Right Wing Dog

The FIGHT for The RIGHT!

Obama’s “Friend” Paul McCartney, bashes President Bush and in doing so OUR COUNTRY!

Sir Paul McCartney’s cheap shot aimed at former President George W. Bush at a White House event on Wednesday has prompted House Minority Leader John Boehner to demand an apology from the Beatle.

McCartney literally gushed over President Obama throughout his East Room concert. “Getting this prize would just be good enough, but getting it from this president…” McCartney said letting his praise trail off as if there were vast volumes left unsaid.

The prize McCartney was given is the Gershwin Prize for Popular Song, a lifetime achievement award bestowed by the Library of Congress.

McCartney ended the evening taking a baseless cheap shot at former President George W. Bush.

“After the last eight years, it’s great to have a President who knows what a library is,” McCartney quipped.

When did decorum go out of style?
“Like millions of other Americans, I have always had a good impression of Paul McCartney and thought of him as a classy guy, but I was surprised and disappointed by the lack of grace and respect he displayed at the White House,” Boehner told HUMAN EVENTS. “I hope he’ll apologize to the American people for his conduct which demeaned him, the White House and President Obama.”

McCartney, hailing from England and having earned no university degrees of his own, the Beatle may not know W. was the first American president to earn a master’s degree in business administration. (The fact the MBA is from Harvard really irks the left.) Not to mention Bush is married to a librarian.

Whar a bunch oif CRAPOLA! The award he won should be recinded and Obama should have told him about Presiddent George W. Bush’s master and the fact his wife was a librarian. Of course he didn’t and he most likely laughed.

I say Mr. McCartney, go the hell home and don’t let our dorr hit you in the ass on your way out. We do not need you or want you here.

RWD

June 5, 2010 Posted by | 2008 Election, 2010 elections, 2012 Elections, America, Blogroll, Bush, Democrat, Entertainer, Liberal Democrat, Michelle Obama, NOBAMA, Obama, Pardon's, Political, POLITICS, President, Presidential Candidate, Socialist | , , | Leave a comment

Obama’s figures just don’t add up to the TRUTH!

I am reporting this on my blog because many have not had the opportunity to see the REAL NUMBERS and not the lies coming out of the Administration of Barack Hussein Obama! We are being told what they want us to know without regard for truth or verification means.

THESE ARE THE TRUE DEFICITS: BUSH $800B, OBAMA $1.4T
By Dick Morris
02.3.2010
Published on TheHill.com February 2, 2010
President Barack Obama is being disingenuous when he says that the budget deficit he faced “when I walked in the door” of the White House was $1.3 trillion. He went on to say that he only increased it to $1.4 trillion in 2009 and was raising it to $1.6 trillion in 2010.
Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) might have said, “You lie,” but we’ll settle for “You distort.”
(As Mark Twain once said, there are three kinds of lies: “lies, damn lies and statistics.”)
Here are the facts:
In 2008, George W. Bush ran a deficit of $485 billion. By the time the fiscal year started, on Oct. 1, 2008, it had gone up by another $100 billion due to increased recession-related spending and depressed revenues. So it was about $600 billion at the start of the fiscal crisis. That was the real Bush deficit.
But when the fiscal crisis hit, Bush had to pass the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in the final months of his presidency, which cost $700 billion. Under the federal budget rules, a loan and a grant are treated the same. So the $700 billion pushed the deficit — officially — up to $1.3 trillion. But not really. The $700 billion was a short-term loan. $500 billion of it has already been repaid.
So what was the real deficit Obama inherited? The $600 billion deficit Bush was running plus the $200 billion of TARP money that probably won’t be repaid (mainly AIG and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). That totals $800 billion. That was the real deficit Obama inherited.
Then … he added $300 billion in his stimulus package, bringing the deficit to $1.1 trillion. This $300 billion was, of course, totally qualitatively different from the TARP money in that it was spending, not lending. It would never be paid back. Once it was out the door, it was gone. Other spending and falling revenues due to the recession pushed the final numbers for Obama’s 2009 deficit up to $1.4 trillion.
So, effectively, Obama came close to doubling the deficit.
Obama seems not to understand that the deficit is the jobs problem. To add to the deficit in the hope of creating more jobs is an oxymoron. Additional deficit spending just crowds out small businesses trying to borrow money to create jobs and consumers seeking credit to buy cars and homes.
Soon, when the Fed stops printing money and we have to borrow real funds from real lenders, the high deficit will send interest rates soaring, further retarding growth and creating a cost-push inflation.
The interest rate we are now paying for the debt — about 3.5 percent — is totally artificial and based on the massive injection of money supply created by the purchase of mortgage-backed securities by an obliging Federal Reserve. Once these injections of currency stop, the rate will more than double, sending our debt service spending into the stratosphere. Once we had to choose between guns and butter. Now we will have to choose between guns and butter on the one hand and paying our debt service on the other.
Obama’s program of fiscal austerity in this new budget is a joke. He freezes very selected budget items while he shovels out new spending in his stimulus packages. If he wanted to lower the deficit, here’s what he could do:
1. Cancel the remaining $500 billion of stimulus spending; and
2. Cancel the $300 billion of spending in stimulus II.
Those are the real numbers. Or, as Al Gore would have it, “the inconvenient truth.”

RWD

February 6, 2010 Posted by | 2010 elections, 2012 Elections, America, Blogroll, Change, Democrat, Healthcare, Joe Biden, Liberal Democrat, Michelle Obama, Military, NOBAMA, Obama, pelosi, Political, POLITICS, President, Presidential Candidate, Senator, Social Security, Socialist, stimulus package, Vice President | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Barack Obama’s Cabinet is full of People Getting On The Job Training! Is that Scary or What?

If you examine the prior private sector experience of the cabinet officials since 1900 that one might expect a president to turn to in seeking advice about helping the economy. It includes secretaries of State, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Interior, Labor, Transportation, Energy, and Housing & Urban Development, and excludes Postmaster General, Navy, War, Health, Education & Welfare, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security—432 cabinet members in all.
When you examine the cabinet positions that Barack Hussein Obama has made, only about SEVEN PER CENT HAVE HAD ANY PRIOR PRIVATE SECTOR EXPERIENCE IN WHAT THEY DO, so says an analysist at J.P. Morgan.

The Presidents with appointments of members with the MOST experience before Washington were; Eisenhower – 59%, Reagan – 58%, George H.W. Bush – 52% and George W. Bush – 52%! Strangely enough they were ALL Republicans! Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Kennedy – 28% and Obama – 7-% were the lowest!
Is this scary or what?

Where does this appear in the Main Stream Media – T.V., Newspapers, Magazines ETC??
This graph for this showing all Presidents since 1900 can be found at: http://blog.american.com/?p=7572

RWD

November 30, 2009 Posted by | 2008 Election, 2010 elections, 2012 Elections, America, Blogroll, Carol Browner, Clinton, Congress, Conservative, Democrat, Durbin, election, Energy, Healthcare, Hilda Solis, Hillary, House, huckabee, Joe Biden, Liberal Democrat, Main Stream Media, Michelle Obama, News Site, NOBAMA, Obama, Political, POLITICS, President, Presidential Candidate, Roland Burris, Senator, Social Security, Socialist, Terrorism, Unconstitutional, unions, Veterans, Vice President, White House | , , , | Leave a comment

Obama’s Congress is Giving Easy Money to Un-Qualified Home Buyers Thru The FHA as It Did With Fannie and Freddie. Barney Frank in The Drivers Seat!

Easy-money mortgages is still provided, by the feds

Is the ghost of Ted Kennedy driving this?

Easy-money mortgages with little or no down payment for buyers/pigs with bad credit/no credit was a thing of the past? The money trough is open.

You can get the money today, guaranteed by the federal government.

Barney Frank and Chris Dodd at work:

Loans insured by the (FHA) have become “the new subprime,” and these loans are exposing taxpayers to the same kinds of soaring default rates and losses that brought down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as destroyed many banks and the private market for mortgage loans. Frank and Dodd don’t care as long as the shlubs that borrow this money vote for them and their party!

While private lenders learned a lesson from the mortgage crisis and are shying away from easy-money loans, the FHA has stepped in. The agency is backing for 37 percent of all mortgages used to buy homes this year.

After the collapse of the private mortgage market last year, Congress and the George W. Bush administration greatly expanded the FHA’s original Depression-era program aimed at assisting sales of modestly priced homes by more than doubling the ceiling on loans that the agency can insure to $625,500 while maintaining its loose lending terms – ensuring that nearly any home sale could be covered by the agency.

The FHA’s predominance was enhanced further this year when Barack Hussein Obama’s Congress lifted the ceiling to more than $729,000 for major urban areas and passed an $8,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers that can be accelerated for borrowers to use as a down payment on FHA loans and avoid any cash commitment to their home purchases. No money down on big money homes means forclosure in a year or two and a HUGE loss to the American Taxpayer!

While these changes were intended to be temporary and expire by the end of the year, given the fragility of the housing and mortgage markets, Congress is considered likely to extend them this fall. Of course they will, 2010 is an election year.

Use of the same bad credit practices that were at the root of the housing crisis, likely feeding further waves of default and foreclosure. But this time it is the taxpayer – not the banks – who could end up holding the bag.

The surging default rates of more than 30 percent on loans insured since 2006 by the FHA. That is not far below the 40 percent rate of default and foreclosure on the notorious subprime loans that ignited the credit crisis.
FHA’s portfolio is exploding and the taxpayer is now on the hook for 100 percent of the losses,”

FHA’s growing default problems are the results are the same – unsustainable/bad loans perpetuate the nightmare of foreclosures.”

It is estimated that 20 percent of the FHA’s entire portfolio of $725 billion mortgages will end up in foreclosure – and FHA agrees . It is predicts that the FHA will require a taxpayer bailout within two to three years. Yet, they continue to push the bad money out the door as the behest of Barack Hussein Obama and his minions in Congress like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.

One reason defaults are soaring is they are lending to homebuyers who haven’t saved enough to make down payments. Loans with little or no down payment (no owner investment) have high rates of loss is because the borrower has little or no financial stake in losing their homes to foreclosure.

The FHA requires a minimal 3.5 percent down payment – far below the 20 percent now required by private lenders.

Many borrowers have been able to avoid that minimal level of l investment in their homes. Obama’s administration is enabling these buyers to put up no cash at all allowing them to get advanced payments of the $8,000 homebuyers tax credit through arrangements with nonprofit housing groups and state housing agencies. The tax credit can be used the same way to pay closing costs.

Beyond the loosened standards on down payments, the FHA remains willing to make loans to people with low credit ratings, even those with histories of default, foreclosure or bankruptcy. Those with histories of default are far more likely to default again.

.

The FHA has a program that will help people who missed two or three payments under such duress by using the insurance fund to make those payments for them and then recouping the money when the property is sold – a provision that has been used in about 400,000 cases so far and could help to bring down the foreclosure rates on loans that go into default as a result of the recession. In other words, don’t even pay your mortgage, Obama’s boys will pay it for you! This is deceptive and covering up bad loans.

The agency also is considering tightening standards for borrowers who pose multiple risks, such as those with histories of default. Sure they will, after the FHA is in such trouble that Obama will have to once against use OUR money to bail them out!

Responsible lending would spoil the housing recoverybecause the FHA has effectively replaced subprime lenders who went bust. They’re under pressure by Barack Hussein Obama to prop up housing prices, and are insuring heaps of risky loans.

The FHA’s backers in Congress, led by House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat Congressman, maintain that high default rates are the price of Congress’ decision to use the FHA to prevent a complete collapse of the housing and mortgage markets in a time of extreme distress. What does he care, not at all just as he didn’t care when Fannie and Freddie went broke!

By keeping affordable loans flowing, particularly to the growing ranks of first-time homebuyers, the FHA has been critical to our nation’s economic and housing market recovery.

But even some liberal housing advocates say the FHA’s spectacular expansion is worrisome.

Given the huge ramp up in its lending in a very short period of time, it seems unlikely that the FHA has been able to adequately scrutinize the loans that it is buying.

While any bailout of FHA likely would be small the crippling of the FHA as a lender would be another blow to the housing market and would be a serious political blow to efforts to ensure access to mortgages for moderate-income families.

RWD

October 19, 2009 Posted by | 2010 elections, 2012 Elections, Blogroll, Congress, corruption, Democrat, economy, House, Liberal Democrat, NOBAMA, Obama, Political, POLITICS, President, Senator, Socialist, stimulus package | , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments