Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    March 2025
    S M T W T F S
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    3031  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘corruption’

A dearth of honest reporting

Posted by Richard on October 27, 2008

I'm getting to it a bit late, but this October 9 column by Orson Scott Card (who is, by the way, a Democrat) deserves your attention. It discusses the source of the housing/financial crisis and the mendacity of the media in reporting it, and it's addressed to "the local daily paper — almost every local daily paper in America":

This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan? It's a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It's as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of congressmen who support increasing their budget.)

Isn't there a story here? Doesn't journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren't you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. "Housing-gate," no doubt. Or "Fannie-gate."

Instead, it was Sen. Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.

As Thomas Sowell points out in a TownHall.com essay entitled "Do Facts Matter?" (http://snipurl.com/457to): "Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury."

These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was … the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was … the Republican Party.

There's much more. Read the whole thing. The extent to which the vast majority of journalists are now promoting, protecting, cheerleading for, covering up for, and flat-out lying on behalf of Obama and the Democrats is shameful.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

The bailout has become an abomination

Posted by Richard on October 2, 2008

The Senate passed a new version of the Wall Street bailout bill designed to attract more House votes. I desperately hope this monstrous, pork-laden abomination fails. I won't expound further because Bob Bidinotto has already explained why better than I could: 

The original administration-backed "rescue package" bill was three pages.

The failed House version had ballooned to 110 pages.

Now, the Senate has expanded it to a 450+ page behemoth, laden with new pork — including provisions completely unrelated to the "financial crisis," such as help for rural schools, disaster aid, and a provision "demanding that insurance companies provide coverage for mental health treatment—such as hospitalization—on parity with physical illnesses." This will include treatment for various "addictions" (drugs? alcohol? gambling? sex? the Internet? cell phones? conservative talk radio?).

The initial five-year estimate of costs for just the mental-health provisions is $3.8 billion, but as we know about all government programs, that's just a chump-change opener. Traditional medical care has been tied, however tenuously, to actual, demonstrable physical maladies. But given the politicized and ever-expanding "mental illness" racket — in which the psychiatric industry discovers, concocts, and arbitrarily defines new "mental diseases" almost daily — this provision alone is absolutely destined to fund an explosive government-underwritten growth industry that will gobble up countless more billions of taxpayer dollars every year. But hell, why not? Now that the employees of banks, investment houses, insurance companies, and Detroit automakers are to be collecting their paychecks (directly or indirectly) from the taxpayers, I suppose it's only fitting to include shrinks. Perhaps they can help all the other groveling beggars restore their battered self-images.

Folks, it's time, more than ever, to kill this sucker. Get on the phone and send your emails to the House of Representatives, the only place where there's a prayer of stopping this statist monster.

In typical Bidinotto fashion, multiple updates follow, and you really need to read them all. The mental-health provision is only one small part of the steaming pile of crap that fills this bill: "disaster relief," rum production, mine safety, Indian tribes, railroads, auto race tracks, wool production … it goes on and on and on…

This bill is so vile and disgusting that it makes me wish the original 3-pager had passed. I can only hope that enough members of the House are equally disgusted, and this monstrosity is terminated with extreme prejudice, as it deserves. 

Bidinotto concluded: 

Now ask yourself: What in hell does all that inserted stuff have to do with a "financial rescue package" for banks and financial institutions during an alleged time of crisis?

This pork-and-special-interest-laden bailout bill is a complete fraud on and rip-off of the taxpayer, and it's high time for us to rise up and demand that the House vote it down.

I have never before used this blog to urge readers to contact their congressmen, but this bill will be a fatal game-changer for the future of America's free-market system. We have to fight this, or, starting next year, we and our kids will live in a very, very different America than the one we grew up in.

If you don't know how to contact your congressman, go here.

Then DO IT. Like, now. 

All I can say is I agree. Completely. And angrily. Do like he says — now! 

This piece of shit must die!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Roots of mortgage crisis

Posted by Richard on September 30, 2008

Ralph Reiland wrote a nice, succinct history of how we got into the current mess. The roots of the current crisis go back to Jimmy Carter's 1977 Community Reinvestment Act, which gave poor people and minorities greater access to mortgage credit by punishing lending institutions that didn't meet "equal credit" guidelines.

In 1995, the Clinton administration greatly accelerated the flood of easy home loans by expanding both the carrots and the sticks.

One of the biggest sticks in the 1995 Treasury regulations involved letting left-wing advocacy groups essentially extort large pools of mortgage money from banks (along with hefty fees for the advocacy groups) in exchange for a satisfactory CRA rating.

