Political Jules for Love, Life & the Pursuit of Politics

Entries from September 2008

Failure brings back Free Market (aka reward success not failure)

September 30, 2008 · Leave a Comment

I had an epiphany last night when, I announced to my mate that the answer to the current crisis is right within our hands.  My plan is unapologetically simple in nature, but simple is as simple does.

You and I are very aware that businesses large and small fail, claim bankruptcy, and have to send their workers home with little or no benefits.  As painful and awful as that would be for all involved, I think the failed organizations need to fail, shut their doors, and send their workers home. 

Then, give the other banks, credit unions, and lending organizations, that have treaded water in these turbulent times, a chance to step forward.   Give them the chance to acquire these unguaranteed loans at a fraction of the cost, or even at no cost at all, (shoot, I’d be willing to give some of my tax payer dollars as a bonus, not a subsidy, to those brave companies who take on a little more risk.) 

These currently successful banks have the best chance to turn this financial crisis around.  If they bite off more than they can chew, and cannot keep themselves from utter failure, then you are DONE, outta here, bring in the next one. 

This way you reward success and not failure.

In addition to letting the surviving banks acquire loans, I propose we let individuals, like you and I, the opportunity to buy the homes involved in the crisis at a price freeze of ten cents on the dollar.  Thus a $100,000 home could be bought for $10,000.  My husband and I said we could potentially buy ten of them to do our part to strengthen the economy.  Any previous home owner can stay and rent from us (with a fair rent to cover our payments plus repairs and a small income for our efforts), but if they refuse to pay, they will be removed. 

When and if we buy these homes, the understanding is, if you have already foreclosed on your home, and gone back on your original word to pay the note, so sorry Charlie, but you no longer qualify to own the home.  You are now a renter, which is what you should have done in the first place.  If you cannot pay your rent, then we will find someone who can.  Eviction laws should be loosened so the new homeowners can take action quickly.  If the government must insist on some kind of bailout money, it should go to the financially responsible new owners to help them fix up the homes, to increase the property values, with some funds going toward programs to educate the ones losing their ownership status.

I hear the naysayers out there saying I should first give the original homeowners the chance to buy back the home at ten cents on the dollar, but this would be a foolish choice.  These people are a considerable credit risk.  Go rent a home or apartment, make your payments on time for seven years, learn fiscal responsibility, and come back with your credit application at that time.  Then we can talk. 

Because nobody wants to be homeless, the new home buyers and investors should be encouraged to charge fair rent, as long as the renters are responsible.  The government could even offer the failed home owners a small, one time only, stipend to help them get into a low rent apartment.  

If any kind of socialist action needs to be taken, it should be that it is unlawful to start whining about making these people homeless.  Additionally, no one will be allowed to use that idea to gain some type of emotional sympathy to overturn the free market.  That is exactly what got us here in the first place. 

It should be a nationally accepted idea that we did not make them homeless, they made themselves homeless.

Categories: financial crisis bailout
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Should Pelosi be removed as Speaker of the House?

September 29, 2008 · Leave a Comment

Truthfully I do not know if that is even possible, but after today, I think we should look into it.

Today while I was following the bailout bill, something truly awful happened on the house floor. After hearing the speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi speak before the bailout bill was to be voted on, I was horrified. The speech was blatant with blame toward the current President, and Pelosi praised those who got us into this mess. Not that I am some bleeding heart Republican whining about blame, but Nancy Pelosi did more to divide the party and prevent the passage of the very bill she supports. She is obviously not the one to lead the house toward some kind of agreement. You can see her speech here:

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/184803.html

The thing that pointed out (to me) her inadequacy to run the house floor were her comments about the great depression. (Paraphrased) She had the audacity to say that she did not know why they call it the “great” depression because it was never that great. My brain almost exploded when I heard that nonsense.

I have heard grumblings about how awful she was, but never realized it until now. I hope something can be done.

I am sure that many in the media will use this to say the Republican leaders killed the bill, but any intelligent person can see that is not true. Let me first start by saying I was not all for the bailout in the first place because it was the wrong people sent in to fix the crisis, and the blame game is getting us nowhere.

 With all of that said, let us take a look at the vote breakdown:

The Democrats voted 140 for the bill, and they voted 95 against the bill.
The Republicans voted 65 for the bill, and they voted 133 against the bill.

Which brought the bill to fail at a total vote of 205 for it, and 228 against it.

Respectfully, the republicans were expected to be against it, BUT the democrats were so divided on the issue that the vote caused it to fail. The 95 democratic votes against their party leaders are what caused it to fail, and I am proud of those democrats who took a stand. We should hold those 95 votes up and applaud them.

I am almost afraid to believe the total idea of a bailout needs to fail.  It would be an awful horrible thing for me and many other Americans to go through, but the only road to recovery might just be to hit bottom.

