It's Hemmer Time

Four years ago, Republicans raised the red flag that there may be potential problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  How did the Democrats respond?  "Crisis?  What crisis?"  See for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

And yesterday (9/29/08) , the Democratic-controlled Congress really earned it's 9% approval rating.  Nancy Pelosi & Co. couldn't get the job done.  The $700 Bailout Bill failed to pass. 

Our own Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) sums up what happened: 

"It is with deep disappointment and a heavy heart to have witnessed Congress’ failure to address the grave financial challenges we face as a nation. With an election looming, my colleagues in Congress thought first and foremost of their own jobs at the expense of the jobs of those they serve. I could not and did not accept last week’s proposal by the Bush Administration – an Administration that totally mishandled this situation. But instead of pointing fingers and standing idly by – as would have been the politically expedient thing to do – I worked to secure concrete protections for the taxpayer.

“Today’s vote was about stopping the Wall Street crisis from creating a banking crisis in our communities. The Bush Administration’s proposal was unacceptable, and the American people demanded an alternative solution be brought to the table. I joined my colleagues in putting forth an alternative economic rescue proposal and secured these taxpayer-protections in the final bipartisan agreement. I fought to make sure that once these troubled institutions start making profits, the taxpayers benefit first and foremost. I fought to make sure Wall Street executives don’t profit personally as a result of their irresponsible decisions. I wrote the provision that ensures that Wall Street shares in the cost of their own recovery. 

“I supported this bill in order to stabilize our economy and to preserve American jobs. It is about Main Street – that Wall Street’s crisis doesn’t become Main Street’s crisis. It is about protecting working families’ access to credit – so students can secure college loans, farmers can buy feed, seniors can secure their retirement, and businesses can pay their employees.

“I am outraged that we find ourselves in this situation, and I have grave concerns for the state of our economy. In light of the political expediency of my colleagues and the horrendous failures of the Bush Administration, we will have to roll up our sleeves and go back to the drawing board to enact a meaningful solution to our financial crisis.”

I agree with Ryan's belief that the Bush Administration has been handling the current economic situation poorly.  However, did the Bush Administration cause the current economic crisis?  NO.  The problems we are seeing now started years ago - approximately 1977 -  with the Community Reinvestment Act.  The "CRA" enabled people to get loans and mortgages with little regard as to their credit ratings, or ability to pay back the loans.  Today, we are seeing the results of such practices, as well as the mismanagement of monies by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  With little regulations to follow, their operations went unchecked for years.  The same situation existed for other businesses we have been hearing about - American International Group  (AIG), for example.   When Republicans did try to address these businesses with their concerns about how they were being managed years ago, Democrats ignored their warnings.  Republicans wanted to enact more regulations.  Democrats didn't see the need.   Alfred E. Neuman, from MAD Magazine, expresses the attitude of the 2004 Democrats nicely:

So, when listening to the mainstream media, Barack Obama, and the Democrats blame Bush (as usual) for causing the current economic problems - ask yourself if you are being told the whole story.  Do a little research on your own.  The media isn't going to admit the Democrats have played a huge role in helping cause this crisis.  It's an election year.  The media want the Democrats in the government and they want Barack Obama to be President.  It's a given the public won't be told both sides of the story when it comes to this important issue.  And if Barack Obama does become the next president, the situation will only get worse...   "What, me worry?"  You bet! 

Obama agrees with McCain during last night's debates (and no,  I'm NOT being sarcastic!).   Great ad from the McCain camp.  Excellent question at the end of the ad, too...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCLyVK3U2IU

OK, so  I'm being sarcastic.  After the presidential debates last night, our own Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel came out and said Obama won the debate.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=799817

Anyone surprised?

As the week's go by, expect to see an increase in the biased, favorable reporting in regards to Obama.  The mainstream media will be in an all-out frenzy to get their chosen one elected.   On the flip side, watch how John McCain will be demonized by the same press that was touting his achievements when he was originally running to become the Republican nominee.  How things have changed. 

The Community Reinvestment Act, enacted in 1977,  required the banks to make loans to people who couldn't afford them as part of our social programming. (You know, the "feel good" programs that liberals are so fond of.)   Congress also created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy mortgages from banks all over the country. Since these were, in effect, guaranteed by the federal government, these mortgage companies didn't pay much attention to the credit worthiness of the borrower or the value of the asset.  In essence, almost anyone could now get a loan, regardless of their credit rating.

What happened over the years is Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together processed over 5 trillion dollars worth of loans and sold them as securities all over the world. This easy credit inflated the cost of homes and created over-building and an over-supply of homes until this finally stalled.   As we are seeing now, the values of homes started to go down, which meant the mortgages were over-priced to begin with.  (Foreclosures began to crop up all over the country.)  Now the banks want to unload these securities in order to have money to loan -  but they can't sell the mortgages for what they got them for.

The biggest creditor is China - and this has not been mentioned in most news reports for some reason. If America did not owe so much to China, we could deal with this problem much more effectively.  However, China has said that the U.S. must make good on all the debt, or they're going to stop lending us money.  Currently that debt is in the trillions of dollars.   China has already stopped lending us money. If we can't borrow money every day (almost hundreds of billions of dollars is needed) the U.S. will default on the loans that are coming due.

So, this is a problem created by the government in the 70's.  Free enterprise, capitalism, and corporate greed -- have really played little, if any, role. In  fact, this is a good example of what happens when the government gets involved in the private sector.  It just doesn't work.  Government has enough issues just running the government...   

We should not have been brought to this brink in the first place.   Patterns and signs throughout the years pointed to a mess like this on the horizon.   A number of politicians, including John McCain, have tried over the years to change the regulations in regards to such businesses.  In 2003, the Bush Administration sought to create an agency to oversee Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  The proposal was shot down in congress.  Barney Frank (D-Mass.),  Chairman of the Financial Services Committee,  said at the time: "these two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis."   In 2005, the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 was introduced in the Senate. The bill would have increased government oversight of loans given by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.   The bill never passed either the House or Senate.  The Democrats have consistently protected Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- and some Republicans are also to blame.  Democrats, however, have consistently been the recipients of huge campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Chris Dodd (D-Connecticut)  has received the most money over the years, with Barack Obama leading the pack at number one for an election year.

The United States government should not be buying parts of companies, buying stocks, mortgages, selling those in the markets, or tinkering in the  financial markets.   The problem we have here is that by the government essentially promising to come in and do that, it is causing the credit markets to go in a holding pattern. They're waiting for the governnment to provide  funds. They're also waiting for the government to buy at a higher market rate.  In the meantime,  they're not operating and credit is closing down in America.

There should be no $700 billion dollar bailout as proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.  The House Republicans holding up this bailout right now are the heroes. No one can blame them for trying to stop Paulson' proposal.   If the Democrats really believe  Paulson's plan is the right thing to do, they could pass it if they wanted to. They are the majority.  There are not enough Republicans in the House to stop them. 

(Please note:  Some of the information provided above can be found on "rightwingnews.com - An Interview with Jim DeMint on the bailout crisis.") 

To quote from the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel (9/26/08):  "House Republicans have thrown Capitol Hill into a frenzy a day after unveiling an alternative financial rescue plan at odds with a $700 billion bailout proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.  Rep. Paul Ryan, a Janesville Republican, is at the center of the plan that has thrown a kink in the negotiations. Emerging from a midday meeting of House Republicans on Friday, Ryan told the Journal Sentinel that his caucus did not like Paulson's plan. The administration plan would allow the government to buy up loans from troubled firms in an effort to give sluggish credit markets a boost.

"Our goal is to protect the taxpayer," Ryan said.

Under the House Republican proposal, the government would offer companies insurance for their mortgage-backed securities for a premium. The government would pay up only on those that default. The government already insures roughly half the nation's mortgage-backed securities."

Ryan and the Republicans backing this plan need to be supported.  John McCain needs to come out in favor of this plan.   President Bush has the wrong idea when it comes to the $700 bailout.  Trying to push something through, just for the sake of getting something done and leaving the mess for a newly-elected president is wrong.  $700 billion is at stake here.  The time and effort needed to do the right thing should be most important. 

(*As an interesting sidenote, on talk radio today it was mentioned that ACORN (yes, that liberal get-out-and-vote organization constantly involved in voter registration fraud) stands to be the recipient of 20% of the $700 billion dollar bailout money.  Taxpayers should be outraged that such money could be going to a liberal political group.)

Recently, I had the privilege to fulfill my civic responsibility and sit for jury duty.  Required to report to the Waukesha County Courthouse this past Tuesday, September 23rd, I arrived and, after voir dire,  was selected to sit on a 13 person jury (12 jurors, 1 alternate) for the past two and a half days. 

