Who's Corrupt? Another Democrat?

Over the weekend Rep. John P. Murtha , D-Pa. had an interview. Considering he's a member of congress, and a senior one at that, an interview isn't surprising. One thing though that may not be known is his history and a quote from that interview.

Murtha's history is known enough that he makes the top 20 of a list of corrupt politicians; you can view Murtha's record here. One of the main reasons he makes this list is his involvement in something called the Abscam scam. Basically the FBI established a bogus business called "Abdul Enterprises, Ltd" which they used as their front to offer great sums of money to politicians in exchange for political favors. Some of the political favors were money laundering, investment schemes and U.S. asylum. Because the FBI had no videotaped exchange of money with Murtha, they got him to roll on his cronies...other U.S. Senators. In exchange for his testimony, charges against Murtha were dropped and he was allowed to run for reelection to the U.S. Congress. His tenure now spans 3 decades.

Not necessarily related, but close, was Murtha's comment in an interview with The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last weekend. Murtha was quoted very distinctly as saying, “If I’m corrupt, it’s because I take care of my district.” Thank you Congressman Murtha. I am grateful that corruption has helped you take care of your district. What exactly have you done? Well Murtha has been able to secure $225 million in government grants to his PAC contributor, Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC). Contracts like these have helped CTC make their $125,000 PAC contribution to Mr. Murtha. This is just one example and it's very hard to figure exactly how many earmarks Murtha has generated for his district or his campaigns, but the title of the Post-Gazette article cited previously is: "Critics claim John Murtha is capitalizing on a corrupt system, but he's not apologizing."

When will this country wake up?

The "20 most corrupt members of Congress" report has both Republicans and Democrats, so neither is without fault. But his comments and this article also come at a time when Obama promised no earmarks: "We can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress' seniority, rather than the merit of the project" Obama, April 15, 2008.

So what do we do?

At the time of the Abscam, Senator Larry Pressler (R-SD) was called a hero by Walter Cronkite for refusing to be involved in the scam and reporting it to the FBI. Pressler scoffed and asked: "what have we come to if turning down a bribe is 'heroic'?"

If Obama is serious about earmarks, lets make penalties for them comparable to bribing a public official.

Funding Terrorists...

What who's doing that?

The Obama Administration!

By January, Obama has promised Guantanamo will be closed. What is interesting are the comments by the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair. He says that some of the detainees will likely be released into the United States. What's worse is that he claims some will need assistance to "start their new lives." That's because, although we can allow our own citizens to live on the streets, we can't have terrorists there. Essentially, I see this as the U.S. doing their part to help finance terrorism.

Let's just wipe the last 8 years (at least) off the slate and put ourselves on the list of state sponsors of terrorism.

Who's the leader of the free market?

$97.4 billion. That's what the Auto industry has received to date from you and I.

What next?

Why not the auto parts manufacturers?

The White House, last Thursday, announced that they were going to give auto parts makers $5 billion because they haven't been paid by the industries receiving taxpayer money. Well that's not fair. We better make the playing field even. Take from the fiscally responsible you and I, and give to the squanders.

Well what about other car manufacturers, mainly European ones where socialism is rampant? Certainly BMW, Mercedes Benz and SAAB must be feeling the crunch as well. In last year's fourth quarter, BMW's net profit fell 89%. Daimler said it's February sales were down 25% from this time last year. SAAB, who "hasn’t had a profit in almost two decades and will be unprofitable in 2009," laid off workers and even filed for bankruptcy last month.

But what are our European Socialist counterparts doing compared to President Obama and our Democrat controlled Congress? Apparently the enterprise minister, Maud Olofsson, said '"The Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories. "' Germany's Economy Minister, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, said "I personally think nothing of a direct stake of the state."

Wait, I'm getting confused here. Which statements are the European leaders making? Their giving the auto industry $97 billion and the leader of the free market is letting major manufacturers fail due to market forces, right? No. European nations are letting industries fail and the U.S. is providing taxpayer money. When did Obama start subscribing to socialist ideology? Oh yeah, that's right, most of his mentors were openly or overtly engaged in communism.

AMERICA'S enemies smell blood and it's type "O." By Ralph Peters

March 25, 2009
Last updated: 3:47 am
March 25, 2009
Posted: 1:00 am

AMERICA'S enemies smell blood and it's type "O."

All new administrations stumble a bit as they seek their footing. But President Obama's foreign-policy botches have set new records for instant incompetence.

Contrary to left-wing myths, I wasn't a fan of the Bush administration. (I called for Donald Rumsfeld to get the boot in mid-2001.) But fair's fair. Despite his many faults, Bush sought to do good. Obama just wants to look good.

Vice President Dick Cheney was arrogant. Vice President Joe Biden is arrogant and stupid. Take your pick.

Don't worry about the new administration's ideology. Worry about its terrifying naivete.

Consider a sampling of the goofs O and his crew have made in just two months:

China: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (you know that gal married to the Saudi hireling) crawled to Beijing to tell the party bosses that human rights don't matter. Our "relationship" is more important than freedom and human dignity.

Beijing's response? A staged military confrontation with an unarmed US Navy vessel; continued screw-America currency cheating; a renewed crackdown on dissidents and, yesterday, a call for a new global currency to replace the dollar.

Thanks, Hill. You're a sweetheart.

Pakistan: With viral corruption throughout and Islamist fanatics sweeping half of its territory, Pakistan's coming apart. Its Dem-adored prez tries to ban opposition parties and gut the judiciary. It has nukes and seethes with hatred of America. And Islamabad controls our primary supply route into Afghanistan, using it as an extortion tool.

Obama's response? Billions in new aid for Pak pols to pocket. We'd be better off handing the money to AIG to pay out more bonuses.

Afghanistan: Obama's Vietnam. Am I the only American who remembers that candidate Obama had a plan to capture Osama bin Laden and fix our previous "mistakes" in Afghanistan? President Obama doesn't have a clue.

Iran: Obama tried to reach out, to talk. After all, talking got him to the White House. But America-bashing is what keeps Iran's leaders in office, it's their political essence. After 30 years of fierce hostility, hasn't anyone figured out that the senior mullahs need us as an enemy? Without the Great Satan America to blame, they'd have some real explaining to do to their homies. So O got the left-hand finger.

He wanted to chat with the Taliban, too. They told him he could stick it where the sun don't shine.

North Korea: Obama wanted a fresh start. North Korea's response? Threats of war with South Korea and the kidnapping of two American journalists. And the renewed pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, along with rocket tests.

Cuba: Obama would like to liberalize our relationship. The Castro boys told him to kiss off. They need an enemy, too. (Dear Mr. President: It's not always about us or how evil America is.)

Venezuela: Guess who else needs an enemy?

Mexico: The good news: Obama knows where it is on a map and recognizes that Mexico's government faces a narco-insurgency that threatens our country, too. His first action? Cave to the Teamsters, violate a lawful treaty on cross-border trucking, reignite fading anti-Americanism and undercut President Felipe Calderon.

Poland: Obama's stance on our bravest ally on the European continent? The Russians are more important than you are. He's sending the same message to Ukraine and Georgia.

Russia: Bolshie Biden, the commuting commissar, knows he's the man who can turn Russia into our best pal. After "Friend of Bill" Strobe Talbott tried and failed disastrously. And after poor W saw into Putin's soul, only to get his butt handed to him. "Uncle Joe" Biden has nothing to learn from past failures, though: He's got a re-set button.

Moscow's response to the Obama administration's bid for a new start? It threatens NATO members it once occupied and continues to back Iran's nuclear program. Plus, it bribes Kyrgystan to kick us off the critical-to-Afghanistan Manas airbase (then offers to help replace that supply lifeline, giving Russia a choke-hold on our troops).

Next, the Kremlin threatens massive re-armament and demands the abandonment of the dollar as the international reserve currency.

Obama's response? Push that re-set button again. And again.

At what point does naivete become cowardice?

As for our allies, Obama apparently needs them less than Bush did. O treated Britain's prime minister like the deputy Paraguayan veterinary inspector, and he blindsided the leaders of the Czech Republic, Poland, Mexico and Canada on issues ranging from missile defense to trade. But he'd like them to take the Gitmo terrorists off our hands, please.

The one bright spot thus far has been Iraq, where Obama quickly tossed aside his campaign promises. The O-man doesn't want to be on the blame-line for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in Baghdad. And his MoveOn.org supporters can throw all the tantrums they want. (Breaking news, folks: O's a professional pol, not the messiah . . . )

Apart from Iraq a success Sen. Obama did all he could to prevent his foreign policy's an instant wasteland. By comparison, the Carter administration is starting to look like a model of manly strength, courage and patriotism.

Ralph Peters recently became Fox News' first "strategic analyst."

Finally, SOME Fiscal Responsibility

The Hill reported yesterday that Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security, told Congress NO to additional funding to battle the increasing crime on the border.

“What I have done is identify other activities that are less urgent ... to be able to move these resources where I think they are needed most.”

Finally someone in this Administration brings forth fiscal responsibility.

Scandalous: The Gate Keeper to Obama

Rahm Emanuel certainly skirted any major repercussions to his involvement in the Blagojevich scandal. But will he be able to do the same from what he knew about the Mortgage Giants Freddie Mac?

