than to $9 trillion.
----
But still, $10 trillion is not three times $4.35 trillion. But that’s where inflation adjustment comes in. According to this inflation calculator, $5.674 trillion in 2000 dollars is the same as $7.035 trillion in 2008 dollars. This makes the inflation adjusted difference between the 2000 debt and the 2008 debt just $2.94 trillion.

I gave Obama a break by assuming that his team didn’t adjust for future inflation, so I made adjustements to his numbers, which meant cutting about $1.6 trillion off the debt leaving us with $18.4 trillion. This means he plans on increasing the debt by about $8.2 trillion (rounding down).

8.2 / 2.94 = 2.79 (the coefficient determining the speed calculation)

64 mph * 2.79 = 178.37 mph

Which is actually a shade faster than I said Obama was going.

I know most liberals aren’t going to believe this, but I really am trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. In this video alone, I underestimated the inflation adjusted debt and I rounded everything down for him. If he still doesn’t look good, it’s not my fault.
Reference Here>>

For more information, follow the Twitter account - PoliticalMath - or visit - politicalmath.wordpress.com

If you're fed up with the Presidential politics, and want to get away from it with a little Xbox escapism, don't play Burnout Paradise. The racing game features VIRTUAL BILLBOARDS URGING GAMERS TO VOTE FOR OBAMA. Is the addition of political ads in console games change you can believe in? Caption & Image Credit: therawfeed.com

The Tripe With TARP & The Obama-Nation

The Troubled Asset Relief Fund (TARP) was originally created by the Bush Administration to help as a buffer for homeowners, who were in trouble of loosing their home when the flexible interest rates of the “sub-prime” mortgages they had used to initially purchase their home … increased. The idea was to be able to have the mortgages reset, or better, renegotiated to a level that the mortgages providers would not have their financial instruments be defaulted on by the people who had committed to pay the mortgages.

By having about 700 Billion dollars of TARP (read that as taxpayer money) set aside, the Federal Government felt that banks would be less inclined to foreclose on, or end the financial contract and the economy would remain relatively level and undisrupted.

This may have been effective … MAY … if the Federal Government applied the monies only where there they were needed. What has happened, however, is a massive level of “mission creep” where the Federal Government has decided to force all financial institutions to take money TARP money in exchange for specialized preferred stock, and if these banks did not participate, they would suffer additional activity brought about through audits and other Governmental investigative activity that hinders a bank from transacting a profitable business.

Further, the Federal Government unilaterally converted the Preferred Stock (non-ownership type) to Common Stock (ownership type) and now own an interest in the banks themselves … and remember, many of these institutions never participated in the issuing and selling of mortgages that are the topic of the TARP monies and/or do not have any loans in default.

The Federal Government forced a transition of ownership of privately held, once profitable businesses to be under the management control and influence of Federal Government bureaucrats who have never managed a private business for profit … in the first place.

The above description is an ugly enough scenario without looking at the additional uses of the original Troubled Asset Relief Fund (TARP).

Transportation Stock and Bond Certificates - Chrysler Corporation, Delaware, USA, 1970: $1,000 Sinking Fund Debenture certificate featuring the famous "Chrysler" radiator cap flanked by allegorical female character and company logos. Also includes traffic scenes showing old trucks and vintage cars in the background. Walter P. Chrysler, formerly of Buick and Willys, acquired Maxwell-Chalmers in 1923 and the first car bearing his name was produced in 1924. Chrysler laid the foundations for a motor empire to rival General Motors and Ford when he took over Dodge and launch the Plymouth Four and the De Soto Six in 1928. Punch cancelled. Scarce. VF+ - Red (12" x 8") $95.00 - Image Credit: stocksearchintl.com

This item published three days before Barack Obama took office excerpted and edited from the Washington Post –

U.S. Expands Aid To Auto Industry

Chrysler Financial Gets $1.5 Billion From Treasury; Ford Credit in Talks

By David Cho and Kendra Marr - Washington Post Staff Writers - Saturday, January 17, 2009; Page D02

The government expanded its bailout of the nation's troubled auto industry yesterday, announcing a new $1.5 billion loan for Chrysler Financial while Ford Credit said it was in talks to obtain federal aid.

The money for Chrysler Financial will come from the government's $700 billion financial rescue program. Senior officials from the Treasury and Federal Reserve are hoping the assistance, combined with earlier support for General Motors' chief lender GMAC, will keep auto loans flowing until the two agencies can make more funds available for credit cards, student loans and small business loans.

The developments came on a frantic last work day at the Treasury Department, as officials pushed out the door several key deals and announcements related to the rescue program, known as the Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP.

----

Last fall, Paulson told lawmakers that the TARP would be used to buy bad assets. But soon after the bill was approved by Congress in early October, he moved away from the idea to provide more direct aid to financial institutions.

----

The moves to aid the financing arms of the nation's automakers draw the federal government more deeply into Detroit's troubles.

To date, the government has committed TARP money to provide $17.4 billion for General Motors and Chrysler, $6 billion for GMAC, and now the new loan to back Chrysler Financial.

----

"We're still funding our business," said Ford Credit spokeswoman Margaret Mellott, who confirmed the talks, which have been going on for months. "We have strong liquidity . . . It's an ongoing dialogue to free up credit."

