The Democrat culture of corruption continues.  Wealthy Democrat donor Raj Rajaratnam, founder of hedge fund Galleon Group, was charged with insider trading.  Rajaratnam is a supporter of Barack Obama.  He donated $4,600 to Obama and $30,800 to Obama Victory Fund in 2008.

View Rajaratnam’s political contributions from Democrats here:

Democrat Raj Rajaratnam’s Political Contributions

The page is a copy of the results of a search of Rajaratnam’s donations at fec.gov.

WSJ Article

I found some media bias exhibited by ABC News.  The news network (if you can call it that) reported that Rajaratnam donated to Hillary Clinton, but they did not report that he also donated to Obama until the final paragraph of the article on page two.

ABC News Article

The New York hedge fund billionaire indicted today in an alleged $20 million insider trading scheme, Raj Rajaratnam, was a major contributor to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and also the single largest known U.S. contributor to a charity linked to the Tamil Tiger terror group in Sri Lanka, according to records obtained by ABCNews.com.

From page two:

Rajaratnam and his wife were also major contributors to a number of Democratic campaigns, giving a total of $118,000 to, among others, the Senate campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer and the presidential campaigns of Mrs. Clinton and Barack Obama.

Why did ABC News mention the donations to Hillary Clinton in the first paragraph, but wait until the second page to mention the donations to Barack Obama when Obama received much more money than Hillary did from Rajaratnam?

Hillary Clinton received a total of $6,500 in donations from Rajaratnam.  Barack Obama received a total of $35,400.

It seems to me that Obama should have been mentioned first.  Not only since he received five times the money that Hillary did, but because he is President.

After serving only 8-1/2 months in office and with no accomplishments of any kind, President Barack Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

If anyone had any doubts that the Nobel Prize Committee is a joke, this should remove them.

Obama was awarded the Peace Price for 2009 “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”

And what efforts would those be?

In a press release, the Nobel Committee said:

The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

This “vision” is not a vision, it is insanity.  There will never be a world without nuclear weapons.  Anyone with a brain knows this, which apparently excludes the members of the Committee who awarded the prize.

The Committee adds further:

Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play.

I recall President George W. Bush going before the United Nations many times to ask for cooperation in dealing with rogue states and states attempting to acquire nuclear weapons.  Bush insisted on working with other nations in dealing with North Korea and Iran.  Bush also requested international input into the affairs of Afghanistan and Iraq.

So what has Obama done that Bush didn’t do?  Nothing.  The difference, however, is that Obama is a liberal fraud who spews meaningless rhetoric that mindless liberals such as those on the Prize Committee like to hear, even if that rhetoric isn’t based in reality.

The press release adds:

Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts.

No kidding?  Bush tried to negotiate with Iraq before deposing Saddam Hussein, even going so far as to offer Saddam exile for him to peacefully step down.  Bush also negotiated with North Korea.

The press release further states:

The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations.

No, it has done no such thing.  No nuclear-armed nation in its right mind would surrender the only tool that can almost surely guarantee that it will never be conquered.

The Committe states:

Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future.

Hope?  Obama’s meaningless speeches filled with drivel written by other people that he reads off of teleprompters is enough to award a Nobel Peace Prize these days?  Ridiculous!

Perhaps the Committee isn’t aware that terrorist-related violence in Iraq and Afghanistan has soared since Obama took over the reins.

People all over the world are scratching their heads over Obama’s award.

Sidney Morning Herald

But the surprise announcement by the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee in Oslo was interpreted more as a bid to encourage the US president’s bold diplomatic overtures to Washington’s enemies, rather than a recognition of the achievement of peace by a leader in office for only nine months.

“We do not yet have peace in the Middle East… this time it was very clear that they wanted to encourage Obama to move on these issues…” said the 2008 winner, former Finnish president Martti Ahtisaari.

The 1983 Laureate, Poland’s Lech Walesa, was more blunt.

“Who, Obama? So fast? Too fast – he hasn’t had the time to do anything yet,” Walesa told reporters in Warsaw.

“For the time being Obama’s just making proposals.”

U.K. Gaurdian

Which is what makes the awarding of this year’s prize to a president who has been in office for a mere nine months an odd departure. It is as if the prize committee had been persuaded to give the award on the future delivery of promises.

