Blame The Economy On The Whites
Mar 27, 2009 General, Political
Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva blamed the economic problems on white people with blue eyes. According to this racist jackass it was only white people who were running the banks and caused the problem because they thought they knew so much but showed how little they really do know.
And this jackass bases his assessment on the fact that he knows no people of color who run banks. Now that is a smart way to come to such a racist conclusion.
Perhaps he never heard of people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton who protested and worked to get loans for people of color. These were loans they could not afford and that would never have been made had banks not been forced to abandon safe practices under the threat of protest and claims of racism. I know there were plenty of people of all races who borrowed more than they could afford but the race baiters do not fight for them. Regardless, they were part of the problem and they are not bankers no matter what color they are.
Perhaps the Brazilian jackass has never heard of Congresswoman Maxine Waters or her husband Sidney Williams. Williams is a banker and Water used her office to try to get him bailout money. Williams is definitely black, or a person or color, of NOT white with blue eyes.
I am pretty sure there are plenty of bankers of color and I am sure many of them ran their businesses ethically just as many white, blue eyed bankers did. There were a lot of things that caused the problems and I am certain that it was not solely a bunch of white, blue eyed guys.
Perhaps president jackass does not know any bankers of color because his country is not as diverse as the US.
Considering George Bush supported an International Monetary Fund bailout of Brazil in 2002 it is hard to say that the white guys are all the problem. This is especially true when one considers that Brazil’s problems were the result of corruption in its financial system.
I guess the corruption, failed judicial system, and need for a bailout in 2002 were the fault of blue eyed white guys as well?
And don’t you white guys with brown or green eyes think you are off the hook. First they came for the blue eyed white guys and I said nothing….
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Support Your Local Sperm Bank
Mar 24, 2009 General
We’re Pulling for You
Today Xytex International, a sperm bank, rolled out its ironically named Stimulus Package by offering a discount on sperm for those who want to have children but are having problems conceiving and who can’t otherwise afford the services of a sperm bank.
Xytex is offering up to $200 off a vial of sperm for those who want a discount kid. I would like to know how a person who can’t afford the normal prices of $385 – $585 can afford to have a child in the first place. It costs more than that in the first few months of the kid’s life and the cost only goes up from there.
And how do they determine the price of the stuff? I mean, what makes one person’s the $385 stuff and another’s the $585 stuff? How depressing would that be to find out your stuff was not top shelf, so to speak…
Then again, Liberal $385, Conservative $585…
Anyway, if you are of a mind to get pregnant and need some sperm, Xytex is there for you. But before you go and do this I only have one word for you:
Octumom…
Source:
Breitbart
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: discount, economy, sperm bank
The World Is Upside Down
Feb 9, 2009 Political
First we had Vladimir Putin warning the west against socialism basically saying that the former Soviet Union tried it and it did not work and now France is the country showing backbone.
Putin’s words were those one would expect from the US only a decade or two ago. As America moves toward government takeover of private business and Socialistic plans, Putin urged that this approach would lead to disaster. It is beyond real that a leader from Russia would be warning the US about the evils of Socialism.
Top this off with French President Nicolas Sarkozy saying that France would keep its nuclear arms in order to guarantee its safety at a time when Barack Obama is working to rid the US (and presumably the world) of nuclear weapons and we can see the world is backwards.
He also challenged the growing pacifism of the continent, saying: “Does Europe want peace or do we want to be left in peace?” If the former, he went on to argue, Europe will have to provide for its defense. If the latter, it can “blindfold” itself to the world’s dangers but will likely pay a high price for such foolish behavior. “Europe isn’t simply a market or an economy,” he argued, but also a set of values that need to be defended. “Do you know anyone who can be rich without an assured defense?” he demanded. Fausta’s Blog [emphasis in the cited source]
Who could have imagined that we would reach a point in history where the Russians were giving counsel on economics and the French were discussing how to defend one’s country?
Nicolas Sarkozy said thanks but no thanks to disarmament.
This while Obama works to rid us of our weapons.
The end must be near…
The Bush administration dismantled nuclear weapons thus reducing our number. Obama wants to eliminate them completely.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: economy, nuclear weapons, Obama, putin, sarkozy
Using Crisis To Advantage, House Democrats Pass Stimulus
Jan 29, 2009 Political
Rahm Emanuel said that they should never let a crisis go to waste. He said that they should use a crisis to pass legislation that they would never be able to pass otherwise. Thus we get statements telling us of the dire consequences if we fail to act.
- “We don’t have a moment to spare,” Obama declared at the White House as congressional allies hastened to do his bidding in the face of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.
- “Another week that we delay is another 100,000 or more people unemployed. I don’t think we want that on our consciences,” said Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the leading architects of the legislation.
The first thing I will mention is that most Americans only want 535 people to lose their jobs next week and those people are in Congress. Secondly, if we are going to lose 100,000 jobs a week we are going to do so for a long time even if this passes and is signed into law tonight. The bill contains very few things that will stimulate the economy and create jobs.
The jobs it will create are jobs working for the government rebuilding infrastructure and those projects will not start for months and maybe a year or more down the road because it takes time to draw up plans, get approvals and put things in place. It might take longer because the Obama administration has been advised not to hire skilled or white workers for the projects. Unskilled minorities are best, according to Robert Reich.
The bill includes great amounts of money for things that will NOT stimulate the economy. The bill contains money for contraception, sexually transmitted disease prevention, voter fraud organizations (ACORN), a mob museum and a number of other items. These things will not stimulate the economy and they will not provide enough jobs (if any) to change the unemployment rate. Other than those involved in building a mobster museum, I can’t think of anything on this list that would create a job. I would love for my liberal commenters to explain these things and tell me how they help the economy.
Please don’t tell me they stop births or improve health or other nonsense because none of that has anything to do with the economy.
It was a foregone conclusion that the bill would pass in the House. The Democrats have a large enough majority that they can pass anything they want on a strictly party line vote. Obama wanted Republicans on board so that if (in his mind, when in mine) it fails he can say it was a bipartisan effort and that they all hold some of the responsibility. As he stated in his meeting, he won’t get reelected if things go badly.
Every Republican except one voted no. There was one Republican who did not vote. Eleven Democrats voted no with the balance voting for it. The final tally was 244-188.
The real battle will be in the Senate. The Republicans can filibuster this and keep it from passing.
Of course, there are a number of concerns with the RINOs who might vote with the Democrats. I am hoping Gillibrand, the new Democrat from New York, continues her opposition to a bailout but she is 99th in seniority and might be forced (ahem, coerced) to go along. Time will tell.
It is time for people to call their Republican Senators and tell them to vote no and to filibuster it to death. They need to be warned that if they vote for it they will be targeted in the next election. They only understand their political careers so that is what they need to see as a consequence of voting for it. This is true of Blue Dog Democrats as well. They will be vulnerable in the next election and their vote could make the difference in where they work in 2011.
This “stimulus” plan will not work. It contains a ton of pork that has nothing to do with the economy and it will saddle us with even more debt. This debt will come from the party that criticized the debt under George Bush which will seem like a drop of water in the ocean compared to this mess. This debt will also be passed on to our children, our grandchildren and to generations of people who are not even born yet.
One warning. Don’t listen to those who say that it will take a few years or that estimates about how money will be spent are incorrect. The reality is that the politicians know it will take quite some time for the economy to recover (it will recover with or without the stimulus) and they want to prepare people now so they do not get shelled in the 2010 midterm elections.
If Senate Republicans follow the House’s lead then at least the Democrats can’t claim it was a bipartisan effort when campaigning for your votes.
To be fair though, if it passes and is a success (by my standards, not a politician’s) then I will give them credit. Of course, I know it will not be successful. History has shown us as much.
Walter E. Williams has an excellent article out that concludes with this:
In stimulus package language, if Congress taxes to hand out money, one person is stimulated at the expense of another, who pays the tax, who is unstimulated. A visual representation of the stimulus package is: Imagine you see a person at work taking buckets of water from the deep end of a swimming pool and dumping them into the shallow end in an attempt to make it deeper. You would deem him stupid. That scenario is equivalent to what Congress and the new president proposes for the economy. A far more important measure that Congress can take toward a healthy economy is to ensure that the 2003 tax cuts don’t expire in 2010 as scheduled. If not, there are 15 separate taxes scheduled to rise in 2010, costing Americans $200 billion a year in increased taxes. In the face of a recession, we don’t need that. [emphasis mine]
The article explains the situation and tells why the “stimulus” will not work. Please take the time to read it.
