The ONE Thing Edward Kennedy Got Right.

"The problems of our economy have occurred not as an outgrowth of laissez-faire, unbridled competition. They have occurred under the guidance of federal agencies, and under the umbrella of federal regulations."

Credit Where the Credit Crisis Is Due

I have demonstrated previously on the hallowed pages of Obama Watch that the economic crisis as it now exists is fully the fault of the Democratic party in the United States. Their semi-retarded politics designed it and, while it is certain that some Republicans cooperated with and facilitated their (always) hare-brained ideas, it is also true that Democrats intentionally stepped over the bodies of protesting Republicans to enact the policies that have brought on the current economic morass.

A crisis of the magnitude of that which the country now faces has the interesting consequence of producing stark honesty where one would not necessarily expect to find such honesty. In reading the book, A Colossal Failure of Common Sense: The Inside Story of the Collapse of Lehman Brothers, author Lawrence G. Mcdonald, who seems generally very sympathetic to Bill Clinton personally and to his administration, nevertheless writes (from the historical perspective of an industry insider - Mcdonald was a Vice President at Lehman Brothers):

Roberta Achtenberg, the daughter of a Russian-born owner of a Los Angeles neighborhood grocery store, was plucked by President Clinton from relative obscurity in 1993 and elevated to the position of assistant secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Roberta and Bill were united in their desire to increase home ownership in poor and minority communities.



And despite a barrage of objections led by Senator Jesse Helms, who referred to Achtenberg as that "damn lesbian," the lady took up her appointment in the new administration, citing innate racism as one of the main reasons why banks were reluctant to lend to those without funds.

In the ensuing couple of years, Roberta Achtenberg harnessed all of the formidable energy on the massed ranks of the United States bankers, sometimes threatening, sometimes berating, sometimes bullying - anything to persuade the banks to provide mortgages to people who might not have been up to the challenge of coping with up-front down payments and regular monthly payments.

Between 1993 and 1999, more than two million such clients became new homeowners. In her two-year tenure as assistant secretary, she set up a national grid of offices staffed by attorneys and investigators. Their principal aim was to enforce the laws against the banks, the laws that dealt with discrimination. Some of the fines leveled at the banks ran into the millions, to drive home Achtenberg's avowed intent to utilize the law to change the ethos of providing mortgage money in the United States of America.

Banks were compelled to jump into line, and soon they were making thousands of loans without any cash-down deposits whatsoever: an unprecedented situation. Mortgage officers inside the banks were forced to bend or break their own rules in order to achieve a good Community Reinvestment Act rating, which would please the administration by demonstrating generosity to underprivileged borrowers even if they might default. Easy mortgages were the invention of Bill Clinton's Democrats.

However, there was, in the mid- to late 1990s one enormous advantage: amid general prosperity, the housing market was strong and prices were rising steadily. At that point in time, mortgage defaults were relatively few in number and the securitization of mortgages, which had such disastrous consequences during the financial crisis that began in 2007, barely existed.

Nonetheless, there were many beady-eyed financiers who looked askance at this new morality and privately yearned for the days when bank policies were strictly conservative, when credit was flatly denied to anyone without the proven ability to repay.

And at the center of this seething disquiet, somewhere between the persuasive silken-tongued members of the banking lobby and the missionary zeal of Roberta Achtenberg, stood William J. Clinton, whose heart, not for the first time, may have been ruling his head.

Emphasis added throughout. But catch the specific wording: "innate racism" is the reason that loans were not extended to "those without funds"? The Clintonistas were willing to do "anything to persuade the banks to provide mortgages to people who might not have been up to the challenge of coping with up-front down payments and regular monthly payments"? Achtenberg's intent was to "change the ethos of providing mortgage money"? Banks and mortgage companies were "forced to break their own rules"?

Now hear this: "Easy mortgages were the invention of Bill Clinton's Democrats." And all those mortgage companies, investment banks, and community banks that are now getting the blame were nonetheless peopled by "beady-eyed financiers who looked askance at this new morality."

Remember, the same people who designed this economic earthquake are in the process of taking over large swathes of American business, the energy industry, and health care - and in the case of Congressional Democrats, it is not merely the same party, but actually the same people involved.

The Democratic party is either populated by the largest concentration of morons in the universe, or is populated by an exceedingly large contingent of wholly evil individuals who are bent on pursuing their utopian political goals in the face of reality and at the expense of their constituents. What idiot actually believes that racism is the reason that banks won't lend money to people who can't pay? What fool thinks that it is a positive step forward to compel banks to forsake their own rules and extend loans to those who have not even demonstrated an ability to regularly and fully pay rent? Only Democrats are capable of these anti-intellectual paroxysms into mental disease. Or at least they are the only ones who can do it and escape being committed....

Are these the people that you really want to trust to do what is best for you and the country in regard to your health care? Have these same individuals not already demonstrated their inarguable inability to get anything right? Look around....

Democrat, thy name is guilty. See what thou hast wrought.

These Trillions are Starting to Add Up!

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) yesterday released its initial evaluation of the Democrat-sponsored "Affordable Health Choices Act." This analysis did not factor in the entire cost of the legislation, a point that the CBO director is at pains to make, as only the major provisions of the bill were evaluated.



As if the trillions of dollars already introduced into the federal deficit by Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama were not enough, the initial, and incomplete estimate of the CBO for this preliminary Democrat-Socialist health care legislation confirms two major points that skeptics of Obama's fantasyland health plans have been making.

* The U.S. cannot afford a major restructuring of the health care system, as the (again, preliminary) estimate is that the cost of the Democrat plan would add more than $1 trillion to existing deficits.

* That any plan such as the nationalization of health care favored by Democrats and Obama would effectively function as a disincentive for private insurance.

In other words, those who now are paying for private insurance would drop their own coverage in preference for the subsidized or free health care offered by the government. This last point undeniably indicates that the socialization of health care has very little to do with the uninsured, and rather has to do with inflicting a command-and-control economy on the United States.

The CBO director wrote on the CBO blog:

According to our preliminary assessment, enacting the proposal would result in a net increase in federal budget deficits of about $1.0 trillion over the 2010-2019 period. When fully implemented, about 39 million individuals would obtain coverage through the new insurance exchanges. At the same time, the number of people who had coverage through an employer would decline by about 15 million (or roughly 10 percent), and coverage from other sources would fall by about 8 million, so the net decrease in the number of people uninsured would be about 16 million or 17 million.

In addition, the CBO frets that the total cost for social welfare/socialized health care spending is not likely encompassed even by the outrageous Democrat proposal at issue, since Democrats are also proposing an expansion of Medicaid, the fiscal consequences of which will not be known until the extent of the expansion is decided.

Ready to have Uncle Sam as Your Landlord?

Bawney Fwank... uhhhhh, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) recently let the cat out of the bag. It is bad enough that Democrats have (at times it seems intentionally) undermined the housing market, but now they would like to become your (Soviet-style) landlord.

"One of the problems that we got into was we did way too much homeownership and way too little rental housing. And [we need to start] getting the federal government back into the business of rental housing."

Here's your key! Welcome to the Democratic Socialist Ghetto....

Bush, McCain Warned of Economic Crisis; Obama Ignored

Be sure to watch this video before YouTube pulls it!





As far back as the Clinton administration, Republicans, particularly John McCain, and later officials of the George W. Bush administration, warned Democrats of an impending housing market problem due to the politicalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Beginning in April 2001, the Bush administration complained that the size of the two quasi-governmental entities, coupled with a troublesome regulatory environment inherited from the Clinton administration (i.e., the subprime loan initiatives rammed through Congress by Clinton and the Congressional Black Caucus), portended a "potential problem" which could lead to "strong repercussions in financial markets" if not immediately addressed.

In 2003, the Bush administration upgraded its warning concerning the two housing giants to the status of "systemic risk," indicating that problems with the two would likely extend beyond the housing market itself and have a detrimental effect upon the entire American economy. That year, Treasury Secretary John Snow was pushing Congress to more actively exercise its regulatory powers over both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, asking for a regulatory agency that would focus on "the safety and soundness of their activities."

Democratic Congressman Barney Frank (MA), however, who had already placed one of his homosexual lovers, Herb Moses, in a leadership position at Fannie Mae, oddly enough as Assistant Director of Product Initiatives (a position that had direct oversight of subprime lending programs), indignantly insisted to Snow that "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are NOT in a crisis." In fact, Frank insisted that the role of the federal government was to encourage more subprime lending to minority and low-income homebuyers.

Frank said, "The more people... exaggerate the [lack of] safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see... we see entities [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] which are fundamentally sound financially... and even if there were a problem the federal government doesn't bail them out [HUH?!?!?!?, ed.], ... then the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing." Emphasis added.

In 2005, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan warned, "Enabling these institutions to increase in size - and they will once the crisis in their judgment passes - we are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk." Greenspan specifically tied the potential insolvency of Fannie and Freddie, and consequent meltdown of the financial system, to the lack of a responsible regulatory regime.

John McCain, in a Senate speech in 2006, stated, "For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac... and the sheer magnitude of these GSEs [Government-Sponsored Entities] and the role that they play in the housing market.... [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] need to be reformed without delay."

Once again, the incompetent Marxist social engineering of Democrats has backfired. The housing market crisis that precipitated the wider financial meltdown was wholly the product of the Maoist thinking of Bill Clinton and the Congressional Black Caucus, and was roundly defended by such liberal blunt objects as Barney Frank and Charles Schumer.

Who saw clearly what was happening? Why, of course, those whom the Democrats ignored at the time of their warnings but find the cojones to blame now! George W. Bush, John McCain, Alan Greenspan.... Note, however, that almost as an afterthought, the reporter announces that, on what could have been the most significant legislation on the issue, Obama "did not weigh in."

What are the odds that Obama and his bunkies are going to solve the problem that they were not wise enough to see in the first place, in spite of all the warnings and signs to the contrary?

Not likely.

Turkish Reporter Mocks Obama in Blackface

Apparently traveling overseas with one's hat in one's hand and insulting your own country in a misguided attempt to curry favor with the subjects of a foreign land, is not a very effective way of gaining respect. Appeasement has a bad historical record, according to some guy named Neville Chamberlain....

This Turkish reporter mocks Barack Obama by delivering the news in blackface.




Where are all the American Poverty Pimps and Race Whores complaining about this one?

Lesson: If you engage in principled opposition to a black liberal in America, you are a racist, though your disagreements center only on ideas and have nothing to do with skin color. But if you are a foreigner (especially a Muslim!) who paints his face in mockery of a black US president, liberals will be glad to overlook it.

After all, to criticize their actions would be so Eurocentric and would demonstrate a lack of tolerance. We need to learn to appreciate the expression of thought from other nations, don't we, O ye liberals? Multiculturalism, man!

Barack Obama: Too Much Spending for Democrats!

Now the Obama administration is stacking chits and keeping score against DEMOCRATIC opposition to his spending-free-as-water ways.

Apparently, Billy Bob Barry Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama is too radical a socialist even for DEMOCRATS at this point.

[The Obama Administration's} targets were initially Republicans, as team Obama ran ads depicting the GOP as the "party of no." But now the fire is being trained on Democrats worried about runaway spending.

Americans United is going after Democrats who are skeptical of Mr. Obama's plans to double the national debt in five years and nearly triple it in 10. The White House is taking aim at lawmakers in 12 states, including Democratic Sens. Kent Conrad, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor. MoveOn.Org is running ads aimed at 10 moderate Senate and House Democrats. And robocalls are urging voters in key districts to pressure their congressman to get in line.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123862834153780427.html

Barack Obama: Ghetto Fabulous

There is a type of populism that is admirable. Think of Thomas Jefferson answering the door of the White House himself. And in his bathrobe.

But then there is a type of cluelessness born of being firmly rooted in the lower classes, no matter how much wealth and power one may amass.

And Barack Obama is one of the most classless individuals on the planet, for shizzle.

When the leaders of two countries meet for the first time, it is customary for them to exchange gifts with one another. Generally, the gifts are simple, classy, and unique expressions of some aspect of the home country's culture or history. Think of a bottle of wine from France, or something containing a small diamond from South Africa.

When Barack Obama met English Prime Minister Gordon Brown for the first time in the White House, Brown brought him an exquisite carved ornamental pen holder from the planks of the English anti-slavery ship, HMS Gannet. Simple. Exquisite. Unique. Meaningful. Reservedly English.

In return, Barack Obama offered to Prime Minister Brown a sack of 25 DVDs. Now wait - good DVDs. Psycho was one of them. Star Wars.

As of today, more than 2,000 letters of apology from U.S. citizens have been received by the English government.

Brown's gift? Exquisite. Meaningful. Obama's gift? Wal-Mart. Trailer park. Ghetto.

To make matters worse, Obama seems blissfully ignorant that DVDs are regionally coded, to make it impossible for new DVD releases to be mass-released overseas while the movies themselves are still in theaters in foreign countries. So the DVDs given by Obama are not even capable of being played in England.

Ghetto fabulous.

See the article in the Christian Science Monitor here: http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/03/31/obama-in-europe-more-dvds-for-gordon-brown/ .

So this week Obama meets the Queen of England for the first time. Again, a traditional gift is presented to her. She is, after all, the Queen.

Obama's gift? An ipod.

An ipod filled with his own speeches. Yes, Barack Obama's speeches.

I'm not kidding

See it here: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/04/what-does-one-g.html .

And to make matters worse, the Queen already owned an ipod.

So I think I can anticipate Billy Bob Barry Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama's re-election slogan: VOTE FOR ME. I'M GHETTO FABULOUS.

Is there any place to hide from this lower class buffoon?

Promises, Promises

That Democrats have their own, unique (read: "special") definition of what "keeping one's campaign promises" means is obvious. Who can forget George Stephanopoulis' statement that Billy Bob "Floral Oral" Clinton "kept all of his promises that he intended to keep"?

Billy Bob Barry Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama seems to be of the same philosophy on campaign promises. Let's see - I promise to close Gitmo, NOT! I promise to bring the troops home, NOT! And now, I promise to not raise taxes on the middle class., PSYCH!

From an AP wire report:

WASHINGTON (AP) - One of President Barack Obama's campaign pledges on taxes went up in puffs of smoke Wednesday.

The largest increase in tobacco taxes took effect despite Obama's promise not to raise taxes of any kind on families earning under $250,000 or individuals under $200,000.

This is one tax that disproportionately affects the poor, who are more likely to smoke than the rich.

(http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D979POSG0&show_article=1 )

Somebody wanna start explaining to me the concept of the "Lyin' Messiah" now?

So Now We Know What Hope and Change Means!

What happens when you take a committed socialist with no experience in governance, who has never so much as held a legitimate adult job (and yes, I know he taught law, and having graduated from law school, I utterly deny that being a law professor is an adult job), who is full of style and resentment but utterly lacks substance and wisdom, and make him president?

In March, nearly 750,000 jobs were lost and the government "rescue" of the economy is almost equivalent to the yearly Gross Domestic Product at $12.8 trillion (see http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5303F820090401 and http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=armOzfkwtCA4&refer=worldwide ).




















Welcome to the nightmare.

Barack Obama is dishonest and incompetent at best. At worst, those folks who maintain that he actually has a strategy to run the nation into the ground in order to do away with Constitutional government may actually be on to something.

During the campaign, it was a cute (though legitimate) recurring theme for those of us who knew Obama wasn't quite up to the job to ask his brain-dead cultlike following, "What does Hope and/or Change mean exactly?" One may look back in my own blogs here on thoughts and note that numerous times I referenced this question. Of course, no genuine answer ever came. Variations on this theme included asking the zombie left, between the gutteral moans accompanying their Obamagasms, "Exactly which position of Obama's do you agree with?" Well, of course, since Obama never actually took a position (other than the fifth-grade essay variety: "War bad, Peace good!"), no answers were ever forthcoming on that question either.

Well, now we know.

