Pro Life and Pro 2nd Amendment...

Thanks Charlie!

More than three years ago, John McCain proposed additional oversight and regulation on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae in a bill that had full Republican support and no Democratic support.  A bill that could have prevented much of what went wrong.  A bill that would have prevented these GSE's (Government Sponsored Enterprises) from speculating on the mortgage based securities that they packaged.  The profit from this speculation is what provided the means for outrageous executive bonuses.  Obama and his cohorts, the rest of the Senate Democrats killed the bill.  Why would they do this?  Maybe it was a difference of opinion.  If so, that shows again why McCain is better suited to lead this country. 

I don't think that is the real reason the Dems killed it.  See, if they sided with McCain, the Democrats would lose their big fat donations (bribes) from Freddie and Fannie.  You see, even though Obama has only been in office for four years, (less than two if you remove his time campaigning for President - something that he said he wasn't qualified to do less than two years before he decided to) yet he was getting bigger payoffs than more senior Democrats.   Conspiracy theorists have speculated that Dhimocrats actually wanted the collapse, to try to build an even better case for one of their own to gain the White House.

Republicans are usually against regulations, but in this case McCain went against conventional thinking and tried to get these GSE's under tighter regulations.  In his speech supporting this legislation this is what he said:

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs-and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

Fox News Journalist John Gibson, reports on how Obama continued to benefit from Freddy and Fannie and how Obama and the Democrats had much to lose if their golden goose was cooked.

JOHN GIBSON: All right Heather. Lehman Brothers' collapse is traced back to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two big mortgage banks that got a federal bailout a few weeks ago. Freddie and Fannie used huge lobbying budgets and political contributions to keep regulators off their backs. A group called the center for responsive politics keeps track of which politicians get Fannie and Freddie political contributions. The top three U.S. Senators getting big Fannie and Freddie political bucks were democrats and number two is Senator Barack Obama.

Now, remember, he has only been in the Senate four years but still managed to grab the number two spot ahead of John Kerry, decades in the senate, and Chris Dodd who is chairman of the senate banking committee. Fannie and Freddie have been creations of the congressional democrats and the Clinton white house, designed to make mortgages available to more people, and as it turned out, some people who couldn't afford them. Fannie and Freddie have also been places for big Washington democrats to go to work in the semi-private sector and pocket millions. The Clinton administration's white house budget director Franklin Raines ran Fannie and collected 50 million dollars. Jamie Gurilli, Clinton Justice Apartment Official, worked for Fannie and took home 26 million dollars. Big Democrat Jim Johnson, recently on Obama's VP search committee has hauled in millions from his Fannie Mae C.E.O. job.

Now remember, Obama's ads and stump speeches attack McCain and republican policies for the current financial turmoil. It is demonstrably not Republican policy and worse, it appears the man attacking McCain, Senator Obama, was at the head of the line when the piggy's lined up at the Fannie and Freddie trough for campaign bucks. Senator Barack Obama, number two on the Fannie/Freddie list of favored politicians after just four short years in the senate. Next time you see that ad; you might notice he fails to mention that part of the Fannie and Freddie problem. Heather.

NAUERT: Wow, that's quite a report, begs the question - where is John McCain on this?

GIBSON: John McCain is a measly $20,000 after over 20 years so he really doesn't even come close in the political contribution department.

20 years of compiling this info and Obama, in less than four years, was number 2 in contributions.

John McCain has finally taken off the gloves to try to get the truth out, instead of playing nice with all of the Obama lies.  Here is what McCain is saying today:

Our current economic crisis is a good case in point. What was his actual record in the years before the great economic crisis of our lifetimes?

This crisis started in our housing market in the form of subprime loans that were pushed on people who could not afford them. Bad mortgages were being backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and it was only a matter of time before a contagion of unsustainable debt began to spread. This corruption was encouraged by Democrats in Congress, and abetted by Senator Obama.

Senator Obama has accused me of opposing regulation to avert this crisis. I guess he believes if a lie is big enough and repeated often enough it will be believed. But the truth is I was the one who called at the time for tighter restrictions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that could have helped prevent this crisis from happening in the first place.

Senator Obama was silent on the regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and his Democratic allies in Congress opposed every effort to rein them in. As recently as September of last year he said that subprime loans had been, quote, "a good idea." Well, Senator Obama, that "good idea" has now plunged this country into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

To hear him talk now, you'd think he'd always opposed the dangerous practices at these institutions. But there is absolutely nothing in his record to suggest he did. He was surely familiar with the people who were creating this problem. The executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have advised him, and he has taken their money for his campaign. He has received more money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than any other senator in history, with the exception of the chairman of the committee overseeing them.

Did he ever talk to the executives at Fannie and Freddie about these reckless loans? Did he ever discuss with them the stronger oversight I proposed? If Senator Obama is such a champion of financial regulation, why didn't he support these regulations that could have prevented this crisis in the first place? He won't tell you, but you deserve an answer.

John McCain has a proven track record of working with the other party and against his own to get done what needs to be done.  Obama has a proven record of poor decisions, poor choices for influential people in his life, corruption and lies.

Choosing McCain is the only reasonable decision.

Another must see video.  Thanks to Charlie Sykes.

Democrats are the majority party in Congress.  This means that if they want something to pass, all they need to do is vote for it.  Nancy Pelosi says that the Republicans are to blame for the bailout failure, because only one third of them voted to approve it.  Yet she only needed a few more votes for it to pass and nearly 100 Democrats voted against this package.  Sorry Nancy, this does not pass the common sense rule.  To top it off, she is the one that called for a vote knowing full well that they were short of the votes needed.  All morning and early afternoon the press said that they didn't have the votes. 

Barney Frank (the second coming of Elmer Fudd - has anybody listened to the way he talks?), Harry Reid and Pelosi have had their own agenda on this since the start.  First Reid says that the Democrats won't vote for anything unless McCain shows up to vote, then McCain calls his bluff and puts Country First to try and make sure that if something is done it gets done right, at which point Reid says don't come we don't need you.  The reason was they were trying to position Obama as the savior and leader.  Even during the big meeting at the White House, the other Democrats deferred to Obama so that he could show his leadership and take charge.  The Democratic leadership was appalled when he failed to do so.  Obama ready to lead?  There isn't one Democratic leader that thinks he is. 

McCain was not my candidate.  Not originally.  His close ties to, and having worked with very liberal democrats had me worried.  Once it was clear that he was going to be the Republican nominee, he was the best of what was left.  Let's face it, the Democrats were choosing a nominee that didn't believe he was ready to run on a national ticket.  Even Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, doesn't believe he is ready, and in fact would have preferred to run with John McCain.  Hillary Clinton also chose McCain over Obama.

What won me over?  Was it 2000 Democratic VP candidate turned Independent Senator Joe Lieberman's endorsement speech for John McCain?  After all, the Democrats still think well enough about Lieberman to have placed him in a leadership position as an important committee chairman.  His speech was convincing, specifically the line about how McCain could anger his own party, but he was doing it because of what he believed in.

Was it Rudy Giuliani's fantastic speech, where he compared the resumes of the two Presidential candidates?  The first candidate, John McCain has an extensive list of accomplishments and experience and even some things that provide a "Wow" moment.  The second candidate, Barak Obama, his biggest experience has been to vote present rather than make decisions on important issues, which was the job he was hired to do.   Obama has never led anything and, in fact, has been doing nothing more than running for the next highest office ever since being elected to the Illinois legislature.

Maybe it was Fred Thompson telling the fantastic biography of John McCain, including his tenure as a POW.  He contrasted that with the description of Obama as the most Liberal and inexperienced Presidential candidate ever, but may be a good match for the Democratic congress, which is the most unpopular congress in history. 

Could it have been McCain running mate Sarah Palin?  She was engaging, funny, and extremely comfortable in her speech to the RNC.  McCain has made a tremendous choice for a running mate.  She has leadership experience and is a serious reformer.  Her record for ethics reform and standing up to special interests in her time as Governor is a testament to a good leader.  She was very good at hitting Obama at his weak points with shots while smiling and having fun.  My favorite line was when she said, "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities."

Possibly it was McCain's own speech to the RNC that got to me.  After a tremendous build up by the speakers leading up to the candidates acceptance speech, my expectations were pretty flat.  How could he possibly perform as the Headliner when the warm up acts provided headliner performances?  But he did it.  He knocked it out of the park.  I particularly liked hearing him discuss how he has worked with members of both parties to do what he felt was important.  It is for this reason that Democrats like Senator Feingold of Wisconsin, as well as Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden consider him a friend and someone they enjoyed working with and consider him ready to lead.

So what won me over?  It was a combination of all the above.  While the Republican platform and ideals are what I most closely identify with, it is the person at the top of the ticket that I have to believe will follow through on those commitments while leading and protecting this country.  That is why I am proud to endorse John McCain as our next President.

John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his VP candidate to help provide balance to the Republican ticket.  She brings with her a more conservative background as well as youth.  The amazing thing is that in Sarah Palin's and Barack Obama's relatively short political careers, the Republican VP candidate has accomplished so much more than the Democratic Presidential candidate.

Barack Obama chose Joe Biden as his VP candidate, thus admitting that he severely lacked any foreign relations experience.  Joe Biden brings that to the Democratic ticket along with experience and accomplishments that are non-existent by the Democratic Presidential nominee. 

What does Joe Biden think of his running mate?  Just a few months ago he stated that Barack Obama is not ready to lead.

While John McCain and Sarah Palin on the Republican ticket are a slam dunk winner over their competition, Barack Obama will do well next year on the Speaking circuit.  After all, that's the one and only thing that he does well.

I have seen this a few times and another friend recently forwarded it to me.  Thought I would put it here for all to enjoy.

>> Subject: Wheat! 
>> 
>> The Little Red Hen called all of her Democrat neighbors together and said, 'If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to 
>> eat. Who will help me plant it?' 
>> 
>> 'Not I,' said the cow. 
>> 
>> 'Not I,' said the duck. 
>> 
>> 'Not I,' said the pig. 
>> 
>> 'Not I,' said the goose. 
>> 
>> 'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen, and so she did. The wheat grew very tall and 
>> ripened into golden grain. 
>> 
>> 'Who will help me reap my wheat?' asked the little red hen. 
>> 
>> 'Not I,' said the duck.. 
>> 
>> 'Out of my classification,' said the pig. 
>> 
>> 'I'd lose my seniority,' said the cow. 
>> 
>> 'I'd lose my unemployment compensation,' said the goose. 
>> 
>> 'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen, and so she did. 
>> 
>> At last it came time to bake the bread. 
>> 
>> 'Who will help me bake the bread?' asked the little red hen. 
>> 
>> 'That would be overtime for me,' said the cow. 
>> 
>> 'I'd lose my welfare benefits,' said the duck. 
>> 
>> 'I'm a dropout and never learned how,' said the pig. 
>> 
>> 'If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination,' said the goose. 
>> 
>> 'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen. 
>> 
>> She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded 
>> a share. But the little red hen said, 'No, I shall eat all five loaves.' 
>> 
>> 'Excess profits!' cried the cow. (Nancy Pelosi) 
>> 
>> 'Capitalist leech!' screamed the duck. (Barbara Boxer) 
>> 
>> 'I demand equal rights!' yelled the goose. (Jesse Jackson) 
>> 
>> The pig just grunted in disdain. (Ted Kennedy) 
>> 
>> And they all painted 'Unfair!' picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities. 
>> 
>> Then the farmer (Obama) came. He said to the little red hen, 'You must not be so greedy.' 
>> 
>> 'But I earned the bread,' said the little red hen. 
>> 
>> 'Exactly,' said Barack the farmer. 'That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone 
>> in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers >>must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle.' 
>> 
>> And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, 'I am grateful, for 
>> now I truly understand.' 
>> 
>> But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the 
>> 'party' and got her bread free. And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established. 
>> 
>> Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared...so long as there was free bread that 
>> 'the rich' were paying for. 
>> 
>> EPILOGUE 
>> 
>> Bill Clinton is getting $12 million for his memoirs. 
>> 
>> Hillary got $8 million for hers. 
>> 
>> That's $20 million for the memories from two people, who for eight years, repeatedly testified, under oath, that 
>> they couldn't remember anything. 
>> 
>> IS THIS A GREAT BARNYARD OR WHAT? 

What else has Obama lied about?  Anything that might help line his pockets or those of his friend’s maybe?

For one thing, not all of Obama's support comes from the little donor he likes to tout with increasing frequency. "Industry PACs may not give directly to his campaign, but employees of industries may do so, and many of his contributors have come from executives and their spouses," the Wall Street Journal noted. "For example, Mr. Obama leads all candidates in donations from the pharmaceutical industry and commercial banks, among other industries.

This is the dirty little secret of the internet financing that the Obama campaign enjoys, but doesn’t want us to know about.  He is accepting huge sums of money that are directed to his campaign by companies and industries that are buying his influence.

This is simply the large-scale version of a shakedown.  Seems that Obama and former Milwaukee Alderman Michael McGee have read from the same Democratic playbook and have an awful lot in common.

Now, I'm  gonna get in trouble for saying this, but I hate the fact that people feel everybody needs to be politically correct at all times.  Here is what some people are upset with Obama for:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Juy9NwI8_i0

As Author and sales guru Jefrey Gitomer once said to a woman at a presentation I attended, "Do you mind if I call you sweetie?"  She said "No".  Gitomer said "Good, because some chicks don't like it when you call them sweetie". 

Politicians really need to watch the words they use.  Because they will most certainly be used against them in the court of public opinion.

I don't see anything wrong with what he said, but my vote only counts once.  Twice, if I live in Milwaukee and vote democrat.

More and more of my entertainment comes from the internet.  I particularly find a number of very clever and creative videos on sites like You Tube.

Here is one of my more recent favorites in light of todays Pennsylvania primary.

Hillary Clinton wants a do-over in Michigan and Florida, because those two states had primary elections that the Democrats decided wouldn't count because the states did not follow the Democratic party rules.  Hillary Clinton is behind in the delegate count for the Democratic Presidential nomination, and those are two states that she would likely win and move her closer to Barrack Obama and improve her chances in convincing "Super Delegates" (no they are not action heroes) that she should be the Democratic nominee.  Obama does not want a do-over, because it could only hurt him.  Instead, he favors splitting the delegates from the two states 50-50 so that they are counted.  Never mind that this is not how the states would actually have voted.  If their positions were reversed, Obama would be fighting for the do-over and Clinton would want to leave it as is.  Neither really cares about everybody being represented, unless it benefits them personally.

 The Democratic Party already has the most convoluted rules for selecting delegates.  I think you can get college credit for taking the course in understanding how it works.  After this year, you can bet that they will make major changes in the system again.  If the Democrats had a similar system to the Republicans, Hillary Clinton would already have clinched the nomination.  The Democrats ruled out the peoples vote in Michigan and Florida, because those states moved their primary elections to an earlier date, against the wishes of the Democratic Party.  Apparently it is the Democratic Party that doesn't want to count every vote.

Barrack Obama, one of the most eloquent speakers of recent times, is choking on his own words lately.  Turns out some of the words that he has been using aren't his, they are from someone else's speeches.  It may be that the original speaker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, a friend of his, gave him permission to use the lines, but it has been Obama's speeches that have earned him most of his praise and support.  Now, it turns out that these are not even original. 

This is a minor point when the bigger problem is that he says nothing.  I take that back, he says he stands for change and for changing politics as usual.  This sounds good to the masses, but let's see what he's been up to lately.  First, he vowed to follow the rules of public finance campaign spending, but now is changing his mind as he realizes that special interest money may be important to win.  Second, he has put nearly $700,000 into the campaigns of the "super delegates", those democratic delegates that may decide their party's nomination.  Lastly, seeking the endorsement of labor, he declared his opposition to a U.S. - Korea Free Trade Agreement, even though he has pledged to "renew American diplomacy".  Sounds like the newbie is learning how things get done and it sounds like politics as usual.

Even though for weeks and months critics, including myself, have complained that Obama is all flash and no substance, some of his biggest supporters still aren't getting that message.  A State Senator from Texas went on MSNBC to speak on behalf of Obama earlier this week and was absolutely dumbstruck when he could not list one thing that Obama has done. 

Obama may me in for a rough ride.  Usually these things don't start coming to light until the two major party candidates are set.  This year though he not only has to worry about the republicans putting dents in his Teflon, but Hillary Clinton is starting to resort to pressing her opponent on these flaws to try to stay alive in the race for delegates.