Monday, April 2, 2012

KAMALA HARRIS PUSHES THE MEXICAN FASCIST SUPREMACY AGENDA WITH THE SUPREME COURT

DESPITE THE FACT THAT CA ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMALA HARRIS HAS DECLARED THAT NEARLY HALF THE MURDERS IN MEXIFORNIA ARE BY MEXICAN GANGS, AND THAT THE STATE of CA PUTS OUT $20 BILLION PER YEAR IN WELFARE TO ILLEGALS, SHE IS PUSHING THE LA RAZA SUPREMACY AGENDA WITH THE SUPREME COURT!

DEMS - THE PARTY FOR LA RAZA ILLEGALS - THE LEGALS STILL GET THE BILLS FOR THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE AND CRIME TIDAL WAVE!

 ON LA RAZA KAMALA HARRIS:

WHEN HARRIS WAS DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF LA RAZA INFESTED SAN FRANCISCO, SHE MADE SURE THE MEXICAN CRIMINALS WERE NOT DEPORTED! LA RAZA SUPREMACY REIGNS IN S.F. DUE TO LA RAZA FEINSTIEN, BOXER AND PELOSI, ALL ADVCOATES OF OPEN BORDERS, NO E-VERIFY, NO I.D. REQUIRED OF ILLEGALS VOTING, AND OBAMA'S AMNESTY or at least CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT!

FEINSTEIN, ONE OF THE MOST CORRUPT POLITICIANS IN AMERICAN HISTORY, HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER S.F HOTEL, ONLY MILES FROM HER $16 MILLION DOLLAR WAR PROFITEER'S MANSION.

BARONESS PELOSI HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER ST. HELENA, NAPA WINERY. AND YES, OBAMA AND PELOSI DID LIE THAT ILLEGALS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN OBAMAcare! PELOSI HAS LONG VOWED THE MEX WALL WILL NEVER BE BUILT. OBAMA HAS SABOTAGED EVERY FOOT OF IT AND TURNED DHS INTO DEPT. of HOMELAND SECURITY = PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP!

BOXER WAS REELECTED WITH THE VOTES OF ILLEGALS BY OFFERING THEM OBAMA'S LA RAZA AGENDA OF DREAM ACTS, OBAMAcare, NO E-VERIFY, OPEN BORDERS, NO I.D. REQUIRED OF ILLEGALS VOTING, NO ENGLISH ONLY (LA RAZA LOATHES THE GRINGO LANGUAGE AS YOU'VE PROBABLY NOTICED) AND AMNESTY OR AT LEAST CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT UNTIL THERE ARE SO MANY ILLEGALS IN OUR COUNTRY THEY'R VOTING FOR ANYTHING THEY WANT!

ON BEHALF OF THEIR BIG AG BIZ DONORS, FEINSTEIN AND BOXER HAVE NOT JUST ONCE, BUT THREE TIMES PUSHED FOR A "SPECIAL AMNESTY" FOR 1.5 MILLION ILLEGAL FARM WORKERS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED, DESPITE THE FACT THAT ONE-THIRD OF THESE WORKERS END UP ON WELFARE.

MEXIFORNIA BUTS OUT $20 BILLION IN SOCIAL SERVICES TO ILLEGALS. IF THEY DIDN'T PEOPLE LIKE FEINSTEIN AND BOXER WOULD HAVE TO PAY LIVING WAGES! NOT ONE LEGAL VOTED FOR THIS MEX WELFARE SYSTEM!

THE COUTNY OF S.F., A SANCTUARY COUNTY WHERE THE LAWS DO NOT APPLY TO ILLEGALS, PUTS OUT $400 MILLION IN WELFARE TO ILLEGALS. LOS ANGELES COUNTY, MEXICO'S ANCHOR BABY BIRTHING CENTER, PUTS OUT $600 MILLION PER YEAR! NOT ONE LEGAL VOTED FOR THIS.

DEMS - PARTY of ILLEGALS AND LA RAZA SUPREMACY! IT'S ALL ABOUT KEEPING WAGES DEPRESSED FOR THEIR CORPORATE PAYMASTERS!

*

REALITY CHECK: JOE LEGAL vs JOSE ILLEGAL .... JOE LEGAL STILL GETS THE TAX BILLS TO PAY FOR THE LA RAZA WELFARE AND CRIME TIDAL WAVE! MORE THAN 2,000 CALIFORNIANS HAVE BEEN MURDERED BY ILLEGALS THAT FLED BACK OVER THE BORDER TO AVOID PROSECUTION. WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE?!?


http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2012/03/assualt-on-american-worker-joe-legal-vs.html

*

California Sides with Illegal Aliens before the Supreme Court

Last week, the State of California and several other states, filed a brief with the United States Supreme Court urging the Court to strike down Arizona's immigration enforcement law, SB 1070. (California Amicus Brief) The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the Obama Administration's challenge to SB 1070 April 25th and in anticipation, dozens of interested parties, organizations, and even foreign governments have filed briefs both in support and opposition to the law. The other states joining California in the amicus brief are New York, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
The core of California's objection to SB 1070 rests on the notion that through SB 1070, Arizona has impermissibly adopted its own removal policy — a power CA argues is "exclusively [a] federal function." (CA Brief at 3) While states have no authority to remove (deport) illegal aliens (nor is the state of Arizona claiming such authority), California argues that the enforcement activities Arizona is encouraging through SB 1070 – the identification, apprehension, and detention of illegal aliens – are by definition part of the removal process. Thus, Arizona has adopted its own "removal policy."
California then argues that Arizona's removal policy, as embodied by SB 1070, is impermissible because it conflicts with the federal removal "scheme." (Id.) Federal law, California asserts, has long recognized that immigration enforcement has "uniquely devastating effects" on "people who are otherwise law abiding and productive members of society." (Id.) Describing SB 1070 an "overzealous and indiscriminate attempt" to enforce the law, California argues that Arizona's law conflicts with "federal removal policy" in two ways. (CA Brief at 3, 9). First, California claims that SB 1070 requires state and local officers to engage in the arrest and detention of illegal aliens without any federal oversight. Second, California argues that SB 1070 supplants the Executive Branch's discretion over the administration of the removal process and thus "interferes with the achievement of the federal priorities Congress has set." (CA Brief at 3-4) California then concludes that because SB 1070 conflicts with this federal removal scheme, it is preempted by federal law.
Through this argument, however, California ignores the simple fact that nothing in SB 1070 supplants the authority of the federal government to decide whether to remove an illegal alien. To the contrary, SB 1070 merely requires Arizona officers to verify immigration status in certain circumstances and report it to the federal government. The law also creates state offenses that mirror already existing federal laws.
California's argument also ignores that numerous federal statutes actually authorize and encourage local officers to identify, apprehend, and detain illegal aliens. For example, Section 1373(c) of the United States Code requires that the federal government respond to all local inquiries about immigration status. Section 1373(a)-(b) prohibits laws that interfere with the sharing of immigration data between local governments and the federal government. And, Section 1357(g)(10) provides that local law enforcement does not need to enter into an agreement with the federal government to cooperate in the enforcement of immigration laws. (See also INA § 287(g)(10))
In addition, California ignores that the Administration itself will soon require all jurisdictions – through the implementation of Secure Communities – to identify illegal aliens booked at jails (before conviction). And, through regulations, the Administration also requires that local jurisdictions detain illegal aliens if federal immigration officers place a hold on them (called a detainer). (See 8 C.F.R. 287.7(d))
Finally, California's argument ignores a plethora of case law that confirms that state and local authorities have the inherent or general enforcement authority to assist in the enforcement of immigration laws. See e.g. United States v. Salinas-Calderon (10th Cir. 1982); United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez (10th Cir. 1999).
SB 1070 therefore does nothing more than further Congressional intent that local jurisdictions participate in the identification, apprehension, and detention of illegal aliens. Moreover, because Congress has encouraged, and in some cases required, local jurisdictions to engage in these activities, California cannot reasonably argue that they are equal to the removal of illegal aliens — a power Congress has reserved for the federal government.

OBAMA'S LEGACY of BROKEN PROMISES, "CHANGE" SCAMS, LA RAZA SUPREMACY AND BANKSTER DONOR BAILOUTS - Will He Be the Most Corrupt President In History?




HE IS THE BANKSTER-BOUGHT PRESIDENT FOR THE 1%... HIS PARTY BASE IS THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA “THE RACE” . FOR LA RAZA OBAMA HAS SABOTAGED OUR BORDER SECURITY, SABOTAGED E-VERIFY TO ASSURE ILLEGALS OF OUR JOBS, SUED 4 AMERICAN STATES ON BEHALF OF LA RAZA, SABOTAGED VOTING I.D. REQUIREMENTS TO EASE ILLEGALS INTO OUR VOTING BOOTHS!

OBAMA HAS PROMISED HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTERS NO PRISON TIME, AND HIS LA RAZA PARTY BASE AMNESTY or at least continued NON-ENFORCEMENT!





Obama’s Achilles: Broken Promise of Bipartisanship May Sink Reelection

Remember “A Chicken in Every Pot” or “No New Taxes”? This president came in vowing a new day of cooperation in Washington. Why that pledge could cost him the election.

by Michael Medved | April 1, 2012 4:45 AM EDT

In the last 100 years, every U.S. president who lost his bid for a second term did so because he abandoned his principal promise to the American people. If Republicans can persuade the public that Barack Obama similarly shattered the pledge at the very core of his presidency, they will succeed in denying him the new lease on the White House he insists he deserves.


President Barack Obama greets supporters as he arrives at McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas, Wednesday, March 21, 2012., Isaac Brekken / AP Photo

Four elected chief executives in the past century failed in their reelection campaigns—and each of them flopped by landslide margins. For William Howard Taft in 1912, Herbert Hoover in 1932, Jimmy Carter in 1980, and George H.W. Bush in 1992, broken promises doomed their chances for another four-year term.

Taft, Theodore Roosevelt’s hand-picked successor, based his first presidential campaign on guarantees that he would continue the popular policies of his ebullient predecessor, but voters in 1912 knew they’d been betrayed because TR himself came out of retirement to tell them so! Roosevelt not only challenged Taft for re-nomination but ultimately conducted his third-party “Bull Moose” campaign, handing victory to Democrat Woodrow Wilson and pushing the incumbent to a paltry 23 percent of the popular vote.

In 1928, Commerce Secretary Herbert Hoover ran as the prosperity candidate, deploying the sonorous slogan, “A Chicken in Every Pot, a Car in Every Garage.” The Great Depression smashed his optimistic assurances and helped FDR carry 42 of 48 states.

After the sleaze and polarization of the Nixon administration, a nation weary of Watergate turned to a youthful, deeply religious Georgia governor who titled his campaign autobiography Why Not the Best? As a former officer on nuclear submarines, Jimmy Carter ran as a sure-handed technocrat who offered the explicit promise of “a government as good as its people.” After three years of economic meltdown, a seemingly endless hostage crisis, and self-defeating talk of malaise, that cheerful vow sounded laughably quaint, and Carter fell by 8.4 million votes to Ronald Reagan.

Finally, in 1988 Vice President George H.W. Bush escaped the nagging “wimp” factor and electrified the GOP convention with an unequivocal declaration meant to evoke the steely resolve of Clint Eastwood. “Read my lips,” he snarled. “No new taxes!” Violating that well-publicized oath with a sharp increase in marginal tax rates literally wrecked his presidency: producing a primary challenge from Pat Buchanan, a formidable third-party candidacy by Ross Perot, and a lopsided November win for the young governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton.

If Republicans want to see history repeat itself in 2012, with a once-popular incumbent turned out of office by a deeply disillusioned electorate, they must persuade the public that Barack Obama has continued the big-loser pattern of broken promises. That means reminding voters of the most important theme associated with his rise to power: the pledge to unify the nation and put aside petty, partisan differences. Whatever happens with the unemployment rate or gas prices, the president’s failure to live up to these assurances remains both painful and apparent.

In the speech that made him a national figure overnight, Illinois Senator Barack Obama gave the keynote address to the Democratic National Convention in 2004. “Alongside our famous individualism, there’s another ingredient in the American saga. A belief that we are connected as one people,” he intoned. “The pundits like to slice and dice our country into red states and blue states; red states for Republicans, blue states for Democrats. But I’ve got news for them…. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.”

In his Inaugural Address four-and-a-half years later, the newly elected president sounded strikingly similar themes. “On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord. On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics.”

Can even the most devoted Obama admirer plausibly claim that this new day of harmony and cooperation actually dawned in Washington?

Low approval ratings for all federal officials suggest that Americans recognize that the “conflict and discord” have become more bitter than ever before and that the president, despite his soaring rhetoric, plays a prominent part in the squabbling. He may attempt to blame conservatives exclusively for the small-minded gamesmanship, but he’s compiled his own long record of below-the-belt, straw-man attacks, sliming his opponents as greedy and corrupt, claiming that they place plutocrats and corporate power above the public welfare.

Instead of the fresh era of “unity of purpose,” President Obama must acknowledge that his signature legislative achievement, health-care reform, passed both houses of Congress without a single Republican vote, and led elected officials in the majority of states to challenge its constitutionality before the Supreme Court.

Yet even more tragically than his crushed hope of overcoming partisanship, Barack Obama has disappointed the public in the historic mission of transcending racial divisions. It may have been unrealistic to expect that election of the first black president would heal four centuries of racial strife, but that didn’t stop millions from rallying to banners of hope and to the intoxicating chant of “Yes We Can!”

Can even the most devoted Obama admirer plausibly claim that a new day of harmony and cooperation actually dawned in Washington?

In that context, no matter how eloquently the president speaks about the Trayvon Martin tragedy, the incident still serves to undermine the notion of his transformative leadership: racism remains a powerful, even paralyzing, presence in American life. To an embarrassing extent, Obama himself remains a racially divisive rather than unifying figure. According to March tracking polls by the Gallup organization, 85 percent of blacks approve of Obama’s job performance, but only 39 percent of whites do—an unprecedented difference of more than two-to-one.

When challenging Barack Obama’s claim on a second term, the Republicans should remind the American people why we entrusted him with the presidency in the first place. Beyond any specific expectations about jobs, taxes, and health care, the public welcomed the prospect of an end to the bickering with a new politics of common-sense reform.

The GOP candidate can expose the president’s spoiled promise by renewing the same pledge more credibly, and demonstrating in the campaign itself the coalition-building, pragmatism, and bipartisanship the people expected from the incumbent. Reinvigorated hope for unity and cooperation provides the best chance to highlight this president’s most fatal failure and to add his name to the melancholy list of discredited one-termers who broke faith with the American people.

HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTER DONORS MADE MORE MONEY DURING THE FIRST TWO YEARS UNDER OBAMA, THAN THEY DID ALL EIGHT UNDER BUSH!

NOT ONE HAS GONE TO PRISON, EVEN HAS HUNDREDS OF OCCUPY WALL ST PROTESTORS HAVE BEEN ARRESTED.

IN FACT, THE SHIFT THIS NATION’S ECONOMY DEEPER INTO THE POCKETS OF THE RICH HAS CONTINUED UNABATED UNDER OBAMA!

HE IS THE 1% PRESIDENT, AND IF YOU’RE A BANKSTER, OR STRONG TIE$ TO BANKSTERS, OR A LA RAZA PARTY MEMBER, YOU CAN COME WORK FOR THE BANKSTER-OWNED PRESIDENT!


“This return of corporate power comes in part because the revolving door between government influence and corporate paydays has begun to turn anew. Even President Obama has submitted to its centrifugal force. His new White House chief of staff, William Daley, comes directly from J.P. Morgan Chase. Daley scored that lucrative gig after serving as commerce secretary during Bill Clinton's second term.”


TWO YEARS OF OBAMA:
Fifteen million Americans are out of work, thanks in part to reckless Wall Street activities. Yet corporate profits are at record highs, companies are sitting on vast amounts of cash, and, after a tough two years, business interests are again atop the Washington power structure.

THE U.S. CHAMBER of COMMERCE, LIKE OBAMA, ADVOCATES NO BORDERS WITH MEXICO, NO E-VERIFY, AND AMNESTY, OR AT LEAST CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT. IT’S ALL ABOUT KEEPING WAGES DEPRESSED!

Big business is back in business

By Dana Milbank
Wednesday, January 12, 2011;

There was a festive atmosphere at U.S. Chamber of Commerce headquarters Tuesday morning as the corporate lobby delivered its annual "State of American Business" address.

Margaret Spellings, the former Bush Cabinet officer who cashed outand joined the business group, made the introductions, telling members that despite "the worst economic climate since the Great Depression," the chamber had scored a "number of legislative victories, tremendous success in the elections and another strong year of fundraising."

Thanks to the chamber, Spellings boasted, "the American business community always has a seat at the table."

A seat? Business has just about all the seats at the table - and more on back order.

Fifteen million Americans are out of work, thanks in part to reckless Wall Street activities. Yet corporate profits are at record highs, companies are sitting on vast amounts of cash, and, after a tough two years, business interests are again atop the Washington power structure.

This return of corporate power comes in part because the revolving door between government influence and corporate paydays has begun to turn anew. Even President Obama has submitted to its centrifugal force. His new White House chief of staff, William Daley, comes directly from J.P. Morgan Chase. Daley scored that lucrative gig after serving as commerce secretary during Bill Clinton's second term.

As Daley came in through the revolving door, OMB Director Peter Orszaghad just gone out. He cashed out to become a vice chairman of Citigroup, where his government expertise should be worth seven figures annually. One of Orszag's partners on Obama's economics team, Larry Summers, is returning to Harvard - but that won't stop him from delivering the keynote addressto the Global Hedge Fund Summit in Bermuda.

The thrill of cashing out has been endorsed by Obama himself. Explaining press secretary Robert Gibbs's decision to depart, the president told the New York Times: "He's had a six-year stretch now where basically he's been going 24/7 with relatively modest pay." The poor Gibbs, who had been earning a "modest" $172,200 a year, is now contemplating making much more than that representing corporate clients.

At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, corporate interests are becoming increasingly brazen. Lobbyists have snagged key staff jobs in the new GOP House leadership and chief-of-staff positions in many new lawmakers' offices. On the day John Boehner was elected speaker last week, lobbyists were literally strutting their stuff on the House floor.

Bob Livingston, the former Republican congressman, was buttonholing members; he's the head of a lobbying firm that advertises Livingston as "the only practicing former chairman of the House Appropriations Committee." Also on the floor, Marty Russo, the longtime Democratic congressman who had just stepped down as head of the lobbying giant Cassidy and Associates, shook Boehner's hand.

A House Republican source says Livingston left when informed that, as a registered lobbyist, he was not allowed to be on the House floor.

Such behavior by lobbyists - both registered lobbyists and unregistered corporate "advisers" - has become more common. At last year's State of the Union address, Post congressional correspondent Paul Kane observed, on the House floor, former members Mike Ferguson, who runs a lobbying firm, and Jim Greenwood, CEO of the biotech lobby. Kane has also spotted former senator Bill Cohen, who runs a big lobbying and consulting firm, on the Senate floor; former representative Sherry Boehlert, now a lobbyist, in the Speaker's Lobby off the House floor; and lawmaker-turned-lobbyist Al Wynn entertaining clients in the members' dining room.

The Center for Responsive Politics has identified more than 340 former members of Congress, and 3,665 former staffers, in lobbying or related fields. The few rules to slow the revolving door do little, both because of the routine granting of waivers and because of loose registration requirements for lobbying.

All of this gave the business lobby much to celebrate as chamber members discussed the State of American Business over mini-muffins and banana bread Tuesday morning. Tom Donohue, the chamber's white-maned CEO, hailed the "new tone coming from the White House" since the elections - which the chamber influenced by spending tens of millions of dollars from donors kept anonymous, Donohue explained, so opponents couldn't "demagogue them." Donohue said he's "absolutely convinced" that the new business-friendly White House will move his way on regulation and trade.

A reporter asked Donohue for a suggestion of what corporate America, with its record profits, should do to put people back to work. "I got to think about this for a minute," Donohue said, then added: "I think the most important thing to tell a company is to return a reasonable return to their investors."

*
NEW YORK TIMES

January 10, 2010

Op-Ed Columnist

The Other Plot to Wreck America


THERE may not be a person in America without a strong opinion about what coulda, shoulda been done to prevent the underwear bomber from boarding that Christmas flight to Detroit. In the years since 9/11, we’ve all become counterterrorists. But in the 16 months since that other calamity in downtown New York — the crash precipitated by the 9/15 failure of Lehman Brothers — most of us are still ignorant about what Warren Buffett called the “financial weapons of mass destruction”that wrecked our economy. Fluent as we are in Al Qaeda and body scanners, when it comes to synthetic C.D.O.’s and credit-default swaps, not so much.

What we don’t know will hurt us, and quite possibly on a more devastating scale than any Qaeda attack. Americans must be told the full story of how Wall Street gamed and inflated the housing bubble, made out like bandits, and then left millions of households in ruin. Without that reckoning, there will be no public clamor for serious reform of a financial system that was as cunningly breached as airline security at the Amsterdam airport. And without reform, another massive attack on our economic security is guaranteed. Now that it can count on government bailouts, Wall Street has more incentive than ever to pump up its risks — secure that it can keep the bonanzas while we get stuck with the losses.

The window for change is rapidly closing. Health care, Afghanistan and the terrorism panic may have exhausted Washington’s already limited capacity for heavy lifting, especially in an election year. The White House’s chief economic hand, Lawrence Summers, has repeatedly announced that “everybody agrees that the recession is over” — which is technically true from an economist’s perspective and certainly true on Wall Street, where bailed-out banks are reporting record profits and bonuses. The contrary voices of Americans who have lost pay, jobs, homes and savings are either patronized or drowned out entirely by a political system where the banking lobby rules in both parties and the revolving door between finance and government never stops spinning.

It’s against this backdrop that this week’s long-awaited initial public hearings of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission are so critical. This is the bipartisan panel that Congress mandated last spring to investigate the still murky story of what happened in the meltdown. Phil Angelides, the former California treasurer who is the inquiry’s chairman, told me in interviews late last year that he has been busy deploying a tough investigative staff and will not allow the proceedings to devolve into a typical blue-ribbon Beltway exercise in toothless bloviation.

He wants to examine the financial sector’s“greed, stupidity, hubris and outright corruption” — from traders on the ground to the board room. “It’s important that we deliver new information,” he said. “We can’t just rehash what we’ve known to date.” He understands that if he fails to make news or to tell the story in a way that is comprehensible and compelling enough to arouse Americans to demand action, Wall Street and Washington will both keep moving on, unchallenged and unchastened.

Angelides gets it. But he has a tough act to follow: Ferdinand Pecora, the legendary prosecutor who served as chief counsel to the Senate committee that investigated the 1929 crash as F.D.R. took office. Pecora was a master of detail and drama. He riveted America even without the aid of television. His investigation led to indictments, jail sentences and, ultimately, key New Deal reforms — the creation of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Glass-Steagall Act, designed to prevent the formation of banks too big to fail.

As it happened, a major Pecora target was the chief executive of National City Bank, the institution that would grow up to be Citigroup. Among other transgressions, National City had repackaged bad Latin American debt as new securities that it then sold to easily suckered investors during the frenzied 1920s boom. Once disaster struck, the bank’s executives helped themselves to millions of dollars in interest-free loans. Yet their own employees had to keep ponying up salary deductions for decimated National City stock purchased at a heady precrash price.

Trade bad Latin American debt for bad mortgage debt, and you have a partial portrait of Citigroup at the height of the housing bubble. The reckless Citi executives of our day may not have given themselves interest-free loans, but they often walked away with the short-term, illusionary profits while their employees were left with shredded jobs and 401(k)’s. Among those Citi executives was Robert Rubin, who, as the Clinton Treasury secretary, helped repeal the last vestiges of Glass-Steagall after years of Wall Street assault. Somewhere Pecora is turning in his grave

Rubin has never apologized, let alone been held accountable. But he’s hardly alone. Even after all the country has gone through, the titans who fueled the bubble are heedless. In last Sunday’s Times, Sandy Weill, the former chief executive who built Citigroup (and recruited Rubin to its ranks), gave a remarkable interview to Katrina Brooker blaming his own hand-picked successor, Charles Prince, for his bank’s implosion. Weill said he preferred to be remembered for his philanthropy. Good luck with that.

Among his causes is Carnegie Hall, where he is chairman of the board. To see how far American capitalism has fallen, contrast Weill with the giant who built Carnegie Hall. Not only is Andrew Carnegie remembered for far more epic and generous philanthropy than Weill’s — some 1,600 public libraries, just for starters — but also for creating a steel empire that actually helped build America’s industrial infrastructure in the late 19th century. At Citi, Weill built little more than a bloated gambling casino. As Paul Volcker, the regrettably powerless chairman of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, said recently, there is not “one shred of neutral evidence”that any financial innovation of the past 20 years has led to economic growth. Citi, that “innovative” banking supermarket, destroyed far more wealth than Weill can or will ever give away.

Even now — despite its near-death experience, despite the departures of Weill, Prince and Rubin — Citi remains as imperious as it was before 9/15. Its current chairman, Richard Parsons, was one of three executives (along with Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs and John Mack of Morgan Stanley) who failed to show up at the mid-December White House meeting where President Obama implored bankers to increase lending. (The trio blamed fog for forcing them to participate by speakerphone, but the weather hadn’t grounded their peers or Amtrak.) Last week, ABC World News was also stiffed by Citi, which refused to answer questions about its latest round of outrageous credit card rate increases and instead e-mailed a statement blaming its customers for “not paying back their loans.” This from a bank that still owes taxpayers $25 billion of its $45 billion handout!

If Citi, among the most egregious of Wall Street reprobates, feels it can get away with business as usual, it’s because it fears no retribution. And it got more good news last week. Now that Chris Dodd is vacating the Senate, his chairmanship of the Banking Committee may fall next year to Tim Johnson of South Dakota, home to Citi’s credit card operation. Johnson was the only Senate Democrat to vote against Congress’s recent bill policing credit card abuses.

Though bad history shows every sign of repeating itself on Wall Street, it will take a near-miracle for Angelides to repeat Pecora’s triumph. Our zoo of financial skullduggery is far more complex, with many more moving pieces, than that of the 1920s. The new inquiry does have subpoena power, but its entire budget, a mere $8 million, doesn’t even match the lobbying expenditures for just three banks (Citi, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America) in the first nine months of 2009. The firms under scrutiny can pay for as many lawyers as they need to stall between now and Dec. 15, deadline day for the commission’s report.

More daunting still is the inquiry’s duty to reach into high places in the public sector as well as the private. The mystery of exactly what happened as TARP fell into place in the fateful fall of 2008 thickens by the day — especially the behind-closed-door machinations surrounding the government rescue of A.I.G. and its counterparties. Last week, a Republican congressman, Darrell Issa of California, released e-mail showing that officials at the New York Fed, then led by Timothy Geithner, pressured A.I.G. to delay disclosing to the S.E.C. and the public the details on the billions of bailout dollars it was funneling to its trading partners. In this backdoor rescue, taxpayers unknowingly awarded banks like Goldman 100 cents on the dollar for their bets on mortgage-backed securities.

Why was our money used to make these high-flying gamblers whole while ordinary Americans received no such beneficence? Nothing less than complete transparency will connect the dots. Among the big-name witnesses that the Angelides commission has called for next week is Goldman’s Blankfein. Geithner, Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke should be next.

If they all skate away yet again by deflecting blame or mouthing pro forma mea culpas, it will be a sign that this inquiry, like so many other promises of reform since 9/15, is likely to leave Wall Street’s status quo largely intact. That’s the ticking-bomb scenario that truly imperils us all.

*
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/04/18/112346/obama-ran-against-bush-but-now.html

Posted on Mon, Apr. 18, 2011

Obama ran against Bush, but now governs like him

Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: April 19, 2011 09:15:43 PM

WASHINGTON — He ran as the anti-Bush.

Silver-tongued, not tongue-tied. A team player on the world stage, not a lone cowboy. A man who'd put a stop to reckless Bush policies at home and abroad. In short, Barack Obama represented Change.

Well, that was then. Now, on one major policy after another, President Barack Obama seems to be morphing into George W. Bush.

On the nation's finances, the man who once ripped Bush as a failed leader for seeking to raise the nation's debt ceiling now wants to do it himself.

On terrorism, he criticized Bush for sending suspected terrorists to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and denying them access to U.S. civilian courts. Now he says he'll do the same.

On taxes, he called the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy wrong, and lately began calling again to end them. But in December he signed a deal with Republicans to extend them for two years, and recently he called the entire tax cut package good for the country.

And on war, as a candidate he said that the president didn't have authority to unilaterally attack a country that didn't pose an imminent threat to the U.S., and even then the president should always seek the informed consent of Congress. Last month, without a vote in Congress, he attacked Libya, which didn't threaten the U.S.

Big differences remain between Obama and Bush, to be sure. His two nominees to the Supreme Court differ vastly from Bush's picks. Obama does want to end the tax cuts for the wealthy. He also pushed through a massive overhaul of the nation's health insurance system.

Yet even on health insurance, his stand wasn't so much a reversal of Bush's approach as an escalation. Bush also pushed through a massive expansion of Medicare by adding a costly prescription drug benefit — at the time, the biggest expansion of a federal entitlement since Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. Indeed, some of the differences between the two presidents are measured in gray, not black and white as once seemed the case.

Some of the changes in Obama can be attributed to the passion of campaign rhetoric giving way to the realities of governing, analysts say.

"He is looking less like a candidate and more like a president," said Dan Schnur, the director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California. "He has discovered that it's much easier to make promises on the campaign trail than it is to keep them as president."

At the same time, some of the surprising continuity of Bush-era policies can be tied to the way Bush and events set the nation's course, particularly on foreign policy.

"Morphing into Bush was not a willful act," said Aaron David Miller, a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "It was acquiescence to the policies his predecessor shaped and the cruel realities that Obama inherited."

For example, Obama found he couldn't easily close the prison at Guantanamo Bay because he couldn't find a place, abroad or at home, willing to take all the terrorist suspects held there.

"Bush created, on the military and security side, new realities from which no successor, Democrat or Republican, could depart, "Miller said. "It's like turning around an aircraft carrier. It cannot happen quickly."

Among the ways Obama has reversed his earlier promises and adopted, extended or echoed Bush policies:

DEBT

In 2006, Bush had cut taxes, gone to war, and expanded Medicare, and increased the national debt from $5.6 trillion to $8.2 trillion. He needed approval from Congress to raise the ceiling for debt to $9 trillion.

The Senate approved the increase by a narrow vote of 52-48.

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., voted no.

"Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally," Obama said in 2006. "Leadership means that 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership."

Now Obama's on the other side. He's increased the national debt to $14 trillion, and needs Congress to approve more debt. Moreover, Obama's aides now say that congressional meddling to use that needed vote to wrangle budget concessions from the White House would be inappropriate and risk financial Armageddon.

What about Obama's own vote against the president in a similar situation? A mistake, the White House said.

TAXES

As a senator and presidential candidate, Obama opposed extending the Bush tax cuts on incomes greater than $250,000 a year past their expiration on Dec., 31, 2009.

In 2007, he said he was for "rolling back the Bush tax cuts on the top 1 percent of people who don't need it." In a 2008 ad, he said, "Instead of extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest, I'll focus on you."

As president, Obama proposed letting those tax cuts expire as scheduled, while also proposing to make permanent the Bush tax cuts for incomes of less than $250,000.

But he didn't get Congress to approve that. When the issue came to a head last December, Republicans insisted on extending all of the tax cuts or none, and Obama went along lest the tax cuts on incomes below $250,000 expire even briefly. His final deal with the Congress also added a one-year cut in the payroll tax for Medicare and Social Security.

"What all of us care about is growing the American economy and creating jobs for the American people," Obama said. "Taken as a whole, that's what this package of tax relief is going to do. It's a good deal for the American people."

He said again last week that he wants to let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire, this time on Dec. 31, 2012.

TERRORISTS

As a presidential candidate, Obama vowed a broad reversal of Bush's policies toward suspected terrorists.

Most pointedly, he said he'd close the prison in Cuba and try suspected terrorists in civilian courts, not in military tribunals.

"I have faith in America's courts," he said in a 2007 speech. "As president, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions. Our Constitution and our Uniform Code of Military Justice provide a framework for dealing with the terrorists."

He ran into a torrent of opposition, however. Members of Congress balked at transferring suspected terrorists to U.S. prisons. New Yorkers balked when his administration said it would try accused 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court in lower Manhattan.

Last month, he changed course, saying he'd keep Guantanamo Bay open, and would try Mohammed before a military court.

The reversal, said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., the chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, "is yet another vindication of President Bush's detention policies by the Obama administration."

Echoing Bush, Obama's also asserted that he has the power to hold suspected terrorists without charges or trial, and that he has the power to kill U.S. citizens abroad if his government considers them a terrorist threat.

WAR POWERS

During his campaign, Obama signaled that he'd be far more circumspect than Bush was in using military power. He did say he'd send more troops to Afghanistan, which he's done, and that he'd attack al Qaida terrorists in Pakistan, which he's also done.

But he opposed the Iraq war from the start, and said he didn't think the president should wage war for humanitarian purposes or act without congressional approval, absent an imminent threat to the U.S.

"The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation," he told The Boston Globe in 2007.

"In instances of self-defense, the president would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action."

On March 19, the U.S. attacked Libya on humanitarian grounds, absent any threat to the U.S. and without approval from Congress.

ORGY OF GREED… Wall Street Celebrates Victory Over Their Crimes on Americans! AND NO ONE SERVES THIS GREED MORE THAN BARACK OBAMA!

*
“On the other side of the social divide is an uninhibited orgy of greed, documented most recently by a Wednesday story in the New York Times (“Signs of Swagger, Wallets out, Wall Street Celebrates.”
Thanksgiving in America

US corporations shatter profit records

25 November 2010

US corporations took in $1.659 trillion in the third quarter, breaking records going back 60 years, according to a Commerce Department report released Tuesday. It was the seventh consecutive quarter of profit growth at “some of the fastest rates in history” according to the New York Times.

If any more proof were needed, the third quarter profit record exposes the lie promoted by Democrats and Republicans alike that only the “free market” and private businesses can reverse the nation’s 9.6 percent unemployment rate. The corporations and banks are sitting on a cash horde in the trillions of dollars. This money is not being used to hire workers, but to line the pockets of the executives and top shareholders.

The profit bonanza that lasted from July through September eclipsed the old record of $1.655 trillion established in the third quarter of 2006—just as the money-mad speculation of the financial elite was hurtling the US and world economy toward the precipice of its worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

The resulting financial crisis, which erupted in the autumn of 2008, threatened a total collapse of the global financial system. In response, the governments of the world, led by the US, used the disaster to hand over tens of trillions in public wealth to the very finance houses that triggered the crisis. This process continues, as demonstrated by the International Monetary Fund/European Union-dictated rescue of the Irish banks this week.

The enormous profit realized by US corporations in the third quarter are only the latest indication that the Bush-Obama bailout of the financial and corporate elite has achieved its desired aim of protecting the personal fortunes of the rich:

*Annual bonuses rose by 11 percent for executives at the 450 largest US corporations last fiscal year, according to a recent survey published by the Wall Street Journal. Overall, median compensation—including salaries, bonuses, stocks, options and other incentives—rose by three percent to $7.3 million in 2009. Shareholder returns increased by 29 percent.

*An October survey by the Wall Street Journal found that employees at 35 of the biggest banks, investment banks, hedge funds, money management firms, and securities exchanges will be paid a record $144 billion in 2010.

*According to Forbes magazine, the net worth of the 400 richest Americans increased by 8 percent in 2010, to $1.37 trillion, more than the GDP of India, population 1.2 billion.

These vast fortunes have been made possible through the impoverishment of the working class, the vast majority of the population that must work in order to maintain itself.

*In 2009, 15 percent of all US households, about 50 million people, went part or all of the year without enough food to eat, according to a recent report from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). More than a third of these households, home to one million children, went without meals on a regular basis.

*A record 49.9 million US adults went without health insurance for at least part of the past year, up from 46 million in 2008, according to a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The uninsured now constitute 26.2 percent of the total adult population, more than one in four, up from 24.5 percent two years ago.

*Average annual wages for US workers fell by $457 in 2009, and the median annual wage fell by $247 to $26,261, according to recently updated data from the Social Security Administration (SSA).

*The US Census Bureau found that about 44 million Americans were living in poverty in 2009, the highest number on record and an increase of 3.8 million in one year. Nearly 19 million Americans were living in extreme poverty in 2009, defined as half of the official poverty level, an increase of 11 percent in one year.

This sampling—many similar statistics could be cited—paints a portrait of a financial oligarchy literally gorging itself at the expense of the population. Yet this reality, which permeates every aspect of life in the US, has only whetted the appetite of the elite and its political servants.

The holiday season finds the lame duck 111th Congress putting the finishing touches on two years of wealth redistribution to the rich. It is almost certain to extend Bush-era income tax cuts for the richest Americans.

On November 30, five days after the Thanksgiving holiday, unemployment benefits will expire for 1.2 million workers due to Congressional inaction. By Christmas and the New Year, this figure will swell to 2 million. The fate of these workers and the several million children who depend on them, tossed out without cash income into the worst job market in seven decades, is of little consequence to the millionaires and multi-millionaires who populate Congress.

One result of these policies is that more people than ever, including those with jobs, are forced to turn to soup kitchens, even on a day when families traditionally gather for a holiday associated with the “bountiful harvest.” Charities across the country are reporting record demand for help on Thanksgiving—a holiday established at a national level by Abraham Lincoln in 1863 to honor the material abundance of the Republic, even in the midst of the Civil War.

On the other side of the social divide is an uninhibited orgy of greed, documented most recently by a Wednesday story in the New York Times (“Signs of Swagger, Wallets out, Wall Street Celebrates.”) From cosmetic plastic surgery to high-priced art auctions, from rental properties in the Hamptons to bachelor parties that cost tens of thousands of dollars, “Wall Street’s moneyed elite are breathing easier again,”the article states.

The stranglehold over society and the economy exercised by this parasitic social layer, this modern-day aristocracy, must be broken once and for all.

Tom Eley

Wsws.org… get on their free no ads E-NEWS!

*
OBAMA'S PROMISE TO BANKSTERS: "I'm not here to punish banks!" FLOOR OF THE SENATE, STATE of the UNION MESSAGE!
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, November 12, 2007

Mortgage giants Wells Fargo and Banks of America are accused of slapping dubious fees on homeowners struggling to save their homes. With fewer new mortgages being written, these
companies appear to be leaning on these lucrative fees to stay profitable—with devastating consequences for homeowners. We’ll have that report.

“Rightly or wrongly, the bankers seem to believe that a return to business as usual is just around the corner.” PAUL KRUGMAN


NEW YORK TIMES

April 27, 2009

Op-Ed Columnist

Money for Nothing


On July 15, 2007, The New York Times published an article with the headline “The Richest of the Rich, Proud of a New Gilded Age.” The most prominently featured of the “new titans”was Sanford Weill, the former chairman of Citigroup, who insisted that he and his peers in the financial sector had earned their immense wealth through their contributions to society.

Soon after that article was printed, the financial edifice Mr. Weill took credit for helping to build collapsed, inflicting immense collateral damage in the process. Even if we manage to avoid a repeat of the Great Depression, the world economy will take years to recover from this crisis.

All of which explains why we should be disturbed by an article in Sunday’s Times reporting that pay at investment banks, after dipping last year, is soaring again — right back up to 2007 levels.

Why is this disturbing? Let me count the ways.

First, there’s no longer any reason to believe that the wizards of Wall Street actually contribute anything positive to society, let alone enough to justify those humongous paychecks.

Remember that the gilded Wall Street of 2007 was a fairly new phenomenon. From the 1930s until around 1980 banking was a staid, rather boring business that paid no better, on average, than other industries, yet kept the economy’s wheels turning.

So why did some bankers suddenly begin making vast fortunes? It was, we were told, a reward for their creativity — for financial innovation. At this point, however, it’s hard to think of any major recent financial innovations that actually aided society, as opposed to being new, improved ways to blow bubbles, evade regulations and implement de facto Ponzi schemes.

Consider a recent speech by Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, in which he tried to defend financial innovation. His examples of “good” financial innovations were (1) credit cards — not exactly a new idea; (2) overdraft protection; and (3) subprime mortgages. (I am not making this up.) These were the things for which bankers got paid the big bucks?

Still, you might argue that we have a free-market economy, and it’s up to the private sector to decide how much its employees are worth. But this brings me to my second point: Wall Street is no longer, in any real sense, part of the private sector. It’s a ward of the state, every bit as dependent on government aid as recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, a k a “welfare.”

I’m not just talking about the $600 billion or so already committed under the TARP. There are also the huge credit lines extended by the Federal Reserve; large-scale lending by Federal Home Loan Banks; the taxpayer-financed payoffs of A.I.G. contracts; the vast expansion of F.D.I.C. guarantees; and, more broadly, the implicit backing provided to every financial firm considered too big, or too strategic, to fail.

One can argue that it’s necessary to rescue Wall Street to protect the economy as a whole — and in fact I agree. But given all that taxpayer money on the line, financial firms should be acting like public utilities, not returning to the practices and paychecks of 2007.

Furthermore, paying vast sums to wheeler-dealers isn’t just outrageous; it’s dangerous. Why, after all, did bankers take such huge risks? Because success — or even the temporary appearance of success — offered such gigantic rewards: even executives who blew up their companies could and did walk away with hundreds of millions. Now we’re seeing similar rewards offered to people who can play their risky games with federal backing.

So what’s going on here? Why are paychecks heading for the stratosphere again? Claims that firms have to pay these salaries to retain their best people aren’t plausible: with employment in the financial sector plunging, where are those people going to go?

No, the real reason financial firms are paying big again is simply because they can. They’re making money again (although not as much as they claim), and why not? After all, they can borrow cheaply, thanks to all those federal guarantees, and lend at much higher rates. So it’s eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you may be regulated.

Or maybe not. There’s a palpable sense in the financial press that the storm has passed: stocks are up, the economy’s nose-dive may be leveling off, and the Obama administration will probably let the bankers off with nothing more than a few stern speeches. Rightly or wrongly, the bankers seem to believe that a return to business as usual is just around the corner.

We can only hope that our leaders prove them wrong, and carry through with real reform. In 2008, overpaid bankers taking big risks with other people’s money brought the world economy to its knees. The last thing we need is to give them a chance to do it all over again.

http://www.FAIRUS.org
Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses


BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY

Editorial Reviews

Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics.

Congressman Ron Paul says, “Every libertarian and free-market conservative needs to read Obamanomics.”And Johan Goldberg, columnist and bestselling author says, “Obamanomicsis conservative muckraking at its best and an indispensable field guide to the Obama years.”

If you’ve wondered what’s happening to America, as the federal government swallows up the financial sector, the auto industry, and healthcare, and enacts deficit exploding “stimulus packages,” this book makes it all clear—it’s a big scam. Ultimately, Obamanomics boils down to this: every time government gets bigger, somebody’s getting rich, and those somebodies are friends of Barack. This book names the names—and it will make your blood boil.

*
Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?


Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers.

Investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics. In this explosive book, Carney reveals:

* The Great Health Care Scam—Obama’s backroom deals with drug companies spell corporate profits and more government control
* The Global Warming Hoax—Obama has bought off industries with a pork-filled bill that will drain your wallet for Al Gore’s agenda
* Obama and Wall Street—“Change” means more bailouts and a heavy Goldman Sachs presence in the West Wing (including Rahm Emanuel)
* Stimulating K Street—The largest spending bill in history gave pork to the well-connected and created a feeding frenzy for lobbyists
* How the GOP needs to change its tune—drastically—to battle Obamanomics

If you’ve wondered what’s happening to our country, as the federal government swallows up the financial sector, the auto industry, and healthcare, and enacts deficit exploding “stimulus packages” that create make-work government jobs, this book makes it all clear—it’s a big scam. Ultimately, Obamanomics boils down to this: every time government gets bigger, somebody’s getting rich, and those somebodies are friends of Barack. This book names the names—and it will make your blood boil.

*
Praise for Obamanomics

“The notion that ‘big business’ is on the side of the free market is one of progressivism’s most valuable myths. It allows them to demonize corporations by day and get in bed with them by night. Obamanomics is conservative muckraking at its best. It reveals how President Obama is exploiting the big business mythology to undermine the free market and stick it to entrepreneurs, taxpayers, and consumers. It’s an indispensable field guide to the Obama years.”
—Jonha Goldberg, LA Times columnist and best-selling author

“‘Every time government gets bigger, somebody’s getting rich.’ With this astute observation, Tim Carney begins his task of laying bare the Obama administration’s corporatist governing strategy, hidden behind the president’s populist veneer. This meticulously researched book is a must-read for anyone who wants to understand how Washington really works.”
—David Freddoso, best-selling author of The Case Against Barack Obama

“Every libertarian and free-market conservative who still believes that large corporations are trusted allies in the battle for economic liberty needs to read this book, as does every well-meaning liberal who believes that expansions of the welfare-regulatory state are done to benefit the common people.”
—Congressman Ron Paul

“It’s understandable for critics to condemn President Obama for his ‘socialism.’ But as Tim Carney shows, the real situation is at once more subtle and more sinister. Obamanomics favors big business while disproportionately punishing everyone else. So-called progressives are too clueless to notice, as usual, which is why we have Tim Carney and this book.”
—Thomas E. Woods, Jr., best-selling author of Meltdown and The Politically Incorrect Guideto American History

*

· Hardcover: 256 pages

· Publisher: Regnery Press (November 30, 2009)

· Language: English

· ISBN-10: 1596986123

· ISBN-13: 978-1596986121


ARE AMAZED AT HOW UTTERLY BRAZEN THESE CORPORATE OWNED POLITICIANS ARE?


GET THIS BOOK!

Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies

by Michelle Malkin

Editorial Reviews

In her shocking new book, Malkin digs deep into the records of President Obama's staff, revealing corrupt dealings, questionable pasts, and abuses of power throughout his administration.

From the Inside Flap

The era of hope and change is dead....and it only took six months in office to kill it.

Never has an administration taken office with more inflated expectations of turning Washington around. Never have a media-anointed American Idol and his entourage fallen so fast and hard. In her latest investigative tour de force, New York Times bestselling author Michelle Malkin delivers a powerful, damning, and comprehensive indictment of the culture of corruption that surrounds Team Obama's brazen tax evaders, Wall Street cronies, petty crooks, slum lords, and business-as-usual influence peddlers. In Culture of Corruption, Malkin reveals:

* Why nepotism beneficiaries First Lady Michelle Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are Team Obama's biggest liberal hypocrites--bashing the corporate world and influence-peddling industries from which they and their relatives have benefited mightily

* What secrets the ethics-deficient members of Obama's cabinet--including Hillary Clinton--are trying to hide

* Why the Obama White House has more power-hungry, unaccountable "czars" than any other administration

* How Team Obama's first one hundred days of appointments became a litany of embarrassments as would-be appointee after would-be appointee was exposed as a tax cheat or had to withdraw for other reasons

* How Obama's old ACORN and union cronies have squandered millions of taxpayer dollars and dues money to enrich themselves and expand their power

* How Obama's Wall Street money men and corporate lobbyists are ruining the economy and helping their friends In Culture of Corruption, Michelle Malkin lays bare the Obama administration's seamy underside that the liberal media would rather keep hidden.

Product Details

Hardcover: 376 pages

Publisher: Regnery Publishing (July 27, 2009)

Language: English

ISBN-10: 1596981091

ISBN-13: 978-1596981096

*