The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for September, 2008

Biden’s “I Was Shot At” Lie

Posted by iusbvision on September 30, 2008

And now he is packpeddling…

When Hillary Clinton told a tall tale about “landing under sniper fire” in Bosnia, she was accused of “inflating her war experience” by rival Democrat Barack Obama’s campaign. 

But the campaign has been silent about Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, telling his own questionable story about being “shot at” in Iraq. 

“Let’s start telling the truth,” Biden said during a presidential primary debate sponsored by YouTube last year. “Number one, you take all the troops out – you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die.” 

But when questioned about the episode afterward by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled from his claim of being “shot at” and instead allowed: “I was near where a shot landed.” 

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/30/unlike-clinton-biden-gets-pass-saying-shot-iraq/

Now Hillary was jumped all over for this, and Palin gets every word she says mega scrutinized while Biden makes 2-3 major gaffes a week and it gets little coverage.  Hat tip Dr. Lott

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Wind Power vs. Storm

Posted by iusbvision on September 30, 2008

Hat tip Dr. Lott

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Moonbat Threatens Life of President on C-Span

Posted by iusbvision on September 30, 2008

Ok place your bets. Is this person a journalist or an ivy league liberal arts professor?

Hat Tip Michelle Malkin

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Second District Congressional Candidates Speak on the Bailout

Posted by iusbvision on September 30, 2008

Statement by Luke Puckett

“The $700 billion taxpayer sponsored bailout bill that was voted on this afternoon did not provide the right solution to our economic needs. Congress must act quickly to put in place solutions that address the grave nature of the current economic problem. This must be done without imposing the cost of such a solution on the taxpayer or future generations of Americans. We cannot do the wrong thing and we cannot do nothing, we must do the right thing.

“The right approach to this challenge is one that maximizes freedom and personal choice while bringing stability to the marketplace. In order to stimulate the economy and generate a much needed sense of certainty, we need to increase the cap on FDIC insurance. We must also develop a plan based on the FDIC model that allows banks and investment companies to purchase insurance for their most vulnerable mortgage-backed securities. This solution would require accountability and restore trust and confidence at a time when both of those commodities are much needed.

“I call on Congress to act in a bipartisan and responsible manner.”–Luke Puckett, Republican Candidate for Congress, IN/02

Statement by Joe Donnelly

“When there are serious people discussing the possibility of another economic depression, it is time to act. The rescue plan was not perfect, but it was necessary. And while no one took any pleasure in voting for it, the alternative — doing nothing — is potentially disastrous and therefore unacceptable.” — Rep. Joe Donnelly, Democrat, IN/02

Our Take: As we have said that bill that was shot down by the House was too flawed. 97 Democrats and 133 Republicans said no. While some of that was purely political, some of it expressed the same concern the American people have; the bill wasn’t good enough. Luke’s FDIC and insurance idea is a good one and I like how he adds that the solution would require accountability. That is nice-nice talk for using REAL banking regulators in the mortgage industry. However, low interest loans or some other vehicle is needed to kick SOME solvency into the market. These tools with a number less than half the $700 billion number should be more than adequte in my view…. again as long as REAL bank regulators under Treasury or the Fed take over regulation enforcement.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

It’s More Than Politics, It’s a Bad Bill.

Posted by iusbvision on September 30, 2008

The Blame Game You Hear on TV is BS – Here is Why So Many Voted NO on the Bailout.

It was a bad bill, but first let’s talk a little politics.

I have watched TV from my daughters hospital room just amazed at the BS you get from the elite media. The simple fact is that the vast majority of talking head “experts” that you see on TV have no idea what they are talking about. I wished I could have blogged right away about what I was seeing, I have a couple of hours at a computer so I thought I would make a few quick posts.

I was watching the roll call of the bailout vote and I saw that 97 Democrats had voted no as well as 133 Republicans. I wondered why so many in both caucuses bailed. I figured that in that 97 defections there must have been major Democrats bailing from the House banking committee and several committee chairs to give more Republicans the political will to vote no. When the Republicans saw that committee chairs that Speaker Pelosi can remove from those chairmanships and others who are close to Pelosi were voting against the bill, they realized that Pelosi was letting them do it.

Think about it. Republicans watch Pelosi come out to make this horrible partisan speech below that is filled with easily disproved nonsense, and then many of Pelosi’s closest allies are voting no. These are people that if Pelosi leaned on would change their vote. If this bill resulted in bad news down the road, Pelosi’s vulnerable yet powerful committee chairs in the House were allowed to vote no so they could say they were not to blame.

We now know from Karl Rove that many GOP members of Congress realized this while on the floor. The Democrats were going to try and eek this vote by and than blame Republicans for it’s results while key Democrats close to Pelosi voted no; yet all you heard in the press was that Republicans were offended by Pelosi’s remarks so they voted no as if they were a bunch of cry babies. Barney Frank who made these allegations  because he knows that most people in the press were ignorant of the facts on the floor as they unfolded. The Democratic leadership was counting on the ignorance of those in the media and in the public to get away with a political play.

Here is Karl Roves’ Statement

Here are the Democrats of the House Banking Committee that voted no and this was their baby with Sec. Paulson.  

Rep. Brad Sherman, CA
Rep. William Lacy Clay, MO
Rep. Joe Baca, CA
Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, MA
Rep. David Scott, GA
Rep. Al Green, TX
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, MO
Rep. Lincoln Davis, TN
Rep. Paul W. Hodes, NH
Rep. Andre Carson, IN
Rep. Don Cazayoux, LA
Rep. Travis Childers, MS

Follow this link for a list of the Democrat Committee and Sub-Committee Chairs who voted no. Pelosi could have easily leaned on them to vote yes. The roll call for the vote is HERE.

While these were peripheral reasons why the bill went down, the primary reason is that it is just not a very good bill. It provides temporary solutions that could make matters even worse down the road. 

It does not fix the oversight issues that were a primary catalyst in the first place, it did not update accounting rules to make mortgage securities easier to rate. The banks would get these funds, but have no obligation to continue extending credit to moderate risk – credit worthy people, smaller banks, farms and companies. If the object is to get some solvency into these banks in trouble because of the mortgage crisis, shouldn’t we demand that they still behave as responsible banks instead of just sitting on a huge wad of taxpayer cash to only act as a soft and fluffy cash barrier to their own risk? The object of the bill is to get banks in the position to be responsible lenders again so the economy doesn’t shut down; this bill doesn’t do that. There is also no ethics reform that prevents the kind of influence peddling that contributed to this mess in the first place.

This video makes some of these points. Rep. McCotter:

Hat Tip Hotair.com and Johnny Dollar Blog

UPDATE: So I popped on famed author and economist Dr. John Lott’s website today and I am thrilled to see that he took a similar take as we did (look at Dr. Lott’s other post HERE as well).

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loans – UPDATED

Posted by iusbvision on September 30, 2008

NEW UPDATE 2-19-2010Congressional  Report says that ACORN/SEIU a criminal conspiracy that played a roll in the mortgage collapse (just as we have said from minute one) – LINK.

UPDATE 9-22-2009: Here we go again, introducing the Community Reinvestment Modernization Act.

[Please see the special editors note at the bottom of this post – Editor]

UPDATE 10-12-2008: Hotair.com posts a video From April 3, 1998 of Clinton’s HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo telling how they forced banks to make high risk affirmative action loans. See Update VIII towards the bottom of this post.

UPDATE V: AUDIO – OBAMA SAID IN 2007 THAT GIVING SUB-PRIME LOANS TO PEOPLE WHO COULDN’T AFFORD THEM WAS A GOOD IDEA!!! Hotair.com comments HERE.

“I’ve been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.” — Barack Obama, Speech to ACORN, November 2007

*****ORIGINAL STORY BEGINS HERE******

Do you remember how we told you that the Democrats and groups associated with them leaned on banks and even sued to get them to make bad loans by abusing the Community Reinvestment Act (see HERE and HERE)? The abuse of this act by ACORN and officials like Janet Reno was a factor in causing the economic crisis. The harassment suits filed under this act were used to get banks to lower credit standards and hand out high risk loans. We have dug up the lawsuit below while researching Obama’s legal career. It is a typical example of an ACORN harassment lawsuit.

In these lawsuits, ACORN makes a bogus claim of Redlining (denying poor people loans because of their ethnic heritage). They protest and get the local media to raise a big stink. This stink means that the bank faces thousands of people closing their accounts and get local politicians to lobby to stop the bank from doing some future business, expansions and mergers. If the bank goes to court, they will win, but the damage is already done because who is going to launch a big campaign to get the bank’s reputation back?

It is important to understand the nature of these lawsuits and what their purpose is. ACORN filed, or threatened to file, tons of these lawsuits and ALL CRA suits allege racism (usually the press involved and such with the threat of the CRA lawsuit is enough to get the bank to give in and put them in a catch 22, they also had a willing Janet Reno Justice Department to work with – see below for more on Reno). As we have said in our series or articles analyzing every aspect of this story (links at the very bottom of this post), the series of ACORN harassment lawsuits and intimidation against banks to lower credit standards was not the sole reason for the mortgage crisis, it was one important layer of many that brought us to the mortgage crisis and the largest financial scandal in the history of the world.

Case Name
Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011
State/Territory Illinois

Case Summary
Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.

U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs’ suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank’s loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

The parties voluntarily dismissed the case on May 12, 1998, pursuant to a settlement agreement.
Plaintiff’s Lawyers Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Childers, Michael Allen (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Clayton, Fay (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Love, Sara Norris (Virginia)
FH-IL-0011-9000
Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Obama, Barack H. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Wickert, John Henry (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-9000

[Editor’s Note – Like so many of these cases, when faced with the bad publicity, the awareness of how the local media would sensationalize such a story, the awareness of ACORN’s close ties with the federal government and the Democratic Leadership, Citi chose to settle the case. All of the details are not known but according to court documents in our possession part of the settlement included $950,000 in attorneys fees.]

UPDATE: Hotair.com comments on other CRA lawsuits HERE.

New York Post Article HERE:

The seeds of today’s financial meltdown lie in the Community Reinvestment Act – a law passed in 1977 and made riskier by unwise amendments and regulatory rulings in later decades.

CRA was meant to encourage banks to make loans to high-risk borrowers, often minorities living in unstable neighborhoods. That has provided an opening to radical groups like ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) to abuse the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in “subprime” loans to often uncreditworthy poor and minority customers.

Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA – and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN.

In fact, intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion have enabled ACORN to extract hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and contributions from America’s financial institutions.

The Woods Fund report makes it clear Obama was fully aware of the intimidation tactics used by ACORN’s Madeline Talbott in her pioneering efforts to force banks to suspend their usual credit standards.Yet he supported Talbott in every conceivable way. He trained her personal staff and other aspiring ACORN leaders, he consulted with her extensively, and he arranged a major boost in foundation funding for her efforts.

And, as the leader of another charity, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Obama channeled morefunding Talbott’s way – ostensibly for education projects but surely supportive of ACORN’s overall efforts.

UPDATE II: Fox News gets on the story

UPDATE III: CNS News Analysis

Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began using the act to combat “red-lining,” a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others, based on economic status. “No loan is exempt, no bank is immune,” warned then-Attorney General Janet Reno. “For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.”

The Clinton-Reno threat of “vigorous enforcement” pushed banks to make the now infamous loans that many blame for the current meltdown, Richman said. “Banks, in order to not get in trouble with the regulators, had to make loans to people who shouldn’t have been getting mortgage loans.”

This threat combined with the government backing of Fannie and Freddie set the stage for the current uncertainty, because the “banks could just sell the loans off to Fannie or Freddie,” who could buy them with little regard for negative financial outcomes, Richman said.

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=36048

UPDATE IV:It’s about time …

Update VI: Investors business daily reports more on Obama’s work with ACORN

As the New York Times reports, “Aides to Mr. Obama said he had not directly reached out to try to sway any House Democrats who opposed the measure.” Is the reason the fact that the slush fund for ACORN in the original bill, siphoning off 20% of any future profits for such activist groups, was trimmed from the tree?

Obama, who once represented ACORN in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois, was hired by the group to train its community organizers and staff in the methods and tactics of the late Saul Alinsky. ACORN would stage in-your-face protests in bank lobbies, drive-through lanes and even at bank managers’ homes to get them to issue risky loans in the inner city or face charges of racism.

In the early 1990s, reports Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow at the Ethics and Policy Center, Obama was personally recruited by Chicago’s ACORN to run training sessions in “direct action.” That’s the euphemism for the techniques used under the cover of the federal Community Reinvestment Act to intimidate financial institutions into giving what have been called “Ninja” loans — no income, no job, no assets — to people who couldn’t afford them.

CRA was designed to increase minority homeownership. Whenever a bank wanted to grow or expand, ACORN would file complaints that it was not sufficiently sensitive to the needs of minorities in providing home loans. Agitators would then be unleashed.

Chicago’s ACORN used Alinsky’s tactics against institutions such as Bell Federal Savings and Loan and Avondale Federal Savings. In September 1992, the Chicago Tribune described the group’s agenda as “affirmative action lending.”

Obama also helped ACORN get funding. When he served on the board of the Woods Fund for Chicago with Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers, the Woods Fund frequently gave ACORN grants to fund its activist agenda.

In 1995, Kurtz reports, Obama chaired the committee that increased funding of ACORN and other community organizers. The committee report boasted that the fund’s “non-ideological” image “enabled the Trustees to make grants to organizations that use confrontational tactics against the business and governmental ‘establishments’ without undue risk of being accused of partisanship.”

The CRA empowered regulators to punish banks that failed to “meet the credit needs” of “low-income, minority and distressed neighborhoods.” It gave groups such as ACORN a license and a means to intimidate banks, claiming they were “redlining” poor and minority neighborhoods. ACORN employed its tactics in 1991 by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA.

As a former White House staff economist writes in the American Thinker, Obama represented ACORN in a 1994 suit against redlining.  ACORN was also a driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton administration that greatly expanded the CRA and helped spawn the current financial crisis.

Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. Last November, he told the group, “I’ve been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career.” Indeed he has. Obama was and is fully aware of what ACORN was doing with the money and expertise he provided. The voters should be aware on Nov. 4 of the roles of both in creating the current crisis.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=307667123149723

UPDATE VII: Some on the left are saying that SNOPES.com has debunked this story, this is not so. Snopes is talking about another story that makes a different claim about this same lawsuit. It does not dispute that this lawsuit was one of a series of lawsuits that were filed by ACORN using “redlining and racism” allegations to lower credit standards. It does not dispute that all of the ACORN CRA lawsuits claimed redlining and racism. It does not dispute that at other times ACORN used intimidation tactics against bank managers to try to make them give high risk loans. ACORN’s activities have been widely reported by many news outfits in the last few days.  We also never claimed that Obama was the main lawyer in the suit, just a part of the “team” that used these tactics to rip banks off. We are glad that we were one of the first to get this story right.

[Editor’s Note – Why would anyone be surprised that a far left group would accuse anyone of racism when not given what they want? This is their favorite tactic. “Oppose ObamaCare your racist” (SIC), oppose nationalization of banks, your racist, oppose 20 new Czar positions that don’t have enough transparency and accountability, your racist, catch Obama in a little white lie, your racist and the list goes on and on.]

UPDATE VIII: (10-12-2008) Hotair.com posts a video From April 3, 1998 of Clinton’s HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo telling how they forced banks to make high risk affirmative action loans. A CNN Story HERE.

CUOMO: To take a greater risk on these mortgages, yes. To give families mortgages that they would not have given otherwise, yes.

Q: [unintellible] … that they would not have given the loans at all?

CUOMO: They would not have qualified but for this affirmative action on the part of the bank, yes.

Q: Are minorities represented in that low and moderate income group?

CUOMO: It is by income, and is it also by minorities? Yes.

CUOMO: With the 2.1 billion, lending that amount in mortgages — which will be a higher risk, and I’m sure there will be a higher default rate on those mortgages than on the rest of the portfolio

Our other posts that explain every facet of the mortgage crash scandal are in detail HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE. – Editor

Special Editor’s Note:

This post has become one of the most discussed articles on the internet, literally linked to by thousands of blogs and discussion forums. After seeing time and time again how this article is used and misused by partisans on both sides, I finally decided to add this note to help give you all a little perspective.

First of all, neither my article, nor most of the other articles I have seen blame the CRA exclusively for the mortgage crisis. The steps that lead to the meltdown are multi-layered and the CRA and its abuse by the Clinton Administration and ACORN was merely a layer of the problem.

There is no question that Janet Reno and Andrew Cuomo and ACORN sought and did use the CRA to scare banks into loosening credit standards to benefit their own constituencies. Cuomo, ACORN and Reno are all on the record doing/saying so.

When Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae started buying any mortgage no matter how bad or risky to sell as mortgage securities, enforcement of the CRA was no longer necessary because banks were given every incentive and were pressured by the House and Senate Banking Committee (mostly by Dems on the committee to be fair)to just give the loans and the banks could sell them to Fannie/Freddie taking the risk away from the bank.

I see many of the hundreds of message boards and blogs that link to my post, but few arguing one way or another are really reading the arguments and the evidence and addressing them. I wrote a dozen articles on this story and as I indicated there were many layers including the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation and abuse by Fannie/Freddie and the abuse/neglect by Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. If you want to get a better grasp on the entire story, read the articles linked above at the bottom of the post as each explains another layer/facet of the problem.

I would like to address some of the sources you guys are quoting because most of them, on the substance are making misleading/ridiculous claims.

The 100K challenge “source” was pretty amusing. He says he will debate anyone that CRA was not a prima cause of the crisis, but the narrative that this post and some of the others give was that since it wasn’t a primary cause, that it was of no cause at all and that is indeed a false narrative. Abuse of the CRA was an important layer, but only one layer of many. The post then goes to say that it wasn’t a major factor, well what is major to one person is not major to another.

These people making these claims would not be so foolish to argue this from the other angle; eg. to make the case that CRA and its later abuse, in no way loosened up credit to those who were high risk and/or had no business trying to obtain such a large loan.

I saw the “source” that was a post on the Businessweek Blog that said CRA wasn’t to blame, and then went on to say that essentially that Freddie/Fannie couldn’t be blamed either, which is preposterous. It was those Mortgage Securities issued by Fannie/Freddie that spread like a toxic poison in the investment markets and everyone knows it.

Many of the other “sources” quoted were merely appeals to authority proclaiming themselves correct and experts and then tell you their view with nothing verifiable for people like you and me to look up.I hope that this post helped to add a little perspective to your discussion.

The “source” that was from the Federal Reserve Bank mentioned in the Wall Street Journal was greeted with skepticism by the WSJ and Investors Business daily. Besides a government report declaring a big government regulation and its abusive enforcement innocent should not surprise anyone.

As far as how most of you have approached this argument, you throw up all these links, but few of you really address the arguments and specific points that are in the links themselves.

Also I encourage you all to avoid emotional attachments to candidates. Have any of you known a bratty kid who is a little terror, whose parents act as if their kid can do no wrong? They act that way because they can’t see passed their own emotional attachments and that is how many of you are behaving.

Here is a simple truth, economic policy in the first Bush term and the second were profoundly different and policy wise the Obama policies are very much like Bush second term policies just on steroids. It also didn’t help that Bush’s second term Treasury Sec. Mr. Paulsen and Obama’s Treasury Sec. Mr. Geithner are two of the very worst Treasury heads ever.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Mortgage Crisis, Palin Truth Squad | 117 Comments »

SHOCKER! CNN GETS A STORY RIGHT! Bidens Pork & Bridge Between Two Nowhere’s!

Posted by iusbvision on September 29, 2008

Hat tip Hotair.com

Posted in Other Links | 1 Comment »

THE VIDEOS THAT SAY IT ALL: Democrats on Banking Committee Lying About Status of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – Saying They are Fine and Don’t Need Reform & Critique of Fannie Mae is a Racial Attack on Franklin Raines…

Posted by iusbvision on September 28, 2008

UPDATE III: If you liked my “In Plain English – How this mess happened” article linked below – someone made a video version that says the same thing. Enjoy and learn.

Now Back to our original story.

Democrats on the banking committee’s have been brazenly lying about all of this for years so they cannot be trusted. Why do I say that? Because the regulatory agency that reports to Congress has been warning them or YEARS that this was coming and they blocked all attempts to reform it as we have demonstrated with the evidence and the government documents HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE.

UPDATE: The New York Times predicted the possible collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 1999! Read HERE.

UPDATE II: House Votes NO on bailout!
People are blaming partisan back and forth for the reason, but the truth is that while the improvements the House Republicans insisted on did improve the bill, the oversight on the mortgage industry was still not up to par; too many political appointees, not enough real bank regulators, which is what caused this whole mess in the first place.

Another problem with this bill is that the banks would get these funds, but have no obligation to continue extending credit to medium risk credit worthy people, smaller banks, farms and companies. If the object is to get some solvency into these banks in trouble because of the mortgage crisis, shouldn’t we demand that they still behave as responsible banks instead of just sitting on a huge wad of taxpayer cash to only act as a soft and fluffy cash barrier to their own risk? The object of the bill is to get banks in the position to be responsible lenders again so the economy doesn’t shut down; this bill doesn’t do that.

UPDATE IV: —–>MUST SEE Video HERE go view it. <——
We have that video on youtube now:

Our entire coverage of ever facet of the mortgage crisis can be found HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HEREHERE, HEREHERE and HERE – Editor

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Mortgage Crisis, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 5 Comments »

Debate News, The Latest on the Bailout, Obama Campaign Trying to Get Law Enforcement to Silence Critics, & More Media Corruption

Posted by iusbvision on September 28, 2008

I apologize for the lack of updates in the last few days. A family medical emergency is taking all my time.

Lets get down to some business.

One:

Thank God for the House Republicans, this bailout was going to be more of the same, more taxpayer dollars to partisan groups, spending money without protections to the tax payer etc. Judging my all the news accounts and insider blogs it looks like the House Republicans said No. They said if your bailout is so good Democrats which is packed with cronyism and influence peddling you pass it over us because you have the votes, and we will have something to run against in the election.

The real thing is , will it be a total bailout or a combination bailout insurance deal that can same us more money, will there be real reforms in this bill. The promise of reforms later means nothing, Democrats on the banking committee’s have been brazenly lying about all of this for years so they cannot be trusted. Why do I say that? Because the regulatory agency that reports to Congress has been warning them or YEARS that this was coming and they blocked all attempts to reform it as we have demonstrated with the evidence and the government documents HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE.

