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 October, 2008

Ayres – Keating – Obama – McCain

Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008

Patterico has a MEGA-AWESOME post on recent political events. This is simply the best analysis of the events of the last few days I have seen – Well done Patterico The key Portion of his post is below – be sure to visit his web site HERE. Also be sure to see our other coverage of this story HERE.


The Politico’s Mark Allen reports:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Monday will launch a multimedia campaign to draw attention to the involvement of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the “Keating Five” savings-and-loan scandal of 1989-91, which blemished McCain’s public image and set him on his course as a self-styled reformer.

This attack is ostensibly in retaliation for McCain’s “guilt-by-association” tactics, presumably Sarah Palin reminding voters of Obama’s longtime association with unrepentant domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.

The McCain campaign ought to use Obama’s attack as an opportunity to educate. 

In the Keating Five case, Senate Ethics Committee Special Counsel Bill Bob Bennett, who did the preliminary investigation of the matter, recommended that no further action be taken against  McCain:

This was perhaps the first time the recommendation of a special counsel not to charge a senator was rejected. This was pure politics as the Democrats on the committee did not want to cut McCain loose so that only Democrats would remain in the proceedings.

Ultimately, the committee found that McCain’s actions were not improper.  Indeed, McCain took no action on Keating’s behalf after regulators said they intended to recommend a criminal investigation of Keating and his savings and loan.

In contrast, Obama has always known that Bill Ayers is an unrepentant domestic terrorist and chose to work with him anyway.  Other “progressives” have chosen to avoid the association.  Thus, while Obama’s website once openly defended Ayers and his equally radical wife Bernadine Dohrn, the site later underwent some creative rewriting.  Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod lied to the press about the Obama-Ayers relationship. Obama lied about it in an nationally-televised debate in Pennsylvania.  Even the New York Times whitewash of their relationship admits that Obama “has played down his contacts” with Ayers.  What Obama has not done is express any disagreement with the underlying hard Left agenda Ayers continues to pursue to this day.

Rather than an official representing a constituent (as was the case with McCain and Keating), Obama chose to chair a $150 million effort spearheaded by Ayers on the important issue of public education, which funded “awful” projects and “had little impact on student outcomes.”  Given that Obama’s work on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) was Obama’s biggest executive experience and biggest attempt at reform, the releationship — and the failure of the project — should be newsworthy even if Ayers had not been involved in bombing the Pentagon.  That Ayers would like to transform the public schools into revolutionary indoctrination centers and used the CAC to advance that agenda also seems newsworthy.  Indeed, Obama touted the effort as a qualification in running for Congress.

Nor was education the only issue on which Obama and Ayers were allies, as Stanley Kurtz notes in deconstructing the NYT’s apologia:

Obama was perfectly aware of Ayers’ radical views, since he read and publically endorsed, without qualification, Ayers’ book on juvenile crime. That book is quite radical, expressing doubts about whether we ought to have a prison system at all, comparing America to South Africa’s apartheid system, and contemptuously dismissing the idea of the United States as a kind or just country. Shane mentions the book endorsement, yet says nothing about the book’s actual content. Nor does Shane mention the panel about Ayers’ book, on which Obama spoke as part of a joint Ayers-Obama effort to sink the 1998 Illinois juvenile crime bill [or mention Michelle Obama’s involvement in setting up the panel. – K] . Again, we have unmistakable evidence of a substantial political working relationship.

Of course, this contemptuous view of the United States could also be heard regularly at the church to which Obama belonged for 20 years and left only when it threatened his presidential campaign.  It is the sort of viewpoint Obama has sought out his entire adult life.

Thus, on the one hand, we have McCain representing a constituent, stopping when he heard Keating might have engaged in wrongdoing, being found to have done nothing improper, yet devoting his career to the cause of reform because he believed he had been made to look less than honorable. 

On the other hand, we have Obama knowingly embracing unrepentant domestic terrorists like Ayers and Dohrn and working to advance their political agendas as part of a lifelong pattern of seeking to associate with the hard Left in the US.

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

New 527 Ads on Fannie Mae Corruption

Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008 comments HERE.

NRCC Ad “What Happened”

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

Reality Check: Ayers Was Obama’s Boss in 2001 While He Desecrated the Flag on a Magazine Cover & Said He Wished He Had Done More Bombings to the NYT – UPDATE Obama Changes Story: Now Its We Hung Out But I Didn’t Know His Past – Oh really…evidence says otherwise.

Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008

This piece is LOADED with evidence so read carefully and enjoy.- Editor

UPDATE III: Now Obama says he worked with Ayres, knew about his past but thought he was rehabilitated, in spite of highly publicized interviews where Ayres said he was proud of what he did and regrets nothing. Details HERE.

UPDATE II: Obama Campaign conceeds they lied about Ayers – Admits that Obama knew of Ayres past when they served on two boards together link HERE.


The original story begins here – Editor

The AP is calling Sarah Palin a racist for bringing up the long term relationship that Obama had with a host of radicals who are not nice people at all. The king of these radicals is William Ayers, who set bombs and killed people and got away with it in the 60’s and 70’s. He did it becayse he is a Marxist and hates American freedom and makes no bones about it. On September 11th 2001 Ayres told the NY Times that he wished ha had bombed more.

Obama’s political career was started in Ayres living room at a meet the candidate meeting where Ayres used his connections among prominent leftists to get Obama’s career going. You don’t do that for someone who doesn’t share your belief system. Ayres hired Obama for his position on the Woods Foundation and the Chicacgo Annenberg Challenge where they routed charity money to political groups and political activism.

While some may say that Ayres hiring Obama to work on the Woods Foundation Board to hand out money is no big deal, but Ayres chose Obama to hand out the $50 million Ayres was given from the Annenberg Foundation to help out poverty striken schools. The money went to radical groups and training for teachers in how to radicalize their students. The fact that Ayres picked Obama to hand out that money for that purpose is significant. What does this mean about what about Obama would do with our education tax dollars and education policy? So while the NYT & the AP lie and say that Obama and Ayres just passed each other occasionally when the truth is that  See Links HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.

I am not making this up folks – just stop and read HERE at and then come back. Hillary said all of these same things about Obama because they are a part of the public record. says that all of this is accurate.

So in 2001 when Ayers was obama’s boss at woods for several years he wrote his book bragging about the bombings and said he didn’t do enough.. but maybe this picture and article from Chicago Magazine will do it for you.

“Barack Obama was much older than 8 when William Ayers was photographed stepping on a US flag in 2001, for an article in which Ayers said he had “No Regrets” for his violent actions in the Weather Underground.” – LGF

The article in Chicago Magazine is titled “No Regrets”

So, would Mr. Ayers do it all again, he is asked? ”I don’t want to discount the possibility,” he said.

When Obama started making good money as his political career took off convicted felon Tony Rezco helped him obtain a house just a short walk from the home of Ayers and Louis Farrakhan. We published an article in March pointing out the numerous radicals and nut cases that Obama has chosen to associate himself with. This included Father Pfleger whose hateful rhetoric, anti-American rhetoric and proud association with Louis Farrakhan is well known. Obama used his influence to send a $225,000 grant to Pfleger and Pfleger contributed to Obama’s campaign. Obama said in his books that Rev Wright and Pfleger were his spiritual advisors for 20 years. Of course Pfleger got thrown under the bus by Obama too.

But words just don’t convey the full meaning of the truth – so here we have two video’s of Father Pfleger and one defends Louis Farrakhan

This is from Rev. Wrights DVD’s of sermons from his church that Barack Obama attended for 20 years and claims he never saw Rev. Wright speak like this and had no idea Wright had such views…. Do you believe that for a minute?

The list goes on:

“Michael Klonsky, whose disgust for mainstream politics led him to launch a new, Maoist Communist Party in the 1970s, today supports Barack Obama so enthusiastically that until recently he was blogging on the Illinois senator’s campaign website.” Michael Rudd, Carl Davidson, Tom Heyden, and Mark Rudd are all professed Maoists, collaborated with Ayres in the 1970’s and now run “Progressives for Obama”.   

MINI UPDATE: Speaking of Mark Rudd he is in this video & Obama Knew Ayres when he did this interview with Connie Chung in 1998 and after all this Obama didn’t know?? 

This isn’t the occasional bad judgement or coincidence, these were ongoing relationships with a list of people who hate the traditional American way of life. It speaks a great deal that these are the kinds of people that Obama feels comfortable with, and that he would throw them under the bus when politically convenient.

The AP and the NYT don’t want you to know this or Obama’s long history with ACORN..

For more evidence about Obama’s history with ACORN and the mortgage crisis click HERE.

Chuck Norton

UPDATE: Ayres and Obama shared the stage in 1997 and Michelle Obama heaped on the praise.

Ayers will be joined by Sen. Barack Obama, Senior Lecturer in the Law School, who is working to combat legislation that would put more juvenile offenders into the adult system; Randolph Stone, Director of the Mandel Legal Aid Clinic; Alex Correa, a reformed juvenile offender who spent seven years in Cook County Temporary Detention Center; Frank Tobin, a former priest and teacher at the Detention Center who helped Correa; and Willy Baldwin, who grew up in public housing and is currently a teacher at the Detention Center.

The juvenile justice system was founded by Chicago reformer Jane Addams, who advocated the establishment of a separate court system for children which would act like a “kind and just parent” for children in crisis.

One hundred years later, the system is “overcrowded, under-funded, over-centralized and racist,” Ayers said.

Michelle Obama, Associate Dean of Student Services and Director of the University Community Service Center, hopes bringing issues like this to campus will open a dialogue between members of the University community and the broader community.

“Students and faculty explore these issues in the classroom, but it is an internal conversation,” Obama said. “We know that issues like juvenile justice impact the city of Chicago, this nation and — directly or indirectly — this campus. This panel gives students a chance to hear about the juvenile justice system not only on a theoretical level, but from the people who have experienced it.”

UPDATE II: Obama Campaign – We were Together But I Didn’t Know His Past

JIM ACOSTA: Now a college professor in Chicago, Ayers and Obama served together several years on a nonprofit board. And in 1995 Ayers hosted a coffee for Obama when the young community organizer was making his first run for the State Senate. At this point looking back, should he not have done that?

