Sent from my iPhone
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Sharia: Cafe owner ordered to remove extractor fan because neighbour claimed ‘smell of frying bacon
A hard-working cafe owner has been ordered to tear down an extractor fan - because the smell of her frying bacon 'offends' Muslims.Here's a question I have: how does the Muslim neighbor know what bacon smells like? This should come as no surprise in a country who's teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims. The Islamization of Europe is almost complete. Partly because of idiot leftists wimps that are sealing their own death sentence, and partly because of leftist Euro ideology that has their culture committing suicide vis-à-vis
Planning bosses acted against Beverley Akciecek, 49, after being told her next-door neighbour's Muslim friends had felt 'physically sick' due to the 'foul odour'.
Councillors at Stockport Council in Greater Manchester say the smell from the fan is 'unacceptable on the grounds of residential amenity'.
The fan has been in Beverley's Snack Shack takeaway in the Shaw Heath area of the town for the past three years.
...They claim they received no complaints about the cafe which is open from 7.30am-2.30pm six days a week, until around 18 months ago when they received a letter from environmental services to say their neighbour Graham Webb-Lee had complained about the smell.
low birth rates while Muslims are reproducing like rabbits:
Sent from my iPhone
Fannie/Freddie Federal Housing Bailout on Track to Double?
WASHINGTON — The government spelled out Thursday just how much the most expensive rescue of the financial crisis will end up costing taxpayers — as much as $259 billion for mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
That figure would be nearly twice the amount Fannie and Freddie have received so far. To date, the rescue of the two companies has cost taxpayers $135 billion. They have repaid $13 billion to the Treasury Department as dividends.
By contrast, the combined bailouts of financial companies and the auto industry have cost taxpayers roughly $50 billion, according to Treasury's latest projections. And the bailouts of Wall Street banks alone, which sparked public fury, have so far brought taxpayers a $16 billion return.
Fannie and Freddie were battered by losses on loans they backed, once the housing bubble burst and foreclosures soared. The two companies buy home loans from lenders, package them into bonds with a guarantee against default and sell them to investors.
On Thursday, the government provided a broad estimate of the costs of bailing out Fannie and Freddie. The final cost will depend on the direction of home values over the next few years. If prices fall sharply, as some analysts forecast, Fannie and Freddie won't be able to recover as much money on foreclosures. They would require more taxpayer aid.
The Fannie-Freddie bailout could end up costing taxpayers between $142 billion and $259 billion through 2013, the Federal Housing Finance Agency projected. The worst-case scenario assumes the economy would fall back into a recession and home prices would sink an additional 24%, until early 2012.
The best-case scenario assumes home prices remain flat for the next two years.
"If the economy does unravel in the next couple of quarters, then the costs will mount very rapidly," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.
Thursday's estimate was the first time the housing agency has released a public estimate of the taxpayer tab. The combined bailout of the two mortgage companies is on track to be the largest of the financial crisis.
The agency's figures take into account dividends that the agency estimates Fannie and Freddie will end up repaying. The terms of their rescue require them to pay a 10% annual dividend to Treasury. That amount is expected to balloon in coming years. Regulators expect Fannie and Freddie to repay an additional $67 billion to $91 billion in dividends over the next three years.
The two mortgage finance companies have been operating under federal control for more than two years. When the government stepped in to take them over in September 2008, their rescue was expected to cost only a combined $200 billion.
Allegations that mortgage lenders nationwide cut corners on foreclosure documents as they moved to seize millions of homes have put Fannie and Freddie under scrutiny. The two companies have used so-called "foreclosure mill" law firms that are accused of processing thousands of files in haste.
A deposition released by the Florida attorney general's office this week revealed that the office manager of the Florida-based Law Offices of David J. Stern, which Fannie and Freddie used, would sign 1,000 files a day without reviewing them. The deposition also said the office manager allowed paralegals to sign her name when she got tired.
Fannie and Freddie say they're suspending use of that firm.
Several banks have been accused of similar conduct. If they can't resolve their foreclosure problems and are barred from seizing many homes, Fannie and Freddie could absorb huge losses on loans they own or guarantee. That's because they would no longer be able to recover anything on loans that have gone bad.
Delays in foreclosures would hurt Fannie and Freddie in areas of the country where home prices are falling. The longer they wait to sell homes, the less money they stand to recover.
But some analysts doubt the document mess will have much impact on Fannie, Freddie or the pace of foreclosures. It's likely to result in weeks of delays for foreclosures, not months, Zandi said.
Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee about half of all U.S. mortgages, or nearly 31 million home loans worth more than $5 trillion.
The bill for rescuing Fannie and Freddie has been rising, while the estimates for other rescues have been sinking. What was once the most expensive single bailout —American International Group— is now projected to cost taxpayers only $5 billion.
Even that bailout could turn a profit, Treasury said this month, depending on the price it gets on its future sale of AIG shares. The Obama administration's rescue of the U.S. auto industry is projected to cost $17 billion, Treasury has said.
Over the next year, lawmakers plan to review the nation's mortgage-lending system and consider a potential replacement for Fannie and Freddie. The financial overhaul law didn't address that issue.
