Bankruptcy Not Bailout

By Jeffrey A. MironSpecial to CNN

Editor's note: Jeffrey A. Miron is senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University. A Libertarian, he was one of 166 academic economists who signed a letter to congressional leaders last week opposing the government bailout plan.

Economist Jeffrey Miron says the bailout plan presented to Congress was the wrong solution to the crisis

CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Congress has balked at the Bush administration's proposed $700 billion bailout of Wall Street. Under this plan, the Treasury would have bought the "troubled assets" of financial institutions in an attempt to avoid economic meltdown.
This bailout was a terrible idea. Here's why.

The current mess would never have occurred in the absence of ill-conceived federal policies. The federal government chartered Fannie Mae in 1938 and Freddie Mac in 1970; these two mortgage lending institutions are at the center of the crisis. The government implicitly promised these institutions that it would make good on their debts, so Fannie and Freddie took on huge amounts of excessive risk.

Worse, beginning in 1977 and even more in the 1990s and the early part of this century, Congress pushed mortgage lenders and Fannie/Freddie to expand subprime lending. The industry was happy to oblige, given the implicit promise of federal backing, and subprime lending soared. Edit note: Click on the title above to read a NY Times article on this subject. The link was provided in an anonymous comment that appears below:

This subprime lending was more than a minor relaxation of existing credit guidelines. This lending was a wholesale abandonment of reasonable lending practices in which borrowers with poor credit characteristics got mortgages they were ill-equipped to handle.

Once housing prices declined and economic conditions worsened, defaults and delinquencies soared, leaving the industry holding large amounts of severely depreciated mortgage assets.
The fact that government bears such a huge responsibility for the current mess means any response should eliminate the conditions that created this situation in the first place, not attempt to fix bad government with more government.

The obvious alternative to a bailout is letting troubled financial institutions declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy means that shareholders typically get wiped out and the creditors own the company.

Bankruptcy does not mean the company disappears; it is just owned by someone new (as has occurred with several airlines). Bankruptcy punishes those who took excessive risks while preserving those aspects of a businesses that remain profitable.

In contrast, a bailout transfers enormous wealth from taxpayers to those who knowingly engaged in risky subprime lending. Thus, the bailout encourages companies to take large, imprudent risks and count on getting bailed out by government. This "moral hazard" generates enormous distortions in an economy's allocation of its financial resources.

Thoughtful advocates of the bailout might concede this perspective, but they argue that a bailout is necessary to prevent economic collapse. According to this view, lenders are not making loans, even for worthy projects, because they cannot get capital. This view has a grain of truth; if the bailout does not occur, more bankruptcies are possible and credit conditions may worsen for a time.

Talk of Armageddon, however, is ridiculous scare-mongering. If financial institutions cannot make productive loans, a profit opportunity exists for someone else. This might not happen instantly, but it will happen.

Further, the current credit freeze is likely due to Wall Street's hope of a bailout; bankers will not sell their lousy assets for 20 cents on the dollar if the government might pay 30, 50, or 80 cents.
The costs of the bailout, moreover, are almost certainly being understated. The administration's claim is that many mortgage assets are merely illiquid, not truly worthless, implying taxpayers will recoup much of their $700 billion.

If these assets are worth something, however, private parties should want to buy them, and they would do so if the owners would accept fair market value. Far more likely is that current owners have brushed under the rug how little their assets are worth.

The bailout has more problems. The final legislation will probably include numerous side conditions and special dealings that reward Washington lobbyists and their clients.
Anticipation of the bailout will engender strategic behavior by Wall Street institutions as they shuffle their assets and position their balance sheets to maximize their take. The bailout will open the door to further federal meddling in financial markets.

So what should the government do? Eliminate those policies that generated the current mess. This means, at a general level, abandoning the goal of home ownership independent of ability to pay. This means, in particular, getting rid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with policies like the Community Reinvestment Act that pressure banks into subprime lending. (Diane's note: And THIS alone is why this won't happen....too many life-time members of the Congress stand to gain too much from this whole debacle)

The right view of the financial mess is that an enormous fraction of subprime lending should never have occurred in the first place. Someone has to pay for that. That someone should not be, and does not need to be, the U.S. taxpayer.

Aiken County GOP Press Release

News Release


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

David B. Lobb, Vice-Chairman of the Aiken County Republican Party

Phone: 1-803-644-4113

Email: vicechairman.lobb@aikengop.com

Website: http://www.aikengop.com/

Aiken County Republican Party Announces an “Old Time Republican Meet the Candidates Rally”

Aiken, SC, September 24, 2008 – Chairman Dennis Saylor and Vice-Chairman David Lobb announced that the Aiken County Republican Party will host an “Old Time Republican Meet the Candidates Rally” to be held at the Aiken Horse Park (Steeplechase grounds) in Aiken on Thursday, October 9 at 6 pm. Both gentlemen expressed their enthusiasm at having all Republican elected officials and Republican candidates running for office on Election Day, November 4th, 2008 attending this Rally. This will be the first time in recent history that Aiken County’s two U.S. House members—Congressman Joe Wilson (CD2) and Congressman Gresham Barrett (CD3)—will appear at the same rally. The Congressmen will speak on the current issues affecting the citizens of Aiken County. i.e. energy issues, the financial crisis, and immigration. S.C. Senator Greg Ryberg (SC24) and S.C. Senator Shane Massey (SC25), both of whom are running for re-election will speak about their accomplishments and visions for the citizens of the county.

Mr. Neal Dillon will speak about how the Congressmen have been helping to honor his son Marine Cpl. Matthew Dillon who was killed, December 11, 2006 while on patrol in the Ambar province of Iraq in the defense of freedom.

Warren Mowry, Executive Director, South Carolina Victory 2008, will speak on behalf of John McCain and Sarah Palin. South Carolina Victory 2008 is the organization responsible for assisting the Republican candidates in their election efforts.

The location of the event is significant, since it is very near the line dividing Congressional Districts 2 and 3. Aiken Horse Park is located at the intersection of Audubon Drive and Powderhouse Road in Aiken.

Cleve Walker from WAFJ (88.3 FM) will be the master of ceremonies for the night’s festivities, Andrew Siders will sing the National Anthem and music will be provided by the AAA (Home School) Band conducted by Barb Rollins

The following Republican elected official and candidates have confirmed their attendance:

• Margaret Gamble, candidate for S.C. Senate 26;

• Tom Young, Representative-elect, S.C. House 81;

• Don Smith, S.C. House 83;

• J. Roland Smith, S.C. House 84;

• Cyrus Spradley, Aiken County Auditor;

• Tim Carlton, Aiken County Coroner;

• Michael Hunt, Aiken County Sheriff;

• Linda Sharpe, Aiken County Treasurer;

• Ronnie Young, Aiken County Council Chairman;

• Scott Singer, Aiken County Councilman, District 2;

• Eddie Butler, Aiken County Councilman, District 5;

• Charles Barton, Aiken County Councilman, District 6;

• Gary Bunker, Aiken County Councilman, District 7;

• Fred Cavanaugh, Mayor, City of Aiken;

• Dick Dewar, Aiken City Councilman;

• Dick Smith, Aiken City Councilman;

• Jane Vaughters, Aiken City Councilwoman;

• Don Wells, Aiken City Councilman;

• Lynn Sullivan, Jackson Town Council;

• Gene Smith, New Ellenton City Councilman;

• Arthur Shealy, North Augusta City Councilman.

Admission to the event is $15 per single (1 person); $25 per couple (2 people) for tickets purchased by Oct. 3rd. After Oct 3rd the tickets will be $25 per single (1 person); $35 per couple (2 people). This admission includes one BBQ meal (single) and two meals (couple) and drinks catered by Papa Russ.

Tickets may be purchased online at www.AikenGOP.com or at these select locations:

• TruValue Hardware: 121 Laurens Street, SW, Aiken, SC 29801 (downtown Aiken);

• Guest Cottage: 146 Laurens Street, SW, Aiken, SC 29801 (downtown Aiken);

• Park Avenue Paints: 200 Park Avenue, SW, Aiken, SC 29801 (downtown Aiken);

• Osbon's Laundry & Cleaners: 732 Silver Bluff Road, Aiken, SC 29803 (Southside Aiken).


Gates will open at 5:30 p.m. Dinner begins at 6:00 p.m. Festivities begin at 6:45 p.m.


.Aiken County Republican Party Headquarters Mailing Address

127 Greenville Street SW P.O. Box 761

Aiken, SC 29801 Aiken, SC, 29802

The Bailout Deal:What is it?

Another good perspective on the deal. It also gives John McCain credit for working with the House Republicans. Click on the title above and read the comment posted for September 28.

Details on bailout bill posted here (as they become available)

National Review:

1. No ACORN money: All money goes to debt reduction. Democrats had wanted to give 20% of taxpayer debt repayment to Democratic activist groups. House Republicans successfully fought this.

2. No blank check: Treasury is required to develop an insurance program

3. No union power grab. Democrats Dodd and Frank permitted unions to force themselves into the board rooms of our investment companies. This proposed compromise eliminates that. Thank a House Republican.

4. No “cram down” bankruptcy provision (aka, trial bar giveaway)

5. No tax hikes: The proposed compromise simply requires a proposal to Congress to recoup any potential losses.

Democrats vs. Republicans on Civil Rights

The following letter appeared in the Aiken Standard today. Pete Seaha sets forth some very interesting facts.


"Josef Stalin once said "If you tell a lie often enough, eventually it becomes the truth." Such is the Democrat Party's mantra when it comes to Civil Rights.

Lincoln and the Republican Party abolished slavery in 1862. Republicans passed the 14th amendment to the Constitution in 1868 known as the equal protection clause and the 15th amendment in 1870 which granted equal rights to vote.

Republicans also passed an act which guaranteed the right or equal access to all citizens in all public accommodations, whether or not controlled by government. (In 1883 the Supreme Court declared the act unconstitutional).

It was Aaron Sargent, Republican from California who introduced the Susan B. Anthony Amendment in 1878, but it didn't become law of the land until 1920 when Republicans gained the majority in the US House and Senate.

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933 a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes. It should be noted that Democrats held the White House from 1933 to 1952.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (HR 7152) passed the House on Feb 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the Civil Rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34 or 80 percent. Democrats supported it 152 to 96 or 61 percent.

In the Senate the person most responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill was Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen, a Republican from Illinois. There were 52 days of filibusters by Southern Democrats before Dirksen got the Senate to vote 76 to 18 to adopt a bipartisan substitute he had worked out. On June 19, 1964 the Senate passed the Civil Rights Bill 73 to 27. Senate Democrats voted 46 to 21 in favor or 69 percent, while Republicans voted 27 to 6 or 82 percent in favor. Democratic Senators Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia and Al Gore Sr. of Tennessee along with most Southern Democrats voted in opposition.

On the Voter Rights Act of 1965, House Democrats voted 217 to 54 or 80 percent in favor while Republicans voted 111 to 20 or 85 percent in favor. In the Senate Democrats voted 49 to 17 or 62 percent in favor while Republicans voted 30 to 1 or 97 percent in favor.

Since passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act Republicans have consistently voted in favor of renewal or enhancement of the Act.

Finally, President George W. Bush has appointed more women and minorities to high level positions within his administration than any other President in history. Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice as Secretaries of State, Alberto Gonzalez as Attorney General along with the appointment of an openly gay man, Scott Evertz, as Director of Office of National AIDS Policy and Michael E. Guest, openly gay, to be Ambassador to Romania to name just a few.

Over the past five decades or more, African Americans have been used by the Democrat Party to win elections under the guise of the Party's support of civil rights. In reality, it is Republicans who have been responsible for most of the civil rights African Americans enjoy today."

Peter J. Seaha

Aiken, SC

Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis

This is must see video.

Progressives for Obama

Another Weatherman terrorist
a player in Obama campaign
Communists, socialists, anarchists
also part of support organization

By Aaron Klein
________________________________________
WorldNetDaily

Read this and be very concerned! Click on title above to view their website.


JERUSALEM – One of the main founders of the Weathermen terrorist organization is a signatory to an independent organization acting to ensure the election of Sen. Barack Obama, WND has learned.
The group in question, Progressives for Obama, also includes among its ranks many former members of the 1960s radical organization Students for a Democratic Society, from which the Weathermen splintered, as well as current and former members of other radical organizations, such as the Communist Party USA and the Black Radical Congress.
In its creed, first published in March in the Nation magazine, the Progressives for Obama founders state their organization descended from the "proud tradition of independent social movements that have made America a more just and democratic country."
Progressives for Obama stated it can help the Illinois senator's ascent to highest office by contributing funds, using the Internet to reach "millions of swing voters;" defending Obama against negative attacks and making its agenda known at the Democratic National Convention.
"Progressives can make a difference in close primary races like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Oregon and Puerto Rico, and in the November general election," the founders state.

The founders stress it is crucial to form a grassroots leftist movement to ensure Obama does not stray too far to the center, claiming other grassroots liberal movements have successfully pressured U.S. presidents into creating new policy:
It was the industrial strikes and radical organizers in the 1930s who pushed Roosevelt to support the New Deal. It was the civil rights and student movements that brought about voting rights legislation under Lyndon Johnson and propelled Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy's antiwar campaigns. It was the original Earth Day that led Richard Nixon to sign environmental laws.