DAVID AXELROD: Well I mean, when he went, he certainly — he didn’t know the history.

ACOSTA: The Democratic nominee’s chief strategist David Axelrod maintains Obama at that time had no idea about Ayers’ violent past.

So no one close to Obama read the Chicago or NY Press? …. come on ….  

Hat Tip

UPDATE III: Mark Steyn and Dr. Thomas Sowell comment

But, in the world in which Obama moves, it would seem absurd and provincial to object to partying with an “unrepentant terrorist”. The Senator advanced and prospered in a milieu in which men like Ayers are not just accepted but admired for their “passionate participation”, and function as power-brokers and path-smoothers. This is a great country, and most of us (as Peter Kirsanow notes below) make it without having to kiss up to America-haters like Ayers and Wright. But not Obama.

Who is this man on course to be 44th president? Apparently, it’s not just impolite but racist to ask. As notorious white supremacist Thomas Sowell puts it:

But the country does not deserve to be put in the hands of a glib and cocky know-it-all, who has accomplished absolutely nothing beyond the advancement of his own career with rhetoric, and who has for years allied himself with a succession of people who have openly expressed their hatred of America.

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


Posted by iusbvision on October 5, 2008

We told you before how Obama sued banks with so called “community organizers” to force the banks to give bad loans to people who couldn’t afford them. Well now we have the audio of Obama saying in 2007 that giving sub-prime loans to people who couldn’t afford them is a good idea.

Click HERE to listen to the audio and get the story!

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Mortgage Crisis, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Mike Oxley – Another Congressman Trying to Lie His Way Out of Blame for the Mortgage Crash

Posted by iusbvision on October 5, 2008


Mike Oxley (R-OH)

Mike Oxley (R-OH)

Former Republican Representative Mike Oxley shares some responsibility for the mortgage crisis and he is trying to lie his way out of his role in what appears to be an attempt to preserve his legacy and his future income.

Oxley has a mixed record, and as we have reported before, to his credit he did try to end the corruption with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and he did try to get some more effective oversight of it. We wrote about the mortgage crisis in detail (links below). 

So what did Representative Oxley do? To answer that question we first have to go back in time just a litle bit.

He co-wrote the now infamous Sarbanes-Oxley law which was a “response to a number of major corporate and accounting scandals including those affecting Enron, Tyco International, Adelphia, Peregrine Systems and WorldCom. These scandals, which cost investors billions of dollars when the share prices of the affected companies collapsed, shook public confidence in the nation’s securities markets. Named after sponsors Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) and Representative Michael G. Oxley (R-OH)”.

The law had some major unintended consequences. While it did do some good such as introducing criminal penalties for executives who commit fraud. It was too costly to administrate and yielded limited results. Some of the latest corporate institutions covered by that law crashed and the Sarbanes-Oxley law not only failed to prevent it, it actually made things WORSE.

How did it make things worse you ask? The non-indexed mark to market accounting rule.

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. Several analysts have stated that SEC Chairman Chris Cox could have changed this rule with the flexibility included in the bill, but in spite of the calls to fix this rule he enforced it as it was.

Instead of just owning up to a mistake, an unintended consequence, and not pushing to fix this rule when he had the chance, Oxley is now lying about what happened to the mortgage industry. And they aren’t very good lies either because after about two hours of public records searching I was able to debunk his story easily.

In the September 9, 2008 Financial Times Oxley said this:

Instead, the Ohio Republican who headed the House financial services committee until his retirement after mid-term elections last year, blames the mess on ideologues within the White House as well as Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve.

The critics have forgotten that the House passed a GSE reform bill in 2005 that could well have prevented the current crisis, says Mr Oxley, now vice-chairman of Nasdaq.

He fumes about the criticism of his House colleagues. “All the handwringing and bedwetting is going on without remembering how the House stepped up on this,” he says. “What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute.”

The House bill, the 2005 Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, would have created a stronger regulator with new powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, to limit their portfolios and to deal with the possibility of receivership.

Mr Oxley reached out to Barney Frank, then the ranking Democrat on the committee and now its chairman, to secure support on the other side of the aisle. But after winning bipartisan support in the House, where the bill passed by 331 to 90 votes, the legislation lacked a champion in the Senate and faced hostility from the Bush administration.

Adamant that the only solution to the problems posed by Fannie and Freddie was their privatisation, the White House attacked the bill. Mr Greenspan also weighed in, saying that the House legislation was worse than no bill at all.

“We missed a golden opportunity that would have avoided a lot of the problems we’re facing now, if we hadn’t had such a firm ideological position at the White House and the Treasury and the Fed,” Mr Oxley says.

Folks, the record shows that almost all of that is simply not the case.

1. Oxley reached out to Barney Frank he says..

Misleading – Frank voted no and tried to block the efforts to pass the legislation in the House and most Democrats voted no as well. In 2005 the Republicans didn’t need Democrats to pass a bill in the House but did need them to pass anything in the Senate.

2. Oxley says that Alan Greenspan opposed the reforms.

Lie – you can read Greenspan’s Congressional testimony for yourself HERE and HERE and we wrote about it HERE. Greenspan was very much in favor of the new Republican proposed regulation to fix the old regulation that was being skirted.

Alan Greenspan testimony – 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.

3. Oxley says that the White House and the Treasury opposed reforms.

Lie. The White House and the Treasury pushed Congress many many times to get these reforms passed and each attempt is listed HERE. Excerpts:

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)

2004  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 home-ownership 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)

4. Oxley says the Legislation lacked a champion in the Senate.

Lie – Sen. Hagel, Dole, and Sununnu pushed for these reforms for years. After S.190 got hung up in the Senate because the Democrats were filibustering everything and could not get 60 votes, and the Democrats in the finance committee all voted no, John McCain became a co-sponsor to try and hammer the legislation through but no Democrats would budge. In fact Senators Sununnu, Hagel and Dole introduced this legislation repeatedly (link HERE and video HERE).

5. Oxley says that the administration wanted privatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or nothing.

Lie – Nothing in Alan Greenspan’s testimony (which is linked in its entirety above) , Secretary Snow’s testimony, Deputy Secretary Bodmon’s testimony, nor any known statement by President Bush say privatize or nothing or any such argument. All of them pushed for the reforms pushed by Dole, Hagel, and Sunnunu. In fact here is an article by “All Business” about the hearings make no mention of Republicans trying to privatize it, but they do make mention of Democrats opposing tighter regulation and accounting practices saying that it would restrict Fannie and Freddie’s mission to give low cost loans to poor people and minorities. Of course those were loans that too many of the poor could not pay back.

HERE is the record of the 2005 hearings in the House on this legislation and no one brings up the White House or a push by Republicans to push for privatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

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

So the question is, why is a former member of Congress lying through his teeth about what happend and trying to blame Bush for all this?

There are several reasons:

1. The White House has never been aggressive about defending itself from untrue allegations. They seem perfectly content with letting partisans and the elite media with little regard for the truth define them . So blaming Bush means you will get away with it and the Democrats will gleefully pile on to give credibility to the bogus claim as Barney Frank did HERE.

2. The Sarbanes-Oxley Law is his legacy and he does not want that legacy sullied with a layer of blame from the worst financial scandal in the history of the world.

3. Oxley speaks and consults for big fees about Sarbanes-Oxley compliance and if word got out that a screw up of this magnitude was a contributor to the mortgage meltdown it would certainly damage his gravy train of fees; not to mention his cushy job at NASDAQ.

UPDATE: Newt Gingrich Explains in some detail

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, Journalism Is Dead, Mortgage Crisis | 2 Comments »

Watch a Politician Lie & Watch O’Reilly Go Nuclear on Barney Frank

Posted by iusbvision on October 5, 2008

UPDATE: Frank now says that critisizing Congress is racist…. wow is this guy desperate or what? He says that conservatives are trying to blame blacks getting loans for the mortgage mess. No Barney we are blaming you pinheads in Congress who were getting paid to let this go on when Republicans were trying to fix it and end the corruption.  

This video is one of the greatest lessons in how politicians lie and shirk responsibility that I have ever seen. So read carefully because we are going to parse this one. 

For those who don’t know, Barney Frank is one of those most responsible for the largest economic scandal in the history of the world; this mortgage crisis. Barney Frank has been a ranking member of the House Finance (banking) Committee, has served in the House since 1981, and is now the chairman of the House Finance Committee.

What you need to know before you watch in a nutshell –

We have explained in detail in different ways  HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HEREHERE, HEREHERE and HERE just how this mess happened, who and what got the ball rolling, and who got paid to keep it rolling when people tried to stop it. We explained how the Federal Reserve, the OFHEO, the Treasury Department, President Bush, and other members of Congress tried to get new laws passed that put the mortgage industry’s biggest players, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, under control of REAL banking regulators that can enforce Generally Accepted Accounting Practices. Those who monitor Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the OFHEO, can monitor but cannot enforce, they can only report to the finance (banking) committees in Congress. OFHEO has been asking for real banking regulator powers or the transfer of the oversight to such an agency for years. You can read these reports HERE and HERE (warning long so read them later). Frank and other Democrats on that committee and in the Congress voted no and worked to block efforts to reform it. This mess was completely avoidable.

See this video here before we get on to the shootout –

Ok Time for O’Relly vs. the Lying Politician

Frank: “I think that prospects for going forward (as an investment) is very solid.”

Keep this comment in mind as you watch the interview.

Frank says that he passed a bill in May… “I did what the Republicans couldn’t do in 12 years, get a bill passed the regulatory committee”

That is because most of the House Democrats, including YOU Barney, voted NO when the Republicans tried to fix this in those 12 years Barney. Those OFHEO reports above have been telling him what was coming for years and even the Democrat friendly New York Times warned of this in 1999…after years of knowing what was coming and denying it…. he says he passed a bill in May… After the Republicans tried to end the corruption being laundered through the “Affordable Housing Trust Fund” all the Senate Democrats voted no and Democrats in both chambers denied that the problems even existed as we saw on the video (more on that trust fund below). In 2005 the House Republicans had enough control to force passage in spite of Frank and his allies, but the Democrats in the Senate unanimously voted no and blocked it.


