For some time, we have been hearing about the housing market, and how things were going in that department, critical to our overall health. Well, as it turns out, the National Realtors Association can’t count. They were off, way off, on where the numbers actually are, and their mistake was not a good one as this Chicago Tribune article highlights:

[snip] Far fewer homes have been sold over the past five years than previously estimated, the National Association of Realtors said Tuesday.

NAR said it plans to downwardly revise sales of previously-owned homes going back to 2007 during the release of its next existing home sales report on Dec. 21.

NAR’s existing home sales numbers, released monthly, are a closely followed gauge of the health of the housing market.

While NAR hasn’t revealed exactly how big the revision to home sales will be, the agency’s chief economist Lawrence Yun said the decrease will be “meaningful.“

“For the real estate business, this means the housing market’s downturn was deeper than what was initially thought,“ Yun said.

Yun said the database NAR uses to track existing home sales, the Multiple Listing Service (MLS), has led the real estate agency to over-count existing home sales for several reasons. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Well, crap. That is some pretty sucky news, isn’t it? This had been one of the upward trends lauded of late, and turns out, that was a big bunch of hooey.

And I have to share one more story of Obama helping out his buddies with our money (H/t FlBreeze), as this editorial from Investor.com highlights:

[snip] Now we find the Navy partnering with the Agriculture Department to purchase hundreds of thousands of gallons of alternative biofuel in place of standard JP-5 fuel for Navy aircraft — the biggest federal purchase of biofuel ever.

It’s part of the White House’s “we can’t wait for Congress” strategy as the 2012 election year looms. But JP-5 typically costs less than $4 a gallon. If a family on a budget started filling up with $16-a-gallon gas, it might want to adopt the motto, “we can’t wait to go broke.”

[...]

As J.E. Dyer noted over the weekend on the Hot Air Green Room, “a member of Obama’s presidential transition team, T. J. Glauthier, is a ‘strategic advisor’ at Solazyme, the California company that is selling a portion of the biofuel to the Navy. Glauthier worked — shock, shock — on the energy-sector portion of the 2009 stimulus bill.”

Solazyme had already gotten a nearly $22 million chunk of change out of the taxpayers thanks to the 2009 stimulus. We heard the ludicrous excuse last week from Obama Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, as quoted in the National Journal, that “we are doing this for one simple reason: It makes us better fighters” because “our use of fossil fuels is a very real threat to our national security and to the U.S. Navy ability to protect America and project power overseas.”(Click here to read the rest.)

What the hell are these people drinking? Whatever it is, they need to put it down, and walk away. This is just ridiculous, and absurd. I swear, Obama is finding all kinds of ways to funnel our money to his buddies, and I am sick of it.

Again, I have to ask – where the hell is the MSM on this?? How many scandals can Obama possibly have before they start reporting them? Unbelievable.

Oh, wait. No, not really. None of those things have really happened. I was shocked to see The Hill, a site I read regularly for its impartiality, and whose Associate Editor, A.B. Stoddard, I have admired for her intellect. The premise of the article by Peter Schroeder is this:

President Obama, with his electoral fate tied to the economy, must be pleased with the momentum he’s getting.

Just months ago, the U.S. credit rating was downgraded and Democrats worried Obama was following in the footsteps of one-term President Jimmy Carter. Maybe he will, but reports in the last week suggest manufacturing and construction are humming, and Thanksgiving saw record-setting shopping by consumers.

The icing on the cake? A jobs report Friday shaved nearly half a point off the unemployment rate. The 8.6 percent rate was down from 9 percent in October and is the lowest unemployment has stood in two and a half years. (Emphasis mine.)

“Democrats have a very good chance in 2012 and if the economy gets better that’ll help us,” said Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.). “Things are looking a lot better. A lot better.”

“The icing on the cake?” Really? He is promoting this false meme that the artificially reduced Unemployment numbers put forth by the Obama Administration (and which Larry Johnson thoroughly debunks in this post, “Delusional America“)? Is it really good news for Obama that over 300,000 people have given up hope of ever finding a job again? That’s a GOOD thing? In what universe? ObamaMedia World? Evidently. I was just appalled to see a site like The Hill pushing this crock of BS for Obama and the Democrats. This wasn’t an opinion piece, after all, it was allegedly “reporting.” Reporting Democratic talking points, maybe, but not the facts, or reality. At the very BEST, the number is now at 8.9%, and even that is pushing it (according to Eric Bolling on “The Five”).

These kinds of machinations by the Democrats are really mind boggling. It wasn’t so long ago that I would have bought this crap they are selling, being a dyed in the wool Dem and all. But no longer. I simply cannot understand how the Party that claims to be SO compassionate is CELEBRATING people giving up out of despair. How is that good in ANYONE’S world?

This does seem to be the Democrats’ MO, though. This kind of hoodwinking, that is. This instance has to do with the economy, riding a wave of glee on the backs of those who have given up. My good friend, CindyIndie, sent me an article about an issue in Texas that highlights more of this double-speaking machination that seems to be SOP. This one deals with their “concern” for minority presence and leadership in politics. The title gives a hint, “Opportunity Lost To End The White-Guy Streak.” Yes, and that opportunity was lost due to an appeal by the Democrats:

For a while there, before a three-judge federal panel did some three-judge federal paneling, the good and progressive people of Travis County (long self-congratulatory about their goodness and progressivity) seemed en route to ballot-box ethnic history.

[...]

This, of course, was all about Republican self-interest and had nothing to do with wanting to break the white-man streak in Travis County. But facts are facts, and regardless of why it happened (largely to stick it to longtime U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, a longtime white man), the map offered a solid possibility of electing an African American and two Hispanics to a five-person (up from the current three) Travis County U.S. House delegation.

To jack with Doggett, the GOP drew a Hispanic-heavy San Antonio-Austin district in which state Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio, had a solid shot at beating Doggett in the Democratic primary. The map also brought into Travis County a multicounty, northward meandering district now represented by Republican Bill Flores of Waco.

The Travis County map also included a greatly rejiggered multicounty district in which former Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams, a black Republican, had a solid chance of winning. The other districts in the county (also multicounty districts) most likely would have continued to have been represented by Republicans Michael McCaul of Austin and Lamar Smith of San Antonio, who self-identify as white men.

So Travis County could have wound up with two white guys, two Hispanic guys and a black guy. Sure, only one of them (McCaul) now lives in the county, but hey, ethnic history is ethnic history — even if the black guy (Williams) and one of the Hispanics (Flores) are Republicans (a concept that irks some of the local good and progressive.) (Click here to read the rest.)

Well, of course it is obvious why the Democrats claimed this would affect minority representation – because we all know that Black Republicans aren’t really black, and I assume that extends to Hispanic Republicans, too. Much better to have a paternalist White Guy represent your interests – they do so well with that. Just look at Women’s Issues and how well our Congress has handled that (e.g., equal pay is still a dream).

Honestly, I don’t know how in the world the Democrats could have even made this argument to the Panel with straight faces. Maybe they didn’t. Maybe there were lots of winks, guffaws, and “dontcha knows” thrown in there. Beats me. But apparently, it is a mindset that allows them to say these things, much like this pronouncement from The Hill’s “Signs” article:

[snip] Democrats have felt the swing in momentum.

Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.) said the president’s chances for reelection have “improved” with the economy, while Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) says voters will see the president has things moving in the right direction.

“The economy is not where we want it to be, but it’s at least stable and slowly but surely going in the right direction,” Cummings told The Hill. (Click here to read the rest.)

Uh, yeah, just keep telling yourselves that. I suppose these folks also still believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, which they are presumably counting on to help ease our massive debt, which is now 100% of our GDP. Yeah, sure, the economy is doing GREAT! Just peachy! Just tell all of those folks who are first time filers for Unemployment, those who dropped out, and those who have lost their homes. I am so certain they will all agree with Levin and Cummings, aren’t you? Cough, cough. Uh huh. Maybe it is time for them to take off their rose colored glasses, and try looking at reality for a change. Just a thought. What do you think?

The chief executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac faced bipartisan outrage Wednesday over multimillion-dollar salaries and large bonuses at the seized housing finance giants, which still owe the government a combined $150 billion in the largest financial crisis bailout.

“Should you profit while the taxpayer is paying the bill?” asked Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

He summoned Fannie Mae CEO Michael Williams and Freddie Mac CEO Charles “Ed” Haldeman Jr. to testify before his committee. The hearing came a day after another House panel voted overwhelmingly to suspend large executive compensation packages at the two companies and align their salaries with that of government employees.

The total compensation for the top six executives at Fannie and Freddie for 2009 and 2010 was $35.4 million, with Williams and Haldeman receiving about half of that. Each of them could take home as much as $6 million apiece in salary and bonuses in 2011.

[...]

The salary and compensation were defended by Williams, Haldeman and Edward DeMarco, the latter of whom is the acting director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which has overseen Fannie and Freddie since they were put in a government conservatorship in 2008 because they were on the brink of failure. (Click here to read the rest.)

Below is an audio of some of the questioning by Rep. Darrell Issa, and Rep. Elijah Cummings, of these executives. They asked some pretty pointed questions, which, frankly, I think the executives did a poor job of answering:

Click here to view the embedded video.

I have to say, I loved when Rep. Elijah Cummings from Georgia mentioned that he sure would remember when he made a million dollars a year. Yeah, no kidding, especially when one is being paid with taxpayer money. I also loved when Rep. Cummings said these two entities had to be dragged along by Congress to do their work. You tell ‘em, Rep. Cummings!

It is just amazing the sheer lack of remorse these executives demonstrate, despite their utter failures thus far at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And they think they deserve bonuses for running the two further into the ground? Unbelievable.

And while I type, Energy Director Chu is also facing the music. He is testifying before Congress about the loan made to Solyndra (and presumably related loans). While this is ongoing, one statement Director Chu did make was this:

[snip] But he acknowledged that chances are dim for taxpayers to see their money returned as Solyndra goes through bankruptcy proceedings.

Asked how much money taxpayers might get back, Chu said: “Well, that remains to be seen. I’m anticipating that not very much.”

Well, that’s just great. Thanks, Director Chu. What a great director you have been for the DOE (snark). Like Holder, Chu cannot muster an apology for this debacle:

While declining to offer a personal apology over the situation, Chu expressed disappointment in the fate of Solyndra and said the buck stopped with him when it came to decisions made by the Energy Department about the company.

Chu claimed he was looking out for the taxpayer all along when reviewing the Solyndra finances.

“As the Secretary of Energy, the final decisions on Solyndra were mine, and I made them with the best interest of the taxpayer in mind,” Chu said in testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “And I want to be clear: over the course of Solyndra’s loan guarantee, I did not make any decision based on political considerations.” (Click here to read the rest.)

And like Holder, all evidence to the contrary as information continues to trickle out about Solyndra and the White House.

What a bunch of liars these Administration people are, and these executives from Fannie and Freddie would be laughable, if it wasn’t OUR money on the line.

Thank heavens the Congress is exercising its oversight. I hope they root out every little pertinent detail on both of these issues. I look forward to seeing the end result of all of this, don’t you? And it cannot come soon enough to suit me. How about you?

That are going to make my head explode. First, news that the ten executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are still operating in the red, and which are largely to blame for the housing crisis, got BONUSES. And I am not talking little bonuses, either. Those ten mo-fos got = and you better sit the hell down and swallow whatever you are drinking – $12.79 MILLION DOLLARS. Yes, you read that number correctly.

Gosh, I hate this Administration:

The Federal Housing Finance Agency, the government regulator for Fannie and Freddie, approved $12.79 million in bonus pay after 10 executives from the two government-sponsored corporations last year met modest performance targets tied to modifying mortgages in jeopardy of foreclosure.

The executives got the bonuses about two years after the federally backed mortgage giants received nearly $170 billion in taxpayer bailouts — and despite pledges by FHFA, the office tasked with keeping them solvent, that it would adjust the level of CEO-level pay after critics slammed huge compensation packages paid out to former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines and others.

Securities and Exchange Commission documents show that Ed Haldeman, who announced last week that he is stepping down as Freddie Mac’s CEO, received a base salary of $900,000 last year yet took home an additional $2.3 million in bonus pay. Records show other Fannie and Freddie executives got similar Wall Street-style compensation packages; Fannie Mae CEO Michael Williams, for example, got $2.37 million in performance bonuses. (Click here to read the rest.)

So they got these massive bonuses for mild improvements after getting $170 BILLION of our taxpaying dollars. Are you freakin’ KIDDING me with this? Outrageous, just outrageous.

Just in case you need a reminder, check out this hearing from 2004:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Good grief, this makes my blood boil.

Next up is the Federal Government’s continued attacks on South Carolina, this time about our new Immigration law set to go into force in January. (You may recall that the NLRB went after SC for Boeing opening up a manufacturing plant here rather than in a union state, despite Boeing having plants in other states with unions, and which cost zero union jobs.)

Yes, the DOJ, that bastion of fairness and justice – cough, choke, cough – is attacking the state’s immigration law, which is similar to Arizona’s. If someone commits a crime, and the police have reason to suspect they are illegal, they can ask for proof of citizenship. If the person is illegal, the police officers will call in the appropriate immigration personnel to handle the offender. Additionally, businesses have to ensure their employees are here legally. (I thought everyone had to do that ANYWAY. I have had to prove my citizenship numerous times for positions I have taken.) But this DOJ takes umbrage with all of that, so it has filed a lawsuit against SC, naming Governor Haley as the defendant.

Now, let’s be clear – in no other country can you expect to go on your merry way if you are discovered to be there illegally. If you think you can live and work easily in another country without a visa, passport, or green card, go check it out. I’ll wait. Oh, no, I won’t because your ass will either be in jail, or on a plane home. No other country, including the two with whom we share borders, will allow you to live and work inside their country ILLEGALLY. Their laws are strict, and THEY ENFORCE THEM, unlike the United States.

The Federal government claims that this is their bastion – that’s their beef. Our governor, a daughter of LEGAL immigrants herself, Nikki Haley, said the government is not doing its job, it is not protecting our borders, it is not keeping out illegal aliens, and they are taking our jobs. Considering SC has higher unemployment than the national average, that is no small thing.

