Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Cuomo Accepts Millions From Interests He Assails (NYT)

But as he delivered his announcement, Mr. Cuomo was sitting on millions in campaign cash from the very special interests whose influence he said he wanted to limit.

from Wiki….

Cuomo was born in Queens, New York, the elder son of former New York Governor Mario Cuomo and the older brother of ABC News journalist Chris Cuomo. Andrew and his ex-wife, Kerry Kennedy, the seventh child of Robert F. Kennedy and Ethel Skakel Kennedy, have three daughters. The couple announced their separation in 2003 and have subsequently divorced.

According to the NYT’s fishwrap Cuomo ‘declined repeated requests to be interviewed for this article.’ Gee, why wouldn’t you want to answer the NYT?  Maybe it is because a Cuomo spokesman claims Andrew Cuomo ‘had consistently demonstrated his independence from special interests and others who contribute to his campaign.’

Is there really a need to say this is what is wrong with American politics?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

During the last 12 months or so a local radio station began airing the Allen Hunt Show. The station describes itself as ‘news/talk’ and gives the impression they offer conservative talk shows. A local radio personality has a talk show for about 2 1/2 hours in the morning. That is followed by Rush Limbaugh, then Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Mark Levin during the week.

There is a mixture of syndicated programming on the weekends that now includes the Allen Hunt Show. I never heard of Allen Hunt before this local programming began. One weekend evening as I worked around the house I listened to the show. I was not impressed. Tried to listen again a couple of times but was not interested as I was opposed to many of this man’s opinions.

Now comes a reason to seriously oppose the Allen Hunt Show. His take on illegal immigration includes his statement that he believes in open borders/immigration. This past weekend I listened to the last hour of a financial program that was pre-empted for sports programming for the first two hours. That was followed by the Allen Hunt Show and his topic from the 16th according to the website was aired today on this station.

Allen Hunt believes a man who was brought here illegally by his parents when he was 4 should be allowed to stay. The man is now 19 and finished his first year at Harvard. Hunt says Obama will deport all those fitting this description and that ICE or CBP have apprehended this man and have him in custody scheduled for deportation.

First it was a student here in Georgia. Now the controversy has moved to Harvard. A student there was arrested for being an illegal immigrant in the country even though he has been her since he was 4, and can’t remember not speaking English. It’s just another example of how messed up our immigration policy is, and how we are targeting the wrong people.

One caller to the show made the correct rebuttal to Mr Hunt’s misguided kindness. Don’t blame the US or Americans for this person’s situation. The blame falls on his parents. If this man is unhappy with his situation he has no one else to blame other than his parents.

If you give this man a pass on immigration laws it simply gives other illegals another reason to break the law. You cannot reward people for breaking the law. It is unfortunate that this man has to suffer the consequences of his parents’ actions. But it is not for the US or its citizens to ignore the rule of law.

Laws are necessary for a civil society to exist. Laws maintain order, protect citizens and their liberty and keep things from getting out of control. Not enforcing the laws related to immigration is why illegal immigration is, go figure, out of control. Eliminating the laws will not solve the problem. Enforcing them will.

Had the law been enforced effectively about 15 years ago the man mentioned on Hunt’s show would not be in the position he is in now. His parents plan to break the law would have been thwarted and we would not be having these discussions.

My conclusion about the Allen Hunt Show early on was correct. His opinions are flawed. He says he is not a liberal. But his opinions say otherwise.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Nothin’ like throwin’ a little mud on the liberals. For all the years of adoration toward the Kennedy administration, Camelot and the popular fascination with such American icons one thing seems certain. No matter how good some works are in politics there always seems to be a downside. That which can cause one to shake their head in disappointment.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Kennedy orgies in romper room
FBI’s XXX files on John, Bobby & Ted

The file on the mob plot began with the informant’s disclosures to the FBI’s Milwaukee office. The FBI added an unsigned statement that said a multimillionaire Manhattan divorcée knew about the orgies.

“It was reported that Mrs. Jacqueline Hammond, age 40, has considerable information concerning sex parties,” the statement said.

Among those who took part were John, Robert and Ted Kennedy, Monroe, Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr. and Lawford and his wife, Patricia Kennedy, it said.

The statement indicated Hammond, who was divorced from a US ambassador, was credible.

It was widely reported in the early 1960s that John Kennedy kept a two-bedroom apartment at The Carlyle, and it was later claimed that he spent the night there with Monroe after she sang “Happy Birthday, Mr. President” at his 45th-birthday celebration.

You probably did not notice some changes in this blog’s sidebar. For some months now the sidebar has been used to feature and promote conservative prinicples. For instance, when Sarah Palin’s book ‘Going Rogue’ was read by this blogger it was featured in a few posts and a link to Amazon as well as an image of the book were placed in the sidebar. About the same time other authors released books which made the NYT best seller’s list and began something of a trend. Along with that this blog’s first choice in the 2008 presidential election was featured in the sidebar as well.

But for now, both Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin have been removed. The initial reason for the removal was their unyielding support for RINO and shamnesty politician John McCain. To claim you adhere to conservative principles while backing an establishment GOP incumbent with a track record comparable to most liberals is dishonest.

To vote for McCain in the 2008 presidential election with the only other viable option being Barack Obama is one thing. And yes, this blogger held his nose and voted for McCain then. But to continue to support such a candidate when conservative options are available is simply wrong.

At a time when voices like Palin and Romney could support lesser known and certainly less well-funded candidates with conservative principles guiding their decisions they choose to support questionable GOP establishment candidates that improve nothing.

Here’s a recent story about Sarah Pain to emphasize the point.

Sunday, 13 Jun 2010 04:33 PM

To critics who said Fiorina was a Republican in name only, Palin countered: “Most importantly, Carly is the only conservative in the race who can beat Barbara Boxer. That’s no RINO. That’s a winner.”

For some conservatives, that’s also a problem.

Shelby Blakely, executive director of the Tea Party Patriots’ online publication, New Patriot Journal, said Palin’s endorsement has become “so undependable, it’s marginalized itself.”

While she once thought highly of Palin, Blakely said that over the past two years the “Going Rogue” author has gone more establishment, and Palin’s failure to criticize her own party is bothersome. “There’s room for criticism (all around),” Blakely said. “If you’re not willing to call it where you see it, that’s useless.”

And Romney’s situation does not appear any different. Just like the Reno, NV mayor who refuses to support Sharron Angle against Harry Reid. He said she is too far to the right for his liking. And he said he will campaign for Reid. That’s no conservative. But it is becoming clear that this is not uncommon in the GOP. Take our establishment pick or take a walk.

The GOP spent like liberals last time out. Maybe they are taking more from the liberal playbook for November 2010. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory was previously a liberal phenomenon. But if they continue to support those who are not conservative to protect their power in Washington and elsewhere they are no better than liberals.

Voting for conservative principles may see some losses. But you will see losses in politics anyway. Unless you stand on principle nothing will ever improve. Take a stand. Stand on principle. Over time that strategy will win over and over again.

Supporting RINOs and other nonsense only perpetuates the long sad story of politics as usual. It allows both Democrat and Republican career POLS to continue business as usual in public office. It’s time for them to go.

Throw the bums out until principle wins.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

President Barack Obama on Tuesday sought to shift the nation’s attention to a sunnier topic: the coming benefits from the Democrats’ recently-passed healthcare reforms.

Surrounded by a sea of seniors in Wheaton, Md., Obama defended the legislation from GOP attacks and trumpeted the arrival of one of earliest benefits of the new law: a $250 rebate to tens of thousands of seniors caught in the coverage gap of Medicare’s prescription drug benefit — a gap known unendearingly as the “doughnut hole.” The government will begin mailing out those checks on Thursday.

That Barry, what a joker. Does he know anything at all about the ‘doughnut hole’? A $250 check to cover the gap would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic. Aside from being able to carry your lame-ass live-at-home 26 year old children on your health insurance nothing much happens with Obamacare until 2014. Well, except for all the new taxes and reductions in Medicare to pay Medicaid for all the new participants Barry wants.

No point in retelling all the sad points about Obamacare here. If you have not learned about it by now you are either disinterested or one of those nut cases believing Barry is going to pay for everything you want.

BTW, the only reason President Obama is ‘trumpeting’ Obamacare is he knows most voters will thump Democrats at the polls this November and he is in campaign mode as usual doing damage control. He should have thought about that before the Cornhusker Cash or Louisiana Purchase bribes he gave Democrats to pass his legislation.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Republican Rand Paul said Tuesday he differs with the Libertarian Party by opposing abortion and supporting judicious overseas troop deployment, distancing himself from the party his father once represented in a presidential election.

The U.S. Senate candidate from Kentucky told syndicated conservative talk show host Sean Hannity that he doesn’t fit the mold of a Libertarian. Paul said his conservative social views and willingness to send troops abroad to protect the U.S. set him apart from the party some have tried to associate him with.

