Bernanke is probably going to flood the economy with money in order to raise inflation. This money will find its way into the market setting up what could be a more significant correction because the economy is not likely to respond, in my opinion without negative consequences.
---
I also have learned, insiders in the Republican Party believe most of the polls which reflect a Republican victory are missing contact with a whole segment of the population because many no longer have traditional home phone lines. The internal belief is that Republicans are actually more ahead than they want to publicize.
---
Axelrod and Obama have become so desperate they have resorted to the approach McCarthy took. It is called the "big lie."
The way it works is you launch a "big lie" and then challenge your opponent to prove it was not true. It is pure demagoguery and will eventually backfire as it did with McCarthy. The "big lie" approach might energize the loyal who cannot or choose not to think for themselves but it will turn off, if not frighten, the uncommitted.
What I am referring to is the baseless and unproven charge The Chamber of Commerce is using foreign funds to finance domestic campaigns.
Once again, Obama proves he is an accomplished liar and surrounds himself with staffing who are low life's. No way to run a presidency. (See 1 below.)
---
Finally, yesterday I attended a meeting and one of the attendees is a committed liberal. As the meeting wound down a few political comments surfaced and he could not refrain from pointing out that Tea Partiers were Nazis. This person happens also to be a practicing lawyer. You would think someone with a somewhat educated brain, sworn to uphold our constitution, would welcome legitimate dissent and be capable of distinguishing between some fringe participants and the masses of citizens who are turned off by what Obama and his crew are doing to our nation.
He defended his comment by stating Republicans would eventually be consumed by Tea Partiers and voters would eventually reject their extremism.
When has balancing the federal budget, reading bills before you vote on them, protecting our borders from an invasion of illegals etc. been equated with extremism?
---
For those who live in Georgia, intend to vote and are confused about the Constitutional proposals on the ballot, perhaps this will be of some help. (See 2 below.)
---
Will some group take out Ahmadinejad as he visits Lebanon? (See 3 below.)
---
Victor Davis Hanson also discusses Obama's need for 'pinatas.' (See 4 below.)
---
Obama is placed in a conundrum between the economy and trial lawyers.
Doubtful few people are being thrown out of their homes that are paying their mortgages and are current.
It is a cross the t and dot the i matter and trial lawyers see an opportunity to extract more pounds of flesh.
We are a too over-regulated and over-lawyered nation and this makes us far too litigious and less competitive. (See 5 below.)
---
Dick
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Obama's chamber attacks - Will voters care?
By Stuart Gottlieb
We all know politics ain't beanbag. And we all know that campaigns can bring out the worst in everyone, especially in a campaign season like this one. And we all know that the idea that Obama was going to "transform American politics" was a myth, much like the Yeti, or its North American cousin, the Sasquatch.
But Obama and the DNC's baseless attacks on alleged foreign corporate donations to conservative political campaign organizations -- as if private liberal campaign groups have not reaped in tens of millions of dollars from undisclosed corporate and other funding sources since 2006 -- is simply astounding.
Let's put it this way: When the New York Times, Washington Post, and CBS News all declare the attacks to be without merit, something, somewhere, has gone very, very, wrong in Democratic Party Land.
Yesterday's Face the Nation's Bob Schieffer said to David Axelrod "three weeks out of an election ... is that the best you can do?" t
Tell me Axelrod did not look just like Dan Quayle after Lloyd Bentsen hit him with the "you're no Jack Kennedy" line in the 1988 vice presidential debate.
As Axelrod's colorless face attests: when you've lost Bob Schieffer, you've seriously lost your way.
Stuart Gottlieb is Director of policy studies, the Jackson Institute for Global Affairs at Yale University.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)Summaries of the Constitutional Amendments, Ballot Questions, and Homestead Referendum
Below are summaries to help you make informed decisions about this year’s ballot issues.
Amendment 1: “Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to make Georgia more economically competitive by authorizing legislation to uphold reasonable competitive agreements?” HR 178
Amendment 1 deals with non-competition agreements, a contract where an employer hires an employee on the condition that the employee, upon leaving his or her job, will not engage in business activities that compete with the employer.
Under the Georgia Constitution, non-competition agreements are strictly limited as to the time period (example: two years after the termination of your employment), geographic area (example: DeKalb County for a company that operates in DeKalb), and prohibited activities (example: selling widgets if you are a widget salesman). If a court finds a non-competition agreement to be unreasonable with respect to one of these factors, the court will strike it down and treat the employment contract as though the non-competition provision is not there.
