MyFoxPhilly

Maybe it's just me, but I am tired of the news. I am tired of this feeling of impending doom, which frankly someone must consider a winning programming policy because just about every single outlet is trying to out do the others on their dire predictions. Frankly, I am tired of trying to tell people of the very serious problems that exist, because it's becoming increasingly clear that we are headed to an Idiocracy-where the stupidest people have more sway over those who actually do things like READ! WRITE! and THINK! This campaign has been far too long and its length has done more to divide this country than unite it. The players are just that, players pretending that if they nudge this issue one way or the other that they can win the entire enchilada. They are playing at what is known as brinksmanship, with the American public being the sole commodity at stake. Aren't you guys tired of it? Aren't you tired of the arguing, the bickering, the false accusations that permeate every single blog? I think the stock market drop after the bailout/pork barrel is largely due to the continued haranging on the part of the press. Stop it. Leave us alone. We need facts, not your opinions!

As someone who has lost a family member to a DWI accident, I know what the implications are down the road for the suvivors. It's something that they live with the rest of their lives. I get online at 3:00 and find two definite manslaughter deaths attributed to DWI and two other fatality accidents that can probably be attributed to alcohol or drug abuse. First, we have to make the laws harder on first time offenders. No more "you can drive to work or school" nonsense. They can learn to use public transit or walk or ride a bike. Maybe by having their wings clipped they will stay out of trouble. Secondly, given the numerous young people that drive without licenses but with their parents negligent approval, we must raise the legal driving age. I hate to say this, but I see and hear about kids driving to places that their parents would be appalled. You cannot monitor your underage child if you don't know where they are or who they are with. Sure, I know the story about "my kid has to work." My kids had to work too, and when they didn't drive, I took them there or they found a ride. It's not easy, but it is doable. Too many parents use a driver's license as a carrot and stick that they can use for leverage. Frankly, many of them use it because they also don't want to be bother taking their kids places. It's a dirty little secret, but a reality. I know of kids who are palling around with older kids who go to clubs and places that really are not safe for young teens. But parents don't want to know this. Heck, I can even go to downtown Denton and see very young kids hanging out in clubs until the wee hours of the morning. It's time to start taking back responsibility. And if people won't do it on their own, then it's up to the law and courts to make that happen, no matter what it takes.

I was trying to find out who or what the Alliance for Protection of the Planet is and found this nifty website that has graphic analysis of organizations and the people that run them. The specific one I searched is listed here:
Muckety-really that's the name
This is just as nifty as opensecret.org for sifting out who is linked to whom and what cause and why. Anyway, the actually organization was, as I suspected, another Al Gore production and the staffing and board of directors is largely the DNC committee and chief financial donors. No surprise there. But I did enjoy finding this website. I will explore other organizations and see what comes up.

Regardless of political views, there is a little thing called the Bill of Rights. Remember that "we hold these truths to be self-evident" stuff they tried to make you learn in high school. Well those rights, the ones our forefathers and mothers fought and died for are on the chopping block today. The spirit of "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" of revolutionary heroes like Patrick Henry are currently and actively being mitigated by the powers of the left. Namecallling aside, this should be worrisome for ALL citizens because such acts that deny any person the ability to freely express their views without fear of governmental retribution will eventually escalate to the point where nobody is allowed to express opinions.

We have already seen this with the willful co-opting of the American news media. While liberals like to couch themselves as victims, there are precious few outlets for conservative thought in mainstream media outside of talk radio. And they are actively seeking to limit that. From troofers to "truth squads" to "active lines"-the current Obama campaign has far more in common with the takeover of eastern Europe by the bad old USSR than a real election of issues and ideas. I am sure that there are those idealists who think that because Obama is a minority that he holds some higher moral and ethical ground. But if you shall "know them by their fruits," as said in the Bible, then you need to consider the discord and doubt that has cycled around this campaign. If you think this is just some crackpot entry, considering the following:

"...But the politics of free speech has been subtly shifting. Opponents of the ACLU on the Right are increasingly worried about overreaching rules against "hate speech" defining legitimate opinions as out of bounds. Meanwhile, the same people who forever decry the country's imminent descent into the dark night of fascism are now comfortable regulating political speech in federal law and banning speech on college campuses. The Left has learned to like some chill with its free speech.