The most successful of these radical left-wing groups was ACORN, today better known for its widespread voter registration frauds that have led to indictments in more than a dozen states. In the 90s, ACORN made a vast fortune extorting mountains of mortgage money from banks and parceling it out in the poor and minority communities over which it exercised influence (emphasis added): 

In addition to setting the stage for giving money for mortgage payouts to ACORN and other lending amateurs, CRA authorized those organizations to collect fees from the banks for their "marketing" of loans.

"The Senate Banking Committee has estimated that, as a result of CRA, $9.5 billion so far has gone to pay for services and salaries of the nonprofit groups involved," reported Husock.

There's big money, in short, in "nonprofit" activism — and upward mobility. A guy carries a sign advocating "Change" in front of a bank and the government turns him into a salaried protester, credit analyst and dispenser of mortgage money.

"The changes came as radical 'housing rights' groups led by ACORN lobbied for such loans," reports Investor's Business Daily, regarding the Clinton era. "ACORN at the time was represented by a young public-interest lawyer in Chicago by the name of Barack Obama."

Change you can bank on.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

Bipartisan opposition killed bailout bill

Posted by Richard on September 30, 2008

The Paulson power grab, a.k.a. the $700 billion bailout bill, was defeated in the House today, 205-228. Both sides are blaming partisanship and pointing fingers. But when I look at the voting breakdown — 95 Democrats and 133 Republicans voted Nay — I see a pretty bipartisan rejection of this ugly monstrosity.

As for the man behind the massive bailout, Hank Paulson, he's nominally a Republican, but his plan appeals to Eastern country-club Republicans and establishment liberal Democrats — the big-government types who have cozy symbiotic relationships with the big-finance types on Wall Street.

In fact, Paulson has been more in tune with liberal Democrats than Republicans, and that's not a new development. About a year ago, Bob Novak pointed out that Paulson had put two strong Democrats — former associates from Goldman Sachs — into important positions at Treasury. Novak also noted that Paulson himself, although a big Bush fundraiser in 2004, had also contributed to Clinton, Schumer, Bill Bradley's presidential campaign, and the very liberal Emily's List. 

Michelle Malkin collected some statements from Paulson over the last 18 months regarding the subprime mortgage mess. They don't reflect well on his financial acumen and judgment.

Paulson isn't the only person who's been denying that there was any problem with subprime mortgages. Democrats have successfully fought off repeated efforts to reform and regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac since 2001. Here's a 3½-minute special report from Fox News summarizing the 8-year history of ignored warnings and failed efforts to stop the impending crisis. 

 

Here's an 8½-minute compilation of C-SPAN clips from a 2004 hearing into Fanny and Freddie. The regulator warns of the inevitable collapse, while Democrats denounce the critics, defend the agencies, and insist there's nothing wrong. Near the end, Franklin Raynes himself insists that Fannie's subprime mortgages have "zero risk."

 

Sen. McCain warned in 2006 about the "enormous risk" that Fannie and Freddie posed to the economy, but Democrats blocked his reform and oversight bill.

 

Plenty of people in both major parties benefited from Fannie and Freddie's house of cards. But virtually all the people enriching themselves on the inside were Democrats (Raines, Johnson, Gorelick, Mudd). And the majority of the politicians raking in big contributions and using the easy credit scam to further their political careers were Democrats (Dodd, Kerry, Obama, Clinton).

It's more than a bit unseemly for Sen. Obama (who took $105,000 from Fannie and Freddie in just 2 years) to blame the mess on the "failed Bush policies."

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Ron Paul endorsed porkmeister Young

Posted by Richard on August 26, 2008

Ron Paul turned me off some time ago, but it wasn't because of economic or fiscal issues. On those, I thought he was solid. So I'm more than a little surprised and quite disappointed that he's pimping votes for one of the GOP's sleaziest congresscritters:

Former Republican presidential contender Ron Paul has endorsed Don Young in his bid to win an 18th term in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Paul, the 72-year-old congressman from Texas whose maverick presidential bid drew wide support in Alaska, sent out a letter to his supporters here urging them to vote for Young.

“Don and I have served together in Congress for many years, and I consider him a friend,” Paul wrote in the letter. “Don has been an outspoken voice against environmental extremists over the years and has strongly opposed the types of federal regulatory overreach advocated in the name of environmentalism.”

What about Young's federal spending overreach, Ron? What about his earmark overreach? What about his support for a gas tax increase? What about his pork projects that benefit campaign contributors in another state? Are you endorsing those, too? Can you tell us what portion of the Constitution authorizes the building of bridges to nowhere, Dr. No?

As I noted last week, I've contributed to Young's primary opponent, Sean Parnell. I think I'll make another contribution to him in "honor" of Ron Paul's endorsement of Young. Please join me in contributing to Sean Parnell's campaign today. You can do so at his website, or better yet, join the Club for Growth and contribute through them.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Boxer tries to stop Coburn from delivering babies for free

Posted by Richard on August 19, 2008

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) has long been a taxpayer hero and a thorn in the side of the porkmeisters and spendthrifts. Along with Sens. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Richard Burr (R-NC), he received a 100% score on the Club for Growth's 2007 Senate RePORK Card, voting for 15 of 15 anti-pork amendments.

In fact, Coburn introduced many of these amendments. And he's a non-partisan enemy of earmarks, corrupt backscratching, and profligate spending — when Republicans controlled the Senate, he fought against his own party leadership just as hard. It was Coburn who tried to block Sen. Ted Stevens' (R-AK, Indicted) infamous "Bridge to Nowhere," prompting Stevens to threaten to resign if Coburn's amendment passed. Now that he's been indicted, maybe some of the Republicans who helped defeat the amendment wish they'd taken Stevens up on his offer.

So why is Sen. Barbara Boxer's Ethics Committee going after Coburn? Because the senator, an obstetrician who prefers to be called "Dr. Coburn," is supposedly guilty of an ethics violation for delivering the babies of poor and at-risk Oklahoma women — for free. 

Coburn used to charge just enough to cover his costs, something he'd been doing since serving in the House with its Ethics Committee's blessing. That wasn't good enough for the Senate Ethics Committee, which has taken time out from investigating sweetheart loans for senators to go after Coburn. Debra Saunders thinks she knows why:

The Senate Ethics Committee allows big-buck book deals for U.S. senators, but in a May memorandum, it told Coburn, "you are allowed to practice medicine if you provide such services for free." So he started working for nothing.


Even free wasn't good enough. After the Muskogee Regional Medical Center, where he practices, was taken over by a for-profit operation, the committee told Coburn to cease "providing any and all medical services" by June 22, pursuant to Senate Rule 37 on conflicts of interest. Coburn could practice medicine only as a solo practitioner, for a private entity that provides services for free, or for a government or tribal health facility.


What's really going on here? The senator — who prefers to be called Dr. Coburn — has been a thorn in the side of both big-spending Republicans and Democrats. He calls earmarks "the gateway drug" to Washington's spending addiction. …

The savvy observer has to conclude that because Coburn has challenged Senate pork, the Ethics Committee essentially is willing to stick it to poor pregnant women, who might benefit from a free delivery.


It's a tactical blunder. If the committee continues to push for a public reprimand, Coburn has the right to ask for a full Senate vote. While Boxer may not mind coming across as petty and vindictive, other senators might hesitate before publicly bullying a man for delivering babies for free.


As Coburn spokesman John Hart noted, there have been many stories about lawmakers, their friends and families profiting from earmarks, but "no one has ever chosen to have Dr. Coburn deliver her baby in order to sway his vote."

Regardless of what you think of his politics (and I love his fiscal conservatism, but am put off by his social conservatism), Sen. Coburn is clearly one of the cleanest members of Congress. For the Senate Ethics Committee to divert its attention from the many members larding up bills with earmarks, doing favors for campaign contributers, getting below-market loans, etc., etc., in order to go after Dr. Coburn for delivering babies for free — well, it's an outrage. 

If you're represented by a member of the Senate Ethics Committee, please let them know what you think of this clearly vindictive and outrageous harrassment of Sen. (Dr.) Coburn. The committee members are Sens. Boxer (D-CA), Pryor (D-AK), Salazar (D-CO), Cornyn (R-TX), Roberts (R-KS), and Isakson (R-GA).

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Defeat Don Young!

Posted by Richard on August 18, 2008

Rep. Don Young of Alaska is one of the House's chief porkmeisters and the poster child for why the Republican Party is no longer trusted as the party of fiscal responsibility. Along with the now-indicted Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, Young pushed through the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" earmark, and that's only one of many pieces of pork he's promoted.

Young doesn't limit himself to pork for Alaska, either. Check out the new Club for Growth PAC ad against Young revealing that he pushed through a $10 million earmark for an interchange in Florida (opposed by local officials) that benefits a Florida developer who raised $40,000 in contributions for Young. 

Young is facing a stiff primary challenge from Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, a solid fiscal conservative who, according to Pat Toomey, "led the fight for lower taxes and spending in the state legislature, and joined Gov. Sarah Palin in pushing for reform in the state."

A recent email from the Club for Growth indicates that Parnell is poised to defeat Young in the Aug. 26 primary, given sufficient funds (emphasis in original):

A new poll done for Sean Parnell in his Alaska Republican primary race against the "Bridge to Nowhere" congressman, Don Young, shows Parnell with a four point lead, but the race is within the margin of error of the poll, so we must leave nothing to chance.

Now is the last chance to get rid of Young, who recently voted with Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats to raise income taxes.

Now is the last chance to defeat Young, a three-time winner of Citizens Against Government Waste's "Porker of the Month" award.

Read what Don Young said to Republican budget cutters on the House floor last year: "This constant harping on this floor about cutting monies from other areas under the guise of balancing the budget, I say shame on you, too. I say shame on you because we are not doing the legislative process any good. . . . And like I say, those that bite me will be bitten back."

Don Young embodies what's wrong with too many Republicans today. Fortunately, we have an excellent chance to replace him with economic conservative Sean Parnell.
… 

Sean Parnell is a different kind of politician. He is the polar opposite of Don Young in both philosophy and temperament.

Before Sean Parnell became lieutenant governor in 2006, he served two terms in the state House (1993-1996) and two terms in the state Senate (1997-2000), compiling a solid record as a fiscal conservative. During that time, he fought against several attempts to raise taxes and increase spending. Sean supports permanent repeal of the Death Tax, making the tax cuts permanent, curbing government spending and drilling for more oil and gas. Sean has also taken a pledge to oppose tax increases.

Along with Alaska's extremely popular governor, Sarah Palin, Parnell is viewed as a reformer who wants to clean up Alaska's image, making it free of corruption and pork-barrel abuses.

Regardless of your party affiliation (or lack thereof), if you're disgusted by the culture of corruption in Congress, by the fiscal irresponsibility and the endless flood of pork and graft, please join me in contributing to Sean Parnell's campaign today. You can do so quickly and easily on this Club for Growth page. Nothing would send a stronger reform message to Washington than the primary defeat of Don Young.

While you're there, consider contributing to some of the other Club for Growth candidates, the Club for Growth itself, and the Club for Growth PAC (just keep scrolling). 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Good riddance to Spitzer

Posted by Richard on March 12, 2008

Ann Coulter's rabid social conservatism is far from my cup of tea, but I do admire her gift for language and ability to turn a phrase. As a fan of puns, I think "Whoreable Behavior" (title of her latest column) is by far the best Eliot Spitzer quip I've heard. And then there's this zinger: "Hillary Clinton couldn't feel worse about the Spitzer case if she were an actual New Yorker." <rimshot />

If you want to know why some of us are pleased to see Spitzer run out of office (and hopefully have his presidential ambitions dashed), read Roger Donway's 2005 article (when Spitzer was running for Governor), "Eliot Spitzer: Ayatollah General," from The New Individualist.

I'm delighted by the downfall of this arrogant, sanctimonious SOB, who never met a capitalist he didn't want to destroy and never had any scruples about how he went about it.

I initially felt sympathy for Spitzer's entire family, but then I saw a report that his wife had urged him to stick it out and not resign. So I'll save my sympathy for his poor daughters. Every day at school must be torture for them.

UPDATE (3/13): See also John Fund's column in the 3/12 Wall Street Journal, which makes it clear that Spitzer brought his arrogance, disdain for the rule of law, and unscrupulousness with him to the governor's office.  

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Porkers

Posted by Richard on November 7, 2007

Monday, the Club for Growth released its 2007 Senate RePORK Card, a scorecard of senators' votes on 15 anti-pork amendments (the House RePORK Card was released back in August). Here's all you really need to know about how sorry the Senate is: only 2 of the 15 anti-pork amendments passed, one to kill a spinach-growers' subsidy included in an Iraq war funding bill, and the other to kill Sen. Clinton's $1 million grant for a Woodstock Festival museum.

PorkbustersNonetheless, some of the scores are interesting:

  • Only three senators received a perfect score of 100% (and were present for a majority of the votes): Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jim DeMint (R-SC), and Richard Burr (R-NC).

  • The only senator receiving a 0% was Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) who voted against all 10 anti-pork amendments he was present for.

  • The average Republican score was 59%; the average Democratic score was 12%.

  • The best scoring Democrat was Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) with an impressive 80%, tying with or scoring better than thirty-nine Republican senators.

  • Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) scored a 53%; Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) scored a 7%, voting for only one amendment.

The House, meanwhile, voted last night to override the President's veto of the pork-laden Water Resources Development Act and to approve the conference report of a monstrous omnibus spending bill. The Labor-HHS-Military-VA conference report not only includes earmarks "airdropped" into the bill without a vote by either chamber, it also includes a Democratic amendment to gut an earlier reform that prohibited "backdoor" earmarks. The veto override vote was 361-54, so most Republicans abandoned their President to protect their pork.

In fact, 42 Republicans sided with Pelosi on both votes. The'yre listed here. The Club for Growth will undoubtedly support primary opponents for some of these people; if you value fiscal responsibility, you might consider helping them. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Bail for a repeat bailjumper??

Posted by Richard on September 14, 2007

Norman Hsu jumped bail in 1992 and was on the lam for fifteen years. He jumped bail again just last week. I'm amazed that the D.A. didn't ask that he be denied bail and held on remand. That seems like a no-brainer to me. Instead, the D.A. asked for $50 million and got $5 million:

GRAND JUNCTION – Fugitive investor and Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu, whose flight from a 1992 grand theft conviction and subsequent campaign donations roiled the presidential race, was ordered held on a record $5 million cash-only bail by a Mesa County judge at a hearing Thursday.

Not only is Hsu an obvious flight risk — plenty of reason to deny bail — but he's purported to be a danger to himself as well:

Mesa County District Attorney Pete Hautzinger disclosed in court that Hsu had mailed a letter to a New York legal organization, the Innocence Project, indicating "he was thinking of harming himself."

A person who saw the letter told The Associated Press on Thursday that the note explicitly stated that Hsu "intended to commit suicide." …

In arguing for higher bail, Hautzinger mentioned the letter Hsu sent to the Innocence Project and others, saying it showed Hsu was "despondent and may hurt himself."

I say "purported" because — given that this case involves the Clintons and allegations of wrongdoing, and that Hsu became mysteriously ill on the train — I can't help but wonder who wrote this alleged suicide note.

The Hsu story got even more interesting the other day when it turned out that one of Hsu's bogus companies recently got $40 million from Source Financing, an investment firm run by Woodstock producer Joel Rosenman, and that Rosenman, members of his family, and others at Source Financing had also recently made significant contributions to the Clinton campaign.

A commenter, Michael, at Inoperable Terran listed some "strange facts" related to the case:

1. Hsu told Source Financial the money was to manufacture clothes for Gucci & Prada in China. Neither company manufactures any items in China, ever.

2. Source Financial never noticed that Hsu’s businesses didn’t exist before loaning him money. They also failed to check his background, or look for a factory in China connected to Hsu.

3. Source Financial was accepting checks post dated by 135 days as payment on their huge loans to Hsu.

4. Source Financial employees are also big Hillary donors.

5. Hillary set aside 1 million dollars of taxpayer money for a “Woodstock” museum. The head of Source Financial was a major Woodstock promoter and also a long time Clinton friend.

6. It took 2 weeks for the head of Source Financial to realize there might be some kind of connection between his company, Clinton, and Hsu.

7. One of the recipients of Hsu’s suicide note googled the term “Hsu Suicide” BEFORE anyone knew where he was or what he was doing – according to Michelle Malkin.

I don't have time to check all of those, but Sen. Clinton apparently did include an earmark for a Woodstock museum in the 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bill (emphasis from Flopping Aces):

$1 million for the Museum at Bethel Woods, which is dedicated to recreating the 1969 Woodstock Music Festival experience and will feature “An interpretation of the 1969 Woodstock Music & Arts Fair” exhibit in 2008, according to the museum’s website. The earmark is at the request of New York Senators Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer.

Limbaugh discussed this yesterday (link will probably stop working in a few days), and repeated something he's said many times: "Nothing that happens with the Clintons is a coincidence."

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Hsu cools heels in Colorado

Posted by Richard on September 8, 2007

From the Rocky Mountain News:

Norman Hsu, the fugitive Democratic fundraiser who jumped a $2 million bail and skipped a California hearing on a felony theft conviction, is under armed guard at a Grand Junction hospital today.

Depending on his health, Hsu, 56, was to appear before a federal magistrate in Grand Junction this afternoon on unlawful flight charges.

Then he would face extradition to California where state authorities say Hsu is facing a three-year prison term under a 1992 plea agreement.

From Grand Junction's KJCT8 News

A 911 call went over the scanner around 11 am MST Thursday, reporting a man who could not feel his legs, and the need for extraction from the train.

When our reporter arrived on scene the conductor said that it appeared to simply be an elderly man with dementia. That man turned out to be Hsu, who did walk off the train under his own power.

In case you missed it, Hsu (pronounced "shoe") is one of the top Democratic fundraisers (albeit a very low-profile one until now), contributing millions to the coffers of candidates and committees across the country. He's raised more than a million dollars for Hillary Clinton alone. Hsu is a "bundler," combining the checks from many individuals into a "bundled" contribution to a campaign. Bundling is legal, as long as the money is actually coming from the many individuals, and they're not just being used as "straw men" to evade contribution limits or hide illegal sources.

The Wall Street Journal and others have found evidence of coordinated contributions from people associated with Hsu who seem unlikely donors. For instance, the Paw family of San Francisco, living in a modest bungalow near the airport, contributed $200,000 since 2004 to Democrats all over the country ($45,000 to Hillary) — more per year than Mr. Paw's $49,000 mail carrier salary. A New York woman who lists her profession as "self-employed actress" gave $40,000.

Since Hsu's status as a felon and fugitive became known, recipients have been trying to distance themselves without giving up too much of the money. For instance, Clinton is donating Hsu's $22,000 to charity, but she's keeping the $150,000 that came from the Paws and other suspicious associates of Hsu.

Given the Clinton history regarding Chinese-American fundraisers, one can't help but wonder if Hsu is using these unlikely donors to launder money from persons of a foreign persuasion. Don't forget Hillary's other fugitive fundraiser, Abdul Jinnah. And then there was the Peter Paul affair. Now, she seems to have hooked up with yet another fundraiser with a shady past, involving racketeering, extortion, and vote fraud.

The persistent stories about how the Clintons have operated going back to the Arkansas days leave one wondering, too, about Hsu's sudden and curious health problem. He couldn't feel his legs and appeared demented? Hmm… Be careful what you eat or drink, Norm.

UPDATE: Gateway Pundit has a good summary, some original reporting, and a link to an interesting AmSpecBlog post. News stories have described Hsu as a successful businessman in the apparel trade, but Philip Klein was unable to locate any trace of the four Hsu companies listed in campaign finance reports. At least one has a non-existent address. Hsu himself has used at least one suspicious address in filings — he made donations from the Fifth Avenue apartment both before and after it changed hands in 2005.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Stupid Party

Posted by Richard on April 27, 2007

The Washington Post reported the other day that an aide to Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ) called U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton's office just six weeks before Alberto Gonzales terminated Charlton. The aide was seeking information about a federal investigation into a land deal involving the congressman's former business partner, and in accordance with Justice Dept. rules, Charlton notified his superiors of the potentially improper contact from Renzi's office. Captain Ed took a dim view of yet another Gonzales misstep (emphasis added):

First, we should point out that Charlton's removal did not end the investigation. The FBI raided Renzi's home last week, and Renzi stepped down from his committee assignments as a result. If he corrupted his office and sold out his constituents, it does not appear that Charlton's termination has kept that from coming to light.

That being said, this makes the entire process of terminations look even more suspect. At the least, it shows political stupidity on a scale so grand as to be almost unbelievable. Who in their right mind would fire a federal prosecutor who just had improper contact from the Congressman he's investigating — especially in the days after a Democratic takeover of Congress? That call should have alerted anyone with any sort of political antennae that firing Charlton would set off all sorts of red flags if that call came to light.

The Stupid Party has certainly been living up to that disparaging appellation lately, and Alberto Gonzales has worked harder than almost anyone to ensure that it does so. If I were inclined toward conspiracy theories, I'd be very suspicious of people like Gonzales. Could the GOP have been infiltrated with sleeper agents who, like the Manchurian Candidate, can be activated at opportune times to do great harm to the party with their apparent cluelessness, corruption, or ineptitude?

Of course not, I remind myself. Remember Occam's Razor. The facts can be adequately explained by stupidity alone. But, hey, it might make a pretty good novel and movie!  

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Anatomy of a smear

Posted by Richard on April 18, 2007

I haven't followed the so-called Wolfowitz scandal at all, barely noticing various stories and posts referring to it. About all I knew was that World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz stood accused of some kind of ethical lapse or corrupt act, and that various people were calling for his resignation, imprisonment, beheading, or something. I didn't think it was terribly interesting. I was wrong.

Monday's Wall Street Journal editorial told me all I needed to know about the case, which is clearly a vicious attempt to destroy an innocent man:

The World Bank released its files in the case of President Paul Wolfowitz's ethics on Friday, and what a revealing download it is. On the evidence in these 109 pages, it is clearer than ever that this flap is a political hit based on highly selective leaks to a willfully gullible press corps.

Mr. Wolfowitz asked the World Bank board to release the documents, after it became possible the 24 executive directors would adjourn early Friday morning without taking any action in the case. This would have allowed Mr. Wolfowitz's anonymous bank enemies to further spin their narrative that he had taken it upon himself to work out a sweetheart deal for his girlfriend and hide it from everyone.

The documents tell a very different story–one that makes us wonder if some bank officials weren't trying to ambush Mr. Wolfowitz from the start. Bear with us as we report the details, because this is a case study in the lack of accountability at these international satrapies.

Read the rest. It's really a fascinating story of how unscrupulous scoundrels can trap and nearly destroy a man by turning his own openness, decency, and desire to do the right thing against him. Especially when they're aided and abetted by a hostile press corps. I hope Wolfowitz hangs tough.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Cashing in on carbon credit scam

Posted by Richard on March 15, 2007

It's long been obvious to me that the environmental fear-mongers are chiefly interested in power — their solution to every perceived problem, whether it's overpopulation, pollution, cooling, warming, or whatever, is always less freedom and more government compulsion. And it's been equally clear that many of them are hypocrites, lecturing us for not being green enough while they live in humongous mansions and jet to their second and third homes in their private Gulfstreams.

It turns out that some of them are also greedy money-grubbers using climate-change hysteria to enrich themselves (emphasis added):

The two cherub like choirboys singing loudest in the Holier Than Thou Global Warming Cathedral are Maurice Strong and Al Gore.

This duo has done more than anyone else to advance the alarmism of man-made global warming.

With little media monitoring, both Strong and Gore are cashing in on the lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming.

Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as "the world's first and North America's only legally binding greenhouse gas emission registry reduction system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil."

Gore buys his carbon off-sets from himself–the Generation Investment Management LLP, "an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C." of which he is both chairman and founding partner.

There's a fine compendium of information about Gore, Knight, and the GIM carbon credit scam at The Global Warming Hoax. Interest in Gore's carbon credit firm grew after the Tennessee Center for Policy Research discovered that Gore's 10,000-square-foot mansion near Nashville used $30,000 worth of electricity and natural gas in 2006. Here's a photoshop picture of the mansion (from FreakingNews.com; used with permission):

Al Gore's mansion, per FreakingNews.com

This isn't the first time Gore and Strong have cashed in on the environment. Back when Gore was Veep, he praised and promoted Molten Metal Technology Inc. (MMTI), which supposedly was developing innovative recycling technology. MMTI got over $30 million in DOE grants, and its stock soared to $35. The company was largely owned and run by Maurice Strong and several Gore associates. Just before news that the technology didn't exist and that the DOE was cutting off funding, Strong and his pals cashed out to the tune of $15 million.

Strong is a piece of work. A wealthy Canadian businessman, U.N. diplomat, and father of the Kyoto Protocol, he was lined up to become U.N. Secretary General before being implicated in the Oil for Food scandal. In 2002, Canadian papers carried a book excerpt profiling Strong and his desire to change the world:

He told Maclean's magazine in 1976 that he was "a socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology." He warns that if we don't heed his environmentalist warnings, the Earth will collapse into chaos.

Strong has always courted power – but not through any shabby election campaign. He was a Liberal candidate in the 1979 federal election, but pulled out a month before the vote.

How could a mere MP wield the kind of international control he had tasted in Stockholm? Journalist Elaine Dewar, who interviewed Strong, described why he loved the UN.

"He could raise his own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the agenda," wrote Dewar.

"He told me he had more unfettered power than a cabinet minister in Ottawa. He was right: He didn't have to run for re-election, yet he could profoundly affect lives."

Strong prefers power extracted from democracies, and kept from unenlightened voters. Most power-crazed men would stop at calling for a one world Earth Charter to replace the U.S. Constitution, or the UN Charter.

But in an interview with his own Earth Charter Commission, Strong said "the real goal of the Earth Charter is it will in fact become like the Ten Commandments. It will become a symbol of the aspirations and commitments of people everywhere." Sounds like Maurice was hanging out at his spirit ranch without his sunhat on.

In 1990, Strong told a reporter a fantasy scenario for the World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland – where 1,000 diplomats, CEOs and politicians gather "to address global issues."

Strong, naturally, is on the board of the World Economic Forum. "What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude the principal risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries?…

In order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring this about?"

Strong may still want to bring down the rich Western industrial democracies. He and George Soros, with whom he's worked on both political goals and business ventures, are pouring money into the Chinese automobile industry, with the goal of flooding the U.S. market with cheap Chinese cars. Strong lives in China these days, and he wants to help China overtake the U.S. economically and become the world's dominant superpower. Never mind what that does to China's "carbon footprint." 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

“Stay the course”: right for Dems, wrong for GOP

Posted by Richard on November 15, 2006

It’s rather ironic, isn’t it? The Democrats succeeded in last Tuesday’s elections largely by appearing cleaner ethically and running moderate and conservative candidates. So Nancy Pelosi wants to celebrate the success of that strategy by dumping Steny Hoyer, who implemented it, and making an ethically challenged moonbat, John Murtha, the new majority leader. Even the Washington Post was struck by the stupidity of that:

Mr. Murtha’s candidacy is troubling for several reasons, beginning with his position on the war in Iraq. A former Marine, Mr. Murtha deserves credit for sounding an alarm about the deteriorating situation a year ago. But his descriptions of the stakes there have been consistently unrealistic, and his solutions irresponsible. …

Mr. Murtha would also be the wrong choice as majority leader after an election in which a large number of voters expressed unhappiness with Washington business as usual. Mr. Murtha has been a force against stronger ethics and lobbying rules. …

As a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, he has been an avid participant in the orgy of earmarking, including numerous projects sought by a lobbying firm that employed his brother. During the Abscam congressional bribery investigation in 1980, Mr. Murtha was videotaped discussing a bribe with an undercover FBI agent. ("You know, we do business for a while, maybe I’ll be interested, maybe I won’t, you know," Mr. Murtha said.) He wasn’t indicted, but it’s fair to say the episode raised questions about his integrity.

Of course, there’s plenty of irony and stupidity on the other side of the aisle, too. The Republicans lost a bunch of seats due to their ethically challenged, unprincipled, inarticulate, and ineffective leadership. So, of course, they’re poised to stick with that leadership. Bob Novak thinks that’s remarkably stupid:

The depleted House Republican caucus, a minority in the next Congress, convenes at 8 a.m. in the Capitol Friday on the brink of committing an act of supreme irrationality. The House members blame their leadership for tasting the bitter dregs of defeat. Yet, the consensus so far is that, in secret ballot, they will re-elect some or all of those leaders.

In private conversation, Republican members of Congress blame Majority Leader John Boehner and Majority Whip Roy Blunt in no small part for their midterm election debacle. Yet, either Boehner, Blunt or both are expected to be returned to their leadership posts Friday. For good reason, the GOP often is called "the stupid party."

Last Wednesday, I expressed my support for Mike Pence as minority leader and John Shadegg as minority whip, noting that the Republicans made a mistake when they chose Blunt over Shadegg in January. The more I read about Pence and Shadegg, the more I hope they can pull off the upset.

Pence said after the election, "The era of big Republican government is over," and issued a vision statement to back that up:

While the scandals of the 109th Congress harmed our cause, the real scandal in Washington D.C. is runaway federal spending, and our voters said, “Enough is enough.”

After 1994, we were a Majority committed to a balanced federal budget, entitlement reform and advancing the principles of a limited federal government. In recent years, our Majority voted to expand the federal government’s role in education by nearly 100 percent, created the largest new entitlement in forty years, and pursued spending policies that created record deficits, national debt and rampant earmark spending.

This was not in the Contract with America. Our opponents will say that the American people rejected our Republican vision. I say the American people did not quit on the Contract with America-we did. And in so doing, we severed the bonds of trust between our government and our most dedicated supporters.

I heard Pence interviewed on the radio this morning, and I was impressed. It’s not just issues, ideology, and vision, either — personality, charisma, and articulateness are important, too, especially when you know the media will be against you. Dennis Hastert cost the Republicans votes every time he stepped in front of a camera and microphone. Pence is a former talk radio host, and it shows.

The more I read about Boehner and Blunt, on the other hand, the more certain I am that "staying the course" with the current leadership would be a monumental mistake. Boehner once handed out checks from the tobacco lobby on the floor of the House while it was in session. Blunt defended earmarks at the Heritage Foundation just last Thursday. Both supported No Child Left Behind, the Medicare drug entitlement, the abandonment of the Contract’s ethics and accountability rules, and boatloads of pork.

Staying with the Boehner – Blunt "business as usual" team could severely damage the GOP nationwide in 2008. And that, in turn, could have disastrous consequences for the 2010 redistricting. Do you Republicans really want to risk returning to minority status for another generation just so these pricks in Washington can protect their perks and pork?

Check out this video in support of Pence and Shadegg (2:21):

[BTW, if you’re on a low-speed connection and the video keeps stopping, that means it’s playing faster than you’re downloading it, so the buffer keeps emptying. Just go get a cup of coffee or a beer or something — give it a minute or two. Once most of it has been downloaded into your buffer (the line at the bottom is red most of the way across), drag the slider back to the beginning and start it playing again. In case it helps, here’s the direct YouTube link.]
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »