Bush Administration Deficits Secondary to Democrats not Paying Taxes

That headline might be a stretch …

Then again, it might not …

Maybe Barack Obama should nominate every Democrat for some position so their tax returns have to be audited. Then we might be able to reduce the National Debt significantly.

Geithner, Daschle, now Sibelius …

Is anyone keeping up with the total of what these people have wound up owing? And, why aren’t they having to pay penalties as well as interest … and interest on penalties … like everyone else?

Thank You, Barney Frank, for the Mess We’re In

Most people haven’t gone so far as to directly blame him, close but not quite, but I will. And we can throw in a few other prominent Democrats like Chris Dodd and Chcuk Schumer as well if you like. If there was ever any one person who deserved to have about 300 million people attend his tar and feathering party, it’s Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts.

If you don’t want to take my word for it, then read the following article by Michael Graham of the Boston Herald.

Better not bank on Barney Frank – BostonHerald.com

Haven’t we been repeatedly hearing how the Republicans and the Bush Administration created this whole mess because they’re in favor of deregulation. And, John McCain is a deregulator so he, in particular is responsible.

Well …

From the standpoint of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, nothing could be farther from the truth. Okay, let me be a little more blunt. They are blatant liars, every one of them … including Barack Obama and all of his puppet like mouths such as Bill Burton and more recently, Stephanie Cutter. These people couldn’t recognize the truth if it hit them in the face.

The truth is …

The Bush Administration as early as 2001 … that’s right … within less than a year in office … recognized that there were serious problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and sent John Snow who was the Secretary of the Treasury to Congress to try to get laws passed to increase regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Democrats wouldn’t hear of it. The Bush Administration sent Alan Greenspan to Capitol Hill but, again, the Democrats wouldn’t listen.

I watched a tape yesterday where Barney Frank said in one of those hearings that the warnings of crises that were being presented were only “hypothetical” and would “never happen”. That’s right. that’s exactly what Barney Frank said … what we’ve been going through the past year and right now would not happen.

In 2005, the Republican passed a bill in committee to increase regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which was voted against to the man by the Democratic members. The bill wasn’t put on the floor for a vote because the Republicans knew they couldn’t get 60 votes to pass the bill.

Barney Frank has consistently favored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac forcing banks and other lending institutions to underwrite loans for people who couldn’t afford them.

Now the taxpayers are having to bail out the corporations that bought these bad loans …

and the Democrats wants the American Taxpayer to pay for the same people who shouldn’t have had the loans in the first place to keep the property that they couldn’t afford in the first place.

That’s the real screw job … not the $700 billion bail out. If it were only the $700 billion bail out American Taxpayers could probably wind up making money on the deal in the long run because the property could probably be sold later at a profit. But, no. We have to pay to keep the people who couldn’t afford the houses in the first place in them.

That’s the real shaft that the American public is getting.

Of course, there’s one more card in the deck. All of this property could be sold at a profit later. My bet is that it will be sold for pennies on the dollar to some special friends of a few special people … (Democrats, of course, since they’re counting on controlling both Congress and the White House after November) … and the American taxpayer and public will be shafted anyway.

Thanks, Barney … and Barack and Chris and Chuck. Yeah … thanks.

26 September 2008 …

I’ve read some people trying to debunk my article by saying that the Republicans controlled Congress and could have passed any bill they wanted to. Those people obviously don’t know what they’re talking about or don’t understand how the Senate works.

A look at the following article on the History of the U.S. Senate,

U.S. Senate: Art & History Home > Origins & Development > Party Division

clearly shows that the Republicans never had a veto proof majority of 60 to pass legislation over the threat of a filibuster. There were never more than 55 Republican Senators in a given Congress during this period and then only that many in two Congresses.

A simple majority is not veto proof control.

So, let the critics try to debunk fact.

Addendum (2/21/2009): The Boston Herald article is no longer available for free access as I found out today … but the comments are. I suppose if you want to read the article you’ll have to subscribe … although I did a search of the title and got “0” results. ???  “Earl”

Joe Biden’s Speech at the Democratic National Convention 2008

Joe Biden began his speech tonight by recognizing his family. There were several times I actually thought he was going to cry.

Without going into all of the details of Biden’s speech, it became apparent how the Democrats are going to attack John McCain, none of which was much of a surprise.

Joe did complain about “Washington” doing nothing to help average Americans … something interesting coming from someone who has been in Washington since the early 1970’s. A number of the current American problems he attributed to the Bush administration actually have their origins during the Clinton administration … things like globalization and job outsourcing.

Joe Biden did try to add some meat to Barack Obama’s resume but it wound up being as skinny as Obama is.

It continues to amaze me how much is forgotten or is left unsaid for the sake of political expediency.

Barack Obama showed up as a “surprise” guest at the end of Biden’s speech. Barack Obama made an open invitation for “everyone” to attend his acceptance speech at Mile High Stadium on Thursday … to open up the process to “all Americans”. I suppose the previously announced “dues paying process” has been dropped. Do you reckon? Let’s all go to Denver and find out. Right.

Very “Jacksonian”.

More Susan Rice Political Rantings

Susan Rice in her typical political posturing, acting more like the proverbial attack dog rather than a foreign policy advisor, again attacked the Bush administration for not negotiating with Iran and not applying tougher sanctions during an interview with Sheppard Smith on Fox News.

Ms. Rice stated that the United States should use more diplomatic means to encourage our European allies to assist with tougher sanctions. She also stated the President Bush finally followed Barack Obama’s recommendations to begin diplomacy with Iran by sending a diplomat to sit in on European talks with Iran in Switzerland a short time ago.

What Ms. Rice failed to explain was how the United States was going to influence Russia and China not to provide support to Iran. She also failed to mention how we were going to influence North Korea in the same way. She also failed to mention the recent increase in sanctions on Iran which had already been planned. I suppose that was also at Senator Obama’s suggestion.

While pointing out that the Iranians have been advancing their nuclear program for the past eight years during the Bush administration, she failed to point out that North Korea did the same thing to the Clinton administration under which she also served as a foreign policy advisor.

While criticizing the McCain campaign for attacking Obama in reference to Obama referring to Iran as a small and insignificant nation stating that Obama has always considered Iran a serious threat, she failed to mention that Obama only “clarified” his position on Iran after his statements about Iran were criticized.

She further made the often repeated complaint that the Democratic candidate’s remarks were “taken out of context” which seems to be the standard response to each of his frequent faux pas which repeatedly point to his lack of experience or inability to completely grasp the significance of world conditions until someone with more experience points out his deficiencies.

Apparently, Susan Rice hasn’t learned from her previous experience while serving the Clinton administration since her approach to rogue nations has been unchanged in more than 15 years.

It makes me wonder how much Senator Obama, if he becomes President Obama, will rely on advice from people like Susan Rice who can’t even learn from their previous mistakes.

Has anyone else noticed how Senator Obama’s “clarifications” of his positions or statements actually sound more like changes in policies and positions?

And, is anyone besides me getting tired of the Democrats using the nearly worn out phrase, “out of context” as a lame excuse for ignorance and inexperience?

Also, has anyone else noticed how Barack Obama or one of his cronies claim credit for his influencing any positive or potentially positive event that occurs?

I suppose if “Gustav” misses New Orleans or any other major Gulf coast city, we will have to give Barack Obama credit for providing divine intervention … and Susan Rice for recommending the action.

All the Rhetoric About Military Families …

Tonight, on the first night of the Democratic party’s national convention, Michelle Obama has continued her appeal to the families of people in the military service as well as those service members themselves for votes.

There is no doubt that military families are now under a lot of stress. Since Congress began reaping it’s “peace dividend” in the early 1990’s, the military, as far as it’s human component is concerned, has been downsized and, to a large degree, neglected.

Michelle Obama has made a lot to do over the plight of military dependents, expressing concerns for their situation and pledging that she and her husband will do everything they can to improve their conditions.

One thing that will do more to relieve the current and recent past conditions of military families hasn’t been mentioned by the Obamas or John McCain that I know of. It is also one of the major blunders of the current Bush administration.

During World War II, the combined manpower of the military services was about 11 million active duty personnel. During the Korean Conflict it was about 3.5 million servicemen and women. During the Vietnam era, military manpower peaked at about 3.2 million members. After the official end of the Vietnam war, the military was downsized to about 2 million members and stayed at this size until the end of the first Iraq War. After the first Iraq War, military manpower was downsized to about 1.5 to 1.6 million members. Currently, and during the extent of the current Iraq War, military manpower has stayed in the range of 1.375 to 1.4 million members.

Insufficient manpower is the major cause of the stresses being placed on military families. Active duty members have had to serve as much as 15 months in the war zone with very short reassignments outside of that area. The United States is unable to adequately man two war zones in Iraq and Afganistan, adequately fulfill its other world wide obligations and has been unable to give an adequate or appropriate response to the recent Russian invasion of the country of Georgia.

Although President Bush called for a significant increase in the number of combat brigades in his last State of the Union speech, review of current manpower statistics show no response to that call for increasing military manpower with an actual decline for several months in the number of active duty personnel after the speech.

I have a daughter whose spouse is currently serving on active duty. One of his major complaints is the lack of adequate personnel to get jobs done, feeling like he is having to do the work of three people.

One of the things that I have noticed living in a community that has had a large military presence over the years, is the fact that, upon talking to various people, many jobs that were once filled by active duty personnel, during my time of military service, are now filled by civilian employees or civilian contractors. My daughter and her husband have noted that these people are frequently uncaring and unresponsive to the needs of the active duty personnel. There is no substitute for having an onbase position filled by a person who can understand and sympathize with the needs of the active duty member and his family and no one can appreciate those needs better than another active duty person or a member of a dependent family.

All of the sophisticated weaponry is no better than the individuals who man and maintain them and the wellbeing of these people should be the number one priority of the government. Adequate manpower can improve the perception of wellbeing among active duty personnel and their families and no amount of improved benefits or improved living conditions will be adequate if the active duty personnel are understaffed. All of the rhetoric and even some fulfilled promises will be to no avail if the working conditions of the military personnel are compromised and made difficult or impossible by a manpower shortage.

The first thing that any administration has to do to improve the conditions of military personnel and their families is to re-establish a reasonable size in manpower to the military, one that will address all of the current needs as well as an adequate number to provide an adequate buffer for unanticipated emergencies.

After all, this is the purpose of having a military force. Having a military which is understaffed and undermanned defies the logic of having a standing military force in the first place.

The United States should, at least return to its manpower of the 1980’s of about 2 million active duty personnel, and, with the current world threats as well as trying to conduct two wars, Congress and the executive branch should strongly consider enlarging the military to even greater numbers.

The lack of NATO support both in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the current reluctance of its members to stand up to Russia should show that it is only wishful thinking if not a grave and serious blunder to count on others to fulfill our shortfalls in manpower. This only emboldens and encourages adversaries of the United States like Russia is currently showing herself to be.