The Chimperator's Idea of a Sound Economy - New Home Sales: Biggest Drop Ever

Watching the early morning news, I listened to some of the preview of the State of the Union Speech being spun by the Chimperator's press secretary. Among the remarks she was gushing - and make me want to gag - were comments that the underlying economy is strong. Obviously, that bubble world view is somewhat hard to reconcile with the CNN headline concerning the plunge in new home sales. It just proves further that the Chimperator is utterly out of touch with reality. Here are some highlights:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- New home sales posted the biggest drop on record in 2007, according to the government's latest look at the battered housing market, as a year that saw a meltdown in the mortgage market and a drop in home values ended with yet more signs of weakness.

December sales came in at an annual rate of 604,000, the report showed, down from 634,000 in November, which was also revised lower. The reading was well below the consensus forecast of 645,000, according to economists surveyed by Briefing.com. The weak December sales left full-year new home sales at 774,000, down 26 percent from the 1.05 million sales in 2006. That was the biggest drop since the government started tracking new home sales in 1963, surpassing the 23 percent decline posted in 1980.

Homes financed by conventional mortgages fell 27 percent, the biggest drop since the government started tracking financing in 1988. But the weakness in prices made buyers reluctant to jump into the market, even if the availability of financing was not an issue. The number of new homes bought with cash fell nearly 24 percent, while mortgages guaranteed by federal agencies such as the Federal Housing Administration or the Veterans Administration fell 16 percent.

Barack Obama’s South Carolina Victory Speech

What Barack Obama said in his victory speech last night (http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/CGxdg) describes why I want him the win the nomination and the election in November. I have spent many years involved in political campaigns and the lies and nastiness al la Karl Rove and Bill Clinton are severely harming the country. I see Obama as a great best hope for a different kind of politics where honesty and integrity are once again valued. His speech is about everything that Hillary is not. Here are some highlights:

So this will not be easy. Make no mistake about what we’re up against. We are up against the belief that it’s ok for lobbyists to dominate our government – that they are just part of the system in Washington. But we know that the undue influence of lobbyists is part of the problem, and this election is our chance to say that we’re not going to let them stand in our way anymore. We are up against the conventional thinking that says your ability to lead as President comes from longevity in Washington or proximity to the White House. But we know that real leadership is about candor, and judgment, and the ability to rally Americans from all walks of life around a common purpose – a higher purpose.

We are up against decades of bitter partisanship that cause politicians to demonize their opponents instead of coming together to make college affordable or energy cleaner; it’s the kind of partisanship where you’re not even allowed to say that a Republican had an idea – even if it’s one you never agreed with. That kind of politics is bad for our party, it’s bad for our country, and this is our chance to end it once and for all.

We are up against the idea that it’s acceptable to say anything and do anything to win an election. We know that this is exactly what’s wrong with our politics; this is why people don’t believe what their leaders say anymore; this is why they tune out. And this election is our chance to give the American people a reason to believe again.

And what we’ve seen in these last weeks is that we’re also up against forces that are not the fault of any one campaign, but feed the habits that prevent us from being who we want to be as a nation. It’s the politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon. A politics that tells us that we have to think, act, and even vote within the confines of the categories that supposedly define us. The assumption that young people are apathetic. The assumption that Republicans won’t cross over. The assumption that the wealthy care nothing for the poor, and that the poor don’t vote. The assumption that African-Americans can’t support the white candidate; whites can’t support the African-American candidate; blacks and Latinos can’t come together.

But we are here tonight to say that this is not the America we believe in. I did not travel around this state over the last year and see a white South Carolina or a black South Carolina. I saw South Carolina. I saw crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children. I saw shuttered mills and homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from all walks of life, and men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. I saw what America is, and I believe in what this country can be.

Final Sunday Male Beauty

Speaking of Possible New Clinton Scandals . . .

As noted earlier, the Washington Post has been trying to get some answers about the donations being given to finance the Bill Clinton Presidential Library. My feeling has always been that if one has nothing to hide, one is not afraid of allowing transparency. By their actions, Billary suggest that there just may well be some unsavory dirt to be found. If there is nothing to hide, why are they hiding information? As noted before, here we go again!! The country does NOT need this crap for 4 to 8 more years. Here are some highlights from the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/14/AR2007121402124.html):

A handful of major donors' names to the Clinton library were disclosed in 2004 when a New York Sun reporter accessed a public computer terminal at the library that provided a list of donors. Soon after the article appeared, the list of donors was removed. The amount of the contribution from Saudi Arabia and several other countries, as well as the percentage of the total given by foreigners, had not been revealed.

The Post confirmed numerous seven-figure donors to the library through interviews and tax records of foundations. Several foreign governments gave at least $1 million, including the Middle Eastern nations of Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, as well as the governments of Taiwan and Brunei.

In addition, a handful of Middle Eastern business executives and officials also gave at least $1 million each, according to the interviews. They include Saudi businessmen Abdullah al-Dabbagh, Nasser al-Rashid and Walid Juffali, as well as Issam Fares, a U.S. citizen who previously served as deputy prime minister of Lebanon.

Clinton has been criticized for asking for donations, including from Saudi Arabia, at questionable moments. In an op-ed column in the Wall Street Journal last year, former FBI director Louis J. Freeh said Clinton "hit up [Saudi Arabia's head of state] Prince Abdullah for a contribution to his library" during a meeting in which Freeh wanted Clinton to ask about the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing. Clinton has publicly disputed Freeh's account.

Clinton has also been challenged by members of Congress for accepting a reported $450,000 donation to his library from the former wife of fugitive financier Marc Rich before he granted Rich a pardon for tax evasion in 2001. Neither Clinton nor the Rich family confirmed the donation.

More Sunday Male Beauty

Yet More Sex Abuse Suits Filed Against Catholic Church Dioceses

Sadly, it has become the norm to see articles about suits against the Roman Catholic Church arising from the sexual abuse of minors. What is also sadly the norm is that NO HIGHER UPS in the Church are ever punished for what was allowed to go on. One new suit was filed this past week in California against Salesian Society. The other lawsuits were filed against the Roman Catholic diocese of Sault Ste. Marie, the Roman Catholic diocese of London and the Congregation of the Resurrection in Ontario. Would that the media would endlessly ask Benedict XVI when will some bishop or cardinal be punished instead of mindlessly repeating the disingenuous statements flowing from the Church as it seeks to meddle in civil law matters and/or deprive gays of fully legal rights. Here are highlights on the California case (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-priest24jan24,1,7487220.story):

Three siblings who say they were molested as children by the same Los Angeles priest filed new allegations of abuse this week against a worldwide religious order, which is the only Roman Catholic organization involved in the 6-year-old clergy scandal that has yet to settle any civil claims.The three allege the Salesian Society, with 16,000 priests, ignored clear signs that Father Titian Miani was a dangerous pedophile. Over the years, he was placed in a succession of church roles in different locations, including a boys orphanage in Canada and a boys school in Bellflower, where he preyed on more than a dozen children, according to the civil lawsuit.

The Salesians refused to join in a $660-million settlement between the Los Angeles Archdiocese and more than 500 plaintiffs who said they were abused. The civil case involving Miani is scheduled for trial in March and represents the first time a jury will be asked to decide the church's culpability. A judge recently ruled that there is evidence the Society acted with "malice and oppression" in failing to protect children, potentially opening the door for punitive damages.

According to the lawsuit, Miani traded on his spiritual and educational authority to prey on the three children, whose father had died suddenly in 1965. Their mother, a seamstress and devout Catholic with four children, was forced to return to work and night school. She had a regular schedule and left her son, the oldest child, in charge of his three sisters in the evening. Miani had approached the family after the father's death, and the mother welcomed him as a strong male influence, she said in a deposition. The boy, then 15, befriended by the gregarious priest, was repeatedly sexually molested by him, both in Miani's office at the Bellflower high school and on field trips to the San Bernardino Mountains, according to the victim's deposition.

At the children's family home in Norwalk, Miani familiarized himself with the mother's schedule and began showing up on the nights when she was away at school or work, the suit alleges. The boy would hide as soon as Miani showed up to avoid further molestation, he testified under oath. Left with the three girls, Miani would pick one, take her to a back room and molest her, two of the daughters have stated in depositions. One of the daughters is not part of the lawsuit, although lawyers contend she was also molested. The Times does not identify victims of sexual abuse.

"For 60 years they knew about this guy," said Anthony M. De Marco, lawyer for the siblings who developed the case, "and they have not done one thing responsible about it."

The other lawsuits likewise have a familiar story line. Here are a few highlights:

The Roman Catholic diocese of Sault Ste. Marie has been hit with six civil lawsuits from men and women claiming they were sexually abused as children by priests decades ago. Ledroit Beckett Litigation Lawyers of London, Ont., are scheduled to hold a news conference Monday to announce the Sault. Ste. Marie lawsuits, as well as one in London.

The firm is suing the Sault diocese, the Roman Catholic diocese of London and the Congregation of the Resurrection in Ontario on behalf of seven plaintiffs. The litigation names six Roman Catholic priests, only one of whom, Gerald Roy, is still alive. Half of the priests named have been charged or convicted of criminal offences.

Some of the alleged abuse occurred at Scollard Hall, a former all-boys’ Catholic secondary school in North Bay. It has since become St. Joseph-Scollard Hall, a co-ed school. Fedy and Killoran were both on staff at Scollard Hall. The Subdury Star could not reach a spokesperson for the Sault diocese Thursday evening.

The plaintiffs, who now range in age from their 40s to their 60s, are expected to attend the news conference Monday at 10:30 a.m. at the Radisson Hotel in Sudbury. Talach said the lawsuits are not about money. He said every plaintiff he represents has the same answer when he asks them what they want: “For this to never happen to another child.”

Heath Ledger Frightened Straight Men

I came across this column on Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-perrin/heath-ledger-frightens-st_b_83370.html) which I believe accurately identifies the irrational fear that too many allegedly straight men seem to exhibit when it comes to gays and gay issues. Of course the ones that really get me are the homophobic straight guys who in their fantasies seem to think every gay near them might want them sexually. They definitely overly flatter themselves. The reality is that NO gay guy with an ounce of style and sense of physical beauty would EVER find these jerks attractive - no matter how much alcohol had been consumed. These homophobes are in la la land. Or perhaps they are latent homosexuals. :) Here are some highlights:

Once news of Heath Ledger's passing spread wide, you knew it was coming, predictably and quite unavoidably. The queer cowpoke jokes. The sniggers and snorts from presumably straight men who think that Ledger dying at this point in his career cements his fag image for eternity.

But I do know the sound of hetero-fear, that nervous, adolescent chuckling that emerges when the closet door starts to open a little too wide. Were Ledger an actual gay ranch hand, it would be bad enough. But he was an actor who played a character in a fictional story -- you know, pretend. Not real. Yet when "Brokeback Mountain" initially appeared, I couldn't believe the amount queer-phobia thrown at the film, at Gyllenhaal and at Ledger. A lot of it was heard on sports radio, one of the last bastions of white male angst, . . .

I grew up with and around a lot of white guys like the ones I've been hearing lately, and I know the type all too well. They're sad, pathetic specimens, hanging on to some fantasy image of male strength and virility (which is, to use their reasoning, kinda "gay" in and of itself). Politically isolated, socially atomized, they look to blame or mock those ostensibly beneath them -- hell, anything but face the stark, political reality that shapes their every movement. Ultimately, the joke's on them.

Sunday Male Beauty

He's under age, but do not get the wrong idea. I posted this photo merely because I believe it will be most interesting to see where this kid goes as time goes by. His name: Patrick Arnold Schwarzenegger. Political and Holywood royalty.

The Billary Road to Republican Victory

Not to beat a dead horse, but Frank Rich also has a great opinion piece in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/opinion/27rich.html?hp) that very well states what Hillary/Bill Clinton will likely bring to the November general election if Hillary is the Democratic nominee. I for one do not believe the country needs to once again be constantly revisiting Clinton scandals, past and those yet to be disclosed (let's face it - with Bill, we KNOW there will be more scandals). Eight years was more than enough and it is time to move on to a new story line. Here are some highlights:

IN the wake of George W. Bush, even a miracle might not be enough for the Republicans to hold on to the White House in 2008. But what about two miracles? The new year’s twin resurrections of Bill Clinton and John McCain, should they not evaporate, at last give the G.O.P. a highly plausible route to victory.

Absent from this debate is any sober recognition that a Hillary Clinton nomination, if it happens, will send the Democrats into the general election with a new and huge peril that may well dwarf the current wars over race, gender and who said what about Ronald Reagan.

What has gone unspoken is this: Up until this moment, Hillary has successfully deflected rough questions about Bill by saying, “I’m running on my own” or, as she snapped at Barack Obama in the last debate, “Well, I’m here; he’s not.” This sleight of hand became officially inoperative once her husband became a co-candidate, even to the point of taking over entirely when she vacated South Carolina last week. With “two for the price of one” back as the unabashed modus operandi, both Clintons are in play.

For the Republicans, that means not just a double dose of the one steroid, Clinton hatred, that might yet restore their party’s unity but also two fat targets. To get a taste of what surprises may be in store, you need merely revisit the Bill Clinton questions that Hillary Clinton has avoided to date.

Asked by Tim Russert at a September debate whether the Clinton presidential library and foundation would disclose the identities of its donors during the campaign, Mrs. Clinton said it wasn’t up to her. “What’s your recommendation?” Mr. Russert countered. Mrs. Clinton replied: “Well, I don’t talk about my private conversations with my husband, but I’m sure he’d be happy to consider that.” Not so happy, as it turns out. The names still have not been made public. Just before the holidays, investigative reporters at both The Washington Post and The New York Times tried to find out why, with no help from the Clintons. The Post uncovered a plethora of foreign contributors, led by Saudi Arabia.

Mr. Clinton’s increased centrality to the campaign will also give The Wall Street Journal a greater news peg to continue its reportorial forays into the unraveling financial partnership between Mr. Clinton and the swashbuckling billionaire Ron Burkle.

People don’t change. Bill Clinton, having always lived on the edge, is back on the precipice. When he repeatedly complains that the press has given Mr. Obama a free ride and over-investigated the Clintons, he seems to be tempting the fates, given all the reporting still to be done on his post-presidential business. When he says, as he did on Monday, that “whatever I do should be totally transparent,” it’s almost as if he’s setting himself up for a fall. There’s little more transparency at “Little Rock’s Fort Knox” than there is at Giuliani Partners.

“The Republicans are not going to have any compunctions about asking anybody anything,” Mrs. Clinton lectured Mr. Obama. Maybe so, but Republicans are smart enough not to start asking until after she has secured the nomination.

In a McCain vs. Billary race, the Democrats will sacrifice the most highly desired commodity by the entire electorate, change; the party will be mired in déjà 1990s all over again. Mrs. Clinton’s spiel about being “tested” by her “35 years of experience” won’t fly either. The moment she attempts it, Mr. McCain will run an ad about how he was being tested when those 35 years began, in 1973. It was that spring when he emerged from five-plus years of incarceration at the Hanoi Hilton while Billary was still bivouacked at Yale Law School. And can Mrs. Clinton presume to sell herself as best equipped to be commander in chief “on Day One” when opposing an actual commander and war hero? I don’t think so.

Unlike Mrs. Clinton, he [Obama] would unambiguously represent change in a race with any Republican. If he vanquishes Billary, he’ll have an even stronger argument to take into battle against a warrior like Mr. McCain.

Few national Democratic leaders have the courage to stand up to the Clintons. Even in defeat, Mr. Obama may at least help wake up a party slipping into denial. Any Democrat who seriously thinks that Bill will fade away if Hillary wins the nomination — let alone that the Clintons will escape being fully vetted — is a Democrat who, as the man said, believes in fairy tales.

Caroline Kennedy - A President Like My Father

Caroline Kennedy - the last survivor of "Camelot" as her father's presidency has sometimes been called - wrote an op-ed piece in today's New York Times where in she endorses Barack Obama for the presidency (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/opinion/27kennedy.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin). While her endorsement carries no real power in terms of delegates and other factors in winning the Democrat Party nomination, it does speak volumes as to the uniqueness that Obama seems to have at a time when the USA so desperately needs a new vision of itself and a new sense of purpose and hope. She identifies many of the thoughts and impressions and hopes that I see in him. Her endorsement certainly serves as a slap in the face to the increasing sleazy campaign of Hillary Clinton and her hatchet man, Bill Clinton. Being of a generation that remembers the Kennedy presidency and the palpable feeling that great things could be accomplished, we truly need to recapture that spirit once again. Here are highlights from her column:

OVER the years, I’ve been deeply moved by the people who’ve told me they wished they could feel inspired and hopeful about America the way people did when my father was president. This sense is even more profound today. That is why I am supporting a presidential candidate in the Democratic primaries, Barack Obama.

Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible. We have that kind of opportunity with Senator Obama. It isn’t that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country — just as we did in 1960.

So qualities of leadership, character and judgment play a larger role than usual. Senator Obama has demonstrated these qualities throughout his more than two decades of public service, not just in the United States Senate but in Illinois, where he helped turn around struggling communities, taught constitutional law and was an elected state official for eight years. And Senator Obama is showing the same qualities today. He has built a movement that is changing the face of politics in this country, and he has demonstrated a special gift for inspiring young people — known for a willingness to volunteer, but an aversion to politics — to become engaged in the political process.

Obama is inspiring my children, my parents’ grandchildren, with that sense of possibility. Senator Obama is running a dignified and honest campaign. He has spoken eloquently about the role of faith in his life, and opened a window into his character in two compelling books. And when it comes to judgment, Barack Obama made the right call on the most important issue of our time by opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning.

I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.