Trying to get somthing for nothing

May 2012
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

Entries Tagged as 'Trying to get somthing for nothing'

MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann suspended for contributing to 3 Democratic candidates

November 6th, 2010 · Corruption, Democrats

By David MontgomeryWashington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, November 6, 2010

MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, the unabashedly liberal-leaning counterpart to cable television’s conservative hosts, was suspended indefinitely without pay on Friday for contributing a total of $7,200 to three Democratic candidates in late October, in violation of network policies.

Olbermann’s banishment leaves uncertain the immediate future of MSNBC’s top-rated show, “Countdown With Keith Olbermann.” MSNBC initially said Christopher Hayes, Washington editor of the Nation, would fill in for Olbermann Friday night — then revised the announcement to say that daytime anchor Thomas Roberts would host. Who will take the helm in coming days has not been decided, a spokesman said.

Olbermann’s audience at 8 p.m. weeknights averaged about 1.1 million people in October, according to the network. He launched “Countdown” in 2003.

Olbermann anchored MSNBC’s election coverage Tuesday night. The revelation of Olbermann’s contributions — first reported by Politico — means that the anchor was leading on-air coverage of races in which he had privately picked favorites.

Federal Election Commission records show that on Oct. 28 Olbermann gave $2,400 each to Arizona Reps. Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords, and on Oct. 29 he donated $2,400 to Kentucky Senate candidate Jack Conway. The donation to Grijalva came on the same day the Democratic incumbent appeared on “Countdown,” Politico reported. Conway and Giffords have also appeared on the show.

Under FEC rules, $2,400 is the most an individual donor can give to a candidate in a general-election campaign.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: Something To Hide·Trying to get somthing for nothing

No Comments

Republicans criticize government’s management of real estate holdings

November 1st, 2010 · Accountability, Economy, Federal Spending, Government, Greed, Non-Transparency, Real Estate, Terrorism from Within

By Jonathan O’Connell – Capital Business Staff Writer
Sunday, October 31, 2010; 10:13 PM

Seven House Republicans have coined a phrase to describe how they think the federal government is managing its property, including its local real estate portfolio: “Sitting on Our Assets.”

Led by ranking minority-party member John L. Mica (Fla.), Republicans on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee recently issued a report by that name, criticizing the management of real estate and other assets by agencies including the General Services Administration, Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers and Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The federal government is the country’s largest real estate owner, with a portfolio of about 1.2 million facilities nationwide. An audit conducted during the George W. Bush administration found that the government owns 14,000 vacant buildings and underuses 55,000 other locations.

Although President Obama issued a memo in June requiring federal agencies to reduce real estate costs by $8 billion by the end of fiscal 2012, the Republicans’ analysis says the government continues to overly rely on leased space and retain underused and vacant property. The GSA, the report says, “struggles to dispose of its surplus property in a timely fashion and for reasonable rates of return despite its enhanced property disposal authorities.”

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: All About the Money·Destroying the American People·Disillusioned Government·Government Incompetence·Greed·Something To Hide·Trying to get somthing for nothing·Where did the money go?

No Comments

Price tag of midterm campaign likely to hit $4 billion: Helping America HOW??

October 29th, 2010 · Corruption, Deception, Economy, Ethics, Government, Politics

By Dan Eggen Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 27, 2010; 10:17 PM

The midterm numbers just keep piling up.

In the latest sign of this year’s record-breaking election season, an independent research group estimated Wednesday that candidates, parties and outside interest groups together could spend up to $4 billion on the campaign.

Data from the Center for Responsive Politics provide evidence for a spending surge, even without a White House race. Expenditures have eclipsed what they were when George W. Bush won the presidency in 2000. The current election makes that contest “look like a bargain,” said Sheila Krumholz, CRP’s executive director.

There are three general tides of money swamping this year’s elections, according to CRP’s data: House and Senate candidates, who have reported raising $1.7 billion; the political parties, with about $1.1 billion; and outside interest groups, which have raised at least $400 million.

That adds up to $3.2 billion, but the numbers are incomplete amid the frenzy of ad buys and other activity in the week before the election. Candidate campaigns alone are on pace to eclipse $2 billion, which is a remarkable number, given restrictions on contributions.

Other patterns are also becoming clearer as the data accumulate. Donations from Wall Street, medical and insurance firms, energy conglomerates and other corporations have shifted decisively toward Republicans over the past year because of policy disputes with Democrats and anticipation of a possible GOP takeover in Congress.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: A Threat To America·Destroying the American People·Disillusioned Government·Election Race·Government Circus·Government Incompetence·Greed·I'll Say Anything To Get Elected·Misuse of Power·Throw Out The Constitution·Trying to get somthing for nothing

No Comments

Big Insurance, Big Medicine: ObamaCare is already driving a wave of health-care consolidation—and higher costs.

October 26th, 2010 · Deception, Democrats, Federal Spending, Government Control, Healthcare, Selling Out the US, Terrorism from Within

ObamaCare’s once and future harms have been well chronicled, but the major effects so far are less obvious and arguably more important: A wave of consolidation is washing over the health markets, and the result is going to be higher costs.

The turn toward consolidation among insurance companies is not new, and neither is it among doctors, hospitals and other providers. Yet the health bill has accelerated these trends, as all sides race to anticipate and manage political risk and regulatory uncertainty. This dynamic is leading to much larger hospital systems and physician groups, and fewer insurers dominated by a handful of national conglomerates. ObamaCare was sold using the language of choice and competition, but it is actually reducing both.

***

The first surge will come among the 1,200 insurers doing business in the U.S., given that a major goal of ObamaCare is to convert these companies into de facto public utilities. Those regulations are now being written—and once they’re up and running some medium-sized carriers will collapse under the new mandates and higher overhead. State insurance commissioners warned the Administration this month that “improper or overly strident application . . . could threaten the solvency of insurers or significantly reduce competition in some insurance markets.” They also implied that bankruptcies are likely.

With these headwinds, investors and Wall Street analysts are now predicting a lost decade for health insurance stocks. But it may be more accurate to say that there will be a lot of losers and some very big winners. Mergers and acquisitions will increase dramatically once companies get a better look at the regulation and figure out the valuation of M&A targets. Larger carriers will swallow smaller ones quietly before they fail.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: Destroying the American People·Disillusioned Government·Empty Promises·Government Incompetence·Making History Tops Ethics·Obama-Nation·Throw Out The Constitution·Trying to get somthing for nothing·Wasteful Spending

No Comments

Obama’s Incoherent Closing Argument : While the economy is the No. 1 issue, the president constantly changes the subject.

October 21st, 2010 · Democrats, Economy, Obama's Scheme, Selling Out the US

Associated Press

By Karl Rove

At an April 2008 fund-raiser in San Francisco, Barack Obama let loose with his famous “they cling to guns or religion” line. Last Saturday at a West Newton, Mass., fund-raiser, the president said, “facts and science and argument [do] not seem to be winning . . . because we’re hard-wired not to always think clearly when we’re scared.”

Memo to White House: Calling voters stupid is not a winning strategy.

The economy and jobs are the No. 1 issue in every poll. Yet Mr. Obama of late has talked about immigration reform and weighed in (unprompted) on the Ground Zero mosque. He devoted Labor Day to an ineffective Mideast peace initiative. He demeans large blocs of voters and now is ending his midterm pitch with attacks on nonexistent foreign campaign contributions and weird assertions that “the Empire is striking back.”

Meanwhile, Republicans have talked about little else than the economy—drawing attention to lackluster job growth, the failed stimulus, out-of-control spending, escalating deficits and the dangers of ObamaCare.

On Sunday, White House senior adviser David Axelrod promised that the administration’s focus next year would be “to generate more growth and jobs” and “on our fiscal situation.” That must have left congressional Democrats—battered for months by the GOP’s message discipline—wondering why there’s been no focus on that up to now.

Much of the blame lies with the president, who has left his party with an incoherent closing argument 12 days before the election.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: A Threat To America·Destroying the American People·Disillusioned Government·Empty Promises·Government Circus·Government Incompetence·I'll Say Anything To Get Elected·Lies·Making History Tops Ethics·Misuse of Power·Not an Obama Priority·Obama-Nation·Power Hungry·Something To Hide·Terrorism·Throw Out The Constitution·Trying to get somthing for nothing·Wasteful Spending·Where did the money go?

No Comments

Felon voting rights expanded in 23 states: With the right vote, maybe they will no longer be felons.

