Monthly Archives: March 2009

Divorce Agreement

I posted this on my facebook some weeks agao and it was well received and I thought I’d share it on my blog:

Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists,
Marxists and Obama supporters, et al:

We have stuck together since the late 1950′s, but the whole of this
latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I
know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future
generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two
ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is
right so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it
up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

Here is a model separation agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each
taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two
sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be
relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide
other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

We don’t like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome
to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we’ll
take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep
Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O’Donnell (You are, however, responsible
for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them).

We’ll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical
companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless,
homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We’ll keep the hot Alaskan hockey
moms, greedy CEO’s and rednecks. We’ll keep the Bibles and give you NBC
and Hollywood.

You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we’ll retain the right to
invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks
and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under
assault, we’ll help provide them security.

We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values.. You are welcome to Islam,
Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N..
But we will no longer be paying the bill.

We’ll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can
take every Subaru station wagon you can find.

You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors.
We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We’ll
keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I’m sure
you’ll be happy to substitute Imagine, I’d Like to Teach the World to
Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World.

We’ll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up
poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our
history, our name and our flag.

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like
minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just
hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I’ll bet you ANWAR which
one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

Sincerely,

John J. Wall
Law Student and an American

P.S. Also, please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda with you.*
**


Daniel Hannan speaks to Prime Minister Brown and the European Parliament

I have to tell you that I never thought I’d hear a British polititian make so much sense.But Daniel Hannan MEP, did just that. This is an address to the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. . 

Man what I wouldn’t give to hear a U.S. Senator speak so honestly, so plainly and with conviction, to our President. 


Daniel Hannan speaks to Prime Minister Brown and the European Parliament

I have to tell you that I never thought I’d hear a British polititian make so much sense.But Daniel Hannan MEP, did just that. This is an address to the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. .

Man what I wouldn’t give to hear a U.S. Senator speak so honestly, so plainly and with conviction, to our President.


The AIG Mystery Solved

1:35 Web Video

Title: “Mystery Solved”

Wolf Blitzer: A huge mystery before those checks were even written, $165 million dollars, someone in Congress inserted a huge loophole allowing the bonuses to go forward.

White House Reporter: Why didn’t you know about it until last week?

Robert Gibbs: Well, I, again, I would check on some exact tic-toc, but understand, again, the reason that something couldn’t be done, the reason – there was ultimately, AIG, made a determination based on existing contracts, that they, had no choice.

Wolf Blitzer: So far, no one is owning up….

Senator Chris Dodd: When that language left the Senate that I wrote, that was not included.

Wolf Blitzer: But we have some new developments….

Senator Chris Dodd: We wrote the language in the bill to deal with bonuses, golden parachutes, excessive compensation – executive compensation – that was adopted unanimously by the United States Senate in the stimulus bill.

Senator Chris Dodd: I didn’t negotiate with myself over this – I wasn’t trying to change it on my own, obviously.

President Obama: Listen, I’ll take responsibility, I’m the President. It’s my job to make sure that we fix these messes, even if I don’t make them.

Wolf Blitzer: The mystery has now been resolved.


Dear A.I.G., I Quit!

from the New York Times:

The following is a letter sent on Tuesday by Jake DeSantis, an executive vice president of the American International Group’s financial products unit, to Edward M. Liddy, the chief executive of A.I.G.

DEAR Mr. Liddy,

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

You and I have never met or spoken to each other, so I’d like to tell you about myself. I was raised by schoolteachers working multiple jobs in a world of closing steel mills. My hard work earned me acceptance to M.I.T., and the institute’s generous financial aid enabled me to attend. I had fulfilled my American dream.

I started at this company in 1998 as an equity trader, became the head of equity and commodity trading and, a couple of years before A.I.G.’s meltdown last September, was named the head of business development for commodities. Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable — in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million. Most recently, during the dismantling of A.I.G.-F.P., I was an integral player in the pending sale of its well-regarded commodity index business to UBS. As you know, business unit sales like this are crucial to A.I.G.’s effort to repay the American taxpayer.

The profitability of the businesses with which I was associated clearly supported my compensation. I never received any pay resulting from the credit default swaps that are now losing so much money. I did, however, like many others here, lose a significant portion of my life savings in the form of deferred compensation invested in the capital of A.I.G.-F.P. because of those losses. In this way I have personally suffered from this controversial activity — directly as well as indirectly with the rest of the taxpayers.

I have the utmost respect for the civic duty that you are now performing at A.I.G. You are as blameless for these credit default swap losses as I am. You answered your country’s call and you are taking a tremendous beating for it.

But you also are aware that most of the employees of your financial products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. And I am disappointed and frustrated over your lack of support for us. I and many others in the unit feel betrayed that you failed to stand up for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations from certain members of Congress last Wednesday and from the press over our retention payments, and that you didn’t defend us against the baseless and reckless comments made by the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut.

My guess is that in October, when you learned of these retention contracts, you realized that the employees of the financial products unit needed some incentive to stay and that the contracts, being both ethical and useful, should be left to stand. That’s probably why A.I.G. management assured us on three occasions during that month that the company would “live up to its commitment” to honor the contract guarantees.

That may be why you decided to accelerate by three months more than a quarter of the amounts due under the contracts. That action signified to us your support, and was hardly something that one would do if he truly found the contracts “distasteful.”

That may also be why you authorized the balance of the payments on March 13.

At no time during the past six months that you have been leading A.I.G. did you ask us to revise, renegotiate or break these contracts — until several hours before your appearance last week before Congress.

I think your initial decision to honor the contracts was both ethical and financially astute, but it seems to have been politically unwise. It’s now apparent that you either misunderstood the agreements that you had made — tacit or otherwise — with the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, various members of Congress and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of New York, or were not strong enough to withstand the shifting political winds.

You’ve now asked the current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. to repay these earnings. As you can imagine, there has been a tremendous amount of serious thought and heated discussion about how we should respond to this breach of trust.

As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

The only real motivation that anyone at A.I.G.-F.P. now has is fear. Mr. Cuomo has threatened to “name and shame,” and his counterpart in Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, has made similar threats — even though attorneys general are supposed to stand for due process, to conduct trials in courts and not the press.

So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree.

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn. This is not a tax-deduction gimmick; I simply believe that I at least deserve to dictate how my earnings are spent, and do not want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget. Our earnings have caused such a distraction for so many from the more pressing issues our country faces, and I would like to see my share of it benefit those truly in need.

On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients.

This choice is right for me. I wish others at A.I.G.-F.P. luck finding peace with their difficult decision, and only hope their judgment is not clouded by fear.

Mr. Liddy, I wish you success in your commitment to return the money extended by the American government, and luck with the continued unwinding of the company’s diverse businesses — especially those remaining credit default swaps. I’ll continue over the short term to help make sure no balls are dropped, but after what’s happened this past week I can’t remain much longer — there is too much bad blood. I’m not sure how you will greet my resignation, but at least Attorney General Blumenthal should be relieved that I’ll leave under my own power and will not need to be “shoved out the door.”

Sincerely,

Jake DeSantis


912 Project, Get back to that fateful unification from that day day, a project by Glenn Beck

I’ve recently come into a new found respect for TV/Radio host Glenn Beck. It’s not just his quick witted humor, funny faces, blunt insights and faithful enthusiasm to what our nation could be; but his pricipals that he represents through his shows.

I encourage my readers to check out this project, The 9-12 Project, that has been spured on by Beck. 912project.com. 
Here are 9 principles from 912project.com 

9 Principles

1. America Is Good.
2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
God “The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the external rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained.” from George Washington’s first Inaugural address.
3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
Honesty “I hope that I shall always possess firmness and virtue enough to maintain what I consider to be the most enviable of all titles, the character of an honest man.” George Washington
4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
Marriage/Family “It is in the love of one’s family only that heartfelt happiness is known. By a law of our nature, we cannot be happy without the endearing connections of a family.” Thomas Jefferson
5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
Justice “I deem one of the essential principles of our government… equal and exact justice to all men of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political.” Thomas Jefferson
6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
Life, Liberty, & The Pursuit of Happiness “Everyone has a natural right to choose that vocation in life which he thinks most likely to give him comfortable subsistence.” Thomas Jefferson
7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
Charity “It is not everyone who asketh that deserveth charity; all however, are worth of the inquiry or the deserving may suffer.” George Washington
8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
On your right to disagree “In a free and republican government, you cannot restrain the voice of the multitude; every man will speak as he thinks, or more properly without thinking.” George Washington
9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
Who works for whom? “I consider the people who constitute a society or a nation as the source of all authority in that nation.” Thomas Jefferson


Thomas Payne, Common Sense look at America


Can’t Trust Obama on Taxes

Friday, September 12, 2008
Can’t Trust Obama on Taxes

Today Obama Said He Wanted To “Take A Pledge” Not To Raise Taxes On Anyone “Making Less Than $250,000 A Year”:

While Campaigning In New Hampshire, Obama Pledged That “No One Making Less Than $250,000 A Year Will See Any Type Of Tax Increase.” “Barack Obama began an important two-day campaign visit to swing state New Hampshire today by … taking his own version of the Granite State’s state’s [sic] anti-tax pledge. … ‘I want to take a pledge,’ he told about 250 supporters and independents in his first of two stops today. ‘I pledge that under my plan, no one making less than $250,000 a year will see any type of tax increase. Not income tax, not capital gains taxes, not any kind of tax.’” (John Distaso, “In NH, Obama Makes ‘Pledge’ Against Tax Hikes On Most Americans,” The [Manchester, NH] Union Leader, 9/12/08)

OBAMA’S PLEDGE CONTRADICTS HIS VOTING RECORD

Obama Voted In Favor Of The Democrats’ FY 2009 Budget, Which Would Raise Tax Rates For Americans Earning $42,000 Or More:

Obama Voted Twice In Favor Of The Democrats’ FY 2009 Budget Resolution. (S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 51-44: R 2-43; D 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #142: Adopted 48-45: R 2-44; D 44- 1; I 2-0, 6/4/08, Obama Voted Yea)

The Democrats’ Budget Would Raise Taxes On Individuals Earning Approximately $42,000 Or More. “The resolution Obama voted for would not have increased taxes on any single taxpayer making less than $41,500 per year in total income, or any couple making less than $83,000. The $32,000 figure is approximately the taxable income of a single person making $41,500 per year, after all deductions and exclusions.” (FactCheck.org, “The $32,000 Question,” www.factcheck.org, 7/11/08)

  • NOTE: The Democrats’ Budget Raised Tax Rates On The 25, 28, 33 And 35 Percent Brackets. For 2008, The 25 Percent Bracket Begins At The Taxable Income Level Of $32,550, Which Is The Figure After All Deductions And Exclusions Are Subtracted From Total Earnings. (“2008 Individual Income Tax Rates, Standard Deductions, Personal Exemptions, And Filing Thresholds,” www.taxpolicycenter.org, 11/4/07; Andrew Taylor, “Presidential Hopefuls To Vote On Budget,” The Associated Press, 3/13/08)

The Budget Also Allows “More Than 20 Million Middle-Class Taxpayers To Be Hit By The Alternative Minimum Tax” After Next Year. “The Senate Wednesday approved a $3.1 trillion election-year Democratic budget blueprint that leaves to the next president the task of sorting out a host of fiscal problems. … It also manages to predict small budget surpluses by 2012, but only by permitting several of President Bush’s tax cuts to expire as scheduled at the end of 2010 and by allowing more than 20 million middle-class taxpayers to be hit by the alternative minimum tax, or AMT, after next year.” (Andrew Taylor, “Senate Approves Stand-Pat Democratic Budget Plan,” The Associated Press, 6/4/08)

The Budget Would Also Let Capital Gains And Dividends Tax Relief Expire In 2011, Nearly Doubling The Capital Gains Tax Rate And More Than Doubling The Dividend Tax Rate. (Andrew Taylor, “House, Senate Debate Democratic Budget Plan,” The Associated Press, 5/21/08)

OBAMA’S PLEDGE CONTRADICTS HIS EARLIER CAMPAIGN RHETORIC

During The Campaign, Obama Has Called For Higher Taxes On Americans Earning Significantly Less Than $250,000:

September 2007: Obama Suggested Applying The 12.4 Percent Social Security Tax To All Earnings. “While Obama has suggested imposing the 12.4 percent tax on all income above $97,000 per year, Edwards would only impose it on those making more than $200,000 per year. Income between $97,000 and $200,000 would continue to be exempt from Social Security taxes under the Edwards proposal.” (Teddy Davis, “Obama Floats Social Security Tax Hike,” ABC News, abcnews.go.com, 9/22/07)

  • Obama: “If We Kept The Payroll Tax Rate Exactly The Same But Applied It To All Earnings And Not Just The First $97,500, We Could Virtually Eliminate The Entire Social Security Shortfall.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Op-Ed, “Fixed-Income Seniors Can Expect A Tax Cut,” Quad City Times [IA], 9/21/07)

April 2008: Obama Said He’d Raise The Capital Gains Rate To 20 Percent Or Higher, And Said That Wouldn’t Impact The “Average Person.” Obama: “In terms of capital gains, I’ve suggested we might go back up to 20 (percent), because…” Fox News’ Chris Wallace: “You had suggested 28 (percent).” Obama: “Well, what I’ve said is I certainly would not raise it higher than it was under Ronald Reagan, but the fact is that I’m mindful that we’ve got to keep our capital gains tax to a point where we can actually get more revenue. But that’s not something that’s going to affect the average person with a 401(k) when people start talking about how, ‘Well, there are, you know, millions of Americans who own stock,’ most of them own stock in 401(k)s where their taxes are deferred and they pay ordinary income taxes when they finally cash out.” (Fox’s’ “Fox News Sunday,” 4/27/08)

June 2008: Obama Said He Would Raise Taxes On The Top 5 Percent Of Earners, Meaning Those Earning Approximately $145,000 Or More A Year.  Obama: “It is true that those like myself who are in the top 5 percent, we’re going to see a tax increase. I’m going to roll the Bush tax cuts back to the levels they were in the 1990s.” (Fox Business’ “Fox Business,” 6/26/08)

  • In 2005, The Cut Off For The Top 5 Percent Of Earners Began At $145,283 – Well Below Obama’s $250,000 Threshold. “Including all tax returns that had a positive AGI, those taxpayers with an AGI of $145,283 or more in 2005 constituted the nation’s top 5 percent of earners.” (Gerald Prante, “Summary Of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data,” www.taxfoundation.org, 10/5/07)

OBAMA’S PLEDGE CONTRADICTS HIS OWN ADVISERS

Obama Pledged That No One Making Less Than $250,000 Would See A Tax Increase, But His Economic Advisers Said Individuals Would See Higher Taxes Starting At $200,000:

In August, Obama’s Economic Advisers Wrote An Op-Ed That Said Individuals Would See Higher Taxes Starting At $200,000 Under An Obama Administration. Obama Economic Advisers Jason Furman And Austan Goolsbee: “Sen. Obama believes that one of the principal problems facing the economy today is the lack of discretionary income for middle-class wage earners. That’s why his plan would not raise any taxes on couples making less than $250,000 a year, nor on any single person with income under $200,000 — not income taxes, capital gains taxes, dividend or payroll taxes.” (Jason Furman and Austan Goolsbee, Op-Ed, “The Obama Tax Plan,” The Wall Street Journal, 8/14/08)

From GOP.com


Shocker: ‘Global warming’ simply no longer happening

from: WorldNetDaily.com

Shocker: ‘Global warming’ simply no longer happening 

Temperatures dropping, fewer hurricanes, arctic ice growing, polar bear population up


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.