Enter the Obama campaign, which reflects the new ethos. It twice issued "Obama Action Wire" alerts for activists to call a Chicago radio station and try to shut down appearances by two Obama critics, writers Stanley Kurtz and David Freddoso. No "chilling effect" here. CNN and the Chicago Tribune reported on the effort to silence Obama's detractors, but mostly by way of noting the Obama camp's tech-savvy mustering of its supporters.

When an outside group ran TV ads pointing out links between Obama and the former Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers, the Obama campaign asked the Bush Justice Department -- yes, that Bush Justice Department, the fount of all evil -- to open a criminal investigation.

The Obama campaign's effort dovetails with the work of an outfit called Accountable America, run by a former MoveOn.org operative. It is devoted to threatening conservative donors with legal action and exposure of any embarrassing details of their private lives if they give money to groups running ads against Obama. The New York Times account says the group hopes to create "a chilling effect," but the phrase is used non-pejoratively...."

Full column here

The scariest part of the entire process is how the media has shifted from reporting the story, to becoming the story. I have found that the press by and large glosses over some serious concerns, or dismisses people who express doubt as ignorant or racist. Why is it that opposing a candidate has to be based on racism? Could it be that as someone with the most liberal record in the Senate, Senator Obama doesn't hold views that I support? Yet in countless forums, the troofers and followers automatically vilify anyone who says something opposed to the apotheosis of Obama. (apostheosis for those of you who don't know, was the process where Roman emperors attained divinity and became gods in their own rights-a symptomatic detail that led to the fall of the Roman Empire....)

If you want an absolute reason why you should beware of the glittering generalities of the Obama/Biden campaign, consider this quote from Joe Biden:
"we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you're paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe. That would keep people in their homes, actually help banks by keeping it from going under..."

For those of you who don't understand the implications, interest is what makes payroll and keeps the doors open of you local bank. It pays depositors for the use of their money to fund other loans. This judiciary fiat of simply lowering the interest rates AND THE PRINCIPLE means that all a borrower has to do is become delinquent, and they get to set their own price. This is no way to run a bank or any other business. When you sign the contract to purchase ANYTHING, you commit to paying the cost on that paper. This dissolves legal contracts and creates a situation where more banks will fail because borrowers will simply stop payments. So if you are enjoying this current bailout-which is absolutely chock full of pork, then you will love the next one two years down the road.

A word of caution: The Obama campaign has offered everything to everyone. Another Illinoian Lincoln said, "You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." I realize Americans are short on math knowledge, but income and outgo must balance. What we have now is an already overloaded budget that will be made more cumbersome by implementing costly programs while claiming to reduce taxpayer burden. At some point you have to get the money from somewhere, or print it and drive up inflation. Beware the candidate that comes to offer you the moon, it isn't theirs to give, and it never was. It's your money they are after.

"we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you're paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe. That would keep people in their homes, actually help banks by keeping it from going under"--Joe Biden, on the debate...

I must admit I was busy writing tests, but I did hear this quote. Is there anyone who was sleeping this past week and didn't get that much of the meltdown was due to credit being extended to people that defaulted on loans? And Obama/Biden would allow a court, presumably appointed or elected, to wave their magic gavels and lower the interest and/or the principle on a loan. Banks are businesses. They have to make a profit in order to open the doors and pay people a living wage.I'm not talking about CEO's I am talking about tellers and cashiers and loan officers-the little guys.Interest on loans keeps the lights on. Likewise, the money that those silly fools like me put in the bank, is used to fund loans. The interest is paid back to people who have savings in the form of interest as a benefit for letting other people use their money. so Obama and Biden seem to think that we should continue funding subprime loans, and when they go belly up, nobody gets hurt. When small banks go under, somebody has to pay the bills. And as it goes up the food chain, that somebody is usually the taxpayer. With this kind of policy on economics, we would have to pass another gigantic bill in four more years. Is this really the kind of change that will improve your life? Never mind the idiocy of trying to hoodwink the public to the idea that 95% of taxpayers will get a refund AND we will still have all these shiny new programs. Folks, it doesn't add up. And as I keep trying to tell you There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

Because I am busy writing my tests for tomorrow, I have only caught bits and pieces of the debate. But I did hear something disturbing. At one point, Biden said that he and Obama would support a policy for bankruptcies that would allow the judge to lower the interest rates AND lower the principle. Excuse me. Someone buys a house for $250K, defaults on the loan
AND THEN A JUDGE CAN CHANGE THE AMOUNT OWED?
That may help delinquent, irresponsible homeowners who bought too much house for their income, but it
STILL LEAVES LENDERS HOLDING THE BAG.
And since lenders get their money from those of us who are silly enough to save it in banks, that means WE LOSE. It also means more bank defaults. So the Democrats are supporting a policy that will make careless borrowers happy, but it will strip any profits from banks and that means lower interest and return on OUR INVESTMENTS. Does this sound good to you? Or is it, as I suspect, socialism gone amok. Even more worrisome is that most judges are either elected or appointed. Which means that judges basically can be bought. Color me worried.

Just in case you were wondering what is said behind closed doors, here's a little memo that leaked out. So how do you like being considered as one of the "idiots" needing re-education. Or should I say indoctrination?
Story here.

Nanci Pelosi, liberal Democrat and head of the Congress from San Francisco, has no common sense. Here we have a crucial vote on a major economic bailout and instead of coaxing the opposing team to her side through logic and persuasion, she take a moment on the floor prior to the vote to blame every economic ill on the Republican party. She kind of glossed over the attempts in 2003 and 2005 to get better oversight on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And do you want me to believe that only Republicans were making hay while the sun shined on a booming market? Many of the problems coming to fruition are the result of policies starting back as early as 1996. What I find odd is how a bill that was three pages last Thursday can suddenly swell to 101 pages today. Does the word "earmarks" ring a bell?

For every expenditure passed by the Congress there have been countless earmarks riding along like the bloodsucking parasites that wrote them on bills that needed to be passed. Frankly, while the party may be over, I don't think Pelosi realizes that the party may be over for everyone. There were just as many Democrats that reneged on that vote as Republicans. And as I recall, the Democrats hold the majority in the House. So whose fault is it that they didn't fall in lockstep with this legislation? Or are there hidden clauses and earmarks that may come back and sting like hell when outed in the media? This was the result of middle America making their preferences known. For too long the government has been run by many for the benefit of a few. That's backasswards. It's time that Congress learns who is boss. And the way to do that is to note how YOUR representatives votes, to note if they have stood up for YOU. If not, they aren't your creature anymore and you owe them no loyalty. Remember that come November.

For many of us, it's overwhelming to view the national economic meltdown without confusion and worry. But if you want to understand what happened nationally, all you have to do is look at the similar economic meltdown of the DISD.

You have a leader who wants to at least give the impression of serving all groups with everything they want, all the time. These goals are virtually impossible. You can only exercise programs to the extent of your budget. But what has happened in the DISD, as well as other governmental type agencies, is that in their need to produce what is politcially expedient, they don't always look at what is economically possible or even necessary. The DISD offered $4000 stipends to bilingual education teachers. Maybe before offering these stipends, someone should have looked at the payroll and made sure funding was appropriate. Likewise, there were numerous specialized programs that all have a "feel good" aura to them, but which are so expensive on a per pupil basis that they end up denying basic services to other students. This is exactly the same type of thing we could see happening with a national healthcare system. Right now nationally, we are seeing potential shortfalls in Medicare and Medicaid. This is largely because people have been coopted into these programs who were never the intended original recipients. While it sounds nice on paper or when giving a speech to offer these services, there has to be some projected method of paying for them. DISD denied Mike Moses a chance ot streamline the district and left largely because of a bureaucratic infrastructure that is more focused on self-preservation than on the good of the students. Likewise in Washington, we have many MANY senators and representatives that got money from many of the bank groups and holding companies that are currently failing. But Congress is more interested in maintaining power bases than in rooting out the problem representatives in office. Where are indictments for the likes of Hinojosa and the DISD school board for covering up what amounts to defrauding this taxpayers of Dallas? And likewise, were are the media pundits and talking heads who are calling for the ousting of the likes of Schumer, Rangel, Jefferson and Franks? One of our most precious freedoms is that of a free press. Right now the press seems more intent on shaping the news than presenting it. We need some people with the guts to call for all people who defraud taxpayers to be taken to task. Instead we have syncophants that chat them up over tea. Something must change, both locally and nationally, for anything to get better.

