Oh, wait, here it is. The first Jimmy Carter moment, as Obama's peanuts come home to roost. What makes this moment so heartwarming is that he hasn't even been inaugurated yet.


So, the first Great March Forward Step, mandatory student activism, has turned into his first Jimmy Carter moment. No more mandatory volunteer work.


The website change.gov has quietly been changed. Please provide your own Hope and Change joke.


Anyway, while we're on Jimmy Carter moments, the time has come for conservatives to daydream about what a hypothetical president would do to help ensure that the Obama presidency has at least some incentive to be somewhat clean. Alas, those of us Bush supporters that nonetheless bash his idiotic, turn the other cheek method of passive blame acceptance know these options will never happen. Hey, if Clinton could pardon donors on his last day of office and lower the arsenic guidelines past the point of diminishing returns so that Bush had to change them, why can't Bush do these things.



*Appoint U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois Patrick Fitzpatrick as a special prosecutor so he can pursue his investigation of Tony Rezko and his corrupt dealings with Illinois's governor and other creatures and spoilsmen of the Daley Machine. This will make it politically difficult for a President Obama to pardon Mr. Rezko and impossible for him to terminate Mr. Fitzpatrick as a federal officer come January 21 as a way of de-railing this investigation.


* Appoint a special prosecutor to investigate ACORN's voter registration methods and its dealings with the Obama campaign.


* Appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Obama campaign's on-line fundraising operation, including its disabling of the credit card security software on its on-line donations system. File a complaint with the Federal Election Commission regarding same.


* Appoint a bipartisan (love that word!) presidential commission to review the candidates' fundraising in this election cycle and to recommend changes in federal election laws.


Would the One dare to fire "the prosecutor's prosecutor" Fitzgerald?

So, two points here.
One, Obama has no idea what he's doing. He is going to be swallowed up by his cabinet. He is going to flail about in the daily running of the government, let alone by how idiotic his ideas on America's place in the world actually are.
Two, Obama's role in the credit crisis shows that his only skill is passing the buck by asking other people to do his job for him.

It seems to me that stories like this should be categorized by the incompetence bomb about to go off in the Federal Government. Other Obama categories will be the Jimmy Carter watch as Obama regularly hinders and punishes our allies, rewards our enemies, and engages in rather wildly conceived military expeditions. A third category should deal with managing expectations. As Obama is all things to all people, it's going to be hard for him to deliver baby, virgin unicorns to everyone in the country. There are going to be some upset folks. Peggy Joseph, I believe you will still be paying for gas and for your house. Finally, a Great March Forward watch. I think the guy's a radical, so let's see what kind of changes he proposes.

So, first Great March forward Watch item:
Hey, college kids, thanks for being so annoying. Thanks for ramrodding Obama down our throats. Here's your thanks: Mandatory Community Service.
Have fun, fuckers.

One of the problems with taking a month off from blogging are that some ideas go to seed.

I was considering the other day, however, about leadership. Every presidential administration is hit by the turmoil of managing many different, high strung personalities. Generally, this is where executive experience is important. You need to manage people because your ideas, strong as you may think they are, will be executed by someone else. That is why Clinton fired all the DOJ attorneys right off the bat. Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and W all had governor backgrounds. W had a Harvard MBA and managed a sports team as well as Texas. George H.W. Bush had the CIA. Generals ran huge organizations.

Senators basically have a staff. Their work product is a vote and a law that is generally written by someone else. McCain, at least, ran several aviation units in the Navy.

Obama. Well, he has 143 days of work as a U.S. Senator. Even those few days were spend campaigning and voting present. In Chicago, he was a cog in the Daley machine before that. He claims to have had experience from running his campaign, although he had a campaign manager to actually, you know, run it. His time at the Chicago Annenburg Challenge was one where he basically handed out money. There was no work product because the kids he indoctrinated had no observable increases in their actual education. His other "community organizer" product was setting up a job bank (fail), setting up a "secondary economy (fail), and running a slum (fail).

Sidenote: It's at this point where I realized that Jesus wasn't a community organizer. Nope, Lenin was a community organizer. That's what Obama did, try to whip up the masses. But that's another post.

What does this mean for the 44th president? Well, he needs Rahm Emmanuel to keep his people in line because Obama is going to be overwhelmed. Executives can give big picture directional guidance. I don't think, however, that anything in Obama's history has prepared him for dealing with actual results based activities or dealing with other executives. You've seen people who've actually run states and armies get bogged down and betrayed by their staffs. Obama? he won't see it coming and won't know what to do about it.

Which brings me to the letter.

Obama claimed to have foreseen the Housing Crisis and its landslide impact into what he have now. That's a lie, of course. He loved sub prime loans and all the other things that were done to create this crisis.

Nonetheless, the letter he wrote is here.

Here is his leadership.

"There is grave concern in low-income communities about a potential coming wave of foreclosures. Because regulators are partly responsible for creating the environment that is leading to rising rates of home foreclosure in the subprime mortgage market, I urge you immediately to convene a homeownership preservation summit with leading mortgage lenders, investors, loan servicing organizations, consumer advocates, federal regulators and housing-related agencies to assess options for private sector responses to the challenge."

Get it? Uh, can you please do something about this so that the people who got home loans they couldn't afford don't lose their homes.

It gets better:

"The summit should consider best practice loan marketing, underwriting, and origination practices consistent with the recent (and overdue) regulators’ Proposed Statement on Subprime Mortgage Lending. The summit participants should also evaluate options for independent loan counseling, voluntary loan restructuring, limited forbearance, and other possible workout strategies. I would also urge you to facilitate a serious conversation about the following:

* What standards investors should require of lenders, particularly with regard to verification of income and assets and the underwriting of borrowers based on fully indexed and fully amortized rates.

* How to facilitate and encourage appropriate intervention by loan servicing companies at the earliest signs of borrower difficulty.

* How to support independent community-based-organizations to provide counseling and work-out services to prevent foreclosure and preserve homeownership where practical.

* How to provide more effective information disclosure and financial education to ensure that borrowers are treated fairly and that deception is never a source of competitive advantage.

* How to adopt principles of fair competition that promote affordability, transparency, non-discrimination, genuine consumer value, and competitive returns.

* How to ensure adequate liquidity across all mortgage markets without exacerbating consumer and housing market vulnerability."

So, yeah, the lending industry was torn apart by people like Obama who forced banks to loan money to risky borrowers in the name of affordable housing. These loans are now decried by people like Obama as "predatory lending." Nonetheless, Obama looks past the damage to the financial sector done by FF/MM in packaging these risky loans into AAA rated MBS's guaranteed by the under capitalized FF/MM.

And also note, that he wanted to help community based organizations (i.e., ACORN) profit from the mess. Also, he wanted to figure out how to make the borrowers have an easier time not paying back their mortgages. That's the solution he had. You and me, homeowners that actually work and pay our bills on time, we're just a bunch of suckers.

Nope, his concern is keeping every one's villains, the idiots who got subprime loans when they couldn't afford them in their houses. Maverick and W both tried to actually fix the problem. Obama wants Bernanke to, uh, convene a summit to figure out how to give poor people more of your money. A job of a Senator is to do things like the things he wants someone else to do. Senators write laws. They hold hearings. They hopefully foresee and solve problems.

Obama simply wrote a letter to Santa Clause and addressed it to the guy who oversees the American money supply. AND IT MISSED THE WHOLE POINT OF THE CRISIS. The crisis was the cancer that these loans were. They killed the AAA rating of the MBS holding them, causing -under current idiotic mark to market laws- the inability of institutions holding these items from using them as valuations in their liquidity.

I wish that Bernanke sent the following reply:

"Dear Senator Obama,

After much research and deliberation, we have come up with the following response to your wishlist, fantasy, extortion letter:

Tell your deadbeat constituents to get jobs and pay their bills.

Thank you,

people who actually worked for a living."

(all my links and formatting got shot to hell, so imagine that this post looks nice and has links to cool stuff)

Well, actually, I do have a post election admission on how Bush failed to respect our fundamental rights: he allowed his department of justice to basically look the other way to massive levels of voter fraud. In addition, his lax attitude towards illegal immigration led to even more voter fraud by persons who weren't even citizens to begin with. Oh, and his administration looked the other way when Saint Obama turned off the address verification system for his credit card contributors. So, I.P. Freely and Joe Stalin along with Mickey Mouse were able to dump millions of dollars of contributions into Obama's war chest. McCain, of course, was too busy magnanimously working on his concession speech to raise any real objections to any of these things.

So, the story of Tan Nguyen is one example where attempts to stop voter fraud is prosecuted as voter suppression. Similar arguments were made throughout the country. The Ohio Secretary of State said the same things as she declined to vet incoming votes.

So, is avoiding voter fraud a fundamental right? Is it a bad thing only when you disagree with it? Doesn't a fraudulent vote cancel out your vote? Doesn't that suppress your vote? So, was Obama aiding and abetting disenfranchisement of unknown number of voters across the country.

Do you think the Obama administration is going to make stopping organized (i.e., ACORN enabled) voter fraud a priority? Is that RICO suit likely to stayopen?

I don't think that ACORN's registration of the Dallas Cowboys and Mickey Mouse, Obama campaigners voting in Ohio and in their homestate, college kids doing the same, or idiot Philadelphians who admit to voting twice on CNN added up to Obama's popular vote margin. However, there are several states that were close. There are congressmen and Senators who lost close races. And they lost because of this voter fraud.

ACORN, with their millions of fradulent voters needed to be hit with a RICO suit back in 2000. Obama should have at least been forced to operate within the law during his campaign. Instead, he gave them $800,000.

I guess right and wrong does not matter to some people.

A further discussion of Obama's respect for "our rights" continued.

As a disciple of Saul Alinsky, we've seen the tactics espoused by Rules for Radicals in the current campaign, and we will see them used in Obama's administration. These examples are not that outlanding, the Bush 43 White House had many DOJ prosecutors who have already used these tactics. Now this is not a criticism about Bush being Hitler, blah blah blah, it's more of a criticism that he kept aboard DOJ lawyers who were apt to go after the wrong people. He should have fired everyone when he came in. But, dipshit decided to be magnanimous and keep those thug Clinton lawyers in the stable.

This article provides some more insight. As I said, what is chilling is that you can come up with examples of how this stuff has already been used in the recent election cycle.

"Watch what Michael Barone called the Obama "thugocracy" use the Justice Department to stifle dissent. Anybody who complains about vote fraud will be charged with "vote suppression." Anybody who complains about DoJ's actions will be charged with interfering with an investigation. Anybody who denies having interfered will be charged with perjury. Likewise, anybody who peacefully protests abortion clinics or the use of state-sponsored racial quotas will be charged with a civil rights violation."

Tan Nguyen was investigated and bankrupted for "vote suppression" because his campaign issued a letter warning illegals not to vote. Similar threats were (I witnessed this) made again poll watchers in 2004 warning them of the liklihood of jail time for "vote suppression," by asking for IDs. Of course, stopping fradulent voting isn't a priority, especially by Obama voters in swing states. From CNN, "It's time for change, man," Jones said. He complained about the long lines and said that "I decided to come back and vote a couple times." "I think that's against the law, but it's okay, all right. Well, thanks, Ron,"



We already saw how Jack Ryan and Joe the Plumber learned about the "Chicago Way."

Of course, all you Ozombies who voted for Hope and Change and for Obama to pay for your gas and mortgage, and to make the world love us knew all this stuff already. You've mindlessly repeated stuff about Bush rewriting the bill of rights or something because he maintained that the executive had commander in chief powers to spy on our enemies, including phone calls between people in America and known overseas Al Qaeda operatives.

Second, the recently uncovered 2001 interview of Obama illustrates what he means by change, Change is wealth redistribution. So, what is hope? Meh, that's a just a meaningless phrase used to hypnotize the gullible, suckers.

"I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributed change and in some ways we still suffer from that. "

Ah, yes, redistribution. That sort of goes against a fundemental liberty: the security in one's possessions. At least Europe loves us now, right?