Sonia Sotomayor has another interesting court case that involved a teen blogger, a reputation as a bully among her peers, declaring the 2nd amendment is not a constitutional right, and after posting yesterday about La Raza, (in which I made no mention of a connection), we find out that she is in fact a member.  La Raza in Spanish means The Race.  The very essence of the group is racist.

The teen blogger case is very disturbing, mainly because it was a high school student who was denied the opportunity to run as class president because of a statement she made on the Internet about her teachers and the school administration calling them D* bags.  What child doesn’t say nasty things from time to time when they get emotional or upset?  Sotomayor’s ruling stated that the female student, who used the term after the school’s battle of the bands was canceled by faculty, would cause a possible disruption, and therefore was unable to run – hello?? Basic 1st amendment? It’s not like she yelled fire in a crowded movie theatre – we are talking about an angry Internet post of a term that is commonly used nowadays when people are upset.  Being from Connecticut myself, I’m surprised I didn’t already know about this woman, granted she did not preside over my jurisdiction/county. 

Sonia Sotomayor’s peers and co-workers have also made statements after her nomination claiming that she is a bully and quite abrasive in the work environment.  Compared to other court justices on both sides of the aisle, most are very well respected and amiable.  It’s important in any working environment to feel comfortable and not harassed – it would be very upsetting to learn that she tried to pressure or bully other SCOTUS members in the future, to make a decision to her liking.

Sonia has also ruled that the 2nd amendment was not a constitutional right in the past.  I’m not sure why it would be an amendment in the constitution, and the 2nd one at that, if it wasn’t constitutional, but what do I know?  It’s also my understanding that our constitution was established based on Jefferson’s Federalist Papers?  Federalism did reign supreme in those days and that meant more state power…?

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayorruled in January 2009 that states do not have to obey the Second Amendment’s commandment that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

In Maloney v. Cuomo, Sotomayor signed an opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that said the Second Amendment does not protect individuals from having their right to keep and bear arms restricted by state governments.

The opinion said that the Second Amendment only restricted the federal government from infringing on an individual’s right to keep and bear arms. As justification for this position, the opinion cited the 1886 Supreme Court case of Presser v. Illinois.

“It is settled law, however, that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose on this right,” said the opinion. Quoting Presser, the court said, “it is a limitation only upon the power of Congress and the national government, and not upon that of the state.”

The final and most extreme issue coming to the forefront is her association with the radically liberal La Raza.  I posted yesterday on other details about the SCOTUS nomination and in so doing, also mentioned the organization and provided a link with facts. 

There are many immigrant groups joined in the overall “La Raza” movement. The most prominent and mainstream organization is the National Council de La Raza — the Council of “The Race”.

To most of the mainstream media, most members of Congress, and even many of their own members, the National Council of La Raza is no more than a Hispanic Rotary Club.

But the National Council of La Raza succeeded in raking in over $15.2 million in federal grants last year alone, of which $7.9 million was in U.S. Department of Education grants for Charter Schools, and undisclosed amounts were for get-out-the-vote efforts supporting La Raza political positions.

The Council of La Raza succeeded in having itself added to congressional hearings by Republican House and Senate leaders. And an anonymous senator even gave the Council of La Raza an extra $4 million in earmarked taxpayer money, supposedly for “housing reform,” while La Raza continues to lobby the Senate for virtual open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens.

La Raza lies the real agenda of the La Raza movement, the agenda that led to those thousands of illegal immigrants in the streets of American cities, waving Mexican flags, brazenly defying our laws, and demanding concessions.

Key among the secondary organizations is the radical racist group Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA), one of the most anti-American groups in the country, which has permeated U.S. campuses since the 1960s, and continues its push to carve a racist nation out of the American West.

Eeeegads we better watch it here!

Share on Facebook

Dodd & Jesse Jackson Jr. have both been involved in some shady dealings over the past couple of years, if not earlier, but as recently as this week.