The reality is that the prize appears to have been awarded to Barack Obama for what he is not. For not being George W Bush. Or rather being less like the last president. The question now is whether having being anointed perhaps too early by the committee, a Nobel prize earned so cheaply and at so little cost will help him in his efforts on the international stage or rather be an albatross around his neck. Something against which all his future efforts will be judged – and perhaps found wanting.

If you question whether or not Barack Obama is a whore to big money, do you need further proof than this?

President Obama is going to attend a $30,400 per couple fundraiser in Manhattan on October 20th.

So much for being for the little guy, huh?

NY Daily News Obama Fundraiser

President Barack Hussein Obama is doing a terrific job keeping his campaign promise to create millions of jobs.  Obama has created -3.558 million jobs since taking office (Feb – Sept).

For those of you Democrats out there, that means Obama has lost 3,558,000 jobs from February through September of this year.

What I find most interesting is how job cuts spiked the month Obama was elected.  In September 2008, 321,000 jobs were cut. In October, 380,000 jobs were cut. But in November when Obama was elected, 597,000 jobs were lost.

BLS Job Cut Numbers By Month

November is when stores, restaurants, factories, and other businesses hire seasonal workers to help with the Christmas rush.  But last year, job cuts jumped 57% over the prior month when Obama was elected.

Why would businesses cut jobs after Obama was elected?  Maybe because he promised massive increases in income, investment, and other taxes.

The only thing tax increases do is push jobs overseas.  Despite a stabilized economy and job growth in other countries around the world, hundreds of thousands of jobs are still being lost in America each month because of Obama’s and the Democrats’ promised tax increases.

This is just the beginning.  Carbon taxes will increase the cost of every product and service manufactured and sold in the country.  That will have a devastating effect on aggregate demand and jobs.

People aren’t stupid.  They know that in the end this massive spending has to come from somewhere.  With a budget deficit expected to reach $9 trillion over the next 10 years, business owners know the Democrats are going to be coming after them for more and more every year.  The smart ones are setting up shop overseas and are getting out now.

Just when you think the Democratic Party cannot come up with more foolish ways to waste taxpayer money, along comes something so stupid it makes you think you are living in an alternate universe.

The Obama administration is going to spend $60 million to identify 10,000 Chicago-area school kids at risk for becoming victims of violence and basically become their mommas.

NY Times Article

Financed by federal stimulus grants for two years, the $60 million plan uses a formula gleaned from an analysis of more than 500 students who were shot over the last several years to predict the characteristics of potential future victims, including when and where they might be attacked. While other big city school districts, including New York, have tried to focus security efforts on preventing violence, this plan goes further by identifying the most vulnerable students and saturating them with adult attention, including giving each of them a paid job and a local advocate who would be on call for support 24 hours a day.

That amount of money, $60 million, divided by the number of kids, 10,000, comes to $6,000 per kid for two years, or $3,000 per kid for one year.  The kids get free jobs–which I am sure they will work really hard at–and an on-call nanny.  And those nannies will be, I am certain, Obama supporters who will be paid handsomely for their “work”.

This is just another payback to Obama’s inner-city backers.  More pay-for-play politics from Democrats.

Also from the article:

The students at highest risk of violence, by statistics, are most likely to be black, male, without a stable living environment, in special education, skipping an average of 42 percent of school days at neighborhood and alternative schools, and having a record of in-school behavioral flare-ups that is about eight times higher than the average student.

The students at highest risk of violence are black because the people perpetrating the violence are black.  It is interesting how they tend to mention the race of the victims but never the race of the perpetrators.  I guess they don’t want you to know who is committing the crime and violence.  That would be racist, right?

Watch this video of 16-year-old Derrion Albert being beaten to death with a two-by-four on the street in Chicago a few weeks ago.  He was a young black male beaten to death on his way home from school by other blacks.

Derrion Alert Video

Also from the article:

Reinvigorated gang wars, some say from the large-scale demolition of public housing and the scattering of tenants, have turned some West and South Side areas into terrifying places for children to crisscross.

What is most interesting is that while Chicago did have problems with organized crime during the 1920s and 1930s, crime and violence soared as Democrats began building thousands of units of public housing in the 1950s.  What happened is that poor blacks from the South came flooding into Chicago to take advantage of the welfare freebies.  Fifty years later, the city is still dealing with the fallout from their massive welfare projects, chiefly in the form of black crime and violence.

The biggest scam artists in the history of the world have all been Democrats.

