Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Democrats’ Countrywide scandal, See what Obama is receiving for throwing some dead presidents at a bunch of sycophant Negro writers, editors and bloggers... Did You Know Obama Cut Taxes You Idiots!?! Just How Lousy Is the Economic Recovery? Some of you look a little more Asian to me” Shocking: Muslims Allowed to Beat Their Wives

The Democrats’ Countrywide scandal: Shhhhhh - Michelle Malkin

Blink and you probably missed it. In yet another classic Friday news dump, Countrywide junk mortgage mogul and Democrat crony Angelo Mozilo copped a $67.5 million plea to avert a high-stakes public trial in the heat of the midterm election season.

Guess who’s pitching in a nice chuck of the settlement?

He and his henchmen admitted no wrongdoing:

In case you forgot: DEMOCRAT Sen. Dodd Took Up to Six VIP Countrywide Loans, Says Oversight Committee

Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT) received up to six sweetheart home loans from Countrywide Financial, even though he has only publicly admitted to accepting two special deals, The Wall Street Journal reported .

The revelations were brought to light by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, raising questions about a previous Senate ethics committee investigation into Dodd’s dealings with Countrywide that just disclosed information about two of the loans.

In 2008, Dodd was accused of accepting two very favorable home loans in 2003 from Countrywide Financial CEO Angelo Mozilo, through the bank’s “Friends of Angelo” program. The program offered VIP mortgages to “influential” individuals, like Dodd, a five-term senator and chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

While Dodd admitted to accepting two favorable home loans from the now-defunct Countrywide, he said he did not believe the dealings were improper or in violation of Senate ethics rules.

But Countrywide loan officer Robert Feinberg said that Dodd knew he was receiving preferential treatment from the bank. “People are referred into that [‘Friends of Angelo’] department as ‘very important people.’ You're told that your loan is priced from Angelo…[the department] has to give them a sense of importance and explain the reduction of fees and the rate as a result of being a ‘Friend of Angelo’,” Feinberg told the Wall Street Journal on Oct. 10, 2008.
Journal-isms: Obama Courts Black Journalists, Bloggers. Democrats Budget $3 Million to Reach African Americans.

I posted this link several days ago… So what is Obama receiving for throwing some dead presidents at a bunch of sycophant Negro writers, editors and bloggers?

Below are a few links… Trying to convince Negros (who don’t watch Meet The Press) that Obama actually cut taxes… he tried to “stimulate” the economy. Those mean racist old white bastard Republicans and those Tea Party rednecks are lying to you and are angry for nothing!


Obama: Dems can win if voters can tune out attacks the truth
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama said Friday that Democrats can prevail in next month's midterm elections if voters focus on what he and his party have accomplished -- rather than on the flood of attack ads from special-interest organizations enabled by the Supreme Court.

"It is the unwritten story of this election," Obama told members of the Trotter Group, an organization of black columnists, in an exclusive interview at the White House. "It is having a huge influence across the country, and it's probably our biggest challenge right now. And it's the direct result of a Supreme Court opinion called Citizens United that passed in the last session.

"So don't let anybody ever tell you that the Supreme Court doesn't matter, because here's a direct example of what I consider to be a profoundly faulty Supreme Court decision (that) has opened the floodgates to special-interest money, undisclosed."
Circled: Writer of this article…

What's at stake in midterm elections - USA Today

By DeWayne Wickham
WASHINGTON — As I watched Barack Obama walk alone across the south lawn of the White House to his waiting helicopter, I had something of a political awakening.
It was in that moment, following the president's one-hour meeting with me and nine other black columnists, that I understood the campaign strategy Republicans have cleverly crafted and their Democratic counterparts are struggling to counter. For the GOP, the central issue of the midterm elections is Obama.

It didn't start out that way. Early on, the Republicans' strategy was to avoid any mention of the president as they probed the political landscape for vulnerable House and Senate Democrats whose defeat would put control of the Congress in Republican hands. Back then, Obama's job approval rating was high and most Americans thought the nation was headed in the right direction.

But after months of withering, right-wing attacks on the Obama-led efforts to bail the nation out of the economic mess that took root when Republicans controlled the White House and Congress, and a nagging concern about broken promises among elements of Obama's political base, Republicans are using the president's declining popularity to rally support for GOP congressional candidates.

