Monday, May 24, 2010

Wall Street and the Gulf Oil Spill: The Stupidest People on Earth

"The most sweeping changes to financial rules since the Great Depression might not prevent another crisis.
Experts say the financial regulatory bill approved by the Senate last week, and a similar bill that passed the House, include loopholes and gaps that weaken their impact. Many provisions depend on the effectiveness of regulatory agencies — the same agencies that failed to foresee the last crisis."

The above is from the corrupt (see P.S.) Associated Press yesterday. For the AP to get something right, it has to be OBVIOUS. Even CNBC (part of the Wall Street/financial community, and therefore some of The Stupidest People on Earth) noted the same thing. The new "comprehensive" (which should be a kiss of death for ANY new Federal legislation) financial "reform" bill can be summarized in one sentence: "The applicable Federal agencies, and the Federal Reserve, are given complete POWER to control our financial system, our financial institutions, and every "player" in them, as they deem fit--including the power to write such regulations as the deem fit." CNBC and Goldman Sachs are, of course, confident that they can CONTROL the Federal bureaucrats--as they have under both Bush and Obama--which is why they generally support the bill (as part of that economic fascist partnership they believe they now have with Obama and the Federal Government).

As the AP implies, this is the "wave the magic wand", Obama theory of government, where you "solve" a problem by giving the same Federal regulators who have failed in the past GREATER authority so they can fail WORSE in the future. Meanwhile, Federal control goes viral, as our lives slip more and more into the hands of faceless Federal bureaucrats, and the unelected people able to influence them. You will note, all though the corrupt AP really did not, that this legislation not only gives further power to the people who got us in this mess (Wall Street believes this includes THEM, and in the short run they are right), but the legislation was primarily drafted by the very same people who were most responsible for the housing bubble that TRIGGERED our present financial "crisis" (as stated by the Fed Chairman, without naming names). Yes, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank are mainly responsible for this legislation, and they are the two men MOST responsible for the mortgage/housing disaster and the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (those two now totally government entities with MORE DEBT--not really counted as government debt, or in the budget deficit--than the entire Federal Government).

Segue to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. President Obama himself has tld you it was a FAILURE of regulation--regulators too "cozy" with the people they are regulation. Obama, of course, wants you to forget that he is talking about HIMSELF, and his Administration. Obama always acts as if he is completely apart from these things, and yet can wave a magic wand and set everything right with the same kind of regulation--just more of it--that has just FAILED. The only difference between the oil spill and the financial crisis is that the oil spill HAS to be the responsibility of the Federal Government--protection of our offshore environment necessarily being a matter of Federal jurisdiction and responsibility. The best way to keep the financial "crisis" from occurring again was to let those responsible (Goldman Sachs and all of the rest of the economic fascists on Wall Street) FAIL. That is not really an option as to our offshore environment. You will note that the main OBSTACLE, by the way, to complete liability (where we SHOULD "let BP fail", the same way we should have let AIG, Citigroup and the rest fail) is one of those "comprehensive" Federal laws limiting liability for environmental cleanup to 75 million (or some such number), in "exchange" for TAXES/FEES paid by BP and other businesses so that the government would supposedly have the money (which we have, of course, SPENT) to clean up environmental problems.

It is absurd to suggest that Ben Bernanke (second worst failure in the history of world finance, behind Henry Paulson--allbeit Geitner may yet eclipse them both) could not have "prevented" the financial crisis. As the AP suggests, the SEC, the Fed, and all of the rest HAD enough authority to do things about the outrageous speculation being engaged in by heavily regulated banks and public companies. All The Fed had to do was SOUND THE ALARM, and put pressure on banks for risky investments, and they could have stopped the speculation in its tracks. Bernanke was appointed in early 2006, as was Paulson, and yet NOTHING was done to rein in the outrageous risk taking by the Stupidest People on Earth. Paulson even came from Goldman Sachs--where he was CEO--and yet sounded no warnings about the risk of what Golman Sachs was doing. It is absurd to say that the Fed and SEC had no authority over derivatives, and "new" financial instruments, when they had ample authority to put pressure on for RISKY investments of any kind. Mrere bringing the issue to public attention would have derailed the whole cascade of outrageous risk taking.

