Blog @ MoreWhat.com

The third video in this series is a reminder of the liberal shamnesty agenda and the Democratic party’s endorsement of Calderon’s shamnesty message to Congress.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The second video in this series includes a discussion of Calderon’s errors in his push for shamnesty. It is also interesting the Mexican president criticizes Arizona’s law and how it might be misused yet Mexico was slammed by ‘human rights’ groups for mistreating illegals. Conveniently Mexico claims they no longer view illegal entry as a crime yet their handling of such matters includes more protections than they suggest the US should employ.

Calderon is a liberal PR nightmare in the making. That’s helpful for November 2010.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

For the record, a series of videos will be presented here on the issue of illegal immigration. The content of this first video in the series is absolutely not endorsed by this blog. To the contrary, Felipe Calderon is in lock step with the open borders, shamnesty crowd. Keep in mind that US Congressional Democrats gave him a standing ovation. Needless to say, Republican members of Congress did not.

But it IS an election year in the US. And the GOP can read the polls. 2/3 to 3/4 of the US population is ‘bone tired’ of illegal immigration. In 2007 the GOP was not so keen on enforcing US immigration law or securing the borders.

What changed? Tea Parties didn’t hurt. Angry voters got their attention. The anti-incumbent mood was a wake up call. This year the public may finally be heard. Thank you Arizona for getting the ball rolling again.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Illegal immigrants: Deport thyself

President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and other US officials have not read SB 1070, the Arizona law signed by Governor Jan Brewer. Yet they criticize it and those who support it. The race card and other typical liberal tactics are employed to denounce opposition to illegal immigration and efforts to correct it. Both Democrats and Republicans and much of the corporate world support what they call ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ which is nothing more than open borders and amnesty for illegals.

President Calderon of Mexico addressed the US Congress this week. He criticizes US immigration policy even though enforcement rarely if ever exists. Allowing open borders and illegal immigration for decades is what caused the problem. An example of Mr Calderon’s dishonesty on this issue is demonstrated by the excerpt below.

Calderon Criticism of Arizona Law Overlooks Mexico’s Tough Immigration Policy

Mexico repeatedly has been cited by human rights groups for abusing or turning a blind eye to the abuse of migrants from Central America. Until recently, Mexican law made illegal immigration a criminal offense — anyone arrested for the violation could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years and deported. Mexican lawmakers changed that in 2008 to make illegal immigration a civil violation like it is in the United States, but their law still reads an awful lot like Arizona’s.

It’s real simple. The US needs strong immigration laws and associated enforcement. Employer sanctions are needed to dry up the job market for illegals. That effort and related immigration policies would solve the problem in a relatively short period of time.

And after self-deportation of illegals is achieved by eliminating taxpayer handouts that fuel illegal immigration supported by those listed above the liberal argument can finally be defeated. Meaning those who truly and honestly want to come here can get back in line and do it the right way. And those who have abused the situation for selfish purposes will no longer be enabled by lack of enforcement.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

related:

Mexico Tourism Promoter Running Threatening Ads in Arizona Newspaper?

In the same week that Rand Paul coasts to victory with a stunning voter majority in the Kentucky race for US Senate a ‘controversy’ is manufactured. A reasonable take on the story is offered at the Washington Post.

from David Weigel | May 20, 2010; 12:09 PM ET at WaPo:

I can’t decide whether Paul has benefited or been hurt by the change of focus from the original story — whether his opposition to basically any federal intervention in business practices meant he opposed the Americans With Disabilities Act, opposed FDA regulation of food, etc. Instead, this has become a fairly tired “is candidate a racist or isn’t he?” story — one that Paul thinks he can deflect.

And here’s part of the ‘take’ at PMSNBC:

In his 15-minute interview with Maddow, Paul repeatedly declined or sidestepped opportunities to endorse the provisions of the 1964 law which require hotels, restaurants, and other businesses to accept all customers without discriminating on the basis of race or ethnicity.

He repeated several times that he opposes racial discrimination. “I’m not in favor of any discrimination of any form, I would never belong to any club that excluded anybody for race,” he said. At the end of the interview, Paul added, “I don’t believe that any private property (owner) should discriminate either.”

But he did not say whether he supported using federal law to enforce non-discrimination in privately owned businesses. He said “had I been around” in 1964 “I would have tried to modify that.”

