Obama the Liar: Tax The Rich

Wow, are we really a nation of morons?  When Obama speaks, he does it as if his speech writers have given him the next historical document and the TV cameras on recording gold.

This week, we were informed by "our" president that he's going to "tax the rich".  He then proceeds to say that the aforementioned "rich" are people making more than $250k per year.  Of course the next day he alters that and now the "rich" are people making more than $208k per year.

Why is this a lie?  Because those people are not "The Rich" by any stretch of the word.  Had he said the rich were those making $1million or more per year, he would have been somewhat honest.  However, his $208k or $250k (depending on the day) targets a large demographic of individuals and business that are GOOD for our economy and provide more benefits than the additional tax burden will achieve.

The only things that saves Obama in the eyes of the common voter would be the fact that more people do not make $208k per year than do.  He doesn't have to be honest or fair to the people he is taxing, he just needs to make more friends than enemies.

Obama's lie is that rather than playing Robin Hood and robbing the rich and giving it to the poor, he's attacking the PRODUCERS in our society, leaving the real "Rich" out of harms way, and pandering to the poor.  But, until he takes it out on your demographic, sleep easy and be glad that somebody else is shouldering the burden for you.

The Irresponsible Home Buyers!!!!

One of the most annoying things I keep hearing on the news is the notion that the mortgage industry problem is caused by "irresponsible home buyers" that for whatever reason bought homes that they knew that they couldn't afford.

My biggest issue with this is the insinuation that the problem was caused by millions of irresponsible people that somehow had the power to approve their own loans.  How is it that the media, including FoxNews is neglecting to acknowledge that BANKS decide which loans get approved and which get denied?

With the exception of certain lending institutions such as Freddy and Fanny, the push for sub prime lending was not a result of government pressure.  It was a sign of greed withing the mortgage industry.  The loans that were being advertised and spoon fed to the "irresponsible" home buyers were no accident.  Even if greedy realtors were taking it upon themselves to market the dangerous loans, the BANK decided if it was going to fund the loan.

Irresponsible Home Buyers is a distraction from the real issue.  

1. Realtors specifically marketed risky loans in an attempt to sell houses that were extremely overvalued in a market that was expected to soften considerably.

2. Banks approved and funded those loans knowing the risky nature of the papers and the overvalued nature of the asset.

3. Bankruptcy laws were tightened to limit bankruptcy options

4. The safe payment era of the risky arm loans expired and the real payments started coming due.

5. As houses foreclose, the market begins to slide.  

When a homeowner can see this coming, how can a rational person believe that the banks that funded these loans were clueless???

To the credit of the Irresponsible home buyers, many were led to believe that growth was going to continue, even with the interest only options, they would be able to live in their home for a couple of years, sell it, then buy a home they could more easily afford with the profits.  While this is similar to gambling, it was also based on lies.  Realtors in the early 2000's were not always honest with their buyers.

The bottom line is that the people responsible for this issue are NOT being held accountable in any way.  This was not an accident.  Look at the data for the last 10 years.  The signs were there.  We saw them and worked on getting out before the storm.  However, things are worse than even i had anticipated.   Unfortunately, we're not at "the bottom" yet . . .

Our Economy and the O Bomb

It looks like our economy is about to take a hit.  Bigger than the one conceived by the terrorists when they began trying to blow up the World Trade Center in the late 1900s.  This one consists of random special interest programs the Democrats have been unable to get through during the years of the Republican controlled White House and Congress.

This coming Tuesday our president is scheduled to sign the Stimulus bill into law.  The amount of misinformation and lies associated to this package is astounding.  Nobody has read it cover to cover.  The positive effects are expected to be minimal, less than $15 per week per person in net gain.  The negative effects, gross government spending and expansion, will last until the house of cards collapses into something we do not recognize as the United States of America.

Brace yourselves, the O-Bomb is gonna detonate our economy Tuesday..

What Exactly Is Economic Stimulus?

To listen to some high profile politicians, stimulus is spending money to create a job.  Not only is there no scope associated to performance of spent dollars, but there is an assumption that any money spent should be considered stimulative.