Amendment 1 would change that, enabling Georgia courts to enforce non-competition agreements by adding reasonable limitations on the time period, geographic area, or prohibited activities.
Supporters of Amendment 1 contend that the amendment will make Georgia more economically competitive as compared to other states. Some businesses prefer to locate in states where the court system is likely to enforce their non-competition agreements. This is especially true in fields like computer technology and biotechnology where companies have a strong interest in protecting their trade secrets.
Opponents argue that Amendment 1 enables courts to change the provisions of a contract, adding limitations that the parties did not see fit to include in the first place. Furthermore, although Amendment 1 could make Georgia more competitive in terms of attracting employers, the amendment also makes it easier to prevent employees from competing in their chosen profession, at least for a period of time.
Amendment 2: “Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to impose an annual $10.00 trauma charge on certain passenger motor vehicles in this state for the purposes of funding trauma care?” SR 277
If Amendment 2 is passed by the voters, an extra $10 charge would be assessed on your vehicle when you renew your tag each year. That $10 fee would be used to fund the state’s trauma system. Grady Hospital would receive some of the funds. In parts of Georgia, including portions of our Interstate highways, a catastrophic automobile accident is virtually guaranteed to be fatal because of the distance from a trauma center. Fixing this problem is why the General Assembly is giving you the chance to vote on Amendment 2.
By placing this provision in the Georgia Constitution, it ensures that the General Assembly will not be able to spend the funds for any purpose other than trauma care.
Amendment 3: “Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to allow the Georgia Department of Transportation to enter into multiyear construction agreements without requiring appropriations in the current fiscal year for the total amount of payments that would be due under the entire agreement so as to reduce long-term construction costs paid by the state?” SR 821
This would allow the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) to pay for multi-year construction contracts one year at a time, rather than having to appropriate the total dollar value of a multi-year contract entirely in the first year. If Amendment 3 is passed, a contract of this nature would not be allowed to last longer than ten years.
Amendment 3 would enable GDOT to work on more projects at any given time. Presently, GDOT works on fewer transportation projects at a time because all of the funds for their multi-year contracts must be appropriated up front.
Amendment 4: “Shall the Constitution be amended so as to provide for guaranteed cost savings for the state by authorizing a state entity to enter into multiyear contracts which obligate state funds for energy efficiency and conservation improvement projects?” SR 1231
Amendment 4 is similar to Amendment 3, except that Amendment 4 deals with multi-year contracts for energy efficiency and conservation improvement projects, like retrofitting the lighting, plumbing, HVAC, and windows in a state building. Multi-year contracts could be funded on a pay-as-you-go annual basis for up to ten years, thus allowing more projects to be completed without appropriating all of the funds up front.
Amendment 5: “Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to allow the owners of real property located in industrial areas to remove the property from the industrial area?” HR 136
Amendment 5 involves a local issue in Garden City, Georgia, near Savannah. It has no impact on DeKalb. There is certain property located in an industrial zone in Garden City that the owners want to remove from that zone, but (believe it or not) they cannot do so without a constitutional amendment.
Statewide Referendum A: “Shall the Act be approved which grants an exemption from state ad valorem taxation for inventory of a business?” HB 482
This referendum will exempt business inventory from property taxes. Under Georgia law, businesses are taxed on an annual basis for the inventory they have sitting on their shelves, whether in a warehouse or in a retail store. This tax makes it difficult for Georgia to compete to attract jobs compared with other states that don’t have an inventory tax. It also creates a disincentive for companies to boost the economy by acquiring more inventory.
DeKalb County Homestead Exemption: “Shall the Act be approved which amends the homestead exemption from DeKalb County ad valorem taxes for county purposes in an amount equal to the amount by which the current year assessed value of a homestead exceeds the base year assessed value of such homestead by extending the exemption for another five-year period?” SB 544
This is the five-year extension of the Property Tax Assessment Freeze that saves you money on your DeKalb County property taxes. The current freeze is set to expire at the end of the 2011 tax year. This renewal will last through 2016.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)Al Qaeda threatens Ahmadinejad's Lebanon visit, US citizens urged to be vigilant
More fuel was thrown on the bubbling brew surrounding Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit toLebanon - and the coming spectacle of his joint appearance in the south Thursday, Oct. 14 with Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah - by an armed Al Qaeda-linked group.
"The whole of Lebanon will tremble if Ahmadinejad sets foot in Lebanon," said the Abdullah Azzam group, named for Osama bin Laden's Palestinian mentor who was al Qaeda's original founder. "We will do the impossible to thwart this conspiracy."
The embassy in Beirut has warned Americans in Lebanon "to be vigilant, monitor news reports, avoid large gatherings of people, and carefully consider their safety and security before choosing to visit popular gathering spots or places where large numbers of people are commonly found."
US citizens were reminded that "even peaceful gatherings can turn violent and spread over neighborhoods with little or no warning."
According to intelligence sources, this warning appeared to cover Beirut international airport, over which Hizballah's militiamen have taken control, public transport and popular eating places.
As Lebanese citizens snapped up every weapon on sale, Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri suddenly took off Monday for Cairo - ostensibly to consult with Arab League Secretary Amr Mussa on the crisis unfolding over the Iranian president's visits. More discreetly, Middle East sources disclose, he met with Egyptian intelligence minister Gen. Omar Suleiman.
In his absence, Nasrallah's deputy Sheik Naim Qassem declared the Ahmadinejad visit was a success even before his arrival. That view is not shared by other Lebanese. A Sunni Islamist group in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli posted large banners and pictures of the Iranian president with large crosses and the slogan: "You are not welcome in Lebanon." Qassem did not forget to once again pin the blame for the 2005 Rafiq Hariri murder on Israel.
Counter-terror sources report that the Abdullah Azzam Brigades threat to the Iranian president is taken seriously because of its track record. Its Ziad al-Jarrah Battalions took credit for the Katyusha rocket attack on the Israeli town of Nahariya in September. This branch of "Al Qaeda in the Levant" is currently resurgent in Palestinian refugee camps in southern and northern Lebanon, Syria and in Iraq, with active offshoots in the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)The Them vs. Us Presidency
By Victor Davis Hanson
The White House has apparently decided to continue with its them-vs.-us polarization. I suppose finding demons revs up the base and provides fodder for local races’ (mostly ad hominem) ads.
Almost every ten days, a new bogeyman appears — John Boehner, Fox News, the Tea Party, Rush Limbaugh, or this week’s, the Chamber of Commerce, all as fresh relish to the main course: George Bush and Dick Cheney.
When the history of this administration is written, a key theme will be the abyss between the hope-and-change, across-the-aisle rhetoric and the almost gratuitous way Obama has caricatured his supposed opponents. The current “don’t make me look bad”/“like a dog” psychodrama follows attacks of various sorts on Arizonans, Wall Street, opponents of the Ground Zero mosque, insurers, police, doctors, and anyone above the hated $250,000 income level.
After the media’s embarrassment over the hagiographic coverage of Obama in 2007–9, they still cannot quite fathom that we have the most lashing-out and paranoid president since Richard Nixon — a nebulous and nefarious “they” always behind every administration stumble.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5)MailContactsCalendarNotepadWhat's New?Mobile MailOptions Mail OptionsColorsMail PlusSwitch to All-New Mail
Options
Mail Search
Try the new Yahoo! Mail Someone
searched for you
FoldersInbox (12)Drafts (7)SentSpam (2)[Empty all the messages from the Spam folder]Trash[Empty all the messages from the Trash folder]Search ShortcutsMy PhotosMy AttachmentsChat & Mobile Text[Show]
I am Offline0 Online Contacts[Add]Not Listed? New Chat0 Mobile Contacts[Add]Not Listed? New Text
Settings
My Folders[Add a new folder - Edit folders]efaxtennis listuntitledwatchingameric...
Go to Previous message Go to Next message Back to MessagesMark as Unread Print
ReplyReply AllMove...efaxtennis listuntitledwatchingamerica.com Flag this messageFW: pro-business stance by Obama admin..fyiTuesday, October 12, 2010 8:40 AMFrom: "Patrick Fleming"
A Foreclosure Tightrope for Democrats
By BINYAMIN APPELBAUM
WASHINGTON — The swelling outcry over fast-and-loose foreclosures has thrust the Obama administration back into the uncomfortable position of sheltering the banking industry from the demands of an angry public.
While senior Congressional Democrats join the calls for a national moratorium on foreclosures, the White House once again is arguing against punishing the industry, just as it did in 2009 amid the outcry over the unbreakable habit of paying large bonuses.
“Irresponsible banks need to be held accountable, but if we have not found a problem with a bank’s process we do not believe that we should impose a moratorium where that can hurt the market and hurt individual buyers,” said Shaun Donovan, secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
The administration’s basic logic has not changed since it took office in the depths of the financial crisis: Hitting the financial industry, officials argue in private and in public, hurts the broader economy. A moratorium on foreclosures may provide short-term political satisfaction in an overheated election climate, but the administration fears it will only delay the inevitable and necessary process of forcing many Americans out of homes they cannot afford.
The intramural argument among Democrats also reflects the political divisions between an administration with two years to improve the economy, and members of Congress facing an angry electorate in less than a month.
The White House can focus on the eventual economic benefits of foreclosures. But Senator Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat battling to salvage re-election in the state with the nation’s highest foreclosure rate, cannot. The result is that Mr. Reid favors a moratorium, and the White House finds itself in an uncomfortable moment of agreement with his Republican opponents.
The latest foreclosure firestorm flared in mid-September when GMAC, a major mortgage lender, announced that it was suspending home seizures in 23 states in light of revelations that the company had not been taking basic steps to double-check and demonstrate its right to seize particular homes.
Bank of America leapfrogged that position last week, announcing that it would stop pursuing foreclosures in all 50 states while reviewing its procedures.
That prompted calls from a wide range of politicians for a national moratorium on all foreclosures, including from Mr. Reid, who released a letter to other lenders urging the rest of the industry to follow Bank of America’s example.
The industry has argued in response that problems should be addressed without halting all foreclosures, because a moratorium would damage the economy. “It must be recognized that the mortgage market, investors and the health of the economy are all interrelated,” Tim Ryan, president of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, said Monday.
The White House shares those concerns, and it has tried to defuse the issue by arguing that problems can be addressed without imposing a moratorium.
“There are, in fact, valid foreclosures that probably should go forward,” David Axelrod, a senior White House adviser, said Sunday on CBS.
Administration officials argue in part that the problems that have emerged in recent weeks do not change the fact that lenders are seeking to foreclose on people who borrowed and then failed to repay. Most of the identified problems are best described as technicalities, not miscarriages of justice.
Advocates for homeowners, however, say that the pattern of sloppiness allows and encourages more serious abuses. They point to a growing number of documented cases in which lenders mistakenly seized homes.
Bank of America apologized last month for foreclosing on a home in Fort Lauderdale , Fla. The homeowner didn’t even have a mortgage. The bank had failed to notice that the previous owner had repaid the mortgage loan.
Last year the company’s contractors entered the home of a Pittsburgh woman, changed the locks, cut off the utilities and seized her pet parrot. The bank later acknowledged that the woman had not missed any mortgage payments.
Other companies including Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase also have apologized for mistaken attempts to seize homes they didn’t own.
Dozens of people have sued lenders charging that their homes were foreclosed even after the lender agreed to a loan modification or repayment plan.
“We need to end the voluntary reliance on the industry to do the right thing with respect to homeowners,” said John Taylor, chief executive of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition.
Mr. Taylor noted that foreclosures also damaged the economy.
The administration’s defense of a process that is throwing many Americans out of their homes echoes its tightrope walk in the spring of 2009, when public anger over Wall Street pay was at a boiling point. The president excoriated the industry in public interviews, and met with executives to caution against large paydays and to press for increased lending. But the administration resisted legislation to force changes in either area.
President Obama told executives at the time that his administration was the bulwark between their industry and the public’s anger.
Now the administration is again seeking to demonstrate its concern over industry practices without taking steps that it fears will damage the economy.
Mr. Obama last week decided not to sign a bill requiring many states to lower their standards for verifying the legitimacy of notarized documents. Mr. Axelrod said that the legislation, which drew fire from state officials after sailing through Congress, would have “made it easier to make mistakes” in foreclosures.
Mr. Donovan said that the problems identified so far were serious and widespread, and that it was necessary for companies including GMAC and Bank of America to suspend foreclosures while they addressed those problems.
He said that his agency and other parts of the government, including banking regulators, were scrutinizing other mortgage companies for evidence of problems.
“We are doing everything we can through a range of enforcement powers to make sure that we find where there are problems,” he said. “We’re going to act very swiftly and very strongly to protect homeowners.”
But Mr. Donovan said it did not make sense to act against companies absent evidence of problems. He said such a step would hurt not just the companies, but also people waiting to buy the foreclosed homes
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment