Saturday, February 28, 2009
Buffett speaks
While Buffett and business partner Charlie Munger can’t predict how stocks will perform in 2009, they’re certain “that the economy will be in shambles throughout 2009 - and, for that matter, probably well beyond,” he wrote.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Where is John Tanner when West Tennessee needs him?
In the past few months approximately 3.2 billion in investment and a couple thousand jobs have been announced in Tennessee. How much money and how many jobs in West Tennessee? A BIG FAT ZERO. Where is John Tanner when we so desperately need him?
I am so sick and tired of being sick and tired
Banks that are never going to make it must file Chapter 7. GM must file Chapter 7. AIG must file Chapter 7.
Obama needs a hard dose of reality such as an approval rating in the 20s to pull his head out of his ass.
He promised the moon thrilling the people. He has yet to deliver. And the economy is failing.
He is a beginner surrounded by beginners. Tim Geithner speaks and the Dow drops. Huh? It's because no one has confidence. Wait until the backlash occurs over the fact he didn't pay income tax. How many times a day does someone tell the IRS "I'm not paying because YOUR BOSS didn't pay his taxes".
You think I'm wrong? Why?
After all:
The people in charge (Democrats and Republicans) have spent approximately 2 trillion in six months. And what has happened? Bush is not without blame; however last I checked he was a normal citizen. He's not here. Who is here is botching the situation. For crying out loud, the actual accountants in the government contradict the statements made by the White House! And Obama decides to pick Biden to head up the stimulus.
Obama made it real obvious when in the middle of a financial crisis he spent 400 million on some crap in some other country that had ZERO to do with the economy and has since gone crazy spending money we don't have.
What if China cuts us off? What then?
What happens when the war on terror we don't speak of explodes in our face? Biden said it best: Obama will be challenged. Probably in the form of a terrorist attack. Luckily, Panetta doesn't listen to Obama.
What happens when the war in our backyard - Mexico - tests us on our own border. Our border which should haven been secured long before 9/11. Kidnappings are up 100% from 2007 to 2008. The #1 kidnapping capital in the world is Mexico City and #2 is Phoenix. Yet DHS head Napolitano said Mexico's violence had not spilled over the border. What?
What happens when North Korea gets it right and drops a missile on California?
What happens when enough of the 91% paying their mortgage on time get fed up with the 9% who shouldn't have been in the home in the first place?
I know I'm rambling but someone needs to read the truth. I just don't see how this situation isn't going to get WAY worse.
You can bet revolution is coming.
Obama needs a hard dose of reality such as an approval rating in the 20s to pull his head out of his ass.
He promised the moon thrilling the people. He has yet to deliver. And the economy is failing.
He is a beginner surrounded by beginners. Tim Geithner speaks and the Dow drops. Huh? It's because no one has confidence. Wait until the backlash occurs over the fact he didn't pay income tax. How many times a day does someone tell the IRS "I'm not paying because YOUR BOSS didn't pay his taxes".
You think I'm wrong? Why?
After all:
The people in charge (Democrats and Republicans) have spent approximately 2 trillion in six months. And what has happened? Bush is not without blame; however last I checked he was a normal citizen. He's not here. Who is here is botching the situation. For crying out loud, the actual accountants in the government contradict the statements made by the White House! And Obama decides to pick Biden to head up the stimulus.
Obama made it real obvious when in the middle of a financial crisis he spent 400 million on some crap in some other country that had ZERO to do with the economy and has since gone crazy spending money we don't have.
What if China cuts us off? What then?
What happens when the war on terror we don't speak of explodes in our face? Biden said it best: Obama will be challenged. Probably in the form of a terrorist attack. Luckily, Panetta doesn't listen to Obama.
What happens when the war in our backyard - Mexico - tests us on our own border. Our border which should haven been secured long before 9/11. Kidnappings are up 100% from 2007 to 2008. The #1 kidnapping capital in the world is Mexico City and #2 is Phoenix. Yet DHS head Napolitano said Mexico's violence had not spilled over the border. What?
What happens when North Korea gets it right and drops a missile on California?
What happens when enough of the 91% paying their mortgage on time get fed up with the 9% who shouldn't have been in the home in the first place?
I know I'm rambling but someone needs to read the truth. I just don't see how this situation isn't going to get WAY worse.
You can bet revolution is coming.
The feds should be more on top of the problems on our border
Article from: The Australian
THE Texas Governor has made an extraordinary call for the militarisation of his state's border with Mexico, asking President Barack Obama for troops as a violent drug war and rising political instability in Mexico threaten to spill over into the Lone Star state.
Governor Rick Perry said he wanted 1000 troops to help guard the Texas-Mexico border and for the Obama administration to start funding stronger security measures amid rising alarm over the Mexican drug cartels and the bloody battle for control of the smuggling of cocaine into the US, the world's largest market for cocaine.
There is also growing concern over Mexico's imploding economy, which could lead to further unrest.
"I don't care if they are military, National Guard or Customs agents," Mr Perry said at a news conference at the border town of El Paso yesterday. "We're very concerned that the federal Government is not funding border security adequately. We must be ready for any contingency."
US Attorney-General Eric Holder acknowledged the Mexican drug cartels were a national security threat, as he announced 52 arrests in a two-year drug-busting operation, which he said was crippling the cartels' distribution network in the US.
The arrests in California, Maryland and Minnesota brought to 755 the total charged in the US under Operation XCellerator, which began in May 2007 and was aimed at Mexico's Sinaloa cartel, authorities said.
"They are a national security threat," Mr Holder said. "They are lucrative. They are violent. And they are operated with stunning planning and precision."
Mexican President Felipe Calderon has sent thousands of troops to crush the gangs and Washington has pledged
$US1.6billion ($2.5 billion) in military equipment and training assistance to Mexico over three years.
"These cartels will be destroyed," Mr Holder said. Yesterday's operation netted more than 12,000kg of cocaine, along with huge quantities of marijuana and methamphetamine and 1.3 million ecstasy pills.
Former US drug czar Barry McCaffrey said the US Government spent $US12 billion on Iraq and $US2 billion on Afghanistan each month, "without taking into account what is happening in Mexico".
Organised crime has claimed more than 10,000 lives in Mexico since 2007, according to human rights groups. In Juarez, the Mexican town bordering El Paso, drug violence has taken almost 1900 lives since last year.
"It is very likely that the levels of violence in Mexico will worsen," Mr McCaffrey said in a recent report. "We in the US must be prepared to provide whatever assistance the Government of Mexico requires to defeat these criminal organisations."
The turf wars in Mexico are becoming increasingly violent as the US tries to break up the networks in the US. Cocaine prices have more than doubled in the US in the past two years as cocaine becomes more scarce, authorities say. Methamphetamine prices also have risen.
Suspects arrested faced charges of racketeering, drug smuggling, money laundering and illegal weapons possession, officials said.
The violence in Mexico has been exacerbated by loose US gun laws, which allow drug-runners to purchase guns in the US and smuggle them back into Mexico.
Mr Holder said the Obama administration would push for the renewal of a US ban on assault rifles, but the timing was uncertain. "I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum," he said.
The ban expired during the Bush administration under heavy pressure from the US gun lobby.
The Sinaloa cartel, based in the northwest Mexican state of the same name, split into two rival groups last year. Joaquin "Shorty" Guzman, Mexico's most wanted man, heads one and his former enforcers, the Beltran Leyva brothers, head the other.
Mr Perry said his presence in El Paso also was meant to send a message that Texas is willing to protect Juarez Mayor Jose Reyes Ferriz, who received death threats from a Mexican drug cartel and moved his family to El Paso.
THE Texas Governor has made an extraordinary call for the militarisation of his state's border with Mexico, asking President Barack Obama for troops as a violent drug war and rising political instability in Mexico threaten to spill over into the Lone Star state.
Governor Rick Perry said he wanted 1000 troops to help guard the Texas-Mexico border and for the Obama administration to start funding stronger security measures amid rising alarm over the Mexican drug cartels and the bloody battle for control of the smuggling of cocaine into the US, the world's largest market for cocaine.
There is also growing concern over Mexico's imploding economy, which could lead to further unrest.
"I don't care if they are military, National Guard or Customs agents," Mr Perry said at a news conference at the border town of El Paso yesterday. "We're very concerned that the federal Government is not funding border security adequately. We must be ready for any contingency."
US Attorney-General Eric Holder acknowledged the Mexican drug cartels were a national security threat, as he announced 52 arrests in a two-year drug-busting operation, which he said was crippling the cartels' distribution network in the US.
The arrests in California, Maryland and Minnesota brought to 755 the total charged in the US under Operation XCellerator, which began in May 2007 and was aimed at Mexico's Sinaloa cartel, authorities said.
"They are a national security threat," Mr Holder said. "They are lucrative. They are violent. And they are operated with stunning planning and precision."
Mexican President Felipe Calderon has sent thousands of troops to crush the gangs and Washington has pledged
$US1.6billion ($2.5 billion) in military equipment and training assistance to Mexico over three years.
"These cartels will be destroyed," Mr Holder said. Yesterday's operation netted more than 12,000kg of cocaine, along with huge quantities of marijuana and methamphetamine and 1.3 million ecstasy pills.
Former US drug czar Barry McCaffrey said the US Government spent $US12 billion on Iraq and $US2 billion on Afghanistan each month, "without taking into account what is happening in Mexico".
Organised crime has claimed more than 10,000 lives in Mexico since 2007, according to human rights groups. In Juarez, the Mexican town bordering El Paso, drug violence has taken almost 1900 lives since last year.
"It is very likely that the levels of violence in Mexico will worsen," Mr McCaffrey said in a recent report. "We in the US must be prepared to provide whatever assistance the Government of Mexico requires to defeat these criminal organisations."
The turf wars in Mexico are becoming increasingly violent as the US tries to break up the networks in the US. Cocaine prices have more than doubled in the US in the past two years as cocaine becomes more scarce, authorities say. Methamphetamine prices also have risen.
Suspects arrested faced charges of racketeering, drug smuggling, money laundering and illegal weapons possession, officials said.
The violence in Mexico has been exacerbated by loose US gun laws, which allow drug-runners to purchase guns in the US and smuggle them back into Mexico.
Mr Holder said the Obama administration would push for the renewal of a US ban on assault rifles, but the timing was uncertain. "I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum," he said.
The ban expired during the Bush administration under heavy pressure from the US gun lobby.
The Sinaloa cartel, based in the northwest Mexican state of the same name, split into two rival groups last year. Joaquin "Shorty" Guzman, Mexico's most wanted man, heads one and his former enforcers, the Beltran Leyva brothers, head the other.
Mr Perry said his presence in El Paso also was meant to send a message that Texas is willing to protect Juarez Mayor Jose Reyes Ferriz, who received death threats from a Mexican drug cartel and moved his family to El Paso.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
From grassfire.org - 1 step closer to eating beans from a can
Last night, President Obama pledged to expand the tentacles of government further into our lives than ever before when he said that government will watch over your children "from the day they are born"!
Here is a sampling of Obama's outrageous socialistic pledges:
...350,000 new government jobs...
...A new government "lending fund that represents the largest
effort ever" to make the government your banker!
...A "housing plan" that further disrupts the market and puts
government in the middle of the foreclosure and refinance process --
the government will decide your payment and maybe even the value
of your home...
...Trillions more in bailout funds for the banking industry that
will further balloon the unprecedented deficit that could approach
$2 trillion this year...
...Onerous regulations that give government more and more control
over the financial markets...
...A new global warming bureaucracy and carbon tax that force us
to adopt inefficient "green" energy...
..."Comprehensive" health care that further burdens our broken
system with more and more health care entitlements..
...A massive expansion of government education that covers children
"from the day they are born" and includes a guarantee that everyone
can afford higher education...
Here is a sampling of Obama's outrageous socialistic pledges:
...350,000 new government jobs...
...A new government "lending fund that represents the largest
effort ever" to make the government your banker!
...A "housing plan" that further disrupts the market and puts
government in the middle of the foreclosure and refinance process --
the government will decide your payment and maybe even the value
of your home...
...Trillions more in bailout funds for the banking industry that
will further balloon the unprecedented deficit that could approach
$2 trillion this year...
...Onerous regulations that give government more and more control
over the financial markets...
...A new global warming bureaucracy and carbon tax that force us
to adopt inefficient "green" energy...
..."Comprehensive" health care that further burdens our broken
system with more and more health care entitlements..
...A massive expansion of government education that covers children
"from the day they are born" and includes a guarantee that everyone
can afford higher education...
From the blog Latina Listas
Example of a rape tree along the U.S- Mexico border.
The violence along the U.S.-Mexico border is unprecedented, to say the least. To think that it will not cross the border into the United States as the Mexican attorney general believes is delusional thinking and disturbing since he refuses to acknowledge the fact that the violence is already here.
There may not be mass executions and beheadings in the United States yet but there is evidence that crimes with a distinct Mexican MO are being committed on this side of the border. Why else would Phoenix be crowned the kidnapping-for-ransom capital of the United States — second only to Mexico City?
And there is further proof that the inhumane level of Mexican violence has infiltrated the U.S. border — rape trees!
This week, it was reported by the Cronkite News Service that the Arizona legislature heard from law enforcement officials that two counties in the state are seeing more and more "rape trees" — "places where Mexican drug cartel members rape female border crossers and hang their clothes."
We can only imagine the trauma and terror that these women, whose only crime was that they wanted to come to work in the United States, must have felt not only during the assault but afterwards as well. Seeing that these rape trees were in Arizona, the probable assumption is that these migrant women were on their way deeper into Arizona on their journey's elsewhere.
Yet, after having been subjected to such horrendous violations, they are forced to suffer silently.
It is gratifying to see that our new Attorney General, Eric Holder, is already aggressively combatting the cartel threat in this country by arresting suspected cartel members and seizing drug shipments but in the midst of all these proactive actions, it is not right for these women who have been raped in such a brutal manner to be afraid to come forward.
While the Justice Department may lodge a host of crimes against those captured — drug smuggling, human trafficking, weapon smuggling, kidnapping, etc — there is one more crime that is needed to be added to the list — rape.
Chances are the women who were raped know their rapists and they probably would come forward if they knew they wouldn't be sent back to their home country.
Though popular opinion always seems to say that these women got what they asked for, the truth is that no woman asks to be raped.
The rape of a woman is more serious than smuggling drugs or weapons and as such needs to be included in any list of charges against a cartel member. The added charge of a rape also elevates the threat to society that person is and may have the potential for a longer and stiffer sentence in both the United States and Mexico or their country of origin.
For that reason, it's time to craft a federal program that gets these women out of the shadows so they can tell their stories, identify their attackers and begin the healing process with the professional counseling that they need.
The long-term psychological damage of a brutal rape is a price no woman should have to pay to support her family — no matter what side of the border she's on.
Our Dear Leader says it best
The answers to our problems … exist in our laboratories and universities, in our fields and our factories, in the imaginations of our entrepreneurs and the pride of the hardest-working people on Earth. Those qualities that have made America the greatest force of progress and prosperity in human history we still possess in ample measure.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Well this was predictable
Police in Baltimore today made what is believed to be the first arrest in a civil disobedience program aimed at supporting homeowners who refuse to vacate their foreclosed homes.
An activist with ACORN — the Association of Community Organization for Reform Now — faces criminal charges after breaking into a home in southeast Baltimore on Thursday to protest the foreclosure crisis sweeping the country.
"This is our house now," ACORN member Louis Beverly reportedly said after cutting a lock with bolt cutters at the home.
Beverly will be charged with fourth-degree burglary, according to Anthony Guglielmi, a spokesman for the Baltimore Police. Attempts to reach his attorney, Justin Brown, were not immediately successful.
Donna Hanks, who owned the home since 2001, lost it in September when she couldn't make her $1,995 mortgage payments. It was not immediately clear whether Hanks re-entered her home last week, but she was not expected to be arrested, Guglielmi said.
Other police departments contacted by FOXNews.com said arrests would be made if an individual is determined to be residing at a foreclosed home illegally.
"If they're trespassing and it's not their property, absolutely, there'd by an arrest," a police source in Boston said. "If they were told to leave the property and they didn't, they'd be charged with disorderly conduct."
Pittsburgh Police Spokeswoman Diane Richard said charges would be filed against any individual found living in a foreclosed home, whether that individual had previously lived at the residence or not.
"If someone is court-ordered to vacate and they do not, it would be trespassing at that point," Richard said. "What exactly would be charged depends on the intensity of the violation. It could go all the way up to burglary, which is a felony."
The flood of foreclosures across the country has already led some law enforcement officials to alter how they handle evictions.
In Wayne County, Michigan, Sheriff Warren Evans suspended all foreclosure sales on Feb. 2 until a federal plan to combat foreclosures can be implemented, spokesman John Roach said. In Butler County, Ohio, Sheriff Richard Jones has reportedly ordered deputies not to evict residents who have no other housing options during the winter months. And in Cook County, Illinois, where a record 4,487 foreclosures occurred last year, Sheriff Thomas Dart appointed an attorney to review all eviction orders in October in order to protect individuals who continued to pay rent after their buildings were seized by banks.
Joe Cox, a community organizer for ACORN in Baltimore, said Monday's arrest was not a surprise.
"We definitely expected some kind of a response," Cox said. "We understand people have to do their jobs and we hope that they understand that we're doing this to highlight the issue."
Cox said he expects homesteading — refusing to vacate a foreclosed property — will become common as blame for the foreclosure crisis increasingly shifts from homeowners to financial corporations.
"This program is saying, 'We are not going,'" Cox said last week. "People say we're breaking the law, but we don't see how putting a person back in an abandoned property is harming anyone."
ACORN launched its "Home Savers" campaign in New York earlier this month and plans to expand the program to at least 22 other cities and three counties nationwide in the coming weeks. Participants like Beverly say they will refuse to move out of foreclosed homes or reclaim properties altogether until a comprehensive federal housing plan takes affect.
Cox said ACORN's homesteading program has attracted homeowners at risk of losing their homes from all socioeconomic backgrounds, from low-income Baltimore city neighborhoods to the more affluent Washington-area suburbs.
"We very much like what President Obama is doing with his foreclosure plan, but there's going to be a lot of people still left out," Cox said. "What we've been calling for nationally is a foreclosure moratorium so people have time to get help from a HUD-certified agency and start negotiating with lenders to get the banks off [their] back."
Attempts to reach Beverly on Monday were unsuccessful. In a Feb. 13 press release announcing the organization's plan to fight foreclosures, Beverly called for "civil disobedience" as a last resort.
"We need foreclosures to stop right now," Beverly said. "We need a moratorium to allow time to try to get loans modified so they can stay in their homes. The banks don't really want your house — it becomes a liability for them. With restructuring of the loan, everyone wins."
At least 500 volunteers have reportedly agreed to work as "home defenders" to employ non-violent tactics to block authorities from evicting homeowners. Other cities targeted by the campaign include Denver, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Cleveland, Minneapolis and Orlando, Fla.
Founded in 1970, ACORN is a community-based, grassroots organization that primarily focuses on — among other social issues — health care, affordable housing and voter registration programs. Its large-scale voter registration drives most recently came under scrutiny during the 2008 presidential race, during which ACORN reportedly gathered more than 1.3 million voter registration forms in 21 states. Approximately 400,000 forms were reportedly rejected for duplications, incomplete forms and fraudulent applications.
President Obama, who was endorsed by ACORN, served as a local counsel for the organization in a 1995 voting rights lawsuit.
An activist with ACORN — the Association of Community Organization for Reform Now — faces criminal charges after breaking into a home in southeast Baltimore on Thursday to protest the foreclosure crisis sweeping the country.
"This is our house now," ACORN member Louis Beverly reportedly said after cutting a lock with bolt cutters at the home.
Beverly will be charged with fourth-degree burglary, according to Anthony Guglielmi, a spokesman for the Baltimore Police. Attempts to reach his attorney, Justin Brown, were not immediately successful.
Donna Hanks, who owned the home since 2001, lost it in September when she couldn't make her $1,995 mortgage payments. It was not immediately clear whether Hanks re-entered her home last week, but she was not expected to be arrested, Guglielmi said.
Other police departments contacted by FOXNews.com said arrests would be made if an individual is determined to be residing at a foreclosed home illegally.
"If they're trespassing and it's not their property, absolutely, there'd by an arrest," a police source in Boston said. "If they were told to leave the property and they didn't, they'd be charged with disorderly conduct."
Pittsburgh Police Spokeswoman Diane Richard said charges would be filed against any individual found living in a foreclosed home, whether that individual had previously lived at the residence or not.
"If someone is court-ordered to vacate and they do not, it would be trespassing at that point," Richard said. "What exactly would be charged depends on the intensity of the violation. It could go all the way up to burglary, which is a felony."
The flood of foreclosures across the country has already led some law enforcement officials to alter how they handle evictions.
In Wayne County, Michigan, Sheriff Warren Evans suspended all foreclosure sales on Feb. 2 until a federal plan to combat foreclosures can be implemented, spokesman John Roach said. In Butler County, Ohio, Sheriff Richard Jones has reportedly ordered deputies not to evict residents who have no other housing options during the winter months. And in Cook County, Illinois, where a record 4,487 foreclosures occurred last year, Sheriff Thomas Dart appointed an attorney to review all eviction orders in October in order to protect individuals who continued to pay rent after their buildings were seized by banks.
Joe Cox, a community organizer for ACORN in Baltimore, said Monday's arrest was not a surprise.
"We definitely expected some kind of a response," Cox said. "We understand people have to do their jobs and we hope that they understand that we're doing this to highlight the issue."
Cox said he expects homesteading — refusing to vacate a foreclosed property — will become common as blame for the foreclosure crisis increasingly shifts from homeowners to financial corporations.
"This program is saying, 'We are not going,'" Cox said last week. "People say we're breaking the law, but we don't see how putting a person back in an abandoned property is harming anyone."
ACORN launched its "Home Savers" campaign in New York earlier this month and plans to expand the program to at least 22 other cities and three counties nationwide in the coming weeks. Participants like Beverly say they will refuse to move out of foreclosed homes or reclaim properties altogether until a comprehensive federal housing plan takes affect.
Cox said ACORN's homesteading program has attracted homeowners at risk of losing their homes from all socioeconomic backgrounds, from low-income Baltimore city neighborhoods to the more affluent Washington-area suburbs.
"We very much like what President Obama is doing with his foreclosure plan, but there's going to be a lot of people still left out," Cox said. "What we've been calling for nationally is a foreclosure moratorium so people have time to get help from a HUD-certified agency and start negotiating with lenders to get the banks off [their] back."
Attempts to reach Beverly on Monday were unsuccessful. In a Feb. 13 press release announcing the organization's plan to fight foreclosures, Beverly called for "civil disobedience" as a last resort.
"We need foreclosures to stop right now," Beverly said. "We need a moratorium to allow time to try to get loans modified so they can stay in their homes. The banks don't really want your house — it becomes a liability for them. With restructuring of the loan, everyone wins."
At least 500 volunteers have reportedly agreed to work as "home defenders" to employ non-violent tactics to block authorities from evicting homeowners. Other cities targeted by the campaign include Denver, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Cleveland, Minneapolis and Orlando, Fla.
Founded in 1970, ACORN is a community-based, grassroots organization that primarily focuses on — among other social issues — health care, affordable housing and voter registration programs. Its large-scale voter registration drives most recently came under scrutiny during the 2008 presidential race, during which ACORN reportedly gathered more than 1.3 million voter registration forms in 21 states. Approximately 400,000 forms were reportedly rejected for duplications, incomplete forms and fraudulent applications.
President Obama, who was endorsed by ACORN, served as a local counsel for the organization in a 1995 voting rights lawsuit.
From Daniel Hernandez - Mexico's drug war - how weird will it get?
Mexico lost its ability to be surprised by its own chaotic nature probably, oh, a few generations ago, but the start of 2009 is seriously pushing the limits on our tolerance for wacky atrocities. So far: Televisa in Monterrey was attacked. Federal authorities detained the police chief of Cancun in connection with the killing of a retired general. El Pozolero coolly admitted to disintegrating at least 300 corpses for his narcos bosses in Tijuana. In Reynosa, a reporter was caught in the cross-fire of a gun battle. And just on Sunday night, the Chihuahua governor's convoy came under attack, resulting in one death.
Things have gotten so surreal, absurd, and downright twisted, that now the cartels themselves are believed to be organizing street protests to "denounce" the military, saying its anti-narco operations in hot zones in the north are unwanted. Imagery of popular street protests against the Mexican military certainly do nothing to help the president's counter-offensive against declarations that his country is a "failed state." If in fact the protests are manufactured by the criminals, the sheer subversion, defiance, and psychic disorder of the whole charade says it all.
The state is doing the best it can to sustain its control. But could something else be happening to Mexico right now? A different, more abstract kind of break-down? If the military hadn't entered the war against the narcos, the Secretary of Economy said in Paris last week, by now we'd have a "narcopresidente." Chilling, but ... by now?
Yet Felipe Calderon insists we march on. On Thursday, he labeled cartel-organized street protests as "cowardice." It was national Military Day. In the next day's paper La Jornada led with Calderon's statements -- and a photograph of schoolchildren gleefully playing with unloaded automatic weapons at the Military Zone in Tijuana.
Things have gotten so surreal, absurd, and downright twisted, that now the cartels themselves are believed to be organizing street protests to "denounce" the military, saying its anti-narco operations in hot zones in the north are unwanted. Imagery of popular street protests against the Mexican military certainly do nothing to help the president's counter-offensive against declarations that his country is a "failed state." If in fact the protests are manufactured by the criminals, the sheer subversion, defiance, and psychic disorder of the whole charade says it all.
The state is doing the best it can to sustain its control. But could something else be happening to Mexico right now? A different, more abstract kind of break-down? If the military hadn't entered the war against the narcos, the Secretary of Economy said in Paris last week, by now we'd have a "narcopresidente." Chilling, but ... by now?
Yet Felipe Calderon insists we march on. On Thursday, he labeled cartel-organized street protests as "cowardice." It was national Military Day. In the next day's paper La Jornada led with Calderon's statements -- and a photograph of schoolchildren gleefully playing with unloaded automatic weapons at the Military Zone in Tijuana.
New travel warning for U.S. Citizens.....
US Government posted a new travel warning for US citizens traveling in Mexico. A lot of concern over the border. The travel warning points out.. "Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez. During some of these incidents, U.S. citizens have been trapped and temporarily prevented from leaving the area. The U.S. Mission in Mexico currently restricts non-essential travel to the state of Durango and all parts of the state of Coahuila south of Mexican Highways 25 and 22 and the Alamos River for U.S. government employees assigned to Mexico. This restriction was implemented in light of the recent increase in assaults, murders, and kidnappings in those two states. The situation in northern Mexico remains fluid; the location and timing of future armed engagements cannot be predicted.
A number of areas along the border are experiencing rapid growth in the rates of many types of crime. Robberies, homicides, petty thefts, and carjackings have all increased over the last year across Mexico generally, with notable spikes in Tijuana and northern Baja California. Ciudad Juarez, Tijuana and Nogales are among the cities which have recently experienced public shootouts during daylight hours in shopping centers and other public venues. Criminals have followed and harassed U.S. citizens traveling in their vehicles in border areas including Nuevo Laredo, Matamoros, and Tijuana.
The situation in Ciudad Juarez is of special concern. Mexican authorities report that more than 1,800 people have been killed in the city since January 2008. Additionally, this city of 1.6 million people experienced more than 17,000 car thefts and 1,650 carjackings in 2008."
A number of areas along the border are experiencing rapid growth in the rates of many types of crime. Robberies, homicides, petty thefts, and carjackings have all increased over the last year across Mexico generally, with notable spikes in Tijuana and northern Baja California. Ciudad Juarez, Tijuana and Nogales are among the cities which have recently experienced public shootouts during daylight hours in shopping centers and other public venues. Criminals have followed and harassed U.S. citizens traveling in their vehicles in border areas including Nuevo Laredo, Matamoros, and Tijuana.
The situation in Ciudad Juarez is of special concern. Mexican authorities report that more than 1,800 people have been killed in the city since January 2008. Additionally, this city of 1.6 million people experienced more than 17,000 car thefts and 1,650 carjackings in 2008."
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Acorn's answer is to move back in!
Refusing to Leave: ACORN Members Step up Fight to Stay in Homes
February 13, 2009
On Feb. 19, ACORN members will launch a new tactic in fighting foreclosures: civil disobedience. Participants in the ACORN Home Savers campaign nationwide will simply refuse to move out of foreclosed homes, or in some cases, will move back in. ACORN homesteaders intend to squat in their homes until a comprehensive, federal solution for people facing foreclosure is put in place.
"What else can you do?" asks Louis Beverly, co-chair of the Baltimore ACORN Foreclosure Fighters. "After you've used all your legal options, your last resort is civil disobedience. We're talking about families who have been in their homes 20 or 30 years. People who are assets in the community, who look out for the elderly, who have community associations, and these are the people being kicked out of the community."
The foreclosure crisis lies at the very heart of the broader economic collapse. The glut of foreclosed properties on the market forced housing prices into a tailspin, and banks loaded up with mortgage-backed securities and complex derivatives, unable to value or sell these assets, stopped lending to each other and the credit markets froze up, triggering the broader economic downturn. A broad and successful economic recovery is impossible without directly addressing the record foreclosure rate that lies at its heart.
"No one understands what to do with the foreclosure situation, though most people are sympathetic because they know someone facing foreclosure," Beverly continued. "We need foreclosures to stop right now. We need a moratorium to allow time to try to get loans modified so they can stay in their homes. And the economic recovery package has to have enough money for them to refinance their homes. The banks don't really want your house – it becomes a liability for them. With restructuring of the loan, everyone wins."
In preparation for the homesteading campaign, ACORN offices around the country are building teams of "Home Savers" – people ready and willing to mobilize on short notice to defend the homesteaders against attempts to evict them.
The Home Savers – concerned community members, allies from religious and labor groups, and in some cases elected officials – will employ nonviolent tactics as necessary to attempt to keep authorities out and families in their homes.
Baltimore ACORN member Donna Hanks remembers the day the sheriff put a lock on her front door – Sept. 29, 2008. "It's been vacant ever since. Today I went by and the lock was gone, the door was wide open – I don't know how that happened." Hanks' brother told her that drug dealers use vacant houses in his neighborhood for drug activity.
"How is this helping anybody?" Hanks asked. "The banks are losing money, and we're left out in the cold. We're hardworking people, not drug dealers, and they're kicking us out. We're looking into squatters' rights, and we're going to see how things go."
After 16 years in the housing industry helping those in need to find housing, Louis Beverly is worried for the families who are being kicked out of their homes. "Many of them will be added to the growing number of homeless people in Baltimore. We are seeing more homeless children in this city than ever before. There are not enough resources to help all these people."
For the 2.3 million families who entered the foreclosure process in 2008 and the millions more predicted to lose their homes over the next few years, the effect of the foreclosure crisis is clear and direct. But the fallout from the foreclosure crisis is more far-reaching than that. Community residents are seeing their property values fall as homes are vacated in their neighborhoods; incidences of crime are up (recently an 11-year-old girl in Orlando was raped in a vacant home); city, county and state governments are seeing their tax bases erode and revenues decline; and the economy remains in tatters.
Homesteading – simply staying in your home – is a tactic ACORN members expect to see increase until an effective solution to the foreclosure crisis is implemented at the national level. Toledo, Ohio-area Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur recently said, "Stay in your homes. If the American people, anybody out there is being foreclosed, don't leave."
Eight cities plan to begin their ACORN Home Savers campaign the week of Feb. 16, and an additional 16 cities will launch their campaigns the week of Feb. 23. Home Defender teams are being built and trained in all areas.
February 13, 2009
On Feb. 19, ACORN members will launch a new tactic in fighting foreclosures: civil disobedience. Participants in the ACORN Home Savers campaign nationwide will simply refuse to move out of foreclosed homes, or in some cases, will move back in. ACORN homesteaders intend to squat in their homes until a comprehensive, federal solution for people facing foreclosure is put in place.
"What else can you do?" asks Louis Beverly, co-chair of the Baltimore ACORN Foreclosure Fighters. "After you've used all your legal options, your last resort is civil disobedience. We're talking about families who have been in their homes 20 or 30 years. People who are assets in the community, who look out for the elderly, who have community associations, and these are the people being kicked out of the community."
The foreclosure crisis lies at the very heart of the broader economic collapse. The glut of foreclosed properties on the market forced housing prices into a tailspin, and banks loaded up with mortgage-backed securities and complex derivatives, unable to value or sell these assets, stopped lending to each other and the credit markets froze up, triggering the broader economic downturn. A broad and successful economic recovery is impossible without directly addressing the record foreclosure rate that lies at its heart.
"No one understands what to do with the foreclosure situation, though most people are sympathetic because they know someone facing foreclosure," Beverly continued. "We need foreclosures to stop right now. We need a moratorium to allow time to try to get loans modified so they can stay in their homes. And the economic recovery package has to have enough money for them to refinance their homes. The banks don't really want your house – it becomes a liability for them. With restructuring of the loan, everyone wins."
In preparation for the homesteading campaign, ACORN offices around the country are building teams of "Home Savers" – people ready and willing to mobilize on short notice to defend the homesteaders against attempts to evict them.
The Home Savers – concerned community members, allies from religious and labor groups, and in some cases elected officials – will employ nonviolent tactics as necessary to attempt to keep authorities out and families in their homes.
Baltimore ACORN member Donna Hanks remembers the day the sheriff put a lock on her front door – Sept. 29, 2008. "It's been vacant ever since. Today I went by and the lock was gone, the door was wide open – I don't know how that happened." Hanks' brother told her that drug dealers use vacant houses in his neighborhood for drug activity.
"How is this helping anybody?" Hanks asked. "The banks are losing money, and we're left out in the cold. We're hardworking people, not drug dealers, and they're kicking us out. We're looking into squatters' rights, and we're going to see how things go."
After 16 years in the housing industry helping those in need to find housing, Louis Beverly is worried for the families who are being kicked out of their homes. "Many of them will be added to the growing number of homeless people in Baltimore. We are seeing more homeless children in this city than ever before. There are not enough resources to help all these people."
For the 2.3 million families who entered the foreclosure process in 2008 and the millions more predicted to lose their homes over the next few years, the effect of the foreclosure crisis is clear and direct. But the fallout from the foreclosure crisis is more far-reaching than that. Community residents are seeing their property values fall as homes are vacated in their neighborhoods; incidences of crime are up (recently an 11-year-old girl in Orlando was raped in a vacant home); city, county and state governments are seeing their tax bases erode and revenues decline; and the economy remains in tatters.
Homesteading – simply staying in your home – is a tactic ACORN members expect to see increase until an effective solution to the foreclosure crisis is implemented at the national level. Toledo, Ohio-area Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur recently said, "Stay in your homes. If the American people, anybody out there is being foreclosed, don't leave."
Eight cities plan to begin their ACORN Home Savers campaign the week of Feb. 16, and an additional 16 cities will launch their campaigns the week of Feb. 23. Home Defender teams are being built and trained in all areas.
Mexico: The Third War
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart
Mexico has pretty much always been a rough-and-tumble place. In recent years, however, the security environment has deteriorated rapidly, and parts of the country have become incredibly violent. It is now common to see military weaponry such as fragmentation grenades and assault rifles used almost daily in attacks.
In fact, just last week we noted two separate strings of grenade attacks directed against police in Durango and Michoacan states. In the Michoacan incident, police in Uruapan and Lazaro Cardenas were targeted by three grenade attacks during a 12-hour period. Then on Feb. 17, a major firefight occurred just across the border from the United States in Reynosa, when Mexican authorities attempted to apprehend several armed men seen riding in a vehicle. The men fled to a nearby residence and engaged the pursuing police with gunfire, hand grenades and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs). After the incident, in which five cartel gunmen were killed and several gunmen, cops, soldiers and civilians were wounded, authorities recovered a 60 mm mortar, five RPG rounds and two fragmentation grenades.
Make no mistake, considering the military weapons now being used in Mexico and the number of deaths involved, the country is in the middle of a war. In fact, there are actually three concurrent wars being waged in Mexico involving the Mexican drug cartels. The first is the battle being waged among the various Mexican drug cartels seeking control over lucrative smuggling corridors, called plazas. One such battleground is Ciudad Juarez, which provides access to the Interstate 10, Interstate 20 and Interstate 25 corridors inside the United States. The second battle is being fought between the various cartels and the Mexican government forces who are seeking to interrupt smuggling operations, curb violence and bring the cartel members to justice.
Then there is a third war being waged in Mexico, though because of its nature it is a bit more subdued. It does not get the same degree of international media attention generated by the running gun battles and grenade and RPG attacks. However, it is no less real, and in many ways it is more dangerous to innocent civilians (as well as foreign tourists and business travelers) than the pitched battles between the cartels and the Mexican government. This third war is the war being waged on the Mexican population by criminals who may or may not be involved with the cartels. Unlike the other battles, where cartel members or government forces are the primary targets and civilians are only killed as collateral damage, on this battlefront, civilians are squarely in the crosshairs.
The Criminal Front
There are many different shapes and sizes of criminal gangs in Mexico. While many of them are in some way related to the drug cartels, others have various types of connections to law enforcement — indeed, some criminal groups are composed of active and retired cops. These various types of criminal gangs target civilians in a number of ways, including, robbery, burglary, carjacking, extortion, fraud and counterfeiting. But of all the crimes committed by these gangs, perhaps the one that creates the most widespread psychological and emotional damage is kidnapping, which also is one of the most underreported crimes. There is no accurate figure for the number of kidnappings that occur in Mexico each year. All of the data regarding kidnapping is based on partial crime statistics and anecdotal accounts and, in the end, can produce only best-guess estimates. Despite this lack of hard data, however, there is little doubt — based even on the low end of these estimates — that Mexico has become the kidnapping capital of the world.
One of the difficult things about studying kidnapping in Mexico is that the crime not only is widespread, affecting almost every corner of the country, but also is executed by a wide range of actors who possess varying levels of professionalism — and very different motives. At one end of the spectrum are the high-end kidnapping gangs that abduct high-net-worth individuals and demand ransoms in the millions of dollars. Such groups employ teams of operatives who carry out specialized tasks such as collecting intelligence, conducting surveillance, snatching the target, negotiating with the victim’s family and establishing and guarding the safe houses.
At the other end of the spectrum are gangs that roam the streets and randomly kidnap targets of opportunity. These gangs are generally less professional than the high-end gangs and often will hold a victim for only a short time. In many instances, these groups hold the victim just long enough to use the victim’s ATM card to drain his or her checking account, or to receive a small ransom of perhaps several hundred or a few thousand dollars from the family. This type of opportunistic kidnapping is often referred to as an “express kidnapping”. Sometimes express kidnapping victims are held in the trunk of a car for the duration of their ordeal, which can sometimes last for days if the victim has a large amount in a checking account and a small daily ATM withdrawal limit. Other times, if an express kidnapping gang discovers it has grabbed a high-value target by accident, the gang will hold the victim longer and demand a much higher ransom. Occasionally, these express kidnapping groups will even “sell” a high-value victim to a more professional kidnapping gang.
Between these extremes there is a wide range of groups that fall somewhere in the middle. These are the groups that might target a bank vice president or branch manager rather than the bank’s CEO, or that might kidnap the owner of a restaurant or other small business rather than a wealthy industrialist. The presence of such a broad spectrum of kidnapping groups ensures that almost no segment of the population is immune from the kidnapping threat. In recent years, the sheer magnitude of the threat in Mexico and the fear it generates has led to a crime called virtual kidnapping. In a virtual kidnapping, the victim is not really kidnapped. Instead, the criminals seek to convince a target’s family that a kidnapping has occurred, and then use threats and psychological pressure to force the family to pay a quick ransom. Although virtual kidnapping has been around for several years, unwitting families continue to fall for the scam, which is a source of easy money. Some virtual kidnappings have even been conducted by criminals using telephones inside prisons.
As noted above, the motives for kidnapping vary. Many of the kidnappings that occur in Mexico are not conducted for ransom. Often the drug cartels will kidnap members of rival gangs or government officials in order to torture and execute them. This torture is conducted to extract information, intimidate rivals and, apparently in some cases, just to have a little fun. The bodies of such victims are frequently found beheaded or otherwise mutilated. Other times, cartel gunmen will kidnap drug dealers who are tardy in payments or who refuse to pay the “tax” required to operate in the cartel’s area of control.
Of course, cartel gunmen do not kidnap only their rivals or cops. As the cartel wars have heated up, and as drug revenues have dropped due to interference from rival cartels or the government, many cartels have resorted to kidnapping for ransom to supplement their cash flow. Perhaps the most widely known group that is engaging in this is the Arellano Felix Organization (AFO), also known as the Tijuana Cartel. The AFO has been reduced to a shadow of its former self, its smuggling operations dramatically impacted by the efforts of the U.S. and Mexican governments, as well as by attacks from other cartels and from an internal power struggle. Because of a steep decrease in smuggling revenues, the group has turned to kidnapping and extortion in order to raise the funds necessary to keep itself alive and to return to prominence as a smuggling organization.
In the Line of Fire
There is very little chance the Mexican government will be able to establish integrity in its law enforcement agencies, or bring law and order to large portions of the country, any time soon. Official corruption and ineptitude are endemic in Mexico, which means that Mexican citizens and visiting foreigners will have to face the threat of kidnapping for the foreseeable future. We believe that for civilians and visiting foreigners, the threat of kidnapping exceeds the threat of being hit by a stray bullet from a cartel firefight. Indeed, things are deteriorating so badly that even professional kidnapping negotiators, once seen as the key to a guaranteed payout, are now being kidnapped themselves. In an even more incredible twist of irony, anti-kidnapping authorities are being abducted and executed.
This environment — and the concerns it has sparked — has provided huge financial opportunities for the private security industry in Mexico. Armored car sales have gone through the roof, as have the number of uniformed guards and executive protection personnel. In fact, the demand for personnel is so acute that security companies are scrambling to find candidates. Such a scramble presents a host of obvious problems, ranging from lack of qualifications to insufficient vetting. In addition to old-fashioned security services, new security-technology companies are also cashing in on the environment of fear, but even high-tech tracking devices can have significant drawbacks and shortcomings.
For many people, armored cars and armed bodyguards can provide a false sense of security, and technology can become a deadly crutch that promotes complacency and actually increases vulnerability. Physical security measures are not enough. The presence of armed bodyguards — or armed guards combined with armored vehicles — does not provide absolute security. This is especially true in Mexico, where large teams of gunmen regularly conduct crimes using military ordnance. Frankly, there are very few executive protection details in the world that have the training and armament to withstand an assault by dozens of attackers armed with assault rifles and RPGs. Private security guards are frequently overwhelmed by Mexican criminals and either killed or forced to flee for their own safety. As we noted in May 2008 after the assassination of Edgar Millan Gomez, acting head of the Mexican Federal Police and the highest-ranking federal cop in Mexico, physical security measures must be supplemented by situational awareness, countersurveillance and protective intelligence.
Criminals look for and exploit vulnerabilities. Their chances for success increase greatly if they are allowed to conduct surveillance at will and are given the opportunity to thoroughly assess the protective security program. We have seen several cases in Mexico in which the criminals even chose to attack despite security measures. In such cases, criminals attack with adequate resources to overcome existing security. For example, if there are protective agents, the attackers will plan to neutralize them first. If there is an armored vehicle, they will find ways to defeat the armor or grab the target when he or she is outside the vehicle. Because of this, criminals must not be allowed to conduct surveillance at will.
Like many crimes, kidnapping is a process. There are certain steps that must be taken to conduct a kidnapping and certain times during the process when those executing it are vulnerable to detection. While these steps may be condensed and accomplished quite quickly in an ad hoc express kidnapping, they are nonetheless followed. In fact, because of the particular steps involved in conducting a kidnapping, the process is not unlike that followed to execute a terrorist attack. The common steps are target selection, planning, deployment, attack, escape and exploitation.
Like the perpetrators of a terrorist attack, those conducting a kidnapping are most vulnerable to detection when they are conducting surveillance — before they are ready to deploy and conduct their attack. As we’ve noted several times in past analyses, one of the secrets of countersurveillance is that most criminals are not very good at conducting surveillance. The primary reason they succeed is that no one is looking for them.
Of course, kidnappers are also very obvious once they launch their attack, pull their weapons and perhaps even begin to shoot. By this time, however, it might very well be too late to escape their attack. They will have selected their attack site and employed the forces they believe they need to complete the operation. While the kidnappers could botch their operation and the target could escape unscathed, it is simply not practical to pin one’s hopes on that possibility. It is clearly better to spot the kidnappers early and avoid their trap before it is sprung and the guns come out.
We have seen many instances of people in Mexico with armed security being kidnapped, and we believe we will likely see more cases of this in the coming months. This trend is due not only to the presence of highly armed and aggressive criminals and the low quality of some security personnel, but also to people placing their trust solely in reactive physical security. Ignoring the very real value of critical, proactive measures such as situational awareness, countersurveillance and protective intelligence can be a fatal mistake.
This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to www.stratfor.com
Mexico has pretty much always been a rough-and-tumble place. In recent years, however, the security environment has deteriorated rapidly, and parts of the country have become incredibly violent. It is now common to see military weaponry such as fragmentation grenades and assault rifles used almost daily in attacks.
In fact, just last week we noted two separate strings of grenade attacks directed against police in Durango and Michoacan states. In the Michoacan incident, police in Uruapan and Lazaro Cardenas were targeted by three grenade attacks during a 12-hour period. Then on Feb. 17, a major firefight occurred just across the border from the United States in Reynosa, when Mexican authorities attempted to apprehend several armed men seen riding in a vehicle. The men fled to a nearby residence and engaged the pursuing police with gunfire, hand grenades and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs). After the incident, in which five cartel gunmen were killed and several gunmen, cops, soldiers and civilians were wounded, authorities recovered a 60 mm mortar, five RPG rounds and two fragmentation grenades.
Make no mistake, considering the military weapons now being used in Mexico and the number of deaths involved, the country is in the middle of a war. In fact, there are actually three concurrent wars being waged in Mexico involving the Mexican drug cartels. The first is the battle being waged among the various Mexican drug cartels seeking control over lucrative smuggling corridors, called plazas. One such battleground is Ciudad Juarez, which provides access to the Interstate 10, Interstate 20 and Interstate 25 corridors inside the United States. The second battle is being fought between the various cartels and the Mexican government forces who are seeking to interrupt smuggling operations, curb violence and bring the cartel members to justice.
Then there is a third war being waged in Mexico, though because of its nature it is a bit more subdued. It does not get the same degree of international media attention generated by the running gun battles and grenade and RPG attacks. However, it is no less real, and in many ways it is more dangerous to innocent civilians (as well as foreign tourists and business travelers) than the pitched battles between the cartels and the Mexican government. This third war is the war being waged on the Mexican population by criminals who may or may not be involved with the cartels. Unlike the other battles, where cartel members or government forces are the primary targets and civilians are only killed as collateral damage, on this battlefront, civilians are squarely in the crosshairs.
The Criminal Front
There are many different shapes and sizes of criminal gangs in Mexico. While many of them are in some way related to the drug cartels, others have various types of connections to law enforcement — indeed, some criminal groups are composed of active and retired cops. These various types of criminal gangs target civilians in a number of ways, including, robbery, burglary, carjacking, extortion, fraud and counterfeiting. But of all the crimes committed by these gangs, perhaps the one that creates the most widespread psychological and emotional damage is kidnapping, which also is one of the most underreported crimes. There is no accurate figure for the number of kidnappings that occur in Mexico each year. All of the data regarding kidnapping is based on partial crime statistics and anecdotal accounts and, in the end, can produce only best-guess estimates. Despite this lack of hard data, however, there is little doubt — based even on the low end of these estimates — that Mexico has become the kidnapping capital of the world.
One of the difficult things about studying kidnapping in Mexico is that the crime not only is widespread, affecting almost every corner of the country, but also is executed by a wide range of actors who possess varying levels of professionalism — and very different motives. At one end of the spectrum are the high-end kidnapping gangs that abduct high-net-worth individuals and demand ransoms in the millions of dollars. Such groups employ teams of operatives who carry out specialized tasks such as collecting intelligence, conducting surveillance, snatching the target, negotiating with the victim’s family and establishing and guarding the safe houses.
At the other end of the spectrum are gangs that roam the streets and randomly kidnap targets of opportunity. These gangs are generally less professional than the high-end gangs and often will hold a victim for only a short time. In many instances, these groups hold the victim just long enough to use the victim’s ATM card to drain his or her checking account, or to receive a small ransom of perhaps several hundred or a few thousand dollars from the family. This type of opportunistic kidnapping is often referred to as an “express kidnapping”. Sometimes express kidnapping victims are held in the trunk of a car for the duration of their ordeal, which can sometimes last for days if the victim has a large amount in a checking account and a small daily ATM withdrawal limit. Other times, if an express kidnapping gang discovers it has grabbed a high-value target by accident, the gang will hold the victim longer and demand a much higher ransom. Occasionally, these express kidnapping groups will even “sell” a high-value victim to a more professional kidnapping gang.
Between these extremes there is a wide range of groups that fall somewhere in the middle. These are the groups that might target a bank vice president or branch manager rather than the bank’s CEO, or that might kidnap the owner of a restaurant or other small business rather than a wealthy industrialist. The presence of such a broad spectrum of kidnapping groups ensures that almost no segment of the population is immune from the kidnapping threat. In recent years, the sheer magnitude of the threat in Mexico and the fear it generates has led to a crime called virtual kidnapping. In a virtual kidnapping, the victim is not really kidnapped. Instead, the criminals seek to convince a target’s family that a kidnapping has occurred, and then use threats and psychological pressure to force the family to pay a quick ransom. Although virtual kidnapping has been around for several years, unwitting families continue to fall for the scam, which is a source of easy money. Some virtual kidnappings have even been conducted by criminals using telephones inside prisons.
As noted above, the motives for kidnapping vary. Many of the kidnappings that occur in Mexico are not conducted for ransom. Often the drug cartels will kidnap members of rival gangs or government officials in order to torture and execute them. This torture is conducted to extract information, intimidate rivals and, apparently in some cases, just to have a little fun. The bodies of such victims are frequently found beheaded or otherwise mutilated. Other times, cartel gunmen will kidnap drug dealers who are tardy in payments or who refuse to pay the “tax” required to operate in the cartel’s area of control.
Of course, cartel gunmen do not kidnap only their rivals or cops. As the cartel wars have heated up, and as drug revenues have dropped due to interference from rival cartels or the government, many cartels have resorted to kidnapping for ransom to supplement their cash flow. Perhaps the most widely known group that is engaging in this is the Arellano Felix Organization (AFO), also known as the Tijuana Cartel. The AFO has been reduced to a shadow of its former self, its smuggling operations dramatically impacted by the efforts of the U.S. and Mexican governments, as well as by attacks from other cartels and from an internal power struggle. Because of a steep decrease in smuggling revenues, the group has turned to kidnapping and extortion in order to raise the funds necessary to keep itself alive and to return to prominence as a smuggling organization.
In the Line of Fire
There is very little chance the Mexican government will be able to establish integrity in its law enforcement agencies, or bring law and order to large portions of the country, any time soon. Official corruption and ineptitude are endemic in Mexico, which means that Mexican citizens and visiting foreigners will have to face the threat of kidnapping for the foreseeable future. We believe that for civilians and visiting foreigners, the threat of kidnapping exceeds the threat of being hit by a stray bullet from a cartel firefight. Indeed, things are deteriorating so badly that even professional kidnapping negotiators, once seen as the key to a guaranteed payout, are now being kidnapped themselves. In an even more incredible twist of irony, anti-kidnapping authorities are being abducted and executed.
This environment — and the concerns it has sparked — has provided huge financial opportunities for the private security industry in Mexico. Armored car sales have gone through the roof, as have the number of uniformed guards and executive protection personnel. In fact, the demand for personnel is so acute that security companies are scrambling to find candidates. Such a scramble presents a host of obvious problems, ranging from lack of qualifications to insufficient vetting. In addition to old-fashioned security services, new security-technology companies are also cashing in on the environment of fear, but even high-tech tracking devices can have significant drawbacks and shortcomings.
For many people, armored cars and armed bodyguards can provide a false sense of security, and technology can become a deadly crutch that promotes complacency and actually increases vulnerability. Physical security measures are not enough. The presence of armed bodyguards — or armed guards combined with armored vehicles — does not provide absolute security. This is especially true in Mexico, where large teams of gunmen regularly conduct crimes using military ordnance. Frankly, there are very few executive protection details in the world that have the training and armament to withstand an assault by dozens of attackers armed with assault rifles and RPGs. Private security guards are frequently overwhelmed by Mexican criminals and either killed or forced to flee for their own safety. As we noted in May 2008 after the assassination of Edgar Millan Gomez, acting head of the Mexican Federal Police and the highest-ranking federal cop in Mexico, physical security measures must be supplemented by situational awareness, countersurveillance and protective intelligence.
Criminals look for and exploit vulnerabilities. Their chances for success increase greatly if they are allowed to conduct surveillance at will and are given the opportunity to thoroughly assess the protective security program. We have seen several cases in Mexico in which the criminals even chose to attack despite security measures. In such cases, criminals attack with adequate resources to overcome existing security. For example, if there are protective agents, the attackers will plan to neutralize them first. If there is an armored vehicle, they will find ways to defeat the armor or grab the target when he or she is outside the vehicle. Because of this, criminals must not be allowed to conduct surveillance at will.
Like many crimes, kidnapping is a process. There are certain steps that must be taken to conduct a kidnapping and certain times during the process when those executing it are vulnerable to detection. While these steps may be condensed and accomplished quite quickly in an ad hoc express kidnapping, they are nonetheless followed. In fact, because of the particular steps involved in conducting a kidnapping, the process is not unlike that followed to execute a terrorist attack. The common steps are target selection, planning, deployment, attack, escape and exploitation.
Like the perpetrators of a terrorist attack, those conducting a kidnapping are most vulnerable to detection when they are conducting surveillance — before they are ready to deploy and conduct their attack. As we’ve noted several times in past analyses, one of the secrets of countersurveillance is that most criminals are not very good at conducting surveillance. The primary reason they succeed is that no one is looking for them.
Of course, kidnappers are also very obvious once they launch their attack, pull their weapons and perhaps even begin to shoot. By this time, however, it might very well be too late to escape their attack. They will have selected their attack site and employed the forces they believe they need to complete the operation. While the kidnappers could botch their operation and the target could escape unscathed, it is simply not practical to pin one’s hopes on that possibility. It is clearly better to spot the kidnappers early and avoid their trap before it is sprung and the guns come out.
We have seen many instances of people in Mexico with armed security being kidnapped, and we believe we will likely see more cases of this in the coming months. This trend is due not only to the presence of highly armed and aggressive criminals and the low quality of some security personnel, but also to people placing their trust solely in reactive physical security. Ignoring the very real value of critical, proactive measures such as situational awareness, countersurveillance and protective intelligence can be a fatal mistake.
This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to www.stratfor.com
Arizona universities caution students about Mexico
The problem has gotten worse since Mexico decided to do something about their crime problem. Unfortunately, the criminals are moving north.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Friday, February 20, 2009
Harvard Professor dogs stimulus package
From Taxing Tennessee:
Washington, DC-- Robert Barro, Professor of Economics at Harvard University, criticizes the recently passed federal stimulus package as a "terrible piece of legislation," and calls for permanent changes to the tax structure to spur economic growth.
"What they call tax reductions in this bill are really transfer payments, particularly redistribution of income from the rich to the poor," says Barro. "I don't think it's really attractive to do something in a temporary fashion. You want to have a more stable tax structure."
Barro also makes recommendations to lawmakers regarding long-term economic incentives to drive economic expansion.
"Abolishing the corporate income tax at the federal level I think would be very positive. It's a very poor form of taxation," says Barro. "I would make permanent the kinds of changes that were in the 2003 tax reform, including the marginal tax rate structure."
Washington, DC-- Robert Barro, Professor of Economics at Harvard University, criticizes the recently passed federal stimulus package as a "terrible piece of legislation," and calls for permanent changes to the tax structure to spur economic growth.
"What they call tax reductions in this bill are really transfer payments, particularly redistribution of income from the rich to the poor," says Barro. "I don't think it's really attractive to do something in a temporary fashion. You want to have a more stable tax structure."
Barro also makes recommendations to lawmakers regarding long-term economic incentives to drive economic expansion.
"Abolishing the corporate income tax at the federal level I think would be very positive. It's a very poor form of taxation," says Barro. "I would make permanent the kinds of changes that were in the 2003 tax reform, including the marginal tax rate structure."
Napolitano: Violence in Mexico Not Yet Spilling Across U.S. Border
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!! Phoenix has the 2nd highest rate of kidnappings in the world. Of course, it has spilled over the border.
Damn right - Resentment Grows Over Paying for Others' Foreclosure Misery
Friday, February 20, 2009
By Gary Gentile
Michelle Fry is a suburban Atlanta homeowner who has seen the value of her modest one-family home drop by more than half in the past year. She now sees a national mortgage bailout plan that appears to reward people who bought more house than they could afford and can't pay their bills. And she has a simple question for President Obama:
"Why am I paying for them?"
"We are very frustrated and scared," said Fry, 32, a newly expectant mother who works as a creative director for a public relations firm. Her husband Sam, 38, is a truck driver for a local printing company. Their combined household income is less than $100,000.
"My husband and I always discuss, 'Why do we try to better ourselves, when it seems if you do nothing, you get all the help in the world?'” she said.
That kind of frustration is being expressed at dinner tables throughout the country. Middle class homeowners who worked hard, played by the rules and paid their mortgage bills and taxes on time are wondering out loud whether the government is interested in helping them, too.
Their frustration is justified, said Richard Green, director of the Lusk Center for Real Estate at the University of Southern California. But the economic risk of letting millions of homeowners default on their mortgages leaves the government with little choice.
"A year ago I would have been appalled at this plan," Green said. "Now I think we have to do something like this. The moral hazard argument is valid, but is trumped by the macroeconomic situation."
Obama's plan, which he announced on Wednesday, would provide $75 billion in incentives to mortgage lenders to refinance homes in danger of foreclosure. Another $200 million would be spent to shore up Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the two large government-controlled entities that back residential mortgages.
The plan would help 8 to 9 million mortgage holders -- a fraction of the approximately 50 million mortgages outstanding, according to Patrick Newport, a housing analyst at IHS Global Insight.
"The 40 million who aren't going to benefit from this will feel some resentment, because they are current on their mortgages and made good decisions," he said.
The president took pains to defend his plan against critics who say it bails out irresponsible buyers who spent more than they could afford.
"The plan I’m announcing focuses on rescuing families who have played by the rules and acted responsibly," Obama said. "It will not rescue the unscrupulous or irresponsible by throwing good taxpayer money after bad loans. And it will not reward folks who bought homes they knew from the beginning they would never be able to afford."
But those assurances are little consolation to Danny and Sara Jovic, who own a condo in Delray Beach, Fla.
They bought their home for $275,000 in April 2006, putting 20 percent down and getting a fixed-rate, 6.25 percent mortgage to cover the rest.
Now their condo is worth only about $175,000, putting the two-income couple among the millions of homeowners whose mortgages are now "underwater" -- meaning they owe the bank more than they can sell their house for.
Their condo association has already whacked them with a one-time fee of $500 to make up for other homeowners who were foreclosed. And their monthly fees have gone up permanently by $100. That's a tough nut to swallow for Jovic, 30, and Sara, 28, whose combined income is between $80,000 and $90,000. They are thinking of starting a family, but they are unsure given the volatile economic times.
"I think the government should help people like me, or the bank should be willing to adjust the loan fairly -- at least make it based on market value now," Jovic said.
Green says the majority of Americans can be forgiven for holding their noses when they look over Obama's plan, but they should accept it nonetheless because it will help those who are in trouble through no fault of their own.
The plan will help millions of people who bought homes they could afford but now are unable to refinance or make payments because they lost their jobs.
"A decent number of these people have been completely responsible and have had the world come crashing down on them,” Green said.
And if the plan succeeds in bolstering sagging home values, that will help everyone, he said.
While the plan may help many who most need assistance, there may be some unforeseen consequences, warned David R. Henderson, a research fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford University.
Bailing out homeowners who would otherwise be forced to find more affordable housing could hurt people who are ready to buy homes at rock-bottom prices, he said.
"All those people who have been saving their money, waiting on the sidelines, are being penalized," Henderson said. "The government is taking away this opportunity."
Philosophical arguments about Obama’s plan do little to comfort Jovic, who wonders if he should continue pouring money into a property that may never fully recover its value.
“Do I continue to invest, or do I cut and run?” he asked.
By Gary Gentile
Michelle Fry is a suburban Atlanta homeowner who has seen the value of her modest one-family home drop by more than half in the past year. She now sees a national mortgage bailout plan that appears to reward people who bought more house than they could afford and can't pay their bills. And she has a simple question for President Obama:
"Why am I paying for them?"
"We are very frustrated and scared," said Fry, 32, a newly expectant mother who works as a creative director for a public relations firm. Her husband Sam, 38, is a truck driver for a local printing company. Their combined household income is less than $100,000.
"My husband and I always discuss, 'Why do we try to better ourselves, when it seems if you do nothing, you get all the help in the world?'” she said.
That kind of frustration is being expressed at dinner tables throughout the country. Middle class homeowners who worked hard, played by the rules and paid their mortgage bills and taxes on time are wondering out loud whether the government is interested in helping them, too.
Their frustration is justified, said Richard Green, director of the Lusk Center for Real Estate at the University of Southern California. But the economic risk of letting millions of homeowners default on their mortgages leaves the government with little choice.
"A year ago I would have been appalled at this plan," Green said. "Now I think we have to do something like this. The moral hazard argument is valid, but is trumped by the macroeconomic situation."
Obama's plan, which he announced on Wednesday, would provide $75 billion in incentives to mortgage lenders to refinance homes in danger of foreclosure. Another $200 million would be spent to shore up Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the two large government-controlled entities that back residential mortgages.
The plan would help 8 to 9 million mortgage holders -- a fraction of the approximately 50 million mortgages outstanding, according to Patrick Newport, a housing analyst at IHS Global Insight.
"The 40 million who aren't going to benefit from this will feel some resentment, because they are current on their mortgages and made good decisions," he said.
The president took pains to defend his plan against critics who say it bails out irresponsible buyers who spent more than they could afford.
"The plan I’m announcing focuses on rescuing families who have played by the rules and acted responsibly," Obama said. "It will not rescue the unscrupulous or irresponsible by throwing good taxpayer money after bad loans. And it will not reward folks who bought homes they knew from the beginning they would never be able to afford."
But those assurances are little consolation to Danny and Sara Jovic, who own a condo in Delray Beach, Fla.
They bought their home for $275,000 in April 2006, putting 20 percent down and getting a fixed-rate, 6.25 percent mortgage to cover the rest.
Now their condo is worth only about $175,000, putting the two-income couple among the millions of homeowners whose mortgages are now "underwater" -- meaning they owe the bank more than they can sell their house for.
Their condo association has already whacked them with a one-time fee of $500 to make up for other homeowners who were foreclosed. And their monthly fees have gone up permanently by $100. That's a tough nut to swallow for Jovic, 30, and Sara, 28, whose combined income is between $80,000 and $90,000. They are thinking of starting a family, but they are unsure given the volatile economic times.
"I think the government should help people like me, or the bank should be willing to adjust the loan fairly -- at least make it based on market value now," Jovic said.
Green says the majority of Americans can be forgiven for holding their noses when they look over Obama's plan, but they should accept it nonetheless because it will help those who are in trouble through no fault of their own.
The plan will help millions of people who bought homes they could afford but now are unable to refinance or make payments because they lost their jobs.
"A decent number of these people have been completely responsible and have had the world come crashing down on them,” Green said.
And if the plan succeeds in bolstering sagging home values, that will help everyone, he said.
While the plan may help many who most need assistance, there may be some unforeseen consequences, warned David R. Henderson, a research fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford University.
Bailing out homeowners who would otherwise be forced to find more affordable housing could hurt people who are ready to buy homes at rock-bottom prices, he said.
"All those people who have been saving their money, waiting on the sidelines, are being penalized," Henderson said. "The government is taking away this opportunity."
Philosophical arguments about Obama’s plan do little to comfort Jovic, who wonders if he should continue pouring money into a property that may never fully recover its value.
“Do I continue to invest, or do I cut and run?” he asked.
Bill Clinton wants Obama to sound more hopeful
The other day Obama used the word crisis 23 times in one speech. The message must be one of hope like before the inauguration. Americans need to be spending money with small businesses. Clinton gets it.
• ABC News -- Bill Clinton says Obama needs to sound more hopeful: Former president Bill Clinton tells Good Morning America, in an interview airing today, that he likes "the fact that (President Obama) didn't come in and give us a bunch of happy talk. I'm glad he shot straight with us. ... (But) I just want the American people to know that he's confident that we are gonna get out of this and he feels good about the long run. ... I like trying to educate the American people about the dimensions and scope of this economic crisis. ... I just would like him to end by saying that he is hopeful and completely convinced we're gonna come through this."
• ABC News -- Bill Clinton says Obama needs to sound more hopeful: Former president Bill Clinton tells Good Morning America, in an interview airing today, that he likes "the fact that (President Obama) didn't come in and give us a bunch of happy talk. I'm glad he shot straight with us. ... (But) I just want the American people to know that he's confident that we are gonna get out of this and he feels good about the long run. ... I like trying to educate the American people about the dimensions and scope of this economic crisis. ... I just would like him to end by saying that he is hopeful and completely convinced we're gonna come through this."
Thursday, February 19, 2009
This is so disturbing - curtailing trade??!!!
From The Heritage Foundation:
Candidate Obama sent some very distressing signals about his commitment to free trade. He told primary voters in Ohio,
"Ten years after NAFTA passed, Senator Clinton said it was good for America. Well, I don’t think NAFTA has been good for America — and I never have." Fortunately for the American economy, President Obama has refined that position. In a recent interview, Obama reassured the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that, "It’s not in anybody’s interest to see that trade diminish." His deputy national security adviser Denis McDonough was even clearer: "This is no time to -- for anybody to give the impression that somehow we are interested in less rather than more trade."
Candidate Obama sent some very distressing signals about his commitment to free trade. He told primary voters in Ohio,
"Ten years after NAFTA passed, Senator Clinton said it was good for America. Well, I don’t think NAFTA has been good for America — and I never have." Fortunately for the American economy, President Obama has refined that position. In a recent interview, Obama reassured the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that, "It’s not in anybody’s interest to see that trade diminish." His deputy national security adviser Denis McDonough was even clearer: "This is no time to -- for anybody to give the impression that somehow we are interested in less rather than more trade."
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Socialism is on its way - by Glenn Beck
Obama’s a Genius — Just Like Those Villains In the Bond Movies
By Glenn Beck
Host, “Glenn Beck“
Hello America,
As some of you may remember, I was less than a fan of Barack Obama during the primaries and general election. If I don’t make it onto his Christmas card list, I guess I’ll have to learn how to live with that. However, after he was elected fair and square under the system that I hold sacred, I accepted the fact that he was indeed my president. And when listeners and viewers contacted me and said, “No way”…they didn’t vote for him …he wasn’t their president, I was put in the surreal position of defending Barack Obama. (It’s not exactly like I voted for the guy either.) I said to them then what I say to you now–Barack Obama is our president, and that’s a fact that you have to live with if you truly believe in the Constitution and the America that grew from it. But here’s the thing: Yeah, he’s got the job and he’s setting the agenda. But everybody’s got a boss, and when it comes to the guy in the Oval Office…that boss is you and me. “We the people” get to give him a “performance review” each and every day, and in 4 years we might just get to fire him. But that’s then and this is now.
Say what you will–this guy’s either a moron or a genius. After watching him bob and weave through the longest campaign season in our nation’s history, it’s clear that this guy knows all the right moves when it comes to imaging a message (or lack thereof). He might be new, but he’s obviously no dummy. So I guess that rules out “moron”– leaving us with “genius.” But not a Reagan-style genius in tune with the hearts and mind of a nation. No, I’m thinking Obama’s more of a Bond villain-type genius.
While Obama tries to distract, divide and conquer, now is the time for us to unite and fight back. If our history has proven one thing, it’s that the voice of the American people cannot and will not be silenced.
The thing I always love about Bond villains is that their schemes are so layered –so many moving parts and gadgets that it’s hard to grasp the whole thing at once. It’s a variation on an old magician’s trick–misdirection. Keep the audience looking at the right hand so they don’t see what the left hand’s doing.
If you have them looking at the right hand, the leggy assistant, the smoke and mirrors and the flashing lights–they might just forget you even have a left hand. In the end, your senses are overloaded and you barely know what you saw or didn’t see. That’s Vegas…that’s David Copperfield…that’s entertainment. But when you apply the same tactics to Washington and running the country…that’s terrifying.
Look at what President Obama has done in just a few weeks: He’s started to close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, dropped the charges against the guy who bombed the USS Cole, just about moved the Census into the White House, and hooked us up with the #2 attorney general who stood up for child pornographers. Then…there’s TARP 2.0 and all the other clowns in Washington with scandals like Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle, Charlie Rangel and Chris Dodd. All that’s missing is waving a magic wand and making the Constitution disappear (and it looks like that could be coming)!
Here’s what’s happening–by giving us so many things to “look” at, we can’t be focused on any one long enough to see the big picture. Don’t you feel overwhelmed? Of course you do–so do I, and I pay a bunch of people to help me keep track of it all. The president wants us to feel overwhelmed–it’s intentional, and it’s working. But I say, not any more.
While Obama tries to distract, divide and conquer, now is the time for us to unite and fight back. If our history has proven one thing, it’s that the voice of the American people cannot and will not be silenced. I know you’re just trying to hold on to your home, your job and your family. These are tough times. Obama knows that. Everyone says call your Representative, and you do, and then they say call again. It gets tiring and frustrating –busy signals and talking to assistants and “the process.” Obama knows that too. You can’t let him tire you out or take your eye off his left hand!
Take this giant spending bill: do you really think that Obama went to Nancy Pelosi and her progressive pals and told them to come up with the best bill possible? Then Nancy just loaded it up with every piece of pork they could come up with, all on her own accord? Obama just thought he could get away with overseas abortions, fluorescent light bulbs and polar bear habitats? Like we wouldn’t notice? Or…did he know it would distract all of us from what this bill is really about: the foundation of universal health care, the end of much of bipartisan welfare reform, and much more. What else is tucked in there? If we get hypnotized by the flashing lights or distracted by the dove in that right hand, we’ll never know all that the left hand is doing. That’s a trick we can’t afford to fall for–not now, not ever.
I’ve looked up the sleeve and the left hand is working full-time to push forward a socialist agenda. It isn’t an illusion, it’s really happening. Remember, this is all in just the first few weeks. The things that conservatives were being ridiculed for 4 months ago, are on the cover of Newsweek today. And here’s the thing about magic tricks–once you know how they’re done, they’re not that fun to watch anymore. Sometimes you even feel stupid for not noticing what was happening right before your very eyes. Well, now we see what President Obama has under that top hat, and it’s no rabbit. Show’s over folks. Better you found out now before you ended up getting sawed in half.
By Glenn Beck
Host, “Glenn Beck“
Hello America,
As some of you may remember, I was less than a fan of Barack Obama during the primaries and general election. If I don’t make it onto his Christmas card list, I guess I’ll have to learn how to live with that. However, after he was elected fair and square under the system that I hold sacred, I accepted the fact that he was indeed my president. And when listeners and viewers contacted me and said, “No way”…they didn’t vote for him …he wasn’t their president, I was put in the surreal position of defending Barack Obama. (It’s not exactly like I voted for the guy either.) I said to them then what I say to you now–Barack Obama is our president, and that’s a fact that you have to live with if you truly believe in the Constitution and the America that grew from it. But here’s the thing: Yeah, he’s got the job and he’s setting the agenda. But everybody’s got a boss, and when it comes to the guy in the Oval Office…that boss is you and me. “We the people” get to give him a “performance review” each and every day, and in 4 years we might just get to fire him. But that’s then and this is now.
Say what you will–this guy’s either a moron or a genius. After watching him bob and weave through the longest campaign season in our nation’s history, it’s clear that this guy knows all the right moves when it comes to imaging a message (or lack thereof). He might be new, but he’s obviously no dummy. So I guess that rules out “moron”– leaving us with “genius.” But not a Reagan-style genius in tune with the hearts and mind of a nation. No, I’m thinking Obama’s more of a Bond villain-type genius.
While Obama tries to distract, divide and conquer, now is the time for us to unite and fight back. If our history has proven one thing, it’s that the voice of the American people cannot and will not be silenced.
The thing I always love about Bond villains is that their schemes are so layered –so many moving parts and gadgets that it’s hard to grasp the whole thing at once. It’s a variation on an old magician’s trick–misdirection. Keep the audience looking at the right hand so they don’t see what the left hand’s doing.
If you have them looking at the right hand, the leggy assistant, the smoke and mirrors and the flashing lights–they might just forget you even have a left hand. In the end, your senses are overloaded and you barely know what you saw or didn’t see. That’s Vegas…that’s David Copperfield…that’s entertainment. But when you apply the same tactics to Washington and running the country…that’s terrifying.
Look at what President Obama has done in just a few weeks: He’s started to close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, dropped the charges against the guy who bombed the USS Cole, just about moved the Census into the White House, and hooked us up with the #2 attorney general who stood up for child pornographers. Then…there’s TARP 2.0 and all the other clowns in Washington with scandals like Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle, Charlie Rangel and Chris Dodd. All that’s missing is waving a magic wand and making the Constitution disappear (and it looks like that could be coming)!
Here’s what’s happening–by giving us so many things to “look” at, we can’t be focused on any one long enough to see the big picture. Don’t you feel overwhelmed? Of course you do–so do I, and I pay a bunch of people to help me keep track of it all. The president wants us to feel overwhelmed–it’s intentional, and it’s working. But I say, not any more.
While Obama tries to distract, divide and conquer, now is the time for us to unite and fight back. If our history has proven one thing, it’s that the voice of the American people cannot and will not be silenced. I know you’re just trying to hold on to your home, your job and your family. These are tough times. Obama knows that. Everyone says call your Representative, and you do, and then they say call again. It gets tiring and frustrating –busy signals and talking to assistants and “the process.” Obama knows that too. You can’t let him tire you out or take your eye off his left hand!
Take this giant spending bill: do you really think that Obama went to Nancy Pelosi and her progressive pals and told them to come up with the best bill possible? Then Nancy just loaded it up with every piece of pork they could come up with, all on her own accord? Obama just thought he could get away with overseas abortions, fluorescent light bulbs and polar bear habitats? Like we wouldn’t notice? Or…did he know it would distract all of us from what this bill is really about: the foundation of universal health care, the end of much of bipartisan welfare reform, and much more. What else is tucked in there? If we get hypnotized by the flashing lights or distracted by the dove in that right hand, we’ll never know all that the left hand is doing. That’s a trick we can’t afford to fall for–not now, not ever.
I’ve looked up the sleeve and the left hand is working full-time to push forward a socialist agenda. It isn’t an illusion, it’s really happening. Remember, this is all in just the first few weeks. The things that conservatives were being ridiculed for 4 months ago, are on the cover of Newsweek today. And here’s the thing about magic tricks–once you know how they’re done, they’re not that fun to watch anymore. Sometimes you even feel stupid for not noticing what was happening right before your very eyes. Well, now we see what President Obama has under that top hat, and it’s no rabbit. Show’s over folks. Better you found out now before you ended up getting sawed in half.
The era of entitlement thanks to our Great Leader
From Michelle Malkin's blog - images from Arizona:
From Michelle Malkin's blog - images from Arizona:
From Michelle Malkin's blog - images from Arizona:
Latinos represent 40% of federal prisoners
More examples of our ever-increasing immigration problem:
Latino convicts now represent the largest ethnic population in the federal prison system, accounting for 40 percent of those convicted of federal crimes, according to a study released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan research organization.
Latinos made up only 13 percent of the United States adult population in 2007, but they accounted for one third of all federal prison inmates that year, a result the study attributed to the sharp rise in illegal immigration and tougher enforcement of immigration laws.
Nearly half of all Latino offenders, or about 48 percent, were convicted of immigration crimes, while drug offenses were the second-most-prevalent charge, according to the report.
As the annual number of federal offenders more than doubled from 1991 to 2007, the number of Latino offenders sentenced in a given year nearly quadrupled, to 29,281 from 7,924.
Of Latino federal offenders, 72 percent are not United States citizens and most were sentenced in courts from one of the four states that border Mexico. Federal prisoners who are illegal immigrants are usually deported to their home countries after serving their sentences.
“The immigration system has essentially become criminalized at a huge cost to the criminal justice system, to courts, to judges, to prisons and prosecutors,” said Lucas Guttentag, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. “And the government has diverted the resources of the criminal justice system from violent crimes, financial skullduggery and other areas that have been the traditional area of the Justice Department.”
Last month, The New York Times reported that federal immigration prosecutions had increased over the last five years, doubling in the last fiscal year to more than 70,000 cases. Meanwhile, other categories of federal prosecutions, including gun trafficking, public corruption, organized crime and white-collar crime, declined over the same period.
The federal justice system accounts for 200,000, or 8.6 percent, of the 2.3 million inmates in federal and state prisons and city and county jails. Nineteen percent of state prisoners and 16 percent of jail inmates were Latinos, the Pew study found. African-Americans, who make up about 12 percent of the national population, make up 39 percent of state prisoners and jail inmates.
Deborah Williams, an assistant federal defender in Phoenix, said that the large number of Latinos in the federal system, particularly those who are not citizens and have limited English proficiency, had sharply changed federal prison culture.
“I have Anglo and Native American clients who tell me about being the only non-Spanish speaker in their pod,” Ms. Williams said. “Ten years ago, it just wasn’t that way. Everything is changing in there, including the language, the television shows they watch, and a lot of times the guards don’t speak the language. How do you safely guard people who may not understand your orders?”
A spokeswoman for the federal Bureau of Prisons, Tracy Billingsley, declined immediate comment on the Pew report.
Mark Hugo Lopez, a co-author of the study, which relied on United States Sentencing Commission statistics, said, “It’s hard to understand whether we’re seeing a policy change or just a growth in the total number of immigrants coming to this country.”
The number of illegal immigrants in the country increased to 11.9 million last year, from 3.9 million in 1992.
Under federal programs like Operation Gatekeeper, which hired thousands of immigration enforcement officials along the Mexican border, and Operation Streamline, which instituted a “zero tolerance policy” for illegal border crossings in the same region, immigration crimes have skyrocketed.
The large number of immigration crimes and low-level drug offenses account for the relatively light sentences that Latinos typically receive — about 46 months, compared with 62 months for white inmates and 91 months for African-American prisoners, according to the study.
The hearing for José Sánchez on Wednesday in Los Angeles was typical. Having been convicted of illegal re-entry, Mr. Sánchez, 37, who has prior convictions for assault and drug possession, pleaded guilty in exchange for a sentence of 46 months.
The hearing took less than 10 minutes. Mr. Sánchez, who has a wife and three children in the area, asked to be assigned to a prison nearby. He is likely to be deported to Mexico after serving his sentence.
Latino convicts now represent the largest ethnic population in the federal prison system, accounting for 40 percent of those convicted of federal crimes, according to a study released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan research organization.
Latinos made up only 13 percent of the United States adult population in 2007, but they accounted for one third of all federal prison inmates that year, a result the study attributed to the sharp rise in illegal immigration and tougher enforcement of immigration laws.
Nearly half of all Latino offenders, or about 48 percent, were convicted of immigration crimes, while drug offenses were the second-most-prevalent charge, according to the report.
As the annual number of federal offenders more than doubled from 1991 to 2007, the number of Latino offenders sentenced in a given year nearly quadrupled, to 29,281 from 7,924.
Of Latino federal offenders, 72 percent are not United States citizens and most were sentenced in courts from one of the four states that border Mexico. Federal prisoners who are illegal immigrants are usually deported to their home countries after serving their sentences.
“The immigration system has essentially become criminalized at a huge cost to the criminal justice system, to courts, to judges, to prisons and prosecutors,” said Lucas Guttentag, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. “And the government has diverted the resources of the criminal justice system from violent crimes, financial skullduggery and other areas that have been the traditional area of the Justice Department.”
Last month, The New York Times reported that federal immigration prosecutions had increased over the last five years, doubling in the last fiscal year to more than 70,000 cases. Meanwhile, other categories of federal prosecutions, including gun trafficking, public corruption, organized crime and white-collar crime, declined over the same period.
The federal justice system accounts for 200,000, or 8.6 percent, of the 2.3 million inmates in federal and state prisons and city and county jails. Nineteen percent of state prisoners and 16 percent of jail inmates were Latinos, the Pew study found. African-Americans, who make up about 12 percent of the national population, make up 39 percent of state prisoners and jail inmates.
Deborah Williams, an assistant federal defender in Phoenix, said that the large number of Latinos in the federal system, particularly those who are not citizens and have limited English proficiency, had sharply changed federal prison culture.
“I have Anglo and Native American clients who tell me about being the only non-Spanish speaker in their pod,” Ms. Williams said. “Ten years ago, it just wasn’t that way. Everything is changing in there, including the language, the television shows they watch, and a lot of times the guards don’t speak the language. How do you safely guard people who may not understand your orders?”
A spokeswoman for the federal Bureau of Prisons, Tracy Billingsley, declined immediate comment on the Pew report.
Mark Hugo Lopez, a co-author of the study, which relied on United States Sentencing Commission statistics, said, “It’s hard to understand whether we’re seeing a policy change or just a growth in the total number of immigrants coming to this country.”
The number of illegal immigrants in the country increased to 11.9 million last year, from 3.9 million in 1992.
Under federal programs like Operation Gatekeeper, which hired thousands of immigration enforcement officials along the Mexican border, and Operation Streamline, which instituted a “zero tolerance policy” for illegal border crossings in the same region, immigration crimes have skyrocketed.
The large number of immigration crimes and low-level drug offenses account for the relatively light sentences that Latinos typically receive — about 46 months, compared with 62 months for white inmates and 91 months for African-American prisoners, according to the study.
The hearing for José Sánchez on Wednesday in Los Angeles was typical. Having been convicted of illegal re-entry, Mr. Sánchez, 37, who has prior convictions for assault and drug possession, pleaded guilty in exchange for a sentence of 46 months.
The hearing took less than 10 minutes. Mr. Sánchez, who has a wife and three children in the area, asked to be assigned to a prison nearby. He is likely to be deported to Mexico after serving his sentence.
After Passing $787B Stimulus Bill, Congress Still Has $410B Spending Bill on Agenda
Of course, it never ends.
Obama plan seeks to save millions from foreclosure
Let me get this straight - everyone who pays their mortgage on time is going to help those who don't.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Frickin Ridiculous
So the government meddles in the analog to digital transition and the industry takes it on themselves to go ahead with the work already planned. Good for them.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Dodd just doesn't get it - if they control any pay, they can control all of it
"I just find it incredible that people are calling up and bellowing about this. We're in the deepest economic crisis in the lifetime of any living American and they're worried about their pay."
Sen. Christoper Dodd, D-Conn.
Sen. Christoper Dodd, D-Conn.
Obamateur Hour
By Mark Steyn
Few pieces of political “wisdom” are more tediously recycled than a well-retailed bon mot of British prime minister Harold Macmillan. Asked what he feared most in the months ahead, he gave an amused Edwardian response: “Events, dear boy, events.” In other words, you can plan all you want but next month, next year, some guy off the radar screen will launch a war, or there’ll be an earthquake, or something. Governments get thrown off course by “events.”
It suggests a perverse kind of genius that the 44th president did not wait for a single “event” to throw him off course. Instead he threw himself off: “Is Obama tanking already?” (Congressional Quarterly); “Has Barack Obama’s presidency already failed?” (the Financial Times). Whether or not it’s “already” failed or tanked, the monthly magazines still gazing out from their newsstands with their glossy inaugural covers of a smiling Barack and Michelle waltzing on the audacity of hope seem like musty historical artifacts from a lost age. The ship didn’t need to hit an iceberg; it stalled halfway down the slipway. This is still the phase before “events” come into play, when an incoming president has nothing to get in the way of his judgment and executive competence. President Obama chose to nominate Tim “Indispensable” Geithner and Tom “Home, James!” Daschle, men whose enthusiasm for the size of the federal budget is in inverse proportion to their urge to contribute to it. He chose to nominate as commerce secretary first the scandal-afflicted Bill Richardson and then the freakishly scandal-free Judd Gregg, and wound up losing both.
To be sure, the present state of the economy is an “event,” and has blown many governments around the world off course. But again: The hideous drooling blob of toxic pustules dignified as “stimulus” is something the incoming Obama had months to prepare for, with oodles of bipartisan goodwill and fawning press coverage to waft him along. Instead he chose to outsource it to Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, and the rest of the congressional pork barons. So that too is not an “event” but merely, like his cabinet picks, a matter of judgment and executive competence.
Not to matter. When the going gets tough, the tough go campaigning. So, almost as if he were still running for office rather than actually running an office, the president arranges a photo-op or a town-hall meeting, where, for the moment, the hopeychangey shtick still plays. “I have an urgent need,” a freeborn citizen of the republic (I use the term loosely) beseeched the president in Fort Myers this week. “We need a home, our own kitchen, our own bathroom.”
As Michelle Malkin commented of the urgent needer: “If she had [had] more time, she probably would have remembered to ask Obama to fill up her gas tank, too.” Obama took her name — Henrietta Hughes — and ordered his staff to meet with her. Hopefully, he won’t insult her by dispatching some no-name deputy assistant associate secretary of whatever instead of flying in one of the bigtime tax-avoiding cabinet honchos to nationalize a Florida bank and convert one of its branches into a desirable family residence, with a swing set hanging where the drive-thru ATM used to be.
Still, the audience loved it. “Yes!” they yelped, and “Amen!” — and even “Gracious God, thank you so much!” In the words of Bob Hope: “Leave your name with the girl, and we may get to you for some crowd scenes.” Ah, but eventually the hosannas fade, and the community-organizer-in-chief has to return to Washington to attend to the drearier chores of being president. The “buy American” provisions in the “stimulus” will invite certain retaliation around the world, wrote Jagdish Bhagwati, the Columbia economics prof, in the New York Times. This is presumably the same Jagdish Bhagwati who reassured a Toronto audience last year that he was endorsing Obama despite the senator’s anti-NAFTA, anti-free-trade rhetoric because he didn’t think Obama really believed it. Today it’s even less clear what, if anything, Obama believes — and, even more critically, whether he has the wit or authority to impose those beliefs on a Congress whose operating procedure for the new era seems to be business as usual with three extra zeroes on the end.
Someday soon this inaugural Obamateur Hour (as one of my correspondents, John Gross, calls it) will end and the “events” phase will begin. Back last spring, some gloomy reflections of mine on multiculturalism prompted a reader to advise me to lighten up: “We’re rich enough that we can afford to be stupid.” A mere nine months later, the first part of that equation no longer seems quite so obvious. The market value of the U.S. banking sector is worth barely a quarter of what it was two years ago — from just north of $1.4 trillion in February 2007 to under $400 billion at the beginning of this month, and that due only to the “bailout.” The so-called Wall Street fat cats are, in fact, emaciated cadavers in the late stages of that feline version of HIV.
On the other hand, U.S. mortgage debt has more than quadrupled since 1990, from $2.5 trillion to over $10 trillion. On the other other hand — you may be running out of fingers by now — the IMF has increased its calculation of potential losses on U.S.-originated credit assets from $1.4 trillion last October to $2.2 trillion today, and that’s at the lowball end of estimates (others figure closer to $4 trillion). If you stick the community-organizer-in-chief in a room with Henrietta Hughes, he can play Bob Barker and tell her to “come on down!” But it’s not obvious that that technique will be quite so effective back in the Oval Office, poring over the smoldering ledgers.
2008: We’re rich enough that we can afford to be stupid.
2009: We’re not so rich so let’s be even more stupid.
The Obama narrative as packaged by the American media (another all-but-bankrupt industry, not coincidentally) is very appealing. Wouldn’t it be so much nicer if a benign paternalist sovereign could take care of all the beastly grown-up stuff like mortgages and health care, like he’s gonna do for Henrietta Hughes, while simultaneously blowing gazillions on “green” initiatives and other touchyfeely things?
America has a choice: It can reacquaint itself with socioeconomic reality, or it can buckle its mandatory seatbelt for the same decline most of the rest of the West embraced a couple of generations back. In 1897, troops from the greatest empire the world had ever seen marched down London’s mall for Queen Victoria’s diamond jubilee. Seventy years later, Britain had government health care, a government-owned car industry, massive government housing, and it was a shriveled high-unemployment socialist basket-case living off the dwindling cultural capital of its glorious past. In 1945, America emerged from the Second World War as the preeminent power on earth. Seventy years later . . .
Let’s not go there.
— Mark Steyn, a National Review columnist, is author of America Alone.
© 2009 Mark Steyn
Few pieces of political “wisdom” are more tediously recycled than a well-retailed bon mot of British prime minister Harold Macmillan. Asked what he feared most in the months ahead, he gave an amused Edwardian response: “Events, dear boy, events.” In other words, you can plan all you want but next month, next year, some guy off the radar screen will launch a war, or there’ll be an earthquake, or something. Governments get thrown off course by “events.”
It suggests a perverse kind of genius that the 44th president did not wait for a single “event” to throw him off course. Instead he threw himself off: “Is Obama tanking already?” (Congressional Quarterly); “Has Barack Obama’s presidency already failed?” (the Financial Times). Whether or not it’s “already” failed or tanked, the monthly magazines still gazing out from their newsstands with their glossy inaugural covers of a smiling Barack and Michelle waltzing on the audacity of hope seem like musty historical artifacts from a lost age. The ship didn’t need to hit an iceberg; it stalled halfway down the slipway. This is still the phase before “events” come into play, when an incoming president has nothing to get in the way of his judgment and executive competence. President Obama chose to nominate Tim “Indispensable” Geithner and Tom “Home, James!” Daschle, men whose enthusiasm for the size of the federal budget is in inverse proportion to their urge to contribute to it. He chose to nominate as commerce secretary first the scandal-afflicted Bill Richardson and then the freakishly scandal-free Judd Gregg, and wound up losing both.
To be sure, the present state of the economy is an “event,” and has blown many governments around the world off course. But again: The hideous drooling blob of toxic pustules dignified as “stimulus” is something the incoming Obama had months to prepare for, with oodles of bipartisan goodwill and fawning press coverage to waft him along. Instead he chose to outsource it to Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, and the rest of the congressional pork barons. So that too is not an “event” but merely, like his cabinet picks, a matter of judgment and executive competence.
Not to matter. When the going gets tough, the tough go campaigning. So, almost as if he were still running for office rather than actually running an office, the president arranges a photo-op or a town-hall meeting, where, for the moment, the hopeychangey shtick still plays. “I have an urgent need,” a freeborn citizen of the republic (I use the term loosely) beseeched the president in Fort Myers this week. “We need a home, our own kitchen, our own bathroom.”
As Michelle Malkin commented of the urgent needer: “If she had [had] more time, she probably would have remembered to ask Obama to fill up her gas tank, too.” Obama took her name — Henrietta Hughes — and ordered his staff to meet with her. Hopefully, he won’t insult her by dispatching some no-name deputy assistant associate secretary of whatever instead of flying in one of the bigtime tax-avoiding cabinet honchos to nationalize a Florida bank and convert one of its branches into a desirable family residence, with a swing set hanging where the drive-thru ATM used to be.
Still, the audience loved it. “Yes!” they yelped, and “Amen!” — and even “Gracious God, thank you so much!” In the words of Bob Hope: “Leave your name with the girl, and we may get to you for some crowd scenes.” Ah, but eventually the hosannas fade, and the community-organizer-in-chief has to return to Washington to attend to the drearier chores of being president. The “buy American” provisions in the “stimulus” will invite certain retaliation around the world, wrote Jagdish Bhagwati, the Columbia economics prof, in the New York Times. This is presumably the same Jagdish Bhagwati who reassured a Toronto audience last year that he was endorsing Obama despite the senator’s anti-NAFTA, anti-free-trade rhetoric because he didn’t think Obama really believed it. Today it’s even less clear what, if anything, Obama believes — and, even more critically, whether he has the wit or authority to impose those beliefs on a Congress whose operating procedure for the new era seems to be business as usual with three extra zeroes on the end.
Someday soon this inaugural Obamateur Hour (as one of my correspondents, John Gross, calls it) will end and the “events” phase will begin. Back last spring, some gloomy reflections of mine on multiculturalism prompted a reader to advise me to lighten up: “We’re rich enough that we can afford to be stupid.” A mere nine months later, the first part of that equation no longer seems quite so obvious. The market value of the U.S. banking sector is worth barely a quarter of what it was two years ago — from just north of $1.4 trillion in February 2007 to under $400 billion at the beginning of this month, and that due only to the “bailout.” The so-called Wall Street fat cats are, in fact, emaciated cadavers in the late stages of that feline version of HIV.
On the other hand, U.S. mortgage debt has more than quadrupled since 1990, from $2.5 trillion to over $10 trillion. On the other other hand — you may be running out of fingers by now — the IMF has increased its calculation of potential losses on U.S.-originated credit assets from $1.4 trillion last October to $2.2 trillion today, and that’s at the lowball end of estimates (others figure closer to $4 trillion). If you stick the community-organizer-in-chief in a room with Henrietta Hughes, he can play Bob Barker and tell her to “come on down!” But it’s not obvious that that technique will be quite so effective back in the Oval Office, poring over the smoldering ledgers.
2008: We’re rich enough that we can afford to be stupid.
2009: We’re not so rich so let’s be even more stupid.
The Obama narrative as packaged by the American media (another all-but-bankrupt industry, not coincidentally) is very appealing. Wouldn’t it be so much nicer if a benign paternalist sovereign could take care of all the beastly grown-up stuff like mortgages and health care, like he’s gonna do for Henrietta Hughes, while simultaneously blowing gazillions on “green” initiatives and other touchyfeely things?
America has a choice: It can reacquaint itself with socioeconomic reality, or it can buckle its mandatory seatbelt for the same decline most of the rest of the West embraced a couple of generations back. In 1897, troops from the greatest empire the world had ever seen marched down London’s mall for Queen Victoria’s diamond jubilee. Seventy years later, Britain had government health care, a government-owned car industry, massive government housing, and it was a shriveled high-unemployment socialist basket-case living off the dwindling cultural capital of its glorious past. In 1945, America emerged from the Second World War as the preeminent power on earth. Seventy years later . . .
Let’s not go there.
— Mark Steyn, a National Review columnist, is author of America Alone.
© 2009 Mark Steyn
Saturday, February 14, 2009
The most transparent bill in history
If the various reports I've read are accurate, lobbyists got copies of the stimulus bill before the House Repub leadership yesterday; in addition, we have Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) saying that not one senator has read the bill in its entirety, along with Minority leader John Boehner (R-OH) saying the same thing today on the House floor.
This against President Obama's campaign promise to post all 'non-emergency' bills on the Web for 5 days before he'd sign it.
The House Democratic leadership promised that the bill would be posted online for 48 hours before a vote.
Change.
Update: On Chris Matthews’ MSNBC show Hardball, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) just called the stimulus bill “the most transparent piece of legislation in American history.”
Interesting.
Update II: With David Schuster on MSNBC, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) called the stimulus bill "the most vetted bill in history," and 'the most transparent piece of legislation in history.'
It looks like the talking points have been passed around...
From the New Editor via Michelle Malkin
This against President Obama's campaign promise to post all 'non-emergency' bills on the Web for 5 days before he'd sign it.
The House Democratic leadership promised that the bill would be posted online for 48 hours before a vote.
Change.
Update: On Chris Matthews’ MSNBC show Hardball, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) just called the stimulus bill “the most transparent piece of legislation in American history.”
Interesting.
Update II: With David Schuster on MSNBC, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) called the stimulus bill "the most vetted bill in history," and 'the most transparent piece of legislation in history.'
It looks like the talking points have been passed around...
From the New Editor via Michelle Malkin
GM considering Chapter 11 filing, new company-WSJ
Hopefully a new company WITHOUT the frickin' UAW!!!
Pelosi had to hurry off to her vacation
Please note what was in my last post. Pelosi wanted the bill passed quickly so she could go to Rome. Give me a break.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Great article about the current mess
Don’t Undertake Then Abandon Me
February 13, 2009 by moorethoughts
Filed under Economy, Politics
Leave a comment
The stimulus bill, for all its unworthiness, is set to pass today.
Congratulations, President Obama. You now own this economy. This is not because the current mess is your fault. It certainly is not. Like Bush, you inherited a weakening economy. Your responsibility stems from the basic tort principle of undertaking rescue. Once you begin to rescue an individual in distress, you must continue with your efforts because the presence of your rescue efforts would dissuade otherwise potential rescuers. You can’t swim half way out to the drowning boy, get tired, and return to shore.
This is the way Obama has chosen to go about it. There were many other ways to address our economic problems, but they have all been dismissed.
The American economy was the Bush economy, just like the economic slow down prior to 9/11 was the Clinton economy. But now we have been sold, through our republican form of government, on a plan that will stimulate the economy and “create or save 3 or 4 million jobs”. The rescue has begun. It was designed, planned and prioritized by Obama and his party. Let there be no mistake about that. The buck has stopped and is no dancing gleefully on the president’s desk.
Now that we are here, let’s discuss what we have got.
New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg had this to say about the final bill
“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg told CNSNews.com.
His colleagues agreed. The reason no one will have a chance to read it? Well, they’re in a rush. Keep in mind the “rush to war” in 2002, which had Democrats tied up in an unseemly array of knots, ended up taking about 13 months. It seems instead the imminent need to vote at 9:00 a.m. stems from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has a date in Rome.
Ah, priorities and the people’s business. At least I can use them in the same sentence without fear of spontaneous combustion.
In addition to the transparency embarrassment that is recovery.gov, the Democrats have broken a previous promise to allow 48 hours for legislators and the public to review the final bill before the vote
Actually — as of 5:15 pm (yesterday), the Democrats had broken their word. The stimulus bill — which we still haven’t seen — will be released late tonight and will be brought up on the House floor at 9 am tomorrow.
The following statement was released by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer at 4:57 p.m.:
“The House is scheduled to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow and is expected to proceed directly to consideration of the American Recovery and Reinvestment conference report. The conference report text will be filed this evening, giving members enough time to review the conference report before voting on it tomorrow afternoon.”
It’s only 1,071 pages. What is some light reading overnight before a vote on the largest social spending bill in the history of the Republic? And while I’m thinking about it, can I register transparency.gov? It seems clear by now that the administration and Democrat representatives won’t be needing it.
Besides, the worst of it is that the bill won’t really be doing anything, anyway. Therein lies the rub - not only is it as liberal and porkish as anything we have seen in a long, long time, it is also going to be ineffectual, even by Keynesian standards.
Mr. Obama this is now your economy. Enjoy it, tremendously.
Nathan Moore is a criminal defense attorney practicing in Nashville, Tennessee, and is co-author of the political and current events blog MooreThoughts.com.
February 13, 2009 by moorethoughts
Filed under Economy, Politics
Leave a comment
The stimulus bill, for all its unworthiness, is set to pass today.
Congratulations, President Obama. You now own this economy. This is not because the current mess is your fault. It certainly is not. Like Bush, you inherited a weakening economy. Your responsibility stems from the basic tort principle of undertaking rescue. Once you begin to rescue an individual in distress, you must continue with your efforts because the presence of your rescue efforts would dissuade otherwise potential rescuers. You can’t swim half way out to the drowning boy, get tired, and return to shore.
This is the way Obama has chosen to go about it. There were many other ways to address our economic problems, but they have all been dismissed.
The American economy was the Bush economy, just like the economic slow down prior to 9/11 was the Clinton economy. But now we have been sold, through our republican form of government, on a plan that will stimulate the economy and “create or save 3 or 4 million jobs”. The rescue has begun. It was designed, planned and prioritized by Obama and his party. Let there be no mistake about that. The buck has stopped and is no dancing gleefully on the president’s desk.
Now that we are here, let’s discuss what we have got.
New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg had this to say about the final bill
“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg told CNSNews.com.
His colleagues agreed. The reason no one will have a chance to read it? Well, they’re in a rush. Keep in mind the “rush to war” in 2002, which had Democrats tied up in an unseemly array of knots, ended up taking about 13 months. It seems instead the imminent need to vote at 9:00 a.m. stems from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has a date in Rome.
Ah, priorities and the people’s business. At least I can use them in the same sentence without fear of spontaneous combustion.
In addition to the transparency embarrassment that is recovery.gov, the Democrats have broken a previous promise to allow 48 hours for legislators and the public to review the final bill before the vote
Actually — as of 5:15 pm (yesterday), the Democrats had broken their word. The stimulus bill — which we still haven’t seen — will be released late tonight and will be brought up on the House floor at 9 am tomorrow.
The following statement was released by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer at 4:57 p.m.:
“The House is scheduled to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow and is expected to proceed directly to consideration of the American Recovery and Reinvestment conference report. The conference report text will be filed this evening, giving members enough time to review the conference report before voting on it tomorrow afternoon.”
It’s only 1,071 pages. What is some light reading overnight before a vote on the largest social spending bill in the history of the Republic? And while I’m thinking about it, can I register transparency.gov? It seems clear by now that the administration and Democrat representatives won’t be needing it.
Besides, the worst of it is that the bill won’t really be doing anything, anyway. Therein lies the rub - not only is it as liberal and porkish as anything we have seen in a long, long time, it is also going to be ineffectual, even by Keynesian standards.
Mr. Obama this is now your economy. Enjoy it, tremendously.
Nathan Moore is a criminal defense attorney practicing in Nashville, Tennessee, and is co-author of the political and current events blog MooreThoughts.com.
Just like Rahm - let's use this crisis to push our agenda
President Obama is proudly touting that he is using the crisis to transform our nation. Yesterday he said:
"We have a once in a generation chance to act boldly, to turn adversity into opportunity, and use this crisis as a chance to transform our economy for the 21st century."
"We have a once in a generation chance to act boldly, to turn adversity into opportunity, and use this crisis as a chance to transform our economy for the 21st century."
More from the crapulous bill
The final version of the bill includes $8 billion in earmarked funding for a super train between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. The environmental impact studies alone will take more than five years to complete . Would it really be a 'catastrophe ' if all this long term spending were properly reviewed, debated, and voted on? Or maybe President Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was speaking the truth when he said: "Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Obama Considers Spending Taxes on Cutting Mortgage Payments Nearing Foreclosure
Great - the people paying their mortgage on time are going to be helping out the deadbeats who didn't.
Economic crisis leads to.....(well, it ain't good)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The nation's new chief intelligence officer delivered the annual threat assessment to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, but his first topic was the economy.
Dennis Blair said the worldwide effects of the economic crisis could lead to instability in governments.
"The primary near-term security concern of the United States is the global economic crisis and its geopolitical implications," said Dennis Blair, who was approved last month as the director of national intelligence for President Obama.
Blair said the worldwide effects of the economic crisis -- from countries cutting back on their defense obligations to their mishandling of humanitarian issues -- could lead to instability in governments.
Such instability could help foster terrorist movements and activities, Blair said.
"Time is probably our greatest threat," Blair said in prepared remarks released before he spoke to the committee. "The longer it takes for the recovery to begin, the greater the likelihood of serious damage to U.S. strategic interests."
In his first appearance before Congress in his new post, Blair addressed topics ranging from cyber-terrorism to al Qaeda.
Asked by committee member Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, about the possibility of a cyber-terrorism attack on the nation's power-grid system, Blair said that "a couple of years ago, (it would have been) a piece of cake."
Changes and security upgrades in the system have reduced the possibility of a debilitating attack on the power system, Blair said.
But "a very skilled attack by a group that knew what it was doing could cause us some problems, so there's work still to be done there," he said.
Extremist Muslim groups still pose the biggest threat for terrorist attacks, but there has been "notable progress" in turning Muslim opinion against such groups, including al Qaeda, he said.
"Because of the pressure we and our allies have put on al Qaeda's core leadership in Pakistan and the continued decline of al Qaeda's most prominent regional affiliate in Iraq, al Qaeda today is less capable and effective than it was a year ago," he added.
Regarding Iran's nuclear-development capabilities, Blair said that nation "is clearly developing all the components of nuclear material." He estimated that Iran could produce a nuclear weapon by 2015.
The United States and other Western nations believe Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program, but Iran says it is developing nuclear capability to produce energy.
International pressure will be the main factor in getting Iran to drop any nuclear military aspirations, Blair said.
"Whether they (Iran) take it all the way to developing nuclear arms and becoming a nuclear power -- I don't think it's a done deal either way," he said.
But he added that getting Iran to stay away from nuclear military development will take a concerted international effort.
"It's not going to be like falling off a log," he saidThird Obama cabinet nominee withdraws name
Did I mention the missteps?
By Jeremy Pelofsky and Ross Colvin
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican Senator Judd Gregg withdrew his nomination as Commerce secretary on Thursday in an embarrassing setback to President Barack Obama's efforts to bridge party differences in his fight against recession.
Gregg said he pulled out because of "irresolvable" differences over policy issues, including the $789 billion economic stimulus package that has so far drawn support from only a handful of Republican lawmakers.
A clearly annoyed White House said in a terse statement it regretted that Gregg withdrew after he had pursued the job.
"He was very clear throughout the interviewing process that despite past disagreements about policies, he would support, embrace and move forward with the President's agenda," said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs.
Three weeks after being sworn in, Obama, who pledged to hit the ground running to tackle one of the worst economic crises in decades, is still trying to form his 15-member cabinet. The Commerce Department, while not central to the fight, plays an important role in promoting U.S. business around the world.
Gregg is the third cabinet nominee to withdraw his nomination and the second for the Commerce Department. The first Commerce nominee was New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who is facing a legal inquiry.
Former Senator Tom Daschle, who was supposed to spearhead reform of the healthcare industry, withdrew because of personal tax issues. A lower-level official at the Office of Management and Budget also withdrew her name for the same reasons.
Obama's Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, also had problems during his Senate confirmation process because he failed to pay certain taxes on time.
Gregg, considered a moderate Republican, sounded apologetic at a news conference to announce his withdrawal from contention, but he said he had decided the policy differences were too great for him to join Obama's cabinet.
"I just realized it wouldn't be a good fit," Gregg said, adding it "would be a bigger mistake" to take the job.
BID FOR BIPARTISANSHIP
"We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy," he said in a separate statement. "Obviously the president requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives."
Gregg met Obama on Wednesday to tell him he was having second thoughts, but the president said he only learned of the senator's final decision on Thursday.
"We had had a discussion over the last couple of days," Obama said. "I wasn't sure whether he'd made a final decision or not. But clearly I think he was just having second thoughts about leaving the Senate, a place where he's thrived and been there for a long time."
Obama took over from Republican President George W. Bush last month vowing to boost bipartisan cooperation in Washington, where political bickering has stalled most legislation over the last several years.
He has spent his first weeks in office struggling to build broad bipartisan support for his economic stimulus package, which is headed for passage in Congress this week. Entrenched philosophical differences with most Republicans over tax cuts and spending stymied that effort.
"The one thing I want to make sure of is that people don't take from this the notion that we can't get Democrats and Republicans working together. I am going to keep on working at this," Obama told reporters traveling with him on Air Force One in Illinois.
Gregg's withdrawal could prompt Obama to reconsider Silicon Valley executive John Thompson to head the commerce department. Many lobbyists believed he had been in line to get the post before Gregg was tapped.
Thompson is chairman and chief executive officer of Symantec Corp, the No. 1 software security company best known to consumers for its Norton product line.
Another name sometimes mentioned for the post has been former Representative Harold Ford, a Democrat from Tennessee who now heads the Democratic Leadership Council.
(Writing by Jeremy Pelofsky and Ross Colvin; additional reporting by Richard Cowan, Doug Palmer, Caren Bohan, David Alexander and Jeff Mason; editing by Todd Eastham)
CEO Contradicts Obama on Rehiring Employees
This just keeps getting better. The missteps, the naivete, the incompetence of this President.
At a Caterpillar Inc. plant in Peoria, Ill., today, President Obama said that his proposed economic stimulus would allow the company's CEO to rehire recently laid-off employees. But the head of the company said he will have to fire more workers before he can rehire anyone who has been let go.
Obama has said twice in the past two days that Caterpillar CEO James Owens indicated his company would be able to rehire some of the 20,000 recently laid-off employees.
"Yesterday, Jim, the head of Caterpillar, said that if Congress passes our plan, this company will be able to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off," Obama said today in Peoria.
But when asked today if the stimulus could do that, Owens said, "I think, realistically, no. The honest reality is we're probably going to have more layoffs before we start hiring again."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