Frank:“..The regulation should be improved. Now from 1995 to 2006 when the Republicans controlled Congress we were in the minority we couldn’t get that done.”

We just saw on video, and it is a part of the Congressional record, Barney Frank saying that Fannie and Freddie are fine, I have other video’s of the other Democrats on his committee saying the same thing, and they even accused the OFHEO regulators of racism because the CEO of Fannie Mae was a black man named Franklin Raines and the committee wanted poor people to get these loans (that were bad loans).

FRANK: Although in 2005, Mike Oxley, of Sarbanes-Oxley fame, a pretty tough guy on regulation, did try to put a bill through to regulate Fannie Mae. I worked with him on it. As he told The Financial Times, he thought ideological rigidity in the Bush administration stopped that.

Oxley’s non-indexed mark to market accounting rule, which was put into effect by the Sarbanes-OXley law in reaction to the Enron scandal,  was a big factor in this mess. I wrote an article that explains this whole crisis in plain English, step 5 of that article explain’s Oxley’s role. Oxley is trying to throw blame off of himself just as Frank is and a new article explaining his role and lies is on the way.

Back to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Some Democrats were willing to go along with the bill until Oxley and the other Republicans added an amendment to the bill to prevent recipients of the “Affordable Housing Trust Fund” from engaging in political activities.

This is crucial. Trust funds supplied from the government have very little oversight and groups such as ACORN and LaRaza were getting millions in taxpayer and taxpayer backed dollars to engage in partisan activities on behalf of Democrats. These groups get this money because they do have affordable housing councillors, but they also engage in partisan activities and ACORN has been caught multiple times in multiple states for vote fraud. Oxley was right to add this provision in the bill.

When taxpayer dollars or taxpayer insured dollars are used to promote a candidate, the word for that is corruption. When Republicans tried to put an end to this corruption most Democrats in the House and all Senate Democrats voted to stop any attempt to fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They voted no and denied that there was a problem as you saw in the video, who is it that is engaging in ideological rigidity?


Frank:But the basic point is that the first time I had any real authority over this was January of 2007. And within two months, we had passed the bill that regulated.”

A fat lie. As the ranking Democrat on the committee you had great influence and authority over the other Democrats on the committee going back for many years.


FRANK: And then also, one other point: The Senate was dragging its feet, as often happens. And in January of 2008, I asked Secretary Paulson to put in the stimulus bill. So, the earliest chance I got to put tough regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we did it.

The Senate was dragging it’s feet alright, the Democrats all voted NO..all of them…and why? Because Fannie and Freddie were paying members in the Senate too, most of them Democrats and they did not wnat the provision that would have stopped ACORN from engaging in partisan activities on behalf of Democrats. The Republicans did not have the 60 votes necessary to force the issue.

Here is where Frank tries to deny what O’Reilly just showed in the video. Frank is literally trying to tell the audience that you did not see what you just saw.

O’REILLY: All right, that’s swell. But you still went out in July and said everything was great. And off that, a lot of people bought stock and lost everything they had.

FRANK: Oh, no.

O’REILLY: And — yes, oh yes. Oh, yes.

FRANK: I said it wasn’t a good investment. Please stop yelling.

O’REILLY: Don’t give me any of that, we just heard the words. What are you…

FRANK: That’s wrong.

O’REILLY: You didn’t say that? You want me to play it again for you?

FRANK: You didn’t listen to it.

O’REILLY: No, I listened to every word you said. And I have the transcript right here.

FRANK: No, and I said it wasn’t a good investment.

O’REILLY: Yes, you said going forward, we’re going to be swell.

FRANK: No, I didn’t say swell. Excuse me, Bill.

An important observation needs to be made here. Frank did say that future prospects are looking solid.. ok O’Reilly uses the word swell but the meaning of what O’Reilly is saying is totally correct.

So instead of facing the 99% truth O’Reilly was giving him, Frank stands on the 1% part that wasnt sand says “I didn’t say swell”. This is the same tactic that Bill Clinton used. When his affair with Gennifer Flowers was exposed and someone said that he had an 11 year relationship with her, Clinton would say, “That is not true. I did not have an 11 year relationship with her.” – when the truth was that he had a 12 year relationship with her.

Politicians like to stand on a tiny detail that is only slightly wrong and use it to technically deny the allegation. Politicians are masters of this kind of deception and use this tactic often just as Barney Frank is here.  

O’REILLY: Look, from August ’07 to August ’08.

FRANK: Excuse me, Bill.

O’REILLY: Don’t — look, stop the B.S. here. Stop the crap! From August ’07 to August ’08…

FRANK: You know, here’s the problem going on your show…

O’REILLY: …under your tutelage, this industry…

FRANK: Here is the problem going on your show.

O’REILLY: …declined 90 percent. 90 percent.

FRANK: Yes, but…

O’REILLY: Oh, none of this was your fault! Oh, no. People lost millions of dollars. It wasn’t your fault. Come on, you coward! Say the truth.

FRANK: What do you mean coward?

O’REILLY: You’re a coward. You blame everybody else. You’re a coward.

FRANK: Bill, here’s the problem with going on your show. You start ranting. And the only way to respond is almost to look as boorish as you. But here’s the facts. I specifically said in the quote you just played that I didn’t think it was a good investment. I wasn’t telling anybody to buy stock. I said it wasn’t a good investment.

Secondly, I wasn’t presiding idly over this. I was trying to get the regulations adopted. We got them adopted in May.

“I wasn’t telling anyone to buy stock”… but hey Barney people bought stock vbased on you saying that the future aspects are solid… and he knows that.

And now they are yelling back and forth at each other, I wish O’Reilly would have taken him apart like a good tactician, but this is what we have to work with  so back to the show….

O’REILLY: You said going forward, it’s going to be swell. And people under that bought stock in that, thought it was a good investment.

FRANK: I didn’t say swell. I didn’t say swell. No, I said in fact in that quote that you played and didn’t listen to because you’re busy ranting that it’s not a good investment. I said that at the time. I did think we were going to improve things going forward. Yes, we had some things that needed improvement.

O’REILLY: All right, you want to — here, let me read you your quote here. OK? OK? “I do think the prospects going forward are very solid.”

Now O’relly catches him on the “I didnd’t say swell” dodge…

FRANK: But that’s not the part about it not being a good investment.

O’REILLY: Now, people bought stock when you said that.

FRANK: You are distorting it. Bill, you’re lying by your words.

O’REILLY: This is what you said.

FRANK: What about the part where…

O’REILLY: Not lying. And I played it and I read it.

FRANK: What about the part where I said it wasn’t a good investment?

O’REILLY: You said it’s not the best right now, but going forward this is going to be solid.

FRANK: Right…

O’REILLY: People lost millions.

FRANK: I didn’t say solid, I didn’t say swell. You distort consistently. And you think ranting and raving…

O’REILLY: All right.

FRANK: …you don’t want to talk about 1994, like no history is relevant. The fact is that you had a problem with an administration — conservative.


O’REILLY: I know, it’s all the conservatives, it’s all the Republicans and not you.

FRANK: Oh, come on.

O’REILLY: None on you. That’s a joke.

…….. comments on the exchange HERE.

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

BREAKING: LA NOW President Endorses Palin!

Posted by iusbvision on October 4, 2008


Just got this email from FNC embed producer….as soon as it came in and I saw it, my eyes popped out!!  I know this woman!!   I read it to my husband…and he agrees!  This endorsement is going to really going to cause a storm!!  Hang on to your seat! Read!

From: Gomez, Serafin
Sent: Sat Oct 04 18:05:43 2008
Subject: Head of NOW. LA chapter Endorses Palin

Carson, CA-

The head of the LA chapter of National Organization for Women has just endorsed Gov Palin @ campaign rally. Not speaking NOW or her chapter she said but as an individual. ” This is what a feminist looks like,” she just before handing it over to SLP.
Serafin Gomez
Producer, FNC Political Unit
Washington Bureau


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

Brilliant Black Conservative Episode III

Posted by iusbvision on October 4, 2008

Our first two installments of video’s from the brilliant black conservative are HERE and HERE.

Today the brilliant black conservative lectures Republicans who are intolerant of Christians. Now this does not get talked about a lot, but there is a wing of activist Republicans who HATE anyone who believes in God. Most of them are people who read Atlas Shrugged before they were emotionally or spiritually mature enough to handle it and just didn’t handle it with any sense of perspective. One of the reasons I stopped chatting with many of the people at Protest Warrior is because of this hate, and for some reason the owner of the site who is a practicing Jew let this hatred go on. Even some of the moderators got in on it. I don’t like to associate myself with extremists or haters (I know before you say it.. then why are you going to college Chuck.. ok ya got me there but lets move on) so I don’t participate.

Mr. Brilliant is talking about Free-Republic today. The “freepers” as they are known mostly are a good group of people, but they have a core of activists who hate people who show religion. I stopped participating there for the same reason Mr. Brilliant has. While the freepers link to my writings and like the stuff I write, they need to deal with or educate the group of people there who are just plain intolerant. Of course activist left wingers are openly hostile to Christians, but that is common knowledge, this group of intolerate Republicans does not get discussed much so I am glad that Mr. Brilliant is taking them on. He also takes on those in the black community who hate those who are different.

Mr. Brilliant explains why he supports the McCain/Palin ticket

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Thomas Sowell Asks: Do Facts Matter?

Posted by iusbvision on October 4, 2008

Famed Author and Economist Thomas Sowell

Famed Author and Economist Thomas Sowell

by Thomas Sowell 

Abraham Lincoln said, “You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time.”

Unfortunately, the future of this country, as well as the fate of the Western world, depends on how many people can be fooled on election day, just a few weeks from now.

Right now, the polls indicate that a whole lot of the people are being fooled a whole lot of the time.

The current financial bailout crisis has propelled Barack Obama back into a substantial lead over John McCain– which is astonishing in view of which man and which party has had the most to do with bringing on this crisis.

It raises the question: Do facts matter? Or is Obama’s rhetoric and the media’s spin enough to make facts irrelevant?

Fact Number One: It was liberal Democrats, led by Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, who for years– including the present year– denied that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taking big risks that could lead to a financial crisis.

It was Senator Dodd, Congressman Frank and other liberal Democrats who for years refused requests from the Bush administration to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

It was liberal Democrats, again led by Dodd and Frank, who for years pushed for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans, which are at the heart of today’s financial crisis.

Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush’s Secretary of the Treasury, five years ago.

Yet, today, what are we hearing? That it was the Bush administration “right-wing ideology” of “de-regulation” that set the stage for the financial crisis. Do facts matter?

We also hear that it is the free market that is to blame. But the facts show that it was the government that pressured financial institutions in general to lend to subprime borrowers, with such things as the Community Reinvestment Act and, later, threats of legal action by then Attorney General Janet Reno if the feds did not like the statistics on who was getting loans and who wasn’t.

Is that the free market? Or do facts not matter?

Then there is the question of being against the “greed” of CEOs and for “the people.” Franklin Raines made $90 million while he was head of Fannie Mae and mismanaging that institution into crisis.

Who in Congress defended Franklin Raines? Liberal Democrats, including Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus, at least one of whom referred to the “lynching” of Raines, as if it was racist to hold him to the same standard as white CEOs.

Even after he was deposed as head of Fannie Mae, Franklin Raines was consulted this year by the Obama campaign for his advice on housing!

The Washington Post criticized the McCain campaign for calling Raines an adviser to Obama, even though that fact was reported in the Washington Post itself on July 16th. The technicality and the spin here is that Raines is not officially listed as an adviser. But someone who advises is an adviser, whether or not his name appears on a letterhead.

The tie between Barack Obama and Franklin Raines is not all one-way. Obama has been the second-largest recipient of Fannie Mae’s financial contributions, right after Senator Christopher Dodd.

But ties between Obama and Raines? Not if you read the mainstream media.

Rabbi Dennis Prager makes the same case

Facts don’t matter much politically if they are not reported.

The media alone are not alone in keeping the facts from the public. Republicans, for reasons unknown, don’t seem to know what it is to counter-attack. They deserve to lose.

But the country does not deserve to be put in the hands of a glib and cocky know-it-all, who has accomplished absolutely nothing beyond the advancement of his own career with rhetoric, and who has for years allied himself with a succession of people who have openly expressed their hatred of America.

Our complete coverage of the mortgage bailout crisis, who got paid, who benefited and who is lying, is HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HEREHERE, HEREHERE and HERE. – Editor

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Mortgage Crisis, Other Links | 1 Comment »

VIDEO: Palin’s Post Debate Party

Posted by iusbvision on October 4, 2008

Thanks to Gateway Pundit for the Pictures!

Sarah with Emma

Sarah with Emma

Piper Autographs

The press looking sour

The press looking sour

Bidens Post Debate Party

Bidens Post Debate Party

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

Biden Used to Stand on Principle – What Happened?

Posted by iusbvision on October 4, 2008

This post is stickied, please scroll down for new updates. For reference the Palin/Biden fact check article is HERE – Editor

What happened to the honorable Senator who said that he would rather lose an election than vote to cut off funding for the troops? What happened to the man who said he would be honored to be John McCain’s running mate? What happened to the man in this video?

Senator Biden on Meet the Press with Tim Russert in September 2007:

Joe Biden: “And, look, Tim, if you tell me I’ve got to take away this protection for these kids in order to win the election, some things aren’t worth it. Some things are worth losing over. That would be worth losing over.

Hundreds of lives are being saved and will be saved by us sending these vehicles over which we are funding with this supplemental legislation. And I want to ask any of my other colleagues, would they, in fact, vote to cut off the money for those troops to protect them? That’s the right question. This isn’t cutting off the war. This is cutting off support that will save the lives of thousands of American troops.”

Palin at the debate:

You also said that Barack Obama was not ready to be commander in chief. And I know again that you opposed the move he made to try to cut off funding for the troops and I respect you for that. I don’t know how you can defend that position now, but I know that you know especially with your son in the National Guard and I have great respect for your family also and the honor that you show our military. Barack Obama though, another story there. Anyone I think who can cut off funding for the troops after promising not to is another story.

Hat Tip Gateway Pundit for the video!

By the way, where is the elite media doing any basic fact checking on this issue?

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

An Appeal to Reason

Posted by iusbvision on October 4, 2008

I certainly share some feelings with you all about how poor this bill bailout was. I have written several articles explaining just how poor this bill was, inspite of the some of the improvements that the holdouts in Congress insisted upon.  We saw the mortgage industry crash in a matter of days, a credit crunch they said, well now look at our deficit. Both parties are spending like crazy, how long can we keep this up till the government’s debt creates the mother of all credit crunches?

Markets go up and down; does anyone believe that if Congress took a few more days to really improve this bill that the market would not have eventually recovered? Instead they filled it with pork to buy a few more votes.

Kirsten Powers (Democrat Strategist) Rips Obama and Congress – Praises Palin  

This just goes to show that there is a massive bipartisan problem with Congress and it needs an ethics and procedural reform overhaul.

Except for the extremists who are mired by hate, this is one issue that is bringing more regular Republican and Democrat voters together.

People need to wake up, on some of the wedge issues too. Just because Palin is pro-life doesn’t mean that she is an activist out to change the law, she never tried to change the law in Alaska.

Palin took down a billion dollar corruption ring in her own party and corruption is now my number one issue period after this debacle that was totally avoidable. Obama and Biden have no intention of dealing with this problem. Instead they want to spend a trillion more. Enough. How much more of OUR trillion will be pisssed away in corruption and influence peddling? 

As far as McCain, I guess all I can do is pray that he is serious about this whole “maverick” thing. If he is and if McCain/Palin win, expect the old boys network in both parties and the elite media to try and destroy them. Lets face facts, lots of people have been killed for lots less money than is being spread due to influence peddling and corruption in and around Congress. Compared to these issues, the other issues that seperate traditional Republicans and Democrats are starting to look smaller and smaller.

So many people just point at Bush or Clinton, and while they have certainly had their errors, Americans need to wake up to the real problem that has been most of the problem all along: a Congress that as an institution is a self first, country last, disaster. They know that the American people are not watching what they do very carefully and the press isn’t either. This must change if our republic is to survive.

I see that some democrats are getting as upset over what is happening as I am:

Of course we can’t forget Hillbuzz  – the big Hillary Blog that has also said that they have had enough.

And Lynn Rothschild

So are some Republicans:

Posted in Chuck Norton | 1 Comment »

NY Times – More Palin Smears – More Covering Up of Obama’s Record – UPDATE AP Calls Palin Racist!

Posted by iusbvision on October 4, 2008

UPDATE III: MSNBC asks Is this AP or the DailyKOS? comments HERE.

UPDATE II: Palin on Obama Palling Around With a Terrorist

I know what you are going to say… so what else is new right?

The same newspaper that ran three front page stories on BRISTOL Palin on the same day, the same newspaper that accused John McCain of having an affair with a lobbyist based on second hand innuendo right after he secured the nomination, the same media who went over Sarah Palin’s daily expense reports, found every bogus allegation and innuendo made by every one of her political enemies and presented it as fact. Now it’s those horrible Palin’s are millionaires…

Of course to the NYT those who have a combined family income over over $120k a year must be millionaires… when you include the value of their house, their family business AND their retirement fund. So small business owners if I took your home, business and retirement fund and added it all up and if it came close to a million in value, you too are “the rich” and need to be taxed up the wazoo. This is why Donald Trump said, when Democrats talk about taxing the rich, they end up taxing a lot of others people too.

The Palin’s released their tax returns and they show that they give more money to charity in one year than Biden gave in eight in spite of the fact that she makes far less money… so what does the NYT have to say

Financial Papers Show Palins’ Assets Top $1 Million

The McCain campaign released financial documents on Friday indicating that Gov. Darah Palin of Alaska had assets over $1 million, consisting largely of an ample retirement portfolio, real estate and her husband’s commercial fishing business.

Ms. Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, kept her tax rate low by putting all of her investments in tax-deferred accounts. In addition, she did not report as income the $17,000 that she received in per diem payments from the state while she remained at her home in Wasilla.

[further down in the story we find out that they aren’t really millionaires….]

Tax returns for 2007 and 2006 show that Ms. Palin and her husband, Todd, had diverse sources of income. In addition to her salary as governor, there were capital gains from the sale of a snowmobile and income from Mr. Palin’s winnings in the annual Iron Dog snow-machine race.

The Palins reported taxable income in 2007 of $166,080, consisting largely of Ms. Palin’s salary as governor. The couple paid $24,738 in taxes on this income, at a tax rate of around 15 percent. But in 2006, the couple reported taxable income of $127,869, which consisted mainly of Mr. Palin’s income from BP Exploration Alaska and an income of less than $5,000 for Ms. Palin from the State of Alaska before she was elected governor.

The article also states that Palin should have declared her Per Diem as governor. Per Diem is reimbursements for expenses and not income. The Per Diem she got was for travel & Food to Anchorage & back while she slept at her home in Wasilla at night. Palin did not even claim as much per Diem as she is allowed by law and her expenses have been 80% less than the previous governor…..but of course no reason for trhe NYT to mention those little details is there?  

This is the part that just kills me….

Yet for a couple with modest incomes, the Palins have amassed a sizable portfolio that consists mainly of retirement investments and real estate.

The disclosure form listed the portfolio’s value as from $300,000 to $850,000. … 

Amassed a SIZABLE… LOL – Folks this $300k to 850K number includes their home, the value of their business and their RETIREMENT funds. Anyone with a lick of sense knows if you have $300K in a retirement fund you need to start saving more because 300k wont last you 25 years after retirement and many say 850k might not last unless you live very frugally,

And Now FINALLY after 20 months on the campaign the New York TImes exposes Barack Obama’s relationship with unapologetic former terrorist William Ayers… ok not exposes… how about lies about and covers up..

The New York Times says that Obama and Ayres “crossed paths” a few times. They leave out that Obama’s career was started by a meet the candidate meeting in Ayres home. They totally whitewash the time Ayers and Obama worked together at the Woods Foundation and at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

Stenley Kurtz has been writing a series of articles on Obama and Ayers based on the records of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge that are stored at the University of Chicago and those records show that the NYT is spinning for Obama yet again. Obama shared the goals and values of Ayers while funneling charity funds to far left political groups. Part of what they did was to misuse Annenberg charity funds to teach radicalized teachers to radicalize students and the records state so clearly. This would explain why the Obama campaign has been trying to use dirty tricks to stop Stanley Kurtz and WGN radio from discussing this information.

We have written extensively on this story and the extraordinary efforts to silence it HERE, HEREHERE and     HERE. comments on the Ayres story HERE.


UPDATE I:  NoQuarters Blog obtained letters from Brown University showing that William Ayers picked who was to serve on the board of CAC. Thus even further demonstrating that Ayres handpicked Obama to chair it…as of the University of Chicago records werent enough. This is example number 285,973 of how the NYT is in the tank for the Democrats. Of course the Obama campaign said that Ayres had nothing to do with gatting Obama on the board of CAC….

UPDATE III: AP Calls Palin Racist

Her reference to Obama’s relationship with William Ayers, a member of the Vietnam-era Weather Underground, was exaggerated at best if not outright false. No evidence shows they were “pals” or even close when they worked on community boards years ago and Ayers hosted a political event for Obama early in his career.

Anyone who just looks at the record knows otherwise, and this info is easy to find even with an internet search engine. Republicans have got to come to terms with the fact that they are just not running against their opponents; they are running against the elite media as well. The only way to shock them into telling the truth is to humiliate them publicly and aggressively with the facts, calling them out as liars and aggressively debunking each wrong story and calling out the reporters by name at campaign stops. It is how FIRE gets corrupt college administrators to behave and Republicans should adopt the same strategy for the truth.

UPDATE IV: Makin comments HERE – Hotair comments HERE. Patterico has a brilliant commentary HERE.

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

Palin gives more to charity in 1 year than Biden did in 8 and she has less income.

Posted by iusbvision on October 4, 2008

The Hill Magazine:

Palin gives more to charity than Biden
By Sam Youngman

Posted: 10/03/08

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin made considerably less money than rival Sen. Joe Biden, but the Palin family gave more to charity in the last two years than Biden has in the last eight combined, according to Palin’s tax records released Friday afternoon.

Palin, the running mate of presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), and her husband Todd reported meager earnings from 2006 and 2007, at least by presidential-politics standards.

In 2006, the Palins paid $11,944 in taxes on $127,869 in income. In 2007, they paid $24,738 on $166,080.

But in 2006, they donated $4,880 to charity, and in 2007, they donated $3,325.

By contrast, Biden (D-Del.), Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s running mate, has donated a total of $3,690 since 1998 despite his higher Senate salary, according to an analysis posted by National Review. weighs in:

Recall what Barack Obama said in his appearance at the Saddleback Forum in August:

“Americans’ greatest moral failure in my lifetime,” he said, “has been that we still don’t abide by that basic precept in Matthew that whatever you do for the least of my brothers, you do for me.”

And what Biden claimed as the moral imperative from soaking people with higher taxes:

“Catholic social doctrine as I was taught it is, you take care of people who need the help the most.”

Once again, we see that liberals talk about charity, and conservatives take action.  The Palins have been quite generous with their cash, while Biden has given far less on an annual basis with a much larger income stream.  Since the two Democrats keep claiming the charitable impulse for spending other people’s money, it’s revealing to once again compare Biden’s own personal giving to his political rhetoric, and to his opponent in November. And of course next to no elite media coverage.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »

Disturbing: Obama Youth Fraternity Regiment

Posted by iusbvision on October 3, 2008

When this first video came out some thought that the children singing about Obama ala North Korea style was a little creepy…wait till you see this new video below. It is full blown sick.

Now for something way more disturbing…

If you havent seen the children singing video here it is… compared with a clip on North Korean kids singing to the leader….

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

Fact Checking the Palin/Biden Debate

Posted by iusbvision on October 3, 2008

Biden tried to lock Palin up by ratting off a dozen figures and allegations in 10 seconds knowing that no one could answer them all in a one minute response. It didnt work. Palin didn’t take the bait to get dragged too far in the mud and kept off message. Biden made a similar mistake that Reagan did in his first debate, he tried to cram too many figures into his answers… and is likely still praying this morning that the elite media doesn’t fact check him….because lots of his “facts” are proving to be whoppers…And of course very little elite media coverage.

We fact checked the Obama/McCain debate and gave you a little reminder HERE and our first post about the Palin/Biden debate is HERE.

We arent alone in pointing this one out LGF did too:

In tonight’s debate, Joe Biden claimed that Barack Obama never said he would meet unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

That was a blatant, shameless lie.

Obama on meeting these rogue leaders at the presidential level without precondiction.

Biden Gaffed on the Constitution when he said that Article I of the Constitution covered the executive branch when it fact it covers the Congress. Not a mistake a judiciary member should make.

Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history. The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.

Ouch…. and it gets worse…Biden’s entire point that Cheney is the most dangerous VP in history because Cheney said that he can go and preside over the Senate as President of the Senate… well Cheney is right folks.. The VP is the President of the Senate and only casts a vote if there is a tie, but he can preside over the Senate if they are in session. The President Pro-Tempore is the temporary President of the Senate as long as the VP is not there. Biden was just plain wrong. Don’t believe me?

U.S. Constitution – Article I Section III

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall chuse (old English spelling folks) their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

Update: wrote about this issue HERE.  

National Review hits Biden on the load of BS he piled on about Hezbollah and Lebanon…we should have gotten NATO peacekeepers in there he said… well I guess that would have dome better than the UN Peacekeepers that were there since the Israeli pull-out of South Lebanon right Joe…(whoops)  Link HERE.

Obama on the Our Trroops are Air-Rading Villages and Killing Civilians…

August 14, 2007 In Nashua, NH, Monday, Obama said that the U.S. has “gotta get the job done” in Afghanistan which requires us to have enough troops that we’re not just air raiding villages and killing civilians which is causing enormous problems there.

“We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.” 


Rove on the 14, 16 points

UPDATE:That canard that Rove mentions about the “nuclear weapons bill that Obama went to Dick Lugar and got done [paraphrasing]” as Bidensaid, Rove is right. I looked up this legislation previously and wrote about it HERE:

For example, the law with Republican Dick Lugar was a tweak to the older Dick Lugar/Sam Nunn law that authorized the United States to buy nuclear weapons from Russia so they would not be tempted to sell them on the black market (we would make sure that they were destroyed). The tweak came after a Senate junket overseas that both Lugar and Obama attended. Lugar wanted to tweak the law to buy up conventional weapons too so they would not end up in terrorist hands. The change in the law was passed by unanimous consent.

Does anyone really believe that Lugar would not have gotten this done without Obama? The other “big bi-partisan bill” that the Obama campaign talks about is a bill with Chuck Hagel asking the Bush Administration for a report. This sort of thing is done regularly and it was done by unanimous consent.

 …Obama went to Lugar and reached out huh Joe….  like ohh ya it was all you Obama….LAUGHABLE

“Joe Biden’s analysis of George Bush’s Middle East policy had 7 errors in 60 seconds.” – Charles Krauthammer interviewed on Special Report with Brit Hume 10/3/2008

These 14 points are from the McCain camp so I took them with a grain of salt, but as I have been going through them so far they check out, but I am still digging so corrections may come later: 

UPDATE II: Ok The McCain Campiagn posted extensive documentation for these – so far what the McCain Camp is saying is checking out. I figure that they have to keep spin to a minimum on this because the elite media will hook onto anything at all to zing Palin. Here is the link.

Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY. [Link to the votes HERE]
2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it. [True and we posted the video]
3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.” [True – was well reported and Democrats votes against drilling and other energy production are well documented – Biden rips Bush on energy by JEFF MONTGOMERY • The News Journal • July 15, 2008]
4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage. [Link to the votes HERE.]
5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate. [True and we posted the video and wrote an article about it]
6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times. [Procedural votes can get pretty convoluted so this one is hard to say either way but here is the link to McCain’s energy plan and we suggest that people just read it for themselves and make a decision]
7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people’s health insurance coverage — they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false.

[McCain is right about this one, the New York Times started this nonsensesaying that if people use the McCain tax credit plan to get health insurance over their employers insurance plan, the employers may just decide to give the money they would have spent on insurance to the employee. If the employee gets a raise as a result he will pay more in taxes. DUH… if you get a raise you should expect to pay taxes on the raise.. but that doesnt mean that your health insurance benefits are taxed…. HERE is the link to McCain’s health plan.]
8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska — she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it’s not a windfall profits tax.

[McCain is right about this one as well. The tax plan on energy companies in Alaska is NOT a windfall profits tax, it is a graduated energy tax based on the price of a barrel of oil. The tax on a barrel of oil in Alaska is 22.5% and the tax goes up by 0.2% per dollar over $52.00 a barrel. So at $100 a barrel that is a 9.6% extra tax per barrel, hardly the profit killing windfall profits tax that Hillary and Obama have supported.]
9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

[True – This was media spin from a San-Francisco paper. The General said he wanted more troops but wanted an implimentation that was slightly different than the Iraq-Surge plan, so I guess you could call it the Afghan surge plan  – LINK]
10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation — he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

[So true we have written about this at length and President Clinton came outand sided with McCain on this one. The law that Obama claims did this, was passed 90-8 by the Senate and Biden voted for it.

The truth is, however, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act had little if anything to do with the current crisis. In fact, economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been.]

11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right. [Everyone knows this, when McCain first started asking for the surge many Republicans and Donald Rumsfeld opposed McCain, so McCain demanded that Rumsfeld resign. McCain was proved correct.]
12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

[Democrats have no credibility when it comes to tax cuts, they talk about them in the campaign but when the bills show up in Congress almost everyone who pays federal income taxes ends up paying a higher rate. Just examining the attempts to raise taxes or reapeal tax cuts over recent years, former Hillary supporter Donald Trump is right when he says that Democrats “taxing the rich” end up hitting lots of other people too. Al Gore’s middle class tax cut was so targeted that almost no one qualified for it and Bill Clinton’s middle class tax cut in 1993 was the largest tax increase in US history at the time and did not cut middle class taxes. 

Obama called for a doubling of the Capital Gains Tax admitting that he knew it would lower government revenue when called on it in a primary debate saying that he was more interested in “fairness” instead of revenue. Capital Gains Tax directly affects the housing market.

Democrats also refuse to acknowledge the increases in government revenue that are often a result of tax rate decreases in spite of the fact that they are well documented.]

13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.” [Having looked at the legislation myself I am calling this as true]
14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won’t pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan. [True – and laughable. The top marginal tax rate under Reagan was 28%. The top rate is higher than that NOW, so how can the rate be the same as Reagan when for some groups the rate will go up? Ridiculous!]

UPDATE III: New York Post Blasts Biden Lies!


For all the focus on Sarah Palin’s graceful performance in Thursday’s vice presidential showdown, a more significant spectacle was taking place behind the other rostrum.

That’s where Joe Biden, speaking with the pompus self-importance befitting his 36 years in the Senate, told one baffling fib after another.

Some, of course, were just Biden being Biden. He smeared Dick Cheney as “the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history.”

To which we must take specific offense: After all, the founder of this newspaper, Alexander Hamilton, was killed in a duel by then-Vice President Aaron Burr. (Certainly Burr was a better shot than Cheney.)

But that’s a matter of opinion.

Not so, some other Biden gems:

* It’s “simply not true” that Barack Obama said he’d meet Iran’s president without preconditions, Biden insisted.

Yet when Obama was asked if he would in a debate during the primaries, he said yes – a position Biden back then termed “naive.”

* Biden said he’s “always supported” clean-coal technology – after stating emphatically only last month, “We’re not supporting clean coal.”

* Biden asserted – repeatedly – that the US spends more money on three weeks’ combat in Iraq than it’s spent in Afghanistan since the war began.

That claim’s only remotely intelligible if he limits Afghan expenditures merely to US rebuilding efforts – and even then, he’s off by a factor of three, according to State Department numbers.

* Also on Afghanistan, Biden insisted – repeatedly – that “our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work” there.

That may not be an out-and-out lie, but it took supposed foreign-policy neophyte Sarah Palin to bring any context or nuance to the statement.

What Gen. David McKiernan had said was that tribal realities in Afghanistan are very different than in Iraq – requiring a different form of cooperation.

But he flatly said more troops, and more local engagement, are needed.

Sounds like a surge to us.

* Then there was what might have been the biggest head-scratcher of the night. Said Biden of the Bush administration’s supposed Middle East follies:

“When . . . along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, ‘Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.”


Assuming that Biden was referring to when, in 2005, American and French pressure helped the Lebanese people kick Syrian troops out of Lebanon, who ever thought NATO occupation of that deeply divided country was a good idea?

As if America’s NATO allies would have gone in the first place.

But hey, as long as it makes Biden sound presidential.

At some point, Americans have to wonder: Is this a fellow who should be a heartbeat away from the White House?

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | 2 Comments »

Tackling the Bogus “Deregulation Argument” II

Posted by iusbvision on October 2, 2008

Today, Biden brought up the totally bogus “Deregulation” argument that it was Republican deregulation that caused the economic mortgage collapse. The McCain campaign has not been effectively nuking this argument.

Bill Clinton said that the Obama campaign is dead wrong about this issue and we wrote about it at this link —>

Tonight in his Analysis Charles Krauthammer said that McCain needs to find a way to handle the deregulation question because it is getting out of hand. IUSB Vision Editor Chuck Norton wrote an article on this very subject on Sept 24th! Once again the IUSB Vision is ahead of nationally respected pundits and analysts. Here is Chuck’s article –>

Here is an excerpt:

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 healthinsurance) by making a government backed GAP plan to help cover those people with health insurance.

In the mean time – lets examine who is really responsible…

Posted in Other Links, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »


Posted by iusbvision on October 2, 2008

The Debate Fact Check Article is now up and the link is HERE – Editor

Palin was in command and as the debate went on she realized she was winning and her mood got better and better and wow did it show. Palin has that near Reaganesque charm, that people power ability that connects her with the middle class and sends condescending elitists running to their overpriced therapists.

Peggy Noonan – A Palin critic, had this to say…

Sarahcuda kept Biden on the ropes…

When Ronald Reagan debated Fritz Mondale, his staff tried to load him up with a bunch of numbers and Reagan tried to use too many of those numbers in each answer. It came off as clumsy, it didn’t work. After that Reagan told his staffers to stuff it and went out and kicked butt, Reagan style.

We now know that the mistakes that were made with Palin at the beginning of the campaign were the same mistake that Reagan’s staff made with him; a mistake that the McCain campaign has recovered from.

Joe Biden, who has a history of being a solid and sober debater, was classic Joe Biden, but he made three mistakes:

1. All the Bush bashing is getting old, most people know that the first 6 years of the Bush administration went great, after the Democrats took Congress 2 years ago things have gone downhill since, while part of that is coincidence, part of it is not. Palin was able to point out that too many people are not taking responsibility and pointing at others in the past and followed up with a powerful statement that people need to take personal responsibility.

2. Biden for the first half of the debate was kicking out a bunch of numbers that ended up jumbling his message and making peoples eyes glass over. After a while I was hearing a bunch of numbers that I can’t verify till I get a transcript and look them up one by one and his message was lost. Biden made the mistake that Reagan did in the first debate with Mondale. Biden tried to jumble her up with a bunch of numbers to try and lock Palin up. It didn’t work.

3. Biden had to make SURE that he didn’t gaffe like he has almost weekly during the campaign. As a result Biden was too sober and was a bit monotone after a time. However when Biden talked about his sons and got a bit emotional that was clearly Biden’s very finest moment.


Biden was not factually accurate on his coal comments. Biden told people in coal states he was for it and told people in non coal states that he wasn’t. We reported it and posted the youtube video on this very web site. Palin could have pounded this point harder so that was a missed opportunity. I have a feeling that when the transcript is out we will find that Biden was not factually accurate on several other points.

When Biden said over and over that McCain voted to cut funding on the troops – no one bought that. It is well known that McCain often votes against good bills that have too much pork. The Republicans should make Biden eat crow for these comments.

Palin pointed out the times where Biden said that Obama was not ready to be Commander in Chief and brought up the votes that Biden criticized Obama on.  

Frank Luntz Focus Groups says Sarah wins!! Hat Tip for the video link

The spin from the Obama campaign is that Palin did not refute all of Biden’s criticism’s of John McCain. McCain camp should make them eat crow for this as well. When Biden throws out 10 unsubstantiated allegations in 15 seconds it takes longer than a one minute response to set the record straight.

Palin also had several powerful moments. When she said “Never again will we be taken advantage of”, “we need to bring Main Street Wasilla common sense to Washington”, her statements that government needs to take personal responsibility just like regular people do. She puleld the quote from the Daily Show where Biden said that he would be honored to run with McCain.  Palin also pointed out that Obama said that our troops in Afghanistan were “air raiding villages and killing civilians”

August 14, 2007 In Nashua, NH, Monday, Obama said that the U.S. has “gotta get the job done” in Afghanistan which requires us to have enough troops that we’re not just air raiding villages and killing civilians which is causing enormous problems there.


–>UPDATE:Karl Rove has a list of 10 points where Biden is factually wrong and there is no argument about. Rove is listing them against the record. Rove is also listing 6 points where Biden is arguably wrong. A bad one was when Biden said that Article I of the Constitution covered the executive branch when in fact it covers the legislative. Several of the votes Biden said McCain voted on are wrong, McCain voted the other way. It will take a bit of time to get through the transcript and fact check it all.

Here is our post on the coal Flip/Flop complete with video —>


UPDATE II: I have been sitting here going over the debate and I have realized another dimension to this story. Joe Biden was not enjoying himself. I say that because it showed that he did not like what he was asked to do, which was tear down one of his good friends of 30 years John McCain, a man that Biden said he would be honored to join with on a presidential ticket. While Joe Biden was more leftist till about 1994, he grew more moderate in time and Biden never liked strident partisanship for the sake of being partisan; although Biden would do it if really pushed into it. As we have said before, Joe Biden is a nice guy, a nice guy who will play hardball politrics but only when forced into it. His heart really wasn’t in it. I am beginning to think that he accepted the VP nomination to prevent Obama from doing something foolish in office. Biden is the kind of man who would make a decision like that.

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

Obama supporters show us their tolerance and intellect….

Posted by iusbvision on October 2, 2008

This guy had a McCain bumper sticker.

Hat Tip

Hat Tip

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

Top 20 Industry Money Recipients This Election Cycle – Who is in the back pocket of Wall Street?

Posted by iusbvision on October 2, 2008

Special thanks to and the Center for Responsive Politics

Rank Industry Total Dem Pct GOP Pct Top Recipient
1 Lawyers/Law Firms $98,597,946 77% 23% Barack Obama (D)
2 Retired $87,981,764 54% 46% John McCain (R)
3 Securities/Invest $51,518,351 66% 34% Barack Obama (D)
4 Real Estate $49,157,612 58% 42% Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
5 Health Professionals $40,912,966 59% 41% Barack Obama (D)
6 Business Services $24,315,183 72% 28% Barack Obama (D)
7 Insurance $23,590,145 52% 48% John McCain (R)
8 Education $22,349,149 86% 14% Barack Obama (D)
9 Misc Finance $21,806,405 55% 45% Barack Obama (D)
10 TV/Movies/Music $19,482,429 77% 23% Barack Obama (D)
11 Commercial Banks $18,193,119 52% 48% Barack Obama (D)
12 Lobbyists $17,856,514 56% 44% Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
13 Leadership PACs $17,605,244 43% 57% Susan Collins (R-Maine)
14 Computers/Internet $16,770,408 68% 32% Barack Obama (D)
15 Misc Business $16,515,455 63% 37% Barack Obama (D)
16 Democratic/Liberal $14,047,626 100% 0% Barack Obama (D)
17 Pharm/Health Prod $13,602,297 54% 46% Barack Obama (D)
18 Oil & Gas $12,226,945 28% 72% John McCain (R)
19 Electric Utilities $12,002,662 51% 49% Barack Obama (D)
20 Hospitals/Nurs Homes $11,414,610 67% 33% Barack Obama (D)

Who is in the back pocket of Wall Street?

Posted in Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

The Elite Media Still Not Talking Much About Candidate’s Records

Posted by iusbvision on October 2, 2008

While the elite media is talking about zingers and gotcha’s what about the record?

We do not hera much About Obama at the Woods Foundation or the Chicago Annenberg Challenge or when he worked with ACORN.

We don’t get much about Biden’s record in foriegn policy during the cold war and the first Iraq war.

We don’t get much about McCain’s record trying to fix the mortgage industry before this debacle happened or his efforts for ethics and spending reform in Congress.

The media poopooh’s Obama’s relationship with the mortgage industry.

Of course they don’t talk about Palin’s record as far as her accomplishments are concerned.

Today RMCPac sent me this little reminder:

Governor Sarah Palin made history on Dec. 4, 2006, when she took office. As the 11th governor of Alaska, as the first woman to hold that office, she has been a leader:


·         Alaska invested $5 billion in state savings, overhauled education funding, and implemented the Senior Benefits Program that provides support for low-income older Alaskans.

·         Created Alaska’s Petroleum Systems Integrity Office

·         Created Climate Change Subcabinet for Alaska.

·         Overhauled the state’s ethics laws

·         Developed a competitive process to construct a gas pipeline [which languished for decades and is the largest state financed infrastructure project in US History].

·         Chaired the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission.

·         Chaired the National Governor’s Association (NGA) Natural Resources Committee,

·         Served two terms on the City Council and two terms as the mayor/manager of Wasilla.  

·         Chaired the Alaska Conservation Commission.

·         Presided over the Alaska Conference of Mayors.

We have written stories covering all of these issues. Just use the handy seach feature in the upper left hand corner of this page.

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

Reminder: Elite Media Doesn’t Fact-Check Obama’s Statements in Debates

Posted by iusbvision on October 2, 2008

Just a little reminder of how the elite media doesn’t call out Obama on his lies/reversals in the debates.

Without preconditions?

Obama’s “forceful” Condemnation of the Invasion of Georgia?

Here is the reversal on missile defense

Obama says that no soldier dies in vain

…but that is not what he said in his 2002 anti-war speech

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.

Obama also said that 3000 lives in Iraq were wasted. 

Obama has twice apologized since implying that U.S. troops had died in vain, telling a rally crowd in Ames, Iowa, on Sunday, “We ended up launching a war that should have never been authorized, and should never been waged, and on which we have now spent $400 billion, and have seen over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americans wasted.”


Obama said that he supports nuclear energy and denied it when McCain said that he was against the storing of nuclear waste and stated that “You cant get there from here”
Well here it is:

On nuclear power, Sen. Obama says he’s open to expanding nuclear energy, which now provides 20% of the nation’s electricity, as part of an effort to increase power sources that emit little or no carbon dioxide. But he also has said there is no future for expanded nuclear energy until the U.S. comes up with a safe, long-term solution for disposing of nuclear waste. He opposes the Bush administration’s plan for storing waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.

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

Ann Coulter on Couric & Biden

Posted by iusbvision on October 1, 2008

We do not quote Ann Coulter very often, Ann is often cryptic and uses a great deal if literary device that is designed to make a point that isn’t clear in the plain text. Quite frankly, most people are not smart enough to understand the nuanced reasoning in her work so quoting it doesn’t often relay the entire point she is making.

This column by Ann Coulter is plain English and a devastatingly accurate analysis. This article’s factual sting outshines Ann’s usual rhetorical sting.  

I tried to just find an excerpt but each paragraph hits like a Mac truck on I-5. HERE is the link to her site.

Ann Coulter: 

While Gov. Sarah Palin is being grilled on her position on mark-to-market accounting rules, the press can’t bother to ask Joe Biden if he could give us a ballpark estimate on when Franklin D. Roosevelt was president — or maybe take a stab at guessing the decade when televisions were first available to the public.

Being interviewed by Katie Couric on the “CBS Evening News,” Biden said: “When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.'”

For those of you who aren’t hard-core history buffs, Biden not only named the wrong president during the 1929 stock market crash, he also claimed a president who wasn’t president during the stock market crash went on TV before Americans had TVs.

Other than that, the statement holds up pretty well. At least Biden managed to avoid mentioning any “clean” Negroes he had met.

Couric was nearly moved to tears by the brilliance of Biden’s brain-damaged remark. She was especially intrigued by Biden’s claim that FDR had said the new iPhone was the bomb!

Here is Couric’s full response to Biden’s bizarre outburst about FDR (a) being president and (b) going on TV in 1929: “Relating to the fears of the average American is one of Biden’s strong suits.”

But when our beauteous Sarah said that John McCain was a better leader on the economy than Barack Obama, Couric relentlessly badgered her for evidence. “Why do you say that?” Couric demanded. “Why are they waiting for John McCain and not Barack Obama? … Can you give us any more examples of his leading the charge for more oversight?”

The beauteous Sarah had cited McCain’s prescient warnings about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But Couric, the crackerjack journalist who didn’t know FDR wasn’t president in 1929, demanded more examples from Palin.

We are currently in the middle of a massive financial crisis brought on by Fannie Mae. McCain was right on Fannie Mae; Obama was wrong. That’s not enough?

Not for the affable Eva Braun of evening TV! “I’m just going to ask you one more time,” Couric snipped, “not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation?”

This would be like responding to someone who predicted the 9/11 attacks by saying: OK, you got one thing right. Not to belabor the point, but what else?

Obama was not merely wrong on Fannie Mae: He is owned by Fannie Mae. Somehow Obama managed to become the second biggest all-time recipient of Fannie Mae political money after only three years in the Senate. The biggest beneficiary, Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, had a 30-year head start on receiving loot from Fannie Mae — the government-backed institution behind our current crisis.

How does the Democratic ticket stack up on other major issues facing the nation, say, gas prices?

Shockingly, Sen. Joe Biden was one of only five senators to vote against the first Alaskan pipeline bill in 1973. This is like having been a Nazi sympathizer during World War II. If Sarah Palin does nothing else, she has got to tie that idiotic pipeline vote around Biden’s neck.

The Senate passed the 1973 Alaskan pipeline bill by an overwhelming 80-5 vote. Only five senators voted against the pipeline on final passage. Sen. Biden is the only one who is still in the Senate — the other four having been confined to mental institutions long ago.

The stakes were clear: This was in the midst of the first Arab oil embargo. Liberal Democrats, such as senators Robert Byrd, Mike Mansfield, Frank Church and Hubert Humphrey, all voted for the pipeline.

But Biden cast one of only five votes against the pipeline that has produced more than 15 billion barrels of oil, supplied nearly 20 percent of this nation’s oil, created tens of thousands of jobs, added hundreds of billions of dollars to the U.S. economy and reduced money transfers to the nation’s enemies by about the same amount.

The only argument against the pipeline was that it would harm the caribou, an argument that was both trivial and wrong. The caribou population near the pipeline increased from 5,000 in the 1970s to 32,000 by 2002.

It would have been bad enough to vote against the pipeline bill even if it had hurt the caribou. A sane person would still say: Our enemies have us in a vice grip. Sorry, caribou, you’ve got to take one for the team. But when the pipeline goes through and the caribou population sextuples in the next 20 years, you really look like a moron.

We couldn’t possibly expect Couric to ask Biden about a vote that is the equivalent of voting against the invention of the wheel. But couldn’t she have come up with just one follow-up question for Biden on FDR’s magnificent handling of the 1929 stock market crash?

Or here’s a question the public is dying to know: “If Obama wanted a historically delusional vice president, why not Lyndon LaRouche?” At least LaRouche didn’t vote against the Alaskan pipeline.

Awesome work Ann, you hit a mega home run with this one.

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

Clinton Says that Obama is Wrong About Economic Crisis

Posted by iusbvision on October 1, 2008

As we have written about HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE. We have explained the current financial crisis in detail, how it happened, who got paid and who is responsible.

We have also written about how Barack Obama has been saying that there is no regulation, that capitalist free wheeling with no oversight led to this problem. Those who have taken the time to read the material know that such claims are nonsense. Bill Clinton, who bears a lesser amount of responsibility for this mess than Congressional Democrats on the banking committees do, properly and accurately stated the facts in some interviews lately about banking and mortgage regulations he signed into law. As we have said, if the regulations, while flawed, were followed in the spirit of the law, this mess might not have ever happened.

As we have shown in the previous posts linked above, a money train in an influence peddling scandal made sure that the spirit of the law was not followed. Congress was warned, some people tried to fix it, but most Democrats just said no and most of the elite media is ignoring this story and public record.

Bill Clinton sets the record straight on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. It was not the deregulation Obama is saying it is, 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, 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. commented on this issue HERE

UPDATE: Investors Business Daily and Human Events Magazine came out with an analysis (albeit they are a bit more strident in their partisanship) that verifies much of what President Clinton has stated. These two articles, especially the one from Human Events, has much evidence demonstrated or linked too. They also are similar to the analysis we wrote on September 21 HERE.

Chuck Norton

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

The text of the Senate Bailout is out & it tells us that we need fundamental changes in Congress

Posted by iusbvision on October 1, 2008

Ok all here is the text of the Senate version of the bill. It is much like the flawed House version that was shot down earlier.

And you bet that they have added a bunch of pork winners to it.

New Tax earmarks in Bailout bill
– Film and Television Productions (Sec. 502)
– Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503)
– 6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)

Tax earmark “extenders” in the bailout bill.
– Virgin Island and Puerto Rican Rum (Section 308)
– American Samoa (Sec. 309)
– Mine Rescue Teams (Sec. 310)
– Mine Safety Equipment (Sec. 311)
– Domestic Production Activities in Puerto Rico (Sec. 312)
– Indian Tribes (Sec. 314, 315)
– Railroads (Sec. 316)
– Auto Racing Tracks (317)
– District of Columbia (Sec. 322)
– Wool Research (Sec. 325)

The House version was 102 pages long, the Senate version is 451 pages… what’s next?

McCain has promised to put an end to this nonsense, Obama hasn’t. This nonsense, corruption and influence peddling in Congress is THE issue of our time. Notice that there is no outrage form the left. In fact the left has no outrage over Congress’ role in this economic scandal, the largest financial scandal in world history. Of course to be fair, there is some outrage on the right, but not enough and that goes for the elite media too.

Special thanks to the Senate Conservatives Blog and

UPDATE: MUST SEE – Senator DeMint video from the floor –
Hat Tip Senate Conservatives Blog

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

My Advice for Palin in the Debate

Posted by iusbvision on October 1, 2008

After watching the interview with Katie Couric, Palin is trying too hard to not offend the interviewer and she is trying to avoid specifics to avoid gotcha questions. It also seems that Palin, like Reagan in his first debate with Walter Mondale, is trying to fit too much into each answer. In the following debates Reagan ignored his staff and just was himself; crushing Mondale. There are many times such as in the “Tear Down This Wall” speech, the “Evil Empire” speech and Reagan’s insistence on human rights as a part of arms negotiations that Reagan’s staff opposed it and Reagan did his own thing anyways.

Governor Palin took on both party machines in Alaska. Tell me, what political advisor would advise someone to do that? Advisors often seek consensus, leaders lead. Palin needs to get back to her roots. We need Alaska’s Sarah Palin, not the post convention Palin that the McCain campaign is hamstringing. In debates in Alaska, Palin destroyed two former governors. Palin is the only politician that the Anchorage Daily News says, comes to Editorial Board discussions and interviews with no advisors or lackeys. This is the Palin America loves.

So my advice is for Governor Palin to ignore McCain’s will to be reserved and non-partisan in tone and to just go to town and be yourself. Ignore the advisors around you. However, get to know Biden’s foreign policy history, which is a history that he can’t win on.

As we have said before, Biden has been wrong on the cold war and many other foreign policy successes over time. This piece from the WSJ says much of what needs to be said. Excerpts:

Decade after decade and on important issue after important issue, Mr. Biden’s judgment has been deeply flawed.

In the 1970’s, Mr. Biden advocated defense cuts so massive that both Edmund Muskie and Walter Mondale, both leading liberal Democrats at the time, opposed them.

In the 1980’s Mr. Biden was a leading opponent of President Ronald Reagan’s efforts to fund the Contras. He also opposed Reagan’s efforts to send military assistance to the pro-American government in El Salvador, which at the time was battling the FMLN, a Soviet-supported Marxist group.

Throughout his career, Mr. Biden has consistently opposed modernization of our strategic nuclear forces. He was a fierce opponent of Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative. Mr. Biden voted against funding SDI, saying, “The president’s continued adherence to [SDI] constitutes one of the most reckless and irresponsible acts in the history of modern statecraft.” Mr. Biden has remained a consistent critic of missile defense and even opposed the U.S. dropping out of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty after the collapse of the Soviet Union (which was the co-signatory to the ABM Treaty) and the end of the Cold War.

[How can anyone oppose a missile defense system to protect our cities from nuclear missiles – its nothing short of nuts – Editor]

Mr. Biden voted against the first Gulf War, asking: “What vital interests of the United States justify sending Americans to their deaths in the sands of Saudi Arabia?”

In 2006, after having voted three years earlier to authorize President George W. Bush’s war to liberate Iraq, Mr. Biden argued for the partition of Iraq, which would have led to its crack-up. Then in 2007, Mr. Biden opposed President Bush’s troop surge in Iraq, calling it a “tragic mistake.” It turned out to be quite the opposite. Without the surge, the Iraq war would have been lost, giving jihadists their most important victory ever.

On many of the most important and controversial issues of the last four decades, Mr. Biden has built a record based on bad assumptions, misguided analyses and flawed judgments. If he had his way, America would be significantly weaker, allies under siege would routinely be cut loose, and the enemies of the U.S. would be stronger.

There are few members of Congress whose record on national security matters can be judged, with the benefit of hindsight, to be as consistently bad as Joseph Biden’s. It’s true that Sarah Palin has precious little experience in national security affairs. But in this instance, no record beats a manifestly bad one.

Chuck Norton
Editor, IUSB Vision

Update: gives it’s advice for Palin.

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

American Thinker Magazine Catches Up With IUSB Vision: Tells McCain to Name Names

Posted by iusbvision on October 1, 2008

On September 18 and 19 the editor of the IUSB Vision, Chuck Norton, told the McCain campaign to start naming names with what is now the largest financial scandal in the history of the world (see links HERE and HERE). The American people want blood for this and when you name the key people who caused this to happen most are Democrats. Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, James Johnson, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd etc.

Today American Thinker Magazine sends the same message HERE. American Thinker points out that the Democrats are trying to put the blame on McCain when in fact they have themselves to blame. It is no different than the blame for Hurricane Katrina, when the money for the levies and other disaster preparedness funds were misspent by local Democrats, when the Democrat Governor Kathleen Blanco did not even attempt to follow the states disaster action plan, when Governor Blanco resisted help from the feds and the Red Cross and the Salvation Army by ordering the State Police to keep their convoy’s of relief supplies out of the area.

This election is winable for the McCain campaign, but they are just not willing to really get into the fight against the elite media and the Democrats. The Republicans, wanting to appear more “gentlemanly” are allowing their enemies to define them with a long series of deceptions.

Excerpt from American Thinker:

When folks are this angry, there is hell to pay and “hell to pay” includes figuring out who to blame. For all of McCain’s wanting to stay “above the fray” and his too-clever-by-half comment that now is not the time to assign blame, he is not hearing the public. It is indeed time to assign blame. With this kind of financial destruction on the part of most American families, someone is going to get blamed. You can count on it.

Let me repeat. Someone will get blamed. You will either enter that debate or you will lose that debate. Period.

And short of properly assigning blame to the liberal policies and politicians who are responsible for this mess, the blame will automatically fall to the current Presidential administration and by extension, his party. Right or wrong, that’s how our politics play out. McCain simply has no choice now. He will start doing what he claims he loves to do related to government corruption — naming names — or he will be thrown on the ash heap of electoral shame alongside Bob Dole, George H. W. Bush and so on.

The good news for McCain, should he decide to grasp it, is that the party against which he is (supposed to be) running can easily be pegged with the lion’s share of the blame regarding our economic meltdown. There is no doubt that liberal policies on energy and housing have combined to put the country in this situation, and only unwinding these policies will lead the nation out of this problem. Naming names properly will name a whole lot of folks with “D” beside their names.

So today we are going to toot out own horn. We tell our readers that we provide some of the best news and analysis anywhere. We deliver on that promise.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | 2 Comments »

Good News: VP Debate Moderator Releasing (Pro-)Obama Book

Posted by iusbvision on October 1, 2008

UPDATE VI: The Colombia Journalism Review takes the same position as IUSB Vision (Hat Tip

Conflict of interest is often about appearances. There appears, to us, to be a conflict in Ifill moderating tomorrow night’s vice presidential debate. Here’s why…

Update V: Hit Michelle Malkin’s link below after you read the story. Ifill is pulling the race card today over thie criticism and she did not tell the Commission on Presidential Debates about her conflict of interest. Any first year journalism student can see that this is royally inappropriate even if Ifill plays it straight. Journalistic ethics are dead.

UPDATE IV: Ed Morrissey has a nice post at called “Defining Moderator”.

According to Websters Dictionary, the word refers to a mediator, someone unaffiliated or neutral between two or more positions to facilitate discussion and negotiation. 

UPDATE III: A best selling book sells about 100,000 copies. An author often gets about 15% of the cover price of the book, less so from Amazon and some discount book sellers. If Obama is elected the book will likely sell over 100,000 copies for a paycheck of $350,000 if Obama wins. If someone bribed Ifill to be biased for $350,000 people would have a cow. This is no different. – Best selling Author Dick Morris

UPDATE II: PBS and Ifill are refusing to take calls from reporters and refuses to comment. Bill O’Reilly just said that he called Ifill on the phone and she refused to take the call. This is ridiculous. 

UPDATE: PBS did not tell McCain Campaign about Ifill’s book! Link HERE. Another Update: Obama refuses interview ith Greta Van Susteren. Greta is an out of the closet center left Democrat, but she doesn’t let that taint her coverage and usually does a great job (link HERE). Hmmmmm.

Michelle Malkin once again has the scoop.

My first syndicated column of the week, filed this afternoon, shines light on PBS anchor Gwen Ifill, who will moderate Thursday’s only vice presidential debate. Try as she might to deflect questions about her impartiality, her biases — and her conflict of interest — are clear. But don’t you dare breathe a word about any of this. You know what will happen if you do…


Sidenote: TVNewser reports that Ifill has broken her ankle, but she’s still going to do the debate. But will she disclose her conflict of interest? Inquiring minds want to know.

Ask the Commission on Presidential Debates if she will acknowledge her conflict of interest: 202-872-1020.

And here’s the e-mail address of Janet H. Brown, Executive Director of the Debates Commission:

Hopefully, their email system works better than the House.

Tons of readers recommend that Sarah Palin open her debate remarks by congratulating Ifill on her book and asking her to tell everyone the title.

The Book is The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama

Here is a youtube clip if Ifill promoting her book. All of the black politicians she mentions are Democrats. There are black Republicans in office or who have had high office recently and she does not mention a single one of them. No Michael Steele, Ken Blackwell, J.C. Watts, Gary Franks, Alveda King, Sherman Parker, Maurice Washinton, etc…

Malkin continues:

Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”

It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.

Here is Ifill’s reaction to Palin at the GOP Convention – she was clearly disgusted by it.

Worldnet Daily called Ifill for comment. She is clamming up.

OUR TAKE: As someone who is trained as a journalist I know that those who claim to do “straight news” are to avoid any appearance of impropriety and are to avoid making themselves a part of the story. Ifill’s book blows both of those out especially considering that her book will sell better of Obama wins.

UPDATE II: Examples of Ifill’s fawning coverage of the Obama’s: HERE and HERE.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | 3 Comments »