President Obama says no to accountability on spending and no to Federal Law passed last year!Last week  the White House terminated Gerald Walpin, inspector general (independent auditor)of the service agency AmeriCorps.  Walpin had led an investigation of Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson of Sacramento, Calif., a former NBA player and Obama supporter. Johnson started a nonprofit education program that Walpin's office alleged had misused federal funds. In other words he misappropriated funds (embezzled) designated by Law for something else for something he wanted too do! Mr. Walpin was given the choice of quitting or being fired by the White House without any notice (Law requires 30 day notice).The firing drew criticism from Republicans and Democrats, who charged that it violated a new law passed last year to protect the independence of inspectors general by requiring 30 days notice and a full explanation to Congress of the dismissal of any IG.In addition, Neil Brodsky who was appointed with fanfare as the public watchdog over the government's multi-billion dollar bailout of the nation's financial system. But now Neil Barofsky is embroiled in a dispute with the Obama administration that delayed one recent inquiry and sparked questions about his ability to freely investigate. Separately this week, the International Trade Commission told its acting inspector general,  that her contract would not be renewed. We are spending trillions of dollars and now we are firing the inspector generals (auditors) because they are doing their jobs and not overlooking what the President wants and/or the fact that President friends are above the Law. Anyone who has been around awhile knows there is allot of waste in government and that's why we have independent agencies like the Inspector Generals. But now we are telling them to stick their heads in the sand or else. What kind of message does this send to other Inspector Generals in the government? I tell you what shut up, overlook, keep quite, or loose your job and/or career. Mr. President stop shooting the messenger its yours friends who are the bad guys!

 

Referencing people whom continue to deny the religious foundation of the great nation of the United States of America, I believe people are entitled to their own opinion but not to their selective and fabricated "facts". I digress at this time to say it use to be said that "what you do not know won't hurt you" but I say at this time its "the things you know and believe as fact but are not, these are the things that will hurt you and everyone else ". The facts are 36 of the 55 framers of the constitution in Philadelphia 1787 were members of the continental or Confederation congress - except for 5 exceptions; they were orthodox members of one of the established Christian communities. For the 39 of the 55 framers of the constitution who signed the constitution their religious membership are as follows:

 Congregationalist - 5
 Deist - 4 
  Episcopal - 15
 Lutheran - 1
 Methodist - 2
 Presbyterian - 7
 Quaker - 3
 Roman Catholic - 2

The 4 Deist that signed were the only Deists of the 55 framers of the Constitution! The colonists were familiar with deist thinking. But deism never gained a strong foothold in America. The first Great Awakening, the religious revival of the 1740s, was partially responsible for cutting short the spread of deism. In many states at the time of the Constitutional Convention, confessed deists were not allowed to hold public office. Deism was generally held in low esteem, as such laws indicate. Additionally, Deism as practiced at the time of America's founding was far different from what we find in our country today, and it certainly was not atheism. In addition, somehow the Supreme Court deemed in the 1900's that the constitution deemed there was a "separation of church and state" by a letter Thomas Jefferson (taken out of content) wrote to some church but what is ironic about that is Thomas Jefferson was not a signer of the Constitution, writer, or a participate at the Constitutional Convention. Thomas Jefferson like Samuel Adams was out of the country so why was a subsequent letter written by Jefferson so germane to the Supreme Court. In addition, the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli was a joke and taken out of content. Why was this so called treaty invented was to pay bribes to pirates. The pirates of (Muslims of Tripoli) the Barbary Coast in general and of Tripoli (in what is now called Libya) in particular were destroying U.S. shipping and holding as prisoners U.S. seamen in the 1790s. It was a serious problem and a series of negotiators were sent to try to put together an agreement to improve it. The Treaty was written by Barlow a friend of Thomas Paine both non believers in God and in the  version of the treaty read and signed by the representatives of Tripoli the famous words were not included (they are not present, as was discovered in about 1930, in the surviving Arabic version). For whatever reason certain words were put into that treaty no one knows but it is very likely that Muslims of Tripoli were in fear of a religious war from the U.S and required it in the so called treaty since they had the upper hand! During the first two presidents (Washington and Adams) we paid bribes to these pirates because America had no Navy! The treaty remained in effect for only four years, replaced, after more war with Tripoli, with another treaty that does not have the famous words included. One or two later treaties even allude to the Trinity. President Jefferson when he became President established a navy and went to war with Tripoli because the bribery and privacy had to stop and Jefferson whom had previously during Washington Administration tried to negotiate with the Muslims of Tripoli stated they could not be trusted and/or reasoned with. And from this episode came a song you remember "from the halls  ..... to the shores of Tripoli!" And if the Constitution is entirely secular then why does it say before all those signatures " in the year of our Lord" what Lord do you think these religious framers were talking about? And for those who think that the religion of America is up for grabs well read the Koran and see how different America will be under that influence!