Then call your Senators…
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Biden Compares Economy To 9/11
Jan 6, 2009 Political
Joe Biden has a way with words and what he says often makes little or no sense or is a lie. I think his brain aneurysms have diminished his capacity which is why he tells us of visiting diners that have been closed for years. Maybe it is also why he is prone to so many gaffes.
Joe The VP (elect) spoke with members of Congress and he expressed that the economy was much like the crisis of the attacks on 9/11 and that we are at war. The blustery politician has also said, in the past, that we need to pass the economic stimulus or the economy will tank.
Joe met with House members and here is a recap of that meeting:
Vice-president-elect Joe Biden likened the country’s economic crisis to the attacks of 9/11 Monday in a private meeting on Capitol Hill.
“We’re at war,” Biden told congressional leaders of both parties during their sit-down with Barack Obama in the Capitol, according to two sources familiar with the exchange
~snip~
Biden spokeswoman Elizabeth Alexander said Biden “was speaking of how after September 11th, that the Congress came together and worked together for the sake of the country, that the Congress worked day and night to accomplish what was necessary. We did it then and we can do it now.” Politico
Of course Biden’s spokesperson had to step in and tell us what Joe really meant. You know it is political BS when someone else has to tell you what a politician meant.
But let’s look at the clarification. Alexander says that Biden was speaking of how we all came together after 9/11 and worked day and night to do what was necessary. I guess this is her way of saying Joe wants Congress, both parties, to work together day and night to pass the stimulus because it needs to be done and is as serious as 9/11.
Isn’t it amazing that when Republicans mention 9/11 they are fear mongering but the Democrats can use it and they are insightful? Isn’t it amazing that they feel free to say they worked day and night after 9/11 to do what had to be done when most of them backtracked on what was done?
In the aftermath of 9/11 a lot of things took place including the authorization for the use of military force in Afghanistan and then in Iraq. Most of the Democrats voted for it but later said they were fooled and that they were wrong in their votes blah, blah. I know a lot took place after 9/11 but the more defining actions were the ones that put the men and women of our Armed Forces in harm’s way. Sure, we got stuff that makes it tough to use air for travel but that is nothing compared to what the men and women in uniform have endured.
However, these people backed away from nearly every thing they claim was accomplished on 9/11. Obama was not in the Senate yet so he ran around saying he has always been against the war (except when he was campaigning for Kerry. Then he said he supported it). Biden voted for the war as did Clinton and many others. This was one of the biggest things Obama used against them in the primaries and people fell for it.
Now, Biden wants to invoke 9/11 as if the economy is as urgent as 9/11 and that we should all hold hands and work around the clock to do what needs to be done.
If he is comparing it to 9/11 then I say the Republicans definitely should not go for the stimulus package. After 9/11 Democrats voted with Republicans and then when things got rough, said they were tricked or lied to and that they were sorry they voted for the wars. Then they blamed everything on George Bush (the person who fooled them who is also the one they call stupid) and the Republicans. They were able to make that stick. They then proceeded to call the war a failure and said that it was lost. To this day Obama believes the surge did not work.
What happens if Republicans buy into this and things do not improve? The Democrats will say they were fooled or tricked or lied to and they will say they now are against a stimulus and that George Bush led them to believe it was needed and they were only following what he said so it is all his fault and they could not possibly be the ones, lions and tigers and bears, oh my…
They will then say that Republicans led them to believe a trillion dollars in spending was needed and that the whole issue is the Republicans fault.
I say we don’t need the stimulus. Before they spend our tax money they need to go through the federal budget line by line and start cutting, not with Obama’s scalpel but with a meat cleaver.
It is amazing that Biden would invoke 9/11 and what was accomplished when Democrats vehemently opposed the things accomplished when they believed there was political gain involved. Then again, political gain is why they voted to defend America in the first place.
Joe Biden went to the movies the other night and was only noticed by a few people and this was in a sold out theater. I guess he has to find some way to get in the news.
Mention 9/11, that ought to do it.
Then again, most anything that he says is newsworthy because it is often very wrong.
Joe Biden is the gaff-o-matic.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.[/tip]
Tags: 9/11, Bush, democrat, economy, joe biden, republican, war