October 20th, 2010 · Corruption, Politics, Selling Out the US, Terrorism from Within

Headshot of Reggie Mitchell, the central figure in a story about outreach to ex-offenders who can now vote in Florida. (Courtesy Of Reggie Mitchell)

By Krissah Thompson Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 19, 2010; 1:37 PM

A study of felony disenfranchisement laws has found that 800,000 former felons have been returned to the voter rolls in the past decade.

A push by criminal justice advocates and civil rights groups to rewrite state laws that sometimes place lifetime voting bans on felons has resulted in 23 states amending their policies since 1997 to expand voter eligibility, according to a report out by the Sentencing Project.

Nine states repealed or reduced their lifetime voting bans, and eight states made it easier for former felons to appeal to have their voting rights restored.

Those changes were made despite “political challenges that hinder reform and can make it difficult for elected officials to extend civil rights to persons with felony convictions,” said Nicole Porter, author of the report and the Sentencing Project’s state advocacy coordinator.

Existing policies vary from state to state, with Kentucky and Virginia denying ex-felons the right to vote – even after they have completed parole or probation sentences. Both states require individuals to apply to the governor for restoration of civil rights.

Other states have changed those policies. Rhode Island repealed a state prohibition on parolees voting, resulting in the restoration of voting rights to more than 15,000 people. Maryland made a similar change resulting in 52,000 ex-felons regaining the right to vote.

Changes to voting laws have come from both Republicans and Democrats.

In Florida, black state legislators led the fight for a decade before populist Republican Gov. Charlie Crist pushed through the change shortly after being elected in 2006. The legislation permits many nonviolent felons to vote as long as they have no charges pending, have paid restitution and have completed probation. About 152,000 ex-felons are now on voter rolls there.

Then-Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack (D) restored voting rights to almost 100,000 ex-felons, and New Mexico’s repeal of a lifetime voting ban for felons affected 69,000 people.

No Comments

Foreclosure freeze leads to uneasy politics for Democrats

October 19th, 2010 · Accountability, Banking Industry, Corruption, Deception, Democrats, Ethics, Federal Spending, Fraud Alert, Government Control, Greed, Housing Industry, Money Lost, Obama's Scheme, Selling Out the US, Tax Dollars, Taxes, Treasury

Another political factor: people struggling to keep paying their mortgages who are upset that deadbeat borrowers may get a break.

“I pay my mortgage every month; that was the deal I made,” Kevin McGrath, a Virginia realtor, wrote in an e-mail. “I know I am currently throwing money into a depreciating asset that every day feels more and more like the Black Hole of Calcutta, but that’s ok; I placed my bet, and I am willing to ride this pony until she breaks.

“But wait a minute; now I look over at my neighbor and I see he is in the same situation, upside down on his mortgage, except he has not made a payment in a year or so. He has multiple cars in his driveway, some of them newer than mine, he just got back from a trip to Best Buy, and he is still living in his house. There are all kinds of neat things to do with your money when your housing costs are zero. Where is my free rent?

By Steven Mufson Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 19, 2010; 7:26 AM

The details of the foreclosure mess are ugly and complicated. The politics of it are even worse.

The calculus is clear for most Democratic incumbents, especially those in tight races like Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid: Nothing could be worse on the eve of elections than images of people being booted out of their homes by big banks that have relied on sloppy, if not fraudulent, paperwork.

But reviving the economy requires repairing the housing market, which won’t happen until foreclosed properties and delinquent mortgages are dealt with. So the White House, which is looking past the midterm elections, has been restrained. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan wrote over the weekend that “a national, blanket moratorium on all foreclosure sales would do far more harm than good, hurting homeowners and home buyers alike.”

It’s a recipe for legislative inaction, especially with lawmakers busy campaigning. For a White House seen by Wall Street as too populist, and by many liberals as too close to Wall Street, that might not be a bad outcome. Democratic candidates can strike a populist note, letting the Obama administration take the economic high road while pressing banks to define the scope of the latest financial mess.

“There’s a problem here,” said one veteran Democratic political consultant, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity. “The politics are very attractive to say, ‘Let’s have a moratorium.’ But shutting down foreclosures has the potential of shutting down the whole housing market, which isn’t helpful to anybody.”

For now, most of the biggest banks, sensitive to political winds, have voluntarily frozen foreclosure sales. Some analysts believe the freeze could last until January. That gives banks until the end of the quarter to figure out the extent of their problems, and it delays foreclosures until after the election as well as the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays.

“I think that they’re trying to see how this is playing,” said one political consultant working for the financial services industry. “They’re trying to gauge the political intensity around the issue.”

Democratic pollster Peter Hart says intensity runs high. “There are two things of critical importance to American households,” he said. “One is their job and two is their house.”

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: A Threat To America·All About the Money·Disillusioned Government·Empty Promises·Obama-Nation·Something To Hide·Trying to get somthing for nothing·Wasteful Spending·Where did the money go?

No Comments

PACs linked to foreign companies legally donate millions to U.S. campaigns

October 18th, 2010 · Politics

Reference: Foreign Influence (Chart)

By Dan Eggen Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 17, 2010; 7:44 PM

As Democrats and Republicans spar over whether foreign money is polluting the midterm elections, a simple point is often overlooked: Hundreds of foreign corporations already play an integral and perfectly legal role in American politics through their U.S. subsidiaries.

Political action committees connected to foreign-based corporations have donated nearly $60 million to candidates and parties over the past decade, including $12 million since the start of 2009, federal contribution records show. Top donors in this election cycle include PACstied to British drugmakers GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca, which together account for about $1 million; Belgium’s Anheuser-Busch InBev, at nearly $650,000; and Credit Suisse Securities, at over $350,000.

The donations must come from U.S. citizens or residents, and they make up a small fraction of overall political giving. Nonetheless, the role of foreign companies and their U.S. subsidiaries has become particularly sensitive in this year’s midterm campaigns, which have featured widespread voter dismay over the economy and eruptions of anti-foreign rhetoric from both parties.

Democrats have made a campaign issue over speculation that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is using foreign dues to help pay for a $75 million pro-Republican ad campaign, a charge the organization denies. White House adviser David Axelrod, appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, attempted to shift the thrust of the criticism to the more general issue of undisclosed donors.

But neither Democrats nor Republicans have drawn attention to PACs linked to global companies, a source of campaign funds that benefits both parties.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: A Threat To America·Destroying the American People·Empty Promises·Government Circus·Government Incompetence·Something To Hide·Trying to get somthing for nothing

No Comments

Obama may be on his own if he wants big changes: Still grasping at straws.

October 18th, 2010 · Deception, Democrats, Dissention, Federal Spending, Government Control, Obama Exposed, Obama's Scheme, Selling Out the US

By Scott Wilson Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 17, 2010; 12:31 AM

As the tumultuous first two years of Barack Obama‘s presidency draw to a close, the president and his advisers have begun to puzzle over a difficult question: Now what?

There are many things Obama has said he would like to accomplish in the next two years of his term – overhauling the nation’s immigration laws, passing energy and climate-change legislation, and shrinking the federal deficit, to name a few. Yet doing so may be exceptionally challenging, if even possible, given the skeptical mood of the public and the coming shake-up in Washington.

Next month’s midterm elections will leave the president with fewer friends in Congress, and possibly a Republican majority in one or both chambers emboldened to thwart his plans.

In White House strategy sessions, Obama’s senior staffers are debating their options. They have not yet settled on a specific plan, and the president has not spelled one out. How Obama approaches the coming years will depend in part on whether Democrats lose Congress or survive with narrower majorities. Yet no matter how the elections turn out, a consensus has emerged in the West Wing that Obama will have to set out goals that do not rely as much on Congress to advance his unfinished reform agenda. Even with his party now in control on Capitol Hill, Obama has had difficulty winning approval for big initiatives such as health care and financial regulation. After the grueling midterms, and with diminished ranks, Democrats will probably return for the new Congress in January more cautious.

“Clearly the agenda carried out by the administration in the first two years – the agenda that it wanted to do rather than had to do – will be smaller these next two years,” said William A. Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who was a policy adviser in the Clinton administration. “But there is still an agenda of necessity with Congress and the administration will not be able to just avoid it entirely.”

One senior administration official said that the courts may play an expanded role in the next two years, as the president defends his health-care and financial-regulation reform laws against legal challenges brought by opponents who hope to undo them or dial them back.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: A Threat To America·Destroying the American People·Disillusioned Government·Election Race·Empty Promises·Government Circus·Government Incompetence·Misuse of Power·Not an Obama Priority·Obama-Nation·Power Hungry·Something To Hide·Trying to get somthing for nothing·Wasteful Spending·Where did the money go?