Categories: financial crisis bailout
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , ,

Here is the video embedded.

September 29, 2008 · 3 Comments

Categories: Uncategorized

This is important to watch

September 28, 2008 · Leave a Comment

Please watch this and hover your mouse over the pause button cause it goes kind of fast.  Be sure to watch it to the end for the surprise ending.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH–o

Categories: Uncategorized

HERE IS A NEWSFLASH THAT WILL BE HIDDEN FROM THE PUBLIC

September 28, 2008 · Leave a Comment

The audacity of BO never ceases to amaze me.

Family Told Obama NOT To Wear Soldier Son’s Bracelet… Where is Media?

 

By Warner Todd Huston (Bio | Archive)
September 28, 2008 – 03:53 ET

 

Barack Obama played the “me too” game during the Friday debates on September 26 after Senator John McCain mentioned that he was wearing a bracelet with the name of Cpl. Matthew Stanley, a resident of New Hampshire and a soldier that lost his life in Iraq in 2006. Obama said that he too had a bracelet. After fumbling and straining to remember the name, he revealed that his had the name of Sergeant Ryan David Jopek of Merrill, Wisconsin.

Shockingly, however, Madison resident Brian Jopek, the father of Ryan Jopek, the young soldier who tragically lost his life to a roadside bomb in 2006, recently said on a Wisconsin Public Radio show that his family had asked Barack Obama to stop wearing the bracelet with his son’s name on it. Yet Obama continues to do so despite the wishes of the family.

Radio host Glenn Moberg of the show “Route 51″ asked Mr. Jopek, a man who believes in the efforts in Iraq and is not in favor of Obama’s positions on the war, what he and his ex-wife think of Obama continually using their son’s name on the campaign trail. (h/t D. Keith Howington of www.dehavelle.com)

Jopek began by saying that his ex-wife was taken aback, even upset, that Obama has made the death of her son a campaign issue. Jopek says his wife gave Obama the bracelet because “she just wanted Mr. Obama to know Ryan’s name.” Jopek went on to say that “she wasn’t looking to turn it into a big media event” and “just wanted it to be something between Barack Obama and herself.” Apparently, they were all shocked it became such a big deal.

But, he also said that his ex-wife has refused further interviews on the matter and that she wanted Obama to stop wearing the reminder of her son’s sacrifice that he keeps turning into a campaign soundbyte. This begins at about 10 minutes into the radio program. (Download radio show HERE)

TRANSCRIPT

Brian Jopek: Because of some of the negative feedback she’s gotten on the Internet, you know Internet blogs, you know people accusing her of… or accusing Obama of trying to get votes doing it… and that sort of thing.

Radio Host Moberg: Yeah

Jopek: She has turned down any subsequent interviews with the media because she just didn’t want it to get turned into something that it wasn’t. She had told me in an email that she had asked, actually asked Mr. Obama to not wear the bracelet any more at any of his public appearances. Which I don’t think he’s…

Moberg: It has been a while since he’s brought it up.

Jopek: Right. But, the other night I was watching the news and he was on, uh, speaking somewhere and he was still wearing it on his right wrist. I could see it on his right wrist. So, that’s his own choice. I mean that’s something Barack Obama, that’s a choice that he continues to wear it despite Tracy asking him not to… Because she is a Barack Obama supporter and she didn’t want to do anything to sabotage his campaign, so, if he’s still wearing the bracelet then, uh, that of course is entirely up to him.

Moberg: Maybe there’s a difference between wearing it and making a point to bring it up in your speeches?

Even the snow job that the radio host tried to pull off to cover for Barack’s refusing the wishes of the family of the KIA soldier who’s bracelet he wears doesn’t pass the smell test. After all, now that Obama has made it a big point in the debates, I guess the silent observance of Sgt. Jopek is no longer so silent and Obama is back to exploiting the death of a soldier even when he was asked NOT to do so by that soldier’s parents.

To pile insult onto injury here, the Mother doesn’t even want to force the issue of telling Obama to stop exploiting her son because she wants to see him win the election. Obama is not only taking advantage of this brave soldier’s death, he is taking advantage of the good wishes of the man’s Mother who doesn’t want to hurt the campaign.

And, why is the media not playing this story? The radio show on which this interview is heard happened all the way back in March. How is it the media missed this? Is it because they are also don’t want to hurt Obama’s campaign?

 

I can only say that if the parents of the soldier whose bracelet John McCain is wearing had said in public that they want him to stop wearing their son’s bracelet the news would have been coast to coast, and wall to wall, not just ignored in Madison, Wisconsin.

Obama’s use of this soldier that fell in the line of duty is tainted by his ambition and callousness. And the media is letting him get away with it.

(Photo credit: Washington Post)

Categories: corruption in politics
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , ,