Custom Search

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Freedom Tower glass "Made in China"


The Skyscraper Safety Campaign
9/11 Parents & Families of Firefighters & WTC Victims

Port Authority Abandons American Manufacturers -
Awards Contract for Critically Important Portion
of Freedom Tower Glass to China !
WHAT: Press Conference to urge Port Authority to use American Manufacturers and
Workmanship to produce high security glass for the Freedom Tower
WHEN: Tomorrow - Wednesday April 1, 2009
TIME: 9:45 A.M.
WHERE: Across from #7 WTC on Greenwich Street ( in vicinity of new PATH station entrance)
The Skyscraper Safety Campaign (SSC) is shocked and appalled to learn that glass for the Freedom Tower - the number one terrorist terror target in the United Sates - will be made in China rather than in the USA using American labor!
It is a well known fact that numerous Chinese products have inconsistent and questionable quality standards as seen in the major safety debacles & constant recalls involving lead in children's toys, contaminated toothpastes, tainted baby formula and pet foods, and most recently, contaminated drywall (gypsum board) used in home construction.
In addition to grave safety concerns, the use of Chinese glass in the Freedom Tower is a slap in the face to every hardworking American worker who has lost his or her job in this time of economic crisis. President Obama has called for jobs to remain in this country so that US citizens can remain gainfully employed. Was it a coincidence that the Beijing Vantone Real Estate Co. signed a lease for several floors in the Freedom Tower at the same time that their country received the multi million dollar contract to manufacture glass to be used in this building? Why were American glass companies - including one in Pennsylvania which has served this country's needs for over a century - denied this contract? Did the dropping of the name Freedom Tower have anything to do with these Chinese contracts?

It is undeniable that the Freedom Tower is an extremely sensitive building. The type and quality of glass is one of the most important considerations when designing a terrorism-resistant building. Glass shards have killed and maimed many people in previous terrorist blasts around the world. It is critical that the design and fabrication of the Freedom Tower glazing meet the highest possible quality standards. Does all of the glass for the Freedom Tower meet the standards of organizations such as the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the Department of Defense? Why were the Chinese selected for such a critical job at the expense of time-tested, high quality American manufacturing companies?

The SSC calls for the following immediate actions:

  • The SSC calls on our NY & NJ Congressional delegation to initiate a federal probe into the legality of the glass contract with China and to explore the relationship between the contract and the signing of the Freedom Tower lease with Beijing Vantone Co. Have any federal security laws been broken regarding sharing sensitive building specifications with foreign countries given the risks posed by the Freedom Tower's status as the nation's number one terrorist target?
  • The SSC calls on PANYNJ to explain why no American glass company received this contract, and to answer the question why American union workers have been overlooked.
  • The SSC calls on the PANYNJ to immediately void the Chinese glass contract & use USA products instead.
  • The SSC demands that the PANYNJ show the public exactly which standards were used to design the glass. The SSC further demands that the PANYNJ show the extent of blast-resistant glazing actually being proposed for the Freedom Tower - will the upper floors have blast-resistant glass or just the base of the building?
  • The SSC again calls on the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to give up its exemptions and immunities to New York City's building and fire codes. "Memoranda of understanding" with the city are useless pieces of paper which offer no legal means of code enforcement, including building permits, certificates of occupancy, and vacate orders.

    Quite apart from the concerns about American jobs, etc., surely I am not the only one who remembers how many goods "Made in China" have been proven hazardous to the health of our children and our pets, AND ourselves.

    The insanity continues.

Meeting Congressman Eric Cantor

I had the pleasure of meeting one of my favorite Jewish Republicans, Congressman Eric Cantor.

At the Republican Jewish Coalition Winter Leadership meeting in Fort Lauderdale last week, he delivered some (kosher) political red meat.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Don't Worry, Be Happy!!!

As per Drudge Report, the government is about to launch a website which is being described as offering "an online emotional rescue kit."


Stressed out by the economy? The U.S. government is offering an online emotional rescue kit.

The "Getting Through Tough Economic Times" guide at is meant to help people identify any serious health concerns related to financial worries, develop coping skills and find help, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration said on Tuesday.

Studies show a serious risk of clinical depression, anxiety and compulsive behaviors such as gambling, overeating and even spending stemming from stress, SAMHSA said.

"By helping people remain resilient, we can help promote the overall recovery of our nation," SAMHSA Acting Administrator Eric Broderick said in a statement.

Note to the Obama administration: If you would stop sending tax payers money to bail out privately owned companies, then Americans wouldn't be quite as "depressed" about their grandchildren paying for your bad decisions.


Bankruptcy Not Bailout

The bailouts, whether for the banks or Wall Street is nothing more than throwing good money after bad... tax payer's money to boot.

If a company is running with a plan that continues to fail, slight adjustments to be able to receive a government bailout is not going to address the root problem and turn the businesses around, so throwing more tax payer money after bad will do nothing but postpone the eventual failure.

While it may sound cold and unfeeling, the facts are the facts.

We are capitalists and that comes with risk. If a business is started and fails, they file for bankruptcy and/or close their doors. If they succeed, they stay in business.

Deciding which private companies deserve to be bailed out and which ones don't, is not the job of the government unless you have a socialist government.

This is the basic concept of why so many Americans are against the bailouts that Washington has been writing checks for, using hundreds of billion of dollars of tax payer money.

Yesterday word went out about Obama's "plans" for the auto industry, once again sticking his nose into privately owned businesses and today we see that the new General Motors CEO is saying that when the options are Obama's plan and bankruptcy, bankruptcy wins out as the better option.

Yes, it does, it did the whole time.

General Motors's new chief executive told CNBC that filing for Bankruptcy may be the best option for the struggling automaker.

In a taped interview to be aired tonight on NBC Nightly News, Fritz Henderson said that because of greater demands from the Obama administration to restructure, GM [GM 2.50 -0.20 (-7.41%) ] is considering the bankruptcy option. The auto giant previously had ruled out such a move, saying it would discourage people from buying GM cars.

Henderson's comments came after President Obama bluntly rejected turnaround plans by GM and Chrysler and demanded that both companies make fresh concessions in order to get more federal aid.

Obama rejected their plans, but still doesn't "get" what capitalism is about, so he offered up his own plans.... as NYT op-ed piece titles their article "Car Dealer in Chief," shows.

The Bush advisers decided in December that bankruptcy without preparation would be a disaster. They decided what all administrations decide — that the best time for a bankruptcy filing is a few months from now, and it always will be. In the meantime, restructuring would continue, federally subsidized.

Today, G.M. and Chrysler have once again come up with restructuring plans. By an amazing coincidence, the plans are again insufficient. In an extremely precedented move, the Obama administration has decided that the best time for possible bankruptcy is — a few months from now. The restructuring will continue.

But this, President Obama declares, is G.M.’s last chance. Honestly. Really.

No kidding.

Could this really be true? Could the Harvard Business Review’s longest-running soap opera possibly be coming to an end? Could President Obama really scare the restructural recidivists in Detroit into coming up with changes big enough to do the job?

Well, the president certainly acted tough on Monday. In a show of force, he released plans from his Office of People Who Are Much Smarter Than You Are. These plans insert the government into the car business in all sorts of ways. They pick winners (new C.E.O. Fritz Henderson) and losers (Rick Wagoner). They basically send Chrysler off into the sunset. Joe Biden will be doing car commercials within weeks.

