A Darker Future For Us

What does redistributive mean. Well, remember that it was the Left-Wing of the Supreme Court that brought us this little jewel, holding that the government could take your real property, like your home, not for public use, but to give to another private individual, such as a political contributor or other party hack or interest group.

Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another to further economic development. The case arose from the condemnation by New London, Connecticut, of privately owned real property so that it could be used as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan. The Court held in a 5-4 decision that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified such redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the majority opinion; he was joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer

The decision was widely criticized by American politicians and the general public. Many members of the general public viewed the outcome as a gross violation of property rights and as a misinterpretation of the Fifth Amendment, the consequence of which would be to benefit large corporations at the expense of individual homeowners and local communities. Some in the legal profession construe the public's outrage as being directed not at the interpretation of legal principles involved in the case, but at the broad moral principles of the general outcome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

Watched Fox ???News??? 11/1 for perspective. Got that and some chills.

LIVs have gotten notice lately, but the real scary ones are the Propaganda Dupes.

Paul Gigot was interviewing someone named Dorothy; didn???t get her last name.

*********

PG: ???We???re back with a look at what???s really at stake, where each candidate really stands. Dorothy, for you what are the really big differences, the defining issues here????

Dorothy: ???The differences are attitudinal and political. Basically: how do you feel about our place in the world. We???ve seen a regular line from Mr. Obama in which he seems to indicate that the opinions of the U.S. held IN THE FASHIONABLE SALONS OF THE LEFT all over Europe, and IN ACADEMIA, and IN THE DARK CHAMBERS OF OUR ENEMIES, are something he understands too well.

???In fact, I suspect we will find a SQUISHY, as some would put it, MULTILATERALISM, AT BEST.???

PG: ???Why can???t McCain exploit that? Because in past elections that would have been a really costly position for a Democrat to take.???

Dorothy: ???He simply has not been willing to say: THIS IS HOW OUR ENEMIES SPEAK.???

PG: ???But Dorothy, if he had said that, the PRESS WOULD JUST HAVE ANNIHILATED HIM!???

Dorothy: ???He [McC] has this weakness, MORAL VANITY, SENSITIVITY. He fears what the press will think of him, instead of understanding it.???

???McCain is so clearly who is not receptive TO THE IDEAS OF OUR ENEMIES.???

???Obama said, the first thing he said was, what will you do when you go abroad: Ah, I will go abroad and make amends TO OUR ENEMIES???to others in the world. He sees us as a fallen nation.???

**********
???Fair and balanced??????

I have seen other manifestations of the propaganda machine in those ubiquitous viral smear emails, but I have now a better appreciation for the vituperation we are seeing from the Propaganda Dupes.

Lord, help us all on Tuesday!

I???m going to take Bass Pro???s idea. I???m going to watch the election coverage on Fox ???News??? Tuesday.

A 40 year republican

"Nowforthetruth" is now selling guilt by association that Obama has PLO buddies referring to Rashid Khalidi. McCain donated $440k to Khalidi.

See for yourselves at: http://richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com/2008/10/mccain-funded-rashid-khalidi.html

"Nowforthetruth", a little more "truth" about guilt by association....

"Nowforthetruth" also said: "Nins, all you prove is that you have perpetual PMS and cannot read. If you are as careless in your practice, you are a danger to your profession." You reveal too much of yourself "Nowforthetruth".

"Nowforthetruth" continues repasting that the cause of our problem is a law decades old that encourages loans to qualified low income people. "Nowforthetruth" continues to repeat well known deceit.

Alan Greenspan stated recently that the problem was not anything like that. Rather, he stated that an entire financial system was built outside of regulation, and "we trusted" these self-interested looters to regulate themselves. Credit Default Swaps were the result.

Credit Default Swaps increased from $106 trillion in '02 to $531 trillion under the R stewardship. No regulation.

While there are several variations of a viral email that tries to blame a few thousands of political donations to some Ds, the actual, legitimate news has reported that Fannie and Freddie paid many millions to Republican lobbyists to lobby Rs, only, to PREVENT REGULATION.

McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, received up to $35K/mo. from Fannie and Freddie from 2000 to present, to lobby Rs,only, against regulation. Freddie paid Rick Davis while he has been McC's campaign manager. Freddie donated $250k to the R convention.

These facts are everywhere in the legitimate news: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/us/politics/22mccain.html and http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732/page/1 There's much more legitimate news on this.

Trillions were looted from our economy because the Rs allowed it. It is inescapable that the Rs, most prominently McC's campaign manager, were in the pockets of big money while they drove the buss off the cliff with us in it.

You can try to distract people with fears about 'those guys'. Lies, distortion, deception. 'Socialist' is only the last in a long, now desperate, list of labels you have tried to pin on 'that one'. That's all you have left.

Is your most recent reposting here directed to fears about "Socialism", or is it just innuendo, or are we trying to fold in a little racism too?

Since we have no more ideas, let's keep running our campaign on fear, smears and hypocrisy.

Keep talking "Nowforthetruth", you're really helping. You keep demonstrating that we all have to vote against lies and propaganda and attempts to hijack our political process with deceit. Your actions are the kinds of reasons that I'm voting for Obama after 40 years of never having voted for a Dem.

A 40 year republican

If you are in trouble,its not Wall Streets fault,nor the Governments,it's YOUR FAULT! There should be no bail outs! Learn to live within your means!

Republicans seem to have nothing left to offer except baseless lies and half-truths. They need to step away from power for a few years and find their way back. New leadership is desperately needed.

For now - I am confident that Obama and the Democrats can lead us through this economic crisis. They have demonstrated to me that they are more honest and calm in a crisis - they earned my vote. Go Obama!

Hear Obama and Clinton for yourself, in their own words with out the filter of someone else's opinion..

Bill Clinton says Democrats failure to allow Republicans to regulate Freddie and Fannie caused economic melt down.

so. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsynspIqAoE

Obama in this video, addressing his community activist work and his work representing ACORN in litigation against the banks and relating to the Community Reinvestment Act, and addressing the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as those actions relate to the destruction of our economy by causing the current real estate and subsequent financial crisis, states that, and I quote:

"Subprime lending started out as a good idea, helping Americans buy homes who previously could not afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securitize these loans, slice them into finer and finer risk categories, and spread them out among investors and around the country, as well as around the world. In theory, this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky, and more diversified."

Acknowledging the catastrophe, but as apologist for the Democrats, Obama then offers this justification.

"The original idea was a good one, which was, lets see if we can distribute risk more broadly, and make it easier to provide loans to people who otherwise might not be able to get one."

Yah, great idea. Economically unsound, but embraced by Obama. Listen for yourself. You cannot dispute the mans on words recorded live:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related
???
And here is Obama again, stating

"And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that,"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

2001 Chicago Public Radio Interview.

And here is Obama again in December 2007, promising a role in formulating policy during his transition if elected, despite saying he has no ties to this organization, Acorn

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU


And here is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

It's time for a serious discussion of the economy - not the dumbed-down (ie Joe the Plumber) nonsense. Obama seems to be the only one willing to take this crisis seriously.

During a previous troubled time...the 70,s the country listened to the voices of a limited future and turned to Jimmy Carter who had no solutions except to retreat internationally and sypathize with the countries malaise. Thank God we kicked him out in 4 short years and turned to a man who knew that the American people have it within them to do whatever they want and put us back on a trajectory for growth and security. Unfortunately, now even though we are far better off than in the 70s the national media have convinced us the sky is falling and we have to retreat and lower our expectations again. And they have another candidate of defeat and lowered expectations who will ease the pain of supposedly dimmer futures by taking from the wealthy to ease the pain. How the country could be turning to a multi-Millionaire who lets his illegal immigrant Aunt live in poverty in public housing, supported by American tax payers, is beyond me? But it does indeed look like we may well be in for Jimmy Obama II. Let's hope there's another Reagan at the end of that dark tunnel!

Hear Obama and Clinton for yourself, in their own words with out the filter of someone else's opinion..

Bill Clinton says Democrats failure to allow Republicans to regulate Freddie and Fannie caused economic melt down.

so. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsynspIqAoE

Obama in this video, addressing his community activist work and his work representing ACORN in litigation against the banks and relating to the Community Reinvestment Act, and addressing the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as those actions relate to the destruction of our economy by causing the current real estate and subsequent financial crisis, states that, and I quote:

"Subprime lending started out as a good idea, helping Americans buy homes who previously could not afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securitize these loans, slice them into finer and finer risk categories, and spread them out among investors and around the country, as well as around the world. In theory, this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky, and more diversified."

Acknowledging the catastrophe, but as apologist for the Democrats, Obama then offers this justification.

"The original idea was a good one, which was, lets see if we can distribute risk more broadly, and make it easier to provide loans to people who otherwise might not be able to get one."

Yah, great idea. Economically unsound, but embraced by Obama. Listen for yourself. You cannot dispute the mans on words recorded live:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related
???
And here is Obama again, stating

"And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that,"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

2001 Chicago Public Radio Interview.

And here is Obama again in December 2007, promising a role in formulating policy during his transition if elected, despite saying he has no ties to this organization, Acorn

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU


And here is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Honestly, looking at McCain and Obama objectively (without any party affiliation or any racism) I really can't see why anybody would vote for McCain. Obama has offered a much more coherent plan to get America out of the economic disaster we are in.

Right now, most people are anxious about the economy, fearing the worst but hoping for the best.

Reality check: within 18 months YOU could be standing in a bread line. That's how bad it really is. And Obama will work actively to prevent this short term, as well as make us strong again long term. As much as I like McCain and admire his patriotism, he really is not up for the job, not now with the global markets falling apart.


Obama's economic plan can be found at:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/index.php

Here's an excellent video about the economy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d4a6RNhCUo

The way this article is written, one would wonder if the emphasis on disinflation is another one of those conspiracy theories about which the general public was unaware of until disaster struck. In my opinion, the author should have tried to explain the implications of inflation for economic growth and for income inequality. He should have also tried to explain the modern methods developed in economics for gauging inflation.

The way it is

DICK CHENEY ENDORSES MCCAIN/PALIN

Thanks Goodness! He waited so long I was beginning to worry that he would be one of the many high-profile Republicans endorsing Obama!

www.RepublicansForObama.com

ABC Reports that in a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin said her First Amendment rights are threatened by reporters suggesting she is engaging in a negative campaigning against Barack Obama.

Palin told WMAL-AM that for reporters or columnists to suggest that she is going negative constitutes an attack on her free speech rights under the Constitution, saying -If the media convince enough voters that this is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media.-


If I hadnt heard her butcher the Constitution numerous times already, I might not have believed it!