He also said the debate over the civil right law’s limits on rights of private property owners “is still a valid discussion.”

Suffice it to say that in the liberal camp you are a bad person if you want to ‘modify’ any legislation they support or ‘discuss’ any part of their self-approved agenda. Hey libs, everything is subject to discussion, even your tired old race card tactic.

Below is a link to Rand Paul’s site and his press release on the story.

Rand Paul Sets the Record Straight
Published on 20 May 2010 by Jesse

In response to liberal media attacks, Dr. Rand Paul today released the following statement:

Seems clear what Rand Paul was saying. He obviously opposes discrimination as does this blog author. But he also is concerned about government overstepping its constitutional limits as well as other threats to freedom and liberty as layed out by the founding documents of our nation. While this blog author does not necessarily agree with everything Rand Paul or his father Ron may express, any differences of opinion would benefit from more discussion.

Discussing issues is an idea lost on liberals. They would prefer you surrender your freedom and allow them to control everything, no questions asked.

Stanford Matthews
Morewhat.com

crossposted at Maggie’s Notebook

An earlier post on Blog @ MoreWhat.com suggested Los Angeles would be the loser in a boycott war initiated by their city council in response to Arizona’s passage of a state measure to deal with illegal immigration and border security.

Looks like this blog author wasn’t the only one considering strategy in light of California’s ill-conceived AZ boycott.

Ariz. official dares L.A. to stage boycott
City would give up quarter of its electricity

The spat over Arizona’s new immigration law expanded Tuesday as a state official dared Los Angeles to follow through on its new boycott by agreeing to give up the 25 percent of electricity the city gets from Arizona sources.

In a letter to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce said a boycott war is bad for both sides, and said he would “be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements” to end the electricity flowing to Los Angeles.

How about lights out for Los Angeles?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted at Maggie’s Notebook

Here we go again. Liberals are not satisfied with passing healthcare legislation dictating what insurance providers must sell and citizens must buy. Now they want to dictate what citizens eat, how much they weigh and how active they are. And they tell you that is what you want.

“Americans want to be healthy, live longer, and have more time with the people they love,” said Rep. Marcia Fudge. “This bill makes it much easier for people to make healthy choices by addressing simple barriers to wellness.

The fallacy here is that people always had and still have the ability to ‘make healthy choices.’ What those who support this legislation really want is to remove your ability to choose and impose their will on you. In other words, you will do what we tell you to do. And we’ll pass laws to try and make that happen.

“The U.S. is paying heavily for the obesity epidemic which is the result of inactivity and the overconsumption of unhealthy food and sugary beverages,” said Nancy Brown, CEO of the American Heart Association. “The Healthy CHOICES Act and its far-reaching policies will help target and address this growing health concern by providing adults and children with the resources and information they need to make healthier lifestyle choices.”

“This legislation reflects thoughtful and effective policies that can help Americans reach and sustain a healthy weight, and we are eager to partner with Congress to advance this much-needed measure,” said Penny Lee, Executive Director of the Campaign to End Obesity.

That’s right. ‘The Healthy Choices Act and ITS FAR-REACHING POLICIES’ will attempt to force you to conform to someone else’s idea of what you should be and how you should act. They fail to mention that if you consume more calories than your activity can use you will gain weight. Even if you eat what they call healthy food that rule still applies. So perhaps this legislation has little to do with ‘healthy choices’ and more to do with controlling your life.

Funny, not so long ago the liberal mindset was trying to convince the world that being fat was okay because those who were could not avoid it. Later, the ‘gene people’ were trying to convince you there is a gene that makes you fat. But now that the liberals are the majority in Washington DC they’re abandoning that and offering legislation to restrict your personal choices once again.

News flash for liberals: If you do not want to be fat you will pursue that which allows you to maintain a suitable weight as well as other characteristics you deem worthwhile. If you do not care about the issue you will not make that effort. This may be another example of nature’s way of cleaning up the gene pool. Congress is unlikely to improve on that.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

There is plenty of detail in a recent story about illegal immigration that requires some sort of confirmation before drawing conclusions. What does not appear to require more supporting evidence is that the subject of the story is an illegal immigrant.