Although Ford has said it can survive without federal aid or intervention, it continues asking to be treated the same as its struggling cross-town rivals GM and Chrysler.

----

The support for Chrysler Financial is structured differently than most other loans the Treasury has made from the TARP. Instead of investing money directly into Chrysler Financial, the company is creating a special entity that will receive the government loan. Chrysler Financial can then withdraw those funds to make new auto loans.

----

In addition, Chrysler Financial agreed to reduce by 40 percent the pool of bonus money for its senior executives relative to the 2007 levels, among other limitations on what it can pay its top officials.

----

"This will provide a great economic stimulus for car buyers across the country," Jim Press, Chrysler vice chairman and president said in a statement.

Chrysler Financial applied for TARP funds in November. In December, Chrysler's sales slid 53 percent compared with the corresponding month a year before.

"This funding will better position us to withstand the current economic challenges until funding becomes available through more traditional commercial sources," said Thomas F. Gilman, vice chairman and chief executive of Chrysler Financial in a statement.

----

Yesterday was supposed to be their last day of work, but many senior Treasury officials kept their government-issued BlackBerrys rather than turn them in. They were given Federal Express envelopes to ship their devices next week, in case they had to work over the weekend.

Reference Here>>

So, just about three months down the road, Chrysler declares bankruptcy!

The company is broken up into several parts where the United Auto Workers Union becomes the majority share owner – surprise, surprise.

Oh, and the people who invested their money in good faith in the company to get a return on their investment protected by our country’s bankruptcy laws which stipulate that the primary share owners are first honored? The Obama Administration shafted their interests and moved them to the back of the line only allowing them, the investors, a chance at a loss on their investment.

MODERN TIMES: If only the UAW were such a victim as they are depicted here in this R.J. Matson cartoon. The worker caught in a web of gears waiting to crush them up - the truth is that with a 55% ownership of Chrysler, THEY ARE the gears ... they had created through negotiation and now own. Image Credit: R.J. Matson, The New York Observer

This excerpted and edited from CBS News –

Chrysler Bankruptcy Exposes Dirty Politics

Declan McCullagh: Obama Calls Creditors Who Lent Money To Chrysler "Speculators," But What About the Rule Of Law?

May 7, 2009 | by Declan McCullagh

Chrysler's sad tale that led to this week's bankruptcy hearing in New York is not only an important business and political story. It also encompasses morality, the rule of law and strong-arm tactics used by some politicians.
----
During its slide, Chrysler borrowed money from lenders and in return signed a contract promising that as so-called senior creditors, they'd get paid before anyone else if the company went under.

These creditors, by the way, represent something of a cross-section of America: the University of Kentucky, Kraft Foods' retirement fund, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, pension funds, teachers' credit unions, and so on.

A normal bankruptcy filing would be straightforward. Senior creditors get paid 100 cents on the dollar. Everyone else gets in line.

But President Obama and his allies don't want that to happen. So they interfered on behalf of unions (the junior creditors) and publicly upbraided the senior creditors who were asserting their contractual rights and threatening to head to bankruptcy court.

Last week Mr. Obama lambasted them as "a small group of speculators" who "endanger Chrysler's future by refusing to sacrifice like everyone else."

Rep. John Dingell, a Michigan Democrat, sent reporters a statement calling the creditors "vultures" and "rouge hedge funds." Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm piled on, taking aim during her radio address at a "few greedy hedge funds that didn't care how much pain the company's failure would have inflicted on families and communities everywhere."

It must be a coincidence that the United Auto Workers has handed $25.4 million to federal politicians over the last two decades, with 99 percent of that cash going to Democrats. And that Mr. Obama's final campaign stop on Election Day was a UAW phone bank.

If those politicians thought about this a bit more, they'd probably realize their mistake. Creditors didn't force Chrysler's management to head to the capital markets and beg for funds: It was poor management, uncompetitive wages, and a union that opposed pay cuts.

Without those greedy "vultures" and "rogues" injecting sorely-needed cash into a business they knew was risky, Chrysler might have been forced to declare bankruptcy much earlier. (And now that lenders know they may be demonized by the president, will they be as likely to help out next time?)

One of the better critiques of this unusual situation comes from Clifford Asness, managing partner at a $20 billion hedge fund named AQR Capital Management. His essay responds to what he called "toxic demagoguery" and says "the president's attempted diktat takes money from bondholders and gives it to a labor union that delivers money and votes for him."
----
A document that the non-TARP creditors filed with the bankruptcy judge about the proposed sale to Fiat says: "The sale is far from an arm's length transaction, but rather, is the result of a tainted sales process dominated by the United States government... It is a sale that was orchestrated entirely by the Treasury and foisted upon (Chrysler)... Well before the filing, (Chrysler) had ceased to function as an independent company and had become an instrumentality of the government."

So if you're keeping score, you have a bankrupt company depending on the government for money negotiating with some TARP-funded creditors depending on the government for money and still more creditors who may hold insurance policies with AIG, which depends on the government for money. And we're already hearing similar allegations about General Motors and political interference.

One disturbing report came from a well-respected attorney representing the dissident Chrysler creditors. Thomas Lauria, the head of White & Case's bankruptcy practice, says that he was threatened by Steven Rattner, the White House's auto task force chief. (A White House spokesman denies making any threats.)

"I represent one less investor today than I represented yesterday," Lauria said on a Detroit radio show. "One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That's how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence." Lauria said that his clients were willing to compromise on 50 cents on the dollar, but the government offered them only 29 cents.

In the Federalist Papers in 1788, James Madison wrote that "laws impairing the obligation of contracts are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation." Unfortunately, Washington politicians seem to pay little attention to history, morality, or the rule of law.

Reference Here>>

All of this economic upheaval and Federal Government takeover of private enterprises are only the beginning of the misuse of tax money and the trust of the American people.

Within the first six weeks, a "Stimulus" appropriations bill was passed that increased the budgets of all Federal Government entities by an average of nearly 80% followed by the "Omnibus" appropriations bill that increased the budgets of all Federal Government entities by an additional 8%.

Some agencies in six weeks, saw a 100% increase in the amount of tax money they could spend ... this at a time of under 4% inflation here at the beginning of Carter's Second Term.

Although the peacock logo for the NBC television network was meant to be multi-colored, for one week each year it definitely “goes green!” For the second year NBC Universal presented over 150 hours of environmentally themed content in a variety of platforms. NBC and NBC.com celebrated their talent in “The More You Know” PSA campaign. Using famous NBC regulars, they produced green-themed storylines in several of their daytime and primetime shows. Image Credit: cassiekleinsmith.files.wordpress.com

FEAR FACTOR ... Not Just Another Reality TV Show

FUTURE EARTH: Journey To The End Of The World ... with Lester Holt, on MSNBC

The title of this posting and the title of the NBC special program has to do with multinational corporation, General Electric, and it's attempts at using their extensive media arm NBC Universal and related properties (Bravo, CNBC, 13th Street, Sci-Fi Channel, Hallmark Channel, Universal Channel, DivaTV, KidsCo, MSNBC, mun2, NBC, NBC Universal Television Distribution, Universal Television Distribution, NBCU Cable Affiliate Support, NBCU Marketplace, Oxygen Pay Per View/VOD, Sci Fi, Telemundo, Universal Pictures, Universal Production Studios, Universal Studios Home Video, Universal Studios Theme Parks: Featured Attraction, Universal Studios Theme Parks: Hollywood, Universal Studios Theme Parks: Japan, Universal Studios Theme Parks: Mediterranea, Universal Studios Theme Parks: Orlando, Universal Studios Theme Parks: Tickets, Universal Television, USA Network, The Weather Channel) to manipulate, massage, and coerce public opinion to be acceptable to Government mandated Green policies that would take Billions of taxpayer dollars through Cap and Trade carbon emissions laws and transfer them to Green projects General Electric believes their company would be the beneficiary of.

For its part, NBC News correspondent, Lester Holt, disclosed in a two minute "ad" that aired during the Sunday Today program, NBC's version of what appeared to be Al Gore's speculation filled, junk science based, Oscar Awarded movie ... "An Inconvenient Truth", which claims that our planet is headed for disaster and that our oceans will rise up 20 plus feet in the very near (tens of years) future.

The real inconvenient truth is that our population is being subjected to coercion, and corruption by a multinational corporation that wants YOUR money to prop it up!

Case In Point: Ad from NBC's Sunday Today for NBC News program (2:25 min.)


This just does not seem right. Full disclosure should be expected from a large company like General Electric. What really makes this situation worse, is that the company has not run its business responsibly, which places it into a situation of desperation. To receive large amounts of Government money in the form of Green contracts looks to be the only strategy of revival for this once proud sponsor of Ronald Reagan when he hosted television programs in the early fifties (before he became a politician).

Case In Point: O'Reilly's Talking Points Memo



This excerpted and edited from NewsBusters -

O'Reilly Claims 'Corruption': GE Using CNBC, MSNBC to Promote Cap-and-Trade for Financial Gain
By Jeff Poor - April 23, 2009 - 21:11 ET

It has been something that there have been rumblings about, but no one has really put the x's and o's together entirely - that General Electric (NYSE:GE) is using its media arm, NBC Universal to promote President Barack Obama's so-called progressive agenda for its own financial gain.
----
O'Reilly outlined how Obama has gotten support from the NBC networks both pre-election and post-election.

"Will General Electric get paid for supporting President Obama - that is the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo," O'Reilly said. "As everybody knows, GE, which owns NBC has been very aggressive in helping Barack Obama - first supporting the president in the election and now attacking his critics."
----
Certain on-air CNBC personalities had been outspoken in criticizing Obama's economic policies. However, that has changed somewhat and according to O'Reilly, CNBC Chicago Mercantile Exchange reporter Rick Santelli - the inspiration for the recent Tax Day tea party protests - had said he had been sent to a "reeducation camp."

"There is also emerging evidence that GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt and NBC News chief Jeff Zucker told CNBC personnel to stop criticizing Obama's economic policies," O'Reilly said. "Now, that would be a major breach of journalistic ethics.
----
O'Reilly played a clip from MSNBC' "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" on April 16, when Janeane Garofalo, in a hateful tirade, called Tax Day tea party protest participants "nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks."
----
"That's no surprise, as also this week Forbes magazine labeled Immelt one of the worst-performing CEOs in the country."

O'Reilly also played the exchange between his producer Jesse Watters and Jeffrey Immelt at the April 22 shareholders' meeting, where he questioned the ethics of MSNBC. But, according to O'Reilly there is reason to believe the slant of MSNBC is allowed because GE stands to profit if Obama is successful in instituting his priorities, specifically cap-and-trade.

"Now, most CEOs would have stopped NBC's corruption a long time ago, but Immelt may be looking for a major payoff," O'Reilly said. "According to reporting by the Washington Examiner, GE is heavily lobbying the Obama administration for bailout money. The company is also pushing for the proposed cap-and-trade program. Apparently GE has set up a joint venture it hopes would manage billions of dollars in cap-and-trade transactions should that corporate carbon tax pass Congress."

NBC has been actively promoting green issues and this revelation by O'Reilly happens to fall during the NBC Universal networks "Green is Universal" week.

"Now think about this ladies and gentlemen - a failing corporation, General Electric might reap billions of dollars if the Feds OK the carbon deal," O'Reilly said. "By the way, GE is already getting taxpayer bailout money for its financial unit. So it's not a stretch to assume Immelt would want to help President Obama as much as possible."

According to O'Reilly, the level of corruption is so big, it stands to make Watergate look small.

"This is obviously a major story - when a powerful corporation, which controls a major part of the American media, may be using its power and the airwaves to influence politics, in order to make money from government contracts," O'Reilly said. "That kind of corruption would make Watergate look small. We hope it is not true."
Reference Here>>

We think Bill O'Reilly is on to something, this Non-Reality television program is just another naked shake-down perpetrated by a major media arm of a hurting and failing consumer products company that is suffering from mismanagement.

Do not submit to the FEAR FACTOR of these tactics ... they are intended to have you agree with the transfer of Billions of your dollars to this corporation's bottom line here in Carter' Second Term.

Obamaisms - All Traced To Reflections On Glass

Set to the tune "Video Killed The Radio Star", This Youtube presentation and the links provided in an accompanying posting, illustrate a trend that shows the building frustration toward a leader ... who can read, but does not listen.

To add insult to injury, yesterday, White house Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, without a Teleprompter ... "Fibbed" when he was pressed to classify the gesture the President of the United States made when he greeted the King of Saudi Arabia.

This excerpted and edited from the Huffington Post -

Obama "Bow" To Saudis: CNN Reporter Asks White House To Clarify
Huffington Post - April 9, 2009 at 11:25 PM

The White House briefing room grew a bit chilly on Thursday after CNN reporter Dan Lothian asked press secretary Robert Gibbs to explain the current cause célèbre of the conservative movement: whether President Obama bowed down to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

LOTHIAN: When the President met with King Abdullah, there was something that took place which I believe the White House explained was just the president being taller than the king. We took a look at the video, and it does appear that the president actually bowed to King Abdullah. Did he bow or didn't he?

GIBBS: No, I think he bent over with both, to shake -- with both hands to shake his hand, so I don't--

LOTHIAN: -- one hand --

GIBBS: Well I... [laughter]

LOTHIAN: Did he bow or didn't he?

GIBBS: No.
----
Please, get the man a Teleprompter so he doesn't have to lie to the American People, and look like a fool for doing so.

Brack Obama bows to Saudi King King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud (click image to launch video). Image Credit: The Sydney Morning Hearld via AP and AFP

This excerpted and edited from California Yankee -

Obama's addiction to TOTUS - a brief history

We first noted Obama's preference for using a teleprompter when Senator McCain invited Obama to a series of weekly town hall meetings. An invitation subsequently backed away from by Obama.

That Obama's teleprompter preference was a dependency was noted when candidate Obama tried to explain his failure to vet the vetters.

The mainstream old media picked up on Obama's teleprompter dependency a few weeks later, when Jake Tapper and Diane Sawyer discussed how Obama is lost without a teleprompter on ABC's "Good Morning America." Unfortunately, the video has now been scrubbed from YouTube.

TOTUS hit the big time a month ago, when recognition was demanded.

President Obama recently took his propaganda war to NBC's "The Tonight Show," without TOTUS. Obama not only defended the A.I.G. bailout, but Obama also thoughtlessly disparaged disabled folks when he compared his recent 129 score in a game in the White House bowling alley to the "Special Olympics or something."

While out West and again without TOTUS to control what he said, Obama compared A.I.G. to suicide bombers at a Costa Mesa Town Hall meeting.

After weeks of criticism for being so dependent upon TOTUS, Obama threw TOTUS under the bus and used massive TV monitors to read his opening statement at his second presidential news conference.

Most recently, the foreign press finally picked up on Obama's addiction.

As we have said before, President Obama is not such a great orator, but he is a very good reader. Is there a program to deal with teleprompter addiction?
Reference Here>>

Why is the MSM and the public worried about "Bows" or weither Barack Obama is just a good reader as opposed to a good speaker - We should be worried about the reasons WHY is our President is giving One-Billion Dollars of taxpayer money to Hamas and the Palistinian Authority!

Is this what the American people voted for?

This action will result in more than just having a problem with "Reflections On Glass"!

The Personal Urban Mobility and Accessibility, or PUMA, project also would involve a vast communications network that would allow vehicles to interact with each other, regulate the flow of traffic and prevent crashes from happening.The 300-pound prototype runs on a lithium-ion battery and uses Segway's characteristic two-wheel balancing technology, along with dual electric motors. It's designed to reach speeds of up to 35 miles-per-hour and can run 35 miles on a single charge. Image Credit: General Motors Corp. and Segway Inc. via Huffington Post

Obama's GM & Segway To Produce The "Barack-O-Chair"

General Motors (struggling, Obama Administration managed automaker) is teaming up with Segway (geek-mover sold primarily to local Governments) to produce a new two-wheeled vehicle for the urban landscape called the PUMA.

It looks like someone took a SMART car and squeezed it. It's far more car-like (and faster) than the Segway, and hopefully, for both GM and Segway, prove more mass-market-friendly: the Segway is banned on many city streets because it's too big to be considered a bike, and too slow and exposed to be considered a car. It is this reason that it has only been acceptable to local Governments for patrol and traffic control (also featured in Paul Blartt Mall Cop, Safety Never Takes A Vacation).


This excerpted and edited from The Wall Street Journal -

GM, Segway to Make Vehicle
By SHARON TERLEP, The Wall Street Journal - APRIL 7, 2009

General Motors Corp. is teaming with Segway Inc., maker of the upright, self-balancing scooters, to build a new type of two-wheeled vehicle designed to move easily through congested urban streets.

The Personal Urban Mobility and Accessibility - PUMA - Image Credit: General Motors Corp. and Segway Inc. via Huffington Post
----
GM has slashed product-development programs, advertising and spending on auto-show events. But it will take to the streets of Manhattan on Tuesday to show off a prototype of the vehicle, called PUMA, for Personal Urban Mobility and Accessibility.
----
The machine, which GM says it aims to develop by 2012, would run on batteries and use wireless technology to avoid traffic backups and navigate cities.
----
GM is betting PUMA's more car-like traits -- an enclosed compartment and top speed of 35 miles per hour -- will lead to better results.

GM didn't say how much the machines would cost, but research chief Larry Burns said owners would spend one-third to one-fourth of the cost of a traditional vehicle.
Reference Here>>

The Personal Urban Mobility and Accessibility - PUMA - Image Credit: General Motors Corp. and Segway Inc. via Huffington Post

This is more of what we can expect from an automobile company owned and operated by the Federal Government and Unions - Clown Cars, and Scooters!

OK,OK! So they're hi-tech. Questions: How practical is this Obama Wheel-Chair (Barack-O-Chair)? Where does one place an airbag?

Where is the updated and Green refined version of the 1957 Chevy with a 0-100 in under 9 seconds acceleration that runs on Hydrogen or Electricity and costs under $20,000?!

When they arrived in Strasbourg, the president and first lady Michelle Obama were welcomed by Sarkozy and his wife, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy. Image Credit: Jason Reed of Reuters

Obama Uses Guilt And Poor Reading In France

Barack Obama refers to the Marshall Plan and slams the idea of the pursuit of national sovereignty through the detention of some really bad actors in Cuba in order to gain sympathy for a shared response to the al-Qaeda threat that continues to grow in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In a teleprompter speech delivered in Strasbourg, France that was followed by a “Town Hall” style question and answer period, the 44th President stated, as he did at his speech to open the G20 Conference of nations, the he was not there to lecture … but to listen. The problem with this phrase in the speech is that he went on to lecture the audience on the responsibility to participate in military actions (NATO) and the surrender of leadership of the United States in the areas of free trade. He lectured against the use of trade barriers going forward on the relationships between Europe and the United States, this at a time his Government is looking to pay for the extraordinary expansion of Government Spending and corporate takeovers in key financial and manufacturing industries.

The beauty of a teleprompter speech is that all words will be in front of the reader in the order that the that they are supposed to be delivered … the problem of a teleprompter speech is that there is ample opportunity to have the words scroll slower (or faster) than the reader can speak. In the case of the Strasbourg speech, Barack’s flubs added to the disingenuous nature of his remarks.

In a “you can’t make this up” moment, the first person to ask a question in this hall setting in Strasbourg, France was an American – that’s right, in a hall full of Europeans the first person to a microphone that was being carried by one of the hall’s AV staff was (I am going to call it as I see it) a plant! USA TODAY's Rich Wolf reports from the scene that there are some empty seats in the upper reaches of the arena. He estimates the building is about 80% full. Maybe this is the reason that the first questioner was an American.

"In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world," Obama said, boldly taking aim at the country that just elected him last November. "There have been times where America's showed arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive." Image Credit: AP

This example of American leadership excerpted and edited from Bloomberg –

Obama Says U.S., Europe Both Must Change to Bolster Alliance
By Edwin Chen and Hans Nichols, Bloomberg

President Barack Obama said the NATO alliance has been damaged by both past U.S. arrogance and “casual but insidious” anti-Americanism in Europe.