The Obama team also raised the bankruptcy specter more explicitly than ever before. Even more tellingly, the administration moved to “stand behind” the companies’ service warranties. That lays the groundwork for a bankruptcy procedure and should be a sharp shock to Detroit.

And yet by enmeshing the White House so deeply into G.M., Obama has increased the odds that March’s menacing threat will lead to June’s wobbly wiggle-out. The Obama administration and the Democratic Party are now completely implicated in the coming G.M. wreck. Over the next few months, the White House will be subject to a gigantic lobbying barrage. The Midwestern delegations, swing states all, will pull out all the stops to prevent plant foreclosures. Unions will be furious if the Obama-run company rips up the union contract. Is the White House ready for the headline “Obama to Middle America: Drop Dead”? It would take a party with a political death wish to see this through.

Furthermore, there’s no reason to think the umpteenth restructuring will produce compelling results. Cost control without a quality revolution will make little difference. There’s no reason to think Americans are going to flock to G.M. cars. (The president lauded their fantabulousness, but G.M. sales fell 51 percent during the first two months of this year while the overall market declined by 39 percent.) Politically expedient environmental demands will make the odds of profitability even more remote.

Corporate welfare rarely works when the government invests in rising firms. The odds are really grim when it tries to subsidize fading ones. (In the ’80s, Chrysler already had the successful K-car in the pipeline.)

I will repeat what I have said on this blog before... the government has no place involving itself in private businesses that are going down... I don't care if it was the Bush administration doing it or the Obama administration.

It.Should. Not. Be. Done.

From The Hill:

Michigan’s senior Democratic senator, Carl Levin, said Obama didn’t ask for advice when he told lawmakers of the move in a Sunday call from the Oval Office to force GM CEO Rick Wagoner to resign, which caught Washington and Detroit by surprise. “He didn’t ask us about it, he informed us,” Levin said.

Some Republicans criticized what they saw as an unprecedented intervention into private industry by the government, while others praised the president’s move as a necessary pain to force the companies to find ways to become viable.

Most Democrats rallied around Obama’s rejection of restructuring plans by General Motors and Chrysler, but several were unhappy with the decision to ask Wagoner to resign.

The announcement sent the stock market reeling. The Dow Jones Industrial closed more than 250 points down, and shares of GM dropped 25 percent.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) offered the toughest criticism of the president’s plans, which would force Chrysler to merge with a foreign suitor to gain more funds and would call on unions, dealers and bondholders connected to GM to make additional sacrifices for more aid.

He said the administration’s plan would lean heavily on using the bankruptcy code to close specific auto plants determined not to be viable. He said this would give the administration too much authority to determine which plants survive.

“This obviously rang an alarm bell with me,” Corker told reporters on a conference call Monday. He said his understanding, based on a briefing by Steven Rattner, a member of Obama’s auto task force, is that the administration will use the threat of the bankruptcy code to force GM to close plants that the administration judges should no longer be in operation.

In a statement, Corker said the “sweeping new powers” could allow the administration to select favored plants based on kowtowing by members of Congress “trying to curry favor with the administration to keep plants in their states open.” He added that it would be “interesting to see if the administration makes these decisions based on a red state and blue state strategy” or on the capability of individual plants and their workers.

The White House disputed any characterization of a federal takeover, and White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said it’s “not fair” to say the federal government is running the companies.
“I think you’ve seen — if you want to talk specifically about management changes, this is not the first entity ... that’s received extensive assistance that has seen a change in management or a composition structure of their board of directors,” Gibbs said.

The White House also pushed back hard against suggestions from Michigan and the left that it is treating automakers and Wall Street banks with a double standard.

So, the auto makers produced a plan, one that won't address the root problem, were surprised by Obama's reaction to said plan, then Obama counters with a plan of his own that STILL doesn't address the root problem and auto makers dislike his plan and some thing bankruptcy is a better option.

Yes, bankruptcy, go for it, that should have been the only option on the table to begin with. We must stop throwing good money after bad on companies that do not have a chance to grow.

Just to be clear on the amounts spent on these bailouts, Bloomberg shows us that the "Financial Rescue Approaches GDP as U.S. Pledges $12.8 Trillion."

Nuff said?


Monday, March 30, 2009

My Interview With Josh Mandel

Josh Mandel did two tours of duty in Iraq. He is now an Ohio State legislator. He may be the First Jewish Republican President some day. My interview with him is below.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Government in the Auto Business Now?

There is some word about the General Motors chief resigning at the request of the White House as well as multiple other stories dealing with the Governments new business, the Auto Industry.

So, rather than break each one down for you folks, I am providing a linkfest today, linking all these reports for your reading.

Washington Post "GM Chief to Resign at White House's Behest."

McClatchy "Feds declare GM, Chrysler not viable, refuse more aid."

Washington Post's, The Fix "White House Cheat Sheet: Obama Plays Hardball on Autos."

The New Republic, "Obama's Speech on Detroit: What to Watch For."

ABC's Political Punch "President Obama Tells Automakers Their Viability Plans Are Lemons."

The Swamp "Why no GM treatment for Wall Street?"

The Politico "Obama to shake up GM, Chrysler."

Wall Street Journal "U.S. Sees Fiat Pact as Chrysler's Best Hope."

Reuters "UPDATE 1-US autos task force rejects GM, Chrysler plans."

Happy reading folks.



In the Washington Times, Andrew Breitbart, has an opinion piece discussing what many of us refer to as the Obamatrons. These are Obama supporters that rush to each and every piece regarding Obama and especially those that point out his flaws, bad judgment, bad policy and anything else that does not make him into the icon that his supporters want the world to think he is.

A digital war has broken out, and the conservative movement is losing. Read the comment sections of right-leaning blogs, news sites and social forums, and the evidence is there in ugly abundance. Internet hooligans are spewing their talking points to thwart the dissent of the newly-out-of-power.

We must not let that go unanswered.

Uninvited Democratic activists are on a mission to demoralize the enemy - us. They want to ensure that President Obama is not subject to the same coordinated, facts-be-damned, multimedia takedown they employed over eight long years to destroy the presidency - and the humanity - of George W. Bush.

Political leftists play for keeps. They are willing to lie, perform deceptive acts in a coordinated fashion and do so in a wicked way - all in the pursuit of victory. Moral relativism is alive and well in the land of Hope and Change and its Web-savvy youth brigade expresses its "idealism" in a most cynical fashion.

The ends justify the means for them - now more than ever.

Read the whole thing, he gives examples of what he is talking about.

These Obamatrons are not new, they appeared during the election and they have blinders on when it comes to Barack Obama.

The good news here is that others, as pointed out the other day, are definitely starting to regret their support for the inexperienced Obama and stating it outright.

As he continues to make the huge mistakes that have plagued the beginning of his term, expect the Obamatrons to get even worse.

If you have comments on your blog, be prepared to moderate them, keep the lies answered and remember, never allow stupidity to go unanswered.


Wounded Combat Warriors Need YOU!


That is the official flyer of an incredible weekend in May that the Combat Warrior Crisis Network and The Independence Fund are hosting. Happening 14 - 17 May, this Independence Ride is CWCN's way of giving back to some of our bravest warriors.

Some information (since I can't figure out how to improve the quality on that flyer):

The Independence Fund and Combat Warrior Crisis Network are working together to bring about 250 wounded soldiers from all over the country to Pensacola. We have DOD and VA support.

Take a look at this video and see some of the great work these groups do for our wounded warriors:...

Please go to Assoluta Tranquillita for more on this here.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

My 2009 NCAA March Madness "Predictions"

I am now ready to predict what will happen in the NCAA Tournament after most of the games have been played.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Saturday, March 28, 2009

My Interview With Laura Ingraham

At the 2008 Republican Convention in Minneapolis, I briefly met and interviewed Laura Ingraham.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Reid Tells Far Left Wing Democrats To Back Off Moderates

For quite a while we have brought news of the far left wing of the Democratic party targeting moderate Democrats, usually referred to as Blue Dog Democrats. We have shown example after example of liberal bloggers starting whole campaigns to get these Blue Dog Democrats out of office.

Most Blue Dogs represent conservative districts, some that used to be offices held by Republicans, and the reason they were voted in was because they were moderates that represent the constituency, rather than just a liberal agenda.

Despite that, groups like and blogs like Open Left, with a variety of others have made it a goal to hinder the moderates chances of reelection.

As a quick reminder, first they set out to "profile" what they called "Bush" Dog Democrats, then they speak of "Bush Dog" campaign against Democratic members of Congress who enable the right-wing through their support of Bush's policies," and they continued.

You can find more examples of the left eating their own, here, here and here, on my previous pieces about this.

Caught up now? Good.

I bookmarked something I saw yesterday titled "Reid to Liberals: Back Off."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Friday that liberal groups targeting moderate Democrats with ads should back off, saying pressure from the left wing of his party won't be helpful to enacting legislation.

"I think it's very unwise and not helpful," Reid said Friday morning. "These groups should leave them alone. It’s not helpful to me. It’s not helpful to the Democratic Caucus.”

Reid, who said he hadn’t seen or heard the ads, added that "most of [the groups] run very few ads — they only to do it to get a little press on it."

The last line of that piece made me laugh, where Reid also says "I think that our success is tied to Obama’s success."

That brings me to a piece I saw today, via Memeorandum, showing that The Economist, who endorsed Barack Obama for presidency, is none to happy with what they got and are disappointed.

HILLARY CLINTON’S most effective quip, in her long struggle with Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination last year, was that the Oval Office is no place for on-the-job training. It went to the heart of the nagging worry about the silver-tongued young senator from Illinois: that he lacked even the slightest executive experience, and that in his brief career he had never really stood up to powerful interests, whether in his home city of Chicago or in the wider world. Might Mrs Clinton have been right.

Not altogether. In foreign policy in particular Mr Obama has already done some commendable things. He has held out a sincere hand to Iran; he has ordered Guantánamo closed within a year; he has set himself firmly against torture. He has, as the world and this newspaper wanted, taken a less strident tone in dealing with friends and rivals alike.

But at home Mr Obama has had a difficult start. His performance has been weaker than those who endorsed his candidacy, including this newspaper, had hoped. Many of his strongest supporters—liberal columnists, prominent donors, Democratic Party stalwarts—have started to question him. As for those not so beholden, polls show that independent voters again prefer Republicans to Democrats, a startling reversal of fortune in just a few weeks. Mr Obama’s once-celestial approval ratings are about where George Bush’s were at this stage in his awful presidency. Despite his resounding electoral victory, his solid majorities in both chambers of Congress and the obvious goodwill of the bulk of the electorate, Mr Obama has seemed curiously feeble.

Considering Obama had no experience to begin with when The Economist endorsed him, one would wonder why they seem so surprised that he doesn't seem to know what he is doing.

Oh, and just for the hell of it?

Here is a flashback of Hillary Clinton warning people Obama did not have the experience to be president:

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Said That While She And Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) Had Crossed "The Commander In Chief Threshold ... You Will Have To Ask Senator Obama With Respect To His Candidacy." Sen. Clinton: "In this election we need a nominee who can pass the commander-in-chief test. Someone ready on day one to defend our country and keep our families safe. And we need a president who passes that test, because the first and most solemn duty of the president of the United States is on protect and defend our nation. And when there is a crisis and when the phone rings whether it's 3:00 p.m. or 3:00 a.m. In the White House, there is no time for speeches and on the job training. Senator McCain will bring a time of experience to the campaign. I will bring a lifetime of experience and Senator Obama will bring a speech he gave in 2002. I think that is a significant difference. I think that since we now know Senator Mc Cain will be the nominee for the party, national security will be front and center in this election. We all know that. And I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander in chief threshold. And I believe that I have done that. Certainly Senator McCain has done that. And you will have to ask Senator Obama with respect to his candidacy." (CNN's "Newsroom," 3/8/08)

Video of Clinton saying this, found at YouTube here and shown below:

Just for shits and giggles, let us also remind everyone what Joe Biden said, you know, the Vice President of the United States of America, the man Obam chose as his running mate?

Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) Reaffirmed That Obama Was Not Ready To Be Commander In Chief. ABC's George Stephanopoulos: "You were asked is he ready. You said 'I think he can be ready, but right now I don't believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.'" Sen. Biden: "I think that I stand by the statement." (ABC's "This Week," 8/19/07)

Sen. Biden: "Having talking points on foreign policy doesn't get you there." ("Biden Lashes Out At Obama," ABC News' "Political Radar" Blog,, 8/2/07)

The Economist and others that are now pissing and moaning about being disappointed in Obama's performance as president, should have done their homework before the election.

If Reid is counting on their success being tied to Obama's success, then things are definitely looking up for the 2010 and 2012 elections..... for the Republicans.


Friday, March 27, 2009


TSUNAMI RELEASE as featured today in W.A.M. News Room

Breaking News: A.C.O.R.N. Ties to S.E.I.U. Exposed Post follows this introduction

It's no news to those who participate in TSUNAMI MEDIA that Obama's community organizers and Mobama's favorite Socialist Union are co-operative cornerstones in his Regime's GAME PLAN to take over the U.S. - via social re-engineering, immigrant union intrusions plus no-volunteer National Service - all to establish the permanent rule of his Administration and the no-longer-democratic party. The use of these sleazy team players to disrupt the business world and break down the already weakened economy has been at the core of the Obama/Alexrod/Emanuel strategy all along. But, until now, the MainStreamMedia has ignored and buried this under-belly of collusion.

Note to Bloggers:

SEND QUICK REPLY to this address with the PERMA-LINK of your related POST and your site will be HIGHLIGHTED on W.A.M. News Room with a link for readers to come to your site for more on this critical topic!

Please do include the ACTION LINK here, within your post, encouraging your readers & contacts to get ACTION TOOLS (FREE PREPARED FAX and ALL CONTACT INFORMATION to their SENATORS will be provided as soon as they sign in here:                    




A Glenn Beck interview with an election attorney has exposed the fact that the SEIU (Service Employees INTERNATIONAL

Union) contracted the angry mob which intimidated AIG employees at their own homes this past week. According to this report,

the "Muscle for Money" program, revealed by a former A.C.O.R.N.employee at hearings held last October, involves formal

work contracts between the SEIU & A.C.O.R.N. in which poor persons are paid to make targeted, aggressive protests.

These "protests" are then covered by the MainStreamMedia with the appearance of spontaneous events led by "everyday


Beck followed up on the mobs which terrorized AIG executives homes when he noticed the protesters were arriving in

organized buses, which were rented by A.C.O.R.N. Referencing A.C.O.R.N.'s shady history, the reporter referred back

to A.C.O.R.N.'s arrangements of voting booths in Nevada casinos as their instrument for assuring Obama's "win"

of last year's Primary caucus in the state. A.C.O.R.N is also being investigated on criminal vote fraud complaints

in several other states for related misconduct.

The "bus tour" attack on AIG families was, specifically, arranged by Connetticcut's (sp) Working Families Party

as one of A.C.O.R.N. & S.E.I.U.'s many public faces. Cleta Mitchell, an attorney who has followed the underlying

connections of these groups explained that the S.E.I.U. has spent tens of millions of dollars on all kinds of

organizations over the last five years. Federally funded in part, and also supported by George Soros, one of

A.C.O.R.N.'s multifold "campaigns" for change includes the legalization of drugs in the U.S.

As Beck noted, former A.C.O.R.N. employees repulsed by the organization's methods and associations have

contributed to exposing their tactics but avoid public statements. One such witness invited on air declined,

expressing fear for her two year old daughter's safety.

W.A.M. ALERT The spider-web of socialist intrigue doesn't stop there. The recent TV network

attention on waves of AIG protests has been used to fuel public enmity toward corporations in order to

gain Congressional passage of CARD CHECK. This union-organizing legislation, spearheaded by the S.E.I.U,

abolishes the secret ballot and would open the door for this INTERNATIONAL union to propagate

intimidation tactics, similar to those above, on successful non-union companies and small businesses

across the nation.

If you, as an "ordinary citizen" (not paid by A.C.O.R.N. or the S.E.I.U.) and have not yet contacted Washington

to block passage of this "Employee Free Choice Act" (aka CARD CHECK) link here to sign in and send

your State's Senators a FREE FAX now:

RJC in Lauderdale

I recently attended the Republican Jewish Coalition Winter Leadership meeting in Fort Lauderdale, FL.

It was an outstanding session. I recommend everybody become familiar with these great Americans.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

The GIVE Act and The Indoctrination of American School Children

Yesterday was the first time I heard about the GIVE Act. Perhaps I have been spending too much time on Facebook. At first glance the bill seems like a feel good funding of community organizations and education for volunteerism. However, there is more than meets the eye with this current legislation. The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act (H.R. 2867) has passed the House and the Senate, and America came dangerously close to forced advocacy.

Previous provisions in the bill would have forced Americans to engage in some kind of community service. Luckily the hullabaloo raised over this provision lead it to its eventual death on the cutting room floor. This time we can breathe a sigh of relief, but do not count the initiative out. The crafters of the bill who put that in will most likely want to try to sneak it in somewhere else. Is that not the usual with the American CONgress?

As it stands the GIVE Act gives $6billion to community organizations and charities, and yes that includes the ever aggressive and corrupt ACORN. The Act also appropriates funding for educational programs, which is of great concern to many Americans who have looked into Barack Obama's community organizer days.

Not to beat a dead horse, but there is a connection between William Ayers and Barack Obama. Cry foul as one might, it is there and it is not based on bombing the Pentagon. It was based on education reform through CAC and CPAA where Obama and Ayers served on the same board promoting the same agenda. On the surface the agenda was more funding for public school systems, but while the one hand was promoting funding the other was slipping the indoctrination card from its sleeve.

The indoctrination of K-12 children in American schools across the nation is not far away, indeed it has already begun with the election of William Ayers as president of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). His influence is now over hundreds of thousands of children in classrooms. His agenda is social advocacy, which would be fine if Americans did not know that his particular brand of social advocacy involves bombing the Pentagon.

Obama and Ayers have a similar foundation to their community organization skills, the teachings of Saul Alinsky. He is the author of the book Rules for Radicals. These rules are meant to teach community organizations how to achieve their goals, the basic rule is the end justifies the means. They are as follows.

Here are Alinsky's rules to test whether the means are ethical.

1.One's concern with the ethics of means and ends varies inversely with one's personal interest in the issue.

2.The judgment of the ethics of means is dependent upon the political position of those sitting in judgment.

3.In war the end justifies almost any means.

4.Judgment must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point.

5.Concern with ethics increases with the number of means available and vice versa.

6.The less important the end to be desired, the more one can afford to engage in ethical evaluations of means.

7.Generally, success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics.

8.The morality of means depends upon whether the means is being employed at a time of imminent defeat or imminent victory.

9.Any effective means is automatically judged by the opposition to be unethical.

10.You do what you can with what you have and clothe it in moral garments.

11.Goals must be phrased in general terms like "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," "Of the Common Welfare," "Pursuit of Happiness," or "Bread and Peace."

Here are his rules of power tactics.

1.Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.

2.Never go outside the experience of your people.

3.Whenever possible, go outside of the experience of the enemy.

4.Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

5. Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.

6.A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

7.A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

8.Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.

9.The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

10.The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

11.If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.

12.The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

13.Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

These are the foundations of modern community organizations, of which children ages K-12 are being encouraged to join and through which will be indoctrinated. While Saul Alinsky felt Democracy was the easiest way to achieve his goals, the groups which advocate under his rules are for big government closer to that of socialism. ACORN is one of those groups, and it will be receiving funding I can bet my eye teeth on that. The question is, do you want ACORN teaching your children how to be an upstanding citizen in the community?

Courtesy of Daughter of America

Afghanistan Strategy

More funding, more troops and benchmarks. No, we are not talking about Iraq, we are talking about Afghanistan.

The New York Times starts us off:

President Obama plans to further bolster American forces in Afghanistan and for the first time set benchmarks for progress in fighting Al Qaeda and the Taliban there and in Pakistan, officials said Thursday.

In imposing conditions on the Afghans and Pakistanis, Mr. Obama is replicating a strategy used in Iraq two years ago both to justify a deeper American commitment and prod governments in the region to take more responsibility for quelling the insurgency and building lasting political institutions.

(Emphasis mine)

Wait, wait, wait, wait.

Replicating a strategy used in Iraq, a strategy that in 2007, Barack Obama clearly stated "would not work", (Video at linked URL of him saying it) he never bothered to admit that it did, but once the strategy did start producing results, some will remember, Obama scrubbed his site of criticism of that "surge".

So, let's get this straight, addition money, $1.5 billion a year in economic development aid and other nonmilitary forms of assistance, according to WSJ, an additional 4,000 added to the the 17,000 extra combat troops that he already ordered to Afghanistan shortly after taking office and benchmarks set for Afghan leaders.

Wow, I guess George Bush should be flattered, they do say imitation is the highest form of flattery. Replicating Bush's strategy, after spending so much time claiming originally that it had no chance of working...

From the Washington Post:

President Obama's new Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy will require significantly higher levels of U.S. funding for both countries, with U.S. military expenses in Afghanistan alone, currently about $2 billion a month, increasing by about 60 percent this year.

"The president has decided he is going to resource this war properly," said a senior administration official of the plan Obama is set to announce this morning. Along with the 17,000 additional combat troops authorized last month, he said, Obama will send 4,000 more this fall to serve as trainers and advisers to an Afghan army expected to double in size over the next two years.

It is The Guardian that brings us the kicker here. Obama believes this will help, Obama is willing to pour more resources and troops into a strategy he thinks will work, unless of course it risks his reelection chances.

The planners fear the war could become an election issue as the mid-term Congressional elections in November next year draw near, and that Congress might be reluctant to fund the strategy.

The planners are also said to assume that the overall US strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan has a working life of three to five years.

Obama, in a TV interview on Sunday, talked of an "exit strategy" but not a time-frame. Democrats do not want a messy war overshadowing the president's expected re-election attempt in 2012.

Winning wars mean nothing compared to elections... there is your ridiculous item of the day.


Tax Day Tea Party

Reader Skeezix requested mention about the April 15, 2009 Tax Day Tea Party, in where people have organized Tea Parties on over 300 cities.

The 44 second video below will explain more about these anti-tax protests.

Written by Eric Odom on March 26, 2009 – 7:11 am

On March first, Stacy Mott, Michael Leahy and myself had a conversation about our goals for the Tax Day Tea Party. The February 17th “Nationwide Chicago Tea Party” took place in about 40 cities, and the estimates show around 30,000 Americans took part in the protests. We collectively decided that our goal for Tax Day would be to organize in 41+ cities and see 30,001 citizens take part.

This goal has already been crushed as the latest tally of confirmed Tax Day Tea Parties is now 300 across every single state in the union. We have good intel that suggests we will have 10+ cities that exceed 5,000 in attendance, and when you add 290 more cities on top of this… well, you get the picture.

There is no doubt that the Tax Day Tea Party Protests will be very Historic in nature due to the high volume of simultaneous protests happening on April 15th. This is because of people like YOU, and this is a prime example of how true grassroots activism moves mountains.

This movement has grown past what was originally expected and provides everyday, ordinary citizens a non-violent way to protest what they see happening and to stand up and be counted, so to speak.

The media has taken notice of this movement as well, as evidence by the video above, and the Tea Party site linked above has multiple other media stories.

Head over to the Tea Party online HQ to find out how to become involved in your city/state.

Below is the Tea Party Anthem, Ridgefield, Connecticut, March 21, 2009 and called "Take Our Country Back."

Video above found at YouTube, here.

[Update] No sooner do I ht publish on this, I get an email regarding the Tea Parties.

The Tax Day Tea Parties, hosted by the DontGo Movement, Smart Girl Politics, and Top Conservatives on Twitter, are proud to announce there are presently over 300 Tea Parties planned with the numbers rising every day. The Tea Parties will take place on April 15th to protest the Obama Stimulus Plan and the government intrusion that comes along with it.

National Communications Director Juliana Johnson states, "These protests are truly making a difference. We are being heard, we have been silent for too long but we refuse to be silent anymore. If anyone is still unsure on whether to attend a Tea Party then realize that by not attending you are staying silent in a time when we need to be loud."

The Tax Day Tea Parties are expected to have a turnout of over 150,000 people across America. The co-hosts include: American Solutions, Michelle Malkin, Newt Gingrich, Institute for Liberty, ALG, ParcBench, Dana Loesch, and GOPUSA.

Please go to for more information on the Tea Parties.
Please go to for more information on the DontGo Movement.


Thursday, March 26, 2009

My Interview With Chris Muir of Day By Day

I had the pleasure of interviewing Chris Muir.

He is the cartoonist behind the fabulous comic strip "Day By Day."

I included a link to his site. Day by Day takes 60 seconds to read, and should be a mandatory daily ritual in addition to the Tygrrrr Express.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Still Unconcerned Barney Frank?

It wasn't long ago when Edward Liddy, representing AIG agreed to give congress the list of names of executives who received large AIG bonuses, on the condition that it be kept confidential. That was denied to him, so he expanded show threats to the lives of those executives AND their families, to which Barney Frank (D-MA) causally waved away completely unconcerned about those lives.

Video showing Frank's reaction, below:

Today, via NBS Connecticut, we see some more of those disturbing threats.

"Get the bonus, we will get your children," someone identified only as "Jacob the Killer" hauntingly writes in an e-mail.

That is just one example, here are more:

Here are some of the highlights (or rather, low-lights). We've cleaned up some of the nasty language, but you can use your imagination:

-- All you motherf***ers should be shot. Thanks for f***ing up our economy then taking our money.

-- Dear Sir: Ya'll should have the balls and come clean and give back the bonuses. I know you would never do this so the gov't ought to take you out back and shoot everyone of you crooked sonofb****es...I would be very careful when I went out side. This is just a warning. If I were ya'll I would be real afraid. Thanks, Bill.

-- I don't hope that bad things happen to the recipients of those bonuses. I really hope that bad things happen to the children and grandchildren of them! Whatever hurts them the most!!

-- You f***ing suck. Paying bonuses to the d*****s that made bad bets losing your company billions of dollars. I want to f***ing puke. Publish the list of those yankee scumbags so some good old southern boys can take care of them.

-- If the bonuses don't stop, it will be very likely that every CEO @ AIG has a bulls-eye on their backs.

-- We will hunt you down. Every last penny. We will hunt your children and we will hunt your conscience. We will do whatever we can to get those people getting the bonuses. Give back the money or kill yourselves.

-- All the executives and their families should be executed with piano wire around their necks --- my greatest hope.

-- You mother-f***ing, c***s***ing, d***l****ers need to be taken out one by one and shot in the head. There's a special place in hell for you pond scum. Watch your backs because someone will come to get you, you can be sure.

-- The Revolution is coming. The family members of your executives are not safe. Your blood will run through the streets in the coming months.

I have to wonder if Mr. Frank is still so unconcerned and if so, what does that say about his morals, his ethics and his stability.


More AIG problems

The hits just keep coming as news comes out that more resignations have hit AIG, this time in Paris which risks $234 billion of derivative transactions.


Amid the flap over bonuses at American International Group Inc. two of the company's top managers in Paris have resigned. Their moves have left the giant insurer and officials scrambling to replace them to avoid an unlikely but expensive situation in which billions in AIG trading contracts could default.

Representatives of the Federal Reserve, AIG's lead U.S. overseer, are talking with French regulators and AIG officials to deal with the consequences of a complicated legal scenario in which the departures of the managers in Banque AIG, a subsidiary of AIG's Financial Products unit, could trigger defaults in $234 billion of derivative transactions, according to people familiar with the situation and a document AIG provided to the U.S. Treasury.

They go on to explain these losses are not inevitable but the risk is there.

The executives at Paris-based Banque AIG, Mauro Gabriele and James Shephard, have resigned in recent days but have agreed to stay on for a transition, according to people familiar with the matter. In the wake of their resignations, AIG must replace them to the satisfaction of French banking regulators.

If they don't, French regulators may appoint their own designee to manage the bank -- an outcome that could trigger defaults under the bank's derivative contracts. The private contracts say that a regulator's appointment of a manager constitutes a change in control, according to a person familiar with the matter; the provision is often included in derivative contracts where parties want to preserve a way out if something about their counterparties changes.

The old expression is true, when it rains, it pours!..


VIDEO- Geithner's Words Heard Around The World

The Telegraph:

The dollar plunged instantly against the euro, yen, and sterling as the comments flashed across trading screens. David Bloom, currency chief at HSBC, said the apparent policy shift amounts to an earthquake in geo-finance.

"The mere fact that the US Treasury Secretary is even entertaining thoughts that the dollar may cease being the anchor of the global monetary system has caused consternation," he said.

One would think a person in the position of U.S Treasury Secretary, would understand his words and comments have an immediate effect on America's currency.

It is being called Amateur hour and that is appropriate considering how incompetent Geithner is.

In a blink of an eye, the U.S. dollar has collapsed against the Euro, Japanese Yen and other major currencies. The trigger was comments from Tim Geithner who said that the U.S. is "quite open" to China's suggestion of moving towards a Special Drawing Right (SDR) linked currency system. If the world adopts the SDR, which was created by the IMF as an international reserve asset, it would mean that countries around the world would need to hold less U.S. dollars. The U.S. is probably open to this suggestion because a weaker dollar is stimulative for the U.S. economy and would relieve the U.S. from having to implement effective monetary policy while balancing the international demand for a reserve currency.

Geithner's comments indicate that the U.S. is not taking China's suggestion with a grain of salt and instead is giving it legitimacy. This is extremely important ahead of the G20 meeting. The only question is whether this is another amateur mistake by the new U.S. Treasury Secretary. When he first took office, he mistakenly threatened to brand China as a currency manipulator, putting his reputation at risk. The dollar will recover its gains if Geithner attempts to clarify his comments. In addition to the comments on China, Geithner also said that the U.S. still has substantial resources left in TARP and that it will take a few months before we can see effects of the mortgage modifications measures.

There is an update at this link, which shows Geithner did try to backtrack from his damaging mistake.

A few minutes after saying the U.S. is open to an SDR linked currency, Geithner clarified his comments by saying that there is "no change in dollar as world's reserve currency and likely to remain so for long time." In our alert, we said that the dollar would rebound if he attempts to clarify his comments. These contradictory statements are clearly the act of an amateur Treasury Secretary that has been thrust onto the public forum and is struggling with the need to be very particular in his choice of words.

The Politico shows a couple things in their article regarding this. First Obama flatly rejected the idea of a "new global currency" and secondly, it was not Geithner that corrected his wording, it was the moderator, Roger Altman, that brought the topic back up for clarification.

UPDATE: Evidently sensing a gaffe, moderator Roger Altman told Geithner that it would be "useful" to return to the question, and asked if he foresaw a change in the dollar's centrality.

"I do not," Geithner said, adding several forceful promises, including, "We will do what's necessary to say we're sustaining confidence in our financial markets."

Rookie mistake and one that now leaves doubt across the world in our ability to pull ourselves out of an economic downturn.

More from Hot Air.

With Geithner's inability to handle the AIG situation, lying about when he knew about the bonuses, the administration pressuring Dodd for the amendment to guarantee those bonuses, Obama signing the stimulus bill making sure they were guaranteed, and Geithner's little confidence game with Toxic assets, it is amazing that he is still Treasury Secretary and shows the extreme inexperience of the Obama administration.

They are in over their heads and making a mess of everything.


Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Mr. Obama, enough press conferences

President Obama is now more overexposed than the Geico Gekko.

He says so much, yet says so little. What little he says is wrong, and harmful.

Enough press conferences.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Quiting AIG

Short and sweet, the public outcry against all of AIG will cost them people, talented people that had nothing to do with the credit default swap transactions that plagued the company.

As is the case of the resignation of Jake DeSantis, Executive VPm AIG Financial Products... portions of his letter below, from the link above.

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.


I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

read the entire letter and understand that because of Obama, Congress and the public, lumping all AIG executives that received bonuses in together, whether they were responsible or not for the mess AIG is in, a loyal, dedicated worker has now left the company at a time when they needed honest, dedicated people.

A pity.


Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Bonus Bill Buried In Senate... For Now

The US House of Representatives, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, reacting out of anger and in a rush, passed a bonus bill that would have targeted a specific group of individuals, blindly reacting to public anger over $165 million in bonuses paid to AIG execs, after the government bailed the company out, yet again, with $30 billion.

The Senate, seeing Obama's reaction and indicating he thought it was a bad idea, have backed away from the Pelosi bill and for now, have buried it.

From The Hill:

President Obama and Senate Democrats have buried a bill passed last week by the House that would have heavily taxed executive bonuses at bailed-out firms.

Despite the public outcry over $165 million in bonuses awarded at troubled insurer AIG, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) showed little inclination Monday to bring the explosive issue to the floor this week or next. Instead, Reid is likely to delay action on executive compensation until late April, after the Senate returns from a two-week recess starting April 4.

The lack of enthusiasm to expedite the bonus legislation comes after Obama said over the weekend that he didn’t think it was a good idea for Congress to target individuals with tax proposals.

“As a general proposition, I think you certainly don’t want to use the tax code … to punish people,” Obama said in the interview with “60 Minutes” that aired Sunday.

Reacting to a frenzy of media coverage, the House last week passed a measure that would levy a 90 percent tax on bonuses received this year by executives at AIG and other companies collecting more than $5 billion in federal aid.

Sad state of affairs when our congress starts passing bills in a rush and out of anger trying to play to what is popular instead of what is right, even going as far as to pass a bill that is unconstitutional.

Wapo is on this story as well:

Jarred by a cool reception from the White House and fears of unintended consequences across the financial world, Senate leaders are likely to delay until late next month legislation to punitively tax bonuses at banks and investment firms that receive federal aid.

Obama has been waffling, which is probably why Pelosi thought she could get away with something this outrageous without thought to the consequences around the whole financial sector, but one he calmed down and started dealing with the realities, he finally called it a bad idea, yet he never said he wouldn't sign it.

Talk about hedging your bets!


Obama's Waffling Noticed

Following the mood of the country rather than just trying to determine a course to follow to fix the economic problems, has cause many to see Barack Obama as waffling on the issue.

AP, on Yahoo news brings this into focus.

President Barack Obama raced to the front of the pitchfork crowd last week, feeding public furor over bonuses paid to publicly rescued companies.

But now, amid signs that rescinding the bonuses might undermine his financial-sector bailout plan, the president is waving an olive branch.

Obama's tone changed dramatically over the weekend, after the House voted for targeted taxes to take back most of the $165 million in bonuses paid to executives of the largely nationalized insurance giant American International Group. Many lawmakers felt Obama had encouraged their step, because he called the bonuses reckless, outrageous and unjustified.

In the White House, however, the situation seemed to be spinning out of control. Some fellow Democrats questioned the constitutionality and wisdom of the harsh reaction.

On Sunday, Obama told CBS's "60 Minutes" the House's plan to slap a special tax on the AIG executives would be unconstitutional. Borrowing a line from his Feb. 24 speech to Congress, he said he would not "govern out of anger."

Many presidents have had to learn that they cannot gauge everyone, cannot keep everyone happy and cannot match their rhetoric and actions to fit a "mob mood", yet Obama has consistently tried to do this and people are starting to notice it, write about and realize it is his weakness.

At a time when it is not just our country watching, but the whole world, the last thing we need is the appearance of weakness from our president and yet that is exactly what we have right now.

Antonia Ferrier, spokeswoman for House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio said "We're getting whiplash watching the administration careen back and forth."

Yes we are, but it is worse than that, whiplash is the least of our worries when our President is seen as an appeaser, a waffler, someone who cannot stay on track instead of a firm decisive leader.

Obama's handling of this crisis, is an indicator, to us and to others, of how he leads and as of right now, he is being found wanting.


More from Richard Cohen who lays this out nicely:

Earlier in the administration, the White House allowed Congress to write the $787 billion stimulus bill. It was bad enough that the candidate who promised change had no choice but to prop up some of the country's most reviled or antiquated institutions -- financial firms, auto manufacturers, etc. -- but what's worse is that the bill came blinged with extra spending. That allowed Republicans to pose as longtime and passionate opponents of pork, producing a noxious cloud of hypocrisy that drifted from the Capitol to the White House. This was not the fresh air of change but the stale air of business as usual.

Something similar happened with the $410 billion omnibus spending bill. Earmarks were permitted. This was not the president's bill since it originated under the previous administration, but Obama did not fight the earmarks or seem upset by them and indeed pronounced them yesterday's news. The speaker, as is her wont, got her way and so, once again, change was parked at some scenic overlook, biding its time until it is allowed into Washington. It is already way late.

The president is slipping in the polls. Last month, he had a 64 percent approval rating. This month it was 59 percent, but more to the point, the National Journal's astute Charlie Cook noticed that political independents were trending Republican. Some of this was bound to happen, but some of it is a consequence of Obama remaining undifferentiated, defined more by allies like Pelosi than by enemies like the GOP.

In foreign policy, where a president is monarch, Obama has been a change agent. But in domestic matters, Obama's image has become muddled. He remains more popular than credible. Where does he draw the line? Not at tax delinquency, clearly, and not at earmarks, clearly, and not at real school reform, which he advocates but has done little to implement. He sometimes says he's angry, as with the AIG bonuses, but it's a parental pose designed to fool children and is not a genuine emotion. Obama eschews symbolic politics.


My Conference Call With Mitch McConnell's Office

Yesterday I was on a conference call with staff members from Senator Mitch McConnell's office.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Monday, March 23, 2009

Taking the Law to the Lawless

Seeing that the anti-Americanists have managed to subvert the judiciary in this nation to the extent that more unconstitutional laws have been passed than constitutional ones, I was wondering if we could use the courts to reverse that trend. One never knows.

So, I went to my attorney that I have used for years for many things and made an appointment for one of those 30-minute free consultations. I presented my idea/desire to my attorney and that 30-minute free consultation lasted more than two hours.
At issue was the viability of a lawsuit against congress for violating the constitution.

I was asked what I would settle for, how much money I was looking for, what kind of damages was I wanting to be compensated for, etc.
I told them that I was not seeking damages in a monetary settlement. I was demanding that either the United States federal government either return to our Constitutional Republic or make the changes they wanted to make by constitutional amendments instead of passing federal laws which made the path clear for legislating around the constitution.

Like I said, over two hours later, I witnessed six lawyers getting on board with the idea. I have no idea where this is going to go but I guess that as long as I pay their fees, they will take this as far as they are able.

What I am looking for is this: 30,000,000 Americans making appointments with their attorneys via the 30-minute free consultations to begin making waves through the legal system. Can you imagine what noise that would make if all of a sudden, our unconstitutional congress critters were getting hit with law suit after law suit demanding they perform their constitutional duties?

I have a recent list of the targets located in this article: Unconstitutional House Members

There are some Senators as well but I haven’t compiled that list yet.

Remember, if you go with this idea, go to your attorneys as if you are the one making this inquiry and don’t tell them others are doing this as well. Let them talk amongst themselves and let them “discover” the Tsunami rising. Also, go armed. If you don’t know the violations against the constitution, you won’t go anywhere with this. I was able to show them the blatant and outright fraudulent behavior of the current and past sessions of congress.
We read the constitution and tried to reconcile the “will of the congress will be done” and the “will of the congress has been heard” and the “the Senate will have final say over states rights” and the “federal statutes trump states rights” garbage. I also brought to their attention where several judges told American citizens that they had no standing in questioning anything the government does. I lit a fire under four of them. Two remain skeptical. But that’s OK.
The man that owns the firm has called me twice since I was there and I may have an appointment with other attorneys from partnered firms. It was even suggested that this could very well turn into a national class-action suit. We’ll see.

So, please make your appointments and go for broke. What do we have to lose? The more important question is this…what do we have to gain?  Our country?  Our Heritage?

Why Chesney Sullenberger Matters

I try so hard to remain an optimist, but sometimes life piles on the bad news. A pair of plane crashes in Montana and Tokyo have added to the sadness.

This makes me thank God that Chesney "Sully" Sullenberger briefly gave us a ray of hope.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Opposition High Against Obama's Budget Plan

Via The Hill we see it isn't only Republicans that see a problem with Barack Obama's budget plan, but some Democrats don't agree with certain aspects either.

On Sunday, politicians from both sides of the aisle in Congress criticized a variety of provisions sprinkled throughout Obama’s budget that would put key investments in for several campaign promises, such as healthcare reform. Some even questioned using the budget reconciliation process for achieving such complex policy goals.

Senator Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Obama’s former Commerce Secretary nominee who withdrew his name from nomination, because he wasn't on board with Obama's plans, offered the sharpest criticism.

“The practical implications of this is bankruptcy for the United States,” Gregg said Sunday on CNN’s "State of the Union" about the budget. “There's no other way around it.”

Calling the Obama administration’s explanations for the budget proposal “unconscionable,” Gregg also said the potential that the deficit could rise to 4 or 5 percent of the national gross domestic product was “staggering.”

After getting a look at the plan the Congressional Budget Office estimated that Obama's plan would leave a national deficit averaging $1 trillion over the next 10 years.

Senator Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, is also presenting a roadblock to certain aspects:

A greater obstacle for Obama, though, than both Gregg and the CBO could be a member of his own party: Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.

Conrad said that he would not use the budget reconciliation process to push through substantial changes to health and energy policy. Using reconciliation would avoid a Senate filibuster and instead require just a simple majority in the upper chamber of Congress.

“It is not included in the budget I will put to my colleagues,” Conrad said on ABC’s “This Week.” “It just doesn’t work very well.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has started an active campaign against Obama's budget plan, which sets them on the same side as other groups who were already opposing, such as the Tax Reform Coalition.


Sweden To Saab: TOUGH LUCK

Obama, listen up dude!!!!!

Sweden might have set a horrible example in nationalizing it's banks, but in the case of Saab, needing to be bailed out, or taken over.... the answer is NO way, no bailout.

Saab Automobile may be just another crisis-ridden car company in an industry full of them. But just as the fortunes of Flint, Mich., are permanently entangled with General Motors, so it is impossible to find anyone in this city in southwest Sweden who is not somehow connected to Saab.

Which makes it all the more wrenching that the Swedish government has responded to Saab’s desperate financial situation by saying, essentially, tough luck. Or, as the enterprise minister, Maud Olofsson, put it recently, “The Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories.”

That is the exact answer AIG, our banks, our car companies and any other privately run business that fails, should be getting from our government.



Obama's Letter To Jacques Chirac Has Tongues Wagging

I am sure at some point a phone call will be made to France's President, Nicolas Sarkozy, by Barack Obama, explaining why Obama sent a letter to the former president of France, Jacques Chirac, telling him "I am certain that we will be able to work together, in the coming four years, in a spirit of peace and friendship to build a safer world."

Gateway Pundit brings us the details of how the French Press is having a field day with this.

No Pasaran has more on the bizarre letter to Chirac.

French newspaper Le Figaro is horrified at the faux pas. And, current French President Sarkozy was appparently upset with the letter.
Europumas and Free Republic has the latest:

Now Obama has insulted French President Sarkozy!

Oh no! Obama sent a letter to Chirac, saying he looks forward to working with him the next four years. Le Figaro, French newspaper is horrified at the faux pas. Doesn't Obama ever consult his staff before acting? Sarkozy is the President there! It's like Sarko writing to George Bush and saying he looks forward to working with him. Chirac is the FORMER president.

When Obama managed to offend Gordon Brown, a phone immediately went out, with a press release from the White House, explaining the two had spoken, so I wonder when the next press release will be issued informing us that Obama has spoken to Sarkozy and everything is just fine and dandy.

Cute French cartoon about this by Herve Baudry, via The Atlanticist.

Other bloggers are having a little fun with this, see their reactions over at Memeorandum.


Pretending Crap Is Roses - Public Private Partnership Investment Program

We will make it very simple here.

You have a pile dog crap, you cover it up with a towel, you tell people there is a pile of roses under it and tell them to buy it, you even give them the money to buy it, so other people will believe it is roses rather than shit under the blanket (ignore the smell folks, nothing here, move along) then IF the people who bought it remove the towel and find they have dog crap instead of roses, well they don't have to pay back the loan they used to buy it.

Any guesses where the money to loan those investors will come from?

The Treasury Department issued the fact sheet providing details of the Public Private Partnership Investment Program that is being proposed. PDF found here.

Sample Investment Under the Legacy Loans Program

Step 1: If a bank has a pool of residential mortgages with $100 face value that it is seeking to divest, the bank would approach the FDIC.

Step 2: The FDIC would determine, according to the above process, that they would be willing to leverage the pool at a 6-to-1 debt-to-equity ratio.

Step 3: The pool would then be auctioned by the FDIC, with several private sector bidders submitting bids. The highest bid from the private sector – in this example, $84 – would be the winner and would form a Public-Private Investment Fund to purchase the pool of mortgages.

Step 4: Of this $84 purchase price, the FDIC would provide guarantees for $72 of financing, leaving $12 of equity.

Step 5: The Treasury would then provide 50% of the equity funding required on a side-by-side basis with the investor. In this example, Treasury would invest approximately $6, with the private investor contributing $6.

Step 6: The private investor would then manage the servicing of the asset pool and the timing of its disposition on an ongoing basis – using asset managers approved and subject to oversight by the FDIC.

Sample Investment Under the Legacy Securities Program

Step 1: Treasury will launch the application process for managers interested in the Legacy Securities Program.

Step 2: A fund manager submits a proposal and is pre-qualified to raise private capital to participate in joint investment programs with Treasury.

Step 3: The Government agrees to provide a one-for-one match for every dollar of private capital that the fund manager raises and to provide fund-level leverage for the proposed Public-Private Investment Fund.

Step 4: The fund manager commences the sales process for the investment fund and is able to raise $100 of private capital for the fund. Treasury provides $100 equity co-investment on a side-by-side basis with private capital and will provide a $100 loan to the Public-Private Investment Fund. Treasury will also consider requests from the fund manager for an additional loan of up to $100 to the fund.

Step 5: As a result, the fund manager has $300 (or, in some cases, up to $400) in total capital and commences a purchase program for targeted securities.

Step 6: The fund manager has full discretion in investment decisions, although it will predominately follow a long-term buy-and-hold strategy. The Public-Private Investment Fund, if the fund manager so determines, would also be eligible to take advantage of the expanded TALF program for legacy securities when it is launched.

Paul Krugman over at the New York Times points out that Tim Geithner, the Treasury secretary, is recycling the Bush administration's "cash for trash" plan that was tried, and abandoned after 6 months, by former Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson.

But the Obama administration, like the Bush administration, apparently wants an easier way out. The common element to the Paulson and Geithner plans is the insistence that the bad assets on banks’ books are really worth much, much more than anyone is currently willing to pay for them. In fact, their true value is so high that if they were properly priced, banks wouldn’t be in trouble.

And so the plan is to use taxpayer funds to drive the prices of bad assets up to “fair” levels. Mr. Paulson proposed having the government buy the assets directly. Mr. Geithner instead proposes a complicated scheme in which the government lends money to private investors, who then use the money to buy the stuff. The idea, says Mr. Obama’s top economic adviser, is to use “the expertise of the market” to set the value of toxic assets.

But the Geithner scheme would offer a one-way bet: if asset values go up, the investors profit, but if they go down, the investors can walk away from their debt. So this isn’t really about letting markets work. It’s just an indirect, disguised way to subsidize purchases of bad assets.

But the Obama administration, like the Bush administration, apparently wants an easier way out. The common element to the Paulson and Geithner plans is the insistence that the bad assets on banks’ books are really worth much, much more than anyone is currently willing to pay for them. In fact, their true value is so high that if they were properly priced, banks wouldn’t be in trouble.

And so the plan is to use taxpayer funds to drive the prices of bad assets up to “fair” levels. Mr. Paulson proposed having the government buy the assets directly. Mr. Geithner instead proposes a complicated scheme in which the government lends money to private investors, who then use the money to buy the stuff. The idea, says Mr. Obama’s top economic adviser, is to use “the expertise of the market” to set the value of toxic assets.

But the Geithner scheme would offer a one-way bet: if asset values go up, the investors profit, but if they go down, the investors can walk away from their debt. So this isn’t really about letting markets work. It’s just an indirect, disguised way to subsidize purchases of bad assets.

In the meantime Geithner, who is having his own problem with public perception, after denying he head knowledge of the AIG bonuses, when in reality it has been shown he did know and that was before they handed over $30 billion to AOG in the latest bailout, has a piece out via Wall Street Journal pitching his plan.

Atrios, whom is rarely quoted here, has the quote of the day:

Actually, it's worse than that, it's "If Timmeh is wrong about the ponies in Big Shitpile then it's Mad Max for all of us."

Here is the deal folks, bad assets are bad assets, spiking the value with some dog and pony show isn't going to make those assets any better.

Michael Shedlock calls this a confidence game and that is exactly what it is.

There have been a lot of intelligent comments by Yves Smith, CalculatedRisk, and Krugman. So far no one has said what I think the plan is: a gigantic confidence game.

This is similar in nature to fraudulent schemes that promise "what's inside the bag is worth $1 million, unless you open the bag".

In this case there may be a few "good bags" similar in nature to salting the mine schemes, but for the most part everyone knows what's in the bag is toxic garbage. What really makes no sense whatsoever is why the government would risk 97% with shared "upside" instead of just buying it all.

Somehow, Geithner (and Obama by implication) believes that igniting a bidding war between hedge funds and private equity over a bag of cow manure will inspire confidence that there's gold in the bag. Such insanity cannot possibly work, which means it won't.

Sunday, March 22, 2009

'Punch Drunk' Obama

Steve Kroft, in a "60 Minutes" interview with Barack Obama asked the President if he was "punch drunk."

The reason for the question was because Obama was laughing and chuckling when discussing America's economy.

President Barack Obama said he believes the global financial system remains at risk of implosion with the failure of Citigroup or AIG, touching off “an even more destructive recession and potentially depression.”

His remarks came in a “60 Minutes” interview in which he was pressed by an incredulous Steve Kroft for laughing and chuckling several times while discussing the perilous state of the world’s economy.

“You're sitting here. And you're— you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people going to look at this and say, ‘I mean, he's sitting there just making jokes about money—’ How do you deal with— I mean: explain. . .” Kroft asks at one point.

“Are you punch-drunk?” Kroft says.

“No, no. There's gotta be a little gallows humor to get you through the day,” Obama says, with a laugh.

Anyone feeling warm and fuzzy right about now?

Via The Politico.