There was Bernard Madoff who ran a $50 billion Ponzi scheme bilking thousands out of their life savings, leaving some destitute.  Then there was R. Allen Stanford who ran an $8 billion certificate of deposit Ponzi scheme.  Yesterday, Democrat fundraiser Norman Hsu was sentenced to 24 years in prison for running a $50 million Ponzi scheme and for violating campaign finance laws so he could illegally steer money to Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Is it purely coincidence that the biggest scammers that have ever lived are all Democrats?  No.  Lying, cheating, and stealing are what Democrats do best.  Every Democrat policy at its core involves stealing money from those who earn it so it can be given to those who didn’t earn it to buy votes.  So it should come as no surprise that scammers are Democrats.

Norman Hsu Article From Boston.com

Norman Hsu Article From CNN.com

A former Democratic fund-raiser who contributed to the presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama was sentenced Tuesday to 292 months, or more than 24 years, in prison for fraud including campaign finance violations…

More about Democrats Bernie Maddoff and Sir Robert Allen Stanford:

Bernard Madoff’s Political Contributions
Proof That Swindler R. Allen Stanford Is A Democrat

What kind of teacher would force her elementary school students to sing a song praising President Barack Hussein Obama for his accomplishments?  Here’s a video of one.

CBS News Obama Song Video And Article
Direct Link To Youtube Video

And what exactly has President Obama accomplished?  Other than to convince millions of brain-dead idiots to vote for him, that is?

Obama promised to create millions of jobs.  Did he accomplish that?  No.  Millions of jobs have been lost since he took office.  Job cuts soared in November 2008, the month he was elected.

Obama promised to create 5 million green jobs.  Has he accomplished that?  No.

Obama promised to end the wars.  Has he accomplished that?  No.  The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are going to hell under his leadership with more troop deaths now than a year ago.

I could go on and on about Obama’s failures.  There are no accomplishments to be found under his leadership.  Certainly nothing to justify indoctrinating little kids to sing a song praising him.

I thought the world was supposed to love us after the election of Barack Obama.  I thought that Muslim extremist terrorists would no longer hate us because of Obama having grown up in the Muslim world.

It looks like domestic terrorist plots have accelerated since the election of Obama.  A few months ago, a terror plot was broken up in New York.  Then a few days ago, another terror plot targeting New York by an Afghan immigrant was foiled.  Then yesterday, two separate arrests were made in bomb plots in Illinois and Texas targeting skyscrapers.

If anything, the election of Obama has not reduced the irrational hatred of America by radical Muslims.  The election of Obama and his actions as President have demonstrated weakness to those who want to do us harm and they are seizing on the perceived opportunity to strike.

Why else would domestic terror plots be on the rise after Obama took office?

Remember how Democrats said that Republicans were using terrorism as a method of stoking fear in the American people?  It looks like Democrats were lying again.  Terrorism is a real threat not ginned-up by Republicans.

It’s only a matter of time until a terrorist bombing succeeds on American soil now that Democrats are running the country.  If there is any silver lining, it is that the areas to be targeted are inhabited mostly by Democrat voters.

Why is it that the world’s most evil leaders all love President Barack Obama?  Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez had kind words for Obama.  And now terrorist dictator Moammar Gaddafi of Libya does, too.

Washington Post Article

…When it came to America’s 44th president (President Obama), Gaddafi offered only warm words, calling him “our son” and “our Obama,” and saying, “The election of Obama is the beginning of change.”

“We are content and happy if Obama can stay forever as the president,” Gaddafi said.

This is just further proof that evil people and terrorists love Democrats.  Why not?  Democrats think the same way and say the exact same things that terrorists do.  Mentally deficient birds of a feather flock together.

The company that made the playset for President Barack Obama’s children is slashing jobs and planning to move production to China.

Article

You may remember that Obama promised to create 2 million jobs.  Then, Obama promised to create 3 million jobs.  Later, he promised to create 4.1 million jobs.  Finally a few months ago, Obama said he was going to create or “save” 600,000 jobs in 100 days.  It’s nice to see him getting more precise as he pulls numbers out of thin air.

Millions have lost their jobs since Obama took office, and millions more have lost their jobs since he was elected.  Job cuts spiked the month Obama was elected.  Why?  Because his policies are disastrous for the economy.

Higher income taxes, higher investment taxes, a likely payroll tax for healthcare, higher energy costs from carbon cap and trade taxes–businesses are not waiting for these higher costs to take effect before doing something about it.  Businesses all over the country are estimating the costs of Obama’s massive new taxes and taking evasive action now.  More will follow.

I think unemployment could hit 12% – 15% if these carbon cap taxes get enacted any time soon.  Democrats have been dragging their feet on cap and trade all summer.  The only consolation is that those who put Obama into power will be the ones hurt most by his policies.

Just when you think that Barack Obama can’t get any dumber, he opens his mouth and proves otherwise.

Blowing off health insurers’ concerns that a government-run health insurance program would drive them out of business and destroy the private health insurance industry, Obama was quoted as saying the following:

If private insurers say that the marketplace provides the best quality health care…then why is it that the government, which they say can’t run anything, suddenly is going to drive them out of business?  That’s not logical.

The government is going to drive them out of business, you stupid idiot, because you plan to borrow trillions of dollars to fund this program and have no intention of operating at anything but a huge loss.  Private businesses can’t operate at huge losses for long and they certainly cannot borrow trillions from future generations.  But all you have to do is borrow money and you can spend into oblivion without regard to financial soundness.  Idiot.

That statement by Obama could be the dumbest thing I have ever heard any politician say.  And the only thing that isn’t logical is the workings of the liberal brain.

I laugh when I think about NY Times writer David Brooks gushing on and on about how smart Barack Obama is.  Anyone who thinks that Obama is intelligent is himself an idiot.

It seems that someone has finally talked some sense into Obama’s dimwitted brain.  Obama is now refusing to release photographs of detainee “abuse” because military commanders say that doing so could whip up anti-American sentiment, create a deadly backlash against American soldiers, and inflame radicals into committing more acts of terrorism.

Really?  Why didn’t someone tell Obama this before he released memos detailing “harsh” interrogation techniques used against terrorism suspects?  What purpose did that serve other than to appease his anti-American liberal base and tip-off terrorists as to what to expect should they be captured?

Is this another example of Obama’s hypocrisy?  Is this an example of him playing politics with human lives?  Or is this an example of an unqualified, incompetent President flip-flopping because he realizes that pandering to his liberal base is dangerous to America and the world?

NY Times Article

How could anyone not know this type of thing would happen with Obama as President?

Meanwhile, all the gains we have made in Iraq are eroding under Obama’s leadership.  Afghanistan is turning into a hellhole.  And Pakistan is on the verge of being taken over by radical jihadists.

Nice work, Mr. President.

Millions of idiots voted for Barack Obama based on his promise that he would create millions of jobs despite the fact that he had never created one himself.  It turns out that he and his Democrat cronies are doing just the opposite.

The hospitality industry is asking Democrats to tone down the anti-business rhetoric because it is bad for their business and destroys jobs.

Star Tribune Hospitality Article

Jay Witzel, CEO of Carlson Hotels Worldwide, was quoted as saying the following about the  business travel industry during testimony to the Senate:

This part of our industry has been the source of undeserved and crippling attacks in recent months.  An environment has been created in America where legitimate business travel is being questioned and cancelled. This translates into additional loss of jobs, taxes, and travel-related revenues for an industry that is already hard-hit from the general economic recession.

Yes, that makes sense.  And that is precisely why Democrats will not be able to comprehend it.

Another article discusses the 789 pending Chrysler dealership closings forced by the Obama administration and the tens-of-thousands of jobs that could be destroyed.

Star Tribune Chrysler Article

Chrysler submitted a 40-page list of pending closures to a bankruptcy court judge Thursday in response to government demands it dramatically shrink.

Economists estimate 42,000 dealership jobs could be lost in the closings, not counting thousands of related jobs at suppliers and ancillary businesses that depend on spending by dealership employees.

That’s an average of 53 jobs lost per dealership, which is a reasonable estimate.  All because of Barack Obama.

I’ve written in the past about how jobs in energy-intensive industries are bearing the brunt of job losses because of impending Democrat carbon taxes.  With Chrysler, we have irrefutable evidence that Obama is directly destroying jobs.

What is most humorous is that auto dealerships, particularly good-paying mechanic jobs, are heavily unionized.  Unions supported Obama, and now he’s destroying their jobs.

Is this what they call poetic justice?  It certainly is sweet irony.

Over two-thirds of the jobs lost since the beginning of the recession in December of 2007 have come since Obama was elected last November.  When Obama was elected, unemployment stood at 6.8%.  As of April 2009, unemployment was 8.9%–and rising.  To contrast, in February 2008 the unemployment rate was 4.8%–almost half of what it is now.