In 2000 Emanuel was appointed to the Board of Freddie Mac after helping Bill Clinton escape from the turbulent Lewinsky and Whitewater scandals. While at Freddie, for 14 months, Rahm did little to earn his $320,000 except to show up to 6 board meetings where they were "told by executives of a plan to use accounting tricks to mislead shareholders about outsize profits."


The Obama Administration, once again is keeping true to a new openness and level of transperancy. Obama refused the Chicago Tribune access to board minutes during Emanuel's stint even though the Freedom of Information Act grants such access.

When will Obama make true his promises to the American people? When will we have integrity back in the White House and this Administration? We have swindlers, tax cheats and lobbyists, all whom Obama promised we wouldn't have. Maybe Obama Hoped we wouldn't have it. Maybe Obama's Change will come when he sees fit.

I don't want to wait! Lets send a message to this Administration that we wont accept these policies, vote for Tedisco in New York.

Insider Information

Senator Dodd knew more about the workings of AIG than he let on. His wife is the former Director of a subsidiary of AIG - IPC Holdings - where she attended more than 75% of the board meetings while working on the Audit and Investment Committee. When coupled with AIG donations to Dodd's campaigns Senator Dodd really must have had insider information.
Dodd's up for reelection in 2010...isn't it time to rid the Senate of dishonesty?

Schooling for Obama

Mr. Obama...these words ring true for you as well! You cannot spend your way out of recession or borrow your way out of debt.

What significance is a name?

I'm sure everyone alive when Kennedy was shot remembers exactly what they were doing at exactly the moment they heard the news. I'm sure people remember exactly what they were doing the morning of September 11. These are events not easily forgotten.

Does President Obama remember what he was doing that horrific morning? Were the then state Senator Obama's first thoughts, "America most have antagonized those 19 hijackers?"

My guess is no.

If I am correct, then what business does, now President Obama, have changing the name, "War on Terror" to, "Overseas Contingency Operation?"

If we revert to the Kennedy Administration we can see how relevant names were. Pobeda! This word is Russian and to the technical expert it's a SS-3 MRBM, but to the rest of us it's commonly referred to as medium range ballistic missile. If the Kennedy Administration had called it something else, and downplayed the terminology, who knows, Washington DC today may not exist.

Changing the name was a bad idea Mr. President! The act may be insignificant to you, but to some, like the terrorists who initially instigated this terminology, it means victory. We have not yet won the war on terror. We should not give this ground to those who threaten peace and stability in the world. I urge you, Mr. President, reconsider your decision.

The Road to Stagflation

The Obama Administration is spending wildly beyond the imagination of any conservative analyst I know. Last month, the spending started (excluding TARP) with H.R. 1, more commonly known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This supposed stimulus bill committed the American people to a $780 billion debt with one signature. Then came the $900 million Obama pledged to rebuild the Gaza strip after terrorists attacked the sovereign nation, Israel. Congress then passed the omnibus spending bill, to keep the government running for the remainder of the year. (I wont discuss Obama's pledge to eradicate bills with earmarks but then signed this one that contained the most ever; over 9000).

As of today, we now have another government agency; the Public-Private Investment Program, which will not only add nearly another $1 trillion to our debt, but will increase the powers of the President as well. The article, "Treasury's toxic asset plan could cost $1 trillion", indicates that the Secretary of the Treasury, under this new agency, can seize any failing firm large enough to ripple the economy sufficiently with the only permission needed being from the President and the Federal Reserve. Is this not a state allowed private market?

So much for our free market economy!

Anyway, back to finances!

The first time Geithner disclosed information about this plan, the market plummeted. Part of the decline was his inability to confidently address the media, but the rest came from the overwhelming lack of support for the program. Today's market response, thus far, has been overwhelmingly positive. At the time of this article the Dow is up over 350 points. This is good news, in the short run. Now banks are happy that they wont have the bad assets to contend with. But what about the spending for future generations?

Remember Senator Judd Gregg, the New Hampshire Republican that withdrew from consideration for Secretary of Commerce over "irresolvable conflicts on issues such as the stimulus package and the census?" Sunday, on CNN's "State of the Union" Gregg once again made an honorable decision; he claimed that the implications of Obama's ambitious agenda was "bankruptcy for the United States!"

Statements such as these are certainly an eye opener. Senator Gregg, before becoming Senator was a member of the House as well as the Governor of New Hampshire. If being governor of a state didn't give him credibility, certainly his experience as the Chairman on the Senate Budget Committee would provide ample time analyzing cost-benefit data and advising on the findings.

Maybe the current administration ought to heed his words and use caution when spending. We currently are in the midst of a great decline in GDP. Despite what some Liberals may tell you, Bush was great for our economy. For seven years we had growth (save right after 9/11...see graph.)

As a President who campaigned on the bettering of all his constituents, albeit through redistribution and heavy taxes for the rich, Obama needs to be mindful of his spending habits.

There is currently no end in sight for the contraction in GDP. Nor is there an end in sight for Federal Spending. Consumer prices are also creeping higher. As the dollar declines in value, (the dollar is declining because the Treasury is pumping trillions of newly made dollars into the economy), prices well seem to rise more. This occurrence is a phenomenon known as stagflation and it occurs when consumer prices rise due to discretionary spending simultaneously during a period of contraction in real GDP.

Stagflation is a dangerous situation and this administration, buy hyper-spending, is edging us closer and closer to it. This is the last thing the poor Obama worked so hard to satisfy with his rhetoric during the campaign needs when money's tight, or ever, for that matter.

I urge President Obama to be mindful of our money. Unlike the U.S. Government we cannot print more. Not that that's what should be done, it just seems to be the answer Obama has chosen for the exit strategy of the current economic crisis. I also urge the administration to remove inflationary pressures. I urge Obama to truthfully open the way for negotiation with his ideological counterparts; some have great ideas for improving the economy, such as Senator DeMint's "The American Option: A Jobs Plan That Works."

More Blunders

I know it's only right that the President have a sense of humor, but to what extent?
My last post discussed the blunders of the new President and some of the groups he's insulting or showing an emotional distance. Well on last night's 60 Minutes the President seemed scarily aloof with what's happening to the economy.

My thought is that this isn't your local comedy club Mr. President: we're not at Second City.
Please show some interest in your job and your constituents. Making fun of the Irish being drunken idiots and the mentally disabled Special Olympians bowling better than you is horrible, now, if that wasn't bad enough, you're minimizing the suffering of millions who've lost their jobs or homes. Many of us were not lucky enough to have signed a half million dollar book deal just days before taking the reigns of a country you seem determined to run into the ground.
Get a grip on your jokes. Learn to speak candidly without a teleprompter. Your predecessor could!

Obama Blunders

Thursday night on national television, Obama made the statement that his bad bowling was like the Special Olympics. What I want to know is when will Obama quit pretending that he is sympathetic to any groups sufferings? Last night he made fun of people with special needs.

Earlier this week, when he flubbed the introduction of Irish PM Cowen, Obama noted that the Irish better take caution, given the open bar, not to step in front of cameras without a lampshade...referring to the cliche that the Irish are nothing but drunken buffoons.
Earlier this month, the Obama administration enacted legislation that will stifle the economy, raise energy rates and enable irresponsible people to siphon your money to pay their mortgage...all this to the tune of about 2 Trillion dollars.
We're printing more money than we've ever printed. This will force the value of the dollar to all time lows. As a result, the main topic of the G-20 next month will be to remove the dollar as the worldly currency. Let's hope China doesn't call in their treasury notes because we're out of money.
In addition to the value of the dollar plummeting, GDP is shrinking and consumer prices are on the rise...what's this mean? Stagflation! This term no one wants to utter. With all this demand for our products and services will be shipped to foreign markets leaving us with less jobs, more debt, and a worthless currency to pay for it.
What can we do?
To start, we as Americans, need to contact our senators and representatives and tell them our dissatisfaction with the current administration and their new laws. We also need to become more active; join the National Tea Party Day, guaranteed there's one in your area. I'm sure there are more but the last I want to write about is education. The 2010 election is crucial to regain control of this country. Find out if your state has an election, then find out how your senator voted for the Recovery Act.

Sports or the Economy...

Yesterday, when the coach of Duke said "the economy is something that [the president] should focus on, probably more than the brackets", he wasn't kidding. "Today, the President's picks placed him in the 27th percentile", amongst all players. But which is Obama and the new Administration playing?

Obama seems to be playing games with the economy, and our money. Obama expressed anger, as much as a multi-culturalist can without ostracizing anyone, over the AIG bonuses. What he failed to do, however, was express this anger when he found out about the bonuses. According to TIME Magazine, the "Treasury staff was informed about the new bonuses in a Feb. 28 memo that the March 15 [bonus-payment] date was upcoming." I find this appalling, not the fact that AIG gave bonuses after receiving taxpayer money instead of declaring bankruptcy, but that Obama expressed no concern until realizing the backlash the American public was doling.
What kind of transparency will Obama have for the American people if his senior staff doesn't have any with him? (This is of course assuming Geithner didn't tell Obama.) What we're dealing with here isn't a government of openness, Obama doesn't care about that. What Obama wants is to fleece the American public for as long as possible until finally we're so fed up with him we actually unite against him, in a democratic way. If Obama wanted transparency, he never would have signed H.R. 1 with legislator only having a few hours to read the bill. More allotted time would have exposed Dodd's ulterior motives - keeping those happy that pad his wallet.

This administration needs some house cleaning-there are too many crooks!