If you need more proof of what dirty frauds and liars Democrats are, we’ve got some for you. 

The son of Democrat Senator Roland Burris was hired by impeached Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s administration in September of last year.  The son, Roland Burris II, got a job with the Illinois Housing Development Authority which administers mortgages for low income people.  Basically, the son got a job with a welfare agency.

Burris is under investigation for perjury during Blagojevich’s impeachment proceedings during which the governor tried to sell Barack Obama’s vacated seat.  Numerous prominent Democrats have called for Burris to resign his Senate post in light of his possible untruthfulness when he admitted that he was asked to raise money for Blago despite denying any such conversations previously.

Not only did the son get a sweetheart job from Blagojevich, but it turns out that he’s a tax cheater and a deadbeat, too.  The son has a $34,163 tax lien on his Chicago home which is currently in foreclosure.

Should anyone be surprised by this?  Democrats are nothing but self-serving crooks. 

CBS News Article

The market was down significantly again today.  Yesterday the market tanked because of Obama’s tax and spending plans.  Today could be a partial continuation of that, or it could be a reaction to his Iraq speech, or it could be a reaction to his grabbing an ownership stake in Citigroup.  Whatever the reason for the sinking stock market, one thing is clear:  Barack Obama is to blame for it.  Every time he opens his mouth or does anything, the market falls.  Major market drops are correlated to his policy announcements.

The Dow ended the day down 119.15 points, or 1.66%, to settle at 7062.93.  The S&P 500 did much worse on a percentage basis, falling points 17.74, or 2.36%, to end at 735.09.

Let’s look at the closing values today versus the day Obama was elected and see just how bad for the economy Obama is.

On November 4th, 2008, election day, the Dow closed at 9625.28.  Since Obama was elected, the Dow has lost 2562.35 points, a total of 26.62%.

The S&P 500 closed at 1005.75 on election day.  Since Black Tuesday, it has lost 270.66 points, or 26.91%.

This is just the beginning.  Obama’s tax increases and carbon caps are going to be devastating to the economy and will push millions of jobs overseas.  Too bad Obamabots are too damn stupid to realize it.  Oh, but they are eagerly anticipating all the welfare benefits they are going to get with money borrowed from future generations.

On the campaign trail, Barack Obama promised to withdraw all troops from Iraq as soon as he was elected.  Actually, he flip-flopped all over on the issue, in typical Democrat fashion.  Today, he gave a speech outlining his plans for withdrawing troops–but not anywhere near all of them.

CNN Article

Obama’s current plan is to withdraw 92,000  of the current total of 142,000 troops in Iraq, leaving up to 50,000 behind until the mandated exit date at the end of 2011.

Does that sound like withdrawal to you?  It’s a draw-down, but not a withdrawal.  Obama was quoted as saying:

Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end.

Actually, the combat mission has mostly ended now, and has been over for quite some time.  Obama plans to keep troops in Iraq to do pretty much what they are already doing:  training Iraqis, providing security, counter-terrorism operations, and supporting Iraqi troops.  From the CNN article:

Administration officials, who briefed reporters on the plan, said the remaining troops would take on advisory roles in training and equipping Iraqi forces, supporting civilian operations in Iraq and conducting targeted counterterrorism missions, which would include some combat.

So, what is the difference between Obama’s grand plan for Iraq and what they are currently doing?  Not much.  The only difference is that there will be less troops doing it than before.  But there will still be plenty of Americans over there, despite Obama’s prior promises.

Let us take a look at what a dirty fraud and liar President Barack Hussein Obama is.  Not surprisingly, he is just as big of a fraud and liar as any other Democrat.

In September, 2007, Obama said:

Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was.

The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq’s leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year – now.

If we start now, all of our combat brigades should be out of Iraq by the end of next year.

There is no ambiguity regarding Obama’s original position on American soldiers in Iraq.  Immediate withdrawal was what he pretended to support back then.

But now that Obama is President, he is no longer supportive of the immediate withdrawal that energized his mindless liberal base and caused millions of dollars in donations to flood in.  Too bad liberals aren’t smart enough to see Obama for what he truly is.  Anyone could have predicted this.  Rush Limbaugh did.

For more on Obama’s Iraq flip-flips, please see:

Barack Obama Sounds Like President Bush On Iraq

Do you remember how liberals would say things like, “Do you want endless wars?”, during the Presidential campaign to justify their support for Obama over John McCain?  As if anybody would support an endless war.  But how has Obama done on that?

Well, Obama not only isn’t ending the Iraq War, as he promised, but he is deepening American involvement in the Afghanistan War.

Obama Sends More American Soldiers To Be Slaughtered

Obama is sending an additional 17,000 American troops to Iraq.  Does that sound like he’s against “endless wars” to you?

Every time Obama opens his mouth (literally), the stock market tanks.  The market sank again today, the day Obama released his fiscal year 2010 budget proposal which includes a $1.75 trillion one-year deficit.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 88.81 points, or 1.22%, to settle at 7182.08.  The S&P 500 fared worse, losing 12.07 points, or 1.58% to end the day with a value of 752.83.

If Obama keeps opening mouth, soon there won’t be any stock market left!

Global warming hypocrite Al Gore has been re-elected to his seat on the board of directors for Apple, Inc., which he has held since 2003.

What exactly Gore does in his role with Apple has never been disclosed.  We all know how Gore tried to claim credit for the development of the internet.  Al Gore said:

During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.

Gore had nothing to do with the invention known as the internet.  He has no technological experience, no business experience, or any other type of qualifications to be on the board of directors for Apple Computer.  So, how did he get that sweet gig?

It turns out that prominent Democrats have a knack for getting high-paying jobs and seats on corporate boards after leaving public office.  In addition to being on the board at Apple, Gore was a “senior advisor” to Google.  He’s probably made a mint from all those stock options he’s been granted at those two companies.  At Apple, Gore got 10,000 stock options in 2008.  All that for a part-time job for which he is totally unqualified.

The stock market lost just over 1% again today following Barack Obama’s prime time speech last night.

Every time Obama opens his mouth, the market tanks.  It’s true.  But don’t expect the traditional news media to report that.  They want you to think that Obama is “turning the economy around”.  But I’ve got news for you:  the stock market is the barometer of the economy.  When a President proposes something good for the economy, the market rises, not drops.

The Dow finished down 80.05 points, or 1.09%, to finish at 7270.89.  The S&P 500 shed 8.24 points, or 1.07%, to end the day at 764.90.  At one point early in the day, the Dow was down nearly 200 points before making up losses.

As for Obama’s speech, here is an article about the man pulling Obama’s strings, or at least, pulling the strings that control Obama’s mouth.  His name is Jon Favreau, and he is the person who tells Obama what to say and how to say it.  You see, Obama cannot think for himself.

Jon Favreau US News & World Report Article

Friends say that when the deadline for a big speech looms, Favreau will devote himself to researching and writing for 16-hour stretches at a time.

His most recent challenge was Obama’s inaugural address. As Favreau prepared it, he listened to recordings of past inaugural addresses and sought advice from Peggy Noonan, one of President Ronald Reagan’s most celebrated speechwriters and a Favreau favorite. One of Favreau’s assistants researched various crises in U.S. history, and still another interviewed historians and passed their insights on to Favs.

The address turned into a somber description of the nation’s current economic crisis, coupled with a promise to take fast action to get the economy moving. It wasn’t a speech for the ages, but it did capture the moment, which is what Obama wanted.

Barack Obama’s secret to success:  a good speech writer and good teleprompters.  Obama’s words are not his own, and they are not reflective of his thoughts.

A baby and four other people were shot today in broad daylight during a Mardi Gras parade in the Democrat-controlled city of New Orleans, Louisiana.

Mardi Gras Shooting Article

Murder, rape, and robbery are what Democrat voters do best.  This is to be expected.  In fact, if this kind of stuff doesn’t happen, it is a rarity.

Every Democrat-voting stronghold in the United States is a hellhole of crime and violence.  The only exceptions are a few wealthy enclaves like Beverly Hills.  Very few people can afford to live there, anyway.

Here is an article about the crime spike in Houston, Texas, after refugees from Hurricane Katrina invaded back in 2005.

Katrina Refugees & Crime

You can trace the rise of crime and violence in America to the beginnings of the Democratic Party’s welfare programs.

Stocks were up today, nearly erasing yesterday’s losses.  The Dow was up 236.16 points, or 3.32%;  the S&P 500 was up 29.81 points, or 4.01%.  But why was the market up today?

Yesterday, the market dropped in reaction to news about Obama’s economic and tax plans made public over the weekend.  Today, the market was up because of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s testimony to the Senate Banking Committee that he believes the economy will bottom out this year and rebound in 2010.  Also contributing to the market uptick today was Bernanke’s comments that the government had no plans to nationalize banks.

When Obama speaks, the market tanks.  When Bernanke speaks, the market jumps.  Too bad Obama plans to replace Bernanke when his four-year term expires in 2010.  I’ll bet the market will tank when Obama does that, too.  The market drops like a rock every time Obama does or says anything!

Reuters Article

TheStreet.com Article

I’m speculating as to whether or not the news media will give President Obama credit for today’s appreciation in the stock market.  They don’t tell the truth about him being responsible when the market sinks, so they’ll probably spin this to Obama’s advantage.

One out of every five residents of Los Angeles County, CA, are on some sort of public assistance.

What a bunch of losers!  Is it any wonder that area votes so heavily Democratic?  Obama got 70% of the vote in Los Angeles County.

LA Times Welfare Parasites Article

Do you want to know what I find most interesting?  It’s that there is a lot of entertainment industry money out in the Los Angeles area.  Why aren’t these rich liberals like Barbara Streisand, Zach Braff, Jennifer Aniston, and many, many others putting away their Porsches and giving a sizeable chunk of their own money to help those they pretend to care about?  Time and time again they have asked for tax increases.  So why don’t they voluntarily tax themselves and give some of their millions away?

Massive dependence on the welfare system is what you would expect with unchecked illegal immigration, isn’t it?  Don’t worry, this is just the tip of the iceberg.  It won’t be long until Obama and the Democrats are ramming amnesty for illegal immigrants down our throats again.  This time, it will pass.  Then we’ll have millions more people to take care of.

Every time Barack Obama opens his ugly mouth, the stock market tanks. The idiot-in-chief is responsible for the loss of trillions of dollars of wealth since he was elected.  And he doesn’t even care!

Yesterday morning, while replying to a reader’s comment, I told him that the market was going to tank again today in response to information about Obama’s plans that hit the news this weekend.  I was right.  The market did plunge again today, thanks to Barack Obama.

It’s common sense, really, something that Democrat voters lack.  If they had any, they would never have voted for Barack Obama in the first place.

Today, February 23, 2009 (02/23/2009), the market had another terrible day.  Here are the point and percentage losses for five of the most commonly quoted stock indexes.

Dow: -250.89 points, -3.41%.

S&P 500: -26.72 points, -3.47%.

Wilshire 5000: -274.40 points, -3.54%.

Russell 2000: -16.38 points, -3.99%.

NASDAQ: -53.51 points, -3.71%.

Hundreds of billions in wealth disappeared today.  Barack Obama is to blame.  Why is Obama to blame?  Because news of his plans hit the media this past weekend.  Today’s Wall Street bloodbath is the predictable reaction to Obama’s plans.  Before we look at the Obama news that drove the market to lows not seen since 1997, let’s look at the Obama effect on the market since the day he was elected. Below are the closing values of the particular index by date.

Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA),

• 11/04/2008 (Election Day):  9625.28
• 02/23/2009 (Today):  7114.78

Since the day Obama was elected (Black Tuesday, in more ways than one), the Dow has lost 2,510.50 points, or 26.08%.

S&P 500

• 11/04/2008 (Election Day):  1005.75
• 02/23/2009 (Today):  743.33

Since Black Tuesday, the Standard & Poor’s 500 index has lost 262 points, or 26.09%.

