The Reptilian, Repulsive Pelosi, aka Spartacus, Bears Her Yellow Fangs at the White House.

We must tolerate countless personality types in our encounters with other beings on this planet although some of them appear to be a bit more agreeable to deal with than others. Most of us might think that nearly all and sundry of us are just ordinary people who can be sensible in their dealings with their peers and this holds, for the most part, until we enter the political arena. In that snake pit, we expect no mercy or quarter for any and all forms of conduct. Today, we discuss an essay into hate and lunacy from those well skilled in the art.

In today’s Associated Press we read that [Nancy] Pelosi Wants Bush Aides Investigated [1]and we might mistakenly assume that this notion should encompass some basis in truth or law to ostensibly proceed. It seems that Pelosi, aka Spartacus, given this name in honor of Rosa Luxemburg [2]who briefly  established some independent Soviet State in Germany in 1919, has to conduct reverse McCarthyism [3]style ‘investigations’ into White House operations in the case of firing federal prosecutors in 2006, a constitutional perogative of the Executive Branch, which requires no approval of Congress. It seems that such probable dumping of the undesirable and/or incompetent graduates of certain law schools [either real or percieved] when they are not following Justice Department instructions and the following the general theme of the President is unacceptable to the rabid left although Clinton fired all of them after he clawed his way into the Oval Office.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi [4] [5], current leader of the Spartakusbundasked the Justice Department  Thursday to open a grand jury investigation, in the spirit of a reptilian humanoid, into whether President Bush's chief of staff and former counsel should be prosecuted for contempt of Congress. Her frolics are described in her own maniacal shrieks:

"There is no authority by which persons may wholly ignore a subpoena and fail to appear as directed because a president unilaterally instructs them to do so," Pelosi wrote Mukasey. She noted that Congress subpoenaed Miers to appear before the House Judiciary Committee, which is investigating the firings.”[6]

There are two salient facts here:

[1] No crime was committed when Bush, or whoever, fired WH appointees and, thusly, there is no basis for any ‘investigation’ unless Congress thinks they can employ a McCarthy style ‘investigation’ of Miers or Bolton that surges back 15 years and includes all of their bank accounts, contracts, leases, letters, video rentals, e-mail and also their family members as the Millard Tydings [7]Hearings did to Senator Joe McCarthy. All this is outlined in the new book Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies by M. Stanton Evans. This event would become a wild celebration with the howlings of ‘contempt of Congress.’ It is very difficult to not be guilty of contempt of Congress by any citizen given their low approval rating and obnoxious Marxian rants of such a person as Nancy Pelosi. Many of these people are intolerable.

[2] Article II of the Constitution.  Separation of powers. 

This is a hunting expedition. They are groping for a sensation. It seems that the House, under Iron Hand of Spartacus, has to time to fish for minnows in an ocean of illegal aliens, street crime and Islamo-Fascists, many centered in San Francisco, but cannot seem to find time to put up the FISA bill for a vote. Her quest for new forms of Staatswissenschaft is ongoing.Translated, that means anything but capitalism.

“"Rather than passing critical national security legislation, they continue to squander time on partisan hijinx," Fratto said. Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said "this sort of pandering to the left-wing fever swamps of loony liberal activists does nothing to make America safer."[8]

Reshrieking the same oath we read:

“She added: "Short of a formal assertion of executive privilege, which cannot be made in this case, there is no authority that permits a president to advise anyone to ignore a duly issued congressional subpoena for documents."

Why not?? She may be merely confused and unconsciously channeling back to the case where former White House aides Sidney Blumenthal and Bruce Lindsey were forced to appear before a grand jury to answer its questions. [9] That is an outage that the rabid left cannot put down.

Is there really some formal procedure where executive privilege must be exercised? One wonders what happened to the concept of separation of powers we used to know. Apparently, Harriet Miers would have her legal imperative of client-counsel secrecy rights abrogated by the House. In the amusing case of the scrutiny of Clinton for Perjury we read:

“Following his day of testimony [who was subpoenaed], Blumenthal told reporters, "If Ken Starr is interested in the truth, he heard it today."

"The president shared his account of the Lewinsky matter with me," Blumenthal said. "He did so unguardedly and freely under the assumption that we were speaking in complete privacy. What I told the grand jury under oath supports completely what the president has told the American people and is contrary to any charge that the president has done anything wrong."

Bill did not have sex with Lewinsky. The library sink was probably responsible for his eruptions.

Of course, we all know how the DNA results came out and Clinton was impeached. Here, the point was that the Special Counsel had the license of the Rule of Law on his side and could attack the case at his choice of options. An Act of Congress gave him such license.[10] This instant slapstick has no bearing on the Pelosi Plea for testimony to elucidate the particulars of a non crime committed by a member of the White House Cabinet and perhaps the Vice President. This is so foolish and we read the rebuttal of this antic from the White House:

“At the White House, spokesman Tony Fratto said House Democrats "have been trying to redefine the notion of contempt and they succeeded."

And, what else would bubble up from the “left-wing fever swamps” but spittle and spite and the howls for fresh meat. This is a typical and expected outcome of the Nancy Pelosi training in politics as she was a witness to the gutter methods and dark alleyway politics of BaltimoreCity in her youth. She learned how to communicate and navigate in the political latrines. Now, matured, she is the Queen of the San Francisco Massage Parlor Set and is grateful for the rubber-stamp votes of the gay cabana cavaliers, illegal aliens and assorted perverts.

San Francisco is an AIDS-infested lagoon of Rimming-Ramming-Romper Room politics that celebrates and fuses the least attractive facets of perversion and Marxian politics into one congealed mass. To vote in the Bay Area, the voters really need only to supply an ample assortment of dope, cheap white wine [11] and a solitary Community Voting Lever to pull during their Fulton Street Follies or at any old time. Such a democratic device could be mounted on some giant cantilever that spans a full city block in the Mission District illuminated with candles, accented with incense and fitted with little bells. When loaded with drunks, perverts and dopers, ceremonial kazoos would be passed out and the machine would just lower itself into the street level under the weight of the screaming masses, score a city-wide unanimous vote on any topic and then disgorge its howling load. It could then just stoically await a second relay to remount the gadget and revivify the unanimous voting process. The citizens of San Francisco have, indeed, chosen the best person to focus their hate upon democracy, society and elements of decency and found a new Sprawa Robotnicza [12]. She might also consider a few more face lifts so as to better complement her Order of Lenin Red dresses that proudly announce her politics in monotone. The overriding cadaver gaze she was apparently born with should be retained as it is now a suitable component of the ambience of her constituents. She is just one of the average citizens.

The frenzy:

“The House voted 223-32 this month to hold Miers and Bolten in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into whether the prosecutors' firings were politically motivated. Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout in an unusually bitter scene even for the fractious House.”[13]

The leftists are in a haluicationatory state over their loss of political power at the hand of Newt Gingrich. As a sop they appear to be chasing some glittering banshee that slithered down the nearest rat hole in the hope of pulling out a marijuana-stuffed rabbit, but this is yet another sick pipedream of the degenerates in San Francisco. In a way, it is too bad the Opium Dens were closed as the inmates in those establishments were at least silent.

The only positive aspect of this outrage is that Spartacus will not lose any votes from Code Pink, the Communist Party USA or from AIDS victims, living or dead.

The voters need to chuck out some of the radical leftist politicos in Congress so she will lose the vote for Speaker on the next round.

If I were subpoenaed by Congress I would use this sterling opportunity to waste their time and set a new record for taking the 5^th Amendment. All the Commies did that in the 40s, 50s and 60s and they were praised and saluted for their courage. Presumably, we still have the same rights as some slimy Communist. I can be just as combative and inventive before a House Committed as Owen Lattimore was, and then some as a few readings of my blogs might indicate.

rycK

Can the Global Warming Zombies Admit they look like Fools Yet??

The Grand Scenario, the Truth and the Quiz:

[1] Global Warming EcoNazis honked and bleeped the horrible news all over the planet, with firm data, kazoos and sophisticated computer models clearly proving that the planet’s temperature increased with CO₂ levels, a politically defined ‘pollutant.’[1]

[2] Real scientists replied that this was so much crap. [2]

[3] Al Gore sets up tax schemes to tax the universe and the drooling leftists pile on the band wagon and dream of higher and taxes.[3]

[4] Swedish and Norwegian Communists give out the Nobel Peace Prize for Phony Science to Al Gore.

[5] The UN gets in the game and parrots the ‘scientific’ findings. [4]

[4] The weather agencies, all four of them, now show that the temperature is decreasing. [5]

“Now there is word that all four major global temperature tracking outlets have released data showing that temperatures have dropped significantly over the last year. California meteorologist Anthony Watts says the amount of cooling ranges from 65-hundredths of a degree Centigrade to 75-hundreds of a degree.”[6]

So, up is down or hot is cold or tax is tax or sleaze is sleaze?!

Quiz:

The liberals and their so-called scientists now either look like: [a] fools, [b] idiots, [c] political toadies devoid of scientific skills [d] simpletons who need more life and fewer drugs[e] other [f] no opinion as I am a liberal.

The best answers are a, b, c or f. Partial credit is given for e.

rycK

The New York Times Sings Wonderful Songs about North Korea and Diplomacy.

The New York Times, always in the furrow created by Walter Duranty[1], the Patron Saint of the Old Gray Lady, now essays us on fairness and diplomacy, again, with North Korea.[2] [3] The editorial staff of the Times remains emotionally enchanted and politically mesmerized by Marxism and its intrinsic ‘fairness’ and ‘concern’ for the poor, notwithstanding the essential vector here: the excuse to plunder the assets of capitalism at all costs. That is their future; that is their present; that is their past. Today, in an odd twist, the NYT actually agrees with the Bush Administration on the failure of the Communists to give an open accounting of their nuclear program. David Gregory must have swooned. Bill Clinton solved the diplomacy problem [4] by shuffling about 5 billion dollars of our tax revenues to the dictator Kim with the Marxian assistance of Jimmy Carter.[5] [6] This sterling piece of diplomacy was based on an exchange of money for ‘promises.” We know how that worked out. Jimmy was ecstatic, Clinton was satisfied, the Communists were overjoyed as they could get paid for producing nuclear weapons and the US citizens got screwed, as usual, in dealings with the shrunken Marxist remains of the Bolshevik Era. This little theatrical production seems to have received unfavorable reviews by some, but not robustly by the Times. The Times will find a way to support our enemies in any way they can and this propaganda piece of today is just illusory fluff—there is more to come.

In today’s little propaganda piece [A Little Nuke Music[7]] that is based on holding the parties accountable for their (now) signed and published promises, we are astonished by the NYT’s admission  that they suddenly [read temporarily] side with Bush on the question that their allies in the flesh would renege on a deal and demand payment anyway. That is a bit too cheesy for the editorial staff to spin directly into policy—they need to create some loopholes for their friends.

“That effort unfortunately has stalled, and the fault — at least this time — is undeniably Pyongyang’s. It would take a serious diplomatic push by the Bush administration and the leaders of China, Russia, Japan and South Korea to ensure that it does not fall apart.”[8] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

!!!

“North Korea agreed last year to disable its Yongbyon nuclear reactor and produce a “complete and correct” accounting of all its nuclear activities, facilities and weapons-usable material by the end of last year. In exchange, it was to get 950,000 tons of heavy fuel oil and start down the road toward normalizing diplomatic and economic relations with the United States and others.”[9]

Is this like scouring Africa and most particularly Niger and not finding yellow cake? A negative can be proven if a sufficient number of leftists join the chorus.

“The Bush administration has a long history of using any excuse to scuttle any diplomatic deal, but in this case it is right. Pyongyang clearly agreed to full disclosure and the deadline. Since then serious questions have also arisen about Pyongyang’s nuclear cooperation with Syria. That must also be disclosed.”[10]

Can we suggest, at this point, that such a “complete and correct” accounting of North Korea’s nuke songs might have been incorporated by Jimmy Carter in his ‘diplomacy’  in the first place before we gave them loads of cash? No. The leftist notions of diplomacy are defined only in the strictest terms of appeasement. Just give the maggots some money and hope the threat will go away. Such measures have worked well in such cases as Mary Joe Kopechne as strict silence, as specified in a signed agreement, was maintained.

“The United States and its partners should continue to explore creative solutions to the impasse and stand ready to lift sanctions and quickly take North Korea off the terrorism list if it fulfills its obligations. China, North Korea’s chief benefactor (and frequent enabler), must press Pyongyang to keep its commitments.”[11]

I thought the NYT was for a one-on-one diplomatic effort at the beginning of the Bush Administration’s efforts to deal with these maggots? Not true? Now, they want China and Japan and South Korea, the capitalistic mirror image of the abortive North[12], to throw in a few things? I thought China was building a wall to keep the illegal North Korean aliens out of their country? Is this an ‘enabling’ process? It might well be as it prevents the horrors of the poor being documented as fleeing the splendors the Dearest Kim’s Paradise. That is leftist diplomacy in full bloom with song and scents.

Then, there is a fleeting mention of the possibility of Syria and North Korea working on a joint project to fit nuclear war heads to missiles so they can obliterate Israel. [13] That might be a diplomatic coup for the left as they are bosom buddies with the Islamo-Fascists. The scheme to give our enemies money to develop nuclear weapons and help out the Islamo-Fascists prepare new exotic missiles to burn down Israel ranks up at the very top of the scale of cooperating with our enemies as we saw in an earlier performance with such fellow-travelers such as Dean Acheson, Millard Tydings and the Little Truman and his lackeys. The Truman administrative decks were awash with FDR-inspired Commies and couldn’t seem to properly investigate them or at least kick them out of the White House or State Department. Notice that the Clinton/Carter antics can be correlated with the Dean Acheson Follies to show that appeasement and direct support of our enemies are a vital and ongoing project for the sordid left. Imagine the ingenuity of our supporting our enemies so they can destroy us! All this seems to show us a concerted FDR/HST/JEC/WJC string of diplomatic successes in aiding our enemies.

The gripper comes in the last element of this propaganda exercise when we read:

” The United States and its partners should continue to explore creative solutions to the impasse and stand ready to lift sanctions and quickly take North Korea off the terrorism list if it fulfills its obligations.”

Now, the dangling carrot is shown in the light. If NK comes up with some phony list then the NYT would push to forget and forgive and remove NK from its state-sponsored terrorist status. That would be a cheap parlor trick reminiscent of Harry Hopkins [14]giving Joe Stalin his pick of land in Eastern Europe he desired or finding ways to sandbag Chang to give Chairman Mao the prize of the People’s Republic.

Maybe the leftists have found a way to get Israel nuked with American support and tax dollars. That would be a coup that would best the Fall of Berlin or Pearl Harbor.

For a mere picosecond it looked like the New York Times had stumbled into some location resembling reality, but a close reading of this well-tuned propagandistic treatise shows that they have reserved several caveats to cover their adoration for Marxism and will remain the compliant stooges that their sordid histories clearly indicates they have been and they will continue to grovel in the political rubble of the vanquished Marxist dream in any event.

The Times is hinting that some random numbers and appropriate dates must be scrawled on an imported clean sheet of paper and then proffered before the world to satisfy due diligence and compliance with the agreement’s critical elements and show that North Korea has fully complied with the deal. Shovel some more money their way so that Times can celebrate in Greenwich Village with white wine and tofu.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

More Big Government and Maniacal Mortgage Manipulation from The New York Times

We can relentlessly depend on the New York Times, the key propaganda arm[1] of the far left to signal us, and their attendant stooges in the various legislature across the land, to advise us when a novel form of taxation is possible. In today’s preposterous dissertation, we read that there is some new debt burden issue in ownership of private property that needs to be adjudicated. The usual leftist intrinsic bias against private property [2]is relaxed in rare cases when such antisocial behavior can be juxtaposed against public ownership.[3] But in this case there are some new and wonderful indirect taxes that can be levied upon the corporations at no political cost! That is an indirect tax that the usual tax whores would not have to express regrets about when election time rolls around. It doesn’t add to the national debt. For that, the Times will go to the legislative mat. Soak the capitalists!

The wailing is noted in today’s new tax scheme screed: Getting Real About theRescue[4]

The problem stated:

“Some big banks are supporting new proposals to rescue homeowners who owe more on their mortgages than their houses are worth, but let’s get one thing straight: the banks haven’t been struck by a sudden urge to help the needy. Rather, by advocating bailouts, the lending industry is trying to head off a possible change in the law that would let troubled borrowers modify their mortgages in bankruptcy court — where lenders, not taxpayers, would be stuck with the losses.”[5] [Emphasis is mine in this and  all  following quotes.]

In propaganda rants, this one gets a C+ as the basis for an urgent rescue is properly set up as is the social basis for change, but the solution to is too cryptic and lacks the usual maudlin songs and sobbing and arrives, too bluntly in my view, at the solution. An A rating on this would begin with starving workers trying to experience the American Dream as they are living their lives in their precious homes but starkly contrasted with the horrors of seeing their meager possessions (and children) being summarily cast off into the streets by officers of the law while greedy mortgage lenders are seen wheeling away stacks of money. This one is a bit abrupt, but the leftist contents might become important talking points in the upcoming election farces so let us plug along and see how it unfolds. Capitalism is going to get whacked here; the interest is in how the Times wants to veil it.

“Congress must not kowtow to the lenders. It should insist that borrowers be given a chance to modify their mortgages under bankruptcy court protection before it even thinks of asking taxpayers to pick up the tab for the mortgage mess.”[6]

The briar patch is now unraveled. Certain members of Congress are the stumbling point. Here we learn that the lenders, presumably some part of our economy that deals in capitalism with all its open markets replete with numerous buyers and sellers should stand last in line in the Congressional legislation. They should have no influence in the legislation. The little guy comes first. Note that the blame and fault are now instantly placed upon the evil money lenders before the solution is revealed in a bright and scented shower of fairness, sensitivity and concern. The lenders must pay for the problem. Justice must be served.

“Under current law, borrowers cannot rework the mortgages on primary homes in bankruptcy proceedings.”[7]

Ah, the jaws of the Demon are exposed. The term rework used here must have its political  roots planted in compassion, socialism and the eternal quest for votes for Democrats must be embedded somewhere. This sentence, the gripper passage that inflames the reader, implies that the law must be changed.

The warriors choose sides in this battle:

“Senate Democratic leaders are pushing a bill to let many at-risk homeowners do just that. The House Judiciary Committee has passed a similar measure. Republicans, who are balking, should get on board, or risk leaving their constituents without an effective way to save their homes.”[8]

This reads like a Greek Tragedy as the stately home owners, through no fault of their own, must seek the help of the gods for relief. The nasty old Republicans stand in the way of Justice as she attempts to minister to her flock. Perhaps their very eyes will adorn the peacock’s tail for this cruelty.

The details of the Redistribution of Wealth and the Poisoned Apple:

“If the bankruptcy provision becomes law, as it should, lenders will have a powerful incentive — which they currently do not have — to modify troubled loans voluntarily. If they can’t or won’t come to new terms with borrowers, then they would run the risk that a bankruptcy court would do the modifying for them.”[9]

There is some prize here proffered to the money lenders. They can take a loss on their loans or they can have the government direct the loss on their loans. This is given in the spirit of the French Revolution where you can have your head roll into the basket after you have selected your favorite raison d'être from the list:   Liberty, Equality or Fraternity. We can only speculate what the word modify means in this context.

The political payoff:

“So far, despite a lot of promises, the industry has been unable or unwilling to rework the junk loans of the bubble years in ways that come near addressing the enormity of the problem. In contrast, access to bankruptcy court would mean relief for some 600,000 homeowners — not by wiping out their debts, but by modifying the loan terms so borrowers can pay them off over time.”[10]

A catchy slogan matching the notion that: “… all the workers have to lose are their chains.” How poetic! Let us break out into song and have the workers of the world unite.

The condemned raise a point of order:

“Lenders object that by giving homeowners the right to modify their mortgages under court supervision, the bankruptcy amendment would raise the cost of mortgages for everyone, forever. That concern is surely overstated, but not entirely without merit. To address it and other industry worries, lawmakers have proposed constraints, such as limiting the bankruptcy relief to junk mortgages of the past few years.”[11]

We must now wonder what a ‘junk mortgage’ might be and if this can be directly compared to junk bonds or junk dealers or junkies. Do you buy a junk mortgage with junk money? What could this mean? We are also blessed with a new (Constitutional?) right—the right to modify corporate contracts if money is lost. I would hope that we would have a similar ‘right’ to modify our tax returns to correct some perceived injustices in federal government spending. How about this: I will acknowledge my full tax liabilities if I can pay off my accrued taxes at a dollar per year at zero interest.

A hint:

“The idea is that if lenders voluntarily agree to loan modifications, they would become entitled to a share of the house’s appreciation, if any, when the house is ultimately sold.”[12]

Who defines the modifications? What share?

“Like other Bush administration plans, this one suffers from its emphasis on voluntary cooperation, which has been shown to be inadequate. The bankruptcy amendment, however, would give lenders more incentive to go along, by providing a real downside to not acting voluntarily — losing control to a bankruptcy judge.”

The justice of the guillotine was not exactly voluntary in the same way that the options to lose money on loans are not exactly voluntary in this case. This is a propagandistic sentence that reveals no facts--only slogans and threats. If the wording is vague in the ‘law’ then the bankruptcy judge can act like Citizen Robespierre and just fill the baskets with heads using vague reasons and barking the trendy explanations of the day. It is too bad that a fraction of our tax liability is not voluntary.

This amounts to a leftist mass groping of some business sector wealth. This is a classic propaganda piece that always incorporates the predictable Retribution of Wealth cliché. Once implemented, a person’s debts may now be adjudicated in some court or by those who owe their jobs to the political machines. This is a form of financial justice offered in democratic terms. The notions of risk and other attributes of capitalism are crushed in this Marxian screed. There is no risk! If you are some leftist parasite, a hopeless druggie, sexual predator who cannot get a job or some felon you now buy a house, default in defiance of the system, and somebody else will subsidize payments for you, enforced by federal law. Here we are instructed that if any housing market turns down then those who sold the products are liable for any loses encountered by the buyers. This places a floor upon which money lost in market activities can be reclaimed merely for the reasons that somebody lost money. I wonder if we could do this at the race track and get a long-term refund for a misplaced bet on some three-legged donkey that somehow missed the winner’s circle, the bright flowers and applause.

No essay from the New York Times, the Walter Duranty Papers[13], could offer more promises for less leftist political risk than this wreckage. This is a freebee.

What is missing here is the nasty effects of the predictable shortage in mortgage loans if this monster becomes law. The lender can now voluntarily lose money, or he can involuntarily lose money—a fair and level choice sanctioned by the leftists. And, the little guy wins. Lenders might then unfairly scrutinize future loans for deadbeats or marginal barrowers or find other ways to secure their loan repayments. The political celebration here comes from a novel test case where in the usual free enterprise arena the markets rise and fall, driven by the expected supply and demand effects, but the socialists are now insisting that any downside risk must be indemnified by somebody else. I am surprised that the Democrats don’t want to establish some federal slush fund that subsidizes loses in any home loans—no let us be generous and add in TVs, autos and beer coolers—so we can have the nasty old capitalists redress for the Sins of the Past. That would necessitate more taxes, so that is a bit tacky in an election year.

I anxiously await the NYT ‘solution’ to restoring lost union auto jobs in Michigan as they may offer some solution related to this. How about the case where car buyers are liable for lost jobs if they buy a car outside Michigan? That sounds fair. We need more taxes and legislation like this one.

I want to be able to ‘rework’ my 401(k) so as to make it tax free. I don’t want to kowtow to the tax mongers.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com