China snubs President Obama and Hillary Clinton in Copenhagen.

China's delaying tactics threaten climate deal - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

China is attempting to scupper chances of a comprehenive agreement at the Copenhagen climate summit by using delaying tactics, sources inside the negotiations have told The Independent.

At an emergency meeting convened at the Bella Center this morning, Barack Obama and Gordon Brown assembled 26 heads of state in an attempt to revive a deal. But China's Premier Wen Jiabao did not attend and was replaced by vice foreign minister He Yafei.

This afternoon, the US president and his secretary of state Hillary Clinton called another meeting with China, but were snubbed again when only three low-level Chinese delegates arrived.

President Obama pleading his case to China's Premier Wen Jiaba.

President Obama clearly regarded Premier Wen’s absence as a major diplomatic insult, and snapped: “It would be nice to negotiate with somebody who can make political decisions.”

UK diplomatic sources later confirmed that China had taken huge offence at remarks by President Obama over the need to independently monitor every country carbon emissions. In his speech President Obama said: "Without any accountability, any agreement would be empty words on a page". The Chinese
delegation interpreted these comments as an attempt to humiliate them. It prompted Prime Minister Wen Jiabao to return to his hotel and send low level delegates to take his place in the talks.

In Copenhagen, joined by 20 other members of Congress, Pelosi was on message, announcing that the visit is really meant to create jobs.

"We see Copenhagen as a meeting about job creation," Pelosi said. "How do we move forward to create millions of clean energy jobs and new technologies to keep America No. 1?"

The jobs bill passed late Wednesday on a 217-212 vote, with no Republicans voting for the plan. The Senate won't take up jobs legislation until next year. With unemployment high it seems certain that some form of the bill will soon make it to the desk of President Barack Obama.

The jobs bill is a political no brainer. The $154 billion package will stimulate the labor market and provide needed jobs; jobs that will help the Democrats retain their control in the House and the Senate.

Good question Nancy "How do we create millions of clean energy jobs." How many green jobs do we have now and what is classified as a green job. And if $787 billion didn't create any new jobs how will $154 billion?

More post from Wag This Dog.
First human embryonic stem cell under Obama's policy
Obama knew Holder's decision to award five Sep 11 conspirators
Taxpayer will pay for Freddie Mac $5 billion loss third quarter

Share this post, Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

Technorati Tags: China, Copenhagen

Obama Snubs Dalai Lama (The Tibetian Monk) For Favors From China !!!

World leaders fall short on climate change deal in Copenhagen.

World leaders reach deal on climate change in Copenhagen - washingtonpost.com

COPENHAGEN -- President Obama said Friday night that an international deal to combat climate change had been reached, but "it is going to be very hard, and it's going to take some time" to get to a legally binding treaty.

"Today, we've made a meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough here in Copenhagen," Obama said.
The agreement, which appeared to fall short of even modest expectations for the talks, has not been endorsed yet by the full summit.

The official, speaking earlier on condition of anonymity, said a "meaningful agreement was reached" following a multilateral meeting between Obama and the leaders of China, India and South Africa. "It's not sufficient to combat the threat of climate change, but it's an important first step," the official said.

System change not climate change.

Obama said.
"Today, we've made a meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough here in Copenhagen," even though the agreement, which appeared to fall short of even modest expectations for the talks, has not been endorsed yet by the full summit. "It's not sufficient to combat the threat of climate change, but it's an important first step,"

Obama admitted the commitments fell far short of what scientists have said is required to avert dangerous climate change. "We know they will not be sufficient, by themselves, to get to where we need to be by 2050," the president said. "Kyoto was legally binding, and everyone still fell short anyway."


"It will not be legally binding, but what it will do is allow for eachcountry to show to the world what they're doing, and there will be a sense on the part of each country that we're in this together, and
we'll know who is meeting and who's not meeting the mutual obligations that have been set forth."

However, the emerging deal - which needs to be accepted by all of the 193 nations at the talks - received a mixed reaction.
Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, speaking on behalf of the G77-China group of nations, reacted angrily to the developments, saying that a deal had been done behind their backs.

"Gross violations have been committed today - against the poor, against traditions of transparency and participation on an equal footing by all nations, and against common sense," he said.
A number of nations are reportedly not willing to accept the latest draft of the document, known as the "Copenhagen Accord".
Reacting to the Copenhagen "deal", John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, said: "The city of Copenhagen is a crime scene tonight, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport.
So Copenhagen was a bust. Two weeks of wasted time with nothing getting done. Even this last minute secret Obama deal, done in the dark of night, no one is happy with. And will not be a deal until 193 nations sign the accord.

More post from Wag This Dog.
Senator Webb takes on President Obama about action in Copenhagen.
Past Global warming shows lack of knowledge in climate change.
Global warming alarmist under stress as temperatures fall.

Share this post, Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to ant post.

Technorati Tags: Copenhagen

Proud Flag-Waving Communists and Socialists March in Copenhagen to Stop Global Warming

Bank of America trying to get Government Obama off it's back.

Bank of America says it's paying back $45 billion in government loans - CharlotteObserver.com

Bank of America said Wednesday evening it is set to repay all of its $45 billion in government aid, a step that helps remove the stigma of being a bailout recipient and dials back government scrutiny of its operations.

The Charlotte bank had been eager to pay back the money for months, but it needed the approval of government regulators. The move allows departing chief executive Ken Lewis to remove a major blot on his legacy, and it potentially makes it easier for the company to find his replacement.

The U.S. Treasury said the repayment means Bank of America will be freed from executive compensation restrictions imposed by pay czar Ken Feinberg, which have made it tougher to attract a new CEO. Feinberg also will have no say on the final total compensation and pension for Lewis.

Czar Ken Feinberg puts ball and chain on business CEO's

No one wants the banks CEO's job with czar Ken Feinberg restrictions on the CEO's pay. With Lewis leaving at year's end, and why should he stay with the little CEO's pay, Bank of America needs to remove those restrictions. The bank received approval to return the TARP money after negotiations with regulators heated up in recent weeks. Chief risk officer Greg Curl, who is considered an internal CEO candidate, spearheaded the talks.

Kenneth Feinberg, the U.S. paymaster for rescued companies, will exempt some executives at American
International Group Inc. from a $500,000 salary cap after at least five employees threatened to quit because of the limits, people familiar with the matter said.

Feinberg may issue a ruling as early as next week on pay limits for 75 of the bailed-out insurer’s executives, the people said. Last week, five executives said they were prepared to resign if their compensation was significantly cut.

The compensation ruling could mean that some AIG executives among the 75 may earn bigger salaries than those in a group that Feinberg ruled on six weeks ago, who were previously the highest-paid employees. The $500,000 limit has so far applied to everyone at New York-based AIG except Chief Executive Officer Robert Benmosche, who has a $7 million salary.

American International Group Inc. Chief Executive Officer Robert Benmosche told the company’s
board that he is considering resigning from the job he’s held for three months, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the situation.

The CEO is chafing under constraints imposed by AIG’s government overseers, in particular a recent compensation review by Kenneth Feinberg, the special master on pay in U.S. PresidentBarack Obama’s administration, according to the people.

Benmosche, who started in August after his predecessor Edward Liddy quit in May, is seeking to halt the departure of customers and employees so he can build up units to sell in order to repay loans included in AIG’s $182.3 billion bailout. New York-based AIG is among firms Feinberg ordered to slash pay.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration will destroy our banking business!

More post from Wag This Dog.
Taxpayer will pay for Freddie Mac $5 billion loss third quarter.
Barack Obama knew AIG could pay bonuses before Executives took them.
Polls show public wary of deficit and Obama's economic intervention.

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

Technorati Tags: Bank of America

FOX News Interview - Exec. Pay, Pay Czar

Senator Webb takes on President Obama about action in Copenhagen.

Webb warns Obama on taking action in Copenhagen - Water Cooler - Washington Times

Dear Mr. President:
I would like to express my concern regarding reports that the Administration may believe it has the unilateral power to commit the government of the United States to certain standards that may be agreed upon at the upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of Parties 15 in Copenhagen, Denmark. The phrase “politically binding” has been used.
Although details have not been made available, recent statements by Special Envoy on Climate Change Todd Stern indicate that negotiators may be intending to commit the United States to a nationwide emission reduction program. As you well know from your time in the Senate, only specific legislation agreed upon in the Congress, or a treaty ratified by the Senate, could actually create such a commitment on behalf of our country.
I would very much appreciate having this matter clarified in advance of the Copenhagen meetings.
Sincerely,
Jim Webb
United States Senator

Barack Obama backed Jim Webb

Senator Webb's office told the Washington Times Water Cooler the president has not replied back in writing, and the decision to write the president a letter on this issue comes from Mr. Webb's concern
about issues of constitutional checks and balances.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Webb said, "If we're going to make binding commitments, the Senate needs to be an obligatory player in that process." The spokeswoman also noted Mr. Webb's concern with the
vague commitment from China and India on the issue of cap and trade.
It said the president believed recent progress included the emissions reduction target announced by the US; China and India setting targets for the first time to reduce their carbon intensity and moves by
members of the Commonwealth.
The White House said the president had discussed the state of the negotiations with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British
Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
He concluded there appeared to be growing support for the suggested $10bn annual fund to help developing countries deal with climate change.
The White House said the US would pay its "fair share".

Looks like King Obama just likes to spend and give our money away.

More post from Wag This Dog.
Past Global Warming shows lack of knowlege in Climate Change.
Global warming alarmist under stress as temperatures fall.
NASA'S giss Dr. Hansen global warming blunder.

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, leave a comment, subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

Technorati Tags: Copenhagen

Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty?

First human embryonic stem cell under Obama's policy

NIH authorizes use of first human embryonic stem cells under new policy - washingtonpost.com

The Obama administration on Wednesday approved the first human embryonic stem cells for experiments by federally funded scientists under a new policy designed to dramatically expand government support for one of the most promising but also most contentious fields of biomedical research.

The National Institutes of Health authorized 11 lines of cells produced by scientists at the Children's Hospital in Boston and two lines created by researchers at the Rockefeller University in New York. All were obtained from embryos left over by couples seeking treatment for infertility.

"This is a real change in the landscape," NIH Director Francis Collins said. "This is the first down payment on what is going to be a much longer list . . . that will empower the scientific community to explore the potential of embryonic stem cell research."

Human Embryo later stage.

What is Embryo Transfer?

Embryo transfer is one of the most important parts of the IVF process. It is during this final stage of the IVF procedure that your embryos will be transferred into your uterus, in the hopes that you will become
pregnant. Embryo transfer is completed after your eggs have been fertilized by your partner’s sperm and they have been through the embryo culture process.

When is Embryo Transfer Performed?

Embryo transfer is usually performed once your embryos have been cultured to the right stage. Typically, there are two types of embryo transfers:

Day 3 Embryo Transfer: The Day 3 embryo transfer

• is performed 72 hours after egg retrieval. Your eggs will be mixed with
  your partner’s sperm and then allowed to develop for three days. At
  this point in time, your embryos will be transferred into your uterus
  where, hopefully, they will implant.
• Blastocyst Transfer: Blastocyst transfer
  occurs when your embryos have reached the blastocyst stage. This occurs
  after five days of culturing. Some fertility specialists prefer doing
  blastocyst transfers because it is easier to choose a healthy embryo
  for transfer at this stage.

VATICAN CITY - A new Vatican
document warned that certain recent developments in stem-cell research,
gene therapy and embryonic experimentation violate moral principles and
reflect an attempt by man to “take the place of his Creator.”



The latest advances raise serious questions of moral complicity for
researchers and other biotech professionals, who have a duty to refuse
to use biological material obtained by unethical means, the document
said.

Would you refuse -- for your parent, your child or yourself -- a
treatment for a terrible ailment because it was developed with
embryonic stem cell research?
First, their is no treatment for a terrible ailment because of embryonic cell research.
Second, their is no evidence that their ever will be a cure because of embryonic cell research.
Third, if their ever is a cure for a terrible ailment because of embryonic cell research, then we will have to fram embryos to meat the great demand for the cures.
Result, we will have to create life, so we can destroy it, to cure someone who is already alive and not aborted by their mother.
Embryos for research should only be excess embryos from fertility clinics, embryos which were going to be destroyed anyway. It should be forbidden to buy, sell or create embryos expressly for research.
Researchers should show that their work could not be done with any other form of stem cell -- yet. But their goal should be to move toward using only non-embryonic stem cells.


More post from Wag This Dog.
Barack Obama, Democrats pledge to eliminate Osama bin Laden.
President Obama grew deficit by $181 billion in July.
President Obama's Health care reform bill encourages "end-of-life" counselling.


Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

embryo development/ full version/Technorati Tags: Embryonic, stem cell

Ahmadinejah, Iran leaders earmark $20 million to support terroist.

The Associated Press: Iran earmarks $20 million to support militants

Iran's parliament passed a law on Sunday earmarking $20 million to support militant groups opposing the West and investigate alleged U.S. and British plots against the Islamic Republic.
The legislation is widely seen as a response to Western criticism of Iran's violent crackdown against protesters following the disputed June presidential election. Lawmakers started debating the outline of the bill in August when Iran's hardline leaders were fending off allegations that security forces had tortured opposition activists detained during the demonstrations.
The text of the legislation says the money is to "support progressive currents that resist illegal activities by by the governments of the U.S. and Britain." Iranian officials often use such terms to describe militant groups.
It was not immediately clear which groups would receive funding from Iran, but Tehran already backs
the Islamic militants Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

Presudent Obama Wait and See is This Leadership?

President Obama sent a letter on Sunday to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil reiterating the American position on Iran’s nuclear program, a day before Iran’s president made his first state visit to Brazil, an aide to Mr. da Silva said Tuesday.

Mr. Obama did not explicitly criticize Mr. da Silva for hosting President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, implying instead that he hoped Mr. da Silva would use the occasion to express support for the international effort to forge a compromise on Iran’s nuclear ambitions, according to two American officials.

After Ahmadinejad's first stop in Brazil, it emerged that Obama had sent a letter to the regional power urging it to be more critical of the Islamic republic and its suspect nuclear activities.

After receiving the letter on Sunday, Lula went ahead Monday and recognized Iran's right to develop nuclear energy, although he urged Tehran to seek a peaceful settlement in talks with Western powers.

The letter, written to Brazilian leader Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva on the eve of Ahmadinejad's visit, outlined Washington's foreign policy goals and opposition to Iran's nuclear program.
So now we have an American President, telling the President of Brazil, to tell the President of Iran how President Obama expect him to behave. So how did Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad receive the lecture from President Barack Obama?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed Wednesday beside firebrand President Hugo Chavez that Iran and Venezuela would "stand together until the end" in the face of US "imperialism." "We'll stand together until the end," he yelled, raising Chavez's hand in front of the television cameras and shouting in Spanish: "Viva Venezuela! Viva Chavez!"

Before arriving in Caracas late Tuesday Ahmadinejad was in Bolivia, where he and President Evo Morales, another close Chavez ally, hailed their own alliance against "imperialism," meaning the United States.

President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are already laying out the framework for negotiations with Iran, and seem more than willing to engage in diplomatic dialogue. How do you think Obama should approach the threat of Iran 's nuclear program? Should the U.S. be using sticks or carrots? Post your thoughts

More post from Wag This Dog.
Holbrooke two minute meeying with Iran deputy Minister, Clinton happy.
President Obama ten days late condemning Iran violence.
Iran boosting aid to Iraqi militias to kill U.S. soldiers.

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.
Technorati Tags: Ahmadinejah, Iran

The New Hitler

Obama Knew Holder's Decision to Award Five Sept. 11 Conspirators

PostPartisan - Holder's decision is embarrassing and offensive

Two weeks ago, in the Friday news black hole with President Obama safely on the way to Asia, Attorney General Eric Holder announced his decision to award five Sept. 11 conspirators, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the full rights of American citizens at a federal trial. Holder perhaps hoped the tides of the cable cycle would wash the news away. They haven’t, for a number of reasons.

We have learned since the announcement that Holder apparently did not consult Obama before deciding to bring the Sept. 11 terrorists back to Ground Zero. No further evidence is necessary that Holder regards the war on terrorism as a law enforcement matter. In a decision with obvious national security implications, the attorney general consulted with neither the commander in chief nor the secretary of defense. He employed a process that might be more appropriately applied to the trial of a mafia kingpin or a serial killer.

Eric Holder Attorney General

Do you beleive that Eric Holder apparently did not consult President Barack Obama before deciding to bring the Sept. 11 terrorists back to Ground Zero with President Obama safely on the way to Asia? So we are to believe that Attorney General Eric Holder did this behind the President's back. Do you believe this?

This is how I know that President Obama knew about the decision of Eric Holder.

  Obama was asked, in June 2008, how he could be sure the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies are not crucial to protecting U.S. citizens. Obama said the government can crack down on terrorists "within the constraints of our Constitution." He mentioned the indefinite detention of Guantanamo Bay detainees, contrasting their treatment with the prosecution of the 1993 World Trade Center bombings.

"And, you know, let's take the example of Guantanamo," Obama said. "What we know is that, in previous terrorist attacks — for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center — we were able to arrest
those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated.

"And the fact that the administration has not tried to do that has created a situation where not only have we never actually put many of these folks on trial, but we have destroyed our credibility when it
comes to rule of law all around the world, and given a huge boost to terrorist recruitment in countries that say, 'Look, this is how the United States treats Muslims. ...

"We could have done the exact same thing, but done it in a way that was consistent with our laws," Obama said. Obama agreed with the Supreme Court ruling last week that detainees in
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have a constitutional right to challenge their indefinite imprisonment in U.S. civilian courts.

So you can see by the very words of President Obama, Eric Holder was for-filling the very desires of his President. 

More post from Wag This Dog.
GM Chevrolet Volt Electric Car get 300 Miles a day for $40,000.
Will GM, Chrysler go Forward ro President Obama's Iraq?
Past Global Warming Shows Lack Of Knowlege in Climate Change.

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.
Technorati Tags: Ground Zerro

Rep. King Joins 9/11 Familes to Oppose Gitmo 9/11 Trial

Barack Obama, Democrats Pledge to Eliminate Osama bin Laden.

Democrats Pledge to 'Eliminate' Osama - Democratic Underground

Democrats Pledge to 'Eliminate' Osama
By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Congressional Democrats promise to "eliminate" Osama bin Laden and ensure a "responsible redeployment of U.S. forces" from Iraq in 2006 in an election-year national security policy statement.

In the position paper to be announced Wednesday, Democrats say they will double the number of special forces and add more spies, which they suggest will increase the chances of finding al-Qaida's elusive leader. They do not set a deadline for when all of the 132,000 American troops now in Iraq should be withdrawn.

"We're uniting behind a national security agenda that is tough and smart and will provide the real security George Bush has promised but failed to deliver," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday.

His counterpart in the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the Democrats are offering a new direction — "one that is strong and smart, which understands the challenges America faces in a post 9/11 world, and one that demonstrates that Democrats are the party of real national security."

Osama defies Obama.

In June 2008, Democrat Barack Obama says he'll take no lectures from Republicans on who will keep America safer. Obama told reporters that the Republicans have no "standing to suggest that they've learned a lot of lessons from 9/11." He said they "helped to engineer the distraction of the war in Iraq at
a time when we could have pinned down the people who actually committed 9/11." He said Osama bin Laden is still at large in part because of their failed strategies.

The Obama team believes the Bush administration has downplayed the
importance of catching the FBI's most-wanted terrorist because it has
not been able to find him.

"We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority,"
Obama said during the presidential debate on October 7.

Then two months after Obama was elected.
Barack Obama suggested last night that removing Osama bin Laden from the battlefield was no longer essential and that America's security goals could be achieved merely by keeping al-Qaeda "on the run".

"My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him," he said. "But if we have so tightened the noose that he's in a cave somewhere and can't even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America."

"I think that we have to so weaken [bin Laden's] infrastructure that, whether he is technically alive or not, he is so pinned down that he cannot function," Obama said. "And I'm confident that we can keep them on the run and ensure that they cannot train terrorists to attack our homeland."

Then in March 2009

"Good morning," began the President today. "Today, I am announcing a comprehensive, new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.  And this marks the conclusion of a careful policy review, led by Bruce [Reidel], that I ordered as soon as I took office."

• Read  the White Paper on the new policy (pdf) >>
• Read  the One-pager on the new elements in the policy >>

The President stressed the perilous position we find ourselves in there, and the threat that would arise should safe havens on Pakistan go unchallenged or should the government in Afghanistan fall to the Taliban again. He also noted that 2008 was the deadliest year to date in that war.

So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future. That's the goal that must be achieved. That is a cause that could not be more just.

By Daniel Mandel on 11.25.09  in the American Spectator

"After ten months, people are rightly asking questions about the war President Barack Obama has made his own -- Afghanistan. Or rather, they are wondering, observing Vice President Joseph Biden publicly opposing troop increases and Defense Secretary Robert Gates foreshadowing that there is limited time in
which to disown it.

In recent days, however, there are rumors that Obama will announce next week the deployment of a further 30,000 troops -- 10,000 less than the 40,000 more troops requested months ago by the U.S. commander, General Stanley McChrystal. produce success, whether the President wishes to disown
it."

Why the hesitation? When Barack Obama ordered a new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan as soon as he took office? And in March he wanted the American people to know that he had a clear and
focused goal. As long it didn't mean more troops?

After months of apparently agonizing deliberations rife with public disagreements among his military advisers, Obama will announce his Afghanistan strategy in a prime-time address to the nation Tuesday from the United States Military Academy at West Point.

But there are growing signs that a troop surge of that size will face serious skepticism in (Democrat) Congress. Aside from doubts about the mission in Afghanistan, some senior congressional Democrats are questioning the high price of a troop surge, which could cost $30 billion or more annually.

These are the same Democrats that said in 2006 they will double the number of special forces and add more spies and will provide the real security George Bush has promised but failed to deliver.
As you can see the Democrats don't have the stomach or back bone to protect us.

More post from Wag This Dog.
 President Obama Grew Deficit by $181 billion in July.
Past Global Warming shows Lack of Knowlege in Climate Change.
President Obama says Lost Auto Jobs Gone Forever.

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to ant post.


Technorati Tags: afghanistan

Barack Obama on Afghanistan and Pakistan

Taxpayer will pay for Freddie Mac $5 Billion Loss Third Quarter

Freddie Mac posts $5 billion loss - Yahoo! News

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Freddie Mac (FRE.N) (FRE.P), the second largest provider of U.S. residential mortgage funding, on Friday posted a loss of $5 billion in the third quarter and predicted it would need more government support amid a "prolonged deterioration" in housing.
Increases in the value of securities Freddie Mac held over the period helped buoy its net worth, however, erasing its need to tap government funds for a second straight quarter to stay solvent while continuing to buy and guarantee home loans.
Including a $1.3 billion dividend payment on senior preferred stock bought by the Treasury in previous quarters, Freddie Mac's third-quarter loss increases to $6.3 billion.
The home funding company's loss comes amid a rise in provisions for credit losses to $7.6 billion in the quarter, up 46 percent compared with the previous quarter, as delinquencies worsened on loans it guarantees. Provisions will remain high this quarter, it added.

Federal Government making us give more of our future wages.

On September 7, 2008, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), James B. Lockhart III, announced his decision to place two Government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association) and Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation), into conservatorship run by the FHFA.

At the same press conference, United States Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, stated that placing the two GSEs into conservatorship was a decision he fully supported, and that he advised "that conservatorship was the only form in which I would commit taxpayer money to the GSEs." He further
said that "I attribute the need for today's action primarily to the inherent conflict and flawed business model embedded in the GSE structure, and to the ongoing housing correction."
In 1970, FMae was privatized so as to remove it from the federal budget and Freddie Mac was established the same year. As government sponsored organizations (GSEs), neither paid local or state taxes, they were exempt from Securities and Exchange registration and fees, they were permitted to operate with lower reserves than banks, and they could each borrow up to $2.5 billion directly from the U.S. Treasury at low interest. The faith that they were backed by the government and operated so cheaply gave them access to massive sums of low-interest money looking for both profits and security.

This proved so profitable that banks and other lenders packaged their loans into bonds, sold them on the market for that quick profit (especially the agent rake offs), loaned out those replenished funds,
and did this over and over again with riskier and riskier loans as housing prices climbed higher and higher and security requirements werelowered to essentially nonexistence.

What It Could Mean for You

The ramifications of this history are many. If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fail and can't back loans
anymore, interest rates will go up.
Banks won't be originating as many loans because they don't have the guarantees they once did.
This means the number of homebuyers will drastically shrink, both because banks won't be authorizing as many mortgage loans and because the ones they do authorize will be out of reach for many homebuyers (higher down payments, higher interest rates, smaller loan amounts).
If the government completes a bailout, as looks more and more like the case, it would use taxpayer money to pay for buying stocks in the companies. It could cost up to $1 trillion in taxpayer money, which likely means higher taxes.
More importantly, it could damage the creditworthiness of the United States, making future loans to the government more difficult to obtain.
With the national deficit at nearly $10 trillion, the only thing going for the US is its credit rating. And when that goes....

Obama and Democrats are Responsible: Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac

More post from Wag this Dog
Ferderal Government will Loose Billions from General Motors and Chrysler
President Obama Grew Deficit by $181 billion in July
Obama Misleading and Outlandish about Health Care Reform

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link ti any post.
Technorati Tags: Freddie Mac

Federal Government will Loose Billions from General Motors and Chrysler.

U.S. 'Unlikely' to Recoup Auto Outlay, Panel Finds - washingtonpost.com

The federal government is unlikely to recoup all of the billions of dollars that it has invested in General Motors and Chrysler, according to a new congressional oversight report assessing the automakers' rescue.

The report said that a $5.4 billion portion of the $10.5 billion owed by Chrysler is "highly unlikely" to be repaid, while full recovery of the $50 billion sunk into GM would require the company's stock to reach unprecedented heights.
"Although taxpayers may recover some portion of their investment in Chrysler and GM, it is unlikely they will recover the entire amount," according to the report, which is scheduled to be released Wednesday.

Great car of the past. Will future cars be loved this way?

We were told by the Treasury Department, just four months ago, that the United States would recover most of its planned $50 billion investment in General Motors within 5 years. And if the government-monitored corporate reorganization fails and GM sputters again, the government investment in the company will be lost.
Now it's starting to look like the US government is going to loose $50 billion dollars or are we loosing $50 billion dollars. How did President Obama believe that we would get our money back from the car companies?
During the boom years, the annualized figure for car sales in the United States hovered around 16 million. Recently, it has fallen to between 9 million and 10 million on an annualized basis. To get our money back President is betting that the US auto market will rebound to 16 million by 2012. A 40 percent increase in just 3 years in this economy? Is President Obama willing to bet the house?
For the United States to fully recover its investment, the value of General Motors stock will have to reach levels it has never before attained. "It's very unlikely" that the government will recover its money, said
David Whiston, auto equities analyst at Morningstar. "GM will be a smaller company after the bankruptcy and there are going to be more foreign automakers entering the market that will make GM's efforts more
difficult."

As the auto rescue has unfolded, the question of whether the government will be repaid has taken on increasingly political overtones, as partisans debate whether the Bush administration or the Obama
administration has handled the industry better. We shall see.
More post from Wag This Dog.
GM Chevrolet Volt Electric Car gets 300 Miles a day for $40,000.
President Obama Grew Deficit by $181 billion in July.
Will GM, Chrysler go Forward or President Obama's Iraq?


Technorati Tags: GM, Auto

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

05.07.09 Sen. Corker Discusses News that Chrysler Won't Repay $7 Billion Taxpayer Loan

President Obama and Democrats hope a Split-the-Vote will force Health Care Reform

New Rx for Health Plan: Split Bill - WSJ.com

The White House and Senate Democratic leaders, seeing little chance of bipartisan support for their health-care overhaul, are considering a strategy shift that would break the legislation into two parts and pass the most expensive provisions solely with Democratic votes.

The idea is the latest effort by Democrats to escape the morass caused by delays in Congress, as well as voter discontent crystallized in angry town-hall meetings. Polls suggest the public is losing support for the overhaul plans, giving Republicans less incentive to go along.

Democrats hope a split-the-bill plan would speed up a vote and help President Barack Obama meet his goal of getting a final measure by year's end.

Angry Protester.

Democratic plan would be put to a separate vote in the Senate, including the requirement that Americans have health insurance. But in Massachusetts the program is a failure it has not achieved universal healthcare, although the reform has been a boon to the private insurance industry. The state has more than 200,000 without coverage, and the count can only go up with rising unemployment.

The program is not affordable for many individuals and families. For middle-income people not qualifying for state-subsidized health insurance, costs are too high for even skimpy coverage. For an
individual earning $31,213, the cheapest plan can cost $9,872 in premiums and out-of-pocket payments. Low-income residents, previously eligible for free care, have insurance policies requiring unaffordable
copayments for office visits and medications.

On April 4th 2006 The Massachusetts legislature approved a bill that would require all residents to purchase health insurance or face legal penalties, which would make this the first state to tackle the problem
of incomplete medical coverage by treating patients the same way it does cars.

The costs of the reform for the state have been formidable. Spending for the Commonwealth Care subsidized program has doubled, from $630 million in 2007 to an estimated $1.3 billion for 2009, which is not sustainable.

We must let Congress know we want improved access to affordable healthcare for all, not more expensive private health insurance we can't afford to use when we are sick. Massachusetts healthcare reform
fails on all five Institute of Medicine criteria. Congress should not make it a model for the nation.

More post from Wag This Dog.

President Obama Grew Deficit by $181 billion in July

President Obama's Health Care Reform Bill Encourges "end-of-life" Counseling for Seniors.

Technorati Tags: Health Care

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

Newt Gingrich Defends Sarah Palin's "Death Panel" Comments

GM Chevrolet Volt Electric Car get 300 Miles a day for $40,000.

GM says new Volt could get 230 mpg in city driving

General Motors said Tuesday its Chevrolet Volt electric car could get 230 mpg in city driving, making it the first American vehicle to achieve triple-digit fuel economy if that figure is confirmed by federal regulators.
But when the four-door family sedan hits showrooms late next year, its efficiency will come with a steep sticker price: $40,000.
Still, the Volt's fuel efficiency would be four times more than the popular Toyota Prius hybrid, the most efficient car now sold in the U.S.


Most automakers are working on similar designs, but GM would offer the first mainstream plug-in with the Volt, which seats four and was introduced at the 2007 Detroit auto show.

Chevrolet Volt electric car.

The Volt is powered by an electric motor and a battery pack with a 40-mile range. After that, a small internal combustion engine kicks in to generate electricity for a total range of 300 miles. The
battery pack can be recharged from a standard home outlet.

Toyota's Prius—which starts at about $22,000—gets 51 mpg in the city and 48 mpg on the highway and goes further than 300 miles. Hybrids use a small internal combustion engine combined with a high-powered battery to boost fuel efficiency.

What is the life of these high powered batteries?
The bottom line is that no one really knows how long they last. Manufacturers like Toyota and Honda have warranties that last for 8 years and between 80,000 and 100,000 miles. Replacement battery packs for hybrid cars generally cost about $3,000.

The batteries in hybrid cars are responsible for the better fuel economy that's become central to the technology. They power the electric motor, which typically propels a hybrid car at lower speeds. This puts less pressure on the gasoline engine and stretches out the amount of fuel a vehicle burns in between trips to the gas station.

But the chemical material that makes up all car batteries, whether it's a conventional car or a hybrid, is typically toxic. Currently, there are far fewer hybrid cars on the road than conventional cars; however,
concerns have been raised that if the number of hybrid cars increase, landfills will soon overflow with toxic batteries that are full of corrosive and carcinogenic materials.

Japanese electronics maker Hitachi Ltd. said Thursday it will supply lithium-ion batteries for hybrid vehicles to General Motors Corp. in 2010 and sharply raise production capacity to meet surging demand for gas-electric cars.
Hitachi currently makes 40,000 lithium-ion batteries per month and will lift the capacity to three million units per month that's 36 million a year.

PHEVs and electric cars need more robust lithium batteries than conventional hybrids, because the batteries undergo a more severe duty cycle, charged to the brim then nearly drained.

Even as it pushes ahead on the electric Smart cars, Mercedes says it isn't sure rechargeable batteries cut pollution or energy use. "You have to produce the energy" for recharging, and that might come from inefficient, higher-polluting sources.

So are you going to buy a GM Chevrolet Volt electric car  for $40,000 that only will go 300 miles a day, which you might have to buy a $3000 replacement battery and not save the environment?

More post from Wag This Dog.

Obama Misleading and Outlandish About Health Care Reform.

Will GM, Chrysler go Forward Obama's Iraq?

President Obama says Lost Auto Jobs Gone Forever.

Technorati Tags: Electric Cars, Volt

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

Hybrid vehicle battery challenges- Jon Lauckner, GM
WE NEED GOVERNMENT MONEY.

President Obama Grew Deficit by $181 billion in July.

TheHill.com - Deficit grew by $181 billion in July

Spending through July of 2009 has increased by $530 billion, which is 21 percent over the same period in 2008. The bailout money for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae accounted for almost half of the spending increase. Unemployment benefits have more than doubled, Medicaid spending has grown by a quarter and Medicare spending has increased by 11 percent.

Tax revenue for the first three quarters of 2009 has fallen by approximately $350 billion, or 17 percent compared to the same period last year, due mostly to the effects of the recession on payroll, income and corporate taxes. A third of the decline is due to tax breaks in the stimulus, including the middle-class tax cut that President Obama campaigned on during last year's election.

The independent budget scorekeeper has projected the deficit to reach $1.8 trillion by the end of the fiscal year, Sept. 30. The deficit in 2008 reached $455 billion, which was a record at the time.

President Obama "Spendaholic".


The latest deficit projections come as Democrats in Congress and the White House are pushing for healthcare reform criticized by Republicans as too costly. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stressed during a town-hall meeting in Colorado this week that the healthcare bill won't add to the
deficit or restrict benefits and instead will increase access to care.

I guess Nancy Pelosi is smarter than the independent Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Which said the bill expected to cost roughly $1 trillion over the next decade. Nancy said the bill won't add to the
deficit.

As if healthcare spending weren't already a train wreck in the making, it's projected to nearly double by 2017, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced today. That means it'll reach a whopping $4.3 trillion and account for 19.5 percent of our gross domestic product, up from 16.3 percent
now.

The Obama campaign maintain that they've figured out how to pay for their proposals without worsening the deficit. The problem is that given the difficulties we already face—that $4.3 trillion—their mechanisms to finance these programs just aren't very convincing. That's like saying you're going to pay for a weight-loss program with the money you'll save on groceries once you're slim.

The final presidential debate: Deficit spending, health care, and more

SCHIEFFER: We found out yesterday that this year's deficit will reach an astounding record high $455 billion. Some experts say it could go to $1 trillion next year.
OBAMA: Well, first of all, I think it's important for the American public to understand that the $750 billion rescue package, if it's structured properly, and, as president, I will make sure it's structured properly, means that ultimately taxpayers get their money back, and that's important to understand. But there is no doubt that we've been living beyond our means and we're going to have to make some
adjustments. Now, what I've done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut. I haven't made a promise about...
SCHIEFFER: But you're going to have to cut some of these programs, certainly.
OBAMA: Absolutely. So let me get to that. What I want to emphasize, though, is that I have been a strong proponent of pay-as- you-go. Every dollar that I've proposed, I've proposed an additional
cut so that it matches. And some of the cuts, just to give you an example, we spend $15 billion a year on subsidies to insurance companies. It doesn't -- under the Medicare plan -- it doesn't help
seniors get any better. It's not improving our health care system. It's just a giveaway. We need to eliminate a whole host of programs that don't work. And I want to go through the federal budget line by line, page by page, programs that don't work, we should cut. Programs that we need, we should make them work better.
But what is absolutely true is that, once we get through this economic crisis and some of the specific proposals to get us out of this slump, that we're not going to be able to go back to our profligate ways. And we're going to have to embrace a culture and an ethic of responsibility, all of us, corporations, the federal government, and individuals out there who may be living beyond their means.
President Obama speaking out of both side of his mouth.

More post from Wag This Dog.
Democrats say Bush Likely to pay.
No Job Growth until after President Obama's four years.
Polls Show Public Wary of Deficit and Obama's Economic Intervention.


Technorati Tags: Deficit

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post

Bush Has Doubled National Debt with Deficits

President Obama's Health Care Reform bill Encourages "end-of- life" Counseling for Seniors

'End-of-Life' Counseling Intensifies Health Care Debate - Political News - FOXNews.com

A provision in President Obama's health care reform bill encourages "end-of- life" counseling for seniors -- sparking euthanasia fears among some of the legislation's critics and leading others to believe that the White House is looking to save money by pressuring insurers to provide less coverage to seniors.

The provision, tucked deep within the House bill, would provide Medicare coverage for an end-of-life consultation every five years, and more frequent sessions if a person is suffering a life-threatening disease.
Health providers would be required to explain to seniors the end-of-life services available, including "palliative care and hospice."
"This provision may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia if enacted into law," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich. said in a statement last month.

Senior Citizen golden years.

What could "end-of-life" counseling really mean to those over 65?

From: What Are the Potential Cost Savings from Legalizing Physician-Assisted Suicide?, New England Journal of Medicine, July 1998

Medicare budget is spent on the 5 percent of Medicare patients who die each year. The last month of life accounts for 30 to 40 percent of the medical care expenditures in the last year of life. To many, savings from reduced use of expensive technological interventions at the end of life are both necessary and desirable." By dying one month earlier by means of physician-assisted suicide, might save his or her family $10,000 in health care costs, having already spent as much as $20,000 in that year."


Obama encourages people to create living wills because researchers, who interviewed 603 advanced-cancer patients about whether they had end-of-life conversations with their physicians, found that
patients who did had an estimated average of $1,876 in health care expenses during their final week of life, compared with $2,917 for those who didn't. Patients also associated higher costs with a worse
quality of death during their final week and typically did not live longer if they received intensive care.
"Policies that promote increased communication, such as incentives for end-of-life conversations, may be cost-effective ways to both improve care and reduce some of the rising health care expenditures."
White House aides acknowledge it's a sensitive issue.
The 64-year-old Oregon woman, whose lung cancer had been in remission, learned the disease had returned and would likely kill her. Her last hope was a $4,000-a-month drug that her doctor prescribed for her, but the insurance company, Oregon State Health Plan, refused to pay.
What the Oregon Health Plan did agree to cover, however, were drugs for a physician-assisted death. Those drugs would cost about $50.
"What is six months of life worth?" he asked in a report in the Eugene Register-Guard. "To me it's worth a lot. This is my life they're playing with."  Remember the government wants to play with your life.

More post from Wag This Dog.
Obama Misleading and Outlandish About Health Care reform.
Polls Show Public Wary of Deficit and Obama's Economic Intervention.
Night Light causes Breast Cancer in Women.

Technorati Tags: Health Care

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

Oregon Health Plan Denies Chemo Medicine- Assisted Suicide Offered Instead

Obama Misleading and Outlandish About Health Care Reform

Obama Addresses 'Outlandish' and 'Misleading' Claims About Health Reform - Political Punch

After a week of rowdy town halls where President Obama’s policies on health care were challenged, the president used his weekly address to debunk what he called “outlandish rumors” about what reform will mean to Americans.

As senators and representatives head home for the August recess to meet with their constituents, the president said it is important that Americans have the facts.
“So let me start by dispelling the outlandish rumors that reform will promote euthanasia, cut Medicaid or bring about a government takeover of health care," he said. "That’s simply not true. This isn’t about putting government in charge of your health insurance; it’s about putting you in charge of your health insurance. Under the reforms we seek, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”

England has had Government Health Insurance for over 50 years. Let's see how they treat their elderly.

Age discrimination

One of the worst areas, the report found, was mental health care, where older people found services deteriorating as they passed the age of 65.

Gordon Lishman, director-general of Age Concern England, said it was "shocking" that so many social services departments were still failing to meet the needs of older people - the main users of these services.

He said: "Sadly, too many older people in need of public services are currently treated as second-class citizens." Liberal Democrat health spokesman Steve Webb said: "The needs of older people are not a priority for this government."


Andrew Lansley, the shadow health secretary, said the report highlighted the possibility that government targets for assessing patients in Accident and Emergency departments had led to the rushed discharge of older people. He also highlighted concerns about inconsistencies in community rehabilitation of stroke patients.

You would think after 50 years of Government Health Care the English government would have gotten it right. No! After 50 years the needs of older people are not a priority for this government.

In the debate about health care reform, France is often held up as an exemplar. The French get excellent outcomes on every measure, and they achieve them at far lower cost than the United States.
Why is this so? Their freedoms of diagnosis and therapy are protected in ways that would make their managed-care-controlled US counterparts envious. However, the average American physician earns more than five times the average US wage while the average French physician makes only about two
times the average earnings of his or her compatriots. But the lower income of French physicians is allayed by two factors. Practice liability is greatly diminished by a tort-averse legal system, and
medical schools, although extremely competitive to enter, are tuition-free. Thus, French physicians enter their careers with little if any debt and pay much lower malpractice insurance premiums.
Maybe we should follow France example. Introduce tort reform and make medical schools tuition free and keep the greatest health systems in the world.
More post from Wag This Dog.
Doctor Shortage big Obstacle to President Obama Healthcare Goals.
Barack Obama Screws Smokers Sign Children's Insurance Law.
A Thousand people Protest Obama Stimulus Plan in 35 degree St. Louis Weather.


Technorati Tags: Health Care

Enjoyed this Post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

Dirty Little Secret - Universal Healthcare? Social Security?

President Obama, We're Pointed in the Right Direction with lost of Quarter Milliom Jobs and People Giving Up.

Job Losses Slow, Signaling Earliest Days of a Rebound - NYTimes.com

The most heartening employment report since last summer suggested on Friday that a recovery was under way — and perhaps gathering steam — despite the reluctance of the nation’s businesses to resume hiring or even stop shedding jobs.

Employers eliminated 247,000 jobs in July, a huge number by the standards of an ordinary recession, but the smallest monthly loss since last August, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported. And the unemployment rate, rising for months, actually ticked down, to 9.4 percent from 9.5 percent in June, mainly because so many people dropped out of the hunt for work, ceasing to list themselves as unemployed.

Unemployment Line.

Suggested on Friday that a recovery was under way — and perhaps gathering steam but never in the 61 years of record keeping has one-third of the unemployed, currently 14.5 million people, been out of work for 27 weeks or more.

The unemployment rate, rising for months, actually ticked down, to 9.4 percent from 9.5 percent in June,
More than 400,000 who had been looking for work dropped out of the labor force in July, if all those people had continued to look for work, then the unemployment rate last month would have ticked up, to 9.7 percent,” said Nigel Gault, chief domestic economist at IHS Global Insight.

After months of painful job losses, the Obama administration was clearly relieved at the brightening picture. Through July, 6.7 million jobs have disappeared since the recession began in December 2007, with manufacturers accounting for nearly one-third of the loss. But manufacturing losses in July eased to
52,000, largely because of a fluke in the auto industry.

"The worst may be behind us," President Barack Obama declared. "Today, we're pointed in the right direction." If laid-off workers who have given up looking for new jobs or have settled for part-time work are included the unemployment rate would have been 16.3 percent in July. All told, 14.5 million were out of work in July.

 Analysts say companies will keep cutting jobs probably through the rest of this year, though the pace of layoffs should continue to taper off. The beginnings of recovery could actually push the unemployment rate higher, since far more people would be energized to look for work again.

So President Obama, don't count your chickens before they hatch. It is like saying you are getting better because your cancer is not growing as fast.Your not getting better when your cancer slows in growth but until it's in remission.

An elevated unemployment rate could become a political liability for Obama when congressional elections are held next year. Ronald Reagan's GOP lost 26 House seats in the midterm elections in 1982.

More Post form Wag This Dog.
President Obama says Lost Auto Jobs Gone Forever.
Report, Biofules will not Replace Oil.

PETA Angry at President Obama Executing a fly.

Technorati Tags: Unemployment

Enjoyed this post? Email a friend, Leave a comment, Subscribe to Wag This Dog, Link to any post.

Unemployment Hits 16.5% (U6) Unbelievable