Mortgage Giants Leave Legal Bills to the Taxpayers

We are paying the legal fees of the executives that lied about the solvency of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

And, this after we the tax payers bailed them out for their politically pressured loan decisions.

nY Times article

Since the government took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, taxpayers have spent more than $160 million defending the mortgage finance companies and their former top executives in civil lawsuits accusing them of fraud. The cost was a closely guarded secret until last week, when the companies and their regulator produced an accounting at the request of Congress.....

Pure corruption... at our expense.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The REAL World

The President's economic "policies" are being soundly rejected in America... and now... the rest of the world.

Boston Globe

Obama’s economic view is rejected on world stage

Free trade deal with South Korea eludes president

SEOUL — President Obama’s hopes of emerging from his Asia trip with the twin victories of a free trade agreement with South Korea and a unified approach to spurring global economic growth ran into resistance on all fronts yesterday, putting Obama at odds with his key allies and largest trading partners.....

Do you think political progressives including the White House will be listening?

Not a chance.

They are going to push ahead with their Nirvana dreamworld of "justice"... and in the process make their fairy tale to be seen for what it is... a fairy tale.

Ummmm.... Mr. President.... welcome to the... real world.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Obama's New Stimulus Won't Stimulate

I could not say it better than this.

By Investor's Business Daily

Leadership: The Obama administration's latest idea for "stimulating" the economy is - you guessed it - more spending.

Is this just a campaign ploy, or is the White House ruining the economy on purpose?

The president's latest plan calls for another $50 billion in stimulus for infrastructure. As the White House puts it, this represents a "bold vision for renewing and expanding our transportation infrastructure - in a plan that combines a long-term vision for the future with new investments."

But why in the world do we need another stimulus when we're not even close to exhausting the funds allocated for the last one?

According to Darrell Issa, ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, $275 billion of the initial $787 billion cost of that stimulus remains unspent. And of the $512 billion that has been spent, just $18.5 billion - or less than 7% - has been paid out by the Transportation Department, the main government infrastructure provider.

This is strange, since the stimulus was originally sold to us as a way to create "shovel-ready" jobs on infrastructure. Instead, much of the money was drained away for financially strapped states to keep their public unions and Medicaid programs afloat.

Here's what President Obama said about the stimulus bill he signed into law Feb. 17, 2009:

"Because of this investment, nearly 400,000 men and women will go to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, repairing our faulty dams and levees, bringing critical broadband connections to businesses and homes in nearly every community in America, upgrading mass transit, building high-speed rail lines that will improve travel and commerce throughout our nation."

Sounded great at the time, but few, if any, of those things got done. Moreover, since the recession began, federal employment has jumped by 10%, or nearly 200,000 positions, while private-sector employment has plunged 7%, or 7.8 million jobs. So who really benefited from the stimulus? Big Government and its unions.

The stimulus did do one thing, however: It set the stage for massive spending and an unprecedented expansion of the role of the U.S. government in the American economy. This, in retrospect, appears to be the real aim of the Democratic stimulus - not jobs or infrastructure or any other real-world accomplishment.

Even as the president released his latest stimulus ideas, the Congressional Budget Office quietly issued its own estimate for spending over the next 10 years. We were struck by the sheer size of it: $44.5 trillion from 2010 to 2020 - an 82% jump from $24.5 trillion spent in the last decade.

That, in a nutshell, is the real problem - not too little stimulus, but too much spending. Over 10 years, the CBO sees deficits of $6.25 trillion. And to keep the projection that low, the agency had to pretend the Bush tax cuts all expire, that Congress does nothing about fixing the Alternative Minimum Tax, that Social Security and Medicare are allowed to fester, and that after all this stimulus is done, "future annual appropriations will be kept constant in real (inflation-adjusted) terms."

Not one of those things is likely to happen.

A more realistic appraisal of the deficit comes from the Concord Coalition, which expects deficits more than twice as large - $15 trillion over 10 years, or $1.5 trillion a year on average. That could push U.S. publicly held debt from last year's level of $7.5 trillion, or 53% of GDP, to as much as $25.1 trillion, or 108% of GDP, in 2020.