Republicans have blasted the Obama administration's handling of Fannie and Freddie, saying the government's reliance on them to modify home loans for troubled borrowers is increasing the cost of their bailout.
"At some point, we have to say, enough is enough, and push forward with a complete overhaul of the government-backed mortgage giants," said Rep. Scott Garrett, R.-N.J.
He said the ballooning costs of their rescue highlight the need to replace Fannie and Freddie with a new system of providing mortgages.
AP Business Writers Christopher S. Rugaber and Daniel Wagner contributed to this report.
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Sent from my iPhone
Harry Reid: “But for me,” Reid says, “we’d be in a world-wide depression.”
Oh no, Harry Reid did not just say that he saved the world. Oh yes he did.
Here's the video proof of his inflated self view:
Yes. He said that.
Between President Obama rolling back the oceans and Reid saving the world…we should be richer, happier and more fulfilled. Also, skinnier.
Sent from my iPhone
‘Fedamageddon’: Federal Reserve Considers Unprecedented Steps to Boost National Economy
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke
As Americans head to their nearest polling station to cast their midterm election ballots on Nov. 2, the Federal Reserve will be winding down its next policy committee meeting.
On November 3, the Fed is expected to announce its latest plans to try and boost the country's faltering economy — plans that may include unprecedented "quantitative easing," or attempts to spur economic growth and keep prices steady by buying up more government debt.
On Oct. 15, chairman Ben Bernanke hinted of the move, saying there appears to be a "case for further action" on the part of the Federal Reserve. Bloomberg reports:
Estimates of the size of a bond-purchase program have varied. Bill Gross, Pacific Investment Management Co.'s co- founder and manager of the world's biggest mutual fund, said Oct. 8 on Bloomberg Television that the central bank may buy about $100 billion in government debt a month, or $1.2 trillion over the next year. A Citigroup Inc. survey of clients released yesterday showed an average expectation of about $560 billion.
Richard Clarida, global strategic adviser at Newport Beach, California-based Pimco, said in an interview with Deirdre Bolton on Bloomberg Television's "Inside Track" that he expects the Fed to focus its buying on the 5- to 10-year maturity range.
Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker said yesterday a new round of quantitative easing "would be a hard case to make," while his Philadelphia counterpart, Charles Plosser, said he's "less concerned about deflation risks" than some officials.
But not everyone thinks this plan is the right one. "In terms of Treasuries, I wouldn't touch them with a 10- foot pole, except maybe on the short side," investor Steven Leuthold told "In the Loop" on Bloomberg Television. "Yields are so skimpy it makes no sense for people to be putting money in anything other than very, very short-term bonds."
TIME's Curious Capitalist blog asked Thursday, "Will the Federal Reserve Cause a Civil War?"
Usually, there is generally a consensus about what the Federal Reserve should do. When the economy is weak, the Fed cuts short-term interest rates to spur borrowing and economic activity. When the economy is strong and inflation is rising, it does the opposite. But nearly two years after the Fed cut short-term interest rates to basically zero, more and more economists are questioning whether the US central bank is making the right moves. The economy is still very weak and unemployment seems stubbornly stuck near 10%.
The problem is the Fed only directly sets short-term interest rates. And they are already about as close to zero as you can go. That's why Ben Bernanke has been recently talking about something called "quantitative easing." That's when the Fed basically creates money to buy the long-term bonds that it doesn't directly control, and drive down those interest rates as well. That should further reduce the cost of borrowing for large companies and homeowners. Some people are calling this "QE2" because the Fed made a similar move during the height of the financial crisis when it bought mortgage bonds.
The Federal Reserve building in Washington, DC
The financial blog Zerohedge specifically warns of the threat of civil unrest if Bernanke and the Federal Reserve move forward with "QE2":
In a very real sense, Bernanke is throwing Granny and Grandpa down the stairs – on purpose. He is literally threatening those at the lower end of the economic strata, along with all who are retired, with starvation and death, and in a just nation where the rule of law controlled instead of being abused by the kleptocrats he would be facing charges of Seditious Conspiracy, as his policies will inevitably lead to the destruction of our republic.
While concerns of a second civil war may seem far-fetched, TIME's Curious Capitalist warns that lower rates do tend to "favor borrowers over savers" and this policy could create serious problems:
[T]he largest borrowers in the country are banks, speculators and large corporations. The largest spenders in our country though tend to be individuals. Consumer spending makes up 70% of the economy. And the vast majority of consumers are on the low-end of the income scale. So I think it is a valid question to ask whether the Fed's desire to drive down interest rates at all costs policy is working. Companies are already borrowing at low rates. They are just not spending. …
The problem with "quantitative easing" then is that eventually, the artificial economic supports it supplies will eventually have to be removed.
John Taylor, a Fed scholar at Stanford University, says that this process is what could be "quite disruptive." Avoiding a double-dip recession now may cause you to just delay an inevitable double-dip later.
"It will be hugely disappointing if the Fed didn't do anything," Brian Edmonds, head of interest rates at Cantor Fitzgerald LP tells Bloomberg. "The Fed can't afford to disappoint the market."
While election results are announced, many eyes will be fixed on the Fed's upcoming announcement.
"In the center of the ring is the Nov. 3 announcement," says David Ader, head of government bond strategy at Stamford, Connecticut-based CRT Capital Group LLC. "Something's going to be done, but they don't know the size or the methodology. As the Fed enters the blackout period, so does the bond market."
Sent from my iPhone
Google Dodges Taxes; Obama Headlines Fundraiser
According to the latest news reports, internet giant Google Inc. has successfully shifted around its income to avoid America's steep 35 percent corporate tax rate. As a result, the company has saved itself an astonishing $3.1 billion:
Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years using a technique that moves most of its foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda.
Google's income shifting — involving strategies known to lawyers as the "Double Irish" and the "Dutch Sandwich" — helped reduce its overseas tax rate to 2.4 percent, the lowest of the top five U.S. technology companies by market capitalization, according to regulatory filings in six countries.
"I want to see our companies remain the most competitive in the world. But the way to make sure that happens is not to reward our companies for moving jobs off our shores or transferring profits to overseas tax havens," Obama said in a White House announcement in May.
But the international corporation's history of tax avoidance isn't enough to keep the president away from their fundraising ability during a contentious election season. The president was in California today for two Democratic Party fundraisers, one of which was held at the personal Palo Alto residence of Marissa Mayer, a vice president at Google. The in-house fundraiser charged $30,000-per-person to support 50 Democratic candidates.
Sent from my iPhone
High Tech Industry Gives More Money to Democrats - US News and World Report
The Democrat Party Is Communist
Their alliance with the Party of European Socialists makes it clear that today's Democrats are in fact commies, as can be seen in the latest episode of CommieTunes:
On a tip from C.B.
Sent from my iPhone
I See White People: Juan Williams Firing Leaves Sudden Lack Of Diversity On Air at NPR
Sent from my iPhone
Bill O’Reilly: “NPR Will Rue the Day… Congress Is Going to Defund NPR” (Video)
Bill O'Reilly and Juan Williams discussed his firing from NPR tonight on The Factor.
O'Reilly warned that:
"NPR has now devolved into a totalitarian outfit functioning as an arm of the far left. As a corporation, has a right to do what it wants, but it does not have a right to any of our tax dollars. NPR will rue the day. Congress is going to defund NPR. We are not letting it go."
Juan Williams responded to his firing from NPR.
This was a great segment.
Sent from my iPhone
Terrorist enabling CAIR On NPR Decision: There Was Dialogue--Juan Spoke, They Fired Him
An updated blog list on the Juan Williams controversy:
Weekly Standard: National Politically-correct RadioThe Daily Caller: Sarah Palin calls for Congress to defund NPR over Juan Williams' firingBeltway Confidential: Will NPR fire Nina Totenberg for wishing Jesse Helms would get AIDS?Alan Colmes' Liberaland: Juan Williams Is No Bigot And Should Not Have Been Fired For His CommentsBearing Drift: NPR fires commenter for commentingNational Review: The Shameful Firing of Juan WilliamsWeasel Zippers: Sarah Palin Says Defund NPR...Michelle Malkin: Defund them now: NPR CEO attacks Williams' sanity, then retracts …Weasel Zippers: NPR CEO apologizes to Juan Williams For Psychiatrist CrackPajamas Media: Should Juan Williams Sue NPR?Power Line: The firing of Juan WilliamsPajamas Media: Fear and Loathing in the 21st CenturyThe Other McCain: Barney Frank Makes Me NervousMedia Research Center: Brent Bozell, Media Research Center (MRC) President, reacted:Outside the Beltway: The Profound Importance of Juan WilliamsThe Right Scoop: NPR fires Juan Williams over O'Reilly appearanceSister Toldjah: NPR fires Juan Williams for admitting he's humanThe Sundries Shack: Another Brave Truth-Teller Silenced by the Evil Media MogulsThe Powers That Be: Naturally: NPR Fires Opinion Journalist for Offering OpinionSweetness & Light: George Soros Buys 100 NPR 'Reporters'Big Journalism: Screw Free Speech, NPR Fires Juan Williams for Muslim RemarksAtlas Shrugs: Hamas-linked, Muslim Brotherhood CAIR Demand for Action — Juan Williams FiredBig Hollywood: NPR Fired Juan Williams For Being InterestingVerum Serum: Is Juan Williams the Right's Shirley Sherrod?Outside the Beltway: What Juan Williams Has In Common With Shirley SherrodGreta Van Susteren: FNC James Rosen emails me NPR internal memo on Juan Williams - here it is!NO QUARTER: Breaking: Juan Williams Fired by NPR [Updates]And So it Goes in Shreveport: Fox All Stars Ought to Be Interesting Tonight: Will Williams Be on the Panel?Beltway Confidential: NPR has been wanting to fire Juan Williams for some timeFlopping Aces: Political Correctness Gets Juan Williams Fired From NPRQuestions and Observations: So much for frank discussions (update)neo-neocon: Juan Williams steps on the NPR third railBabalú Blog: PC Has Officially Become MC ... Muslim CorrectnessStop The ACLU: NPR, George Soros, and the Canning of Juan WilliamsThe Daily Caller: Let the healing begin: NPR brings Whoopi & Bill togetherTigerHawk: A liberal's defense of Juan WilliamsRiehl World View: Juan Williams Was Fired Because He's BlackWeasel Zippers: The Juan Williams Story: Living Well is the Best Revenge ...
Sent from my iPhone
Fwd: News Alert: Pakistani Troops Linked to Abuses Will Lose U.S. Aid
> Pakistani Troops Linked to Abuses Will Lose U.S. Aid
>
> The Obama administration plans to refuse to train or equip
> about a half-dozen Pakistani Army units that are believed to
> have killed unarmed prisoners and civilians during recent
> offensives against the Taliban, according to senior
> administration and Congressional officials.
>
> The cutoff of funds is an unusual rebuke to a wartime ally,
> and it illustrates the growing tensions with a country that
> is seen as a pivotal partner, and sometimes impediment, in a
> campaign to root out Al Qaeda and other militant groups.
>
> Read More:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/world/asia/22policy.html?emc=na
>
>
>
>
BREAKING: Leftist Group Finds 3,000 Suspect Latino Voters to Register & Vote on Last Day of Early Vo
Well, what a complete shock.
A far left group in Rep. Raul Grijalva's district in Arizona registered and turned in several thousand votes today on the last day of registration. The socialist Grijalva is currently the trailing or tied in the most recent polls to rocket scientist Ruth McClung. This ought to be a nice boost for the Code Pink candidate.
Grijalva is best known for calling for a boycott on his own state and district.
The Yuma Sun reported:
Seven workers are going door to door in Yuma County to get eligible Latino voters to register for permanent early voting ballots.
"They are going by precinct and talking to folks," said Francisco Heredia, Arizona state director for Mi Familia Vota and spokesman for One Arizona, the organizations behind the effort.
"It has been mainly Latino voters that we are trying to make sure sign up on the permanent early voter list because we feel that by them being on this list they have ample time to make an informed decision on the candidates and propositions that are going to be on the ballot."
In just two months, the seven canvassers have gotten more than 3,000 local Hispanics to sign up for the early ballot.
"Our goal was above 3,000 and we've met that goal," Heredia said.
The group is nonpartisan, and Heredia said it is not their intention to tell voters who to vote for.
"We just tell them to fill it out, sign the envelope and send it back so their vote counts."
Statewide, Mi Familia Vota and One Vote Arizona have registered 20,000 new voters in four months.
"What is more impressive is we have registered over 43,000 on the permanent early voting list," Heredia said, adding that many Hispanics don't vote regularly…
Getting Hispanics to register for the permanent early ballot will ensure their involvement in the political process, Heredia said.
"The permanent early voting list is important because not only will they receive a ballot for this election, but for every future election."
For your information, despite what they claim, Mi Familia Vota is a far left group. The group along with SEIU and America's Voice launched a Spanish-language radio ad in six states in September, highlighting Republican opposition to the DREAM act, among other issues.
Sent from my iPhone
Freedom Works Website Hacked During Glenn Beck Money Bomb
Evil never sleeps. The Wall Street Journal reports that Freedom Works website was hacked this morning. Says Peter Wallsten:
A mysterious cyber attack apparently struck the computer servers at the pro-tea party group FreedomWorks this morning, just as it launched a major fund-raising drive.
FreedomWorks officials are investigating, but they suspect they were attacked deliberately, perhaps by a political opponent seeking the thwart its fund-raising efforts.
The attack crippled the site at about 9:45 a.m. just when the fund-raising drive was publicized on the radio by conservative talk show host Glenn Beck. The group estimates it lost about $80,000 in potential donations as it struggled to bring its site back online.
An "autopsy" showed a highly sophisticated hacker struck at 6:55 a.m., the group said, setting the stage for the eventual meltdown. The server was wiped out, though group officials said no data was lost or stolen.
"We think the idea was to take our site down until after the election," said Kara Pally, web developer for FreedomWorks. "This was politically motivated."
When will the liberals stop this climate of hate?
Sent from my iPhone
Fired NPR reporter Juan Williams signs new 3-year contract with Fox News reportedly worth $2 million
Sent from my iPhone
NPR CEO Vivian Schiller Apologizes to Juan Williams
"I spoke hastily and I apologize to Juan and others for my thoughtless remark."And about that lawsuit? ...
Sent from my iPhone
Juan Williams: I Was Fired for Telling the Truth
Yesterday NPR fired me for telling the truth. The truth is that I worry when I am getting on an airplane and see people dressed in garb that identifies them first and foremost as Muslims.
This is not a bigoted statement. It is a statement of my feelings, my fears after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 by radical Muslims. In a debate with Bill O'Reilly I revealed my fears to set up the case for not making rash judgments about people of any faith. I pointed out that the Atlanta Olympic bomber -- as well as Timothy McVeigh and the people who protest against gay rights at military funerals -- are Christians but we journalists don't identify them by their religion.
And I made it clear that all Americans have to be careful not to let fears lead to violation of anyone's constitutional rights, be it to build a mosque, carry the Koran or drive a New York cab without fear having your throat slashed. Bill and I argued after I said he has to take care in the way he talks about the 9/11 attacks so as not to provoke bigotry.
This was an honest, sensitive debate hosted by O'Reilly. At the start of the debate Bill invited me, challenged me to tell him where he was wrong for stating the fact that "Muslims killed us there," in the 9/11 attacks. He made that initial statement on the ABC program, "The View," which caused some of the co-hosts to walk off the set. They did not return until O'Reilly apologized for not being clear that he did not mean the country was attacked by all Muslims but by extremist radical Muslims.
I took Bill's challenge and began by saying that political correctness can cause people to become so paralyzed that they don't deal with reality. And the fact is that it was a group of Muslims who attacked the U.S. I added that radicalism has continued to pose a threat to the United States and much of the world. That threat was expressed in court last week by the unsuccessful Times Square bomber who bragged that he was just one of the first engaged in a "Muslim War" against the United States. -- There is no doubt that there's a real war and people are trying to kill us.
Mary Katharine Ham, a conservative writer, joined the debate to say that it is important to make the distinction between moderate and extreme Islam for conservatives who support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq on the premise that the U.S. can build up moderate elements in those countries and push out the extremists. I later added that we don't want anyone attacked on American streets because "they heard rhetoric from Bill O'Reilly and they act crazy." Bill agreed and said the man who slashed the cabby was a "nut" and so was the Florida pastor who wanted to burn the Koran.
My point in recounting this debate is to show this was in the best American tradition of a fair, full-throated and honest discourse about the issues of the day. -- There was no bigotry, no crude provocation, no support for anti-Muslim sentiments of any kind.
Two days later, Ellen Weiss, my boss at NPR called to say I had crossed the line, essentially accusing me of bigotry. She took the admission of my visceral fear of people dressed in Muslim garb at the airport as evidence that I am a bigot. She said there are people who wear Muslim garb to work at NPR and they are offended by my comments. She never suggested that I had discriminated against anyone. Instead she continued to ask me what did I mean and I told her I said what I meant. Then she said she did not sense remorse from me. I said I made an honest statement. She informed me that I had violated NPR's values for editorial commentary and she was terminating my contract as a news analyst.
I pointed out that I had not made my comments on NPR. She asked if I would have said the same thing on NPR. I said yes, because in keeping with my values I will tell people the truth about feelings and opinions.
I asked why she would fire me without speaking to me face to face and she said there was nothing I could say to change her mind, the decision had been confirmed above her, and there was no point to meeting in person. To say the least this is a chilling assault on free speech. The critical importance of honest journalism and a free flowing, respectful national conversation needs to be had in our country. But it is being buried as collateral damage in a war whose battles include political correctness and ideological orthodoxy.
I say an ideological battle because my comments on "The O'Reilly Factor" are being distorted by the self-righteous ideological, left-wing leadership at NPR. They are taking bits and pieces of what I said to go after me for daring to have a conversation with leading conservative thinkers. They loathe the fact that I appear on Fox News. They don't notice that I am challenging Bill O'Reilly and trading ideas with Sean Hannity. In their hubris they think by talking with O'Reilly or Hannity I am lending them legitimacy. Believe me, Bill O'Reilly (and Sean, too) is a major force in American culture and politics whether or not I appear on his show.
Years ago NPR tried to stop me from going on "The Factor." When I refused they insisted that I not identify myself as an NPR journalist. I asked them if they thought people did not know where I appeared on the air as a daily talk show host, national correspondent and news analyst. They refused to budge.
This self-reverential attitude was on display several years ago when NPR asked me to help them get an interview with President George W. Bush. I have longstanding relationships with some of the key players in his White House due to my years as a political writer at The Washington Post. When I got the interview some in management expressed anger that in the course of the interview I said to the president that Americans pray for him but don't understand some of his actions. They said it was wrong to say Americans pray for him.
Later on the 50th anniversary of the Little Rock crisis President Bush offered to do an NPR interview with me about race relations in America. NPR management refused to take the interview on the grounds that the White House offered it to me and not their other correspondents and hosts. One NPR executive implied I was in the administration's pocket, which is a joke, and there was no other reason to offer me the interview. Gee, I guess NPR news executives never read my bestselling history of the civil rights movement "Eyes on the Prize – America's Civil Rights Years," or my highly acclaimed biography "Thurgood Marshall –American Revolutionary." I guess they never noticed that "ENOUGH," my last book on the state of black leadership in America, found a place on the New York Times bestseller list.
This all led to NPR demanding that I either agree to let them control my appearances on Fox News and my writings or sign a new contract that removed me from their staff but allowed me to continue working as a news analyst with an office at NPR. The idea was that they would be insulated against anything I said or wrote outside of NPR because they could say that I was not a staff member. What happened is that they immediately began to cut my salary and diminish my on-air role. This week when I pointed out that they had forced me to sign a contract that gave them distance from my commentary outside of NPR I was cut off, ignored and fired.
And now they have used an honest statement of feeling as the basis for a charge of bigotry to create a basis for firing me. Well, now that I no longer work for NPR let me give you my opinion. This is an outrageous violation of journalistic standards and ethics by management that has no use for a diversity of opinion, ideas or a diversity of staff (I was the only black male on the air). This is evidence of one-party rule and one sided thinking at NPR that leads to enforced ideology, speech and writing. It leads to people, especially journalists, being sent to the gulag for raising the wrong questions and displaying independence of thought.
Daniel Schorr, my fellow NPR commentator who died earlier this year, used to talk about the initial shock of finding himself on President Nixon's enemies list. I can only imagine Dan's revulsion to realize that today NPR treats a journalist who has worked for them for ten years with less regard, less respect for the value of independence of thought and embrace of real debate across political lines, than Nixon ever displayed.
Sent from my iPhone
Shocker: University illegally emails students, staff urging them to vote for Democrats
It wasn't just improper - it was ILLEGAL:Some 6,400 staffers and students at Winston-Salem State University received e-mail exhortations Monday to take advantage of early voting and help the Democratic Party, setting off local Republicans.
"Vote early! Vote often!"
After a complaint by Nathan Tabor, the chairman of the Forsyth County GOP, university officials acknowledged that the e-mail — sent from the student-affairs division — was improper.
The university cited a state law that prohibits the use of a state employee's authority or state property to support or oppose a person or an issue in any election.The university said it would try to discover whether it was sent intentionally or if the official email calling on everyone to support Democrats to all students and staff member was an accident. Bill Clinton heard about it earlier in the day and had this reaction:
..."That is a tax-funded school," Tabor said, calling the original e-mail "highly illegal and unethical."
The University will get around to finding that out after they go out and discover whether the 911 hijackers flew the planes into the World Trade Center towers intentionally or by accident. Oops.
Sent from my iPhone
Anita Montcrief: Feds Fund ACORN, Investigate Tea Party
Anita Montcrief writes a damning piece today about the Department of Justice, federal funding of ACORN and how Democrats are counting on the government to interfere with fraudulent voting practices by going after poll watchers. Please go read the whole thing. Here is just a bit of her investigative piece:
It is equally disturbing that the grant in question is part of the Help America Vote College Program, administered by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), a federal agency established by Congress in 2002 to provide assistance to states in the administration of federal elections. According to its website, since 2004, the EAC has awarded 72 grants worth a total of $2.4 million to recruit and train college poll workers. How much of that 2.4 million went to ACORN?
To be clear, according to Democrats and folks at the DOJ, ordinary citizens who want to ensure fair elections are not welcome at polling places without being accused of voter intimidation but ACORN receives tax dollars to train college students. With ACORN's history of partisan and aggressive activity, I wonder if they would have qualified without Project Vote's tax status and reputation.
Will the DOJ silence the efforts of True the Vote or help them expose fraudulent voter registration drives? Will Democrats succeed in painting ordinary citizens as racists? As the election draws nearer, every American should be asking themselves these questions. If citizens are not allowed to expose corruption and fully participate in the electoral process our votes will be diluted by those with partisan political intentions. It's up to all of us to stand with True the Vote and demand an investigation into the voter fraud in Texas.
What is happening in Harris County, Houston, Texas seems emblematic of a systematic problem where the DOJ sees through race-colored glasses to achieve political ends. It is almost as if the Department of Justice is an extension of the Democratic party who have the force of the law to go after political opponents. This is a real problem.
Meanwhile, the government gives grants to groups like ACORN which help the Democratic party.
The only way the Democrats can lose? At the ballot box. It appears that they're doing everything in their power–both legal and illegal–to make sure that doesn't happen.
Sent from my iPhone
Promises Promises? Obama appoints a Wall Street Mogul to State Dept. and a Lobbyist to NSA
RWB News: Remember when Obama said Lobbyist will have no place in his administration? Remember when Obama demonized Wall Street in his many speeches? Well those were more "in your face" broken promises. Liberal Media and his supporters remain silent.
Wall St. mogul picked for State Department post
President Obama's nominee for deputy secretary of state has earned more than $8 million in salary and bonuses since January 2009 as an executive at a Wall Street bank that received a federal bailout.
Thomas R. Nides, a six-figure fundraiser for Hillary Rodham Clinton during her 2008 presidential run, disclosed his compensation from Morgan Stanley in a recent filing with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.
Mr. Nides, the company's chief operating officer, also said he remains eligible for additional bonus money at Morgan Stanley, which repaid its share of the federal bailout last year.
As deputy secretary of state for management and resources, Mr. Nides would replace Jacob Lew, who is awaiting confirmation as Mr. Obama's federal budget chief and whose own nearly $1 million bonus at bailed-out banking giant Citigroup last year came under scrutiny.
The powerful position is one of two deputy secretary slots at the State Department, a post described on the department's website as chief operating officer and "alter ego" to Mrs. Clinton, the secretary of state.
Read More: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/20/wall-street-mogul-picked-for-state-department-post/
Why is Obama putting a Fannie Mae/Goldman Sachs lobbyist/consultant as NSA?
He was a top lobbyist at Fannie Mae during the housing bubble, when Fannie fought — with Democratic help — to avoid any restrictions or curbs on its work to inflate home values and get more people under mortgage. Before that, Donilon was a lobbyist at O'Melveny and Myers, where Fannie was a client.
In 2008, according to his financial disclosure forms, Donilon was a paid consultant for Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and Apollo Investments.
Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., had a similar reaction to the NSA news, putting out this press release:
"Now that we're in a post 9/11 environment we need a National Security Advisor who has a history of expertise with security issues to protect us against terrorists and not a lobbyist who has a history of running our economy into the ditch as Senior Vice President & General Counsel for Fannie Mae and a lobbyist for Goldman Sachs"
Sent from my iPhone
CAIR complaint leads to NPR firing Williams
Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has long used intimidation as a tactic to push the Islamization of America. Fox News has reported that a complaint from CAIR led to the firing of Juan Williams.
A Daily Caller article points out the goal of CAIR:
"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth," San Ramon Valley Herald reporter Lisa Gardiner wrote when summarizing the message of Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR) founder Omar Ahmad to a Muslim audience in 1998.
Since their founding in 1994, CAIR has sued and/or attacked with consequence such media outlets as: The Washington Times, The Los Angeles Times, The National Post, National Review, Anti-CAIR, various talk radio hosts, and college newspapers. Recently, even The Daily Caller has found itself caught in CAIR's crosshairs.
You can see why NPR may have quickly bowed to the intimidation of a complaint by CAIR especially in the light of its recent affiliation with George Soros.
- Michael Whipple, Editor
RELATED STORIES:
Jihad conquers free speech in US
Will Islamic flag fly over the White House?
CAIR tries to squash criticism of agenda through intimidation and lawfare, critics say
Internet Freedom Under Siege
New 'CAIR Observatory' connects the dots on CAIR's foreign funding and lobbying
Obama Bans Words Islam, Jihad From National Security Strategy Document
FBI Escorts Known Hamas Operative Through Top-Secret National Counterterrorism Center as "Outreach" to Muslim Community
Yemeni cleric part of terror plots
The Muslim Brotherhood in America
Shouting 'Fire' in a Crowded Globe
Bolton on Obama's 'We can absorb a terrorist attack'
CAIR tries to squash criticism of agenda through intimidation and lawfare, critics say
National Security Experts: Shariah Law Is 'Preeminent Totalitarian Threat of Our Time'
Jihad conquers free speech in US
Public middle school takes kids to radical mosque
When Prophet and Profit Team Up
U.S. Faces Growing Terror Threat from 'Indigenous Muslims,' Experts Find
Interview with Claudia Rosett of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies
9-11-2001 Never forget they still want to kill us
The Eternal Flame of Muslim Outrage – Michelle Malkin
Obama's Secret Link to Hamas
DOJ drops prosecution of USS Cole bombing mastermind for political reasons
Counterterror Expert: Ground Zero Mosque 'Symbol of Victory' for Extremists, bin Laden
Son of Hamas founder warns US fatally falling for lies
Counterterrorism adviser refuses to discuss jihad
U.S. government funds mosque renovation and rehabilitation around the world
American Taxpayers are now Financial Jihadists
Under New American Management Al-Qaida Now Poses Inner Threat
Free Speech Wins A Narrow Victory In New York 9/11 ads
Gingrich Sounds the Alarm about the Stealth Jihad
Jailhouse Islam – The Radicals Among Us
Hoekstra: Homegrown Jihad Threat Growing
Hezbollah at the Border
Honor Killing Awareness Campaign: Freedom Taxis Hit the Streets of Chicago
Terror Experts Blast Obama Move to Drop References to Islamic Extremism
Activist: Islam on the rise, compliments of Obama
Iran Threatens U.S. with Proxy Terrorists on Border
More Al Qaeda Links to Terror in U.S.
A Moving Sidewalk for Terrorists
Jimmy Carter Worries Court Ruling May Affect His Interaction With Terror Groups
The Terror Finance Flotilla
Mexican border is gateway for terrorists
Texas congressman complains about terrorists crossing Mexican border
Feds Issue Terror Watch for the Texas/Mexico Border
Taxpayer Funded Terrorism
The American Taliban are coming
4 Scary Ways Terror and Immigration Are Tied Together
General Boykin and Major Hasan – more Islamic preferential treatment
Islam continues to win censorship in the US – especially in the military
Muslim threat of violence now forcing censorship in the US
The Principle of Abrogation in the Quran
Air Force blacklisted Family Research Council President Tony Perkins from speaking at Andrews Air Force Base because of his position on the military policy on homosexuality
Lieberman: Omitting 'Islamic' Terrorism From Security Document Dishonest, 'Offensive'
Sent from my iPhone
Mountains of Our Money to Be Poured Down Fannie and Freddie
Our liberal rulers, who brought about the 2008 financial crisis with Affirmative Action "affordable housing" policies that forced banks to make bad loans under the insane Community Reinvestment Act, and by blocking Republican attempts to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, have done nothing whatsoever to prevent the disaster from recurring on a still larger scale — as it soon will:
The federal bailout for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could nearly double in size during the next three years, according to projections from the companies' federal regulator.
Fannie and Freddie, the federally controlled mortgage finance giants, will need as much as $215 billion more from taxpayers in the next three years to meet their financial obligations, the Federal Housing Finance Agency said Thursday…
The growing taxpayer infusions will cover losses Fannie and Freddie suffer on home loans, as well as payments the companies must make to the U.S. Treasury in exchange for a federal guarantee to provide cash to keep the companies solvent. …
To date, the Treasury has injected $148 billion into Fannie and Freddie, $13 billion of which has been returned to the government. Under the worst case, in which the country enters a second recession, the total infusion would be $363 billion in three years.
As a red diaper baby who has spent his entire life steeping in radical left ideology, Obama could not help but be aware of the Cloward-Piven strategy, which calls for collapsing the economy with excessive government spending, thereby paving the way for the imposition of totalitarian collectivism. This explains why the Redistributor in Chief has pledged unlimited taxpayer-funded support for the black holes of corruption, communism, and incompetence known as Fannie and Freddie.
On a tip from Byron.
Sent from my iPhone
Fwd: What’s the Worst That Could Happen With The New Health Law?
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is one of the largest and most complicated overhauls ever enacted. Policy experts continue to debate the impact it will have.
Among the issues that has raised concerns is its cost. Supporters point to an estimate by the Congressional Budget Office that the law will reduce the nation's budget deficit by about $140 billion over the next 10 years.
But according to an analysis by The Heritage Foundation, the health overhaul could end up costing
The Scoop
American taxpayers millions of dollars in higher health insurance premiums or put a tremendous amount of pressure on an already soaring national debt.
The foundation offers an interactive Web calculator where readers can test their own judgments about the effect of the law, too.
We investigated what would happen to the estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, the official scorekeeping arm of Congress charged with analyzing the budget implications of legislative proposals, if different assumptions were made about how the health overhaul will work. This is important because, during the health reform legislative debates, CBO provided Congress with cost estimates and impact reports about the bill. But CBO scores can be gamed. One rule Congress has repeatedly abused is that the CBO must score legislation as if all the provisions in a bill end up being enacted exactly as intended. But that rarely ever happens, especially with a law that calls for a massive change to one-sixth of the U.S. economy.
For instance, the agency's baseline assumed that the alternative minimum tax will never be patched or another Medicare "Doc Fix" to prevent a big cut in doctors' reimbursements will never happen. Yet both of these short-term fixes have occurred every year since the issues arose more than a decade ago. Recognizing how political realities often are at odds with projected outcomes, CBO director Douglas Elmendorf recently acknowledged that certain parts of the estimates are unrealistic because public outcry and political maneuvering likely won't allow some of the legislation's key provisions to take effect.
Since CBO is confined in its estimates, Heritage decided to draw from a larger crowd of outside experts to determine what happens if certain overhaul provisions don't deliver, or the results are better than expected. We looked at seven factors that came up repeatedly during the health reform debate, and then analyzed how various changes to each one could alter the CBO's final scorecard.
Those factors include the individual mandate which, beginning in 2014, will require almost everyone to buy health insurance; planned Medicare cuts; expected losses in employer coverage; a new "Cadillac" tax on rich benefit plans as well as other new health care taxes; more adoption of health information technology; and a reduction in health insurers' administrative costs.
The calculator draws on estimates from sources such as Harvard economist David Cutler, The Lewin Group and includes estimates from former CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who has suggested that the number of individuals covered by employer-sponsored insurance will undergo a larger change than what the official CBO score approximated.
Our findings demonstrate just how sensitive the CBO's scorecard can be when slight differences are applied to the agency's underlying assumptions. For instance, if only 40 percent of the scheduled Medicare cuts actually occur, the law will push up the federal deficit by more than $132 billion in the first 10 years.
In addition, if 14 million Americans (rather than the 8 million predicted by the CBO) end up leaving their employer-sponsored health plans, the federal deficit would jump by more than $300 billion. This could happen because more are enrolled in Medicaid or qualify for subsidies to purchase coverage in national health insurance exchanges.
And, because the health law imposes a 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices (such as powered wheelchairs, hearing aids, breast-milk pumps, prosthetics, replacement joints, and diagnostic tools like MRI and CT scanners), that tax will likely be passed down to consumers (patients) in the form of higher premiums. Common economic theory explains that the burden of any tax is likely to be shared between the supplier and consumer.
The bottom line is that no one knows what the exact impact of health law will be once all of its provisions go into effect, which will take many years to occur and analyze. Americans need to be prepared for what they could face if it fails to meet up to CBO expectations.
This editorial, by Heritage Foundation's Paul Winfree and Rea Hederman, was originally published in Kaiser Health News.
forward message or visit our website The Heritage Foundation--214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, DC
Call us at 202-546-4400.