And it will be the Obama movement that will make it necessary and possible to end the war in Iraq, renew our economy with a populist emphasis, and confront the challenge of global warming. We should not only keep the pressure on [Obama] but also connect the issues that Obama has made central to his campaign into an overarching progressive vision."
Among the signatories and endorsers to Progressives for Obama is Mark Rudd, one of the main founders of the Weathermen terrorist organization. Rudd worked closely for years with Weathermen terrorist William Ayers, whose association with Obama has generated controversy for the presidential candidate.
Rudd originally was a top member of the Students for a Democratic Society, or SDS, leading the famed 1968 Columbia University strikes in which hundreds of students seized several university buildings. He also served as spokesman for the strikes, attracting international media attention.
In 1968, Rudd traveled with the SDS to Cuba, defying U.S. travel bans, where he says he was heavily influenced by the legacy of Che Guevara and by Cuban-style revolution. When he returned to the U.S., Rudd advocated for Columbia's chapter of the SDS to carry out militant, aggressive action, but he was turned down.
A bio published on his own website explains Rudd worked to form the Weathermen as a radical alternative to the SDS and for white Americans to eject their "white skin privilege" and begin "armed struggle" against the U.S. government.
The Weathermen took responsibility for bombing U.S. governmental buildings in the 1970s.
Rudd went underground in 1970, when a bomb exploded in a townhouse in Greenwich Village in New York City, killing three of his comrades. He lived for seven and a half years in hiding as a fugitive, finally surrendering in 1977, facing only low-level state charges after federal charges against Weathermen leaders had been dropped. He resurfaced as a teacher in New Mexico.
As late as 2005, Rudd wrote an editorial in the Los Angeles Times lamenting the state of the antiwar movement in the U.S.
"What's hard to understand – given the revelations about the rush to war, the use of torture and the loss of more than 2,000 soldiers – is why the antiwar movement isn't further along than it is. Given that President Bush is now talking about Iraq as only one skirmish in an unlimited struggle against a global Islamic enemy, a struggle comparable to the titanic, 40-year Cold War against communism, shouldn't a massive critique of the global war on terrorism already be underway?" he wrote.
Rudd condemned the Weathermen's decision to embark on an "armed-struggle," calling it "stupid" since the violent acts led to the group's demise.
Rudd didn't condemn the terrorism itself, only its contribution to the downfall of the Weathermen.
Rudd declined to speak on the record to WND, explaining an interview may spark more Weathermen controversy for Obama.
Rudd is just one of scores of radicals involved with Progressives for Obama.
The group was founded by four individuals with ties to extremist groups:
• Tom Hayden, a former state senator who was a founder and principal organizer of the SDS. Discover the Networks notes Hayden, previously married to actress Jane Fonda, traveled many times to North Vietnam, Czechoslovakia and Paris to strategize with communist North Vietnamese and Viet Cong leaders on how to defeat America's anti-communist efforts.
• Bill Fletcher, a former Maoist and current leader of Democratic Socialists of America or DSA. The New Zeal blog notes Fletcher was also a founder of the Black Radical Congress, closely linked to the Communist Party USA, which advocated for "progressive social justice, racial equality and economic justice goals within the U.S.
• Barbara Ehenreich, an honorary chairman of DSA who was formerly active in antiwar movements in which some notorious radicals took part.
• Actor Danny Glover, a member of the Black Students Union, who has visited Venezuela, making guest appearances on President Hugo Chavez's television and radio talk show. He reportedly has accepted loans of about $20 million from the Venezuelan government to make a movie about a Haitian revolutionary leader.
The Progressives for Obama webmaster is Carl Davidson, a former vice president of the Students for a Democratic Society, who has traveled to Cuba to meet with Fidel Castro.
The signatories and endorsers of the Obama activist group, listed on the Progressives website, include scores of well known communist, socialist and anarchist activists and former SDS members.
The Obama campaign was not prepared to comment on the links to Rudd and other extremists in the allied organization.

Obama tells supporters to get in faces of Republicans and argue

"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face," he said.

Lovely. Obama will negotiate with our nation's enemies without preconditions but he wants his supporters to get in our faces and argue.

YouTube captured the moment.

Obama asking Missouri law enforcement to prosecute anyone who lies about Obama

http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1

This is a shocking video. Missouri prosecutors and sheriffs will prosecute anyone who lies about Obama in lies or otherwise. They are not offering the same level of protection to McCain.

And who is going to determine the truth? Obama supporters?

Free speech for thee but not for me

Three times now Senator Obama has threatened to yank the FCC license of radio stations for airing ads or hosting guests that did not portray the Senator in a favorable light.

It should be apparent by now the self declared party of "free speech" doesn't really mean it.

This is reminiscent of how feminists have behaved for the last 2 decades. While proclaiming they wish to push forward women's rights, they are really an ideological wing of the Democratic party. We can see this with how they have treated Sarah Palin. When NOW and other feminist groups tell us they want to enhance women's rights and power and voice in government, what they really mean is they want this for Democratic women. If one is a Republican or conservative, women will be called "whore" or threatened with gang rape -- both the threat and name calling came from a comedy "artist" named Sarah Bernhard.

It is one thing to disagree with Palin on policy issues, but they've made it personal and they have used their malignant and unstable followers from the Daily Kos in order to push the most venal lies I've ever seen published and then, shockingly, reiterated by the mainstream media and specifically and frequently, Andrea Mitchell.

CNN anchors have often wondered how a woman with 5 children could work outside the home in any capacity, let alone as Governor or Vice President. Although Obama is referred to as a Senator, the media can barely bring itself to utter the words Governor when referring to Palin.

They have pondered how a person from a state with such a small population could possibly be ready to serve as Vice President.

These same geniuses treated the following men as viable PRESIDENTIAL candidates but never wondered how they could possibly be prepared given their state's small population.

Joe Biden - Senator, Delaware - population 853,476 (2006)
Howard Dean - Governor, Vermont - population 623,908 (2006)

Sarah Palin - Governor, Alaska - population 670,053 (2006)

Democrats poison pill in bailout bill

Bush told the country that we are in an economic crisis and his Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, came up with an idea that would, it is claimed, end up actually making money for the U.S. Treasury in the long run. That’s all well and good, but the Democrats already have a plan to siphon off any repayment of the people’s money back to the treasury by adding one little line to the agreement that would end up stealing money from any repayments and giving it to left-wing political advocacy groups like ACORN, the National Urban League and the Hispanic group La Raza. Instead of trying to help the economy, the Democrats just want more money for their left-wing political constituents. It’s business as usual for the Democrats, of course, but a bigger question is will the media let them get away with it?

On Thursday, the Senate Democrats shopped around a one page “Agreement in Principle” from the U.S. Senate Banking Committee that laid out their proposal for the bailout of the economy. At first it all seems rather straight forward, but hidden inside this document is one little line that proves that Democrats aren’t as interested in the economy as they are in trying to extort a payday for their favorite political advocacy groups. Yes, even in a bill as important as the bailout the Democrats are trying to stuff it with pork!

Of course, the claim that this bailout will make money is not cut and dried. But the idea is that the bailout will put the Treasury Department in ownership of what could easily later become lucrative investments. And, at that later date, the Treasury Dept. can then begin to sell these investments off at a profit and, thence, pay back the Treasury for the bailout — in essence repaying the American people. But, the Democrats already have a plan to spend “profits” that not only do not exist yet, but may never exist. In the “Agreement in Principle” is the following line:

“Directs a certain percentage of future profits to the Affordable Housing Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund to meet America’s housing needs.”

So, the Senate Democrats want to re-direct profits to the “Affordable Housing Fund” and the “Capital Magnet Fund” instead of keeping these future profits going to pay back the American people for this $700 Billion bailout loan. And what are these special agencies the Senate Dems want to fund? We turn to the Wall Street Journal in a July 2008 piece that reports on what sorts of groups that were to be the recipients of the federal pork from earlier bills the Senate tried to pass.

That tax eventually will channel upwards of $600 million annually in grants for developing and restoring housing, mostly as low-income rentals, available to Acorn and other groups (such as the National Council of La Raza and the National Urban League ). Democrats on Capitol Hill and housing groups say the housing-assistance money is vital to helping Americans hit hardest by what some call the largest drop in home values since the Great Depression. But they acknowledge the perception of political conflict in giving federal funds to an organization that does political work. “We are guarding against it,” said Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank in an interview. He secured the Affordable Housing Trust from his seat as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee…

Many may already know that ACORN ( The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is under investigation in several states for voter fraud. They have been caught turning in hundreds of thousands of fake voter registration cards in an effort to stuff ballot boxes with fake voters and pump up Democrat vote totals. ACORN’s founder also tried to cover up an embezzlement scheme his little brother perpetrated when he stole $1 million dollars of the organization’s money. This has only lately come to light.

Of course, many are also aware of the race oriented Hispanic La Raza group that has been a major player in trying to allow illegal aliens to enter the U.S., vote in our elections, and take freely of schools and social welfare monies.

