Arkady's Thoughts

In a world that is progressively getting crazier by each day and the facade that is the American "recovery" peels away news like this no longer surprises, but instills a lot of hostility. Wall Street Journal reports that the Obama administration is seeking to strike a "mortgage deal".  More specifically, Obama in his infinite wisdom will now mandate banks (most of which are technically insolvent) to pay out 20 Billion dollars to underwater mortgages.  So good news for those individuals whose mortgages are now less than the actual value of the home, a gift is coming! Terms of the administration's proposal include a commitment from mortgage servicers to reduce the loan balances of troubled borrowers who owe more than their homes are worth, people familiar with the matter said. The cost of those writedowns won't be borne by investors who purchased mortgage-backed securities, these people said. If a unified settlement can be reached, some state attorneys g...

The highly anticipated proposal has finally been released and can be found in it's full glory here .  There is quite a bit to go through, but we can focus on the general overview in to retain some modicum of sanity.  There has been quite a bit of buzz about Obama's budget insofar that we will finally get a plan to tackle our debt crisis.  Instead we get a fantasy, pure and simple fantasy.  Obama's disjointed reality has produced a plan that offers a combination of spending reduction - can't call them cuts because they are just reductions of previous plans - tax hikes and the primary ingredient: fantasy. Let us start with what the administration *thinks* will happen. FY 2011 projected revenue: $2.174 Trillion (Arkady: 1.1 Trillion in income) FY 2011 projected spending: $3.819 Trillion (Arkady:  1.682 Trillion on SS/Medicare/Medicaid) FY 2011 projected deficit: $1.645 Trillion Spending as a % of GDP: 25.3% Deficit as a % of GDP: 10.9% FY 2015 projected r...

This is a very impressive video done by CATO that breaks down Obama's speech and focuses on how realistic Obama's promises are, discusses specific legislation and highlights the good aspects of Obama's administration. In particular, focus on the education aspect of the speech.  As you may be aware, higher education costs are climbing at astronomic rates and other than insurance premiums are probably the fastest rising costs in America.  Because Americans hold collages and universities in slightly higher regard than blood sucking insurance companies these costs are seldom discussed.  However if there is one thing you learn from this blog is that when costs stop making sense, look for government intervention as an explanation.  Nothing distorts free market prices faster and more efficiently than the heavy and reckless hand of government.  Higher education is no exception and the constant grants, breaks, subsidies, incentives and programs stemmin...

In what appears to be an act of desperation the Democrats dispatched our president to rally the shell shocked liberals in voting for Coakley.  This is particularly perplexing because it would appear that every poll is suggesting that Brown is guaranteed to clinch the win - so what is Obama doing?  After stumping for Corzine in NJ and speaking on behalf of Deeds in VA, is he willing to further undermine his own credibility here in MA?  Now perhaps these losses are irrelevant to him or do not hurt his standing in any way, but a third loss in a row would suggest that the magical aura is beginning to wear off.  At one point virtually anything Obama touched would instantly turn into gold and Democrats gained an impressive majority riding his coat tails in 2008, but we are on the cusp of a major reversal in fortune. While I am not rooting for a liberal to win this coming Tuesday, whether it be Coakley or Brown, a win that could further hurt Obama's credibility will be f...

While SNL has made fun of Obama before, this is probably the most accurate and brutal mockery we have seen so far!  Not only is it actually funny (for the first time), but it tends to capture much of what some of us have been trying to explain to those believing that Obama actually knows what he is doing.  Truth is, Obama's agenda is not what we are battling against, but rather that of Pelosi and Reid with Obama rallying the liberal base in the background.  More importantly the monetary policy that has lead this country down a one way path to destruction is not necessarily Obama's fault, nor Bush's and not even Clinton's.  Yet we must admit that if not for Obama, then things like the 787 Stimulus package, (Obama/Pelosi/Reid)Care would probably not be the current topic of discussion. Seems like SNL has finally come to it's senses and beginning to understand the very dangerous path we have embarked.  Now, when will the rest of the rational liberal base wake up...

One would expect to find this headline from Onion news, but apparently Obama indeed warns of a double-dip recession due to mounting debt !!  No sh*t Sherlock!   It has now officially become impossible to take our president seriously, he sounds like a child pure and simple.  Obama's policies alone have piled on more debt that Bush ever did and Obama can claim all day that his administration inherited a mess, but anyone with an IQ higher than their shoe size should now realize that our debt problem are due to Obama.  Let's just go from memory to see how our 2009 deficit jumped from 485 billion/year to 1.8 trillion /year - 787 billion dollar stimulus package; we argued against it on the grounds that infusing an economy with more liquidity was not the answer.  We now know the stimulus is riddled with fraud and our economic condition worsened, not improved. - 33 billion  in homebuilder bailouts !!  After the housing bubble do you think...

Yesterday news broke of the shootings at Fort Hood and some immediately cut to the President who was at the time at a conference.  Watch the video below and decide for yourself, but the problem arises from the fact that instead of addressing the tragedy he instead made a shout out to an individual and made light of the situation.  There does certainly appear to be a level of inappropriateness here, but given the context of the situation it is unclear as to how exactly he should have acted.  It is pretty clear that plenty of people are extremely upset and dissapointed with the way Obama handled the situation.  Ironically, NBC Chicago wrote a very scathing piece titled Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting .

Yesterday (video below), President Obama in his usual elitist manner accused a majority of Americans being brainless zombies, while praising Democrats for being " an opinionated bunch" while the other side just "do what they are told". There are several problems with this statement, beyond the glaring partisanship exhibited by our President.  First of all Obama's popularity is in the toilet and has been there for quite some time, perhaps this fact is bringing about more elitism than usual.  According to Rasmussen . For the first time during Obama’s time in office, the Approval Index has been in negative double digits for seven straight days. Fifty percent (50%) of Democrats Strongly Approve while 66% of Republicans Strongly Disapprove of his performance. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 18% Strongly Approve and 42% Strongly Disapprove. Interesting to note that his opinionated bunch still blindly support him while the rest of coun...

Congratulations Mr. Obama apparently the Norwegeians caught the hope and change fever and reduced the Nobel peace prize to a set of promises.  At least Gore (sort of) made a movie (8.0 on IMDB, well done) despite being debunked along with the "experts" at the international climate change counil. At least Arafat once attempted to seek peace even if it was after waging terror on innocent civilians.  Today's winner fittingly shocked observers because while he has not accomplished anything YET , he has fantastic potential.  Why the shock? The Norwegeian commitee consists primarily of politicians representing political leanings of Norway's parliament, a body with strong socialist ties. Still, the peace prize has often landed into the hands of people leaving a mark on histry. Men like Gorbachev deserve all the recognition in the world for dismantling one of the most oppressive regimes the world has seen by simply believing in personal liberties.  Lech Wal...

Oama and his wife flew to Copenhagen, Denmark to convince the International Olympic Committee in choosing Chicago as the 2016 site of the Olympic Games. Instead, Obama was served on a platter and Chicago rejected in the first round with such force that it literally knocked the wind out of the windy city. For what it's worth, I do feel bad for all the Chicago residents who poured time and money into this project and wanted so badly to host the Olympic games. 100 million dollars is a hefty price to pay for such a profound rejection. So why did the IOC reject Chicago? After all, they should have been honored that for the first time in American history a president and wife personally appeared on behalf of Obama the American people.  So what are the reasons for this swift rejection? 1) Chicago is the most corrupt city in America. Consider: Bonus Explainer : How do we know that Chicago's so corrupt? The most straightforward way to measure corruption is to check the n...