Colotl, a Mexico native, has been in the United States for much of her life, coming here with her parents when she was 10. Friends said the family moved often until Colotl graduated from DeKalb County’s Lakeside High School in 2006 with a 3.8 grade-point average.

Her troubles began March 29 when she was stopped on the KSU campus and charged with impeding the flow of traffic. She reportedly told the officer she had a Mexican driver’s license but could not find it; she offered him a Mexican passport that expired in August 2007 as identification. While driving without a license is a relatively minor offense, making a false statement is a felony with a maximum punishment of five years in prison and a $1,000 fine.

The open borders crowd and reconquista fanatics love making a distinction between ‘criminal’ aliens and others who are here illegally. The linked report from AJC demonstrates this point. But their point/counterpoint reference that this story ‘has sparked debate’ on the issue misses the central point.

The student is an illegal immigrant. While the portrayal at AJC suggests she is not an immediate threat to national security and that ICE focuses on ‘criminal aliens’ she is here illegally and being given at least a temporary pass on violating US immigration law.

You will get lost in the minutiae and miss this central point when the MSM and others prey on your natural sympathy for the poster child of ‘just coming here to find a better life.’ A better life should include following the rule of law. The first ‘better life’ component all illegals violate.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The city of Los Angeles, California highlights the logic of referring to the state as Americ’a Greece with passage of a nonsense boycott of the state of Arizona. California’s pathetic state of financial affairs causing it to hover over the brink of economic disaster can be linked to the stupidity of public officials. Not the least of which reside in Los Angeles.

LA Approves Arizona Boycott Over Immigration Law
Wednesday, 12 May 2010 03:57 PM

Los Angeles on Wednesday became the largest city yet to boycott Arizona over its tough new law targeting illegal immigration in a move that likely will affect some $8 million in contracts with the state.

Oh, the bold move to shore up liberal sentiment in the land of fruits, nuts and flakes relies on exactly what California cannot do. Manage the public sector or its finances. Even one of the authors of the boycott admits the move is a paper tiger.

But Councilwoman Janice Hahn, who co-authored the resolution, said it would be impractical to cancel most of those deals and only about $7 million to $8 million in city contracts probably would be affected.

If Arizona countered with a similar measure California would likely be the loser. And failing to act against illegal immigration points to a major reason California is all but bankrupt. Liberal fantasies transformed to political action are doomed to fail. History is full of examples.

So go ahead California, continue to demonstrate how incredibly feeble you are by continuing to support your nonsense agenda. But let us all know when your going out of business sale gets scheduled. Everyone could use serious discounts if you have anything of value left to sell. And we’ll pass on the cheap imported labor.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Metcalfe’s Arizona-Style Apprehension Measure Offers 140,000+ Illegal Aliens Two Options: Leave PA or Go to Jail

5/4/2010

Legislation could save PA taxpayers more than $728 million annually

Citing mounting taxpayer costs combined with the $1 billion Rendell budget deficit, lost jobs and ever-increasing crime resulting from Pennsylvania’s illegal alien invasion, Representative Daryl Metcalfe (R-Butler) today introduced the newest and toughest addition (House Bill 2479) to the National Security Begins at Home legislative package.

“With the federal government currently AWOL in fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities to protect American lives, property and jobs against the clear and present dangers of illegal alien invaders, state lawmakers from Arizona to Oklahoma, Georgia to Utah and now Pennsylvania are left with no choice but to take individual action to address this critical economic and national security epidemic,” said Metcalfe. “The purpose of this legislation is to offer every illegal alien residing in Pennsylvania two options, leave immediately or go to jail. Whether you came to steal Pennsylvania jobs or to leech off of our state’s fraud-ridden, ‘close your eyes and verify’ welfare system, once this law is enacted there will be absolutely no economic incentives for you to remain here.”

Metcalfe’s Arizona-modeled legislation would provide state and local law enforcement with full authority to apprehend Pennsylvania’s estimated 140,000 illegal aliens and several other sweeping reform measures, including:

• Creating a new criminal offense for illegal aliens who violate federal law by either willfully failing to register as an alien or failing to possess proper proof of such registration when stopped for another primary offense such as a traffic violation.
• Requiring law enforcement officers to attempt to verify the immigration status of suspected illegal aliens.
• Creating a new criminal offense for persons who are unlawfully present in the United States and are an unauthorized alien applying for work.
• Allowing law enforcement officers to arrest illegal aliens for any public offense which would warrant removal from the United States.
• Creating a new felony offense for intentionally smuggling illegal aliens for profit; and authorizing law enforcement officers to impound any vehicle driven by an illegal alien, or used to transport illegal aliens.

House Bill 2479 also incorporates several other previously introduced National Security Begins at Home provisions, including cracking down on “Sanctuary” cities, employers who refuse to use the federal government’s FREE e-verify system to verify the immigration status of potential employees or that knowingly hire illegal aliens; and ending access to public benefits without verification of lawful status within the United States.

Offering support for House Bill 2479 during today’s press conference included Kathleen Appell, Citizens for Immigration Control in Pennsylvania; Mariann Davies Esq., You Don’t Speak for Me; Jeff Lewis, national director, Federal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Coalition (FIRE); and Ned Pfeifer, president, Eagle Forum.

Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) was also on hand to once again highlight FAIR’s recent research on the ever-increasing taxpayer costs directly associated with Pennsylvania’s illegal alien population, which has nearly tripled since 2000:

• Pennsylvania has the 16th largest concentration of illegal aliens in the United States.
• Providing education to the estimated 48,500 illegal alien children (or 2.7 percent of K-12 students) attending Pennsylvania’s public schools costs state taxpayers nearly $660 million annually.
• Expanding this initial price tag to include unreimbursed health care expenditures and incarceration costs, total state taxpayer costs for illegal aliens increases to $728 million annually or about $150 per Pennsylvania resident household.

On the upside, FAIR’s report also concluded that the annual fiscal costs to Pennsylvania taxpayers associated with illegal aliens are not inevitable. The complete Cost of Illegal Immigration to Pennsylvanians report can be reviewed and downloaded at FAIRUS.org.

“Giving Pennsylvania law enforcement full authority to apprehend illegal alien invaders for eventual deportation has everything to do with fully restoring the rule of law in favor of tax-paying Pennsylvania citizens who are currently footing the bill for no less than $728 million annually to clothe, feed, educate, medicate and incarcerate illegal aliens,” said Metcalfe. “Most importantly, this legislation recognizes that Pennsylvania citizens have a constitutional right to expect their rights and laws to be enforced, especially against foreign invaders.”

Earlier this year someone introduced me to the refreshing advice and commentary of Nicole Gelinas. Earlier this month at Roll Call Gelinas presented ‘A Simple GOP Plan for Wall Street.’ It is the subject of this post for two reasons.

First, it IS a simple plan and not just for the GOP although directing it toward them is helpful. Surely Democrats are not interested. And second, this blog has urged a return to a time before gutting Glass-Steagall, the attendant Gramm Leach Bliley and the sin of POLS at that time. The contract with America GOP and Bill Clinton set our course for troubles in the markets more than a decade ago.

According to Gelinas ‘Republicans should present to the public a clear goal — allowing free markets to govern Wall Street and a set of simple rules to get there.’

Republicans can say: Senators on both sides of the aisle want to end “too big to fail.” But the fatal flaw in Dodd’s bill is that it would try to decree an end to taxpayer bailouts, rather than create the conditions necessary to achieve that end.

Americans can understand that in a free-market economy, success in business doesn’t happen by decree. Instead, it is the result of a consistent, predictable set of rules that apply to everyone. Similarly, failure in finance can’t happen by government decree. It must be the result of consistent, predictable rules.

Follow the link to read the rest. You won’t be disappointed. Especially attractive are statements like this one. History shows that these rules work. That is what people usually mean when they use the words, ‘common sense’. Something sorely lacking these days.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Real Immigration Reform Starts with Border Security and Stronger Enforcement
Published in the Ramona Sentinel

Now that health care legislation has been finalized, the Obama Administration and Congressional leaders have hinted at the possibility of moving forward with illegal immigration reform sometime this year. The prospect is still uncertain but one thing is clear. Any attempt at reform that does not make enforcement a priority will fall short in addressing the real problems with illegal immigration and should be opposed outright.

The more responsible approach is straightforward: secure our nation’s borders, starting with the U.S.-Mexico land border, and strengthen the enforcement of existing immigration laws.

It is no surprise that proponents of immigration reform have focused their energy on pushing an agenda that encompasses amnesty and open borders. What they seemingly fail to recognize is that the violence and destruction that is common along the Southern border is often the result of inadequate enforcement and policies that encourage illegal entry – including the prospect of amnesty.

More than 8,000 people were killed due to violence on the U.S.-Mexico border last year alone, far surpassing the number of deaths attributable to insurgent activity in Iraq and Afghanistan since the start of combat operations.

Click here to read the rest….

from Hunter’s bio….

Hunter is a strong conservative who is committed to strengthening national security, enforcing our borders, creating opportunities for American workers and protecting the interests of taxpayers. He is also a strong proponent of the Second Amendment, protecting traditional marriage and the rights of the unborn.

Click here to read the rest….

This blog recently criticized Arizona US Senators Kyl and McCain for their pathetic performance on the issue of illegal immigration.

Senators Kyl and McCain: Shamnesty Fiasco

There is also a post here supporting Arizona Gov Jan Brewer and AZ State Senator Russell Pearce for their efforts resulting in SB 1070.

Jan Brewer, Russell Pearce: Arizona Takes a Stand

A H/T to Newsmax for the heads up on an editorial from the Arizona Republic on the same topic.

Arizona’s Largest Newspaper Slams McCain, Kyl

Arizona’s largest newspaper criticized U.S. Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl and a host of other elected officials in a rare front-page editorial on Sunday, saying the politicians have failed to find solutions to illegal immigration.

But the Arizona Republic is as guilty of self-serving motives for their issue positions as they claim the same about those with opposing positions.

The federal government is abdicating its duty on the border.

Arizona politicians are pandering to public fear.

The result is a state law that intimidates Latinos while doing nothing to curb illegal immigration.

This represents years of failure. Years of politicians taking the easy way and allowing the debate to descend into chaos.

The Arizona Republic has been calling for comprehensive immigration reform continuously since 2002. For a brief time, our congressional delegation led the nation on this front. But no more.

Now, it seems our elected officials prefer to serve political expediency instead.

AZ POLS are not ‘pandering to public fear’ nor have they passed a ‘law that intimidates Latinos.’ On the one hand shamnesty advocates call it unfair to blame Latinos for the illegal immigration problem and on the other criticize efforts to end illegal immigration as racist for targeting Latinos. That’s tantamount to saying it was unfair to blame the Japanese for attacking Pearl Harbor then calling the US racist for declaring war on Japan for the attack.

The Arizona Republic was originally called the Arizona Republican. And while they supported George W Bush at one point and of course McCain and Kyl at others their current and past calls for ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ are support of shamnesty and nothing more.

The paper has been owned by Gannett since 2000 and supporting shamnesty since 2002. There is nothing Republican or Arizonan about the paper. It serves its corporate master who belongs to that perverse subculture within the free market that shamelessly pursues cheap labor by exploiting those who violate US immigration law.

Saying Jan Brewer has other motives for signing SB 1070 while criticizing the law for ignoring ‘Arizona’s Latino heritage’ and creating a ‘backlash that will hurt the state’s economic development’ betrays the paper’s argument. The only heritage being ignored by those who support shamnesty is our nation’s founding documents and principles including the rule of law. SB 1070 merely responds to a federal failure of the government’s duty to protect the nation, its sovereignty and citizens.

The Arizona Republic liked McCain’s sellout to shamnesty as well as Kyl’s and lauded Napolitano for her contribution to their effort. Now that Kyl is viewed by them as abandoning this stand they are not pleased. McCain avoids it for re-election purposes and Napolitano is beholding to a new master in the White House and no longer needs Arizona.

And the AZ paper of course attacks those fighting the good fight like Sheriff Joe. They bash the fed for dropping the ball and bash the sheriff for picking it up. Proof positive the Arizona Republic is bought and paid for by Gannett’s shamnesty support.

The decadence of mainstream media is alive and well in Arizona. BTW, so is illegal immigration and those who benefit from it…. corrupt business interests, criminals including drug cartels and, go figure, illegal immigrants.

There are other Arizona publications which seem to support the rule of law and SB 1070. Obviously seventy percent of voters in Arizona do. So maybe another post about these other pubs will be forthcoming.

As for the Arizona Republic you can file it with the NYT fish wrap.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

update May 22, 2010:

Mexico Tourism Promoter Running Threatening Ads in Arizona Newspaper?

A stop at Google News to see what the MSM offers today starts out with US considers Goldman Sachs criminal charges. You have to ask yourself if that includes suspects like former employees of Fannie and Freddie as well as their co-conspirators in Congress, then and now? The push to place everyone in a home of their own whether they could afford it or not started the whole mess. It took years of quiet meddling by POLS and regulators as well as those who made a bundle in the market to lift regulations designed to avoid such problems. But the liberals need a villain to cover their tracks and apparently Goldman Sachs will suffice for their witch hunt and slight of hand redirection of blame.

And you have to wonder if BP is stepping up to pay for the spill in the Gulf of Mexico now that the slick is reaching shore and conspiracy theories abound? And it is reasonable that the Obama administration would postpone offshore drilling plans due to the incident. But that delay plays well into the liberal agenda in the first place. Another set of villains to be targeted by the left for political purposes rather than pursuit of justice.

Economic growth is slower than expected according to a report at WaPo. Again you have to wonder who really expected it to be above a 3.2% annual rate in the first quarter of 2010? The public opposition to continued fiscal irresponsibility likely includes business leaders and those who do the hiring and manage the risk of whether or not to expand. That is if they even have access to the resources (funding) to do so.

You would be hard pressed to find examples exhibiting effective leadership in government these days. When the taxpayer via government entities should be partnering with the private sector to improve the economy and resolve issues across the board little evidence exists that anyone is prepared to do just that.

That leads well into a sentiment expressed frequently on this blog. Come November, throw the bums out. Continue natural term limits through 2012. Repeat as necessary.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted at Maggies’s Notebook

Oh my, let’s get all indignant on the topic of Wall Street and the liberal pursuit of villains to take the blame for choices made by others. Maureen (Moron) Dowd does her level best to support the Democratic party’s attempt to shift blame. She pans ‘Las Vegas metaphors’ used by POLS in chastising Goldman Sachs while ignoring a basic rule designed to remind consumers of the pitfalls in the marketplace - caveat emptor, let the buyer beware.

According to Princeton’s Wordnet, caveat emptor is described as ‘a commercial principle that without a warranty the buyer takes upon himself the risk of quality.’ Does it get any simpler than that?

From Dowd’s op-ed….

As Americans lost homes and lined up for jobs, Goldman made $13 billion in 2009, and Blankfein got a bonus of, as he haltingly admitted to McCain, “um, um, nine million.”

“The idea that Wall Street came out of this thing just fine, thank you, is something that just grates on people,” Delaware Senator Ted Kaufman told Blankfein. “They think that you didn’t just come out fine because it was luck. They think that you guys just really gamed this thing real, real well.”

Sure, let’s talk about the greed of Wall Street and the bonuses received by Blankfein and others. Never mind the greed of those who were stung by real estate investments they would never have purchased had they performed the due diligence required.

This is no different than the wailing and gnashing of teeth coming from Enron employees who lost their jobs when that house of cards imploded as well as retirement accounts exclusively or largely built around Enron stock. Though one should never place all their investment eggs in one basket, the meteoric rise of Enron stock enticed the greedy to ignore another simple and common concept. If it seems to good to be true it probably is.

Conveniently, Dowd also ignores the role of many politicians steering Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, banking regulators and other government entities toward real estate disaster. A long history of accommodating the notion that everyone should own a home whether they can afford it or not led to ‘no docs’ loans and banking interests scurrying to unload bad mortgages they would not have produced on their own.

While POLS ‘grill’ Goldman Sachs in the US Senate and call for ‘Wall Street reforms’ take a look at Fannie and Freddie now and tell me anything has changed. As for those facing foreclosure since taking a mortgage they cannot afford or others lured by greed during the recent real estate ‘bubble’ POLS advocating more bailouts for bad decisions should be retired in November 2010.

It’s about time people begin taking responsibility for their own failures. Crying foul when you end up on the losing side of a transaction and expecting others to take the blame is childish. Some forget that transactions on Wall Street between buyers and sellers are a zero sum game. For each transaction there is a winner and a loser. Someone posts a gain and someone posts a loss. Get over it or get out.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com