Naturally, all these organizations exclusively support the Democratic Party.

Lastly, there is one more aspect of this that proves the Democrats are playing politics with this issue instead of being concerned with the saving the economy. The Senate Democrats and Democratic Speaker of the House Pelosi have been pressuring John McCain to sign onto this deal. If he does and this payoff to left-wing groups like the vote fraud infused ACORN or the racemongering La Raza stays in the bill, McCain will be responsible for giving pork to dangerous hardcore, left-wing organizations. If he doesn’t sign onto this because of this pork laden provision, the Democrats can then turn around and say that McCain is a stumbling block in this important bailout bill. The Democrats have, in other words, slipped a poison pill into the plan.

Once again, the Democratic Party proves that it doesn’t care about capitalism, doesn’t care about the economy, doesn’t care about working for the people, but does want to continue slipping huge amounts of cash to their buddies in anti-American groups as well as using important bills to advance mere political partisanship.

So, lets see if the media siezes on this one line in the Senate Democrat’s “Agreement” and reports it for what it is: a cynical, partisan attempt to play politics during one of the most important crises in years.

Comment by Ed giobbe on the Financial Crisis

President Bush's speech to the nation on Wednesday was an excellent summary of the current financial crisis and what needs to be done.  The President, as well as the Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve have told us that immediate, decisive action, on a massive scale must be undertaken to prevent further financial panic and economic collapse. They have put forth a plan which will restore liquidity and confidence to the financial markets.  This plan is not a $700 billion expenditure by the Federal government.  It is a purchase of illiquid mortgage assets from financial institutions by the government which will sell these assets in an auction process.  This will allow these assets to be sold in a more orderly way to establish a price point and avoid fire sale prices or no prices. The taxpayers will very likely suffer very little or no loss and may even make money. 
 
The consequences of no action or delay are monumental. Prolonged severe recession, much higher unemployment and a deflationary spiral leading to a further drop in house prices will almost surely occur. We face the greatest national crisis since the Second World War and the Great Depression.  It is no time for partisan politics, political posturing or economic philosophical debate.  Warren Buffett, one of the most astute financial managers of our time said if the proposed bill by the Secretary of the Treasury does not pass, "We will fall over a precipice". 
 
We are at this sorry state for the following reasons:
  - overly lax lending practices by financial  institutions encouraged by Congress in order to make
    home ownership more affordable
  - a massive regulatory failure
  - the creation of enormously complex mortgage products which no one really understood or 
    correctly valued

If your house was on fire, you want the firemen to put the fire out and save your house, not to be debating who was to blame or why better equipment is needed.  So it is in the current situation.  Let's take immediate action to restore confidence and liquidity to our financial markets.
We can then make the necessary changes to assign responsibility for the current situation and make sure it doesn't happen again. 

Call or e-mail your Senators and Representatives and demand that they act on the proposals made
by the Secretary of the Treasury and the President.  It is a matter of the utmost urgency.
 
Sen. Lindsey Graham (202) 224 5972
Sen.Jim DeMint         (202) 224 6121
Rep.J. Gresham Barrett (202) 225 5301
 

Clinton and the Subprime crisis

How A Clinton-Era Rule Rewrite Made Subprime Crisis Inevitable

By TERRY JONES
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, September 24, 2008 4:30 PM PT

One of the most frequently asked questions about the subprime market meltdown and housing crisis is: How did the government get so deeply involved in the housing market?

---

IBD Exclusive Series: What Caused The Loan Crisis?

---

The answer is: President Clinton wanted it that way.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, even into the early 1990s, weren't the juggernauts they'd later be.
While President Carter in 1977 signed the Community Reinvestment Act, which pushed Fannie and Freddie to aggressively lend to minority communities, it was Clinton who supercharged the process. After entering office in 1993, he extensively rewrote Fannie's and Freddie's rules.
In so doing, he turned the two quasi-private, mortgage-funding firms into a semi-nationalized monopoly that dispensed cash to markets, made loans to large Democratic voting blocs and handed favors, jobs and money to political allies. This potent mix led inevitably to corruption and the Fannie-Freddie collapse.
Despite warnings of trouble at Fannie and Freddie, in 1994 Clinton unveiled his National Homeownership Strategy, which broadened the CRA in ways Congress never intended.
Addressing the National Association of Realtors that year, Clinton bluntly told the group that "more Americans should own their own homes." He meant it.
Clinton saw homeownership as a way to open the door for blacks and other minorities to enter the middle class.
Though well-intended, the problem was that Congress was about to change hands, from the Democrats to the Republicans. Rather than submit legislation that the GOP-led Congress was almost sure to reject, Clinton ordered Robert Rubin's Treasury Department to rewrite the rules in 1995.
The rewrite, as City Journal noted back in 2000, "made getting a satisfactory CRA rating harder." Banks were given strict new numerical quotas and measures for the level of "diversity" in their loan portfolios. Getting a good CRA rating was key for a bank that wanted to expand or merge with another.
Loans started being made on the basis of race, and often little else.
"Bank examiners would use federal home-loan data, broken down by neighborhood, income group and race, to rate banks on performance," wrote Howard Husock, a scholar at the Manhattan Institute.
But those rules weren't enough.
Clinton got the Department of Housing and Urban Development to double-team the issue. That would later prove disastrous.
Clinton's HUD secretary, Andrew Cuomo, "made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country's current crisis," the liberal Village Voice noted. Among those decisions were changes that let Fannie and Freddie get into subprime loan markets in a big way.
Other rule changes gave Fannie and Freddie extraordinary leverage, allowing them to hold just 2.5% of capital to back their investments, vs. 10% for banks.
Since they could borrow at lower rates than banks due to implicit government guarantees for their debt, the government-sponsored enterprises boomed.
With incentives in place, banks poured billions of dollars of loans into poor communities, often "no doc" and "no income" loans that required no money down and no verification of income.
By 2007, Fannie and Freddie owned or guaranteed nearly half of the $12 trillion U.S. mortgage market — a staggering exposure.
Worse still was the cronyism.
Fannie and Freddie became home to out-of-work politicians, mostly Clinton Democrats. An informal survey of their top officials shows a roughly 2-to-1 dominance of Democrats over Republicans.
Then there were the campaign donations. From 1989 to 2008, some 384 politicians got their tip jars filled by Fannie and Freddie.
Over that time, the two GSEs spent $200 million on lobbying and political activities. Their charitable foundations dropped millions more on think tanks and radical community groups.
Did it work? Well, if measured by the goal of putting more poor people into homes, the answer would have to be yes.
From 1995 to 2005, a Harvard study shows, minorities made up 49% of the 12.5 million new homeowners.
The problem is that many of those loans have now gone bad, and minority homeownership rates are shrinking fast.
Fannie and Freddie, with their massive loan portfolios stuffed with securitized mortgage-backed paper created from subprime loans, are a failed legacy of the Clinton era.

 

Congressman Gresham Barrett on Bailout

Dear Friends,

We wanted to make sure you had a chance to read firsthand Congressman Barrett’s thoughts on the economic crisis and the proposed bailout plan. Congressman Barrett gave the testimony below before the House Financial Services Committee on Wednesday.

Thanks –

The Barrett Brigade


Congressman Barrett’s Testimony Before the House Financial Services Committee

“I firmly subscribe to the belief that “Main Street” and Wall Street are inextricably linked. Instability in the financial markets leads to instability in taxpayers’ retirement accounts, pension funds, people are concerned about if and how this will affect their jobs, student loans, car loans. And the capital that flows through our financial markets is vital to the continued success of our businesses, large and small. We should all agree that a failure of our credit markets could be catastrophic.

“However, I am not convinced that the Treasury’s plan to purchase $700 billion in illiquid assets is the most responsible way forward. And I am also not sure that this proposal gets at the root of the problem. I fear that it may only treat the immediate symptoms. While I understand that the symptoms – that is a shut down in the credit markets – are potentially disastrous, I worry that if we go forward with this plan, we will have to come back again and again with more and more money to treat new symptoms that pop up. We must instead treat the causes of the problem, which may be a long and possibly painful process.

“The whole crisis started around a type of debt: sub-prime mortgages. And it still revolves around debt. Mortgage-backed securities and other debt instruments are at the root of this problem. And we need to do something to restore access to credit, which means more debt. But the proposal brought to us involves even more debt – the government borrowing another $700 billion. Consumers, like the government, have borrowed too much. We must cut government spending. We must also institute pro-growth policies to help our economy grow, so Americans and their government can get out of debt. It makes sense that when people have good jobs, they do not need to borrow as much, whether a mortgage to buy a home or on a credit card to pay for school supplies or gasoline.

“Too much of our recent economic growth has been built on debt. We see that businesses have been massively over-leveraged, as have American consumers. If debt was at a safe level, we would have never been in this fix in the first place. When consumer spending makes up 70 percent of GDP, I think that indicates an unsustainable form of economic growth, especially when it’s financed by credit card debt and increasingly unaffordable mortgages. We need to start producing, whether it’s energy, computers, or intellectual property. I think the road-map to get us there is pretty clear: we must shore up our balance sheet, we need to reduce our capital gains taxes to spur investment, we must reduce our corporate taxes which are among the highest in the world, and we must move towards energy independence, as high energy prices are an increasingly dangerous drag on our economy. We should take this opportunity to do the right thing to help America grow in the long run.

“I appreciate that there is a panic in the markets, but policies derived from panic are never sound. I strongly believe in the superiority of free markets, and the ability of markets to correct themselves. However, the government does and has always had a role in ensuring that markets function correctly and efficiently, to keep them free of fraud and malfeasance and to minimize market failures. For example, we are all familiar with the important role that the FDIC plays in insuring bank accounts. I think that we should more actively explore other options where the government can take a role in helping the credit markets find order, but allow the free market to do most of the heavy lifting and provide more capital. One option that should be explored in greater detail is to allow private entities — private equity, hedge funds, other private partnerships — to participate in a competitive bidding process for the distressed assets that will be offloaded by banks and other financial institutions, rather than having the Treasury as the only potential buyer. This proposal could include an initial traditional auction which might include the government as well as all other qualified buyers with the assets awarded to the highest bidder.

“There is no doubt that we find ourselves in a precarious situation. But, like many of my colleagues, I think it would be a mistake to rush into a huge new expenditure. Just as the market is now panicking, the government is also apt to panic.”

Republican Study Committee on Bailout

Anonymous wrote the following and sent me a link to Human Events.


"I think this article has a pretty good list of what sould be done. I also think it could/should be coupled with a drill everywhere do everything energy plan that would be a big boost to the economy. I think the bailout is a very bad idea and the camel's nose under the tent again. If we want to fix the economy, we need to strengthen the principle on which it is built - i.e capitalism - not weaken it with a govt. bailout. Sen. Richard Shelby is doing a good job. I had never really been impressed with him - but he is speaking out now. I am also encouraged to hear the FBI is investigating - interesting choice of the body to do the investigating.

Part of the article appears below and you can read the entire piece by clicking on the title of this posting.

.
"The Republican Study Committee has released an alternative to the Treasury Department's bailout proposal and will discuss the proposal at a press conference today. Conservatives have expressed concern that the Treasury's proposal will alter the country's free-market system, awards massive authority to the Treasury, and fails to penalize debtholders and shareholders. Here is the committee's free-market alternative as released this morning."

Working Hard to Shake Things Up

Senator Shane Massey is running for re-election in State Senate District 25. He has done a good job and proven himself to be a good conservative who is working hard in support of Governor Sanford's reform initiatives. Shane will be at the Aiken County Republican Rally on October 9th and I encourage everyone to attend the Rally to meet Shane. The following comes from Shanes's website which you can reach by clicking on the title of this posting.



WORKING HARD TO SHAKE THINGS UP

Shane Massey said he would work hard to shake things up in Columbia. He didn’t wait long to start shaking up the good ole’ boy system and the status quo politicians.

* Before session even started, Shane introduced legislation to end secret pork-barrel spending projects. For the first time in recent history, the Senate passed a “pork free” budget…protecting your hard earned tax dollars.

* Shane spent a large part of his first year strengthening DUI laws to crack down on drunk drivers in South Carolina. The law passed and now your family is safer on the street because of Shane’s hard work.

* When illegal immigrants were taking advantage of hardworking taxpayers, Shane worked hard to help pass the toughest immigration bill in the nation.

* Shane fought for our values by allowing local governments to display the 10 Commandments.

10,000 REASONS TO BELIEVE SHANE WILL KEEP WORKING HARD FOR US IN 2009.

Last year Shane Massey knocked on over 10,000 in the primary and general elections to get your vote for State Senate. This year he’s going to knock on another 5,000 doors in just three months to prove that he will work hard to…

Improve the quality of public education.

“The future of our state hinges on our ability to educate our children. My primary focus next session will be fixing the public education-funding problem, making our schools safer for teachers to teach and students to learn, and ensuring that no child is stuck in a failing school. Politicians have been talking about these problems for far too long. It’s time for the politicians to act or get out of the way for those of us who are ready to do the hard work it takes to fix our education system.” - Shane

Make South Carolina energy efficient.

“Federal politicians can’t seem to get it right. They dropped the ball on illegal immigration, and we had to step up and tackle the problem here in South Carolina. Now they are refusing to address our energy crisis. I support the funding of future missions at the Savannah River Site and continued research and development to find alternative energy resources. I also support oil exploration hundreds of miles off South Carolina’s coast.” - Shane

Ensure all South Carolinians have access to quality, affordable healthcare.

“Nearly 700,000 South Carolinians live without health insurance while government continues to ignore the problem. I support innovative reforms to reduce the price of prescription drugs, especially for seniors living on a tight budget. These reforms should include market-based solutions aimed at reducing the rising cost of healthcare by providing more options for patients, ensuring affordable insurance premiums, and making coverage accessible to all hard-working South Carolinians. Most importantly, we need to make sure that medical decisions are ALWAYS made by doctors and patients rather than insurance companies.” - Shane

Demand stronger ethics legislation for elected officials.

“Transparency and accountability are the foundation of our democracy. Unfortunately too many politicians at both the federal and state levels of government have represented special interests and the good ole’ boy political system instead of their constituents. I’m sick of seeing stories of politicians going to jail and resigning from office. It’s past time to strengthen South Carolina’s ethics laws. I will introduce legislation demanding more transparency in contributions to politicians.” - Shane

Make South Carolina the best place to do business with tax cuts and spending restraints.

“The first step in improving South Carolina’s economy is fixing public education. We must provide employers with an educated workforce to compete with workers in China and India. We must create an economic environment conducive to job growth by cutting income taxes and relieving this great burden on both employers and employees. But the only way to cut taxes responsibly is to quit wasting taxpayers’ dollars. I will continue to push for immediate earmark reform, and I will file legislation to make 100% of spending bills require a roll call vote. When voters know who is wasting their money, the politicians will begin to clean up their act.” - Shane

Shane doesn’t just make empty promises. He works hard to get things done.

Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism on Schools

Wall Street Journal Online today carried an interesting and SCARY story. Click on the title above to read the entire article.


"Despite having authored two autobiographies, Barack Obama has never written about his most important executive experience. From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists.

AP

Bill Ayers.

The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama's first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers's home.
The Obama campaign has struggled to downplay that association. Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC. Those archives are housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago and I've recently spent days looking through them."

Oregon Congressman On Bailout

Anonymous sent me this as a comment on the Demint article that follows this posting. I don't agree with everything Defazio said but the basic premise is right.

DeMint Opposes Wall Street Bailout

DeMint Opposes Wall Street Bailout

Plan does not solve the problems that caused the current credit crunch, and could make them much worse

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) announced his opposition to the $700 billion plan proposed by the Bush Administration to bailout Wall Street.

"After reviewing the Administration's proposed bailout plan, I believe it is completely unacceptable. This plan does nothing to address the misguided government policies that created this mess and it could make matters much worse by socializing an entire sector of the U.S. economy. This plan fails to oversee or regulate the government failures that led to this crisis. Instead it greatly increases the role for Secretary Paulson whose market predictions have been consistently wrong in the last year, and provides corporate welfare for investment firms on Wall Street that don't want to disclose their assets and sell them to private investors for market rates. Most Americans are paying their bills on time and investing responsibly and should not be forced to pay for the reckless actions of some on Wall Street, especially when no one can guarantee this will solve our current problems."

"This plan will not only cause our nation to fall off the debt cliff, it could send the value of the dollar into a free-fall as investors around the world question our ability to repay our debts. It's also very likely that this plan will extend the cycle of bailouts, encouraging other companies to behave in reckless ways that create the need for even more bailouts, triggering an endless run on our treasury. This plan may make things look better for Wall Street in the next couple months, but the long-term consequences to our economy could be disastrous.

"There are much better ways of dealing with this problem than forcing American taxpayers to pay for every asset some investor doesn't want anymore. We should start by reforming government policies and programs that created this mess, including the Federal Reserve's easy money policy, the congressional charters of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the Community Reinvestment Act. Then Congress should pass a number of permanent and proven pro-growth reforms to encourage capital formation and boost asset values. We need to make permanent reductions in the corporate tax and the capital gains tax rates. We have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, which encourages companies to take jobs and investment overseas."

"It's a sad fact, but Americans can no longer trust the economic information they are getting from this Administration. The Administration said the bailout of Bear Stearns would stop the bleeding and solve the problem, but they were wrong. They said $150 billion in new government spending using rebate checks would solve the problem, but they were wrong again. They said new authority to bailout Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would solve the problem without being used, but they were wrong again. Now they want us to trust them to spend nearly a trillion dollars on more government bailouts. It's completely irresponsible and I cannot support it."

Wall Street Journal on Mortgage Crisis

The following paragraphs lead into an excellent article that appears in the WSJ Online Journal today. Click the title above to read the entire article. 



"Once upon a time, in the land that FDR built, there was the rule of "regulation" and all was right on Wall and Main Streets. Wise 27-year-old bank examiners looked down upon the banks and saw that they were sound. America's Hobbits lived happily in homes financed by 30-year-mortgages that never left their local banker's balance sheet, and nary a crisis did we have.
Then, lo, came the evil Reagan marching from Mordor with his horde of Orcs, short for "market fundamentalists." Reagan's apprentice, Gramm of Texas and later of McCain, unleashed the scourge of "deregulation," and thus were "greed," short-selling, securitization, McMansions, liar loans and other horrors loosed upon the world of men.
Now, however, comes Obama of Illinois, Schumer of New York and others in the fellowship of the Beltway to slay the Orcs and restore the rule of the regulator. So once more will the Hobbits be able to sleep peacefully in the shire."

The Worst President in American History

 Will we let it happen again?

 

 

 

Profile In Incompetence: The Worst President In American History

     By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT

 

  Jimmy Carter became our 39th president at the young age of 52.  He was a one-term governor from Plains, GA, where he managed the family peanut farm and taught Sunday school.  He was also a graduate of the Naval Academy and served seven years in the Navy, leaving as a lieutenant.

 

  He came to power in the aftermath of the Vietnam War and the resignation of President Nixon.  The public wanted change and someone new, and Carter was an ambitious, hands-on politician who promised better days.  As good as his intentions were, however, the things he tried were not successful.  In fact, he created far more serious problems than he ever solved.

 

  The centerpiece of Carter's foreign policy was human rights, and he did achieve one noble success—a peace treaty between Egypt's Anwar Sadat and Israel's Menachem Begin. 

 

Unfortunately, that later led to Sadat's assassination at the hands of Muslim radicals.

 

  Many people felt Carter was a good man who worked hard and meant well.  But he was naive and incompetent in handling the enormous burdens and complex challenges of being president.

 

  He wrongly believed Americans had an "inordinate fear of communism," so he lifted travel bans to Cuba, North Vietnam and Cambodia and pa rdoned draft evaders.  He also stopped B-1 bomber production and gave away our strategically located Panama Canal.

 

  His most damaging miscalculation was the withdrawal of U.S. support for the Shah of Iran, a strong and longtime military ally.  Carter objected to the Shah's alleged mistreatment of imprisoned Soviet spies who were working to overthrow Iran's government.  He thought the exiled Ayatollah Khomeini, being a religious man, would make a fairer leader.

 

  Having lost U.S. support, the Shah was overthrown, the Ayatollah returned, Iran was declared an Islamic nation and Palestinian hit men were hired to eliminate opposition.

 

  The Ayatollah then introduced the idea of suicide bombers to the Palestine Liberation Organization, paying $35,000 to PLO families whose young people were brainwashed to kill as many Israelis as possible by blowing themselves up in crowded shopping areas.

 

  Next, the Ayatollah used Iran's oil wealth to create, train and finance a new terrorist organization, Hezbollah, which later would attack Israel in 2006.

 

  In November 1979, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other Iranians stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.  Not until six months into the ordeal did Carter attempt a rescue.  But the mission, using just six Navy helicopters, was poorly executed.  Three of the copters were disabled or lost in sandstorms.  (Pilots weren't allowed to meet with weather forecasters because someone in authority worried about security.)  Five airmen and three Marines lost their lives.

 

  So, due to overconfidence, inexperience and poor judgment, Carter undermined and lost a strong ally, Iran, that today aggressively threatens the U.S., Israel and the rest of the world with nuclear weapons.

 

  But that's not all.  After Carter met for the first time with Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev, the USSR promptly invaded Afghanistan.  Carter, ever the naive appeaser, was shocked.  "I can't believe the Russians lied to me," he said.

 

  The invasion attracted a 23-year-old Saudi named Osama bin Laden to Afghanistan to recruit Muslim fighters and raise money for an anti-Soviet jihad.  Part of that group eventually became al-Qaida, a terrorist organization that would declare war on America several times between 1996 and 1998 before attacking us on 9/11, killing more Americans than the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

  On Carter's watch, the Soviet Union went on an unrestrained rampage in which it took over not only Afghanistan, but also Ethiopia, South Yemen, Angola, Cambodia, Mozambique, Grenada and Nicaragua.

  In spite of this, Carter's last defense budget proposed spending 45% below pre-Vietnam levels for fighter aircraft, 75% for ships, 83% for attack submarines and 90% for helicopters.

 

  Years later, as a civilian, Carter negotiated a peace agreement with North Korea to keep that communist country from developing nuclear weapons.  He also convinced President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to go along with it.  But the signed piece of paper proved worthless.  The North Koreans deceived Carter and instead used our money, incentives and technical equipment to build nuclear weapons and pose the threat we face today.

 

  Thus did Carter unwittingly become our Neville Chamberlain, creating with his well-intended but inept, unrealistic and gullible actions the very conditions that led to the three most dangerous security threats we face today:  Iran, al-Qaida and North Korea.

 

  On the domestic side, Carter gave us inflation of 15%, the highest in 34 years; interest rates of 21%, the highest in 115 years; and a severe energy crisis with lines around the block at gas stations nationwide.

 

  In 1977, Carter, along with a Democrat Congress, created a worthy project with noble intentions—the Community Reinvestment Act.  Over strong industry objections, it mandated that all banks meet the credit needs of their entire communities.

 

  In 1995, President Clinton imposed even stronger regulations and performance tests that coerced banks to substantially increase loans to low-income, poverty-area borrowers or face fines or possible restrictions on expansion.  These revisions allowed for securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages.

 

  By 1997, good loans were bundled with poor ones and sold as prime packages to institutions here and abroad.  That shifted risk from the loan originators, freeing banks to begin pyramiding and make more of these profitable subprime products.

 

  Under two young, well-intended presidents, therefore, big-government plans and mandates played a significant role in the current subprime mortgage mess and its catastrophic consequences for the U.S. and international economies.

 

  Hardest-hit by the mortgage forec losures have been the citizens that Democrats always claim to help most—inner-city residents who fell victim to low or no down payment schemes, unexpected adjustable rates, deceptive loan applications and commission-hungry salespeople.

 

  Now we're having to bail out at huge cost Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the very agencies that were supposed to stabilize the system.  In time, this should improve the situation.  But the party of Carter and Clinton that midwifed our mortgage mess now wants to be trusted to take over and have the government run our entire system of health care!

 

  And everyone is blaming Bush for our current problems.

Transparency in State Government

Let your State legislators know you want more roll call votes.

SOUTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHOULD CALL ROLL

Legislators must be held accountable for their choices, and South Carolinians deserve to know how their elected officials vote. Roll call voting is critical to ensuring open government. Voice votes keep citizens in the dark. In South Carolina, roll call voting in the General Assembly is the exception rather than the rule.

In 2008, when voting on passage of a General Bill or Joint Resolution:

• The South Carolina House of Representatives called roll 8 percent of the time
• The South Carolina Senate called roll 1 percent of the time
• On average, the South Carolina General Assembly called roll 5 percent of the time

Most states in the Southeast mandate roll call votes for their legislatures:

• Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana and Mississippi mandate roll call voting on final passage of all bills

• Tennessee requires roll call voting on every bill including bills making appropriations of public dollars

• North Carolina mandates roll call votes on second and third reading of revenue bills

• Currently, South Carolina mandates roll call voting only on elections by the General Assembly,
taking up the Governor’s vetoes, contested Supreme Court elections, removal of officers and
amendments to the state Constitution

House Bill 5019 was introduced in April. That bill, called the “2008 Spending Accountability Act” would have required a roll call vote for all bills with a fiscal impact. House lawmakers objected to immediate consideration of HB 5019, and the bill was diverted to the Ways and Means Committee where no action was taken.

Representative democracy depends upon citizens’ ability to hold their lawmakers accountable. State government spending has increased by 40 percent in just a few years. Citizens deserve to know when legislators vote to spend public money. They should call roll when they do it.

The link above will provide specific data on the last legislative session. Kudos to the South Carolina Policy Council for compiling this information.
.

Aiken Choral Society Concert September 27th

AIKEN CHORAL SOCIETY AUTUMN CONCERT



           SIMPSON, HASLAM and LOSEY 

                                   AT 

                       AIKEN MUSEUM

The Aiken Choral Society will present Maureen Simpson, soprano, and Diane Haslam, mezzo-soprano in:


A Concert of Favorite Opera Arias and Duets, on September 27th, 2008, at 7:30 p.m., in the Aiken County Historical Museum.  Mary Losey will accompany on the piano.  The event will also feature a reception and silent auction.

Tickets will be available at the Aiken County Historical Museum and at the door:  $35/individual; $50/couple. 

In addition to the concert, there will be a post-concert reception of wine and light hors d'oeuvres.  Items in the silent auction include a 14 carat two-tone amethyst and diamond pendant necklace, donated by Floyd & Green; a tea party for ten preteen young ladies, offered by Sissy Brodie; a 6-month membership provided by Just Breathe Studio (www.justbreathestudio.com); a 3-night stay at a Wyndham condo at Edisto beach, courtesy of Just Breathe Studio; a basket of goodies from Bone-a-Fide Bakery; an elegant formally appointed dinner for eight, with nine courses and four imported wines; and many more wonderful items.   For more information call  642-2015.

Aiken Choral Society, the second oldest performing arts group in Aiken, rehearses every Thursday, 7:30 PM, at Cornerstone Baptist Church, on Hitchcock Highway.  For more information regarding rehearsals, call Dr. Maureen Simpson, 649-6570.


Joann B. Hartley, PR ACS   803-642-0467, jbhartley@yahoo.com

Can Palin Follow Thatcher’s Footsteps?

Newsmax has an excellent article today comparing Margaret Thatcher and Sarah Palin. The first two paragraphs are quoted below. To read the entire article click on the title of this posting.   Can Palin Follow Thatcher’s Footsteps?

Thursday, September 18, 2008 1:28 PM By: James Humes

Parallels abound between Gov. Sarah Palin’s quest to be a heartbeat from the U.S. presidency and Margaret Thatcher’s rise to power in Great Britain. Thatcher broke the glass ceiling in her country, where no woman had ever risen to such a top leadership position. The arguments against her were plenty: She had no experience in foreign policy, defense or national security matters. Most of her expertise was in domestic issues such as education. The old-boy network was united against her, but she took on the leadership in her own party.

Democratic Party Annual Fish Fry October 9

AIKEN COUNTY
DEMOCRATIC PARTY
SIXTH ANNUAL FISH FRY

Thursday, October 9, 2008

6:00 - 9:00 p.m.
Aiken County Shrine Club

(1526 Columbia Hwy., Enter off Hwy.1)

Guest Speakers:

Inez Tenenbaum, former Democratic State Superintendent of Education
Jane Dyer, Democratic candidate for U.S. Representative District 3
Rob Miller, Democratic candidate for U.S. Representative District 2
Greg Anderson, Democratic candidate for State Senate District 25
Clay Middleton, South Carolina Political Director, Obama for America

Ticket Price Includes:

Admittance • One Hot Fish Dinner
Silent Auction • Door Prizes

DONATION
$20.00 single ticket
$35.00 for two tickets
Children under 12 & Students with student ID $15.00


For ticket information contact:
Teresa Harper 803-642-4871 or Mary Monroe 954-326-6001

Old Time Republican Meet the Candidates Rally

Aiken County Republican Party's Old Time 

Republican Meet the Candidates Rally

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

The Aiken County Republican Party is hosting an Old Time Republican Meet the Candidates Rally on Thursday, October 9, 2008 featuring Congressman Joe Wilson (CD2) and Congressman Gresham Barrett (CD3).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All Republicans currently holding or seeking elected office to serve some portion of Aiken County are being invited. Not only that, but this is the first time that Aiken County's two Congressmen will appear at a joint rally held by the Aiken County Republican Party! So, you don't want to miss it.

Date: Thursday, October, 9, 2008

Location: Ford Conger Field (Aiken Horse Park)

Address: intersection of Audubon Drive and Powderhouse Road in Aiken (Google map of area; Close-up map)

Times:

Gates open at 5:30 p.m.

Dinner begins at 6:00 p.m.

Festivities begin at 6:45 p.m.

Republican elected officials and candidates attending:

Featured speakers:

Congressman Joe Wilson, Congressional District 2

Congressman Gresham Barrett, Congressional District 3

Spokesman for candidates:

Warren Mowry, Executive Director, SC Victory '08 -- the organization responsible for electing all Republicans in South Carolina -- speaking for John McCain and Sarah Palin

Aiken County Republican elected officials:

Greg Ryberg, S.C. Senate 24

Shane Massey, S.C. Senate 25

Margaret Gamble, candidate for S.C. Senate 26

Tom Young, Representative-elect, S.C. House 81

J. Roland Smith, S.C. House 84

Michael Hunt, Aiken County Sheriff

Scott Singer, Aiken County Councilman, District 2

Charles Barton, Aiken County Councilman, District 6

Gary Bunker, Aiken County Councilman, District 7

Fred Cavanaugh, Mayor, City of Aiken

Dick Dewar, Aiken City Councilman

Dick Smith, Aiken City Councilman

Jane Vaughters, Aiken City Councilwoman

Don Wells, Aiken City Councilman

Music will be provided by the AAA Band conducted by Barb Rollins.

Admission cost:

Your admission to this event includes the price of one meal, catered by Papa Russ, consisting of his Original Smoked BBQ, bread, two sides and a beverage (tea, lemonade or water).

Payment methods accepted: cash, check or PayPal online at http://www.aikengop.com/
Per-person advance ticket price (by no later than 5:00 p.m. on Friday, October 3):

$15 per single (1 person)

$25 per couple (2 people).

Per-person day-of / walk-in ticket price (after 5:00 p.m. on Friday, October 3):

$25 per single (1 person)

$35 per couple (2 people).

Ticket sales: Tickets to this event may also be purchased after Wednesday, September 17 at:

TruValue Hardware: 121 Laurens Street, SW, Aiken, SC 29801 (downtown Aiken)

Guest Cottage: 146 Laurens Street, SW, Aiken, SC 29801 (downtown Aiken)

Osbon's Laundry & Cleaners: 732 Silver Bluff Road, Aiken, SC 29803 (southside Aiken)

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



We encourage you to pay for this event before 5 p.m. on October 3.

Hurricane Ike Update

Most of us know by know that gas has been expensive and not readily available in the past few days. Some gas stations are closed awaiting future deliveries. News released a few hours ago is not good. Some refineries will not open for at least nine days and deliveries to service stations will add several days before we see local relief.

Kudo's to City Manager Roger LeDuc, who, after Hurrican Katrina a few years ago, upgraded the condition of two 10,000 fuel tanks. Each is currently half full which means that Public Safety and Fire Response will not be affected by Hurricane Ike. We should survive the local gas crisis as long as it does not last too long.

City Staff will further evaluate the situation to determine if additional conservation measures should be enacted.

Congressman Don Young on Oil and ANWR

McCain and NY Times Interview

Recieved the following by email today. You can read the NYTimes interview mentioned in the last paragraph by clicking the title of this posting.


NOTE: AND SINCE AL GORE "INVENTED" THE INTERNET, HOW MANY E-MAILS DID HE SEND?

Friday, September 12, 2008

Wondering No More [Jonah Goldberg]

Yep. The day after 9/11, as part of its "get tough" makeover, the Obama campaign is mocking John McCain for not using a computer, without caring why he doesn't use a computer. From the AP story about the computer illiterate ad:

"Our economy wouldn't survive without the Internet, and cyber-security continues to represent one our most serious national security threats," [Obama spokesman Dan] Pfeiffer said. "It's extraordinary that someone who wants to be our president and our commander in chief doesn't know how to send an e-mail."

Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "extraordinary." The reason he doesn't send email is that he can't use a keyboard because of the relentless beatings he received from the Viet Cong in service to our country. From the Boston Globe (March 4, 2000):

McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside: McCain's severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes. Friends marvel at McCain's encyclopedic knowledge of sports. He's an avid fan - Ted Williams is his hero - but he can't raise his arm above his shoulder to throw a baseball.

In a similar vein I guess it's an outrage that the blind governor of New York David Patterson doesn't know how to drive a car. After all, transportation issues are pretty important. How dare he serve as governor while being ignorant of what it's like to navigate New York's highways.

Update: Well, now the story is up on Drudge (You heard it here first!). Re: Mark's point about how the supposedly web-savvy Obama campaign can't handle Google, here's another story confirming he has difficulty using a keyboard. Ironically, it's from one of the most pro-Obama journalists out there, Jacob Weisberg, in an article in Slate in 2000:

"Six months ago, no one would have pegged McCain as the most cybersavvy of this year's crop of candidates. At 63, he is the oldest of the bunch and because of his war injuries, he is limited in his ability to wield a keyboard."

Now, in response to some angry criticism already coming in: Feh.

Some say, So what if he was handicapped? He could still learn how to send email.

Sure, but why would he? Bill Clinton sent two emails during his entire presidency and often admitted he didn't know squat about the Internet.

One reader says "Steven Hawking knows how to use a computer!" Yes, because if he didn't he couldn't do his job or communicate. McCain, like Clinton, didn't have that problem. Here's a more sane version of t he same complaint:

You are ridiculous about this. While of course McCain probably can't type for long periods or in the manner in which many of us do, there are a tremendous amount of people that peck with just their index fingers. He also can surely use a mouse. How much typing do you really have to do to send emails and use the Internet. Plus, when he was asked point blank about it he never said he couldn't type. I am sure he can't use a blackberry, but there are tons of people with far worse injuries than McCain that use a computer.

That's absolutely true, I'm sure. But they need to use computers to get through life. McCain doesn't. And the fact that he's not blaming his disability hardly sounds like a serious indictment. If he did blame his disability, many of the same folks yelling at me would be complaining that McCain's whining.

Now, I'd hardly be surprised if McCain could type for short stretches and all that. The point is, that it's perfectly understandable why he wouldn't get in the habit of it.

Oh one last point for now: Lord knows I think the chicken-hawk arguments are stupid. And I don't think the fact that Obama never served in the military should count against him in and of itself. But how stupid is it for the Obama campaign to claim that McCain is unqualified to be president because he can't grasp cyber-security issues based on the fact he has never sent an email when the McCain campaign can just as easily say Obama can't understand first order national security issues because he's never fired a rife, flown a plane, commanded men in battle, or faced an enemy? I mean which prepares someone to be commander in chief better, hitting "send" on AOL or fighting a war?

Update II: On the other hand: I don't know what to make of this interview with the New York Times. He sounds awfully web savvy in it, which makes the Obama ad sound unfair. And if you read it closely, it sounds like he knows how to surf with a mouse, but doesn't do much by way of typing.







09/12 06:42 PM



NATIONAL REVIEW 09/12/08

--

TO ONE AND ALL, STAY WELL, SAFE, HAPPY AND HEALTHY, AND BEST WISHES TO ALL, AS ALWAYS, TONY