Hey Wall Street - Enough is Enough! Or Did You Already Bet on Obama?

In yet another slap in the face to the American consumer the greed mongers on Wall Street have gotten everything they wanted from the President, the Congress, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, the international central banks, even the two candidates for president Obama and McCain and still they refuse to release the trillions of US dollars they are hoarding while continuing to hold the economy hostage.

Over two trillion dollars in American pension savings have gone up in smoke this year as the forces behind the government have manipulated and raped every treasure trove they could find to protect their precious credit, line their pockets, and demonstrate to the government just who is in charge of the US economy. Such behavior almost borders on criminal if there were any laws that existed to prosecute the predators of lower Manhattan. But thanks to the millions of dollars in special interest contributions poured into the campaigns and pockets of our elected officials no such laws exist.

Is it just circumstance that only two investment houses survived the economic meltdown this year and gobbled up all their competitors, two firms now sitting on billions if not trillions of our funds? Is it circumstance these firms have the power to call accounts in other companies, in other words demand early payment, when there is no money to be had thus driving those competitors out of business?

Is it circumstance that the survivors, Goldman Sachs and J P Morgan owned and controlled the London energy futures market used to drive up the price of oil and devastate our economy and that of the world? Well is it circumstance that these companies have poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into the campaigns of our elected officials and both were the primary beneficiaries of stunning government actions to rescue the economy?

As of August 31 according to the Center for Responsive Government Barack Obama had raised about $460 million compared to about $230 million for McCain. Obama is the first federal candidate in our history to refuse public financing even though he pledged to take the public financing which would have greatly reduced his spending in the campaign.

Goldman Sachs temple in Wall Street.

So what financial interest did Goldman Sachs have in Barack Obama? Since the beginning of his campaign the boys at Goldmans have been the biggest contributors to Obama and helped bring in millions from the Wall Street establishment. Goldman executives alone have given Obama $739,521 and have helped raise the following from Wall Street firms for Obama. CitiGroup - $492,548, J P Morgan - $475,112, UBS - $419,550, Lehman Brothers - $391,774, Morgan Stanley - $341,380 and various amounts from Bear Stearns, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank and Merrill Lynch.

What could be Obama's fascination with Goldman Sachs? Well it goes back as Bloomberg News reported Obama was the featured speaker at the Goldman's annual partners meeting in 2006 in Chicago. This was a junior member of the US Senate who had not even been in office two years yet he was speaking to the top executives of one of the most powerful investment houses in the world. There is something very strange about the circumstance.

The story only gets better. On May 3, 2007, Barack Obama attended an event at the Museum of Modern Art in Manhattan that was not on his public schedule and is only now surfacing. The exclusive private dinner was for Goldman Sachs traders and featured a discussion on issues moderated for the Wall Street firm by NBC's Tom Brokaw. Once again the circumstances are strange as a year later Brokaw would be moderating the second presidential debate between Obama and McCain and the economy and Wall Street were the main points of discussion. Of course the debate commission and McCain were unaware that Obama and Brokaw had already held a practice session the year earlier when Obama was facing a withering attack from Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden in the democratic primary.

Now that is three most unusual encounters between Obama and Goldman Sachs. Then comes the economic chaos and the president calls a meeting of Congressional leaders, Treasury and Federal Reserve staff and the presidential candidates. Obama, who was staying away from Washington during the crisis got the call and at the meeting was the only person to talk about a Republican alternative proposal for the crisis, a proposal that had not even been made public at the time.

Former Goldman CEO and now Treasury Secretary Paulsen.



It was later learned that a Treasury staff member reviewing the confidential proposal from Republicans was able to smuggle the information to Goldman Sachs employees who emailed it to Obama staff and it was given to him before the White House meeting, thus enabling him to pre-empt McCain from offering the new Republican proposal. Of course the Secretary of the Treasury was a former Chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs.

Do we really know anything about the relationship between Obama and Goldman Sachs other than their massive fund raising for him? Since he has been secretly guided and financed by Goldman people from the very beginning of his presidential campaign were they influential in his economic platform. While he now admits things have changed and many of his proposals might be delayed or dropped, he still proposed a tax on the rich which would seem to be opposed to the Goldman executives.

Yet it was convenient that Goldman faced billions in losses from the sub-prime mortgage mess and they helped trigger the economic collapse with the manipulation of oil futures driving the world into a credit crisis, a crisis that helped them make billions of dollars through spiraling oil prices. Most convenient of all, the $700 billion Wall Street bailout plan was approved just before a new president was elected so the new president would not be blamed for anything that went wrong.

Obama never questioned the role of Goldman in the sub-prime fiasco nor in manipulating the oil futures prices. When Goldman specialists tried to drive the price of oil up to $200 a barrel Obama never said a word. His meetings with them over the years were in secret and his actions were a wall of silence as the boys from Wall Street destroyed the economic system forcing a historic bailout by Congress that gave Wall Street nearly unlimited access to the US Treasury. Now did all of these incidents slip his mind as well as if his secret meetings with Goldman had nothing to do with the economy. I hope he can explain to the public just what has been going on and what, if anything he promised them in return.

Polling the Polls - Too Close to Call

As we have been warning for the past year, the polls in the presidential race are wrong and the latest round of poll releases demonstrates just how wrong they are. Five major tracking polls have been released in the past 24 hours and the difference is night and day. Each day of the campaign has seen major shifts but the most important factor is that Real Politics shows that McCain-Palin has been slowly and surely closing the gap.

Right now Gallup shows Obama ahead by 11 counting all registered voters and leaners, the Rasmussen poll of likely and leaning voters shows Obama ahead by 6, the Reuters/Zogby poll of likely voters shows Obama ahead by 2, while the Battleground poll shows Obama ahead by 4 and the Hotline poll shows Obama ahead by 1. Realclearpolitics.com, which compiles and averages all polls, show the Obama lead has shrunk to just 3, well within the margin of error.

By now there should be about 10% undecided and the Zogby poll shows 8% while Gallup shows 7%. With about 4 weeks left anyone can win the election so hold on to your hats. There is only one poll that really counts, election day!

Campaign 2008 - Defining Issues - Abortion

Few social and moral issues in America draw such emotional response from the opposing sides of an issue like abortion and most of the time it is kept far from the public spotlight but this year may be different, it may be drug out of the closet into the consciousness of the public. With Obama and Biden solidly pro-abortion and McCain and Palin solidly pro-life there is a clear distinction between candidates.

There is nothing unusual about the fact the Democratic candidates are pro-abortion and the Republican candidates are pro-life, that happens most elections. What is different is the Palin effect and the fact she refused to have an abortion of a child even though she knew it had down syndrome before birth. Then there is her teenage daughter who got pregnant and also refused to have an abortion. In response the feminist leftists condemned Palin, the pro-abortionists have gone on television condemning her and the pro-abortion media has denounced her choice.

For better or worse they have collectively made abortion a matter of public debate with hysterical claims that Sarah Palin would single handedly reverse the 1973 Supreme Court ruling, Roe versus Wade, that legalized abortion in America. Such a claim is false because a vice president cannot reverse the Supreme Court and Sarah Palin has never said such a thing but telling the truth does not seem to be a concern of the political pundits. Her magnetic attraction to the public and ability to draw thousands to see her give her a platform never before seen on this side of the issue.

As for Roe versus Wade, it was a ruling by the Supreme Court that centrally held that a mother may abort her pregnancy for any reason, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable'". The Court defined viable as being potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. In 1973 viability usually occurred at about seven months (28 weeks) but might occur earlier, even at 24 weeks. Medical breakthroughs since the ruling and prenatal advances have demonstrated that the ability of the fetus to live outside the mother's womb may come at a much earlier time.

So what is the real story with abortion in America? It has been 35 years since the Supreme Court ruling. The pro-abortion movement changed their name to pro-choice to improve their image and the anti-abortion movement changed their name to pro-life for the same reason, both changes within a couple of years of Roe versus Wade.

As for the record in America since passage of Roe versus Wade, as of 2008 there have now been 50 million legal abortions in the US, a total that somehow gets left out of all discussions of abortion. For comparison purposes, the total people killed in all wars fought by the United States from the War of Independence through Iraq is 1,315,237. In other words there have been 38 times as many abortions in 35 years as death from wars in 232 years. The total abortions in the US is nearly equal to the entire population of England or France.

Worldwide there have now been over 1 billion abortions in the years between 1920 and 2008 according to estimates of the United Nations Population Fund. That means total abortions now equal about 16% of the population of the world. Every year there are about 50 million abortions worldwide.

Beyond the basic belief that the government has no right to legislate morality, a favored argument of the pro-choice movement to justify the abortion option, they also offer three conditions of pregnancy that dominate their defense of unrestricted abortions. First they say it is justified in the case of rape or incest. Total abortions performed annually according to multiple studies and reports reflect less than 1% for rape or incest.

A second justification is in the event of the threat of death to the mother for completing the term. The same studies have shown this is the reason for slightly less than 2% of the abortions. Finally they claim the health of the fetus, when shown to be suffering from life threatening or severe physical impediments is another justification but again this only represents less than 2% of abortions. In other words, the three primary justifications total just under 5% of total annual abortions. Of the 50 million abortions about 2.5 million fall in the three most emotional, most often mentioned and most overrated reasons for abortions. That means 47.5 million abortions that have been performed don't fall into those classifications.

What does this mean to the election? Catholics and other Christian congregations are the strongest group opposed to abortion and we have written earlier how the 47 million Catholics of voting age represent a total demographic block equal to over 25% of all eligible voters. The concentration of Catholics and Christian sharing similar views in swing states make the group even more substantial. With Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden, both Catholics advocating abortions, then going on NBC Meet the Press and attempting to distort the teachings of the Catholic Church, the issue has become very hot.

Finally, there is the very dark side of the history of the pro-abortion movement which is not generally known to many dating back to the work of Margaret Sanger early in the 20th century to legalize first birth control and then abortions. She is generally recognized as the founder of pro-abortion and Planned Parenthood and her work in eugenics is a very hidden and dark side of the movement.

Back at the turn of the century some eugenics advocates such as Margaret Sanger used it as a justification for state-sponsored discrimination, forced sterilization of persons deemed genetically defective, and the killing of institutionalized populations. It evolved into a practice intended to cleanse the human population of inferior classes and cultures. Sanger's newsletters and organizations were advocates of this social philosophy and her associates worked with people including Ernst Rudin who became architects of the Nazi Aryan Purification programs under Adolph Hitler.

Although eugenics has been condemned by pro-abortion groups in recent history abortions have resulted in significant "defective" children being aborted and overall 58% of abortions involve Whites while 34% involve Blacks. Such a controversial justification for abortion is relatively unknown to members of the current pro-choice movement.


Depending on the reaction of the Catholic Church to the Pelosi and Biden fiascos, the efforts of the many Christian coalitions opposed to abortion and the growing awareness of the history and stunning numbers of abortions now being performed, there is a potential for this issue to impact on the presidential race. Sarah Palin could also ignite the debate with her fierce opposition to the movement and leftist media attacks against her. In the end, any or all of these factors could help fire up the issue and make it impossible to factor it into the polls.

Palin Must See TV - The Great Debate

If Obama was truly media savvy he would be debating Sarah Palin as she continues to be the star of the presidential campaign. Over 72 million Americans tuned in to watch her debate, a bunch cheering for her to beat the leftist media at their own game and a bunch waiting for her to self destruct. Once again, when her message cannot be diluted by the edit happy media like Katie Couric, Charles Gibson and the increasingly bitter David Letterman, Palin connects to the heart and soul of America.

Palin power pulled 20 million more viewers than the darling of the liberal media Barack Obama. For probably the first time in history a vice presidential candidate buried the presidential candidate audience in an avalanche of television followers and proved to the world that her experience and media savvy are far more powerful than Barack's inexperience and media manipulation when it comes to the typical American viewer.

