The Renunciation

It’s now three days after Easter Sunday and Mess-iah Obama has not yet ascended to Heaven. Quite the contrary. Obama and his Dimocrats have descended to a hot spot, and we don’t mean wireless access or Florida.

The promise from Mess-iah to his disciples was that because he, not Bill Clinton, reigned – they would be saved. “The big difference is me” But that’s not how matters have developed.

Iranian nut Mahmoud Ahmadinejad laughs at Clown Obama. “Mr. Obama, you are a newcomer (to politics). Wait until your sweat dries and get some experience” mocks Mahmoud – well maybe the nut has a point. Mahmoud spiced his analysis of Barack Obama by calling Obama “inexperienced and an amateur politician”. Wasn’t Obama the one who said he would talk to nuts like Ahmadinejad? Wasn’t Obama the one who bristled when Hillary Clinton labeled him “irresponsible and frankly naive” during the primaries?

Obama’s response to repeated insults from Persians, Arabs, and Muslims will be to squeeze the reliable American ally Israel and “impose” his “peace” – the peace of the grave.

Samantha Powers, who called Hillary Clinton a “monster” on behalf of Barack Obama during the primaries has all but called for an invasion of Israel by the United States in order to impose a “peace”. The words are ugly, but Hillary supporters expect ugliness from Samantha Powers.



That’s not the way it was supposed to be, at least not with Muslims. Remember when Dumb White People like John Kerry and Andrew Sullivan declared that Obama’s skin color (Kerry “Because he’s African American”) and “his person” would make Muslims fall in love with America (Sullivan “Which is where his face comes in.”) and all those silly old problems would melt away with celestial choirs singing the One’s praises? But old problems don’t vanish by wishing on a star; appeasement only encourages challenges; and calling a skunk “a rose” does not kill the smell.

It was all a delusion.

And now more delusions are headed towards disastrous end. The economic recovery, as Obama loving Robert Reich stated, is a “jobless recovery”.

“In March, the federal government began hiring census takers big time. These are six-month temp jobs, and they tell us nothing about underlying trends in the labor market. It’s hard to gauge precisely how many were hired — probably between 100,000 and 140,000, although some estimates put the hiring as low as 48,000. Almost a million census workers will need to be hired over the next few months. Subtract these, and today’s job numbers are good but nothing to write home about.[snip]

First, government spending on last year’s giant stimulus is still near its peak, and the Fed continues to hold down interest rates. Without these props, it’s far from clear we’d have any job growth at all.

Second, since the start of the Great Recession, the economy has lost 8.4 million jobs and failed to create another 2.7 million needed just to keep up with population growth. That means we’re more than 11 million in the hole right now. And that hole keeps deepening every month we fail to add at least 150,000 new jobs, again reflecting population growth.

A census-taking job is better than no job, but it’s no substitute for the real thing.

Bottom line: This is no jobs recovery.”

It’s another Obama scam to try to save Dimocrats in November from the angry jobless. Census employment gooses the numbers and government employment will not accomplish the priority job – which is jobs, jobs, jobs.

Those Dimocratic politicians who thought Obama would be their Mess-iah, or Noah, now see the water leaks ready to swamp the balsa wood ark.

“Before Congress left town for the spring recess, Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged rank-and-file Democrats to return home and tout the benefits of the landmark health care bill.

But instead of barnstorming their districts celebrating their historic accomplishment, some have been content to remain beneath the radar, reluctant to advertise their role in passing the centerpiece of President Barack Obama’s domestic policy agenda.

Rep. John Boccieri, who represents this conservative area in northeast Ohio, is one of them.

After announcing his intention to vote for the bill in a news conference televised live on CNN two days before the vote, Obama lauded his political courage. The president noted that the freshman Democrat sat “in as tough a district as there is,” a shout-out that prompted a standing ovation from the House Democratic Caucus.

For the past week, however, Boccieri has gone dark, surfacing only last Wednesday night — in New York City — at a cocktail party fundraiser to benefit his reelection campaign. Otherwise, the congressman had no public schedule.”

Boccieri and his fellow Dimocratic delusionals should drink as many of those New York City cocktails as they possibly can before they join the unemployment line:

“Boccieri is not alone. He’s one of a number of House Democrats who’ve kept a low profile over the recess, a group largely defined by the level of political jeopardy they face this fall.[snip]

One of them, Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.), has not held any events in Republican-oriented North Dakota to talk about health care, his staff acknowledged. This week, he’ll talk about Social Security.

The offices of other endangered members, ranging from veterans such as Reps. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.) and Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) to junior members such as Reps. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-Ariz.) and John Salazar (D-Colo.), did not return messages asking about how they had promoted health care last week. [snip]

His back flip on health care simply dumps fuel on a fire that no amount of special-interest money or pats on the back from Speaker Pelosi will be able to put out,” said Jim Renacci, the front-runner in the 16th District’s contested Republican primary. “I think he knows that people are mad as hell, … and I think that concerns him.”

After the Obama promises that he would save them if they saved him with a “yes” vote on the health scam Big Media celebrated. Emotions would run cooler and dumb American would learn to love the Obama scam crowed Big Media. The test would be if the anger died down, according to Big Media. But the anger boils:

“If the experience of this state’s two Democratic House members is any indication, the raw emotion and mistrust emanating from last summer’s congressional town halls never really went away.

Instead, the unrest simmered over the ensuing months, only to return to a boil when Rep. Carol Shea-Porter and Rep. Paul Hodes, who is running for U.S. Senate, returned home to meet with their constituents here during the first week of the Easter recess.

Their public events provided a bracing reminder to Democrats that the political pivot from health care to economic and financial issues is going to be much more arduous than they expected.”

Only now as the water gushes into the balsa wood Obama ark, do these dumb Dimocrats begin to question whether their Mess-iah is a false prophet.

“At a senior center in Manchester Wednesday, one woman turned away when Hodes offered his outstretched hand for an introduction.

I don’t want to shake your hand. You voted for health care, so just go,” snapped Carmen Guimond, as she refocused on her lunch of roast beef and mashed potatoes and waved him on. [snip]

While the landmark health care reform law is driving much of the hostility, at a handful of events here in the week after its passage, voters expressed profound cynicism and suspicion not just about the legislation but about Washington, government and virtually everything that came out of their legislators’ mouths. [snip]

For her part, at back-to-back town hall meetings in Bedford and Merrimack, Shea-Porter faced consistent boos, heckles and catcalls after almost every point she rattled off in defense of her vote. [snip]

“Why can’t we ask a question?” yelled one man, objecting to a format that randomly selected numbers out of a tub of tickets to choose questioners.

Are you a princess or a representative?” chastised one woman.

Yet another man was miffed that he received a form letter from the representative’s office in response to six specific questions he sent her by mail.

I expect a reply. I heard a position statement that did not answer any of my questions,” complained Ben Niles of Merrimack.”

Delusional Obama Dimocrats and their enablers assured themselves that the American public would not care about “process” and they would eventually love the stinking product (in the same way Obama used to say “to know me is to love me” – how has that panned out?).

“One question, though, is whether the unseemly horse trading that to many voters seemed to characterize the process has tainted the final product — and voters’ trust of Congress.

When Shea-Porter referred to the health care legislation as a bipartisan effort at one event and noted 200 amendments by Republicans, several in the audience jeered, “What a joke! You have got to be kidding me!

When she said there was growing support for the legislation, even within her congressional district, a heckler taunted her, yelling, “How are your polls doing, Carol?” Another shouted, “That’s a lie! That’s a Pelosi line!

Her statement that “the bill is paid for” led to a hearty round of laughs that made it seem as if she had delivered a joke.”

Carol Shea-Porter did deliver a joke, a bad joke no one is laughing at. Well, maybe Republicans are laughing.

American voters will laugh alongside Republicans because American still don’t know what is going on with health care.

“Questions reflecting confusion have flooded insurance companies, doctors’ offices, human resources departments and business groups.

“They’re saying, ‘Where do we get the free Obama care, and how do I sign up for that?’ ” said Carrie McLean, a licensed agent for eHealthInsurance.com.[snip]

McLean said the call center had been inundated by uninsured consumers who were hoping that the overhaul would translate into instant, affordable coverage.[snip]

We tell them it’s not free, that there are going to be things in place that help people who are low-income, but that ultimately most of that is not going to be taking place until 2014,” McLean said.”

That’s right, it’s not free, it’s a scam.

Even with Republican National Committee Chair Michael Steele proving daily he is a buffoon, the Republicans up for election in November continue to grow in strength. Steele’s ugly and stupid “racism” defense is as hollow as the Obama “racist opponents” charges doled out by Obama defenders. So stupid are the Steele “racist” charges that other Republicans are smartly smacking Steele down for using the race card. If only Dimocrats would denounce New Jersey Senator Menendez’ friends (such as state party chair John Wisniewski who reportedly said the recall campaign against Menendez is “racially motivated”) for their race-baiting.

Even with bumbling Michael Steele at the helm Republicans have managed to raise $11.4 million in March, the best amount raised in a midterm election year thus far by Republicans. The big dollar figures for Dimocrats will not save them from their own Obama albatross. The latest Gallup poll reflects the “enthusiasm” of Republicans and Independents to vote Dimocrats out in the November elections.

And all that talk about how the Obama health scam was written in stone, never to be changed? Not quite yet, reports the respected Christian Science Monitor.

“But their fight to sustain the new law through the 2010 and 2012 elections – before key features such as subsidies and the health insurance “exchanges” take effect – could be as daunting as passing it.

One reason: House and Senate Republicans, who uniformly rejected the healthcare package, may well remain opposed.

We don’t know a lot about what the long-term implications are of sustaining laws if they are passed on such partisan votes,” says Eric Patashnik, professor of politics and public policy at the University of Virginia.

Democrats upended conventional wisdom when they moved a major new social entitlement without a single Republican vote. The Social Security Act in 1935 and Medicare in 1965 passed with broad, bipartisan majorities. Call it a Senate mantra: No big bill moves unless it’s bipartisan. [snip]

During the next two election cycles, voters won’t have much to go on when judging whether they like healthcare reform. Many of the law’s key features won’t take effect until 2014. For Democrats, maintaining support for the law through those elections won’t be easy.

What sustained Social Security and Medicare through the years was that they came to be viewed as broad entitlements that helped the middle class as well as the poor.

“Even conservatives who had ideological concerns about these bills couldn’t oppose them because they developed such strong middle-class constituencies,” says Professor Patashnik. “It’s not clear this law will develop a similar level of support.”

Obama Dimocrats will continue to bamboozle the poor and the middle class, but as Abraham Lincoln observed, ‘you can’t fool all of the people all of the time’ and two elections cycles are a lot of time.

“Republicans, meanwhile, are already campaigning to repeal the law.

“The tax hikes, the Medicare cuts, the job-killing mandate, the accounting gimmicks, the backroom deals – we’re going to fight to repeal them at every single turn,” said House GOP leader John Boehner at a briefing on March 25.

“The American people aren’t going to take this lying down. The ink isn’t even dry and there’s a grass-roots revolt over this bill,” he added, referring to two states that have voted to reject mandates in the law and 37 others considering such measures or court challenges.”

As we pointed out last year, their is a very close historical analogy to the current Obama scam:

“Even a big, bipartisan vote is no guarantee that healthcare reforms can be sustained.

Case in point: the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988, which promised prescription-drug coverage and extended hospitalization benefits to seniors. Congress repealed the law a year after it was passed, after seniors objected to new out-of-pocket costs that kicked in before the law’s biggest benefits.

In 2003, House Republicans ground out a victory for President Bush’s prescription-drug reform. Sixteen Democrats in the House and 11 in the Senate gave Republicans at least a claim to be moving bipartisan legislation. Still, Democrats objected to GOP tactics to jam the bill through the House, including adding nearly three hours to a 15-minute vote. They also opposed GOP provisions to extend prescription-drug coverage to those who receive Medicare benefits through private plans (Medicare Advantage).

Now, in another twist, Democrats are using their majority to reverse that policy. The “fixes” that passed along with the healthcare reform bill cut $135.6 billion from the Medicare Advantage program from 2010 through 2019.

“It’s reasonable to speculate that [a partisan vote] is another factor that increases the risk of a law being appealed or eroded over time,” says Patashnik.”

Such is the level of Renunciation by the American public that some Republicans with long historical memories are reliving the great past triumphs and thinking it can happen again. Michael Barone:

“It is interesting to look back at the biggest Republican victory of the last 80 years, the off-year election of 1946. [snip]

Recent polls tell me that the Democratic Party is in the worst shape I have seen during my 50 years of following politics closely. So I thought it would be interesting to look back at the biggest Republican victory of the last 80 years, the off-year election of 1946. Republicans in that election gained 13 seats in the Senate and emerged with a 51–45 majority there, the largest majority that they enjoyed between 1930 and 1980. And they gained 55 seats in the House, giving them a 246–188 majority in that body, the largest majority they have held since 1930. The popular vote for the House was 53% Republican and 44% Democratic, a bigger margin than Republicans have won ever since. And that’s even more impressive when you consider that in 1946 Republicans did not seriously contest most seats in the South. In the 11 states that had been part of the Confederacy, Democrats won 103 of 105 seats and Republicans won only 2 seats in east Tennessee. In the 37 non-Confederate states, in contrast, Republicans won 246 of 330 seats, compared to only 85 for Democrats.

There are some intriguing similarities between the political situation in 1946 and the political situation today.”

Back in 1946 government was growing rapidly and Democrats threatened to grow it even faster. Government was taking 40% of the gross domestic product due to the war. There was talk of following the British example and create a “welfare state”. In 1944 Democrats controlled both houses of Congress (Senate 57-38, House 242-191) but not with such wide margins as today. Harry Truman was popular at first, but faded fast. The similarities have Republicans salivating.

Even before the November elections the Republicans are salivating.

“The prospect of losing two House seats in back-to-back special elections next month has sparked a vigorous, behind-the-scenes Democratic effort, designed to avoid an outcome that could lead to panic among the rank and file and stall the momentum generated by the recent passage of landmark health care legislation.

The trajectories of the two elections, which will take place in Pennsylvania and Hawaii over a span of four days next month, have raised alarm bells among top party officials who fear that a pair of defeats in the Democratic-held seats could amount to a Massachusetts Senate sequel, overshadowing President Barack Obama’s health care reform plan and reinforcing a narrative that the Democratic Party is on track for severe losses in November.”

In Hawaii Obama’s Washington thugs are backing the brother of Steve Case, the Dell CEO and Obama classmate, a man by the name of Ed Case against a Japanese-American woman, Colleen Hanabusa. Where are the charges of “racism”?

In Pennsylvania, John Murtha’s district might easily elect a Republican too.

“Locally, there’s a lot of anger, people know things aren’t right. And it taps into the general anxiety out there that things are on the wrong track,” Barbara Hafer, Critz’s onetime primary opponent and a former state treasurer, told POLITICO. “That could lead into a throw-the-bums out attitude.”

One Democratic operative following the race, noting that public polling shows Critz with a narrow lead over Republican businessman Tim Burns in a district with a significant Democratic voter registration advantage, was blunter in his assessment: “It’s easy to make an argument that he’s part of the problem. He was a Hill staffer; he asked for questionable earmarks. There’s a lot to beat him up on.”

Not only does Obama have to worry about a Republican winning in overwhelmingly Democratic Hawaii, there is also the problem of Deval Patrick. Deval Patrick in Massachusetts is in trouble and his puppet master David Axelrod, who used Patrick as a crash test dummy for Obama, might not be able to help:

“They are also trailblazing, post-civil-rights era African-American politicians of roughly the same age who rode similar hope and change themes to victory — “Yes we can” for Obama in 2008; “Together we can” for Patrick in 2006. Their messages were close enough that in one much-publicized 2008 speech, Obama even borrowed nearly exact phrasing from a 2006 Patrick speech.

It is precisely those thematic similarities — not to mention some shared political experiences — that have spawned theories that Patrick’s re-elect will be a bellwether for how Obama fares in 2012.

“Deval Patrick is the canary in the coal mine for Barack Obama in 2012,” conservative Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr wrote in January.

Mary Anne Marsh, a Democratic strategist in Massachusetts, believes that if Patrick loses, “many people would say, ‘This is the way to try to beat Barack Obama in 2012.’”

The time to beat Obama is in 2010.

For Obama no Ascension – only Renunciation remains.

Share

58 thoughts on “The Renunciation

  1. turndownobama
    I believe Palin would be neutralized as a politician if she were to consider a syndicated television talk show as those shows require clearance in the majority of the country to get a green light she’d have to market the show in a way as to be evocative without alienating people. A successful show would run at 4/5 pm or between 9 and noon and would have to be able to cover a wide range of issues and steer away from hotbed themes. Oprah created an empire by doing just that. Pre icky she had never spoken politically and when she did her well established show took a measurable hit even though she didn’t endorse him on the program. I think Palin would be a great alternative to what is now available but I think if she goes that way she will comprimise her ability to be vocal. TV shows have sponsors and a syndicated show recognizes that. IMHO a Sarah Palin show at four might work as a product and she may be able able to shine the light on issues more so but she will have to temper her responses. A King maker she may yet be. Well heading to the top to read the latest wisdom rom admin.

  2. basement angel
    April 7th, 2010 at 12:51 am
    And no one thinks of the US under Obama, where we are now fighting two wars, as pacifist. Obama is seen as as much a war enthusiast as Bush. People don’t like Obama and they don’t trust him. But he has made very clear, by doubling down in afghanistan, that he is willing to put our military on ground to fight.
    &&&&&&

    I don’t think the other world players, other big boys, the little guys, the rouge states, etc., consider Obama a “pacificist”. But he’s proven real good at bowing, caving in, poor negotiation tactics, in other words, a pushover.

    Just wait him out, or start with an outrageous negoatiating position, and watch him become Super Appeasement Man.

    Unless you are a predominantly Muslim country, then he will automatically prostrate himself to your country, to atone for our long standing relationship with our democratic allies such as Israel, England, France, etc.

  3. Arguably, he is a pacifist. Look at how reluctant he has been to use military force to attack adversaries who pose real threats to American lives. It started with the pirate incident where he refused to give the order to pull the trigger. The SEALS had to go on CNN and point the finger at him, and only then did he give the authority. Look at how long it took him to support the surge in Afghanistan. People died in the meantime. And now look at the way he is engaging in what many of us perceive to be a form of unilateral nuclear disarmament–by limiting future development, deployment and strategic utilization.

    The rebuttal argument is that inasmuch as he is engaged in two wars by definition he cannot be a pacifist. That argument is unpersuasive however, given the fact that he voted against that war and did in fact inherit it from his predecessor. He would like to pull out but his hands are tied. Thus, the argument is not compelling. The further argument is that he cannot be a pacifist because to be a pacifist is to possess a coherent philosophy, courage and a set of convictions. He has none of these. Therefore, this argument is more compelling.

    But it does raise a further question: if he is not a pacifist, but will not defend America, then what is he? In that case, the most likely explanation is that Obama is a coward. I find that explanation compelling as well/

    But I may be wrong. Why? Because to characterize him as a pacifist is to impute to him a coherent philosophy. That may well be a mistake. Thus, the alternative explanation is coward. And that indeed may be the better term/

  4. Lawsuit progresses:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6363NL20100407?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22&sp=true

    The joint lawsuit led by Florida and now grouping 18 states was filed on March 23 by mostly Republican attorney generals.

    It claims the sweeping reform of the $2.5 trillion U.S.healthcare system, pushed through by Democrats in the Congress after months of bitter partisan fighting, violates state-government rights in the U.S. Constitution and will force massive new spending on hard-pressed state governments.

    While some legal scholars think the suits will reach the Supreme Court, many agree that the supremacy clause of the Constitution, which puts the powers of the U.S. government above those of the states, will trump the states’ arguments.

    South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Utah, Louisiana, Alabama, Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Washington, Idaho, and South Dakota had previously joined Florida’s lawsuit.[snip]

    “We welcome the partnership of Indiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Nevada and Arizona as we continue fighting to protect the constitutional rights of American citizens and the sovereignty of our states,” Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum said.

    McCollum is seeking the Republican nomination to run for Florida governor.

    Another state, Virginia, has filed a separate suit, arguing the new law’s requirements that most Americans buy health insurance clash with a state law that exempts Virginians from federal fines to be imposed for not owning health insurance.[snip]

    The lawsuit asks the trial court to declare that the federal government is violating the sovereignty of the states and to bar federal agencies from enforcing the new law.

    A scheduling hearing is set for April 14, 2010 at the federal courthouse in Pensacola.

  5. I am wondering, if there is only one violation claimed in the lawsuit would it be ‘easier’ to dismiss it or rule against it? Virginia has filed a separet lawsuit. YAY, Virginia!!!!! Where are the rest of the states I ask???? Time to protect the Constitution.

  6. Admin: in my view, I do not see the Supremecy Clause as pivotal here.

    It reads: “The Constitution and all federal laws passed pursuant thereto shall be the supreme law of the land, all state and local laws to the contrary notwithstanding”.

    Obamacare is a federal law. It must be constitutional in order to be enforceable upon the states. Only then does it take precedence over state law.

    In other words, the Supremecy Clause does not answer the ultimate question as to whether Obamacare it valid. Rather it begs the question.

  7. Dem Strategist Have It Wrong
    E-mail from Dick Morris to Newsmax

    Stanley Greenberg and James Carville claim that the Republican Party has peaked too soon. Incredibly, Greenberg says “when we look back on this, we’re going to say Massachusetts is when 1994 happened.” Stan’s only claim to expertise in the 1994 elections, of course, is that he’s the guy who blew it for the Democrats. Right after that, President Clinton fired both of the flawed consultants and never brought them back again.

    Now,their latest pitch is that the highpoint of the GOP advance was the Scott Brown election and that, from here on, things will “improve slightly” for the Democrats.

    Once again, Carville and Greenberg are totally misreading the public mood. Each time the Republican activists battle, they become stronger. Their cyber and grass roots grow deeper. The negatives that attach to so-called “moderate” Democratic incumbents increase. And each time Obama, Reid and Pelosi defy public opinion and use their majorities to ram through unpopular legislation, frustration and anger rises.

    Were Obama’s ambitions to slacken, perhaps a cooling off might eventuate. But soon the socialist financial takeover bill will come on the agenda, followed by amnesty for illegal immigrants, cap and trade, and card check unionization. Each bill will trigger its own mobilization of public opposition and add to the swelling coalition of opposition to Obama and his radical agenda.

    And, all the while, the deficit will increase, interest rates will rise, and unemployment will remain high.

    Meanwhile, the political process will generate more and more strong Republican challengers. We have yet to see if former Governor Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin or Dino Rossi of Washington State will emerge to challenge Senators Feingold and Murray. Better House candidates will decide to capitalize on the momentum and will jump into the race and Republican donors will come out of hiding, their efforts catalyzed by the growing optimism about GOP chances.

    Presaging the Republican sweep that looms ahead, is the shift in the party ratings on various issues. Rasmussen has the Republicans ahead by 49-37 on the economy and 53-37 on health care. His likely voter poll shows GOP leads on every major issue area: national security (49-37), Iraq (47-39), Education (43-30), Immigration (47-34), Social Security (48-36), and Taxes (52-34).

    When Republicans are winning issues like education, healthy care, and social security – normally solidly Democratic issues – a sweep of unimaginable proportions is in the offing.

    Will the rise in economic growth and job creation – if they continue — offset the Republican gains? Not very likely. Remember Bill Clinton’s 1994 experience. Even though the recession had officially ended in the quarter before he took office and he proudly pointed to five million new jobs that had been created during the first two years of his presidency, Clinton got no bounce from the jobs issue or the economy. Even in the election of 1996, the economy was only marginally a source of strength for the Democratic president. It wasn’t until impeachment that the job growth that had been ongoing since he took office began to work heavily in his favor with the public. The hangover from a recession, certainly from one a violent as this, lasts a long time. A very long time.

    And all this assumes that things will, indeed, improve. Worries about inflation loom large and concerns that higher taxes and interest rates will trigger a new downturn also abound. As long as the deficit is as high as it is, there is no solid foundation for a sustained period of economic growth.

    Finally, Obama is now responsible for health care in America. When premiums rise, it will be his fault. When coverage is denied, it will be on his watch. When Medicare cuts kick in, it will be Obama who gets the blame.

    Carville’s last book touted “forty more years of Democrats.” Now he dreams of a loss of “only” 25 seats in the House and “six or seven” Senators. But these are pipe dreams. Republicans will gain more than fifty House seats and at least ten in the Senate, enough to take control in both Houses. That’s reality.

  8. Questions reflecting confusion have flooded insurance companies, doctors’ offices, human resources departments and business groups.

    LOL!! Crooks and fools.

    “They’re saying, ‘Where do we get the free Obama care, and how do I sign up for that?’ ” said Carrie McLean, a licensed agent for eHealthInsurance.com. The California-based company sells coverage from 185 health insurance carriers in 50 states.

    Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/06/91696/health-care-overhaul-spawns-mass.html#ixzz0kS7WVbtR

  9. jbstonesfan,

    This is for you.

    07/04/2010

    Netanyahu: Israel will not be pushed to peace

    By Barak Ravid and Haaretz Service

    Israel will not accept a Middle East peace agreement that is forced on it by external forces, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly said in private meetings in recent days, sources said Wednesday.

    Netanyahu reportedly told close aides that “it won’t work and it won’t be acceptable if a settlement is forced on us,” stressing the need to ensure proper security arrangements as part of any future peace deal.

    For that end, the PM reportedly said, Israel would have to retain a military presence along its eastern border with Jordan, adding that any agreement that doesn’t allow for those measure will not be accepted.

    Netanyahu’s comments came as the Washington Post quoted senior U.S. officials as saying earlier Wednesday that President Barack Obama was weighing the possibility of submitting a new American Middle East peace plan by this fall.

    Also Wednesday, in a press conference in the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said differences with Washington over a disputed construction project in East Jerusalem were yet to be resolved, signaling a continued deadlock in the U.S. push to restart Mideast peace talks.

    He spoke at a news conference called to trumpet the accomplishments of his first year in office.

    The U.S. has been pressuring Israel to halt construction in east Jerusalem, the section of the holy city claimed by the Palestinians. Israel considers all of Jerusalem to be its eternal capital.

    The dispute erupted into a crisis last month when Israel announced plans to build 1,600 new homes for Jews in east Jerusalem during a visit by Vice President Joe Biden. The announcement infuriated the Americans, who demanded the project be canceled, and derailed a plan to restart peace talks.

    Netanyahu accused the media of blowing the disagreement out of proportion.

    “What is being published doesn’t fit what we are talking about,” he said. “Apparently the discussion between us is more serious and more to the point than what is generally believed.”

    Netanyahu also said at the press conference that his was a “goverment of action,” adding that “the public is unaware of most of the actions” undertaken by the government.

    Netanyahu added that his government made 1,500 decisions in the past year, but said he wasn’t going to go into detail on them.
    The prime minister spoke of the continued firing of rockets by Gaza militants into Israel, and said that in the past year, his government adopted a new policy of “quick response” to any incident of rocket fire.

    “We are looking out for Israel’s security interests while at the same time trying to renew the peace process,” Netanyahu said.

    Netanyahu also spoke of the deal to release abducted IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, and said that Israel is willing to go a long way in order to push the deal forward. “Up to this point, we haven’t gotten a response from Hamas. I must note that when I asked, I did get a sign of life – the video of Gilad. We are taking actions to bring him home that we can’t always elaborate on,” the prime minister stressed.

    The Prime Minister commented on the recent tensions between Defense Minister Ehud Barak and IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Askenazi, and the decision not to extend Ashkenazi’s term.

    “Every organization must refresh its chain of command, even when there are people of quality at its head,” said Netanyahu. “Actually, it wasn’t a decision – it is a long standing rule that the IDF Chief of Staff serves a four-year term only,” said Netanyahu.

    Netanyahu also said that Israel is on its way to becoming a regional economic power, as well as a world technological power.

    “Under my leadership, Israel’s economy successfully recovered from the world economic crisis, and in order to complete the process, we must free the economy from bureaucracy,” Netanyahu said.

    The Prime Minister also said that during his time in office, gaps in Israeli society have decreased, speaking of the gaps between the rich and the poor as well as those between the young and the elderly. “These are one of the social steps that I am most proud of,” said Netanyahu.

    cont. at…

    http://www.worldjewishdaily.com/toolbar.html?4t=extlink&4u=http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1161409.html

  10. An email I was sent. I agree with most of this
    *****************

    Subject: congressional reform

    Date: Tuesday, April 6, 2010, 1:33 PM

    I am sending this to virtually everybody on my e-mail list and that includes conservatives, liberals, and everybody in between. Even though we disagree on a number of issues, I count all of yo u as friends. My friend and neighbor wants to promote a “Congressional Reform Act of 2010.” It would contain eight provisions, all of which would probably be strongly endorsed by those who drafted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

    I know many of you will say “this is impossible.” Let me remind you, Congress has the lowest approval rating of any entity in Government. Now is the time when Americans will join together to reform Congress – the entity that represents us.

    We need to get a Senator to introduce this bill in the US Senate and a Representative to introduce a similar bill in the US House. These people will become American heroes.

    **********************************

    Congressional Reform Act of 2010

    1. Term Limits.
    12 years only, one of the possible options below..

    A. Two Six-year Senate terms
    B. Six Two-year House terms
    C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

    2. No Tenure / No Pension.

    A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

    3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.

    All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.

    4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

    5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

    6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

    7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

    8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.

    The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

    Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

    If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete.

  11. Funny stuff from BP
    ***************

    Discovery Announcement ~ The densest element in the known Universe has been found!

    A major research institution has just announced the discovery of the densest element yet known to science. The new element has been named Pelosium. Pelosium has one neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 224 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 311.

    These particles are held together by dark forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.
    The symbol of Pelosium is PU.

    Pelosium’s mass actually increases over time, as morons randomly interact with various elements in the atmosphere and become assistant deputy neutrons within the Pelosium molecule, leading to the formation of isodopes.

    This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientist to believe that Pelosium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as Critical Morass.

    When catalyzed with money, Pelosium activates CNNadnausium, an element that radiates orders of magnitude more energy, albeit as incoherent noise, since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons as Pelosium.

  12. One of my friends on facebook had a photo of Obama with a cigarette, and a link to a poll about whether you would re-elect him in 2012. After you vote, you are redirected to a republican page. I found this interesting as I am sure this friend a few months ago though O was doing a great job.

    Some more evidence that things are not going according to the plans of the Dims.

  13. Nearly half of US households escape fed income tax
    Recession, new tax credits have nearly half of US households paying no federal income tax

    FILE – In this April 5, 2010 file photo, Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman gestures while speaking at the National Press Club in Washington. Tax Day is a dreaded symbol of civic responsibility for millions of taxpayers, but for nearly half of all U.S. households, it’s simply somebody else’s problem. About 47 percent of U.S. households will pay no federal income taxes for 2009, either because their incomes were too low or because they qualified for enough credits and deductions to eliminate their tax liability, according to projections by a private research group. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, File)
    Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer, On Wednesday April 7, 2010, 5:38 pm EDT
    WASHINGTON (AP) — Tax Day is a dreaded deadline for millions, but for nearly half of U.S. households it’s simply somebody else’s problem.

    About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That’s according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.

    Most people still are required to file returns by the April 15 deadline. The penalty for skipping it is limited to the amount of taxes owed, but it’s still almost always better to file: That’s the only way to get a refund of all the income taxes withheld by employers.

    In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.

    Tax cuts enacted in the past decade have been generous to wealthy taxpayers, too, making them a target for President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress. Less noticed were tax cuts for low- and middle-income families, which were expanded when Obama signed the massive economic recovery package last year.

    The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners — households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 — paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.

    The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

    “We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing,” said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

    The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes, including federal payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, and excise taxes on gasoline, aviation, alcohol and cigarettes. Many also pay state or local taxes on sales, income and property.

    That helps explain the country’s aversion to taxes, said Clint Stretch, a tax policy expert Deloitte Tax. He said many people simply look at the difference between their gross pay and their take-home pay and blame the government for the disparity.

    “It’s not uncommon for people to think that their Social Security taxes, their 401(k) contributions, their share of employer health premiums, all of that stuff in their mind gets lumped into income taxes,” Stretch said.

    The federal income tax is the government’s largest source of revenue, raising more than $900 billion — or a little less than half of all government receipts — in the budget year that ended last Sept. 30. But with deductions and credits, especially for families with children, there have long been people who don’t pay it, mainly lower-income families.

    The number of households that don’t pay federal income taxes increased substantially in 2008, when the poor economy reduced incomes and Congress cut taxes in an attempt to help recovery.

    In 2007, about 38 percent of households paid no federal income tax, a figure that jumped to 49 percent in 2008, according to estimates by the Tax Policy Center.

    In 2008, President George W. Bush signed a law providing most families with rebate checks of $300 to $1,200. Last year, Obama signed the economic recovery law that expanded some tax credits and created others. Most targeted low- and middle-income families.

    Obama’s Making Work Pay credit provides as much as $800 to couples and $400 to individuals. The expanded child tax credit provides $1,000 for each child under 17. The Earned Income Tax Credit provides up to $5,657 to low-income families with at least three children.

    There are also tax credits for college expenses, buying a new home and upgrading an existing home with energy-efficient doors, windows, furnaces and other appliances. Many of the credits are refundable, meaning if the credits exceed the amount of income taxes owed, the taxpayer gets a payment from the government for the difference.

    “All these things are ways the government says, if you do this, we’ll reduce your tax bill by some amount,” said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

    The government could provide the same benefits through spending programs, with the same effect on the federal budget, Williams said. But it sounds better for politicians to say they cut taxes rather than they started a new spending program, he added.

    Obama has pushed tax cuts for low- and middle-income families and tax increases for the wealthy, arguing that wealthier taxpayers fared well in the past decade, so it’s time to pay up. The nation’s wealthiest taxpayers did get big tax breaks under Bush, with the top marginal tax rate reduced from 39.6 percent to 35 percent, and the second-highest rate reduced from 36 percent to 33 percent.

    But income tax rates were lowered at every income level. The changes made it relatively easy for families of four making $50,000 to eliminate their income tax liability.

    Here’s how they did it, according to Deloitte Tax:

    The family was entitled to a standard deduction of $11,400 and four personal exemptions of $3,650 apiece, leaving a taxable income of $24,000. The federal income tax on $24,000 is $2,769.

    With two children younger than 17, the family qualified for two $1,000 child tax credits. Its Making Work Pay credit was $800 because the parents were married filing jointly.

    The $2,800 in credits exceeds the $2,769 in taxes, so the family makes a $31 profit from the federal income tax. That ought to take the sting out of April 15.

    Internal Revenue Service: http://www.irs.gov

    Tax Policy Center: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org

  14. Thanks JanH…hope you are doing well as we miss your contributions. Obama is pushing for and is being advised to force a peace plan on Israel which would essentially require pre 67 borders and a right of return, obviously suicidal to the Jewish state. I just can’t understand why the Clinton’s are going along with this.

  15. Non-sequitur alert.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/07/AR2010040703402.html?nav=hcmodule
    Sowell wrote a commentary on the Web site GOPUSA cautioning Americans to “stay away from injecting race into political issues” and doubting news reports and firsthand accounts by members of Congress that tea party protesters directed racial slurs at black legislators as they walked to the Capitol to cast their votes.
    “This is a serious charge — and one deserving of some serious evidence,” Sowell said. “But, despite all the media recording devices on the scene, not to mention recording devices among the crowd gathered there, nobody can come up with a single recorded sound to back up that incendiary charge. Worse yet, some people have claimed that even doubting the charge suggests that you are a racist.”
    Yet Lenny McAllister, a Republican commentator and author, said he has seen racism within the tea party and has confronted it — approaching people with racially derogatory signs of President Obama and asking them to take the signs down.

  16. Black conservative tea party backers take heat
    Apr 6 06:07 PM

    By VALERIE BAUMAN
    Associated Press Writer

    ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) – They’ve been called Oreos, traitors and Uncle Toms, and are used to having to defend their values. Now black conservatives are really taking heat for their involvement in the mostly white tea party movement—and for having the audacity to oppose the policies of the nation’s first black president.
    “I’ve been told I hate myself. I’ve been called an Uncle Tom. I’ve been told I’m a spook at the door,” said Timothy F. Johnson, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, a group of black conservatives who support free market principles and limited government.

    “Black Republicans find themselves always having to prove who they are. Because the assumption is the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks,” he said.

    Johnson and other black conservatives say they were drawn to the tea party movement because of what they consider its commonsense fiscal values of controlled spending, less taxes and smaller government. The fact that they’re black—or that most tea partyers are white—should have nothing to do with it, they say.

    “You have to be honest and true to yourself. What am I supposed to do, vote Democratic just to be popular? Just to fit in?” asked Clifton Bazar, a 45-year-old New Jersey freelance photographer and conservative blogger.

    Opponents have branded the tea party as a group of racists hiding behind economic concerns—and reports that some tea partyers were lobbing racist slurs at black congressmen during last month’s heated health care vote give them ammunition.

    But these black conservatives don’t consider racism representative of the movement as a whole—or race a reason to support it.

    Angela McGlowan, a black congressional candidate from Mississippi, said her tea party involvement is “not about a black or white issue.”

    “It’s not even about Republican or Democrat, from my standpoint,” she told The Associated Press. “All of us are taxed too much.”

    Still, she’s in the minority. As a nascent grassroots movement with no registration or formal structure, there are no racial demographics available for the tea party movement; it’s believed to include only a small number of blacks and Hispanics.

    Some black conservatives credit President Barack Obama’s election—and their distaste for his policies—with inspiring them and motivating dozens of black Republicans to plan political runs in November.

    For black candidates like McGlowan, tea party events are a way to reach out to voters of all races with her conservative message.

    “I’m so proud to be a part of this movement! I want to tell you that a lot of people underestimate you guys,” the former national political commentator for Fox News told the cheering crowd at a tea party rally in Nashville, Tenn., in February.

    Tea party voters represent a new model for these black conservatives—away from the black, liberal Democratic base located primarily in cities, and toward a black and white conservative base that extends into the suburbs.

    Black voters have overwhelmingly backed Democratic candidates, support that has only grown in recent years. In 2004, presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry won 88 percent of the black vote; four years later, 95 percent of black voters cast ballots for Obama.

    Black conservatives don’t want to have to apologize for their divergent views.

    “I’ve gotten the statement, ‘How can you not support the brother?'” said David Webb, an organizer of New York City’s Tea Party 365, Inc. movement and a conservative radio personality.

    Since Obama’s election, Webb said some black conservatives have even resorted to hiding their political views.

    “I know of people who would play the (liberal) role publicly, but have their private opinions,” he said. “They don’t agree with the policy but they have to work, live and exist in the community … Why can’t we speak openly and honestly if we disagree?”

    Among the 37 black Republicans running for U.S. House and Senate seats in November is Charles Lollar of Maryland’s 5th District.

    A tea party supporter running against House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Lollar says he’s finding support in unexpected places.

    The 38-year-old U.S. Marine Corps reservist recently walked into a bar in southern Maryland decorated with a Confederate flag. It gave his wife Rosha pause.

    “I said, ‘You know what, honey? Many, many of our Southern citizens came together under that flag for the purpose of keeping their family and their state together,'” Lollar recalled. “The flag is not what you’re to fear. It’s the stupidity behind the flag that is a problem. I don’t think we’ll find that in here. Let’s go ahead in.”

    Once inside, they were treated to a pig roast, a motorcycle rally—and presented with $5,000 in contributions for his campaign.

    McGlowan, one of three GOP candidates in north Mississippi’s 1st District primary, seeks a seat held since 2008 by Democrat Travis Childers. The National Republican Congressional Committee has supported Alan Nunnelee, chairman of the state Senate Appropriations Committee, who is also pursuing tea party voters.

    McGlowan believes the tea party movement has been unfairly portrayed as monolithically white, male and middle-aged, though she acknowledged blacks and Hispanics are a minority at most events.

    Racist protest signs at some tea party rallies and recent reports by U.S. Reps. John Lewis, D-Ga., and Barney Frank, D-Mass., that tea partyers shouted racial and anti-gay slurs at them have raised allegations of racism in the tea party movement.

    Black members of the movement say it is not inherently racist, and some question the reported slurs. “You would think—something that offensive—you would think someone got video of it,” Bazar, the conservative blogger, said.

    “Just because you have one nut case, it doesn’t automatically equate that you’ve got an organization that espouses (racism) as a sane belief,” Johnson said.

    Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington bureau of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, suggested a bit of caution.

    “I’m sure the reason that (black conservatives) are involved is that from an ideological perspective, they agree,” said Shelton. “But when those kinds of things happen, it is very important to be careful of the company that you keep.”

  17. OH Debbie, Debbie, Debbie…how far you are falling…

    cnsnews.com/news/article/63885

    Rep. Wasserman Schultz Insists Health Care Law Doesn’t Require Individuals to Buy Insurance

    Wednesday, April 07, 2010
    By Matt Cover, Staff Writer

    Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) (CNSNews.com) – Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D.-Fla.) is insisting that the new health care law she voted for last month does not mandate that individuals buy health insurance, despite language in the law that plainly says otherwise.

    At an April 5 town hall meeting in Fort Lauderdale (see video below), a constituent asked Wasserman Shultz where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance. She responded that the new health care law did not require individuals to buy health insurance.

    In a written statement to CNSNews.com on Wednesday, her press secretary, Jonathan Beeton, said it was true that the health care law did not mandate that individuals buy health insurance and that Wasserman Schultz stood by her assertion at the townhall meeting.

    “We actually have not required in this law that you carry health insurance,” Wasserman Schultz said at the townhall meeting.

    “Yes, this is accurate,” Beeton said in his statement to CNSNews.com. “You have a choice of insuring yourself with affordable coverage, or paying an assessment that will offset the burden you place on other insured Americans and taxpayers by not being insured.”

    Wasserman Schultz said at the townhall meeting that instead of an individual federal mandate, the law merely created new tax categories that would reflect who carries insurance and who does not. “What we did is that–just like when you’re treated–that they categorize you differently in terms of your tax return when you’re married versus single, just like we categorize you differently when you’re a homeowner versus someone who doesn’t own a home; just like we’ve categorized you differently when you have children versus not having children,” she said.

    “What we’re doing is that you will be in a different tax status if you carry insurance versus not carrying health insurance,” said the congresswoman. “So you can feel free to choose not to carry health insurance — that’s just going to be reflected in the tax category that you’re in on your tax return.”

    To drive her point home, Wasserman Schultz again stated that there was no requirement to buy health insurance. “But there is no requirement in this law that you must carry health insurance,” she said.

    The actual law she voted for says otherwise. It contains a requirement that each person have health insurance, and assesses a penalty if they do not.

    The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code, the nation’s tax law, adding a section entitled, “Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage,” section 5000A.

    “Subtitle D of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new chapter: ‘‘CHAPTER 48—MAINTENANCE OF MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE ‘‘Sec. 5000A. Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage.”

    Contrary to Rep. Wasserman Schultz’s claim, this section of the law requires that every individual certify to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that they have a government-approved level of health insurance coverage.

    “REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.—An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month,” the law reads.

    Individuals who fail to compy with this “requirement” are assessed a “shared responsibility payment”–a fine collected by the IRS.

    “SHARED RESPONSIBILITY PAYMENT.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—If an applicable individual fails to meet the requirement of subsection (a) for 1 or more months during any calendar year beginning after 2013…there is hereby imposed a penalty with respect to the individual in the amount determined under subsection (c).”

    That penalty will be no more than $750 per person who does not have health insurance, up to a maximum of $2,250 per household or two percent of household income, whichever is greater.

    The law does not create additional tax filing statuses–like the current married or single-filing status–nor does it mandate that not having insurance would place an individual in a different tax bracket, as the mortgage and child deductions can.

    “INCLUSION WITH RETURN.—Any penalty imposed by this section with respect to any month shall be included with a taxpayer’s return under chapter 1 for the taxable year which includes such month,” says the new law.
    **********************************************

    there is a video clip of her speaking on the website above…

    Does she think we are really going to buy this BS? such a big disappointment!

  18. wbboei, some pacifist — read Greenwald’s article.
    ——————-
    Oh come on pm 317. You cannot be serious. This order did not really come from Obama. Someone forged his signature when no one was looking. Messiahs do not do contract hits. He is a man of peace who just happens to come from Chicago.

  19. Yet Lenny McAllister, a Republican commentator and author, said he has seen racism within the tea party and has confronted it — approaching people with racially derogatory signs of President Obama and asking them to take the signs down.
    —————————
    I do not doubt there were isolated expressions of this. But that is not what the movement stands for. That was Tom Sowell’s point. I wonder why Lennie is grandstanding on this issue. He claims to be a Repubulican. But I must confess that I am suspicious of his motives.

  20. Didn’t this dustup with Karzai happen after Obama’s middle of the night visit to Afganistan??? It seems to me that I heard Karzai’s supposed anti-american statements after our dumbass-in-chief went there….So now he calls Hillary to clarify his statements??? Even Karzai knows who the brains of the outfit is???

    http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/04/07/white-house-may-cancel-obama-meeting-with-karzai/

    It sure seems to me everytime Hillary makes headway with a country or a leader, Obama comes along and F*&ks it up, every time!!

  21. If Obama has authorized a hit on this Islamic Terrorist, then he has info on Obama he wants concealed…Obama wants to keep his past kept very quiet…

  22. Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)
    Wednesday, April 7th at 10:36PM EDT
    17 Comments
    Updated: As the night goes on speculation has moved to the guy smoking on the plane and being a jerk – joking about lighting his shoe. No explosives residue has been found.
    ————–

    Today, the White House leaked that it was ditching the phrase ‘radical Islam’ from government language.

    Though details are still sketchy, early reports are that an Islamic radical attempted to blow up a United Airlines flight from Reagan National Airport to Denver tonight with a shoe bomb. However the news is changing rapidly and by the time you read this, Pete Williams at NBC is reporting it may have been something else.

    ABC News is reporting the bomber made it on to the plane and attempted to light the bomb, but was stopped by air marshals.

    The bomber is claiming diplomatic immunity from Qatar and worked at Qatar’s embassy in Washington.

    So we have now had two bombers make it through airport security and on to planes under Barack Obama’s Department of Homeland Security — a Department of Homeland Security that has been tweaking Bush administration era policies to make us safer.

    On top of these, we’ve had the recruiting office shootings and the Ft. Hood terrorist attack and the White House still wants to bring the GTMO detainees to Illinois.

    All of that talk about making our enemies like us and forgiving us in the post-Bush era isn’t really working out for us, is it?

    Now, all that said, before we start throwing blame, let’s get some answers. And let’s begin the countdown until Jane Hall Lute is thrown under the bus. Lute, the Deputy Secretary for Homeland Security, has been on “an outreach effort” to boost airport security. Her qualification for her job? Assistant Secretary General of Peacekeeping Operations for the United Nations. Yes, that peacekeeping operation.

    There is much we do not yet know. But we can see the game changing before our eyes with this diplomatic immunity issue.

    Category: terrorism

  23. #
    wbboei
    April 8th, 2010 at 12:34 am

    wbboei, some pacifist — read Greenwald’s article.
    ——————-
    Oh come on pm 317. You cannot be serious. This order did not really come from Obama. Someone forged his signature when no one was looking. Messiahs do not do contract hits. He is a man of peace who just happens to come from Chicago.
    ————————————–

    OMG, wbboei has turned into an Obot!! 😉

    All those anti-war, ACLU type leftists who fell for his words over Hillary. Shame on them.

  24. Now the bots are sabotaging the email of a congressional candidate who opposes the dim administration. The alternative explanations do not wash. Why not? Because they have done this before, repeatedly.

    “Liz Carter’s personal email account has been sabotaged. We have arrived.”
    ————————————————————————
    Liz Carter’s Email Sabotoged

    So reads a tweet from Liz Carter’s campaign manager Cheryl Prater. Earlier today, I saw her post about email sabotaged, and contacted her for further explanation.

    Liz had noticed some problems with people not receiving her email. Realizing there may be a problem, she checked with her email server. After some digging, she found out she’d been blacklisted by all of the major email servers. This is common with spammers and people who send mass emails frequently… none of which applied to her personal email account. All mass communication was handled through a service, so spamming wasn’t the cause. This is the screen they were directed to.

    The only option is that someone reported her email and IP address to the servers and had her blacklisted. Which is funny, because all the email went out through the 3rd party service anyway. The following is the full statement from Liz:

    I’ve always believed that if you’re not getting attacked, you’re miles from the fight.

    Today, I received confirmation that I am indeed on the frontline of the battle: my personal email account and IP address were sabotaged by someone who wants me silenced. The following is a message to whomever blacklisted my accounts:

    You will not silence me.

    First of all, I utilize a bulk e-mail service to communicate with those who want to see improvement in District 4 and in Congress, not my personal account, so my message was still being received.

    Secondly, a virtual rock through my window only strengthens my resolve to bring true transparency to Congress and prosperity to the People. All you’ve accomplished to do is disrupt my schedule for a couple of hours and hopefully get a good laugh thinking you got to me.

    The joke is on you. You have failed to capsize my campaign or silence my voice on behalf of the people I hope to serve.

    Liz Carter

    Georgia District 4

    Candidate for US Congress

    Liz, this is just the beginning, girl. Hang on for the ride – it’s not a secret what they do to women who threaten their agenda. This ain’t nothin’ but fuel for the fire.

  25. I would think tampering with an email account would be a federal offense. That is tampering with the mail. The only difference is the Feds to not run it. Interesting! If they tampered with your mail at UPS, I think you are covered, so why not the internet.

  26. More evidence that Obama’s Serial Lies Are Catching Up With Him. The economy is improving jobs are coming back and everything is beautiful, now excuse me while I go cork off.

    Even the lying sacks of shit at AP cannot ignore the announcement. Oh they would if they could, but they can’t because they know they would be scooped, yet again, by FOX News.

    Of course these liars not bother to mention the connection between the continued failure of the economy and the lavish spending of his banker buddies who were the recipients of taxpayer bail outs and now refuse to lend money to the private sector who provides the jobs.

    There are times when I think Obama is incompetent, and there are other times when I think he is evil and purposeful. In the final analysis, it matters not a farthing because either way he is doing irreparable harm to the country.
    ———————————————————————————————————

    Initial jobless claims increase unexpectedly
    New claims for jobless benefits increase unexpectedly, while total benefit rolls drop
    Buzz up! 16
    Print
    Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer, On Thursday April 8, 2010, 9:09 am

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of newly laid-off workers seeking unemployment benefits rose last week, a sign that jobs remain scarce even as the economy recovers.

    The Labor Department said Thursday that first-time claims increased by 18,000 in the week ending April 3, to a seasonally adjusted 460,000. That’s worse than economists’ estimates of a drop to 435,000, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters.

    The report covers the week that includes the Easter holiday, and a Labor Department analyst said seasonal adjustment for Easter can be difficult since the holiday occurs in different weeks each year.

    California also closed its state offices for a holiday March 31, the analyst said, which likely held down the claims figures. On an unadjusted basis, claims rose by 6,500 to nearly 415,000.

    Economists closely watch unemployment claims, which are seen as a gauge of layoffs and a measure of companies’ willingness to hire new workers.

    The four week average, which smooths volatility, rose to 450,250. Two weeks ago, the average fell to its lowest level since September 2008, when Lehman Brothers collapsed and the financial crisis intensified.

    Jobless claims peaked during the recession at 651,000 in late March 2009.

    The figures underscore that the job market remains weak even as the economy recovers. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Wednesday that high unemployment is one of the toughest challenges the economy faces.

    While layoffs have slowed, hiring is “very weak,” he said. “We are far from being out of the woods. Many Americans are still grappling with unemployment or foreclosure or both.”

    On a more positive note in the Labor Department’s report, the tally of people continuing to claim benefits for more than a week fell by 131,000 to 4.55 million, the lowest level since December 2008.

    That figure lags initial claims by a week. But it doesn’t include millions of people who have used up the regular 26 weeks of benefits typically provided by states, and are receiving extended benefits for up to 73 additional weeks, paid for by the federal government.

    Slightly more than 5.8 million people were receiving extended benefits in the week ended March 20, the latest data available, a drop of about 230,000 from the previous week. The extended benefit data isn’t seasonally adjusted and is volatile from week to week.

    Other recent reports have indicated that employers are slowly ramping up hiring. The Labor Department said Friday that the nation added a net total of 162,000 jobs in March, the most in three years. The unemployment rate held at 9.7 percent for the third straight month.

    Layoffs fell to their lowest level in three years in February, according to a separate government report Tuesday. But hiring remained about 40 percent below pre-recession levels.

    Some companies are still cutting jobs. An oilfield services company, Denver-based EnerCrest, said this month it has closed five locations in four states, losing 225 employees. Business software company Computer Associates Inc. said Tuesday that it is cutting 1,000 jobs as part of a plan to reduce costs.

    Some recipients of the extended federal aid could see their benefits disrupted this week, as Congress failed to approve a continuation of the federal programs before leaving for a two-week vacation at the end of March.

    That could cut off benefits for more than 200,000 people this week, according to the National Employment Law Project, an advocacy group, but Congressional Democratic leaders have said they will make up for the lost checks when they extend the program later this month

  27. Okie: if you are around, please give me your assessment of Tom Coburn (R-Ok).

    By all appearances, he is a doctor. He is supposedly a conservative, etc.

    But he is a good friend of Obama? He thinks Pelosi is a nice person?? And recently, he told his constituents that they are being misled not by Obama, not by Pelosi, but by FOX???.

    At the same time, he says nothing negative about the Obama worshiping media outlets.

    Which begs the obvious question, whose side is he really on?

    At a minimum, he appears to be ignorant of their treachery. That alone is inexcusable. Furthermore, he seems to have little gasp of the adverse effect which their destructive policies are having on this country, and our constitution.

    It makes me wonder whether he is fixing to change parties.

    What is your take on this guy?

  28. Olberman is making hay over Coburn’s repudiation of FOX News and to a lesser extent conservative principles. He is praising him as a truth teller whereas previously he condemened his as a rebublican ignoramus. And here is part of what Bob Somerby had to say about that. It suggests that the media is primarily responsible for dividing the nation. There is truth in that, but the equal fault lies with politicians who foresee the Great Reckoning, and want to control the people (as Dingell and Dean before him so artfully put it), and disenfranchise the middle class politically and economically, in order to protect the elites.
    —————————-
    Coburn did something very important on March 31. He stood before a room of citizens and told them they’re being misled. For years, we have screamed, howled, shouted and yelled, suggesting that liberals need to develop platforms from which we respectfully go before these voters and tell them this same darn thing. But none of those voters would ever listen to a word KO or Maddow said. Our own leaders have endlessly mocked, and ridiculed, and insulted the voters who sat in that room with Coburn. Those voters would never listen to us when we told them the truth about Fox. We have traded away our relevance, as our clowns and hacks push their own agendas—agendas which are closely tied to the corporation’s desire to make large profits.

  29. I would think tampering with an email account would be a federal offense. That is tampering with the mail. The only difference is the Feds to not run it. Interesting! If they tampered with your mail at UPS, I think you are covered, so why not the internet
    ——————-
    In theory yes. In practice it depends on prosecutorial enforcement. Holder is the Attorney General. Holder has let Obama Thugs off the hook when they brandished weapons outside a voting place in Philadelphia.

    Thus, it is hard to escape the impression that under the Obama Administration we have what the Founding Fathers and Mothers deplored and took great pains to prevent: not a government of laws but a government of men.

  30. If you combine this with the stuff Cabana Al, i.e. Judge Gonzales did when he was AG under Bush, then you will see the problem I am sure.

  31. “Yes. She (Pelosi) really thinks you are that stupid.” Evidently, Tom Coburn does too.
    —————————————————————————–

    Posted by Moe Lane (Profile)
    Thursday, April 8th at 8:36AM EDT
    15 Comments
    (Via neo-neocon, via Instapundit) Nancy Pelosi:

    ”It’s like the back of the refrigerator. You see all these wires and the rest,” said Pelosi. “All you need to know is, you open the door. The light goes on. You open this door, you go through a whole different path, in terms of access to quality, affordable healthcare for all Americans.”

    So, you know, never you worry about the fact that the wires seem to be hooked up to a baby. Which is crying. And on fire.

    Moe Lane

    PS: YES. SHE REALLY THINKS YOU ARE THAT STUPID.

    Crossposted to Moe Lane.

  32. I see Palin and Bachman have teamed up together and are touring for the Teaparty movement…Fox is going nuts and warning everyone about Ross Perot phenomena…which turned out to be 8 years of prosperity….the republicans are making sure AGAIN that Obama wins….Palin and Bachman could win!

  33. ABC did not exactly cover itself with glory in their hysterical reporting of the so-called terrorist incident yesterday which turned out to be nothing more than a joke by a minor diplomat over security measures taken by the United States.

    Nevertheless, the misreported incident is highly instructive in one sense.

    1. When Bush was president foreign officials disliked America. They thought we were arrogant and overbearing. And perhaps in certain ways they were right. But I would not fault Bush for that transgression.

    2. Now that Obama occupies the white house America has become a joke. They see us as weak, indecisive and not truthful. This comes out obliquely at times, and directly at other times from people like Sarkosi, Putin and obviously others.

    Somewhere in his writings, Machiavelli made the important point that given a choice between being loved and being feared, it is better that a Prince (in this case a nation) be feared. Why? Because when a nation is feared what it says and what it does are not treated as a laughing matter by petty officials from so called allies, and their masters. And when a nation is feared, its adversaries will think twice before they embark upon aggressive actions- be they political economic or military/

  34. The reason I said founding fathers and mother is because it is impossible to think about the American Revolution without remembering the profound influence of women like Abagail Adams in the creation of this Republic.

  35. Didn’t this dustup with Karzai happen after Obama’s middle of the night visit to Afganistan??? It seems to me that I heard Karzai’s supposed anti-american statements after our dumbass-in-chief went there….So now he calls Hillary to clarify his statements??? Even Karzai knows who the brains of the outfit is???

    http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/04/07/white-house-may-cancel-obama-meeting-with-karzai/

    It sure seems to me everytime Hillary makes headway with a country or a leader, Obama comes along and F*&ks it up, every time!!
    ———————-
    Well said. And by the way, that is what I am told FOX News is reporting.

  36. When you cannot count on the civilian government you are backing, and when it does not command the support of the people outside Kabul, and then the army is little more than a collection of tribes, then cavear emptor lest history repeat itself. We would be far better served by devoting our time energy and effort to dealing effectively with Iran.

  37. Posted by Brian Darling (Profile)
    Thursday, April 8th at 2:00PM EDT
    16 Comments

    Obama is vetting a new national sales tax (commonly referred to as a VAT) to extract more wealth from the private sector to sustain his insatiable hunger for more government spending. Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker and current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke have commenced a vetting strategy to convince Americans that they need to give more and more money to an every-expanding and bloated federal government. Congress needs to just say no to a VAT — and increased taxation — as part of any pitch by this Administration to balance the budget.

    Volker and Bernanke have used a two pronged strategy to vet the VAT. First is fear mongering. Bernanke argues that Americans need to choose between higher taxes or massive cuts in critical government programs. He mentioned Social Security, Medicare, Education and Defense as areas of government spending that would be targeted if we don’t raise taxes. This is a false choice. The federal government needs to reform entitlement programs, needs to root out waste fraud and abuse and should eliminate programs like the National Endowment for the Arts.

    The deficit incurred by the federal government has reached about $12.8 trillion and next year’s projected deficit is record breaking at $1.6 trillion. Obama’s solution? Not cutting government, not ending bailouts, not entitlement reform, and not stopping the Stimulus. Instead, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke yesterday commenced a debate on higher taxes yesterday, see the Washington Post:

    To avoid large and ultimately unsustainable budget deficits, the nation will ultimately have to choose among higher taxes, modifications to entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, less spending on everything else from education to defense, or some combination of the above.

    White House economic advisor Paul Volcker, and former Chairman of the Fed, urged the United States to follow Europe and impose a Value Added Tax (VAT). The Washington Examiner has this description of a VAT:

    A VAT is a national sales tax that would be collected by retailers. But it can also be imposed on products as they make their way through the manufacturing process. That is, the tax for a single product is paid by manufacturers, producers, and business that add value to the product, as well as by the consumers. Critics argue that the VAT is a regressive tax that unduly places the burden on the poor.

    The reason why elites in Washington would look to a VAT before increasing income taxes (and, believe me, higher income taxes are coming) is because not enough of the population even pays income taxes to make it worthwhile for the government to use the income tax structure to balance the budget. According to the Tax Policy Center, only about 47 percent of Americans will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Meanwhile, the government can extract the most amount of your wealth from a national sales tax (VAT) and Volker’s statement yesterday evidences a will on the part of this Administration to start the fear mongering process to tee up higher taxes.

    Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric on the part of the agents of President Obama when they try to downplay the effort to impose higher taxes on all Americans. Volker and Bernanke would not be messaging for higher taxes if this Administration did not want them to. A VAT, national sales tax, would be the end of economic freedom as we know it, because the federal government would then have the power to tax all aspects of our lives. Until Washington can restrain spending, we should not entrust it with the power to create a brand new tax.