Historical Unemployment Data

I would love to meet an Obama voter who recently lost his or her job and laugh in their face.  We on the Right told you this was going to happen.  Sure enough, it is.  It is, afterall, nothing more than simple logic, which is something beyond the grasp of the Democrat mind.

As Obama is proving, sometimes change can be bad.

I’ve been saying all along that this Democrat claim that banks aren’t lending money to people has been one big lie.  I was right.

Washington Post-AP Article

Kelly King, CEO of bank BB&T, said the following:

We have people in the street looking to give loans. This notion that people can not get loans is a myth. Banks are making all the good loans they can find.

No, it’s not a myth, it’s a lie.  A lie is a deliberate telling of a falsehood with the intent to mislead.  This is a Democrat lie intended to justify their goal of nationalizing banks by forcing them to accept government equity investments they don’t need.  Democrats want to control the banks.  Why?  Probably to justify their social engineering goals and for other nefarious reasons, I’m sure.  The Democrat desire to control everything comes into play, too.

Also in that article is discussion about some of the banks that got bailouts wanting to pay the money back as soon as possible.  They don’t want Obama meddling in their operations.  I can’t say I blame them.  I wouldn’t want a moron like Barack Obama interfering with my business, either.

By now, you’ve probably seen several “news” stories about Obama’s first 100 days in office.  No doubt, you’ve noticed how the media keeps saying how “ambitious” and “bold” Obama’s plans are.

How are $2 trillion annual budget deficits ambitious or bold?  Wouldn’t the proper words to describe Obama’s first 100 days be more along the lines of dangerous, reckless, bankrupting, and foolish?

I still cannot believe how the media is shilling for Obama.  Obama quadruples the budget deficit, then plans to cut it in half, which is still twice as high as its highest ever level, and all the media can do is latch onto that one part and parrot it endlessly as if he’s doing something good.

What about the massive inflation that is coming down the road as a result of all the government spending?  Or the higher interest rates due to the “crowding out” effect of government borrowing?  Or the fact that 100% taxation on the “rich” won’t even come close to closing Obama’s budget deficits, meaning that all Americans will eventually endure massive tax increases?

Or what about the massive tax increases on all Americans that are coming in the form of a carbon cap-and-trade scheme which will raise the cost of all production and all goods and services sold in this country?  Or the millions of jobs that will be lost as companies flee America for countries where costs of production and taxes are lower?  Already we have seen that jobs in energy-intensive industries are being lost at the highest rates due to the carbon taxes around the corner.

Why isn’t the media reporting on the effects that Obama’s “ambitious” and “bold” policies are going to have on the average American?

It seems there have been a rash of mass murders across the country since President Barack Obama took office less than three months ago.  I guess you could call this the Obama effect on society.  One might expect certain high-crime segments of our society to feel empowered by someone in the White House who looks like them, but Obama seems to have drawn out murderous kooks of all stripes.

AP Mass Murders Article

Mass murder is nothing new, and the invention of repeating guns only made it easier. But even experts who study the phenomenon have been stunned by the recent rash — seven in the past month, three in the past week alone.

“Boy, this is a lot,” said Safarik, now a partner with Forensic Behavioral Services International.

I find this passage from the article particularly interesting:

Most mass murderers, like most serial killers, are middle-aged, white males…

That may be true, but America is still majority white.  Based on population metrics, most mass murderers and serial killers should be white.  However, what this article doesn’t tell you is that blacks are over-represented among serial killers, as they are in all categories of violent crime, including assault and rape.  Blacks represent 12.5% of the American population, but commit over 50% of the murders and over 20% of serial murders.

Data

Serial killings by race of perpetrator:

• White:  72.82%
• Black:  21.33%
• Hispanic:  5.13%
• Asian:  0.72%

I found it interesting that the article would go out of its way to state that most mass murderers were white without mentioning the disproportionate killing by blacks.  You know how liberals are, they’ve always got to blame everything on white people.

It looks like they broke out the race of serial killers, giving Hispanics and Asians their own categories.  When the government publishes murder statistics, they lump Latinos in with Whites so as to skew the white murder rate upward.  Here are the murder offender by race statistics from 1976 to 2005.  If you notice, there are no categories for Latinos or Asians.

United States Homicide Offenders By Race

In a majority of the years in the report, blacks have committed over 50% of the murders.  But you will rarely see that reported in the media.

Since we are on the topic of racial crime due to the biased article, I’ll take the opportunity to expose a long-standing Democrat lie.