These numbers may not mean much now, but they will soon: Such abrupt changes mark an economy careening towards bankruptcy. Piling on more spending now isn't just unwise policy, it's a form of fiscal insanity.

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Security in my days

Hezekiah... boasting to his enemy of his and his nations great wealth... in fact laid the marker for his nation's defeat... and his children's.

Hezekiah's response? Read it and see if it sounds familiar.

"Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, "Hear the word of the LORD of hosts: Behold, the days are coming, when all that is in your house, and that which your fathers have stored up till this day, shall be carried to Babylon. Nothing shall be left, says the LORD. And some of your own sons, who will come from you, whom you will father, shall be taken away, and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon." Then said Hezekiah to Isaiah, "The word of the LORD that you have spoken is good." For he thought, "There will be peace and security in my days."
Isaiah 39:5-8 (ESV)

This is so much like reading today's political news... "We are rich! We can do what we want! We have so much money that we can invent money! (And our children will pay the price... just so we can live the good life today.)

This is the stimulus.

This is madness.

This is a failing society.

We must be prepared to pick up the pieces.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Even Barney Frank has enough horse sense to know that one needs to be careful about predicting the future.




The HILL article

Frank: Obama admin 'dumb' to predict no higher than 8% unemployment

It was "dumb" for President Obama and his aides to promise that unemployment would not surpass 8 percent if the stimulus act passed, a top House Democrat said Tuesday.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, called into question the wisdom of projections issued by the Obama administration during the congressional fight over the stimulus bill that argued it would prevent higher levels of joblessness.

"President Obama, whom I greatly admire ... when the economic recovery bill — we're supposed to call it the 'recovery bill,' not the 'stimulus' bill; that's what the focus groups tell us — he predicted or his aides predicted at the time that if it passed, unemployment would get under 8 percent," Frank said Tuesday evening during an appearance on the Fox Business Network. "That was a dumb thing to do.".....

The reality is that this administration made a lot of promises... then did the opposite after being elected according to the promises made.

By, by.

Barney knows.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Balancing the Budget... or... republicans are actually contemplating another shot at a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution.

This should send shock-waves through Progressive Ville.

The Hill

Republicans see balanced budget amendment as potent campaign weapon

Senate Republicans are planning a new push for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution when lawmakers return to Washington after the August recess.

GOP Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), John McCain (Ariz.) and Tom Coburn (Okla.) will lead the charge in the fall, when Democrats plan to debate raising taxes on families that earn more than $250,000 a year.

It’s the latest campaign in a crusade that conservatives have waged for two decades.

They believe the proposal, which came within one vote of passing Congress in 1995, will gain new political traction in the weeks before the election, when federal deficits are a chief concern of many voters.

“We’ll bring that back between now and the election,” DeMint, chairman of the Senate Republican Steering Committee, told The Hill.

In February, the lawmakers introduced a resolution to establish a balanced budget amendment; DeMint reintroduced it last week so that he could bring it straight to the floor after the recess.

“In the last week there’s been a lot of movement in terms of Republican senators saying we need to press this issue,” said a Senate GOP aide.

The amendment would bar the federal government from spending more than it collects in revenues each year. It would also require a two-thirds majority vote in each chamber to raise taxes.....

Are you required to balance your budget at home?

xtnyoda, shalomed

I really didn't think I would see an opinion published on the Politico Opinion page like this one... esp. about the economic policies of the current administration.

Things must be worst than we even realize.

Obama, Reagan and the economy

It’s easy to understand why President Barack Obama’s friends don’t want to acknowledge that July represents 17 months since Congress passed the $787 billion economic stimulus bill — the president’s signature measure to jump-start the economy and fight unemployment.

Obama says the economy is headed in the right direction; jobs are being created, not lost, and he is doing everything possible to revive the “worst economy since the Great Depression.” Most of the national press has been remarkably accepting of this narrative — even if the president has been vague, at best, about when we might finally see an uptick in economic growth and job creation.