  38. Just a dumb question on my part but if 70% your economy depends on consumer spending why would you consider enacting a national sales tax? Would that not have a negative impact on consumer spending? And if that is true, then would it not also have an negative impact on economic recovery? Like I say, just a dumb question–but too tough for Obama to answer truthfully.

  39. I think everyone in Congress should be mandated to take the classes they require persons filing for bankruptcy to take.
    Lets see 6 million to create a turtle underpass being financed costs in the end 20 plus million and the jobs created if any were completed in one year.

  40. We wondered in our article where/when the “racist” charges in the Hawaii election would appear. Now they have.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0410/AsianAmerican_Dems_take_offense_at_DCCC_Hawaii_move.html?showall

    Asian-American Democrats are criticizing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for favoring a white former congressman from Hawaii over the Asian-American State Senate President in a hotly contested special election to represent a majority-minority Hawaii district.

    “The DCCC should focus the party on uniting Democrats and keeping this seat blue rather than dividing us and helping us defeat ourselves. It is unseemly for party officials to step into a special election with more than one Democrat, particularly in a district where 58 percent of the population is Asian Pacific American,” says the Asian American Action Fund executive director Gautam Dutta in a statement, provided to POLITICO, that’s likely to be the first shot in a campaign to resist DCCC’s efforts.

    Imagine the disgruntled reaction were the DCCC to step into a contested special election in a predominantly African-American or Latino district,” Dutta pointedly added.[snip]

    Another prominent Asian-American operative said Asian-American Democrats see the move as “beyond an affront” and that there’s an effort to organize a boycott of the DCCC by Asian-American donors.

  41. wbboei
    April 8th, 2010 at 10:47 am
    **************

    I called all of the Senator’s office’s and they all tried to say that his statements were being taken out of context (poppycock ) I encouraged him to come out and make a clarifying statement because as it stood, his message was anti- conservative and people were wondering about him. I used some of your talking points…hope u don’t mind! (too late if you do )

  42. Love of country drives our Hillary

    ecretary Clinton to Deliver Remarks on Nuclear Nonproliferation at The University of Louisville as Part of the McConnell Center’s Spring Lecture Series on Friday, April 9

    Office of the Spokesman
    Washington, DC

    April 8, 2010

    ——————————————————————————–

    Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will deliver Remarks entitled “No Greater Danger: Protecting our Nation and Allies from Nuclear Terrorism and Nuclear Proliferation” at the University of Louisville as part of the McConnell Center’s Spring Lecture Series, in Louisville, Kentucky on Friday, April 9 at 3:30 p.m.

    The remarks will be carried live on BNET and live-streamed on http://www.state.gov. The address will also be shown in the Press Briefing Room at the Department of State.

    The McConnell Center at the University of Louisville was established in 1991 by Kentucky’s senior Senator Mitch McConnell. The Center is dedicated to providing a non-partisan, well rounded education that encourages top undergraduates to become valued citizens and future leaders. Through a variety of lectures, seminars, panel discussions, and conferences, the McConnell Center seeks to bring influential political leaders, business executives, and accomplished scholars to the University of Louisville.

    University of Louisville
    Papa John’s Cardinal Stadium
    Brown & Williamson Club
    3rd Floor

    ———————————————–

  43. From BP
    ****************

    Obamas to Appear on “American Idol”
    http://whitehouse.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/04/08/obamas-to-appear-on-american-idol/?test=latestnews

    April 8, 2010 at 1:55 pm

    oh that must be a typo

    the obamas will be appearing on american psychos
    ****************

    gonzotx // April 8, 2010 at 5:56 pm

    So the Fraud can’t go to church because he and MoZilla cause such a scene wherever they go
    ..What a Muslim he is. He can go on American Idol? Really? And throw out baseballs the way he governs? Poorly. So how do you think America will like seeing the fool and his family on TV again while Rome burns? This guy is a FU*king loser!!!!!

  44. Ex-Citigroup leaders defensive on crisis

    Rachelle Younglai and Kevin Drawbaugh Buzz Up! Print Story Charles Prince and Robert Rubin, who led Citigroup in the run-up to the 2008 banking crisis, voiced regrets on Thursday, but accepted no responsibility for the mega-bank’s massive losses. Skip related content
    Related photos / videos Charles Prince and Robert Rubin arrive at the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission hearing …More Enlarge photo The two came under heavy fire in a congressional panel hearing for being blind to Citi taking on huge financial risks under their watch, leading ultimately to the bank’s near collapse, prevented only by a $45-billion (29 billion pound) taxpayer bailout.

    His hands visibly shaking as he answered questions, Rubin, formerly U.S. Treasury secretary during the Clinton administration, told panel members that he was not a key decision-maker at Citi during the worst of its troubles.

    Former CEO Prince came to the defence of Rubin, saying that as an advisor he was not responsible for Citi’s losses. Prince offered up multiple apologies for his own ignorance.

    “I can only say that I am deeply sorry that our management — starting with me — was not more prescient and that we did not foresee what lay before us,” Prince said.

    Some members of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission — charged by Congress with explaining the origins of the worst U.S. financial crisis since the Great Depression — did not buy the two executives’ half-hearted mea culpas.

    “You either were pulling the levers or asleep at the switch,” commission Chairman Phil Angelides said to Rubin.

    Citi has been in the crosshairs of the commission for two days now in public hearings occurring just before Congress resumes debate on a raft of financial reform proposals, and as the White House ramps up its push for a regulatory overhaul.

    Eight former and current Citi executives have testified. All have basically said that no one, including them, could have foreseen the problems that nearly destroyed the bank.

    THOMAS PUSHES FOR ANSWERS

    Vice Chairman Bill Thomas pushed the Citi executives for some explanation of how they personally square the bank’s financial calamities with their own lavish compensation packages, saying, “Behaviour has to have consequences.”

    Prince left the bank in 2007 with almost $40 million in bonuses, shares and options. Citigroup paid Rubin more than $120 million for his work at the bank over several years.

    Bad bets on repackaged debt securities, consumer loans and other assets forced Citi to take three separate government rescue packages totalling $45 billion, more than any other major bank. When the dust settled, taxpayers held about a third of Citigroup’s common stock and $27 billion of its debt.

    “The overriding lesson of the financial crisis was that the financial system is subject to more severe downside risk than almost anyone had foreseen,” Rubin said. “It is imperative that private institutions and the government act on that lesson.”

    Rubin tried to clear his name on an old score from the late 1990s, defending his opposition to bringing over-the-counter derivatives under stricter regulatory control.

    Back then, Rubin joined with former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan in resisting attempts by former Commodity Futures Trading Commission chair Brooksley Born to bring transparency to the unpoliced OTC derivatives market.

    On Thursday, Rubin told the commission — which includes Born — he was never against more regulation, he simply feared the CFTC’s approach would bring dangerous legal uncertainty.

    “Financial reform is imperative and should include … derivatives regulation,” said Rubin, a former Citi executive committee chairman and a former Goldman Sachs executive.

    BANK BREAK-UP EYED IN CONGRESS

    Some members of Congress want to break up banks such as Citi, arguing that they have become not only “too big to fail,” as some in the markets see it, but also “too big to manage.”

    Prince said that that is not the case, saying “I personally do not think that Citi was too big to manage.”

    Over the past two days, the commission has delved into the breakdown of Wall Street’s subprime mortgage securitization business, the complex securities it produced, and the impact those toxic assets had on financial giants, such as Citi.

    In explaining their actions, Citi executives have said they relied chiefly on the judgement of others in assessing the risks being taken in loading the bank’s balance sheet with subprime mortgage bonds and other complex debt instruments.

    Rubin expressed deep regret for not recognizing the approach of the crisis. “Almost all of us … missed the powerful combination of forces at work and the serious possibility of a massive crisis,” he said.

    The Obama administration is backing a reform proposal that would limit the growth of mega-banks with a market-share cap.

    But Prince said he believes the financial world needs large, diversified banks. “We are past the days of exclusively small, local banks and financial institutions,” he said.

    PRINCE COMMENTS ON “STILL DANCING” QUIP

    Prince’s infamous comment that his bank was “still dancing” even as the subprime crisis worsened came back to haunt him at the commission hearing where he was asked about it.

    His explanation seemed to boil down to this: it was a race to keep up with competitors who kept loosening lending standards and Citi couldn’t afford to drop out.

    In July 2007, the Financial Times quoted Prince as saying, “As long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance … We’re still dancing.” The quip became emblematic of bankers’ failure to grasp the gravity of the crisis.

    Prince said the quote related to the leveraged lending business. “It had nothing to do with the mortgage business. … It had nothing to do with the issues that we’ve been talking about here,” he said.

    A few months after the Financial Times interview, Prince resigned.

    The commission will hold another hearing on Friday to take testimony from former executives of housing finance giant Fannie Mae and former regulators who supervised it. Fannie Mae was seized by the government in September 2008.

Comments are closed.