by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
March 6, 2011

In the summer of 2008 as McCain and Obama were in the midst of their campaigns to capture the presidency, a series of events dramatically changed the focus of the campaign from Iraq to the economy. From that point on, Obama took the lead and eventually won the presidency. 

Now, a full two years later, the Pentagon has issued a reporton the series of events that led to the 2008 economic crash. Bill Gertz writes in the Washington Times:

Evidence outlined in a Pentagon contractor report suggests that financial subversion carried out by unknown parties, such as terrorists or hostile nations, contributed to the 2008 economic crash by covertly using vulnerabilities in the U.S. financial system

Consider: The economic house of cards started tumbling on June 26, 2008, when Senator Chuck Schumer leaked a memo questioning the solvency of IndyMac bank. This memo precipitated a run on IndyMac which led to its failure. Federal regulators pointedly cited U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., in explaining the bank’s failure. “The immediate cause of the closing was a deposit run that began and continued after the public release of a June 26 letter to the OTS and the FDIC from Senator Charles Schumer of New York.”

As I wrote in February of 2009, this event, coupled with the Lehman Brothers collapse in September, marked the beginning of the current economic meltdown and provided the environment that enabled Barack Obama to focus on the economy instead of his position on Iraq – and, not incidentally, resulted in his election as President.

July 12, 2008: The federal government takes control of the $32 billion IndyMac Bank. *

* Six months later, Jan 2, 2009, a seven-member group of investors agreed to buy the remnants of failed lender IndyMac for $13.9 billion. Other investors included a fund controlled by billionaire George Soros’ Fund Management. 

Sept. 6, 2008: Fannie Mae begins its downward spiral, which will end with a crash in November. This crash was avoidable, as the problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were identified in June of 2006, when 15 Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee introduced legislation to address the problem. Democrats, led by Barney Frank, killed the reform efforts.

Sept. 15, 2008: Obama and McCain are virtually tied in their race for the presidency. Out of no-where, in the space of less than 2 hours, the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous drawdown of money market accounts in the U.S. to the tune of $550 billion. Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania said that if authorities had not closed the banks, $5.5 trillion would have been withdrawn from US banks, which would have caused the collapse of the US  within 24 hours.

The markets reacted to Obama’s proposal to bail-out mortgages and Senator Christopher Dodd’s talk of nationalizing banks by reaching 11-year lows.

Enter George Soros. The infamous one-worlder, billionaire George Soros adds his voice to the media doomsayers by opining that the world financial system has effectively disintegrated, adding that there is yet no prospect of near-term resolution to the crisis.* 

Suspects include financial enemies in Middle Eastern states, Islamic terrorists, hostile members of the Chinese military, or government and organized crime groups in Russia, Venezuela or Iran. Chinese military officials.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com

Originally posted 2009-11-11 22:47:34. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Image by The U.S. Army via Flickr

by Scott Spiegel
ScottSpiegel.com
November 11, 2009

The problem with hate crime legislation is that it creates special classes of minorities who receive greater protection from harassment via harsher penalties for their would-be assailants.  One upshot of this approach is that groups perceived as chronically threatened because of their identity are given greater benefit of the doubt in bias-motivated crimes they commit against other groups.

If there were ever a group that U.S. law should consider shielding through hate crime legislation, it is: Americans.  The U.S. should be uniquely interested in protecting its citizens against attacks for being residents of this country, in the same way it protects its citizens against foreign attacks and its soldiers against enemies on the battleground.

If there were ever a setting in which pro-American hate crime protections should be enforced, it is in the military.  American soldiers, more than any other group, actively display dedication to pro-American ideals.

If there were ever a cultural group in modern times that has demonstrated persistent, widespread hostility toward and willingness to engage in violent attacks against Americans, especially Americans in the military, it is radical Islamists.

