August 31, 2009
As we've been reporting for some time now, Congress continues to turn a blind-eye to homeowners struggling to save their homes. It sure was/is easy for the elected representatives to "rescue" any industry that can benefit their own interests, but heaven forbid if you aren't ready to offer them a few thousand dollars for their coffers or hire their "educationally-challenged" offspring as your new CEO.
These "representatives" apparently still haven't gotten the message that people are mad and will not allow the current cast of characters to continue in the cushy jobs they were elected to perform. The rules of the game, as politicians have known them for a hundred years, have changed. People are aware of the corrupt characters representing them, mainly due to the efforts of independent bloggers - hello Mr. Rangel!
It's high time that Congress step in and demand that lenders seriously attempt to modify mortgages, especially those in imminent danger of foreclosure. The Administration can sure find things to spend money on and events to distract us. Any chance they can look at the perilous situation facing huge numbers of homeowners? That part of the economy apparently isn't sexy enough for them - so, maybe if we can make the issue more attractive or someone can offer a CEO spot to one of their mushrooms in return for some action, we could see something being done for homeowners.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
STRANGE PROFILE EMERGES FOR WASHINGTON APPOINTMENTS
August 25, 2009
We are seeing a very strange commonality in the background of persons being appointed to significant positions within the current Administration. This is even more important if you take President Obama seriously when he said, "If you want to know what I'm about, look at the people I surround myself with". Well, if we want to believe what the President is telling us (and this is what they want and deserve as the elected leader of the free world), we have to interpret his statement at face value. To do this raises very disturbing questions concerning exactly where this Administration intends to take America.
There appears to be more than a few radicals from the 1960's and union-types finding their way into influential positions within the Administration. A former co-founder of the '60's radical Weather Underground, Jeff Jones, is now head of the Apollo Alliance. The Weather Underground bombed government buildings in the '60's and Bill Ayers, another Obama "acquaintance" was a founding member of the group. According to House Majority Leader Harry Reid, the Apollo Alliance was instrumental in writing the Stimulus Package legislation. Mr. Jones now profits handsomely by advising companies on how to obtain money from the Stimulus Package.
This is only one of the Administration's ties to '60's radicals, including William Ayers, Van Jones, Rev. Wright, Carol Browner, Cass Sunstein, John Holdren, Ezekiel Emmanuel (brother of the Chief of Staff - surprising), plus a recent decision not to prosecute members of the Black Panthers for alleged polling place intimidation violations from the 2008 Presidential election.
In 1996, a number of these White House "acquaintances" even reconstituted the '60's radical groups like "Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)" and the Weather Underground into a new entity calling themselves "Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS)". It is not surprising that Mr. Jones, head of the Apollo Alliance, is on the Board of MDS.
Is anyone vetting these individuals? Or, taking Mr. Obama at his word, should we assume there's a message in these appointments and "acquaintences"? As we've said before, if there's not an agenda here, there have to be qualified individuals without this "baggage" that are willing to fill these positions. We are at a loss to explain why these professed radicals continue to be influencing our Country's future policy and ultimate destiny.
We are seeing a very strange commonality in the background of persons being appointed to significant positions within the current Administration. This is even more important if you take President Obama seriously when he said, "If you want to know what I'm about, look at the people I surround myself with". Well, if we want to believe what the President is telling us (and this is what they want and deserve as the elected leader of the free world), we have to interpret his statement at face value. To do this raises very disturbing questions concerning exactly where this Administration intends to take America.
There appears to be more than a few radicals from the 1960's and union-types finding their way into influential positions within the Administration. A former co-founder of the '60's radical Weather Underground, Jeff Jones, is now head of the Apollo Alliance. The Weather Underground bombed government buildings in the '60's and Bill Ayers, another Obama "acquaintance" was a founding member of the group. According to House Majority Leader Harry Reid, the Apollo Alliance was instrumental in writing the Stimulus Package legislation. Mr. Jones now profits handsomely by advising companies on how to obtain money from the Stimulus Package.
This is only one of the Administration's ties to '60's radicals, including William Ayers, Van Jones, Rev. Wright, Carol Browner, Cass Sunstein, John Holdren, Ezekiel Emmanuel (brother of the Chief of Staff - surprising), plus a recent decision not to prosecute members of the Black Panthers for alleged polling place intimidation violations from the 2008 Presidential election.
In 1996, a number of these White House "acquaintances" even reconstituted the '60's radical groups like "Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)" and the Weather Underground into a new entity calling themselves "Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS)". It is not surprising that Mr. Jones, head of the Apollo Alliance, is on the Board of MDS.
Is anyone vetting these individuals? Or, taking Mr. Obama at his word, should we assume there's a message in these appointments and "acquaintences"? As we've said before, if there's not an agenda here, there have to be qualified individuals without this "baggage" that are willing to fill these positions. We are at a loss to explain why these professed radicals continue to be influencing our Country's future policy and ultimate destiny.
Monday, August 24, 2009
ADVICE TO HOMEOWNERS IN FORECLOSURE
August 24, 2009
Many homeowners currently in foreclosure have tried unsuccessfully to have their loans modified. The vast majority of loan modification firms are either scams or simply ineffective, which leaves few options for the unfortunate homeowner.
If you've tried all options and still face a foreclosure sale AND you're interested in staying in your home, I highly recommend that you file bankruptcy. It's our understanding that either Chapter 7 or 13 will allow for the following action. At the time you file, indicate to your attorney that you are interested in requesting the "loan stripping" option. This allows the presiding judge to nullify your existing mortgage(s) (including home equity loans) and to re-value the property based on current market values. A new 30-year fixed-rate mortgage will be structured by the Court and you will be able to save your home.
You should only employ this option if you are interested in staying in your home and can afford to pay the new mortgage payment. You can even file an "emergency" bankruptcy within a few days of the sale and, in most cases, the scheduled sale will be cancelled.
We are simply interested in giving homeowners an option that gets little attention, but provides significant relief and, importantly, sticks it to the lenders. These crooks have gotten away with grand larceny, insurance fraud and investment fraud on a monumental scale and deserve all the consequences that can be unloaded on them.