Senator Dodd, as we all know, has some major corruption and reputation issues to work through, especially after his Countrywide ties and his own dealings with AIG (with his wife and campaign contributions/bonus language in the stimulus), as well as the complete meltdown of the financial industry under his watch and Barney Frank’s!

However, there was a recent investigation into some old lobbying ties of Senator Dodd’s, and of all places this investigative reporting took place on the Huffington Post!

there’s a lobbying group called the Online Lenders Alliance. Fair enough. They’re throwing a conference this week. So far, so good. There’s a bunch of people from Congress involved or speaking, on both sides of the aisle. Fine*. Senator Dodd was one of the scheduled Senators for the event, except when asked about it first his staff, then Dodd himself flatly denied that he was there on OLA’s behalf at all; it was an independent fundraising dinner. Nothing unusu… wait, what?

Inside the restaurant, Dodd staffers said the dinner, which was not open to press, was not even sponsored by the Online Lenders Alliance.

The dinner “is not an OLA event,” OLA spokeswoman Lisa McGreevy said in a subsequent phone interview. But the OLA agenda lists a Dodd dinner — was there a mixup?

“I don’t think there was any mixup,” she said. “There is a fundraiser tonight for Senator Dodd.”

McGreevy added: “There may be some OLA people there.”

Needless to say, the Huffington Post has a contradictory screenshot, presumably from the OLA website. They also helpfully note that Dodd takes the cash from payday loan people, although I don’t know how fair it is to point that out, particularly since 44 grand isn’t that much in the scheme of things. Anyway, it looks like Dodd’s lying to somebody: he’s either using what should have been a perfectly-normal lobbying event to quietly and deniably raise some cash, or he doesn’t want the Left to think that he’s playing both sides of the fence when it comes to credit card ‘reform.’

Poor milk dodd – he continues to speak out of both sides of his mouth and wonders why he is so low in the polls against Simmons.

Jesse Jackson Jr. doesn’t think twice when it comes to funnelling money to his wife due to loopholes in laws that allow her to act as a consultant for political action committees.  This is typical of the dynasties set up in Chicago, where people are still poor, crime is still high, and children are being killed on the street at alarming rates… One would think that the reason this continues to occur is due to the political thugacracy and the dynasties that could care less about their constituents.  They care more about power and control and remaining atop the “hill.”  Ask Obama!

Representative Jesse Jackson Jr.’s congressional campaign organization has paid his wife at least $247,500 since 2001, including at least $95,000 after Sandra Jackson joined the Chicago City Council two years ago, according to federal election records.

Jackson’s political committee also gave at least $298,927 in cash and in-kind contributions to Sandra Jackson’s campaign fund, which bankrolled her races for a city council seat that pays more than $100,000 per year and an unpaid position on the Cook County Democratic Committee.

Sandra Jackson, known as Sandi, received the $95,000 for political consulting after pledging during her campaign to give “my full attention” to the alderman’s post.

Jesse Jackson got a Federal Election Commission advisory opinion in 2001 saying his campaign could pay Sandi Jackson for consulting work without violating a ban on personal use of political donations. Even so, the Chicago Democrat’s fundraising is so entangled with his family’s interests that he’s pushing the limits of propriety, said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonprofit ethics watchdog group.

“Much of this may be legal, but let’s refer back to an old quote: the scandal in Washington often is what’s legal,” said Sloan, whose group in 2007 reported on relatives who profit from their ties to members of Congress. “Mr. Jackson is availing himself of the full range of loopholes by which he can transfer money to his family.”

Share on Facebook

When will the corruption end!?  I love how this guy being interviewed tries to okay this.  This is just another example of the limousine liberals and the “X for me, but not for thee” philosophy.

Share on Facebook

Connecticut on the road to ruin…again!

The latest coming out of the notoriously liberal state is the banning of physical contact at a middle school in Milford, CT.  After an inappropriate kick to the groin that sent a child to the hospital, the school’s principle is taking a zero tolerance stand in which everyone is being punished for the bad behavior of one.  “One rotten apple spoils a bunch.”

Principal Catherine Williams sent out a letter earlier in the week telling parents recent behavior has seriously impacted the safety and learning at the school.