You know how Democrats have always blamed the high rate of crime among blacks on poverty?  Well, here’s the truth:  there are more whites in America in poverty than blacks.

US Poverty Statistics

According to government census statistics, in 2006 there were 16 million non-Hispanic whites living in poverty compared to about 9 million blacks.  If poverty was responsible for crime, and violent crime like murder in particular, then there should be more murders committed by whites than by blacks.  But that is not the case.  A majority of murders are not committed by whites, which represent the largest ethnic group living in poverty.

The Democratic Party has been using the “poverty causes crime” argument for decades to excuse disproportionate levels of crime among their beloved voting base and to further their agenda for more wealth redistribution.  It’s all been one big Democrat lie!

Do you want to know something interesting?  Crime correlates to intelligence as measured by IQ.  Those with lower IQ scores are several times more likely to commit crime.  Not only are dimwits more likely to commit crime, they are more likely to end up on welfare.  If you ever take the opportunity to talk to a police officer, he or she will tell you that most criminals are criminals because they are stupid, and that is why they get caught.  Criminals also vote Democrat, which is why the DFL is so hellbent on restoring voting rights to convicted felons.

No surprises.

Crime Statistics

Has anyone else noticed that the news stories about AIG’s $163 million in retention bonuses have disappeared?

Do you think these news stories would have disappeared if Bush was still President?  I think the media is covering for Obama.  The media did reveal that the Obama administration and Senator Chris Dodd were responsible for making these bonus payments possible, but they didn’t make a big deal out of it.  Right after this revelation was made, with little mention of Obama’s direct responsibility, the eruption of Democrat anger died down.

It seems the Democrats in Congress have dropped efforts to slap a 90% tax on the AIG bonus payments.  I guess pursuing this issue further would draw more attention to the fact that Democrats were responsible for it in the first place.

I can’t say this is surprising.  It seems that a large percentage of home owners in default who get loan modifications to lower their monthly payments are going back into default shortly after renegotiating new terms.

Twenty-six percent of people who got mortgage modifications last year to reduce their monthly payments by 10% or more went back into default within nine months.  Those who didn’t get payment reductions defaulted at an even higher rate, nearly 57%.

Article 1
Article 2

There are always going to be some cases where people get behind on their house payments due to unforeseen medical problems or other circumstances beyond their control.  But in the vast majority of these cases, the reason the borrowers are going into default is because of their own shortcomings, not the least of which is character, and a lack of common sense.

So, what does this portend about Obama’s foreclosure rescue program and it’s potential $275 billion price tag?  If the past is any guide to the future, Obama’s plan will be a huge and costly failure.  Here’s a story from December 2008, before Obama took office, about loan defaulters re-defaulting.

Dec. 2008 Reuters Borrowers Re-Defaulting Article

As the old saying goes, those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.  Judging from academic achievement in Democrat strongholds, we know that Democrats aren’t very good at learning much of anything.  Can’t read, can’t write, can’t do math, but they can turn out in droves to vote Democrat.

It looks like there will be no shortage of hypocrisy in the Obama administration.

In less than three months in office, Obama has displayed hypocrisy at every turn from signing a lucrative book deal just before taking office to cranking up the thermostat in the White House when he previously said that people wouldn’t be able to keep their homes as warm as they’d like because of the need to reduce carbon emissions.  He nominated a total of six tax cheaters to high-ranking government positions while demanding higher taxation on all Americans.  He pretended to be outraged about the AIG retention bonuses, which were later revealed to have been made possible by his administration lobbying Congress to exempt prior bonus agreements for bailout recipients.  Now, it looks like his chief economic advisor made millions of dollars last year from hedge funds and Wall Street.

Reuters Article

Lawrence Summers, director of the White House’s National Economic Council, was paid $5.2 million by hedge fund D.E. Shaw in the past year.  Not only did he make millions from a hedge fund, an industry Democrats love to demonize, but Summers also made $2.7 million in speaking fees, some of which came from troubled Wall Street investment firms.

These Democrats pretend to be opposed to “big business”, Wall Street, and inequitable wealth, but they sure like to make as much money for themselves as possible whenever the opportunity presents itself.

The Democratic Party has made its market among the unthinking.  All they have to do is to say the things their voting base wants to hear and they will get votes and campaign cash no matter how hypocritical their behavior is.

It’s bad enough that President Barack Hussein Obama wants to bankrupt the United States with multi-trillion dollar annual budget deficits, but he expects the rest of the world to do the same.

NY Times Article

For all of Mr. Obama’s early optimism that the rest of the world would follow his lead on big stimulus packages, there is no clear move in that direction. By last weekend the White House was signaling that it would not confront the nations, notably Germany, that resisted more deficit spending.

Maybe Obama will come to realize that the rest of the world isn’t as stupid as he and his millions of brain-dead supporters are.  But I doubt it.

Idiot-in-chief Barack Obama has nominated another Democrat tax cheater for a high-ranking federal post.  Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, nominated by Obama to be Health and Human Services Secretary after former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle withdrew his nomination, admitted to “errors” in paying her taxes to the tune of $7,040.  She is paying that–only after getting caught–plus $878 in interest.

So nice of these Democrats to not pay their taxes while demanding that all Americans pay more, isn’t it?  This is the sixth tax cheater Obama has nominated for cabinet and high-ranking government positions.  The list of Obama tax cheaters are:

• Timothy Geithner – Treasury Secretary
• Tom Daschle – Secretary of Health and Human Services nominee
• Nancy Killefer – White House Chief Performance Officer nominee
• Hilda Solis – Labor Secretary nominee and current Congresswoman from California
• Ron Kirk – Chief trade representative
• Kathleen Sebelius – Secretary of Health and Human Services

Democrat scumbags, liars, frauds, and hypocrites, one and all.

AP Article

Every time President Barack Hussein Obama opens his mouth, the stock market tanks. It dropped again on Monday, March 31, 2009, as his plans for the ailing American auto industry were made public, including the forced resignation of General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 254.16 points, or 3.27%, to end at 7522.02. The S&P 500 fell 28.41 points, or 3.48%, to finish at 787.53.

How much more proof does one need to see that Obama is bad for the stock market and the economy? Literally, every time he opens his mouth, the market tanks.

Last week, the market was up because of Obama’s transfer-of-wealth plan for Wall Street. Obama wants to lend upwards of $1 trillion to investors at enticingly low interest rates so they can buy up banks’ “toxic assets” to clear them off of balance sheets with the government bearing most, if not all, of the risk of loss. The market reacted favorably, which you would expect given the potential transfer of wealth involved, moving up over 6.5% the first trading day following the announcement of the plan.

If you take money from group X and give it to group Y, the value of group Y is going to increase. That is what a transfer of wealth does. It increases the value of one group at the expense of another group. No real wealth is created in such situations. That is why the market rose on March 23, 2009. It is nothing more than a transfer of wealth to Wall Street.

One investment company CEO summed up the rally correctly.

NY Times Article

“This is the free-money rally,” said Barry Ritholtz, chief executive of Fusion IQ, an investment and research firm. “Traders like the fact that there’s a boatload of cash headed their way.”

A boatload of cash is right. This reeks of a payback to Wall Street. Obama was the largest recipient of campaign contributions from Wall Street employees during the 2008 Presidential campaign. He has a long history of using his influence to get taxpayer money for his financial backers. He is doing it again. Obama is still as crooked as he ever was. He just has a larger pool of money to dole out as paybacks now that he’s the President of the United States.  And all of it is borrowed from future generations.

Democrat Senator Christopher Dodd was caught in a lie.  He originally denied having anything to do with inserting language into the Obama stimulus bill exempting restrictions on bonuses of bailed-out companies prior to February 11, 2009.  Yesterday, Dodd admitted that he did insert that language into the bill at the urging of the Obama administration.

Dodd was quoted by ABC News as saying:

I did not want to make any changes to my original Senate passed amendment. But I did so at the request of administration officials who gave us no indication that this was in any way related to AIG.

Interestingly, Dodd is the single largest recipient of political contributions from AIG employees and their family members.  There also happens to be an AIG office in Connecticut, the state that Dodd represents, which houses the AIG Financial Products headquarters and has several people working in it who are recipients of the $163 million in bonus money.

You may remember Obama railing against executive bonuses in the past.  Do you really think that members of his administration would pressure Congress into inserting bonus exemption language into the stimulus bill without his knowledge or consent?  Absolutely not.  Obama had to have known about this before the news broke, which means that the outrage he expressed earlier this week was fake.

This past Monday (March 16th, 2009), President Obama expressed his anger at the AIG bonuses, saying the following:

I do want to comment on the news about executive bonuses at AIG. I think some of you have heard a little bit about this over the last few days. This is a corporation that finds itself in financial distress due to recklessness and greed. Under these circumstances, it’s hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165 million in extra pay. I mean, how do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?

In the last six months, AIG has received substantial sums from the U.S. Treasury. And I’ve asked Secretary Geithner to use that leverage and pursue every single legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayers whole. I want everybody to be clear that Secretary Geithner has been on the case. He’s working to resolve this matter with the new CEO, Edward Liddy — who, by the way, everybody needs to understand came on board after the contracts that led to these bonuses were agreed to last year.

AIG can justify the outrage, idiot President, because it was you and your administration who pressured Chris Dodd to put language in your stimulus bill to exempt these bonuses from any restrictions.  Obama later added in his speech:

Excuse me, I’m choked up with anger here.

That Obama is a shameless liar.  He expresses outrage over something that he and his administration are responsible for.  Not only are they responsible for it, but they lobbied Congress to make it happen.  Congress was trying to prevent these types of bonuses from happening until the Obama administration stepped in.

Barack Obama is responsible for the bonuses at AIG.  He lied through his teeth when he acted shocked, surprised, and angry because he was the one behind it.

Barack Obama, President of the United States, is a liar.

Just days before being inaugurated as President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama signed a book deal with Crown Publishing that gave him a $250,000 cash advance.

On Janurary 15th, Obama inked the deal with Crown for an abridged version of his crappy book “Dreams From My Father” aimed at children.  Since it is based on an Obama book, it must be targeted toward kids with severe learning disabilities.  Nobody else would want to read that garbage.  In addition to the huge cash advance, he will receive a percentage of sales.

If Democrat-leaning teachers force their kids to read this book, it could mean millions of dollars in royalties for Obama.  What could Obama give teachers to gain their endearment so they will make their students read his book?  Obama has a long history of using his position of power for financial gain.  I suspect he will do the same here.

Barack Obama is a massive hypocrite.  He drones on and on in his speeches about “economic inequality”, “income inequality”, and the horrors of class disparities.  So what does he do days before taking office?  He grabs as much cash as he can.  Obama represents that very economic inequality that he says is so dangerous to our society.  Every move he makes is designed to line his pockets.  His supporters are too dumb to realize it.

CBS News Article

It was also reported that Obama made $2.5 million in book royalties last year.  Before he ran for President, his books did not sell very many copies.  After he announced, his book sales took off.

Obama has gotten very rich off of his run for the Presidency.  Millions of Americans have lost their jobs since Obama was elected.  Trillions of dollars in stock market wealth has evaporated.  But Obama is making millions.

As the fake Democrat anger over the $163 million in bonuses at AIG continues, it is becoming more evident that Democrats were the ones who enabled it to occur.

AIG claims that the government approved the bonuses.  The Obama administration originally pleaded ignorance.  The New York Times, however, said that the administration had known about the bonuses for months.  The Obama administration now admits that the President knew about the bonuses for several days before the news broke.  It’s interesting how Obama didn’t get upset about the bonuses until after the public got enraged, isn’t it?

There are lies and half-truths coming from all over the place.  Obviously, some people are not being completely truthful.  It looks like Democrat Senator Christopher Dodd (CT) has been caught red-handed in a lie.

Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, seems to have changed his story about the bonus language in the Democrat stimulus legislation he helped write.  Yesterday, he denied having anything to do with adding the legal language to allow the bonuses.  Today, he admits that he did.

CNN Christopher Dodd Article

Senate Banking committee Chairman Christopher Dodd told CNN Wednesday that he was responsible for language added to the federal stimulus bill to make sure that already-existing contracts for bonuses at companies receiving federal bailout money were honored.

On Tuesday, Dodd denied to CNN that he had anything to do with adding the language, which has been used by officials at bailed-out insurance giant AIG to justify paying millions of dollars in bonuses to executives after receiving federal money.

We now have concrete proof that Democrat Chris Dodd is a filthy, lying pig.  This isn’t surprising.  After all, he is a Democrat and DFLers have a seemingly genetic propensity to lie.

Not only did Dodd admit his role in the AIG bonuses, but he and an unnamed source say that the Obama administration pressured them into adding language into the Democrat stimulus bill to allow fulfillment of pre-existing bonus contracts for bailout recipients.

All the Democrat outrage about the AIG bonuses is fake.  It turns out that the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress allowed the bonuses to occur.  The Obama administration lobbied for the bonus language in the stimulus bill.  The Democrats put it in and passed it.

These Democrats are nothing but liars and frauds.