An earlier post on this blog reminded readers that Rand Paul is a Libertarian and not a conservative. It would be nice to think that is responsible for his statements on Sean Hannity’s radio show. But then this is just another insignificant blog and could not possibly influence big time politicians.

Mark Levin supports Rand Paul and from what I heard considers him a conservative. I respect Mark Levin and his opinions but am reminded of Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts. I don’t believe Scott Brown is a conservative either.

Maybe Rand Paul could explain in detail what he means by ‘judicious overseas troop deployment.’ Is this someone carefully dancing around the facts or is he truly a conservative in libertarian’s clothing. Or maybe it’s the other way around.

If politics was an honest living it might not be necessary to be so skeptical. (or cynical if you prefer that word)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

In an earlier post it was suggested a biblical reference about teaching a person to fish can feed them for a lifetime. It was part of commentary on entitlements and out of control spending. A final comment in the post warned the NEA would then ask for more funding but suggested the NEA would not ask to be held accountable for actually teaching. That brings us to the following story.

NY passes students who get wrong answers on tests

Despite promises that the exams — which determine whether students advance to the next grade — would not be dumbed down this year, students got “partial credit” for wrong answers after failing to correctly add, subtract, multiply and divide. Some got credit for no answer at all.

Examples in the fourth-grade scoring guide include:

* A kid who answers that a 2-foot-long skateboard is 48 inches long gets half-credit for adding 24 and 24 instead of the correct 12 plus 12.

That’s just one item in the guide. You can follow the link for the full story. But you do not need to read the rest to understand the sad state of affairs in US education. Is there any wonder why US education continues to cost more while student achievement continues to flat line and fall behind other students around the world?

You cannot teach a kid to fish if they don’t know what a fish is. But with this style of education you can all but guarantee most of these students will become entitlement recipients that promote the liberal agenda of the nanny state. Not to mention burden the taxpayer who will always be expected to pay for this failure.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Support him or oppose him the one thing you can say about Rand Paul is that he is not shy. Fresh off something of a controversy over a discussion on civil rights with Rachel Maddow, Rand is mixing it up again on the immigration issue.

Paul Opposes Citizenship for Babies of Illegals
Friday, 28 May 2010 01:27 PM

U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul is stirring it up again, this time by saying he opposes citizenship for children born in the U.S. to parents who are illegal immigrants.

Also in the report above Rand Paul suggests his reason for opposing the above is that Mexican immigrants register 3 to 1 as a Democrat. Is he really against it because liberals are scamming it for votes?

Every indication suggests the Tea Party movement or at least one of the related organizations strongly supports Rand Paul. In another item from Newsmax liberal Lanny Davis has an article entitled ‘Ron Paul Sticks to His Principles.’ That may be. But conservatives may not agree with much of what libertarians have to say. You may remember Ron Paul’s campaign. Not exactly a slam dunk on popular political philosophy.

Here’s part of the Davis’ piece that demonstrates a concern.

That’s when I decided to read the Libertarian Platform, the one adopted at the May 2008 convention in Denver that nominated Rand’s father, Ron, for president. I wanted to understand better why Rand Paul was taking what seemed to be such a politically suicidal set of positions. It explained a lot . . . including about why my and my fellow liberals’ sanctimony about Mr. Paul might have been somewhat misplaced.

This situation is much like that of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. Presented as a conservative or anything but a liberal or Democrat yet the new Senator is still an unknown quantity that hasn’t yet passed the smell test. Rand Paul may mirror this situation except that as Davis cites, liberal angst may be misplaced. So may be conservative support.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted at Maggie’s Notebook

The only transparency available from liberals is demonstrated by their politically correct choices as determined by their adoption of 7th century theocracy into their nanny state agenda. As long as they are bowing to Arab leaders and coddling Muslim terrorists (pardon the redundancy) might as well invade pop culture with politics.

Arab-American Crowned Miss USA
VOA News

Arab-American won the title of Miss USA in the annual beauty pageant held Sunday night in Las Vegas.

Rima Fakih, a Lebanese immigrant, won the pageant after swimsuit, evening gown and interview competitions.

During the competition, she nearly fell while walking in her gown, but she made it without a spill and went on to beat out contestants from all of the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Fakih, who moved to the United States as a baby, is believed to be the first Arab-American and Muslim to hold the title of Miss USA.

She told pageant organizers that her family celebrates both Catholic and Muslim holidays.

Fakih represented the state of Michigan. According to pageant officials, she is a graduate of the University of Michigan, where she earned her Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics. After completing her reign as Miss USA, Fakih plans to attend law school.

The Miss USA pageant is not affiliated with the annual Miss America pageant.

Now for the news you don’t get via most of the MSM on this topic.

A gaffetastic new Miss USA

“I believe that birth control is just like every other medication even though it’s a controlled substance,” Fakih said.

An Econ graduate of the University of Michigan heading for law school offers that quote? Do you now understand the problem of education in the United States? It gets better. But you will have to self-serve the due diligence to uncover the rest.

Given the political landscape both in the United States and around the planet how convenient was it to have Rima Fakih selected as Miss USA? (not to mention, political)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted at Maggie’s Notebook

Here we go again. Liberals are not satisfied with passing healthcare legislation dictating what insurance providers must sell and citizens must buy. Now they want to dictate what citizens eat, how much they weigh and how active they are. And they tell you that is what you want.

“Americans want to be healthy, live longer, and have more time with the people they love,” said Rep. Marcia Fudge. “This bill makes it much easier for people to make healthy choices by addressing simple barriers to wellness.

The fallacy here is that people always had and still have the ability to ‘make healthy choices.’ What those who support this legislation really want is to remove your ability to choose and impose their will on you. In other words, you will do what we tell you to do. And we’ll pass laws to try and make that happen.

“The U.S. is paying heavily for the obesity epidemic which is the result of inactivity and the overconsumption of unhealthy food and sugary beverages,” said Nancy Brown, CEO of the American Heart Association. “The Healthy CHOICES Act and its far-reaching policies will help target and address this growing health concern by providing adults and children with the resources and information they need to make healthier lifestyle choices.”

“This legislation reflects thoughtful and effective policies that can help Americans reach and sustain a healthy weight, and we are eager to partner with Congress to advance this much-needed measure,” said Penny Lee, Executive Director of the Campaign to End Obesity.

That’s right. ‘The Healthy Choices Act and ITS FAR-REACHING POLICIES’ will attempt to force you to conform to someone else’s idea of what you should be and how you should act. They fail to mention that if you consume more calories than your activity can use you will gain weight. Even if you eat what they call healthy food that rule still applies. So perhaps this legislation has little to do with ‘healthy choices’ and more to do with controlling your life.

Funny, not so long ago the liberal mindset was trying to convince the world that being fat was okay because those who were could not avoid it. Later, the ‘gene people’ were trying to convince you there is a gene that makes you fat. But now that the liberals are the majority in Washington DC they’re abandoning that and offering legislation to restrict your personal choices once again.

News flash for liberals: If you do not want to be fat you will pursue that which allows you to maintain a suitable weight as well as other characteristics you deem worthwhile. If you do not care about the issue you will not make that effort. This may be another example of nature’s way of cleaning up the gene pool. Congress is unlikely to improve on that.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The city of Los Angeles, California highlights the logic of referring to the state as Americ’a Greece with passage of a nonsense boycott of the state of Arizona. California’s pathetic state of financial affairs causing it to hover over the brink of economic disaster can be linked to the stupidity of public officials. Not the least of which reside in Los Angeles.

LA Approves Arizona Boycott Over Immigration Law
Wednesday, 12 May 2010 03:57 PM

Los Angeles on Wednesday became the largest city yet to boycott Arizona over its tough new law targeting illegal immigration in a move that likely will affect some $8 million in contracts with the state.

Oh, the bold move to shore up liberal sentiment in the land of fruits, nuts and flakes relies on exactly what California cannot do. Manage the public sector or its finances. Even one of the authors of the boycott admits the move is a paper tiger.

But Councilwoman Janice Hahn, who co-authored the resolution, said it would be impractical to cancel most of those deals and only about $7 million to $8 million in city contracts probably would be affected.

If Arizona countered with a similar measure California would likely be the loser. And failing to act against illegal immigration points to a major reason California is all but bankrupt. Liberal fantasies transformed to political action are doomed to fail. History is full of examples.

So go ahead California, continue to demonstrate how incredibly feeble you are by continuing to support your nonsense agenda. But let us all know when your going out of business sale gets scheduled. Everyone could use serious discounts if you have anything of value left to sell. And we’ll pass on the cheap imported labor.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This blog recently criticized Arizona US Senators Kyl and McCain for their pathetic performance on the issue of illegal immigration.

Senators Kyl and McCain: Shamnesty Fiasco

There is also a post here supporting Arizona Gov Jan Brewer and AZ State Senator Russell Pearce for their efforts resulting in SB 1070.

Jan Brewer, Russell Pearce: Arizona Takes a Stand

A H/T to Newsmax for the heads up on an editorial from the Arizona Republic on the same topic.

Arizona’s Largest Newspaper Slams McCain, Kyl

Arizona’s largest newspaper criticized U.S. Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl and a host of other elected officials in a rare front-page editorial on Sunday, saying the politicians have failed to find solutions to illegal immigration.

But the Arizona Republic is as guilty of self-serving motives for their issue positions as they claim the same about those with opposing positions.

The federal government is abdicating its duty on the border.

Arizona politicians are pandering to public fear.

The result is a state law that intimidates Latinos while doing nothing to curb illegal immigration.

This represents years of failure. Years of politicians taking the easy way and allowing the debate to descend into chaos.

The Arizona Republic has been calling for comprehensive immigration reform continuously since 2002. For a brief time, our congressional delegation led the nation on this front. But no more.

Now, it seems our elected officials prefer to serve political expediency instead.

AZ POLS are not ‘pandering to public fear’ nor have they passed a ‘law that intimidates Latinos.’ On the one hand shamnesty advocates call it unfair to blame Latinos for the illegal immigration problem and on the other criticize efforts to end illegal immigration as racist for targeting Latinos. That’s tantamount to saying it was unfair to blame the Japanese for attacking Pearl Harbor then calling the US racist for declaring war on Japan for the attack.

The Arizona Republic was originally called the Arizona Republican. And while they supported George W Bush at one point and of course McCain and Kyl at others their current and past calls for ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ are support of shamnesty and nothing more.

The paper has been owned by Gannett since 2000 and supporting shamnesty since 2002. There is nothing Republican or Arizonan about the paper. It serves its corporate master who belongs to that perverse subculture within the free market that shamelessly pursues cheap labor by exploiting those who violate US immigration law.

Saying Jan Brewer has other motives for signing SB 1070 while criticizing the law for ignoring ‘Arizona’s Latino heritage’ and creating a ‘backlash that will hurt the state’s economic development’ betrays the paper’s argument. The only heritage being ignored by those who support shamnesty is our nation’s founding documents and principles including the rule of law. SB 1070 merely responds to a federal failure of the government’s duty to protect the nation, its sovereignty and citizens.

The Arizona Republic liked McCain’s sellout to shamnesty as well as Kyl’s and lauded Napolitano for her contribution to their effort. Now that Kyl is viewed by them as abandoning this stand they are not pleased. McCain avoids it for re-election purposes and Napolitano is beholding to a new master in the White House and no longer needs Arizona.

And the AZ paper of course attacks those fighting the good fight like Sheriff Joe. They bash the fed for dropping the ball and bash the sheriff for picking it up. Proof positive the Arizona Republic is bought and paid for by Gannett’s shamnesty support.

The decadence of mainstream media is alive and well in Arizona. BTW, so is illegal immigration and those who benefit from it…. corrupt business interests, criminals including drug cartels and, go figure, illegal immigrants.

There are other Arizona publications which seem to support the rule of law and SB 1070. Obviously seventy percent of voters in Arizona do. So maybe another post about these other pubs will be forthcoming.

As for the Arizona Republic you can file it with the NYT fish wrap.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

update May 22, 2010:

Mexico Tourism Promoter Running Threatening Ads in Arizona Newspaper?

crossposted at Maggies’s Notebook

Oh my, let’s get all indignant on the topic of Wall Street and the liberal pursuit of villains to take the blame for choices made by others. Maureen (Moron) Dowd does her level best to support the Democratic party’s attempt to shift blame. She pans ‘Las Vegas metaphors’ used by POLS in chastising Goldman Sachs while ignoring a basic rule designed to remind consumers of the pitfalls in the marketplace - caveat emptor, let the buyer beware.

According to Princeton’s Wordnet, caveat emptor is described as ‘a commercial principle that without a warranty the buyer takes upon himself the risk of quality.’ Does it get any simpler than that?

From Dowd’s op-ed….

As Americans lost homes and lined up for jobs, Goldman made $13 billion in 2009, and Blankfein got a bonus of, as he haltingly admitted to McCain, “um, um, nine million.”

“The idea that Wall Street came out of this thing just fine, thank you, is something that just grates on people,” Delaware Senator Ted Kaufman told Blankfein. “They think that you didn’t just come out fine because it was luck. They think that you guys just really gamed this thing real, real well.”

Sure, let’s talk about the greed of Wall Street and the bonuses received by Blankfein and others. Never mind the greed of those who were stung by real estate investments they would never have purchased had they performed the due diligence required.

This is no different than the wailing and gnashing of teeth coming from Enron employees who lost their jobs when that house of cards imploded as well as retirement accounts exclusively or largely built around Enron stock. Though one should never place all their investment eggs in one basket, the meteoric rise of Enron stock enticed the greedy to ignore another simple and common concept. If it seems to good to be true it probably is.

Conveniently, Dowd also ignores the role of many politicians steering Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, banking regulators and other government entities toward real estate disaster. A long history of accommodating the notion that everyone should own a home whether they can afford it or not led to ‘no docs’ loans and banking interests scurrying to unload bad mortgages they would not have produced on their own.

While POLS ‘grill’ Goldman Sachs in the US Senate and call for ‘Wall Street reforms’ take a look at Fannie and Freddie now and tell me anything has changed. As for those facing foreclosure since taking a mortgage they cannot afford or others lured by greed during the recent real estate ‘bubble’ POLS advocating more bailouts for bad decisions should be retired in November 2010.

It’s about time people begin taking responsibility for their own failures. Crying foul when you end up on the losing side of a transaction and expecting others to take the blame is childish. Some forget that transactions on Wall Street between buyers and sellers are a zero sum game. For each transaction there is a winner and a loser. Someone posts a gain and someone posts a loss. Get over it or get out.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Conservative talkers point to one of many subtle tactics used by liberals regarding their legislative reform proposals. That is beyond the point that they call their legislative agenda, ‘reform’. This week’s propaganda centers on what liberals refer to as ‘wall street reforms.’ They even have the media doing it.

This points to an old and trusted tactic by liberals to manufacture a villain right after creating a crisis. Rahm Emanuel has been quoted as saying, ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ or something similar. That would be especially true if you create the crisis. You might want to ask the Obama Chief of Staff where he acrrued most of his net worth. You can add the Senator from Countrywide, Chris Dodd, to that list. Follow the money, the committees and other congressional career paths to understand what caused the so-called financial crisis.

President Obama and other Democrats would like you to believe that Wall Street is the villain for economic turmoil around the planet over the last few years. Nothing is that simple. But it is a simple idea to create a crisis, invent the villain and pursue the rest of your liberal agenda by convincing the public you are gettin’ the bad guys.

Try this for a simple explanation. Changes were made after the Crash of ‘29′ to ensure what led to the Great Depression never happened again. You might want to study something called Glass-Steagall which was passed in 1932 and repealed in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and President Clinton.

You might also consider the Community Reinvestment Act as well as other actions by Congress and the FDIC and Fannie and Freddie, etc. over time. The list can get quite long and like any whodunnit it takes some effort to sort out the mess. Nothing is as simple as Wall Street did it. But President Obama would like you to believe that. So would his cronies who share the blame for much of what happened. And the GOP is certainly not without fault in this. Neither is the general public.

“After a recession that stole eight million jobs, this is going to take some time,” he said. “And this will require that we continue to tackle the underlying problems that caused this turmoil in the first place. In short, it is essential that we learn the lessons of this crisis, or we risk repeating it.”

Barry from DC sounds pretty good in that quote. But then he fails.

Mr. Obama says it is necessary to end taxpayer bailouts of private companies and make financial deals more transparent. “That is how we will restore trust and confidence in our markets,” he said. “That is how we will help to put an end to the cycles of boom and bust that we have seen. And that is how, after two very difficult years, we will not only revive the economy, but help to rebuild it stronger than ever before.”

Look for the phrase ‘help to put an end’ when referring to ‘cycles of boom and bust.’ That’s right Mr President. You may help but it won’t eliminate up and down cycles. And some say your legislation will make things worse not better. One of these days POLS may get the message that when you muddy the waters with politics you have to slow down to prove what you’re saying.

While the GOP may be opposing Dems on general principle if only by accident they have been correct lately.

“It is time for Democrats to put away the political playbook and simply say publicly what they are suggesting privately: that this bill still needs some work, that both parties should come together to do that work on behalf of the American people,” she said.

A little too much political fluff in that statement but we get the point. And the larger point is legislators need to bring proof of concept to the table not just political or any other kind of rhetoric.

As a final note for this post, if Chris Dodd had anything to do with it, throw it out.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com