Help Me Out Here On Obama’s Second Press Conference?

Clearly everything Geithner’s bailout programs are doing is intended to “fix the credit markets,” which is to increase lending/borrowing to businesses and consumers. Geithner/Obama’s programs are to increase mortgage lending, and consumer and small business borrowing. There are special programs to increase lending for new cars, and to securitize credit card receivables so that consumers can spend on new cars and every kind of credit card borrowing.

At the same time these programs create  trillions of government debt, truly massive debt, but that is OK because the purpose is to make credit more available. Doesn’t that boil down to getting businesses, consumers and the government deeper into debt?

Help me out here. Isn’t excessive borrowing and excessive debt what got us into this mess?

Is increasing consumer and business debt the way to cure the problem of excessive consumer, business and government borrowing? What am I missing?

Here is text from Obama’s second press conference, cut and pasted exactly, courtesy of Associated Press:

At the end of the day, the best way to bring our deficit down in the long run is not with a budget that continues the very same policies that have led us to a narrow prosperity and massive debt. It’s with a budget that leads to broad economic growth by moving from an era of borrow and spend to one where we save and invest.” BH Obama March 24, 2009.

Well, clearly all the government programs contradict the words of our President about “moving from an era of borrow and spend…”

Let us examine the last part where Obama says: “to one where we save and invest.”

Exactly how does Obama stimulate saving and investing? The interest that savers can earn from the banks or from investing in Treasury securities range from one quarter of one percent to two percent, the lowest in my lifetime. How does Obama encourage people to save when he artificially forces the return on savings down to nothing?  I feel like I am being punished for saving.

My interest income has been destroyed.

But Obama wants to raise my taxes on income from savings and investments. How is increasing taxes on income, and on capital gains from savings and investing going to increase savings and investing?

Then the hypocrite will take the tax fruits from punishing savings and investing, and give it to people who borrowed and spent. Isn’t that rewarding “borrow and spend” while punishing, disincentivizing “where we save and invest?”

Help me out here. How are Obama’s lying, false words “by moving from an era of borrow and spend to one where we save and invest” not an even meaner, more cruel  joke than “Change you can believe in?”

We must decide whether Obama truly has no idea about what he is reading from the teleprompter and is merely another brainless idiot President, even dumber than the one he replaced, or whether he is bipolar and his evil side wants to destroy America. Because that is exactly what his policies are doing.

Ten Obama Dollars for a Gallon of Gas

France is a socialist nation, but even they are complaining that Barack Obama is spending way too much in his insanely bloated stimulus package combined with his budget.

Even Communist Russia and Communist China are not fooled by Obama’s use of the word “investing” to misrepresent his “spending” to pay off all the interest groups of the Democratic Party Machinery that got him elected.

All the major nations of the world are uniting to demand a new currency to replace the Obama Dollar that everyone with half a brain realizes is about to become inflated and lose value dramatically.

The oil producing nations, led by Russia and Saudi Arabia, and yes, Hugo Chavez, do not want to accept Ten Worthless Obama Dollars for a gallon of their gas.

We had no idea that “Change you can believe in” meant that our currency was about to become an international joke because our welfare baby President was about to spend money as though he never had to work for a dollar in his life.

Oh! Come to think of it, he never did!

Nancy Pelosi Actually Most Corrupt Member of Congress

Monster Pelosi abuses lowest paid workers for her personal wealth!! Monster Pelosi forces down pay of poorest people to increase her stock profits.

 

 

CORRUPTION!
    
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi’s home district includes San  Francisco .
          
Star-Kist Tuna’s headquarters are in San Francisco,  Pelosi’s home district.
            
Star-Kist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a major contributor to Pelosi.
           
Star-Kist  is the major employer in American Samoa  employing 75% of the Samoan work force.
 
Paul Pelosi, Nancy’s husband, owns $17 million  dollars of Star-Kist stock.  
           
In  January, 2007 when the minimum wage was  increased from $5.15 to $7.25, Pelosi had  American Samoa exempted from the increase so Del Monte would not have to pay the higher wage. This would make Del Monte p roducts less  expensive than their competition’s.
 Last  week when the huge bailout bill was passed, Pelosi added an earmark to the final bill  adding $33 million dollars for  an ‘economic development credit in  American Samoa ‘.

 Pelosi  has called the Bush Administration “CORRUPT” ? ?
How  do you spell “HYPOCRISY” ?

EVERY  PERSON IN THE WORLD SHOULD GET THIS FORWARDED

 Why do we not get media coverage of stories like this? 

           “SNOPES”  VALIDATES     

Please forward links to this so Pelosi is exposed for the monster she is

Octomom Nadya Suleman Gets Even Crazier and Fires Free Nurses

Octomom Nadya Suleman is convinced the world is out to get her, and thinks the free nurses and nannies are conspiring against her.

Suleman is a combination of raving lunatic delusional crazy combined with manipulative narcissist exploitation of state welfare and of the poor innocent malformed children that she created for her own personal benefit.

Octomom may appear on Dr. Phil Tuesday March 14, 2009, and the Angels In Waiting charity that had been providing the free care may also appear.

Rape Tree Idiot’s Psychotic Temper Tantrum

My last Post  Rape Tree Idiots  rebutted a delusional poster who equated rapes on illegal alien smuggling routes with debauchery at luxury ski resorts. Instead of a civilized response, the author posted this on her website, also saying that she doubted I would approve it from moderation here. Normally I delete comments containing vulgarities, but this person’s comment says so much about her that I am posting it so you can all see the character of people who attempt to play down the horrors of illegal immigration and generally criticise laws and law enforcement. Here is her temper tantrum:

__________________

Because my comment is awaiting moderation at her site and I’m not sure that it’ll be published, here’s my response to Ruthtalks.

Dear sister,

Your rebuttal was entertaining but I must ask, “Are you listening to too much Rush?” A few items of note:

1) I didn’t compare the route of an illegal alien to a ski resort. I was poking fun of the idiot in a You Tube video who said wrongly that women don’t show their underwear.

2) Where in the world would you get the idea I’m a progressive liberal? While it’s truly none of your fucking business, I’m what would be called classically liberal or a Goldwater conservative. If you don’t know what that means, perhaps you should turn off the idiot box and pick up a book.

3) Nothing in my post glamorized criminal activity. Now that I think of it, perhaps you aren’t yet ready for a book. Learn to read.

4) Show me the law enforcement files. All I’ve seen on the subject comes from one of two sources. The first being neo-con border nazis with an agenda or the human rights suppressor masquerading as bringer of equality called the UN. That the WSJ or NYT picks up an article based on those sources does not prove anything. Here’s an interesting source on trafficking. Get somebody to help you read it; you might learn something.

5) I am a female and you’d have known that if you’d read my post with a critical mind rather than knee-jerk haughtiness. Generalizations such as yours underscore the point of my post.

Of course, based on your poorly written rebuttal, I don’t suspect that you possess the capability to understand any of this comment.

___________________

Wow! Civilized discourse, where art thou? This looks more like a temper tantrum of a jerk infuriated that a serious author exposed her lack of the ability for rational thought.

Item 1. “I didn’t compare the route of illegal alien to a ski resort.” You write many words, but you need to work on logic. The overriding logical proposition of your offfending article, once one strips out the excess verbiage, is to deny the existence of Rape Trees because you saw bras in trees at luxury resorts. If you cannot understand what you wrote, our schools are in real trouble.

Consider this contradiction in her lies: After she says “none of your f—-ing business” shes lies that she is a Goldwater Conservative!” Why do we know this is a lie?

Because in Item 4 she uses the two terms “neo-con border nazi” and “human rights suppressor” in reference to authors who decry the Rape Trees and illegal alien smuggling! Barry Goldwater would never say that.

Does anyone doubt that Barry Goldwater would be raising hell about the Rape Trees? Instead of denying their existence by references to  bras in trees at luxury resorts? 

In contrast, the entire theme of her original post was that bras in trees on illegal alien smuggling routes cannot possibly be described as Rape Trees because there are bras in trees at luxury ski resorts and in the rafters of grossly tasteless restaurants with vulgar names. But of course she has shown that she likes vulgarity.

Item 3. “Nothing in my post glamorized criminal activity.” When you dispute the existence of Rape Trees by reference to debauchery in luxury ski resorts, that is implied glorification of the illegal aliens smuggling and the rapes committed therein.

Silly Lying Liberal, your entire lengthy post is entirely in defiance of logic and in defiance of the facts.

Item 4. “All I’ve seen on the subject comes from one of two sources.” Haa! First, this implies you did not bother to read your second source! Second, you threw a temper tantrum laced with (A) vulgarities and (B) ad hominem personal insults (neither of which are acceptable in public blogging) because a logical and well researched author disputes your misinterpretation of what you admit to be your only source, since you say you only used one source!

Perhaps if you did serious research using more than one source you (A) would not have committed your errors of fact and logic, and (B) would not insult serious authors whose only offense is exposing how your biases and delusions warp your perception of reality.

Please understand, this is not meant as an insult, but as a diagnosis. You are seriously out of touch with reality. If you decline emotional help, at least read a book or two on how to perform serious journalistic research including “representative sourcing” which is different from selecting only a single source that support one’s own delusions biases, and another on logic.

Since you speak of my comment as “entertaining,” perhaps you might be entertained by reviewing a comment from others on your own post:

Useful idiots”

This saying is much older than 1980s, it originates from Lenin who was describing idealists in the West (such as GB Shaw) helping Soviet propaganda in the 1920s and 30s. It is a phrase well known and casually used in ex-communist countries.”

Perhaps you might ruminate about whether your are a “Useful Idiot.”

 

Finally, I canot resist a comment on the dishonesty of extreme liberal progressives:

As part of the Karl Marx/George Soros/Bill Ayres/Barack Obama style of subversion, extremists are instructed to disguise themselves. Nobody in America will admit to being a Communist or the equivalent: an extreme liberal progressive.

This strategy is intended to deceive the public into thinking that the most extreme propaganda is not extreme, but to falsely think it is mainstream because the subversives lie and say they are “independents” or “conservatives” or even “Goldwater Conservatives.”  Then they deny the existence of Rape Trees because they wish to increase illegal immigration, with the concurrent drug smuggling, rape trees, sexual slavery and infiltration of terrorists.

 

Fortunately most Useful Idiots are also idiots, and give themselves away by using terms that my opponent did: she uses the two terms “neo-con border nazi” and “human rights suppressor” which are in direct contradiction to her lie that she is a Goldwater Conservative. In her original post she even promotes legalization of drugs.

The truth will set you free, unless you are psychotic or liberal progressive, in which case you cannot distinguish between reality and biased delusions.

Rape Trees and Idiots Out Of Touch With Real World

A recent post demonstrated how progressive liberals are able to completely disconnect from reality for the purpose of  letting their biases completely warp their interpretation of anything in conflict with their biases. In the  illustrative post the author observes that ladies’  women’s undergarments can be found in trees at ski resorts. Therefore, this liberal progressive concludes that finding women’s undergarments in trees on illegal alien human smugging routes cannot be considered evidence of rape trees.

The biased author writes:

That idea that some women are raped while attempting to cross the border should never be discounted; I don’t doubt there is rape and other violence in some situations. The idea of panties in trees being proof of widespread rape is what is laughable. The conjectures without victims, witnesses or other proof make a mockery of the very real subject of abuse and the people who copy and paste such nonsense in blog posts are either well meaning idiots or idiots with an agenda, but idiots nonetheless.”

The reality is that the victims, witnesses and other proof are widespread throughout court and law enforcement files in every major city in America. This psychotic liberal progressive chooses to ignore the widespread existence of evidence disproving his delusional ravings.

Legitimate formal law enforcement files, not neo-con blogs as the liberal progressive offending author claims, are filled with sworn statements of women who have been raped during illegal alien smuggling treks, corroborated by sworn statements of the rape victims husbands and children. Police in every major city in America consistently, and constantly, arrest illegal aliens operating brothels filled with sex slaves imported via the Southern smuggling routes. These sex slaves typically report that they were gang raped and their undergarments hung in a boastful rape tree.

To repeat, in hopes that hopelessly biased liberal progressives might comprehend reality, this information is not from neo-con blogs, but from law enforcement files. In addition, these police reports are published nationwide in almost every major metropolitan newspaper, all of which are liberal publications, not neo-cons as the offending post suggests.

One might interpret the offending post as an attempt to glorify and justify the criminal activity of smuggling illegal aliens as part of a broader La Raza campaign to increase the flow of illegal aliens by falsely misleading the public into thinking that the horrific abuses on the smuggling routes are instead no different than sexual misconduct under the glamour of ski resorts. Idiocy!

How could any none-biased person equate smuggling routes with the debauchery at ski resorts? Young people who have been spoiled with more wealth and leisure than brains take ski resort vacations costing thousands of dollars to indulge in “look at me” sports, wet T-shirt contests in bars, and debauchery both indoors and outdoors, all as part of sybaritic luxurious self-indulgence.

In total contrast, the psychological environment of the illegal alien smuggling routes is abuse, fear and desperation. The cartels and “coyotes” herding the illegal aliens are all armed and vicious. Literally every day of the year, for many years, at least one more dead body of the illegal aliens is found in the deserts.

What kind of psychotic delusion of liberal progressive bias is required to equate the death, fear and desperation of the smuggling routes with the indulgent luxuries of ski resorts?

Bank Of America Newest Awsome, Incredible Fraud on TARP and Investors

Bank of America  Chief Executive Officer Kenneth Lewis just forecast an absurd, totally unbelievable profit of $50 billion for this year on revenue of over $100 billion, a 50 percent profit margin. No legitimate bank in history ever had a 50 percent profit margin!

Under Chief Executive Officer Kenneth Lewis, Bank America  took $163 billion from the federal rescue program, and was widely expected to be taken over and totally nationalized because of bad assets. “Bad Assets” means that management had no idea what it was doing with shareholders’ and depositors’ money; i.e., bad management, failed management, management that should be replaced, invested in more than $163 billion of worthless assets, the losses on which had to be covered by the taxpayers..

CEO Ken Lewis also bought Merrill Lynch and failed to foresee that Merrill had tens of billions MORE of bad assets  than it told Bank America about during negotiations. Then a few months after being acquired by Ken Lewis’ Bank, Merrill suddenly discovered another billion or so of losses in its London office.

Ken Lewis appears to be guilty of, select one or more of the following:

1.   Not having the foggiest idea of what is going on inside his bank;

2.  Not knowing what the condition of Merrill Lynch was when he was dumb enough to buy Merrill, let alone overpaid for Merrill;

3. Defrauding the government out of $163 billion to save a troubled bank when it actually had the highest profit margin in the history of all banks anywhere in the world, anytime;

4. Lewis presided over a gigantic phoney, criminal write down of assets last year, and then reversed the write down this year to save his job by falsely claiming his grand intelligent management saved the bank;

5.  Bank America is run by escapees from the lunatic asylum, or by Barney Frank, or by Chris Dodd, and has no connection to reality whatsoever, just like Obama’s stimulus plan, and just makes up numbers for press releases depending on how much coffee the good ol’ boys drank that morning;

6. No one in finance or the government has any idea what the truth is about any big bank, so it is acceptable for a bank to say it needs $163 billion of taxpayer money, and the 90 days later accidentally notices that it made $50 billion profit;

7. In an industry that normally has a 3 to 5 percent profit margin, incompetent management can make a 50 percent profit margin, and nobody smells a “Madoff?”

With events like this continuuing, it is insane to believe any reported financials, which means there is no way to decide which stocks to buy or sell. In the land of the blind, the one eyed person is king. This one eyed person sees nothing but piles of deaf, dumb and blind retards pretending to be corporate boards of directors, and will not own any stock or bond for a long time.