Where Are My Keys?

Could Barack Obama work for Barack Obama?

The Obama transition team has a 63 question application for prospective employees.  Let's look at a few, and see how Obama would have to answer them, shall we?

8.  Briefly describe the most controversial matters you have been involved with during the course of your career.  Sitting in a church run by a racist, bigoted, America-hating clergyman.  Being actively involved with an unrepentant terrorist.  Getting a sweetheart real estate deal from a convicted felon.

12.  Please provide text and or audio from any speeches you have given.  Please see the LA Times for this.

18.  Please list any dealing with any financial institutions.  Please see Chris Dodd for information about lobbying donations from Freddie and Fannie.

61.  Have you ever had any association with an individual or organization that might be used to impugn your character? See Ayers, William;Rezko, Tony; Wright, Jeremiah, Khalidi, Rashid.

Isn't it ironic that the man who "pooh pooh's" guilt by association in his own relationships, will use guilt by association to disqualify others for employment?

"Paygo", R.I.P.

"Paygo" goes the way of the Dodo.  Not that the Democrats really meant what they said about it:

As Congress gears up to pass another spending "stimulus" bill, there's one political silver lining: Democrats are being forced to abandon the pretense of fiscal conservatism known as "pay as you go" budgeting.

Late last week the leader of the House Blue Dog Coalition, Tennessee Democrat Jim Cooper, announced that with Barack Obama about to enter the White House, "I'm not sure the old rules are relevant anymore." Why not? Because, Mr. Cooper said, "It would be unfair to the new President to put him in a budget straitjacket."

Democrats ran on "paygo" in 2006, promising to offset any new spending increases or tax cuts with comparable tax increases or spending cuts. Once in charge on Capitol Hill they quickly made exceptions, waiving paygo no fewer than 12 times to accommodate some $398 billion in new deficit spending -- not that the press corps bothered to notice. That didn't stop Majority Leader Steny Hoyer from announcing in May that "We're absolutely committed to paygo. Speaker [Nancy Pelosi] is committed to paygo. I'm very committed to paygo. Our caucus is committed to paygo."

Yet now Mr. Cooper is delivering official last rites, as the Washington spending machinery powers up in earnest. Paygo was always a big con designed not to reduce spending but to stop tax cuts. It was invented to stop the GOP Congress and then a Republican President, but it is inconvenient when Democrats run the show. With the recession available as an excuse for just about anything, get ready for the first $1 trillion federal budget deficit. And don't expect any howling from the Blue Dogs.

(emphasis mine)

"I talk to Geithner and he was pretty sure that they're OK,''..

So said Barney Frank.  Pardon me if I don't feel at ease with your ringing endorsement, Mr. Frank.  After all, you have a history of being wrong (dare I say misleading?) in matters such as these. 

In an interview Nov. 6, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said the Fed's disclosure is sufficient and that the risk the central bank is taking on is appropriate in the current economic climate.  Frank said he has discussed the program with Timothy F. Geithner, president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and a possible candidate to succeed Paulson as Treasury secretary.

``I talk to Geithner and he was pretty sure that they're OK,'' said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat. (WAMK note: "Pretty sure?!?!")  ``If the risk is that the Fed takes a little bit of a haircut, well that's regrettable.'' Such losses would be acceptable, he said, if the program helps revive the economy. (WAMK note: Mr. Frank, what if the program doesn't help the economy, and the money used to bailout the banks is lost as well?  Is that "acceptable" to you?  And it's not the Fed taking a haircut, it's the U.S. Taxpayer.)

Frank said the Fed shouldn't reveal the assets it holds or how it values them because of ``delicacy with respect to pricing.'' He said such disclosure would ``give people clues to what your pricing is and what they might be able to sell us and what your estimates are.'' He wouldn't say why he thought that information would be problematic. (WAMK note: It's problematic, because bank stock prices would plummet.  I wonder if Barney gets any lobby cash from any banks on the list.  You know, the list that the Fed won't let us see.)

The Fed is refusing to disclose not only which banks got $2 trillion in loans, but the collateral put up by the banks to secure the loans.  And Mr. Frank has no problem with that.  In the words of Yogi Berra, "It's deja vu all over again."

"I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work."

I guess that only applies to Democrat Presidents, eh Mr. Matthews?  Amazing.  All along, I thought the job of a journalist was to report the news, and let the people decide.

Silly me.

Good thing there is no bias in the Media.

A few things on Auntie Zeituni..

First off, if the information on her immigration status was gained illegally, the people responsible need to be punished.  I'll do a post in a minute on the similarities/differences (as I see them) in Joe v. Auntie.  So save those comments for that post.

Second, how was someone who has been "flagged" for deportation able to be on public assisstence in Boston for the last four years?  This is what drives us on the Right CRAZY, when it comes to Government entitlement programs.  Here you have someone who is in the Country illegally, using tax dollars for housing  (and most likely medical care, food, etc.).

Third, it was reported that Auntie had donated $260 to Obama's campaign.  Those funds are illegal for Obama to accept, as Auntie is not a citizen of the U.S.  Additionally, where did she get the $$ from?  If she has that kind of disposable cash laying around, why are taxpayers subsidizing her rent?  +++UPDATE+++ The donations were made in three $5 increments, two were made for $25, and it is unclear on the other donations.

Michelle Malkin notes one of her commenters has a great moment of clarity in Obama-think:

QUESTION II, from commenter tony4951: “So let me get this straight. Millionaire Obama doesn’t use his wealth to help his poor illegal alien Aunt get out of public housing, but if I complain about Obama wanting to raise my taxes to ’spread the wealth around’ I’m the selfish one?”

More "gray area" fundraising by Obama..

Now he's raffling off a chance to spend election night as his guest.  But does it run afoul of campaign finance rules?  (Not that it matters to Obama)  A closer look:

"Obama has set a dangerous precedent especially in terms of taking those credit card donations and not verifying where they are coming from," he said.

What are the precise ground rules of this "front-row-seat-to-history" giveaway? And what about those claims that federal election laws may be violated?

Obama's campaign declined to comment.

Careful there, CBS2 in Chicago.  We know what happens if you ask the Obama Camp the "wrong" type of questions.

Informed interview vs. uninformed interview..

First, read this snippet of an Obama/Gibson interview.

Then, read this "enhanced" version of the same interview.

Wow.  What a difference it makes when a "journalist" like Gibson is informed about what is really going on.

(H/T: Powerline)

Who is lying?

My money is on the Countrywide guy telling the truth.

ACORN doesn't fall too far from the tree..

The guys over at Powerline have a good post on ACORN and it's "saplings":

So the Obama campaign gave ACORN a list of donors who had given the maximum allowable contributions to Obama and urged ACORN to contact those donors to get them to help Obama some more by contributing to ACORN.

There's nothing wrong with that, except that 1) ACORN is the country's number one source of voter registration fraud, and 2) the relationship between the Obama campaign and ACORN, which Obama insists is non-existent, is in fact symbiotic at a minimum.

Of course, no story of this sort would be complete without thuggish behavior by the Left:

Moncrief said she had received repeated warnings to "back off" from testifying today by people she knows at ACORN.

Hey, don't worry. In a few months these people will be running the Justice Department.

But his donations come from small donors, right?

Once again, Obama showing he's no different that the politicians that preceeded him.  He's just more creative, and a little more polished in how he does it.