FOUR MORE YEARS…PLEASE

It was more interesting to watch the audience than to listen to the President’s pleading for four more years to accomplish what he couldn’t do in the first four. MSNBC scanned the audience and focused on the Delegates frequently throughout the speech. The Delegates appeared to be a somewhat motley group of folks. There were a lot of teary people among them particularly (but far from only) when Gabrielle Gifford was brought out on the stage. We can only wonder how many of those in the great hall and watching on television felt a deep pang of animosity toward Republicans for the horrible atrocity suffered by the former Congresswoman. How many remembered that Jared Lee Loughner was not a denizen of the Right, but a wacko from the Left who hated Gifford because she was too far to the Right to match up with his ideals.

The audience was notable for being heavily black. Blacks make up about 14% of the population but the ratio at the Convention appeared to be more than double that. Make of it what you will, but it was not a good cross section representation of the general population.

I saw deep emotion in many faces, black and white, man and woman. The nation is in bad shape and we all know it, but who is to blame? Once a Messiah always a Messiah in the minds of a true believer. High unemployment, the weak economy heavy debt and whatever else ails the country must be due to Republican policies because Messiahs don’t fail.

The speech itself was all about how insurance companies, banks, oil companies and people whose accomplishments brought them wealth are all bad. Only government is good.  It was straight out of that “Manifesto” book.

Doors and Rules, Doors and Rules. Impressions of an American in Germany.

THE FAMILY FIAT PHOTOGRAPHED CRUISING AT THE NORMAL AUTOBAHN RATE OF 96 MPH

Homes in Germany have more doors than windows.  The only thing there is more of than doors is rules.  To go from the kitchen to the dining room in my hosts home there are two doors that must be opened and closed on the way.  And there are three thick doors to negotiate to get from the bedroom to the bathroom.  Excuse me, I should say to the toilette.  In most cases I make it through all of them in time.  There must be another rule against door knobs; there isn’t a knob to be seen anywhere.  They all have large sturdy handles so you can open them with your elbow when your hands are full.

There is no toilet in the bathroom.  If you need a toilet, that’s a different door.  Once inside, you may see a little graphic sign there that tells a man that “Stehen ist verboten!”  A man’s aim is not trusted in some homes in this country; he must sit the way the ladies do.  And if serious business has been completed the product will neither sink nor float in the bowl.  It sits high and dry on a little shelf until you push the button to whisk it away.  But don’t look for a handle to flush.  All the handles are on the doors.  Look for two buttons that may be that may be somewhere on the wall.  Intuition will tell you whether pushing the small button or the large one is the most appropriate.

If your bedroom is on the second floor it probably has a door to the outside and nice little balcony.  If you want a little air in the room just lean the whole door into the room.  It can be tipped in as though the hinges were along the bottom instead of on the side.  It doesn’t take long to figure out how to manipulate the handle to accomplish that.  Most any Americans learn to do it in less than ten minutes.  Then it’s a fun thing to do.

Now about those rules, our hosts went out to buy a variety of breads and pretzels to go with the liverwurst and baloney slices for breakfast.  They came back empty handed.  The shopkeepers who sell bread are not allowed to be open on Sunday, but gas stations are, and some of them sell bread.  However it turned out there is yet a new rule that gas stations are only allowed to sell bread on Sunday to people who are from out of town and can confirm that by driving in with a car that has an out of town license plate.  The German people are proud of their rules but still complain when a new one like this comes along.  Angela Merkel got the blame for our stale bread and shortage of enough breakfast pretzels to go around.  She is out of favor in this household.

After nearly two weeks on this trip to Germany it is time to go back home to the land of a few flimsy bedroom doors and wide open lawlessness, especially on Sundays; home to America where a liter of beer costs more than a cup of coffee, if you can imagine that.  I will miss the pristine beauty of Bavaria where there are no paper cups littering the roads because there are no paper cups.  There is more I will be sorry to leave behind, but a helping of fried eggs and bacon or even a donut beats still beats liverwurst and pretzels for breakfast anytime.

RADICAL IN CHIEF – ACORN part III

 

This post continues the series of chapter summations of Radical-In-Chief by Stanley Kurtz.  Today we cover the final portion of Chapter 6 which touches on President Clinton’s contribution to ACORN and his administrations assistance to ACORN’s drive to dramatically increase the amount of outstanding mortgages to high credit risk housing buyers.

*****

RADICAL IN CHIEF
Chapter 6   ACORN  part III

Bank Fairs were held where banks were asked to attend and interact with the communities they served.  At these events the banks were asked to pledge to meet the reforms outlined by ACORN, i.e. to lower their standards set for mortgage qualification.  Retribution fell upon those who declined.

In July of 1992, the delegation from Citibank left an ACORN Bank Summit Fair without agreeing to ACORN’s terms. Within days, a group was organized that disrupted Citicorp’s headquarters in NY with songs and chants. Later, in August, officers and staff from Citibank-Chicago were invited to a gathering of about 400 people from the community.  They were given prestigious seating on the stage in view of everyone in attendance.  And then ACORN’s banking specialist, Ernestine Whiting, took the podium and mercilessly berated the bankers sitting on the platform.  According to Kurtz, the Citibank people were “shaking in anger” over the treatment to which they had been subjected.  But it worked. Eventually Citibank relented and agreed to increase the amount of their sub-prime lending in accordance with ACORN’s terms.

Bill Clinton’s appointed a man named Henry Cisneros as of Secretary of Housing and Human Development. Cisneros was one of the first Hispanics to be elected mayor of a large city. He knew ACORN well and was familiar with their confrontational tactics. In his first meeting with the organization’s leaders he made it clear he had no problem with the “aggressive” tactics. In fact, unsolicited, he offered ACORN government funding. The meeting lasted an hour longer than scheduled, and that hour was devoted to exploring ways to channel money from the federal coffers to help support ACORN’s activities.

Then in July of 1994 President Clinton met personally with a delegation from ACORN.  The group found a receptive audience in the President as they explained that their agenda included expanding the reach of the Community Reinvestment Act to go beyond just the banks.  They wanted mortgage brokers (as lenders) and insurance companies (as investors) to meet sub-prime quotas as well.  ACORN had already convinced Allstate to put $10 million into the funding of sub-prime mortgages.

The author believes ACORN leaders realized their housing activities could contribute to a financial crisis of sorts, but it is doubtful any of them anticipated the extent of the mess that actually occurred.  It is unlikely the creation of a crisis was intended, but should one occur it would be seen more as an opportunity than as a failure.  Leaders Peter Dreier and Frances Fox Piven taught that any financial crisis is an opportunity to condemn capitalism as a failure and proclaim socialism is the solution.

 

IF I BELIEVED

If I believed that what MSNBC broadcasts was the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and if I believed the New York Times was honorable in its journalistic ethics then I would absolutely despise Republicans and everything they stand for.  There is very little ethical difference in the fourth estate ethics between outright lies and lies by omission.  The paper is particularly guilty of the latter.  The New York Times does more than claim to be the newspaper of record; it is the newspaper of record.  As such it has a responsibility greater than any other to record all the news and report it accurately.  It has failed this responsibility miserably.

In his final column, Arthur Brisbane, who very recently resigned his post as Public Editor wrote mostly about the papers steady financial demise which he blamed entirely on the rise of new media, namely twitter.  There was nary a word about the effect that content may have had on readership.  Brisbane acknowledged,

The Times’s “believability rating” had dropped drastically among Republicans compared with Democrats, and was an almost-perfect mirror opposite of Fox News’s rating. Can that be good?

Is this statement not bias itself?  Nonetheless, Brisbane is acknowledging that the paper’s perceived integrity trending downward and he does not hesitate to use the word “drastically” while inferring that an integrity rating equivalent to FOX Is bad.  Then Brisbane confirmed what has become very obvious.

Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times.

The Times is bias.  Brisbane is jut reporting it.

OBAMA’S GAFFES, GEMS NOT TO MISS

Ramirez is best known for his cartoons but he writes a mean article as well.  This one is something about Obama giving a speech to some corpse men in the Austrian language in all 57 US states, especially in Beaverton, Oregon.

MEDIA MISSES EVERY OBAMA GAFFE

DEMOCRATS AGAINST DEMOCRACY

In a republic, representatives are chosen to debate and vote the issues on behalf of its citizens. The representatives are generally expected to vote according to the will of the majority but they are not bound to do so.  In a democracy however, the people vote the issues themselves and majority rules – period!  How strange it is then that the party that calls themselves Democrats is the party that so often ignores the will of the majority.

Case in point.  In the recent primaries, Tennessee Democratic Party voters elected Mark Clayton to be their candidate on the Democratic Party ticket running for the US Senate.  But the Democratic Party will have none of it.  A Party spokesperson announced that:

“The Tennessee Democratic Party disavows his candidacy, and will not do anything to promote or support him in any way.”

This in spite of the fact the Clayton received nearly twice as many votes as his closest challenger.   It goes from the ridiculous to the sublime.  The spokesperson added:

“Many Democrats in Tennessee knew nothing about any of the candidates in the race, so they voted for the person at the top of the ticket. Unfortunately, none of the other Democratic candidates were able to run the race needed to gain statewide visibility or support.”

That’s not a reasonable excuse; it’s an admission of incompetence.  It says Tennessee Democrats have no minds of their own.

I love Tennessee with its rolling hills and magnificent horse farms.  Their politics aren’t bad either.  Tennessee voted against Al Gore for president and it cost him the election.  If only the people of his home state, who presumably knew him best, had voted for him we never would have learned what a chad is and the Supreme Court would never have been involved.

Some states allow resolutions where every citizen has the opportunity to vote on an issue.  The decision may or may not be binding but it’s as democratic as it gets.  California voted on Prop. 8 in 2000 and it passed by majority vote.  The people had spoken; they made their wishes clear.  And then the Democratic Party took the issue to the California Supreme court and won a decision to have the peoples wishes overturned.  Californians followed with a new Prop. 8 in 2008.  Same issue, same result.  The people voted for it by a margin of 52 to 47.  Democrats proceed once again to have the will of the people overturned in the courts.  A better name for the Party would be the Autocrats.

EXPLORING THE PROGRESSIVE MIND

Someday a great philosophical Einstein may emerge to explain the Liberal mind.  The most puzzling dichotomy is the generosity and tolerance Liberal thinkers show toward all manner of human failings and yet are “utterly intolerance of any creed, belief or opinion that differs from their own.”  Cheat on your wife in a White House closet and lie about it under oath and it is overlooked.  Say you don’t believe in homosexual marriage and they try to destroy you and put you out of business.  Excuse the one who actually commits an egregious act; punish the one who simply holds a different belief.  How do you explain that?

Demonstrate dressed up to look like giant vaginas to make some vague protest and claim the moral high ground.  How do you explain that?

Argue against extremism in the Christian religion then elect Muslim Congressmen to office with ties to anti-American terrorism.  How do you explain that?

Complain about how poor our education system is and then support tenure for public school teachers, support policies that undermine the teacher’s ability to maintain discipline in class and support a teacher’s union that cares no more about the product its members produce than does the auto-worker’s union.  How do you explain that?  As a matter of fact, I think you can explain that.  Greed and power seeking on the part of union leadership, ignorance on the part of the general public, and a little bit of both among some of the teachers.

Nevertheless, neither hypocrisy, greed or ignorance explain the other dichotomies — well, perhaps ignorance.

GEMS FROM ELSEWHERE NOT TO MISS

Email solicitations for 3 dollar contributions from Carville and Biden are classless, stupid and desperate.

Today’s Hysteria From the Democrats

THE LOSER’S PARTY

f you tally up the numbers of highly successful people you will find roughly as many Democrats as Republicans.  However, when you count the losers it’s a different story.  The denizens of the underground economy, the gamers of the system, the perpetually unemployed and the takers from the makers flock overwhelmingly to the Democratic Party.  You can add prisoners to that list as well.  Otherwise why would Democrats occasionally move to restore the voting rights of convicted felons and Republicans always oppose it?

In the Democratic Party you are a member of a group.  Obama’s gift registry, for instance, solicits donors from 16 listed groups.  Starting with African Americans and then including Native, Jewish, Latino and even a group called LGBT Americans, finally ending up near the bottom of the alphabet with Young People.  To a conservative you are either Sid, Sally, Jose, Sarah or Bob.  To a liberal you are either a Black, Jewish, Hispanic or Gay person.  Or you may even be white Anglo-Saxon in which case you have a special burden of guilt to bear.

MY LAME EXCUSE

 

Try typing on a computer with a keyboard that has 30 keys for the 26 letters and hides the Y in the lower left corner of the keyboard and you will begin to understand what I am up against.  Several keys have 3 symbols.  Press only the 8 key and you get the number 8 as expected.  But you also need to use the 8 key somehow to type the question mark and the backward backslash.  There is both an ALT key and an ALT GR key and another key to type a double S (SS).  And I don’ t know where the @ is at.  I have not found it anywhere.

All this is just one reason posts have been so sparse while I am overseas on this trip.  Don’t ask why I don’t use my own laptop that I brought along.  You wouldn’t want to hear that story too.  New posts may be sparse until after I get home on Sept 5th.