Wilshire 5000

• 11/04/2008 (Election Day):  10105.20
• 02/23/2009 (Today):  7475.31

The Wilshire 5000 Composite Index is off 2629.89 points, or 26.03% since Obama won the election.

Russell 2000

• 11/04/2008 (Election Day):  545.97
• 02/23/2009 (Today):  394.58

This index is down 151.39 points, or 27.73% since election day.

NASDAQ

• 11/04/2008 (Election Day):  1780.12
• 02/23/2009 (Today):  1387.72

The technology-heavy NASDAQ index is down 392.4 points, or 22.04% since Black Tuesday.

Have you seen Obama apologize or indicate any concern over the plunging stock market?  No.  That’s because the more the stock market sinks, the more people will need him, the easier he will get his desired socialism, and the more power he will have over our lives.

It’s about control.

Why the market tanked

The reason for the huge sell-off today can be summed up in two words: Barack Obama.

Over the weekend, more of Obama’s agenda was made available to the public.  Suffice it to say, the market doesn’t have confidence in Obama and is downright afraid of the damage he intends to do to the economy during a difficult time.

Obama Budget & Tax Increases Article

In that article are the basic worn-out liberal objectives of more taxation on the “rich” and higher taxes on investments.

Also included in that article is Obama’s plan to run $1 trillion budget deficits through fiscal year 2011, not including the current fiscal year 2009, during which the deficit is expected to approach $2 trillion.  You may recall that Obama criticized Bush many times for not holding the line on Congressional spending, letting the deficit get out of control.  But you haven’t seen anything yet!

From the article:

Obama said he is determined to “get exploding deficits under control” and said his budget request is “sober in its assessments, honest in its accounting, and lays out in detail my strategy for investing in what we need, cutting what we don’t, and restoring fiscal discipline.”

Reducing the deficit, he said, is critical: “We can’t generate sustained growth without getting our deficits under control.”

Other than FY2009, when has the United States ever run a $1 trillion budget deficit?  How can you jack up the deficit through massive spending on welfare programs then portray yourself to be cutting the deficit in half?  It would still be 2.5 times what the last budget signed by Bush was at.  This guy actually believes his own BS!

I especially like this passage from that article:

Even some nonpartisan observers question the wisdom of announcing a plan to raise taxes in the midst of a recession.

We are talking about Democrats.  Nothing they do is wise.  In fact, everything they do is pretty foolish.  That is why the market has been tanking under Obama.

The only objective of Obama’s that I can agree with is cutting spending on the wars.  But then, only if it is possible without jeopardizing anything.

Also this weekend news broke of the Obama administration’s plan to put everyone on some sort of healthcare plan, including putting tens-of-millions on government programs at taxpayer expense.  Healthcare and insurance company stocks could be expected to take a severe blow because of this.  Investors are probably wondering who Obama is going to target for tax increases next to pay for this, helping to push stocks down.

The government cannot keep racking-up trillions of dollars in debt.  The government cannot provide cradle-to-grave welfare benefits for everyone.  Obama and the Democrats do not seem to understand that.  The market knows that eventually that money is going to have to be repaid.  And the market also knows that the Democrats will be coming after them for it.  If the country doesn’t go bankrupt first, that is.  And that won’t be good for the stock market, either.

All of this is helping push the stock market down further.  As the market goes down, Democrats point to it and say, “Look, the sinking stock market is proof that the free market does not work.  You better let us Democrats control everything.”

Democrats are causing the problems in the economy so they can have a justification to advance their socialist agenda using the problems they created as the rationale.

For a period of 13 years, Democrat Bernard Madoff did not invest any of the money that clients entrusted to him in stocks or bonds or any other securities, according to the court-appointed trustee handling disposition of remaining assets.  Apparently, he kept the billions of dollars for himself.

Washington Post Article

ABC News Article 1

ABC News Article 2

Bernie Madoff has been charged with running the world’s biggest Ponzi scheme that ripped-off thousands of individual investors, investment management firms, and foundations through his investment firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities.  By Madoff’s own admission, the total fraud could total $50 billion.

Investigators are currently tracking what the DFLer did with all the money.  It is believed that instead of using client deposits to buy securities for their accounts, as an honest Republican would have done, Madoff hid the money by wiring it to foreign banks in several different countries.

ABC News Madoff Money Trail Article

Bernard Madoff is a big time Democrat.  He has been a financial backer of the Democratic Party and DFL candidates for years.  You can glean a person’s political affiliation by looking at their personal political campaign contributions, which I did back in December.  Of Bernie Madoff’s individual political donations, 97.7% of the total dollar amount went to Democrats. That makes him a Democrat.  Only a tiny bit was donated to Republicans.  You can view Madoff’s donations here:

Bernard Madoff Political Donations

Maybe Madoff took it upon himself to “tax the rich”?  Perhaps ripping people off is Madoff’s idea of wealth redistribution?  What he did isn’t any different than what Obama or any other Democrat wants to do.

Madoff is a Democrat.  R. Allen Stanford, the investment manager who was accused by the SEC of perpetrating an $8 billion fraud, is a Democrat, too.  Almost 80% of Stanford’s personal political donations went to Democrats.  There is also video of him hobnobbing with prominent Democrats, too, including getting a nice hug from Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and being thanked by Bill Clinton at the 2008 Democratic National Convention (DNC).  You can read more about Sir Robert Allen Stanford and his political affiliation here:

Democrat R. Allen Stanford Political Donations

Stanford Is A Tax Cheater

You cannot trust a Democrat.  They all lie, cheat, and steal from anyone and everyone.  It must be encoded in their genes.

Democrats keep telling the lie that banks are not lending money and that is the reason for the weak economy, dropping home values, and justification for nationalization of the banking sector.  But that just is not true.

Banks are still lending plenty of money to people with good credit.  They may not be originating loans to people with poor credit like they did in the past, which is a good thing, but people with good credit, such as myself, are still able to get loans. A few weeks ago, I called a car dealership and asked them if people with good credit could get financing.  I was told yes.

According to the Treasury, bank lending was up in December of 2008 from the prior month.  The Treasury said that loan activity was “resilient”.  Wells Fargo originated $48.2 billion in loans, Bank of America originated $44.6 billion, and JP Morgan Chase made $28.3 billion in loans.  These banks also extended in the neighborhood of $50 billion in loans or lines of credit to commercial businesses.

So why do Democrats keep lying about banks not lending money?  Is it because they are trying to justify nationalization of banks to further their socialist agenda?  That’s what I think.

Bloomberg Bank Lending Article

The stock market dropped again yesterday (02/20/2009) thanks to Democrats, leaving tens-of-millions of Americans, including fixed-income retirees, poorer.  Democrat Senator from Connecticut Christopher Dodd made some reckless comments that banks might have to be nationalized, causing owners of bank shares to dump them, driving values to new lows.

The Obama administration did not deny that banks might be nationalized, which further spooked the market.

NY Times Article

Despite somber assurances from the White House that the industry is sound, shares of bank companies plunged to new lows Friday on fears that some of the nation’s largest banks, including Citigroup and Bank of America, eventually could be nationalized.

Though both companies said that was not the case, investors pointed to a seemingly offhand remark by Senator Christopher J. Dodd – to the effect that the administration might assume ownership of certain banks for a short time – as cause for concern.

The Obama administration has provided few details about its plans to shore up troubled lenders, sowing confusion in the markets and inside the banks about its intentions.

President Obama has provided few concrete details about any of his plans.  That’s mainly because he doesn’t have any real ideas. But that is to be expected from an incompetent empty suit with no experience and no qualifications to be President.  We must also consider that the few plans Obama has had, namely the stimulus package and mortgage rescue plan, have actually caused the stock market to drop further.  Maybe that is why he isn’t offering details.

Everything Obama says about pretty much any topic is nothing but empty platitudes and meaningless populist rhetoric.  Obama’s hollow statements aren’t going to inspire confidence in the market or in the economy.  His words may convince millions of mindless people to vote for him, but they aren’t going to get anything accomplished and are not going to turn the economy around.

(I’m beginning to understand why Obama refused to release his college transcripts.  If he got good grades, he would want people to see them.)

As for Dodd’s comments, you may recall that idiot Democratic Party Senator Charles “Chuck” Schumer destroyed IndyMac bank in July of 2008 by leaking documents to the press indicating his concern that the bank might fail.  Instead of things playing out naturally, which included IndyMac surviving intact or being sold to another bank, Schumer’s actions caused a massive bank run resulting in failure–which would not have occurred if Schumer kept his opinions to himself.  According to the FDIC failed bank list, 25 banks failed in 2008.  Of those bank failures, there was only one bank run, and that was caused by Schumer.

In early January of this year, Indy Mac was sold to a private investment group for $13.9 billion.  Because of Schumer’s Democrat stupidity, the taxpayers lost billions of dollars.

MSNBC Article

The failure of IndyMac, which had $32 billion in assets, was the second-largest last year, trailing only the September failure of Washington Mutual Inc. Losses to the FDIC’s bank insurance fund are expected to range between $8.5 billion and $9.4 billion.

And now Chris Dodd is shooting off his big mouth much like Schumer did last year.  Maybe Democrats are purposely trying to destroy the banking sector and the economy so they can nationalize everything and control every aspect of our lives.

Loose lips sink ships.  They can also sink the stock market, destroy banks, and potentially destroy the economy, too.

Millions of Americans are now poorer thanks to Barack Obama.  The stock market continued its steep descent following the signing of his ridiculously wasteful and pork-laden stimulus bill earlier this week.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) closed today down 100.28 points, or 1.34%, to finish at 7365.67.  The S&P 500 fared a little better, closing down 8.89 points, or 1.14%, ending the week at 770.05.  At one point earlier in the day, the market was down over 2.5%.

On February 13th, 2009, the Dow closed at 7850.41 and the S&P 500 closed at 826.84.  That was the last trading session before the passage of the Obama stimulus plan.   Since the Obama economic stimulus plan (aka porkulus) passed Congress one week ago and was signed into law three days ago, the Dow has lost 6.18% of its value (484.74 points), the S&P 500 has lost 6.9% of its value (56.79 points).  That’s how much the market lost in only four trading days since the passage of his plan–and all due to Obama.

Obviously, the market has no confidence in Barack Obama or the Democrats judging by the way it tanks every time he announces a new plan.  The market doesn’t just lack confidence in Obama, it is fearful, and justifiably so.

If the market had confidence in Obama and the Democrats, the market would have risen, not tanked.  If the market was indifferent to Obama’s stimulus plan, it would have stayed flat.  But, the market tanked following passage of the plan.  This is clear evidence that the stock market thinks that Obama is going to be harmful to the economy.  And the market is absolutely correct.

Anyone who voted for Barack Obama based on his lies that he would turn the economy around should have enough proof by now to conclude that they were very wrong.

On the day that Obama was elected (November 4th, 2008), the Dow closed at 9625.28,  and the S&P 500 closed at 1005.75.  Since that black day, the Dow has lost 2,259.61 points, or 23.48%; the S&P 500 has lost 235.7 points, or 23.44%.

Is this how Obama is going to turn the economy around, by destroying it?

Trillions in wealth have disappeared because of Barack Obama and the millions of idiots who voted for him.  Hopefully, those Obamabots are losing lots of money, for they deserve it.  They are the reason we are in the mess we are in.

Obama has promised to raise taxes on incomes, on capital gains, and on dividends. The market expects this and businesses are now trying to prepare for higher taxes, carbon caps, and the lower profits they entail.  It isn’t surprising that the market is dropping because of Obama, it should be expected.  In fact, those of us on the Right predicted this.

Obama has also started to block oil drilling by cancelling Utah drilling leases and he promises to prevent more domestic drilling. Within two years, $4 a gallon gas will return, with $3 a gallon likely by this summer.  The United States is in for a world of hurt, economically speaking.  This is only the beginning.  Barack Obama is solely to blame for it.

But this is the way Democrats want it.  For the more people who are hurting economically, the more people will be dependent on the Democrats and their welfare programs.  By making people dependent on the welfare state, Democrats will always have a loyal voting base and will never lose power.

This is by design.

The stock market closed down yet again today.  The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA 30) closed down 89.68 points, or 1.19%, to close at 7465.95.  The S&P 500 closed down 9.48 points, or 1.2% to close at 778.94.

This was the week that Barack Obama revealed the economic plans that he promised would turn the economy around.  The market does not like Barack Obama or his plans, evidently.

Since the Obama stimulus plan passed Congress and was signed into law two days ago, the Dow has lost 4.9% of its value and the S&P 500 has lost 5.8%.  That would not have happened if Obama’s economic plan was a good thing for the economy.

Anyone who voted for Obama thinking that he would turn the economy around was wrong.  Hopefully, those who did are the first to lose their jobs.  It would serve them right.

A poll by Associated Press-GfK indicates that more Americans think that the country is heading in the wrong direction than those who think America is heading in the right direction under Barack Obama.

According to the poll, 49% of those polled between February 12th and 17th say the country is heading in the wrong direction.  Only 40% said the country is heading in the right direction.

I guess the public doesn’t have much confidence in Barack Obama as we were once led to believe.

AP-GfK Poll

R. Allen Stanford, the Democratic Party donor who is suspected of committing an $8 billion fraud, apparently didn’t believe in paying his taxes.  According to the Associated Press, Stanford had four federal tax liens against him for years 2007 and 2008 for a total of $212 million.  That’s how much he owed the government in taxes!

Can you believe this guy’s hypocrisy?  He was a major financial supporter of the Democratic Party, the party that is responsible for taxes being as high as they are and who wants to raise them higher, and he didn’t even pay the taxes that he supported via his support for the DFL!

Since Stanford is a wealthy Democrat who doesn’t believe in paying his taxes, maybe Obama should nominate him for a cabinet post.  Obama already nominated four tax cheaters, why not a fifth?

How do these Democrats live with themselves?

Here is conclusive, irrefutable proof that alleged conman R. Allen Stanford is a Democrat.

Stanford is known by many aliases including: Robert Allen Stanford, Allen Stanford, and Sir Allen Stanford. Regardless of what he calls himself, we know what he truly is at heart: a Democrat.  He is as big of a Democrat as Bernard Madoff is (more on Madoff’s political contributions can be found at this site).  Both men are huge financial contributors to the Democratic Party and enjoyed hobnobbing with DFL power brokers.  The content of their character is typically Democrat as well.  They lie, cheat, and steal with no regard for others and no intelligence to tell them they will eventually get caught.

Stanford stands accused of scamming billions of dollars from clients of his investment firm Stanford Financial Group over many years. Around $8 billion of client money is unaccounted for. Stanford, once estimated to be worth $2 billion, is accused of being the architect of the fraud. He is also suspected of helping Mexican drug lords launder money. Law enforcement authorities are currently trying to locate him as he seems to have disappeared.  I wonder why…

ABC News ran a story this evening about Stanford’s cozy relationship with Washington D.C. Democrats (video).  In Brian Ross’ piece, Stanford is shown at the Democratic National Convention in August 2008.  In the video, he is seen hugging Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).  Former President and sexual predator Bill Clinton is shown thanking Stanford for his sponsorship of a big event.  The National Democratic Institute even invited Stanford to speak to them.

Picture of R. Allen Stanford being hugged by Nancy Pelosi:

If anyone doubts that R. Allen Stanford is a true blue Democrat, that picture should remove all doubt.  Nancy Pelosi isn’t a Republican hugger.

I showed you in an earlier post that Stanford is a Barack Obama supporter.

Let’s look at all of R. Allen Stanford’s political contributions.  Who did he donate to?  He donated mostly to Democrats.

What is most of interest are Stanford’s personal political donations.  His company ran a political action committee (PAC) that had numerous Stanford Financial Group employees donating to it.  But we want to examine the content of the character of a man who would scam people out of billions of dollars.  So we want to look at who he donated to, we don’t care about  anyone else.  We want to understand the mindset of one of the biggest scam artists in history.  We can learn much about a man’s character–and his intelligence–by looking at his political affiliations.  Generally speaking, if someone votes Democrat, they aren’t very bright.  A man who thinks he can get away with scamming investors out of billions has to be pretty stupid.  Predictably, he’s a Democrat.

Our research is complicated by the fact that Stanford used several variations on his name.  He also has a father named Allen Stanford.  Whether or not the father’s full name is the same as the son’s is not known by me at this time.  The father worked for the firm on the investment committee.  The son, Robert Allen Stanford, was Chairman and CEO.  That will help us determine which contributions are his.  Also, Stanford’s company has offices in several cities.  Most of his contributions are listed in Houston, Texas, but one critical contribution is listed as from Miami, Florida, where his company has an office.  Other contributions list his residence in the Virgin Islands.  His company was based in Antigua.  Yes, this Democrat didn’t want to pay taxes so he located his company in a tax haven.  Typical Democrat hypocrisy.

Political contributions under the name R. Allen Stanford employed by Stanford Financial Group.  Donations to Democrats:

• 02/17/2000 – Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee: $20,000;
• 07/17/2000 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $10,000;
• 10/09/2002 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $250,000;
• 11/01/2002 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $250,000;
• 11/05/2002 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $50,000;
• 05/31/2003 – Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee: $10,000;
• 06/30/2003 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $10,000;
• 06/30/2004 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $10,000;
• 07/20/2005 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $25,000;
• 08/02/2002 – New Jersey Democratic State Committee: $5,000;
• 05/31/2008 – Barack Obama Presidential Campaign (D-IL): $4,600;
• 04/18/2001 – Max Baucus (D-MT): $1,000;
• 02/04/2000 – Kenneth Bentsen (D-TX): $2,000;
• 08/21/2008 – John Boccieri (D-OH): $2,300;
• 04/02/2001 – Maria Cantwell (D-WA): $1,000;
• 06/13/2003 – Byron Dorgan (D-ND): $1,000;
• 07/12/2000 – Martin Frost (D-TX): $1,000;
• 08/22/2000 – Charles Gonzalez (D-TX): $1,000;
• 05/03/2002 – Charles Gonzalez (D-TX): $1,000;
• 02/03/2004 – Charles Gonzalez (D-TX): $2,000;
• 08/21/2008 – Deborah Halvorson (D-IL): $2,300;
• 08/06/2008 – Ashwin Madia (D-MN): $2,300;
• 11/02/2006 – Daniel Maffei (D-NY): $2,000;
• 08/20/2008 – Daniel Maffei (D-NY): $2,550;
• 08/20/2008 – Eric Massa (D-NY): $2,550;
• 08/20/2008 – Michael McMahon (D-NY): $2,550;
• 07/31/2008 – Gregory Meeks (D-NY): $4,600;
• 08/27/2008 – Walter Minnick (D-ID): $2,300;
• 04/04/2004 – Patty Murray (D-WA): $2,000;
• 08/09/2000 – Bill Nelson (D-FL): $1,000;
• 10/27/2006 – Bill Nelson (D-FL): $2,100;
• 11/02/2004 – Donald Payne (D-NJ): $1,000;
• 08/20/2008 – Jonathan Powers (D-NY): $2,550;
• 02/03/2008 – Charles Rangel (D-NY): $2,300;
• 08/20/2008 – Charles Rangel (D-NY): $1,000;
• 05/23/2002 – Jack Reed (D-RI): $1,000;
• 06/03/2003 – Harry Reid (D-NV): $1,000;
• 10/31/2000 – Max Sandlin (D-TX): $3,000;
• 11/05/2002 – Max Sandlin (D-TX): $1,000;
• 05/31/2002 – Charles “Chuck” Schumer (D-NY): $2,000;
• 07/02/2003 – Charles “Chuck” Schumer (D-NY): $2,000;
• 08/20/2008 – Daniel Seals (D-IL): $2,300;
• 08/20/2008 – Linda Stender (D-NJ): $2,300;

Total donations to Democrats: $704,600.

Donations to Republicans:

• 10/11/2002 – National Republican Congressional Committee: $100,000;
• 03/02/2004 – Republican National Committee: $25,000;
• 09/22/2004 – National Republican Congressional Committee: $5,000;
• 04/08/2005 – National Republican Congressional Committee: $5,000;
• 05/21/2008 – National Republican Congressional Committee: $28,500;
• 07/01/2003 – John Cornyn (R-TX): $2,000;
• 06/18/2007 – John Cornyn (R-TX): $2,000;
• 09/22/2000 – Rodney Grams (R-MN): $1,000;
• 07/20/2006 – Orrin Hatch (R-UT): $2,100;
• 06/25/2001 – Bob Ney (R-OH): $1,000;
• 12/07/2005 – Bob Ney (R-OH): $4,200;
• 05/30/2008 – Peter Olson (R-TX): $2,300;
• 07/25/2003 – Richard Shelby (R-AL): $2,000;

Total donations to Republicans:  $180,100.

Total donated by R. Allen Smith, CEO or Chairman of Stanford Financial Group:  $884,700.

Percentage of contributions given to Democrats: 79.6%.

Percentage of contributions given to Republicans:  20.4%.

For every dollar he gave to Republicans, Stanford gave four dollars to Democrats.  He financially supported Democrats over Republicans by a four-to-one ratio.

Given Stanford’s disproportionate giving to Democrats, his attendance of the 2008 DNC, his hug with Nancy Pelosi, him being invited to speak to a group of Democrats, and him publicly being thanked by Bill Clinton, the evidence is overwhelming that R. Allen Stanford is a Democrat.

And he’s a typical Democrat scumbag!

There are a few more contributions under variations of his name which may be from the Stanford in question or his father.

Political Contributions under the name of R. Allen Stanford from Houston, Texas, with no employer information given.

Non-party donations:

• 02/25/2000 – Friends of Phil Gramm PAC (non-party contribution, but Gramm was a Republican): $1,000 ($2,000 was given, but $1,000 was refunded in October, 2001;
• 05/17/2000 – Americans For A Republican Majority PAC: $5,000;
• 06/30/2001 – KPAC: $5,000;

Non-Party contributions using the Miami address:

• 08/01/2001 – Lone Star Fund: $5,000;
• 02/12/2004 – Leadership PAC 2006: $3,000;
• 05/30/2008 – Olson-Texas Victory Committee: $2,300;
• 08/20/2008 – Rangel Victory Fund: $25,000;

Mrs. R. Allen Stanford donated $1,000 to the campaign of Martin Frost (D-TX).

R. Allen Stanford, Stanford Financial President:

• 10/23/2003 – National Leadership PAC: $2,500.  This PAC gave almost exclusively to Democrat candidates.

Contributions under the name of Allen Stanford, CEO of Stanford Financial Group:

• 09/28/2004 – Pete Sessions (R-TX): $2,000;
• 12/02/2005 – Thomas DeLay (R-TX): $4,200;
• 05/20/2008 – Stanford Financial Group Company Employees PAC: $5,000;

Contributions under the name of Allen Stanford of Stanford Financial Group with no job title given.  These could possibly be the father’s contributions, I’m not sure.

• 08/08/2002 – Christopher Dodd (D-CT): $1,000;
• 03/24/2003 – Christopher Dodd (D-CT): $2,000;
• 09/28/2000 – Paul Sarbanes (D-MD): $1,000;
• 05/29/2001 – Robert Torricelli (D-NJ): $1,000;

Even though Stanford was from Texas, he gave no money to fellow Texan George Bush.  But he did donate the maximum to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.

There can be no disputing the fact that alleged scam artist Robert Allen Stanford is as big of a Democrat as his fellow crook Bernie Madoff is.  The man is a crook.  The man is a Democrat.

Today, the Federal Reserve offered a bleak assessment of the economy of the United States for the duration of 2009, including continued job losses and an increasing unemployment rate.  Despite the dour report, the stock market barely reacted at all, and in fact, the Dow 30 closed slightly higher.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed up 3.03 points to close at 7555.63.  The S&P 500 closed down 0.75 points to close at 788.42.

Why is it that when the Fed gives a bad assessment of the economy, the market barely moves, but when Barack Obama’s economic stimulus plan passes and is signed into law the stock market tanks?

I just think it is hilarious the way the stock market reacted so negatively to Obama’s economic plan but didn’t care about the Fed’s dismal economic outlook.

If I were to put forth a hypothesis, I would say that the market is less concerned about the natural state of the economy than it is about the harm that Barack Obama and the Democrats are expected to do to it.

NY Times Fed Economic Outlook Article

Republicans are doubtful that Obama’s plan to spend $75 billion of taxpayer money to reduce home foreclosures will have any meaningful effect.  Is it any wonder that Republicans are skeptical considering that Democrats are to blame for the foreclosure crisis in the first place?

Even some left-wing journalists are doubtful that Obama’s plan will work.

MSNBC Article

CNN Article

ABC News Article

Barack Obama is an idiot.  His plan is nothing more than hollow symbolism.  And very expensive hollow symbolism at that.

Those Democrats sure have a difficult time telling the truth, don’t they?

Senator Roland Burris, who was appointed to fill Barack Obama’s vacant Senate seat, may not have been completely honest about his conversations regarding raising money for former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich.  It turns out that he did indeed discuss raising money for the disgraced former governor, and had those discussions with the governor’s brother, Robert Blagojevich.

Burris recently revealed details about the conversations.  Some have speculated that Burris may have been captured on the FBI’s wiretaps of Blagojevich.  From the Chicago Sun Times:

After contact with federal agents, U.S. Sen. Roland Burris changed his sworn testimony to the Illinois House committee that moved to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.

Burris acknowledged Sunday that federal investigators have contacted his lawyers.

Burris’ voice “might have been” on the tapes, said his lawyer Timothy Wright.

So, Burris may have been caught red-handed committing perjury.  Illinois Republicans are asking prosecutors to investigate him.

Burris has been revealed to be another Democrat liar after less than two months in office.  Is anyone surprised? 

Another Democrat is accused of a multibillion dollar fraud.  Texas financier R. Allen Stanford (a.k.a. Robert Allen Stanford, a.k.a. Sir Allen Stanford) has been charged by the SEC with running a massive fraud involving certificates of deposit (CDs).  Stanford’s investment company Stanford Financial Group and its affiliates have been unable to account for $8 billion in investor money.  Stanford lured investors by promising high interest rates on his CDs.

It looks like we may have another Democrat Ponzi scheme here.

Bloomberg Article About Stanford Fraud

SEC Press Release About Charges Against Stanford

It appears that most of Stanford’s political contributions went to Democrats, but he did donate to a small number of Republicans as well.  A further analysis will follow with a breakdown by political party.  Stay tuned for more.

What is most revealing is who alleged scam artist Stanford supported in the Presidential election.  Stanford donated $4,600 to Barack Obama via his election committee.  On May 31st, 2008, Stanford made his donation to Obama, according to the Federal Election Commission website.

Stanford gave no contributions to John McCain.

It isn’t surprising that a scam artist who engages in fraud would be drawn to a fraud like Barack Obama, is it?  Birds of a feather flock together.

While R. Allen Stanford lives in Texas, his company does have multiple offices throughout the country, including one in Miami, Florida.

Stanford had an estimated net worth of $2 billion, which apparently wasn’t enough to satisfy his Democrat lust for money.

Also charged as part of the Stanford Financial Group fraud was Chief Financial Officer James Davis and Chief Investment Officer Laura Pendergest-Holt.  The SEC charges clearly indicate that Stanford is the architect of the fraud.

By the way, did you know that Wall Street was the largest contributor to Barack Obama’s inaugural?  It is true.

Reuters Article

Battered Wall St tops Obama inaugural donors: study

Wall Street may be bruised and battered, but it still donated more money than any other U.S. industry to President-elect Barack Obama’s inaugural festivities on Tuesday, a study has found.

The Center for Responsive Politics said executives of finance, insurance and real estate companies and their family members gave $7.1 million to Obama’s inaugural committee.

Democrats have been perpetuating the lie for years that big money supports Republicans.  That is not true.  Democrats are in the hip pocket of Wall Street and big money, not Republicans.  Wall Street is largely run by Democrats.  Coming up, I’ll show you the political contributions of the Wall Street executives who destroyed their own firms through their Democrat greed.

Remember Bernard Madoff and his $50 billion fraud?  He, too, is a major Democratic Party supporter.  You can read about Bernie Madoff’s political donations in these articles of ours:

Bernard Madoff’s Political Donations

Bernard Madoff’s $50 Billion Ponzi Scheme

Wherever you find lies, fraud, and blatant stupidity, you will find a Democrat behind it.

Today (February 17th, 2009) was the first day of stock market trading after the passage by Congress of the Obama stimulus plan, which the President signed into law.  The market tanked!

The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 297.81 points, or 4.56%, to close at 7552.60.  The S&P 500 shed 37.67 points, or 4.56%, to close at 789.17.

Since Barack Obama was elected on November 4th, 2008, the Dow has lost 2072.68 points, or 21.53%, and the S&P 500 has dropped 216.58 points, or 21.53%.  Trillions in wealth have disappeared because of Barack Obama.  Interestingly, both the Dow Jones and S&P 500 indexes are down by the same percentage.  That does not happen very often.

Anyone with a brain could have seen this coming.  Democrats are always bad for the economy–always!  How big of an idiot must one be to argue that higher taxes and carbon caps are good for the economy, especially during a recession?

Immediate Market Reaction

When gauging the impact of news affecting the economy, one must look at the immediate reaction of the stock market.  The stock market moves fast.  It incorporates new information into stock prices within seconds of it being distributed on news wires.  Good news makes the market go up, bad news causes the market to go down.  The market is forward looking.  It doesn’t care about yesterday.  It only cares about what it thinks is going to happen in the future.

Every time Barack Obama opens his mouth, the market goes down.  Today, the market went down because of his stimulus plan passing in Congress and being signed into law.  The market obviously does not view Obama’s stimulus plan as being good for the economy, else it would have risen.

In fact, the market does not view Obama as being good for the economy.

Here is the Obama effect on the stock market:

11/04/2008 (Election Day)

• DJIA: 9625.28
• S&P 500: 1005.75

11/05/2008

• DJIA: 9139.27
• S&P 500: 952.77

The Dow lost 486.01 points, or 5.05%, and the S&P 500 lost 52.98 points, or 5.27%, when news that Barack Obama was elected to be President was incorporated into stock prices.

The market did not like the election of Barack Obama and viewed him as being bad for the economy.

11/06/2008

• DJIA: 8695.79
• S&P 500: 904.88

On the second day of trading following the election of Obama, the market again tanked.  The Dow lost 443.48 points, or 4.9%, and the S&P 500 lost 47.89 points, or 5.03%.

That is hundreds of billions of dollars of American wealth lost as a direct result of the election of Barack Obama.  If the market thought that Obama was good for the economy, the market would have risen in reaction to the news of his election.

01/16/2009 (Trading Day Before Inauguration)

• DJIA: 8281.22
• S&P 500: 850.12

01/20/2009 (Inauguration Day)

• DJIA: 7949.09
• S&P 500: 805.22

On the day Obama was sworn-in as President, the stock market tanked yet again.  The Dow lost 332.13 points, or 4.01%, and the S&P 500 lost 44.9 points, or 5.28%, over the prior trading day closing numbers.

Then today, the first trading day after passage of the Obama stimulus plan and the day it was signed into law, the market tanked again.

This is not coincidence.

How much more proof does one need to realize that Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats are bad for the economy?  Stock markets don’t drop like a rock on good news.  They only drop on bad news, like the election of Obama back in November or on the passage of his worthless stimulus plan.

The stock market despises Barack Obama almost as much as I and millions of others do.

A few days ago, it was revealed that President Barack Obama’s pick for Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, has tax issues.  Her husband failed to pay taxes going back to 1993.  His business had a $6,400 lien on it.  They plead ignorance.

Hilda Solis Article

So, we have another Democrat tax deadbeat picked by Obama to head up a government agency.  The list of Obama tax cheaters who failed to properly pay their taxes thus far is:

• 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

Geithner was approved by the Senate.  Daschle and Killefer withdrew their nominations.  It looks like Solis will be approved.

No wonder Democrats are so eager to raise taxes, they refuse to pay their own.

And I won’t mention the lobbyists working in the Obama administration in violation of Obama’s own executive order prohibiting them.  Ex-defense contractor lobbyist William J. Lynn was approved as deputy Secretary of Defense after being given an exemption to Obama’s own ethics rules by Obama himself.  Last year, Lynn earned nearly half-a-million dollars working as a lobbyist for Raytheon.

Not even liberals want to live under their own rules, as Obama has proven many times over the past few years.

Liberals were all giddy when Obama issued ethics rules barring people from working in his administration if they had worked as lobbyists within two years of their employment date.  Too bad those liberals were too stupid to see it as an empty, insincere order that Obama never intended to follow.

Just three weeks into his administration, Obama has produced one failure after another.  It is going to be a long, dreadful four years.

A few days ago at stop in Florida to promote his non-stimulative stimulus plan, Barack Obama was asked a tearful a question by a homeless black woman by the name of Henrietta Hughes.  She wanted help.  She wanted welfare (surprise, surprise!).  She was seeking the President’s assistance in getting public housing.  Oh, how sad.

You see, despite living 61 years of life, neither the woman nor her 37-year-old idiot son Cory have managed to save any money.  Nope.  They packed their belongings and moved from Rochester, NY, to Florida last year.  Did they have any jobs lined up?  No.  Did they have any money to support themselves when they got to Florida?  No.  They moved to Florida on borrowed money.  After the money ran out, they found themselves homeless, sleeping in a Nissan pickup truck.  They wanted the President’s help to secure long-term public housing so they would never have to worry about taking care of themselves again.  The worthless loser Henrietta Hughes said to the President:

The housing authority has two years waiting list and we need something more than parks to go to. We need our own kitchen and our own bathroom. Please help.

And Ms. Hughes wants the taxpayers to pay for it.  This is so typical of Democrats, isn’t it?

Luckily for her, President Obama promised to help.  But how will he help?  I’ll tell you how Obama won’t help her:  by giving her his own money.

You see, Barack Obama is a multimillionaire.  He is a very wealthy man.  The Obamas had a household income of $4.2 million in 2007, and likely will have made much more in 2008.  As President, Obama gets a salary of $400,000 per year and a generous pension when he leaves office.

So, if Obama wants to help the woman, why doesn’t he give her some of his own money?  Why doesn’t he give her 25% of his annual salary so she can buy a small two-bedroom house someplace where living expenses are low?  Or, why doesn’t Obama dip into his savings account and give this woman $150,000 in cash so she can find a decent place to live?  He would still have millions left in his bank account.  Obama will never do this because he doesn’t truly care.  Obama’s compassion only extends as far as using other people’s money to help others, but never his own.  If you look at his charitable giving, you will see that it amounts to only a small percentage of his income.

All liberals are liars, frauds, and hypocrites.  Rich limousine liberals, like Barack Obama, who have more money than they could ever reasonably spend in their lifetimes, are the biggest hypocrites of all.  Their hearts bleed for the homeless and the irresponsible, but they never give away their own money to help those they pretend to care about.

AP Article