I'm sure that there are a number of things in the package which are short term in that they provide an instant job that will perform a task and then end.  At the end of that particular "job", the money is gone, and a product such as a road or government building is the result.  This does not scale in terms of long term economic growth.

Equally stimulative (in many ways) would be to create short term jobs by providing politicians with an account for hiring prostitutes.  It would create "short term" jobs while creating no lasting stimulative effect as there was no scalable product produced.  The prostitutes would be getting paid, the politicians would be getting something of interest, and the money would work it's way back into the market.

Are we still supposed to believe that ANY spending by the government to hire somebody to do something constitutes stimulus that will recover our economy?

Fox News: Fair & Balanced?

The claim of "fair and balanced" gets arguments started.  Most detractors say that FoxNews is nothing more than a right wing media front.  Most fans will say that FoxNews is the only media that delivers news not approved by the left wing media front.

It's a given that the mainstream media as delivered by the major networks is left leaning, and in some cases ultra liberal.  Examples cited often relate to Obama getting a free ride during the PotUS race while the opponents faced tough questions and harsh reviews.  On the other hand, detractors of FoxNews will point out that FoxNews was giving no good press on Obama, while promoting only Republican candidates.

So we get to the point where we have to acknowledge that it's probably not possible to be "both" Fair and Balanced in this particular media.  This would require that all of the candidates were given an unbiased assessment of pros and cons.  Were FoxNews to be "fair" in this manner, the public would still be missing balance.

As we throw a little logic into the mix, we find that the things that detractors hate about FoxNews are the things that make it Balanced.  In order to balance mainstream media, the "other side" has to be delivered.  Since the liberal opinions are promoted on outlets like ABC and MSNBC, FoxNews seems to be the only outlet delivering the other side of those issues.

Now we get to a bit of a stretch on the word "fair".  Although FoxNews does have a conservative slant, we have already determined that it is required that both sides get out.  Since FoxNews is the major outlet of the other side of the story, it is "fair" that they exist and provide the other side.

This still doesn't accommodate the "level" of fairness or balance.  The thought that FoxNews is an ultra right wing organization with "out there" reporting needs a reality check.  Were fox news to perform as Rush Limbaugh does, going off the deep end twisting things around for entertainment to extremes, just as the ultra liberal outlets do, then yes FoxNews would be in that category.  However, FoxNews does not twist to the right as far as others twist to the left.  This is where FoxNews, although primarily leaning conservative, IS performing in a Fair and Balanced nature when compared to the "other side".

Obama: Liar or Idiot?

S M U G - the only way to describe obama with regard to "stimulus IS spending by definition".

It's a shame to see him lie to us like that. He is either a moron or a liar. The statement about stimulus is as misleading as it presumes that ANY spending is stimulus.  

If we just wanted wasteful stimulus, the bill could simply be: 900 Billion dollars will be divided among all American homeowners in exchange for their "median beautification project.  

This project will require that every homeowner spend 3 months on their hands and knees cutting grass with scissors and cleaning up trash.  

In return, they will receive a check for 90% of their mortgage." 

It would fit the description in that money would go to reducing cost of living, a job would be provided, and a work or service would be provided temporarily. However, that is not the "spirit" of the "stimulus" that our country and it's citizens need.  

If obama wants to throw money away, I'm sure the American people would fare better if he threw it away at a short sighted plan like mine.  

Think about it, clean roads, billions of dollars in "cost of living" DECREASE. Of course it's not a well thought out plan, which is why I think it deserves to be on the table with the rest of the "not well thought out" items being shoved down our throats.

Do American's Really Need Jobs?

In 20008, over 2.5 Million Americans lost their jobs

However, the government is still allowing 1.5 Million foreign workers in each year.

Until the government has a profitable plan to pay Americans "just for being American", why are we bringing in so many foreign workers to take jobs desperately needed by our own citizens?

For the record, this doesn't include the American jobs lost due to "outsourcing" to other countries. As a nation, we should always put our own economy before the economy of other nations.  It is a sad day when our country is contributing to it's own economic demise.

http://americanworker.org/ for more information on this subject.