CBO says that the Stimulus plan might hurt economy

Tell me something that I don't know? According to the Washington Times:

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

For those of you who are wondering exactly what the CBO wrote:

In contrast to its positive near-term macroeconomic effects, the Senate legislation would reduce output slightly in the long run, CBO estimates, as would other similar proposals. The principal channel for this effect is that the legislation would result in an increase in government debt. To the extent that people hold their wealth in the form of government bonds rather than in a form that can be used to finance private investment, the increased government debt would tend to “crowd out” private investment—thus reducing the stock of private capital and the long-term potential output of the economy.

This is just basic economics, folks. If you spend government money, you are increasing debt and increasing inflation. This isn't a mystery to anyone who took a course in high school.

Which leads to the obvious question: why is Obama pushing this if he knows that it will, in the long term, hurt the economy???

Using fear to pass the stimulus bill

President Barack Obama warned on Thursday that failure to act on an economic recovery package could plunge the nation into a long-lasting recession that might prove irreversible, a fresh call to a recalcitrant Congress to move quickly.

What???
That's what AP said. So I went to the source, Obama's editorial in the Washington Post. (For those of you who don't know, that's Barack's Pravda)

Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.

What???
To the point where we can't REVERSE it? You mean we'd be in a permanant recession? Something that could never be changed?
What the fuck?
That's a whole new level of rhetoric.

Imagine a George Bush or a John McCain trying to shovel that shit. It wouldn't happen.

Everyone should read this post by the Coyote blog. He takes this argument apart for the crap that it is. I hope this will get you interested in reading it:

By the way, speaking of bait and switch, these solutions Obama focuses on - health information, energy projects, school rebuilding, and highways - account for at most 6.5% of the total tax cuts and spending programmed by the stimulus bill for the first 2 years (34.1 of 525.5 billion, which is a bit outdated because it is based on a CBO report of last week, and has not kept up with the new pork added by Congress since then).

I've said this before, and I need to repeat it: this isn't a Stimulus bill that includes a little bit of pork. This is a Pork bill, that includes a little bit of stimulus.

AP almost admits that Obama is arrogant

But then they kinda back off.

The new president, seen by some as arrogant, was anything but on Tuesday.

"I screwed up," Obama said repeatedly during a series of TV interviews. "I take responsibility for this mistake."

It was a frank admission from an Oval Office where "mistakes were made" has often been the preferred dodge.

What was Obama's 'mistake'? That part, the article never gets into.

Pepsi joins the pod people

Its official.
I'm in a science fiction movie right now, and most of the people around me have become zombies.

If you click on this website, you'll find yourself at a soft drink website. The soft drink website is celebrating our current president.
I'd like to repeat that.
A soft drink company is endorsing the actions of our current president.

Its hard to tell whether Pepsi stole Obama's logo, or Obama stole from Pepsi. Whatever. The point is that they are far too alike, and both are using vapid sloganeering to sell their product.

I find it ironic that the very same people who would denounce a soft drink company seem to be okay with it now that its behind Obama. Wait... ironic isn't the right word. Scary is.

Anyway, that same company held the 'refresh' symposium... a series of lectures that featured some very left leaning people.

I'm not into boycotts. I don't like the idea of choosing one product over another because the CEO might have belonged to the ________ party. But the next time I buy soft drinks, I'm going to remember this post from the Age Of Hooper, which sums up a bunch of Pepsi ads that were in a subway.

Its getting scarier every day.

Suddenly, a powerful WH is a good thing?

Well, this is what Politico says:

Not even a week has passed since he was sworn in, but already Obama is moving to create perhaps the most powerful staff in modern history – a sort of West Wing on steroids that places no less than a half-dozen of his top initiatives into the hands of advisers outside the Cabinet.

Interesting.

Two top Obama ppl were subject of Subpoenas

One of those things that would have made the news if his name was Bush, instead of Obama:

Among 43 subpoenas released by the Blagojevich administration Friday, one from Dec. 8 seeks notes, calendars, correspondence and any other data that relate to Axelrod, Jarrett and 32 other people and organizations.

That was the day before the FBI arrested Blagojevich, a two-term Democrat, on charges that he tried to trade his appointment to replace Obama in the Senate for campaign contributions. Wiretapped conversations show Blagojevich thought Jarrett was interested in the seat and he wanted campaign money or a high-paying job in return, according to a sworn statement.

Yep. Who believes that Blago was trying to get a pay-off from everyone... but never asked the president elect for one?

Heard during coverage of the Inauguration

I watched and TIVO'd part of the coverage of the post-inauguration to see what the press was saying about Obama.
The fawning was more ridiculous then usual.

I have some of my favorite quotes, and I'm including them here. I know that they are not 100% accurate, but I typed them as I heard them, and they do reflect what was said.
All of these quotes came from the coverage on ABC.

At one point, a woman is talking about how Obama was a basketball player in high school, for a short amount of time. After explaining that he rarely played, she had this to say:

I think he did have talent. It was just that some of the other players had been there longer, and had played more.

I think that was the first official apology of the press on a shortcoming of the incoming president. It wasn't that the president wasn't good. It was that others had been there longer and played more. So outside of experience, Obama had talent. Where have I heard that before?

Later in the coverage, Obama entered the White House and the parade started. It took a while for Obama to leave the WH for the reviewing stand, to watch the parade. This made one of the male commentators fret:

I'm just worried that some of those units will go by, and the president won't get to see them.

Yes. I'm sure that the president was worried about that. I'm sure the first thing that he was thinking about, after becoming president, was "Yay! Marching bands!"

But as funny as those quotes were, my favorite quote came from a woman who was talking, and let this gem out:

Washington encompasses all that is corrupt and evil about the United States.

I'm sure that if you gave her more time, she'd tell you about the other things that she thought were evil about the United States. I'm sure she had a list. But at that time, she was worried about Obama because now he was in Washington... where everything that is corrupt and evil about the United States resides.
Mainly, reporters.

Bi-partisanship? "I won"

Obama, explaining why he doesn't have to listen to Republicans:

President Obama listened to Republican gripes about his stimulus package during a meeting with congressional leaders Friday morning - but he also left no doubt about who's in charge of these negotiations. "I won," Obama noted matter-of-factly, according to sources familiar with the conversation.

Yes. Yes you did.
You won on the promise that you would find a new spirit of co-operation. Which some of us knew was bullshit.

Media surprised that the new administration is arrogant

I actually smiled when I read this in Politico:

A growing media frustration with Barack Obama’s team spilled into the open at Thursday’s briefing, with reporters accusing the White House of stifling access to his oath re-do and giving Obama’s first interview as president to a multi-million dollar inauguration sponsor.

Growing frustration? Wow, that sounds familiar. Maybe its because myself and every single Republican have felt it since Obama started running?

A little piece of trivia was included in the story. ABC News was granted special access to the DC inaugeral ball, which they paid millions for.
So much for the man of the people.

Here's another fun tidbit.
The 'most open administration ever' started a press conference with a briefing on Guantanamo. However, the administration wanted the briefers referred to as 'senior administration officials', and didn't want their real identities reported.
Keep in mind, they did this at a press conference.
According to the Washington Times:

"Why did the administration believe it was important for the American people not to know the name of the two senior administration officials who briefed us this morning on Guantanamo?" one reporter asked in the packed and steaming hot briefing room just off the White House West Wing.

Great question. I hope the press remembers to keep asking them.

Stimulating the Democrats

I'm sure you've already heard about the $600 million in the Obama stimulus package that they want to spend on government vehicles.
I wonder how many people have made this connection?

1. The auto companies complain that they need to be bailed out.
2. Democrats, eager to keep union votes, create a bailout package to lend/give the auto companies money.
3. The same democrats approve of $600 million to be spent on (American) cars for the federal work force.

Thus the Democrats get to double dip into your pocket for a corporate bailout of the auto industry, and then claim that [$600 million/cost of car] extra cars have been sold due to their bailout package.
Presuming that the cars cost $20,000 each, that means that the government could increase sales of cars by 30,000. What were the names of those lobbyists again?

It gets worse. According to the Wall Street Journal:

Power-equipment maker General Electric Co. lobbied for a slew of provisions in the bill and won several, including the production tax credit for renewables, $32 billion for a "smart" U.S. electrical grid for which it manufactures most components; and $300 million for rebates for consumers who buy energy efficient appliances, which GE sells.

This is really, really, really important for the American people to understand.
If this bill goes through, your LIFETIME TAXES will increase by about $78,000 to pay for this bill. That's everyone's taxes.
-And who is this money going to?
Why... those "greedy corporations", like General Electric. -And General Motors. -And all of those other companies that the Democrats have been criticizing Republicans for giving tax breaks to.

I can't stress this enough: the biggest way to waste $78,000 of your money is to approve of this stimulus bill.
If you want to buy the equivelent of 3 luxury cars, without anything in return? Cool. Tell that to your congressman/woman. But if you don't have a cool 80k to throw into the sewer, call your congressperson now. Today. Right now. You have a cell phone, and you have the minutes.

Give them a piece of your mind.
Tell them that you know that the economy is in the crapper, but that you're onto them.
While you're at it? Call your newspaper and ask them for the details of whats in this stimulus package. Tell your friends what you know about it... particularly the guys wearing the shirts with Obama's face on it.
When they start giving you talking points about how we have to do something, ask them if they know that it will cost them $78,000. -And slap them if you have to.
Hard.

Obamatize yourself

So you know, I do realize that most of my posts are Obama-centric right now. Its hard to ignore that powder blue and red socialist donkey in the room.

Particularly when the Facebook community is Obama-tizing themselves. This website takes any image that you have and converts it into the socialist-icon colors that were used for the Obama posters.

Now I have to start out by explaining, in all fairness, that I took a photo of myself in a santa suit for my Christmas card, and used photo-shop to do the same thing.
But the difference is that I was making fun of the people who seem to have no idea of the socialist imagery used to sell Obama.
I'm not sure how many of the people on facebook know where Shepard Fairley got his inspiration from.
To their credit, someone on the Obamacon website understood the origins and made the image of another socialist icon.

What Rahm has said... for the record

I believe that Blago has a more cynical reason for trying to get Rahm on the stand, rather then just to defend himself.
I think that the threat of getting Rahm Emmanuel on the stand, under oath, is there to get Democrats to back off of Blago. Because, and this is just my feeling, Rahm is hiding something.

But for the record, this is what Rahm said in an interview on Meet The Press:

MR. GREGORY: At any point during those discussions with either Governor Blagojevich or with his chief of staff, did you get the impression or the distinct impression that he wanted something in return for exceeding...

MR. EMANUEL: No.

MR. GREGORY: ...to the recommendation of the president-elect?

MR. EMANUEL: No.

Eventually, taped transcripts of their conversation will come out. Then we will see if what Rahm said is the truth.
In the meantime, I'll note that Rahm hasn't requested that those conversations become public.

Renewing America's Rhetoric

I was watching the parade after Obama's inauguration and I started noticing this logo all over the place. Or rather... I thought I did. You know how when you see an ad placement in a baseball game, and you can't believe that someone was actually that crass?

That's how I felt when I saw this:

Yes, that's "Renewing America's Promise" written on the drum of Florida A&M marching band. I enlarged and lightened it so that you could see it better.

This was TIVO'd on my computer. I have the option to grab frames off of my HD recording, which is how I got this image.

Now I ask you: how did that logo get on that drum? You know, the presidential logo in the middle of the President's new motto?

Keep in mind, it wasn't just on that drum. It was on the front of floats, and other places that I saw in the parade route.
Now ask yourself: how would you feel if you saw President Bush's logo all over the band instruments of his inauguration, along with his presidential seal?

I get the feeling that we are about to experience the most crass marketing that has ever been enacted by any president. If this parade is any indication, every federal government item is soon going to say "Renewing American's Promise" on it.
Which just makes this administration all the more creepy.

Smaller inauguration

Salon asked for one in 2005, quoting the NYT, who also thought that a lavish celebration was out of place during tough economic times.

In Sunday's New York Times, John Tierney examined the delicate balancing act administrations face when throwing a lavish inauguration celebration against the backdrop of unsettling world events. Tierney wrote that inaugurations "become even trickier during times of war, particularly when television images of dancers in black tie can be instantly juxtaposed with soldiers in body armor."

I guess they got over it?

Guess whose inviting the rich to his inauguration?

First, according to ABC, there were the concerts:

While hundreds of thousands of Americans spent hours in the cold to enjoy the "We Are One" inaugural concert Sunday at the Lincoln Memorial, a clutch of Obama's top donors could watch from a heated tent near the performers, courtesy of the president-elect's Inaugural Committee.

Uh huh.

Stay tuned: your instructions are coming

A good article on Lincoln and Obama

Obama is trying to follow Lincoln's footsteps for his inaugeration. In this article on Bloomburg, author Hans Nichols explores the comparisons. In it, Obama says this:

“I’m a practical-minded guy,” he said. “And you know one of my heroes is Abraham Lincoln.”

There are few things that Obama could have said that would annoy me as much as that quote.

I'm a big Lincoln fan. I own a book of his personal writings that I've read a couple of times. I'm fascinated by the history of a man who saw hundreds of thousands of US soldiers die at his own hands, due to the very tough choice that he had to make.

Lincoln made that choice for two reasons:
Firstly, to preserve the union of the US.
Secondly, to eliminate the horror of slavery.

Both are pretty good reasons. Right? And no president in modern time has had to make those types of choices. Right?
But wait... that's not true.

When Iraq voided its treaty of surrender - by continuing to deny UN inspectors access to weapons sites - Bush made the case to enforce the UN resolution. In addition, he made the case that we needed to free Iraq from a brutal dictator.

He knew that US troops would die. When American papers cried for us to get out of Iraq, he stayed in. When protesters pulled body bags out onto the streets to remind the public of those deaths, Bush remained steadfast.
Because of our involvement in Iraq, that country now has its first ever democratically elected government.

Remember those people who were dancing in the streets holding their purple fingers in the air despite threats of death to anyone who voted?
That's the power of democracy.
That's what we bought to Iraq.

Remember what Barack said about Iraq?
He wanted us out. More then a year ago. He opposed the surge. He said that we lost the war. He would have pulled out of Iraq and left those people to die. Even worse, he would have left them under the rule of a dictator, and ignored the violations of the surrender treaty that Iraq signed. He would have capitulated to a dictator for the simple reason that he didn't have the courage to do what needed to be done.

If Obama were in charge of the civil war, he would have stopped the war after the first 2,000 deaths. He would have asked for a timetable for the pullout of the confederate territories. He certainly would have opposed Sherman's march, which was the brutality that ended the war.

Obama not only would have lost the Civil war. He never would have fought it.
Which makes the comparison to Lincoln all the more absurd.

Another creepy "Yes we can" song

Boy George performing yet another "Yes we can" song. Its not as creepy as the kids who were singing 'yes we can'. (That video has since been removed, because so many people left not-so-nice comments about indoctrinating little kids.) But I get the feeling its just another in the long list of praise songs for Obama.

While you're watching this positive message about how we can do anything if we put our minds to it, remember that Obama wanted us to pull out of Iraq and abandon those people when they have their first-ever democratically elected government.

Poll focused fear-mongering

I thought that the Republicans were the party of fear?

President-elect Barack Obama’s top political aides are transplanting their campaign tactics to the policy arena, using data from polls and focus groups to shape the debate over a stimulus plan that may cost at least $775 billion.

Look for the words 'recovery' and 'investment' to be used a lot. And the phrase 'the sky is falling'.

Comic book heros

Obama was a big fan of comic books.

Please don't get me wrong. I have friends who collect. But then again, they weren't senators who got carried away with it. According to AP:

His Senate Web site used to have a photo of him posing in front of a Superman statue.

Oh. So the guys from Marvel comics put Obama in their latest Spiderman book.

Oh, man.
This can't possibly get more creepy.

Obamunism, Carol Browner, and the International Socialists

Time for me to go out and buy one of these shirts.

Earlier, I posted a short bio of a number of Obama's appointments. The one that took me most by surprise was Carol Browner, who he appointed to the position of "Energy Czar."

First, I found out that she used to work for uber-environmentalist Al Gore.

Then I found out that she worked for Citizen Action, an environmental group. Is it any surpirse, then, that I found her ties to a socialist organziation?

Last week, conservative blogs were buzzing with the news that Carol Browner was part of the International Socialist organization. She was one of the leaders of an organization in that group called "Commission for a Sustainable World Society." Last week, I linked to this page where you could read a short profile of her.

This week, the profile has disappeared.
The Washington Times picked up on the story, and asked the Obama administration about it. Guess what their response was?

Mr. Obama's transition team said Mrs. Browner's membership in the organization is not a problem and that it brings experience in U.S. policymaking to her new role.

Yep. That's completely predictable. They think her participation in a socialist organization is a plus.

Mike Brown vs. Leon Panetta

Mike Brown, in case you don't remember the name, was the head of FEMA.
When the media criticized the federal reaction to Katrina, they focused on the head of FEMA. They said that Bush had hired a man who was completely unqualified to take that position, and that he was just there as a friend of Bush.

Okay.

Obama just hired Leon Panetta to head up the CIA. Panetta has never worked for the CIA. He has never worked in intelligence. Its not his field of expertise.
Does this mean that Obama is a bumbling idiot, as Bush was portrayed for hiring Brown?

Is someone holding the media's family hostage?

In the first few seasons of my favorite television show, "24", there was usually a plotline where someone was forced to do something that they didn't like, because a family member was being held hostage.

Watching the news lately, I'm convinced that someone in the Obama administration is holding hostage a family member from each news outlet.
That's the only reason that I can possibly think of for why the press has stopped asking questions.

For instance, here is a CNN article on the president-elect's spending bill of nearly a Trillion dollars. The focus of the article? How Obama is going to get rid of earmarks!

Banning earmarks -- usually pet projects of Congress members inserted in money bills unrelated to the projects -- is one of several steps the president-elect wants to take with the stimulus bill.

What do you notice about the sentence, above?
I'll give you a hint: Its missing the words 'according to the president-elect', or 'the president-elect says'. It unquestionably accepts the idea that Obama is getting rid of earmarks.
For those of us who have taken journalism classes, its a blaring ommision.
Go there and read the article. Tell me where the reporter left the building, and where they just let Obama's PR person write the article as a press release. Heck, compare it with this AP article, which uses the proper "Obama said" venacular.

Speaking of AP, here is an AP story on Obama's recovery plan.

Washington bureaucrats have a reputation for being able to spend taxpayer money real fast. But, believe it or not, spending it fast enough is one of the biggest hurdles President-elect Barack Obama's team faces in putting together an economic recovery measure.

Yes, you read that right. According to AP... Obama needs to spend money. Quick!
I've never known a Democrat to get into office and forget to spend money. But I guess its possible that the Democratically run congress won't approve of the spending fast enough?
Here's a trick: name a congressional democrat who has objected to government spending.

The point is that the media has gone from cheerleading for Obama to actively working as an Obama spokesperson. Which should make everyone kind of wary, unless someone is actually holding their family member hostage.

Socialist head of Energy Department???

When Obama put Carol Browner in charge of the energy department, I read up on her. Or I thought I had. I mean, I had read a few profiles of her in the news. Based on that, I did a brief profile of her and other Obama appointees.

Somehow, they missed this little tidbit:
Carol Browner is an honest to god socialist.


When I accused Obama of being a socialist, its because he belonged to the socialist democrat New Party. (More to come on that.) But people argued with me that The New Party claimed that he was a member, and that we have no record of Obama himself declaring him a member of The New Party.

Okay, fine. Then why does he keep hiring socialists?

Here are the facts. Carol belongs to the Socialist International. You can find her profile on this page.

Here's the Constitution of Socialist International, and something to leave you with from that Constitution:

Human rights include economic and social rights; the right to form trade unions and to strike; the right to social security and welfare for all, including the protection of mothers and children; the right to education, training and leisure; the right to decent housing in a liveable environment, and the right to economic security. Crucially, there is the right to both full and useful employment in an adequately rewarded job. Unemployment undermines human dignity, threatens social stability and wastes the world's most valuable resource.

If you read the Constitution of the Socialist International, it almost mirror's exactly what The New Party says. Which makes sense, because they pull from the same source materials.

I wonder how long it will take until the media actually notices that the guy in the White House has Socialist Democrat policies?

Obama to create 600,000 new Democratic votes

Or as we like to call them, government jobs.
According to the Political Punch, who did the math:

The president-elect says he wants to "create three million new jobs" -- this is a change from a few weeks ago, when he said he wanted the plan to create OR SAVE two million jobs.

He says the "No. 1 goal of my plan ... is to create three million new jobs, more than 80 percent of them in the private sector.”

If you do the math: 20 percent of three million means 600,000 new government employees.

Oh man. Goodbye to all of the talk about controlling the deficit.I did some more math, and I figured out the following:

Approximately 125 million people voted in the last election. Let's presume that Obama hires 600,000 of them into government jobs. He just shifted about 0.5% of the vote into the Democratic party.

You can also read the text of Obama's statement here, on the Politburo website.

Senator (?) Roland Burris

For those of you who don't know, Roland Burris is a politician from Illinois. My crooked governor Blago just appointed him as the replacement senator for Barack Obama's open seat.

This is perfectly 'legal' for Blago to do, and its legal for Burris to accept. That doesn't make it a smart move on either person's part.

When the press started covering Roland Burris, I wondered what alternate universe they were reporting from.
For instance, USA Today said:

Burris has been free of controversy
For nearly two decades in office Roland Burris avoided the kind of controversy that has helped define his home state's rough and tumble political scene.

In a chat on Slate, Edward Clelland, who has been covering this story for several sources, said:

Burris no longer had a political career in Illinois. He was an uninspiring but honest state office holder in the '80s and '90s, but since then, he had lost three races for governor and a race for mayor.

I'll never understand how those reporters came to that conclusion.
Here are a few stories that give a more complete picture.
From Yahoo News:

Burris a Registered Lobbyist, but Tardy on His Paperwork
Roland W. Burris, the former state attorney general picked by Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich to fill the Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama, is a registered lobbyist who appears to be out of compliance with federal lobbying laws.

This is important because of some of the contracts that Burris' law firm has been involved with. For instance, did you know that Burris' law firm is responsible for looking over minority contracts with the state's tollway authority?
Given that, this Sun-Times article is all the more the more important to read:

Burris, his lobbying firm, his clients and a law firm that includes him donated $127,986 to Blagojevich since the governor took office. Burris himself gave $4,500 to the governor, including $1,000 last June. His lobbying firm, Burris & Lebed Consulting, gave $10,796 in cash and services. The law firm with which Burris is affiliated kicked in $5,000 for the governor. Burris' consulting firm has gotten $294,546.30 in state contracts under Blagojevich.

Burris' lobbying clients -- which were under contract with the state for $3.09 million while he represented them -- contributed $107,690 for the governor.

Let me sum this up:
My crooked governor Blago is accused of trying to sell a senate seat for cash, in-kind donations, and appointments.
While under a cloud of corruption, he appointed Roland Burris to that senate position.
Roland Burris... the same Roland Burris who has contributed thousands to the governor's campaign, and who owns a lobbying firm who has sent hundreds of thousands of dollars the governor's way through their clients.
(For those of you who have forgotten; lobbyists are people who funnel money to the politician to get their way.)

-And some media are claiming that Burris is untouched by corruption?

Ack.

One TRILLION dollars (or, "What are you doing after the Obama rally?")

After the Obama rally in grant park

Okay, kids.

It was cute and everything to see all of you in your fresh, new, Obama t-shirts talking about change and rallying against Bush, and how he 'ruined' the so-called 'Clinton surplus' that we had.

And even though I hated the American-idol run to the presidency - complete with e-mail campaigns to call in your pledge - I was struck by how much you young ones wanted to get involved in politics. -And, you know, understand things. Such as, the economy of the US of America. And stuff.

Pretty much the only thing that we agreed upon was that spending needs to stop going on unchecked. The difference is that I blamed the Democratic congress, and you blamed Bush.
No matter. Bush is about to leave.

Which leaves us with your president-elect, who up until recently, was preaching against spending away our children's future with deficit spending. And stuff.

So could we both get on board here, and stop this ONE TRILLION DOLLARS in NEW SPENDING that the incoming moneybags-in-chief is proposing???
And stuff?
Or is your children's future suddenly not as important, because that was all BS, and you never believed it for one second?

Headline you won't read in the NY Times

Obama and two aides interviewed by Fitzgerald in Blago Bribery

You'll never read that.
But you should have.
As the Wall Street Journal points out:

Federal prosecutors investigating alleged corruption by Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich interviewed President-elect Barack Obama and two of his top advisers last week in connection with the case, according to a memo released Tuesday by the Obama transition team.

Let's review:
Obama, and 2 of his advisors, were interviewed by Fitz. Why? Well, certainly, it was because there was no improper contact between any of the advisers and Blago on the many taped conversations they didn't have.

I'm sure that Fitz was just asking them to confirm that they really didn't talk to Blago at all about a deal. I imagine the conversation going something like this:

FITZ: We have you on tape telling Blago absolutely nothing. Is that true?
OBAMA ADVISOR: Yep. I handed him a list of senate candidates that I felt were acceptable.
FITZ: But you asked for nothing in return. We have tapes of that not happening. Correct?
OBAMA ADVISOR: Stop badgering me! Yes, we did nothing!
FITZ: Look... I can't help you unless you continue to deny offering him anything. I'm not going to waste my time interviewing you - knowing that I have nothing on you - unless you tell me that all of my tapes are substantially correct.
OBAMA ADVISOR: Look, cop; I don't know what you're holding back. I just know what I said. Yeah... those conversations were proper, and I never asked for quid pro quo! Is that what you want me to say???
FITZ: I want you to say it only, and only, if my tapes are correct!
OBAMA ADVISOR: Arrrrgh! You got me! I didn't offer him anything! Oh man... I knew that I was in trouble when I came in here! That's why I've been offering interviews for the past week, because there was no improper contact!

The weird thing is that I know that somewhere out there, there are Obama fans who think that's how it went.

Number 6.1

Another link with the Clintons...
...Bettie Currie is working behind the scenes for Obama.

The last time we saw Bettie Currie, she was hiding gifts underneath her bed that had been exchanged between Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.
I'm sure her work with Obama does not reflect anything negative on him, whatsoever.

Obama / Clinton WH counter
6.1

President Elect Sidesteps

Obama didn't want this reporter to "waste his question"...



It reminded me of this guy.

Obama's administration picks: Little Known Facts

I'm amazed at how the media has portrayed Obama's picks as 'centrist'.
Thanks to Time magazine, and a few other sources, I hope to dispel that myth.

U.N. Ambassador: Susan E. Rice

You might know that Susan has Jamaican parents.
You probably know that she worked as Assistant Secretary for African Affairs under Clinton, starting in 1997. -Or that she worked for the Brookings Institution on issues of "global poverty and inequality."
But did you know who her hubby is?

Age 44, Rice is married to Canadian journalist Ian Cameron, executive producer of ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos. They met in college when she was a freshman and he was a senior and are the parents of two children.

Hmmm.
Think that Clinton's former spokesperson, Stephanopoulos, is going to be harsh on her?

People who worked for Clinton - who now work for Obama - Counter:
1

Energy Czar Carol Browner.

If you've read a lot, you know that the Energy Czar Browner used to work as a Legislative Director for then-Senator Al Gore, a lifelong environmentalist.

You might know that she was the director of the EPA under Clinton, and was the longest serving administrator in that position. Or that she protected us against that horrible water borne killer Cryptosporidium. (If you've ever taken a food safety class, as I have, you know how bizarre it is that the EPA felt a need to take action over something like this.)

What you probably don't know is that up until recently, she worked for the Albright Group; a management consulting firm with some pretty hefty political ties, including former Clintonite Madeline.

But did you know that she used to work for Citizen Action, an environmental action group?

I understand completely that many people want someone in the department of energy who will be responsible. But putting an environmentalist in charge of energy, is like putting a vegetarian in charge of issuing hunting licenses. Their core beliefs run counter to their job description.

Anyway, back to our Clinton/Obama WH Counter:
2

I forgot to add...

Secretary of State, Hillary

Clinton/Obama WH Counter:
3

Attorney General, Eric Holder

Eric is the third member of the Obama administration to have ties to the Caribbean, with parents from Barbados. (I'm always amused when an Irish guy feels a need to hire a bunch of Irish guys to work for him. Similarly, Obama's picks amuse me.)

What you might know?
That he worked at Covington & Burling LLP, or that he was originally hired by Reagan in 1988 to be an associate judge.
He was then hired by Clinton in 1993 to be a US Attorney.

What you don't know about Holder?
That he was the guy who approved of Marc Rich's pardon. Marc Rich was a 'fugitive billionaire' who had fled the country. His wife had lobbied hard for his pardon. The day before George Bush took office, Holder reviewed the pardon and wrote that he was "neutral to favorable" about the pardon. Clinton signed it, and the rest is history.

Clinton / Obama WH Counter:
4

Homeland Security Secretary: Janet Napolitano

Time magazine's profile of Napolitano is remarkable in one way; they say that she has a "nuanced approach" that has pleased both sides on the issue of immigration. But a link to their previous article on Napolitano reveals this quote:

Last November angry voters passed Proposition 200, which in part provides that undocumented aliens receive no state welfare benefits that they are not entitled to. Napolitano opposed it, as well as several bills that targeted illegal immigrants.

Read the complete article, because I can't quote it here without violating copyright. It also points out 'immigration reforms' that Janet created on her own, but it seems clear from the article that she's not taking a centrist position.

Back to what you probably do know:
She was appointed as a US attorney general by Bill Clinton.

What you don't know:

In 1991, represented Anita Hill in Hill's sexual harrassment lawsuit against then-Supreme Court nominee (and now Justice) Clarence Thomas

You can say many things about Janet, but you can't say that she's a centrist.

Obama / Clinton WH Counter:
5

Whew! My fingers are getting tired from writing all of those numbers.

Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel

Yeah, that's Blagojevich to the right of him. So let's start there.
Did you know that Rahm and Obama were both chief strategists for Blago's run for governor in 2002?
From the New Yorker:

Rahm Emanuel, a congressman from Chicago and a friend of Obama’s, told me that he, Obama, David Wilhelm, who was Blagojevich’s campaign co-chair, and another Blagojevich aide were the top strategists of Blagojevich’s victory. He and Obama “participated in a small group that met weekly when Rod was running for governor,” Emanuel said. “We basically laid out the general election, Barack and I and these two.” A spokesman for Blagojevich confirmed Emanuel’s account, although David Wilhelm, who now works for Obama, said that Emanuel had overstated Obama’s role. “There was an advisory council that was inclusive of Rahm and Barack but not limited to them,” Wilhelm said, and he disputed the notion that Obama was “an architect or one of the principal strategists.”

Rahm was also a chief advisor to Bill Clinton. Before that, he worked as a fundraiser for Mayor Daley of Chicago. Which means he worked for 3 crooks that we know of.
But hey... I'm positive that Obama is completely different from Rahm's previous clients.

Oh, and Emanuel Was Director Of Freddie Mac During Scandal, according to the ABC news story of the same name.

Emanuel was named to the Freddie Mac board by President Bill Clinton in 2000 and resigned his position when he ran for Congress in May, 2001.
During the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to the SEC, Freddie Mac substantially misrepresented its income to "present investors with the image of a company that would continue to generate predictable and growing earnings."

Neat.
But he's clean as snow. Chicago snow.

Clinton / Obama WH Count:
6

This is where I have to take a break. But I'll be back for round two of 'what you probably don't know' about Obama's cabinet.

TSG 'change' mug shots, Obama, and Change

I was talking to a friend of mine, who is black, about the Obama shirts that so many people are wearing. We were both annoyed by how many people were jumping on the bandwagon.

Although he voted for Obama, he had reservations about the people who were going over the edge in their support without knowing who they were voting for.

His biggest complaint had to do with guys in his neighborhood who were selling drugs while wearing Obama t-shirts. As he rightly pointed out, they clearly missed the message.

The Smoking Gun has a montage of mug shots from 2008 on their web page. Most recently, they selected their favorite ones with the icon of change on them:
I think that there are a lot of people out there who are just wearing the t-shirts to "look cool," and have no real intention of changing the way politics are done.

This week, Obama said that he can't release his internal report declaring that his staffers had no 'improper contact' with Blago.
I'm curious if, despite his insistence, a member of his staff will join the mug shot list, above.

Ohio official resigns in Joe the Plumber case

I need to catch up on some news here.
Most importantly?
The slime who investigated Joe The Plumber with government resources, Helen Jones-Kelley, resigned from her state position in Ohio. Helen used to work as the department of Job and Family Services director.
From the AP story on Yahoo:

Gov. Ted Strickland suspended Jones-Kelley for a month without pay after the Ohio Inspector General's office found in November that she improperly used state computers to find personal information on Samuel Wurzelbacher. The investigation also found that she conducted improper political fundraising activity for now President-elect Barack Obama.

Its bad enough that our civil servants use their government time to raise money for their chosen candidates. (Which seems like an infinite circle to me, of someone getting hired to raise money, so that more government robots can get hired.)
What's worse is to see that they used that government time (and government private resources) to snoop into the background of political opponents. That kind of slimy dealing makes me want to bring back tar-and-feathering of criminal officials.

The silver bullet that connects Obama to Blago?

Can someone help me out on this?
I believe, if I'm right, that this connects the Obama camp directly to Blago.

But you tell me if I'm wrong.

This is from the criminal complaint.
Its right after the part of the complaint where Blago says "f' em" about the Obama camp, if they don't want to deal. That note is note 104.
This is note 105, right after that:

Later on November 11, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor A.
Advisor A indicated that he will stay “on top” of getting the Senate Candidate 5 information leaked to the particular Sun Times columnist. ROD BLAGOJEVICH again raised the idea of the 501(c)(4) organization and asked whether “they” (believed be the President-elect and his associates) can get Warren Buffett and others to put $10, $12, or $15 million into the organization. Advisor A responded that “they” should be able to find a way to fund the organization.

I won't quote the whole thing. But go read it.
Now further down, note 107, on page 68:

On November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor B. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH discussed with Advisor B his idea for a 501(c)(4) organization. Advisor B stated that he likes the idea, but liked the Change to Win option better because, according to Advisor B, from the President-elect’s perspective, there would be fewer “fingerprints” on the President-elect’s involvement with Change to Win because Change to Win already has an existing stream of revenue and, therefore, “you won’t have stories in four years that they bought you off.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that he likes the 501(c)(4) idea because he knows it will be there in two years when he is no longer Governor, whereas Change to Win might not be.

Now you tell me:

How the heck is it that this hasn't made the papers yet? What'd I miss?

The Obama/ Blagovich connection

A lot of us knew that Blagojevich was slime. That was pretty easy to see.
But others took to Blagojevich fairly quickly. Guess who was associated with him?
The same guy who had a fundraiser by Ayers, and a racist preacher:

In the Democratic gubernatorial primary that year, then-state sen. Obama endorsed former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris. But after Blagojevich won, Obama came around enthusiastically.

That, according to ABC news. Its worth noting that Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel had connections too. But, if the article is to be believed:

At the same time, meanwhile, Axelrod had such serious concerns about whether Blagojevich was ready for governing he refused to work for his one-time client.

According to Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., Mr. Obama's incoming White House chief of staff, Emanuel, then-state senator Obama, a third Blagojevich aide, and Blagojevich's campaign co-chair, David Wilhelm, were the top strategists of Blagojevich's 2002 gubernatorial victory.

Just so that you understand:
Obama & Rahm were both aides to Blagojevich. But if we are to believe Obama fans, Obama didn't know about this at all.
He was completely in the dark of how corrupt Blagojevich was.

It wasn't quite the change they pictured

Normally, I'd like to rest easy knowing that the left isn't happy.
But when the left is David Corn, of Mother Jones, I don't know what would make him happy. Che? Chavez?
From his editorial in the WP:

It's no surprise that many progressives are -- depending on whom you ask -- disappointed, irritated or fit to be tied. Sure, Obama's appointments do represent change -- that is, change from the widely unpopular Bush-Cheney status quo. But do these appointments amount to the kind of change that progressives, who were an essential part of Obama's political base during the campaign, can really believe in?

David,
You'll be relieved to know that us conservatives still think his appointments are really really left.
If you don't believe me, check out his speechwriter, in the photo below.

No, I'm not kidding. That really is his speechwriter groping a cardboard cutout of Hillary.

And yeah... that's kind of the change that I pictured Barack would bring.

Politico has some questions for Obama

Most of their questions I think are legitimate. But the first one really has me puzzled:

“Are you going to get off the sidelines before you're sworn in and, if not, what do you say to those in your own party who are waiting for you to show some leadership?”

Since when did that matter?
Every incoming administration that is different from the last is going to have a strong following of people who hope that things will 'change' to their vision.
However, unlike Obama, the president-elect normally doesn't do weekly addresses.
Obama does.
Which begs the asking: What does he think he's doing?
Didn't he have an idea of what he was going to do, as president, when he ran?
Wasn't he supposed to tell us then?
If he did, then what is the point of all of these press conferences? Unless, of course, its to change what he promised when he ran for president?

List of Obama broken Obama promises

Provided, of course, that he's being honest about breaking his promises.

• He said he was going to tax the wealthy.
• He said he was going to put windfall profits taxes on big oil.

Already, he's reversed those two promises.

Former promises he's broken?

• When he was running for the Democratic primary, he said that warrantless wiretaps should not continue. Then he won the primary, and figured out a compromise on wiretaps.

Promises I'm willing to bet he breaks?

• Obama will not pull out of Iraq starting the first day he gets into office.
• He will not open the gates on Guantanamo bay.

More broken promises to come. I promise that.

Obama promises to make economy worse

Sorry, I'm pretending like I'm a Bush hater, and Obama is Bush.
But this is what Obama said, from AP:

"The economy is going to get worse before it gets better," he said twice in the early moments of the interview, taped Saturday in Chicago.

I thought that it was the president's fault that the economy was bad?
I thought that once he became president, he could fix things?
Oh man. I'm so... disillusioned? Surprised?

Chang (ing light bulbs)

I forgot to add this to the mind-boggling logic of our president elect. From Politico:

ENERGY: “[W]e will launch a massive effort to make public buildings more energy-efficient. Our government now pays the highest energy bill in the world. We need to change that. We need to upgrade our federal buildings by replacing old heating systems and installing efficient light bulbs. That won’t just save you, the American taxpayer, billions of dollars each year. It will put people back to work.”

We're going to put people back to work changing out light bulbs?
Uh... if that isn't a 'make work' job, what is?

HUMAN: What do you do?
OBAMA DRONE: I work for the government making the world less energy dependent.
HUMAN: Oh, you change out light bulbs?
OBAMA DRONE: That's not all I do!
HUMAN: What else?
OBAMA DRONE: I fill out paperwork, and report on the improved efficiency of the building.
HUMAN: That accounts for 15 minutes of your day. What do you do with the rest of it?
OBAMA DRONE: The point is that I'm working, and I feel better about myself. What do you do for a living?
HUMAN: I have a real job. I work at McDonalds. I feed people in a very short amount of time. Because of me, they have more time to be productive, and create more wealth in our society... you useless fucktard.

Obama sets plans for Mega Spending

Hold onto your wallet. From Bloomburg:

Obama, in his weekly radio speech today, said his plan to create or preserve 2.5 million jobs will also include making public buildings more energy efficient, repairing schools and modernizing health care with electronic medical records.

“We won’t just throw money at the problem,” he said. “We’ll measure progress by the reforms we make and the results we achieve -- by the jobs we create, by the energy we save, by whether America is more competitive in the world.”

Of course, the best way to create wealth is to have the government do it.

Right?

(I'm joking.)

PS- Everything that Obama said about our deficit being too big? You can kiss that rhetoric goodbye.

Weekly address from the office of the president elect???

You gotta hand it to the fans of Obama: there is nothing he can do that will shake their love.

In a new standard of presumptiveness, Obama has been having regular press conferences from the 'Office Of the President Elect'... which is a bullshit office.
But now he's taking it one step further.
Obama is releasing weekly addresses from the office of the president elect.
Say what?

Keep in mind, previous president elects haven't even held regular press conferences. So why would Obama do this?
Unless he:
1) Incredibly insecure about the job
2) Already thinks he's in power
or
3) Wants to pretend like he's in charge

Any of those three things are creepy. I want you to watch the video above, and realize its not his job yet.
Man, I understand that he was elected. I greatly respect democracy, even when I don't agree with the outcome of an election.
But only because I respect an orderly transition of power.
Obama is trying to skip past that transition thing. You know, where he waits to be inaugurated?

Obama's followers have always creeped me out.
I wish that Obama wouldn't do the same.

Obama hires the woman who called Hillary a monster?

If anyone was wondering about Obama's ethics and morals, I think this one will kind of give you a clue as to what he's going to do once president.

Last Spring, an Obama advisor by the name of Samantha Power was forced to resign after she called Hillary Clinton a "monster".
That should be the end of the story. But its not.
You see, Obama rehired her for the transition process.
Guess what part of his government she's helping with?

According to the Washington Post:

Power is listed on Obama's transition Web site as part of the team reviewing national security agencies. Her duties, according to the site, will be to "ensure that senior appointees have the information necessary to complete the confirmation process, lead their departments, and begin implementing signature policy initiatives immediately after they are sworn in."

Good for WaPo for doing this report.
Of course, if it were Bush doing such a thing, it would be healines for a week. But hey... we all know that Obama gets a buddy pass.