Paint The Obama Administration With Halliburton Brush Coated With AIG

Officials handling the multibillion dollar bailout of insurance giant American International Group Inc. mismanaged an initial rescue attempt and may have overpaid other banks to wind down AIG's business relationships, a government watchdog says. Image Credit: Mark Lennihan

Paint The Obama Administration With Halliburton Brush Coated With AIG

The facts are surfacing about the activities of Timothy Geithner and his transition into the Obama Administration and the bail-out of AIG.

These facts should have the press take out the Halliburton brush and begin painting the Obama Administration with a healthy coat of AIG.

The reference here is to compare the point of view that the Mainstream Media held with respect to the relationship the Bush Administration had with the exclusive contract bid process they used to engage Halliburton Corporation in providing services on a sub-contract basis in the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan.

With Halliburton, however, the argument can be made that this corporation was unique in being able to provide the services required and the Government did, in fact, receive the services contracted for. The American people got what they paid for.

What did the American people get from the management of its money spent on AIG and how was this effort managed.

For his part, Barack Obama assured us all how the Government would operate in a speech just after the $787 Billion dollar Stimulus Bill was passed by Congress.

With the party-line voting on the stimulus marking a defeat for his push for bipartisanship, Obama shifted focus to something else most un-Washington: making government spending transparent.

"Washington hasn't set a very good example in recent years, and with so much on the line, it's time to begin doing things differently," he said.

"I've tasked my Cabinet and staff to set up the kind of management, oversight, and disclosure that will help ensure that."

Enter (tax-cheat) Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner ... it was revealed today in an article appearing in the Washington Post that he did not negotiate with the AIG corporate primaries, let alone the additional connected web of companies associated with AIG, a discount on the money to be paid to financial institutions to secure their sub-prime portfolio assets in order to save these institutions from collapsing. The taxpayer money committed paid 100% on the value of the assets purchased.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner: The Federal Reserve Bank of New York didn't even try to get a good deal for taxpayers when it caved to demands from AIG's creditors that they should be paid in full. Image Credit: Clusterstock

This excerpted and edited from the Washington Post -

Fed criticized for not negotiating harder with AIG creditors
Inspector general says decisions during bailout 'came with a cost'
By Brady Dennis, Washington Post Staff Writer - Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Federal Reserve officials made only a passing attempt to negotiate discounts from the creditors of American International Group last fall before directing the company to fully pay what it owed on its troubled derivatives contracts, according to a report from the special inspector general overseeing the government's financial rescue program.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, who was then the president of the New York Fed, concurred with advisers that it would be impractical to impose losses on AIG's counterparties and that they essentially should be paid at 100 cents on the dollar, the report by special inspector general Neil Barofsky states.
----
The government extended an $85 billion loan to AIG in September 2008 as the company struggled to pay obligations related to derivatives contracts at its Financial Products unit. According to Barofsky, that initial loan came with a high interest rate, which "inadequately addressed AIG's long term liquidity concerns, thus requiring further government support."

Later, New York Fed officials agreed to buy tens of billions of dollars worth of complex securities that would allow Financial Products to cancel its most troublesome contracts, and staff members developed talking points that stressed to AIG's trading partners that they were benefiting from the bailouts and asked them to agree to concessions, according to Barofsky.
----
Ultimately, AIG's trading partners received more than $62 billion, which many critics have branded as "backdoor bailouts."

In a letter commenting on Barofsky's report, Fed officials called the original AIG loan "appropriate in light of the circumstances at the time." In addition, they argued that the Fed had done what it could in trying to negotiate with AIG's trading partners.

"We believe that the Federal Reserve acted appropriately in conducting these negotiations, and that our negotiating strategy, including the decision to treat all counterparties equally, was not flawed or unreasonably limited," the letter said. It said the Fed actively sought concessions from AIG's counterparties, "but was unable to obtain any such agreements." The officials added that they were wary of using their supervisory authority on behalf of AIG to impose losses on other companies.
Reference Here>>

The American taxpayer got what it paid for ... through the tens of billions of dollars to AIG and its network of companies. A 'still ugly' economy with a group of financial executives that will be giving some of the money they received with their intact multi-million dollar pay bonuses, political contributions to this one-party "CONTROL" Government regime we have three more years (hopefully, only one) to endure.

It is high time to start painting!

The Obama Administration, The EPA, & Free Speech

U.S. EPA attorneys Allan Zabel and Laurie Williams produce a YouTube video (The Huge Mistake Climate Change 2009) and are asked to take it down by the EPA and the Obama Administration [ctrl-click to launch video]. Video Credit: Allan Zabel and Laurie Williams via oversightandreform

The Obama Administration, The EPA, & Free Speech

The short answer ... It is not happening.

This probably isn't surprising to many who are critics of the current leadership of our country, that the Government is actively working against the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights in order to insure that their approach to governance carries the day, but this last week saw the passing of a troubling example of this kind of action and attitude.

A couple of lawyers who work for the Environmental Protection Agency, who are all for the protection and care of the environment and green agenda of the United States, posted a YouTube video voicing their objection to the effort at fashioning legislation that would measure CO2 emission outputs of business activity and set limits on the level of emissions an effort can produce.

This legislation is commonly called "Cap & Trade" where the Government is able to assess penalties on the CO2 emissions produced above the authorized level and thereby make the business effort more expensive to the end products the effort creates which is then reflected in the price to the consumer. This legislation amounts to a backdoor TAX to the purchasing public on all products the Government deems worthy of scrutiny in their CO2 creating activities.

These two lawyers do not believe that this approach of Cap & Trade is not good and a "huge mistake". They argue that the legislation, while making the offense of producing CO2 costly, allows offenders to continue to create emissions without actually reducing or improving the activity that creates the CO2 gas in the first place and makes the activity more costly but OK!

This excerpted and edited from the Washington Post -

EPA tells workers to tone down YouTube clip about climate bill
By David A. Fahrenthold, Washington Post Staff Writer - Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Two Environmental Protection Agency lawyers who made a YouTube video calling current climate legislation a "huge mistake" were told by the agency to remove the clip and edit out some references to their employer, one of them said.

Allan Zabel and Laurie Williams, a husband and wife who have worked in the EPA's San Francisco office for more than 20 years, have been outspoken in their opposition to a "cap and trade" system for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

That system -- in which companies may buy and sell the right to pollute -- is at the heart of a climate bill passed by the House this summer, and another under consideration in the Senate.

On Oct. 31, the two made their case in an opinion piece in The Washington Post, saying the bill was fatally flawed by the inclusion of unreliable "carbon offsets," and would "lock in climate degradation" instead of solving it.

A few days later, Williams said, they were approached by EPA ethics officials. She said the officials demanded they take down a YouTube video they had posted in September that made many of the same points.

In the video, Zabel says none of their statements should be construed as an official position of the EPA or the Obama administration. But Williams said the EPA wanted them to further play down their federal connections. The officials said they could repost the video, she said, if they removed a mention of the length of their experience at EPA.

Another comment, in which Zabel said he oversees a cap-and-trade system for smog-causing pollutants in California, also had to go, she said. In addition, the agency said they had to take out a photo of the EPA's San Francisco office building.

The EPA cited a federal regulation that says government employees may note their official position when making statements on their own time -- as long as their title is "given no more prominence than other significant biographical details."

Williams said the pair have taken down their video, although it was reposted by an environmental group.
Reference Here>>

China's president, Hu Jintao, meets US President Barack Obama tomorrow. Obama has said that a treaty is unlikely to be ratified at Copenhagen. Delaying a treaty for long enough for the US to sign up might mean that China would be willing to sign up. Image Credit: Kevin Lamarque

Addendum:

This consternation voiced by a couple of committed left bureaucrat lawyers from the EPA may be the reason why President Barack Obama is signaling that the meeting of world leaders on an over-reaching Global Warming agreement next month in Copenhagen ... may be put off.

There is a division in the ranks on the left that Cap & Trade does not go far enough, while on the right, having the President sign away our country's sovereignty in a world governance agreement may not be in the best interest of our nation ... ever!

This excerpted and edited from The Guardian -

Copenhagen climate talks: No deal, we're out of time, Obama warns
Gordon Brown still hopes to salvage climate talks as US rules out binding targets
David Adam, Jonathan Watts and Patrick Wintour - guardian.co.uk, Sunday 15 November 2009 21.36 GMT

Barack Obama acknowledged today that time had run out to secure a legally binding climate deal at the Copenhagen summit in December and threw his support behind plans to delay a formal pact until next year at the earliest.

During a hastily convened meeting in Singapore, the US president supported a Danish plan to salvage something from next month's meeting by aiming to make it a first-stage series of commitments rather than an all-encompassing protocol.

Postponing many contentious decisions on emissions targets, financing and technology transfer until the second-stage, leaders will instead try to reach a political agreement in Copenhagen that sends a strong message of intent.

While this falls short of hopes that the meeting would lock in place a global action plan to replace the Kyoto protocol, it recognises the lack of progress in recent preparatory talks and the hold-ups of climate legislation in the US Senate.
---
Britain's climate change secretary, Ed Miliband, tried to put a brave face on Obama's move, insisting it is still possible to reach a broad political agreement on carbon emissions targets, but senior Labour MPs admitted they feared the necessary momentum for a detailed agreement would be sucked from the Copenhagen event if politicians know a deal has been postponed to the next scheduled meeting in Mexico City next year.
----
There will now be intense discussions on whether the political agreement at Copenhagen contains any detailed meaningful commitments.
----
Obama spoke in support of the proposal, cautioning the group not to let the "perfect be the enemy of the good".

The proposal by Denmark would buy time for the US Senate to pass carbon-capping legislation, allowing the Obama administration to bring a 2020 target and financing pledges to the table at a UN climate meeting in mid-2010.

But there are many other divisions between developed and developing nations that could prolong talks. It was unclear if China, the world's biggest emitter, and other developing countries supported the two-stage plan.
----
According to the UK government's former chief scientist Sir David King, these talks are the best chance for the world to agree a new deal. "Once Hu Jintao and Obama agree, I think the rest of the world could fall into place," he told the Guardian. "It's a head of state issue. Obama, through an agreement with Hu Jintao, could be able to deal with some of the concerns of the American population."
----
"Copenhagen has come a year too early. There was no way Obama could get this together for December this year," said King. Chinese negotiators have been saying much the same thing in private.
Reference Here>>

Obama As Commander-In-Chief ... From A Law Professor Perspective

President tells Jake Tapper it was important to let the investigation play itself out so the details as to how and why the rampage happened are known before he comments further [ctrl-click to launch video]. Image Credit: ABC News

Obama As Commander-In-Chief ... From A Law Professor Perspective

Yesterday, Jake Tapper of ABC News had a sit down interview with President Barack Obama at the White House that covered many of the pressing issues of the day from the economy (unemployment at 10.2%), the Congress passing its version of a Health Care system overhaul (that included a ban on Federal funding of abortion procedures), Afghanistan and a slow-paced troop build-up, and a small discussion on the mass murder rampage by Major Nidal Malik Hasan at Fort Hood and its meaning in the face of 9/11, jihad, and acts of terrorism.

One would expect that President Obama, as Commander-In-Chief over all of our American military, would have a profound and decisive response to almost any act that would be damaging to the moral, unity of purpose, and overall readiness of our armed forces. Sadly, Barack Hussein Obam(Mmmm, Mmmmm, Mmmmmm)a's response, and this in light that this Nov. 5 shooting rampage happened 4 days ago, was anything but one that had the steely resolve of a Commander-In-Chief.

No, the response from Barack Obama was one of a Chicago university law professor, ending a discussion where he wanted the students to think of the professor as one burdened with so much knowledge, that a direct and resolved answer would give away too much and spur the students to want to study more.