Here is more about both the law, and the complaint against it:

[snip] he government wants a judge to stop enforcement of the legislation, which requires that officers call federal immigration officials if they suspect someone is in the country illegally following a stop for something else, U.S. Attorney Bill Nettles told The Associated Press.

“The Department of Justice has many important tasks,” Nettles said. “Two of those important tasks are the defense of the constitution and ensuring equality is afforded to all.”

The law says all law enforcement officers are required to call federal immigration officials if they suspect someone is in the country illegally. The question must follow an arrest or traffic stop for something else. The measure bars officers from holding someone solely on that suspicion. Opponents railed against the measure as encouraging racial profiling.

[...]

The law also makes it a felony for someone to make fake photo IDs for illegal residents and creates a new law enforcement unit within the Department of Public Safety to enforce state immigration laws. It also makes it a felony for illegal immigrants to allow themselves to be transported.

Nettles said the law is unconstitutional and violates people’s right to due process.

I’m sorry, but none of those things sound all that egregious to me. The state wants to ensure people are living and working in the state legally, and it wants to punish those who try and get around that by making fake IDs, which I would think is illegal anyway. And this violates” due process”??

You know, if the DOJ wasn’t already such a laughing stock for the crap it has been pulling with not going after actual offenders, like the New Black Panther Party, or lying its freaking ass off over “Fast and Furious,” I might give them a tad more leeway. But they don’t deserve it. Not by a long shot.

Oh, but wait, there’s more. This is from none other than Janet Napolitano:

In a news release, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said South Carolina’s law “diverts critical law enforcement resources from the most serious threats to public safety and undermines the vital trust between local jurisdictions and the communities they serve, while failing to address the underlying problem: the need for comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level.” (Click here to read the rest.)

Oh, freakin’ spare me already. DO YOUR JOBS!!! This is just another wordy excuse for not doing what the US Constitution declares is the role of the Federal Government – to protect the country and its citizens from “invasion.” Do your damn job, and stop attacking states when they have to resort to taking care of their own borders for lack of federal action.

And speaking of the DOJ and lying its ass off over programs like “Fast and Furious,” the DOJ dumped a TON of emails on Congress the night before another hearing on this program. Yep. They have had months to do this, but waited until the very last minute to release 650 pages. Why? Well, because there was a hearing scheduled for the next day, that’s why.

But get this – not only are there more Congresspeople demanding Holder step down, but the data dump revealed the following:

[snip] The new documents, according to Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, “indicate that contrary to previous denials by the Justice Department, the criminal division has a great deal of culpability in sweeping the previous Wide Receiver strategy under the rug and then allowing the subsequent Operation Fast and Furious to continue without asking key questions.”

“Most importantly, officials raised very appropriate questions related to Operation Wide Receiver at the same time that many of these same officials were receiving briefings on Operation Fast and Furious,” Grassley said in a statement. “It begs the question why they didn’t ask the same important policy questions about an ongoing case being run out of the same field division.” [snip](Click here to read the rest.)

Have I mentioned how much I hate this Administration?

So, sorry if this makes your head explode, too. I just had to share. I am sure there are things going on in your neck of the woods or with this government that are getting on your last nerve, too. Feel free to share that with us, too. I need an aspirin…

Seriously, Mr. President – put down the crack pipe. We are better off now than we were four years ago? For real? I’m with Speaker Boehner on this when I ask, “are you kidding me?” Boehner continued:

“Why don’t you go ask the 14 million Americans who are out of work whether they’re better off today than they were four years ago?”

Excellent idea, Speaker Boehner. I think we all know what they might say.

But again, don’t take my word for it. Here are just a few of the ways in which we are NOT better off under Obama’s policies than four years ago (H/t to Republican Security Council):

I think that pretty much sums it up, don’t you? I don’t know what President Obama has been smoking, but he needs to stop if he truly believes our nation is better off now than we were four years ago. Nothing could be further from the truth.

So, what’s on your mind today? The House voting to subpoena the White House in relation to Solyndra? The Inspector General investigating over 100 loans made by the Energy Department? The media’s obsession with anonymous allegations against Cain, along with his actually getting snippy with reporters? The convoluted way the media presents “support” for the OWS, like this headline from CNN, “More Americans Supporting Occupy Wall Street**“? (Hint – they put the higher number of people who have HEARD of it at the top, and the much lower number of those who support it further down. How could people NOT have heard of it with the incessant coverage of it??) Up to you – let’s hear it!

**Update: Oops, the new Quinnipiac Poll shows more people have an unfavorable opinion of the OWS folks, so maybe not such a great idea for the Democrats to support it, according to this National Journal piece.

You might recall, Obama tried this very same phrase back in 2008 with John McCain. It didn’t get much traction then, but that hasn’t stopped Obama from trotting it back out now, trying to scare the crap out of people and malign the Republicans all at the same time.

And may I digress for a moment and say, this whole thing about forgiving student loans at OUR expense pisses me off. I just paid off my student loans last month. I am not kidding. It is expensive to go to graduate school in New York City and Boston, but I did it because that is what I needed to do for ordination. No one forgave my loans, no one helped pay off my loans, and I damn sure didn’t ask my fellow taxpayers to cover the debt I CHOSE to incur. Just sayin’. Frankly, I do not think MoveOn.org should be dictating our public policy. But that’s me.

Ahem. But that is precisely what Obama is talking about doing in his current jaunt around the country at our expense, trying to get back the 20-somethings who have become disenchanted with The One. But it is not just at our financial expense, but at the expense of our Constitution. There is a reason we have checks and balances, and it is precisely to keep the president from acting as King. But that is not stopping the so-called Constitutional Scholar in Chief. No sirree. His claims belittling Republicans and Congress have gotten out of hand, and his rhetoric is negative, to put it mildly.

One Congressman who is not taking it sitting down is Rep. Paul Ryan. Ryan is fighting back against Obama’s allegations that the reason he willfully plans to violate the Constitution (and just WHEN is someone going to call him on that) is because those horrible Republicans will not pass any of his plans, damn their eyes. Not only does Ryan speak out against the plans, but claims, rightfully, IMHO, that Obama is “sowing social unrest.” I could not agree with him more (Photo by US Embassy Kabul):

“Instead of working together where we agree, the president has opted for divisive rhetoric and the broken politics of the past,” Ryan will say, according to speech excerpts. “He is going from town to town, impugning the motives of Republicans, setting up straw men and scapegoats, and engaging in intellectually lazy arguments, as he tries to build support for punitive tax hikes on job creators.”

“Pitting one group against another only distracts us from the true sources of inequity in this country – corporate welfare that enriches the powerful, and empty promises that betray the powerless,” Ryan also plans to say.

[...]

“Instead of appealing to the hope and optimism that were hallmarks of his first campaign, he has launched his second campaign by preying on the emotions of fear, envy, and resentment,” Ryan says, according to his prepared remarks.

“This has the potential to be just as damaging as his misguided policies. Sowing social unrest and class resentment makes America weaker, not stronger. Pitting one group against another only distracts us from the true sources of inequity in this country – corporate welfare that enriches the powerful, and empty promises that betray the powerless.” (Click here to read the rest.)

You tell ‘em, Rep. Ryan – that is PRECISELY what Obama is doing. He is playing people off each other, threatening them with doom and gloom should they not keep him in the White House, like the past 3 years have been anything to crow about (continued high unemployment, continued low house sales, escalating health costs, etc.).

Obama’s fear-mongering in an attempt to keep people in his camp is disingenuous at best, especially given his lack of effort in actually working with the House, and his convenient amnesia that the Senate is controlled by Democrats. I am glad Rep. Paul Ryan is standing up to Obama, and calling him out on his divisive rhetoric. It reminds me of why I wish he was running for president. Someone who actually has a grasp of economics seems like a mighty good choice to me right now, not to mention someone who doesn’t antagonize half of the nation.

But hey, that’s Mr. Unity Hope and Change for you – you can bet if he says something, the exact opposite is the case, at least as far as I can tell. How about you?

Meanwhile, now that Libya has made it clear that they are in a Sharia frame of mind, concerns are escalating about how things are going to turn out in the Middle East. Add to that Afghanistan saying they will stand with Pakistan against the United States, if push comes to shove. Oh, yippee. More good news from the diplomatic efforts of this Administration. Ahem.

Back here in the good ol’ US of A, seems folks are not too optimistic about the outlook of the country. In fact, over two thirds of voters feel the nation is in decline. Wow. That is pretty significant. Americans have been an optimistic bunch generally. We have believed if we worked hard enough, we could achieve great things. Now, not so much. That is a sad state of affairs, indeed.

Okay. Just getting us started. What is on your minds?

There are the swelling numbers of unemployed now homeless, including military veterans. Now students are joining the ranks of the homeless. There is no government funding for homeless shelters. And existing shelters are swamped. Meanwhile, Obama’s administration is trying to shutter the Boeing plant in South Carolina. The Boeing story is becoming a major campaign issue, infuriating middle-class people who believe that the federal government shouldn’t mess with companies that want to hire Americans rather than get cheaper labor overseas. But Obama is more interested in keeping his Labor groupies happy and Labor’s campaign cash flowing.

Why did I post the photo of Michelle Obama — besides noticing that TOTUS is part of the group hug? Do you see the “cuff” bracelets she is wearing? Well, here we go: “Michelle Obama dazzles New York in $42,150 diamond bracelets“:

Michelle Obama dazzled in true First Lady style at the DNC fundraiser this week, her left wrist dripping with diamonds as she supported her husband at the party event.

In total, she sported an astonishing $42,150 worth of bracelets to the New York Democratic Party dinner.

Designed by Texas-based jeweller, Katie Decker, the three white gold cuffs glittered and sparkled, catching the spotlight as she spoke to the high-powered audience.

The First Lady, 47, chose to wear Miss Decker’s Lotus cuff, with 2.9 carats of diamonds, costing $15,000, the Gothic cuff with 2.17 carats of diamonds, costing $15,350, and the $11,800 Quatrefoil bracelet with 1.73 carats of diamonds to the Gotham Hall event.

According to Houston’s culturemap.com, Mrs Obama’s stylist found the sparkling cuffs in Miss Decker’s showroom at SoHo’s Fragments store. …

So Michelle has a stylist. Every woman needs one.

In Steve’s excellent post — “The Real Barack Obama” — we learn how the indolent, disinterested Obama spends his days — in shorts and flip-flops, watching sports on TV — while earning a $400,000 annual salary. About the only times we see Obama are when he is feigning concern for the nation’s unemployed while his real agenda is to raise money for his reelection campaign.

By the way, several months ago, Larry Johnson posted material that sounds eerily similar to what Steve posted. I wonder if the White House source is the same person. Maybe not — there are some differences in style and the person’s self-described access to the White House. Check out Larry’s post, “Is Barack Losing It?”

So if Obama doesn’t appear interested in the job of president, what does he do day after day? Well, he takes his meetings just like any other president would, though even then, he seems to lack a certain focus and on a few occasions, actually leaves with the directive that be given a summary of the meeting at a later date. I hear he plays a lot of golf, and watches a lot of television – ESPN mainly.

I’ll tell you this – if you want to see President Obama get excited about a conversation, turn it to sports. That gets him interested.

You start talking about Congress, or some policy, and he just kinda turns off. It’s really very strange. I mean, we were all led to believe that this guy was some kind of intellectual giant, right? Ivy League and all that. Well, that is not what I saw. Barack Obama doesn’t have a whole lot of intellectual curiosity.

When he is off script, he is what I call a real “slow talker”. Lots of ummms, and lots of time in between answers where you can almost see the little wheel in his head turning very slowly. I am not going to say the president is a dumb man, because he is not, but yeah, there was a definite letdown when you actually hear him talking without the script. . . .

You’ll also want to revisit Larry’s post to read about Obama’s serious problem with paranoia and his inappropriate behavior with staff (such as throwing temper tantrums).

Here we have it: A president who is utterly unconcerned about the jobs crisis and lives a lifestyle the rest of us can only dream of.

A $42,000 bracelet would keep a single mother and children in housing and food for over two years, if they budget carefully.

Just saying …

I AM FURIOUS.

Politico has a good article about the Boeing plant situation. From “South Carolina Boeing factory turns sour for Obama“:

“It’s like a lightning rod,” said Gary Chaison, an industrial relations professor at Clark University in Worcester, Mass. “The Boeing case is so dramatic. All the anti-union forces and all anti-Obama people are coalescing.”

At the same time the president was selling his American Jobs Act in the Rose Garden last week, Mitt Romney was visiting Boeing’s South Carolina factory. The former governor of Massachusetts drew loud cheers for suggesting that any stimulus package should include legislation telling the board to drop its complaint.

“It’s an egregious example of political payback where the president is able to pay back the unions for the hundreds of millions of dollars they have put into his campaigns at the expense of American workers,” Romney said.

Newt Gingrich toured the new plant and called for cutting the NLRB’s funding, while Jon Huntsman did his own swing through the manufacturing facility, advocating that the president step in before it scares business from South Carolina. Rick Perry has accused Obama of stacking the board with “anti-business cronies.”

Despite the assertions of his critics, Obama’s hands are tied — and the case could get dragged out for years with delays and appeals. Beyond vetoing any congressional proposals, if they make it to his desk, the president has little influence over the complaint or the board’s acting general counsel Lafe Solomon. [WHEW!]

P.S. That airplane that Boeing is building in South Carolina? It is “the world’s most fuel-efficient commercial jet.”

Wouldn’t that classify the positions held by the thousands of workers Boeing has hired in South Carolina as “green jobs”?

You remember the Patriot Act – it is the one many of us were furious about when the Bush Administration came up with it. It is the one that permits warrant-less wiretapping on US citizens. The very one Obama, as Candidate Obama, took time out from pandering to the masses to vote to extend the last time, though Senators Clinton and McCain were opposed to it.

And you may recall, Obama’s minions were adamantly opposed to the Patriot Act. Adamantly opposed. When he pulled that stunt, going to vote for it, their eyes glossed over, their ears closed, and their brains shut down so they wouldn’t go into apoplexy. My younger brother, a stalwart Obamabot, said it was “disappointing” that Obama voted for it. “Disappointing.” Right.

So, what is it now that President Obama has signed an extension, huh? Where is MoveOn.org NOW? Where is Code Pink? Where is DailyKos? I’m just wondering.

Another question I have is, why does Barney Frank not think it is a conflict of interest for him to push his then-lover to work for Fannie Mae? He doesn’t think there are any “ethical” problems with it at all:

[snip] “If it is (a conflict of interest), then much of Washington is involved (in conflicts),” Frank told the Herald last night. “It is a common thing in Washington for members of Congress to have spouses work for the federal government. There is no rule against it at all.”

Frank said he helped his former longtime companion, Herb Moses, land a job at Fannie Mae in 1991 after Moses graduated with a master’s degree in business administration from Dartmouth College. Frank said he was approached by a Fannie Mae executive and vouched for Moses, who formerly worked as an economist in the Department of Agriculture. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Uh huh. Yeah, this is just how Washington does it, so what’s the big deal? Well, this is:

[snip] OK. But Barney’s problem with this latest “bias and vitriol” is that it doesn’t come from the Herald. It comes from a New York Times [NYT] reporter, Gretchen Morgenson — a Pulitzer Prize winner — in a new book, “Reckless Endangerment.”

Morgenson accused Barney of getting a job for his boyfriend on a show a couple of days ago on, of all places, National Public Radio.

[snip]

Can anyone dispute that the New York Times/Boston Globe protects and venerates Barney Frank? And yet here is what the Times’ Pulitzer Prize winner says:

“Frank actually called up the company (Fannie Mae) and asked them to hire his companion, who had just gotten an MBA from the Amos Tuck School of Business (at Dartmouth). . . . Of course the company was happy to provide a job for his companion and rolled out the red carpet in a series of interviews with a variety of executives, and it ultimately did hire the man.”

Another nationwide search!

“And he stayed there for, I believe, seven years.”

[...]

The Pulitzer Prize winner from the Times interviewed Barney about his Significant Other, and Mr. Hot Bottom assured her he never, ever went to bat for his boyfriend’s employer at congressional hearings. Not true, says the NYT reporter.

“The record shows that he was very aggressive and really tough on those who were testifying in Congress about reining in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

True love is what it was. Later on, Barney had an epiphany about Fannie Mae’s corruption. But as Morgenson puts it, “He had been a vocal supporter for so long that it was sort of an odd turnabout.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

I’ll say it was. And if you recall, Fannie and Freddie have had wide ranging, far reaching, effects on our economy. So, thanks a lot for that, Barney. And of course, you did NOTHING wrong. Ahahahahahaha. Right.

And it came out the other day that Obama Administration has paid the six top executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the past two years – $34.4 MILLION. Yes, you read that right. Read more here:

[snip] Over the last two years, the Obama administration has approved a whopping $34.4 million in compensation to the top six executives of the financially troubled Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage giants, and lacks the necessary protections to ensure such compensation is even warranted.
The largesse flowed to the six executives even though the two companies they run struggle to staunch billions of dollars in losses, remain in government conservatorship, and must compensate taxpayers for assuming the companies’ liabilities during the mortgage crisis. To compensate taxpayers, Fannie and Freddie are tapping Treasury Department funds to pay required 10 percent dividends each quarter to the U.S. government.[snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

These two mortgage behemoths have helped to throw this country into an economic tailspin, and are still bleeding money. And WE are paying them that kind of money?? This is insane. It is absolutely insane. Wow…

And finally, I’d also like to know why Obama is wanting to shell out billions of OUR taxpaying dollars to go to Egypt and other so-called “Arab Spring” countries? I understand he wants to send money there for job creation? What about job creation in his OWN country?? (The other day, when I posted this at my blog, I had mentioned Debbie Wasserman Schultz and her “Do As I Say, Not As I Do, and Buy American,” but Larry Johnson covered it in his own inimitable style, so no need to rehash it here unless you want to do so.)

And not for nothing, but this money will be going to groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, the “rebels” in Libya, who are not all freedom loving would be Democrats. Not at all, since some of them have ties to Al-Qaeda. And we are going to help fund them WHY, exactly?

See, I have questions, though the above are just the beginning. Anyone have some answers?

As state attorneys general prepare to pursue these Wall Street banks for the activity of forging these documents, I would raise the question whether this coordinated forging activity rose to the level of racketeering. Did these Wall Street banks violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act? Let’s navigate.

Before I delve into the questions surrounding the potential violation of the RICO Act, I STRONGLY encourage you to take the 5 minutes to review this summary video of the 60 Minutes’ piece:

For the overachievers in the crowd who care to watch the entire outstanding 14 minute piece, I am happy to provide the link here.

I have long believed that a significant segment of the mortgage origination, securitization, and now foreclosure process was knowingly and actively engaged in a concerted fraud. The fraud encompassed not only those issuing and securitizing the mortgages but also those taking out the mortgages. While regulators and legal authorities have shown little willingness to pursue the obvious fraudulent activity, the blatant fraud involved in the forging of foreclosure documents is the ultimate insult to the indescribable injury.

I ask the following very simple question. Did this activity violate the RICO Act? In what manner might the the RICO Act have been violated? Try the following on for size:
1. Mail and wire fraud.
2. Extortionate credit transactions.
3. Obstruction of justice.
4. Interference of commerce.
5. Laundering of monetary instruments.
6. Monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activities.
7. Relating to trafficking in goods and services bearing counterfeit marks.
8. Fraud in the sale of securities.

Who within these Wall Street banks was aware of the fraudulent robo-signing of the mortgage documents? Who authorized the robo-signing? We need names!!

If Wall Street was so brazen to undertake such a blatantly obvious fraud in this robo-signing activity, where else did these banks engage in fraud? Remember, you never find just one rodent.

I am no lawyer but I am not so sure you need to be in order to connect the dots involved in this ongoing housing nightmare. On behalf of every citizen and taxpayer in our nation, I call upon each and every attorney general in our nation to ask the question at the head of this commentary.

For those who truly love capitalism and the never ending pursuit of truth, transparency, and integrity our nation deserves nothing less than a full and total exposition of the obvious fraud involved in this entire mortgage travesty.

Who amongst our attorneys general have got the balls and the character to raise the question as to whether Wall Street did violate the Racketeering Act?

Thank you again to the reader who prompted me regarding last evening’s episode of 60 Minutes.

Larry Doyle

I have no affiliation or business interest with any entity referenced in this commentary. The opinions expressed are my own. I am a proponent of real transparency within our markets so that investor confidence and investor protection can be achieved.

Yes, Rep. Moran made this ludicrous charge in an interview with an Arab TV station (honestly, I am having a hard time writing this, I am just so incredulous that this is his delusional rationale for the Election results. WOW.). Here is what the Representative from Virginia said:

[snip] The Virginia Democrat told Alhurra that Republicans gained 63 seats in the House “for the same reason the Civil War happened in the United States.”

“The Civil War happened because the Southern states, particularly the slaveholding states, didn’t want to see a president who was opposed to slavery,” Moran said. “In this case a lot of people in this country, I believe, don’t want to be governed by an African American, particularly one who is inclusive, who is liberal, who wants to spend money on everyone and who wants to reach out to include everyone in our society.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Can you believe this shit? Bringing up the Civil War as a justification for this absurd, obscene, ridiculous charge? What the hell is wrong with Moran?

Let me help you understand what happened in 2010, Rep. Moran. The reason for the huge shift was your party shoving a massive, costly health care law, that none of you bozos bothered to read, down the throats of Americans after we screamed our heads off telling you in every way we could we DID NOT WANT IT. It is because Unemployment in this country is still EXCEEDINGLY high, currently being touted at 9.4%, but that does not include the underemployed. It is because foreclosures in this country are expected to hit a record high in 2011. It is because the debt you and your cronies are running up just this year is $1.5 TRILLION dollars, added to the over $14 trillion we are in debt, a debt that has escalated under your party’s, and Obama’s, “leadership.”

I could go on and on, but it is clear you aren’t listening to what the people have been saying. No matter how clearly we have been telling you. This isn’t about race, this is about one party dominating the political landscape and doing what they wanted to do, and not what they people who sent them to DC wanted them to do. Seriously, using a charge of racism in the face of the reality of what is going on in our country is delusional at best. Using a charge of racism, or Nazism, as your colleague, Rep. Cohen (D-TN), did recently, is offensive, gutless, and an attempt at silencing all opposition.

With all due respect (as much as I can muster for someone who uses such a ridiculous charge), you need to look in the mirror, look at your party, look at what you are doing to this country, rather than cast aspersions. The Democratic Party has no one to blame but itself for what happened in 2010, and it has zero to do with race.

And now to the sexism portion of the post. I received a lovely email from a faithful No Quarter reader, Candy*, who wrote about the way Google organizes responses to a search on Sarah Palin. She noted that the primary results are largely negative, with only a few favorable ones tossed in here or there. I have no doubt she is right. (Photo credit: October 22, 2010, Photo by Matt Stroshane/Getty Images North America)

For instance, if you did a search right this minute, one of the very top articles is one that made me throw up in my mouth a bit. Here is the headline: “Tracy Morgan: Palin Is ‘Good Masturbation Material,’” complete with video of Morgan saying this. TNT was quick to apologize for this remark on their show, “Inside The NBA,” after they started getting emails about it, that is. But hey, still, they did apologize. One of the hosts, Ernie Johnson, did try to change the topic quickly, and to cut Morgan off, but it was already out there. Wow.

Many of us remember all too well how Google operated during the 2008 campaign. Many people complained about the bias way it presented its search results. Apparently, with some justification, as this article in Politico would indicate, “Obama-Google Connection Scares Competitors.” Uh huh, I bet. Though I would not hold my breath for any official acknowledgment, as the article makes clear:

[snip] Google says that Schmidt was acting on his own, and his politics don’t reflect the company’s official stance.

“Eric’s endorsement of Sen. Obama was a personal matter, and as a company Google was neutral in the campaign,” said Adam Kovacevich, Google’s senior manager of global communications and public affairs. “We look forward to working with the new administration and congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle to keep the Internet open and to promote economic growth.”

Obama’s transition team declined comment. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Show of hands – who believes the Google guy? Anyone? Anyone? Yeah, me neither. Especially since Obama’s own team declined comment. Many of us remember having to grab snapshots of images before they got scrubbed from Google (yes, they may have gone up initially, but often got taken down). And, many of us remember Google not allowing anti-Obama blogs during the 2008 campaign. I am going to guess there may be more of the same now, especially given the close relationship between Obama and Google’s owner, Eric Scmidt.

But hey, don’t take my word for it. How about a little exercise – do a search on Google for Sarah Palin, and see what comes up. See how far you have to go to find something positive on her that does not come from, say, Fox News or American Thinker. Better yet, try to find a site for photos of her that do NOT have sexually suggestive photo-shopped pictures. Then try another search engine and see what happens. I am curious to see what you all find. Please feel free to share.

Finally, here’s a challenge for the Democrats as they gear up (or continue) the campaign for Obama for 2012: Please refrain from calling those who do not support Obama racists, or Nazis, or any of the other smears you have used against us in the past. Our opposition has absolutely nothing to do with the color of Obama’s skin, but with his policies and actions (along with the actions of many others in the Democratic Party, like Nancy Pelosi, who helped to craft Obamacare). Instead of using such highly charged rhetoric, try listening for a change at why people in this country are unhappy. Try looking at what is really going on with the economy, with the deficit, with people’s very lives. You know, what you were sent to Washington to do. Just a thought.

*Candy, thank you so much for the email. I appreciate your taking the time to write me, and appreciate your kind words. Thank you!

Here is Stuart Varney explaining it all:

Yes, you heard that right – $160 MILLION dollars we have shelled out for these folks thus far. It is in their contract. Nice.

Fannie and Freddie are STILL dragging us down, be it through paying for these executives, or continuing to lost money on mortgages. To recap, in 2008, Fannie Mae lost $58.7 BILLION dollars, and Freddie Mac lost $50.1 BILLION dollars. And we are already in the red to the tune of $145 Billion now since 2008. One can only hope that the bleeding of money from these two institutions will be stanched, and SOON. Until then, though, it is the mother of bailouts since we owe 80% of the two now. You don’t even want to know what the anticipated amount is to fix them. If you can stomach it, click here.

But I am not holding my breath that Fannie and Freddie will get their comeuppance, which is long overdue. Considering Obama is expected to assert he wants to keep his spending ways when he gives the SOTU Tuesday night, I sure don’t see him taking on these two F’s.

Speaking of Obama, why is everyone acting like his actually getting a 50% approval in a few polls is the greatest thing since sliced bread? Is this an indication of our poor performance in mathematics that we see that as a GOOD thing? Many polls still have him below 50%, which is not exactly a glowing recommendation in my book (unless someone is a meteorologist, and then being right half of the time isn’t so bad. Ahem.).

I don’t get it. But that is the meme going into the SOTU – how Obama is doing SO well. Being crappy half the time (or more) at your job is NOT a good report, people, no matter how the pundits might want to spin it. I believe that would qualify as an “F” by most (all?) academic standards. Or at least it was back when I went to school (we didn’t get the “well, even though you failed at your homework, and failed your test, we are still going to pass you because we don’t want to hamper your self-esteem” pedagogy. We had to earn our grades, had to pass our tests, had to do WAY better than 50%, if we wanted to move on. Just sayin’.)

So, we continue to be bilked by Fannie and Freddie. They will continue to get our hard earned tax paying dollars to continue to operate in the red. Obama will continue his spending, deficit increasing ways, and ALL of this is passed on to us.

Gee – and he’s getting close to 50% approval? I guess some people don’t mind throwing their money away, especially to bail out a bunch of guys who lied, lied, and lied some more. But I do. How about you?

I hasten to add, the stories of the six victims in Tucson, Judge John Roll, Christina Taylor Green, Giffords Aide Gabe Zimmerman, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwin Stoddard, and Dorothy Morris, need to be held in the fore, our prayers going out to their families. The continued updates regarding Rep. Giffords miraculous improvements, as well as the condition of the other 13 injured, is also important to keep in the fore.

But here are some of the things you may have missed. Amy Siskind of The New Agenda had a very interesting post about Obama, and the number of women in his cabinet/inner circle. Bottom line, it is low, as her post, “After Arizona, Will Obama Learn to Include Women?” indicates:

[snip] Yes, just as I was snapping to, Air Force One would be landing back in D.C. Senator Gillibrand and Congresswomen Wasserman Schultz and Pelosi would deplane and return to their 17% minority. President Obama would be head back to the White House — or should I say, the “fraternity house”: his inner-circle is composed almost exclusively of men.

Yes, to the president’s credit, he did appoint two women to the Supreme Court. That’s the end of the good news for women. Here’s the bad news:

* Obama’s cabinet picks are just 25% women.

* Obama’s czars are only 12% women.

* No women have leadership roles in running our country’s economy.

* Obama has only one woman in his inner-circle: Valerie Jarrett.

[...]

Paradoxically, Speaker Boehner in his opening days seems quite comfortable with women. One of his first symbolic gestures: to build a women’s restroom near the House floor. Next, Boehner shocked even me: he officially endorsed a woman for RNC chair (Maria Cino). And here’s a prediction: Boehner’s ability to cry in public will make it easier for women candidates to do the same in the future. Hey — I gotta admit — although I agree with Speaker Boehner on very few issues, I like the guy! He walks the walk for women on the right.

[...]

So I say this to our president: yes, let’s live up to the dreams of Christina Green, the nine-year-old who was tragically and senselessly killed in the Arizona shooting. The girl who was interested in politics and therefore came to see Congresswoman Giffords, Arizona’s only female representative in the U.S. House or Senate. Why don’t we have more women in leadership for girls like Christina to see and model after? And President Obama, what will YOU do to live up to her expectations? (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Yes, I can see why so many “feminists” wanted to support Obama over Hillary Clinton. He is SO good on the women’s equality issue – not.

But wait, there is more. Once again, LGBT groups are unhappy with Obama. Yes, yes, I know he signed the bill to repeal DADT, but he did blessed little to get that to come about, and did exactly what I thought he would do – have it in the Lame Duck session so he could blame the Republicans in case it didn’t pass.

Well, that is exactly what he did in terms of DOMA, but not before his Justice Department did this:

Supporting DOMA: Gay rights advocates are criticizing the Obama Justice Department after its attorneys filed a court motion Thursday in support of the Defense of Marriage Act despite the president’s view that the law should be repealed.

[...]

The Justice Department says it’s obligated to defend U.S. policy regardless of the president’s personal beliefs. The department made the same case after it had to, awkwardly, fight a judge’s ruling against “don’t ask, don’t tell” in the months before it was repealed by Congress.

But that’s no salve to the gay rights community, which has called on the administration to show more resolve against laws like DOMA. [snip]

And it is not true, either. Other Administrations have stood up to laws they thought were un-Constitutional, not continuing to defend them, as the Obama Administration has done repeatedly with DOMA. Indeed, it continues in that same vein in this filing:

[snip] “All families deserve the recognition and respect of their government. We know the president supports us. It’s time for him to help lead the American public toward full equality for all Americans,” Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese said in a statement. The gay rights group said the Justice Department should at least “acknowledge that the law is unconstitutional.”

It does not. In its filing, Justice Department attorneys said the law was “not unconstitutional under this court’s binding precedent.” The Justice Department argued that the law “reflects Congress’s reasonable response to this still-evolving debate among the states regarding same-sex marriage.”

Why Solmonese, that Hillary Clinton backstabber, continues to act all insulted is beyond me, but I will spare you my diatribe on him this time around.

But here’s what I knew would happen with Obama:

[snip] “The Department of Justice has long followed the practice of defending federal statutes as long as reasonable arguments can be made in support of their constitutionality, even if the administration disagrees with a particular statute as a policy matter, as it does here,” the brief said.

“Indeed, the president supports repeal of DOMA and has taken the position that Congress should extend federal benefits to individuals in same-sex marriages. But a consensus behind that approach has not yet developed, and Congress could properly take notice of the divergent views regarding same-sex marriage across the states,” it said.

[...]

He told a gay-and-lesbian magazine last month that while a repeal of DOMA may not be possible, particularly with Republicans in control of the House, “that’s something that I think we have to strategize on over the next several months.” (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Yep, like I expected, Obama will blame the Republicans if it doesn’t get changed now. The Democrats were in control of the entire Congress for FOUR years, and now it is all the Republicans fault…(Civility? Oh, that is only for Conservatives, not Democrats.)

Here is a whopper of what came out this week. It was foretold by none other than Sarah Palin back in November when the government was looking to buy more bonds:

“All this pump priming will come at a serious price. And I mean that literally: everyone who ever goes out shopping for groceries knows that prices have risen significantly over the past year or so. Pump priming would push them even higher. And it’s not just groceries. Oil recently hit a six month high, at more than $87 a barrel. The weak dollar — a direct result of the Fed’s decision to dump more dollars onto the market — is pushing oil prices upward.”

I intentionally withheld the title of that article: “What Sarah Palin Gets Wrong About Inflation.” And that would be what, exactly? Haven’t all of those things, along with foreclosures setting another record high in 2010, and an increase in unemployment claims, come to pass? Yes.

In that same article, though, there was this (condescending) response:

[snip] Sudeep Reddy of The Wall Street Journal pointed out that Palin didn’t seem to be quite up on what’s been going on with inflation. In fact, he noted, grocery prices haven’t risen that much. “The consumer price index’s measure of food and beverages for the first nine months of this year showed average annual inflation of less than 0.6%, the slowest pace on record (since the Labor Department started keeping this measure in 1968).” [snip]

Hey, Reedy – guess which one of you is wrong here? I’ll give you a hint – it is not Palin. No need to take my word for it. Here is Stuart Varney discussing this issue:

These are just a few of the issues that have been going on this week (I know, Daley came onboard on Friday, but the massacre on Saturday pretty much knocked that way down, as it should have). Women still are underrepresented, Obama’s Justice Department is still targeting gay people, and we are increasingly in an economic world of hurt.

We cannot forget the victims of last week’s shooting, but nor can we allow ourselves to allow the political smoke and mirrors to distract us from what else is going on in our country.

What else happened this week that was low on the media totem pole? Consider this an Open Thread.

The Wall Street-Washington incest MUST end.

This coming Tuesday, America has a chance to ring that bell, expose that incest, cleanse the system, and deliver the message loud and clear. The peal of that bell must emanate from the 4th District in the state of Massachusetts.

You do not need to read Sense on Cents to appreciate that many politicians from both sides of the aisle have badly forsaken our nation’s future with misguided and ill-advised policies over the last few decades. Many of these politicians now look to save their skins– if not their souls– by professing a newly found religion with an anti-Wall Street mantel. America, and the residents of the 4th District in Massachusetts, should not be so easily hoodwinked. These politicians, especially Barney Frank, must be held accountable and sent home.

I implore the voters of the 4th District to think long and hard and appreciate that their longstanding elected representative Barney Frank embraced the people and the policies which continue to crush our nation. Which people? What policies? Those which were centered in America’s great financial sinkhole known as Fannie Mae then led by its former CEO Franklin Raines. During my own career on Wall Street, I witnessed Barney’s bear hug of Fannie and Franklin from up close. Do not forget Barney’s desire to ‘roll the dice’ with sub-prime mortgage financing.

Many media outlets will look the other way in holding Barney accountable; I have no interest in that.

In my strong opinion, Fannie Mae was nothing more than a Washington sponsored “Enron on steroids.” Who led the charge on Capitol Hill for the ‘private profit, social loss’ housing monster? Many Democrat and Republican politicos gladly stuck their hands in the Fannie Mae gift bag, but no politician more stridently promoted the programs of Fannie Mae than Barney Frank. Recalling Barney’s work on behalf of Fannie over the years, it was readily apparent to me that he had no understanding of the risks of mispricing capital. For those involved in the private sector and focused on properly pricing risk, the reality of a career politician not appreciating the proper price of capital is not difficult to understand. Regrettably, all of America now pays the price for Barney’s shortcoming and that of so many of his colleagues. While we pay that price, we do not need to and must not suffer from that shortcoming any longer.

I am not endorsing Sean Bielat simply because Barney ran interference for Fannie Mae and its failed socialized housing program for the last few decades. No, my interest in seeing the voters of the 4th District in Massachusetts “retire Barney” is also predicated on events of the last twelve months as well. How so? Where else did Barney fail us? Let’s continue to navigate.

Barney Frank is the chair of the House Financial Services Committee. In that role, he led the charge to supposedly re-regulate Wall Street via the Dodd-Frank Financial Regulatory Reform legislation. Say what you want about that legislation, but let me remind all of America that our pal Barney did not venture close to ‘ground zero’ during this process. Really? How so? As I wrote last March 22nd in my commentary, The BIG Hole in Financial Regulatory Reform:

Why am I so skeptical that Senator Chris Dodd’s proposed Financial Regulatory Reform (for overachievers in the audience, the link connects to the 89-page proposal) will truly change behaviors on Wall Street? For the very simple reason that I have seen no highlighting of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority within the proposed Financial Regulatory Reform. Strike you as a little odd? It strikes me that the Wall Street lobby is hard at work keeping its self-regulator, that being FINRA, right where they want it.

The fact that FINRA is not singled out by name in Dodd’s report is a HUGE red flag. Over and above that, Dodd’s proposal is nothing more than a review of the SEC’s oversight of FINRA. Why only once every three years? A review of the reviewer? That’s accountability? That’s transparency? Not in my book. In my opinion, that’s both a joke and a confirmation that the Wall Street lobby was hard at work to keep the wolves at bay!!

While my commentary last March focused specifically on Chris Dodd, the simple fact is Barney Frank walked very much in lock step with Dodd on this reform. The ultimate 2000-plus page Dodd-Frank Financial Regulatory Reform legislation barely makes mention of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). Strike you as a little odd? Yes, me too. Very odd!!

Regrettably, America has come to understand that most political and financial reform is ultimately that in name only.

Neither Dodd nor Frank can say that they were not FULLY apprised of ALL the issues within FINRA. I shared all of my concerns regarding FINRA with the Project on Government Oversight early this year. POGO itself was also looking hard at the structural and practical failings of FINRA. Regular readers of Sense on Cents are well aware of my calls for increased transparency for FINRA. Those calls were echoed by POGO but they fell upon deaf ears in Washington. I wrote in my March commentary:

Perhaps Senator Dodd and his colleagues may want to review the Project on Government Oversight’s thoughts on FINRA in which they call the very concept of self-regulation for Wall Street into question. POGO’s letter to four separate Congressional sub-committees can be found here.

Neither Dodd, Frank, nor anybody else on Capitol Hill ever addressed POGO’s letter and grave concerns. That fact should be the final nail in Barney Frank’s political coffin.

Chris Dodd’s political career is over.

I implore the citizens of the 4th District in Massachusetts to do our nation an enormous service and end Barney Frank’s political career this coming Tuesday.

Sense on Cents strongly endorses Sean Bielat!!

Larry Doyle

P.S. I typically shun from this type of commentary. That said,  given the historic nature of this election and this specific race, I believe it is my civic responsibility to share my feelings and a link to my March commentary. Comments, questions, and constructive criticisms are encouraged and appreciated.

Please subscribe to all my work via e-mail, an RSS feed, on Twitter or Facebook.

I have no affiliation or business interest with any entity referenced in this commentary. As President of Greenwich Investment Management, an SEC regulated privately held registered investment adviser, I am merely a proponent of real transparency within our markets so that investor confidence and investor protection can be achieved.

1. Can we now declare the HAMP (Making Home Affordable) program to be totally futile? How is it that everybody on Wall Street and in Washington is now promoting that the economy will be harmed if we forestall the mortgage foreclosure process? What the hell have the wizards in Washington been doing via HAMP and through Freddie and Fannie for the last 18 months? The simple fact is our policy makers have done everything in their power to inhibit the markets from working. Now, all of a sudden, they become proponents of free market principles? Were we born yesterday? Not here at NoQuarter.

I have continually harangued our Washington politicos for not allowing the housing market to clear, and highlighted how forestalling that process would only prolong our economic pain. We’re feeling that pain now and will be for the foreseeable future.

2. Where are we going with this moratorium?

Do the banks, mortgage servicers, and originators run significant  litigation risks for improperly foreclosing on selected mortgages? Perhaps, BUT I personally believe the smokescreen created by this process is a precursor to having Uncle Sam impose mortgage principal forgiveness as the price for settling the potential legal fiasco of improper mortgage foreclosures. Am I being overly cynical, if not outright conspiratorial, in my line of reasoning? The fact is I believe the White House has always wanted to write down mortgage principal as the mechanism to support housing. Does crafting principal forgiveness as the ‘settlement’ for alleged improprieties by the aforementioned mortgage originators become a convenient way to subvert the courts on the issue of contract law? I am not an attorney, but my gut instincts tell me we are headed in this direction. Who gets hurt under this scenario? Mortgage investors who hold the mortgages which will have some form of principal forgiven. On that note, let’s navigate further.

3. The imposition of principal forgiveness may actually be less expensive for banks and servicers than addressing the real root problem behind many mortgages. What is that problem? The fact that a lot of mortgages in our nation today were fraudulently underwritten from point of origination and were then fraudulently conveyed via mortgage securitizations. A handful of investors (including some FHLBS and Freddie/Fannie) have pursued legal actions to have these frauds unearthed and adjudicated in their favor. How would that work? The banks and originators would have to purchase the fraudulently underwritten mortgages back at par. That cost would be enormous. Forgiving principal on an original fraud will not necessarily cure the problem, BUT it does become a means of buying time or ‘kicking the can down the road.’ That, my friends, is all we have been doing for the last few years anyway, so why stop now?

In less polite terms, Wall Street and Washington have been and continue to be hard at work to continue to disguise the massive Ponzi scheme that was our nation’s economy. The moratorium on foreclosures may seem like the principals are trying to be good citizens. I view it in a decidedly different light. The principals on Wall Street and their cronies in Washington are looking for a means to write off the stranglehold of massive mortgage debt that continues to cripple our economy. These developments are merely the next leg in the great financial experiment playing out on our national stage and economic landscape.

Navigate accordingly.

Larry Doyle

I have no affiliation or business interest with any entity referenced in this commentary. As President of Greenwich Investment Management, an SEC regulated privately held registered investment adviser, I am merely a proponent of real transparency within our markets so that investor confidence and investor protection can be achieved.