But in another economic time, President Ronald Reagan’s economic recovery program took 17 months to take hold. It took from the time Congress passed his tax cuts, in August 1981, until the recession he inherited finally ended in January 1983.

Unemployment hit a high of 10.8 percent in December 1982. But then economic growth spiked, and the unemployment rate began a long, steady decline throughout the 1980s. It was obvious the program was working when people stopped calling it “Reaganomics.”

Tax cuts were a part of Reagan’s effort to cut the size and scope of government to fight economic stagnation. “Government is not the solution,” Reagan said in his remarkably clear inaugural address. “It is the problem.”

In addition to tax cuts, Reagan reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. He believed that government should give individuals and businesses the proper incentives to grow and expand and not inhibit the private sector with high taxes and cumbersome regulations.

Reagan faced obstacles that Obama did not. The House he had to work with was always controlled by Democrats. More ominously, inflation was running at double-digit rates, and it took nearly a year for the Federal Reserve to squeeze those pressures out of the system.

Regardless, in the end, Reagan’s program worked. The turnaround began 17 months later.

Fast-forward to today. The Obama administration says that government-directed investment, via huge spending increases, can revive the economy. It’s now stimulus plus 17. Is there a turnaround in sight?

Apparently not. Obama’s own budget estimates, released just last week, project trillion-dollar deficits, anemic economic growth coming out of a recession and unemployment near 9 percent for 2011 and 8 percent for 2012.

You have to go back to the 1930s to find a period in which unemployment has been so high for so long. This economic record would make former President Jimmy Carter blush.

Yet Obama continues to get a pass on his version of recent economic events. He has said that he inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression. He didn’t. The economies inherited by both President Gerald Ford in 1974 and Reagan in 1981 were far worse.

Obama has said the stimulus has saved 3 million jobs. It hasn’t. We have nearly that many fewer jobs than before the stimulus was passed in February 2009, and the unemployment rate is 1½ percentage points higher than what he claimed would be the high point once his program was enacted.

Obama has said he is doing all he can to revive the economy. Actually, he’s doing too much. The economic uncertainty that his “historic” health care and budget bills have created is doing more to hold back economic growth than anything else. Companies are hoarding cash rather than invest in Obama’s uncertain economic climate.

As a result, the recovery is anemic by historic standards.

So we have two historic presidents. Both inherited bad economies. One cut spending and taxes, and then, 17 months later, the economy boomed. The other increased taxes and spending. It’s now 17 months later.

Mr. President, we’re waiting.

Pretty strong stuff... esp. coming from Politico.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Today the President had this to say about the republicans driving skills while stumping in Kansas City...

TIME article

"These folks drove the economy into a ditch, and they want the keys back. (Applause.) And you got to say the same thing to them that you say to your teenager: You can't have the keys back because you don't know how to drive yet. (Applause.) You can't have the keys. (Applause.) You can't have them. Maybe you take a remedial course. (Laughter.) I'll take you out to the parking lot and you can drive in circles. (Laughter.) But we're not going to let you out on the open road. You can't drive. (Laughter.)"

So I would offer a simple question to the President... "Which is worst Sir... driving a car into a ditch... or driving it full speed over a cliff?"

This congress and White House has not just shoved the car over the cliff... as in the picture above... they have rammed it over with the engine thrust into after-burner mode.

I'd take the ditch any day.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Alright... is this administration and congress just plain stupid... or are they driving an agenda?

Reuters story

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month, the Treasury Department said on Wednesday.

It was more than twice the $40-billion deficit that Wall Street economists surveyed by Reuters had forecast and was striking since April marks the filing deadline for individual income taxes that are the main source of government revenue....

The government has now posted 19 consecutive monthly budget deficits, the longest string of shortfalls on record....

.... The U.S. full-year deficit this year is projected at $1.5 trillion on top of a $1.4 trillion shortfall last year.

It's one or the other.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The fedearal government is going to spend $31,406 dollars per household this year...

...yet the federal government is only going to actually collect $13,130 average per household during the same time... so... just where do you think that the other $18 or so thousand is going to come from?

Oh... it's going to come from our children.... and keep in mind this only represents the debt being passed on for 1 (one) year... to those coming after us.

Tampabay opinion

Washington will spend $31,406 per household this year

Taxpayers filing their 1040s are likely wondering just where all their hard-earned tax dollars are going, anyway. • Washington will spend $31,406 per household in 2010 — the highest level in American history (adjusted for inflation). It will collect $18,276 per household in taxes. The remaining $13,130 represents this year's staggering budget deficit per household, which, along with all prior government debt, will be dumped in the laps of our children....

Social Security/Medicare: $9,949.
Defense: $6,071.
Antipoverty programs: $5,466.
Unemployment benefits: $1,640.
Interest on the federal debt: $1,585.
Veterans' benefits: $1,052.
Education: $914.
Highways/mass transit: $613.
Health research/regulation: $550.
Mortgage Credit: $470....

The programs listed above cover $29,328 per household. The remaining $2,078 is allocated to all other federal programs, including justice, international affairs, natural resources, the environment, regional development, farm subsidies, social services, space exploration, air transportation and energy.

Taxpayers — and the next generation that will be paying nearly half of the bill — must decide for themselves if they're getting their money's worth.

Our government is not only spending today's resources... but spending tomorrow's resources... today.

And they want to accuse conservatives as being.... greedy?

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Bones at David Bellavia is making some astute deductions concerning the current "economic stimulus" situation going on in America... you'll want to follow the link to read his full treatment.

Two of Closest Obama Advisor Issue Dire Warnings on Economy

Two of the Obama Administrations closest financial allies, Fed. Chair Ben Bernanke and former Chair Paul Volker have given stern warnings to the Obama Administration on the federal debt.

for all intent and purposes they are siding with advise emitted from conservative blogs for years, the debt is unsustainable. My question to them is where were they a few weeks ago when this administration claimed the new health care entitlement was ‘deficit neutral’.

Washington Post

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke warned Wednesday that Americans may have to accept higher taxes or changes in cherished entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security if the nation is to avoid staggering budget deficits that threaten to choke off economic growth.

“These choices are difficult, and it always seems easier to put them off — until the day they cannot be put off anymore,” Bernanke said in a speech. “But unless we as a nation demonstrate a strong commitment to fiscal responsibility, in the longer run we will have neither financial stability nor healthy economic growth.”…

The health-care bill signed by President Obama last month has further stoked the national debate over government entitlement programs, though the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has projected that the legislation would actually reduce future deficits….

But what has now been disclosed is that in order for this bill to ‘reduce future deficits’ and make the CBO’s numbers work they had to throw in student loans and guarantee that Medicare would be cut by 20%. They have already reneged on the cut and are rumored to have a ‘doc fix’ in the works. This became obvious when they prevented the cuts from going into effect before their spring recess. Make no mistake, if the ‘doc fix’ is in, and it almost certainly is, the CBO numbers are out.

Then there is Volker’s warning and suggestion:

…On Tuesday, White House adviser Paul A. Volcker spoke in favor of higher taxes, telling an audience at a New York Historical Society event that the nation may have to consider a European-style sales tax, known as a value-added tax, to close the persistent budget gap. In answer to a question, Volcker said a VAT “was not as toxic an idea” as it has been in the past, according to Reuters. “If at the end of the day we need to raise taxes, we should raise taxes,” he added

One of the Presidents most trusted economic advisors does not chose to cut the budget and programs in a fiscal responsible manner, but rather raising taxes, in a European kind of way.....

To which xtnyoda responded:

The “progressives” are making us a nation of slaves… and they are very well aware of what they are doing… it is by design.

“The borrower is a slave to the lender.” (Proverbs 22:7 HCSB)

…. and they don’t care if one is red, yellow, black, or white…

One day folks are going to wake up and realize that this “redistribution of wealth” is actually a “subversion into slavery.”

For the entire nation.

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The picture is of "Corky the Pig"... a piggy bank from the 50's. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, has some tough words for our nation's "piggy banks" that were "too big to fail."

Bloomberg news report

Bernanke Says Large Bank Bailouts ‘Unconscionable,’ Must End

By Steve Matthews and Phil Mattingly

March 21 (Bloomberg) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said government bailouts of big financial companies are “unconscionable” and must be ended as part of a regulatory overhaul following the worst financial crisis since the 1930s.

“It is unconscionable that the fate of the world economy should be so closely tied to the fortunes of a relatively small number of giant financial firms,” Bernanke said yesterday in a speech in Orlando, Florida. “If we achieve nothing else in the wake of the crisis, we must ensure that we never again face such a situation.” .....

Our government "bailed out" a number of "big" businesses... but not very many of the "little people" were bailed out... most have been "left-out to dry."

This is part of the reason for the skepticism toward our government right now... big business was bailed out from their poor business practices... and the rest of us?

I thought the left was all about the little man and against the power of big business?

Mr. Bernanke wants to scale down the protections of the big banks... maybe they will be a little more cautious... like Cordy... but I'm probably not going to hold my breath.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Somehow I missed this in the news last week... the white house has decided that there will be no such thing as drilling for oil off our shores as long as Obama is president.

President Bush had it where the drilling was to begin last July... that was first stalled... now this official release...

... now just what does the president mean when he talks about needing to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?

... Oh... I think I might have an idea... how about our government doing all it can to stimulate and help start "green jobs" and that entire industry... all the while restricting other areas of industry that would be in competition with green industry?

The Washington Examiner

The Obama Moratorium: No offshore drilling while he’s in office

The Obama administration’s six-month delay in approving new offshore drilling leases in federal waters will become a new three-year ban, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar quietly told reporters last Friday. Which means that no new oil and gas leases will be approved during President Obama’s term even though two –thirds of the American public supports such activity, according to a December 2009 Rasmussen poll.

Sixty percent also believe that gas and oil prices will drop if the government allows offshore drilling, opening up an estimate 14 billion barrels of oil and 55 trillion cubic feet of natural gas

On July 14, 2008 President George W. Bush lifted an executive ban on Outer Continental Shelf leasing. On October 1, 2008, in a bipartisan agreement, Congress lifted another longstanding ban on new oil and gas leasing in the OCS.

Drilling was supposed to begin this July. But Salazar said he intends to discard the 2010-2015 lease plan developed by the Bush administration in favor of a new plan that won’t even go into effect until 2012.

“Secretary Salazar has finally confirmed what had long been feared – that the Obama Administration has no intention of opening up new areas for offshore drilling during his four-years in office,” said Rep. Doc Hastings, the ranking Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee.

So for the next three years and probably more, trillions of dollars in domestic energy assets will remain untouched while billions of dollars more are spent on foreign oil.

Of course the ones that are going to suffer the most as the price of fuel continues to rise are the "little people" that the progressives present themselves as defending... when in reality... these progressive policies are the most harmful to the little people.

But... the little people "believe" that the progressives have them in their concerns... and yes they are in their concerns... concerned how they can get every last speck of dust from their desperate scalps.

And they call it social justice.

There is a pay-day coming... Yahweh will see to it.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Thomas Jefferson understood many things in a prophetic way, and one of the most was in the area of spending in the name of 'funding' what has not yet been earned today... exactly what our government is doing in unprecedented and record amounts.

... and this isn't one of those e-mail things... where I get the quote is actually from the Library of Congress and the quote is in the closing remarks by Jefferson in a Letter written to John Taylor..

Library of Congress
Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, May 28, 1816

"I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."

I think it should be pretty obvious that Jefferson would have a fit of indignation at the corruption and evil being perpetrated on hard working Americans in the name of 'compassion' and 'moral responsibility' to fund the progressive's agenda of paying for their experimental projects today... on the tax burden of tomorrow.

This post mainly to show that we are being driven further and further away from the reality of fiscal responsibility into a cesspool of unbridled greed and corruption under the false pretense of moral responsibility.

Truth is being turned upside down... and will land with a crash on top of the heads of every American... on some tomorrow.

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Matthew Continetti, of the Weekly Standard, has put together a few quotes from "progressive liberals" demonstrating for all we neanderthal, dimwitted conservatives that our nation's problems are all our fault... and how according to them democracy has outlived it's time.

Weekly Stnadard

Blame Americans First... Democrats lose patience with democracy.

What’s the clearest sign the Obama agenda is in trouble? That’s easy: the string of jeremiads in the pages of the New York Times, Washington Post, and other outlets of fashionable opinion. Unable to tout the administration’s successes, and worried about Republican ascendancy, liberals have assigned responsibility for the mess they’re in neither to their program nor to their methods but to larger, structural faults in American politics and society. Beginning with you.

You aren’t too bright, for one thing. After all, opines Jacob Weisberg in Newsweek, the “biggest culprit” behind “our political paralysis” is the “childishness, ignorance, and growing incoherence of the public at large.” You simply do not know what’s good for you. “On many issues these days,” writes the Washington Post’s Steven Pearlstein, “the American people are badly confused.” “The people may have spoken,” writes the New -Yorker’s James Surowiecki. “It’s just not clear that they’re making any sense.” In a blog post titled “Too Dumb to Thrive,” Time magazine’s Joe Klein cuts to the chase: “It is very difficult to thrive in an increasingly competitive world if you’re a nation of dodos.”

... And that’s the problem, says Kurt Andersen in New York magazine. “American democracy has gotten way too democratic.” The “thoughtful, educated, well-off, well-regarded gentlemen” who designed our Constitution “wanted a government run by an American elite like themselves.” But the “populist impulse” abroad in the land today has scared legislators into obeying the people’s demands.

It was not always thus. “In the old days,” Andersen laments, “the elite media really did control the national political discourse” and “presidents and congressional leaders could pretty well manage the policy conversations” without the public trying to butt in. But there’s no going back now; “maybe our republic’s constitutional operating system simply can’t scale up to deal satisfactorily with a heterogenous population of 310 million.”....

.... In a Huffington Post blog, Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, writes that special interests are “using the filibuster to stop legislation that would benefit the little guy,” whether the little guy likes it or not.

If I could speak to these "progressives" I would point out to them that THEY are the problem... THEY are in the minority... THEY are the very ones standing in the way of true economic and social progress in this nation.

They are going to learn just how much THEY are in the minority this coming November when America votes... and just like they are quoted... they would LOVE to stop the vote in November... it's the only way they can "hide the decline" in their elected numbers.

xtnyoda, shalomed

H/T Kathleen McKinley!

Huffington Post is calling for Tim Geithner's head on a platter...

... and if you read all the way to the last line... the bottom reason for throwing Timmie boy under the bus is to... save the president... as if Timmy boy wasn't taking orders...

Huffington Post

Tim Geithner Must Go

The latest revelations about the New York Fed's actions in the AIG bailout make one thing clear: Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner must go.

Geithner must go not just because of the emails showing that his New York Fed ordered AIG to keep details of the bailout secret, but because of many other decisions and policies he has championed in the past two years.

These decisions and policies have consistently put the interests of Wall Street ahead of the interests of the taxpayer, and they have undermined the public's confidence in the government at a time when the country needs it the most....

For five reasons, Geithner must go:

* Geithner was directly responsible for the most appalling corporate bailout in U.S. history, in which tens of billions of taxpayer dollars were secretly funneled to some of the richest corporations in the world. The terms of this bailout, and the associated cloak of secrecy under which it was conducted (the details of which continue to leak out) have hurt the public's confidence in the government.

* Geithner's ongoing decision to save banks at any cost was predicated on the theory that this would keep the banks lending. This policy has failed: The banks have not continued to lend. What the banks HAVE done is coin billions of dollars of profits risk-free at taxpayer expense, fueling even more public outrage.

* Geithner's policy of "too big to fail" has created a banking system whose bets are guaranteed by the US taxpayer, and it has distorted lending and market forces across the entire economy. This policy, which has now been all but written into the Constitution, is grossly unfair. Big banks can do whatever they want with no concern about the consequences; small banks have to hunker down or they'll get taken over and shut down.

* Geithner's role in the AIG bailout, which the current administration bears no responsibility for, continues to destroy confidence in his current boss, President Barack Obama. If AIG stays in the headlines, and Geithner does not accept responsibility for what happened. Obama's agenda and influence will continue to suffer.

* Geithner's consistent decision to put Wall Street first has helped fuel a populist rage that will make it very difficult for the government to do anything more to help the financial system. If the recovery continues, such help might never become necessary. If it falters, however, Geithner's policies will have severely curtailed the government's ability to do anything about it.

.... contrary to the revisionist history now being promulgated, these actions were not the only way out. They were grossly unfair to taxpayers, and they have undermined public confidence in the government -- and our current President -- at a time when the country needs it most.

At least the 'left' is starting to realize and admit that they have been taken in by... supported and defended... a total culture of corruption in Washington... whose real objective has been to funnel tax payer money to big banking lards... in the name of... compassion.

Perhaps this raping of the complicit MSM by the 'left' politicians... is finally starting to feel like rape... they've been drowning in "victim shock" and are starting to come out of the stupor...

It is going to be painful... but it has begun.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Most Americans wouldn't know a prophet if they saw one... and of course that is common to the human condition in general... because prophets are usually not welcomed individuals...

... but sooner or later society usually is forced to deal with them... as is the swelling case with Ron Paul.

LA Times article

Ron Paul's ideas no longer fringe

For three decades, Texas congressman and former presidential candidate Ron Paul's extreme brand of libertarian economics consigned him to the far fringes even among conservatives. Not a few times, his views put him on the losing end of 434-1 votes on Capitol Hill.

No longer. With the economy still struggling and political divisions deepening, Paul's ideas not only are gaining a wider audience but also are helping to shape a potentially historic battle over economic policy -- a struggle that will affect everything including jobs, growth and the nation's place in the global economy.

Already, Paul's long-derided proposal to give Congress supervisory power over the traditionally independent Federal Reserve appears to be on its way to becoming law.

His warnings on deficits and inflation are now Republican mantras....

Can you feel the drum-beat of the Church waking... and shaking herself?

Are you awake? Admitted... waking up is often painful and difficult.

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Speaking of ruling by a culture of crisis... how about Washington taking a look at a genuine crisis that has more real potential to damage this nation than all the contrived global crisis' the administration is touting...

... and the sick irony is that this administration is the very ones that are pushing and creating our real crisis.

USA Today

U.S. in fiscal peril with $12.1 trillion debt... DEBT CEILING HEADS HIGHER

The nation's debt limit -- the amount it is permitted to borrow -- has nearly doubled since 2002. Congress is on the verge of passing a $290 billion increase, enough for just the next couple of months.

Date....... Debt limit
June 2002 $6.4 trillion
May 2003 $7.4 trillion
November 2004 $8.2 trillion
March 2006 $9 trillion
September 2007 $9.8 trillion
July 2008 $10.6 trillion
October 2008 $11.3 trillion
February 2009 $12.1 trillion

WASHINGTON — After $787 billion in stimulus spending and $700 billion in bank bailouts, 2010 is fast shaping up to be the year of the federal budget diet.

Bipartisan support is growing in Congress for action to stabilize the nation's bulging debt, which is now $12.1 trillion....

....The public debt is the amount owed to individual investors, including foreign countries, but excluding money the government owes to its own trust funds. It has soared from $5.8 trillion to $7.6 trillion this year alone — and is more than half the size of the nation's economy for the first time since 1956.

Without action to reduce that unprecedented rise in red ink, lawmakers and experts say, Washington risks a fiscal crisis.... "This is a defining moment for this chamber, for this Congress, for this administration," said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who came to Washington in 1986 when the deficit and debt were one-sixth their current size. "It is imperative that we find a way to deal with this debt threat."

....Greenspan... added his authoritative voice to the cause last week... "The challenge to contain this threat is more urgent than at any time in our history... Our nation has never before had to confront so formidable a fiscal crisis as is now visible just over the horizon.".....

The only real question remaining is... is congress and the white house just... ignorant... or are they doing this on purpose? And if they are doing this on purpose... why?

Friends... this is spawning our 3rd Great Awakening... which we are in the middle of. The Church is waking up and is going to eventually say... we will no longer be slaves to the world system of debt believing.

The Church is going to shake herself... free herself... and it will heal our land.

Consider and ponder.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Here is a democrat calling for the sacking of Geithner and outright accusing Geithner of illegally funneling massive amounts of American's "Bail Out" bucks to provide HUGE bonuses at Goldman Sachs for certain Wall Street Executives.

This administration is rife with corruption and justly deserves the tag "Culture of Corruption." We've never seen anything like this kind of corruption that Obama has brought into our nation's political life... into our nation period.

video site with quotes

Rep. Peter DeFazio called for the firing of President Barack Obama's top two economic aides on Wednesday, accusing them of pursuing a recovery plan skewed too heavily in Wall Street's favor.

The Oregon Democrat told MSNBC's Ed Schultz that he was dismayed with the administration's lack of focus on job creation. He said it was time to dismiss both White House economic adviser Larry Summers and Treasury Secretary "Timmy Geithner."

"We think it is time, maybe, that we turn our focus to Main Street -- we reclaim some of the unspent [TARP] funds, we reclaim some of the funds that are being paid back, which will not be paid back in full, and we use it to put people back to work. Rebuilding America's infrastructure is a tried and true way to put people back to work," said DeFazio.

"Unfortunately, the President has an adviser from Wall Street, Larry Summers, and a Treasury Secretary from Wall Street, Timmy Geithner, who don't like that idea," he added. "They want to keep the TARP money either to continue to bail out Wall Street...or to pay down the deficit. That's absurd."

Asked specifically whether Geithner should stay in his job, DeFazio replied: "No.

"Especially if you look back at the AIG scandal," he said, "and Goldman and others who got their bets paid off in full...with taxpayer money through AIG. We channeled the money through them. Geithner would not answer my question when I said, 'Were those naked credit default swaps by Goldman or were they a counterparty?' He would not answer that question."

DeFazio said that there is a growing consensus among the Congressional Progressive Caucus that Geithner needs to be removed. He added that some lawmakers were "considering questions regarding him and other economic advisers" -- though a petition calling for the Treasury Secretary's removal had not been drafted, he said.

"[Obama] is being failed by his economic team," DeFazio concluded. "We may have to sacrifice just two more jobs to get millions back for Americans."

Neither the White House or the Treasury Department immediately returned a request for comment.

There are more who are getting ready to take one for the White House...

xtnyoda, shalomed

Crazy Math coming out of bureaucrats across our nation! Like the following lady who thinks that a 1.84% pay increase because of the tax stimulus money her "federally-funded-to-begin-with" agency received... not only saved the jobs of the 508 people who already work there... but added an additional 327 jobs! I kid you not!

AP report

STIMULUS WATCH: Salary raise counted as saved job

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's economic recovery program saved 935 jobs at the Southwest Georgia Community Action Council, an impressive success story for the stimulus plan. Trouble is, only 508 people work there.

The Georgia nonprofit's inflated job count is among persisting errors in the government's latest effort to measure the effect of the $787 billion stimulus plan despite White House promises last week that the new data would undergo an "extensive review" to root out errors discovered in an earlier report....

...At Southwest Georgia Community Action Council in Moultrie, Ga., director Myrtis Mulkey-Ndawula said she followed the guidelines the Obama administration provided. She said she multiplied the 508 employees by 1.84 — the percentage pay raise they received — and came up with 935 jobs saved.

"I would say it's confusing at best," she said. "But we followed the instructions we were given."...

....More than 250 other community agencies in the U.S. similarly reported saving jobs when using the money to give pay raises, to pay for training and continuing education, to extend employee work hours or to buy equipment, according to their spending reports.....

.... So.... all these "saved" jobs are government jobs that already exist and paid for by our tax dollars to begin with...

...and these people think they can actually run real-time businesses in the real world?

I'd like to see them make this kind of growth report to an actual business board of directors.

xtnyoda, shalomed