A little recent history as to the reasons that Freddie and Fannie crashed and burned. Once the Democrats got control of committees, they ran roughshod on the Republicans, denying them any real place at the table. Even long time experts on committees were hooted down by the new heads. Here's some of what happened-of course you know the results:

1) The Bill to correct abuses in Freddie and Fannie introduced by Hagel with McCain, Dole and Sunnunu as co-sponsors in Januray 2005 (S.190 (109th)..
2) Bill never got to Congressional vote because 12 votes were needed in committee to go to Congress.. the Democrats wouldn't dare concede to more control over the financial entities because they were getting far too much political money from these groups.
3) In July of 2006 the following committee vote occurred:

(NOTE: Dodd the # 1 recipient of bribes, um, I mean campaign contributions from Freddie & Fannie with Obama the Pure second in receiving this Freddie & Fannie Money).

Against Freddie and Fannie reform (100% / all nine Democrats):
DODD (!), SCHUMER (!), Sarbanes, Johnson, Reed, Bayh, Carper, Stabenow and Menendez.

For: (100% all Republicans.):
Shelby, Bennet, Allard Enzi,, Hagel, Santorum, Bunning, Crapo, Sunnunu, Dole and Martinez.

So, who are you blaming for the Fannie / Freddie catastrophes.........?

For those of you thinking that an Obama victory will cut you taxes, consider this:

Fact Check: Obama Misleads on $250,000 Tax Claim

September 26, 2008 10:14 PM

ABC News' Teddy Davis and Nitya Venkataraman Report: During Friday's presidential debate, Sen. Barack Obama provided a loose interpretation of his tax plan, saying that those making less than $250,000 a year "will not see one dime's worth of tax increase."

It's not entirely true.

Obama has called for higher taxes on income, capital gains and dividends for individuals making $200,000 per year; his tax plan imposes higher taxes on couples starting at $250,000 a year.

Now granted, my family isn't even close to that tax bracket, but given the many spending programs such as national healthcare that are big ticket items, I doubt very much we would see a decrease in taxes for middle class taxpayers. In fact, I am pretty sure that overall taxes, which include state, local, school, sales and other tax rates, will have to rise precipitously to cover federal demands on states and cities.

Okay, now since it looks like my taxes will be going through the roof to pay for defaulted loans taken out by deadbeats, here's a few things I would like you to consider. The Democrats have funded and supported a wide range of programs to put low income people into mortgages. They never once considered that may those people are low income because they don't handle finances very well. Not paying your bills, not working, doing silly stuff with your money like buying expensive rims for your car or taking out payday loans to fund weekend partying are not examples of responsible personal finance. This whole situation is NOT NEW. As far back 2003, the president and member of the banking regulatory groups were concerned about the runaway nature of the banking industry and the swelling bubble of real estate values.But instead of reeling in our collective spendthrift ways, too many people saw real estate as a way to get rich quick. They flipped properties, they bought over their limits and when they defaulted, the banks were stuck with the property-often after it was gutted. This is irresponsible behavior on a national scale. It is based on personal, political and corporate greed and there are some things you should look at before you take a rush to judgment and vote in December. Here's one (note the date):

TexasTruBlu's Blog

Worn Out

The DWI Laws Aren't Working

Interesting Website

Why You Should Be Concerned About Your Rights

Political Thoughts: Reality

More Political Thoughts

If This Is Change, Count Me Out

Disturbing

What Democrats REALLY Think About You

The Party's Over Or Nancy Go Home.

So the Party's Over, Eh? or A Win for Middle America

All Politics Is Local...

Congressional Financial Bumbling Cont'd

Fact Check

Democrats In Denial

TexasTruBlu

Inside Fox:
Hot List About Us Good Day TV Listings Politics