If there is no REAL reform in the bailout, the people should not support it and people should punish the Democrats and the Republicans for not demanding it NOW. One thing is for sure, Pelosi is lying about the House Republicans, she is calling them “unpatriotic” etc… so she obviously is not getting her way and she is ticked. You know, if Republicans called the Democrats unpatriotic during this the elite media would have been screaming that the Republicans were politicizing the whole event. Everyone needs to hold Journalists accountable for how bad their industry has abandoned the public trust. I suggest that everyone make a list of the top 10 media abuses in this campaign and stick it in their wallet and when you come across a journalist start lecturing them. Public pressure is what it will take to start shaming these people into a residue of ethics.

Two:

As with WGN– the Obama campaign is trying to pressure law enforcement into silencing critics of Obama. They have been trying this in Missouri so the Missouri governor went ballistic on the Obama Campaign and rightly so.

Three:

The elite media is doing next to nothing to fact-check Obama’s statements in the debate, there are many times when Obama’s statements ran 180 degrees opposite of what he said in the Primary. Due to my family emergency and being short on time I cant list them all but…

Gateway Pundit has a list of Obama’s reversals from the debate HERE.

Hotair has a good one HERE that is a great read.

Here Obama says that no soldier ever dies in vain… how nice

Hotair.com reminds us that McCain was right again:

And here’s how poseur ended his 2002 anti-war speech, which remains to this day the biggest/only credential on his foreign-policy resume:

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not — we will not — travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

Four:

Do you think that Obama will try to spin statements by Henry Kissinger again? Kissinger didn’t stand for it:

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Democrats trying to enrich radical partisan allies with bailout.

Posted by iusbvision on September 26, 2008

 

This is exactly the same kind of crony capitalism that lead to the mess we are in now – Democrats have learned NOTHING from this.

Follow this link and READ and watch the video – it’s important.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/the-democratic-acorn-bailout/

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Editor to McCain Campaign: Let Me Tell You How To Answer The “Deregulation” Talking Point that Palin Blew with Katie

Posted by iusbvision on September 24, 2008

Here Katie hits Palin with this ridiculous Obama talking point that he has been using for over a week.

The Left Wing Narrative: Why would McCain have called for more strict regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when Republicans are for less regulation and smaller government?

Palin Answers

Palin’s answer, while barely adequate, should have been hit out of the park and resulted in a missed opportunity.

Here is what an effective political communications advisor would have advised Palin to say to nuke the deregulation talking point, so turn on your best Sarah Palin voice in your head and read along:

Katie, I have two answers to that question because that question comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of government and conservatism in general, and the problem we are facing right now with these institutions that were the catalyst to this whole mess,  which is why it is no surprise that the other guys are using it as a talking point.

When I first ran for my first political office my city did not have a police department. Now maybe the person who ran against me might say that I am not for small government because I am expanding it by inventing a whole new city department, but that would be silly.

Katie this is no different. Bank regulators and Treasury Agents are like police and need to protect us from theft and fraud. Senator McCain realized that there was a problem with the financial police that oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because the people who were supervising those police and were taking money from those that they regulated. Those regulators report to the Banking Committees in Congress and not to the Treasury Department. Those politicians in Congress were taking money from them and protecting them. Senator McCain tried to fix that.

Protecting people from fraud and theft is a perfectly proper and expected role of government and just because Republicans tend to favor leaner, more efficient government doesn’t mean that we don’t want good police. And just because we want good police doesn’t mean that we want the government butting into other aspects of our lives.

The other answer is even more simple Katie, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, weren’t private companies as most people understand them, they are government sponsored enterprises and as such the obligation to make sure they are doing right by the people is natural.

This explanation, besides being completely true, destroys the core of Obama’s chief talking point on this issue and would also make her base jump for joy by showing an understanding of what conservatism is all about.

As far as answering Katie’s question on more regulation, stick with the police theme:

Sure Katie that’s easy, crime bills, ethics laws in political campaigns, drug interdiction, anti-terror legislation, Homeland Security, the voting rights bills and again Katie, that is a proper role of government that no conservative would oppose.

If the campaign wanted to get “touchy feely” they could mention McCain’s solution to cover people who have pre-existing conditions and have catastrophic health concerns (preventing them from getting private health insurance) by making a government backed GAP plan to help cover those people with health insurance.

Tossing all modesty aside for a moment, several professors have said that I “articulate Administration positions better than anyone in the administration”. As a communications major and a student of political science, I know my craft well, if only those in Washington were so competent. I am quite tired of allowing the elite media to define traditional America as the enemy because we have lacked an effective communications strategy. Hat Tip Hotair.com for the video. UPDATE: Hotair comments on this question from Katie HERE.

Bottom Line –

Obama has used that talking point for a week, any campaign should have an argument against every talking point of the other side, and in this case it is really easy because most of their talking points are easily debunked deceptions. There is no excuse for Palin to not be more prepared for that question. Maybe I should let myself out for hire. Don’t get me wrong, Palin is a great leader and has proved it time and time again. I would like to see the campaign do better in the communications department.

Chuck Norton

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

McCain Pulls Down Ads – Suspends Campaign to Go to Washington to Lead on Economic Issue – Obama says “If You Need Me Call Me”

Posted by iusbvision on September 24, 2008

A leader goes to where the thick of it is. Obama just made a statement saying that he talked with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Ried on the phone and told them “if you need me call me”.

After Obama’s statement he took questions, the first question from a reporter asked how the McCain camp was politicizing this issue ….

It was McCain who predicted this would happen in 2005.

Leiberman says he is disappointed with Obama’s response.

It is McCain being McCain…. and appearently Obama being Obama.

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

McCain Ad Hits Obama Campaign on Their “Clean Coal” Energy Policy Lie

Posted by iusbvision on September 24, 2008

The ad…it’s tough when you get cold busted in a lie isn’t it? 

It is spot on accurate. They totaly reversed themselves in days depending on the crowd they are in front of.

Great give it all to China….

Problem: While the Obama campaign says it supports new technology and alternative energy including “Clean Coal”, the Democrats while paying this lip service to it have opposed it with votes.

Hotair.com comments HERE & HERE:

Joe Biden visited Virginia on Saturday, saying that he was a “hard-coal miner” and that it was “nice to be back in coal country” while Obama supporter, Congressman Rick Boucher (D-VA) said “Senator Obama’s a friend of coal.” But just two days later in Ohio, Senator Biden said he wants “no coal plants here in America” and that he and Senator Obama are “not supporting clean coal.”

It is no secret that America is the “Saudi Arabia of Coal” and like our domestic oil, wind, nuclear and natural gas resources much of it just sits there. We can get them in a clean and safe way, yet anti-capitalists disguising themselves as “green activists” and their friends in the Democratic Party make the United States the only country in the world who refuses to expand its own domestic sources of energy.

Biden also deliberatly muttles and confuses the difference between “Clean Coal Technology” and the 1940’s style old “dirty coal” technology that China uses.

“Clean Coal Technology” is one of those new technologies that allows us to use old style energy sources in a much cleaner way. We had an opportunity to have a clean coal energy facility in Northern Indiana and you guessed it, Democrats and anti-capitalist extremists managed to scare politicians into saying no; costing us energy and many high paying jobs. British Petroleum wants to modernize a refinery here in northern Indiana and every Democrats in the Indiana Congressional Delegation (including our Congressman Joe Donnelly)opposed it even though the result would have been less emissions (on a side note Donnelly has been a real disappointment and many fair minded Democrats I know want him out).

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

When Obama Chaired Education Charity He Routed Funds to Radical Leftist Political Orgs Instead of Helping Poverty Stricken Schools

Posted by iusbvision on September 24, 2008

Barack Obama was the Chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Annenberg Charities are designed to aid poor schools and have received funds from across the entire political spectrum. Former terrorist William Ayers, who Obama described as someone he “never traded ideas with” and was “just a guy who lived in the neighborhood” was a the founder of the Chicago chapter of the charity and worked with Obama regularly in it. Related stories HEREHEREHEREHERE and HERE.. Hotair.com comments HERE. Kurtz has a follow up story HERE.

The Wall Street Journal has the details that were in papers from the University of Chicago. Excerpt:

Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism On Schools

Despite having authored two autobiographies, Barack Obama has never written about his most important executive experience. From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists.

[Obama and Ayers] AP Bill Ayers

The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama’s first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers’s home.

The Obama campaign has struggled to downplay that association. Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood,” and “not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis.” Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC. Those archives are housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago and I’ve recently spent days looking through them.

The Chicago Annenberg Challenge was created ostensibly to improve Chicago’s public schools. The funding came from a national education initiative by Ambassador Walter Annenberg. In early 1995, Mr. Obama was appointed the first chairman of the board, which handled fiscal matters. Mr. Ayers co-chaired the foundation’s other key body, the “Collaborative,” which shaped education policy.

The CAC’s basic functioning has long been known, because its annual reports, evaluations and some board minutes were public. But the Daley archive contains additional board minutes, the Collaborative minutes, and documentation on the groups that CAC funded and rejected. The Daley archives show that Mr. Obama and Mr. Ayers worked as a team to advance the CAC agenda.

One unsettled question is how Mr. Obama, a former community organizer fresh out of law school, could vault to the top of a new foundation? In response to my questions, the Obama campaign issued a statement saying that Mr. Ayers had nothing to do with Obama’s “recruitment” to the board. The statement says Deborah Leff and Patricia Albjerg Graham (presidents of other foundations) recruited him. Yet the archives show that, along with Ms. Leff and Ms. Graham, Mr. Ayers was one of a working group of five who assembled the initial board in 1994. Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval.

The CAC’s agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers’s educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism. In the mid-1960s, Mr. Ayers taught at a radical alternative school, and served as a community organizer in Cleveland’s ghetto.

In works like “City Kids, City Teachers” and “Teaching the Personal and the Political,” Mr. Ayers wrote that teachers should be community organizers dedicated to provoking resistance to American racism and oppression. His preferred alternative? “I’m a radical, Leftist, small ‘c’ communist,” Mr. Ayers said in an interview in Ron Chepesiuk’s, “Sixties Radicals,” at about the same time Mr. Ayers was forming CAC.

CAC translated Mr. Ayers’s radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with “external partners,” which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn) [ACORN has been in trouble for numerous cases of vote fraud on nehalf of Democrats].

Posted in Campaign 2008, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Christian Activist Starts Charity for George Obama Who Lives in a 6×10 Hut in a Slum.

Posted by iusbvision on September 24, 2008

While Senator Obama has criticized John McCain for not knowing how many homes his wealthy wife Cindy owns, some Republicans have stated that Obama has no room to talk because the multi-million dollar home Obama has was obtained with the assistance of Tony Rezco, a political power broker who is now a convicted felon.

What concerns me is the house that Obama’s brother George lives in and that he lives on less than two dollars a month. His dream is to become a mechanic, if he could ever get the money for the training. He is ashamed because his brother Barack Obama has disowned him.

During the televised sit down with Pastor Rick Warren Senator Obama mentioned a Bible verse that was important to him. The verse is Mathew 25 where Jesus said, “What you have done for the least of thee you have done for me.” The wording is a little different from translation to translation from the original text but the message is the same.

Here is a picture of the shack that George Obama lives in. George Obama says he has learned how to defend himself well because it is dangerous where he lives.

George Obama - Courtesy Vanity Fair

George Obama - Courtesy Vanity Fair

George was mentioned in Barack Obama’s book and the last time they met was in 2006. Barack Obama is a millionaire and a success in every sense of the word so how can he explain why he has let his own brother live like this. If Barack Obama is elected president the risk of George’s abduction becomes a real national security problem.

