The Truth, The Whole Truth and Nothing But a Fabrication

First we had a President who didn't know the definition of "is" or the implications of a double negative. Followed by CEO's that run multi-billion dollar companies whose accounting skills don't go beyond calculating their stock bonuses, (General Motors, Chrysler, Bank of America, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, etc.).

Then we had members of Congress who can't do their own taxes, (Nancy Pelosi, Tom Daschle, etc., and obviously are too poor to hire someone to do it for them.) We even have the Secretary of the Treasury, (Timothy Geithner,) the head tax collector, who didn't learn how to do his own taxes until he was nominated to the post.

Now we are plagued with the Attorney General of the United States of America, (Eric Holder,) the man who makes everyone stand up and swear they are telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing by the truth, unable to separate truth from fantasy.

(I could say it is coincidental that they are all Democrats, but then I might be guilty of profiling.)

In regards to his testimony before Congress acknowledging when he first knew about Operation Fast and Furious, his recollection process reminds me of progressive Alzheimer's Disease. Every week, Mr. Holder is able to remember further back in time.

In May 2011, relating to the Operation which started in 2009, before Congress he said, "I'm not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks." But, a memo addressed to the Attorney General, July 5, 2010, explains Mr Holder was briefed on the program 10 months earlier. Oh, now he remembers.

In a speech Eric Holder gave to Mexican Authorities, April 2, 2009, he said. "Last week, our administration launched a major new effort to break the backs of the cartels. My department is committing 100 new ATF personnel to the Southwest border in the next 100 days to supplement our ongoing Project Gunrunner, DEA is adding 16 new positions on the border, as well as mobile enforcement teams, and the FBI is creating a new intelligence group focusing on kidnapping and extortion. DHS is making similar commitments, as Secretary Napolitano will detail." Oh, that's right, he did say that.

We now know that in 2009, the White House gave stimulus money to the Department of Justice to the tune of $10,000,000 to implement Project Gunrunner or Operation Fast and Furious. The exact wording is "10,000,000 shall be transferred to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, salaries and expenses for the ATF Project Gunrunner."

But his aids say that Mr. Holder didn't know the details of the project at that time, so he really didn't know what was happening. Let's see, the last time I asked for $10,000,000 for a project, I really didn't want to know any of the details, just in case I had to deny culpability later, right?

Well, now that his memory has been restored and the facts are on the table, Mr. Holder was asked a very pointed question by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), in another Congressional Hearing last week. The question was,"Tell me, what’s the difference between lying and misleading Congress, in this context?"

“Well, if you want to have this legal conversation, it all has to do with your state of mind and whether or not you had the requisite intent to come up with something that can be considered perjury or a lie,” Holder said.

In other words, if you intended to lie, it is a lie; if you didn't have that intent, then it isn't a lie. Or, if you made a statement you thought was the truth, which later was proven to be based on a false premise, you didn't lie; you too, were deceived. I can agree entirely with Mr. Holder on his textbook answer.

His problem is, he knew about the program in April, 2009 and was briefed in written memos on it almost weekly, for 2 years. He even pontificated in public discourses his support for the program. For him to sit before Congress or the people of the United States in May, 2011, and say that he only knew of the program a few weeks before, is by definition, a lie. He knew the truth and chose not to say it.

For Mr. Eric Holder to retain his job after supporting this controversial program that killed 2 American Agents and hundreds of Mexican Nationals is hard to imagine. But for him to commit perjury, under oath, on multiple occasions, regarding his involvement in the program, and remain employed, is unfathomable. He should be fired or impeached immediately.

*Image courtesy of - http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/sarah-palin-calls-for-the-firing-of-the-employee-who-shouldve-never-been-hired/ This is also a great article on the history of Eric Holder and the pile of asinine judicial orders and bungles he has implemented.

A Link to - The Definitive Post On Why SOPA And Protect IP Are Bad, Bad Ideas

In the not too distant future.

The U. S. Attorney General, back-lit in a dim room, shrouded with an Inquisition style hooded robe, solemnly declares, "You have been accused to be in suspected violation of vaguely stated copyright laws, wherein you presumably allowed to be uploaded, 1 copyrighted file to the 327,246,135,753 existing files on one of your servers, without making herculean efforts and/or spending tens of thousands of dollars, (USD) to ferret out such malicious activity; thereby providing the possibility that one or more rogue internet user(s) might download said file, bypassing the obligation of paying just and due compensation to the legal and legitimate copyright holders, namely; unnamed recording and/or motion picture and/or digital archives; consequently, stealing, defrauding or interfering with the due process of collection of revenue for copyrighted materials, as outlined in Congressional Edicts, SOPA and PIPA, respectively.

As a result of this flagrant violation of the sovereign right of compensation as out-lined in Congressional Edicts, SOPA and PIPA, respectively, for recording and/or motion picture and/or digital archives, this Internet Service Provider, Your Name Here , (ISP) is hereby and un-equivocally ordered to cease and desist operations, services and compensation to all clients, customers, and/or consumers, until a complete review of the above named site and files, as well as all SOPA and PIPA compliant protocols to prevent such actions, are completed by a Senate sub-committee under the direction and over-sight of a combined Senate and House committee on the Implementation and Voluntary Compliance of Protocols to Prevent the Mis-Appropriation of Funds Legally and Lawfully Awarded to Unnamed Recording, and/or Motion Picture, and/or Digital Archives, For Works They Own, But Didn't Produce.

He stops and surveys the crowd, as 666 security guards, surround him and escort him from the room. . .

_______________________

The United States Congress is considering legislation that will give control of Internet Service Providers (ISP) sites to the Attorney General in an effort to control internet piracy of copyrighted material. With this authority, the Attorney General could legally, upon "suspicion" of piracy, shut down suspected offending sites and then begin an investigation. This could happen regardless of whether the ISP had any knowledge of the alleged infraction.

While I don't know all the ins and outs of the proposed laws, the page, The Definitive Post On Why SOPA And Protect IP Are Bad, Bad Ideas, does. In this article, Mike Masnick elequantly describes what is in the laws, why they won't achieve the desired result and why the recording industry needs to embrace new technology for greater profits rather than spending millions of dollars fighting the advancements.

The Definitive Post On Why SOPA And Protect IP Are Bad, Bad Ideas

By Mike Masnick

There's been plenty of talk (and a ton of posts here on Techdirt) discussing both SOPA (originally E-PARASITE) and PROTECT IP (aka PIPA), but it seemed like it would be useful to create a single, "definitive" post to highlight why both of these bills are extremely problematic and won't do much (if anything) to deal with the issues they're supposed to deal with, but will have massive unintended consequences. I also think it's important to highlight how PIPA is almost as bad as SOPA. Tragically, because SOPA was so bad, some in the entertainment industry have seen it as an opportunity to present PIPA as a "compromise." It is not. Both bills have tremendous problems, and they start with the fact that neither bill will help deal with the actual issues being raised. . . . (read the rest of the article)

You can also read the text of the bill here.

I urge you to contact your elected representatives and the bill's sponsors to express your feelings regarding this. Remember, Senator Hatch, (R-Utah), proposed in 2003, that all computers that had pirated software be remotely destroyed, until it was discovered that his own web-site was running an unlicensed application. I voted against him in 2006 and will again in 2012.

*The image above is from: http://act2.freepress.net/call/pipa_call/?akid=3086.9828048.Ssc8mA&rd=1&t=1

Not With My Paycheck You Don't

"We want to spread around the wealth." - Barrack Obama, the Socialist

$700 million or even $700 billion will not fix the financial crisis if we don't understand what caused it. The meltdown of our economy was not a natural result of the failure of Capitalism. It did not happen because greed came home to roost. It occurred because the first law of Capitalism was broken and then ignored while the greedy cashed in.

The basic rule of Capitalism, never loan money to someone who can't pay it back.

The Democratically controlled Congress of 1992, forced into law the Socialistic concept that every person, regardless of income, had the right to own a home. Ann Coulter, in her column on September 24, 2008, reported the following:

Before the Democrats' affirmative action lending policies became an embarrassment, the Los Angeles Times reported that, starting in 1992, a majority-Democratic Congress "mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains."

Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.

She goes on to state:

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.

When Democrats controlled both the executive and legislative branches, political correctness was given a veto over sound business practices.

These loans were known as "sub-prime mortgages" because the standards for qualification were below the prime or normal requirements. Adjustable rates, interest only and other anomaly instruments of lending were invented to satisfy the need. The rational used was that because of inflating prices in the housing market, an owner could hold on to the house at the reduced payment rate, sell it before the terms changed and cash in on the appreciation. It was nothing more than a government sponsored pyramid scheme.

What was the basic rule? Never loan money to someone who can't pay it back. If you do, you are just giving the money away. Reality is coming back to bite us in the behind. Over the past 16 years we have given away millions of houses, now they are giving them back.

The Democratic (Socialist) Party created this mess by tinkering with the universal laws of economics. Now Obama is suggesting that he wants to take my paycheck, spread it around and fix the problem. Has he talked with Matt Damon, Barbara Streisand, Whoopi Goldberg, Sean Penn and the Dixie Chicks about spreading their money around? I'm sure he would leave them with about $50,000 each, like the rest of middle America.

I think not.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice and I must be a Democrat.