We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility and provide for the common def---aw, f*#@ it, let's just be Socialists!
In early November 2009, I wrote a little about my disdain for RINO's and Blue Dog Democrats. It's primary season in California, which means that the airwaves are being inundated with political ads. Unfortunately, neither of the Republican candidates for Governor are ideal. Poizner is a slime ball and you can read below all about Meg Whitman. She's since clarified her 'praise' for Van Jones, with whom she was most unfamiliar at the time.
Lean in close for the wet and sloppy one...
I'll answer the question of my take on Meg Whitman with another question; when are you going to get fed up of voting for the lesser of two evils?
This goes back to growing tired of the pragmatism versus principle argument that is going on throughout the Republican party, spurred in large part by the election of Obama and more recently by the nomination of Dede Scozzafava in NY-23. For far too long, the citizenry of this country has sat upon the sidelines taking no real action in supporting a candidate of any sort. And as a result when the primary comes along, the candidate we'd prefer (i.e. Tom McClintock for Governor, 2001; Fred Thompson for President, 2008; etc.) loses to a candidate that has larger name recognition or a prettier smile. We sit back and pontificate amongst ourselves on why these conservative candidates are the only acceptable choice for the office they seek and then sit back on our laurels as a much more moderate and distasteful candidate handily wins the primary. Once the primaries are over, then we watch this milquetoast candidate go on to run against the candidate from the other party, and then hold our noses as we enter the voting booth and publicly state that we've just voted for the lesser of two evils. Are you catching my drift here? We are to blame for 'middle of the road' candidates, and the RINO plague that currently infests the Republican party.
Now specifically as to Ms. Whitman... My principles would never allow me to support Barbara Boxer for Senate, ever. However, the last time that Boxer was up for re-election, Ms. Whitman publicly supported Boxer, and maxed out on donations to the Boxer for Senate campaign. (Also supported by Meg Whitman are moderate icons Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins as well as Democrats John Kerry and Mike Honda.) There are few in the Senate who in my opinion are more liberal than Mrs. Boxer, and yet Ms. Whitman not only publicly supported Boxer, but also donated money to her, snubbing Republican Bill Jones in his bid for the Senate seat. I would be interested to know what has changed about Mrs. Boxer, and Ms. Whitman in the last 5-6 years that would allow Ms. Whitman to support Carly Fiorina or Chuck Devore against Boxer as a Republican candidate would have to do in order to secure the Republican nomination. In addition, Ms. Whitman seems to be pleased with the job that self-proclaimed 'Radical Communist' Van Jones was doing, as recently as May 2009. If you'll recall Van Jones was President Obama's Green Jobs Czar and an admitted 9/11 truther. What business does a 'darned good' conservative Republican have supporting an avowed communist and 9/11 truther who is in the Obama Administration?! I have yet to hear Meg Whitman explicitly denounce the Stimulus package which has proven to be an unmitigated disaster. Ms. Whitman seems to have a hard time showing up to complete her civic duty. She was not registered to vote until 2002 and since that time, no voting records can be found in any of the counties or precincts she has inhabited. Recently, Ms. Whitman has also made some 'pro-amnesty' comments in interviews, all of which make my skin crawl.
Ms. Whitman may indeed be a Republican, but she, should she get elected, is going to be the type of Republican than is difficult to distinguish from a Democrat and that is one of the factors contributing to the Grand Old Party's current wander in the wilderness.
I refuse to continue to elect RINO's and then spend 2, 4 or 6 years complaining about the direction of the country. Ms. Whitman will not receive my vote, because she has not earned it, period.
A little bit of good news, to temper the blow from the last post. From Reuters:
A wealthy businessman who raised money for leading Democratic Party politicians, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, pleaded guilty on Thursday to defrauding three major banks out of $292.2 million in loan transactions.
Hassan Nemazee, 60, who once ran a private equity firm, admitted in Manhattan federal court to defrauding Bank of America Corp of more than $142 million, Citigroup Inc of $74.9 million and HSBC Holdings Plc of $74.9 million to pay his debt to Citigroup.
...
Nemazee was listed as one of the top "bundlers" of contributions to Obama's 2008 presidential campaign, according to OpenSecrets.org, a website run by the Center for Responsive Politics.
He typically donated more than $100,000 annually to Democratic Party political candidates, including Obama and now-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
...
The Democratic National Committee declined to comment, but an official said it had been previously announced that the affected donations would go to charity.
I am completely shocked... No really, this is my shocked face. Clinton just can't catch a break, can she? First there was Norman Hsu, and now Nemazee... What's next?
Please take the time to comment! Click the Comment Link adjacent to the Post Title.
Here's another Washington DC politician who was against the Slaughter Solution before they were for it. G_d that sounds familiar... Almost like I've heard it before. Hmmm.
Add this to the long list of examples of politicians who will change their moral and ethical standards dependent upon who is in control and what the issue is. Shame on you Steny.
Please take the time to comment! Click the Comment Link adjacent to the Post Title.
I know much hay was made over Nancy Pelosi's remarks about passing the bill so that people can learn what's in it... but, she's doubled down on stupid and dropped another gem. Ephasis mine:
In her most expansive case yet for health reform, Nancy Pelosi argued in a small roundtable with bloggers today that passing it into law would set the stage for a great, long-term debate with the GOP over the proper role of government in our lives...
So, just to confirm that I have this correct, we need to pass the bill so that everyone can see all the great things that are in it. Then once it's passed and we all see it's magnificence, at that point we can debate the merits of the bill. Gotcha. That's brilliant.
Speaking of the nuclear option, this is the approach that the GOP needs to adopt the next time Democrats are holding up the confirmation of judicial nominees.
No really, he's going to be great. Just put him on the bench, then we'll have a discussion about whether or not he'll make the right kinds of rulings.
And in other news, this guy's been elected President of The United States for the 2012 term. We'll begin exploring his past in 2014 and then we'll debate whether or not he's right for the country some time the year after that.
Please take the time to comment! Click the Comment Link adjacent to the Post Title.
You might have heard that a local State Senator by the name of Roy Ashburn was arrested last week for drunken driving after leaving a notorious gay bar in Sacramento. For a week, people were working themselves up into frothy foams attempting to determine just what it was that Roy Assburn was doing out so late at night, with an unidentified male in the car, supposedly leaving a gay night club. Today, Senator Assburn let the gay cat out of the bag:
State Sen. Roy Ashburn said he was feeling "numb" mid-morning Monday after announcing to his constituents that he is gay.
Ashburn, R-Bakersfield, came out Monday morning in an interview with talk radio host Inga Barks of AM 1180 KERN.
That numbness is a result of squeezing too hard. Just relax and you wont be so sore next time, or so Andrew Sullivan says...
Anyway, over the course of the week between Ashburn's arrest and his 'coming out,' accusations were flying all over the web accusing him of being a hypocritical gay. The very people who should, according to their own professions, have been Assburn's biggest defenders were tearing him down, all in the name of politics.
I don't give a rat's petootie whether or not Roy's gay. I don't care what he does in or out of a closet in the privacy of his or any other man's home. I do care how he votes. Roy's been pretty consistently conservative in his voting, so I have no problems with Roy. I do, however, have issues with how this will be used by the radical gay agenda as an example of self-loathing republicans who vote hypocritically. Asserting that all gays should vote for gay rights issues is the same as saying all whites should have voted for McCain and all blacks should have voted for PeeBo. This assertion is, of course, ludicrous.
For the record, the Government should not be involved in relationships, period. A marriage is a personal, physical and spiritual bond which a couple enters into, one with the other. When I read my bible (which doesn't happen often enough) I don't recall the part in Genesis 2:24 where it says:
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh, once the government has been paid for the marriage license and blood work has been completed.
This is why all gays should be libertarians, or conservatives on this issue. Sadly it's no longer about the issue, but an agenda. It's not enough to be accepted, they must instead be allowed to perform their revolting acts on television, in the streets and in your face. Should you protest, why you're nothing but a homophobic bigot. What, you didn't know?
Please take the time to comment! Click the Comment Link next to the Post Title.
Fair warning. I am in a funk and my writing will reflect that. I seem to have taken off my razor sharp wit and drippy sarcasm before I went to bed last night and have yet to find it this morning. My apologies...
In today's example of leftist morons, we have a real winner. This esteemed libtard goes by the name of Kagro X, aka David Waldman. Not that David Waldman, this one:
Yes, so brilliant is this man, that he calls his wife an idiot who betrayed her own kind by starting the propagandist outlet of Fox News, and he admits to torturing his children all on his public profile at DKos.
Anyway, on to the real reason for the post. It should not surprise anyone at this point that leftists and progressives have no morals. It should not surprise anyone that they are so invested in a thought process that they will damn all evidence to the contrary to forward their bilk. Although it could be implied in the last sentence, I am not speaking of Global Warming, Healthcare; per se, Minimum Wage, Gay Rights, ACORN, Second Hand Smoke or any typical lefty talking point du jour. Well, okay, maybe just one lefty talking point. You know the one about Sarah Palin being a foaming at the mouth mental midget? Seems, David X accuses Palin of telling everyone else to screw off after she got hers. True story, well sort of...
See! It says so, right there in the headline. Sarah Palin, apparently, is a fan of Socialized Medicine when she needs to use it, but "f*@#" the rest of y'all.
There's only one minor, teensy weensy little detail that David X forgot to check out before he hammered Palin. See, according to Palin, they were going across the border into Canada to get medical help in "the 60's," however, Yukon didn't begin Socialized Healthcare until 1972. Hmm, I'm pretty sure that "the 60's" and 1972 are different decades, but I might be off. I'll go ahead and defer to Barack "57 States" Obama on that one.
Please take the time to comment!Click the Comment Link next to the Post Title.
New York Institute for Special Education, Class Picture 2009
Surely if you've been living above ground for the last three weeks you recall the utter conniption the lefties had when the Supreme Court overturned the McCain Feingold legislation banning unregulated donations to the national parties. The law also explicitly denied the ability of large corporations to directly donate to candidates and advertise in an election for or against any candidate or issue. Democrats decried the court's decision as allowing corporations (including foreign) to spend without limit to influence elections here in the United States. This is of course a claim which has no basis in the actual understanding of law. Quoteth I from ABC News, emphasis mine:
Under current law, foreign nationals cannot donate to political candidates or pay for campaign ads. Concerns that other countries might try to influence American elections are not merely academic. In the late 1990s the Justice Department and congressional investigators uncovered efforts by foreign donors to infiltrate the American political system through donations to the Democratic Party under Bill Clinton. Among those implicated was Johnny Chung, a Clinton fund-raiser who told Federal investigators that a large part of the nearly $100,000 he gave the Democrats in the 1996 campaign came from China. According to published reports, Democrats had to return another $1.6 million brought in by another prominent Clinton money man, John Huang, after questions were raised about the source of the funds.
So, you're saying that the only ones to ever exploit the system in place by accepting donations from foreign companies was the Democrats?! Say it ain't so! Anyhoo, looks as though the party of law breakers found another loophole to exploit. From Hot Air:
"...the New York Times reports today, one select group of Democrats have had no problem cultivating corporate influence, and doing so by working around the McCain-Feingold restrictions their party claims to champion:
When the Congressional Black Caucus wanted to pay off the mortgage on its foundation’s stately 1930s redbrick headquarters on Embassy Row, it turned to a familiar roster of friends: corporate backers like Wal-Mart, AT&T, General Motors, Coca-Cola and Altria, the nation’s largest tobacco company.
Soon enough, in 2008, a jazz band was playing at what amounted to a mortgage-burning party for the $4 million town house.
Most political groups in Washington would have been barred by law from accepting that kind of direct aid from corporations. But by taking advantage of political finance laws, the caucus has built a fund-raising juggernaut unlike anything else in town.
It has a traditional political fund-raising arm subject to federal rules. But it also has a network of nonprofit groups and charities that allow it to collect unlimited amounts of money from corporations and labor unions.
From 2004 to 2008, the Congressional Black Caucus’s political and charitable wings took in at least $55 million in corporate and union contributions, according to an analysis by The New York Times, an impressive amount even by the standards of a Washington awash in cash. Only $1 million of that went to the caucus’s political action committee; the rest poured into the largely unregulated nonprofit network. (Data for 2009 is not available.)
Now, consider that $55 million in light of the outrage expressed over the last few weeks over the court’s Citizens United decision.
Color me completely shocked. Be sure to read the rest and watch the attached video. The effort here is to keep the status quo, in other words allow Democrats to continue to collect large sums of money from corporations to fund their political activities, while explicitly denying corporations from donating to groups and individuals with differing ideologies. Keep in mind that the Congressional Black Caucus is the same group of morons who visited Fidel Castro in Cuba last year and proclaimed him a great and compassionate leader.
This morning on The Spew, Meghan McCain aka Young Sally Struthers, pontificated on 'exactly what's wrong with politics.' At issue is Sarah Palin's call for Rahm Emmanuel to be fired while simultaneously finding nothing wrong with Rush Limbaugh's use of the word 'retarded' when used in as satire aimed at Rahm Emmanuel. Rush's point, which was obvious to anyone in his audience, was that a Republican under the same exact circumstance, would be run out of town on a rail. However, the POTUS' chief of staff just has to act like he's sorry, then all is forgiven. So, since Rahm can say it and get away with it, then it must be okay to do now, right? When Bawbawa Wawa questioned Rush's use of 'satire,' Whoopi Gasbag chimed in saying:
"Yeah, well, when he appears at Caroline's, the comedy club, I'll believe it was satirical. "
You see, only comedians in comedy clubs can use satire. Everybody knows that.
Also on the firing range for Young Sally Struthers, Tom Tancredo's Tea Party speech. Apparently Y.S.S. no issue with uninformed voters and illegal aliens voting in the election. Fucking Brilliant. She also accuses Tom Tancredo of racism. Here are the two remarks of Tancredo's which are racist, as determined by Y.S.S.:
"People who could not spell the word 'Vote' or say it in English, put a committed Socialist Ideologue in the White House, who's name is Barrack 'Hussein' Obama..."
"...People at the convention should have to pass literacy tests in order to be able to vote in this country..."
Y.S.S. compares Tancredo's statements to the 1960's and the excuses used to deny African-Americans' the right to vote. Either Y.S.S. is extremely ignorant, or she's as retarded as Rahm Emmanuel. Citizens of the United States who'd been granted the right to vote by the Constitution were being singled out and refused their right to vote based solely upon the color of their skin. The charge of illiteracy was a canard floated as a legitimate disqualifier by racists to prevent blacks their rights. Fast forward to November 4, 2008. It is known that there are somewhere between 12 and 40 MILLION Illegal Aliens residing within the borders of this nation. Illegal Aliens, are by definition NOT citizens of the United States and are therefore legally disqualified from voting. The other burr under Y.S.S.'s saddle is the fact that Tancredo used Barry's middle name which is a McCaniac no no. I'm sure when Y.S.S. got home, John grounded her for a week just for mentioning PeeBo's middle name, regardless of the context.
Yeah, I know... It's been like forever, so quit acting like you're truly hurt that I haven't blogged, and I'll quit acting like this was ever anything serious to start with. Deal? Sweet.
So, on to the point of this here blarg post. I was reading a little about on of the left's most treasured individuals of the 20th century last week, and ran across some not so surprising stuff. First, before you go any further, if you have not read Humberto Fontova's review of Steven Soderbergh's Che, go read it right now. I will wait here. Please hurry, I kinda have to pee. I think it's this bottle of wine I'm drinking. Are you done yet? Jeezus, I'm going to wet my pants! Ooohoohoo, lalala, ebebebebe. Yes, this actually makes it better. Don't act like you don't do the pee pee dance when you have to go. Alright, your turn to wait.
The only picture of Che Guevara worthy to be shown.
OMG, do I feel better. And look who else is done now. How convenient. Shall we continue? Are you certain? Fantastic, let's go.
Okay, so now you've figured out that this post is about Ernesto Che Guevara. Che, as he is most often called, was marxist reformer who attempted to spread socialism and communism across the world. While he was only moderately successful at this feat, he was much more accomplished at racism and murder. What kind of a man was Che? Well, let's take a look. Why don't we start with the views of the progressive left's favorite T-Shirt icon on Black people?
"Given the prevailing lack of discipline, it would have been impossible to use [Black] Congolese machine-gunners to defend the base from air attack: they did not know how to handle their weapons and did not want to learn,"
"The blacks, those magnificent examples of the African race who have maintained their racial purity thanks to their lack of an affinity with bathing, have seen their territory invaded by a new kind of slave: the Portuguese."
"The black is indolent and a dreamer; spending his meager wage on frivolity or drink; the European has a tradition of work and saving, which has pursued him as far as this corner of America and drives him to advance himself, even independently of his own individual aspirations."
So, here we have a mass murdering, racist, homophobe who has become not just an idol, but an icon of the left in this country. Their justification seems to be his humanitarian efforts, and his medical work with the people of Guatemala. How many humanitarians you know that have murdered 180 people? So, now we arrive at my blog post title, At what point do we call him a racist, murdering bastard?
Here are some libtards trying to justify some of Che's more racist quotes. Here is another lefty blog running to Che's rescue, without any source material to refute claims which the author finds abhorrent. To them, I have this to say:
Should you have any doubts about how Che felt about Mexicans, Americans, Blacks, Jews or Homosexuals, read HIS fucking words, mmkay?
I think we're finally there. Che Guevara is a racist, murdering bastard. There, I feel so much better.
I hope that you have had opportunity to watch Revolutionary Holocaust in it's entirety. However, Part 3 of 5 starting at the 6:27 mark is quite relevant, wouldn't you say?
Paul linked to this web article in his New Year's Eve link dump, and I thought it was worth excerpting.
I cannot fathom why people do not understand when you legislate in favor of any people group, you are discriminating against another. It's not that difficult a concept to wrap your mind around. However, since all white people are racists, we need to be given a disadvantage so the poor helpless minorities can get a fair shake.
Both [health reform] proposals are obscenely expensive. Both limit our freedom to choose our families’ health care. And both would legislate racial and other forms of discrimination — making them not only unconstitutional, but immoral, counterproductive, and dangerous.
I would like to point out, however, that on several occasions Barack Obama has stated that he is open to listening to other ideas, opinions from outside his own party and political persuasion. That's why he and every member of the Moron Party ignored two letters sent from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Within the last three months, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has twice sent letters to the president and the leaders of the House and Senate warning them of discriminatory provisions in both bills. But those warnings have been ignored, and the problems remain.
Apparently the Senate bill written by the pillar of marital fidelity, Max Baucus (Moron-MT), states that "priority" for federal education funds are only to be given to institutions which offer "preferential" admissions to underrepresented minorities. This is obviously because dumber more rich and racist white people are getting the spots that would otherwise go to the sweet, innocent, wholesome and much more intelligent underrepresented minorities.
[The health care reform bill] directs the secretary of health and human services to award federal grants worth billions of dollars to educational institutions that train medical-service providers. However, “priority” for federal dollars is to be given only to those institutions offering “preferential” admissions to underrepresented minorities (according to race, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, and religion, depending on which section of the bill you look at). Thus, schools will be unable to compete for essential federal funding unless they adopt admission policies that intentionally and deliberately discriminate.
This next part is one of my personal favorites. The bill states that those institutions which do not have a clear understanding of the mating habits of the homosexual and transgendered sub-aboriginal people of the island of Tonga and/or lack concern for the LBGT community of Puama'u, Hiva Oa are subject to ineligibility for federal funds and are liable for "liquidated damages."
The bill also declares that institutions training social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, behavioral pediatricians, psychiatric nurses, and counselors will be ineligible for federal grants unless they discriminate. According to Section 756, these programs must enroll “individuals and groups from different racial, ethnic, cultural, geographic, religious, linguistic, and class backgrounds, and different genders and sexual orientations” and demonstrate “knowledge and understanding of the concerns of the[se] individuals and groups.” If the schools fail to abide by these requirements, they will be liable for “liquidated damages.”
Take the time to read through the entire article and have your eyes opened to the mandated racism from the Party of Morons. Also, be sure to see Paul's blog posts on the truth about the Dixiecrats, Democrat racists who were NOT ever Republicans.
There has been quite the hot debate going on in the comment section of this blog post over at The Bakersfield Californian. Essentially, what's up for debate is the causal reason of the foreclosure crisis, and the subsequent recession. So, in an attempt to lay out what happened, when and who was involved, I submit the following.
Before we get to everything, there are two very important points I wish to make. First, were the Democratics solely responsible for the foreclosure crisis? No, not solely. They were, as you'll see below, primarily responsible. Second, every elected official (well, damn near all of them anyway) is scum. They primarily seek to enrich themselves and their specific interests. Why be a conservative then and not an anarchist? Because, I understand that some government is needed. The less, the better. How can anyone benefit with an over-reaching bureaucratic mess entangled in every part of your life? Better to support a party who, at least in theory, is for smaller and less government.
Let's begin.
In 1977, while Jimmuh Carter was President and Tip O'Neill and Robert 'KKK' Byrd were Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader, respectively, the Community Reinvestment Act, or CRA, law was passed. Passed with the best intentions, the CRA was intended to cut down on discriminatory lending practices and open up loans to borrowers in low and moderate income neighborhoods.
Then in 1980, with the same players in power, Congress passed the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act. This act removed the state limits on interest rates banks could charge on mortgages. Amongst other things, this legislation was a continuation of the policy to get more low and moderate income home ownership, by giving banks more incentive to lend to riskier parties.
In 1982, with Reagan in the White House, and Democratics still in control of both houses of congress, the Alternative Mortgage Transactions Parity Act was passed. AMTPA specifically allowed alternative types of financing on home loans other than traditional fixed rate mortgages. Again, here as with before, the intention was to open up home ownership to low and moderate-income households by offering additional methods to finance a house.
Starting in 1995, the GSE's (read: oxymoron), Government Sponsored Enterprises, began to receive government tax incentives to purchase mortgage backed securities. This is a critical turning point in the foreclosure crisis, because later it will be shown that after HUD set goals for the GSE's to buy more subprime paper, which are riskier than traditional mortgages and have a higher rate of failure, the GSE's turned around and sold to investment banks as low-risk investments.
In 1997, congress passed, and President Clinton signed the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. This legislation reduced the capital gains on the sale of homes under $500,000. This action alone did nothing to impact the foreclosure crisis. However, when coupled with insane subprime lending practices, these tax rates made home sales the best return on the dollar investment for the average person. Thus began the home speculation wave.
In 1998, HUD Director Andrew Cuomo held a press conference detailing a settlement reached with a major bank on a lending discrimination case, presumably based on the CRA. The result of the settlement was $2.1 Billion for subprime loan offers. He admits that the lawsuit forced the bank to lower it's qualification standards as a remedy to the 'discriminatory' lending practices. This is is another crucial turn in the foreclosure crisis. The press conference was a warning to other lending institutions that the administration intended to interpret the CRA laws broadly and that the full force of the Clinton Administration would be aligned against any company that did not meet their standards of the CRA.
It is these enforcement techniques coupled with the marketing of the MBS as low-risk investments which spurred the enthusiastic subprime lending from the private lenders. What was the risk? Offer risky loans to low-income applicants making a large profit, then sell the asset to the GSE's which then acquired the risk. No risk, high profit subprime loans then became a no lose option for the private lenders.
The next step is one of supply and demand. With a flood of new 'qualified buyers' on the market for homes, the new home builders went gonzo. New home starts went through the roof, as demand never seemed to dry up. Demand out paced supply until sometime during mid 2006. Once the supply of homes outweighed the demand by consumers, home prices began to fall. It is this fall coupled with insane personal debt amounts that would begin the foreclosure crisis. During the boom years between 1998 and 2006, home owners were able to use their homes as banks, borrowing against the equity in their home at values higher than the home's actual value, all while banking on the increasing value of the home. Also at this time, Adjustable Rate Mortgages were in demand allowing a home owner to purchase the home with an introductory, low interest rate, which would adjust after 3-5 years. The expectation was that the value of the home would have risen during that time, allowing the owner to refinance into another ARM or traditional loan, at a lower interest rate. It was this expectation of an ever increasing home value that lead home owner after home owner to extend their personal debt beyond the sustainable point.
Once home values began to fall, and adjustable rate mortgages adjusted, many home owners were no longer able to afford their monthly mortgage payments. As a result, foreclosures began to rise. In turn home values fell further causing the housing bubble to burst.
Finally, and most despicably, the systematic fraud committed by the two GSE's in mis-stating earnings as to increase the bonus compensation for the executive staff's allowed the crisis to continue on long after it should have. The GSE's were government entities, so they could borrow money at lower interest rates, they required less capitalization and they had less regulations all of which were supposed to translate into more money available to securitize mortgages. Instead, names like Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick and Jim Johnson all cooked the books in order to increase their bonuses. At the same time, Alan Greenspan was pointing out the dangers of the GSE's weak capitalization. There were voices of reason, but few had ears to listen.
Liberals, Progressives and Democratics are all quick to point at the Republicans and claim that it was through deregulation that the subprime mortgage crisis began. As a point of fact, Democratics repeatedly attacked and undermined the regulators which oversaw the two GSE's, accusing them of being bigoted and attacking Franklin Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae. In reality the foreclosure crisis is as a result of the Carter Administration's efforts to expand low and moderate-income home ownership through the CRA along with DIDMCA's removal of interest rate caps and AMTPA's opening up of non-traditional loan types, coupled with the Clinton Administration's aggressive enforcement of it's own broad interpretation of the CRA which coerced the free market into supporting subprime loans. The deregulation in and of itself had little to do with the foreclosure crisis. It was primarily through the efforts of the Clinton Administration that brought us the crisis.
In the early 2000's, some Republicans in congress were able to see the policy which kept the GSE's under capitalized and allowed the GSE's to purchase risky subprime paper and resell them as low risk investments had the potential to bring the financial system to its knees. These Republicans proposed new regulation attempting to increase the capital which the GSE's had on hand and attempted to reduce the quota's for subprime acquisitions set up by earlier sessions of congress. In the end, however, the Republicans failed to use their majority in both houses of congress to force the regulation instead acquiescing to the minority party. Watch below as several Democratic congresscritters attack the regulators from OFHEO.
So, here we are on the other side of this orgy of destruction, and who is to be held responsible?
Christopher Dodd (D-CT) The Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee blocked legislation from Republicans which attempted to rein in the GSE's undercapitalized vacuuming of subprime paper. He, the largest recipient of campaign donations from Freddie and Fannie, killed the legislation in committee.
William Jefferson 'BJ' Clinton (D-AR) The former President was instrumental in pushing the banking industry into expanding home loans to the low and moderate-income markets. So set on the increase in ownership that he was willfully ignorant of the destruction his policies would have on the financial markets of this country in the coming years.
Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) As Director of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Cuomo set the standard by which all lending institutions would be judged. He used his bully pulpit to praise his department's efforts in winning a $2.1 Billion settlement which would be used to provide subprime loans. He went as far as to admit that the loans were riskier and had a higher rate of failure, yet did nothing to undo the damage he'd begun.
Honorable Mentions:
Barney Frank (D-MA) As the ranking Democratic on the House Financial Services Committee, he opposed a proposal in 2003 to remove the oversight of Fannie and Freddie to a new agency under the Treasury Department. The justification for the proposal was that congress neither had the tools nor the stature for adequate oversight, however, Frank opposed the move stating "These two entities... are not facing any type of financial crisis... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." It should also be noted that Mr. Frank had a relationship with Herb Moses, the CEO of Fannie Mae and referred to him as his "spouse" and his "lover."
Barack Obama (D-IL) The Race Baiter in Chief sued Citibank under the CRA laws to force them to make risky loans. Obama was listed in a class action lawsuit along with ACORN against Citibank alleging that the bank had specifically denied loans based upon racism. This NY Post article makes it clear that Obama was aware of the intimidation tactics being used against Citibank and yet still supported the plaintiff in the lawsuit. This leaves little doubt that Obama was not only aware of ACORN's tactics in attempting to strong arm banks into making risky loans, but was complicit, as well.
A word about lenders, borrowers and the free market. It is often alleged that predatory lenders were responsible for the foreclosure crisis by preying upon unsuspecting borrowers, encouraging them to take loans that the borrowers could never possibly afford to pay back. One would be foolish to believe that this did not happen. However, this scenario was spawned by every other action listed in this post. Predatory lenders had no influence on the CRA, DIDMCA, AMTPA, the dropping of capital gains taxes, the increased mandate for the GSE's to purchase subprime paper, and on and on. This was a by product of the failure of the government, period. In the list of people who need be held responsible, the consumer themselves should not be ruled out. Similarly to the predatory lenders, they were not responsible in starting the foreclosure crisis, but without their uninformed and greedy borrowing, this crisis would never has gotten as large as it became. Ultimately, when you place your signature on those 200 different forms, you are in effect saying that you understand the terms of the loan for which you are signing. It is your responsibility to understand what your are getting yourself into. When a person loses their home and cries that they had no idea, I feel little sorrow. For that person claimed on a legal document that they did, in fact, understand what they were getting into.
The free market is not to blame for what went wrong here. It was only through the manipulation of that free market and players within that market that this crisis came to be. The market left to it's own devices will regulate itself. Greedy and predatory lenders will go out of business as customers become wise to their practices and purchase from someone else. Lending institutions will offer loans which will be competitive with other lenders, but secure enough as not to be overly risky. No company goes into business looking to scare away potential customers and few customers go into a business relationship without knowing exactly what they are consuming and for how much. It is these principles that guide the free market to function and correct when it needs to.
-UPDATE-
Paul pointed out in the comments some facts I left out on predatory lenders: Uncollateralized loans.
The idea that someone could approve the loan of and move someone into a house without the borrower so much as having a job was also begun during the Clinton Administration's Gestapo forced lending tactics. A whole new cottage industry called "Mortgage Origination Offices" cropped up in all the neighborhoods where payday loan places do good business.
Paul goes on to reference this Wall Street Journal Article which shows the areas that are hardest hit by default rates. Paul notes the areas which are hardest hit also seem to have the highest unemployment rates, and the lowest incomes. The areas are referred to as Urban Enterprise Zones, which are areas in which development of blighted neighborhoods is encouraged through tax and regulatory relief. With the revelation of tactics used by community advocate groups such as ACORN, there is a strong possibility that these groups were instrumental in securing loans for some of those now in default.
-UPDATE II-
This subject is so large, and the damage so widespread that it is difficult to sum up all of the factors that played a roll in the eventual meltdown in a single post, let alone at 3:00 in the morning. A commenter at TBC points out that artificially low interest rates in the early 2000's encouraged lending practices that were out of control. This is true, however, it's important to note that low interest rates alone could not have caused this crisis. It is only when all of the pieces are strung together that you get the financial meltdown we are all currently experiencing.
Fed policy in the early 2000's was to keep the economy afloat after the dot com bubble and 9/11. In order to encourage people to continue spending money and making investments, and with the help of a wave of foreign cash from growing Asian economies, money was made cheap and available. The Fed policy was foolish, but, as pointed out with several other steps in the eventual crisis, not without good intentions. The intent was to keep the economy moving and minimize the downturn. As a result, the dot com bubble was not burst, but instead moved to become the housing bubble. This is why conservatives, but primarily libertarians believe that the Federal Government should not get involved in financial downturns or crashes. With limited exception, the FedGov always makes the situation worse.
Whereas, all residents of the United States are created equal; and Whereas it is the responsibility of the Congress of the United States to provide for the common defense and welfare of the residents of the United States; and Whereas from each according to their ability, to each according to their need; it is proposed this day, the 28th of December in the Year of 2009, a bill, H.R. 666, to provide for the sustenance of all residents of the United States.
H.R. 666 Title: A bill to provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and distribute foodstuffs and nourishment for the purposes of reducing and preventing hunger as well as shafting taxpayers, to amend the United States Department of Agriculture Code of 1946 to provide incentives for food redistribution and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual hunger relief, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Socialisme, Pierre J. [WI-7] (introduced 12/28/2009) Cosponsors (124)
Division A: Emergency Hunger Reduction - Hunger Obstruction and Restriction; Starvation Halting Initiative Tenets (hereinafter HORSHIT) Title I: Emergency Hunger Reduction - Unrestricted Redistributive Sustenance Collection Ratification and Withholding Directive (hereinafter URSCRWD) Authorizes the Secretary of the USDA (Secretary) to establish URSCRWD to collect foodstuffs from production locations, in accordance with the terms, conditions and policies set forth in the HORSHIT bill; and redistribute the sustenance to parties determined to be deserving as established in H.R. 6362, YOUGAVEUPYOURSOVEREIGNTYWHENWEENACTEDTHEQUALITYAFFORDABLE HEALTHCAREACTALONGWITHANYHOPEOFOVERTURNINGDIRECT SOCIALISMINTHEUNITEDSTATES act.
Directs the Secretary to establish within the Office of Domestic Fulfillment of the Department of Agriculture an Office of Hunger Eradication and Contentment Stability, through which URSCRWD shall be implemented.
Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) designate family and corporate farms as public enterprises and agents of the federal government; and (2) establishes commodities to be seized, held and redistributed as well as designate new debtors.
Directs the Secretary to prevent unjust enrichment of involuntarily participatory family and corporate farms, including any sale of a foodstuff or commodity (with no exceptions) to any entity outside of the United States Government.
(Sec. 1963) Requires the Secretary, once URSCRWD is established, to create a public entity to seize all wealth generated as a result of foodstuff and commodity production prior to the enactment of the HORSHIT act.
Title II: Director Appropriated Mandates and Directives (hereinafter DAMN) - (Sec. 1917) Requires all information gathered by the Secretary in connection with activities authorized under the HORSHIT act, be used against any private enterprises attempting to enter the market as a for profit entity.
(Sec. Woodstock) Requires the Secretary to report to the Justice Department any free market enterprise which resists the HORSHIT and URSCRWD acts, and establishes punitive fines for any such entity in the amount of $250,000 for each violation.
Title III: Tax The Hell Out Of Them Provisions - (Sec. Marx) Provides for extraordinary income or loss treatment of gain or loss from the exchange of any applicable foodstuff or commodity by any applicable public family or corporate farm entity. Defines 'any applicable foodstuff or commodity' as anything we damn well choose.
(Sec. Teddy Kennedy) Provides for the taxation of any business, individual or entity not listed or described in this legislation, at the rate of 150% of every U.S. Dollar earned so that the collective wealth may be redistributed to ACRON, COI, United States Green Party, and The Nancy Pelosi Plastic Surgery Foundation
(Sec. Stalin) Specifically prevents the closure, dissolution or bankruptcy of any family or corporate farm in existence at the time of the authoring of this bill, and relegates the ownership, employees and 'help' (both paid and non-paid) of these family and corporate farms as indentured servants for the remainder of their natural born lives, unless they choose to become registered Democrats, donors to the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and Moonbat activists for the remainder of their ambulatory existance.
Title IV: Repealment - There ain't none, and repealment is expressly prohibited.
Call your Congressional representation and Senators to urge their support for the HORSHIT bill and the DAMN URSCRWD act of 2009.
Please, do not follow this link and give the Pittsburgh Post Gazette any traffic. Apparently the Post Gazette has a special needs hiring program and one Reg Henry has benefited. Mr. Henry writes a column lamenting the evil genius of them damn right-wingers and their attacks on the pure hearted, and good intentioned Barack Hussein Obama. After extolling the genuine goodness of Mr. Obama he takes him to task for just taking to stinking long to think about things. Of course, it's the evil-genius republicans who are forcing PeeBo into this difficult spot. I shall quote from the dimbulb, below:
"This is where the evil geniuses (political) come in. The challenge for them is that old bugbear, reality. They are faced with a president who obviously wants to find the middle road and end partisanship and who is by nature cautious and good-hearted. In human terms, these are endearing traits -- and, of course, that will never do. Reality must be changed because partisanship must endure, otherwise evil geniuses would be unemployed.
The work of changing reality began quickly, even before the election. Almost in the same breath it was put around that not only did Mr. Obama attend the shocking Rev. Jeremiah Wright's Christian church for many years but also he was a Muslim, which would be a very strange thing for a Muslim to do. (When I go to church, I rarely see any Muslims). To sell this bizarre and contradictory notion took genius."
Of course Mr. Henry neglects to mention that Louis Farrakhan is a close personal friend of Jeremiah Wright, and that the Revarund often quoted Crazy Louis. He also fails to point out that Mr. Farrakhan is the cover story of the November/December 2007 issue of Wright’s Trinity United Church Of Christ’s magazine. So as you can see it's highly illogical to assume that PeeBo may have some Muslim leanings.
"The troublesome idea that the president is smart had to be turned around, too. Fortunately for the evil geniuses, Mr. Obama, while visibly tired on the campaign trail, stumbled and referred to 57 states, which confirmed the populist image of ex-presidents of the Harvard Law Review as Dumbos. A normal person would look at this and other slips often mentioned and just laugh but that would be to be underestimate evil and genius both.
The touch of genius is also upon the fuss about teleprompters (all modern presidents have used them) and unconfirmed czars (recent presidents have had them -- and, moreover, when experts were called to Congress to testify about this concern they agreed they were constitutional). Still, you have to admire the genius of those who tied people's knickers in a twist."
Do we really have to go over how smart PeeBo really isn't again?! I'm not going to rehash what a moron the POTUS really is. If you need examples, please see any/every post over at Paul's place. And the whole Teleprompter thing is sooo partisan and evil that even that bastion of right wing ideals, The Onion chronicled it's over use by PeeBo.
"The same can be said of the string pullers for the tea-bag protest movement. The very name conjures up the spirit of those who resisted taxes in Boston long ago, except that one of Mr. Obama's first acts was to pass a stimulus package that included tax cuts for most taxpayers. To make people forget about this was genius, sheer genius."
These must be the tax breaks Mr. Henry was talking about...
Of course, Mr. Henry gets most worked up, however, about those damn tea bag people calling PeeBo a Marxist Socialist!
"But in my view the greatest act of evil genius was to dust off the hoary stereotypes about Marxists and socialists and apply them to Mr. Obama, a leader milquetoast enough to confound any real revolutionaries.
And how can these labels have any sting in an era that thought it proper for Communist China to own most of our debt and produce most of our consumer goods? And how can they call health-care reform socialism when the public option barely hangs on? Genius, my friends, and evil at that."
Because we all know that nationalizing the banking industry and striving to nationalize the healthcare industry are bedrock capitalist principles.
I wonder if Mr. Henry has ever stopped to ponder why the Post Gazette is losing it's ass? The last report I can find of an increase in readership was while Clinton was still playing hide the cigar with Monica.
What has been revealed here, along with the manufactured data and side-by-side with the destruction of original data, is that scientists are as human as any other person. Meaning, that scientists are subject to the same political and financial influences that any other person is. This is why it is so utterly and critically important that science is based upon actual scientific fact and not upon 'consensus.'
Definition time:
scientific fact - n: any observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and accepted as true; any scientific observation that has not been refuted
consensus - n: 1. majority of opinion. 2. general agreement or concord; harmony.
As I'm sure all of you have been reading my blog since the beginning of time or whenever I started blogging, there is no need for me to point out that I have been blogging about AGW for quite a while. None-the-less... Pay particular attention to the quote from Professor Ian Plimer in that last post. For you with little time or patience on your hands, here is the quote:
"I'm a natural scientist. I'm out there every day, buried up to my neck in sh**, collecting raw data. And that’s why I’m so sceptical of these models, which have nothing to do with science or empiricism but are about torturing the data till it finally confesses. None of them predicted this current period we’re in of global cooling. There is no problem with global warming. It stopped in 1998. The last two years of global cooling have erased nearly 30 years of temperature increase."
In the case of Climategate and until otherwise proven all global warming 'science,' 'torturing the data' would mean replacing data that does not support your theory with data that does, and then destroying the original data.
Most damning, however, has to be the fact that when confronted with the fact that the books had been cooked and these scientists had engaged in egregious behavior, other climatologists and AGW supporters failed to admit that they'd been caught in this circumstance and agreeing to dismiss the data from the University of East Anglia. Instead they are circling the wagons around the massive failure and continuing with outright denial and name calling.
UPDATE As Paul points out in the commments section, the IPCC wading deep in a cesspool of lies and fakery, says they stand firm next to the evidence
No critically thinking adult can argue that the attack on our uniformed hero's last Thursday was an unprovoked terrorist attack against this great nation. It was a massacre of our defenders in arguably their most weak place.
--
There exists, predominantly on the political left, the ideal that in order for society perfected, one must rise above the not merely the color of an individual's skin, but also our cultural behaviors. Cultural differences are not to have attention drawn to them, but are instead to be accepted without question, lest you be labeled a racist or intolerant. So strong is the belief that these 'differences' must be overlooked that even to take notice of the obvious distinctions is demonized. This bedrock principle of multiculturalism is now so pervasive within our society that it has invaded our military at the cost of 13 lives and nearly 30 injuries. Make no mistake, this act of terrorism was perpetrated by a jihadist and he was abetted in his murderous rampage by the politically correct culture that now exists within our military structure.
Our society is paralyzed with the thought of being labeled insensitive, or worse getting sued for some trumped up charge of racsim. This paralysis grips not only individuals but companies and government agencies. So unwilling or unable to act were the supervisors within the intelligence community that Nidal Malik Hasan was able to repeatedly attempt to contact Al-Qaeda, pontificate on the heroism of suicide bombers and preach that infidels should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats in front of peers within the United States Army.
So powerful is the influence of multiculturalism within the intelligence and defense communities of this nation that they are rendered ineffective to the point that we are no safer now than we were on 9/10/2001. Arguably we are much worse off. Blatantly staring us in the face was a declared threat and the FBI and Army turned a blind eye to the danger. Hasan publicly broadcast his terrorist sympathies and with the full knowledge of the FBI attempted to contact our sworn enemy during war time, and yet nothing was done to impede his efforts. Worse yet, the FBI knew of the attempts at contact and willfully turned their eyes away. Diversity has rendered our military ineffectual at discerning threats within their own ranks. It has forced us to become slaves to those we are sworn to defend against.
The 'multiculturalism is a great threat to this country' meme has existed for many years, but now in a very public and publicized way people are able to see why and how the threat will contribute to the destruction of the greatest nation upon the face of this earth.
--
I cannot argue with Right Girl's analysis on the placement of blame.
"The only thing a politician cares about more than the money, prestige, and fame is getting re-elected." "The only principle that a Blue Dog politician is concerned with is not a principle at all, but instead a principal."
As I am sure you are now aware, HR 3692 the Affordable Health Care for America Act, passed in the House last night 220 - 215. Make no mistake, this is the closest this country has ever flirted with European style Socialism. Yet there are some positives to hold on to. Number one, Harry Reid is a spineless douche, and will never be able to organize the 60 votes he needs in the Senate to pass this on to PeeBo for signing. Number two, and far more important, is the message that Blue Dog Democrats sent to the people of the United States, and to their constituents: 'We don't care what you think.'
I guess, in order to fully understand the impact that this legislation is going to have on the Blue Dog community it is important to first understand what a 'Blue Dog' is. Emphasis, mine. Wikipedia:
The Democratic Blue Dog Coalition is a group of currently 52 moderate and conservative Democratic Party members of the United States House of Representatives, first formed in 1995. The Blue Dog Coalition describes itself as a group of moderate-to-conservative Democrats committed to financial and national security, favoring compromise and bipartisanship over ideology and party discipline. In 2006, Blue Dog candidates such as Heath Shuler and Brad Ellsworth were elected in conservative-leaning districts, ending years of Republican dominance in these areas.
The fiscally conservative Democratic Blue Dog Coalition was formed in 1995 with the goal of representing the center of the House of Representatives and appealing to the mainstream values of the American public. The Blue Dogs are dedicated to a core set of beliefs that transcend partisan politics, including a deep commitment to the financial stability and national security of the United States.
So, what do we have here? We have a group of 52 individuals who proclaim themselves to be fiscally conservative, and who strive to rise above 'partisan politics' to put the best interests of this country first. However, 28 members of the so called fiscal conservative Blue Dogs voted for the largest expansion of government in the history of the United States. They voted for the bill that will grow the government somewhere between $2,400,000,000,000 and $3,000,000,000,000. So who are these fiscal superhero's? Who are the 28 defenders of our nation's wealth and fiscal sovereignty?
Arcuri, NY
Baca, CA
Berry, AR
Bishop, GA
Boswell, IA
Cardoza, CA
Carney, PA
Cooper, TN
Costa, CA
Cuellar, TX
Dahlkamper, PA
Donnelly, IN
Ellsowrth, IN
Giffords, AZ
Harman, CA
Hill, IN
Michaud, ME
Mitchell, AZ
Moore, KS
Murphy, PA
Pomeroy, ND
Salazar, CO
Loretta Sanchez, CA
Schiff, CA
Scott, GA
Space, OH
Thompson, CA
Wilson, OH
These are the politicians who profess to the American people that they stand for fiscal conservatism, while simultaneously shoving the knife of health care legislation into our backs and telling us, 'it's good for you.'
You might be saying, 'Well, at least 24 Blue Dogs stood strong and voted 'No.'' Ha! Go back to the top of this post and read those quotes again. These spineless punks are possibly the worst lot of sleazy, political whores in the United States today. You'd be mistaken to think that these 24 stood up against the fiscally disastrous health care bill on principle. Paralyzed with the overwhelming fear of losing re-election, these gutless wusses, crawled in to Nancy Pelosi's office and begged to be allowed to vote against the bill. They've bucked their party so that at the end of the day, they could stand in front of their constituents and proclaim themselves to be the fiscal conservatives they campaigned as. These 24 members are losers who are incapable of supporting the party position for fear of being ousted during the re-elections next year. They are neither principled nor fiscally conservative, they are merely double talking politicians.
So what are we to take away from this, then? Blue Dogs, despite all their barking about fiscal conservatism, are nothing more than big government, liberty-hating Democrats. You're response to this situation is clearly laid before you, VOTE THEM OUT!
We have a message for the members of Congress, Blue Dog or not, we're coming for you and we will not sleep until you are nothing more than has-been, former politicians.
As long as the political gods seem to be attentive to our supplications, be sure to intercede on behalf of Pennsylvanians everywhere and beg for this guy's removal.
In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti... Amen
Now, I knew that the White House was inhabited by some low life scum, but this is really taking their petty war with the Chamber of Commerce a little far, wouldn't you say?
And in "I'm Sorry, The President Thinks You're Retarded News..." The Justice Department has overruled the results of a local election in Kinston, North Carolina removing party affiliation from the ballot.
Of note in the Justice Department's findings were the following:
The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters’ right to elect the candidates they want…
...
Black voters account for 9,702 of the city’s 15,402 registered voters but typically don’t vote at the rates whites do.
As a result of the low turnout, Ms. King wrote, "black voters have had limited success in electing candidates of choice during recent municipal elections."
"It is the partisan makeup of the general electorate that results in enough white cross-over to allow the black community to elect a candidate of choice," she wrote…
By the way, this is what passes as 'Post Racial America.'
Obama just wants to make sure you know which candidates are from the correct party, and the gentlemen above are here to guarantee the right vote.
Be sure to read the whole thing, and keep a bucket handy as your brain is sure to run out your ears.
Communist News Network posted an article regarding the Anita Dunn controversy. If you're not up to speed on who Anita Dunn is, read all about it and watch the video below.
Now that you know some background, CNN attempted to defend Anita Dunn, offering her claim "The use of the phrase 'favorite political philosophers' was intended as irony, but clearly the effort fell flat -- at least with a certain Fox commentator whose sense of irony may be missing.". Here are some especially interesting quotes from the article. See if you find anything interesting:
Dunn, taped in a speech in what appears to be a church, said the leader's philosophies were a guidepost for her own strategy on politics. She also praised the philosophy used by religious icon Mother Teresa.
"The third lesson and tip actually comes from two of my favorite political philosophers: Mao Tse-tung and Mother Theresa -- not often coupled with each other, but the two people I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point which is 'you're going to make choices; you're going to challenge; you're going to say why not; you're going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before."
And here's the second part.
Media Matters for America, a liberal media watchdog group, points out that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, also a Fox News contributor, quoted Mao in a 1995 Roll Call profile.
"War is politics with blood; politics is war without blood," Gingrich said, citing Mao.
Karl Rove, another Fox News contributor, wrote in a December 2008 Wall Street Journal op-ed that President Bush "encouraged me to read a Mao biography."
Notice any difference between the two? Sure, there's the obvious trying to drag republicans down by tying them in with the source of the controversy, in this case Mao. However, there seems to be a major difference between quoting Mao and stating that he is one of your two favorite political philosophers. Sorry CNN & Media Matters, not the same. Nice try though, fools.