This situation should have been taken care of and George should have gotten some help from his brother, but that isn’t going to happen.

Dinesh D’Souza, a scholar and Christian activist, has taken up a compassion fund for George Obama. I saw George interviewed on CNN and he comes across as a man who is honest and who does what he can to preserve his dignity. The fund which is linked HERE got a huge boost today with some publicity from radio host Mike Ghallager and donations are coming in. Please donate if it suits you to do so. Having the brother of a Senator and a presidential candidate living in a slum is a national security risk anyways. It is best to get George Obama out of there for his own sake. I fear for his life in that slum. Most of the elite media has ignored this story.

The rest of the elite media isn’t touching this story.

Chuck Norton
Editor

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Warned Congress – Greenspan Testified for McCain’s Bill to Fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2004 and 2005 – Democrats Voted No in House and in Senate Blocked it Along Party Lines!

Posted by iusbvision on September 23, 2008

Brit Hume covered this story on Sept 23 and came to the same conclusion as we did here at IUSB Vision.

The Republicans, in a bill co-sponsored by John McCain,  tried to change the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac oversight regulations to those that are used by bank regulators. The bill to change the oversight rules was eek-ed by the Senate Committee in a party line vote with Democrats against it, but since Democrats were filibustering most significant legislation they didn’t like the Republicans did not have the 60 votes to pass it. Not one Democrat would budge.

Editors note: a reader (see below) commented that he takes issue with the paragraph above about the Democrats filibustering all significant legislation they didn’t like in the Senate to stop provisions they opposed.

We could write a new article presenting a list of legislation and amendments that was stopped because the Democrats were stopping cloture constantly by abusing the filibuster rule. It is a VERY long list. Remember the judicial nominees that were blocked for months and months and some never got a vote… etc…

Some partisans may not like it but the statement above is essentially true.

Examining the inverse – should I say that the Democrats were voting for and or making sure that they were not filibustering legislation that they didn’t like?? – Editor]

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae answer to the banking committee’s in Congress – NOT the Treasury Dept, and are monitored by a small agency called OFHEO to report to the committee’s, so Congress KNEW this was coming and have for years as we have covered HERE, HERE and HERE.

Alan Greenspan testified in favor of the reforms (transcript HERE and HERE) and warned:

If we fail to strengthen GSE regulation, we increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis. … As I concluded last year, the GSEs need a regulator with authority on a par with banking regulators, with a free hand to set appropriate capital standards, and with a clear and credible process sanctioned by the Congress for placing a GSE in receivership, where the conditions under which debt holders take losses are made clear.

Hotair.com has the following commentary:

By special request of Ace. Nothing here you haven’t read and/or heard before, but Fox deserves a little publicity for being willing to challenge the narrative. Especially now that we’re about to be told it’s McCain’s campaign manager and his lobbyist pals, not the Democrats they lobbied who actually cast the votes, who are the real culprits in all this. The FBI: Doing the (after-the-fact) oversight job Congress wouldn’t.

UPDATE: Bloomberg News covered the story and gives similar information.

UPDATE II:Fox updated the story and has a devastating new report. The Report mirrors the investigation IUSB Vision Published HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE. Hotair.com comments on this new report from Fox HERE.

Every facet of the mortgage crisis story, who benefited and who is lying can be found HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HEREHERE, HEREHERE and HERE. – Editor

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Mortgage Crisis, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 10 Comments »

Aurora Colorado School Suspends 5th Grader for Wearing Anti-Obama Shirt

Posted by iusbvision on September 23, 2008

Another lawwuit that a shool will lose. Another group of leftist administrators who have no regard for freedom of political speech.

The school says that the T-Shirt was a distraction. Nice try, it is just a shirt, not much different than the black armbands case in during the Vietnam War (Tinker v. Des Moines). It was not a school sponsored speech event where it was the school speaking and not an individual student and did not promote illegal behavior (Morse v. Frederick), it was not packed with sexual innuendo that is a distraction in a public school (Bethel School District v. Fraser), the message did not contain obscenities. It is pure political speech by an individual student. It is the MOST protected form of speech. The school encouraged students to wear patriotic kinds of speech that day so they were inviting a political message, so it was all about content.

My advice to this young man and his family: sue them and make them pay and make them face public humiliation for it. 

Now the school has changed it’s tune and says that suspending the student had nothing to do with the shirt, but it was about disobedience because he would not take the shirt off…. and no sane judge or member of any jury is going to buy such a preposterous argument.

Take them to the cleaners kid, you are right.

Hotair.com comments here and they take a similar take. Malkin too.

In honor of the Aurora School District I bequeeth to power hungry, control freakish, elitist, law breaking and foolish administrators a proper tribute…

Posted in Campaign 2008, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Other Links | 2 Comments »

Biden Admits Obama Campiagn Lying About Clean Coal Energy for America…”Let China Have It”

Posted by iusbvision on September 23, 2008

Great give it all to China….

Problem: While the Obama campaign says it supports new technology and alternative energy including “Clean Coal”, the Democrats while paying this lip service to it have opposed it with votes.

Hotair.com comments HERE:

Joe Biden visited Virginia on Saturday, saying that he was a “hard-coal miner” and that it was “nice to be back in coal country” while Obama supporter, Congressman Rick Boucher (D-VA) said “Senator Obama’s a friend of coal.” But just two days later in Ohio, Senator Biden said he wants “no coal plants here in America” and that he and Senator Obama are “not supporting clean coal.”

It is no secret that America is the “Saudi Arabia of Coal” and like our domestic oil, wind, nuclear and natural gas resources much of it just sits there. We can get them in a clean and safe way, yet anti-capitalists disguising themselves as “green activists” and their friends in the Democratic Party make the United States the only country in the world who refuses to expand its own domestic sources of energy.

Biden also deliberatly muttles and confuses the difference between “Clean Coal Technology” and the 1940’s style old “dirty coal” technology that China uses.

“Clean Coal Technology” is one of those new technologies that allows us to use old style energy sources in a much cleaner way. We had an opportunity to have a clean coal energy facility in Northern Indiana and you guessed it, Democrats and anti-capitalist extremists managed to scare politicians into saying no; costing us energy and many high paying jobs. British Petroleum wants to modernize a refinery here in northern Indiana and every Democrats in the Indiana Congressional Delegation (including our Congressman Joe Donnelly)opposed it even though the result would have been less emissions (on a side note Donnelly has been a real disappointment and many fair minded Democrats I know want him out).

Biden got busted in another lie/gaffe…

Politico had interesting coverage of this:

“When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed,” Biden told Couric. “He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.'”

As Reason’s Jesse Walker footnotes it: “And if you owned an experimental TV set in 1929, you would have seen him. And you would have said to yourself, ‘Who is that guy? What happened to President Hoover?'”

If this had happened to Governor Palin it would have been all we would have heard about for weeks. The elite media would have went ballistic. I have seen partisans and leftist professors deny the obvious truth of leftist elite media bias. This election the bias and media corruption is so bad that such professors have all the credibility of a holocaust denier. Hotair.com comments HERE.

Where is the elite media doing any fact checking??? Oh that’s right journalism is dead. 

UPDATE McCain Coal Ad

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Obama Pro-Gun Radio Ad is a Lie – Don’t Be Fooled

Posted by iusbvision on September 22, 2008

Here in Indiana, where Obama is trying to make a competitive run, the Obama campaign is playing radio ads talking up how pro-gun he is. Examine the evidence and please feel free to comment on whether or not you think his ad is trying to fool you.

Dr. John Lott, who worked with Obama at the University of Chicago, says:

The Obama that I knew while we were both at the University of Chicago Law School during the 1990s was someone who disliked talking to people with whom he disagreed. Possibly it was just his extreme dislike of gun ownership, but I had more than one occasion when my attempts to talk to him ended in him turning his back and walking away.

The media’s portrayal of Obama as willing to work with those who disagree with him is not the person that I remember from a decade ago.

Dr. Lott’s research on gun control laws is the academic standard on the issue.  

The NRA has Obama’s voting record listed as an F rating on gun laws. The NRA says this:

Fact : Obama voted to allow the prosecution of citizens who use a firearm for self-defense in the home.
Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165. 3/25/04

Fact : Obama has supported banning hundreds of rifles and shotguns commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.
Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes, 10 / 21 / 0 4

Fact : Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to put the firearms industry out of business.
S.397, vote 219, 7/ 29/ 05

Fact : Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.
S.397, vote 217, 7/29/05

Update: Hotair.com comments on the NRA’s ads reminding people of this issue.

MSNBC calls out Obama on gun control deception.

Obama then vs Obama now.

McCain

Obama in reference to Pennsylvania voters when he is at a closed fund raiser of left coast elite friends: You folk get bitter and cling to your religion and guns out of frustration (that Obama hasn’t “saved” you yet)

Hillary on Obama’s comments.

Ar 5:14 into the video, Sarah Palin reacts to Obama’s comments.

ABC’s 20/20 examines gun laws to see if they reduce crime.

UPDATE: Remember how I said that Factcheck.org gets it right about 80% of the time? Well this is one of the 20% where FactCheck didn’t do their homework, didn’t look at the record and blew it big time. Anyone who checked the public record for 30 minutes could not take the position Fantcheck.org took on the gun control issue. I could give a top to bottom analysis, but Patterico beat me to it and he did a great job. Malkin comments HERE.

UPDATE II: On TV the Obama campaign spokesman is openly lying about Obama’s gun ban record. The public record is clear and easy to find, yet the Washington Post (who has still not retracted a long list of debunked Palin smears) and factcheck.org simply refuse to look at his record or his previous statements. They are even saying that a questionnaire where he said that he wanted to ban all handguns that had Obama’s handwriting on it wasn’t his and they were not his answers. The NRA is spot on when it comes to Obama’s record. Don’t be fooled. The elite media going “pro-gun” all of the sudden for Obama should be a clue as to what is going on. Hotair.com comments HERE.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Firearms, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Palin Blasts Iran’s Nuclear Program & Treatment of Women: He Must be Stopped

Posted by iusbvision on September 22, 2008

This is the speech that Democrats threatened a charity’s tax exempt status in order to stop Palin from delivering it at their event. Palin released the text of the speech to the New York Sun.

Read her speech HERE.

Exerpt:

Tomorrow, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will come to New York — to the heart of what he calls the Great Satan — and speak freely in this, a country whose demise he has called for.

Ahmadinejad may choose his words carefully, but underneath all of the rhetoric is an agenda that threatens all who seek a safer and freer world. We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator’s intentions and to call for action to thwart him.

He must be stopped.

The world must awake to the threat this man poses to all of us. Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever took place. He dreams of being an agent in a “Final Solution” — the elimination of the Jewish people. He has called Israel a “stinking corpse” that is “on its way to annihilation.” Such talk cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a madman — not when Iran just this summer tested long-range Shahab-3 missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv, not when the Iranian nuclear program is nearing completion, and not when Iran sponsors terrorists that threaten and kill innocent people around the world. …

It is said that the measure of a country is the treatment of its most vulnerable citizens. By that standard, the Iranian government is both oppressive and barbaric. Under Ahmadinejad’s rule, Iranian women are some of the most vulnerable citizens.

If an Iranian woman shows too much hair in public, she risks being beaten or killed.

If she walks down a public street in clothing that violates the state dress code, she could be arrested.

