?

Log in

Welcome to My World [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Dave

[ website | Get More Dave ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Creative Lifelong Learning Money Manager [Feb. 16th, 2009|05:45 pm]
Dave

I took the 43 Things Personality Quiz and found out I'm a
Creative Lifelong Learning Money Manager

LinkLeave a comment

Terrorists Declare War on US - Obama Issues Arrest Warrant [Nov. 10th, 2008|05:45 pm]
Dave
 DON’T LET PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA TRY FOREIGN TERRORISTS IN US CIVILIAN COURTS

“I’ll talk to you guys when you take me to New York and I can see my lawyer.”

-          Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, lead planner of 9/11 attacks, after his capture

-          Uncle to convicted terrorist Ramzi Yousef who was responsible for the 1993 WTC bombing

"In previous terrorist attacks — for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center, we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated."

-          President-Elect Barack Obama

The Bush Administration, as imperfect as it may have been, set up military tribunals to prosecute inmates held at Guantanamo for good reason.

Obama team ponders what to do with Guantanamo inmates

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/10/obama.transition.guantanamo/index.html

PLEASE FORWARD TO ANYONE YOU KNOW WHO MAY BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ISSUE

LinkLeave a comment

Bush says what he means, does Obama? [Nov. 10th, 2008|12:46 pm]
Dave
 “Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes.  Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen.  It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success.

 

– George W. Bush, Sept. 20, 2001, Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People

 

Secret order lets U.S. raid Al Qaeda around the world

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/10/america/10military.php?page=1

  

Maybe this is what John McCain had in mind when he told Obama not to telegraph publicly that you are going to perform military operations in Pakistan.  Obama has said he will continue to aggressively go after al Qaeda, but he also referred to prosecutions of the 1993 WTC bombers as a success despite it occurring after the fact and not going after those tied to them who carried out 9/11.  Hopefully, with the Presidential level intelligence briefings Obama is now receiving that he will have better informed opinions, which will lead to the best decisions possible.

LinkLeave a comment

SERIOUSLY [Sep. 26th, 2008|12:35 pm]
Dave
 It's amazing how some in the media are trying to chracterize McCain's most recent actions.

If Obama had been the one to "suspend" his campaign and suggest postponing the first debate, the majority of the mainstream media, which is clearly in the tank for him, would be gushing at his leadership and decisiveness; trying to solve the problem supposedly created only by non-Democrats.

Obviously Obama can't relate to McCain's desire to work in a bipartisan manner and actually get something accomplished.  So by default he thinks it was merely a political stunt.  I disagree, while McCain must have considered the political fallout, the decision was much more than a stunt.  McCain's record proves he is about more than pure stunts.

The deal was clearly DOA. Yet some are trying to blame McCain's appearance in Washington for the deal falling through.  McCain rightly pointed out early on, there would be no concensus on the initial proposal, and rightly went to Washington to LISTEN before then coming up with a deal that will be passed.  Yet we see critcism that he didn't speak enough... yet somehow that was responsible for the deal falling through... typical logic coming from liberals.

McCain must take Obama to task tonight in the debate, which will presumably include much more about the economy, rather than the originally proposed foreign policy and national security debate (which is unfortunate, Obama thinks the handling of the 1993 WTC bombing was a success, this faulty thinking sums him up well in my mind).  However, McCain will still be able to outshine Obama on the economy, despite this current crisis supposedly helping Obama in the polls, but for the life of me I can't figure out why.  McCain is the one who tried to pass a bill and predicted the dangerousness of the situation two years ago.
LinkLeave a comment

Obama's Campaign is a Pipe Dream [Sep. 24th, 2008|12:52 pm]
Dave
Statement by Senator John McCain, May 25, 2006:

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Congress, with a slim Democratic majority, did not act. Now the FBI is investigating these companies, who have directly impacted the economy in a major detrimental way. The Obama campaign can no longer spread the false and empty spin that McCain is weak on the economy and on proper regulation without losing whatever credibility they have left.
LinkLeave a comment

Apparently John McCain does know something about the economy... [Sep. 22nd, 2008|11:26 am]
Dave
How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS:

For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different.

[...]

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it...

That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: "It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing."

Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing.

[...]

Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.
LinkLeave a comment

Obama is Running on Empty [Sep. 19th, 2008|10:38 am]
Dave
Barack Obama's campaign is unbelievable.

Their attacks and criticisms of McCain and Palin are so empty it is scary.

McCain's campaign has stretched the truth somewhat in some of their ads critical of Obama, but nowhere near the degree that the Obama camp has been doing. I can't even call what the Obama campaign is doing as stretching the truth, because they're not even starting with the truth in much of their criticism.

First they continually try to link McCain to Bush, despite that fact that:
- McCain has had several disagreements with the Bush administration on some key issues over the last eight years.
- Joe Lieberman, the man who ran against Bush in 2000, who AL GORE picked as his VP candidate, is supporting McCain.

They also claim McCain (and Palin?!) is more of the same old politics, despite the fact that:
- Obama is from the notoriously corrupt Chicago political arena, and what is his record of reform there?
- Obama is now engaging in more negative attacks than McCain
- McCain has a reputation of bipartisanship in the Senate to actually accomplish something
- McCain picked a running mate who unseated an incumbent Republican and did act to reduce corruption
- Obama chose Joe Biden as his running mate

They criticize Palin's experience, despite the fact that:
- Palin has more executive experience than Obama, who has little if any executive experience
- Obama is at the top of his ticket while Palin is appropriately in the VP slot
- Obama was criticized by Democrats for being too inexperienced during their primary

And to top it off, the Obama campaign has been running spanish language ads that take two Rush Limbaugh quotes way out of context, and then try to link McCain to Limbaugh! Do we have to pull out all the non-out-of-context anti-McCain quotes from Limbaugh during the Republican primaries? These ads are clearly designed to inflame racial/ethnic tensions, so we have to ask ourselves; what kind of change is Obama really promoting here?

Barack Obama is running on empty. At some point you have to believe that the Democrats are going to get tired of losing Presidential elections.
LinkLeave a comment

VP Palin! [Aug. 29th, 2008|03:05 pm]
Dave
At first glance, John McCain's pick for VP may seem like a stunt to woo women and Hillary supporters. However, this is definitely not solely a pick based on gender. Although it is a factor and makes the ticket much more exciting, she actually does have Executive experience, both as mayor (yes only 7,500 people or so, but that's 7,500 more than Obama has ever governed) and Governor (of an important state with regards to our energy future).

People are always complaining about politicians and how they are not like regular people, well this woman is! She is a mother of 5 and her husband is a union worker. Why not put someone who is more in touch with average Americans into the VP spot?

She has a proven track record in unseating an incumbent Republican and getting things done for her state. Regardless of her gender, we can look at what she's done, even in a relatively brief period, versus Obama's lack of accomplishment.

I'm not even sure how many Hillary supporters will be won over by this, probably not many, because they are too liberal and do not think logically enough. Palin is too anti-abortion for many Hillary supporters among other things. What this pick will do most is annoy the heck out of Democrats since they did not have the first woman elected to the White House.

I am very excited about this election, we need a mostly moderate ticket that has shown it is willing to negotiate across party lines to get things done like McCain/Palin. Obama proclaims change, but he is in reality a Chicago Machine politician. McCain/Palin will get things done!

Country First 2008
LinkLeave a comment

Larry King needs a History Lesson, badly... [Aug. 29th, 2008|10:45 am]
Dave
During his show last night Larry King made it clear how little he knows about terrorism and 9/11. It was freightening to hear him claim that everyone who planned 9/11 was dead and that he did not know that the plot and training for it began during the Clinton administration. As a TV personality on a news channel he should be more informed than that.

Excerpt from Transcript on Larry King Live following Barack Obama's DNC speech:

KING: Other things he could have put in: there were no weapons of mass destruction, which he sold the whole war. Didn't mention that.

ELDER: It's interesting why they didn't mention that.

KING: Maybe just the same mistake...

ELDER: Because Bush didn't lie about it, because they know that he didn't lie about it. Almost his whole position...

KING: There are those who say he did.

ELDER: During this whole convention, they had all these speakers there. There was ample opportunity to say that Bush lied about it. I didn't hear a single one say that.

KING: Or that he was grossly mistaken then.

ELDER: He had the same CIA director, George Tenet, as who served under Bill Clinton.

KING: So it's Bill Clinton's war now?

ELDER: George Tenet is the one who said it was a slam dunk. Well, under Bill Clinton's administration, al Qaeda was planning to do 9/11.

KING: It's Bill's fault?

ELDER: And Bill Clinton had five or six chances to get Osama bin Laden and didn't do it.

KING: George Bush had nothing to do with this, then?

ELDER: I didn't say he didn't.

STEIN: I don't think anyone blames George Bush for 9/11. I mean, no one in their right mind blames...

KING: He said they didn't bring up 9/11.

STEIN: I know, but nobody blames...

KING: It happened on the Republicans' watch.

STEIN: I know, but the fact that it hasn't happened since. There's always been...

KING: It didn't happen on Clinton's watch.

ELDER: They had planned it on Clinton's watch. On the first attack...

KING: They planned it, then?

ELDER: In the first attack on the World Trade Center, he treated it like a law enforcement matter rather than a war. The 9/11 Commission said he had five chances...

KING: I'm lost -- your history's better than mine. I'm lost. I thought it was during the Bush administration.

STEIN: It was. Everyone knows that al Qaeda planned it and led up to it and got away with it.

ELDER: You didn't know it was planned under Clinton?

KING: You know something? You're better than me. You know when it was planned. All the guys who planned it are dead. They're dead on a plane, you know when. You interviewed them during the flight.

Anyway, you got it better than me. You know more than me.

ELDER: Read the 9/11 Commission report.

[ ... ]

KING: By the way, gentlemen, before we can comment, I just want to clear things up. You mentioned 9/11 was not mentioned. Here's what he said: "While Senator McCain was turning his sights to Iraq just days after 9/11, I stood up and opposed the war, knowing that it would distract us from the real threats we face. When John McCain said we would muddle through in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11 and made clear that we must take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants when we had them in our sights."

STEIN: I think if I may correctly say so, what is meant by lack of mention, as mentioned, of the incredible sorrow and horror we feel and that the losses to the American families...

KING: Should he have mentioned that?

STEIN: Oh, absolutely. It's the worst thing that ever happened on American soil in the 20th century.

KING: I'm just asking. I'm an independent. I'm just asking.

ELDER: Larry, you're an independent?

KING: Wait until you see me next week.

ELDER: And that's what brought about 9/11, a complete different change in our national security.
LinkLeave a comment

My thoughts on recent comments from Nancy Pelosi [Aug. 26th, 2008|11:13 am]
Dave
"I think that women, we have to get away from the politics of victim. This is about you go out there and you fight." - Nancy Pelosi

Some words of actual wisdom from the House Speaker. Democrats seem to be notorious for using the "politics of victim" - not only in regards to women, but as well as racial/ethnic issues as well. This is not to say that there aren't legitimate issues to be dealt with, but it's a matter of how you go about it. Treating a certain group of people (however you want to categorize people) as victims, and continually telling them that they are, never really seems to actually help them.

"You name it, there isn't anything that's been improved in this [Bush] administration. We must turn this around and take the country in a new direction. I'll leave it to the academics and later I'll see what happened and analyze it, but right now we're in a fight." - Nancy Pelosi

Not a single thing? Maybe she's blind to the fact that the Democrats have continually blocked Bush's attempts to improve things (Social Security being one of several) which is in my view their plan, to deny Bush credit for anything good, at the expense of the country or not.

She's also clearly blind to the fact that our policies towards combating terrorism, while still not perfected/ideal, have been dramatically improved over the Clinton years (which is of course when al Qaeda was executing several attacks against the US as well as planning 9/11 and other plots).

Isn't her statement about not analyzing anything in the present and leaving it to others for later quite interesting?! I for one prefer to analyze things for myself, in the here and now, to the best of my ability with the resources I have, while taking in others analysis to supplement my own as well. I also see it as a sign that she realizes Bush & co. may receive higher marks from historians in the future than people give them now. Of course she can't admit any of that, wouldn't be good for her party, screw the country, right Dems?

John McCain 2008 - Country First

READ THIS - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121918996082755013.html
LinkLeave a comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]