Having never served on a jury before, I was prepared for the worst.  Missed work opportunities, boredom, time commitments, etc.  I heard from others who had served and their experiences seemed dull and/or a waste of their time.   After the jurors were chosen, we had a short break, where most of us grumbled about the potential for lost wages, time issues, and the general upset to the order of our daily lives.   However, I was surprised to find that serving on the jury for 2-plus days was an interesting experience.  We jurors were treated quite well.  In our jury room, we were provided soda, water, coffee, cookies and other comforts.  In the jury room, the judge,  prosecutor and defense attorneys were very respectful and appreciative of our services. Our bailiff was available to answer questions and help us as allowed.   The case itself was intriguing, and the whole process enabled me to have a greater appreciation for our court systems and the people who work within it.

By the time we were ready to deliberate, the alternate had not been determined.  In the courtroom, a name was picked out of a drum and one of our fellow jurors had to leave, since we had enough people to reach a verdict and would not need anyone to fill in.  We had all mentioned earlier (in the jury room on the final day)  how disappointing it would be to be selected as the alternate and not allowed to participate in determining a verdict! (Quite a change from our initial complaints of having to serve for two-plus days!)...    Each of us had invested so much time and energy into following the courtroom case - we all wanted to stay and participate on reaching the verdicts.  After a name was drawn, one of our fellow jurors was dismissed.  I  was relieved that I would be allowed to stay and  participate in the deliberation process.   After receiving instructions from the judge, my fellow jurors and I retired to the jury room for the task of finding the defendant "guilty" or "not guilty" on two different counts.  After  about three hours of discussion - which was in my estimation, very intelligent, with good questions and conversation, we reached our verdicts.  I truly feel we did the best job we could.  My fellow jurors and I were very thorough.  We  examined the evidence, testimonies, and situations to the best of our abilities.   

The trial ended yesterday.   The crime wasn't very high profile, but had been reported on television and in the newspapers.  It involved a man who was alleged to have tapped into a gas line decades ago and by-passed the gas meter, allowing free gas to be diverted to different areas on his property.  Over the course of approximately 30 years, it was estimated that the value of the stolen gas approached $25,000.00, which was considered to be a  conservative amount.  We found the defendant guilty on two counts - the first for stealing the natural gas. The second - for tampering with a WeEnergies gas lines.  He is scheduled to be sentenced in December.  As jurors, we were never told was his penalty would be (how much prison time or fines).  We still do not know.  It was mentioned jurors are never told what the sentences could be, as that may influence their verdicts.  I agree. 

In summary,  jury duty is just one small aspect of what makes the United States the greatest country in the world.   Originally, when I had received my jury summons in the mail, I cringed.  In looking back, I realize I was wrong.  I should have been honored. 

Rumor has it:

On  or about October 5th, Biden will excuse  himself from the ticket, citing health  problems, and  he will be  replaced by Hillary.  This is timed to  occur after the VP debate on  10/2.

Pass this message on to anyone you know.  If the McCain camp is smart, they'll seize on this information right away and bring it to the forefront.  This information has not been denied by the Obama camp, nor has it shown up as a hoax.

Well, it didn't take long.  Joe Biden  (you know,  the guy who is currently serving his sixth term in Washington D.C.  The same guy who has served for the sixth-longest period among current Senators (fourth among Democrats) and is Delaware's longest-serving Senator.  The one that the Obama camp has selected to help promote "change" and getting away from doing  "business as usual in Washington D.C"....) is at it again.  Talking too much.  He just cannot help himself.  Obama must be cringing whenever this guy gets a microphone in front of his face....  The gaffes just keep on coming.

- First up,  Joe Biden says if you pay higher taxes, you are patriotic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytIsTX_WNjo

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/biden_retracts_ad_slam/2008/09/23/133491.html?s=al&promo_code=6B2B-1 

- Biden also said neither he nor Obama supports clean coal technology in America. But Obama does support clean coal.  Maybe Biden needs a bit more one-on-one time with Barack to hash out these issues whenever Biden is due to appear in  public. 

- While talking with Katie Couric (the really unbiased woman who pretends to do serious news while drooling all over Obama...)  Biden tells Couric:  "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the prices of greed.   He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"  Doesn't anyone wonder why Couric didn't tell Biden that FDR wasn't the President in 1929?  Or that television didn't exist yet?  I mean, come on, the guy needs help!   Then again, maybe she didn't know the President at the time was Herbert Hoover or that there was no television in 1929 ...