Many homeowners currently in foreclosure have tried unsuccessfully to have their loans modified. The vast majority of loan modification firms are either scams or simply ineffective, which leaves few options for the unfortunate homeowner.
If you've tried all options and still face a foreclosure sale AND you're interested in staying in your home, I highly recommend that you file bankruptcy. It's our understanding that either Chapter 7 or 13 will allow for the following action. At the time you file, indicate to your attorney that you are interested in requesting the "loan stripping" option. This allows the presiding judge to nullify your existing mortgage(s) (including home equity loans) and to re-value the property based on current market values. A new 30-year fixed-rate mortgage will be structured by the Court and you will be able to save your home.
You should only employ this option if you are interested in staying in your home and can afford to pay the new mortgage payment. You can even file an "emergency" bankruptcy within a few days of the sale and, in most cases, the scheduled sale will be cancelled.
We are simply interested in giving homeowners an option that gets little attention, but provides significant relief and, importantly, sticks it to the lenders. These crooks have gotten away with grand larceny, insurance fraud and investment fraud on a monumental scale and deserve all the consequences that can be unloaded on them.
Friday, August 21, 2009
CAPPS MIA IN WASHINGTON
August 21, 2009
We get reports from people all the time and it's amazing how some government officials get more negative interest than others. One example is California Congresswoman Lois Capps. Ms. Capps (apologies to "Senator" Boxer) represents some pretty pricey areas in Southern California, but apparently has gone MIA during the recent economic crisis in Washington.
Her constituents have flooded her office with pleas for assistance only to be largely ignored by her and her staff. A Town Hall meeting is a far from happening as her sudden resignation from what she apparently sees as a career job. From what we're hearing, she may have a big surprise when she next appears on the ballot.
Constituents have been demanding that she do something about the huge numbers of homes going into foreclosure in her District. Guess she has her fingers into the profits being made from those robberies, otherwise you'd think she'd try to stop the lenders from stealing the homes in her District. Just another example of the weak representation we have in Washington. When things are good, they love the perks in return for breathing. But when they actually need to represent the interests of their constituents, they disappear and hope they can keep their cushy job by simply staying out of the press. Surprise! We advertised that we were going to name those who are failing the voters that put them in office, Lois Capps you are a disgrace.
We get reports from people all the time and it's amazing how some government officials get more negative interest than others. One example is California Congresswoman Lois Capps. Ms. Capps (apologies to "Senator" Boxer) represents some pretty pricey areas in Southern California, but apparently has gone MIA during the recent economic crisis in Washington.
Her constituents have flooded her office with pleas for assistance only to be largely ignored by her and her staff. A Town Hall meeting is a far from happening as her sudden resignation from what she apparently sees as a career job. From what we're hearing, she may have a big surprise when she next appears on the ballot.
Constituents have been demanding that she do something about the huge numbers of homes going into foreclosure in her District. Guess she has her fingers into the profits being made from those robberies, otherwise you'd think she'd try to stop the lenders from stealing the homes in her District. Just another example of the weak representation we have in Washington. When things are good, they love the perks in return for breathing. But when they actually need to represent the interests of their constituents, they disappear and hope they can keep their cushy job by simply staying out of the press. Surprise! We advertised that we were going to name those who are failing the voters that put them in office, Lois Capps you are a disgrace.
GREEN JOBS "ADVISOR" NAMED - MAINSTREAM MEDIA IGNORES APPOINTMENT
August 21, 2009
We've been waiting to see what kind of coverage Obama's appointment of Van Jones as the U.S. Green Jobs Special Advisor would get from the mainstream media. it was of interest because of Mr. Jones' previous affiliations and "social justice" beliefs. He admittedly has advocated for social unrest and describes himself as a "communist" and a "rowdy black nationalist".
Now, we've tried to be pragmatic when reporting on issues affecting the country, but it's difficult to understand why this appointment has been largely ignored. Considering the coverage Obama's relationship with Reverend Wright got from the press, it's strange that this fellow has flown under the radar.
Granted, Mr. Jones has advocated for increasing our focus on using green technology for a number of years and has published a book entitled "The Green Collar Economy". But, given the background and admitted beliefs of Mr. Jones, should he have been the primary choice to fill this position? What good does it do for the Administration to have a man described by NewsBusters as having "a very checkered past" deep-rooted in radical politics, including black nationalism, anarchism, and communism" guiding the Nation's green technology interests? There were no other candidates with equal or better qualifications and with less polarizing ideas to fill this position?
Again, putting aside politics and focusing simply on the best interests of the Country, why introduce such an admitted social radical into the top-levels of government? We need people in Washington that are concerned with doing the right thing, rather than radicals from either side pushing special-interest agendas. These type of appointments are disturbing, especially since they evade the normal "consent" process that Congress has over confirming Cabinet Secretaries.
Our charge is to give our readers the facts as we can best discern from information gather from numerous sources, especially when important stories are ignored by the mainstream media. Therefore, we will give you the background of Mr. Jones and let you decide whether he is the best choice.
We've already pointed out Mr. Jones advocacy for green technology and promoting the creation of jobs from increased use and his published book on green economy. An active advocate for a number of years. Now, let's look at his past. Jones is an admitted San Francisco extremist who says he was "radicalized in jail".
The National Review Online reports that Jones was a co-founder of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, a San Francisco–area organization once focused exclusively on so-called social-justice issues. Now, actively involved in the green movement.
In a 2007 entry on the Huffington Post, Jones marked the 15th anniversary of the riots that followed the acquittal of the four LAPD officers accused of beating Rodney King. Attached to the post is an essay he wrote in those heady days of 1992, which includes this account of the genesis of his revolutionary ardor:
"Our rallying cry was for justice; our demand was that the System be changed! Yes, the Great Revolutionary Moment had at long last come. And the time, clearly, was ours! So we stole stuff.Y’know, stole stuff. Radios, tennis shoes. Well, not everybody, of course.The vast majority (me included) just marched around and chanted slogans. But some set trash cans on fire. And smashed in car windows. And some kids stoned a few passing cars pretty good. And stole stuff, like I said."
So it's obvious that Mr. Jones at one time at least felt that he was part of "the Great Revolution" and they felt the need for "justice", which was demonstrated by stealing merchandise from neighborhood stores.
We just have to question Mr. Obama's choice, it seems too in-line with previous affiliations with Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright, and Bill Ayers. Again, we do not need polarizing figures with radical agendas deciding policy for our Country.
We've been waiting to see what kind of coverage Obama's appointment of Van Jones as the U.S. Green Jobs Special Advisor would get from the mainstream media. it was of interest because of Mr. Jones' previous affiliations and "social justice" beliefs. He admittedly has advocated for social unrest and describes himself as a "communist" and a "rowdy black nationalist".
Now, we've tried to be pragmatic when reporting on issues affecting the country, but it's difficult to understand why this appointment has been largely ignored. Considering the coverage Obama's relationship with Reverend Wright got from the press, it's strange that this fellow has flown under the radar.
Granted, Mr. Jones has advocated for increasing our focus on using green technology for a number of years and has published a book entitled "The Green Collar Economy". But, given the background and admitted beliefs of Mr. Jones, should he have been the primary choice to fill this position? What good does it do for the Administration to have a man described by NewsBusters as having "a very checkered past" deep-rooted in radical politics, including black nationalism, anarchism, and communism" guiding the Nation's green technology interests? There were no other candidates with equal or better qualifications and with less polarizing ideas to fill this position?
Again, putting aside politics and focusing simply on the best interests of the Country, why introduce such an admitted social radical into the top-levels of government? We need people in Washington that are concerned with doing the right thing, rather than radicals from either side pushing special-interest agendas. These type of appointments are disturbing, especially since they evade the normal "consent" process that Congress has over confirming Cabinet Secretaries.
Our charge is to give our readers the facts as we can best discern from information gather from numerous sources, especially when important stories are ignored by the mainstream media. Therefore, we will give you the background of Mr. Jones and let you decide whether he is the best choice.
We've already pointed out Mr. Jones advocacy for green technology and promoting the creation of jobs from increased use and his published book on green economy. An active advocate for a number of years. Now, let's look at his past. Jones is an admitted San Francisco extremist who says he was "radicalized in jail".
The National Review Online reports that Jones was a co-founder of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, a San Francisco–area organization once focused exclusively on so-called social-justice issues. Now, actively involved in the green movement.
In a 2007 entry on the Huffington Post, Jones marked the 15th anniversary of the riots that followed the acquittal of the four LAPD officers accused of beating Rodney King. Attached to the post is an essay he wrote in those heady days of 1992, which includes this account of the genesis of his revolutionary ardor:
"Our rallying cry was for justice; our demand was that the System be changed! Yes, the Great Revolutionary Moment had at long last come. And the time, clearly, was ours! So we stole stuff.Y’know, stole stuff. Radios, tennis shoes. Well, not everybody, of course.The vast majority (me included) just marched around and chanted slogans. But some set trash cans on fire. And smashed in car windows. And some kids stoned a few passing cars pretty good. And stole stuff, like I said."
So it's obvious that Mr. Jones at one time at least felt that he was part of "the Great Revolution" and they felt the need for "justice", which was demonstrated by stealing merchandise from neighborhood stores.
We just have to question Mr. Obama's choice, it seems too in-line with previous affiliations with Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright, and Bill Ayers. Again, we do not need polarizing figures with radical agendas deciding policy for our Country.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
MORTGAGE SERVICERS, BANKS THUMB THEIR NOSES AT CONGRESS
August 11, 2009
There seems to be some type of collusion occurring between so-called "mortgage servicers", banks and Congress. Although significant legislation has been passed requiring lien holders to contact homeowners and attempt to modify their loans, these companies seem impervious to legal requirements and their consequences for noncompliance.
One of the worst offenders in the "mortgage servicer" category is Saxon Mortgage. Not only is this company an apparent "black hole" when it comes to providing information, they are well known by most legal firms dealing with foreclosures, being described by one attorney as "one of, if not the worst of the bunch".
How is it that these shills for "investors" can circumvent legal requirements and continue to profit at the expense of our economy for the sole purpose of sucking out further ill-gotten gains? Politicians who sat by and allowed this rape of homeowners to proceed will not be forgotten when the next election rolls around. When hundreds of thousands of people's net worth is basically wiped out to further line the pockets of politicians and criminals posing as mortgage bankers there will be consequences.
There seems to be some type of collusion occurring between so-called "mortgage servicers", banks and Congress. Although significant legislation has been passed requiring lien holders to contact homeowners and attempt to modify their loans, these companies seem impervious to legal requirements and their consequences for noncompliance.
One of the worst offenders in the "mortgage servicer" category is Saxon Mortgage. Not only is this company an apparent "black hole" when it comes to providing information, they are well known by most legal firms dealing with foreclosures, being described by one attorney as "one of, if not the worst of the bunch".
How is it that these shills for "investors" can circumvent legal requirements and continue to profit at the expense of our economy for the sole purpose of sucking out further ill-gotten gains? Politicians who sat by and allowed this rape of homeowners to proceed will not be forgotten when the next election rolls around. When hundreds of thousands of people's net worth is basically wiped out to further line the pockets of politicians and criminals posing as mortgage bankers there will be consequences.
Monday, August 10, 2009
FREDDIE AND FANNIE COOK BOOKS - AGAIN!
August 10, 2009
Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac saw huge increases in their stock prices today, after it was disclosed that both entities intend to restructure their financial situation by basically ignoring their debts. This "approach" is nothing new to either institution, now if average Americans can just figure out how they get away with it, we can all take a "mulligan" and start over!
Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac saw huge increases in their stock prices today, after it was disclosed that both entities intend to restructure their financial situation by basically ignoring their debts. This "approach" is nothing new to either institution, now if average Americans can just figure out how they get away with it, we can all take a "mulligan" and start over!
BANKS SEE HUGE WINDFALL FROM OVERDRAFT CHARGES
August 10, 2009
The Financial Times is reporting that banks expect to receive over $38 billion from Americans this year from overdraft charges alone. These figures have been confirmed by JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, Bank of America, and other major banks and are another slap in the face to their customers.
These banks have hiked their charges for overdrawing their accounts in recent months and have added increasing penalties for additional charges against the overdrawn account. There are reports of banks charging a customer $385/day when their account became overdrawn. It's not a question of penalizing for an overdraft, most would agree that some financial penalty is required, but to profit to such an extent from customers who are either already in a poor financial situation or simply made an error reconciling their account is the height of audacity!
We shouldn't be surprised that banks are taking advantage of us. They continue to ignore hundreds of thousands of homeowners who are struggling with fraudulent mortgages that were illegally packaged and sold as investment products. These banks and financial institutions, including mortgage companies and hedge funds, have profited to an astronomical extent at the expense of tax-paying Americans.
By continuing to accept checks and charges against an already overdrawn account, the bank has a huge upside from overdraft charges and the customer has no recourse. Congress must immediately require banks to stop this practice. Penalize the customer once for a reasonable amount, stop taking additional charges against the account and immediately notify the customer when the overdraft occurs.
The Financial Times is reporting that banks expect to receive over $38 billion from Americans this year from overdraft charges alone. These figures have been confirmed by JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, Bank of America, and other major banks and are another slap in the face to their customers.
These banks have hiked their charges for overdrawing their accounts in recent months and have added increasing penalties for additional charges against the overdrawn account. There are reports of banks charging a customer $385/day when their account became overdrawn. It's not a question of penalizing for an overdraft, most would agree that some financial penalty is required, but to profit to such an extent from customers who are either already in a poor financial situation or simply made an error reconciling their account is the height of audacity!
We shouldn't be surprised that banks are taking advantage of us. They continue to ignore hundreds of thousands of homeowners who are struggling with fraudulent mortgages that were illegally packaged and sold as investment products. These banks and financial institutions, including mortgage companies and hedge funds, have profited to an astronomical extent at the expense of tax-paying Americans.
By continuing to accept checks and charges against an already overdrawn account, the bank has a huge upside from overdraft charges and the customer has no recourse. Congress must immediately require banks to stop this practice. Penalize the customer once for a reasonable amount, stop taking additional charges against the account and immediately notify the customer when the overdraft occurs.
CONSERVATIVES NEED HEALTH CARE REALITY CHECK
August 10, 2009
Conservative advocates of defeating the proposed health care reform need to get their message out without hyperbole or fear tactics. There are enough verifiable issues in the proposed legislation to argue over, without introducing potential radical approaches to reform such as "death panels" referenced by former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin last weekend.
Both sides would be well served if they would focus on discussing actual changes being proposed. The trouble is, we don't really know what changes are actually being considered and what those alterations would ultimately mean to the "average" American.
Proponents of the health care reform, like Speaker Pelosi, should also refrain from characterizing those opposing the changes as "Nazis" and "un-American". The vast majority are simply concerned and they are fed-up with efforts to push legislation through without adequate review and debate. The "transparency" that was promised is sorely lacking and it hasn't gone unnoticed by supporters and opponents alike. Tactics like "ratting out" people who provide "fishy" information; SEIU's organized efforts, with input from HHS Secretary Sebelius to derail protesters from attending Town Hall meetings; using comments like "We prefer to use the power of persuasion, but aren't opposed to using the persuasion of power" only give opponents a very real reason to question the Administration's intentions.
Democrats must stop critizing conservatives for "organizing" and "vocal outbursts". These tactics are well known by left-wing liberals and have been used for decades against targets of their efforts for social reform.
Both sides of this issue should focus on civil debate and doing what is right for their constituents, not what gets them the most political capital. Politicians had better start realizing that the old days of staying off the radar, while taking huge "contributions" from special interest groups for supporting their pet projects, is over. They will be held responsible for what they've done for/to their citizens and will pay the price at the polls if they do not deliver.
Conservative advocates of defeating the proposed health care reform need to get their message out without hyperbole or fear tactics. There are enough verifiable issues in the proposed legislation to argue over, without introducing potential radical approaches to reform such as "death panels" referenced by former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin last weekend.
Both sides would be well served if they would focus on discussing actual changes being proposed. The trouble is, we don't really know what changes are actually being considered and what those alterations would ultimately mean to the "average" American.
Proponents of the health care reform, like Speaker Pelosi, should also refrain from characterizing those opposing the changes as "Nazis" and "un-American". The vast majority are simply concerned and they are fed-up with efforts to push legislation through without adequate review and debate. The "transparency" that was promised is sorely lacking and it hasn't gone unnoticed by supporters and opponents alike. Tactics like "ratting out" people who provide "fishy" information; SEIU's organized efforts, with input from HHS Secretary Sebelius to derail protesters from attending Town Hall meetings; using comments like "We prefer to use the power of persuasion, but aren't opposed to using the persuasion of power" only give opponents a very real reason to question the Administration's intentions.
Democrats must stop critizing conservatives for "organizing" and "vocal outbursts". These tactics are well known by left-wing liberals and have been used for decades against targets of their efforts for social reform.
Both sides of this issue should focus on civil debate and doing what is right for their constituents, not what gets them the most political capital. Politicians had better start realizing that the old days of staying off the radar, while taking huge "contributions" from special interest groups for supporting their pet projects, is over. They will be held responsible for what they've done for/to their citizens and will pay the price at the polls if they do not deliver.
Friday, August 7, 2009
PROTESTS UNAMERICAN?
August 7, 2009
My God, we're trying to give the Administration the benefit of the doubt whenever possible, but their criticism of "town hall meetings" being overwhelmed by "organized, astroturf" right-wing zealots would be laughable if not so serious.
The Democratic Party and especially extreme Left-wing liberals have made organized, loud and many times unruly protests their M.O. for the last 45 years. The "organized" approach to protests is a well-documented tactic of radicals beginning with the Black Panthers in the '60s to ACORN and the Pink Ladies today. These groups have historically promoted an extreme Left-wing agenda, with basically no equivalent group(s) representing the Right Wing.
It's recognized that this approach, while personally distasteful, is effective in bringing attention to whatever is being protested. It does not benefit either side when both try to yell over each other, it actually looks extremely juvenile. This is the type of response you'd expect from a 13-year old who's mad at you! It's just such a waste of time trying to simply be the loudest and get in the last word, can't we truly be civilized and speak in turn? We're interested in getting something done, not just who can yell the loudest and longest.
So, let's have both sides quit acting like scorned teenagers and the Democrats have to give up their apparent belief that Right-wing protests are invalid, too organized and mean spirited. Give us a break, anyone with a memory can recall plenty of mean spirited attacks and protests coming from the current majority party and their activist organizations.
We've always allowed this type of protest under our freedom of speech and right of non-violent assembly, even though some Left-wing extremists are allowed to spew the most despicable insults during the funerals of military killed in combat. What reason, other than a pathologic aversion to the military, could these "protesters" have to justify their actions and tirades? Certainly the individual soldier, sailor, airman or marine had done nothing to personally offend these individuals, they were simply defending our Country and following orders.
The percent of Americans who support the actions of those who protest at military funerals is basically an unmeasurable percentage of our population, however, we allow their insults to be yelled and we don't remember anyone in Congress calling them "Nazis" or indicating that the group's intentions weren't valid because they were "organized".
Ms Pelosi, before you call concerned Americans "Nazis", I'd take a look at the Administration's own call for citizens to report "fishy" activity that they'd consider inappropriate. Statements like this do nothing but raise questions in people's minds about the actual intent of the request. Obviously, the Administration expects that most Americans won't equate their request for "fishy" activity reporting to very similar requests made by tyrannical regimes throughout history.
Otherwise they should realize that the request alone would be received poorly and their intentions would be questioned. Senator Dick Durbin has been the most recent to criticize town hall protesters, they should look within before they begin throwing stones.
My God, we're trying to give the Administration the benefit of the doubt whenever possible, but their criticism of "town hall meetings" being overwhelmed by "organized, astroturf" right-wing zealots would be laughable if not so serious.
The Democratic Party and especially extreme Left-wing liberals have made organized, loud and many times unruly protests their M.O. for the last 45 years. The "organized" approach to protests is a well-documented tactic of radicals beginning with the Black Panthers in the '60s to ACORN and the Pink Ladies today. These groups have historically promoted an extreme Left-wing agenda, with basically no equivalent group(s) representing the Right Wing.
It's recognized that this approach, while personally distasteful, is effective in bringing attention to whatever is being protested. It does not benefit either side when both try to yell over each other, it actually looks extremely juvenile. This is the type of response you'd expect from a 13-year old who's mad at you! It's just such a waste of time trying to simply be the loudest and get in the last word, can't we truly be civilized and speak in turn? We're interested in getting something done, not just who can yell the loudest and longest.
So, let's have both sides quit acting like scorned teenagers and the Democrats have to give up their apparent belief that Right-wing protests are invalid, too organized and mean spirited. Give us a break, anyone with a memory can recall plenty of mean spirited attacks and protests coming from the current majority party and their activist organizations.
We've always allowed this type of protest under our freedom of speech and right of non-violent assembly, even though some Left-wing extremists are allowed to spew the most despicable insults during the funerals of military killed in combat. What reason, other than a pathologic aversion to the military, could these "protesters" have to justify their actions and tirades? Certainly the individual soldier, sailor, airman or marine had done nothing to personally offend these individuals, they were simply defending our Country and following orders.
The percent of Americans who support the actions of those who protest at military funerals is basically an unmeasurable percentage of our population, however, we allow their insults to be yelled and we don't remember anyone in Congress calling them "Nazis" or indicating that the group's intentions weren't valid because they were "organized".
Ms Pelosi, before you call concerned Americans "Nazis", I'd take a look at the Administration's own call for citizens to report "fishy" activity that they'd consider inappropriate. Statements like this do nothing but raise questions in people's minds about the actual intent of the request. Obviously, the Administration expects that most Americans won't equate their request for "fishy" activity reporting to very similar requests made by tyrannical regimes throughout history.
Otherwise they should realize that the request alone would be received poorly and their intentions would be questioned. Senator Dick Durbin has been the most recent to criticize town hall protesters, they should look within before they begin throwing stones.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
CONGRESS GETS THREE NEW PRIVATE JETS
August 6, 2009
Congress has quietly authorized $200 million for the Air Force to purchase three "military versions" of the Gulfstream G550 jet to add to a fleet currently used by members of Congress and other top government officials. This little purchase was inserted into the House's 2010 Defense Appropriations Bill and overwhelmingly passed 400 to 30 on July 30. The Air Force had requested one additional jet, but apparently Congressional advocates of the purchase couldn't reign in their desire to assure that they'll be able to continue living the "high life".
When members of Congress criticized auto executives for flying to Washington on the company's private jets, is it any wonder they'd want to keep this "little" expenditure quiet? What is so different between the weak financial situation that faced the automakers and the critical condition of the government's coffers? One difference is that the money being used to purchase jets for Congress belongs to taxpayers and should not be used as a Congressional slush fund! The automaker's decision to purchase their aircraft was between the company and their stockholders.
This expenditure was muscled through the House by two Georgia members, Jack Kingston (R)and Sanford Bishop (D). It should come as no surprise that Gulfstream just happens to manufacture its aircraft in Georgia and both Bishop and Kingston have received multi-thousand dollar campaign contributions from the parent company (i.e., General Dynamics) of Gulfstream over the past 2 years.
Congress has quietly authorized $200 million for the Air Force to purchase three "military versions" of the Gulfstream G550 jet to add to a fleet currently used by members of Congress and other top government officials. This little purchase was inserted into the House's 2010 Defense Appropriations Bill and overwhelmingly passed 400 to 30 on July 30. The Air Force had requested one additional jet, but apparently Congressional advocates of the purchase couldn't reign in their desire to assure that they'll be able to continue living the "high life".
When members of Congress criticized auto executives for flying to Washington on the company's private jets, is it any wonder they'd want to keep this "little" expenditure quiet? What is so different between the weak financial situation that faced the automakers and the critical condition of the government's coffers? One difference is that the money being used to purchase jets for Congress belongs to taxpayers and should not be used as a Congressional slush fund! The automaker's decision to purchase their aircraft was between the company and their stockholders.
This expenditure was muscled through the House by two Georgia members, Jack Kingston (R)and Sanford Bishop (D). It should come as no surprise that Gulfstream just happens to manufacture its aircraft in Georgia and both Bishop and Kingston have received multi-thousand dollar campaign contributions from the parent company (i.e., General Dynamics) of Gulfstream over the past 2 years.
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said that the Air Force had asked for only what it needed when they requested one additional jet. He added, "Congress would be the one who would best be equipped to answer why it is they have added additional Gulfstreams to the budget."
So, can we get an explanation? Congress is telling everyone to tighten their belts, make cuts and make do with less while they do exactly the opposite. This may be Speaker Pelosi trying to take revenge for her previous attempts to upgrade her flying options. Peter Roff from U.S. News and World Reports has apparently wondered the same thing. In his August 6th column he wrote:
"It may be that Speaker Pelosi has wearied of traveling back and forth to her luxury San Francisco apartment with its beautiful view on commercial flights or that the schedules to and from Washington Dulles International Airport just don't fit in very well with her plans. She is, after all, a grandmother, as her partisans like to remind us all, and the travel might be too strenuous. But it also may be that she just doesn't like having to call up the Department of Defense to ask to borrow a plane when she or her congressional colleagues want to jet off someplace.
Remember, this is not the first time Pelosi's airplane fetish has been in the news. In February 2007, ABC News reported on the Pentagon's refusal to honor her request "for use of a military plane that can fly to and from her home district in San Francisco without having to stop to refuel."
The Pentagon offered Pelosi the same plane that her predecessor, Republican Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., had used—but that wasn't good enough—maybe because of the restrictions that came with it: no more than 10 passengers; no travel to political events; members of Pelosi's family couldn't fly unless she made a request in writing (and the family would have to reimburse the U.S. Treasury for the cost of a coach ticket per person for the travel plus the cost of any food); members of Congress couldn't fly on the plane unless their travel has been cleared with the House Ethics Committee; and Pelosi's multimillionaire husband could fly for free with her only for official protocol purposes".
OK Speaker Pelosi, Representatives Kingston and Bishop, let's start with your little group. Setting aside the routine answers about it helping your constituents by creating jobs and "time savings" gained by avoiding commercial flights, what could you have been thinking? We are trying to CUT spending and ELIMINATE excess, do you understand those concepts?
HOMEOWNER'S STABILITY INITIATIVE - CONGRESSIONAL/BANKING SCAM?
August 6, 2009
It's beginning to look like the Homeowner's Stability Initiative program and the $75 billion that was to fund it, is being used to further line the pockets of everyone but homeowners. Months have passed with no action to even formally implement the program, instead Congress allows lenders to continue to foreclose on homes that could have been saved under the program.
We're calling on the House Banking Committee and Chairman Barney Frank and the Senate Finance Committee and Chairman Max Baucus to immediately investigate why this program is apparently being blocked and why the money to fund the program is being used for other purposes.
Why is Congress refusing to help homeowners? It's estimated that nearly 50% of all homes with mortgages will be "underwater" in the next 2 years. Does Congress and lenders really think Americans are so stupid that they will continue to pay on these loans? And, just because "existing" home sales have risen recently, does Washington think we don't realize it's because foreclosed houses are being sold at greatly reduced prices? This is the real estate recovery they're predicting? I guess the economy will really spring to life when greedy lenders have foreclosed on half of all homes with a loan!
Mr. Frank, Mr. Baucus, you must immediately require ALL lenders to contact homeowners and offer them a new, low interest, fixed-rate mortgage AND a reduction of principal inline with current market values. The new mortgage must include paying all outstanding State property taxes and insurance payments and adding that amount to the new principal. The new fixed-rate mortgage must also require the mortgage company to escrow money from monthly payments to cover paying annual property tax and insurance payments in the future.
It's beginning to look like the Homeowner's Stability Initiative program and the $75 billion that was to fund it, is being used to further line the pockets of everyone but homeowners. Months have passed with no action to even formally implement the program, instead Congress allows lenders to continue to foreclose on homes that could have been saved under the program.
We're calling on the House Banking Committee and Chairman Barney Frank and the Senate Finance Committee and Chairman Max Baucus to immediately investigate why this program is apparently being blocked and why the money to fund the program is being used for other purposes.
Why is Congress refusing to help homeowners? It's estimated that nearly 50% of all homes with mortgages will be "underwater" in the next 2 years. Does Congress and lenders really think Americans are so stupid that they will continue to pay on these loans? And, just because "existing" home sales have risen recently, does Washington think we don't realize it's because foreclosed houses are being sold at greatly reduced prices? This is the real estate recovery they're predicting? I guess the economy will really spring to life when greedy lenders have foreclosed on half of all homes with a loan!
Mr. Frank, Mr. Baucus, you must immediately require ALL lenders to contact homeowners and offer them a new, low interest, fixed-rate mortgage AND a reduction of principal inline with current market values. The new mortgage must include paying all outstanding State property taxes and insurance payments and adding that amount to the new principal. The new fixed-rate mortgage must also require the mortgage company to escrow money from monthly payments to cover paying annual property tax and insurance payments in the future.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
OBAMA WANTS "CIVILIAN" PARA-MILITARY GROUP?
August 5, 2009
On July 2, 2008, during a campaign appearance in Colorado Springs, candidate Barack Obama was explaining his plans to expand the Peace Corps and the Americorp program when he suddenly made another statement, which has been totally ignored by both mainstream print and broadcast media.
The candidate, now President, said "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
The first response from Obama supporters will be that his statement was taken "out of context". That's sometimes a valid concern, however, we try very hard to be totally objective in our reporting, so a full video clip of his statement from that appearance can be played at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
so watch and decide for yourself.
Granted candidates sometimes say things that they subsequently have to reverse or retract and sometimes they just "stupidly" executing their rhetoric, but this is off the scale. This statement cannot be simply ignored. President Obama must explain exactly what he meant - especially since the plan has apparently been getting the hush-hush from virtually everyone, except for a few independent, truth-seeking bloggers. Why would broadcast news commentators and anchors from programs/networks and editors/investigative reporters from print media, most with fairly obvious political preferences, choose to completely ignore this issue?
Is it too much to ask for the President to disclose what his intentions are/were in relation to this statement, one important enough for him to deliberately include in his prepared speech? Not only would the creation of such a "security force" be a hotly debated issue, it would have a potentially devastating impact on our fragile economy. Well, maybe we've hit on the reason for the silence. Let's hope it's not hidden in the proposed "health care" legislation, most members of Congress have a problem reading an entire bill and midnight additions are common.
Bottom line: All Americans deserve to have an explanation and now!
On July 2, 2008, during a campaign appearance in Colorado Springs, candidate Barack Obama was explaining his plans to expand the Peace Corps and the Americorp program when he suddenly made another statement, which has been totally ignored by both mainstream print and broadcast media.
The candidate, now President, said "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
The first response from Obama supporters will be that his statement was taken "out of context". That's sometimes a valid concern, however, we try very hard to be totally objective in our reporting, so a full video clip of his statement from that appearance can be played at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
so watch and decide for yourself.
Granted candidates sometimes say things that they subsequently have to reverse or retract and sometimes they just "stupidly" executing their rhetoric, but this is off the scale. This statement cannot be simply ignored. President Obama must explain exactly what he meant - especially since the plan has apparently been getting the hush-hush from virtually everyone, except for a few independent, truth-seeking bloggers. Why would broadcast news commentators and anchors from programs/networks and editors/investigative reporters from print media, most with fairly obvious political preferences, choose to completely ignore this issue?
Is it too much to ask for the President to disclose what his intentions are/were in relation to this statement, one important enough for him to deliberately include in his prepared speech? Not only would the creation of such a "security force" be a hotly debated issue, it would have a potentially devastating impact on our fragile economy. Well, maybe we've hit on the reason for the silence. Let's hope it's not hidden in the proposed "health care" legislation, most members of Congress have a problem reading an entire bill and midnight additions are common.
Bottom line: All Americans deserve to have an explanation and now!
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
WHERE ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES?
August 4, 2009
The government's "Cash for Clunkers" program is pressing ahead and additional funds are being sought to take even more "clunkers" off the road. Surprisingly, environmental groups (who actively backed the Obama candidacy) have been totally silent concerning the impact of this program on our environment.
What is happening to all of the engine oil, transmission fluids, coolant, refrigerant removed from these automobiles? How about the engines that have been destroyed by running basically ground glass in them until they freeze up? What are you going to do with that mess, further grind it up and use it for what - landfills, bunkers, to seal radioactive/infectious material? Doesn't the American taxpayers deserve to know what the impact of this program is beyond the further destruction of our economy?
The silence of environmental groups says a ton about how all of these groups have sided with the Administration. When it benefits their agenda, they'll go nuts trying to stop the destruction of the "whistling sparrow mouse", but when it doesn't we can expect them to totally ignore the issue. A group as different from the Sierra Club as the AARP is another example of siding with the Administration instead of promoting the policies and best interests of their members. The AARP thinks the health care initiatives are just what we need. Really? Your members really want their benefits decreased and want to be "counseled" by a government employee on when they may be too old to receive appropriate medical care?
The government's "Cash for Clunkers" program is pressing ahead and additional funds are being sought to take even more "clunkers" off the road. Surprisingly, environmental groups (who actively backed the Obama candidacy) have been totally silent concerning the impact of this program on our environment.
What is happening to all of the engine oil, transmission fluids, coolant, refrigerant removed from these automobiles? How about the engines that have been destroyed by running basically ground glass in them until they freeze up? What are you going to do with that mess, further grind it up and use it for what - landfills, bunkers, to seal radioactive/infectious material? Doesn't the American taxpayers deserve to know what the impact of this program is beyond the further destruction of our economy?
The silence of environmental groups says a ton about how all of these groups have sided with the Administration. When it benefits their agenda, they'll go nuts trying to stop the destruction of the "whistling sparrow mouse", but when it doesn't we can expect them to totally ignore the issue. A group as different from the Sierra Club as the AARP is another example of siding with the Administration instead of promoting the policies and best interests of their members. The AARP thinks the health care initiatives are just what we need. Really? Your members really want their benefits decreased and want to be "counseled" by a government employee on when they may be too old to receive appropriate medical care?
CASH FOR ....?
August 4, 2009
Now that the automakers have been further "stimulated" by the "Cash for Clunkers" program, who's next in line? The $75 billion earmarked for the "Homeowners Stability Initiative" is being whittled away by more handouts to everyone but homeowners. After many months, this program is inexplicably spinning its wheels and distressed homeowners wait for the assistance promised by the Obama administration. This is another example of the money set aside for the Homeowner's Stability Initiative program going to help other causes - namely, those with a stronger lobby in Washington (i.e., banks, brokers, insurance, automakers, etc.).
In areas hardest hit by the real estate collapse, especially in areas with historically high home prices, this program could provide significant relief. There has been no assistance provided to homeowners with "jumbo" loans, who now see their investments further and further underwater and who have suffered larger losses, percentage wise, than most. Is the Administration and Congress purposely ignoring the housing issue? They seem buoyed by recent increases in pending home sales and hesitant to take action.
The problem with the increased pending home sales figures is that they mainly represent foreclosed properties that are being sold far below market value. Not only does this not help homeowners trying to retain their homes, it further depresses comparative values of the surrounding neighborhoods making a real recovery of prices impossible.
There has been extensive reporting of the increase in "pending" home sales, but nothing is being said about the reason or consequences associated with this perceived recovery. An average of only 15% of eligible mortgagees have even been approached by their lenders to modify their loans, with some lenders only at 4%. These are the "big boys" of course, Citibank, Bank of America, Wells Fargo - well you know the players. And the "mortgage servicers" like Saxon Mortgage are simply a joke. They are simply shilling for "investors" who, for some strange reason, wish to remain anonymous. These companies are required to produce the actual names of the "investors" if requested by the mortgagee. However, we've heard of no one who has actually gotten a response. By ignoring this request, they should have all of their rights concerning foreclosure stripped. Furthermore, these "servicers" should be required to pay off each mortgage that they've ignored and the "investor" must then turn over the property to the homeowner with a clear title. Only by creating significant penalties will these crooks begin to play by the rules.
Principal reduction is an huge and important issue that lenders still refuse to address. They will not face reality, instead they are certain Washington will protect them from having to do the right thing. How can lenders expect homeowners to continue to pay property taxes on a home that is now worth 30%-40% less than the mortgage and the value listed on the tax rolls? Property taxes are a huge annual payment for homeowners living in States with excessive taxes and this tax can represent a difference of $10,000 or more between the inflated value of the home recorded on the tax rolls versus the current market value of the home. Again, these State governments are insisting that homeowners pay the inflated tax bill, so that culprits like California can continue to support illegals. Do we really want to give these clowns our money to simply play with as they please?
So what's the homeowner to do? Lenders would love to continue down the current path, foreclose on as many homes as possible and continue to ring their cash register. All homeowners who are currently underwater in their loans must insist that Congress address this issue immediately. Withholding property tax payments, while potentially hurting a home owner's credit rating, is the only way to get State governments to address the problem. We are advocating that all homeowners adopt this stance and demand State and Federal governments take action before more hostile approaches are taken by taxpayers. While we do not approve of civil disorder, our elected officials had better wake-up before they are faced with some very difficult decisions.
Distressed homeowners deserve the same attention that other troubled institutions have promptly received. Banks, mortgage companies, insurance companies, and the auto industry have enjoyed multiple injections of taxpayer money to keep them alive. Many of these recipients of taxpayer money are the same entities that caused the crisis, but they are strangely the first to find relief.
Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Frank, Secretary Geithner, Representatives and Congressmen from California (where property taxes and State taxes in general are totally out of control and unsustainable) are in positions to get some action for homeowners. For example, exactly what has House Representative Lois Capps, who represents some of the highest property value areas in Southern California, done for her constituents? The answer is NOTHING! She has meekly sat by as her District continues to see huge decreases in property values. We warned that we would begin calling out individual members of Congress that are doing nothing for their constituents. Unfortunately, it's beginning to look like I'll be listing quite a few names from both sides of the aisle.
These elected officials are totally in the pocket of banks and lenders and fear for their political lives. I can guarantee that this is not something they need worry about. If they do not take immediate action, voters will decide for them and the result is going to be very disappointing for them.
Now that the automakers have been further "stimulated" by the "Cash for Clunkers" program, who's next in line? The $75 billion earmarked for the "Homeowners Stability Initiative" is being whittled away by more handouts to everyone but homeowners. After many months, this program is inexplicably spinning its wheels and distressed homeowners wait for the assistance promised by the Obama administration. This is another example of the money set aside for the Homeowner's Stability Initiative program going to help other causes - namely, those with a stronger lobby in Washington (i.e., banks, brokers, insurance, automakers, etc.).
In areas hardest hit by the real estate collapse, especially in areas with historically high home prices, this program could provide significant relief. There has been no assistance provided to homeowners with "jumbo" loans, who now see their investments further and further underwater and who have suffered larger losses, percentage wise, than most. Is the Administration and Congress purposely ignoring the housing issue? They seem buoyed by recent increases in pending home sales and hesitant to take action.
The problem with the increased pending home sales figures is that they mainly represent foreclosed properties that are being sold far below market value. Not only does this not help homeowners trying to retain their homes, it further depresses comparative values of the surrounding neighborhoods making a real recovery of prices impossible.
There has been extensive reporting of the increase in "pending" home sales, but nothing is being said about the reason or consequences associated with this perceived recovery. An average of only 15% of eligible mortgagees have even been approached by their lenders to modify their loans, with some lenders only at 4%. These are the "big boys" of course, Citibank, Bank of America, Wells Fargo - well you know the players. And the "mortgage servicers" like Saxon Mortgage are simply a joke. They are simply shilling for "investors" who, for some strange reason, wish to remain anonymous. These companies are required to produce the actual names of the "investors" if requested by the mortgagee. However, we've heard of no one who has actually gotten a response. By ignoring this request, they should have all of their rights concerning foreclosure stripped. Furthermore, these "servicers" should be required to pay off each mortgage that they've ignored and the "investor" must then turn over the property to the homeowner with a clear title. Only by creating significant penalties will these crooks begin to play by the rules.
Principal reduction is an huge and important issue that lenders still refuse to address. They will not face reality, instead they are certain Washington will protect them from having to do the right thing. How can lenders expect homeowners to continue to pay property taxes on a home that is now worth 30%-40% less than the mortgage and the value listed on the tax rolls? Property taxes are a huge annual payment for homeowners living in States with excessive taxes and this tax can represent a difference of $10,000 or more between the inflated value of the home recorded on the tax rolls versus the current market value of the home. Again, these State governments are insisting that homeowners pay the inflated tax bill, so that culprits like California can continue to support illegals. Do we really want to give these clowns our money to simply play with as they please?
So what's the homeowner to do? Lenders would love to continue down the current path, foreclose on as many homes as possible and continue to ring their cash register. All homeowners who are currently underwater in their loans must insist that Congress address this issue immediately. Withholding property tax payments, while potentially hurting a home owner's credit rating, is the only way to get State governments to address the problem. We are advocating that all homeowners adopt this stance and demand State and Federal governments take action before more hostile approaches are taken by taxpayers. While we do not approve of civil disorder, our elected officials had better wake-up before they are faced with some very difficult decisions.
Distressed homeowners deserve the same attention that other troubled institutions have promptly received. Banks, mortgage companies, insurance companies, and the auto industry have enjoyed multiple injections of taxpayer money to keep them alive. Many of these recipients of taxpayer money are the same entities that caused the crisis, but they are strangely the first to find relief.
Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Frank, Secretary Geithner, Representatives and Congressmen from California (where property taxes and State taxes in general are totally out of control and unsustainable) are in positions to get some action for homeowners. For example, exactly what has House Representative Lois Capps, who represents some of the highest property value areas in Southern California, done for her constituents? The answer is NOTHING! She has meekly sat by as her District continues to see huge decreases in property values. We warned that we would begin calling out individual members of Congress that are doing nothing for their constituents. Unfortunately, it's beginning to look like I'll be listing quite a few names from both sides of the aisle.
These elected officials are totally in the pocket of banks and lenders and fear for their political lives. I can guarantee that this is not something they need worry about. If they do not take immediate action, voters will decide for them and the result is going to be very disappointing for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)