Naturally, army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan, who adhered to extremist Islamist ideology, sought connections with Al Qaeda, and shouted “Allahu Akbar!” as he massacred 13 soldiers and wounded dozens at Fort Hood last week, is being portrayed by the mainstream media and the present administration as a guy who needs OSHA counseling.

Muslim apologists have been telling us to not jump to conclusions (except that the killings were caused by stress), that the murders weren’t related to Islam, that it’s “speculation” that the military ignored warning signs regarding Hasan.  We get clueless gems like this from the New York Times on Monday: “It is unclear what might have motivated Major Hasan.”  Wusses like Lindsey Graham don’t help by claiming that the murders were “not about his religion—the fact that this man was a Muslim.”  (Wait—isn’t that a conclusion?)  It takes a hawk like Joe Lieberman to initiate hearings into Hasan’s conduct and the military’s failure to eject him for anti-American actions in which he engaged for years.

In the interest of preventing future attacks, I propose that we learn from the following warning signs:

•    Hasan identified as an Islamic fundamentalist, advocated for Muslims to “rise up and attack Americans” in retaliation for war against Muslims abroad, and espoused anti-Semitic views.

•    Hasan rejoiced over the murder of an army recruiter in Arkansas in June by an American convert to Islam.  According to Colonel Terry Lee, who worked with Hasan at Fort Hood, after the attack Hasan helpfully suggested, “Maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Times Square.”

•    In 2003 Sergeant Hasan Karim Akbar—another American convert—slaughtered two U.S. soldiers and wounded 14 more in a grenade and rifle attack on a base in Kuwait in retaliation for the war in Iraq.  (I wonder how Hasan felt about that?)

•    Classmates in Hasan’s master’s program complained of his anti-American views and his insistence that Sharia outweighs U.S. constitutional law.

•    Fellow psychiatrists reported that, at a Grand Rounds talk during his residency, Hasan lectured his audience on Koranic justice, including the proscription to behead nonbelievers and/or pour hot oil down their throats and set them on fire.  Hasan defended suicide bombers, a position he has taken in postings on jihad-themed websites.

•    Hassan called the war on terror a war on Islam and said that military service for the U.S. is incompatible with Muslim beliefs.  (He may be on to something!  About 0.6% of the country identifies as Muslim, compared to only 0.25% of the military.)  Hasan argued that Muslim soldiers should be exempted from combat due to their status as conscientious objectors.

•    At Fort Hood, Hasan received warnings from supervisors for attempting to convert his patients to Islam, though he maintains it was entirely their choice whether to receive castor oil or hot oil for their remedies.

•    The FBI had been investigating Hasan since 2008 and was aware he had sent dozens of e-mails to Al Qaeda spiritual leader Anwar al-Awlaki.  Hasan and his family attended the mosque in Falls Church, Virginia where al-Awlaki served as imam in the months leading up to September 11 and two of the 9/11 hijackers worshiped.

Even if Hasan’s admonitions to slaughter infidels were not evidence enough to convict him of some kind of crime, he should have been ruled unfit for his position by military officials.

Hate crime legislation has been justified as necessary due to specious defenses offered for crimes against minority groups, such as the claim by lawyers for Harvey Milk’s assassin that junk food contributed to his inability to control his actions, or the “homosexual panic defense” that some who feel threatened by advances from a gay person enter a state of irrationality that prompts them to murderously strike out.  Hate crime laws have also been offered to cover minority groups whom police might not adequately protect due to racial bias.  The solution to specious legal defenses and lapses in police enforcement is to treat members of all groups equally, not some better than others.

As a consequence of this inverted mentality, we are warned by our political leaders to ignore the cause of obviously jihad-motivated killing of U.S. soldiers and swallow spurious explanations for the massacre such as stress over anticipated deployment in Afghanistan or the inability of a trained psychiatrist to listen to stories from combat veterans.

The latest enlightened word, from Fort Hood base commander Lieutenant General Robert Cone, regarding the military’s plan to prevent future violence: “What we’re looking for is people with personal problems, not at all related to their religion—not at all.”