- Should the Federal Government bail out American International Group, better known as AIG?  Biden says "NO"!!!  This again contradicts his running mate.  Obama has said the Federal Government should indeed help AIG - to the tune of $85 billion dollars.  Obama has a bit more to add about this  - click on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KbaG8eTXz4

Joe Biden is the gift that keeps on giving - to the Republican Party!  Barack Obama is probably thinking that Hillary Clinton is looking better all the time.    Will Obama eventually throw Biden under the bus?  Is Biden becoming a "distraction"? 

The Atlantic Monthly magazine hires many free-lance photographers.  One such photographer, Jill Greenberg, was hired to photograph John McCain for a recent cover.  The Atlantic Monthly thought Greenberg would be mature enough to leave her liberal political leanings at the door for the job.  In other words, act like a professional.  That wasn't the case.  Please see the following:

http://www.nypost.com:80/seven/09142008/news/politics/mac_hater_has_a_lousy_image_129007.htm

To it's credit, The Atlantic Monthly opted not to use Greenbergs photos of McCain.

Greenberg's own blog site regarding her McCain photographs  (where she boasted about how horrible she made McCain look) seems to not allow access to the McCain photos she toyed with.  Boy, those liberals are a crafty bunch!  Aside from Greenberg's photos of McCain, she is said to have shot many pics for other publications of President Bush looking as bad as possible.  That shouldn't surprise anyone.  Just glance through our own Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel for the past seven-plus years and try to find a nice, decent picture of President Bush.  It will be a difficult task.  

 Now just imagine for one moment if any photographer had taken pictures of Barack Obama and tried to make him look as unflattering as possible.  (In other words, without the halo behind Obama's head that many publications seem to be using....). 

 And then the photographer would take it one step further and distort the photographs as Greenberg did to McCain.  Would there have been an outcry?  Calls of racism?  Or bias? 

And to top it off, Greenberg blames "The Atlantic Monthly" for hiring. her...couldn't she have said she didn't want the job?

"No, I don't," she replied.  "But you know what?  That's not what she's running for.  Running a corporation is a different set of things."

Fiorina, hailed as the most powerful woman in business before she was fired by HP in 2005, stood by her remarks and then went further in an interview Tuesday afternoon with NBC's Andrea Mitchell.

"Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation,"*Fiorina said when Mitchell asked her about the morning interview. Fiorina added that she didn't think that Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden would be up to the job either.

"A major corporation is not the same as being president or vice president of the United States," Fiorina said on MSNBC.

"To run a business you have to have a lifetime of experience in business," she said.  "But that's not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Joe Biden or Barack Obama are doing."

The rest of the interview was somehow dropped when the mainstream media rehashed this interview on the news outlets.  Here's what was left out:

Fiorina goes on to say that ''Sarah Palin has more executive experience than Barack Obama. ... Barack Obama has never made an executive decision in his life. He has been in the U.S. Senate for a very short period of time,'' she said.  Besides, ''She's the vice presidential nominee; Barack Obama is the presidential nominee.''  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnBXXssj0KY

So, in Fiorini's estimation, not one of the four candidates for President or Vice-President could run a  major corporation.   That would be Obama, Biden, McCain, and Palin.   As Fiorini said,  that is not what any of them are running for.   Running a company is different that running a country.  Yet she goes on the say that Palin is more qualified and has more executive experience than Barack Obama.

Palin's background is in politics, not business.  The relevant question McGraw Milhaven of KTRS in St. Louis should have asked Fiorini would have been: "If Palin's background was in business, not politics, would she have the experience to run a major company?"

*The Obama campaign has chosen to use only this quote from the Fiorni interview, taken out of context., saying McCain's own economic advisor doesn't think he is fit to lead a company...misleading?  You be the judge...

(I'd like to thank fellow blogger "Steve T." for providing me with this example of how the mainstream media continues to do its best to help Obama win the presidency.)

CNN, one of the so-called  "mainstream news networks" that claims to be unbiased, has provided the following YouTube clip: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCaa3u9HqGE

CNN's John Roberts didn't want to talk about liberal media bias while at the Republican National Convention. He didn't need to.  His own bias comes through loud and clear on this video, in which he refers to the Democrats as "we"... 

From Newsmax.org: 

 At 6:57 AM, after showing a video of Barack Obama saying, "I don't care what they say about me, but I love this country too much to let them take over another election with lies and phony outrage and Swift Boat politics. Enough is enough," Roberts said to his guest:

You know, this almost looks like what happened in 2004 where the Bush campaign was very, very good at defining John Kerry in their own terms, and he was on the defensive, and he was always trying to fight back against them. Do we risk, or does the Democratic Party here risk Barack Obama becoming John Kerry II?

"WE"?  Slip of the tongue, or is the truth finally coming out at CNN?

Stay tuned, I'm sure "Mainstream Media never ceases to amaze...Part IV" will be coming soon...

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) continues its unethical activities of turning in fake voter registration cards, setting the stage for voter fraud come November.  This time, the state of Michigan is the target of this unscrupulous organization.  From the Michigan Secretary of States Office comes this statement:  "There appears to be a sizeable number of duplicate and fraudulent applications, and it appears to be widespread".

Read the whole story by clicking on:  http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080914/NEWS03/809140383

ACORN has been implicated in voter fraud in at least 14 additional states.  All states are important in any presidential election, but some of the states ACORN targets are the so-called "swing" states that could go either Democrat or Republican in an election - and are key to victory in the eyes of the candidates.  Wisconsin itself was recently in the news, as 32 ACORN workers were found to have submitted fraudulent voter registration cards to the voting commission.   

ACORN employees have been accused of illegal elections practices in New Mexico, Florida, Colorado, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio and our own state of Wisconsin, among others.  Thousands of phony voter registration cards have been discovered throughout these states.   Here are just a few examples of ACORN’s pattern and practice of fraud associated with their campaigns:

Florida—When ACORN led a ballot initiative to raise Florida’s minimum wage in 2004, a Florida Department of Law Enforcement spokesman said ACORN was “singled out” among suspected voter registration groups because it was “the common thread” in the agency’s investigations from one end of the state to the other. One blatant example of voter fraud includes registering 68-year-old Charles Shuh, a former Democratic mayor of St. Petersburg, as a 30-year-old female Republican.

Washington:  Seattle’s KOMO TV: “King County prosecutors filed felony charges Thursday against seven people in what a top official described as the worst case of voter-registration fraud in state history, while the organization they worked for agreed to keep a better eye on its employees and pay $25,000 to defray costs of the investigation. The seven submitted about 1,800 registration cards last fall on behalf of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, which had hired them at $8 an hour to sign people up to vote, according to charging documents filed in Superior Court.”

New Mexico—In an effort to put a wage initiative on the ballot in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 2005 ACORN employees forged thousands of fraudulent signatures. Following their voter registration drive in 2004, a state Representative stated that ACORN was “manufacturing voters” throughout New Mexico.  (To see an example of the fraudulent signatures ACORN submitted for their ballot initiative to raise Albuquerque’s minimum wage or to read the report click on ROTTEN ACORN.)

Pennsylvania:  Philadelphia elections officials are accusing the nonprofit advocacy group “Acorn” of filing fraudulent voter registrations in advance of the April 22nd Pennsylvania primary.  Acorn, which advocates on behalf of low-income residents in the city, has mounted a voter registration drive in the past few months. But city election commissioners are complaining that many of the submitted registrations appear to be faulty, and they have forwarded the matter to the district attorney’s office for further investigation.

Ohio—This is not the first time ACORN has been accused of shady practices in Ohio. In Cuyahoga County in 2004, ACORN and its affiliate Project Vote submitted registration cards that had the highest rate of errors for any voter registration group.   ACORN tends to wait until the last minute to dump thousands of Voter Registration cards into the system. “You have to wonder what’s the point of that, if not to overwhelm the system and get phony registrations on the voter rolls,” says Thor Hearne of the American Center for Voting Rights,  

Also interesting to note is Barack Obama's strong ties to ACORN.  Please click on :  Voter ID and read the entire story.

The biggest problem with election and voter fraud is that it must be addressed prior to an actual election. Given its history, it’s not surprising that ACORN is so hostile to voter identification laws and other efforts to ensure fairness and accuracy at the polls.   Once votes have been cast, nothing can be done.  The candidate with the most votes wins - whether those votes were legally or illegally cast.  That fact alone should be enough to motivate anyone in our state who wants to end voter fraud to support and demand Voter ID.  We should also address how absentee ballots are handed out - as a mere convenience (which easily lends itself to fraud), or as a necessity.  Same-day registration also needs to be looked at.  Rules and regulations must be in place.  We must do everything possible to hold honest elections.  Who wants their vote stolen?  No one.  So why are the Democrats against doing anything - anything at all - that would help ensure honest elections?   

Maybe we should follow the voter example set by the people of Iraq. We could require people to dip their finger in ink, showing that they voted - and that they only voted once!!!  (The civil liberty groups would probably complain about that, saying that would be a violation of people's rights to keep their hands clean....)

Enforcing the law is the responsibility of our state Attorney General, J.B. Van Hollen.  On Thursday, September 11th, Van Hollen filed a lawsuit against the state's election authority.  Van Hollen is suing the state Government Accountability Board saying that the Board needs to cross-check voters names with driver's license records for some voters who registered to vote or changed their addresses since January 1, 2006. 

The important point to note here is that J.B. Van Hollen is enforcing A FEDERAL LAW.  These voter checks are required under federal law in 2002, when Congress passed the Help America Vote Act.  This law was a result of the mess that occurred in Florida in the 2000 election.  The law required states to create voter databases that could compare voter information to driver, felon, and death records.  This law is a strong deterrence to voter fraud, one of the first steps Wisconsin must take to help ensure honest elections.  Voter ID, of course, is next.

Funny, though, in Wisconsin, with a Democratic Governor who could care less about voter fraud,  the Government Accountability Board didn't start working on these voter checks until last month (yes, you read that right - last month!) due to "technical problems".

The Wisconsin voter system is ripe for fraud.  Fraud has occurred in the past elections - it has been proven and people have either gone to jail or made plea deals.  Just recently, the liberal organization ACORN (which registers voters) was found to have turned in fake voter registration cards.  Almost 40 people of such liberal "get out and vote" groups have been caught trying to do this.  How many more are out there?

Here we have a law being enforced that would address the issue of voter fraud.  Don't you think that Van Hollen would be backed by Democrats and Republicans alike, if both groups wanted an honest election?  Surprise! Surprise!  Governor Doyle, at the request of the Government Accountability Board, has hired an attorney to challenge Van Hollen in court.  The hearing will take place in, of all places, the People's Republic of Madison - a bastion of liberalism.  Hopefully the law will triumph the left's attempt to claim voters will be "disenfranchised" (their favorite buzz word when it comes to voter fraud issues).    Kevin Kennedy, the Board's director, says that  attempts to enforce this law would "create hardship and confusion at the polls" should the Government Accountability Board be forced to do their job as required by federal law.

Of course we'll get the usual - Van Hollen is a Republican!!!  He wants to suppress Democrats votes!!!  Not true - Van Hollen is the state's Attorney General.  It is his job to enforce the laws.  He is doing his job. 

One would really think that Van Hollen would have the support of everyone, after all who wants cheating at the polls in November???   Hmmmmmm............... maybe those who do not support Voter ID or do not like the fact that Van Hollen is holding the Government Accountability Board to "accountability"?

Barack Obama and Co. are panicking.  They are behind in the polls.    They have been overshadowed by a Governor from Alaska and they do not know what hit them.  Witness for yourself the Democrats falling apart:

It all seemed to start when an obviously tired and confused Obama "smears McCain-Palin as lipstick on a pig":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg

...and continues with Joe Biden "asking a gentleman in a wheelchair to stand up...."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRV5Y1JCGRI

...and gets even worse when Biden "admits Hillary was probably a better choice..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBgB0SrFliQ

Then on to Congressman Cohen who "compares Palin to Pontius Pilate, and Obama to Jesus".....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmnbTBCktoM&feature=related

No YouTube video available on the following, but recently South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler sharply attacked Sarah Palin, saying John McCain had chosen a running mate "whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.”  

So-called comedian Bill Maher also made a compassionate and caring observation so representative of the Democratic Party, on Sarah Palin's son, Trig (who has Down syndrome):   In a monologue on one of his most recent HBO shows, Maher  said that Palin has an infant "that has Down syndrome.  She had it when she was 43 years old. And it looks a lot like John Edwards."

Do the Democrats appear desperate?  Yes.

The self-proclaimed party of "hope" and "change" seems to be coming apart at the seams - and from within.  It is obvious that  McCain and Palin are a strong team - one the Democrats clearly never saw coming.

Over the weekend during an interview on ABC's "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos, without a teleprompter to help out, Barack Obama succeeded in yet another gaffe.  Rumors have persisted that Obama is not a Christian, but indeed a Muslim. 

From the interview:

Asked about whether McCain himself has done anything to suggest he’s Muslim, Obama said, “Let’s not play games. What I was suggesting — you’re absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith. And you’re absolutely right that that has not come…”

“Christian faith,” Stephanopoulos interrupted, correcting Obama.

“… my Christian faith. Well, what I’m saying is that he hasn’t suggested that I’m a Muslim. And I think that his campaign’s upper echelons have not, either. What I think is fair to say is that, coming out of the Republican camp, there have been efforts to suggest that perhaps I’m not who I say I am when it comes to my faith, something which I find deeply offensive, and that has been going on for a pretty long time,” Obama said.

Asked whether Obama’s misstatement will continue to fuel rumors of his faith, allegiances or patriotism, the Obama campaign responded that it is clear after watching the interview that the senator was cut off by Stephanopoulos before he could self-correct.

See this exchange on the following YouTube clip (and note how many "ahs" and "ums" come from the usually eloquent Obama):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQqIpdBOg6I

Wonder why this gaffe has been ignored by the mainstream media.  Imagine if John McCain had made the same mistake.

Obama has been knocked off the mountain top.  McCain is now in the lead in the polls for President according to Gallup.  Oh where, oh where is that "Obama bounce" that was supposed to propel the anointed one to a huge lead after the DNC!?!?!   Never happened.  Instead, a "McCain bounce"  has taken its place.

Let the mainstream media continue their smear attacks against Sarah Palin.  Let the mainstream media continue their smear attacks against John McCain.  Let the mainstream media continue their smear attacks against Republicans and Conservatives.  Let the mainstream media continue their smear attacks against President Bush.   More American voters seem to have caught on, and they don't like it!

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/gallup_poll_mccain/2008/09/07/128582.html?s=al&promo_code=6975-1L

 Let's see how the mainstream media explains this one....

Liberals are out for blood - Sarah Palin's blood, that is. Read any article about Palin in today's newspapers.  Listen to the  talking heads on CNN, MSNBC and other news channels.    Terrified of how favorable her ratings are with American voters, as well as the boost she has given to the Republican party as the VP nominee, lefties have stepped up their smear tactics in an effort to rip her to shreds.  They have taken on the wrong woman.  Tough, strong, intelligent, and patriotic - Palin has shown she can fight back.   

"Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left.":  Jeffrey Bell/The Weekly Standard

 Please pick up today's (9/6/08) Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel for a perfect example of liberal bias in the news.  Be sure to check out the front page.  Notice how an article on "GOP fires up Cedarburg" is surrounded by the following two articles:  "Foreclosure looms despite vow of aid" and "Jobless rate in U.S. hits 6.1%".  It's a given on the weekends, that many people just glance at headlines, failing to read the news from within.  But it is easy to see what the Journal/Sentinel is trying to do:  connect the McCain campaign to the supposedly depression-era economy.  But I digress.  Within the GOP article itself are very telling examples that show whose camp the Journal/Sentinel staffers are entrenched (hint:  it's not the McCain camp).  I'll get to that in a bit.

First, focus on the "Jobless rate in U.S. hits 6.1%".  Please read the following: 

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

 From the Media Research Center, October 2004:

Economic Conditions Portrayed as Positive During Clinton Presented as Negative for Bush

… The analysis was completed by the Media Research Center’s Business & Media Institute. It focused on TV news coverage the day of or newspaper coverage the day after the release of unemployment and job creation reports during the summer reelection season in 1996 and 2004. (The 10 EMPLOYMENT SITUATION reports, five from May through September each year, came out the month following their survey date.) BMI researchers analyzed ABC, NBC and CBS, CNN, The Washington Post and The New York Times. Their findings include:

* Clinton Good; Bush Bad: Stories about jobs during Bill Clinton’s reelection campaign were positive 85 percent of the time – more than six times as often as they were for Bush, despite similar economic data. Reporters praised the Clinton unemployment rate of 5.6 percent as “low,” but they downplayed a 5.4 percent rate under Bush and called job growth “anemic.”

* Good News Becomes Bad News: Under Bush, reporters presented good economic data as bad news stories by minimizing positive achievements and emphasizing people who might be out of work or regions of the U.S. that were still “struggling.” The opposite approach was taken under President Clinton. Then, reporters explained away a 0.2 percent rise in unemployment as minor or, “not necessarily bad news.” …

So a .2 percent rise up from 5.6 percent unemployment under Bill Clinton was good news. But a .1 percent uptick from 4.5 percent unemployment under President Bush is the end of the world.

It was ever thus with our Democrat controlled media.

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

Interesting to say the least.  And if you read the article in the Journal/Sentinel "Jobless rate in U.S. hits 6.1%" you will find towards the very end of the article, the following statement:  "But the 6.1% rate for August may be inflated because of recent extended unemployment insurance benefits, which could have prompted more people to seek jobs last month rather than sit and wait for conditions to improve, said Russ Kashian, an economist at the University of Wisconsin - Whitewater. 

So, is the 6.1% jobless rate for August correct or not?  Doesn't matter to the media - it sounds bad, so they'll run with it.

Now, on to the "GOP fires up Cedarburg" story on the front page.  Most of the story is pretty straight forward, I will give the Journal/Sentinel credit for that.  But reading further into the article, one paragraph really stood out. It read:

McCain briefly touched on "tough times" facing job-seekers in Wisconsin and across the U.S. and promised lower taxes and better job training.  He said "Obama wants to increase your taxes".  Obama's tax plan, however, proposes tax cuts for most earners.

See anything unusual about that statement?  The last sentence is a defense of Obama's tax plan.  When does the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel EVER offer a balance with McCain's solution(s) when printing a story on Obama's ideas?  The last sentence was written by reporters Dave Umhoefer and Craig Glibert.  (And why don't these two reporters ever mention Obama's record for voting for every increase in taxes ever put in front of him while a Senator? And yet the chosen one will suddenly go against his nature and agree to cut taxes?  I think not.)

On the front page under a picture of McCain and Palin, the caption reads:  "Republican presidential nominee John McCain and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin address a large political rally in Cedarburg. A long line of supporters snaked through the village's streets for several hours before the event."  Sounds harmless on the surface, but did the reporters have to use the word "snaked" to describe the crowd?  Subtle, yet effective to paint the crowd "moving, crawling, or dragging with a snake-like motion" (as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary).  And we all know what a snake is.  

Also interesting to note is that the caption under a picture of Sarah Palin on page 6A, which reads:  Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin finds a friendly crowd in Cedarburg....  OK, did she have to search out a "friendly" crowd?  Is everyone else "hostile"?  Very revealing, too, is that a large picture of U.S. Rep Gwen Moore (yes, the same classless woman who was handing out condoms at the DNC to "protect people from John McCain") meeting  supporters at the Obama campaign office in Mequon is right below Palins picture. 

Last, but not least, are two more key points:

1)  Absolutely NO mention was made of the 3 busses carrying members of the press to the Cedarburg event.  According to many people there, these busses were heckled, booed, and given the one-finger salute by the crowd.  Wonder why - could  the crowd have been upset with the press for  their "unbiased" reporting and/or their disgusting attempts to smear Palin based on nothing?  Isn't the crowds reaction to the press newsworthy?  You can bet if McCain or Palin were heckled or booed, that would have made it in the story!!! 

2)  After reading the entire article about McCain and Palins visit, the only article on the same page (6A) where the story ends.  The only other article on the entire page is titled:   "Probe of Palin's conduct sped up". 

When it comes to giving equal time for Democrats in response to Republican articles, the Journal/Sentinel comes through with flying colors.  And notice how positive those stories are in regards to Democrats!  Especially Barry!   However, how fair has the Journal/Sentinel been when it comes to giving equal coverage to Republicans when Democrats and Obama are constantly touted in the paper?   Can the Journal/Sentinel ever run a story about Republicans without using some sort of derogatory views or smear?  Stay tuned.  If the mainstream media continues down the same road, the weeks to come will get ugly for McCain, Palin, and the Republican party.  

Can anyone say there is no bias in the media after viewing these two YouTube videos? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Qzn_ChyYsk&feature=related

Be sure to watch this next video to see how Bradley Jacobs, the senior editor of "Us Weekly" defends his magazine's attack on Sarah Palin  (by the way, he doesn't do a very good job....):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M05JiYnjNI&feature=related

Expect more viciousness from the "unbiased" media regarding Palin in the weeks leading up to the election in November. However, after watching her speech last night at the RNC, Palin has shown she can handle herself with confidence, strength and intelligence.   She won't back down from a fight.  If she can lead a state like Alaska (and kill and dress a moose!), she can certainly take on the mainstream media's pathetic attempts to discredit her.  Bring it on!