Ok, I might be a presumptious prick by saying that in the title (but hey I've been called worse, MUCH worse) but doing my tri-daily (yes that means AT LEAST 3 times a day) check of Drudgereport I see something that caught my eye in the upper left corner of the page. It read 'Workers say Obama treated autos worse than Wall St... '
To say I was interested is a fucking understatement. This guy was thrust into office in a populus outrage of Bush&Co. (still can't believe he got re-elected in 2004, John Kerry was possibly the worst choice for the dems since McGovern) and the fact that seriously a majority of people thought that Republicans still controlled Congress, how they thought this is beyond me. But hey American Idol gets 25+ million viewers a week so I am clearly out of touch with "mainstream America" or at least what they want us to think is mainstream America. The true patriots will show their faces on April 15th at all the tea parties, but a few excerpts from the article first...
"It's the age-old Wall Street vs. Main Street smackdown again," said Brian Fredline, president of UAW Local 602 at a plant near Lansing. "You have all kinds of funding available to banks that are apparently too big to fail, but they're also too big to be responsible."
"But when it comes to auto manufacturing and middle-class jobs and people that don't matter on Wall Street, there are certainly different standards that we have to meet -- higher standards -- than the financials. That is a double standard that exists and it's unfair," Fredline said.
Hey Barak how do you like that class warfare strategy blowing up in your face? Keep in mind these were the same people who he whipped into a populus uproar a few weeks ago, now they view him as having turned on them. How can he win them back? I'll be blunt I don't think he can, this guy just fucked any oppertunity of having a second term. Shit he needs to get his agenda done in the next 18 months because that's all the time he'll have majorities in both houses of Congress. The thing about an angry mob is they tend to lack common sense and can end up turning on their own, see: current situation. This will not be reported in the MSM of course, they are still way too invested in Obama to admit they were hoodwinked by him. The first sign of the tide turning will be the election in NY20 tomorrow. My prediction is Tedisco 55-45%. At the end of the article they do say some stuff I disagree with:
Despite Granholm's criticism and what many workers saw as the president's unduly harsh treatment, Obama's actions might not have a lasting effect on voters.
"It will be accepted, grudgingly perhaps, but accepted by anybody and everybody with a brain in their heads," said Bill Ballenger, editor of a Michigan political newsletter and a former Republican state lawmaker.
Sorry Yahoo reporter, the people of Michigan will not forget this. Expect a red Michigan in 2012, and a lot of other red states too, I'm not saying it will be like Reagan's 1980 or 1984 election but might be like Bush Sr. in 1988 or Nixon in 1968. O you are a tool and I can't wait until your sorry ass is back in chicago as a 'community organizer'
Monday, March 30, 2009
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Congresswoman Bachmann lays a beatdown to Timmy and Benny...
Ok, I am not always a big fan of Bachmann but... she takes these two to task here. Funny thing is that this got little press. And you gotta love Bawney Fwank bailing out Bernanke of answering a really important question at the end there. I would have liked to have heard his answer.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Failblog and FML Friday Vol. 1...
Ok this is an idea I have been floating around for a couple weeks and I've decided to act on it, albeit in the last half hour of the day but I didn't want to wait another week to debut it. The origins of the idea are a combination of influences, most notably from my buds at Anti-Strib and their HCF (Hot Chick Friday) and the KAR uses and refrences to failblog. I knew about failblog before I started reading KAR but still I liked the idea of using it. The other site I found from a friend at college known as fmylife.com or simply FML. It's like shit you cannot (or can I guess) makeup. It's really embaressing or infuriating moments in peoples lives and its their place to vent. It's usually short and to the point. Some are light-hearted, some are dark, some are downright mean, and I'm pretty sure there's a few I've read that if true people could be in prison over or have gotten arrested at least. So without further adieu, Failblog and FML Friday...
This one you really can't make up, and validates my opinion of the UN
This one shows technological (or light) usage, top is North Korea, bottom is South Korea.
Tell me again how communists represent the people?
Ok enough of Failblog, it will be back next week. Now onto F my life...
Today, I was packing my son's lunch and we ran out of water bottles. I asked my 16 years old to run to the store. She didnt want to but gave me one she had. After dropping my son off, my daughter frantically told me she made a mistake. I sent my second grader to school with a bottle of vodka. FML
Today, I received a GPS for my birthday. I decided to test it out by getting utterly lost as far into the country as I could on a little under half a tank of gas. I installed the GPS once out in the middle of nowhere in preparation for heading home. It needed batteries. FML
Today, my parents were helping me construct my bed. We ended up not having enough screws to properly secure the frame. My dad mentioned that it might cause problems if I got a girl into my bed. My mom said, "Don't worry about it, we all know that's not going to happen." FML
Today, I had my girlfriend over and we we're watching a movie in my basement. I run upstairs and pop a bag of popcorn. Later I come downstairs to find my 10 year old brother sitting next to my girlfriend saying," My brother always says he wants to screw your brains out, whatever that means". FML
Today, I found out that driving five miles an hour under the posted speed limit is "suspicious" and cause for a field sobriety test, breathalyzer, having your car searched and being handcuffed on the side of the road. FML
Well that wraps up volume 1 of Failbog/FML friday, check back next friday for volume 2!
This one you really can't make up, and validates my opinion of the UN
This one shows technological (or light) usage, top is North Korea, bottom is South Korea.
Tell me again how communists represent the people?
Ok enough of Failblog, it will be back next week. Now onto F my life...
Today, I was packing my son's lunch and we ran out of water bottles. I asked my 16 years old to run to the store. She didnt want to but gave me one she had. After dropping my son off, my daughter frantically told me she made a mistake. I sent my second grader to school with a bottle of vodka. FML
Today, I received a GPS for my birthday. I decided to test it out by getting utterly lost as far into the country as I could on a little under half a tank of gas. I installed the GPS once out in the middle of nowhere in preparation for heading home. It needed batteries. FML
Today, my parents were helping me construct my bed. We ended up not having enough screws to properly secure the frame. My dad mentioned that it might cause problems if I got a girl into my bed. My mom said, "Don't worry about it, we all know that's not going to happen." FML
Today, I had my girlfriend over and we we're watching a movie in my basement. I run upstairs and pop a bag of popcorn. Later I come downstairs to find my 10 year old brother sitting next to my girlfriend saying," My brother always says he wants to screw your brains out, whatever that means". FML
Today, I found out that driving five miles an hour under the posted speed limit is "suspicious" and cause for a field sobriety test, breathalyzer, having your car searched and being handcuffed on the side of the road. FML
Well that wraps up volume 1 of Failbog/FML friday, check back next friday for volume 2!
The Dream and the 44th, a black guy lays in to Obama
This video gives me hope for our future, pretty cool guy and video. I know that the clip is 9+ minutes long but it is worth the watch.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
welcome to the USSA
Ok some class envy I can understand, sort of. But being a free-market capitalist with libertarian tendencies I am not part of that crowd, never have been and never will be. I was part of the maybe 2-5% percent in this country that wasn't outraged at AIG bonuses, guess what peoples? It's in their FUCKING CONTRACTS. Contract law is so vital to business dealings in this country there is an entire court system (practically) set up to deal with this stuff. People go to law school for 3+ years studying this shit. I think that all the idiots in Congress (some 390+ of them) D and R should be impeached and thrown out of office for passing that 90% tax bill that Obama will thankfully not sign. Of course, if Obama didn't incite populus outrage in the beginning of the week that bill probably would have never even been proposed.
Anyway back to AIG. People are literally threatening these people AND THEIR CHILDREN. Now I am pretty loose when it comes to the first amendment but me, and my buddies over at anti-strib have drawn the line when it comes to peoples children. We had to institute said rule during the 2008 election season after Palin was picked as VP. The attacks on her family were disgusting, over the line, and simply off limits on that site. Now everyone, shall we look at the threats these dipshits put forth to AIG shall we? (btw these are QUOTES from the article, editing NOT done by me)
-- All you motherf***ers should be shot. Thanks for f***ing up our economy then taking our money.
You are a creep.
-- Dear Sir: Ya'll should have the balls and come clean and give back the bonuses. I know you would never do this so the gov't ought to take you out back and shoot everyone of you crooked sonofb****es...I would be very careful when I went out side. This is just a warning. If I were ya'll I would be real afraid. Thanks, Bill.
Bill is an idiot and a creepy one at that. so the gov't ought to take you out back and shoot everyone of you crooked sonofb****es...
Um... isn't that what people in the 1917 Russian revolution did? Class envy is too kind, this guy needs to have a nice dose of valium every 8 hours so he isn't a threat to society.
-- I don't hope that bad things happen to the recipients of those bonuses. I really hope that bad things happen to the children and grandchildren of them! Whatever hurts them the most!!
Fuck you you intolerant, fascist prick. Wishing harm on people is bad enough but their children and grandchildren? Rot in hell
-- You f***ing suck. Paying bonuses to the d*****s that made bad bets losing your company billions of dollars. I want to f***ing puke. Publish the list of those yankee scumbags so some good old southern boys can take care of them.
First off the good old southern boys would probably be more sympathetic to them than you might think second what finishing school did you go to? And do you kiss your mom with that mouth?
-- If the bonuses don't stop, it will be very likely that every CEO @ AIG has a bulls-eye on their backs.
how nice of you, please paint one on yourself too.
-- We will hunt you down. Every last penny. We will hunt your children and we will hunt your conscience. We will do whatever we can to get those people getting the bonuses. Give back the money or kill yourselves.
If this guy isn't in prison yet the FBI isn't doing their job. I hope he gets 15-20 years for this threat, at least.
-- All the executives and their families should be executed with piano wire around their necks --- my greatest hope.
I bet you like to kill puppies and kittens too
-- You mother-f***ing, c***s***ing, d***l****ers need to be taken out one by one and shot in the head. There's a special place in hell for you pond scum. Watch your backs because someone will come to get you, you can be sure.
Wow, how calmly and well thought out was that statement boys and girls?
-- The Revolution is coming. The family members of your executives are not safe. Your blood will run through the streets in the coming months.
I'd gladly defend those executives from people like you, free of charge. No one in this country should have to fear for their life because of a company they work for
I could go on to the comment section but that deserves a whole post itself
Anyway back to AIG. People are literally threatening these people AND THEIR CHILDREN. Now I am pretty loose when it comes to the first amendment but me, and my buddies over at anti-strib have drawn the line when it comes to peoples children. We had to institute said rule during the 2008 election season after Palin was picked as VP. The attacks on her family were disgusting, over the line, and simply off limits on that site. Now everyone, shall we look at the threats these dipshits put forth to AIG shall we? (btw these are QUOTES from the article, editing NOT done by me)
-- All you motherf***ers should be shot. Thanks for f***ing up our economy then taking our money.
You are a creep.
-- Dear Sir: Ya'll should have the balls and come clean and give back the bonuses. I know you would never do this so the gov't ought to take you out back and shoot everyone of you crooked sonofb****es...I would be very careful when I went out side. This is just a warning. If I were ya'll I would be real afraid. Thanks, Bill.
Bill is an idiot and a creepy one at that. so the gov't ought to take you out back and shoot everyone of you crooked sonofb****es...
Um... isn't that what people in the 1917 Russian revolution did? Class envy is too kind, this guy needs to have a nice dose of valium every 8 hours so he isn't a threat to society.
-- I don't hope that bad things happen to the recipients of those bonuses. I really hope that bad things happen to the children and grandchildren of them! Whatever hurts them the most!!
Fuck you you intolerant, fascist prick. Wishing harm on people is bad enough but their children and grandchildren? Rot in hell
-- You f***ing suck. Paying bonuses to the d*****s that made bad bets losing your company billions of dollars. I want to f***ing puke. Publish the list of those yankee scumbags so some good old southern boys can take care of them.
First off the good old southern boys would probably be more sympathetic to them than you might think second what finishing school did you go to? And do you kiss your mom with that mouth?
-- If the bonuses don't stop, it will be very likely that every CEO @ AIG has a bulls-eye on their backs.
how nice of you, please paint one on yourself too.
-- We will hunt you down. Every last penny. We will hunt your children and we will hunt your conscience. We will do whatever we can to get those people getting the bonuses. Give back the money or kill yourselves.
If this guy isn't in prison yet the FBI isn't doing their job. I hope he gets 15-20 years for this threat, at least.
-- All the executives and their families should be executed with piano wire around their necks --- my greatest hope.
I bet you like to kill puppies and kittens too
-- You mother-f***ing, c***s***ing, d***l****ers need to be taken out one by one and shot in the head. There's a special place in hell for you pond scum. Watch your backs because someone will come to get you, you can be sure.
Wow, how calmly and well thought out was that statement boys and girls?
-- The Revolution is coming. The family members of your executives are not safe. Your blood will run through the streets in the coming months.
I'd gladly defend those executives from people like you, free of charge. No one in this country should have to fear for their life because of a company they work for
I could go on to the comment section but that deserves a whole post itself
Friday, March 20, 2009
CNN gets pwned by... CNN Headline News?!?
yep you read that headline right folks, CNN, the once preeminent name in cable news (back before Fox News was even a brainstorm in Murdoch's mind), has fallen to 4th in the cable ratings. Now if you follow conservative radio or talk in general they like to make fun of the fact that MSNBC has low ratings, here's something for CNN execs to lose sleep over, (link to article below)...
Through March 17, CNN trailed not only Fox News and MSNBC but also its own sister network, Headline News, on nine out of 17 days. On one day, March 13, CNN even drew fewer 25-to-54 viewers than CNBC -- the first time that's happened since November 2007. And of the eight days it finished higher than fourth in the demo, five were either Saturdays or Sundays, typically the lowest rated nights for the news networks
Ouchies... read the full article here
Through March 17, CNN trailed not only Fox News and MSNBC but also its own sister network, Headline News, on nine out of 17 days. On one day, March 13, CNN even drew fewer 25-to-54 viewers than CNBC -- the first time that's happened since November 2007. And of the eight days it finished higher than fourth in the demo, five were either Saturdays or Sundays, typically the lowest rated nights for the news networks
Ouchies... read the full article here
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
shit you cannot make up
Barak Obama has been accused many a time recently of relying way too much on his electronic friend. No not that electronic friend idiot (although with michelle as a wife who knows) I'm talking about the Teleprompter. Sky news has a great article about it here but don't look for too many US outlets to carry any negative news about the Messiah. I'd give him some slack but I mean come on, isn't he supposed to be bright and articulate? Would Bush not be raked across the coals if he did something similar to this? And in just a minute I will show you a great example of how this isn't the first time something like this has happened.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen Official HD Movie Trailer...
drooling... this is going to fucking ROCK! It's going to shatter box office records.
Rememeber Sarah Jane Olsen people?
Ok, long story short this all started about a couple of days ago when I read about how she was going to be released from prison and serve her parole back at home in St.Paul where she lived for 24 years, as a fugitive. She was originally Kathleen Ann Soliah, member of the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA) a radical domestic terrorist group that bombed police cars and killed people for the hell of it back in the 1970's. It also has some connections to The Weather Underground (cough, cough BILL AYERS) and if that's not the kicker here is, SHE HAS NEVER ONCE APOLOGIZED FOR HER ACTIONS, ZERO REMORSE PEOPLE! She has been linked to a few murders and is not fit, in my opinion, to ever function in society again. Why she didn't get a life sentence is beyond me. Also, Greg Lang (who does a miraculous job at maintaining a website dedicated to all things about this evil, disgusting, cunt) has this to say about her...
More thoughts on this. If mainstream media people read this and want a story angle here should be one. If Soliah would have caught that airplane flight and arrived here in Minnesota she could, according to my understanding of the law petitioned for extradition. If she was under custody of Ramsey County, either under parole supervision or incarceration she would technically not be violating the law if she petitioned against extradition. I suspect that our Governor Palenty would deny extradition but that would put him in the “cat seat”. Tim Palenty is on the very short list of vice presidential candidates to run with presumptive Republican Presidential nominee John McCain. To add to that William (Bill) Ayers, who Barak Obama met with is on the “short list” of Soliah/Olson “supporters. I'm too tired to look up now but go to http://archive.org and look up www.saraolsondefense.org Go back on older soliah.com pages and there is a link of a woman now in Israel claiming a gang rape by Bill Ayers. This is one on the “advisors” Barak Obama met with. Ayers is married(?) to fellow Weather underground terrorist/fugitive Bernadine Dohne who glorified the murder of the pregnant Sharon Tate by the Charles Manson family and later sent out a communique commending the Symbionese Liberation Army on the assassination of Marcus Foster. Another resource might be my Representative Keith Ellison (dated) page. Bernadine Dorn appeared at the Soliah/Olson February 2000 “ungagged” fund raiser.
http://presslord.com/speech.htm
This release reeks of trying to pull a “fast one” that is ”under the radar”. Police and crime victims often complain of criminals being released with out the public. Police and victims knowing. This is usually low profile”. This can become the “poster child” for this very legitimate concern. That's the “reality” but it should be used. I forget if it's this month or April but I will be mentioned in a book about would be presidential assassin Sara Jane Moore. The writer stayed in touch with Moore for thirty years. She asked to be notified of Moors parole but wasn't and can't get information. Look back on Soliah.com and you will find it. For the police and victims rights groups these are high profile so they might get more media “traction”. It's something the public would relate to.
If this SF Chronicle article is correct they may still have it wrong. As I recall the one year sentence reduction was overturned, if so that would add one year/six months. Also, the Opshal murder sentence was, I thing six/three years for Soliah. Kilgore and Borton. If so that would add another two/one year. I recall, the early calculation were for release in mid 2010 with 50% time off for good behavior.
Stay tuned folks, this could get interesting.
More thoughts on this. If mainstream media people read this and want a story angle here should be one. If Soliah would have caught that airplane flight and arrived here in Minnesota she could, according to my understanding of the law petitioned for extradition. If she was under custody of Ramsey County, either under parole supervision or incarceration she would technically not be violating the law if she petitioned against extradition. I suspect that our Governor Palenty would deny extradition but that would put him in the “cat seat”. Tim Palenty is on the very short list of vice presidential candidates to run with presumptive Republican Presidential nominee John McCain. To add to that William (Bill) Ayers, who Barak Obama met with is on the “short list” of Soliah/Olson “supporters. I'm too tired to look up now but go to http://archive.org and look up www.saraolsondefense.org Go back on older soliah.com pages and there is a link of a woman now in Israel claiming a gang rape by Bill Ayers. This is one on the “advisors” Barak Obama met with. Ayers is married(?) to fellow Weather underground terrorist/fugitive Bernadine Dohne who glorified the murder of the pregnant Sharon Tate by the Charles Manson family and later sent out a communique commending the Symbionese Liberation Army on the assassination of Marcus Foster. Another resource might be my Representative Keith Ellison (dated) page. Bernadine Dorn appeared at the Soliah/Olson February 2000 “ungagged” fund raiser.
http://presslord.com/speech.htm
This release reeks of trying to pull a “fast one” that is ”under the radar”. Police and crime victims often complain of criminals being released with out the public. Police and victims knowing. This is usually low profile”. This can become the “poster child” for this very legitimate concern. That's the “reality” but it should be used. I forget if it's this month or April but I will be mentioned in a book about would be presidential assassin Sara Jane Moore. The writer stayed in touch with Moore for thirty years. She asked to be notified of Moors parole but wasn't and can't get information. Look back on Soliah.com and you will find it. For the police and victims rights groups these are high profile so they might get more media “traction”. It's something the public would relate to.
If this SF Chronicle article is correct they may still have it wrong. As I recall the one year sentence reduction was overturned, if so that would add one year/six months. Also, the Opshal murder sentence was, I thing six/three years for Soliah. Kilgore and Borton. If so that would add another two/one year. I recall, the early calculation were for release in mid 2010 with 50% time off for good behavior.
Stay tuned folks, this could get interesting.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
A little reminder on who rules cable news...
From Drudge, the latest Nielsen ratings are in and...
CABLE NEWS RACE
TUES., MARCH 10, 2009
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,212,000(8pm EST)
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,376,000 (9pm EST)
FOXNEWS BECK 2,331,000 (5pm EST)
FOXNEWS BAIER 2,274,000 (6pm EST)
FOXNEWS SHEP 2,044,000 (7pm EST)
FOXNEWS GRETA 1,965,000 (10pm EST)
CNN COOPER 1,214,000 (10pm EST)
CNN KING 1,185,000 (9pm EST)
MSNBC MADDOW 1,041,000 (9pm EST)
CNNHN GRACE 986,000 (9pm EST)
MSNBC OLBERMANN 928,000 (8pm EST)
wow fucking clean sweep for FoxNews. Not even close. I added the programs time on the side because I'd like to point out that newcomer to Fox, Glenn Beck, gets literally 2.5X the audience that Olbermann gets and Keith's show is primetime while most people are at work or on their way home when Beck's show airs. If he can pull 2.3 million viewers at 5pm EST he could probably at least double that if he got O'Reilly's slot (which I think he will personally, eventually). FoxNews is everyone's bitch and I love it.
CABLE NEWS RACE
TUES., MARCH 10, 2009
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,212,000(8pm EST)
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,376,000 (9pm EST)
FOXNEWS BECK 2,331,000 (5pm EST)
FOXNEWS BAIER 2,274,000 (6pm EST)
FOXNEWS SHEP 2,044,000 (7pm EST)
FOXNEWS GRETA 1,965,000 (10pm EST)
CNN COOPER 1,214,000 (10pm EST)
CNN KING 1,185,000 (9pm EST)
MSNBC MADDOW 1,041,000 (9pm EST)
CNNHN GRACE 986,000 (9pm EST)
MSNBC OLBERMANN 928,000 (8pm EST)
wow fucking clean sweep for FoxNews. Not even close. I added the programs time on the side because I'd like to point out that newcomer to Fox, Glenn Beck, gets literally 2.5X the audience that Olbermann gets and Keith's show is primetime while most people are at work or on their way home when Beck's show airs. If he can pull 2.3 million viewers at 5pm EST he could probably at least double that if he got O'Reilly's slot (which I think he will personally, eventually). FoxNews is everyone's bitch and I love it.
The allure is starting to wear off of Obama
Once again, saying I told you so is getting old but when the center lefties start turning on Obama (or at least his "handlers") you know things aren't going well. Damn I mean were only 51 days in and the center-left Salon.com blog's writers are seeing the writing on the wall I saw back in oh I don't know, LAST MAY! Not to mention the fact Warren Buffet came out yesterday saying Obama's hurting the economy. I mean read this venom that is coming out of Camille Paglia's mouth in her opening paragraph about WH operations...
Yes, free the president from his flacks, fixers and goons -- his posse of smirky smart alecks and provincial rubes, who were shrewd enough to beat the slow, pompous Clintons in the mano-a-mano primaries but who seem like dazed lost lambs in the brave new world of federal legislation and global statesmanship.
Damn, she almost sounds like, dare I say it, A conservative. I mean Rahm "Dead Fish" Emanuel is running the show like Karl Rove could only have dreamed of, David Axelrod had to admit they were attacking Rush Limbaugh about how he wants Obama to fail (later today there will be a important post concerning that) and basically trying to distract the American people from what they're really doing. Then there's Robert Gibbs who is seriously the dumbest, worst speaking, press secretary I've ever seen. Remember people ripping Ari Fleisher and Scott McClellan during the Bush years? This idiot will be lucky to have his job by the end of the year at the rate he's going, I do have to say it provides some really great humor, I hope SNL does a paradoy of him soon.
Also remember during the campaign that all non-americans wanted Obama elected to help repair our relations with the world? Well Obama gave Brown a half-assed gift after Brown gave some frankly amazingly thoughtful stuff (if I was Brown I'd ask for it back). I mean 25 DVD's, really Barak? Didn't you learn etiquette at all growing up? Jesus fuckin christ man, oh and the gift Hillary gave the Russian Ambassador was a button that was meant to say "do-over" but the dipshits at the state department couldn't even get that right. The button said, and I really am not kidding, "overcharge" when translated back to english. Either we have morons running the state department or someone wanted to make Hillary look like a fool. I hope no one at our state department is that petty but you never know. Anyway you cut it that person had their ass canned. Things are looking dark for America, even though the Dow is going up, but even I am cynical at that. There is a growing unease in this country that could erupt into a "summer of violence" this year across the streets of America. 2009=1968, I'm just sayin...
Yes, free the president from his flacks, fixers and goons -- his posse of smirky smart alecks and provincial rubes, who were shrewd enough to beat the slow, pompous Clintons in the mano-a-mano primaries but who seem like dazed lost lambs in the brave new world of federal legislation and global statesmanship.
Damn, she almost sounds like, dare I say it, A conservative. I mean Rahm "Dead Fish" Emanuel is running the show like Karl Rove could only have dreamed of, David Axelrod had to admit they were attacking Rush Limbaugh about how he wants Obama to fail (later today there will be a important post concerning that) and basically trying to distract the American people from what they're really doing. Then there's Robert Gibbs who is seriously the dumbest, worst speaking, press secretary I've ever seen. Remember people ripping Ari Fleisher and Scott McClellan during the Bush years? This idiot will be lucky to have his job by the end of the year at the rate he's going, I do have to say it provides some really great humor, I hope SNL does a paradoy of him soon.
Also remember during the campaign that all non-americans wanted Obama elected to help repair our relations with the world? Well Obama gave Brown a half-assed gift after Brown gave some frankly amazingly thoughtful stuff (if I was Brown I'd ask for it back). I mean 25 DVD's, really Barak? Didn't you learn etiquette at all growing up? Jesus fuckin christ man, oh and the gift Hillary gave the Russian Ambassador was a button that was meant to say "do-over" but the dipshits at the state department couldn't even get that right. The button said, and I really am not kidding, "overcharge" when translated back to english. Either we have morons running the state department or someone wanted to make Hillary look like a fool. I hope no one at our state department is that petty but you never know. Anyway you cut it that person had their ass canned. Things are looking dark for America, even though the Dow is going up, but even I am cynical at that. There is a growing unease in this country that could erupt into a "summer of violence" this year across the streets of America. 2009=1968, I'm just sayin...
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Rob Zombie - Living Dead Girl
Because it's my blog and I think we need to lighten up. Note to people with sensibilities, I'm pretty sure this song will make you bleed out your eyes. Don't say I didn't warn you.
Monday, March 09, 2009
Newsflash to Obama: the campaign is OVER!
Sometime you got to laugh, cry or just shake your head. I'll chalk this one up to a head shake, you really can't make this up, from breitbart:
US President Barack Obama mustered his powerful campaign army on Monday, calling on his millions of supporters to lobby on behalf of his budget and economic plan.
The appeal to back the president was made in an email and video sent out by "Organizing for America," the organization which morphed out of Obama's campaign machinery to push his agenda when he entered the White House.
In the video, Mitch Stewart, the director of Organizing for America, urged the president's supporters to take part in the "Organizing for America Pledge Project."
"The pledge project is an ambitious effort to map out and identify support for President Obama's economic blueprint across towns and communities in America," Stewart said.
"We're doing that by asking people to pledge your support for the broad initiatives outlined in President Obama's economic plan.
"Once you do, we will ask you to build support in your own communities by forwarding this pledge by email, by knocking on doors and by making phone call," he said.
"We will show in every state, in every congressional district the hunger, for leadership and long range thinking that's in too short supply here in Washington."
Stewart said Obama's budget provides a "bold blueprint for our country's future.
"It addresses three of the most pressing challenges facing our nation: health care, energy and education," he said.
"That's the good news. The bad news is that as a result the special interests and the old habits in Washington will dig in even more.
"It's up to you to make sure that they don't stand in our way.
"By pledging and building support you will be taking the first steps towards establishing a nationwide grassroots network, neighborhood by neighborhood, standing side by side with President Obama as we bring about our agenda for change."
The appeal to grass roots supporters closely follows the tactics used by Obama during his triumphant election campaign and is another sign that the president plans to use the organization to help pass difficult legislation.
Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, has stressed that Organizing for America is not aimed at twisting the arms of members of Congress but meant to keep activists engaged on issues such as health care, energy and the economy.
Am I the only one that finds this shit not only annoying but a little creepy? Mark my words there will be blowback from this.
US President Barack Obama mustered his powerful campaign army on Monday, calling on his millions of supporters to lobby on behalf of his budget and economic plan.
The appeal to back the president was made in an email and video sent out by "Organizing for America," the organization which morphed out of Obama's campaign machinery to push his agenda when he entered the White House.
In the video, Mitch Stewart, the director of Organizing for America, urged the president's supporters to take part in the "Organizing for America Pledge Project."
"The pledge project is an ambitious effort to map out and identify support for President Obama's economic blueprint across towns and communities in America," Stewart said.
"We're doing that by asking people to pledge your support for the broad initiatives outlined in President Obama's economic plan.
"Once you do, we will ask you to build support in your own communities by forwarding this pledge by email, by knocking on doors and by making phone call," he said.
"We will show in every state, in every congressional district the hunger, for leadership and long range thinking that's in too short supply here in Washington."
Stewart said Obama's budget provides a "bold blueprint for our country's future.
"It addresses three of the most pressing challenges facing our nation: health care, energy and education," he said.
"That's the good news. The bad news is that as a result the special interests and the old habits in Washington will dig in even more.
"It's up to you to make sure that they don't stand in our way.
"By pledging and building support you will be taking the first steps towards establishing a nationwide grassroots network, neighborhood by neighborhood, standing side by side with President Obama as we bring about our agenda for change."
The appeal to grass roots supporters closely follows the tactics used by Obama during his triumphant election campaign and is another sign that the president plans to use the organization to help pass difficult legislation.
Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, has stressed that Organizing for America is not aimed at twisting the arms of members of Congress but meant to keep activists engaged on issues such as health care, energy and the economy.
Am I the only one that finds this shit not only annoying but a little creepy? Mark my words there will be blowback from this.
a picture is worth 1000 words...
Normally when I get spam shit, especially from my facebook friends, I delete it without even bothering to open it, today for some reason I decided to read it for shits and giggles. Now I don't know if the following story is true but if it is this is what's wrong when it comes to immigration into this great country.
A letter by a Florida teacher...............
A teacher speaks:
This is a subject close to my heart. Do you know that we have adult students at the school where I teach who are not US citizens and who get the PELL grant, which is a federal grant (no pay back required) plus other federal grants to go to school?
One student from the Dominican Republic told me that she didn't want me to find a job for her after she finished my program, because she was getting housing from our housing department and she was getting a PELL grant which paid for her total tuition and books, plus money leftover.
She was looking into WAIT which gives students a CREDIT CARD for gas to come to school, and into CARIBE which is a special program (check it out - I did) http://caribeprogram.com/ for immigrants and it pays for child care and all sorts of needs while they go to school or training. The one student I just mentioned told me she was not going to be a US Citizen because she plans to return to the Dominican Republic someday and that she 'loves HER country.'
I asked her if she felt guilty taking what the US is giving her and then not even bothering to become a citizen and she told me that it doesn't bother her, because that is what the money is there for!
I asked the CARIBE administration about their program and if you ARE a US Citizen, you don't qualify for their program. And all the while, I am working a full day, my son-in-law works more than 60 hours a week, and everyone in my family works and pays for our education.
Something is wrong here. I am sorry but after hearing they want to sing the National Anthem in Spanish - enough is enough. Nowhere did they sing it in Italian, Polish, Irish (Celtic), German or any other language because of immigration. It was written by Francis Scott Key and should be sung word for word the way it was written. The news broadcasts even gave the translation -- not even close. Sorry if this offends anyone but this is MY COUNTRY.
IF IT IS YOUR COUNTRY SPEAK UP -- please pass this along. I am not against immigration -- just come through like everyone else.
Get a sponsor; have a place to lay your head; have a job; pay your taxes, live by the rules AND LEARN THE LANGUAGE as all other immigrants have in the past -- and GOD BLESS AMERICA!
PART OF THE PROBLEM, Think about this: If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone -- YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM! It is Time for America to Speak up If you agree -- pass this along, if you don't agree --- delete it!
Friday, March 06, 2009
Friday fun...
Its friday time to lighten up and have some fun...
Now, for some religious humor (if you don't laugh at this there's something seriously wrong with you)
Now for some lowbrow humor
Now, for some religious humor (if you don't laugh at this there's something seriously wrong with you)
Now for some lowbrow humor
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Jim Cramer to White House: Bring it on
I have been a fan of Jim Cramer's unusual, some may say insane, style for nearly 5 years now. I first caught wind of him when I started watching CNBC back in January 2005 because I was taking an investment class during my final semester as a high schooler. As I went on feild trips to places with my group I always made it a point to gauge people's professional opinion on him. Most of them dismissed him as a nutcase that was obselete at best. Boy were those people wrong, I watch Mad Money nightly (at least I try to) and yes he is wrong, but he is right more often than not and when he is wrong he mans up to it, he doesn't make excuses. That is a unique quality most people do not have, especially in the financial world, and the sooner people realize that the better. Of course Robert Gibbs doesn't care as he took a potshot at him earlier this week and put him on what people are calling the White Houses "enemies list". Cramer responded the other day on his show and made Gibbs look like a fucking tool, here is an article articulating what he said on Mad Money earlier this week.
When I come to work each day, whether as a commentator for TheStreet.com or a host of Mad Money With Jim Cramer, I have only one thought in mind: helping people with their money.
I fight to help viewers and readers make and preserve capital. I fight for their 401(k)s, for their 529s and their IRAs. I fight for their annuities and for their life insurance policies. I fight for their profits, trading and investing. And in this horrible market, I fight to keep their losses to a minimum by having some good dividend-yielding stocks from different sectors, some bonds, some gold and some cash.
The lines are drawn pretty clearly: If you can help people make money to be able to retire, enjoy life, pay for college, pay down debt, etc., you are a "good guy," so to speak. If you take the other side of the trade, you are, well, let's say, a less favored fellow. And if you gun for the gigantic investor class that is out there that includes 90 million people in one form or another, whether it be 401(k)s or individual stocks or pension plans, then you are on my enemies list.
Now some, including Rush Limbaugh, would say I am on another enemies list: that of the White House. Limbaugh says there are only a handful of us on it, and if I am on it for defending all of the shareholders out there, then I am in good company. Limbaugh -- whom I do not know personally, but having been in radio myself, know professionally as a genius of the medium -- says, "They're going to shut Cramer up pretty soon, too, but he'll go down with a fight."
Limbaugh's dead right. I am a fight-not-flight guy, so I was on my hackles when I heard White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' answer to a question about my pointed criticism of the president on multiple venues, including the Today Show.
"I'm not entirely sure what he's pointing to to make some of the statements," Gibbs said about my point that President Obama's budget may be one of the great wealth destroyers of all time. "And you can go back and look at any number of statements he's made in the past about the economy and wonder where some of the backup for those are, too."
Huh? Backup? Look at the incredible decline in the stock market, in all indices, since the inauguration of the president, with the drop accelerating when the budget plan came to light because of the massive fear and indecision the document sowed: Raising taxes on the eve of what could be a second Great Depression, destroying the profits in healthcare companies (one of the few areas still robust in the economy), tinkering with the mortgage deduction at a time when U.S. house price depreciation is behind much of the world's morass and certainly the devastation affecting our banks, and pushing an aggressive cap and trade program that could raise the price of energy for millions of people.
The market's the effect; much of what the president is fighting for is the cause. The market's signal can't be ignored. It's too palpable, too predictive to be ignored, despite the prattle that the market's predicted far more recessions than we have.
Gibbs went on to say, "If you turn on a certain program, it's geared to a very small audience. No offense to my good friends or friend at CNBC, but the president has to look out for the broader economy and the broader population."
How much I wish it were true right now that stocks played less of a role in peoples' lives. But stocks, along with housing, are our principal forms of wealth in this country. Only the people who have lifetime tenure, insured solid pensions and rent homes but own no stocks personally are unaffected. Sure that's a lot of people, but believe me, they aspire to have homes and portfolios. If we only want to help those who have no wealth to destroy, we are not helping the majority of Americans; we are not helping the broader population.
You can argue, of course, that Obama inherited one of the worst hands in the world. I had been a relentless critic of the Bush administration's "stewardship" of the economy, calling repeatedly for changes to avert the disaster that I saw coming, although perhaps Gibbs hasn't seen my CNBC meltdown. Seemed pretty prescient to me.
I, like everyone else, have made less authoritative and wrong statements in the past, but that rant still stands as something that I am sure everyone in the Bush administrations' Treasury and Fed listened to. My calls to sell 20% of your stocks in September at Dow 11,000 and then all of your stock if you need the money for the next five years at Dow 10,000 in October, might have eluded Gibbs, too.
But Obama has undeniably made things worse by creating an atmosphere of fear and panic rather than an atmosphere of calm and hope. He's done it by pushing a huge amount of change at a very perilous moment, by seeking to demonize the entire banking system and by raising taxes for those making more than $250,000 at the exact time when we need them to spend and build new businesses, and by revoking deductions for funds to charity that help eliminate the excess supply of homes.
We had a banking crisis coming into this regime, but now every area is in crisis. Each day is worse than the previous one for this miserable economy and while Obama's champions cite the stimulus plan, it's really just a hodgepodge of old Democratic pork and will not create nearly as many manufacturing or service jobs as we hoped. China's stimulus plan is the model; ours is the parody.
Sure there's going to be some mortgage relief, but the way to approach that problem is to eliminate the overhang, which a $15,000 tax credit for existing home sales could have dented if not consumed. I have offered a comprehensive plan of 4% refinanced mortgages for all by the government, not just those many considered deadbeats, to eliminate moral hazard. I have come up with a novel plan to cut the principal and spare the banks regulatory problems by offering them a certificate of equity, making them whole over time when the house appreciates in value, which will happen if demand is stoked and supply is shrunk.
I have offered a comprehensive bank plan to solve a systemic problem -- could all bankers really be malefactors of wealth, Mr. President, or given the endemic nature can't we just presume that it's an epidemic and finger-pointing is a worthless endeavor until things get better? Like after Pearl Harbor -- let's win the war and then investigate, and even try and convict the bad actors, instead of demonizing everyone who works at a bank right now, when we need them to right themselves without too much taxpayer help.
Which leads me to the true irony of not being political: I don't like talking politics. It is personal, but some things are a matter of public record, including my substantial six figure donations to the Democratic Party before I was no longer allowed to contribute by contractual agreement. I regard two Democratic governors as my friends, and helped back one of them in a major financial way and spoke and campaigned directly for the other.
I also made it clear in a New York magazine article that I favored Obama over McCain because I thought Obama to be a middle-of-the-road Democrat, exactly the kind I have supported all my adult life, although I will admit to being far more left-wing during my teenage years and early 20s.
To be totally out of the closet, I actually embrace every part of Obama's agenda, right down to the increase on personal taxes and the mortgage deduction. I am a fierce environmentalist who has donated multiple acres to the state of New Jersey to keep forever wild. I believe in cap and trade. I favor playing hardball with drug companies that hold up the U.S. government with me-too products.
But these are issues that we have no time for now, on the verge of a second Great Depression. This is an agenda that must be held back for better times. It is an agenda that at this moment is radical vs. what is called for. I am proud to have voted for the Obama who I thought understood the need to get us on the right path, and create jobs and wealth before taxing it and making moves that hurt job creation -- certainly ones that will outweigh the meager number of jobs he's creating.
Most important, I believe his agenda is crushing nest eggs around the nation in loud ways, like the decline in the averages, and in soft but dangerous ways, like in the annuities that can't be paid and the insurance benefits that will be challenging to deliver on.
So I will fight the fight against that agenda. I will stand up for what I believe and for what I have always believed: Every person has a right to be rich in this country and I want to help them get there. And when they get there, if times are good, we can have them give back or pay higher taxes. Until they get there, I don't want them shackled or scared or paralyzed. That's what I see now.
If that makes me an enemy of the White House, then call me a general of an army that Obama may not even know exists -- tens of millions of people who live in fear of having no money saved when they need it and who get poorer by the day.
I was surprised at the revelation that he was that entrenched in the Democratic party at one point in his life but at this point who cares? I really am an American first and a Republican second (technically libertarian but, not practical voting for one at the moment). Bush did some very stupid stuff at the end of his term but Obama ain't making it any better.
When I come to work each day, whether as a commentator for TheStreet.com or a host of Mad Money With Jim Cramer, I have only one thought in mind: helping people with their money.
I fight to help viewers and readers make and preserve capital. I fight for their 401(k)s, for their 529s and their IRAs. I fight for their annuities and for their life insurance policies. I fight for their profits, trading and investing. And in this horrible market, I fight to keep their losses to a minimum by having some good dividend-yielding stocks from different sectors, some bonds, some gold and some cash.
The lines are drawn pretty clearly: If you can help people make money to be able to retire, enjoy life, pay for college, pay down debt, etc., you are a "good guy," so to speak. If you take the other side of the trade, you are, well, let's say, a less favored fellow. And if you gun for the gigantic investor class that is out there that includes 90 million people in one form or another, whether it be 401(k)s or individual stocks or pension plans, then you are on my enemies list.
Now some, including Rush Limbaugh, would say I am on another enemies list: that of the White House. Limbaugh says there are only a handful of us on it, and if I am on it for defending all of the shareholders out there, then I am in good company. Limbaugh -- whom I do not know personally, but having been in radio myself, know professionally as a genius of the medium -- says, "They're going to shut Cramer up pretty soon, too, but he'll go down with a fight."
Limbaugh's dead right. I am a fight-not-flight guy, so I was on my hackles when I heard White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' answer to a question about my pointed criticism of the president on multiple venues, including the Today Show.
"I'm not entirely sure what he's pointing to to make some of the statements," Gibbs said about my point that President Obama's budget may be one of the great wealth destroyers of all time. "And you can go back and look at any number of statements he's made in the past about the economy and wonder where some of the backup for those are, too."
Huh? Backup? Look at the incredible decline in the stock market, in all indices, since the inauguration of the president, with the drop accelerating when the budget plan came to light because of the massive fear and indecision the document sowed: Raising taxes on the eve of what could be a second Great Depression, destroying the profits in healthcare companies (one of the few areas still robust in the economy), tinkering with the mortgage deduction at a time when U.S. house price depreciation is behind much of the world's morass and certainly the devastation affecting our banks, and pushing an aggressive cap and trade program that could raise the price of energy for millions of people.
The market's the effect; much of what the president is fighting for is the cause. The market's signal can't be ignored. It's too palpable, too predictive to be ignored, despite the prattle that the market's predicted far more recessions than we have.
Gibbs went on to say, "If you turn on a certain program, it's geared to a very small audience. No offense to my good friends or friend at CNBC, but the president has to look out for the broader economy and the broader population."
How much I wish it were true right now that stocks played less of a role in peoples' lives. But stocks, along with housing, are our principal forms of wealth in this country. Only the people who have lifetime tenure, insured solid pensions and rent homes but own no stocks personally are unaffected. Sure that's a lot of people, but believe me, they aspire to have homes and portfolios. If we only want to help those who have no wealth to destroy, we are not helping the majority of Americans; we are not helping the broader population.
You can argue, of course, that Obama inherited one of the worst hands in the world. I had been a relentless critic of the Bush administration's "stewardship" of the economy, calling repeatedly for changes to avert the disaster that I saw coming, although perhaps Gibbs hasn't seen my CNBC meltdown. Seemed pretty prescient to me.
I, like everyone else, have made less authoritative and wrong statements in the past, but that rant still stands as something that I am sure everyone in the Bush administrations' Treasury and Fed listened to. My calls to sell 20% of your stocks in September at Dow 11,000 and then all of your stock if you need the money for the next five years at Dow 10,000 in October, might have eluded Gibbs, too.
But Obama has undeniably made things worse by creating an atmosphere of fear and panic rather than an atmosphere of calm and hope. He's done it by pushing a huge amount of change at a very perilous moment, by seeking to demonize the entire banking system and by raising taxes for those making more than $250,000 at the exact time when we need them to spend and build new businesses, and by revoking deductions for funds to charity that help eliminate the excess supply of homes.
We had a banking crisis coming into this regime, but now every area is in crisis. Each day is worse than the previous one for this miserable economy and while Obama's champions cite the stimulus plan, it's really just a hodgepodge of old Democratic pork and will not create nearly as many manufacturing or service jobs as we hoped. China's stimulus plan is the model; ours is the parody.
Sure there's going to be some mortgage relief, but the way to approach that problem is to eliminate the overhang, which a $15,000 tax credit for existing home sales could have dented if not consumed. I have offered a comprehensive plan of 4% refinanced mortgages for all by the government, not just those many considered deadbeats, to eliminate moral hazard. I have come up with a novel plan to cut the principal and spare the banks regulatory problems by offering them a certificate of equity, making them whole over time when the house appreciates in value, which will happen if demand is stoked and supply is shrunk.
I have offered a comprehensive bank plan to solve a systemic problem -- could all bankers really be malefactors of wealth, Mr. President, or given the endemic nature can't we just presume that it's an epidemic and finger-pointing is a worthless endeavor until things get better? Like after Pearl Harbor -- let's win the war and then investigate, and even try and convict the bad actors, instead of demonizing everyone who works at a bank right now, when we need them to right themselves without too much taxpayer help.
Which leads me to the true irony of not being political: I don't like talking politics. It is personal, but some things are a matter of public record, including my substantial six figure donations to the Democratic Party before I was no longer allowed to contribute by contractual agreement. I regard two Democratic governors as my friends, and helped back one of them in a major financial way and spoke and campaigned directly for the other.
I also made it clear in a New York magazine article that I favored Obama over McCain because I thought Obama to be a middle-of-the-road Democrat, exactly the kind I have supported all my adult life, although I will admit to being far more left-wing during my teenage years and early 20s.
To be totally out of the closet, I actually embrace every part of Obama's agenda, right down to the increase on personal taxes and the mortgage deduction. I am a fierce environmentalist who has donated multiple acres to the state of New Jersey to keep forever wild. I believe in cap and trade. I favor playing hardball with drug companies that hold up the U.S. government with me-too products.
But these are issues that we have no time for now, on the verge of a second Great Depression. This is an agenda that must be held back for better times. It is an agenda that at this moment is radical vs. what is called for. I am proud to have voted for the Obama who I thought understood the need to get us on the right path, and create jobs and wealth before taxing it and making moves that hurt job creation -- certainly ones that will outweigh the meager number of jobs he's creating.
Most important, I believe his agenda is crushing nest eggs around the nation in loud ways, like the decline in the averages, and in soft but dangerous ways, like in the annuities that can't be paid and the insurance benefits that will be challenging to deliver on.
So I will fight the fight against that agenda. I will stand up for what I believe and for what I have always believed: Every person has a right to be rich in this country and I want to help them get there. And when they get there, if times are good, we can have them give back or pay higher taxes. Until they get there, I don't want them shackled or scared or paralyzed. That's what I see now.
If that makes me an enemy of the White House, then call me a general of an army that Obama may not even know exists -- tens of millions of people who live in fear of having no money saved when they need it and who get poorer by the day.
I was surprised at the revelation that he was that entrenched in the Democratic party at one point in his life but at this point who cares? I really am an American first and a Republican second (technically libertarian but, not practical voting for one at the moment). Bush did some very stupid stuff at the end of his term but Obama ain't making it any better.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
there may be hope after all...
Well just when you think all hope is lost I get this story that comes across Drudge...
Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona have joined a quiet revolt in the House that could slow some of President Obama's fast-moving priorities.
The two are among 49 Democrats from congressional districts that backed Republican Sen. John McCain 's 2008 presidential race and whose support for the Democratic majority's progressive agenda is increasingly not assured.
A dozen of them were among 20 House Democrats who voted against the $410 billion discretionary fiscal 2009 spending package (HR 1105) on Feb. 25. Another group later forced House leaders to sideline a contentious bill (HR 1106) to allow bankruptcy judges to modify home loans.
Although only a handful of moderate and conservative Democrats abandoned their leaders during party-line votes on the economic stimulus law (PL 111-5), the group of vulnerable Democrats branded the omnibus spending bill as a budget buster and questioned whether the mortgage bill would raise interest rates on average home-owners and cause some struggling homeowners to rush to bankruptcy.
The defections could cause heartburn for Democratic leaders charged with ushering through Obama's three biggest priorities: a health care overhaul, a cap-and-trade system to curb carbon emissions and his fiscal 2010 budget blueprint. The president might also have trouble winning their votes for an anticipated second financial bailout package.
"My job is not to be a rubber stamp for the president or Democratic leadership, but to be a voice for the people that elected me," Giffords said. "I voted for the stimulus, but found I could not vote for the omnibus." She faces a tough 2010 campaign in a state that will be dominated by McCain's expected re-election to his Senate seat.
For his part, Matheson echoed Giffords' concerns about an increase of $31 billion, or 8 percent, in discretionary spending in the nine bills contained in the omnibus measure. Like Giffords, he also has raised concerns about the mortgage bankruptcy bill, which many banks oppose.
"A lot needs to be done to help people keep their homes. But I'm just not sure about this bill," Giffords said.
John B. Larson of Connecticut, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said party leaders would respond to recent defections by trying to slow the pace of bills to allow more time for hearings and debate. "Everything's coming at them fast and furious. The more that people get an opportunity to go back and forth . . . the greater the comfort level they will have," Larson said.
Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer , D-Md., acknowledged the defections, saying: "We have a very diverse party, with diverse opinions. We're working on it."
Many of the 49 Democrats in the group have particular concerns about Obama's call for allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for wealthy families to expire.
"I don't agree with the administration about letting all those tax cuts expire for upper-income families," said Harry E. Mitchell , D-Ariz. He argues for retaining the current 15 percent rate on capital gains and for permanent reductions in the estate tax.
Republicans are eyeing the group of 49 as prime targets in their party's push to expand the 178-seat minority in the 2010 elections. They are betting on "bailout and stimulus fatigue" and ramping up pressure by launching early attack advertising in their districts and daring them to line up behind Obama's ambitious to-do list.
"All Republicans voted 'no' on the stimulus. Almost all Democrats voted 'yes' on the stimulus. They own it. And before it's over, the public is not going to like the stimulus,'' a senior House GOP aide said.
Kevin McCarthy , R-Calif., who heads recruitment efforts for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said: "We are looking for candidates that fit these districts. We think we have a good chance to win some of them back.''
Matheson could face a special challenge in coming days over his vote on a bill that would give the District of Columbia a full voting member in the House. House Democratic leaders are pushing for fast action on its version (HR 157), which would leave Utah's three existing districts alone and create an at-large seat in Utah.
But the Senate version (S 160), passed Feb. 26, would create a fourth congressional district in Utah, a largely Republican state, and could force Matheson and two home-state GOP colleagues to run in reconfigured districts in 2010.
Regardless of what happens in Utah, GOP strategist Grover Norquist urged loyalists at last week's Conservative Political Action Conference annual convention to step up attacks on the Democrats "in districts that actually want to elect Republicans."
"We need in 2010 to win 40 House seats held by Democrats, some of them masquerading as conservatives but every one of them a [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi liberal in their voting and their impact," he added. Norquist serves as president of Americans for Tax Reform, a conservative watchdog group.
GOP leaders are optimistic that Republican Jim Tedisco, minority leader of the New York Assembly, can defeat Democrat Scott Murphy in a March 31 special election to fill the vacancy created by the Senate appointment of Kirsten Gillibrand , D-N.Y. "After the March 31 election in New York, we'll need 39 seats," Norquist predicted.
With the 2010 midterm campaigns off to a fast start, Matheson, Giffords and the other vulnerable Democrats face tough choices.
Still, Democrats gained some leeway last fall by winning what temporarily were 257 seats: They can lose as many as 37 Democrats on a given bill and still see it pass.
Now, there are three House vacancies, created when Gillibrand moved to the Senate, former Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois became Obama's chief of staff and former California Rep. Hilda L. Solis became Labor secretary.
But signs of trouble loom. Just seven Democrats — six from districts carried by McCain plus liberal Peter A. DeFazio of Oregon — voted Feb. 13 against Obama's biggest early priority, the $787.2 billion economic stimulus.
But a day after the 20 Democrats voted against the omnibus spending bill — including 12 from districts carried by McCain — a larger group of conservative Democrats forced party leaders to pull the mortgage bankruptcy measure. In a symbolic protest, a group of 26 dissident Democrats — including 18 from districts carried by McCain — sided with Republicans when the House narrowly adopted, 224-198, a procedural motion (H Res 190) that had the effect of postponing action on the mortgage bankruptcy bill. A modified version of the legislation is likely to go to the House floor this week.
wow, it would be nice to know that some people out there in Democrat land have a conscious. These 49 are damned if they do and damned if they don't. First of all they supported McCain against the messiah in this election and still got the seat, that means at best they live in moderate districts to districts that lean or are heavily Republican, second they are the "blue dogs" so in order to keep their seats they need to have a moderate position overall while this Congress just made a violently hard left turn. Third, if they go moderate (which they may or may not do) they risk pissing off the DK/DU/Moron.org crowd and face a primary challenge in 2010 while the Republican candidate builds up their bankroll. Fourth, if they go hard left, which is the pressure, they will get their asses voted out because if they chose to support McCain in 2008 it means their districts trend to the right. Things are looking good, if we can make it to November 2010. Only 20 months to go...
Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona have joined a quiet revolt in the House that could slow some of President Obama's fast-moving priorities.
The two are among 49 Democrats from congressional districts that backed Republican Sen. John McCain 's 2008 presidential race and whose support for the Democratic majority's progressive agenda is increasingly not assured.
A dozen of them were among 20 House Democrats who voted against the $410 billion discretionary fiscal 2009 spending package (HR 1105) on Feb. 25. Another group later forced House leaders to sideline a contentious bill (HR 1106) to allow bankruptcy judges to modify home loans.
Although only a handful of moderate and conservative Democrats abandoned their leaders during party-line votes on the economic stimulus law (PL 111-5), the group of vulnerable Democrats branded the omnibus spending bill as a budget buster and questioned whether the mortgage bill would raise interest rates on average home-owners and cause some struggling homeowners to rush to bankruptcy.
The defections could cause heartburn for Democratic leaders charged with ushering through Obama's three biggest priorities: a health care overhaul, a cap-and-trade system to curb carbon emissions and his fiscal 2010 budget blueprint. The president might also have trouble winning their votes for an anticipated second financial bailout package.
"My job is not to be a rubber stamp for the president or Democratic leadership, but to be a voice for the people that elected me," Giffords said. "I voted for the stimulus, but found I could not vote for the omnibus." She faces a tough 2010 campaign in a state that will be dominated by McCain's expected re-election to his Senate seat.
For his part, Matheson echoed Giffords' concerns about an increase of $31 billion, or 8 percent, in discretionary spending in the nine bills contained in the omnibus measure. Like Giffords, he also has raised concerns about the mortgage bankruptcy bill, which many banks oppose.
"A lot needs to be done to help people keep their homes. But I'm just not sure about this bill," Giffords said.
John B. Larson of Connecticut, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said party leaders would respond to recent defections by trying to slow the pace of bills to allow more time for hearings and debate. "Everything's coming at them fast and furious. The more that people get an opportunity to go back and forth . . . the greater the comfort level they will have," Larson said.
Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer , D-Md., acknowledged the defections, saying: "We have a very diverse party, with diverse opinions. We're working on it."
Many of the 49 Democrats in the group have particular concerns about Obama's call for allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for wealthy families to expire.
"I don't agree with the administration about letting all those tax cuts expire for upper-income families," said Harry E. Mitchell , D-Ariz. He argues for retaining the current 15 percent rate on capital gains and for permanent reductions in the estate tax.
Republicans are eyeing the group of 49 as prime targets in their party's push to expand the 178-seat minority in the 2010 elections. They are betting on "bailout and stimulus fatigue" and ramping up pressure by launching early attack advertising in their districts and daring them to line up behind Obama's ambitious to-do list.
"All Republicans voted 'no' on the stimulus. Almost all Democrats voted 'yes' on the stimulus. They own it. And before it's over, the public is not going to like the stimulus,'' a senior House GOP aide said.
Kevin McCarthy , R-Calif., who heads recruitment efforts for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said: "We are looking for candidates that fit these districts. We think we have a good chance to win some of them back.''
Matheson could face a special challenge in coming days over his vote on a bill that would give the District of Columbia a full voting member in the House. House Democratic leaders are pushing for fast action on its version (HR 157), which would leave Utah's three existing districts alone and create an at-large seat in Utah.
But the Senate version (S 160), passed Feb. 26, would create a fourth congressional district in Utah, a largely Republican state, and could force Matheson and two home-state GOP colleagues to run in reconfigured districts in 2010.
Regardless of what happens in Utah, GOP strategist Grover Norquist urged loyalists at last week's Conservative Political Action Conference annual convention to step up attacks on the Democrats "in districts that actually want to elect Republicans."
"We need in 2010 to win 40 House seats held by Democrats, some of them masquerading as conservatives but every one of them a [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi liberal in their voting and their impact," he added. Norquist serves as president of Americans for Tax Reform, a conservative watchdog group.
GOP leaders are optimistic that Republican Jim Tedisco, minority leader of the New York Assembly, can defeat Democrat Scott Murphy in a March 31 special election to fill the vacancy created by the Senate appointment of Kirsten Gillibrand , D-N.Y. "After the March 31 election in New York, we'll need 39 seats," Norquist predicted.
With the 2010 midterm campaigns off to a fast start, Matheson, Giffords and the other vulnerable Democrats face tough choices.
Still, Democrats gained some leeway last fall by winning what temporarily were 257 seats: They can lose as many as 37 Democrats on a given bill and still see it pass.
Now, there are three House vacancies, created when Gillibrand moved to the Senate, former Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois became Obama's chief of staff and former California Rep. Hilda L. Solis became Labor secretary.
But signs of trouble loom. Just seven Democrats — six from districts carried by McCain plus liberal Peter A. DeFazio of Oregon — voted Feb. 13 against Obama's biggest early priority, the $787.2 billion economic stimulus.
But a day after the 20 Democrats voted against the omnibus spending bill — including 12 from districts carried by McCain — a larger group of conservative Democrats forced party leaders to pull the mortgage bankruptcy measure. In a symbolic protest, a group of 26 dissident Democrats — including 18 from districts carried by McCain — sided with Republicans when the House narrowly adopted, 224-198, a procedural motion (H Res 190) that had the effect of postponing action on the mortgage bankruptcy bill. A modified version of the legislation is likely to go to the House floor this week.
wow, it would be nice to know that some people out there in Democrat land have a conscious. These 49 are damned if they do and damned if they don't. First of all they supported McCain against the messiah in this election and still got the seat, that means at best they live in moderate districts to districts that lean or are heavily Republican, second they are the "blue dogs" so in order to keep their seats they need to have a moderate position overall while this Congress just made a violently hard left turn. Third, if they go moderate (which they may or may not do) they risk pissing off the DK/DU/Moron.org crowd and face a primary challenge in 2010 while the Republican candidate builds up their bankroll. Fourth, if they go hard left, which is the pressure, they will get their asses voted out because if they chose to support McCain in 2008 it means their districts trend to the right. Things are looking good, if we can make it to November 2010. Only 20 months to go...
yea, about the stock market, I kinda called it...
ok, for those of you who don't know I had this called back in September, right after Obama took a commanding and insurmountable lead in the polls, here's my post (if your too lazy to read below link is in the title)
Man I could be venturing off into dangerous territory with this one. Economics is not my strongest suit, that being said I usually watch CNBC 1-2 hours a day (mostly Mad Money) and consider myself somewhat knowledgeable about the stock market. I am opening this up to anyone who knows anything about this type of economy. When and where is the bottom for this market? Will it happen tomorrow? Next week? Next month? Sometime in 2009 (god forbid)? What is the bottom for the Dow Jones? 10000? 9000? 8000? 7000? Or maybe even lower? That being said after watching the first few minutes of Cramer I think the Dow will bottom out at around 7,000 sometime around Halloween. I am trying to get some cash available because, and I'll be honest, I have dollar signs in my eyes right now. I'm drooling at the possibility of being able to make an absolute killing right now in the market. Stocks that have good bottom lines and solid "fundamentals" are being sold off in this panic frenzy are way undervalued at this point and they could go lower. As FDR said, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Fear causes people to do irrational things, irrational things lead to unintended results. Word to the wise, people who are confident and keep their cool (me and hopefully at least a few of you out there) will see a 100-1000% return on their even short-term investment if you do your research.
Ok maybe I was a LITTLE wrong about the dates but not the numbers, back then I was holding out hope McCain could make a late run but even as doom and gloom as I was less than 4 months ago I didn't think the Dow could go below 7000. And now I am nowhere near as optimistic as I was in this post, I said earlier this week that I thought the Dow will hit 1000 and I stand by that not because I want it to but because logically I see it happening because Obama is so damn stubborn with his retarded economic policy. I shouldn't say that, that's an insult to retarded people, I think if you lock a bunch of retarded people in a room they'd come up with a better economic plan than Obama and his team of dunces. And I'm not the only one saying this, this is from an opinion piece from the WSJ today...
As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama's policies have become part of the economy's problem.
Americans have welcomed the Obama era in the same spirit of hope the President campaigned on. But after five weeks in office, it's become clear that Mr. Obama's policies are slowing, if not stopping, what would otherwise be the normal process of economic recovery. From punishing business to squandering scarce national public resources, Team Obama is creating more uncertainty and less confidence -- and thus a longer period of recession or subpar growth.
The Democrats who now run Washington don't want to hear this, because they benefit from blaming all bad economic news on President Bush. And Mr. Obama has inherited an unusual recession deepened by credit problems, both of which will take time to climb out of. But it's also true that the economy has fallen far enough, and long enough, that much of the excess that led to recession is being worked off. Already 15 months old, the current recession will soon match the average length -- and average job loss -- of the last three postwar downturns. What goes down will come up -- unless destructive policies interfere with the sources of potential recovery.
And those sources have been forming for some time. The price of oil and other commodities have fallen by two-thirds since their 2008 summer peak, which has the effect of a major tax cut. The world is awash in liquidity, thanks to monetary ease by the Federal Reserve and other central banks. Monetary policy operates with a lag, but last year's easing will eventually stir economic activity.
Housing prices have fallen 27% from their Case-Shiller peak, or some two-thirds of the way back to their historical trend. While still high, credit spreads are far from their peaks during the panic, and corporate borrowers are again able to tap the credit markets. As equities were signaling with their late 2008 rally and January top, growth should under normal circumstances begin to appear in the second half of this year.
So what has happened in the last two months? The economy has received no great new outside shock. Exchange rates and other prices have been stable, and there are no security crises of note. The reality of a sharp recession has been known and built into stock prices since last year's fourth quarter.
What is new is the unveiling of Mr. Obama's agenda and his approach to governance. Every new President has a finite stock of capital -- financial and political -- to deploy, and amid recession Mr. Obama has more than most. But one negative revelation has been the way he has chosen to spend his scarce resources on income transfers rather than growth promotion. Most of his "stimulus" spending was devoted to social programs, rather than public works, and nearly all of the tax cuts were devoted to income maintenance rather than to improving incentives to work or invest.
His Treasury has been making a similar mistake with its financial bailout plans. The banking system needs to work through its losses, and one necessary use of public capital is to assist in burning down those bad assets as fast as possible. Yet most of Team Obama's ministrations so far have gone toward triage and life support, rather than repair and recovery.
AIG yesterday received its fourth "rescue," including $70 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program cash, without any clear business direction. (See here.) Citigroup's restructuring last week added not a dollar of new capital, and also no clear direction. Perhaps the imminent Treasury "stress tests" will clear the decks, but until they do the banks are all living in fear of becoming the next AIG. All of this squanders public money that could better go toward burning down bank debt.
The market has notably plunged since Mr. Obama introduced his budget last week, and that should be no surprise. The document was a declaration of hostility toward capitalists across the economy. Health-care stocks have dived on fears of new government mandates and price controls. Private lenders to students have been told they're no longer wanted. Anyone who uses carbon energy has been warned to expect a huge tax increase from cap and trade. And every risk-taker and investor now knows that another tax increase will slam the economy in 2011, unless Mr. Obama lets Speaker Nancy Pelosi impose one even earlier.
Meanwhile, Congress demands more bank lending even as it assails lenders and threatens to let judges rewrite mortgage contracts. The powers in Congress -- unrebuked by Mr. Obama -- are ridiculing and punishing the very capitalists who are essential to a sustainable recovery. The result has been a capital strike, and the return of the fear from last year that we could face a far deeper downturn. This is no way to nurture a wounded economy back to health.
Listening to Mr. Obama and his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, on the weekend, we couldn't help but wonder if they appreciate any of this. They seem preoccupied with going to the barricades against Republicans who wield little power, or picking a fight with Rush Limbaugh, as if this is the kind of economic leadership Americans want.
Perhaps they're reading the polls and figure they have two or three years before voters stop blaming Republicans and Mr. Bush for the economy. Even if that's right in the long run, in the meantime their assault on business and investors is delaying a recovery and ensuring that the expansion will be weaker than it should be when it finally does arrive.
And check this lovely graph to go along with it...
The Obama Depression has begun.
Man I could be venturing off into dangerous territory with this one. Economics is not my strongest suit, that being said I usually watch CNBC 1-2 hours a day (mostly Mad Money) and consider myself somewhat knowledgeable about the stock market. I am opening this up to anyone who knows anything about this type of economy. When and where is the bottom for this market? Will it happen tomorrow? Next week? Next month? Sometime in 2009 (god forbid)? What is the bottom for the Dow Jones? 10000? 9000? 8000? 7000? Or maybe even lower? That being said after watching the first few minutes of Cramer I think the Dow will bottom out at around 7,000 sometime around Halloween. I am trying to get some cash available because, and I'll be honest, I have dollar signs in my eyes right now. I'm drooling at the possibility of being able to make an absolute killing right now in the market. Stocks that have good bottom lines and solid "fundamentals" are being sold off in this panic frenzy are way undervalued at this point and they could go lower. As FDR said, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Fear causes people to do irrational things, irrational things lead to unintended results. Word to the wise, people who are confident and keep their cool (me and hopefully at least a few of you out there) will see a 100-1000% return on their even short-term investment if you do your research.
Ok maybe I was a LITTLE wrong about the dates but not the numbers, back then I was holding out hope McCain could make a late run but even as doom and gloom as I was less than 4 months ago I didn't think the Dow could go below 7000. And now I am nowhere near as optimistic as I was in this post, I said earlier this week that I thought the Dow will hit 1000 and I stand by that not because I want it to but because logically I see it happening because Obama is so damn stubborn with his retarded economic policy. I shouldn't say that, that's an insult to retarded people, I think if you lock a bunch of retarded people in a room they'd come up with a better economic plan than Obama and his team of dunces. And I'm not the only one saying this, this is from an opinion piece from the WSJ today...
As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama's policies have become part of the economy's problem.
Americans have welcomed the Obama era in the same spirit of hope the President campaigned on. But after five weeks in office, it's become clear that Mr. Obama's policies are slowing, if not stopping, what would otherwise be the normal process of economic recovery. From punishing business to squandering scarce national public resources, Team Obama is creating more uncertainty and less confidence -- and thus a longer period of recession or subpar growth.
The Democrats who now run Washington don't want to hear this, because they benefit from blaming all bad economic news on President Bush. And Mr. Obama has inherited an unusual recession deepened by credit problems, both of which will take time to climb out of. But it's also true that the economy has fallen far enough, and long enough, that much of the excess that led to recession is being worked off. Already 15 months old, the current recession will soon match the average length -- and average job loss -- of the last three postwar downturns. What goes down will come up -- unless destructive policies interfere with the sources of potential recovery.
And those sources have been forming for some time. The price of oil and other commodities have fallen by two-thirds since their 2008 summer peak, which has the effect of a major tax cut. The world is awash in liquidity, thanks to monetary ease by the Federal Reserve and other central banks. Monetary policy operates with a lag, but last year's easing will eventually stir economic activity.
Housing prices have fallen 27% from their Case-Shiller peak, or some two-thirds of the way back to their historical trend. While still high, credit spreads are far from their peaks during the panic, and corporate borrowers are again able to tap the credit markets. As equities were signaling with their late 2008 rally and January top, growth should under normal circumstances begin to appear in the second half of this year.
So what has happened in the last two months? The economy has received no great new outside shock. Exchange rates and other prices have been stable, and there are no security crises of note. The reality of a sharp recession has been known and built into stock prices since last year's fourth quarter.
What is new is the unveiling of Mr. Obama's agenda and his approach to governance. Every new President has a finite stock of capital -- financial and political -- to deploy, and amid recession Mr. Obama has more than most. But one negative revelation has been the way he has chosen to spend his scarce resources on income transfers rather than growth promotion. Most of his "stimulus" spending was devoted to social programs, rather than public works, and nearly all of the tax cuts were devoted to income maintenance rather than to improving incentives to work or invest.
His Treasury has been making a similar mistake with its financial bailout plans. The banking system needs to work through its losses, and one necessary use of public capital is to assist in burning down those bad assets as fast as possible. Yet most of Team Obama's ministrations so far have gone toward triage and life support, rather than repair and recovery.
AIG yesterday received its fourth "rescue," including $70 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program cash, without any clear business direction. (See here.) Citigroup's restructuring last week added not a dollar of new capital, and also no clear direction. Perhaps the imminent Treasury "stress tests" will clear the decks, but until they do the banks are all living in fear of becoming the next AIG. All of this squanders public money that could better go toward burning down bank debt.
The market has notably plunged since Mr. Obama introduced his budget last week, and that should be no surprise. The document was a declaration of hostility toward capitalists across the economy. Health-care stocks have dived on fears of new government mandates and price controls. Private lenders to students have been told they're no longer wanted. Anyone who uses carbon energy has been warned to expect a huge tax increase from cap and trade. And every risk-taker and investor now knows that another tax increase will slam the economy in 2011, unless Mr. Obama lets Speaker Nancy Pelosi impose one even earlier.
Meanwhile, Congress demands more bank lending even as it assails lenders and threatens to let judges rewrite mortgage contracts. The powers in Congress -- unrebuked by Mr. Obama -- are ridiculing and punishing the very capitalists who are essential to a sustainable recovery. The result has been a capital strike, and the return of the fear from last year that we could face a far deeper downturn. This is no way to nurture a wounded economy back to health.
Listening to Mr. Obama and his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, on the weekend, we couldn't help but wonder if they appreciate any of this. They seem preoccupied with going to the barricades against Republicans who wield little power, or picking a fight with Rush Limbaugh, as if this is the kind of economic leadership Americans want.
Perhaps they're reading the polls and figure they have two or three years before voters stop blaming Republicans and Mr. Bush for the economy. Even if that's right in the long run, in the meantime their assault on business and investors is delaying a recovery and ensuring that the expansion will be weaker than it should be when it finally does arrive.
And check this lovely graph to go along with it...
The Obama Depression has begun.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Bye, bye EU, hello USSR (again)
Is it just me or does it seem like any article from an overseas sorce seem insanely depressing and/or negative lately. Which reminds me, by this time tommorow I should have a new link section up called "World News", it will be a collection of what I think are the best sources of news outside this country. Anyway, read the article, if you dare...
The leaders of the European Union gathered Sunday in Brussels for an emergency summit meeting designed to tamp down the centrifugal forces unleashed by the global economic crisis that threaten to spin the bloc - and its single currency - apart.
In a statement afterward, the leaders tried to reassure their publics, promising to hold to the single market, promote growth and reject protectionism.
A call from Hungary for a large bailout for newer, eastern members of the union was rejected by Germany, the richest EU nation, and received little support from other countries.
Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsany of Hungary warned of "a new Iron Curtain" dividing Europe, even if the metal today was gold. He called for a special EU fund of up to €190 billion, or $241 billion, to protect the bloc's weakest members.
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, however, facing European elections this summer and national elections in September, said that countries must be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, but without explaining how. The Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, meanwhile, insisted that no member would be left "in the lurch."
Europe may now be "whole and free" after the collapse of communism. But the European Union is not a country, and the deep global contraction is stimulating nationalism, not consensus.
With uncertain leadership and few powerful collective institutions, the union is struggling with the strains this economic crisis has inevitably produced among 27 different countries with different economic histories. The traditional concept of "solidarity," of one for all, is being undermined by protectionist pressures from political leaders with national constituencies and agendas.
It is a sharp contrast with the meltdown's effects on the U.S. government. President Barack Obama has just announced a radical budget that will send the United States more deeply into debt, but that also makes an effort to redistribute income and lay the foundations for significant changes in health care, education and the environment.
Whether Europe can reach across constituencies to create consensus has been an open, and suddenly urgent, question.
"The European Union will now have to prove whether it is just a fair-weather union or has a real joint political destiny," said Stefan Kornelius, the foreign news editor of Süddeutsche Zeitung in Germany. "The whole project of a joint currency is being tested for the first time. We always said you can't really have a currency union without a political union, and we don't have one. There is no joint fiscal policy, no joint tax policy, no joint policy on which industries to subsidize or not. And none of the leaders is strong enough to pull the others out of the mud."
Karel Lanoo, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Studies in Brussels, said that "the lack of leadership in Europe is becoming dramatic," while Thomas Klau, Paris director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, said: "This crisis affects the political union that backs the euro and of course the EU as a whole, and solidarity is at the heart of the debate."
The crisis has implications for Washington, too, which wants a European Union that can promote allied interests in places like Afghanistan and the Middle East with financial and, increasingly, military help. "All of that is in doubt if the cornerstone of the EU - its internal market, economic union and solidarity - is in question," said Ronald Asmus, a former State Department official who runs the Brussels office of the German Marshall Fund.
The problems are basically twofold, one within the euro zone, which itself has an economy roughly the size of the United States, and one within the larger European Union. The 16 nations that use the euro - introduced in 1999 and one of the most significant political accomplishments of the last decade - are trying to keep the severe economic troubles of some members, like Ireland, Spain, Italy and Greece, from turning into national defaults that could force them to abandon the currency.
While Germany vowed never to bail out weaker members in return for giving up its strong national currency, the Deutsche mark, German leaders, with elections on the horizon, are now faced with the unpalatable prospect of having to do precisely that: put German money at risk to bail out weaker, less responsible partners.
Within the larger European Union, fissures are growing between older members and newer ones, especially those that lived under the stifling yoke of Soviet socialism only 20 years ago. Some countries of Central Europe, like the Czech Republic and Poland, are doing relatively well. Others, like Hungary, Romania and the Baltic states, are in a state of near-meltdown. But only two newer members - tiny Slovenia and Slovakia - are protected by being inside the euro zone, and there was little support Sunday for changing the rules to allow more to join quickly.
The other new members - even those doing relatively well, and whose banks did not engage in the subprime mortgage frenzy or indulge in toxic derivatives - have seen their currencies plummet against the euro, causing enormous problems of debt repayment, while the recession in their partners to the west has meant a radical drop in orders for the factories set up in the lower-cost eastern countries to satisfy consumers to the west.
Some countries are asking for aid, both from their partners and in some cases from the International Monetary Fund, to prop up their currencies and banks. While Western European countries are reluctant, with their own problems at home and within the euro zone itself, there is a deep interconnectedness in any case. Much of the debt at risk in Eastern Europe is on the books of euro zone banks - especially in Austria and Italy. The same is true for the mess farther afield, in Ukraine, which talks of joining the union.
Having watched the Soviet model fail, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe embraced the liberal, capitalist model as the price of integration with the west. Now that model, too, seems to be faltering, and the newer members feel adrift. Before the larger summit meeting Sunday, the Poles called an unprecedented meeting of nine of the new member states.
Afterward, Topolanek, who has been bickering with an impatient France, said: "We do not want any dividing lines, we do not want a Europe divided along a north-south or east-west line, pursuing a beggar-thy-neighbor policy."
The Hungarian government circulated a paper Sunday suggesting that the refinancing needs of Central Europe needs this year - including the nonmembers Croatia and Ukraine - could total $380 billion. "Failure to act," the paper said, "could cause a second round of systemic meltdowns that would mainly hit the euro zone economies."
Merkel, however, put her foot down against an undifferentiated package, though she suggested last week that targeted help to specific countries might be on offer, mentioning Ireland.
EU governments have already spent $380 billion in bank recapitalizations and put up $3.17 trillion to guarantee loans of banks and to try to get credit moving again.
The European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, the European Investment Bank and the World Bank said Friday they would jointly provide $31.1 billion to support East European nations, but more will be needed.
Klau of the European Council on Foreign Relations sees a worrying loss of faith in a certain brand of capitalism. "It's politically dangerous there since they've just emerged from an ultra-regulated and stifling system, were confronted with shock therapy that created great hardship, and are just beginning to recover and stabilize," Klau said. "Now they're thrown back into an economic and political cauldron."
And they are finding that their European partners are putting their own national interests ahead of "collective and necessary solidarity," Klau said.
Charles Grant, director of the Center for European Reform, is more sanguine. "My expectation is that the euro zone countries, out of pure self interest, will bail each other out," he said. "For Central and Eastern Europe, it is too early to say there won't be solidarity. But non-EU countries in the east, particularly Ukraine, seem to be the No. 1 worry."
Well ironically it looks like the EU is going the way the USSR did in the late 80's early 90's and the Soviet Union is coming back with Vladimir Putin as its Chairman. The Soviet Union never really died, it just went broke and dormant. Putin will wake it up and God help us all. The next few years could be ugly people, both nationally and worldwide.
The leaders of the European Union gathered Sunday in Brussels for an emergency summit meeting designed to tamp down the centrifugal forces unleashed by the global economic crisis that threaten to spin the bloc - and its single currency - apart.
In a statement afterward, the leaders tried to reassure their publics, promising to hold to the single market, promote growth and reject protectionism.
A call from Hungary for a large bailout for newer, eastern members of the union was rejected by Germany, the richest EU nation, and received little support from other countries.
Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsany of Hungary warned of "a new Iron Curtain" dividing Europe, even if the metal today was gold. He called for a special EU fund of up to €190 billion, or $241 billion, to protect the bloc's weakest members.
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, however, facing European elections this summer and national elections in September, said that countries must be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, but without explaining how. The Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, meanwhile, insisted that no member would be left "in the lurch."
Europe may now be "whole and free" after the collapse of communism. But the European Union is not a country, and the deep global contraction is stimulating nationalism, not consensus.
With uncertain leadership and few powerful collective institutions, the union is struggling with the strains this economic crisis has inevitably produced among 27 different countries with different economic histories. The traditional concept of "solidarity," of one for all, is being undermined by protectionist pressures from political leaders with national constituencies and agendas.
It is a sharp contrast with the meltdown's effects on the U.S. government. President Barack Obama has just announced a radical budget that will send the United States more deeply into debt, but that also makes an effort to redistribute income and lay the foundations for significant changes in health care, education and the environment.
Whether Europe can reach across constituencies to create consensus has been an open, and suddenly urgent, question.
"The European Union will now have to prove whether it is just a fair-weather union or has a real joint political destiny," said Stefan Kornelius, the foreign news editor of Süddeutsche Zeitung in Germany. "The whole project of a joint currency is being tested for the first time. We always said you can't really have a currency union without a political union, and we don't have one. There is no joint fiscal policy, no joint tax policy, no joint policy on which industries to subsidize or not. And none of the leaders is strong enough to pull the others out of the mud."
Karel Lanoo, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Studies in Brussels, said that "the lack of leadership in Europe is becoming dramatic," while Thomas Klau, Paris director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, said: "This crisis affects the political union that backs the euro and of course the EU as a whole, and solidarity is at the heart of the debate."
The crisis has implications for Washington, too, which wants a European Union that can promote allied interests in places like Afghanistan and the Middle East with financial and, increasingly, military help. "All of that is in doubt if the cornerstone of the EU - its internal market, economic union and solidarity - is in question," said Ronald Asmus, a former State Department official who runs the Brussels office of the German Marshall Fund.
The problems are basically twofold, one within the euro zone, which itself has an economy roughly the size of the United States, and one within the larger European Union. The 16 nations that use the euro - introduced in 1999 and one of the most significant political accomplishments of the last decade - are trying to keep the severe economic troubles of some members, like Ireland, Spain, Italy and Greece, from turning into national defaults that could force them to abandon the currency.
While Germany vowed never to bail out weaker members in return for giving up its strong national currency, the Deutsche mark, German leaders, with elections on the horizon, are now faced with the unpalatable prospect of having to do precisely that: put German money at risk to bail out weaker, less responsible partners.
Within the larger European Union, fissures are growing between older members and newer ones, especially those that lived under the stifling yoke of Soviet socialism only 20 years ago. Some countries of Central Europe, like the Czech Republic and Poland, are doing relatively well. Others, like Hungary, Romania and the Baltic states, are in a state of near-meltdown. But only two newer members - tiny Slovenia and Slovakia - are protected by being inside the euro zone, and there was little support Sunday for changing the rules to allow more to join quickly.
The other new members - even those doing relatively well, and whose banks did not engage in the subprime mortgage frenzy or indulge in toxic derivatives - have seen their currencies plummet against the euro, causing enormous problems of debt repayment, while the recession in their partners to the west has meant a radical drop in orders for the factories set up in the lower-cost eastern countries to satisfy consumers to the west.
Some countries are asking for aid, both from their partners and in some cases from the International Monetary Fund, to prop up their currencies and banks. While Western European countries are reluctant, with their own problems at home and within the euro zone itself, there is a deep interconnectedness in any case. Much of the debt at risk in Eastern Europe is on the books of euro zone banks - especially in Austria and Italy. The same is true for the mess farther afield, in Ukraine, which talks of joining the union.
Having watched the Soviet model fail, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe embraced the liberal, capitalist model as the price of integration with the west. Now that model, too, seems to be faltering, and the newer members feel adrift. Before the larger summit meeting Sunday, the Poles called an unprecedented meeting of nine of the new member states.
Afterward, Topolanek, who has been bickering with an impatient France, said: "We do not want any dividing lines, we do not want a Europe divided along a north-south or east-west line, pursuing a beggar-thy-neighbor policy."
The Hungarian government circulated a paper Sunday suggesting that the refinancing needs of Central Europe needs this year - including the nonmembers Croatia and Ukraine - could total $380 billion. "Failure to act," the paper said, "could cause a second round of systemic meltdowns that would mainly hit the euro zone economies."
Merkel, however, put her foot down against an undifferentiated package, though she suggested last week that targeted help to specific countries might be on offer, mentioning Ireland.
EU governments have already spent $380 billion in bank recapitalizations and put up $3.17 trillion to guarantee loans of banks and to try to get credit moving again.
The European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, the European Investment Bank and the World Bank said Friday they would jointly provide $31.1 billion to support East European nations, but more will be needed.
Klau of the European Council on Foreign Relations sees a worrying loss of faith in a certain brand of capitalism. "It's politically dangerous there since they've just emerged from an ultra-regulated and stifling system, were confronted with shock therapy that created great hardship, and are just beginning to recover and stabilize," Klau said. "Now they're thrown back into an economic and political cauldron."
And they are finding that their European partners are putting their own national interests ahead of "collective and necessary solidarity," Klau said.
Charles Grant, director of the Center for European Reform, is more sanguine. "My expectation is that the euro zone countries, out of pure self interest, will bail each other out," he said. "For Central and Eastern Europe, it is too early to say there won't be solidarity. But non-EU countries in the east, particularly Ukraine, seem to be the No. 1 worry."
Well ironically it looks like the EU is going the way the USSR did in the late 80's early 90's and the Soviet Union is coming back with Vladimir Putin as its Chairman. The Soviet Union never really died, it just went broke and dormant. Putin will wake it up and God help us all. The next few years could be ugly people, both nationally and worldwide.
The Hopey Changitude bus claims PepsiCo. as its latest victim
Ok, if your wondering about the title no I didn't come up with it. I believe the first person to use it was Sequel of Anti-Strib during march or april of this year. We coined the term because it seemed like for awhile the Hope and Change rhetoric of the Obama camp was getting sick and he was using people (like rev. Wright) for political use then throwing them under the perverbial bus once he had exhausted all use of them or they became a political liability to him. Anyway, if you have noticed recently the latest Pepsi ad campaign push uses something strikingly similar to the "classic" Obama campaign logo that was plastered across every cult member, er I mean "follower of the Chosen One", this campaign season.
The logo on the left is Pepsi's new logo, now boys and girls lets compare that with the Obama campaign's logo...
yea... no big difference there. Heck I'm surprised the National Lawyers Guild (see: new name for Trial Lawyers & Co.) hasn't been called upon by Obama the most Merciful to sue their asses for copyright infringement. And if there really was any dobut here's the Time "article".
In an apparent homage to the new President, PepsiCo has plastered the sides of buses and bus stops in the nation's capital with slogans like "Yes You Can," "Optimismmmm" and "Hope." In each poster, the letter O is inscribed with the redesigned Pepsi logo, a red, white and blue sphere that echoes the rising-sun image used by the Obama campaign.
It is not hard to interpret the message. Since 1984, Pepsi has been marketing itself as the hip, happening beverage of youth — "The choice of a new generation," as its longtime slogan went. And Barack Obama, one of the youngest men to serve as President, is nothing if not hip, especially among young consumers who supported him by wide margins. Pepsi says the campaign is not a political endorsement. "We're not interested in following political tailwinds," says Nicole Bradley, a Pepsi spokeswoman. "But we are interested in cultural change."
That said, the marketing campaign, which includes TV and print ads as well, does raise a question: Is Pepsi actually the choice of the Obama Administration?
My reporting at the White House suggests the answer is a resounding no. Several senior Administration officials are committed cola drinkers, and without fail they spend their days sipping from a can of Diet Coke, a product of Pepsi's chief competitor, Coca-Cola. On Monday, as members of Congress and key lobbyists filed into a briefing room for the final event of a daylong fiscal summit, they were greeted with an ice chest full of complimentary Diet Coke, not Diet Pepsi. (Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus was one of many to grab a can.) Hours earlier, at a breakout session with members of Congress in the Indian Treaty Room, Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag handled not one, but two cans of Diet Coke during the nearly two-hour session. Larry Summers, Obama's top economic adviser, rarely walks anywhere in the White House complex without a can of Diet Coke in his hand. He is well known for interrupting conversations to take another swig.
But these examples do not even constitute the most damning evidence against Pepsi. Late last year, Obama's nascent Administration worked out of transition offices in a downtown government building, which was serviced by only Pepsi-brand vending machines, according to three people who worked in the building. Two Administration officials have told me that a group of Obama aides, frustrated by having to run the security gauntlet to go to the corner store, stocked a refrigerator with Diet Coke in open rebellion against the available options. The pattern has continued at the White House. In his West Wing office, as in his previous office at Harvard University, Summers has a refrigerator stocked with cans of the decidedly non-Pepsi beverage.
Though Pepsi is available in the West Wing mess, it is rarely, if ever, seen out in the open. On Thursday, the recycling bin outside White House spokesman Robert Gibbs' office contained six cans of Diet Coke and one can of Sprite Zero, which is also a Coca-Cola product. In another part of the building, I asked a White House official, who had a can of Diet Coke sitting on his desk, if the Obama Administration had a clear bias for Coke over Pepsi. "I think that's true," the official responded, with a smile. "Don't most Americans?"
To a certain degree, yes. Nationwide, Coke is more popular than Pepsi, but not by the same margin seen among White House staff. Beverage Digest, a trade publication, reported that Coke and Diet Coke had a 27.2% share of the carbonated-beverage market in 2007, compared with a 16.7% share for Pepsi and Diet Pepsi.
As an official matter, the U.S. government is usually nonpartisan in the cola wars. In congressional office buildings, both Coke and Pepsi products are sold at vending machines, as they are in the waiting room at Andrews Air Force Base, where reporters wait to board Air Force One. In the air, the President's personal flight crew offers either cola to passengers. Nor is soda the only option for officials working in the White House. Several members of the press operation keep going with a steady diet of coffee, while one younger member of the White House Web team was spotted recently walking to work with a case of kombucha, a fermented tea drink sold at health food stores.
The health-conscious President is not known to have a strong preference for either Coke or Pepsi — though he was spotted at one debate sipping from a bottle of Aquafina water, which is made by PepsiCo. Obama is, however, a well-known fan of Honest Tea, a drink made by a company that is 40% owned by Coca-Cola.
Excuse me, but I need to laugh for a minute, HAHAHAHAHAHA. Pepsi you fools, not have you made yourselves look like a complete tool but then you get the cold shoulder and have probably turned off a lot of people. I am an avid pop drinker and I will avoid Pepsi until they change their creepy logo and get onto a new ad campaign.
The logo on the left is Pepsi's new logo, now boys and girls lets compare that with the Obama campaign's logo...
yea... no big difference there. Heck I'm surprised the National Lawyers Guild (see: new name for Trial Lawyers & Co.) hasn't been called upon by Obama the most Merciful to sue their asses for copyright infringement. And if there really was any dobut here's the Time "article".
In an apparent homage to the new President, PepsiCo has plastered the sides of buses and bus stops in the nation's capital with slogans like "Yes You Can," "Optimismmmm" and "Hope." In each poster, the letter O is inscribed with the redesigned Pepsi logo, a red, white and blue sphere that echoes the rising-sun image used by the Obama campaign.
It is not hard to interpret the message. Since 1984, Pepsi has been marketing itself as the hip, happening beverage of youth — "The choice of a new generation," as its longtime slogan went. And Barack Obama, one of the youngest men to serve as President, is nothing if not hip, especially among young consumers who supported him by wide margins. Pepsi says the campaign is not a political endorsement. "We're not interested in following political tailwinds," says Nicole Bradley, a Pepsi spokeswoman. "But we are interested in cultural change."
That said, the marketing campaign, which includes TV and print ads as well, does raise a question: Is Pepsi actually the choice of the Obama Administration?
My reporting at the White House suggests the answer is a resounding no. Several senior Administration officials are committed cola drinkers, and without fail they spend their days sipping from a can of Diet Coke, a product of Pepsi's chief competitor, Coca-Cola. On Monday, as members of Congress and key lobbyists filed into a briefing room for the final event of a daylong fiscal summit, they were greeted with an ice chest full of complimentary Diet Coke, not Diet Pepsi. (Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus was one of many to grab a can.) Hours earlier, at a breakout session with members of Congress in the Indian Treaty Room, Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag handled not one, but two cans of Diet Coke during the nearly two-hour session. Larry Summers, Obama's top economic adviser, rarely walks anywhere in the White House complex without a can of Diet Coke in his hand. He is well known for interrupting conversations to take another swig.
But these examples do not even constitute the most damning evidence against Pepsi. Late last year, Obama's nascent Administration worked out of transition offices in a downtown government building, which was serviced by only Pepsi-brand vending machines, according to three people who worked in the building. Two Administration officials have told me that a group of Obama aides, frustrated by having to run the security gauntlet to go to the corner store, stocked a refrigerator with Diet Coke in open rebellion against the available options. The pattern has continued at the White House. In his West Wing office, as in his previous office at Harvard University, Summers has a refrigerator stocked with cans of the decidedly non-Pepsi beverage.
Though Pepsi is available in the West Wing mess, it is rarely, if ever, seen out in the open. On Thursday, the recycling bin outside White House spokesman Robert Gibbs' office contained six cans of Diet Coke and one can of Sprite Zero, which is also a Coca-Cola product. In another part of the building, I asked a White House official, who had a can of Diet Coke sitting on his desk, if the Obama Administration had a clear bias for Coke over Pepsi. "I think that's true," the official responded, with a smile. "Don't most Americans?"
To a certain degree, yes. Nationwide, Coke is more popular than Pepsi, but not by the same margin seen among White House staff. Beverage Digest, a trade publication, reported that Coke and Diet Coke had a 27.2% share of the carbonated-beverage market in 2007, compared with a 16.7% share for Pepsi and Diet Pepsi.
As an official matter, the U.S. government is usually nonpartisan in the cola wars. In congressional office buildings, both Coke and Pepsi products are sold at vending machines, as they are in the waiting room at Andrews Air Force Base, where reporters wait to board Air Force One. In the air, the President's personal flight crew offers either cola to passengers. Nor is soda the only option for officials working in the White House. Several members of the press operation keep going with a steady diet of coffee, while one younger member of the White House Web team was spotted recently walking to work with a case of kombucha, a fermented tea drink sold at health food stores.
The health-conscious President is not known to have a strong preference for either Coke or Pepsi — though he was spotted at one debate sipping from a bottle of Aquafina water, which is made by PepsiCo. Obama is, however, a well-known fan of Honest Tea, a drink made by a company that is 40% owned by Coca-Cola.
Excuse me, but I need to laugh for a minute, HAHAHAHAHAHA. Pepsi you fools, not have you made yourselves look like a complete tool but then you get the cold shoulder and have probably turned off a lot of people. I am an avid pop drinker and I will avoid Pepsi until they change their creepy logo and get onto a new ad campaign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
