Thursday, October 09, 2008

Obama's Real Problem With Ayers

And the nation stands in wait to elect this guy?

Obama's Real Problem With Ayers

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 10/7/2008

Election '08: At an education forum in Venezuela, Bill Ayers showed the real issue is not his terrorist past. It's the socialist revolutionary agenda that he and Barack Obama want to impose on the nation's schools.

Obama Membership in Socialist New Party?

logo

Published on NewsBusters.org (http://newsbusters.org)

Will MSM Report on Obama Membership in Socialist New Party?

By P.J. Gladnick

Created 2008-10-08 16:15

The mainstream media thought that the membership of Todd Palin, who is not a candidate for any office, in the Alaska Independence Party important enough to report in such outlets as the Los Angeles Times [1], MSNBC [2], and the New York Times [3], among others. So now that Barack Obama's membership in the far left New Party has been unearthed, will they report his membership in that Socialist organization?

Proof of Obama's membership in the New Party was discovered by the Politically Drunk On Power blog [4]:

In June sources released information that during his campaign for the State Senate in Illinois, Barack Obama was endorsed by an organization known as the Chicago "New Party". The 'New Party' was a political party established by the Democratic Socialists of America (the DSA) to push forth the socialist principles of the DSA by focusing on winnable elections at a local level and spreading the Socialist movement upwards. The admittedly Socialist Organization experienced a moderate rise in numbers between 1995 and 1999. By 1999, however, the Socialist 'New Party' was essentially defunct after losing a supreme court challenge that ruled the organizations "fusion" reform platform [5] as unconstitutional.

After allegations surfaced in early summer over the 'New Party's' endorsement of Obama, the Obama campaign along with the remnants of the New Party and Democratic Socialists of America claimed that Obama was never a member of either organization. The DSA and 'New Party' then systematically attempted to cover up any ties between Obama and the Socialist Organizations. However, it now appears that Barack Obama was indeed a certified and acknowledged member of the DSA's New Party.

On Tuesday, I discovered a web page that had been scrubbed from the New Party's website. The web page which was published in October 1996, was an internet newsletter update on that years congressional races. Although the web page was deleted from the New Party's website, the non-profit Internet Archive Organization [6] had archived the page.

From the October 1996 Update of the DSA 'New Party':
"New Party members are busy knocking on doors, hammering down lawn signs, and phoning voters to support NP candidates this fall. Here are some of our key races...

Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)."

You can find the above quote from the scubbed New Party web page at this Internet Archive Organization link [7]. More confirmation of Obama's membership in the New Party can be found at an article [8] in the November 1996 Progressive Populist magazine:

New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago.

The Democratic Socialist Party of America also reported on Obama's New Party membership in its July/August 1996 edition [9]:

The Chicago New Party is increasely becoming a viable political organization that can make a different in Chicago politics. It is crucial for a political organization to have a solid infrastructure and visible results in its political program. The New Party has continued to solidify this base.

First, in relation to its infrastructure, the NP's membership has increased since January '95 from 225 to 440. National membership has increased from 5700 in December '95 to 7000. Currently the NP's fiscal balance is $7,000 and receives an average of $450/month is sustainer donations.

Secondly, the NP's '96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration. The lone loser was Willie Delgado, in the 3rd Illinois House District. Although Delgado received 45% of the vote, he lost by only 800 votes. Delgado commented that it was due to the NP volunteers that he carried the 32nd Ward. Delgado emphasized that he will remain a visible community activist in Humbolt Park. He will conduct four Immigration workshops and encouraged NP activists to get involved.

Kudos to Politically Drunk On Power for digging up this information about Obama's membership in the socialist New Party. The question now is if the MSM will deem his party membership important enough to report on. They sure didn't hesitate to report on Todd Palin's membership in the Alaska Independence Party.

UPDATE: Yet more proof of Obama's close involvement in the socialist New Party from NewsBusters' Hermano who provided this link [10] to the Chicago Democratic Socialists of American September-October 1995 New Ground 42 edition:

About 50 activists attended the Chicago New Party membership meeting in July. The purpose of the meeting was to update members on local activities and to hear appeals for NP support from four potential political candidates. The NP is being very active in organization building and politics. There are 300 members in Chicago. In order to build an organizational and financial base the NP is sponsoring house parties. Locally it has been successful both fiscally and in building a grassroots base. Nationwide it has resulted in 1000 people committed to monthly contributions. The NP's political strategy is to support progressive candidates in elections only if they have a concrete chance to "win". This has resulted in a winning ratio of 77 of 110 elections. Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP.

The political entourage included Alderman Michael Chandler, William Delgado, chief of staff for State Rep Miguel del Valle, and spokespersons for State Sen. Alice Palmer, Sonya Sanchez, chief of staff for State Sen. Jesse Garcia, who is running for State Rep in Garcia's District; and Barack Obama, chief of staff for State Sen. Alice Palmer. Obama is running for Palmer's vacant seat.

So Obama signed a contract with the New Party? Verrrry interesting.

Source URL:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/10/08/will-msm-report-obama-membership-socialist-new-party

Links:
[1] http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brooks4-2008sep04,0,5675222.column
[2] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26524024/
[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/us/politics/04party.html?ref=politics
[4] http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/10/web-archives-confirm-barack-obama-was.html
[5] http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26913
[6] http://archive.org/
[7] http://web.archive.org/web/20010306031216/www.newparty.org/up9610.html
[8] http://www.populist.com/11.96.Edit.html
[9] http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng47.html
[10] http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html#anchor792932

THE OBAMA-AYERS CONNECTION

THE OBAMA-AYERS CONNECTION

By DICK MORRIS

Published on TheHill.com
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2447/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3RoZWhpb
GwuY29tLw%3d%3d&x=3dad52ed> on October 7, 2008

Printer-Friendly Version
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2647/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy52b
3RlLmNvbS9tbXBfcHJpbnRlcmZyaWVuZGx5LnBocD9pZD0xMTQ3&x=8210ff79>

In the best tradition of Bill Clinton's famous declaration that the
answer to the question of whether or not he was having an affair with
Monica depended on "what the definition of 'is' is," Barack Obama was
clearly splitting hairs and concealing the truth when he said that
William Ayers was "just a guy who lives in my neighborhood."

The records of the administration of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge
(CAC), released last week by the University of Illinois, show that the
Ayers-Obama connection was, in fact, an intimate collaboration and that
it led to the only executive or administrative experience in Obama's
life.

After Walter Annenberg's foundation offered several hundred million
dollars to American public schools in the mid-'90s, William Ayers
applied for $50 million for Chicago. The purpose of his application was
to secure funds to "raise political consciousness" in Chicago's public
schools. After he won the grant, Ayers's group chose Barack Obama to
distribute the money. Between 1995 and 1999, Obama distributed the $50
million and raised another $60 million from other civic groups to
augment it. In doing so, he was following Ayers's admonition to grant
the funds to "external" organizations, like American Community
Organizations for Reform

Now (ACORN) to pair with schools and conduct programs to radicalize the
students and politicize them.

Can McCain Stop Obama?
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2648/0/?u=aHR0cDovL25ld3MxL
m5ld3NtYXguY29tL2RlbW9jcmF0aWMvP1BST01PX0NPREU9NkNBOC0x&x=c511fad3>
Reading, math and science achievement tests counted for little in the
CAC grants, but the school's success in preaching a radical political
agenda determined how much money they got.

Barack Obama should have run screaming at the sight of William Ayers and
his wife, Bernadette Dohrn. Ayers has admitted bombing the U.S. Capitol
building and the Pentagon, and his wife was sent to prison for failing
to cooperate in solving the robbery of a Brink's armored car in which
two police officers were killed. Far from remorse, Ayers told The New
York Times in September 2001 that he "wished he could have done more."

Ayers only avoided conviction when the evidence against him turned out
to be contained in illegally obtained wiretaps by the FBI. He was, in
fact, guilty as sin.

That Obama should ally himself with Ayers is almost beyond
understanding. The former terrorist had not repented of his views and
the education grants he got were expressly designed to further them.

So let's sum up Obama's Chicago connections. His chief financial
supporter was Tony Rezko, now on his way to federal prison. His
spiritual adviser and mentor was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, of "God damn
America" fame. And the guy who got him his only administrative job and
put him in charge of doling out $50 million is William Ayers, a
terrorist who was a domestic Osama bin Laden in his youth.

Even apart from the details of the Obama/Ayers connection, two key
points emerge:

a) Obama lied and misled the American people in his description of his
relationship with Ayers as casual and arm's-length; and

b) Obama was consciously guided by Ayers's radical philosophy, rooted in
the teachings of leftist Saul Alinksy, in his distribution of CAC grant
funds.

Since Obama is asking us to let him direct education spending by the
federal government and wants us to trust his veracity, these are
difficulties he will have to explain in order to get the votes to win.

Now that Obama is comfortably ahead in the polls, attention will
understandably shift to him. We will want to know what kind of president
he would make. The fact that, within the past 10 years, he participated
in a radical program of political education conceptualized by an
admitted radical terrorist offers no reassurance.

Why did Obama put up with Ayers? Because he got a big job and $50
million of patronage to distribute to his friends and supporters in
Chicago. Why did he hang out with Jeremiah Wright? Because he was new in
town, having grown up in Hawaii and Indonesia and having been educated
at Columbia and Harvard, and needed all the local introductions he could
get to jump-start his political career. Why was he so close to Rezko?

Because he funded Obama's campaigns and helped him buy a house for
$300,000 less than he otherwise would have had to pay.

Not a good recommendation for a president.

<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2120/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3BvbGxzL
m5ld3NtYXguY29tL2hpbGxhcnkvP1BST01PX0NPREU9NjNCRi0x&x=e8ab9d2c> Sarah
Palin's Book Free - Just Pay Shipping
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2649/0/?u=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cub
mV3c21heHN0b3JlLmNvbS9ubV9tYWcvc2FyYWguY2ZtP1BST01PX0NPREU9NkNBOS0xIA%3d
%3d&x=6a2ce84b>

<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2120/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3BvbGxzL
m5ld3NtYXguY29tL2hpbGxhcnkvP1BST01PX0NPREU9NjNCRi0x&x=e8ab9d2c> Will
Obama Steal the Election? John Fund Reveals...
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2650/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3Nob3Aub
mV3c21heC5jb20vc2hvcC9pbmRleC5jZm0%2fcGFnZT1wcm9kdWN0cyZwcm9kdWN0aWQ9NjI
zJlBST01PX0NPREU9NkNBQy0xIA%3d%3d&x=f0ad3523>

Your Tiny Thyroid Linked to Obesity, Heart, and 49 Diseases
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2651/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3czLm5ld
3NtYXguY29tL25ld3NsZXR0ZXJzL2Jyb3duc3RlaW4vdGh5cm9pZDIuY2ZtP1BST01PX0NPR
EU9NkNBRC0x&x=9684e93b>

Doctor Says Cholesterol is Not Your Real Worry
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2652/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3czLm5ld
3NtYXguY29tL2JsYXlsb2NrLzIyYS5jZm0%2fUFJPTU9fQ09ERT02Q0FFLTEg&x=7b574e6c
>

Go to DickMorris.com
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/1957/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5ka
WNrbW9ycmlzLmNvbS8%3d&x=6a0df86c> to read all of Dick's columns!

<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2122/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5tY
XJrc2tvdXNlbi5jb20vdmlzaXRvci5waHA%2fb2ZmZXI9MTA2Njc%3d&x=7b7d62d9>

<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/2123/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3BvbGxzL
m5ld3NtYXguY29tL2dvcDIwMDgvP1BST01PX0NPREU9NDMwNC0x&x=9038d028>
________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________

PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND TELL THEM THEY CAN
GET THESE COLUMNS E-MAILED TO THEM FOR FREE BY SUBSCRIBING AT
WWW.DICKMORRIS.COM
<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/125757/7907599/1957/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5ka
WNrbW9ycmlzLmNvbS8%3d&x=6a0df86c> !

THANK YOU!

***COPYRIGHT EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS 2008. REPRINTS WITH
PERMISSION ONLY***

<http://rs1.netatlantic.com/db/125757/7907599/1.gif>

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

The Debate and.......

Nevin,

Unfortunately, I don't think America will "ever really come out of this morass of self indulgence and abandonment of family traditional values" as a whole. On a micro scale, I think that those who continue to seek after those traditional values, however, will find success and will remain better off than the others and they will be happier than those who continue to indulge. On a macro scale, those who seek traditional values will likely find, create, and enjoy a subculture of perfect capitalism and reap the fruits of such living, and the rest will "enjoy" the contentment of a socialistic society, never improving, never advancing.

Think about this: self-indulgence leads to the need for socialism, self-interest leads to the need for capitalism, and self-improvement leads to the need for pure capitalism.

Karl Marx wrote in Das Kapital the flaws of capitalism - "self-indulgence" as he saw it - would ultimately lead to the destruction of capitalism by the proletariat, leaving socialism in its place. Ayn Rand on the other hand wrote in Atlas Shugged that self-interest is good and drives capitalism. Marx predicted that capitalism would boom and bust, and each time a bust came, the institutions that survived would become larger and larger, until at the final bust capitalism was doomed. He was right. Look at what has happened in the history of capitalism. Every bust seems to be 'unprecedented' or 'record breaking'. Ayn Rand theorized that if capitalism would embrace a self-interest, it would create wealth of self, knowledge, and power the world had never seen before (and so much of it that the need for God would be thwarted, as man would basically become his own "god"). I think capitalism has nearly reached this stage. So who is right, Marx or Rand? I think both have substance as noted above, but their ideas have flaws.

So, who taught about self-improvement and "pure capitalism", you may ask. I would answer that Joseph Smith taught these virtues. The man who improves himself to a point where he can live up to the Lord's teaching "I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves" will ultimately be able to live the Law of Consecration. That law, to my own understanding and analysis, fits very well with many of the base theories of "pure capitalism", which we have been moving toward since the first billionares became philanthropists instead of kings, and since the capitalist has been forced by the working class to attend to their needs more closely.

In short, "...It was the best of times ('pure capitalism'), it was the worst of times ('socialism'), it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to heaven, we were all going direct the other way - in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only."

-Sir Charles Dickens

The next few decades will be interesting to watch unfold.

Tijs Limburg

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Nevin Limburg

I have to first look up the word 'etymological,' Steve.

Other than that, I believe you have hit the nail right on the head, just like a perfect Sakoda kick!

Nevin

Question is: can America ever really come out of this morass of self indulgence and abandonment of family traditional values?

>>> "Steven"

Very simple, really.

McCain is like your dad, telling you how life is and what you need to do to be better and more successful. Who wants to hear that when you're being rebelious, indulgent, irresponsible, and sinful.

Obama is like a charming young lover, seducing you with promises of sugar and spice and everything nice if you give "it" up, telling you that there are no consequences to your self indulgence, passion, or abandonment family and traditional values, personal responsibility, and self reliance.

Oh, and by the way, it's my opinion that we're now paying for the bastard child of Bill Clinton, created by buying votes with subprime mortgages and politically motivated financial legislation, appointments, and favors.

$50 bucks to the first person who finds an etymological connection between the names "Lucifer" and "Obama."

-----Original Message-----
From: Nevin Limburg

Go McCain/Palin! Dawn, I got your message about the debate and the survey. I watched my recorded version and....Hannity & Colmes,and during their show, Colmes of all people was the one who even announced the survey results: McCain 84% Obama 12%. Of Course, those are Fox News viewers (the only true ones), but I agree with them and you. McCain had passion, facts, voting records, and .....his wide range experience, and in this election....experience counts....esp. in working with Congress bi-partisan and in foreign affairs. McCain killed him on those. And on taxes.

Why can't more people see this choice? On the one hand they have a two-year Senator who only has rhetoric and ideas, with nothing to back him up, and on the other hand they have a man who has fought the battles his whole career, including real battles in the military, and 24 years in the Senate, while not a part of the problem there! Do people just want change so much that they would vote for an inexperienced rhetoric-only windbag with socialistic ideas and who is the most liberal member of Congress, after being a country that was once converted to conservatism and saw the results with the largest tax cuts in history and the end of the cold war and the fall of the Soviet Empire? Have we gone that far as a country? (I guess so, since after that period we elected wonderful Bill Womanizer Adulterer Clinton, twice even!)

Nevin

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Terrorists For Obama

This from the Investors Business Daily. Don't vote for Obama, it's too risky. Be sure to forward this on:

From In The Dark - getoutofthedark.blogspot.com

Reprint | Post | Republish | E-Mail | More>

October 7, 2008

Terrorists For Obama

Campaign '08: Sarah takes the gloves off and talks about Obama "palling around with terrorists." The New York Times says their "paths have crossed sporadically." But William Ayers isn't the only terrorist supporting Obama.

This speaks to what I was saying in a previous e-mail

DeLay: McCain's "hard to swallow"

The former House Majority Leader veers off message in an interview with PolitickerCA: "If McCain wins the election, we've got just as much work to do as if Obama won," DeLay said.  "I've known McCain for 23 years, and McCain's hard to swallow."

More: "His stance on global warming, immigration, campaign finance, affirmative action," DeLay said, "it's just a whole list of things that is not going to appeal to conservative Republicans. And if he becomes president, teaming up with the Democrats, we're going to have a lot of work to do to stop them."

This is actually not a bad thing for McCain vis a vis independent voters as it allows his campaign to note that he's taken on and angered members of parties.

DeLay, it should be noted, did say he was planning to vote for McCain and that Obama is "awful."

UPDATE: I got at it two paragraphs above, but should probably have been more explicit: McCain and DeLay clashed over the years and the GOP nominee aggressively went after some of the former leader's aides in the Abramoff probe.   One of the great parts about Politico is that you don't have to lard items with explanations about who is who as there is an expectation about the knowledge of readers.   But I should have fleshed out the McCain-DeLay backstory a bit more.

By Jonathan Martin 12:38 PM

Monday, October 06, 2008

The New Economy

A RESPONSE TO THE ARTICLE 'HOW FANNIE MAE & THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION STARTED THE SUBPRIME MESS'

I don't mean to be the contrarian here, but I guess I will assume that role in this email regardless. I think that this situation is way too broad, and way too complex to pin on one single contributing factor, administration, government, or economy. Many things have changed and gone right or wrong over the past few years. Remember this as well, the economy we were touting 18 months ago was largely, largely supported and fueled by the mortgages, whether prime or subprime, the derivitives of those morgages, whether AAA rated or not, and by the massive amounts of cash and equity generated by people rich and poor who had ownership in a home.

I think we can honeslty agree that 18 months ago, we were not concerned about mortgages, loans, or finances as the economy continued to roll along in bullish strength as more and more outside, international investors poured trillions of dollars we sent overseas back to our country to buy bonds and other investments that were based on the mortgages, and double mortgages, and equity loans we have been taking out for the past 30 years.

Everything was working well.

But ironically, what brought friction into the markets was higher costs of energy, oil especially. As these costs went up, people and businesses had less to spend, especially those who had subprime mortgages. That meant defaults would rise, and inevitably they did. Because commodities went higher, the dollar continued to decline, making the problem continue this cycle of rising energy and food prices, and lower currency value. As currency declined, those countries that sent the money back to buy asset derivitives and bonds lost their incentive to do so, tightening up the credit markets. This caused banks to become more concerned about defaulted loans, because by this point many of them were so over-leveraged. But no one stepped in to stop the train from derailing, and commodities continued to climb in price, and the dollar continued its deline, all almost unnoticed to the general public.

Until it was too late, and here we are fretting about our economy.

I'm not sure I agree with blaming the Clinton Administration, who had at the helm of the Fed headed by a Republican, Alan Greenspan, making these kinds of recommendations on mortgages and derivitives. I think on paper, the idea seems to work to me. It seems to be the same train of thought that Republicans use to denounce raising taxes, or that many corporations use to increase revenue, and thereby profits. Theoretically, since the economy of the US is largely valued by the amount of assets that are held in mortgages, by increasing the amount of mortgages, you increase the wealth of the economy. This is similar to a distribution company increasing their profitable stockpiles (assets) in increasing bulk amounts and decreasing bulk prices in order to generate more profit. Accusations of buying votes aside, the amount of corporate and government profit from increased mortgages likely far outwieghed the amount of taxes that were needed, and thus we had surplus years toward the end of the century and into the beginning, which gave the government the ability to decrease taxes. For all of us who received those increased tax benefits over the past 10 years, lets consider how many trillions of dollars the government has, well, spent on us for lack of a better term.

And now we have the chance to be part of a 700 billion dollar BUYBACK (I hate to call it a bail out because it really isn't one now with the changes congress made). Corporations have used the buyback scheme for centuries to buy their own stock to bouy it up when their stock value falls, on Wall Street this is called "putting stock into treasury". They then sell the stock back later when the price is higher for a profit. Is this not what we are doing now? Buying "bad" stocks in the economy (as I said before, the biggest indicator of economic weath is the value of the mortgages within it, which is a similie to how a corporation's value is largely based on the share value of its outstanding shares), literally putting them into treasury, in hopes that they will regain their desired value at some point in the future.

Again, does that not look exaclty like a corporate buyback?

To continue that line of thought, sometimes corporation's stocks continue to decline in value, even as they buy back stocks to put into treasury. So what do they do with those bad stocks? They keep them in treasury, where the stockholders can vote to dissolve them. Isn't this what the government will do with the mortgages that do not return to value? They've said they would. When a company does this it becomes a stockholder loss and is reported against the earnings of the company, and all become responsible.

Also, we need to remember that the Fed has the responsibility to be our J.P. Morgan of the 20th and 21st century. That is why they were set up. The Fed has to ask the Treasury to print bills to expend. The Treasury has to have Congress's authorization to increase the amount of money. None of this is new, it has been done before. Our economy has increased in value and wealth, so it will take larger amounts of wealth to protect it from collapse.

I have learned since my first class in US History that the cause of the Great Depression was inaction. The thing that perpetuated it was flawed policies of price-fixing and increased taxation, and the thing that ended it was reinvestment, retooling, and construction of all kinds to prepare our country for war.

We are looking down a similar tunnel. We have already had the issue of inaction, do we really want to follow the same pattern, needing a war to end it?

Although I don't think our inaction was as far along as it was in 1929, we cannot let it continue, and I think the government is taking steps that are necessary (not necessarily right, but necessary). We at least did not have the monsterous banking machine as depicted in the Grapes of Wrath devouring peoples assets and forcing them off their land in droves. And as long as the policies don't fail, and the prices remain unfixed, I think we can avoid the things of the past, and move along as we did in the 60s with moderate growth and a slower-but-stable economy, and in a few years be primed for further economic expansion.

I have learned from History how the Great Depression could have been avoided, and now we are seeing that knowledge put to action. Let's not lose faith in the good, smart, and loyal government officials we have elected. They have found ways to triumph over the naysayers before, and they will do it again.

Tijs Limburg

On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Nevin Limburg <Nevin.Limburg@wvc-ut.gov> wrote:

Bruce and Eric, you are BOTH SO RIGHT ON!

NEVIN

"Eric Limburg"
This is sickening! And exactly what the article said almost 10 years ago is
what is in fact happening now. This cancer has now spread beyond Freddie
and Fannie and has infected many financial institutions (not relieving them
of any responsibility mind you). The Clinton administration pushed this and
the Bush administration did nothing to stop it. I blame Clinton and his
"Kronies" more but Bush has had his head so far up Osama Bin Laden's butt
that the important issues here at home get pushed to the side until it is
too late (don't get me wrong, I am glad I don't have terrorists at my
door). Now McCain blows his campaign chances up by suspending his campaign,
going to Washington and supporting a bail out that isn't working. Our
government is truly broken by its leadership. Reminds me of President
Packer's talk on Sunday and the example of the Mormons and current
administration of the time. No one can get their heads screwed on straight
so the almost "perfect" government system founded by God himself fails
because of greed and corruption of men. And all we can do is be
patriotic citizens with the Constitution and Declaration of Independence in
one hand and our "quads" in the other just as those saints of 1849 and hope
that one day the United States and its leaders will become humble enough
again to support and follow the God of this land that created them.
Sometimes all we will have left to hold on to are our faith and
testimonies. This may be one of those time but it is exactly those that
will get us through these times. Notice none of the general
authorities gave a dooms-day speech. They gave us faith building lessons
and strengthened our testimonies through teaching by the Spirit. It still
brings tears to my eyes and sorrow to my heart however to see our government
fail in this way. Maybe we know now how Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and
the early saints felt, even on that day of celebration in July, 1849.

On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Bruce Gundersen

> I'm afraid that unless there is some major episode revolving around
> national security, McCain is going to have a very rough road. People think
> it is all the fault of George Bush and don't want to listen to the facts.
> That is why Obama is polling well, people don't want the facts.
>
> Bruce
>
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Nevin Limburg
>
>> So why in Heaven's name isn't the main stream press (friends of Dick
>> Morris?) reminding the American people about this---that a democrat
>> President liberal started this whole mess we are in? Why? How long do we
>> the American people have to listen and be advised by the liberal main stream
>> media who go soft on the liberals? Does anyone have an answer to this?
>> Will I have to spend the rest of my time on Earth, about 20 years, with
>> this crap?
>>
>> Nevin
>>
>> >>> "Limburg, Garth" <
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Dick Morris Reports [mailto:subscribers@dickmorris.com]
>> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 12:00 PM
>> To: Limburg, Garth
>> Subject: HOW FANNIE MAE & THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION STARTED THE
>> SUBPRIME MESS
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Subscriber,
>>
>> A friend recently sent me this article published in the NY Times on
>> September 30, 1999. Yes, 1999. The column is about how Fannie Mae was
>> going to start easing credit requirements for subprime lenders under
>> pressure from the Clinton Administration. Thought you would like to see
>> it.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Dick
>>
>> FANNIE MAE EASES CREDIT TO AID MORTGAGE LENDING
>>
>> By STEVEN A. HOLMES
>>
>> Published in the New York Times on September 30, 1999.
>>
>> Printer-Friendly Version
>> <http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/121816/7907599/2545/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy52b
>> 3RlLmNvbS9tbXBfcHJpbnRlcmZyaWVuZGx5LnBocD9pZD0xMTM3&x=06cc98ba>
>>
>> In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities
>> and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the
>> credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other
>> lenders.
>>
>> The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15
>> markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage
>> those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is
>> generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae
>> officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.
>>
>> The REAL "skeletons" in Obama's closet!
>> <http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/121816/7907599/1958/0/?u=aHR0cHM6Ly9tZW1iZ
>> XJzLmh1bWFuZXZlbnRzb25saW5lLmNvbS9vcmRlci5waHA%2fb2ZmZXI9MTMwNA%3d%3d&x=
>> 8bd72283>
>>
>> Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been
>> under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand
>> mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure
>> from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
>>
>> In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been
>> pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime
>> borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are
>> not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans
>> from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates --
>> anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional
>> loans.
>>
>>
>> ''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the
>> 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines,
>> Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain
>> too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our
>> underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying
>> significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
>>
>> Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one
>> study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went
>> to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional
>> loan market.
>>
>> In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae
>> is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any
>> difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized
>> corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a
>> government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in
>> the 1980's.
>>
>> ''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another
>> thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident
>> fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the
>> government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up
>> and bailed out the thrift industry.''
>>
>> Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a
>> mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a
>> conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a
>> rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes
>> his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage
>> point premium is dropped.
>>
>> Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not
>> lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks
>> make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of
>> loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more
>> loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.
>>
>> Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to
>> all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add
>> that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and
>> low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than
>> non-Hispanic whites.
>>
>> Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the
>> economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to
>> Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according
>> to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that
>> same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a
>> home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by
>> 46.3 per cent.
>>
>> In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for
>> homes increased by 31.2 per cent.
>>
>> Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag
>> behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in
>> particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.
>>
>> In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that
>> by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio
>> be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44
>> percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.
>>
>> The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is
>> investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated
>> underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the
>> credit-worthiness of credit applicants.
>>
>> The REAL "skeletons" in Obama's closet!
>> <http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/121816/7907599/1958/0/?u=aHR0cHM6Ly9tZW1iZ
>> XJzLmh1bWFuZXZlbnRzb25saW5lLmNvbS9vcmRlci5waHA%2fb2ZmZXI9MTMwNA%3d%3d&x=
>> 8bd72283>
>>
>> Go to DickMorris.com
>> <http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/121816/7907599/1957/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5ka
>> WNrbW9ycmlzLmNvbS8%3d&x=d3b548cd> to read all of Dick's columns!
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND TELL THEM THEY CAN
>> GET THESE COLUMNS E-MAILED TO THEM FOR FREE BY SUBSCRIBING AT
>> www.DICKMORRIS.COM <http://www.dickmorris.com/>
>> <http://rs1.netatlantic.com/t/121816/7907599/1957/0/?u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5ka
>> WNrbW9ycmlzLmNvbS8%3d&x=d3b548cd> !
>>
>> THANK YOU!
>>
>> ***COPYRIGHT EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS 2008. REPRINTS WITH
>> PERMISSION ONLY***
>>
>>
>>
>> <http://rs1.netatlantic.com/db/121816/7907599/1.gif>
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a blank email to
>> leave-121816-7907599.6b6688a91d85c06dc905240157ce1b11@rs1.netatlantic.co
>> m
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Bruce Gundersen
>
>

--
Eric Limburg

-President and THX Certified Technician
DMX, Digital Media eXceleron Inc.
-Home Entertainment- -Business IT- -Networks-
www.dmxed.com

next*mobile broadband, a DMX Inc. company
-Free Wi-Fi Internet Hotspots-
-Digital Signage and Online Advertising-
www.dmxed.com/next

-Sound/Recording Engineer
eXceleron Records and DJ Service
www.eXedmusic.com

(801) 938-5DMX office
(801) 633-2239 cell

Fwd: FW: HOW FANNIE MAE & THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION STARTED THE SUBPRIME MESS

A friend recently sent me this article published in the NY Times on September 30, 1999. Yes, 1999. The column is about how Fannie Mae was going to start easing credit requirements for subprime lenders under pressure from the Clinton Administration. Thought you would like to see it.

Thanks,

Dick

FANNIE MAE EASES CREDIT TO AID MORTGAGE LENDING

Dear Subscriber,

By STEVEN A. HOLMES

Published in the New York Times on September 30, 1999.

Printer-Friendly Version

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.

Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.

In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent.

Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.

In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.

The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

The REAL "skeletons" in Obama's closet!

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND TELL THEM THEY CAN GET THESE COLUMNS E-MAILED TO THEM FOR FREE BY SUBSCRIBING AT WWW.DICKMORRIS.COM!

THANK YOU!

***COPYRIGHT EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS 2008. REPRINTS WITH PERMISSION ONLY***

You are currently subscribed to dick_morris_reports as: garth.limburg@slcgov.com
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to leave-121816-7907599.6b6688a91d85c06dc905240157ce1b11@rs1.netatlantic.com

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

Fwd: MCCAIN NEEDS TO GET HIS CAMPAIGN BACK ON TRACK

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Limburg, Garth
Date: Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 1:14 PM
Subject: RE: MCCAIN NEEDS TO GET HIS CAMPAIGN BACK ON TRACK

You and I agree. Dick Morris said today that McCain accomplished nothing in Washington during the bailout meetings even while trying to postpone the debate so the independents are abandoning him. Even Arizona is up for grabs. McCain had no bailout plan of his own so the house republicans came up with one that protects the tax payers. I stand by what I said yesterday despite what Dick Morris may believe, the winning ticket would have been Romney-McCain or Romney-General Petraeus. Granted Romney would have started low in the national polls but after the first debate I think he would have pulled even and then after debates two and three I believe he would have taken the lead and stayed there. The republican hierarchy and the evangelicals have only themselves to blame for four years of Obama-Biden-Pelosi-Reed. God help us!

From: Starbound Records [mailto:sales@starboundrecords.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 1:02 PM
To: Limburg, Garth
Subject: Re: MCCAIN NEEDS TO GET HIS CAMPAIGN BACK ON TRACK

McCain had a golden opportunity last friday to really shine. He Blew it. He is losing ground in the battleground states, including virginia. Hopefully Palin won't "flubber around" like she did with Catie C, and if she can act intelligent and score some vital points against obama-biden, and have McCain start acting like Ronald Reagan, we may yet win this election. I am mostly disappointed with how McCain is campaigning.

Matt