Who? Huh? Just a very liberal voice from a very liberal paper, Richard Cohen's piece Time to Act Like a President from the Washington Post speaks loudly just based on title alone. While this may not be the proverbial rats fleeing from the sinking ship, Obama's invulnerability is coming to an end. Sharply criticized from two ideological extremes Obama's f aux centrist rhetoric will inevitably leave him with no base and undermine his capacity to lead. The trouble with Obama is that he gets into the moment and means what he says for that moment only. He meant what he said when he called Afghanistan a " war of necessity " -- and now is not necessarily so sure. He meant what he said about the public option in his health-care plan -- and then again maybe not . He would not prosecute CIA agents for getting rough with detainees -- and then again maybe he would. Obama is an empty suit and Liberals have become acutely aware of this fact. On the other side, Conservative...

ACORN has been under significant pressure from two heroes literally risking their life to expose ACORN and the criminal enterprise they have built on Alinsky's principles. For every liberty loving and red blooded American, ACORN represents everything that is wrong with this country. Most of us have discovered this awful organization accidentally during Obama's campaign. We learned slowly about ACORN's involvement with the Community Reinvestment Act and it's mafia-style tactics they used to intimidate bankers. We learned that Obama represented ACORN during a lawsuit in Chicago, where ACORN alleged that banks practice discriminatory lending practices. Although Obama's involvement was minimal his roots as a community organizer and presence in this case suggests that he is partial with their views. Lastly, we discovered the following video of community organizers and Obama pledging his support and acceptance of ACORN's agenda. Then we learned that ACORN was kn...

Joe Wilson may have erred and is the source of condemnation of his party, but virtually nobody is discussing Obama's bitterly partisan speech or his ideas - no, Joe Wilson is the topic of conversation. Job well done, whether intentional or not. However a divide between the left and right continues to rage and now the nitty -gritty regarding illegal immigrant coverage is on the forefront. So, who is the actual liar? First of all, we need to figure out just how many illegal immigrants are in this country. This number varies drastically depending on source, here are just some examples: Center for Immigration Studies : 6 million New York Times : 11-12 million Department of Homeland Security : 11.5 million American Resistance : 15-20 million Let us also assume that tracking people without any documentation or formal entry is very difficult and estimating these numbers is hardly an exact science. Let us however assume that the number is closer to 12 million because that was the number c...

Obama administration is finding itself in a most unpleasant situation and the results are going to be devastating. You may be aware that Obama has garnered interest from many left of center individuals with his appointment of numerous czars . Beyond czars being unconstitutional as they bypass Senate confirmation hearings, these czars have a more radical past than Obama himself and that should tell you something. Move out Jeremiah Wright, out of the way Bill Ayers, here comes Van Jones. We first learned about Van Jones from Glenn Beck the popular conservative host on Fox News. Incidentally the discovery of Van Jones is accidental and most of the blame can go on the Obama administration, something I am sure they are now regretting. It all began after Beck accused Obama of being a racist, after Obama accused Cambridge police of acting “stupidly” involving an incident with his friend and professor, Robert Gates Jr. Shortly after, Beck found himself under the attack by a group called Color...

Rasmussen reports ; Obama continues to drop in approval polling. According to the graph and the notion that a picture speaks a thousand words, Obama has to be concerned about the alarming rate his approval numbers are dropping. One has to wonder what is transpiring among the American voting public and how legitimate these numbers are. Rasmussen is one of the most reliable pollsters in America because he constantly polls actual voters, a distinction worth making and an aspect that makes Rasmussen a leader in polling strategy. Voters, unlike 'likely voters' are the most knowledgeable and honest people to question, their sentiment although anecdotal can prove to be extremely useful in determining future trends. Therefore I am not dismissive of these numbers and neither should Obama be. Why is this happening? First likely answer to this dramatic decline is the health care reform bill, raging town halls and grassroots awareness. People truly understand, throwing an entire system un...

Really? Truly this must be a mistake! With an economy in crisis and unemployment projected to worsen, does mentioning an incident in Cambridge, MA really solve any problems? Or does it instead escalate a story onto the national stage that should have been buried days ago, adding fuel to the fire of race relations. After doing diligent investigation, Obama recited the story to the American public in the following fashion. "My understanding is that Professor Gates then shows his I.D. to show that this is his house and, at that point, he gets arrested for disorderly conduct, charges which are later dropped,." finally adding "Police Acted 'Stupidly' in Gates Case". How presidential, no? According to the Boston Herald, Sargent Crowley - the officer involved in the arrest filed his official report and clearly stated that Professor Gates did NOT show his identification upon request. Refusal to show the ID immediately escalated the situation as officers suddenly h...

We live in interesting times and the job of POTUS is probably the most difficult and stressful task in the world. This is of course why so much emphasis is placed on elections, campaigns and public involvement. Obama rode in a wave of irrational popularity bolstered by the nation's vehement dislike of George W. Bush, a souring economy and the attraction to a youthful black male. A great many of us in the political "right" and "center" were put off by Obama as we began to learn about his experience, stances and dubious past. It appears, however, that some sense is starting to creep back into the American public although at a stubbornly slow rate. As of now, the most trusted pollster - Scott Rasmussen suggests that for the first time since Obama's election the number of people who greatly disapprove of Obama's performance outweigh those that greatly approve. Total approval is still outweighing the total disapproval by 9%. I trust Rasmussen more than a...

How many czars does it take to destroy a representative government? Sounds like the start of a corny political joke, but this is a question every American should now be asking. Obama is now officially dancing with the czars, after appointing more czars into his administration than the entire history of the Russian empire. As of now the total list is as follows (although not all have been appointed by Obama). This list is unverified: Drug Czar,U.S. Border Czar,Urban Czar,Regulatory Czar,Stimulus Accountability Czar ,Iran Czar,Middle East Czar,Afghanistan-Pakistan Czar ,Cyber Security Czar,Bank Bailout/TARP Czar,Energy Czar,Technology Czar,Copyright Czar,Climate Czar,Health Care Czar,WMD Czar,Education Czar,Economic Czar,Housing Czar,Mortgage Czar,Pay Czar,Guantanamo closure Czar,Terrorism Czar, more? What makes czars dangerous? Let's ask a senior Democrat and pork king himself, Senator Byrd, who wrote a letter to Mr. Obama regarding the very same question we are discussing right now...

Today America's highest court stood by a decision to maintain the ban on gays serving in the military, a decision that was supported and encouraged by the White House. There are several important issues at play and while I contend that this is an extremely sensitive topic, it is no less a topic that should be openly discussed with out the fear of infringing upon political correctness. First of all, I fail to see how a ban on gay military service is at all constitutional. Whatever happened to individual liberty and freedom? I for one do not approve of the homosexual lifestyle, but this is my own personal conviction and not anything I would ever use to enact policy from. Homosexuality is something an individual is born with, discriminating against sexual orientation is akin to discriminating against skin color. Even if we were to assume that homosexuality is a choice, then under whose authority and under what right can we discriminate against that choice? I choose to be straight, wha...

I feel compelled to make frivolous commentary regarding the latest spat between former VP Dick Cheney and Mr. Obama. Current topic of conversation? War on terror, a topic that Obama has undoubtedly mastered and fully understood in his short time as the president of this great nation. Positions? Cheney maintains his unwavering stance that dealing with terrorism requires a strong and calculated approach, a recognition of who the enemy is and what they are capable of doing is constantly reiterated and never forgotten. Obama maintains his wavering stance that America is built on certain principles and this "war on terror" is potentially violating these principles, furthermore that our political spectrum has it wrong and only a compromising approach can be a solution to avoid "man-made disasters". Who is winning? Once again, I must apologize to the frivolous nature of this post because I fail to see this as even a battle worthy of commentary. Considering of course the pa...