In President Obama  speech in France called America "arrogant." I'm sure the
French loved it and President speech while in Europe stated than America is not
a Christian or Jewish Nation and  White House will not be holding any sort of
event on  The National Day of Prayer (for those church goers that voted for our
President the bible says you should be meek but not stupid) and Singed $787
billion "stimulus'" bill, which the CBO projects could cost $3.27 trillion (and
while signing said defect would be gone by the end of the 3rd year of his "first
term" sounds like he knows there will be more than one term)and  Extended
taxpayer financing to abortions abroad;  Invited taxpayer funding for
controversial embryonic stem cell research,  made it harder on doctors not to do
abortions, $410 billion earmark-packed omnibus bill;  Shutting down the
terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; Drastically reducing
funding for missile defense, despite increased threats from rogue nations such
as North Korea and Iran;  Cutting the overall defense budget to unsustainable
levels, leaving the military without critical new tools and incapable of meeting
the growing challenges we face; and Going without "a coherent approach to
homeland security." Discouraged volunteerism by signing a costly national
service bill allowing government funding and expansion of AmeriCorps;  flew air
force 1 around the Statue of Liberty causing a panic in New York  just for a
publicity photo shoot and now pushing immigration reform (amnesty) by the end of
2009 and his recent appointment to the 7th Circuit Court you know the guy (this
gentlemen was one of the most overturned judges by ironically the 7th Circuit
Court) who ruled that you could not pray to God or Jesus in government setting
but it was OK to pray to Allah.

 

When will the bailouts stop!! It is simple math and you can not continue to bailout bad behavior and if you do where does it stop. Most people in the Congress knows that Fannie Mae and Freddy Max needed reforming years ago! 12 times since 2001 Bush administration tried to regulate these agencies to no avail , SCC Counsel reported Fannie Mae had bad accounting, and the last couple of years Republicans have tried but the media and Democrats say no. and I say no to this bailout!!! The root of these problems started with the Carter administration and went into overdrive with Clinton. Attorney General Reno threaten to sue financial institutions that were redlining and made these institutions make loans to people that are not financially worthy or capable to make these payments and then when the sub-prime loans adjustments went in effect it was no way to pay the piper. And what about the values of homes going up, and up, and up - you do not have to be a brain surgeon to figure that this could not keep going. And with the two above mention quasi-government entities pushing the sub-prime mortgages what were the other financial institutes going to do to stay in business-yes jump in the sub-prime mortgages with both feet. Then there is the political contributions of these agencies (Senator Dodd and Reprenstative Franks) and don't forget Senator Obama.

 

The there's the areas hardes hit by  foreclosure wave which is no  coincidence -- Loudoun County, Va., California's Inland Empire, Stockton and San Joaquin Valley, and Las Vegas and Phoenix, for starters -- also happen to be some of the nation's largest illegal alien sanctuaries. Half of the mortgages to Hispanics are subprime (the accursed species of loan to borrowers with the shadiest credit histories). A quarter of all those subprime loans are in default and foreclosure.

Regional reports across the country have decried the subprime meltdown's impact on illegal immigrant "victims." A July report showed that in seven of the 10 metro areas with the highest foreclosure rates, Hispanics represented at least one-third of the population; in two of those areas -- Merced and Salinas-Monterey, Calif. -- Hispanics comprised half the population. The amnesty-promoting National Council of La Raza and its Development Fund have received millions in federal funds to "counsel" their constituents on obtaining mortgages with little to no money down; the group almost succeeded in attaching a $10-million earmark for itself in one of the housing bills past this spring.

 The top banks clamoring for their handouts as their profits plummet, led by Wachovia and Bank of America, launched aggressive campaigns to woo illegal alien homebuyers. The quasi-governmental Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority jumped in to guarantee home loans to illegal immigrants. The Washington Post noted, almost as an afterthought in a 2005 report: "Hispanics, the nation's fastest-growing major ethnic or racial group, have been courted aggressively by real estate agents, mortgage brokers and programs for first-time buyers that offer help with closing costs. Ads proclaim: "Sin verificacion de ingresos! Sin verificacion de documento!" -- which loosely translates as, 'Income tax forms are not required, nor are immigration papers.'"

In addition, fraudsters have engaged in massive house-flipping rings using illegal aliens as straw buyers. Among many examples cited by the FBI: a conspiracy in Las Vegas involving a former Nevada First Residential Mortgage Company branch manager who directed loan officers and processors in the origination of 233 fraudulent Federal Housing Authority loans valued at over $25 million. The defrauders manufactured and submitted false employment and income documentation for borrowers; most were illegal immigrants from Mexico. To date, the FBI reported, "Fifty-eight loans with a total value of $6.2 million have gone into default, with a loss to the Housing and Urban Development Department of over $1.9 million."  Then there are other contributiors organizations supposely social justice organizations (Acorn, National Community Reinvestment Coalition  Organization ) there job to protest and track financial institiutes and make sure they are making loans to minorities no matter the financial risk of the individuals! These organizations get grants from the federal government to do this!!!

When liberalism causes a problem, by all means, don't allow the natural equalizer of the free market to cure it. Insist on more government intervention under the theory that the problem is a result of too little government. It's kind of reminiscent of the Marxist promise of the withering away of the state, is it not? Just give us totalitarian control and we'll eventually unshackle the proletariat from government bondage. Right. There's also a bridge to the Kremlin they'd like to sell you.

 When we strip away all the complexity, we discover that social planning largely led to this debacle. Government politicians and bureaucrats forced lending institutions to make un-creditworthy loans and helped create unnatural demand in the housing market by priming the pump on bad loans. This created an unnatural price bubble in real estate, which was securing these ill-advised loans. If Congress bailout this problem , it will be at the prohibitive price of even more government intermeddling. They've already said they want to subsidize — rather than demand accountability from — homeowners for their irresponsible loans. They want to demonize and scapegoat capitalism and Wall Street, which didn't cause this crisis, with further regulations.

 

One major lesson from this is the affirmation of the market principle that government does not create prosperity — only temporary bubbles that must go pop. When the bubble inevitably burst, the mortgages secured by the artificially inflated real estate plummeted in value, which left us with an epidemic of grossly under-secured loans.

 

It's so bad that even conservatives are considering supporting an unprecedented plan approaching a trillion dollars to "bail out" the financial industry — not as a sop to Wall Street or corporate fat cats, but to prevent a cascading effect that some financial gurus believe could lead to a depression.

 

 

 

If there is a bailout , it will be at the prohibitive price of even more government intermeddling. They've already said they want to subsidize — rather than demand accountability from — homeowners for their irresponsible loans. They want to demonize and scapegoat capitalism and Wall Street, which didn't cause this crisis, with further regulations.

 

One major lesson from this is the affirmation of the market principle that government does not create prosperity — only temporary bubbles that must go pop.

 

The President speech was a very pleasant surprise, a strong effort, especially the foreign policy stuff which actually did put the Iraq war in context. The President in spite of six years in Washington is still trying to work with the Democrats what perseverance. The president also benefited from Senator Webb's supremely lame, divisive and petty response. Senator Webb says we need a new direction but I was not sure if he was talking about the war on terror or the Democratic Party since before the speech he said his comments would be directed at Democratic Party members! There were a lot of recycled lines from his campaign stump. He claimed that a majority of the military was against the war now (source?). He said we shouldn't have a precipitous withdrawal and then he said we need to get out in short order. So what is the Democrats plan again oh ya UN!