Ten Things To Make You Go H'MMMM

10) Only in America ...could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.

9) Only in America ...could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black while only 12% of the population is black.

8) Only in America ...could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner (the head of the Treasury Department) and Charles Rangel (who once ran the Ways and Means Committee), BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

7) Only in America ...can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.

6) Only in America ...would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege, while they discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just 'magically' become American citizens.

5) Only in America ...could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists."

4) Only in America ...could you need to present a driver's license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.

3) Only in America ...could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

2) Only in America ...could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year - for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn't have nearly enough money.

1 ) Only in America ...could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all.

Fair Tax Transition

Overhauling the current tax system and converting it to a Fair Tax/Flat Tax/NRST system needs to be done. Sooner than later. Yesterday, or the day before, works for me.

You'll hear pundits, politicians, accountants and the corner hot dog vendor tell you it can't be done because the current system is so solidly entrenched in the fabric of our lives, converting to something else would just cause chaos and take too long.

Thats what they said about the automobile.

I have an idea to make the transtion as simple and effortless as possible and the citizens get the benefits of the transtion immediately.

The first thing that needs to happen is the elimination of the payroll deduction for Federal taxes. BAM!!! American workers get to keep 15 to 18% of their earned income. No muss no fuss. Don't touch SS, Medicare or state taxes. They have to stay, but there should be an option for self-directed SS accounts for new workers.

Second, the IRS needs to be downsized and employees re-trained as field representatives for the new tax collection system. They will go out and assist retail outlets in upgrading the software to start collecting an increased percentage at the Point of Sale.

Once that is done, the government starts getting General Fund revenue. Note, the NRST has exemptions for certain scenarios. Bulders wouldn't pay a sales tax on building materials, the end user would pay the tax when they purchased the finished product, whether it's a house or a chair. Second sales of used autos and trucks is exempt because theoretically, the original purchaser would have paid the tax. I don't like either of those. 2nd sales of used cars/trucks shouldn't be taxed. Resale of items purchased wouldn't be taxed. The tax would only be paid at the point of purchase for the new product by the original purchaser.If we're going to try to convert to a simple plan, we need to start out by making it simple. Less paperwork is more simple.

If the system is a flat tax on earned income, then we need to decide how to pay it and how frequently. We should have options for paying taxes. Monthly, quarterly, bi-yearly, yearly, pre-pay.
Credit card or written check. No debit cards, no ACH transfers, although that could be done.

The ideal system would only tax profits on income. Wages are not profit. It's a result of your efforts as a worker. Earning a living requires an investement on the part of the earner. It requires that you make daily investments to generate that income. You have to live somewhere. You have to get to work. You have to feed yourself and your family. You need clothes, electricity, water, sewage. All of those costs are money you spend to make it possible for you to make a wage. The wages generated from those expenses is gross profit. The amount you have left could be considered profit, but we call it disposable income. Fun money. Thats the part that should be taxed.

I am a staunch supporter of the Flat Tax. A 10% across the board tax on every cent you earn, no matter where it comes from, with no deductions, no exemptions, no paperwork, no refunds of overpaid taxes.. Everyone pays 10% of their earnings to the government and if the government pays you, 10% of that gets held back unless it is a Social Security check, a veterans benefit or retirement account.. Those would be untaxed. If you recieve SS or VB, you can work if you're able. If you choose to work, it will not affect your benefits, but you'll pay 10% of your earnings just like everybody else. You will also be expected to pay 10% on the return from investments NOT tied to a retirement account.

It's good enough for God. It should be good enough for the government.

Elizabeth Warren Ancestor Rounded Up Cherokees For Trail of Tears

Elizabeth Warren Ancestor Rounded Up Cherokees For Trail of Tears

After researching her story, it is obvious that her "family lore" is just fiction. As I pointed out in my article here on Sunday, no evidence supports this claim. O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford had no Cherokee heritage, was listed as "white" in the Census of 1860, and was most likely half Swedish and half English, Scottish, or German, or some combination thereof. (Note, the actual 1894 marriage license makes no claim of Cherokee ancestry  

But the most stunning discovery about the life of O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford is that her husband, Ms. Warren's great-great-great grandfather, was apparently a member of the Tennessee Militia who rounded up Cherokees from their family homes in the Southeastern United States and herded them into government-built stockades in what was then called Ross’s Landing (now Chattanooga), Tennessee—the point of origin for the horrific Trail of Tears, which began in January, 1837.

Full disclosure: I am Cherokee. More than 1/8. Proven.

Liberals use minorities to further their own agenda until they're no longer needed, then they kick them to the curb and look for the next victim to use. This is just another example of a shameless academic elitist using the image of the Native-American to further her own career. You really think she gives a rats butt about any tribe in this country?

From the Morning Examiner

Morning Examiner: Obama's secret plan
By Conn Carroll

President Obama has a secret plan. He told Iowans Monday his “very specific plan” would boost the economy, create jobs, and control the deficit. What are the details of this plan? Sorry, Obama has to travel to Martha’s Vineyard for a ten day vacation first.

According to National Journal, Obama’s secret plan is part of a new White House strategy to counter the “growing perception that President Obama is a weak leader.” Apparently, the president’s senior advisers believe Libya, Egypt, and the debt hike debate “have done serious damage to his leadership image.” The polling backs this belief up. NJ reports: “In April 2009, Gallup found 73 percent of Americans who said that Obama was a “strong leader.” In May 2010, that had declined to 60 percent. In March 2011, Gallup had it down to 52 percent. There has been no more recent polling on that issue.” And that leadership fall all happened before Libya and the debt hike.

Obama’s solution? Blame Congress. But how can Obama blame Congress for his own leadership failures? That is where the “very specific” secret plan comes in. Obama hopes to convince Americans that 1) he has a plan to cut the debt and create jobs, and 2) only “unreasonable” Republicans in Congress stand between America and success. Will it work? That depends on how compliant the press is.

Obama has not submitted a specific plan to address the debt since he submitted his budget to Congress in February. That plan was rejected by the Senate 97-0. Obama has since given many speeches about the debt, but as Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf testified to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, “We don’t estimate speeches. We need much more specificity then was provided in that speech for us to do our analysis.”

If Obama does submit his “very specific plan” to the CBO so that it can be scored on an equal footing with the Republican budget, then the country will benefit from a great debate. But if Obama just gives another speech, backed up only by bogus economic projections from his Office of Management and Budget, then his secret plan should be exposed for the fraud that it is.

Around the Bigs
The Wall Street Journal, Obama Aims to Keep White Voters on Board: President Obama’s taxpayer-paid Midwest trip is allowing him to address a central challenge for his re-election: His very low approval ratings among white voters. While white working class voters already chose Republicans over Obama by 18 points in 2008, the gap has opened up to 30 points today.

The Wall Street Journal, Wal-Mart Frets Over Uncertainty: Wal-Mart Chief Financial Officer Charles Holley told investors on a conference call Tuesday: “Our core customer continues to be strained. The volatility in the headlines doesn’t help the customer. They are really stretched right now.” Last week, more upscale retailers like Macy’s and JC Penny’s also said their customers are worried about the economy as well.

The New York Times, Europe’s Debt Crisis Weakens Quarterly Growth: Official figures released Tuesday showed that the Germany economy has slowed to a standstill and growth across Europe has fall to its lowest rate in two years. The data show that uncertainty generated the debt and economic problems in countries like Greece and Italy is infecting the rest of the 17-country euro zone.

The Los Angeles Times, Firearms from ATF sting linked to 11 more violent crimes: The Obama Justice Department has admitted to Congress that weapons from ATF’s botched Operation Fast and Furious investigation have turned up at the scenes of at least 11 violent crimes across the United States.

The Washington Examiner, Barone: Harry S. Obama?: Michael Barone explains that Obama is unlikely to repeat President Harry Truman’s comeback 1948 reelection campaign.

The Wall Street Journal, Unions Set for New Battle in Turf War: The National Union of Healthcare Workers is expected to file charges with the National Labor Relations Board alleging that Kaiser Permante, the largest private health care employer in the state, gave the Service Employees International Union preferential treatment in the last union election.

Public Policy Polling, Sentiment moving against Walker recall: According to the latest PPP poll, 50 percent of Wisconsin voters oppose a recall of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, while 47 percent are in favor. Those numbers are flipped from PPP’s last Wisconsin poll, in May, which found 50 percent in support of a recall and 47% opposed.

Campaign 2012
GOP Field: According to a Rasmussen poll released yesterday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry now leads former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney by 11 points, 29 to 18 percent. Rep. Michele Bachmann came in third with 13 percent.

Perry: Texas Gov. Rick Perry refused to retract or apologize for saying about Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke Monday, “If this guy prints more money between now and the election … we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas.” On Tuesday, Perry explained: “I am just passionate about the issue, and we stand by what we said.”

Righty Playbook
Breitbart.tv caught MSNBC’s Ed Schultz selectively editing video of Perry saying, “That big black cloud that hangs over America, that debt that is so monstrous,” to just “That big black cloud that hangs over America, is so monstrous.” Schultz used the doctored to quote to accuse Perry of racism.

Under the header Rick Perry’s bad, Obama-style medicine, Michelle Malkin calls Perry “Governor Gardasil, R-Merck.” and lays into him for “his odious Gardasil vaccine mandate for children.”

Lefty Playbook
Brendan Nyhan pops liberal dreams that Obama could be the next Truman, pointing out that in 1948 the U.S. economiy was growing at a sizzling 6.8 percent clip.

Daily Kos Joan McCarter links to an MSNBC transcript where Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., tells Chuck Todd that Democrats will not be pushing an increase in the Super Congress. McCarter comments: “The “everything but tax increases is on the table” strategy is the one the Republicans are pushing. It’s not entirely helpful to have it come from the Democratic side, too.”

The Washington Post‘s Brad Plummer makes the case that Claifornia’s high-speed rail project is not a boondoggle … yet.

Econominc Terrorism

Conspiracy to commit economic terrorism; conspiracy to disrupt financial transactions; conspriacy to commit fraud; consoiracy to be stupid; (ok so thats not illegal, but it should be)

Revealed — The Left’s Economic Terrorism Playbook: The Chase Campaign by a Coalition of Unions, Community Groups, Lawmakers and Students to Take Down US Capitalism and Redistribute Wealth & Power

Redstate Morning Briefing

I'm sure he had a perfectly good reason for being a wimp and selling out to the dhimmis. He probably talked to his wife before he voted to bankrupt the nation.

Eric Cantor's Failure of Leadership

On Friday, 92 Republicans, including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, joined all of the Democrats to defeat an amendment offered up by Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn to ensure the GOP lived up to its "$100 billion in cuts" pledge.

This was a failure of leadership, particularly by Eric Cantor.

Blackburn's amendment, by its own description, would have "reduce[d] spending by 5.5% in 8 non-securiy spending subsections of the bill and reduce[d] Legislative Branch appropriations by 11%."

In other words, just as Republicans pledged to bring spending down to 2008 levels, Congresswoman Blackburn's amendment would have ensured it happened across the board, save for security matters.

Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy joined Democrats to oppose this. Other Republicans took to the floor to call Rep. Blackburn and her conservative colleagues "lazy" for wanting across the board cuts.

Senate Sell-out..Redstate

Less than 12 months to find replacements for the corrupt politicians subverting our Constitution. We need a super-majority, lets get one.

Eric from Redstate posted this about an hour and a half ago.

We Are No Longer a Nation of Laws.
Senate Sets Up Requirement for Super-Majority to Ever Repeal Obamacare
The Senate Democrats declare a super-majority of senators will be needed to overrule any regulation imposed by the Death Panels

If ever the people of the United States rise up and fight over passage of Obamacare, Harry Reid must be remembered as the man who sacrificed the dignity of his office for a few pieces of silver.

The rules of fair play that have kept the basic integrity of the Republic alive have died with Harry Reid. Reid has slipped in a provision into the health care legislation prohibiting future Congresses from changing any regulations imposed on Americans by the Independent Medical Advisory Boards, which are commonly called the “Death Panels.”

On December 21, 2009, however, Harry Reid sold out the Republic in toto.

Upon examination of Senator Harry Reid’s amendment to the health care legislation, Senators discovered section 3403. That section changes the rules of the United States Senate.

To change the rules of the United States Senate, there must be sixty-seven votes.

Section 3403 of Senator Harry Reid’s amendment requires that “it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.” The good news is that this only applies to one section of the Obamacare legislation. The bad news is that it applies to regulations imposed on doctors and patients by the Independent Medical Advisory Boards a/k/a the Death Panels.

Section 3403 of Senator Reid’s legislation also states, “Notwithstanding rule XV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a committee amendment described in subparagraph (A) may include matter not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Finance if that matter is relevant to a proposal contained in the bill submitted under subsection (c)(3).” In short, it sets up a rule to ignore another Senate rule.

NY-23 Is the "Tipping Point"

DCProtestWarrior:NY-23 Is the "Tipping Point"

Doug Hoffman is the beginning of the conservative movement's efforts to take Congress back to the original intent of the Founding Fathers. The "Republican" leadership in the House will be measured by how well they adapt to the new/old ideas of governing.
Its time for the conservatives in Congress to put a stop to the socialist ideas being pushed down the throats of American citizens. Its time to recognize that the Constitution tells Congress what they can and cannot do.

The Constitution is the Law.
Everything else is a regulation.

Heritage Morning Bell

“By Any Legislative Means Necessary”
The American people do not like President Barack Obama’s health care plan. According to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll 42% of Americans “think his plan is a bad idea” compared to only 36% who think it is a good idea. 40% of Americans believe Obama’s health care plan “will result in the quality of your health care getting worse” compared to 24% who believe their care will get better. And 47% of Americans oppose “creating a public health care plan administered by the federal government” compared to only 43% who support it.

Facing this cratering of public support, the left in Congress is now considering abandoning moderates and independents to pass their narrow partisan ideal of health reform. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid spokesman Jim Manley promised yesterday that Democrats will pass Obamacare “by any legislative means necessary.”

What exactly does Senator Reid mean by ‘any legislative means necessary’? The Wall Street Journal explains: “Most legislation in the Senate requires 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, but certain budget-related measures can pass with 51 votes through a parliamentary maneuver called reconciliation.” The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 created reconciliation, but Congress didn’t really use it until the 1980s. In 1993, President Bill Clinton tried to use the rule to press his health care plan through the Senate, but Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) resisted, introducing the Byrd Rule which allows any Senator to strike specific provisions or amendments from legislation if a 60 vote Senate majority agrees that the item is “extraneous” to the budget. At the time Byrd specifically argued that health care was out of bounds for a process that was intended to only apply to budgets.

But Democrats in Congress are undeterred by history, precedent, and public opinion. They are now planning to split the bill into two parts: one bill with budget-related matters and another bill with policy changes such as the insurance market reforms. They even are prepared to argue that the core of the left’s health care vision: a government-run health care plan can be considered a budget related item. The WSJ reports: “Democratic leaders have concluded they can pack more of their health overhaul plans under this procedure, congressional aides said. They might even be able to include a public insurance plan to compete with private insurers, a key demand of the party’s liberal wing.”

The American people are already sick and tired of 1,000 page bills and strong arm legislative tactics. A new Gallup poll shows that 82% of Republicans and even 40% of Democrats disapprove of the job Congress is doing. Even more troubling for the “by any means necessary” crowd is that 70% of independents share a negative view of the House and Senate. Finally, a new Pew poll shows that for the first time since President Barack Obama took office the percentage of Americans who hold a favorable view of the Democratic Party has slipped below 50%. How will independents feel about liberals in Congress if they pass a health plan that 40% of Americans believe “will result in the quality of your health care getting worse”?

They Will Succeed If You Don't Do Something

The extreme-left is desperately trying to take over every aspect of your life. In case you haven't noticed, they're taking control of the banking industry, they're trying to take control of your family's healthcare, they're taking control of the auto industry and the energy industry...

But, most horrifically, THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE CONTROL OF YOU. And, make no mistake; the so-called $3.6 TRILLION BUDGET ABOMINATION IS THEIR MEANS TO DO IT. Some critics, to borrow a phrase from the good folks at FreedomWorks, are saying that this $ 3.6 trillion budget abomination "taxes too much, spends too much, and borrows too much." But the simple fact that $3.6 trillion is a mind-boggling figure is just one small piece of the puzzle.

The one thing that no one is really taking about (the 800 pound gorilla in the room) is that this $3.6 trillion budget abomination is ALSO the LARGEST AND MOST AMBITIOUS GOVERNMENT POWER GRAB IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY. And if it passes, you can start to kiss the free-market system goodbye. If it passes, you can kiss your personal liberties goodbye.

Here are just a handful of the highlights:
Health Care: According to the typically pro-Obama New York Times: "Mr. Obama asked Congress to set aside $634 billion in a 'reserve fund for health care reform.' He provided no new information about how to cover the uninsured, saying he would work out the details with Congress later this year." The Times also stated that Obama "would also increase premiums charged to Medicare beneficiaries...." No, your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Obama is asking Congress for $634 billion dollars of your money, is offering no clear plan as to what he wants to do with the money (he'll get to that later, after the money is appropriated) and wants to cut back on benefits. The only thing that is certain is the government will start taking money out of your pocket and start making your healthcare decisions for you.

Taxes: Moveon.org, while promoting the $3.6 trillion budget abomination, repeats the Obama mantra that it: "Reduces taxes for 95% of working Americans. And if your family makes less than $250,000, your taxes won't go up one dime."

The truth of the matter, however, is that this $3.6 trillion budget calls for a number of hidden taxes. One of these is a cap-and-trade energy tax which, according to The Wall Street Journal "would cost the average household in the bottom-income quintile about 3.3 percent of its after-tax income every year. That's about $680, not including the costs of reduced employment and output. The three middle quintiles would see their paychecks cut between $880 and $1,500, or 2.9 percent to 2.7 percent of income."

The Wall Street Journal concludes: "Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth--but in a very curious way. It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street 'green tech' investors who know how to leverage the political class."

Jobs: MoveOn.org claims the budget "Invests more than $100 billion in clean energy technology, creating millions of green jobs that can never be outsourced." The folks at FreedomWorks have this to say: "The numbers being used here, like the numbers used in the stimulus debate, are deceptive in that they hide the less rosy bigger picture. It is a classic case of 'what is seen and what is not seen' as described so clearly by economists Frederic Bastiat and Henry Hazlitt. What is seen are the jobs that will certainly result from the government spending $100 billion. What is not seen are all the jobs that are lost because the government has to take those $100 billion out of one part of the economy to spend it somewhere else."

You're starting to get the picture. This $3.6 trillion budget has nothing to do with stimulating the economy, or making life better for the average Joe; unless, of course, you believe that the redistribution of YOUR income and government intrusion into YOUR life are good things. Perhaps that's why Senator Judd Gregg called Obama's $3.6 trillion budget "an extraordinary move of our government to the left." Gregg added that President Obama "is proposing the largest tax increase in history..."

Tell the Republican and Democratic Leadership of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. in unmistakable terms that the American people want this $3.6 trillion abomination of a budget bill DEAD... a stake driven through its heart. Tell them that the American people do not want "compromises" or insignificant amounts of fat trimmed from this monster. Tell the Republican and Democratic Leadership of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. that OBAMA'S BUDGET MUST DIE!

Del Jeff Frederick is 10x th Conservative

Postscript to post below:

...and that letter written and signed by the VA Congressional delegation asking Delegate Frederick to step down? Ya'll can take that letter, fold it til it's all pointy corners and stuff it where the sun don't shine. Ya'll have lost the right to ask any conservative to do anything.

Jeff Frederick is ten times the conservative and 100 times the American any current member of the VA Congressional delegation will ever hope to be.

We're going to find some true conservatives, true Americans and we will run them in 2010 and 2012 and put this current crop of dhimmi wannabes out the door.

Thats a promise

From A Conservative to Mr Cantor

I'v been busy the past two days so I haven't really had time to formulate a response to the most breathtaking subversion of our Constitution I've ever seen. I heard about the vote to tax the retention bonuses AIG was contractually obligated to pay 71 employees on Thursday evening and my first thought was: "Damn I hope Congressman Cantor didn't vote for this monstrous violation of the takings clause." I knew it was the dhimmicrats just doing what they do best: ignoring the will of the people, ignoring the Constitution, and covering their slimy asses. I've said repeatedly here and on other forums, the dhimmis are in charge, they can do whatever they like whenever they like.

On Friday morning I was listening to WRVA and Jimmy Barrett and I heard Cantor try to justify his vote to single out 71 American citizens for puntitive retribution.

Well, that dog don't hunt. So, with the help of friends over at FreeRepublic, I can post a response to this idiotic, anti-American, anti-Constitutional, Marxist tactic:

Dear Mr. Cantor-
I just heard that you voted to tax the AIG bonuses. I am stunned that you would vote for a bill that targets specific individuals who did not commit any crime! Like it or not those bonuses were rightfully earned and rightfully paid. The ramifications of this bill are so stunning that I am speechless. What on earth were you thinking? I just cannot believe it.
I used to think you had conservative values and beliefs. I don’t think that anymore. You seem to be drinking the Obama/Pelosi/Reid Kool Aid.
I am disgusted. Don’t count on my vote in the future. You sold this country down the socialist/fascist river with that vote.

McCauliffe Is A Typical Democrat

You really want this piece of democrat excrement as Governor of our Commonwealth?
Remember Enron?

McAuliffe’s Shady Business Past
Why the former DNC chairman and potential candidate for Governor of Viriginia can’t preach about business accountability.

But even as he questions the president's credibility on the issue of corporate responsibility, there are questions about McAuliffe's own past as a private businessman — questions that suggest how difficult it will be for the DNC chairman to be a credible voice for greater accountability. In the late 1990s, some of McAuliffe's business ventures came under investigation by the U.S. Department of Labor, which filed suit against two labor-union officials, both of them with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers pension fund, for entering into questionable business arrangements with McAuliffe. Both officials later agreed to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in penalties for their actions, and the union itself had to reimburse its pension fund by nearly $5 million.
McAuliffe's real-estate deals have attracted relatively little attention in the press. Last October's consent agreement that ended the Labor Department lawsuit, coming after the terrorist attacks of September and just before the collapse of Enron, received almost no coverage. But the details of McAuliffe's business career may take on new importance now that he has become one of the president's chief critics on the issue of business ethics.
A Democratic-party spokeswoman dismisses suggestions that McAuliffe's record might damage his credibility. "First of all, Terry McAuliffe isn't president of the
United States," says the DNC's Jennifer Palmieiri. "He doesn't have the responsibility or the ability to restore confidence in the markets." Second, Palmieiri says, "We're holding Bush to Bush's standard — the standard he has laid out for corporate CEOs. He should follow that example. He has not been upfront with what his own situation was." Finally, Palmieiri says, the business records of Bush's Democratic critics are far less important than the fact that they support the Sarbanes corporate reform bill. "Whatever their business dealings are, and whatever they have done in the private sector," Palmieiri says, "they still want to support the most responsible reforms
available."
Nevertheless, McAuliffe's business career might attract increased scrutiny should he continue his high-profile criticism of the president's business history. Already there have been mentions of McAuliffe's extraordinarily well-timed investment in the now-bankrupt Global Crossing, in which McAuliffe invested $100,000 and made $18 million. There has also been talk about the six-figure profit McAuliffe made for helping Prudential Insurance Company win a government contract. And there has been talk about McAuliffe's role in a politically connected Washington bank in the 1980s and early 1990s.

As McAuliffe himself has said, every day, more questions arise.

Questions indeed. Let's ask them, before this gets too far.

Ineligible Obama Playing with Constitutional Fire

From JB Williams
Canada Free Press

Numerous legal challenges have been filed in an effort to force president-elect Barack Obama to validate his constitutional eligibility for the office he seeks and while it is true that suit after suit has been denied in the courts, it is also true that all of them have been denied on a technicality rather than on the merits of the case against Obama. And although Obama could have ended the debate months ago by simply delivering a $10.00 certified copy of his official birth records to prove his constitutional eligibility, he has instead chosen to spend nearly amillion bucks in legal defense fees hoping to run out the clock and assumeoffice before any of the legal challenges will be heard by the courts.

A few things are quite clear at this point:

Article II – Section I of the Constitution clearly limits those who canserve as Commander-in-Chief to “natural born citizens” of the United States, and for good reason.

The Hawaii certificate posted on Obama’s web-site is insufficient and in question at best

Obama’s Kenyan relatives state that they attended his birth in Kenya Later, Obama was indeed a legal citizen of Indonesia, traveling under his Indonesian passport as recent as in his early twenties

There is no known record of Obama changing his Indonesian citizenship back to American citizenship, and it wouldn’t make him a “natural born citizen”even if he did None of this seems to matter to anyone of consequence…

On this basis, we are headed towards not one, but numerous constitutional crises.
How will an unconstitutional president rule?For starters, it’s clear that he will rule without regard for the Constitution or the laws erected upon that foundation. His entire presidencyis a blatant violation of both.
When political power is the only goal, the end always justifies the means. In what ways will this new unconstitutional government seek to subvert or pervert constitutional law for its own political gain?
Responding to a question about what type of judicial appointments he would make, Obama said, “We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”
–
This somewhat innocuous sounding Obama statement is the basis upon which an unconstitutional president will dismantle constitutional law and the representative republic it has held together for more than 230 years.

The sum of his statement is this. Justice must not be blind to color, race, gender, sexual preference or religious doctrine. It must favor some segments of society over others. It must provide unequal justice for some members ofsociety at the expense of other members of society.

Specifically, justice must favor the poor, the African-American, the gay, the disabled and the old, at the expense of all who are not poor, African-American, gay, disabled or old. In short, justice must become yet another affirmative action committee.

Jefferson Warned

“At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account.”

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Monsieur A. Coray, Oct 31, 1823

The left has used the courts to undermine constitutional law and founding American principles and values for many years now. Today, Americans have so little respect for constitutional law that they see no problem with seating an unconstitutional president who openly promises to use the full weight and power of the federal government, including the judicial branch, to completely dismantle the republic.
Obama has the power of the people behind him. He was elected by a seven million vote margin, despite the fact that he is constitutionally ineligible for the office he seeks.
Jefferson warned about this too, “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule,where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”

The People’s Unalienable Rights These words are the cornerstone of American freedom and liberty…

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” – OurDeclaration of Independence

Yet these rights have already been alienated. Not so much by congress, the legitimate law making branch of the federal government, but by the courts,which have operated as a politically appointed and motivated nine memberaffirmative action oligarchy.

Over forty million innocent Americans have been robbed of their unalienable right to Life by way of the unbridled right of a mother to kill

Individual Liberty has been alienated by the rights of a greater common good

The unalienable right to pursue Happiness has been alienated by the governments right to confiscate the earned property of some for benefit of others via oppressive taxation.

Still, the people have voted themselves even deeper into an unconstitutional abyss by electing an unconstitutional president to preside over a congress controlled by the same leftists who have already stripped Americans of many of their fundamental rights.

Rendering the Constitution Irrelevant:

If Article II – Section I of the US Constitution is meaningless, can you tell me
what parts of the Constitution still have standing?
The issue of Obama’s eligibility is much bigger than Obama himself, the Democratic quest for unbridled power, or even the ill-fated hope for change in the hearts of many ill-informed American voters.
McCain’s $326 million dollar campaign was no match for Obama’s $712 million dollar coup, much of which was funded by unknown foreign sources.
The seating of Barack Obama in the Oval Office amounts to rendering the entire US Constitution moot. The new affirmative action administration will operate free from constitutional limitations, as the constitution will be rendered irrelevant as of the swearing in ceremony on January 20th.
The Democrat controlled congress will not stop it from happening. The people voted for it. The courts refuse to weigh in against the overwhelming “will of the people,” and they won’t stop it either.

Obama is not the issue here.

Constitutional law and the survival of a free representative republic is the issue at hand. Federal power was to be limited by the letter of the US Constitution, as it was ratified by the people of the states. Without the constitution, there are no limitations to federal power.
If Article II – Section I of the constitution is meaningless, then the entire Constitution is meaningless. Do the people willing to look the other way just to seat Obama, realize this?
Why has Obama spent a million dollars in legal fees when he could have spent$10.00 for a certified copy of his birth records?
You have eighteen days to find the answer to this question, and then find someone in power who cares… Good Luck!

JB Williams is a business man, a husband, a father, and a writer. A no-nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy. He is published nationwide and in many countries around the world. JB Williams’ website is jb-williams.com/

They Can't Blame Republicans For This

What if there was corruption and there were no Republicans to blame for it?

Illinois and Chicago.... Who runs it?
Senators:Barack Obama & Dick Durbin
Representative:Jesse Jackson, Jr.
Illinois Governor:Rod Blogo jevich (arrested)
Illinois House leader:Mike Madigan
Illinois Attorney General: Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike)
Chicago Mayor:Richard M.Daley (son of Mayor Richard J. Daley) 1968 Chicago

The leadership in Illinois? .....all Democrats.
Thank you for the combat zone in Chicago.
Body count in the last six months 292 killed (murdered) in Chicago
221 killed in Iraq.
State pension fund - $44 Billion in debt, worst in the country.
Cook County (Chicago) sales tax - 10.25% highest in the country. (Look it up).
Chicago school system- rated one of the worst in the country.
Of course, they're all blaming each other. They can't blame Republicans because there aren't any.
This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois.
And he's going to fix"Washington politics for us?
Good luck and may God help us

If It Talks Like A Marxist Duck and Walks Like A Marxist Duck

its NOT a platypus. The secret is out. Obama is a Marxist. We all knew that. If the dhimmicrats gain total control of our country, prepare for the worst you can imagine.

Family Security Matters:

Joe Biden wanted to know if WFTV-Channel 9’s Barbara West was “joking” when she asked, “How is Sen. Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?” After hearing this interview, perhaps Joe might want to amend his answer.

In a nutshell: Obama thinks the Constitution stands in the way of government meddling in the way you and I live our lives.

A Gallup poll in June indicated that Americans oppose redistribution of wealth by the government 84% to 13%, preferring that the government do what it can to improve the overall economic situation. I find it hard to believe they’ve changed their minds in just a few months. So if a majority of Americans are against socialism, how would Obama enact it?

Simple: judges.

The next president will likely make appointments to the Supreme Court - possibly as many as three. Tommy Vietor, Obama spokesman, explained that "Barack Obama has always believed that our courts should stand up for social and economic justice, and what's truly elitist is to appoint judges who will protect the powerful and leave ordinary Americans to fend for themselves." Denver Post columnist David Harnsanyi points out that

“Justices solemnly swear to "administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich." So judges, incredible as this may sound, are not prohibited from "protecting" the powerful if the powerful happen to be right on the constitutional issue.

To suggest otherwise, as Obama has, is to suggest they should ignore their oath.

Could this latest bombshell be why Americans have not been privy to Obama’s college records and writings? The Obama campaign is calling this latest revelation a distraction. I call it critical information.

Tom Blumer, writing for Pajamas Media, says, “No wonder Team Obama is pushing the travesty known as ‘early voting’ so hard. They’re praying that as many Obama voters as possible will cast their ballots without learning the true nature of the person they are supporting.”

Voters who have been enthralled by Obama’s flowery teleprompter speeches and promises of hope, change, lollipops and unicorns owe it to themselves to look beyond the information being offered by the mainstream media in this last significant week before the election.

As the saying goes, forewarned is forearmed.

Where is THIS MONEY Coming From?

from NewsMax.com

As Barack Obama reaped a stunning $150 million in campaign donations in September, bringing his total to more than $600 million, new questions have arisen about the source of his amazing funding.
By Obama’s own admission, more than half of his contributions have come from small donors giving $200 or less. But unlike John McCain’s campaign, Obama won’t release the names of these donors.
A Newsmax canvass of disclosed Obama campaign donors shows worrisome anomalies, including outright violations of federal election laws.
For example, Obama has numerous donors who have contributed well over the $4,600 federal election limit.
Many of these donors have never been contacted by the Obama campaign to refund the excess amounts to them.
And more than 37,000 Obama donations appear to be conversions of foreign currency.
According to a Newsmax analysis of the Obama campaign data before the latest figures were released, potential foreign currency donations could range anywhere from $12.8 million to a stunning $63 million in all. With the addition of $150 million raised in September, this amount could be much more.
When asked by Newsmax about excess contributions, Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said that contributions already identified as excess had been returned and that those the campaign was just learning about -- either through news accounts or from the Federal Election Commission -- “will be returned.”
“Every campaign faces the challenge of screening and reviewing its contributions,” LaBolt said. “And we have been aggressive about taking every available step to make sure our contributions are appropriate, updating our systems when necessary.”
But many of the donors Newsmax canvassed said they had “never” been contacted by the Obama campaign or seen any refunds, even though their contributions went over the limit months ago.
In all, Newsmax found more than 2,000 donors who had contributed in excess of the $4,600 limit for individuals per election cycle.
Such donations, if not returned within 60 days, are a clear violation of federal campaign finance laws.
Lisa Handley, a stay-at-home mom from Portland, Ore., recalled giving $4,600 to the Obama campaign by credit card, contributions she made because “I love Obama,” she said.
According to FEC records, however, she gave an additional $2,300 to the campaign, putting her over the limit.
The Obama campaign reported that it had “redesignated” the excess money, which could mean that it had contributed it to a separate party committee or a joint fundraising committee, which have higher limits.
But if that happened, it’s news to Handley. “No one ever contacted me to return any of the money or told me they were redesignating some of the money,” she said.
Ronald J. Sharpe Jr., a retired teacher from Rockledge, Fla., appears in the Obama campaign reports as having given a whopping $13,800.
The campaign reported that it returned $4,600 to him, making his net contribution of $9,200 still way over the legal limit.
But there’s one problem with the Obama data: Sharpe doesn’t remember giving that much money to the Obama campaign in the first place, nor does he recall anyone from the campaign ever contacting him to return money.
“At the end, I was making monthly payments,” he told Newsmax. The Obama campaign records do not show any such payments.
Many donors refused to answer questions about the political campaign contributions appearing in their name when they learned that the caller was from a news organization.
John Atkinson, an insurance agent in Burr Ridge, Ill., refused to discuss his contributions, which totaled $8,724.26, before numerous refunds.
Atkinson and others gave in odd amounts: $188.67, $1,542.06, $876.09, $388.67, $282.20, $195.66, $118.15, and one rounded contribution of $2,300.
Sandra Daneshinia, a self-employed caregiver from Los Angeles, made 36 separate contributions, totaling $7,051.12, according to FEC records. Thirteen of them were eventually refunded.
In a bizarre coincidence, those 13 refunded contributions -- for varying amounts such as $223.88 and $201.44 -- added up exactly to $2,300, the amount an individual may give per federal election.
Also giving in odd amounts was Robert Porter, an accountant for the town of Oviedo, Fla. Porter gave a surprising $4,786.02 to the Obama campaign.
In all, Newsmax found an astonishing 37,265 unique donors to the Obama campaign whose contributions were not rounded up to dollar amounts. That amounts to more than 10 percent of the total number of unique donors whose names have been disclosed by the Obama campaign to the public.
Of those, 44,410 contributions came in unrounded amounts of less than $100. FEC regulations only require that campaigns disclose the names of donors who have given a total of $200 or more, so that means that all these contributors were repeat donors.
Another 15,269 contributions gave in unrounded amounts between $101 and $999, while 704 of the unrounded contributions were in amounts of more than $1,000.
Campaign finance experts find the frequent appearance of unrounded contributions suspicious, since contributors almost invariably give in whole dollar amounts.
One expert in campaign finance irregularities offers a possible explanation.
“Of course this is odd. They are obviously converting from local currency to U.S. dollars,” said Ken Boehm, the chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center.
“The overwhelming number of large dollar contributors -- and even small donors -- are in even dollar amounts,” he told Newsmax. “Anyone who doubts that can go to FEC.gov and look through the campaign contribution data bases. You will not find many uneven numbers.”
Boehm said he had rarely seen unrounded contributions in his 30 years as a lawyer doing campaign finance work.
“There’s always the odd cat who wants to round up his checkbook, but they are very rare,” he said.
Richard E. Hug, a veteran Republican fundraiser in Maryland who who raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004, and spearheaded the successful 2002 gubernatorial race for Bob Ehrlich that brought in a record $10 million, told Newsmax that unrounded contributions were extremely unusual.
“I’ve never seen this in all my years of raising money for political candidates,” he said. “The first thing it suggests is foreign currency transactions -- contributions from foreign donors, which is clearly illegal.”
Top Republican fundraiser Steve Gordon, who has raised $65 million for GOP candidates over the past 30 years, told Newsmax that such contributions in uneven amounts would be “pretty unusual.”
“You might have a rounding process if there was some kind of joint event, but since all appears to be on the Internet, it’s pretty unusual. At the very least, it would need to be explored.”
LaBolt attributed the uneven amounts to the online “Obama store,” which sells T-shirts and other campaign items.
“Contributions made to the Obama store often produce totals that are not exact dollar amounts,” he said.
But the campaign has never produced any accounting for proceeds from its online store, which virtually shut down several weeks ago after Newsmax and news organizations revealed that Palestinians from the Gaza Strip and other foreigners had made large purchases there.
The Republican National Committee has filed a complaint against the Obama campaign for “accepting prohibited contributions from foreign nationals and excessive contributions from individuals,” which incorporated reporting from Newsmax and other news organizations.
“Their responses to FEC inquiries have often been inadequate and late,” RNC general counsel Sean Cairncross told Newsmax.
The Obama camp claims to have 2.5 million donors in all. But until now, they have kept secret the names of the overwhelming majority of these money-givers. According to a Newsmax analysis, the Obama campaign finance records contain just 370,448 unique names.
Even accounting for common names such as Robert Taylor or Michael Brown, which can signify multiple donors, Obama’s publicly known donor base is less than 20 percent of the total number of donors the campaign claims to have attracted. But the identity of the other 2 million donors is being kept secret.
As of the end of August, those secret donors have given an incredible $222.7 million to Obama, according to the FEC -- money whose origin remains unknown to anyone other than Obama’s finance team, who won’t take calls from the press.
While no exact figures are available, if the same percentage of potential foreign contributions found in the itemized contribution data is applied to the total $426.9 million the Obama camp says it has taken in from individuals, this could mean that Obama is financing his presidential campaign with anywhere from $13 million to a whopping $63 million from overseas credit cards or foreign currency purchases.
The sum of all unrounded contributions in the itemized FEC filings for the Obama campaigns comes to $6,437,066.07. That is the actual amount of money that appears to have been charged to foreign credit cards that the Obama campaign has disclosed.
If the same ratio applies to the unitemized contributions, which are again as large, then the Obama campaign may have taken as much as $13 million from foreign donors.
However, the donors who made those unrounded contributions gave a total of $31,484,584.27, meaning that as much as $63 million may have come from questionable sources.
Both presidential campaigns are required to submit detailed fundraising reports for September on Monday.

Rotten ACORN

Within its shell, ACORN contains all the makings of an intriguing government political conspiracy movie: drama, injustice, organized crime, election fraud, intimidation, violence, money, lies, extortion and a presidential candidate.[1]

If you are a patriotic, middle class American who spends most of your time working for your family and enjoying your FREEDOM, you have probably not been bothered by the sounds of an ACORN dropping before now.

But, while you were sleeping peacefully at night, the roots of Socialism have broadened its reach, without determent right into the foundation of the White House.[2]

Allow me to enlighten you to the ways of a radical community action group that could impact your way of life forever.

ACORN is an acronym that stands for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Its mere definition contains hints of Socialism as it claims to be a group advocating for low- and
moderate-income families that addresses housing, schools, neighborhood safety, health care, job conditions, and other social issues.[3]

Beneath that surface lie violence, intimidation, threats, race baiting and direct physical attacks on property, people and the legal establishment.

Without going into the myriad details, many ACORN policy proposals are widely considered to be in line with the far left wing of the Democratic Party.[4]

If you are asking yourself what could possibly be so ‘bad' with a group that in theory advocates for low income families, then you've just given yourself the reason this group has been allowed to thrive in America with little scrutiny and under the radar of main street observation until now.[5]

In truth, ACORN is the most virulent, organized crime group in this decade...and it is funded by YOU.

Put simply, ACORN is ripping off the taxpayer through Congressional hand outs.[6]

In fact, ACORN was recently due to receive nearly $700 million of the $700 billion dollar bailout bill until Republicans in the Senate redlined it.[7]

Allow that to sink in for a moment: $700 million from the US for an organized crime group.

Yes, ACORN has been receiving Obama campaign funding, but what's worse is that ACORN leaders are actively extorting money from banks, mortgage brokers and Congress. To add insult to injury, ACORN is costing Americans millions to investigate all of its criminal activities across America.

And then there's the end of the democratic process through valid elections.[8]

Yes, ACORN is behind much of the rampant voter fraud.[9] ACORN has been involved with fraudulent voter registrations for years.[10] In fact, Missouri has 8 ACORN guilty pleas on record (for 2006 violations of federal voting laws) just this year. Many other states are investigating many hundreds of cases of voter fraud in their jurisdiction.[11] We have compelling evidence that ACORN has been involved in fraudulent voter registration since early in the 2007 launch of the Obama campaign.

But we don't stop at faulty funding and voter fraud. Obama's community organizational skills are synonymous with totalitarian tactics as its leaders use violence, intimidation, threats, racial baiting and direct physical attacks on property, persons and the legal establishment.[12]

When you shed the shell, there is just no good to the group known as ACORN. It is corrupt and without any upside.

With a group like ACORN running rampant in government and shaking hands in Washington, why not legitimize the Bloods and The Crypts? They too are street gangs but they just happen to push drugs instead of bogus registrations drives and sub-prime mortgage deals.

Uncle Sam should be putting ACORN at the top of its list as internal terrorist groups, yet the red, white and blue sense of justice seems to be crumbling. Many numbed citizens just roll their eyes at groups like ACORN simply because America has unfortunately become deadened to the idea that politicians have ulterior motives, nameless agenda's and behave unscrupulously at times.

However, the rest of this American story is without filtering or fear. The disturbing reason more ACORN activities go un-prosecuted is because the FEC as well as the FBI have refused to open investigations out of fear of rocking the Obama campaign.[13]

The MOST disturbing fact you need to know about ACORN is that its organizers have terrorized the Federal justice and law enforcement system into NON-action.

How can one group get away with so much? Because ACORN has many Democratic backers in Congress who work tirelessly for its perpetuation and the head ACORN nut is Senator Obama.[14] In fact, Senator Obama is so entwined in ACORN it has become a career and campaign double helix in his DNA.

If you're asking yourself what Obama has to do with ACORN, consider this:Obama has served ACORN as its attorney, has been its direct action trainer, its mentor, its contractor, and its PRIMARY illegal campaign funder. ACORN is part of the ‘Community Organizing'experience his evil empire would like to bring into the White House.[15] American men and American women should be recognizing that mother freedom is on the brink of extinction with one single NUT trampling all over liberty.

Who will be left sleeping peacefully at night as the ACORN marks the beginning of Socialism in America brought to you courtesy of Barack Obama?[16] With ACORN intact or worse, empowered in the White House, American Democracy will be a legend long gone. Socialism and criminality will be the rule.

[1] Rotten Acorn http://www.rottenacorn.com/

[2] IBD Editorial http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=307579834298611

[3] Special Report: Rotten Acorn http://www.rottenacorn.com/downloads/060728_badSeed.pdf

[4] Discover the Networks.org
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupprofile.asp?grpid=6968

[5] National Review
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI=

[6] New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/09/us/09embezzle.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[7] Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431804,00.html

[8] National Review
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/clyne200410311142.asp

[9] Fox News http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/05/02/voter-fraud-watch-could-acorn-scandal-in-washington-have-been-avoided-with-photo-id/

[10] Michelle Malkin http://michellemalkin.com/2008/03/13/more-left-wing-voter-fraud-allegations-against-acorn/

[11] Rotten Acorn http://www.rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html

[12] IBD Editorial
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306457496204115

[13] Texas Darlin
http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/10/02/breaking-whistleblower-ignored-by-doj-fec-fbi-200-million-in-fishy-obama-donations/

[14] Real Clear Politics
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/acorn_obama_and_the_mortgage_m.html

[15] IBD Editorial
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=302914868143810

[16] IBD Editorial
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=303605575673142

When All Else Fails

His Highness the Messiah has taken a new tack.

The so-called failure of all these financial institutions is not bad accounting practices, it's not back channel payoffs to favorite butt buddies, it's not giving high paying jobs to political cronies as hush money (Jamie Gorelick and Fannie Mae),

Oh no, Brothers and Sisters. The fault is HALLIBURTON!!!!!!!!!!
Thats right. The libs favorite whipping post, Halliburton, is to blame for the financial crisis.

Whew...I sure am glad The Chosen One was around to clear that up. I was beginning to worry.

Just Give Us Our Money Back

We'll fix this on our own, without greedy, manipulative politicians.

The ultimate example of opportunistic politics before good government was displayed in Washington over the past several days. Political operatives from both sides of the aisle did everything in their power to create a government-based solution to the financial crisis facing our country; a government-created problem. In the end the US House of Representatives voted down the highly contentious Wall Street bailout bill mostly due to the fact that we are within the 30-day window when voters do not forget actions taken by their elected officials. If only the public's attention were always so focused.
In the end 90 House Democrats joined with 133 House Republicans in an effort to stop a measure that would have seen the biggest expansion of government in US history. In effect, it would have placed the coyote in charge of the hen house.
Many in our citizenry viewed the now-dead proposal as a "no fault" measure that would have allowed those responsible for this financial malfeasance to escape culpability and with good reason. Watching US Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and US Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) - along with their leadership, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senior Senator from New York, Charles Schumer - harangue about how Democrats were taking the lead in crafting "bi-partisan" legislation to "rescue" the average American from the evils of Wall Street was the ultimate exercise in political hypocrisy.
Frank and Dodd, both chairmen of their respective committees that over see the financial community on matters directly related to this crisis and the malfeasance that brought us to this point, were derelict in their duties not only as chairmen charged with oversight, but in their duties to their respective constituencies in that they were not providing good government.
Without doubt, Frank and Dodd should resign from their chairmanships immediately and without question. If the GOP had been in control of Congress at this point in time Democrats would have been screaming for the chairmen's resignation not only from their chairmanships but from Congress. So, let's exact some "what's good for the goose" here.

Our elected officials - our US Representatives, US Senators and the White House - must understand we the taxpayers - We the People - have had enough and are exercising our constitutionally mandated right to provide oversight to our elected officials. To do that we must make our voices heard.
Just as We the People stopped the sham of an immigration bill we can apply enough pressure on our elected officials to bring them to craft a piece of legislation that affords taxpayer monies to the taxpayers so that they can lift themselves out of this financial crisis by paying their own bills. Approaching the existing crisis in this manner would:
▪ Make available liquid assets to the banks and financial institutions currently strapped for cash because of the "bad paper" they hold.
▪ Eliminate the immediate threat of foreclosure to those who were afforded loans they couldn't afford.
▪ Eliminate any need for a massive expansion of federal government, thus reducing the proposal for a greater "governmental footprint" in our private lives.
▪ Allows taxpayers to use their own money to rectify private sector matters without governmental interference.
The solution for this "crisis" rests with the people, not the government; government will be responsible for repealing Bill Clinton's National Homeownership Initiative and eliminating Jimmy Carter's Community Reinvestment Act, and disciplining US Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd for their dereliction of duty with regard to their obligation to provide congressional oversight.
In the beginning, when our Framers and Founders created the incredible documents that are The Charters of Freedom - the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights - they understood that government was to be executed from the local to the federal; they maintained that because we had a citizen government, created to serve the people rather than to lord over the people, that the power needed to rest with the people.
Ladies and Gentlemen, it is time to exercise our constitutional duties of civic responsibility. Let's tell government to give us our own money back so we can fix the mess they have created. It is time to put good government before opportunistic blame-game politics. Anything else would be to ignore the will of the people.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Frank Salvato is the managing editor for The New Media Journal. He serves at the Executive Director of the Basics Project, a non-profit, non-partisan, 501(C)(3) research and education initiative.
Feedback: editorialdirector@familysecuritymatters.org.
Contact Information:White HousePresident George W. Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington DC
Email: president@whitehouse.gov
Comments: (202) 456-1111
Switchboard: (202) 456-1414
FAX: (202) 456-2461
US Senate
Click Here to access contact information for your US Senators
US House of Representatives
Click Here to access contact information for your Congressman
Media
Click Here for a comprehensive, state-by-state database of media contacts.