But in the face of this harsh regime, the Iranian women have shown courage. Despite threats to their lives and their families, Iranian women have sought better treatment through the “One Million Signatures Campaign Demanding Changes to Discriminatory Laws.” The authorities have reacted with predictable barbarism. Last year, women’s rights activist Delaram Ali was sentenced to 20 lashes and 10 months in prison for committing the crime of “propaganda against the system.” After international protests, the judiciary reduced her sentence to “only” 10 lashes and 36 months in prison and then temporarily suspended her sentence. She still faces the threat of imprisonment.

Hotair.com comments HERE.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Palin Draws 60,000 People for Florida Speech

Posted by iusbvision on September 22, 2008

…and where is the elite media showing the crowds and talking up what a “Superstar” she is like they did Obama?

http://news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080921/NEWS0107/80921022

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Illegal Unattributed Smear Palin Ads from the Same PR Firm Obama Campaign Uses

Posted by iusbvision on September 22, 2008

UPDATE: Fox News Megyn Kelly Covers the Story!

Hotair.com comments HERE.

FEC rules require that political ads have to say who paid for them. These are totally dishonest smear ads that have been debunked by factchek.org and other legit news outfits, yet Winner and Associates, a PR firm that has been used by David Axelrod and the Obama campaign has been making these illegal ads and posting them on youtube and other places on the internet.

  • Evidence suggests that a YouTube video with false claims about Palin was uploaded and promoted by members of a professional PR firm.
  • The family that runs the PR firm has extensive ties to the Democratic Party, the netroots, and are staunch Obama supporters.
  • Evidence suggests that the firm engaged in a concerted effort to distribute the video in such a way that it would appear to have gone viral on its own. Yet this effort took place on company time.
  • Evidence suggests that these distribution efforts included actions by at least one employee of the firm who is unconnected with the family running the company.
  • The voice-over artist used in this supposedly amateur video is a professional.
  • This same voice-over artist has worked extensively with David Axelrod’s firm, which has a history of engaging in phony grassroots efforts, otherwise known as “astroturfing.”
  • David Axelrod is Barack Obama’s chief media strategist.
  • The same voice-over artist has worked directly for the Barack Obama campaign.

Jawa Report has all the evidence HERE, Special thanks to Hotair for the heads up.

Here is the bogus smear ad

HERE is who has been uploading them all over the place.

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin is on the case. UPDATE II – Looks like Malkin got a confession. Just use the previous link.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Why Are Former Fannie Mae CEO’s Not in Front of Congress?

Posted by iusbvision on September 22, 2008

 

Congress yanked the oil company CEO’s in front of a committee to grill them so why not Fannie Mae?

Answer, Franklin Raines, James Johnson, Jamie Gorelick etc… they are all Clinton political appointees.

Hello elite media??

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | 1 Comment »

SNL Destroy’s Elite Media in Video

Posted by iusbvision on September 22, 2008

Hat Tip Hotair.com

And as is so often the case, when SNL goes after the elite media or the Democrats NBC pulls down the video from everywhere.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Bush Administration Warned Congress Almost 20 Times Reforms Were Needed

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

UPDATE IV – April 7, 2009 More evidence of how Barney Frank and the Democrats blocked mortgage industry policing reform HERE.

Think the elite media will cover the story? I am taking bets. – Editor  Update: Nothing on NYT or Washpost web sites yet 11:08 AM eastern time Sept 23.

UPDATE III: Fox updated the story and has a devastating new report. The Report mirrors the investigation IUSB Vision Published  HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HEREHERE, HEREHERE and HERE. Hotair.com comments on this new report from Fox HERE.

 
UPDATE II: Bloomberg News covered the story and gives similar information.
Fox is not a part of the elite media but Brit Hume covered this story on Sept 23.

UPDATE I: The Republicans, in a bill co-sponsored by John McCain (see HERE), tried to change the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac oversight regulations to those that are used by bank regulators (now they answer to the banking committee’s in Congress that set up a small agency to report to the committee’s so Congress KNEW this was coming and have for years). The bill to change the oversight rules was killed in a party line vote with Democrats against it. Alan Greenspan testified in favor of the bill (transcript HERE) and warned:

If we fail to strengthen GSE regulation, we increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis. … As I concluded last year, the GSEs need a regulator with authority on a par with banking regulators, with a free hand to set appropriate capital standards, and with a clear and credible process sanctioned by the Congress for placing a GSE in receivership, where the conditions under which debt holders take losses are made clear.

Hotair.com has the following commentary:

By special request of Ace. Nothing here you haven’t read and/or heard before, but Fox deserves a little publicity for being willing to challenge the narrative. Especially now that we’re about to be told it’s McCain’s campaign manager and his lobbyist pals, not the Democrats they lobbied who actually cast the votes, who are the real culprits in all this. The FBI: Doing the (after-the-fact) oversight job Congress wouldn’t.

*********Original Story*********

2001

April:The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”

2002

May:The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years. 

February:The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.”  As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.  (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03) 

September:Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November:  Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.”  To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.”  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

February:The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator:  “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.”  (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February:CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market’s] strength for granted.”  Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.”  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June:Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system.  Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs:  Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.”  (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

April:Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.”  (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)

…..And the list goes on HERE. (update, the Obama administration has removed this briefing from the Whitehouse.gov website – anyone surprised?)     Hat Tip Gateway Pundit

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Mortgage Crisis, Palin Truth Squad | 2 Comments »

Fact-Check Issues Double Whammy on Obama’s Ads

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

Obama’s Social Security Whopper
September 20, 2008
He tells Social Security recipients their money would now be in the stock market under McCain’s plan. False.

 
Scaring Seniors
September 19, 2008
Updated: September 20, 2008
An Obama-Biden ad says McCain supports “cutting benefits in half” for Social Security recipients. False

Fact-check.org gets it right about 85% of the time, I am glad to see that they got these two correct.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

More Unions Breaking for McCain

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

 

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/zito/s_589297.html

It is a simple economic reality. If McCain/Palin get their way there will be a huge rush towards energy independence. Drilling, wind, natural gas, clean coal all of it; the result will be tens of thousands new union jobs that wont happen if the Democrats get their way.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

MORE CENSORSHIP: Dems Threaten Charity’s Tax Exampt Status if They Let Palin Speak, Dems Threaten ABC’s Broadcast License, Obama Threaten’s WGN for not censoring for him, Universities & leftist bloggers going censor happy…

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

 

This site, and others such as the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, and the Alliance Defense Fund, have demonstrated that there is no shortage of political activists and academics who are eager to censor people, even illegally and are quite bold in their attempts to get away with it. Take a look at the category called “Campus Freedom” on this page and you will see 100 articles with most of them dealing with illegal censorship dome by state employees or professors. Nearly all of the people who engage in the behavior are leftists. I use the word leftist because liberal does not describe these people as there is nothing liberal about them.

Democrats working to censor talk radio –

Attempts to silence talk radio is a big deal among Congressional Democrats. They have something called a “fairness doctrine” that they only wish to apply to radio and not TV or Newsprint. The “fairness doctrine” isn’t about fairness at all. It is designed to silence talk radio and Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama have all voiced support for it. Right now I do not believe the Supreme Court would stand for it so things are safe for the immediate future.

Democrat threats censor ABC –

The ABC documentary based on the 9/11 Commission Report was not welcomed by the Clintons. Democrats put massive pressure on ABC to censor the documentary in favor of the Clintons. After ABC’s broadcast license was threatened by Democrats in Washington ABC caved and has since refused to release the unedited DVD of the movie. It cost ABC $40 million to make the film and they refuse to sell it because they are frightened. Now a documentary has been made about thie Censorship called “Blocking the Path to 9/11”.

I wrote a fully sourced article about this subject two years ago and you can view it HERE.

Far left academics go censor happy –

Right here at IUSB I have had to fight censorship at the American Democracy Project, the proposed (and defeated) bulletin board policy, attempts to sensor the Preface (student newspaper), and attempts to punish students for constitutionally protected speech and guess what political ideology the perpetrators had in common?

Obama threatens WGN if they won’t censor for him –

According to collegues Obama worked with at the University of Chicago, Obama was not someone who could tolerate people who would dare disagree with him:

Dr. Lott also commented on Barack Obama and the years they spent together at the University of Chicago:

Hopefully, Biden will balance off Barack Obama’s partisan tendencies. The Obama that I knew while we were both at the University of Chicago Law School during the 1990s was someone who disliked talking to people with whom he disagreed. Possibly it was just his extreme dislike of gun ownership, but I had more than one occasion when my attempts to talk to him ended in him turning his back and walking away.

The media’s portrayal of Obama as willing to work with those who disagree with him is not the person that I remember from a decade ago.

Barack Obama is someone who has shown his appreciation of strong arm censorship tactics as well. Obama has been pressuring WGN Radio with harassment, threats to use the FCC and asked the Justice Department to look into to a criminal probe of WGN and host Stanley Kurtz all because Obama did not like the research a guest on the show was doing into Obama’s work as Chair of the Annenberg Challenge project that had goals including:

During Obama’s tenure as Annenberg chairman, Ayers’ own education projects received substantial funding. As we’ve noted in our series, “The Audacity of Socialism,” Ayers, now a tenured distinguished professor of education at UIC, works to educate teachers in socialist revolutionary ideology, urging that it be passed on to impressionable students.

One of Ayer’s descriptions for a course called “Improving Learning Environments” says prospective K-12 teachers need to “be aware of the social and moral universe we inhabit and . . . be a teacher capable of hope and struggle, outrage and action, teaching for social justice and liberation.”

The Annenberg papers are quite extensive – 132 boxes containing 947 file folders with 70 linear feet of material. They undoubtedly contain more surprises regarding Obama’s relationship with Ayers, one of many relationships Obama has sought to hide.

Democrats threaten charity’s tax exempt status if they let Palin speak at Iran protest –

Ad has been reported, both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin were invited to speak at an anti-nukes for Iran rally. Both had accepted, unconfirmed reports say that the Obama campaign leaned on Hillary to cancel. Hillary did cancel and refuses to talk to reporters about it.

The charity invited other Democrats including Joe Biden and in the past has enjoyed bi-partisan support at these protests. Confrmed reports (with video) from WCBS say that the Democrats threatened the tax exempt status of the charity if they did not disinvite Palin. The story and the video report are HERE.

Excerpt from WCBS:

Sources tell CBS 2 HD that a decision to disinvite Palin from the high profile rally after Clinton pulled out in a huff came as the result of intense pressure from Democrats.

“This is insulting. This is embarrassing, especially to Gov. Palin, to me and I think it should be to every single New Yorker,” Assemblyman Dov Hikind, D-Brooklyn, told CBS 2 HD.

The groups sponsoring the rally against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaking at the UN were reportedly told, “it could jeopardize their tax exempt status” if they had Palin and not Clinton or Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden on hand.

So all politicians were disinvited, most prominently, Palin.

“It’s an absolute shame that this has happened,” Hikind said. “To threaten organizations … to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don’t withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we’re going to look into your tax exempt status … that’s McCarthyism.”

Another Jewish group tried to step into the breach by inviting Palin to a different protest a day earlier.

“I’m absolutely appalled at the behavior of the Democrats,” said Bob Kunst of Defenders.net. “I’m a Democrat and for the first time in my life I’m going to vote Republican. I can’t take it anymore.”

As for Sen. Clinton, she brushed right past CBS 2 HD’s Lou Young when he tried to ask her about the issue on Thursday night.

Hotair.com comments:

NBC wrote about the tax-exemption issue two days ago but they made it sound like something the organizers had taken up of their own accord. Quote from an unnamed official involved: “The IRS is very clear, Hillary Clinton does not equal Sarah Palin… You have to have equal representation of candidates.” You do? Here’s the speaker list from last year’s anti-Iran rally at the UN. Scott Garrett is a Republican congressman; as far as I know, every other pol on the list is a Democrat.

Unhinged leftist bloggers censor happy –

It is no secret that if you aren’t a leftist and you make a good argument, they delete your post at places like ‘Think Progress’ and other blog sites. What I find so amusing when when leftist bloggers come here and post a comment. Most just drop a bomb in the comment’s section and do not wish to engage in a real conversation (that they are almost sure to lose). Sometimes I return the favor and drop a little inconvenient evidence in a very nice way on their blogs; most of the time they delete or alter the evidence out of the post (of course they would be outraged if I did the same thing to them).

Leftist blogger Archcrone is an example of a hateful, unhinged, leftist blogger that sent me some traffic so I popped on over to see what was going on. What I found was a cuss word sprinkled post saying essentially that the then Mayor Palin and her police and administration were pro-rape and wanted to victimize rape victims again by making them pay for the rape kit and other parts of the investigation. This silliness has been debunked all over the blogosphere including HERE. So after posting my link “Archcrone” continued to post some outrageous spin so I followed up with this little comment:

Archcrone, I hate to spoil the fun but you are misinformed.

The federal bill you are referring to ( it updates the violence against women act to force states to pay for rape kits if they cannot recover the cost from perps) was sponsored by James Sensenbrenner. It was introduced in the House and passed before it got to the Senate. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-3402

Since Joe Biden is a ranking member on the Judiciary Committee in the Senate, all crime bills will be co-sponsored by him, as his committee position will allow him to stop any crime bill cold. The federal law does not take effect till 2009 on this issue.

Also if you bothered to read the Alaska bill first, you would see that Chief Fannon in Wasilla opposed the Alaska Bill because it made NO provision for obtaining restitution from a perpetrator and that is why he opposed it. Not because anyone wanted to stick women with the bill. http://www.legis.state.ak.us/PDF/21/Bills/HB0270D.PDF

When you came to the conclusion that the administration in Wasilla were some kind of monsters, didn’t you stop to ask yourself “why would a police chief want to make sure women paid” and think twice, before you started posting these silly accusations?

At least the 2000 Illinois bill made a provision for the perp to pay if he was found guilty. But the bottom line is that many women still ended up with paying for the kit in the 2000 Illinois law. The 2000 Illinois law makes it clear why AND the recent US News & World Report article demonstrate it.

Of course if you wanted to show some consistency, how many poor women in Illinois were stuck with the bill even before the new law passed?  Was every mayor and police chief in the State of Illinois some craven jerk out to make women pay? To be consistent you would have to take that position.

Women who aren’t near destitute and who’s insurance would not cover it could still be stuck with the bill under the 2000 Illinois law.

Of course, if ideological nuts weren’t so obsessed with trying to make Palin into some craven figure, they could just read the evidence and see what was going on, but such people have no interest in the facts.

Why do you think that the Obama campaign hasn’t touched this at all…… think and get facts BEFORE you post… the order of those things IS important.

Comment deleted. Now said blogger claims that the comment above violated his comment policy…. laughable. This is the status of the left folks, in Canada they have these so-called “Human Rights Commissions” who have made it their sole purpose to silence dissent from leftism by calling it “hate speech” and a violation of “law” and don’t worry the truth is no defense. After all I have witnessed, I am sure the far left in this country would like to have a similar program.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

More Media Bias to the Point of Laughable Stupidity

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

This time it is CNN.

This article from CNN criticizes Sarah Palin because one of her top advisors is ….drum roll please…. her husband Todd.

Elenoar Roosevelt is revered as a great political figure, Jackie had influence in foreign policy, Lady Bird Johnson made her husbands early political career possible, Bill & Hillary Clinton it was two heads in one, Michelle Obama the bright lawyer and partner of Barack Obama who adds so much substance to everything Barack does…and Todd Palin… the evil SHADOW GOVERNOR that CNN and the critics object to….

Give me a break.

UPDATE: Now the Washington Post has the “unaccountable husband” piece. The double standard here is amazing. Spouses of government executives oftem play a role in things. Of course this is about what I expect from the WashPost any more.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

The Wilkow Guide to Media Perception

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

Thanks to Beltway Snark for the heads up on this.

The Wilkow guide to media perception

If you have spent time in Washington:

Conservative…you are part of the problem.
Liberal…you have experience.

If you don’t have time in Washington:

Conservative….you have no experience.
Liberal….you represent change.

If you have wealth:

Conservative …you are greedy and a cheat who had advantages in life.
Liberal…you are successful and your life story is an inspiration.

If you don’t have wealth:

Conservative…you are low class.
Liberal…you are disadvantaged.

If you went to college:

Conservative…your academic pedigree is scrutinized.
Liberal….your degree speaks for itself.

If you didn’t go to college:

Conservative…you are un-educated.
Liberal…you are an artist/activist.

If you own a business:

Conservative…you are a profiteer.
Liberal…you provide jobs to the community.

If you are working class:

Conservative….you’re just a (insert job title or trade).
Liberal…you are a proletariat who finds strength in numbers.

If you believe in the wisdom of the constitution:

Conservative…you are narrow minded.
Liberal…you are a civil libertarian.

If you believe in individual freedoms:

Conservative….you have made peace with inequality.
Liberal….you are for choice.

If you take to the streets to voice your opinions:

Conservative…you are a thug.
Liberal…you are a demonstrator.

If you are religious:

Conservative….you are a fundamentalist.
Liberal…you are spiritual.

If you are serving in the military:

Conservative…you are a mindless killer.
Liberal…you wear the uniform of your country.

If you are popular:

Conservative….you have blind sheep followers.
Liberal…you are leading a movement.

If you are attractive:

Conservative…you are shallow and empty.
Liberal…you are stunning and a trend setter.

If you are un-attractive:

Conservative…you are just ugly.
Liberal…you are too intellectual to be concerned with your appearance.

If you enjoy an outdoors lifestyle:

Conservative…you are a hick.
Liberal…you are earthy.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | 3 Comments »

In Plain English: How Did The Biggest Financial Scandal in History Happen? – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

This article is a bit long for a blog post, but if you wish to truly understand, this article is a great place to start. – Editor

First a little perspective…..

Enron generated huge press when it failed, lots of money went “POOF”, and the elite media and the Democrats had a great time “blaming Bush” for it until the investigations started and they realized that it was Democrats that worked in the Clinton administration that had set up their “accounting system” when those people worked in the private sector. It proved to be a bi-partisan scandal so it vanished from the front pages just like that.

Global Crossing was another huge one, it got even less press because just before they went belly up they gave $18 million to Democratic National Committee Chair Terre McAuliffe.

Halliburton just had a few accounting errors and the occasional overcharge, which is to be expected in an operation the size of a country in a war zone. The reported accounting and billing errors were all caught by the inspectors and it was settled easily. The press pounded it and pounded it because Vice-President Cheney used to be the CEO of Halliburton. Of course when it was learned that Bill Clinton gave Halliburton no bid contracts and Al Gore had given Halliburton an award that press went away too.

The next big one was the UN Oil for Food Program. It was supposed to administer Iraq’s oil revenues so they could be used for food, medical supplies, and infrastructure instead of weapons programs. The UN handlers managed to bilk (read rob) up to $26 billion from the program. Until Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac went belly up, this was the biggest financial scandal in world history.

The media and politicians have had a cow over $30 billion in profits from oil companies. Of course they don’t tell you that they often pay more in taxes than they make in profit, but why would politicians who demagogued the issue and a leftist press want to tell you that?

Now we have the current scams, which is approaching a $1Trillion and will go into the trillions of dollars more if these countless home mortgages do not get covered or sold in the future. This is the biggest financial scandal in the history of the world and is so big that it likely is bigger than most previous scandals combined.

Congress yanked the oil company CEO’s in front of a committee to grill them so why not Fannie Mae? Answer: Franklin Raines, James Johnson, Jamie Gorelick etc… they are all Clinton political appointees.

So now that you have some perspective, let’s start to look at how this all happened.

Before the stock market crash of 1929 and before the great depression, commercial banks and investment banks either worked closely together or in many cases were one. A single bank could do both roles. An investment bank did investments and securities and all those things associated with it and commercial banks would do home loans, savings accounts, checking, CDs etc.

One of the elements that led to the stock market crash and the depression is that the investment banks were counting the saving accounts (& deposits), mortgages (good and bad) and all they had as assets that they could use for trading in the market. When the market gets out of control and people cook the books to ensure that on paper it looks like you have a growing quarterly profits so people could get paid more things get shaky. They ended up having a lot of “bad paper” mortgages and investments and eventually it all came crashing down.

Laws were passed such as the Glass-Steagal Act. Among other things Glass-Steagal divided commercial banks and investment banks so that people’s savings would not be put at such investment risk. This law weakened the banks but disproportionately weakened the Morgan Bank which pleased the Rockefeller Bank (Yup influence peddling back then too).

Over the years other countries unified banks had an advantage over American banks so Congress moved to even things up and re-unify the banks and set up a regulation and monitoring system to make sure that what happened to help lead up to the Crash of 1929 did not happen again. The first vote in the Senate went along party lines but after compromises with Democrats and the Clinton Administration it passed the Senate 90 votes to 8. The law is called the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

Clinton Signs Legislation Overhauling Banking Laws
New York Times Published: November 13, 1999

President Clinton signed into law today a sweeping overhaul of Depression-era banking laws. The measure lifts barriers in the industry and allows banks, securities firms and insurance companies to merge and to sell each other’s products.

”This legislation is truly historic,” President Clinton told a packed audience of lawmakers and top financial regulators. ”We have done right by the American people.”

The bill repeals parts of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and the 1956 Bank Holding Company Act to level the domestic playing field for United States financial companies and allow them to compete better in the evolving global financial marketplace.

Analysts and industry leaders say the measure will probably fuel a wave of mergers as companies compete to build financial supermarkets offering all the services customers need under one roof.

Financial stocks were winners on Wall Street today, with J. P. Morgan & Company, Citigroup, American Express and Merrill Lynch all posting big gains. That helped the Dow Jones industrial average end up 174.02 points, at 10,769.32.

The Senate approved the final bill by 90 to 8 on Nov. 4 and the House followed suit by a vote of 362 to 57. Congress had previously made almost a dozen unsuccessful attempts over the last 25 years to revise the statutes, which had increasingly come to be viewed as anachronisms.

The Obama campaign and far left web sites are blaming this law for the current economic problems. They are pointing to the first vote which was mostly along party lines but ignore the second vote which was almost unanimous. If you examine the wikipedia entry on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act it tells how one of the compromises that Democrats insisted upon was a strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).

The CRA was the first step to this crisis because even with unified banks, if sound and ethical financial practices were used all would have been fine. The Obama campaign says that re-unifying the banks and “deregulating” is what caused this and capitalism is what caused the economic problems of today, yet other countries have unified banks and don’t get these problems so what is the real problem?

The Community Reinvestment Act likely started out with good intentions. It made it illegal to engage in what is known as “redlining” or singling out loan applicants by race. The problem is that there are enough minorities in poverty stricken inner city areas that banks who simply use standard good credit practices would leave out most anyone in those regardless of race. This created a loophole for groups such as ACORN to file a long series of harassment lawsuits charging redlining. ACORN also engaged in physical harassment of bank employees and other tactics to get them to lower credit standards.

Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began using the act to combat “red-lining,” a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others, based on economic status. “No loan is exempt, no bank is immune,” warned then-Attorney General Janet Reno. “For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.”

In the name of fighting “racism”  and “redlining” ACORN and the government forced banks to make riskier loans in areas less economically feasable and to customers who had a low and/or unstable income, e.g. those who are a high credit risk. Banks said it was risk management, Democrats said it was racism.

Abuse of the CRA was the first step in what became the mortgage crisis. For a more detailed article on ACORN and the abuse of the CRA, and Barack Obama’s role in ACORN please visit this link HERE.

April 3, 1998. After announcing billions in fines via CRA Andrew Cuomo is bold in pride that CRA would be abused to force banks to give bad loans.

CUOMO: To take a greater risk on these mortgages, yes. To give families mortgages that they would not have given otherwise, yes.

Q: [unintellible] … that they would not have given the loans at all?

CUOMO: They would not have qualified but for this affirmative action on the part of the bank, yes.

Q: Are minorities represented in that low and moderate income group?

CUOMO: It is by income, and is it also by minorities? Yes.

CUOMO: With the 2.1 billion, lending that amount in mortgages — which will be a higher risk, and I’m sure there will be a higher default rate on those mortgages than on the rest of the portfolio

This risk banks were subjected to was amplified because loan customers wanted fixed rates and depositors wanted a variable rate. The banks had to keep enough liquid assets to cover loans. This limited the number of loans that a bank could issue. Banks were being pushed into more lending by the political and regulatory environment. The government tracked every loan and the banks were issued a “CRA rating” by the government. So how did they get around these problems and buffer the risk?

Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created as a partially private corporation backed by the US Government to buy loan bonds or buy the mortgages outright from banks. Congress created a regulation and monitoring agency called the OFHEO that reported to the Banking Committee’s in the Congress and exempted them from reporting to the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC).

OFHEO has two missions.

An affordable housing mission that reports to HUD, but has no real enforcement power and a mortgage finance mission that has almost no enforcement power and reports to the finance committee’s in Congress.

OFHEO is paid for by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and is not paid for by the tax payer.

Sounds odd you say? It is. Separation of powers would be true for a real constitutional agency, but Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and OFHEO are a part of the GSE system and are not real constitutional agencies as authorized by Congress under Article I Section VIII.

Most of the mortgage industry debt is managed by GSE’s which are unique animals in government being part government and part private. That is why GSE’s do not follow the standard separation of powers as they were set up. It is no surprise that their monitoring and enforcement are not typical as well.

OFHEO has begged Congress year after year to have itself replaced by REAL banking regulators with REAL enforcement power either under the Federal Reserve or the Treasury Department. Here is an example from their 2007 Report:

Legislation
OFHEO has continued to strongly support enactment of legislative reform to strengthen GSE oversight. During the past year, the agency worked with the Bush Administration, Congress and interested parties on legislation that will provide bank regulator-like powers to a newGSE regulator overseeing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks.The House of Representatives passed, on a bipartisan basis, GSE regulatory reform legislation (H.R. 1427) in May 2007 [Barney Frank and Finance Committee Democrat members in both houses of Congress opposed it year after year till 2007 – Editor]. It is a balanced bill that will strengthen the nation’s housing finance system by enhancing oversight of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks. It is my hope that the Senate will complete its work on this important legislation soon.
http://www.ofheo.gov/media/pdf/OFHEOPARNovember2007508.pdf

Democrats blocked that legislation year after year and below we posted the youtube VIDEO of members of the Finance Committee’s in Congress showing Democrats like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank and Maxine Waters all saying that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the mortgage industry was in just dandy financial shape.

This was step two that led to this crisis. The abuse of CRA as we described above forced banks to make more loans available that carried more risk, so banks were eager to sell these higher risk loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. With the housing boom the inflated value of the houses it had as collateral for the loans on paper made it look like Fannie and Freddie had more collateral assets than reality could bear. With the housing market inflating due to easy loans and low interest rates making it TOO EASY to get a loan for a new home, demand for loans went up. Fannie and Freddie started buying loans at a furious rate. The more loans they bought, the more income on paper they could claim, but more and more people were defaulting on the bad loans….

Political appointees (not financial guru’s) were placed in charge of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; people like Franklin Raines, Jeff Johnson and former Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick. It was the policy of the Clinton Administration and Congressional Democrats to lean on banks, and Freddie and Fannie to get loans to low income people so that “everyone could have a home” (besides all that loan money out there propped up and somewhat inflated the economy so it helped make the numbers look good).

So let’s add up the cards we have now, the government and Fannie and Freddie, are encouraging banks to give bad loans and Freddie and Fannie would buy them up to help absolve the banks from the risk by buying the high risk loans up. Political appointees with political motivations, rather than sound financial motivations were in charge, and the people the regulators and Fannie and Freddie reported to, was not the SEC, which demands sound accounting practices, but the congressional committees that as policy wanted more loans given out as well, mostly Democrats. Here is step three.

Corruption and influence peddling begin to infect the entire system. While the law made it clear that sound financial principles were to be practiced, political pressure caused people to look the other way. The political cronies running Fannie and Freddie realized that they could make themselves rich with tens of millions of dollars in bonuses by buying more loans to make it seem on paper that they had all this money coming in from people’s house payments as if the loans they owned were good, but they weren’t. Too many of the loans were high risk, they had bought “bad paper”. The bonuses were spread around, but they wanted to keep the cash train flowing and help their fellow political friends so Fannie and Freddie gave $200 million away in political donations, to candidates and partisan organizations, a majority of those being Democrats. Barack Obama and Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd were the two biggest recipients of this money in the Senate. Fannie and Freddie had become the money train for the corrupt. The regulators who reported to Congress warned what was going on but members of the banking committee who were getting paid didn’t want to hear it.

And that was step four folks.

President Bush tried to put an end to this in 2003 along with a group of Republican Senators (Dole, Sununu, Chafee, McCain). Congressional Banking leaders Chris Dodd and Barney Frank said that everything was just fine and no reforms were needed.

Before you accuse us of just trying to be partisan and making it all up here is some of the evidence. These attempts to fix the system were blocked by Democrats.

New York Times Excerpt:

September 11, 2003
New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae
By STEPHEN LABATON

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,” Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ”We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,” the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

”These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,” he added.

“These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.

Here is an OFHEO report form 2006 that warned of what was coming. McCain mentions this report (in a pre-release version) in his remarks. Here is a summary from the OFHEO saying:

The report details an arrogant and unethical corporate culture where Fannie Mae employees manipulated accounting and earnings to trigger bonuses for senior executives from 1998 to 2004.

A large number of Fannie Mae’s accounting policies and practices did not comply with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The Enterprise also had serious problems of internal control, financial reporting, and corporate governance. Those errors resulted in Fannie Mae overstating reported income and capital by a currently estimated $10.6 billion.

Here is McCain’s Bill and Statements:

S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005
A bill to address the regulation of secondary mortgage market enterprises, and for other purposes. Here is the text of the bill. HERE is the link to McCain’s remarks on the floor of the Senate. The bottom line, Bush and McCain, who Obama accuses of knowing nothing about the economy and putting us in this mess, predicted it and tried to fix it, while Obama and Dodd and others were taking the largest sums of money from these people. They should have gone public and made a big stink in the press, but Republicans since Nixon have been awful at communications strategy.

The House version of S.190 was H.R. 1461

In fact Senators Sununnu, Hagel, and Dole introduced this legislation repeatedly (link HERE).

While I do not like quoting party sources THIS LINK (now taken down) from GOP.com has some good information, fully sourced, that is pretty spot on. It leaves out that some Republicans were a part of this influence peddling scandal though.

You can also read quotes of what Senators and Representatives said about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac HERE.

Here is a video of McCain lecturing on the issue:

Step 5 … After the Enron scandal the Congress passed a new regulatory law called Sarbanes-Oxley. This law had a major flaw. It changed the accounting rules laws so that a non-indexed mark to market rule was used.

What it does, according to federal accounting rules, is artificially lower the value of an asset or security that has lost value and artificially inflates an asset’s or security’s value when the market is going up. So when these mortgage securities crashed companies had to say they were worth nothing (because no one wanted to buy them) in spite of the fact that there is a house there that has some value. This problem was a real factor in why things crashed so quickly because it lowered the liquidity rating and solvency rating of those assets artificially.

When the housing market was going up the companies holding them had their rating inflated by them, making it all look dandy on paper and when they crashed they had their rating set artificially low and the company fell below solvency standards.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and many business leaders and economists asked to have this rule fixed; no one in government listened.

Fast forward to today.

Three events in the economy greatly accelerated the rate of default on the loans. Energy prices skyrocketed because of increased global demand and OPEC learned that it could gouge us and we had no immediate way of stopping them. This caused food, transportation, etc. prices to skyrocket and slowed the economy. Many states were raising property taxes and as time went on housing had become so inflated that the market values had to make an adjustment. If the value of homes just went up and up eventually people could not afford to buy a home so the market had to adjust.

Step 6: The number of home loan defaults skyrockets and it all crashes down to the mess we have now.

As you can see, the banking unification of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act would have been fine if the system was not filled with corruption, cronies, politics, and regulated by Congress. A system could have been set up where high risk loans were made cautiously and generally accepted accounting and finance practices were used. If that was done, we would not be in the spot we are in. This is not and was never a problem with bank unification, it was a problem with influence peddling and political cronyism. What we need are ethics laws that have jail time teeth and regulatory laws that help to protect the regulators from political pressures. For more details on the influence peddling part of this scandal and the political consequences click HERE.

The left and the Obama campaign are saying essentially, “Oh so you Republicans are the big regulators now…what happened to low regulation and free markets” This article is a common example http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/09/19/mccain_the_regulator/index.html.

Those who make such arguments are counting on people’s ignorance. While conservatives believe in less government they do not believe in NO government. It is a proper constitutional role of government to protect people from fraud and theft. A proper policing structure to help ensure safety and stability to prevent fraud and promote ethics is a proper role of government that no conservative would object to. This kind of criticism is just designed to deflect attention away from the real issue here; corruption and influence peddling in Congress.

UPDATE: Famed author and legal scholar Mark Levin gives a highly charged yet factually accurate lecture on how this all came about. Levin is a partisan guy, but the facts he gives are verifiable and the analysis is sound. Levin is furiousabout this scandal so there is some adult language. People should be carted off for influence peddling and bank fraud. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd should be removed from the Banking Committee’s in Congress immediately. Hat Tip Hotair.com for the link, we love you guys.

UPDATE II:Bloomberg Financial News gives a similar analysis to ours today (Monday Sept.22) http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

UPDATE III: Hotair.com comments

UPDATE IV: FBI investigates fraud at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac… thanks W it’s about freakin’ time.

UPDATE V: Brit Hume covered this story on Sept 23 and came to many of the same facts we did here at IUSB Vision

The Republicans, in a bill co-sponsored by John McCain (see HERE), tried to change the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac oversight regulations to those that are used by bank regulators (now they answer to the banking committee’s in Congress that set up a small agency to report to the committee’s so Congress KNEW this was coming and have for years). The bill to change the oversight rules was killed in a party line vote with Democrats against it. Alan Greenspan testified in favor of the bill (transcript HERE and HERE) and warned:

If we fail to strengthen GSE regulation, we increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis. … As I concluded last year, the GSEs need a regulator with authority on a par with banking regulators, with a free hand to set appropriate capital standards, and with a clear and credible process sanctioned by the Congress for placing a GSE in receivership, where the conditions under which debt holders take losses are made clear.

Hotair.com has the following commentary:

By special request of Ace. Nothing here you haven’t read and/or heard before, but Fox deserves a little publicity for being willing to challenge the narrative. Especially now that we’re about to be told it’s McCain’s campaign manager and his lobbyist pals, not the Democrats they lobbied who actually cast the votes, who are the real culprits in all this. The FBI: Doing the (after-the-fact) oversight job Congress wouldn’t.

UPDATE VI: Bloomberg News covered the story and gives similar information.

UPDATE VII:Fox updated the story and has a devastating new report. The Report mirrors the investigation IUSB Vision Published HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE. Hotair.com comments on this new report from Fox HERE.

UPDATE VIII: Bill Clinton sets the record straight on the Gramm Leach Bliley Act. It was not the deregulation Obama said it was, and it had little to do with the mess we see ourselves in now.

A running cliché of the political left and the press corps these days is that our current financial problems all flow from Congress’s 1999 decision to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 that separated commercial and investment banking. Barack Obama has been selling this line every day. Bill Clinton signed that “deregulation” bill into law, and he knows better.

In BusinessWeek.com, Maria Bartiromo reports that she asked the former President last week whether he regretted signing that legislation. Mr. Clinton’s reply: “No, because it wasn’t a complete deregulation at all. We still have heavy regulations and insurance on bank deposits, requirements on banks for capital and for disclosure. I thought at the time that it might lead to more stable investments and a reduced pressure on Wall Street to produce quarterly profits that were always bigger than the previous quarter.

“But I have really thought about this a lot. I don’t see that signing that bill had anything to do with the current crisis. Indeed, one of the things that has helped stabilize the current situation as much as it has is the purchase of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America, which was much smoother than it would have been if I hadn’t signed that bill.”

One of the writers of that legislation was then-Senator Phil Gramm, who is now advising John McCain, and who Mr. Obama described last week as “the architect in the United States Senate of the deregulatory steps that helped cause this mess.” Ms. Bartiromo asked Mr. Clinton if he felt Mr. Gramm had sold him “a bill of goods”?

Mr. Clinton: “Not on this bill I don’t think he did. You know, Phil Gramm and I disagreed on a lot of things, but he can’t possibly be wrong about everything. On the Glass-Steagall thing, like I said, if you could demonstrate to me that it was a mistake, I’d be glad to look at the evidence.

“But I can’t blame [the Republicans]. This wasn’t something they forced me into. I really believed that given the level of oversight of banks and their ability to have more patient capital, if you made it possible for [commercial banks] to go into the investment banking business as Continental European investment banks could always do, that it might give us a more stable source of long-term investment.”

We agree that Mr. Clinton isn’t wrong about everything. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act passed the Senate on a 90-8 vote, including 38 Democrats and such notable Obama supporters as Chuck Schumer, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Dick Durbin, Tom Daschle — oh, and Joe Biden. Mr. Schumer was especially fulsome in his endorsement.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122282635048992995.html?mod=todays_us_opinion

Hotair.com commented on this issue HERE

UPDATE IX: Investors Business Daily and Human Events Magazine came out with a similar analysis (albeit they are a bit more strident in their partisanship) on September 30th, nine days after the IUSB Vision. Once again we beat the big guys. These two articles, especially the one from Human Events, has much evidence we demonstrated or linked too.

UPDATE X: Dennis Prager Explains how this happened on his radio show and famed author and economist Dr. Thomas Sowell’s explanation mirrors our analysis HERE

UPDATE XI – There are two other factors that aided to magnify the crisis. The main thing that is missing in my series of articles is a piece that explains the role of the Federal Reserve. In keeping interest rates artificially below market levels for political reasons, they encouraged bad lending and the housing market bubble. Dr. Hayek wrote a paper on this subject that helped him get the Nobel Prize for Economics.

Another factor that I left out because it gets too much into the weeds of financial technospeak is the “credit default swaps” or CDS. A credit default swap (CDS) is like an insurance policy on an investment. You by the CDS and if your investment tanks the CDS pays you a portion of what you lost. As the housing market became more inflated, and along with it the issued mortgage securities, more people bought this type of insurance. When it all crashed the CDS insurance had to be paid to those who lost and as a result in helped bring down Lehman Brothers, AIG etc.

Every facet of the mortgage crisis story, who benefited and who is lying can be found HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE. – Editor

Chuck Norton

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Mortgage Crisis, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 16 Comments »

Profiles in Journalism – Time Magazine: McCain’s Franklin Raines ad is racist because, um, he released it before the Jim Johnson one

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

2008 is truly the year Journalism died. As has been demonstrated time and time again, Journalists are making more biased attacks on Republicans than Democrats are. These attacks as we have shown, as well as other smart blogs, do not even pass a basic public records fact check. Literally they invent lies and publish them as truth and when called on it rarely is there a retraction.

Today it is Time Magazine, who was jumping at the chance to say that the McCain ad about former Fannie Mae CEO, thief and con artist, who has been an economic advisor to the Obama campaign, Franklin Raines, is a racist ad because Raines is Black & that it did not mention the OTHER former Fannie Mae CEO, thief and con artist, who has been an economic advisor to the Obama campaign, who happens to be white James Johnson wa snot in the ad. Well the Johnson ad came out hours after the Raines ad did so Time was eating crow….enjoy how they tried to weasel their way out of this one….

Hotair.com:

Cuffy Meigs is all over it. This started last night with Karen Tumulty asserting, on the basis of zero evidence except her own Gergenesque “I know it when I see it” secret racial decoder ring, that McCain’s ad was racist for showing a white victim being exploited by former Fannie Mae CEO turned Obama advisor Raines, who’s black, but not former Fannie Mae CEO turned Obama advisor Jim Johnson, who’s white. Come the morning and what do you know: Here’s that Johnson ad now. Was it rushed into production to head Tumulty and the racial paranoiacs off at the pass? Nope — according to Ana Marie Cox, it’s been in the works for days.

The facts are pointing one way and her secret racial decoder ring’s pointing in the other. What’s an honest reporter to do? This, of course:

Yes, Ana. The ad pointing out the Jim Johnson connection to Obama’s campaign is fair, which raises the question of why the campaign didn’t air that one in the first place.

Really? Why does it raise that question? What significance lies in the fact that one ad dropped 12 hours before the other? No word yet from Time HQ. But if you think I’m kidding that her argument boils down to “I know it when I see it,” here’s Tumulty explaining her “logic” in the comments:

I have been a political reporter long enough to have lived through Willie Horton, the Jesse Helms infamous “hands” ad and to have covered races in the South where people have used the slogan “one of us.” I know what this stuff looks like. In this case, the McCain campaign chose NOT to draw attention to the very real connections between Fannie Mae and the campaign (Jim Johnson and campaign contributions), and instead, focused on this one. If Raines had been included in an ad that mentioned the others, that would have been well within the bounds of fairness as well.

QED. Karen Tumulty knows, and that’s that [LOL – click the links for more info].

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

The Man Obama Wants to Chat With

Posted by iusbvision on September 21, 2008

Warning adult language.

Is this the man we should talk with at the Presidential level without precondition? If so please explain what good would come of it.

Hotair.com:

The One reiterated his willingness to meet with Chavez as recently as May,just a day before he turned around and called for the isolation of regimes that support FARC — like, um, Hugo Chavez’s. A gaffe like that would destroy McCain or Palin, but in Obama’s case it’s merely further evidence of how supple and nuanced his intellect is [just ask the elite media].

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

HEY OBAMA REALITY CHECK: DOW UP 40 POINTS IN PAST MONTH – UP 18% PAST 5 YEARS – UP 44% PAST 10 YEARS

Posted by iusbvision on September 20, 2008

Matt Drudge gave us this little reminder today of just how sound our markets are. There has never been a 25 year period where the market would not have given diversified investors a market gain, and that includes the time of the great depression.

When politicians use this crisis to scare you and say don’t invest and don’t allow partial privatization of Social Security, it is important to keep in mind that these very same politicians are getting rich off the markets. Those who were smart and diversified properly.

Speaking of a partially private retirement plan, the Congress has one for itself called the government Thrift Savings Plan. Here is the web site for it. http://www.tsp.gov/

The Thrift Savings Plan has done very well as an investment vehicle and still does. So if it is good enough for Congress to use, why isn’t it good enough for Social Security?

Remember that the reason Fannie, Freddie and Lehman Brothers went down is because of “crony capitalism” and influence peddling. If the people involved just did their duty none of these things would have happened. As we have shown politicians were paid off big time to help lean on federal regulators to look the other way. 

This influence peddling scandal, which may cost the taxpayer over a trillion dollars, makes Enron, Global Crossing, oil company profits, and the theft of $26 billion from the UN Oil for Food Program look like a drop in the bucket, because money wise they are and they had hearings and investigations and all of it. Yet no calls for hearings, no calls for a special prosecutor in the biggest financial swindle in world history and why??…because several powerful Democrats, and a few Republicans got rich off of this scam. The problem isn’t capitalism folks, the problem is corruption, mostly in Congress.

Never forget that Barack Obama got huge money from these people.

DOW UP 40 POINTS IN PAST MONTH – UP 18% PAST 5 YEARS – UP 44% PAST 10 YEARS

Here is the lastest Obama ad on Social Security, and it is a deception.

Keep in mind that the idea was to take 1-2% of people’s contributions and give them a diversified private account to supplement social security and help PRE-FUND their retirement, much like Congress’s own Thrift Savings Plan does. So it wasn’t total privatization as the ad implies and social security would not have been cut in half. As the system stands right now it does not create wealth, so Social Security is going broke. Obama’s plan is to just raise taxes, but since Congress has raided Social Security funds in the past, if they raise taxes in the name of Social Security, do you actually believe they wont spend that money too?

A great deal of Obama’s ads and attacks on McCain are demagogic and deceptive just like this one. People really need to take a long hard and serious look at this man, because the elite media just isn’t.

 

Rupert Murdoch, who was a Hillary supporter, has this to say about Obama’s economic plan:

“I am very worried,” Murdoch said during an interview Friday with Fox Business Network. “I like Sen. Obama very much. I have met him. He is a very intelligent man. But his policy of anti-globalization, protectionism, is going to be — and card checks — are going to do two or three things. It’s going to give us a lot of inflation. They’re going to ruin our relationships with the rest of the world. And they are going to slow down the rest of the world, too. And they’re going to make people frightened to add to employment. You are going to find companies leaving this country if it’s — if you put a protectionist wall around it. You’re going to get — his policy is really very, very naive, old-fashioned, 1960s.”

http://www.thrfeed.com/2008/09/murdoch-obamas.html

It is Jimmy Carter’s economic plan all over again, as we have said here before. It is too bad that most college students do not remember how bad those days were.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

VIDEO: Blacks Against Obama Heckles During Speech

Posted by iusbvision on September 20, 2008

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=178233

There is the link, I had heard about this group. It is interesting that they are using some of the left’s own tactics against them, which I am sure they will tell you is totally unfair.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »