}
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. -- Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. Thomas Jefferson

Liberalism: Ideas so good, you have to be forced to accept them.

''ARE YOU AN AMERICAN --or a LIBERAL.''


Sunday, September 23, 2012

Chapter III: The 1997 speech that launched Obama



Photo - Like so many in the liberal powerbase that served as a springboard for Obama, Marilyn Katz’s activist roots stretch back to her days as a Students for a Democratic Society operative. Today, Katz is an influential political operative in Chicago who has visited the White House 26 times since 2009. 
Like so many in the liberal powerbase that served as a springboard for Obama, Marilyn Katz’s activist roots stretch back to her days as a Students for a Democratic Society operative. Today, Katz is an influential political operative in Chicago who has visited the White House 26 times since 2009.

Few doubt that Barack Obama's stirring oration before the 2004 Democratic National Convention vaulted him into the national limelight.
But another, less-heralded Obama address -- delivered on Valentine's Day 1997 at First Chicago Bank -- was equally essential to his later successes. Without it, it is doubtful that he would have ever been in position to assume so prominent a role in 2004.

Obama was a newly elected Illinois state senator in 1997 when he addressed an audience that included many of Chicago's most powerful political insiders and activists, nonprofit executives, business movers and shakers, and philanthropic funders.

The occasion was a meeting of the Futures Committee, an elite Chicago civic leadership group created by the Local Initiatives Support Corp., or LISC, a liberal, nonprofit, low-income-housing activist group.

No authenticated text of Obama's speech -- which was billed beforehand by LISC in a promotional flier obtained by The Washington Examiner as "a local perspective on effective communities" -- is now known to exist.
But people interviewed by the Examiner who heard him speak say Obama laid out a powerful vision for a political strategy that ultimately reshaped housing activism on the Left, first in Chicago and then nationwide, even as it paved the way for an accommodation between the corrupt political machine of Mayor Richard M. Daley and its long-standing nemesis, the city's coalition of white liberal reformers and black community organizers.
Obama described a practical strategy for building on the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit, or LIHTC, contained in the 1986 Tax Reform Act, plus federal, state and local funds and programs, to create new public-private development partnerships.

The LIHTC encouraged the partnerships needed to unite government officials and progressive nonprofit activists behind the cause of building thousands of new affordable-housing units, first on Chicago's poor South Side and then, as the movement spread, to similar neighborhoods across the nation.

Obama spoke at a time of great ferment on the Left in which federal housing policies became a central focus for political activism.

He was drawing from the same well that had produced the Community Reinvestment Act, relaxed federal standards for mortgage qualifications, and creative financial packaging of subprime loans, but doing so in a manner uniquely matched to conditions on the political ground of Chicago.

Public-private partnerships for affordable-housing projects were not a new idea to some of Obama's listeners, since philanthropic groups like the Ford Foundation and the MacArthur Foundation had been promoting the concept for several years.

Not coincidentally, it was a MacArthur vice president, Rebecca Riley, who arranged for Obama to speak at the Valentine's Day gathering.

Obama's innovation was to expand the concept beyond simply building affordable apartments and high-rises. It encompassed a cradle-to-grave vision of providing for the material needs of the low-income families residing in the new housing, including their schools, child care, job training, medical coverage, clothing and food.

In turn, the residents would campaign and vote for the officials advocating the partnerships, adding significantly to their political power.

Left unstated was the underlying reality that politically connected developers who built the housing would profit handsomely and could be expected to gratefully give millions of dollars in campaign contributions to politicians like Obama who made it all possible.

Chicago thus became the proving ground for Obama's vision, which, according to LISC spokesman Joel Bookman, "really changed the direction of community development in Chicago and ultimately nationally."

It was an irresistible combination of money, politics and idealism that also offered endless opportunities for greed and tragic abuse of the poor.

That made it an ideal tool for uniting the Daley machine with the reform coalition that had elected Harold Washington as the city's first African-American mayor in 1983. (Richard M. Daley, who reinvigorated the machine and became mayor in 1989, was the son of the machine's founder, Richard J. Daley, who died in 1976.)

The key to Obama's vision in Chicago, according to Marilyn Katz, was the city's most famous radical: "Remember, this is the community of Saul Alinsky. And most of the first housing groups were the Alinsky groups who were still banging at the door."

Katz, an influential Chicago public relations executive and longtime Obama friend and political operative, has visited the White House more than two dozen times since 2009.

Like so many in the liberal power base that served as a springboard for Obama, Katz had activist roots stretching back to her days as a Students for a Democratic Society operative in Chicago.

A Futures Committee handout for the Valentine's Day meeting titled, "Barack Obama's principles of community development," said the proposed program had "to organize around production, not just consumption."

Such words were a clarion call to activists raised on a thousand variations of the Marxist labor theory of value and capitalist alienation.

"He really questioned the kind of surrogate capitalist strategy that most of the nonprofit community-based organizations had been pursuing," Katz told the Examiner.
"And he suggested that a real estate strategy for redevelopment of communities was not enough and that you had to really go into the quality-of-life issues, education, wealth building, amenities that were the hallmarks of any community needs," she said.

Obama's vision "changed the direction and the nature of the 123 groups that were working in the various communities in the city. It was a very influential speech," she said.

The LISC vision speech was a critical turning point for Obama because his position with the Chicago law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland put him at ground zero with what Katz called "the tangential and interlocking circles between the Left-liberal political community, the urban redevelopment community, the legal community and politicos" who controlled Chicago, then and to this day.

It was from that point that Obama cultivated the personal, professional and political relationships that would serve him well all the way to the White House.

Next: Chapter IV: For the slumlord's defense, Barack Obama, Esq.

Occupy Unmasked

 Democrats supported the OWS movement. I wonder what they will say after this movie gets viewed by millions of Americans.


Howard Dean Says Harry Reid’s Credibility is in Trouble

Howard Dean is pathetic as is all the Democrats.


We’re Out of Patience and You’re Gone, Obama

This character no longer even pretends to respect the office of the presidency:



 Not only does he not try, he doesn’t try to look like he’s trying. He is sure that everything will be handed to him once again by the Powers That Be in the liberal establishment. The sheer insolence is staggering.

Senate Conservatives Gather Enough Votes to Block Lame Duck Treaties. Well Done!

A group of Senate conservatives has gathered enough support to block any treaties that come up for a vote during the lame duck session.

A total of 37 Senators pledged, in a letter drafted by Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) to Majority and Minority leaders Harry Reid (D-NV) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY), to “oppose efforts to consider a treaty during” the lame duck session.

Because treaties require a two-thirds majority in the Senate to reach the president’s desk, the group of Senators will be able to block any treaties considered after the Nov. 6 election.

“The writers of the Constitution clearly believed that all treaties presented to the Senate should undergo the most thorough scrutiny before being agreed upon,” the letter states. “The American people will be electing representatives and senators in November, and the new representatives carrying the election mandate should be afforded the opportunity to review and consider any international agreements that are outstanding at the time of their election.”

Some Senators had expressed hope that their house would ratify the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (commonly known as the Law of the Sea Treaty) in a lame duck session. The treaty was blocked earlier this year by Senators who noted that it would cede some level of U.S. sovereignty to an international body, force the United States to forgo some level oil and gas royalty revenue, and would produce few tangible benefits.

The Heritage Foundation’s Steve Groves testified on LOST before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
A U.N. treaty on persons with disabilities may also be considered during a lame duck session. Lee this week blocked an attempt to pass that treaty by unanimous consent. “For various reasons we don’t think any treaty should come up during the lame duck time period and we will continue to oppose any treaty passage,” Lee said. “If it is true that it is too fast to move a treaty through during a lame duck, then it’s also too fast to move it through now.”

Here is a copy of Lee’s letter to Reid and McConnell:


 

Thank you for your diligence, staying true to your word and all honorable efforts to revive America's principles and her upstanding truth.

The Romney Tax Returns Mock The Dems And The Media

Political campaigns frequently lack humor, but after today, that can't be said about the Romney campaign. After months of sly innuendo and slander based on Harry Reid's invisible friend Mitt and Ann Romney released their 2011 income taxes and a tax summary of the last twenty years. And lo and behold, not only did the Romneys pay every single cent they owed,they actually paid more than they needed to as well as giving a percentage of the Adjusted Gross Income to charity that dwarfs a certain president and his wife whom claim to be compassionate warriors for the middle class:

UPDATE: Unlike Warren Buffett, Mitt Romney Overpaid His Taxes.

- In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.
- The Romneys’ effective tax rate for 2011 was 14.1%.
-The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.
-The Romneys claimed a deduction for $2.25 million of those charitable contributions. The Romneys’ generous charitable donations in 2011 would have significantly reduced their tax obligation for the year. The Romneys thus limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the Governor's statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13% in income taxes in each of the last 10 years.

To summarize, the Romneys paid nearly $2 million to Uncle Sam last year and donated more than $4 million to charity.  He actually overpaid on his taxes by not claiming all the charitable deductions he could have, which could have driven his obligations to government even lower.

And the last 20 years?

- In each year during the entire 20-year period, the Romneys owed both state and federal income taxes.
-Over the entire 20-year period, the average annual effective federal tax rate was 20.20%.
-Over the entire 20-year period, the lowest annual effective federal personal tax rate was 13.66%.
-Over the entire 20-year period, the Romneys gave to charity an average of 13.45% of their adjusted gross income.
-Over the entire 20-year period, the total federal and state taxes owed plus the total charitable donations deducted represented 38.49% of total AGI.
-During the 20-year period covered by the PWC letter, Gov. and Mrs. Romney paid 100 percent of the taxes that they owed.

Remember that a lot of the Romney's income was capital gains, money that had already been taxed as income once before it was invested and was taxed a second time as the investments were sold. His actual tax rate of his adjusted gross income is closer to 45% .

Their effective tax rate, on average, was over 20 percent, almost double the average effective tax rate in America. And over the last twenty years, the Romney's have  donated 13.45 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity. The Romneys, in fact, paid every cent they owed, and  almost 40 percent of their income either went  to charity or Uncle Sam.

I can just hear the Democrats and their supine lackeys in the media's heads exploding.  Dammit! That sneaky, duplicitous  Mitt Romney is actually a remarkably generous, public spirited law abiding guy..how dare he punk us like that!

 REID MUST APOLOGIZE - FROM THE WELL OF THE SENATE.

NANCY PELOSI AND DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ SHOULD APOLOGIZE FROM THE WELL OF THE US HOUSE.

AND THE WHITE HOUSE SHOULD ISSUE AN APOLOGY.

ANYTHING LESS WILL JUST BE FURTHER CONFIRMATION THAT OBAMA AND REID AND PELOSI AND THE DNC ARE IMMORAL LYING SHAMELESS SCUM.

"Recession is when your neighbor loses his job. Depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Barack Obama loses his."

Peter Brady analyzes this week's depressing jobs report.


Initial jobless claims were just announced at 382K, much higher than the expected of 375K.

Last week's claims were announced at 382K, but revised up to 385K.

Today's headlines across all media outlets: JOBLESS CLAIMS FALL BY 3K

Wash, rinse and repeat.

Real unemployment is 11.7 percent... and still rising.



Title borrowed from Ronald Reagan.

Good News: Obama To Trash First Amendment in Speech to U.N.

How else would you interpret this story?

For weeks this administration, aided and abetted by The State Media, has shamelessly lied to us about what happened in Libya.

Obama to Condemn Christian Filmmaker Before United Nations


Not only are we seeing the White House and State Department call more attention to the Mohammed-mocking "Innocence of Muslims" than any terrorist network ever could've hoped for, but the President's indefensible scapegoating of the film and filmmaker to draw attention and blame away from U.S. security failures apparently knows no bounds.

Next week, Obama will denounce the film in a speech before the United Nations General Assembly:

"As he has in recent days, the President will make it clear that we reject the views in this video, while also underscoring that violence is never acceptable[.]"

As Obama's appalling policy of disengaging in the Middle East comes to fruition in the form of the region exploding and al-Qaeda's targeted assassination of an American ambassador -- the media spen[t] two weeks savaging Mitt Romney and directing our sorrow, rage, and helplessness on [a filmmaker].

For weeks this administration, aided and abetted by The State Media, has shamelessly lied to us about what happened in Libya. Moreover, in order to cover up and distract for unforgivable security lapses, this hapless filmmaker has been targeted for all of the blame -- certainly more blame than the Administration's failure to secure a consulate on 9/11 (of all days), but even more blame than the actual murderers.

And now, even though we know the truth about what really happened in Libya, it won't stop. It will never stop. Because Obama knows his media will never make him pay a political price for lying and scapegoating...

And so, next week, as Obama condemns this film, and therefore the American ideal of freedom of speech, before the entire world -- all in an effort to quadruple-down on a brazen lie that's already been exposed as such -- it will truly be the ultimate Big Brother moment of this presidency.

Not only has the administration lied about and covered up its failures in Libya, but today The Hill reported something even more bizarre:

Senate Republicans are furious the Obama administration rebuffed their attempts to learn details of the Benghazi attack, only to give the coveted information to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.

Senators say they were rebuffed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when they pressed for more information about the attack that killed U.S. envoy Christopher Stephens in Libya.

“That is the most useless, worthless briefing I have attended in a long time,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told reporters after the closed-door session.

GOP lawmakers were incensed to find many of the details they tried to learn Thursday were in a front-page article in The Times the following morning.

That's right: the "President of All the People" gives better intelligence briefings to The New York Times than to Republican Senators.

Circulate this far and wide. November is coming.

FORE!!!!

Teleprompter Fail 1

Teleprompter Fail 2

Teleprompter Fail 3

Teleprompter Fail 4