The State Of Dis-Union

January 28 2010 by Big Frick in Barack Obama, congress, democrats, economy |No Comments
Women and children first.
 
Captain Hope E. Changey delivered his first State of the Union address last night and basically gave a pep talk to all the terrified passengers who are scrambling for the rail of the severely listing USS Obama. Don’t panic, was his message, I’m still in control here. Unfortunately that is exactly why so many of his once ardent admirers are now looking for a new Messiah. Or at least a way to save their own skin while this captain goes down with his socialist ship into the turbulent and icy waters of public disapproval.
 
The president once again tried to tie his failures to the previous administration, laying out the deficit and unemployment numbers he was faced with on day one of his reign. He brought up the debt incurred by “fighting two wars” and also erroneously claimed the Bush tax cuts were responsible for the current deficit. The problem with the Democrats continuing to hang onto that “last 8 years” mentality is that if my memory serves me correctly George W. Bush got reelected during that time, fighting two wars and cutting taxes. Both of those issues were hammered repeatedly by his then opponent John Kerry who, having been soundly defeated by the voters, has since been sent back into both obscurity and the Botox Club waiting room. 
 
The other problem with the Obama approach is that just hours after he arrived in Washington as a US Senator he began to campaign for the job he now holds. That campaign spanned two full years plus during which time he constantly beat the deficit drum claiming the Bush deficit would bankrupt the country. The American voters are not necessarily outraged that he has not eliminated the old deficit but rather that he has tripled it in less than a year. There was, of course, no reasonable explanation for those inconvenient mathematical truths other than to once again use magic numbers to create a deceptive figure of ambiguous heritage regarding the jobs supposedly saved by the hundreds of millions spent on rehabbing the habitat of the California jumping blue tit mouse and installing tattoo removal machines on the gang riddled streets of L.A..
 
"Somewhere along the line, the White House lost its way. Instead of focusing on solutions to help America’s families wade through the wreckage of the worst economic crisis since the 1930s, Washington has wasted valuable time wrestling with partisan politics in an effort to rush through drastic reforms that do not directly address our most immediate needs."
 
That quote is not part of the Republican response to the president’s address. No, that quote comes from Democrat Congressman Ike Skelton of Missouri. Skelton added: "The president’s address has lent us all hope – hope that the administration is finally heeding our concerns. It’s about time."  The comments of Skelton and other Democrats puts the exclamation point at the end of the sentence that reads – Things are not going well in the land of Pelosi and Reid!
 
Congressional Democrats are scared, as is their less than fearless leader Barack Obama, who displayed his concern by chiding Republicans to not use their newly elected vote in the Senate to thwart his agenda. An agenda so fraught with untenable spending and oppressive government restrictions that he was unable to accomplish it even when he had filibuster proof rubber stamp.
 
But the most telling moment for me came when the president scolded the US Supreme Court for their recent ruling on corporate campaign spending. With all the Justices seated right in front of him this say anything community activist qua president was caught in yet another bold faced lie when he claimed their ruling would allow even foreign companies to spend on campaigns without limits.    "With all due deference to the separation of powers," he said, the Supreme Court last week "reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections."
 
Well, with all due deference Mr. President, if you’re going to lie about what somebody actually did it would be best of you did it without them sitting there on camera to reply “simply not true” as was done by an obviously perturbed Justice Samuel Alito.
 
No Mr. President, with all due deference, the Supreme Court acts in accordance with the U.S. Constitution.
 
You might want to try it sometime.

Buzz Buzz Buzz

January 27 2010 by Big Frick in Barack Obama, democrats, populist movement |No Comments
Don’t you just hate it when the news media latches onto a new word and then beats it like a drum until all the meaning has been whipped out of it?
 
You can’t swing a cat in a TV newsroom, anchor desk or print media press room without hitting someone using the new buzzword “Populist”. It is simply all the rage. The country was anxiously waiting for another buzzword that could fit into just about every news story and fortunately, with the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts, we have found one.
 
And just in time too. Most of our old buzzwords and catch phrases have died by the wayside. Global warming is now timidly called climate change, alternative energy and recycling is now green anything and everything, the phrase war on terror has been stricken entirely from our speech and the word terrorist has been replaced by lone radical, the term unilateral is no longer uttered even when the new president unilaterally chooses to send an additional 40,000 American troops to Afghanistan, healthcare now means insurance and change equates to socialism.
 
Be assured that every candidate from either party is going to present himself as a populist. The real key will be once they do will anybody ask them to define what that means. 
 
The list of suddenly populist candidates is wide and varied. California liberal Democrat and ex Linda Ronstadt sweetie pie Jerry Brown is said to be looking to regain the governor’s job in that liberally doomed and union controlled state and is already claiming some newfound populist roots in his possible run against the likely Republican candidate, mega-millionaire and former CEO and founder of eBay Meg Whitman. Even Barack Obama, the Chosen One, is going to attempt to shed his elitist persona and present a new populist personality.
 
The fact that Jerry Brown or Barack Obama or any of the Democrats currently controlling the reins of Congress would even attempt to deceive the voting public into believing them to be pragmatic populists is stunning in its audacity and laughable in its absurdity. It only goes to show how little these liberals in populist’s clothing know about the definition of populism and moreover how very little they think of the intellect of the voting public.
 
The definition of a populist is a member of a political party claiming to represent the common people. It dates back in this country to the 1890’s when the Populist Party was formed to mainly address agrarian issues. The part the Democrats miss is that a populist represents the interests of the people but does not dictate to the people what those interests should be. A populist listens, a liberal Democrat, not so much.
 
Literally hundreds of millions of dollars are about to be spent by Democrats in an attempt to keep their coveted seat in the hallowed Halls of Congress. Without a doubt, most of those seeking reelection will be spending heavily on recasting their image in a populist mold. Even those that need not take up the populist banner will do so in an effort to show a unified and populist Democratic front. The Pennsylvania Avenue Messiah will become the lead populist in an attempt to rally the political troops and abate at least some of the political damage caused by his dismal failures thus far.
 
I believe this will be exactly the wrong strategy for these out of control tax and spend liberals to take as it will do nothing but alienate their liberal base and anger real conservative populists by attempting to insult their intelligence. The fact that Democrats explain away the loss of the Massachusetts US Senate seat to Scott Brown as being caused by voters still being upset with the Bush administration shows how truly clueless they are about the nation’s outrage as displayed by groups like the Tea Party movement and other true conservative populist believers.
 
It will be up to the voters in November to decide if we are going to buy the new and improved populist Democrat Party or if we are going to send the members of this faux-populist party packing.
 
Just the thought of that makes this old populist proud.

Of Special Interest

January 26 2010 by Big Frick in Barack Obama, Maxine Waters, banks, democrats, liberals, politicians, populist movement |No Comments
I’m all for free speech as long as I can control what you’re saying.
 
That seems to be the message the Democrats are sending after the Supreme Court dismantled rules in place for a hundred years restricting corporate spending on political ads. The court’s edict officially reinstated the constitutional right to freedom of speech for America’s corporate voice which has been unjustly stifled for over a century.
 
The Democrats are crying foul and warning that this ruling will allow a huge influx of “special interest money” into the political process. I have a news flash for all the whining Dem’s who are once again attempting to mislead the American voters with deceptive and ominous sounding verbiage; all money spent on or donated to a political campaign is special interest money. Every single dollar and cent, and in the case of Barack Obama, riyal, halalah, euro and peso.
 
It seems unconscionable that a president who raised nearly $1 billion in campaign funds would now claim to be worried about special interest money. After making a solemn promise to fund his campaign the way every other presidential candidate has done by using matching public funds Barack Obama pulled out a little of that CHANGE he promised early and decided he could do much better without the restrictions that come with public funding. Acting as if the country has forgotten that little sleight of hand trick he now insists that expanding participation to privately owned American corporations is tantamount to vote fixing.
 
The problem the Democrats are now facing is that they have spent years demonizing corporate America. They have pushed, poked, slapped and slugged companies and entire industries to the point of near nationalized government takeover. The last thing Democrats want at this point is for these corporations to have a strong vocal platform from which to fight back.
 
A perfect example is Democrat Congresswoman Maxine Waters, who once again made the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s (CREW) 2009 list of the 15 most corrupt members of congress. She was also prominent on the list in 2005 and 2006. It was Waters who told Shell Oil president John Hofmeister that she is “all about” instituting a complete government takeover of the oil industry. Do you think Congresswoman Waters wants Shell and other oil companies to have the right to speak out against her in her next campaign?
 
Congresswoman Waters and a host of other Democrat House and Senate members have made a career out of inflicting corporate pain for political gain. Their leader, Barack Obama, has just recently announced his plan to unconstitutionally single out financial institutions to hit with a special tax. Under the old rules financial institutions were powerless to get their message out to the voting public during the campaign season. Do you think perhaps Democrats may now be more than a little worried about the push back to come from these and other major American corporations?
 
Democrats have been successful at demonizing corporations as cold, uncaring entities when in fact they are nothing more than groups of people. Successful, profitable companies grow and employ more people. But Democrats want the government, not industry, to dictate who wins and loses in the game of business. Democrats have already announced plans to override the Supreme Court decision with new laws and restrictions. They will also come to depend heavily on their friends at the major networks to do their dirty work for them, as was done by NBC and ABC’s refusal to air commercials opposing the ObamaCare debacle. The networks are already decrying the ruling as being dangerous. ABC’s Diane Sawyer echoed most of the major networks when she warned that the ruling would open the “floodgates for companies and unions to spend all the money they want attacking political candidates." Their immediate reaction certainly gives one reason to assume the networks will do everything within their power to avoid compliance.
 
But the Supreme Court was fairly clear in their ruling and any attempt, either by politicians, political parties or the major networks, to stifle corporate America’s newfound right to free speech should be met with immediate and vigorous legal challenges. How much the networks are willing to spend to defend themselves remains to be seen. 
 
If corporations, unions and industry groups are afforded the same rights to free speech as individuals Democrats will have a whole new populist movement to deal with.
 
What scares the hell out of them is that they see how well that worked for them in Massachusetts.

The Un-Populist Populist

January 25 2010 by Big Frick in Barack Obama, democrats, economy, populist movement |No Comments
Here comes CHANGE!
 
Having suffered yet another humiliating political defeat, this time in Massachusetts the liberal Mecca of the eastern seaboard, at the hands of the great unwashed “teabaggers”, Barack Hussein Obama is about to bring on some more of that change he promised during the campaign. No, it won’t be a change in attitude. Nor will it be a change in direction. It will simply be a change in the way he says things, not a change in what he is saying.
 
Obama is set to do what he does best; give yet another speech. This one will be before both Houses of Congress and the entire nation as he delivers his first State of the Union address this Wednesday. This community activist qua speechifying leader of the free world will be where he is most comfortable; behind a podium with carefully crafted words flashing across teleprompters. Just like the other 422 times he has given a speech in his first year in office, Barack Obama will be in his element. He will talk at length about what must be done but will be scant with details of what has been done. He may take a new, stronger tone as he assures the American people that he will never quit “fighting” for them. But in the end it will be the same unworkable misconceptions he has failed with thus far packaged into a new set of verbiage. 
 
He will talk about how the middle class has gotten the short end of the stick from Wall Street fat cats and how he plans to rein in these uncaring financial demons by creating new sweeping legislation dictating their future profits by restricting their ability to make any. He will not explain how his plan will work, he never does, only that it is necessary for the future of Main Street USA. He will also not take into consideration the damage these new, unconstitutional restrictions on the 15 largest banks will have on the 45% of Americans that are invested in the stock market either through direct investments or their 401K retirement plans.
 
Having been defeated for a third time in the past three months by a vocal and growing populist movement Barack Obama is about to become a populist himself. Or at least attempt to appear so. But don’t be fooled.  Inside this pretty new packaging is the same socialist financial neophyte that tripled the national deficit in less than 12 months and focused all his political capital on nationalizing health care while actual unemployment rose to near 20% and business bankruptcies skyrocketed.
 
Using the same smoke and mirrors and misdirection that worked so well during his presidential campaign Obama will attempt to vilify the financial community and create a new rallying point for his failing Democrat minions. He will continue to be directed by his old community activist mentality, unable to recognize that it is the financial institutions that hold the key to our economic recovery, not sole responsibility for its failure. An inside peak into Obama’s intentions was given last week when instead of bringing new financial expertise and advise into his administration Obama rehired political guru David Plouffe as an advisor. Plouffe is credited as being the mastermind behind Obama’s presidential campaign and will likely attempt to bring the same meaningless mantra mentality to faltering Democrats in the 2010 midterm election.
 
Many analysts and pundits view the State of the Union speech as a critical turning point in Obama’s presidency. I do not. It will simply be more of the same delivered impeccably and convincingly by an accomplished wordsmith. But in the end it will be like a doctor, unable to cure your fatal illness and refusing to bring in a medical specialist that can help you recover, instead bringing in a public relations specialist to make your demise sound more appealing.
 
The question is; do the voters buy his new approach and allow the economy to slowly but surely expire or see through the deception and bring the Democrat control of the House and Senate to the political guillotine?
 
Obama may have some pretty new ribbons to put in what he’s spreading.
 
But you still don’t want to step in it.

Full Court Press

January 24 2010 by Big Frick in Barack Obama, Joe Biden, terrorism, terrorists |No Comments
Welcome to U.S. Court System 101
 
In an obvious attempt to placate a pissed Persian potentate, VP Joe “Footinmouth” Biden said the United States would appeal the recent decision made by the US Federal Court in Washington DC to dismiss charges against five Blackwater Worldwide guards. 
 
Six Blackwater guards had been involved in what can only be described as a massacre when, having been hired to protect US diplomats as they traveled in Baghdad, they opened fire at a crowded intersection and mowed down seventeen people, including women and children. One of the guards pleaded guilty to manslaughter and other charges while the other five pled not guilty. Details of what actual threat was faced at the time of the shooting are sketchy. The guards claim they were under attack. The prosecution claims they were unprovoked. But with a body count of seventeen that includes women and kids the Iraqis had demanded that the Blackwater guards be tried for murder in Iraq, a demand the US refused. Federal Judge Ricardo Urbina said in a December 31st ruling that prosecutors had mishandled key evidence in the 2007 shooting and violated the guard’s constitutional rights therefore compelling him to dismiss the case.  
 
I cannot speak to the merits of the case, but regardless of the how’s and the why’s, seventeen people being gunned down as they walked the streets of Baghdad by forces under US employ certainly indicates somebody is responsible for something.

 

But that’s not how it works in our court system. You can be guilty as hell but if the prosecution makes a legal mistake in their efforts to convict you, you walk out of court a free man. Do the initials O.J. ring a bell? A member of Simpson’s famed defense team was F. Lee Bailey. I recall back in the early 1970’s while promoting his book “The Defense Never Rests” Bailey made an appearance on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson. During his interview he stated quite plainly that if you could afford a defense like he could provide, you were almost assured of an acquittal, but if you were poor and unable to mount that kind of defense you may as well “bring your toothbrush to court because you are going to jail”.
 
The Obama administration can feign outrage at the technical dismissal of the Blackwater guards and put on a good show by appealing the decision but this court case clearly displays the insanity of their decision to prosecute Islamic terrorists in the federal court system rather than by a military panel. Be assured these terrorists will be given an F. Lee Bailey type defense.
 
In the media frenzied trial that awaits to prosecute these murderous zealots, a trial that will cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in legal defense and increased security costs for all involved, the terrorists will not actually be on trial but rather their captors will. The defense will demand access to top secret intelligence and the CIA interrogators, who have dedicated their lives to protecting this country, will be the ones whose actions are scrutinized. These Islamic fascists, whose sole purpose in life is to kill Americans, will be afforded all of the same constitutional rights as the natural born American citizens they seek to kill. Their legal defense team will mount a defense by calling into question the constitutionality of every action that has been taken against them and every interrogator that has ever spoken to them. If they are successful, evil will walk out the door of the federal courthouse in New York City and, much like many of those released from Guantanamo Bay for repatriation, they will be free to pick up where they left off in their plans of mass murder and national destruction.
 
Our court system was designed to adjudicate American laws. It was never intended to prosecute acts of war. If the Blackwater guards had been tried by the military that subcontracted them there is a pretty good chance all those involved would have pled guilty or been found guilty by the standards of military law.
 
The world will be watching and our enemies will be taking notes as we prosecute the masterminds of the 9-11 attacks as if they had shoplifted from the gift shop of the World Trade Center and Pentagon rather than flown passenger loaded planes into them. The same holds true for the now infamous Christmas Day Nigerian Underpants Bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a guy recruited by terrorists released from Guantanamo Bay. The legal precedent set by the Obama administration in using the courts will affect how we deal with our enemies for many years to come. 
 
Does any of this make you feel safe? Not me.
 
Maybe that’s the CHANGE he was talking about.

MLK – A Dream Abandoned – Part 2

January 17 2010 by Big Frick in Martin Luther King |No Comments

This Martin Luther King Day the man being celebrated would have been 81 years old had not a bullet ended his life at a Memphis hotel in April of 1968. It is the 24th time the nation has celebrated Martin Luther King Day since it was declared a national holiday in 1986. But what is it we remember?

As we take this day to celebrate the life of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., it is not only important to remember the man but what it was he stood for as well. There were many defining moments in the life of Dr. King but probably none bigger than his “I Have a Dream” speech delivered from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC on August 28, 1963. This speech was part of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. Dr. King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference was just one of the “big six” civil rights organizations that organized the march.

Along with his SCLC was the NAACP, The National Urban League, the predominantly black labor union group The Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee and the Congress of Racial Equality. All had their place at the rally, but it was Dr. King that not only made history that day but kept the entire rally, even though attended by an estimated 250,000 people of all races, from being no more than a minor blip in American history.

In his speech Dr. King laid out what he believed and what he dreamed for the black community. Some of his dreams have been realized. But some of what he believed has proven to be completely incorrect and much of his dream has been abandoned if not forgotten completely.

Dr. King spoke of “The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community” and said that it “must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.”

Little did Dr. King know at the time that this “marvelous new militancy” would completely overrun the black community and not only marginalize him but make him distrusted and ridiculed in his own lifetime within the community he dedicated his life to empowering.

He spoke of the horrors blacks faced from whites in the states of Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama and of his dream that one day the oppression of racism in these states would be transformed into peace and harmony. Little did he know at the time that the “marvelous new militancy” would grow in these states and throughout the United States to the point that blacks would no longer fear death at the hands of the white man but rather at the hands of each other.

He spoke of his faith and his dream “that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.” Little did he know at the time that in the name of God so called religious leaders would aid and abet murderers and drug dealers under the misguided policy of “Do For Self”. Little did he know that from the teachings of these pulpits radical groups like the Black Panthers, the Black P Stone Nation and other equally violent groups would rise up not to fight against the injustices of the white man against blacks but become the oppressors of the black community through murderous violence and drug addiction. And that this “marvelous new militancy” would evolve into the numerous street gangs that rule the black neighborhoods and control the community through intimidation, violence and murder.

His dream that “one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers” has for the most part been fulfilled. But he could have never imagined the nightmare that little black boys and little black girls would one day be targets of each other based on not the color of their skin but the gang colors of their bandana and clothing.

Dr. King lobbied and protested to end Jim Crow laws that prohibited blacks from their right to vote and dreamt of the day blacks would be able to politically participate in their future. He never dreamt that once the black community became a voting bloc their support would be bought and paid for by the Democrat Party through the enslavement of generational welfare and their individual personal responsibility would be replaced with unrealistic expectations of entitlement and handouts.

The country will honor Martin Luther King Jr. with a day of reverent remembrance. But on the streets of the community he sought to empower his dream of equality and peace and harmony has been all but abandoned.

MLK – A Dream Abandoned – Part 1

January 15 2010 by Big Frick in Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Martin Luther King, civil rights, democrats, equality, race |No Comments

When you are a BigFrick it is probably suggestible to stay off thin ice. But I never followed suggestions very well.

As the country prepares to celebrate Martin Luther King Day I took a random, unscientific survey to get an idea of exactly what people think Dr. King actually did. It unfortunately came as no surprise that, beyond the most generic idea of him being a black civil rights leader, most of those I spoke with truly have no idea.

I have absolutely no intention of besmirching the memory or accomplishments of Martin Luther King. But MLK has become such a lauded icon that his inflated legend has done more to harm his legacy than his detractors could have. I believe the very fact that children are given the day off of school as a holiday to honor him is a perfect example of how wrongly we are celebrating what it was that Martin Luther King stood for. Keeping kids out of school would have seemed absurd to him.

Martin Luther King Jr. was a man who believed passionately in the power of education as a means to move people out of poverty. That includes black people and white people alike. King, who is now remembered for his efforts to end segregation and oppression against blacks, was really very closely aligned with the populist movement. As such, he was as much an advocate for poor white people as he was for blacks and later in his life, after many of the civil rights laws were passed, he spent the bulk of his time bringing attention to the plight of poverty in America.

He was the public face of the civil rights movement but more importantly he was focused on equality for all people. In researching his life and his speeches I have no doubt that Martin Luther King would have been appalled by any program that gave preferential treatment based on skin color, even if that preference was for blacks. His goal was to evoke equality through a change in the public’s consciousness not by some misguided racial quota.

We have lost much of what Dr. King stood for in the media hoopla of camera hogs like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. The basic premise behind Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition is a Martin Luther King idea. But the actual actions of that so called coalition, focusing only on advancing blacks at the expense of all others is not.

While King deserves much credit for keeping the pressure on politicians to create and pass civil rights legislation he personally never passed a single bill or enacted any law. It is important to remember not only Martin Luther King but also who it was that supported him and his efforts and who it was that opposed him. Democrats are quick to scream racism at the drop of a hat today, but when push came to shove in the early sixties when all the civil rights legislation was being fought in the Halls of Congress, it was the Democrats that vehemently opposed it. The Kennedy administration publically supported King, but it was also then Attorney General Bobby Kennedy that ordered the FBI to secretly wiretap King’s phone lines in an effort to thwart his efforts.

The country is a very different place today than it was for Martin Luther King. In many ways the dream he spoke of on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963 has been fulfilled. Unfortunately in just as many was his dream has been dashed by the slavery imposed on the culture and the spirit of the black community by the Democrats insidious imposition of dependence through welfare. I fear that Dr. King would be heartbroken to see the community he tried so hard to lift up wallowing in mire of unbridled teen pregnancies, single parent homes and parental neglect, drug abuse, gang violence, dysfunctional entitlement, abandonment of personal responsibility, prejudice and self-imposed ignorance through the rejection of education. It was never his vision that the black community be given so many fishes that they forget how to fish for themselves becoming slaves to their Democrat masters.

If you truly have a desire to honor the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. spend some time Monday reading exactly what it was that he stood for. Then come back to BigFrick.com where we will discuss: Martin Luther King; A Dream Abandoned Part 2

Just Stop Digging

January 14 2010 by Big Frick in Barack Obama, Culture War, bailout, barney frank, congress, economy, liberals |No Comments

RULE # 1 – When you find yourself in a hole the best thing you can do is stop digging.

I think there is very little argument that the country is in a hole. A deep, deep hole. So why, finding the country in this hole, a hole much deeper than he ever imagined, does Barack Obama find the need to not only keep digging but to bring in new tools to dig even faster?

Such is the case with the president’s misguided plan to create a new tax on banks and his blatantly misleading statements used to sell the proposition to the voting public.

The president is reinvigorating yet another attempt at all out class warfare. The “haves” versus the “have nots”, the “us” against “them” mentality that worked so well for him in the campaign. But make no mistake about it. This new tax has absolutely nothing to do with, as the president said, getting “our money back”. This is a political decision designed to help a failing Democrat Party reignite the victim mentality amongst the voting public that has worked so well for them in the past. The deception behind this plan is profound and the misdirection being used to sell it is so subtle yet complete that it would make even Siegfried and Roy take notes.

“We want our money back” said Barack Obama. What he neglected to say is that most of the banks that received TARP funds have not only already given us our money back, but have given us an additional $8 billion in interest. To say that all these banks owe an additional debt for the emergency funds they received ignores the fact that some, like Goldman Sacks, didn’t want or need the TARP money and only took it because they were forced to do so. It also doesn’t explain the fact that some of the financial institutions being charged this new tax never took TARP money in the first place.

It is indeed the battle cry of a president so diminished in his handling of every task set before him, like the war on terror, that now in an effort to regain some form of stature he must return to the old time tested war on class. Barack Obama talks about Wall Street as if it was located on the moon. He puts Wall Street and the financial institutions in a different class as if they have no bearing in the lives of those on Main Street. To believe that, as proven once again today by Obama’s comments, is to be completely ignorant of just how our economy works.

Excluded from this new tax are the bailed-out, UAW run auto manufacturers General Motors and Chrysler as well as the genesis generators of the financial collapse Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. On September 30th, 1999 the very liberal New York Times published an article by the editor of their Washington Bureau Steven A. Holmes warning of the possible catastrophic consequences of the new policy being undertaken by the Clinton administration in forcing lenders to loan to unqualified buyers under the direction of Fannie May and Freddie Mac. In September of 2008, after the collapse, the equally liberal Senator Chuck Schumer all but admitted that it was this inane policy of lending money to people who could never pay it back that was the cause of the financial pandemic. Schumer said “Oh, the lowly mortgage, who would have ever thought that the lowly mortgage has brought us to the brink of financial ruin?” Uhhh…Steven A Holmes of the New York Times did Senator, along with past Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and a host of other economists worldwide. Those who did not think it were the Democrats, like Chuck Schumer and his pal the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee Barney Frank. It was Big Bad Barney who told Fannie and Freddie that the only reason for their existence was to lend to subprime and minority home buyers. Congressman Frank supports the president’s new tax. With his economic track record that in and of itself should be enough to tell the American people that it’s a bad idea.

Once again proving his ignorance of anything economic Barack Obama said the banks being hit with this new tax would not be able to pass this new $90 billion expense on to consumers through increased fees because it would make them uncompetitive with the banks not being charged. This comment is beyond stupid on any number of levels, not the least of which is constitutional. This may be why the president warned the banks not get their lawyers involved fighting against the selective and unfair tax.

In order to stimulate the economy and create jobs businesses need to have access to credit. In order for banks to offer that credit they need to be solvent and profitable. Adding a new tax on the driving force of the economic recovery at a time when unemployment is at 10% and consumer confidence is nonexistent is like dousing the embers of the backyard barbeque with a fire hose. Class warfare is a fine tactic for a community activist but it can be fatal to the economy for the President of the United States.

In November we the people need to take away this guys shovel or the hole we are in will look like the penthouse when he’s done.

Harry’s Game Change

January 13 2010 by Big Frick in Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton |No Comments

The following line may be hard for some of you to believe, but I can assure you it was even harder for me to write: “I completely agree with Harry Reid.”

There I said it.

In the latest and greatest tell all book about the 2008 presidential election “Game Change” authors John Heilemann and Mark Halperin assemble supposed quotes from more than 200 supposed campaign workers and campaign insiders including Barack Obama himself.

Within the pages of this innuendo filled sump pit, Halperin, who is an analyst for Time magazine, and Heilemann, who contributes for New York magazine, engage in what could only be described as gutter trash journalism so beneath normal journalistic standards that the weekly checkout line gossip rags would have a hard time justifying its publication.

The book is filled with damning portrayals of just about every major presidential candidate as well as vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. The only candidate immune from the degenerate insinuations is Barack Obama, which may be why he agreed to sit down with the authors for his input last June in the White House.

In each instance an anonymous source gives juicy tidbits of what it was really like on the inside of the campaign. None of these sources are ever named or in any way identified and none of the claims made can be substantiated in any fashion whatsoever by anyone other than the authors who have an obvious vested interest in selling books.

There are stories of Sarah Palin being mentally unstable and incapable of debating Joe Biden or showing any sign of intelligence to the American people. While it makes for a few good sound bites on the six o’clock news, the reality is that Palin came across as quite prepared in her debate, with many saying she had actually won and since then has had no problem garnering massive support amongst conservatives and causing even greater panic amongst liberals.

There are other stories about Bill Clinton carrying on new sordid romantic dalliances and how the Hillary camp was prepared to deal with it should it have become public. John Edwards and his pants dropping videographer pal Rielle Hunter, as well as Edwards’ wife and her mental and emotional instability, paying no mind to the fact that she is fighting terminal cancer.

There are stories of Joe Biden fighting with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton fighting with just about everybody. But the one story that has recently attracted the most attention is a comment made by the Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid regarding Barack Obama.

Reid is quoted from a private conversation as saying that Obama could be elected president because “He is a light skinned African-American with no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one.”

Republicans are foolishly trying to make political hay out of the comment and Democrats are circling the wagons to defend him. I really don’t see what all the hubbub is about. What Reid said is not racist, it’s absolutely correct. It is also the exact reason Obama was elected president with absolutely no useful experience or qualifications to serve in that capacity.

Obama truly is a light skinned African-American with no Negro dialect unless he wants to have one. He is light skinned because he is half white. A fact that he has discussed at length but is rarely recognized in the black community. He is actually one of the few true African-Americans in this country because his father was an African and his mother was American. He has no Negro dialect because he was raised by his white mother and had very limited contact with folks that spoke with a discernable Negro dialect until he was much older. He has since developed the ability to switch on a faux Negro dialect for situations where it is politically expedient for him to do so.

None of these are racist issues, but race was in fact the one overwhelming factor in this past presidential election. Obama was just black enough to garner near 100% of the black community’s support. But his appearance and speech was white enough so as not to scare away white voters, who were willing to overlook his complete lack of qualifications in order to be part of history. It was almost all about skin tone and the ability to connect with white voters verbally through meaningless mantras like Hope and Change. It doesn’t matter if you carry 110% of the black vote. If whites don’t vote for you, you don’t get elected.

Reid was already in deep democrat dung before this quote became known and he owned up to it. It won’t bother me a bit if it helps to get him soundly defeated in the November election. But I do not believe that Harry Reid had any racist undertones in his opinion and description of Barack Obama.

Of course that doesn’t make him any less of a horse’s ass.

One Sick PUP

January 12 2010 by Big Frick in Computer Virus, Internet |No Comments

“If only they had used their powers for niceness instead of evil” – Maxwell Smart

If only indeed.

I must admit I remain amazed at just how much damage can be caused by some of the destructive computer viruses floating around the internet. I think I would have preferred getting the H1N1 to whatever virus it was that downloaded itself into my poor Dell Workstation. I had always assumed that the viruses we hear so often about were created by some lonely computer nerd with no social skills and a penchant for getting worldwide attention, even if that attention was negative. Kind of like the kid that would rather be punished than ignored. I was wrong. I had also assumed that my computer was relatively safe from these web borne menaces because I invested in what I was told was the best antivirus software available. Most unfortunately, I was wrong again.

The odyssey of my complete computer destruction began with a simple visit to the web site eBaums World. I can’t begin to estimate how many times I have visited this site but it’s probably safe to say it has been a few thousand over the past 3 or 4 years. It is a site similar to You Tube where submitters download videos and funny pictures. I don’t watch many of the videos available as most consist of some skateboarder getting whacked in the nuts or some drunk guy doing a face plant at a frat party. Not really my cup of tea. But some of the videos are funny and I enjoy some of the pictures created, like the one of Darth Vader using his light saber to light a cigarette.

But this visit was far different than any before. When I clicked on a video to watch suddenly my computer screen began to fill with pop up windows warning me that viruses had been detected. Having been recommended by the guy who runs my local computer store, I had Panda Security Suite protecting my computer. He claimed this product was superior to the Norton 360 I had used for years. But the warning pop up’s where not from Panda but rather showed Windows Defender and appeared to be coming directly from my Windows operating system. Click here to identify the virus, it warned. I closed the window only to have it reappear again and again. Click here, it said, and Windows will remove the threat. After several unsuccessful attempts to close the warning and to my great consternation, eventually I did. What a mistake.

According to the computer repair guy, at least in the part he was kind enough to explain in neophyte terms for me, what I did at that point may have been the fatal mistake. Apparently, when I clicked the button it allowed my computer to download a P.U.P. or Potentially Unwanted Program and once it was downloaded it was game over from that point forward. As a bevy of pornographic pictures began to display on my screen the program displayed a list of deadly viruses that had been downloaded onto my hard drive. It then directed me to enter my credit card number to buy the full version of the Windows Defender program which would remove these unwanted viruses. I knew I had been had at that point and fortunately I did not enter any credit card info.

I attempted to run the Panda protection program, but the poor Panda’s ass had been kicked and the Security Suite was no longer capable of securing anything. My goose was cooked. I had no choice but to bring my ailing laptop to the repair shop where, after several failed attempts to disinfect the machine, the hard drive had to be wiped clean.

Larry, the guy who runs the shop, is the same guy who told me to dump Norton and get Panda. He claimed that it wouldn’t have mattered what antivirus program I had because I allowed this P.U.P. to be downloaded. That may well be true, but before I reconnected my now barren computer I downloaded a new version of Norton 360. All I know is that in all the time I had Norton I had no problems and that’s good enough for me.

The key to this whole unfortunate episode is that the viruses downloaded into my computer were not created solely to do the damage they did. Their main purpose is to aid in identity theft. The perpetrator of this virus didn’t want my $49.95 for the antivirus program. They wanted my credit card number. Larry told me that had I bought the program offered it would have appeared to remove the virus but in fact would have put tracking programs in my computer that would have submitted all the personal data I have stored. One of his customers made this mistake and not only found thousands of dollars of charges on their credit card but had their bank accounts accessed as well. These programs not only track your activity but your account numbers, passwords and security question answers. The pornographic pictures that popped up are designed to cause panic and embarrassment forcing the now doomed computer user to act quickly, without considering the consequences, particularly if that user is on a shared computer.

This is no small potatoes. The Federal Trade Commission reported that 9.1 million Americans have had their identity stolen through the internet or other means, with a total cost in excess of $50 billion annually. And because the World Wide Web is indeed worldwide these thieves can be located anywhere on the planet.

It has been a huge pain in my huge ass replacing all the lost data on my computer but fortunately I did have a separate hard drive backup. I can only suggest that the cost of an external hard drive is insignificant when compared to the value of everything we store on our computers. I also suggest that if you find yourself with the same pop up windows you do nothing but shut down the computer and hope. While my problem occurred on e Baum, I am told that these viruses are on almost all the social networking sites.

All in all, if anybody is to be held accountable for all this theft it must be the ultimate creator himself. Just another Al Gore idea gone bad.

« Previous Page — Next Page »