I hear the sugar rush from the Halloween candy civilians sent soldiers in care packages can lead them to do some crazy things.

Scott Spiegel writes for the ScottSpiegel.com blog
Article published with the author’s permission

Related articles by Zemanta

• Fort Hood: Army Gains with Muslim Soldiers May Be Lost (time.com)
• The massacre at Fort Hood and Muslim soldiers with attitude (michellemalkin.com)
• Fort Hood: Army Gains with Muslim Soldiers May Be Lost (time.com)
• Officials: U.S. Aware of Hasan Efforts to Contact al Qaeda (abcnews.go.com)
• -Homeland Security’s Upside Down Reaction to Fort Hood (answersforthefaith.com)
• Fort Hood shooting: Texas army killer linked to September 11 terrorists (telegraph.co.uk)

Originally posted 2010-04-19 22:34:05. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
April 19, 2010

My liberal friend Pam and I are a perfect example of the class warfare currently being waged in America between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots.’ Also known as ‘the war against the rich,’ or, in a nutshell, socialism.
 
Though Pam and I are lifelong friends, we couldn’t be more different. Pam is the quintessential liberal, quick to espouse views that show America in a bad light. Sarah Palin is evil, Bush is bad and anyone (like myself) that doesn’t base their decisions on feelings is, well, just plain uncompassionate. End of story. I, on the other hand, am a traditional, conservative Christian.
 
Though conservatives have yet to be included under the leftist’s much vaunted ‘tolerance’ and ‘multicultural’ umbrellas, Pam has decided that she will tolerate her renegade friend, as long as that friend doesn’t publicly air any conservative views. Which is becoming a problem for our friendship.
 
Pam is the product of government schools and a culture that ignores merit in favor of any perceived underdog or victim. She is the proud owner of a Masters Degree, which, according to her, validates all of her leftist views – regardless of any facts to the contrary. And its not her fault that, at the ripe age of 57, she has yet to pay off the student loans that paid for her education.
 
Both Pam and I are the end result of the decisions we have made over the course of our lives. Pam’s choices have resulted in her absolute refusal to participate in capitalism, or our free market system. Instead, she survives on a government check, feeling it is her due. And like most who receive something for nothing, she hates the one whose largesse she has chosen to accept. Kinda like all those countries who get aid from America and hate us for it. Hey, no one likes to be acknowledged as being subservient.
 
Fortunately for Pam, her leftists illusions allow her to maintain the moral high ground. Unlike her capitalist friend, who has never asked for or received dime one from the government. I am considered one of the evil ‘rich.’ Pam graciously ignores this fact, at least until she needs another loan.
 
Pam maintains the romantic illusion of being a struggling, misunderstood artist. She exists on a higher plane than Joe Six pack and Susy Homemaker. She is ‘sensitive’ and totally in tune with Mother Earth, victims of capitalism, and all creature great and small. That my tax dollars allow her this freedom is one of those inconvenient facts that Pam has learned to compartmentalize. Meaning she has chosen to ignore (or demonize) any facts that don’t align with her vision of herself.
 
Like most leftists, Pam believes that life is a zero sum game. If someone has a big slice of the pie, that automatically  means that some poor unfortunate has to do with a smaller slice. And all rich people are only rich because they made their money off the backs of those less fortunate.
 
This mind set, while comforting, is not conducive to material success. Which is OK with Pam, as she has spent her whole life eschewing the almighty dollar, choosing instead to allow others, like her ‘rich’ friend and financially stable family members the favor of periodically bailing her out financially. Her only concession to reality.
 
Ever since Obama was elected president, my friendship with Pam has become strained. Though politics was never a part of our friendship in the past, it has now become a factor. Pam apparently feels that Obama’s socialist agenda is the best thing that ever happened to the Oppressive State of America. And since she knows that everyone feels this way, she has no qualms parroting the Dem’s sound bite of the day as fact.
 
Since I know Obama didn’t really cut taxes by $800 billion, it rankles somewhat that Pam believes it. Pam also believes that the government take over of the private sector is long overdue. And that Obama’s take over of the health care system is the only way to ensure social justice. 
 
I don’t blame Pam for her desire for social justice. After all, she just had both hips replaced, courtesy Uncle Sam. And she sees no reason why other misunderstood victims shouldn’t have access to the same free lunch. But her attitude is starting to rankle.
 
Though I am aware of the politically viable yet destructive effect of pitting one class of Americans against another class, I find I am becoming an active participant. I’m starting to resent my friend. I resent her cavalier, tax-payer funded attitude. I am starting to take umbrage at her assumption that her liberal views are the only valid views and any dissent or challenge to her world view is either racist and/or lacking in compassion.
 
I’m starting to resent the fact that people like myself, dirty little capitalists, are required to support deadbeats who have decided to live off the system. All the while, spitting in the eye of those that provide the means. (Sorry, Pam.)
 
Having been allowed the luxury of basing her life on feelings instead of being forced to make a living, Pam now takes great offense should I dare mention any of these inconvenient realities. She will allow no dissent. Our friendship has become political.

Pam wastes no time analyzing my weekly articles as being motivated solely by hate and ‘lacking in compassion.’ She has adopted the proven tactic of continually forcing me to proving a negative. And I just don’t want to do that anymore, especially since I have lost respect for her.
 
With great regret, I realize Pam has become like so many of her fellow leftists. Willing to defend to the death leftists opinions (that are formed by others) and dismissing out of hand any facts to the contrary. If I don’t agree with her, why, there must be something wrong with me. This attitude is not conducive to friendship.
 
Lifelong friendships that have weathered the test of time are rare and should be cherished. That our current political climate has ended this friendship is regrettable. But this case is not unique. Across the nation, friends are pitted against friends, families are dividing along partisan lines and Americans are being encouraged to resent anyone percieved as having more than their (fair)share of the pie.
 
I fear this will continue and become more pervasive under our current president. Raising the distinct possibility of America’s downfall coming from within. The ‘have nots’ and victims are consolidating their premier position at the public trough, forcing others to pay for their ever evolving version of social justice. And considering that fully half of Americans now pay no federal income taxes yet still vote, the chances of changing this through the ballot box are becoming slimmer.
 
I already miss Pam. Our friendship was very important to me and I am saddened that today’s political climate makes it impossible for good friends to agree to disagree. But if the choice is between actively enabling her views by keeping silent or fighting to keep America from turning into a nation of useful idiots, I’ll choose the latter. Without regret.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
 
Article has been published with the author’s permission. 

Originally posted 2010-11-14 21:11:29. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
November 8, 2010

After living in California for 33 years, I finally decided to leave. I sold my business and my home and relocated to South Carolina.

I moved to California when I was 17. Like most of my fellow residents, I was busy living my life. I gave very little thought to politics, assuming that politicians knew best how to run the state. I wasn’t even aware of the difference between Republicans and Democrats. I would always vote, but with 20/20 hindsight, I see how my votes were manipulated and influenced by the overwhelmingly liberal media.

Until age 36, I pretty much followed the party line, believing what I saw on the news and read in the papers. I figured the ‘experts’ knew better than I, and was relieved not to have to form my own opinions. I relied on group thought, which is, or was, extremely pervasive in the Los Angeles area.

I remember hearing a talk show host describe how a school board in Torrance was successful in defeating a Christian candidate and remember feeling glad that there were others out there working to keep radical influences away from our children. I never questioned the premise that Christians were considered radical.

I adopted as fact the headlines I saw on the news. I was busy living my life. It wasn’t until 1992 that I became aware that I had only been exposed to one side of the story. I was not even aware that there was a conservative point of view.

In 1992, Ross Perot was on TV holding up a toilet seat. Perot said the Air Force had paid something like $700.00 for that toilet seat. He then said the 5 words that changed my life forever. “And this is public knowledge.”

Huh? I decided to check out his claim. And I found that, yes, that information was public knowledge. Only problem was, the media in Los Angeles had never reported it. Just as they never reported any other than the liberal point of view.

After some searching, I latched onto National Review Magazine and the Washington Times. What I found when reading those publications made my blood boil. There was a whole school of thought out there that I had never been exposed to. The conservative point of view. And I found I agreed with their premises.

No matter how thin the pancake, there are always two sides. For 22 years, I had only been exposed to one side of the story. And I came to find that side I had been exposed to was far different from what I had been led to believe. Shame on me.

I assumed that my husband, family and friends would be just as angry as I when I informed them of my new insights. I quickly found out that, then, as now, they were totally opposed to hearing any facts that challenged their long held views.

Long story short, I became a pariah. Conservative views were simply not tolerated back in the 90′s in Los Angeles. When I persisted in voicing my opinions, most of my relationships suffered. My husband left me and my family made clear that there must be something wrong with me. I got tired of the raised eyebrows and condescending smiles. I realized nothing I said would penetrate. The frustration drove me to anger, which pretty much nixed any chance I had of influencing others to my new point of view.

For 8 years, the only place I could be myself was when I covered conservative gatherings. Finally, a stray news item had a catalytic effect on me. I found that 7th graders in San Francisco were being taught how to fist. (A homosexual practice – enough said) Under the guise of teaching tolerance, my tax dollars were being used to fund a week-end ‘health’ fair that brainwashed children into believing that the gay lifestyle was normal – merely a lifestyle choice. That was the last straw.

I took off on a cross country trip, seeking a place where I could be myself and where my tax dollars wouldn’t be continually funding policies with which I fundamentally disagreed. I finally decided on South Carolina. I sold my business and home and left California for good.

I miss many things about California. But after last Tuesday’s election, I realize that living in California is no longer an option for me.

The blatant media malfeasance, the lack of intellectual diversity and the continuing reign of liberal politicians guarantees that California will remain mired in failed liberal policies for the foreseeable future. And I will not condone paying the taxes the state insists upon when I know the money will be spent on promoting a largely discredited liberal agenda. That’s not the America I want to live in.

Since 2002, several of my friends have also left California for good. Studies show that the only increase in population in California right now are immigrants. Which begs the question: Who will be paying the taxes required to fund the utopian agenda put in place by far-left liberals? And how long can California continue to ignore reality before the whole state comes crashing down?

Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe it’s possible Governor-elect Moonbeam can solve the state’s fiscal crisis. Just because he’s a lifetime member of the far left doesn’t mean he can’t change his stripes and usher in the reforms California so desperately needs. By golly, I just saw a pig fly right by my window!

Article posted with the author’s permission.

Related articles

• “Gloria Allred Should Be Disbarred” and related posts (noisyroom.net)
• It’s about freedom, Meathead (dakotavoice.com)
• Canada Free Press Mailout: Waiting for the King’s Return By Judi McLeod, etc. (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Conservative intellectuals kowtow to the Tea Party. (slate.com)
• California here we come – Eureka California, CA (travelpod.com)
• Stolen Without a Gun: On the Left’s Hijacking of Liberalism (blogcritics.org)

Originally posted 2009-11-03 22:24:33. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
November 3, 2009
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In the summer of 2008, then presidential candidate Barack Obama delivered  a historic campaign speech in Germany. With the Berlin Wall as a back drop, Obama proudly informed the masses that he was not there as a candidate, but as “…a fellow citizen of the world.”
 
The crowd went crazy and the world rejoiced. Finally, the United States was ready to join the community of man. 
 
In what former U.S. ambassador to the UN John Bolton calls our first post-American President, Obama has bestowed instant cachet on the growing ranks of Americans who revel in the thought of being the first in their own social set to be considered cutting edge ‘citizens of the world.’ Especially since joining this community of global citizens confers upon them automatic (albeit, unearned) virtue, along with instant and unassailable moral stature. 
 
For those of you who just aren’t with it, (like Christians, conservatives and a few Republicans) here are the latest, up to the minute, details on how to gain inclusion in this trendy and politically correct group.
 
To become a ‘citizen of the world,’ you must first and foremost declare your support for the disenfranchised. Preferably in front of a camera in a very public forum. Just pick a group of victims upon whom you will bestow your empathy and support. The only caveat being that they reside in underdeveloped countries ruled by misunderstood men of good will like Uganda, or Cuba, or Somalia, or…well, you get my drift. Oh, and make sure everyone understands that these victims are only victims because of George W. Bush and/or America.

Next, you must ardently advocate the spending of other people’s money in order to help these poor victims. If you’re one of the fortunate ‘non-rich,’ (meaning your income is under $250,000 and/or you receive a government check every month) then a straight party line vote for the Democrats, frequent letters to the editor and a catchy bumper sticker are strongly recommended. In addition, you must make yourself available for the occasional photo-op or rally, and vocalize your support for all of Obama’s policies to every-one you know. (T-shirts are a very cool way to do this)
 
If you’re unfortunate enough and greedy enough to have an annual income over $250,000, your membership entrance requirements are a bit more stringent. The good news is, you can skip right over victims and concentrate on vital issues like global warming or the evils of capitalism.
 
For all you rich guys out there, its recommended that you use whatever influence you have to advocate for whichever policy Obama is currently trying to foist on the American public. Bumper stickers won’t do it, guys. You need to atone big time.
 
Not to worry, just contact DNC.org and they will give you a list of organizations you should  support. And since you’ve made all that money on the backs of the poor, social justice requires that you give back some of your own money, instead of merely advocating the expenditure of other people’s money.
 
A list of approved recipient groups will be provided free of charge. It is recommended that you give early and often. ACORN is the most needy cause as of this writing. But whatever group you decide to donate your bucks to, rest assured, Obama is in the process of making those donations tax deductible.
 
If you happen to be filthy rich and/or an elected official or head of a union, different rules apply. In order to be considered a citizen of the world, all you have to do is believe (faking belief is totally OK) in Obama’s vision of utopia. You must believe, or at least profess to believe, that world peace is possible, that the earth is melting, that diplomacy trumps war and that America is the cause of all the world’s problems. Other that that, the only real requirement is a constant and sustained effort to ensure that global governance trumps American sovereignty.
 
Hat-tip: it wouldn’t hurt if you make known that yours was one of the Swiss bank accounts the Obama administration recently forced the Swiss to disclose. That alone will ensure you are recognized by the right people.
 
There you have it, fellow comrades. If you have followed the above steps, we want to officially welcome you as a new ‘citizen of the world.’ Take a load off. You are now eligible to engage in global groupthink, which means that you will never again be forced to make any moral, financial or life decisions on your own. More membership perks are already in the works, and you guys will be the first to benefit! Kumbaya.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina

Article has been published with the author’s permission

Related articles by Zemanta

• Has Obama met the hopes of the world?(guardian.co.uk)
• Obama’s year of vitriol and rebuff at home, deadlock abroad. Not a bad start at all | Jonathan Freedland(guardian.co.uk)
• Letter From Washington: A Culture of Business as Usual(nytimes.com)
• Another Self-Inflicted Wound(powerlineblog.com)
• He’s Still No-Drama Obama(usnews.com)
• Divided Republicans hope for big victories in Virginia, New Jersey(cnn.com)
• John Hannah’s Tone-Deaf Political Strategy(themoderatevoice.com)
• “Obama and today’s elections” and related posts(publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com)
• “Bill Owens, Doug Hoffman, New York Congressional Race Live, Winner” and related posts(rightpundits.com)
• Job-Creation Panel Leery of Spending(online.wsj.com)
• By visiting our war dead, Obama passes Dover test(americablog.com)