Now the liberal leftist pundits say a candidate for vice president can never win an election for president but these are the same pundits who failed to warn us about the stock market crash, the credit crisis, the budget deficit and even the Yankees and Cubs being knocked out of the World Series. Their credibility to the general public is well below that of President Bush and threatens the Congress for having the lowest credibility of any profession in America. No one believes the media. No one believes the politicians.

I believe the vice presidential candidate can win the election when both candidates for president have the same standing in polls on issues like being prepared, qualified, trusted to be president, etc. and for now McCain and Obama are little different. What these same media pundits fail to say is that for the first time in our history women, not the bra burning feminists of 5th Avenue and Hollywood and Vine but the Main Street grandmothers, mothers and daughters who have watched in dismay as the media, politicians and Wall Street have sunk into the cesspool of corruption, back room deals and greed, these women can make things different.

These women you never read about in People Magazine or Crime Reporter have waited a long time for the men to get it right, the men of the left and the men of the right, and things are not getting any better no matter which way you turn. No, the seeds were planted long ago for a populist revolt in America and not just in Iraq but in Viet Nam. The people who run our government have been around for a very long time. But this time the silent women's majority has a choice to send a message so loud and clear it will knock the socks off the feet and the dirty cash out of the pockets of the entire male dominated establishment in the media, in Washington and on Wall Street.

Love her or hate her Palin is the only one of the big four candidates not contaminated by Wall Street, not contaminated by Washington insiders and not contaminated by a pandering media. She is the only candidate who is not a member of the most sacred men's club in Washington, in America,the US Senate. The people are truly fed up with the establishment, the existing order of things and the people who have brought us the mess we are in, and only one candidate is not part of that tainted establishment, Sarah Palin.

That is why she draws far bigger audiences, interest and even media attention than the big three. And if the silent majority of women decide for the first time in history that enough is enough, then the cocky candidates and cranky media will be in for the surprise of their collective lives when the Moose hunting momma kicks the butts of the mainstream media, the elite establishment and the executives of Wall Street come November 4.

Campaign 2008 - Defining Issues - The Catholic Vote

No religious group in America packs the political potential of the Catholic Church with over 47 million registered voters, over 25% of the eligible voters. More important, the 47 million are in 19,000 parishes, of which 146 are Latin Catholic parishes. No religious group even approaches the Catholic community in numbers, in organization, and in the ability to deliver a message to the masses through the pulpit. In total the US has over 70 million Catholics and there are over 1.1 billion worldwide.

Only once in the past 30 years have the Catholics failed to support the winning candidate for president. Once reliably Democrat, the new Catholics are 41% Independent, up from 30% in the last election. The strength of the Catholics can be even more pronounced when looking at the election state by state. There are 7 swing states identified in this election, states that total 107 of the 270 electoral votes needed to win.

In 2004 Bush pulled 66% of the Catholic vote in Florida and 65% in Ohio to capture the states and the election. With the Hispanic population the fastest growing sector of the US population and being predominantly Catholic, especially in swing states like Florida and border states, it is doubtful any current polls are reflecting the potential vote accurately.

Of the seven recognized swing states Florida, a state with over 2.3 million Catholics, was decided in 2004 by 363,000 votes. Pennsylvania has 3.3 million Catholics and was decided by 145,000 votes. Ohio has 2.2 million Catholics and was decided by 118,000 votes. Virginia has 1.1 million Catholics and was decided by 262,000 votes. Missouri has 1.1 million Catholics and was decided by 196,000 votes while Minnesota has 1.2 million Catholics and was decided by 99,000 votes. Finally Nevada has 480,000 Catholics and was decided by 21,000 votes.

So what does that mean? It means the winning margin in those states equaled just 15% of the Catholic vote in Florida, 4% of the Catholics in Pennsylvania and Nevada, 5% in Ohio, 8% in Minnesota, 17% in Missouri and 23% in Virginia. In other words less than 25% of the Catholics in two states and less than 15% in all the rest were enough to swing the swing states. That does not fare well for the Obama and Biden ticket or the Democratic party in particular. Most certainly the tracking polls in those states have not been adjusted to reflect the significant strength of the Catholic vote.

The fall from grace of the Democrats can be traced to the increasing liberal platform of the party over the years and especially the radial left moves toward pro-abortion, gay rights and same sex marriages, the favorite issues of the far left that dominate the Democratic platform. Obama, Biden and Pelosi have all adopted positions on those issues opposed by the Catholic Church. More recently major blunders by House Speaker and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden have aggravated the schism and that could be a major factor in the election.

There are two ways to infuriate the Vatican, home of the Catholic Church. First is to adopt positions that reject the law of the Church. Second is to go on national television and invoke the names of church scholars and say those scholars support rejecting the law. Well Pelosi invoked the name of St. Augustine and Biden invoked the name of Thomas Aquinas, both on separate appearances on NBC Meet the Press where they grossly misrepresented the teaching of the church on abortion.

Such strategic blunders in the midst of an election campaign have cost the Obama ticket the support of the Vatican and the American Bishops and the television appearances of Biden and Pelosi attempting to redefine the teachings of the Catholic Church could result in the Church setting the record straight through the 19,000 parishes across the country. There is some evidence this has already begun as a pastoral letter condemning their efforts has already been issued on the subject. Will this schism between the Democratic ticket and the Catholic Church be felt at the ballot box? If so it could cost Obama the election.

CNBC Joins Media Gutter with MSNBC over Bailout Bill

History was made tonight as the Senate voted 74-25 for the Wall Street bailout bill which was really a Main Street rescue effort passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support. Apparently CNBC got tired of being the only news unit in the NBC family not directly associated with the anti-Republican avalanche of distorted media coverage and took action to claim their rightful place in the media gutter. In the process they embarrassed whatever Democrat and Republican friends they may have had.

Tonight as the US Senate was in the process of voting CNBC decided to offer live coverage of the activity and promptly demonstrated that for all their claims of being the leading financial network, they are little more than a bunch of whining fools.

For two hours tonight the so called anchors of CNBC did nothing but ridicule the US Constitutional process and the Senate in particular with the most ridiculous comments and observations on the Senate procedures ever presented on television. Their total confusion over tax extensions versus pork barrel legislation was astounding and reflected their degree of total misunderstanding.

GE, the owner of CBNC, should be ashamed of the attacks by their staff on the deliberations, the content of the bill that will keep them all in business, and the procedures of the Congress displayed by their gang of children on the air.

Despite the goading by the maniacs clearly jealous of the leftist credentials of Keith Obermann and Chris Matthews on bedfellow MSNBC, at least a few of the anchors resist the urging to look like fools and kept a sense of dignity when discussing Congress and the money that will save their beloved Wall Street.

People like Becky Quick, Erin Burnett and Maria Bartiromo continue to offer objective news reporting and as a result they make the others seem like kids in a schoolyard brawl. What a pity. But those like Mark Haines, Charles Gasparino and Melissa Francis become blabbering fools in the heat of the television lights.




I wrote that the arrogance of Wall Street and the media is one of the biggest roadblocks to the federal government saving their elitist butts. Well Mark Haines demonstrated over and over again what happens when a network turns a disrespectful bellowing, blabbering idiot loose on the airways. Surely such anti-government antics and lack of understanding or appreciation of the American political process as that demonstrated by the CNBC crew should lead them to the cellar of the cable ratings along with their fellow MSNBC socialists.

Obama and McCain back on Track - The Election is on Again

For the first time since the political conventions in August today the two candidates for president acted presidential and maybe there is hope that the people will finally get the choice they need, a choice between two visions for the future of America.

I suspect the candidates finally got control of the campaigns back from the staff as there is no way these two people were performing to the best of their abilities the past few weeks. I have said repeatedly that we need to hear ideas, a vision and a future of hope for America and the campaigns were bogged down in blame, accusation and hostility that served no good purpose.

Today that seemed to change. Both gave speeches directed to the future, not pointing fingers to the past. It was refreshing to hear so many good ideas being offered and if the candidates were honest then they demonstrated that either one is not beholden to the forces in Washington, DC or Wall Street and were in a position to really go after the people standing in the way of change.

There are many people who represent the old way and will resist any reforms that take away their power and control over the nation and only a president free of dependence on them can offer such hope to the public. Our president is elected to serve all the people, not just the liberals or conservatives, and both candidates could do that.

If the biased media would just shut up and report the news rather than work so hard to manufacture the news, if they would stop the efforts to discredit candidates and recognize that the people running for office have given up a lot to run and will give up a lot more to serve, then we will all be better served.

There are a lot of similarities in the agendas of the candidates but a lot of difference in how they will go about changing things. That is the decision the voters must make. Because of the economy and Bush John McCain has an uphill battle to win but he is not a Bush clone and the people know it.

Barach Obama has to resist being labeled as the liberal candidate in order to reach across party and philosophical lines and his worst enemy are the leftist media supporting him but he too can effectively distance himself from the enemy.

It is time for a populist president and both can be standard bearers for the populist movement. Liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, and Wall Street and Congress have all demonstrated that their narrow agenda is not what America needs at this moment in time. What we need is to hear more of the candidates vision and implementation strategy these last 30 days. If they keep from attacks and focus on the future America will be well served.

What we need is a president with "No strings attached." If the candidates will stay focused America will get such a leader and a new wave of hope and promise will flow over the land.

The Great Debate - Obama and McCain - Enough is Enough

Buried in the middle of an economic meltdown was the first great debate in which every Democratic and Republican pundit and news media person said it would be the debate of the century drawing 80-100 million viewers according to the gospel of MSNBC. It wasn't. Fact is in terms of people watching it didn't even make the top 10 as just 52.4 million people tuned in. It finished 28.2 million people behind the Reagan-Carter debate of 1980. If you adjust the 1980 debate for today's population over 109 million people would have been watching, more than double our present day warriors.

So here are the facts. In terms of convention speeches McCain, Obama and Palin each drew about 40 million viewers. The debate drew 52.4 million. There will be about 121.5 million people actually voting this election so 43% of the likely voters watched, while 57% did not watch. That is not a particularly good sign that the campaigns have energized the voters.

During these last few weeks of the campaign we are going to be hit with an avalanche of campaign ads, emails, television bytes and other forms of slander, distortion and nasty stuff. We have already faced 18 months of the same stuff. Obama will outspend McCain 2-1 nationally and 4-1 in the swing states. If you had access to an honest poll you would see Obama has a slight lead but nearly 16% of the voters are undecided so no matter what the experts say, the race is still up in the air.

By now we expected Obama to have a solid double digit lead but he doesn't in spite of the huge spending advantage. Neither candidate demonstrated much leadership in our economic crisis so don't count on any surge from that. Palin has been mauled by the leftist media, ridiculed by the Hollywood elite and outright slandered by Democratic special interest groups but she is still here.


This weeks vice presidential debate will have to be her coming out party or the election will probably be over but to those hate mongering liberals don't be surprised if she doesn't knock that smug smile off your faces. The McCain campaign staff has done a terrible job of over managing her and it has cost them. If they learned their lesson and they cut her loose things might be a lot different.

Both candidates, their many surrogates and in particular the elitist media need to stop with the criticism, charges and political nonsense and get on with telling us how they will govern. Who cares if Sarah Palin doesn't know the name of regulation reforms offered by McCain over the years, we need to know that she understands our needs and interests and they sure aren't old regulatory bills from the past. All the candidates need to focus on their vision of the future.

With the election leaning toward Obama but still up in the air there are four factors that could swing the final tally either way, the Catholic vote, the pro and anti abortion vote, the women's vote as opposed to the feminist vote and the racial issue. Each of these will be examined in detail during the next few days.

Is Wall Street Arrogance To Blame for Failures in Congress?

Today the Wall Street bailout failed in Congress. Immediately after the financial experts on television began threatening yet again that the public is too dumb to understand the problem and as a result there will be no money for mortgages, autos, credit card purchases and other needs of Main Street America.

The financial experts went so far on CNBC to say the people in Congress are limited to liberal arts and law degrees and have no understanding of the economy and that is why the bailout failed. One day the many people whose lives and pocketbooks are lined by their close relationship to Wall Street may wake up and discover their own arrogance is what is fueling the public opinion revolt against them in their efforts to raid the public Treasury.

Long ago the general public stopped paying attention to idle threats from those demanding access to the Treasury to solve all the problems of the world. The international banking cartel and financiers from around the world have made run after run on the U.S. Treasury since the days of the American revolution to the Civil War to the latest crisis resulting from the mismanagement and greed on Wall Street.

Clever public relations people hired by them told them to stop talking about Wall Street and keep talking about how their problems are really the problems of Main Street but the American public knows better in spite of the public relations efforts. Today's problems on Wall Street were caused by greed, incompetent government regulation, Congress looking the other way while the financial institutions lined their pockets and campaign treasuries, and the expectation that the taxpayer could be hoodwinked into covering their losses.

Now the American taxpayer is expected to pay $700 billion to buy all the "toxic" loans that were issued by banks and mortgage companies and have resulted in a tightened credit market. What in the world makes them think the public should buy all the toxic loans and bail them out of their mismanagement and greed? If Wall Street had not started meddling in the mortgage market by packaging sub-prime mortgages when they saw how much money could be made in real estate we would have no crisis.

So they get caught with a couple of trillion in worthless mortgages and decide the American taxpayer has a responsibility to bail them out or they will cut off credit to Main Street. Where I come from that is not a request for help but blackmail. Then they say the financial integrity of our 401k, IRAs and pensions are in jeopardy if the bail out is not approved. That is second degree blackmail. The only way our pension money could be threatened is if the thieves on Wall Street invested it in the crooked stocks to begin with. Of course they did.

A reasonable way to help Wall Street while protecting the federal Treasury is possible and maybe now that the stampede to action has been halted by the vote in Congress perhaps the arrogant experts on wall Street who are demanding the handout can simply ask the stupid public for help in a nice and honest way and maybe this time they will get it.



Perhaps most important, the financial elitists and their liberal apologists had better learn humility and take responsibility for the mess we are in that they caused. Their days of unlimited feeding at the public treasury are over. The public has no responsibility to pay them for the mess they made and if we do give help, then we have every right to prosecute them if they violated the law. As for the financial television channels, turn them off, there are far better ways to spend the day.

Hijacking of American Economy Stopped by the People

Bush Pelosi Obama bailout of Wall Street fails!

To the absolute amazement of Wall Street and the weak-kneed Democratic leadership the people of America spoke through their elected representatives and the takeover of America by Wall Street was brought to a screeching halt in a stunning vote today.

Obama who refused to consider the negotiations over the vote worthy of returning to the capitol but remained available via telephone found out just what Americans thought of his "call me if you need me" attitude. No one called him. Pelosi called the Republicans "unpatriotic", hardly a way to encourage cooperation.

In the end the strange alliance of Bush, Obama and Pelosi to save the money mongers on Wall Street and help pursue our course toward socialism got, well, bushwhacked. Obama ran from his leadership chance while Pelosi again demonstrated why she has no business acting like a leader.

The American public, overwhelming against this Wall Street bailout and unwilling to use public dollars to reward corrupt corporate executives were finally heard by the Republicans in Congress and about 94 Democrats opposed to their own leaders bitter partisanship attacks. If just 11 votes were needed to pass the bill why did Pelosi lose 94 from her own party?

For the moment the world witnessed the real strength of the American political system. No political party nor Wall Street is going to steal the banking system from public accountability nor hijack the American economy. Our Constitution remains intact and our country remains the strongest light in the world toward a true nation devoted to "We The People."

What the Hell is Happening on Wall Street?

What a week we just saw as the ship of state shipwrecked and in the process drug us all through the media frenzy and speculation only Wall Street and the media could generate. For a long time it seemed there was as much lying, distortion, misrepresentation and outright stupidity in the media reporting of the financial crisis as their coverage of the Obama versus Palin presidential campaign. No Freudian slip on that one.

Is it possible to summarize the complexity of what just happened to the American economy? Either we just saved the US and world economies with a pretty breathtaking rescue plan or, we just gave away more control of the US economy to the financial warlords of the world who have been controlling things for the past few centuries.

If the answer was the first then the villains of Wall Street have now been stopped, only a few hundred more insignificant banks should collapse, our government should make a profit of a few billion saving the banking system, and long term stability should return to our real estate and financial institutions. If we could figure out a way to throw out all the financial experts in the media who failed to be the watchdogs of the public interest for the past decades we would further strengthen our system. If we could throw out the Congress and the lobbyist corps sucking up to them it might even all work.

On the other hand, if the latter explanation is true, then we continued to have a government that is a puppet to much more powerful forces who can buy and sell all the nations of the world. The invisible power of this mysterious force that has operated in the shadows of the world the past few centuries is every bit as real as our media, our government and institutions.

However, even this force needs a source of life blood and that is the US so whether we are saving the financial systems of the world or saving the Masters of the Universe the result is probably about the same. Neither the forces of good or bad can afford to destroy our economic system. As we have witnessed first hand the past few days, as the US goes so goes the world.

The greed that forced us into this mess was prevalent throughout the world as the world was deeply involved in the US economy. They got too greedy, they forgot that if Americans aren't kept happy they will put an end to the gravy train. They compounded their problems further by using even more sinister techniques to try and save them from the mistakes they already made.

Thanks to a bewildered administration and comatose Congress, both seduced by lobbyists with endless piles of cash, the wizards of Wall Street spun a deeper and deeper web of deceit as the savings and loan groups, dot coms, home mortgages, oil and wheat futures and eventually the investment banks themselves fell prey and were milked of every last penny of profit from our financial system.

When it finally became clear that the Masters of the Universe on Wall Street were grounded on a foundation of quicksand the game ended and when the dust settles, and it will settle, and the economy has recovered and is back to serving as the cash cow again, no doubt the Masters will probably rise again and when they do we better be ready.

In the meantime the American public will be given stable banks and lower home prices. Lower gas and oil prices will return. Savings and pensions will be protected and jobs will be created. Inflation will remain stable and the stock market will again flourish. All of these things are the bones we are thrown for serving as the cash cow for the world. All of these things are the necessary progression of our historical cycles within our cultural evolution.

So how will this impact on the election? It doesn't matter. Whoever wins the presidency will be blocked from needed reform by an antiquated Congress who have been in office too many years to turn on the forces who keep getting them elected. No viable change will come until after the 2010 elections when the American public finally realizes that no president can be effective without a Congress willing to accept responsibility for past failures and embrace change. When the scoundrels are thrown out of office the change can finally be realized.

Liberal Media's Code of Omertà Fails to Silence Sarah Palin

The seemingly secret pact between the liberal media and the Obama campaign to block all news coverage and reference to Sarah Palin is failing if we can believe our eyes. It is failing because MSNBC, ABC, The New York Times and the host of other left-leaning media just don't get it, the people of America are not going to let the media tell them who to support.

This past weekend Sarah Palin held a rally in Florida, one of the critical swing states, and there was a virtual media wall of silence about the event. MSNBC had the audacity to only report Palin said "Goodbye to thanks but no thanks," a direct reference to the Alaska bridge to nowhere. Of course MSNBC would have been a little more honest if they said in the end Palin refused to approve the project. They might have been more honest yet if they told you Obama and Biden both voted for the bridge to nowhere but that is the truth and we know the American people aren't ready for the truth.

Not a word was mentioned in the MSNBC report about the rally in Florida, a rally in which the largest crowd to ever witness a vice presidential candidate gathered to see Palin. According to the local Fire Chief Mike Tucker over 60,000 people attended. Only Obama's convention speech drew more and the Obama campaign spent over $8 million to stage that event. Sarah Palin didn't have top spend millions of dollars to draw a crowd. The media did nothing to help make people aware of the event or let the rest of the world know what did happen.

Did I mention that Obama is running for president? The 60,000 screaming, chanting fans of Sarah Palin know all about the liberal media's policy of Omertà and how it is intended to help the liberal Democratic ticket. The people responded by turning out in record numbers. Now that is hard news. The idiotic efforts of the media to dictate the results of the election and protect the leftist movement in America so they can bring about a more socialist government will backfire and their coveted policy of Omertà is going to be drowned in a chorus of chants, "Sarah, Sarah."

Could Palin Invasion of Privacy be Obama's Watergate?

Privacy in America is guaranteed by the Constitution and an invasion of privacy is a criminal violation with dire consequences which is why it seems odd how little the Obama campaign has had to say about the illegal hacking into Sarah Palin's private email, the posting of the stolen emails on the internet, and the fact the liberal media all seemed to have copies of the emails.

About 36 years ago another well financed presidential campaign that expected to win the election did something equally as stupid, denied it to the world, and then got caught in the lie later costing the winner the presidency. Back then the President was Richard Nixon and the break in was called Watergate.

Watergate was not about approving the act, nor even knowing about the act. Watergate was all about covering up the act for campaign functionaries whose enthusiasm to win at all costs made them ignore the laws. We are far better prepared to investigate this illegal act than we were 36 years ago and it is serious enough that the FBI and the Secret Service have already launched an investigation.

If the private emails of our presidential and vice presidential candidates can be stolen all those involved must be prosecuted. The Obama campaign denies involvement. Barack Obama claims he personally runs the campaign, he has said so as a claim of his executive experience during the campaign so we should give him the benefit of the doubt on both counts.

But if his campaign was involved in any way in the theft, in encouraging the theft, or the distribution of the stolen materials by notifying the liberal media where to find them and give them talking points on what to say about them, then he should stand ready to withdraw from the race in disgrace.

In watching the various liberal media outlets comment about the stolen emails they used almost the exact words as Obama campaign representatives dismissing the seriousness of the theft and turning attention to the fact Sarah Palin had a private email account. Then insinuating she must have had the account to hide things from the State of Alaska. How stupid is that? Nearly everyone in America has a private email account including most members of the media.

Why did the liberal media and the campaign spokespersons have the exact same script? Why did they raise the exact same issue? Why weren't they outraged by the invasion of privacy? And why did they keep looking at the emails in their possession? If the Obama campaign was involved in the theft or any of these following actions it is the most serious breach of faith possible to the American public and would only demonstrate that a secret agenda must be driving them, one called Big Brother, where the right to privacy will no longer exist.

In one of the true ironies of history, Julie Nixon Eisenhower, daughter of President Richard Nixon, who grew up in the White House, is a supporter of Barack Obama and gave him the maximum financial contribution possible in the primary election. You certainly don't hear much about her from the Obama campaign. We shall await the results of the federal criminal investigation.

Is Obama Really The One? The $440 Million People's Person

Everyone in America knows we are in the midst of a serious economic crisis. First came the Bear Stearns collapse and Barack Obama refused to take a position saying we should wait and see what happens. Then came the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bail out by the government and the Lehmann collapse not bailed out. That was followed immediately by the AIG collapse that was saved at the last minute by the Federal Reserve. Each time Obama said we should wait and see what happens though our economy was a mess because of Bush.

Now that sounds like a Harvard educated response to the series of events. Is that leadership? Is that how he intends to govern through these tough times? He did promise us tax breaks and tax increases, a whole lot of them. And Biden did attempt to clarify how they would create new jobs, through public works projects. Yet another form of federal welfare destined to create dead end jobs with no career path at a cost to the taxpayer of billions of more dollars.

Some say the twin mortgage companies of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the root cause of what has happened. Well they were created by a Democratic administration and run by former Clinton insiders so I think that might be a Democratic problem that triggered the catastrophe. Some say a bill sponsored by Republicans that was passed in 2005 and impacted on the investment and commercial banks was the cause but that same bill was approved by 90 of the 100 Senators including the Democratic leadership.

For the past two years Nancy Pelosi has controlled the House and Harry Reid has controlled the Senate, presiding over Democratic majorities. If they control the Congress why didn't they fix the problems? In fact since they did control both the House and Senate why didn't they do anything the past two years after making all kinds of wonderful promises? Empty promises - broken leadership.

Now they want you to give them control of the White House as well. So how fiscally responsible is the candidate for president for the Democrats? Well, he is spending more than twice as much in the 2008 presidential campaign then anyone else in history, having already raised over $440 million. McCain has raised $190 million. And while he claims the largest donor base in history, the million plus donors don't get access to him.

No, the only contributors that get personal pictures with Obama and get to sip wine and get served by waiters in tuxedos are the Hollywood elite who pay $30,000 to have dinner with him. Now the price of the evening ticket to be with Obama is equal to 60% of the median annual family income in America, meaning the average family would have to work from January until July 15 to pay for a single ticket. If you want to take your spouse you will have to work 14 months for the tickets! The savior of the common people only dines with the richest of the rich, how Ivy League, how elitist and how disconnected with the common people he claims to champion.

While he sips wine in Beverly Hills we patiently wait for Obama to tell us how he will really help the people. While he dines for dollars, very big dollars, with Barbra Streisand and Bon Jovi at million dollar private parties people are suffering. While he waits to see how things work out before he takes a position Wall Street continues to crumble under the weight of its own corruption and greed. While he throws hundreds of millions of dollars at us to convince us he is THE ONE, people are fighting wars and digging out from hurricanes so there is an America left for someone to govern, but I am not certain what he has demonstrated is a convincing argument he is REALLY THE ONE.

Nancy Pelosi Really Believes We Are Stupid

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic speaker of the House and the person most responsible for the passage of legislation in our nation's capitol has continued her leadership mission of destroying the effectiveness of Congress with passage of the House Energy bill which is as stupid as stupid gets.

Of course Pelosi is also the one that promised to change history in her first 100 days as the most powerful person in Congress. That was over 500 days ago. We are still waiting for the first action to change history and in the meantime the approval rating of Congress has deservedly sunk to its lowest point in history, just 9% of Americans approve the job they are doing. It should be the job they are not doing.

Now her Obama energy bill promised the world we would be energy independent but as with everything Pelosi does you better read the fine print. She allowed off shore drilling for oil but only beyond 50 miles knowing full well that the vast majority of oil reserves are between 3 and 50 miles.

She also required approval by the state for the drilling but did not share any of the oil revenue with the state. So why in the world would they approve anything? It was a joke, it passed on a party line vote, and her own Democratic leadership in the Senate already declared it dead. And wasn't that the purpose all along?

If we are ever going to be energy independent we must first drill a big hole and drop in Pelosi and the Democratic leadership but then we would be sued for toxic poisoning by Democratic class action lawyers hired by the DNC to cover up the broken promises buried with the Democratic leadership.

Or maybe we should just vote them all out of office.

Liberal Elitists of the World Unite - Intellectual Constipation Reaches Epidemic Proportions

Are all liberal media elitists and their army of mouthpieces intellectually constipated? There is a chorus of condemnation today toward Sarah Palin from everyone that hates Republicans, mothers, mothers with children, mothers with down children, mothers with sons in the war, religious mothers, feminists opposed to abortion, feminists opposed to fanatical feminism, conservatives, small town, Alaskan, moose hunting, oil drilling and whatever else the latest smear may be.

Wake up eggheads, Sarah Palin got it right, you got it wrong. The Bush Doctrine is not preemptive strikes as ABC News and Obama backers shouted all over the cyber world. The Bush Doctrine, if any of you have any interest in the truth, is the National Security Strategy of 2002 that identifies the US position concerning terrorism and includes four pillars in the struggle.

The four pillars include (1) rejection of moral relativism and commitment to fostering the spread of democracy in the Middle East, (2) treating terrorism proactively, on a global basis, and not as law enforcement issue, (3) willingness to engage in preemptive attacks against terrorists and terrorist supporting states, and (4) unwillingness to support a Palestinian state until Palestinian leaders "engage in a sustained fight against terrorists and dismantle their infrastructure."
Palin addressed the global view on terrorism, and she was right. She even asked Gibson to be more specific when he asked about the Bush Doctrine and he didn't change the question. Finally, he clarified his question, acting like a professor correcting a student, and said the Bush Doctrine was preemptive strikes. Guess what professor, wrong! You left out the other three pillars.

You also didn't correct Obama when ABC News on Rick Klein Reports asked Obama about the Bush Doctrine back on July 26, 2007. Obama said Clinton would continue the "Bush Doctrine" of only speaking to leaders of rogue nations if they first meet conditions laid out by the United States. No mention of preemptive strikes, no mention of the Obama mistake on such a critical national security issue and he was a sitting US Senator running for president.

Now are there dual standards in this race? Are female VP candidates expected to know what US Senators don't know. Can the news media simply call them wrong when they are right? Is there no requirement for the news media to check the facts? Perhaps the media madness that prevails within the Washington elite establishment should be cleaned out first.

ABC News Continues Media Efforts to Distort Palin Message

ABC News Charles Gibson introduced the first comprehensive news interview of Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin to the world with clips of how he was able to cause her to stumble in questioning over the "Bush Doctrine."

Perhaps this was his effort to appease the criticism he received from the liberal left of being too soft in interviews with the McCain ticket and reacquire "macho" liberal approval but the result was a blatant attempt to trick Palin.

Gibson, out of the blue, asked Palin about the Bush Doctrine. She immediately asked him to be more specific. As she attempted to explain he asked the same question several more times, never bothering to explain what part of the Bush doctrine he intended to address. Finally after she gave increasingly more detail about the Bush doctrine he finally asked specifically for her position on preemptive strikes against terrorist targets.

ABC promptly sent out the edited questions and the liberal media jumped on the exchange as more evidence of her lack of knowledge of foreign affairs. Well shame on you Charles Gibson, until now ABC had not joined the stampede of news outlets leaning to the left but you have reestablished your news credentials as a master of media manipulation and should get a standing ovation at the next socialist convention in America.

The truth, in case anyone cares, is the Bush Doctrine is a four pillar approach to terrorism in the world, exactly as Palin described. Preemptive strikes are one of the four pillars thus her request to him to clarify his ambiguous question demonstrated far more understanding of the Doctrine than ABC News. His repeated response of refusing to clarify it was clearly intended to make her look bad.

According to the book, yes books have been published about the Bush Doctrine, World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism, Norman Podhoretz identifies the four pillars of the Bush Doctrine: (1) rejection of moral relativism and commitment to fostering the spread of democracy in the Middle East, (2) treating terrorism proactively, on a global basis, and not as law enforcement issue, (3) willingness to engage in preemptive attacks against terrorists and terrorist supporting states, and (4) unwillingness to support a Palestinian state until Palestinian leaders "engage in a sustained fight against terrorists and dismantle their infrastructure."

Palin was right in asking for him to be specific. Her answer was right about the Bush Doctrine being the worldview on terrorism. And once again Gibson demonstrated how the mainstream media in America is hell bent on distorting the record, words and experience of Sarah Palin. Oh yeah, when he finally asked the real question she nailed it like she did on all the rest.

ABC has already issued misinformation on the exchange trying to limit the Bush Doctrine to the issue of preemptive strikes but the Bush Doctrine was detailed in the National Security Strategy of 2002 for all the world to see and its odd ABC missed such an important document.

Finally, when the same ABC (ABC News Rick Klein Reports) asked Obama about the Bush Doctrine back on July 26, 2007 during a conference call to reporters, according to ABC Obama "said Clinton would continue the "Bush doctrine" of only speaking to leaders of rogue nations if they first meet conditions laid out by the United States." Clearly Obama didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was so in terms of truth, Palin 1, ABC News 0.

Perhaps when Sarah Palin gets to Washington her first mess to clean up should be the media as they are more tied to the lobbyists and special interests than the politicians.

9-11 The Day America Changed

Today is the 7th anniversary of the 9-11 attacks and the deaths of over 3,000 Americans in our first taste of a coordinated terrorist attack on our soil. I worked in NYC during the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the 9-11, 2001 destruction of the World Trade Center.

On my way to a meeting with journalists in 1993 on the 15th floor of the Trade Center, I got no further than the lobby when the explosion underground prevented further access. On 9-11 I was working at home in New Jersey, in Atlantic Highlands directly across New York Harbor from Wall Street and the Trade Center.

From where I lived you could see the buildings and smoke when suddenly all of lower Manhattan disappeared in a dense cloud with the collapse of the buildings. It was a sight I will never forget. I hope all Americans join me in honoring the heroes of the NYC Fire and Police Departments, the 3.000 victims and families of the victims. Over 100 children were born after 9-11 to widows who lost husbands in the catastrophe.

Letters to the Editor on Biased Media

We love getting comments on the stories and the latest comment concerns media bias asking why we don't point out the right wing media bias like we point out the left wing bias. A good question as media bias is media bias no matter which way the pendulum swings.

However, in the past two years we have pointed out many instances of right wing media abuse against Barack Obama showing that true journalism in America is a lot closer to being dead than we might think. Truth is even the left wing media took many unfair shots at Obama in their frenzy to get Hillary elected.

With the era of the blogger regular news organizations have insulated themselves from responsibility for many stories that would never meet the test for objective journalism. They do this by using blogs to front for them by running unsubstantiated stories, rumors and outright lies.

That said, I would like to ask readers to help me compile a more complete list of biased media from both the right and left fringe, sites that are prone to publishing without validation and whose agenda is not reporting news but promoting their beliefs.

In earlier stories I have identified the following as some of the right wing media, FAUX, or Fox News Network, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and Hannity. Other shows include Fox and Friends.

Left wing media includes NBC, MSNBC, CNN, Olbermann, Matthews, The Washington Post, The New York Times, NPR sometimes and Time Magazine among others. Since the media is dominated by the left wing there will naturally be more. However, I do not waste time with biased blogs as there are hundreds for each side and to mention them is to not really serve the public interest.

I am asking you to send me your additions to the list of purveyors of false truth so we can keep a running record of who not to trust in our nation's media. Actually, you can trust them to sell their own agenda and if you believe their agenda that is your right as an American but these groups hardly qualify as objective media and people need to know it.

Let me know who you would add to the list.

Obama Says Governor Palin Not Experienced to Lead Nation

Barack Obama has challenged the experience of Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, saying being governor is inadequate experience to be president of the US even though Palin is running for vice president, not president. But she will be a heart beat from the presidency so we can accept his hypothetical claim.

To make such a claim, the Obama campaign and the entire biased liberal media echoing the same propaganda surely must be suffering from temporary memory loss. The governor is not qualified to be president? Can animosity be so blind? Having been in many campaigns I know it is not the candidate but the campaign staff that undertakes these missions so I do not hold the candidates totally responsible.

The truth. In the last 32 years a former state governor has served as US president during 28 of those years! Four of the past five US presidents were governors including the last two Democrats to serve as president. Bush, Clinton, Reagan and Carter all went from the statehouse directly to the White House and the American public had no trouble entrusting the future of the nation to them.

Fact is whenever America faced the darkest hours the voters turned to the governors to save the day, not the professional politicians in our nation's capitol. In modern times former governor Teddy Roosevelt became the youngest president in our history in 1901 when President McKinley was assassinated and Teddy helped us through economic chaos.

Former Governor Wilson guided us through World War I while former Governor Franklin Roosevelt brought us through the Great Depression and World War II. The Cold War was brought to an end by former Governor Reagan while former Governors Clinton and Bush drove the ship of state through the era of rampant international terrorism.

In total 18 former governors beginning with Thomas Jefferson went on to serve as president of the US, 42% of all US presidents. Four of the past five presidents were governors. So before anyone states that governors are not qualified or able to run the United States perhaps they better take a refresher course on the history of the US. In America the will of the people decides who has the necessary experience, not the claims of the candidates or the wayward whims of the media.