As stated, the best "punishment" for Wall Street and the banks, and the best PREVENTIVE measure for the future, was to LET THEM FAIL. For people like Bernanke, Paulson and Geitner (at the New York Fed, and in a position to have prevented a lot of this), the proper "punishment" was to permanently get them OUT--with their reputation ruined. Instead, as with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd (although Connecticut people forced Dodd not to run again), many of these people just received MORE power. Have these Federal bureaucrats shown that they deserve this kind of power, or that this kind of central planning can really "save" us? Not on your life. And your life is what they are being given power to run.

as I said, it is the "magic wand" theory of government: the theory that all you have to do is give enough power to Federal bureaucrats and they will "solve" our problems. Both experience and theory (impossibility of fallible human beings knowing enough to centrally direct major portions of our economy) conclusively prove that central planning does not, and cannot, work. Still, we keep not only falling for it, but "doubling down". Federal bureaucrats fail, in financial regulation or in the Gulf of Mexico, and the "answer" is supposedly more power to the same type of Federal bureaucrats (instead of, for example, HEADS ROLLING and actual accountability for failure). Maybe I am being unfair to Wall Street calling them The Stupidest People on Earth. Maybe we, the public, are just as stupid for letting--even sometimes demanding--this "magic wand" theory of government take control.

No. Tempting as it is to admit that the people on Wall Street are no more stupid than the rest of us, and despite the evidence for that, I can't quite buy it. I watched CNBC on Thursday, after the close of the market when the Dow had gone down 375 points (after going UP more than 400 points on Monday or so), and was convinced--despite my wavering--that I was right (as usual). These truly are The Stupidest People on Earth.

Was CNBC discussing how WALL STREET could "clean its own house", and stop this outrageous computer program trading, and momentum trading, which lead to these wild swings. Yes, although Wall Street does not seem to realize it, these wild swings (up and down), and the complete divorce of Wall Street from economic reality, will inevitably DESTROY our financial system--just like that bridge in Washington state (Tacoma?--don't remember) that was shaken to pieces by ever stronger harmonic vibrations.

Nope. The financial "experts" featured on CNBC looked to GOVERNMENT to save them. Yes, they wanted the governments of the world to save them from world debt. They wanted foreign governments to PRINT MONEY, just like the Fed (CNBC obviously believing that they had control of Fed policy--probably correctly). They expressed some concern about the new financial "reform" bill because the details were impossible to know--CNBC people recognizing that the bill did nothing put put power in the hands of Federal agencies and regulators. But the "experts" seemed confident that they could CONTROL what the Federal agencies and regulators eventually did so that it would not affect Wall Street much. You can see why Goldman Sachs SUPPORTED this bill.

What were the "experts" on CNBC worried about? No. They weren't worried about general government power or "regulation". They fully expected a "cozy" relationship with government regulators in the United States. They were, however, worried that Europe would not have the "courage" to fully BAIL OUT Wall Street like our government, and the Fed did. And they did not like the German banning of "naked" short selling (which I strongly support for US--looking upon the Wall Street reaction to the idea as an ENDORSEMENT). In other words, the "experts" at CNBC were pretty confident that fianl "regulations" would be in their interest, but had some slight fears that political pressure might result in actual RESTRICTIONS on the way Wall Street does business--on its "liquidity". Thus, they criticized" the "circuit breakers"--which will stop trading for a few minutes when Wall Street goes out of control Yes, those ae STUPID, but Wall Street wants NO restrictions on their activities, beyond cosmetic. They believe in a "free market" for traders, so long as they get BAILED OUT when they make truly bad decisions and fail to fix their borken market. Further, they don't believe in a "free market" for the country. They believe in GOVERNMENT, because they think they can control government for their benefit.

Nope. You need no further evidence that these people are deluded: The Stupidest People on Earth, because they really should know better.

P.S. I have consistently--with concrete examples--shown the despicable AP to be a CORRUPT "news" organization. Yet, I basically approve, above, of this particular AP story. Is this a Sodom and Gomorrah moment, where I have actually succeeded in my God-like search for a single honest AP reporter? Not necessarily. Yes, this means I am cynical, and skeptical of the corrupt AP. I look at every story on its merits, but is there a hidden agenda? Maybe. Note that we are in a FRAGILE economic state. What if this government "solution" FAILS again? Well, the AP may simply be preparing the way for the NEXT government "solution", on the grounds that this one did not go far enough.

P.PS. In case you did not get the point, I AM saying that Wall Street and the financial community are now basically DEMOCRATS--Big Government people fully invested in this idea of a partnership with government involving ever more SPENDING. The criticism on Wall Street of Europe is that they are not SPENDING the way we did--instead starting to look at austerity. Sure, there are dissenters. But it is no surprise that both Goldman Sachs and British Petroleum (PACs) made their major contributions to OBAMA. Devinition of economic fascism: a central planning partnership between big government and big business ("socialism with a capitalist veneer").

Thursday, May 20, 2010

"WASHINGTON – The number of people filing new claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly rose last week by the largest amount in three months. The big surge was a setback to hopes that layoffs were declining.
The Labor Department says that applications for unemployment benefits rose to 471,000 last week, up by 25,000 from the previous week. It was the first increase in five weeks and the biggest jump since a gain of 40,000 in February."

The above is from the despicable Associated Press, as linked on the equally despicable Yahoo "News". Now for the Rest of the Story (to quote Paul Harvey).

This weekly report of new unemployment claims comes out every Thursday. For six months, and more, I have CORRECTLY informed you that this weekly number has been a record of FAILURE of the Obama Administration. That is not because the number has gotten worse. It is because the number has NOT IMPROVED. While the Obama Administration, and Democrats in Congress, have bankrupted us--Obama supposedly, although there is no evidence of it,"focusing like a laser beam on jobs"--the labor market has remained STUCK in a BAD PLACE.

It gets wore. For six months I have reported the weekly numbers, and shown you that those numbers--although bouncing around week by week--have NOT IMPROVED. The weekly average in December was 455,000. The average for the past four weeks is 453,000 (and likely to go up, unless next week's numbers declines at least the same 25,000 that this week's number increased). The four week average has remained over 450,000 the ENTIRE TIME since December. Around Easter, the number spiked up to 490,000--one week,, not the average. That was "explained" as because of Easter. Then the number gradually went back to the same level at which it has been for six months (NO IMPROVEMENT). I correctly told you the whole time that the weekly numbers meant little each week, but that the numbers over time showed NO IMPROVEMENT in the labor market--a labor market that remained just as sick now as it was last November. The weekly number had been as low as 435,000 5-6 months ago, and the four week average almost as low as 440,000 ("predicted"--lol--by economists for this week's one week number).

What have the LIARS at the despicable AP--and Yahoo "News"--been telling you for these same six months? Well, they have LIED--repeatedly. See my article last week, and the week before than, and the week before that, and so on for about six months. The "storyline" (Big Lie) from the CORRUPT LIARS at the Associated Press has been that the jobless claims numbers showed a "slow, steady improvement" in the job market--an absolute, objective LIE. The numbers would bounce up. Then they would bounce down. But there has been NO--none, zilch, nada--TREND of improvement. The labor market has remained the same: bad. No, as I have correctly told you, it has not gotten worse, in terms of this weekly number even if it has not gotten better. However, it HAS gotten worse in the sense that we have mortgaged our future for NOTHING--for no improvement. We would be in a much better place, even with the same numbers, had we done NOTHING. Need I remind you that the overall unemployment number is still right at 10%--right at its HIGH fro the Obama Presidency, and HIGHER than any unemployment number for the Bush Presidency. This 9.9% number is HIGHER than it was last July-August (when it DROPPED from 9.5% to 9.4% in one of those supposed "signs" of an improvement turnaround in jobs). This is important, because it shows the FAILURE of Obama to improve the job market, while bankrupting the country, is now approaching ONE YEAR after the job market had stabilized (albeit in a bad place) last summer.

What did the LIARS at the AP say last week? Read last week's article, where I have again been PROVEN correct. The AP lied last week that there was a "slow, steady" improvement in the job market based on a ONE WEEK supposed decline of 4,000 in layoffs. That is to be compared to a 25,000 RISE in this week's reported number. Worse (for the LIARS at the AP), last week's number was REVISED (for the second week in a row) UPWARD to show basically NO CHANGE. That was the second week in a row that the number had stayed essentially unchanged, after revision. The LIARS at the AP, meanwhile, reported last week that there had been "four straight weeks" of decline, proving this--fictional--slow, steady" improvement in the labor market. Actually, of course, there has been NO IMPROVEMENT since November-December, and the weekly numbers have been anything but "steady". They have only been "steady" in the sense of being consistently between 4440,000 and 490,000, with no evidence of either any improvement or any significant worsening.

Now if the LIARS at the AP were honest liars, they would say this week that the labor market has gotten WORSE. But the AP is composed of CORRUPT LIARS, and not merely honestly stupid liars. Thus, this week's number is merely a "setback" in "hopes" (you can just fee the DEPRESSION of the AP liars at being unable to "spin"). Yes, the AP has reverted to something approaching accuracy, because that fits their agenda. This week's number, in fact, does NOT indicate the labor market is getting worse, because it never got better. We are still "bumping along the bottom"--as I have correctly told you for six months while the mainstream media has lied to you. We are not getting significantly worse, but neither are we getting any better.

Now if the weekly number were to go above 500,000 in the next week or two, we would be IN TROUBLE. As it is, this measure of layoffs is merely showing that we remain in the (bad) status quo. But what if the weekly number DECLINES next week, as it will be expected to do--if we are merely "bumping along the bottom", rather than getting worse? Well, we know what will happen, because it has already happened repeatedly for the last six months. The LIARS--corrupt, dishonest liars--at the despicable AP will again start saying that such decline shows a TREND of "slow, steady" improvement in the labor market. They will say that even though it is obviously a LIE. We know that, because they have done that very same thing repeatedly since December. Weekly increases are reported somewhat factually, although often with an "explanation" of "special factors". But weekly declines (merely offsetting the increases--no net improvement) are then reported as "evidence" of a steady improvement in the labor market. You just don't get any more CORRUPT than the LIARS at the Associated Press.

What about those "economists" who "predicted" a DECLINE of the weekly number to 440,000--only off 31,000, failing to predict either the direction or magnitude of the largest increase in three months? Again, I have been proven right. I have been correctly calling these perpetually "surprised" economists, along with the rest of Wall Street and the financial community, The Stupidest People on Earth. Rarely has anyone been proven so right as I have been. Sometimes, I am asked if it is difficult to live in a world where envy from lesser creatures keeps me from receiving the credit I deserve. I am asked whether it is frustrating to never be wrong, and yet not be listened to. Well, it is not so much that I have to face the fact that the rest of the world is not as smart as I am. I faced that long ago. What is hard is to suffer the continuing existence of LIARS like the Associated Press, who aer constantly wrong and never acknowledge it. It is frustrating to see those people LIE week in and week out, as if they can prove Lincoln wrong and fool all of the people all of the time. That is a bigger annoyance than constantly being proven superior to mere economists, who no one expects to be right. I know. no one really expects the mainstream media to be either honest or right either, but they "use ink by the barrel". That makes them ANNOYING--since you can't get away from them.

Note that this week's reported 471,000 new unemployment claims is close to the six month HIGH of 490,000 or so. That shows how narrow the range has been, and how little change there has been in six months. You should be insulted as to how dumb the mainstream media thinks you are to fail to notice their DISHONESTY about these numbers week after week. Stay tuned to see if we keep "bumping along the bottom", as we have done for these last six months (really since last summer), or whether the weekly number deteriorates above 500,000. If THAT were to happen, all bets are off and we will be facing a DETERIORATING labor market (instead of merely one not improving).

Monday, May 17, 2010

You may not realize, since the corrupt mainstream media tires to deceive on the subject, theAFL-CIO jned the ACLU to STOP a belated Bush Administration attempt to belatedly make employers comply with the law. Yes--one of those concealed facts--we ALREADY match names and social security numbers from employer reports. We even--at least in the past, because my brother got a few--sent letters to employers telling them that names and social security numbers do not match. If we ENFORCED sanctions against employers who do not act on this information (to verify social security number), we would almost STOP illegal immigrants from working in this country That would obviously help American workers. The Bush Administration proposed new regulations, with letters READY TO GO OUT TO EMPLOYERS--imposing sanctions on employers if they did not act upon notice of a discrepancy in social security numbers. The AFL-CIO moved to block the Bush Administration in court in San Francisco, acting as a TRAITOR to American labor.

This was not an aberration. The AFL-CIO has now joined other leftist groups asking the Justice Department to end programs cooperating with Arizona authorities because of these MISREPRESENTATIONS of the 17 page Arizona law. Yes, the Attorney General of the United States admitted before Congress that he has been threatening Congress even though he has not red the law (without the excuse of the law being a 2000 page health care bill that no one read or understood).

I am willing to state flatly: the AFL-CIO is a TRAITOR to American labor, and does not want immigration laws enforced. I will go further: Leftists generally do not want to enforce our immigration laws, or to control our border with Mexico, and any proposals they make which seem to be "enforcement" measures are SCAMS. Among other things, you cannot enforce ANY law purporting to control illegal immigration if you can never do anything to identify illegal immigrants.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Jobs and Jobless Claims: Obama's 6 Month Failure Continues, as AP Corruption Gets Worse

"WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) - The number of people applying for unemployment benefits essentially held steady at 444,000 in the latest week, the Labor Department reported Thursday. Claims actually fell by 4,000 for the week ended May 8, but the data was revised up by 4,000 for the prior week. The net effect: no change from last week's headline number."

I am never wrong. In last week's weekly article on jobless claims--to correspond with the weekly release of the initial unemployment claims number from the Labor Department--I told you that last week's number was really UNCHANGED. TI told you (you can look it up) that the reported decline of 4,000 was so statistically insignificant as to represent no change--being well within the margin of error. The reported "decline" was from 448,000 to 444,000. I have repeatedly told you that this kind of meaningless "decline" is even within the REVISION of the number made every subsequent week. That is what MarketWatch (a mainstream media financial News" outlet, but not as absolutely corrupt as the AP) is telling you in the quote above. Last week's number was revised to 448,000 (no change), and this week's number of new unemployment claims (layoffs) was reported as that SAME 444,000 (the "decline" of 4,000 being again statistically insignificant, and withint the possible revision amount as well as within the margin of error inherent in the statistic).

What about the CORRUPT Associated Press (reported as usual on the equally corrupt Yahoo News)--the AP being the most corrupt "news" organization to ever exist on this planet (including Pravda, under the old Soviet Union, in the comparison sample)? What do you expect. The corrupt AP LIED to you again, and Yahoo "News" lied to you by using the corrupt AP article, as follows:"WASHINGTON – New claims for unemployment benefits dipped for the fourth straight week, a sign the job market is improving at a slow but steady pace."

Read the first quote from MarketWatch. Then read the above LIES from the utterly corrupt liars at the Associated Presss (and Yahoo). Q.E.D. As Marketwatch said, the "headline number" was UNCHANGED this week from last week at 444,000. And the revised number was UNCHANGED last week. Either way, there has not ben a decline for "four straight weeks". Only an organization as corrupt as the AP would even dare assert otherwise. That is beside the point that the number has not really "improved" for two straight Weeks--the total 4,000 "decline" over that period being statistically meaningless. "Steady" improvement my ass!!!! Another LIE from the liars at the Associated Press, brought to you by Yahoo. It gets worse.

I have been bringing you these weekly articles for at least the past six months. Over that entire time there has been NO--none, zilch, nada--in the jobless claims number. I have explained that week after week, as the corrupt AP has lied to you. Yes, there has been "noise" over that time: the weekly numbers going up and down. But the number went as low as 535,000 in the November-December time period, and the four week average went as low as 442,000 during that time period (that r week average being 450,000 this week).

My headline is correct. Obama has utterly failed. For six months, there has been NO IMPROVEMENT in this weekly number. It has bounced up as high as 490,0000 (without the liars at the AP saying the labor market was getting worse), and has several times bounced down to about this same level. Overall, it has stayed the same. In other words, despite the AP lie, the labor market has shown NO improvement at all for six months--much less a "steady" improvement. That is not just a lie. That is a 1984 style Big Lie. George Orwell was writing about today's Associated Press when he wrote about the technique of the Big Lie.

For at least these six months of no improvement in the unemployment claims number, the AP has maintained the same storyline--the Big Lie--of a "slow, steady improvement" and consistent "trend--regardless of the actual facts". You just don't get any more corrupt than that.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Obama Urges Repeal of Health Care Bill Because of Congressional Fraud

What? You say the headline is wrong? You say that Obama did NOT urge repeal of the health care bill, and starting over with a new bill, because Congress passed the bill under false pretenses?

Well, okay. But the CBO--upon which Democrats placed such emphasis, while making it impossible for the CBO to really evaluate the bill--put out revised numbers saying the health care billl will cost over 1 TRILLION dollars, and not reduce the federal deficit. This made Obama, and the Democrats in Congress, liars. The CBO said that spending measures in the health care bill which tahe CBO had not previously had time to evaluate--Republicans having asked for a delay for this very reason--will add $115 billion dollars to the bill's costs over the next 10 years. This is only the last of a series of government announcements since the bill passed indicating the bill was passed under false pretenses. For example, the chief Medicare actuary, in a report suppressed until after passage of the bill, said that health care costs will INCREASE after the bill is implemented, and Medicare premiums rise. This is in addition to the Medicare actuary saying that Medicare Advantage premiums will rise, and that medical care will likely be LESS available to seniors. Then there are several reports that health insurance premiums will RISE--especially for younger people and the middle class.

What was the Obama response to today's further evidence that Congress DEFRAUDED the American people? Well, the Obama spokesman--I believe the budget director--said that Obama considered this unacceptable. You can see why I thought that this meant Obama--clearly throwing Democrats in Congress under the bus in the 2010 elections--was calling for REPEAL of the law. After all, rescission is the usual remedy for fraud in the inducement which causes people to buy into something they would otherwise not have bought into. Why should people vote for ANY Democrat in 2010 who remains a party to this fraud?

It turns out, however, that Obama is NOT calling for repeal. Instead, Obama is saying that he will VETO any such "discretionary" spending by Congress, since it would violate(lol) Obama's "freeze" on discretionary spending. Well, not so fast. Obama's position evidently is that this will be true UNLESS Congress's games the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) AGAIN, and comes up with $115 billion somewhere else to "apy for" (lol) the additional spending. Obama is taking this position even though the spending is already authorized and directed in the health care bill that Obama signed--the CBO number being the cost of the bill (not the cost of proposals not in the bill.

"Skip", I am being told by some of you leftists, "you just don't understand the genius of Obama. He got the health care bill passed by giving those "Blue Dog" Democrats cover to vote for the bill. Obama did not, and does not, care about these numbers. In fact, no one believes that anyone knows how much this health care bill will really cost. And no one believes those Medicare "savings" that are supposed to help "pay for" (lol again) the bill. But the American people have stopped paying attention. Now Obama is simply using another brilliant SCAM *(emphasis added) to provide cover for himself and Democrats. He knows the mainstream media will never really hold him to account for theses things, or examine whether Congress is being honest about "paying for" the additional spending."

All right. I understand now. Thanks. Where I disagree is the idea that the American people are this DUMB--or so forgetful and easily fooled. Abraham Lincoln would have to be wrong, and the evidence is that the American people are fully aware of the scams involved with this health care bill.

My question is: Will there be ANY Democrats be left in the House of Representatives, except in uncontested seats? Obama himself is telling the American people that the Democrats in Congress have utter contempt for them, and for honesty in legislation.

P.S. Yes, Obama has given Republicans a blueprint for how to STOP the health care bill from being implemented. Obama obviously does not regard Congress as bound by the provisions of the health care bill, in terms of forcing Congress to fund them. Republicans, with this example (unless they are wimps), should DEFUND all of the provisions of the bill. If Congress refuses to fund the bill, it does not matter if Obama would veto repeal. If Republicans, by the way, do not insist on repeal and totally starting over, the Republican Party is DEAD. People want principle now, and not games. Repeal is the only game in town for a principled party, and betrayal on this one is something most conservatives will not forgive.
Yes, both Dennis Miller and I have called President Obama a comic genius. I did it first. Obama proved it against today.

Two news stories today:

1। The April U.S. deficit was FOUR times the deficit for last April. It was an all time record for ANY April॥ If that percentage gain happened every month (not too likely, but we are getting worse at an incredible rate), our 12 month deficit would be more than 4 TRILLION dollars--really almost 5 trillion. The April deficit was 82.5 billion, but April is supposed to be a pretty good month for the deficit (tax filing). If other months follow April in this kind of percentage gain, we are worse off than even I thought.

2। Obama supposedly LECTURED the Spanish government, by phone, about the increase in Spain's deficit and the necessity for Spain to institute austeriry measures.

Q.E.D. President Obama is a comic genius. If only we had someone to lecture HIM--someone, that is, to whom he will listen.
This sounds like a joke. It IS a joke to sane people. However, the story is evidently real, from the Navy Times.

It is evidently a real proposal "inspired" by Obama (see Obama's comments meeting with the Afghanistan leader the Obama Administration was trashing for months)--comments about how our soldiers are often risking their own life restraining themselves to save civilians).

Yes, this is still only a proposal. The idea is that a "medal for courageous restraint" would be given for holding fire because of civilian danger--at risk to the soldier doing so. Obviously, the medal would ordinarily be given posthumously (my take--not in the Navy Times).

You can see why I call Obama a comic genius--inspiring other comic geniuses. You will note that Obama says SOLDIERS are this stupid, instead of being required to be this stupid by Rules of Engagement basically required by the Obama Administration.

Thursday, May 6, 2010

"New York City car bomber believed to have acted alone IN U.S." (emphasis mine)

Yes, we are back to those strange headlines/stories from the CORRUPT Associated Press, as regurgitated on the useless Yahoo News ( boycott Yahoo).

You will remember my correct criticism early in the week about the AP/Yahoo headline that the NYPD found "no evidence" to connect the car bomber with the Taliban. That headline remains disgraceful. The car bomber may not have been traced directly to the Taliban, but he has been pretty well connected to ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS in PAKISTAN. That early story attempting to downplay a connection with Muslim extremists served no purpose, except to push the mainstream media agenda of ignoring Islamic extremism (including, even, in things like the Danish cartoons and South Park), while still being perfectly willing to reach for "guilt by association" with the Tea Party people if a mere shout comes from the audience (often made up) which indicates "extremism".

That has been the agenda of the mainstream media on the car bomber from the beginning: to label him a "lone disturbed individual"--even before the guy was even identified. The "money honey" on CNBC--believing her won NBC network propaganda--even blamed some stock market nervousness on the obvious FALSITY of this mainstream media mantra that the bomber was unconnected to Islamic extremists. (Maria Bartaromo--sp? Who cares?--is the "money honey")

Why is this latest headline so bad? Isn't it true that the car bomber was probably acting alone in the United States? Probably, although it remains SPECULATION for no purpose.

That is the point. This headline is pretty much meaningless--not "news" of a headline nature at all. Its existence as a major headline (on Yahoo last night) can only be explained by the mainstream media AGENDA and CORRUPTION.

Yes, it would be news if it was discovered that the bomber is part of a larger group of U.S. terrorists. But if he was not part of a larger U.S. group, as appears more likely than not, that is NOT VERY IMPORTANT. Oh, it is worth putting in a larger story on the actual foreign connections of the car bomber. But the corrupt AP, and the mainstream media, want to IGNORE those foreign connections The guy made multiple trips (13?) to Pakistan, and people were arrested in Pakistan. Sure, it is not clear the EXACT connections to Islamic extremists of the car bomber. That is why that is the MAJOR STORY here. But it is a story the corrupt mainstream media is uninterested in (short of absolute proof, and even then they promptly forget it, as they have done with the Ft. Hood shooter and the Detroit plane bomber).

Why is it unimportant that the car bomber "acted alone in the U.S.", if that is true? So What. We now have at least THREE incidents of foreign Islamic extremists "inspiring (probably more than that with regard to Detroit and New York City) a lone individual to make a terror attack in the U.S. All three could probably have been stopped if we acted upon the information we had, and should have had. It is obvious Ft. Hood and Detroit could have been stopped, where we had specific warnings.

What about this last one? Well, we may find we had specific warnings there too. But it is clear WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALERT TO THIS GUY. Multiple trips to Pakistan? I am willing to flatly state: We should be paying attention to the passenger manifest of ALL flights to and from Pakistan (as well as the rest of the Middle East)--especially likely Muslim passengers. Our problem is Muslim extremists. No, we can't ignore everyone else totally, but we should be concentrating on the real problem. It is true that not all, r even most (a question here), Muslims are Islamic extremists. But essentially ALL Islamic extremists are Muslim (generally of Middle Eastern origin or descent). Our mainstream media has no problem asking the Catholic Church why so many of its priests have turned out to be pedophiles (although not nearly so many as the Muslim clerics who are radicals encouraging terrorists). Why is our mainstream media unwilling to ask the Muslim sects the same question: Why do you have so many terrorists, and terrorist sympathizers?

Does it mean we are "safe" if the car bomber was not part of a U.S. group? Were we "safe" that the Ft. Hood shooter was not part of a U.S. group? Were we safe that the Detroit plane bomber was not part of a U.S. group?

Of course not. The car bomber was already out there when the Detroit bomber tried his attack. There could be any number of "lone" people sent into the United States--in one way or another--by Islamic extremists overseas. And there could be any number of lone Americans "inspired" by those Islamic extremists, and who have tried to contact them, even if they are not agents of a particular foreign group.

As the Ft. Hood, Detroit, and NYC attacks have shown, it is IMPOSSIBLE to "defend" every target in the U.S. You have to proactively IDENTIFY even the lone actors. We COULD have so identified the THREE "lone actors" (a possible fourth attacked a recruiting office in Arkansas). But to do so we had to pay attention to ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS (in this country and out of it). Muslims should want these people stopped as much as anyone else--the Muslims who are not Islamic extremists.

Every day, people step off of a plane from Pakistan and other Muslim countries. Any one of those people could be another NYC bomber or Detroit bomber. That does not mean we should persecute all Muslims, or all people who step off of a plane from Pakistan. It does mean that the only way to stop these attacks is to PAY ATTENTION to Muslim extremists.

No, we did NOT "stop" ANY of these attacks. We got LUCKY. The Detroit bomb simply did not work. The NYC bomb did not work--helped by ordinary citizens. The Ft. Hood shooter did kill 13 people or so. We FAILED to stop any of these people, despite information, and possible information, that could have allowed us to stop ALL of these attacks before they reached the end stage.

We may not continue to be lucky. We may not avoid the attack which might now be contemplated by someone who stepped off a plane from Pakistan YESTERDAY (or last month, or last year, or etc.)..

It is a fact that the big problem here are the GROUPS of Islamic extremists willing to, and striving to, send an army of "lone" killers into the United States to kill, and to "inspire" lone Muslims in the United States to kill. This is not speculation. The corrupt AP/Yahoo News even--briefly, reluctantly and belatedly--carried a story early in the week about the Pakistan Taliban threatening more attacks of the type of the New York City car bomber ("appearing" to take credit for this attack, which gains quite a bit of credibility with the now known Pakistan connection). It is true that a GROUP of people in the United States can potentially cause more damage (9/11). However, an ARMY of lone killers recruited by Islamic extremists from outside the country are a pretty big threat. And "lone" individuals are harder to find than groups. Therefore, it is not necessarily true that it is "good news" that it is only foreign groups trying to kill us, or that the New York City bomber was not part of a larger U.S. group. It is BAD news that these Islamic extremists are trying to kill us, and dangerous that they are recruiting/inspiring "lone" killers for that
It appears that our government let the New York City bomber GET ON A PLANE. Nope. This has nothing to do with whether there was a real danger he would "get away". Airport security LET HIM ON A PLANE!!!!! That is nuts. What if he had a bomb?

My brother is till irritated that his young teen daughters were searched almost every time he brought them to Nashville (3 of them). That was because my brother always bought a one-way ticket, since he did not know when they wre going back (as if a smart terrorist--exclusively ISLAMIC in recent decades--would not buy a round trip ticket, knowing the "red flag" of a one-way ticket). Nobody looked LESS like a terrorist than my brother's slightly built, blondish teenage girls. But we engage in this INSANITY because we are "politically correct", and refused to concentrate our attention on the most likely real threats (Middle Eastern males, for one).

PLEASE tell me that this New York bomber was thoroughly SEARCHED at airport security!!!!! Is our corrupt mainstream media even interested? They are hardly interested that this is yt another Muslim extremist (from all indications), inspired by other Muslim extremists (even if nit the actual agent of an Islamic terrorist organization, which is still possible).

Nope. The Obama Administration can "spin" this all they want. They had no business letting this guy get on a plane. Are we so "politically correct' that we don't even "profile" as to BOMBING SUSPECTS? That I even ask this question shows how little confidence I have in the Obama Administration, and how much confidence I have in the corruption of our mainstream media (confidence that they are mainly interested in AGENDA, and in covering for the Obama Administration--not to mention an apparent policy of covering for extremist Islam).

Sunday, May 2, 2010

Some of you--fools that you are--may have doubted me as I have proven that there is no worse "news" organization in the universe (including known and unknown planets) than the despicable Associated Press--because it is impossible to be worse. Or some of you may have considered me harsh when I have suggested you BOYCOTT YAHOO. Consider these three headlines I encountered on Sunday when I logged on to AT&T (meaning I get the Yahoo News welcome page):

"NYPD: No evidence that Taliban linked to SUV" (AP)

This is what the despicable AP, and Yahoo News, regard as the most IMPORTANT "news" out of New York on that terrorist attack averted by LUCK. Isn't that one of you greatest worries? That the Taliban might be SLANDERED by an unjust accusation. Well, it IS one of the greatest worries of the anti-American mainstream media. Nope. I am not saing this should not be reported. As a HEADLINE, it is DISGRACEFUL. Meaningless, too. Note that the story does not prove there is no link with the Taliban. Remember the Ft. Hood initial mainstream media attempt to avoid a Muslim connection, only to have all of those embarrassing emails surface?

"Obama states that he will do everything "humanly possible" on spill>" (AP)

Again.A HEADLINE? Can you imagine the mainstream media trying to COVER President Bush with this kind of headline on Katrina, where the Federal Government did NOT have primary "first response" responsibility, which it DOES have on the oil spill? Aren't you comforted that it took Obama TEN DAYS to SAY he will do everything "humanly possible"?

"Arizona''s largest newspaper says Pols failed on immigration." (AP)

This last is the WORST of a bad lot, and again proves the despicable AP to be a TOTALLY CORRUPT organization, from the janitors up to every single "journalist". Only EVIL, lying people work for the despicable Associated Press.

First, note the "journalistic" INCOMPETENCE. You don't even find out the NAME of the newspaper from the despicable AP in the headline, or in the first paragraph or two. I never even got to the name, because I never not past the first two paragraphs. I ASSUME we are talking about the Arizona Republic here--a LEFTIST newspaper (as are most mainstream newspapers, if only because they rely on the despicable AP for a good number of their stories--but usually because they also want to be).

Yes, this is INCEST. This "largest newspaper" (an attempt at propaganda in itself) is probably PART of the Associated Press, in the sense of being associated with it. It has the same AGENDA as the despicable AP. Yet, the AP is trying to BOOTSTRAP the opinion of a mainstream media outlet to bolster the mainstream media AGENDA on the new Arizona law. The second paragraph of the AP story refers to the supposed boycott of Arizona, being pushed by the mainstream media. What if an Arizona newspaper did a front page editorial SUPPORTING the Arizona law? There is no chance the AP would do this kind of story. CORRUPT. That is the despicable AP. CORRUPT to its core.

Bottom line. BOYCOTT the Arizona Republic--whether you live in Arizona or elsewhere. BOYCOTT Yahoo News. BOYCOTT any "news" outlet that relies upon the despicable AP. The above "news" headlines are NOT "news". They are CORRUPT propaganda.

When is the last time you saw a mere newspaper editorial bootstrapped into national "news"? Nope. The AP is totally corrupt. But it is ironic that one of the main targets of the AP CORRUPTION was former media darling John McCain. Now you could say this is a deep plot to get McCain elected, since NO ONE likes or trusts "journalists" today. But that would be giving the despicable AP too much credit. The AP thinks it is atttacking REPUBLICANS--not realizing that people like me AGREE that McCain has FAILED on immigration as badly as a stupid politician has failed. However, this is not because we agree with the AP, or the Arizona Republic. What we agree with is that the McCain-Kennedy "comprehensive" immigration approach was always a FAILURE, and a stupidity. Yes, I continue to advise you to vote AGAINST McCain in Arizona, even if it means joining the Devil (the despicable AP).