“Observed behaviors of concern recently exhibited include kicking others in the groin area, grabbing and touching of others in personal areas, hugging and horseplay. Physical contact is prohibited to keep all students safe in the learning environment,” Williams wrote.

Students and parents are outraged. They said the new policy means no high-fives and hugs, as well as horseplay of any kind. The consequences could be dire, Williams warned in the letter.

“Potential consequences and disciplinary action may include parent conferences, detention, suspension and/or a request for expulsion from school,” Williams wrote.

Many think the school’s no tolerance policy goes way too far. Others said it’s utterly ridiculous.

“Now it’s almost as if it’s a sanitized school. Where you have to keep your distance from everybody? And that’s not what school is about,” one father said.

“What if they are out on the playground at recess, or in gym class?” parent Kathy Casey wondered. “You know, gym class is physical.”

Some of these parents just seem too logical – “suck it up parents – the latest liberal establishment will be a school requirement that all children must be in a bubble to attend.”

Share on Facebook

I will be paraphrasing and placing those elements from a family friend who was an executive at AIG in quotes.

Thank you for contactingn me about the current AIG crisis.  I am very worried about my wife and the pressure that she has been under in regards to this situation.

I have not been with AIG since October, but I did receive a retention plan payment (way under the $ 1 million payment though). The vast majority of people working at AIG-Financial Products Division had nothing to do with the transactions that are causing so much trouble.  10 employees out 400 executed and priced those transactions.  The rest of us at the company were pretty much clueless in regards to how these products were underwritten.  The AIG employees were told that the underwritten securities contained no risk.  However, the current AIG-FP employees (those who account for the 390 who had nothing to do with the underwritings) are enduring the most anger from the public.

I can understand why there is anger, however,  AIG-FP did not cause the ruin of AIG, that distinction belongs to AIG itself through its security lending program that has lost billion more than AIG-FP. Why is that not being discussed?  because it does not fit the class warfare discussion that is going on now. Its not conducive to the “crisis” to say that senior management at AIG was irresponsible and incompetent its much easier to say that and entire division of AIG (AIG-FP) and those greedy employees and credit derivatives destroyed the company.  

Now the History:

AIG goes to AIG-FP employees in late March of 2008 (not March of 2009 – these contracts were signed way in advance) with a retention plan because the head of FP is fired for the credit derivatives that are causing so many problems. The employees did not ask for the retention plans and most employees were not very happy about signing them either. 

AIG gives us two weeks to decide whether we want to sign these agreements.  As an AIG employee, if you did not sign the agreement you weren’t considered a “team-player” and your days at the office were numbered.  Yes, we benefited by signing the retention agreements, but the offset is that AIG wants to make sure that its employees do not walk out the door with the specific knowledge they have to deal with these products and the problems at hand.  Most of the employees sign the agreements, and most employees work their butts off figuring out how best to get us out of the mess.  The problem is that we did not know how bad the mess was and the economy continues to unravel, which exascerbates the problems.

Fast forward to the end of December, 2008 – the Fed and the new administration, current democratic leaders, all agree to the TARP money in late Fall for AIG, and the Treasury Secretary knows all about the retention plans because the plans were restructured for existing employees so that they could get some funds released prior to the March dead- line. Those that were downsized (me) were not allowed to be involved in these discussions nor were we allowed to benefit from the acceleration. All parties (Cuomo, Dept. of Treasury, Democratic Leaders, Obama, etc….) agree to the advance payment of the retention plans for those employees still at the company. This was all reported in the newspapers and news in January 2009 but how quickly and conveniently people forget!

Today:

Now it’s March 2009, and everyone is outraged by the retention payment plans; agreed to by the government, esp. the democrats, the Fed, the Treasury and AIG senior management.  A bunch of representatives, senators, and the administration get caught in lies in regards to the level of detail and their knowledge of these bonuses. The result is an assault on contract law.  The government proposed a specific tax on a select group of people and the very essence of this proposal violates the constitution.   The President telling jokes on Leno rather then dealing with the real issues at hand is appalling.  I understand why there is anger from the public in regards to the AIG-FP employees’ retention payments. There is so much blame about so many things but there is no plan, and thus the smell of fear and uncertainty are too pungent and mob mentality breaks out.  Everyone is worried about their own job, retirement money, increased taxes, etc.

I am now being asked to give my bonus back, which is fine with me, even though I have done nothing personally wrong. Here is the kicker:  you cannot even give the money back, because no one has decided or determine whether the government believes you earn the money that you want to give back. IF they decided you earn it and you gave it back, then you still pay taxes on the full amount you gave back as well as a possible additional gift tax ( but I am not sure how that comes into play). In essence, I will be paying 36% tax on phantom income.  And who do I make this payment to?  Nothing has been decided in that regard.  Do I pay back the government, the Treasury, AIG?   If I keep the money, because of the tax situation, which I did not create, then I am an evil person because I have no morals, but I pay 90% of real income and real cash. The unfortunate and very disheartening fact of the mattter is that AIG-FP names have been released to Cuomo and Rell (gov. of Connecticut) so that they can jump on the pile. Some names have been released to the press; media has been pounding on windows of employees or their neighbors’ windows. Some local and national newspapers have published employees’ house pictures and addresses, and now there are bus tours of peoples’ homes.  My fear is that there will be physical violence and that someone will get hurt… This is utter insanity and the epitome of a manufactured crisis and class warfare at its finest…

Share on Facebook

AIG’s Financial Products Division is located in Wilton, Connecticut, of Fairfield County.  Fairfield County has always ranked as one of the top 3-5 richest counties in the nation.  In fact I grew up in Fairfield, CT and spent the first 18 years of my life there.  Taxes and snooty, elitist attitudes lead me further south.  The chip on my shoulder in regards to CT, still does not make me feel ok with what is happening in this country and to these AIG executives. 

The Democrats want nothing more than mob mentality to use as another manufactured crisis or a smoke screen, as some have been calling it, to pass other big legislative measures under the radar.  If the public was made aware of what the Democrats were really attempting to do, they would be in an uproar over the unconstitutional and costly bills being passed. 

The French Revolution started much the same way – let’s take a look at one major parallel:

There were also social and political factors, many of which involved resentments and aspirations given focus by the rise of Enlightenment ideals, which included resentment of royal absolutism, resentment by the ambitious professional and mercantile classes towards noble privileges and dominance in public life, many of whom were familiar with the lives of their peers in commercial cities in the Netherlands and Great Britain, resentment by peasants, wage-earners, and the bourgeoisie toward the traditional seigneurial privileges possessed by nobles, resentment of clerical advantage (anti-clericalism) and aspirations for freedom of religion, and resentment of aristocratic bishops by the poorer rural clergy, continued hatred for Catholic control and influence on institutions of all kinds, by the large Protestant minorities, aspirations for liberty and (especially as the Revolution progressed) republicanism, and anger toward the King for firing Jacques Necker and A.R.J. Turgot (among other financial advisors), who were popularly seen as representatives of the people.

Finally, perhaps above all, was the almost total failure of Louis XVI and his advisers to deal effectively with any of these problems.

Could we be experiencing the creation of the same mentality and attitudes?  Our sitting president is inept and cannot make a decision, besides his horrible NCAA picks.  The government is also inciting rage and chaos on purpose to play at class warfare to distract and take the attention off of themselves, their policies, and their own corruption. 

We now havea lynch mob/pitch fork mentality against rich executives who gave out valid retention bonuses to keep people on board until all of AIG’s mess was resolved – these bonuses were allowed by little Timmy Geithner during the architecture of the first TARP as well as Chris Dodd and Obama in the American Recovery Act (The Porkulus).  These were private contracts that were legal and were done before the FED gave money to AIG to bail them out.

Some AIG executives are fearing for their lives and the safety of their families since they are receiving death threats.  Some employees are too afraid to show up at work and others are being publicly harassed by groups, organizations and even neighbors in the area.

Here are some quotes from the International Herald Tribune:

NEW YORK:An A.I.G. executive who had been nicknamed ‘‘Jackpot Jimmy’’ by a New York tabloid walked up the driveway toward his bay-windowed house in Fairfield, Connecticut, on Thursday. ‘‘How do I feel?’’ said the executive, James Haas, repeating the question he had just been asked. ‘‘I feel horrible. This has been a complete invasion of privacy.’’

Mr. Haas walked on, his pink shirt a burst of color on a slate-gray afternoon. The words came haltingly. ‘‘You have to understand,’’ he said, ‘‘there are kids involved. There have been death threats. …’’ His voice trailed off. It looked as if he were fighting back tears.

‘‘I didn’t have anything to do with those credit problems. I told Mr. Liddy I would rescind my retention contract,’’ he said, referring to Edward M. Liddy, the chief executive of A.I.G.

He ended the conversation with an order: ‘‘Leave my neighbors alone.’’

Too late. Jean Wieson, who has lived down the block for 24 years, had stopped her car in front of Mr. Haas’s house before he arrived home. She was angry about the millions of dollars in bonuses paid to its executives, the credit-default swaps that brought American International Group to its knees and the $170 billion the U.S. government has spent to prop it up. ‘‘It makes me absolutely sick,’’ she said. ‘‘It’s despicable. It’s disgusting what these people havedone. They should be forced to give every cent back.’’

Now these executives are toxic, and those communities are rattled and divided. Private security guards have been stationed outside their houses, and sometimes the local police drive by. A.I.G. employees at the company’s office tower in New York City were told to avoid leaving the building while a demonstration was going on outside. The memo also advised them to avoid displaying company-issued ID cards when they left the office and to abandon tote bags or other items with the A.I.G. logo.

One A.I.G. executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he feared the consequences of identifying himself, said many workers felt demonized and betrayed. ‘‘It is as bad, if not worse, than McCarthyism,’’ he said, referring to Joseph McCarthy, the former U.S. senator who used indiscriminate, often unfounded, accusations to suppress opponents. Everyone has sacrificed the employees of A.I.G.’s financial products division, he said, ‘‘for their own political agenda.’’

The public’s anger, he said, ‘‘is coming from bad facts as a result of someone else’s agenda — or just bad facts, period.’’ Instead, he said, the so-called bonuses were in fact just payments that had been promised long ago to workers, including technical and administrative assistants.

And there may be more protests. The Connecticut Working Families party, which has support from organized labor, was planning a bus tour Saturday of A.I.G. executives’ homes, with a stop at the company’s Wilton office.

‘‘We’re going to be peaceful and lawful in everything we do,’’ said Jon Green, the director of Connecticut Working Families. ‘‘I know there’s a lot of anger and a lot of rage about what’s happened. We’re not looking to foment that unnecessarily, but what we want to do is give folks in Bridgeport and Hartford and other parts of Connecticut who are struggling and losing their homes and their jobs and their health insurance an opportunity to see what kinds of lifestyle billions of dollars in credit-default swaps can buy.’

The largest single bonus check, for $6.4 million, went to Douglas L. Poling, an executive vice president for energy and infrastructure investments. Mark Herr, an A.I.G. spokesman, said Mr. Poling had told him he was returning the bonus ‘‘because he thought it was the correct thing to do.’’

‘‘He’s done an outstanding job in winding down his investment books,’’ said Mr. Pasciucco. ‘‘He did it at the right time, and we’ve made money. We would be losing money today if we waited to sell some of these assets.’’

Douglas Poling has lived in the same house on a dead-end street in Fairfield for 11 years. The local papers say that he and his wife have given generously to a shelter for the homeless, to the Westport Country Playhouse and the Fairfield Country Day School, a private school where tuition runs as high as $29,300 a year.

But Thursday, his house, like Mr. Haas’s, was being watched by private security guards.

I can see it now – Leahy, Frank, Dodd and Waxman heading up the next McCarthy Hearings for Executives who received bonuses in 2008.

Share on Facebook