The Change promised by Obama includes the surrender of all fiscal responsiblity. Obama has increased the public debt of the United States by more in his first less-than-hundred-days than any other president in the history of the United States - and more than all of them combined. The cumulative federal deficit for the United States, as accumulated over more than 200 years of history, was $4.4 trillion when Obama took office. In less than 100 days in office, Obama has already proposed $4.8 trillion in deficit spending. Yet he continues to promise that the federal budget deficit will be halved by the end of his first term. Yeah, right. And Gitmo is closing and the soldiers in Iraq are coming home, right?

The Hope promised by Obama, then, certainly involves the ethereal hope that somebody, someday, may be able to pay all this fiat money back.

The Change promised by Obama includes the end of American leadership in the world economy. Again, before Obama's first 100 days had ended, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was reduced to panhandling on the streets of Beijing - showing up at an economic meeting in China and, with hat in hand and trained monkey dancing, begging the Chinese not to stop investing in American government paper. "After all," she crooned, "we really need your money, and if we go down, you guys will lose everything you have already invested!" A stunning argument, sure to go down in the annals of rhetoric as one of the great appeals in all of human history.

The Chinese responded by proposing a new worldwide currency administered by the International Monetary Fund that would relieve them of the need of the American greenback entirely.

So the Hope promised by Obama likely involves the ephemeral wish that perhaps somebody other than the Chinese will start lending us money so that we can fund Obama's federal shopping spree.

The Change promised by Obama includes the end of the private sector's freedom from governmental intervention. Yes, the federal government, the same people who brought you such marvels of efficiency and service as the Post Office, is now going to make the rules for private businesses.

Remember that the very mortgage schemes that firms such as Countrywide mastered to their own detriment were originally dreamed up by Democrats and the Clinton administration in an attempt to get people into houses who could not afford the mortgages for those houses. Who saw a mortgage problem coming when you lent mortgage money to people who could not repay it? (Hint: Democrats) Now, dressed in his Super Socialist red cape, Obama rushes in and says, "The pound of flesh that I exact from the firms who did exactly what we Democrats demanded that they do, and now need governmental rescuing because of it, is that I, Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama, the Super Socialist, will now be making decisions on how to run these private companies. I will be making decisions on wage issues (so you guys over there give back those contractual bonuses!) and I will be making hiring decisions (so the head of GM is now summarily fired without Due Process of law).

So apparently the Hope promised by Obama involves the wispy notion that the federal government, who cannot adequately deliver mail or make laws without melting down the mortgage industry, is going to be able to directly run multinational organizations like AIG and GM better than people who actually have money to make or lose based on performance.

And this is killer: because Obama has so royally screwed matters up in less than 100 days in office, now the government has a hyperfemme help-me-emote website that will, I suppose, offer governmental subsidies for facial tissues since I can't stop crying as I look at the whole world collapsing under Obama's gentle and incompetent tutelage. The essence of Obamazombie hope is crystallized in the new Nanny State website, "Getting Through Tough Economic Times" at http://www.samhsa.gov/economy/. Note to self: there is a better way to get through tough economic times, and it is a proven success - ELECT REAGAN.

Finally, the Change promised by Obama includes such a headlong, trainwreck, rush into socialism that even Eurosocialists are frightened by America's descent into Marxism. Who ever thought we would see the day when the Swedes and the French would helpfully offer advice to America: "Perhaps you need to slow down on your socialist scheming?" Who ever thought that the economy of the United States could be so poorly managed - in a mere 100 days or less at that! - that the Chinese Communists would begin to lecture us on fiscal responsibility?

The real Hope? I hope the next two years goes quickly.... Vote Republican in 2010.

And I hope that a law will soon be passed taking the privilege of voting away from the brain-dead buffoons who voted for Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama. They've done enough damage already.

Obama: A Lying Liberal of Clintonesque Proportions

Of course, people in the know warned that Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama was the most liberal member of the senate when he was running for office. Unfortunately, the folks who voted for him don't understand reality enough to differentiate between "tax and spend" and "rock star," so it really didn't matter.

* After the banks have twice been bailed out, Obama's proposed budget contains nearly $750 billion to bail them out once again (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aY8vuevw1NKs ).

* Obama is proposing nearly $1 trillion dollars in NEW taxes beginning in 2011, with almost $650 BILLION of that falling on individuals, not the hated "corporations" that liberals aspire to destroy (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/obamas-budget-a.html ).

*Obama ADMITS that his budget would cause a spike in the single-year deficit to unheard-of proportions, escalating the deficit nearly $2 trillion dollars to almost $4 trillion dollars (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96JCFLG1&show_article=1 ).

* Spending for Fiscal Year 2009 under Obama will be approximately $12,000 for EVERY AMERICAN - not every family - but EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN.

And like all Democrats, Obama, following in the path blazed by convicted perjurer Bill('sAFool) Clinton, is an inveterate liar.

* After "promising" to withdraw troops from Iraq, The Liar now requests almost $76 billion to extend operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aN3Z5Oo3eStg&refer=worldwide ).

* After flooding radio airwaves during his presidential campaign stating the absurdity that both he and McCain would equally preserve and protect the Second Amendment rights of Americans, The Liar now threatens a (so-called) "assault weapons ban" - realizing full well that "assault weapons" are not "assault weapons" at all, but rather are "scary looking" (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1 ).

* While admitting that his ridiculous budget proposals will produce increasing deficits for as far as the eye can see, The Liar titles his budget "A NEW ERA OF RESPONSIBILITY" (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/fy2010_new_era/A_New_Era_of_Responsibility2.pdf ).

* After promising to shut down the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, upon his election, The Liar issued an executive order closing it, EXCEPT that it could be kept open for high-value prisoners "temporarily," and EXCEPT that it might be left open indefinitely (http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/obama_guantanamo_bay/2009/01/27/175694.html ).

Hey, you jackasses who voted for this loser. Maybe read a newspaper before voting next time, huh?

The End....

The American experiment is now officially ending... not over, but ending.

The inmates are running the asylum. The imbeciles are teaching the class.

Given the Obama administration, emphasis is on "imbeciles."

Hillary Clinton, obeying that centuries-old maxim of diplomatic practice called "keeping your cards close to your vest," did everything short of falling to her knees and offering to shine the shoes of our enemies (rumor has it that she also contemplated offering sexual favors - but get real, we are talking Hillary Clinton here - exactly how does a woman's ankles get that thick anyway?) in begging them to continue to bless us with investment in our fine nation.

From Breitbart -

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Sunday urged China to keep buying US debt as she wrapped up her first overseas trip, during which she agreed to work closely with Beijing on the financial crisis.

Clinton made the plea shortly before leaving China, the final stop on a four-nation Asian tour that also took her to Japan, Indonesia and South Korea, where she worked the crowds to try to restore America's standing abroad.

In Beijing, she called on authorities in Beijing to continue buying US Treasuries, saying it would help jumpstart the flagging US economy and stimulate imports of Chinese goods.

"By continuing to support American Treasury instruments the Chinese are recognising our interconnection. We are truly going to rise or fall together," Clinton said at the US embassy here.

Translation for those of you who do not comprehend diplo-speak: "RAH- RAH, REE-REE, YOU CAN STILL INVEST WITH ME! PLEASE?"

(http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.42a44b0f5d9cf5c9762e80574e79a3d5.831&show_article=1 )

Well, all of you jackasses who wanted change - you got it. The United States is now reduced to standing on a street corner, hat in hand, doing a fairly passable blind guy imitation (or alternately, holding a sign that reads: "Will work for treasury investments"), and dependent upon the charity of whomever may walk by.

Yes, the United States is now dependent upon the good will of the CHINESE COMMUNISTS to stay afloat. And notice that Hillary did not offer - "Investment in the U.S. is safe, as in the past, and you can trust us," but rather she abjectly prostrates herself before the sworn enemies of freedom and of good in the world and begs, "If you don't invest in us, we might sink!!! Waaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh!"

The only bigger imbeciles than those in the Obama administration - whose head imbecile is certainly Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama himself - are those imbeciles ignorant and morally warped enough to have believed that he might have the answer. Heck, you are a fool if you think the likes of Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama even understood the question....

Take comfort! This is not the end - it is only the beginning of the end.