ABC News is out front on the Fort Hood massacre story. Correspondent Brian Ross is reporting that U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Hasan was attempting to contact associates of Al Qaeda [ctrl-click to launch video]. Image Credit: ABC News

This excerpted and edited from ABC News -

Obama: All Necessary Steps Will Be Taken to Prevent Another Tragedy Like Fort Hood
By JAKE TAPPER, KAREN TRAVERS, SUNLEN MILLER and DEVIN DWYER - Nov. 9, 2009

On Tuesday, Obama will attend a memorial service at Fort Hood for the 13 killed in last week's shooting. Today he reiterated that the nation is "heartbroken" by what happened there Thursday, but said there are many questions to be answered.

The president was asked about an ABC News report that intelligence officials learned months ago that Maj. Malik Nidal Hasan had reached out via the Internet to al Qaeda affiliates, and had passed it into military intelligence, though no official actions seem to have been taken. But he wouldn't say directly whether he was concerned that the U.S. government failed to communicate with itself as was seen in the investigation into 9/11.
----
Asked what philosophically separates an act of violence from an act of terrorism, the president said, "I think the questions that we're asking now and we don't have yet complete answers to is, is this an individual who's acting in this way or is it some larger set of actors? You know, what are the motivations? Those are all questions that I think we have to ask ourselves. Until we have these answers buttoned down, I'd rather not comment on it.
Reference Here>>

Obama's statement on May 31, 2009, just hours after George Tiller's death (the assassination of a renowned abortion doctor at the hands of another): "I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."

Why couldn't have Obama issued a statement similar just hours as opposed to days after the murderous act to the statement he issued for the Tiller murder like ... "However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as religious freedom and jihad, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."

As Commander-In-Chief over all of our American military, President Barack Obama has an obligation to lead and protect - not to philosophize over what type of mass murder this act represents ... but to make sure it does not happen again beyond any considerations of Political Correctness.

Obama Administration: Horse Trading For Healthcare Control

Nancy Pelosi couldn’t have announced the new House healthcare reform bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962), with any more pomp and circumstance. It was certainly more impressive than the Senate’s mouse-like rollout, apparently intended to avoid rubbing salt in the Baucus “bipartisanship” wound. H.R. 3962 is definitely a major milestone in attempting to reform our broken system-less healthcare; it’s historic, certainly. But no, it’s not the best our legislators could do. Image Credit: Wikipedia

Obama Administration: Horse Trading For Healthcare Control

Many have said it over these last several months ... "It's the Chicago way." What pundits have been reacting to is the way Barack Obama and the Administration around him negotiate in bad faith in order to get what they want, politically, even when the outcome will create more damage to our Constitutional country than fix the problems they say they are trying to address.

Just this last week, President Obama was able to come to the microphones Friday and tout the fact that he has received the endorsements of some pretty recognizable health care and special interest advocacy groups in the run up to the close approval of the House of Representatives Bill for the radical overhaul of America's health care insurance industry - HR-3962.

This excerpted and edited from The Doc Is In -

Health Care Reform 2009: Why Did the AMA & AARP Back Obamacare?
by Dick Morris & Eileen McGann

Here are the deals:

* The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians’ reimbursements under the current law.

Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5-6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors and as of this point in time, they have risen to 21 percent. With this leverage as blackmail, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill … or else!

* The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill.

Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP — which supposedly represents them — will make more money. (If this galls you, join the American Seniors Association, the alternative group; contact sbarton@americanseniors.org. This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it).

* The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs.

This represents chump-change to HR-3962's almost $3 trillion projected costs over the next decade. They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.

* Insurance companies get access to 36-40 million potential new customers.

When the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who don’t buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship and opposed the bill, albeit for the worst of motives - so the fine stood.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the Medical Device Makers (MDM). They stood on principle and wouldn’t go along with Obama’s blackmail strategy for an endorsement. The Senate Finance Committee reacted to this stance by imposing a tax on the MDM marketplace targeting medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accouterments and consumables of healthcare.
Reference Here>>

So, these endorsements were not freely given, but were bought and paid for by an administration that is intent on passing its "Control of Healthcare" program at any cost. This is not the American way, you know, for the good of the country ...

... It's the Chicago way!

Welcome to the new, and improved Carter's Second Term.

Obama / Ayers Link Surfaces In An Oblique Way

In his first address to the UN General Assembly, the President denounces reflexive anti-Americanism and calls on the world's leaders to recognize the common challenges we face while delivering a litany of internal accomplishments and policy changes his Administration has impleminted. Image Credit: WhiteHouse.Gov

Obama / Ayers Link Surfaces In An Oblique Way

Barack Obama's personal relationships and their effect toward the way he governs are a little like discovering the effect of sun spot activity on the climate of the Earth!

In a new book just released, Christopher Andersen’s Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage, a reference was made based upon information the author was able to get through interviews with friends and neighbors. Normally, this information would not mean so much, but in the light of the multiple Czar appointments and the lack of background check of those in the shadow government Barack Obama is setting up ... without Congressional oversight, combined with the recent revelations of Van Jones (recently dispatched Green Jobs Czar due to radical, political affiliations that were recently uncovered), and independent ACORN investigations/convictions for illegal activity, this past connection validation becomes of greater importance.

In Barack and Michelle, America’s First Couple is scrutinized in stirring detail by Christopher Andersen, author of thirteen New York Times bestsellers including Jack and Jackie, Somewhere in Heaven, and the phenomenal #1 New York Times bestsellers The Day Diana Died and The Day John Died. Subtitled Portrait of an American Marriage, here is the first in-depth look at the popular U.S. President and his beautiful, brilliant, and stylish First Lady. Caption & Image Credit: HarperCollins

This excerpted and edited from Pajamas Media -

An Old Claim Arises Once More: Did Barack Obama Write ‘Dreams From My Father’?
By Ron Radosh - September 23rd, 2009 8:52 pm - Pajamas Media

Those who were skeptical of Barack Obama’s bona fides before the campaign, particularly the nature of his apparent relationship (or non-relationship, if you believe Obama) with Bill Ayers, will be stunned by Jack Cashill’s new revelation. Remember Cashill? He is a Ph.D. in American Studies from Purdue University and a blogger at American Thinker, one of the multitudes of conservative websites.

In October 2008, Cashill penned a much discussed blog, in which he suggested the possibility that Bill Ayers actually was the ghost writer for Barack Obama’s powerful memoir, Dreams From My Father. His claim was so reminiscent of the discussion before Bill Clinton’s first campaign about who wrote the novel Primary Colors, which bore only the name “Anonymous.” Some suspected Joe Klein, the political journalist. Klein vehmently denied the allegation. Then, he was forced to admit authorship when a literary detective compared phrases in Klein’s writings and those in the novel for New York magazine, and Klein was forced to hold a press conference admitting that he indeed was the author.
----
And so his effort became just another one of those apparent conspiracy theories so prevalent in the ranks of both the left and the right. Then at the end of June 2009, Cashill returned to his original article.
----
Again, the two contributors and Cashill played literary detective, offering more examples of strange similarities in the metaphors used in both Ayers’ Fugitive Days and in Obama’s Dreams. One of them found 759 striking similarities. Cashill found one of his contributor’s analysis to be “systematic, comprehensive, and utterly, totally, damning.” You can read his article and judge for yourself.

And now, Cashill picked up the new bestseller about Obama and his wife, Christopher Andersen’s Barack and Michelle:Portrait of an American Marriage. What he found simply threw him for a loop because, I suspect, it was the last thing Cashill expected to find. Andersen writes in his book that after Obama finally got a new contract to write a book, Michelle Obama suggested that her husband get advice “from his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers.”
----
Obama had not as yet written anything. But he had taped interviews with family members. Andersen writes: “These oral histories, along with a partial manuscript and a truckload of notes, were given to Ayers.”
----
Andersen also writes, quoting a Hyde Park neighbor of Obama: “Everyone knew they were friends and that they worked on various projects together. It was no secret. Why would it be? People liked them both.”
----
Finally, Christopher Andersen concludes: “In the end, Ayers’s contribution to Barack’s Dreams From My Father would be significant — so much so that the book’s language, oddly specific references, literary devices, and themes would bear a jarring similarity to Ayers’s own writing.”

Let me make the point as sharply as possible. A book about the relationship of the first couple, their history together, and their road to the presidency makes the point in passing that is precisely the same as that made by Jack Cashill. Most reviewers, and readers, will probably read this in passing and go on.
----
In the meantime, Cashill promises us more is coming. I, for one, look forward to reading what he comes up with.
Reference Here>>

Unearthed! Barack Obama's Twisted ACORN Roots

Anti-ACORN Guerrilla Art goes viral in Los Angeles. Here is an example, stencil spray painted on the side of a signal control box on a typical LA street corner. Image Credit: Publius

Unearthed! Barack Obama's Twisted ACORN Roots

Many of the citizens here in the lower 48 (otherwise known in Canada as Americans), have been treated to a fair amount of change in the political landscape over the last week or so.

It really all started with the fact that a whole lot of people showed up at, and filled the mall park that runs between the Capitol Dome building and the Washington Monument (about one mile long and 1/4 mile wide).

ABC News posted a story dated September 12, 2009 quoting a DC fire department official as estimating the crowd at 70,000 people but upon further investigation, the very first comment was logged at 1:59AM (the actual times have since been scrubbed from the log of comments), the very early morning before the gathering even got started. Maybe ABC News got confused in that the estimate of the crowd may have been for people sleeping in the mall area waiting for the gathering to begin some six hours later!

Then, at the beginning of the week, investigative tapes began to be broadcast by FOX News and Andrew Brietbat's new website "BigGovernment.Com" catching the largest names in media flat-footed. The first tape showed ACORN advisers instructing two young people, one posing as a pimp, and the other, a hooker, on how to fill out the paperwork so that the house they wanted to use as a brothel would qualify for Government/Taxpayer money. This tape, combined with the successful prosecutions of ACORN on the charges of voter fraud, caused the Census Bureau to drop the organization from the list of agencies they planned to use to collect information for them from citizens.

Four more tapes were shown throughout the week and it has become apparent the ACORN suffers from a "culture of corruption", so much so that both houses of Congress decided to vote to de-fund the organization from any Federal monies it may receive and to be placed on a list to never do business with them ever again.

For The Record: The “De-fund ACORN Act” passed the House Thursday, September 17th, 2009 by an overwhelming margin of 345-75. The House vote comes just days after the Senate voted 83-7 to block ACORN from receiving federal housing grants. With these votes, 80% of the members of Congress have weighed in to block ACORN from receiving any more taxpayer dollars.

The President of the United States, Barack Obama, insists that his ties to the organization, ACORN, were minimal but here is some information that might be useful to those who would like to have a complete understanding of the ties that bind this President to an organization that has grown and thrived by building itself on a "culture of corruption".

Anti-ACORN Guerrilla Art goes viral in Los Angeles where Obama “Hope” poster artist, Shepard Fairey, studio wall was targeted with the stencil spray painted image. Image Credit: Publius

This excerpted and edited from WorldNetDaily -

While ACORN remains riddled in scandal, lawmakers have voted to cut off federal funding to the group, the U.S. Census Bureau has severed ties to the organization – and the White House has blasted its behavior as "unacceptable."

But just how extensive are President Obama's personal ties to ACORN?

The following is a timeline outlining some of the purported connections between the president and ACORN through the years:

1990s: Obama meets ACORN

ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, first noticed Obama when he was organizing on the far south side of the city with the Developing Communities Project. A March 2, 2008, Los Angeles Times article by Letta Tayler and Keith Herbert, titled "Obama Forged Path As Chicago Community Organizer," explored Obama's pre-law school days as a community organizer in Chicago and his efforts to build a partnership with Chicago's "Friends of the Parks."

"Obama's task was to help far South Side residents press for improvement," the Times article explained.

National Review Online noted, "Part of Obama's work, it would appear, was to organize demonstrations, much in the mold of radical groups like ACORN."

The Times article reveals that Madeleine Talbot, who at the time was a leader at Chicago ACORN, was thoroughly impressed with Obama because "he got people to vote with their feet."

"At the time, Talbot worked at the social action group ACORN and initially considered Obama a competitor," the article stated. "But she became so impressed with his work that she invited him to help train her staff."

Talbott personally led Chicago ACORN's campaign to intimidate banks into making high-risk loans to low-credit customers, Stanley Kurtz reported.

"Long the director of Chicago ACORN, Talbott is a specialist in 'direct action' – organizers' term for their militant tactics of intimidation and disruption," Kurtz writes. "Perhaps her most famous stunt was leading a group of ACORN protesters breaking into a meeting of the Chicago City Council to push for a 'living wage' law, shouting in defiance as she was arrested for mob action and disorderly conduct. But her real legacy may be her drive to push banks into making risky mortgage loans."

MORE AT SOURCE>>

I recovered the copy of the comment that was made by the original ABC News article (referenced at the top) on the attendance to the 9/12 Tea Party Rally on the Washington DC mall:

"The time stamp of the very first comment says it all - it was stamped in advance of the rally, way in advance - comment and stamp here:

obama gave his speech to congress on wednesday, not tuesday as the article states twice.
Posted by: ericgwitte 1:59 AM"
Link>>

This is beginning to become one rockin' beginning to Carter's Second Term!

9/12 "Million MOB March" A Success Without MSM Help

9/12 "Million MOB March" - Image Credit: Mary Kathrine Ham

9/12 "Million MOB March" A Success Without MSM Help

Here in Carter's Second Term, many thought that life would carry on in a business as usual, politics as usual kind of approach.

Sure, Barack Obama made history by becoming the first man with African DNA in his blood to be elected as President of the United States, and sure, he ran and campaigned on being the one man who could reach across the divides in this country by being the first "post-racial" and "post-partisan" chief executive to hold the office ... but that was not meant to be.

Under his leadership (and the leadership of the Democrat-Party controlled Congress), the debt has quadrupled with the passage of two large spending bills (Stimulus and Omnibus), a further executive spending initiative known by TARP, started by the previous Administration (Bush) but expanded and used as a tool to take-over two of the three domestic automobile manufacturers in the United States and change the ownership matrix away from investors and place labor unions in the majority ownership position, along with the Federal Government. A serious attempt to take-over about one-sixth of our economy and bring into a single-payer Government program of CONTROL making all decisions about ones health the power of government boards (death panels) while driving out free enterprise. And lastly, an energy policy that would make some forms of common energy (coal and petroleum) virtually unavailable if not very expensive and scarce.

9/12 "Million MOB March" - View of Capitol Dome from adjacent grounds packed with small government, lower taxes activists - Image Credit: Twitpiv via Prisminc

Enter the Tea Party movement.

Named after the uprising and revolt that eventually led to the formation of this country after, as a colony of England, the territory occupied by people who, for the most part left England to start a life free from excessive Monarchical control over their lives from the King of England, had large taxes places on many goods and services produced or imported in the country. A revolt in Boston led to the dumping of bales of tea being imported into the country but this tea had new taxes placed on its sale and so, in a show of defiance, the tea was dumped into the harbor and the Boston Tea Party was born into the lore of the United States.

9/12 "Million MOB March" - View of Tea Party Movement protest rally from the Capitol Building Dome down the mall to the Washington Monument tower ... one mile away - Image Credit: Hutch123

Today, people (53% and rising) are not happy that their elected representatives are not listening to them. The representatives are voting on, and passing legislation into law without reading the bills that they are voting on. The government is not even allowing any time or the ability for the people to see and read proposed legislation so that they understand what the representatives are committing WE THE PEOPLE to pay for and to do!

September 10, 2001, our country was safe and life was good. September 11, 2001, our country was viciously attacked by a group of 19 islamo-fascist terrorist that wanted to take away the freedoms we enjoy in this country. The day, September, 12 of any year has stood as a response that our freedoms will never die and we will all stand up as Americans to proclaim this to be true.

September 12, 2009, a perfect storm of grass-roots protest came together in Washington DC and it did not have the sponsorship of any political party, no support from special interest groups and/or unions, and absolutely no help from the established "Fourth Estate" known in this country as the Main Stream Media (MSM).

This excerpted and edited from Michelle Malkin -

Celebrating the 9/12 rallies; Turnout estimated at 2 million
By Michelle Malkin • September 12, 2009 10:06 AM

It’s been an unprecedented year for limited government activism. It would never have been possible without the early initiative of grass-roots leaders in the #tcot community on Twitter, Smart Girl Politics #DontGo — and concerned women like Keli Carender and Amanda Grosserode who stood up in their communities against reckless spending in Washington before anyone was listening. Before the cable news was paying attention. Before it became fashionable for politicians to latch on.

Activists were derided as amateurs who couldn’t turn out a crowd. Then they were smeared as corporate shills. They were criticized for not having a coherent message. Then they were mocked for ideological single-mindedness. They are resented by professional strategists who accuse them of organizing empty protests that won’t translate into electoral gains. But the movement has given birth to a new generation of movers and shakers who have rejected establishment partisan politics for nimble, Internet-facilitated, issues-based advocacy.
----
The Tea Party Express blog is here.

12:34pm Eastern: Police estimate 1.2 million in attendance. ABC News reporting crowd at 2 million — tweets Tabitha Hale from D.C.

Teeny, tiny fringe, huh?
----
Update: Tabitha Hale says Parks & Rec estimated 1.2 million. An ABC News correspondent says it wasn’t national ABC News network that reported 2 million figure. I take them at their word — and am checking to find out more info.

So, how many were there? Allah looks at the numbers reports here.
Reference Here>>

9/12 "Million MOB March" - Taking it to the streets in Washington DC - Image Credit: Twitpiv via Brooks Bayne

COMMENT (on attendance article made at a social media portal):
ABC News, citing the DC fire department, reported that between 60,000 and 70,000 people had attended the tea party rally at the Capitol. By the time this figure reached Michelle Malkin, however, it had been blown up to 2,000,000. There is a big difference, obviously, between 70,000 and 2,000,000. That's not a twofold or threefold exaggeration -- it's roughly a thirtyfold exaggeration.

The way this false estimate came into being is relatively simple: Matt Kibbe, the president of FreedomWorks, lied, claiming that ABC News had reported numbers of between 1.0 and 1.5 million when they never did anything of the sort. A few tweets later, the numbers had been exaggerated still further to 2 million. Kibbe wasn't "in error", as Malkin gently puts it. He lied. He did the equivalent of telling people that his penis is 53 inches long.

Malkin, who to her credit later corrected the error, frets that it might be used to by liberals to "discredit the undeniably massive turnout". She's right to be worried -- it absolutely will be used that way. If you don't want to be discredited, then don't, as Kibbe did, tell a ridiculous (and easily disprovable) lie.

RESPONSE (to comment by blog author on attendance article made at a social media portal):
The photos do not lie but maybe the MSM did a little pumping up so that people who still support this style of leadership could make the counter-argument that you are making.

The truth is that the New York Times, the Washington Post and many other MSM print outlets are embargoing (not mentioning) the fact that a march ever took place. The photos confirm that one of the largest gatherings EVER in the mall at the nation's capitol took place.

Just because official estimates have been done away with through policy after the much hyped "Million Man March" (remember that socialist and race-focused fiasco? ... 200,000 at best) was such a bust, let us just half the estimate of a few broadcast MSM outlets and call it a solid million people ... and report it as a very successful protest against the policies of a One-Party rule government.