“America is changing, but it cannot be America alone that changes,” Obama told a crowd of about 3,500 students and local residents at the Rhenus Sports Arena in Strasbourg, France, his second stop on an eight-day European trip.

“I’ve come to Europe this week to renew our partnership, one in which America listens and learns from our friends and allies, but where friends and allies bear their share of the burden,” Obama said.
----
“We are confronting the greatest economic crisis since World War II,” Obama said. “The only way to confront this unprecedented crisis is through unprecedented coordination.”

Obama said that in a speech he’s planning to give in Prague near the end of his trip he will outline his goal of a “world without nuclear weapons.”

The spread of nuclear weapons or the theft of such material “could lead to the extermination of any city on the planet,” he said.
Reference Here>>

"In recent years, we've allowed our alliance to drift," Obama said in a campaign-style town hall meeting on the France-Germany border city of Strasbourg, ahead of the 60th anniversary NATO summit. Image Credit: Google Maps

This example of American leadership excerpted and edited from Cover It Live, USAToday -

As it happened: Obama town hall in Strasbourg, France
USAToday - Obama town hall in Strasbourg - Cover It Live – 7:25 PM France, 4-3-2009

The president begins his remarks with comments on threats around the world.
----
"This weekend in Prague I will lay out an agenda that seeks a world without nuclear weapons."
----
"There have been times when America has shown arrogance ... and been dismissive," toward Europe, Obama says.

But in Europe, he adds, "there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual and divisive."

"On both sides of the Atlantic these attitudes have become all too common," the president continues. "They are not wise and do not represent the truth."

"America is changing, but it cannot be America alone that changes."
----
"history shows us that we can do improbable, sometimes impossible things."

"Now, we must not give up on one another. We must renew this relationship for a new generation. ... Together I'm confident that we can achieve the promise of a new day."

He's now going to take questions from the audience.

"My French and German are terrible," he admits, but there are translators in the audience.

The first person Obama calls on is from the U.S.

"I did not call on the American on purpose," he jokes.

The woman asks about what he expects his legacy as president will be.

After only two months in office, Obama says, “That's a daunting question.

My first task," he says, is to get the economy moving.”
----
“The richest nations must have a strategy that recognizes it is not just charity to assist the developing world in feeding children and combating poverty,” Obama says.

"If young men are standing idle ... and feel completely detached and removed from the modern world, they are more likely" to resort to terrorism, he adds.
Reference Here>>

President Barack Obama's biggest applause lines came from his affirmation of closing the Guantanamo detention center in Cuba, but one wonders how many of these Europeans would applaud if these detainees moved in next door to them?!

American leadership has been replaced with American celebrity here in Carter's Second Term.

President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pictured with radical socialist revolutionary Che' Guevara as a backdrop. Image credit: Fr Loren Gonzales via overheardinthesacristy

Hillary Clinton's North Korea Foreign Policy Via "Shout-Out"

Last night, Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton made a plea during an interview she was having with Greta Van Sustern during Greta's program on FOXNews, On The Record.

What is striking about the interview and the plea, is that part of it took the form of a broadcast "Shout-Out" to North Korea and that nation's rumored attempt to launch a test of another intercontinental missile.

What we were treated to was an example of a foreign policy carried out in the most unorganized, sophomoric, ineffective, and unprofessional level ... a "Shout-Out"

This method of communication of our foreign policy to another nation reflects the level of disarray the 44th Presidency is in, some 67 days into the four year run.

President Barack Obama, while he campaigned for the job, at least stated a desire to sit down and talk without "per-condition" ... Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apparently really doesn't even need, or care to have, someone in the room!

This excerpted and edited from FOXNews -

Secretary of State Clinton Confronts the Problems with Mexico and North Korea
On the Record w/ Greta - FOX News - Friday, March 27, 2009

VAN SUSTEREN: Back home, headlines now about North Korea, and so I'm going to try to pry some answers out of you on North Korea. What are we going to do about North Korea?

CLINTON: Well, you and I were just talking before the cameras started rolling because you're one of the few people I know who's actually been there and who understand that it is a -- you know, it's a different environment.

You've got to figure out how to convince them to act in what we consider to be, you know, the interests of the people of North Korea but also the interests of the rest of the world.

I have been very clear, President Obama has been very clear, we would like to get back to the kind of talks that led to the initial steps in their de-nuclearization. The six-party framework that involves all of the neighbors, each of whom have a stake in what happens in North Korea -- we have offered that. I sent word that we would like to have our special envoy for North Korean policy go to Pyongyang. They didn't want him to come.

So we're working hard. And if they're watching you, I'm sure that since you were there, you made a big impression, went to a karaoke bar in Pyongyang.

(LAUGHTER)

CLINTON: They probably still remember you. If they're watching -- if anybody from North Korea is watching this program with you, Greta...

VAN SUSTEREN: I do a mean Elvis karaoke.

CLINTON: I bet. You know, we'd love for them to begin to talk about what we can do together to fulfill the framework of the six-party talks.

VAN SUSTEREN: But we've drawn a line in the sand, saying, If you launch that missile, there will be consequences. But I'm not sure what consequences because they don't have anything at this point. It's not like we can cut anything off. They're already hermetically sealed from the world. I mean, what kind of consequences short of military consequences, I guess?

CLINTON: No, I don't -- I don't -- I mean, we're certainly not talking about that. What we are saying is that we believe that a launch would violate the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718. That would, you know, in our view, trigger certain actions by the United Nations.

They have sought help for fuel and food. It would be difficult to provide those necessities. So you know, we don't want to get there. I mean, the problem with their missile launch is that these provisions of 1718 don't distinguish between a missile with a satellite and a missile with a warhead. We think it covers any kind of missile launch.

And we would hope that the North Koreans would take a deep breath here, and you know, begin to reconnect and start working with us.
Reference Here>>

Video on North Korea "Shout-Out">>

In back-to-back press conferences (held Nov. 24, 2008) by Bush (first) and Obama (second), the men either stated or implied that they were sort of working together to muscle the nation through this tough economic period. Bush said, “I talked to Obama about the decision we made. I told the American people, and I told the president-elect when I first met him, that anytime we were to make a big decision during this transition, he will be informed, as will his team.” The plans discussed are still in play to this day during the Obama Administration. Image Credit: St. Louis Post-Dispatch (2008)

Ebony & Ivory - Obama Deficits & Bush Deficits Together

These figures do not live together in perfect harmony here in Carter's Second Term.

Question:

Did you know that the Barack Obama Administration inherited deficits from the previous Bush Administration? Really?!

How can the Obama Administration continue to float the tired old saw that they just happen to inherit large deficits so it will take more just to dig ourselves out?

After sixty short days, the Congress that the Obama Administration actually DID INHERIT, and Barack Obama himself, increased the commitments to spend taxpayer money on social programs alone from the 3% of GDP to 20% of GDP ... or an increase in social spending programs of an eerie 6.66 times greater level.

It is called Deficit Spending (socialism) - and now foreign countries (China and Russia) are suggesting that the world economy adopt a new currency on which to peg/judge the value of other currencies other than the United States dollar - the formally most stable currency in the world.

Graphic showing the Bush Administration and the committed and projected Obama Administration deficits side-by-side. Graphic Credit: The Washington Post via the Heritage Foundation (2009)

This excerpted and edited from the Heritage Foundation -

Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures
The Heritage Foundation - Posted March 24th, 2009 at 10.20am

President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious. The Washington Post has a great graphic which helps put President Obama’s budget deficits in context of President Bush’s.

What’s driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending. Riedl details:

* President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.

* President Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.

* President Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new government health care fund.

* President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. President Obama would double it.
----
* President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.

* President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
Reference Here>>

What the American people inherited with the Clinton and Bush Administrations (and thrust forward with the Obama Administration) were the building blocks of economic slavery and communism.

First, the Government took the position that every person that lived in America (citizen or non-citizen) deserved to be able to participate in home ownership. The Clinton Administration formed the quasi Governmental financial institutions backed by taxpayer money of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to insure low interest loans with reduced qualification requirements. Bonus programs were implemented and paid to the political (Democrat) management of these organizations.

Banks did not want to lend money with this level of low proof, so the management of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had community development organizations (ACORN) prod them to loan money through lawsuits. In order to fuel demand for these weak mortgages (purchase commitments without the ability or intention to pay), the Government regulating agencies allowed them to be bundled and packaged as grouped financial instruments and sold to the highest bidder through insurance companies and financial institutions (AIG, WAMU, Wachovia, banks in France, Finland, Germany, and etc.).

What triggered this collapse is the increased payment demanded the mortgage companies when the initial period of artificially low inducement interest ran out and the actual value of the house became greater than the mortgage value of the home. People who originally had no real means to afford the home they committed to purchase in the first place, simply walked away with no real damage to their lives leaving all of the intuitions holding the mortgages without an income stream. The asset value of the bundled "Junk Mortgages" dropped and the economic crisis begins.

The sick logic in all of this is that the two-party Bush Government got our economy into this position and now the one-party Obama Government (of Obama/Pelosi/Reid) is smart enough to get us out … with heavier intervention and greater spending commitments - all on the American Taxpayer.

Does anyone in Government realize that this deficit spending of our collective money will all implode eventually?

This strategy will turn our currency into the value of the bundled "Junk Mortgages" that helped to put us into this place to start with - all on the back of the Government move toward social engineering!

Leaders of the White House economic team and the Senate's top Republican bellowed about bonuses at a bailed-out insurance giant and pledged to prevent such payments in the future.From one Sunday talk show to the next, they tore into the contracts that American International Group asserted had to be honored, to the tune of about $165 million and payable to executives by Sunday, even as the company has benefited from more than $170 billion in a federal rescue. Image Credit: KOMO News

Circular Logic Defines Obama’s Turn At President

Here we are only about 57 days into the 44th Presidency of the United States and what we find doesn’t match up with what was promised.

Barack Obama ran on an overriding theme of ushering a new era of responsibility, yet all this administration can do is put forward and hire people, Timothy Geithner, to oversee our economy and its pursuit of increased taxes, that cheat on their responsibility to actually pay taxes.

Case in point:

The Obama administration blames this economy and the Government solutions put in place to correct its downturn on the previous executive administration of George W. Bush, yet this administration fights to keep most of the same people, policies, and level of oversight in place from the previous administration.

This administration decided to give a third round of additional TARP fund billions of dollars to its largest troubled financial institution, AIG, without pre-condition (again) while upping the Government’s ownership (80%) in the company … then becomes outraged (only after the disclosure of the bonus plan) when the company honors its employment contracts with many of its top executives by issuing $165 million dollars in bonuses – averaging $500,000 to each.

Obama economic chief Larry Summers: AIG bonuses 'outrageous' but government can't stop them. Image Credit: Associated Press via KDRV-TV

This excerpted and edited from NationlJournal.com –

Hotline After Dark -- Resident Evil?
March 17, 2009 8:50 AM

"World News" led with AIG bonuses. "Evening News" led with AIG bonuses and featured a taped interview with special inspector gen. for Iraq Stuart Bowen Jr. "Nightly News" led with AIG bonuses.

Last night's TV coverage was dominated by Pres. Obama's announcement that he asked Treas. Sec. Tim Geithner to use all legal tools to block the AIG exec bonuses. Among the reaction:
----
Weekly Standard's Ham: "There's nothing that brings people in Washington together from both sides of the aisle faster than the need to get on the right side of a populist backlash" ("O'Reilly Factor," FNC, 3/16).

Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ): "None of this should have surprised any of us. ... And it was actually out there also for Secretary Geithner to understand coming into this, as well. ... So it's only now that it's making headlines that the president is coming back and basically second-guessing his own treasury secretary on this. Why Secretary Geithner didn't raise this when he first understood it is beyond me" ("NewsHour," PBS, 3/16).

Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ), asked if he's satisfied with the responses from the WH: "I'm not satisfied. ... They have to renegotiate their contracts. There is no reason why when the federal government is poised to do another $30 billion that, in fact, we can't insist that those contracts get renegotiated, and renegotiated in such a way in which those bonuses simply don't take place." ("1600," MSNBC, 3/16).
----
FNC's Hume: "... it is a big problem for the president. He has already added substantially to the bailout money previously provided to AIG and to others and will almost certainly need to add more, much more to address the continuing credit crisis. ("Special Report," 3/16).
----
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA): "The boneheads are the people in the previous administration and this administration who gave out over $170 billion of our money and did not, in fact, do what anyone else giving money does, which is ensure that the money is not a conduit for simply paying out bonuses" ("Hardball," MSNBC, 3/16).

Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer: "This is not so much an economic issue as a psychological and a political issue. Economically, if you add up all the bonuses, it's less than 1/10 of one percent of the bailout to AIG alone, so it's lunch money. Psychologically, it's important because there's outrage in the country, and ... unless there's an appeasement in the anger in the population who are going to have to support the next bailout, which is going to be a trillion dollars, the money won't be made available, Congress will deny it. So that's why you get the president heaping opprobrium on these miscreants who made the bad deals and now are getting the bonuses."

More Krauthammer: "I'm all in favor of keeping this heaping opprobrium. I would deny them the bonuses if possible. I would be for an exemplary hanging or two. Have it in Times Square, invite Madame Defarge. You borrow a guillotine from the French and we could have a party. If that's what it takes to maintain popular support, let's do it. But it's not going to change anything economically" ("Special Report," FNC, 3/16).

CNN's Dobbs: "I'm calling for Liddy to be fired. I'm calling for the Board of AIG to be fired here tonight, and looking forward ... we can't afford in this country any longer to tolerate corporate leaders who don't understand the basic values of this country ... ("Lou Dobbs Tonight," 3/16).
Reference Here>>

Why is anyone surprised? Barack Obama never was an executive in charge of anything throughout his entire career.

He became educated, earned a law degree, edited a law review publication, worked as a foot soldier for ACORN (an organization that is funded, in part, by the federal government to support socialism projects to people who look for handouts as opposed to a hand up on which one can become self-sustaining), became friends with a group of radical educators and priests, taught constitutional law at a college, ran and secured a state senate office in Illinois, then waged an uncontested campaign to become a Senator from the state of Illinois to the federal government, where he served 144 days before he declared and ran for President of the country full time until he became elected.

And now, as President, with the help of a Democrat political party lead congress and three Republican political party Senators, he has been successful at committing each and every household to an additional $18,500+ in spending debt. He has defined his presidency by throwing taxpayer money at continuing, and historically, self-correcting economic problems while re-labeling our effort to stop islamofascism created violence that continues to kill thousands of innocent citizens … from an act of ongoing war to a police action.

The economy has lost over 40% of its value since he was voted into office (over 15% in these last two months), South Korea and Iran threaten to launch rockets and make nuclear bombs, Russia is moving to control the flow of oil out of their region of the world while President Barack Obama reverses the opening up of off-shore drilling activity in our own country, Riots are breaking out in Pakistan, and Barack Obama pledges $900,000,000 (nine-hundred million dollars) of United States taxpayer money to rebuild infrastructure in Hamas (a recognized islamofascism ideology based terrorist organization) controlled Gaza.

All of this chaos and we have only witnessed this President’s first two months in the office of executive leadership.

Circular logic … dizzying, isn’t it?