They are buoyed in this effort by those on the rabid fringe of the right wing who chant: "I want my country back," as if slaves have taken over the plantation. And they are financed to a great degree by right-wing donors who pour money — much of it untraceable — into the GOP coffers.

"If the election is posed as a choice between Republican policies that got us into this mess and (my) policies that are getting us out of this mess, then I think we can do very well," Obama said during his meeting with members of The Trotter Group, an organization of black columnists. "And, frankly, I would feel very confident about our position right now if it weren't for the fact that these third-party independent groups, funded by corporate special interests and run by GOP operatives, without disclosing where that money is coming from, are outspending our candidates" by big margins.

Most Americans Don't Know Obama Cut Taxes - NY Times
Less than one in ten respondents in a recent New York Times poll were aware that their taxes had been cut by the Obama administration. Even worse: a third of the people polled thought their taxes had gone up. In truth, taxes were cut for 95 percent of working Americans -- and a conscious decision was made to withold less tax money from paychecks instead of sending out rebate checks, like the Bush Administration did. The idea was that people were more likely to spend a lump sum check, but getting a little more money (an average of about $65 a month) in each paycheck would encourage saving. The decision may have been costly. Come voting time, you kind of need people to notice that you helped them save some money. To make matters worse, many people were making less money anyway because of the economy, and 30 state governments increased taxes. Even though there was no publicity, the Obama administration still thinks reducing witholding was a good idea and will continue it next year. “In retrospect, we think that judgment was right,” Jason Furman, Deputy Director of the National Economic Council told The New York Times. “It’s harder to predict what’s good for politics. Ultimately, the best thing for politics is going to be helping the economy.”

Little-known fact: Obama has CUT taxes- Atlanta Journal-Constitution
By Cynthia Tucker

If you’re going to blame the president for your economic misery, then you ought to at least have your facts right.

The Obama Tax Cut Nobody Ever Heard Of - Praise Indy

What if a president cut Americans’ income taxes by $116 billion and nobody noticed?

Obama agenda: The tax cut no one remembers - MSNBC

Some dude on Twitter...

The Unknown Tax Cut (NYT): http://goo.gl/Xnjq - most ppl don't realize Obama has cut taxes - major marketing problem for Dems
Howard Dean says that "elections are no time to educate people."

Amid Bush Tax Cut Debate, Obama Tax Cut Quietly Nears Expiration - FoxNews.com
September 21, 2010

The Making Work Pay tax credit, Obama's signature tax break in the stimulus package, provides up to $400 to individuals making up to $75,000 and up to $800 to couples making up to $150,000 through adjusted withholding in their paychecks.

Extending the tax cut would cost $60 billion, significantly less than the $3 trillion over 10 years to renew the Bush tax cuts for the middle class or nearly $4 trillion to extend them for everyone.

Obama proposed extending the tax credit in his budget for the next fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. But that budget is unlikely to get passed, and Congress would need to pass it separately to keep the tax cut from expiring.

"I think it's obviously the worst time for this to expire because these are people who live paycheck-to-paycheck and they would spend the money," said Chuck Marr, the director of federal tax policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Marr said he believes Democrats are not pushing to extend the Obama tax cut because of concerns about the cost. While the Bush tax cuts are more expensive, they are "seen as more embedded," Marr said.


Bush Tax Cuts Are Now ‘Obama Tax Cuts’ - Sweetness and Light

Top Democratic leaders in the House are discussing using that phrase to rebrand President Obama’s proposed extension of the Bush tax cuts for those making less than $250,000, senior leadership aides tell me.
We thought we were kidding when we wondered how long it would be before extending the Bush tax cuts would be ‘re-gifted’ as the ‘Obama tax cuts.’
But, as usual, even the wildest imagination cannot outdo the Democrats when it comes to shameless chutzpah.
The use of the phrase has the informal support of Nancy Pelosi and Majority Whip James Clyburn, and Pelosi has used the phrase in private meetings, leadership aides tell me. Rank and file House Dems are privately discussing the phrase. Top Senate aides also like the idea.
The concept behind the new phrase, which has been kicked around by liberal bloggers and others, is that calling them the "Bush tax cuts" cedes the rhetorical game to Republicans in advance. It obscures the history here — the GOP built in the sunset of the cuts to begin with, to obscure their true costs.
This, of course is a blatant and despicable lie. The GOP had to pass the Bush tax cuts through reconciliation. (As is the tradition of late, for budgetary items.)
But ten years ago the ‘non-partisan’ Congressional Budget Office would not admit that these tax cuts would cut the deficit, so under the rules of reconciliation the bill had to ‘sunset’ automatically after 10 years.
All of this is in stark distinction to the recent passage of Obama-care via reconciliation, which the CBO blatantly lied in claiming that it would cut the deficit, so that it would have no such ‘sunset provision.’
If we had an honest CBO, the Bush tax cuts would still be the law of the land, and we would be calling Mr. Obama’s plan a tax hike on the small business class – which is exactly what it is.
The new formulation would also do a better job of highlighting the fact that Obama is willing to extend tax cuts for the middle class now, while Republicans insist on linking that extension to one for the rich, a key distinction in the debate

Isn’t it wonderfully kind of Mr. Obama to not raise taxes on the middle class?

And aren’t those Republicans evil for wanting the people who actually hire the middle class to be able to keep doing so.
Just How Lousy Is the Economic Recovery?

It's become conventional wisdom that the country has come through the worst recession since the Great Depression. President Obama has repeatedly made this claim -- during his campaign, just before his inauguration, at a town hall meeting this September, and many times in between. Lots of commentators have as well -- and, indeed, the term Great Recession is quickly becoming the accepted name for the 2007-09 downturn.

What is crystal clear, however, is that we are in the midst of the most pathetic economic recovery since the Great Depression. As John Lott put it recently: "The only records being broken are for the stubbornly slow recovery."
The NAACP's "study" on racism within the Tea Party - Weasel Zippers
Moral Arguments for Soaking the Rich...


Angle to Hispanic children: “Some of you look a little more Asian to me” - Ralston's Flash

As more of the video surfaces from GOP Senate nominee Sharron Angle's meeting last week with Rancho High School's Hispanic kids, the more bizarre it gets. Elsewhere on this blog, I have posted the video of her claiming an infamous still she and Louisiana Sen. David Vitter used in an ad, an incendiary image of Hispanic thugs, may not have been an image of Hispanics. That was nutty enough. But at the same meeting, according to video I have obtained and taken by one of the Hispanic students, she said some of the kids looked more Asian.

Strange? You be the judge.


"So that’s what we want is a secure and sovereign nation and, you know, I don’t know that all of you are Latino. Some of you look a little more Asian to me. I don’t know that. [Note: it's the Hispanic Student Union. The whole room is Hispanic teenagers.] What we know, what we know about ourselves is that we are a melting pot in this country. My grandchildren are evidence of that. I’m evidence of that. I’ve been called the first Asian legislator in our Nevada State Assembly."

That last comment, about her being called the first Asian legislator? I have no idea what she is talking about

UPDATE: The Angle campaign says she made that remark about being the first Asian legislator because "a reporter thought she looked Asian." OK.

Moderate UAE: Muslims Allowed to Beat Their Wives and Young Children As Long as They Don't Leave Marks - Atlas Shrugs

The highest judicial body in the United Arab Emirates says a man should be allowed to beat his wife and young children, according to media reports. Certain conditions must apply.

In the moderate Muslim country of the UAE, a man was found guilty of slapping his wife so hard that he damaged her bottom lip and teeth. He also slapped and kicked his 23-year-old daughter, so that she suffered bruises on her hand and knee.
He appealed claiming that even if he had intended to strike his wife and daughter, under Shariah law he had the right to do so.
This needs no comment.

Men ALLOWED to beat their wives and young children (as long as they don't leave any marks), rules UAE court Daily Mail (hat tip Pt C)
Husbands are allowed to beat their wives and children - as long as they don’t leave any physical marks, an Islamic court in the United Arab Emirates has ruled.
The astonishing legal ruling gives all husbands and fathers in the ultra-rich Gulf state the 'right to discipline' female family members if they have first attempted reconciliation.
The judgment was made by one of the UAE’s most senior judges, Chief Justic Falah al Hajeri, who made the ruling in the case of a man fined £85 for slapping his wife and kicking his daughter.

No comments: