Why Doesn’t President Obama Support ‘Citizens Against Senseless Violence’?

New York Times headline today:

Obama Poised to Back Comprehensive
Plan to Curb Gun Violence

If he’s against “gun violence,” why would his attorney general call the cops on a peaceful group promoting its own “comprehensive plan”?

Posing as “Citizens Against Senseless Violence,” [James] O’Keefe and company visited the homes of anti-gun journalists employed by The Journal News in New York and the Star-Ledger in New Jersey.
They also swung by Touré’s place and paid a visit to the ol’ Eric Holder homestead. Each household was asked to display a yard sign with the words “This Home is Proudly Gun Free.”
Any guesses how that turned out?

You don’t have to guess:

“FBI Police confronted our reporters within minutes of their knocking on the Attorney General’s home. Eric Holder is safe and sound under armed protection, unlike the nation’s children.”

 

CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO PROJECT VERITAS

 

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) to Retire

This news creates a huge opportunity for Republicans in 2014 in an increasingly GOP-leaning state:

Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller will not run for reelection in 2014, passing up a bid for a sixth term and putting in play a Senate seat in deep red West Virginia.

(Via Memeorandum.) The big question, of course, is whether West Virginia Republicans — from the party leadership down to the grassroots — can come together and nominate an electable candidate who can generate widespread enthusiasm from the conservative base.

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey offers this analysis:

[Republican Rep. Shelley] Moore Capito has a lot more experience in running for office in West Virginia than previous candidates. She may not be a Tea Party darling — at least not yet — but she has been an effective campaigner in the state. It certainly seems to have provided the impetus to drive Rockefeller into retirement in a state that kept re-electing Robert Byrd even when it became clear he wasn’t up to the task.

After two years of woe for Senate GOP campaigns caused by incompetence and internal divisions, we have to cross our fingers and hope that Republicans can avoid needless blunders in 2014.

When Your Gun Is Not Your Gun

Your firearms are your private property and you have the right to sell your private property, right? Well, not if Joe Biden gets his way:

“[T]here is a surprising — so far — a surprising recurrence of suggestions that we have universal background checks. Not just close the gun show loophole but total, universal background checks, including private sales.”

Last week, I explained that when liberals talk about “closing the gun-show loophole,” they mean prohibiting inviduals from selling their own guns — so that your gun isn’t really your gun anymore.

(Via Memeorandum.)

They Told Me If I Voted for Romney …

. . . low-income minorities would have a harder time getting approved for mortgages — and they were right!

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday will roll out the first of several far-reaching changes to the nation’s mortgage market, limiting upfront fees and curtailing practices such as interest-only payments that can leave homeowners stuck with unsustainable loans. The agency also will set standards for how much income a consumer must have to obtain a mortgage.
This marks the first time the government has spelled out what constitutes a “qualified mortgage,” an effort to prevent the widespread toxic loans that hurt millions of Americans during the housing crisis.
Banks that offer qualified mortgages will be protected from lawsuits if they adhere to the criteria. The consumer agency hopes that will drive the entire industry to live by the tighter standards that have taken hold since the crisis, ensuring safer loans but potentially limiting the number of people who can qualify to buy a home.
“Credit is going to be restricted, at least a little,” said Cristian deRitis, a senior director at Moody’s Analytics. “The debt-to-income cap, for instance, is going to affect some folks at the lower end of the income scale.”

Your key phrase there: “Banks . . . will be protected from lawsuits.” The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was a government-issued invitation to a lot of class-action litigation and mau-mauing of banks, which led in turn to a deliberate lowering of lending standards, which in turn led to a rising default rate, which in turn eventually triggered the collape of the mortgage bubble.

Liberals have tried to blame the bubble exclusively on Wall Street and the dubious business of trading mortgage-backed securities without adequate regard for the obvious risks of “subprime” loans. In truth, there is plenty enough blame to go around, but (a) the involvement of FHA, Fannie and Freddie in the lending market had the effect of conveying the impression that U.S. mortgages were guaranteed by the feds, and (b) the role of the CRA was crucial to what happened. Easy credit as a civil right was an Idea that had Consequences.

Dodd-Frank and the CFPB are nightmares that ought to be repealed, but Ed Morrissey is slightly encouraged by this move:

In other words, the government is going to force lenders to stick to rules they liked before the government forced them to stop using them.

C’mon, let’s be honest: They’ll probably find a way to screw it up again.

 

 

Elizabeth Warren’s ‘Middle Class’ Looks an Awful Lot Like Occupy’s ’99 Percent’

Guest Post by Badger Pundit

Writing at National Review’s The Corner (h/t Instapundit) Patrick Brennan chides Senator Elizabeth Warren (D – Mass.) for declining, in a recent televised interview, to explain her definition of “middle class.” Even when asked specifically, “what numbers are we talking about, in terms of income level,” Warren declined to get specific — except to disagree with the reporter’s statement (at 1:00 of the linked video) that surely someone making a million dollars a year is not in the “middle class.”

Perhaps Mr. Brennan should have done a little homework before criticizing the soon-to-be senior Senator from Massachusetts. Warren has been on record for more than a decade that the “middle class” extends all the way up to highly successful lawyers, doctors, and other professionals — even up to high-tech millionaires One must keep in mind that, as Warren herself confessed, she “created much of the intellectual foundation” for Occupy Wall Street. To her, “middle class” is just another term for “the 99 percent” — the base of support that Warren and her fellow occupiers rely on in their class war against the ultra-rich evil “1 percent.”

Don’t believe me — believe what Warren herself wrote in two books describing the problems of the “middle class”: 2000’s The Forgotten Middle Class (PDF excerpts here), and 2003’s The Two-Income Trap (PDF excerpts here).

On page 1 of her 2000 book, Warren and her two co-authors state that they have written the book about, and on behalf of: “Stolid middle-class people, such as ourselves” (emphasis added). Recall that in 2000, as in 2012 before she was elected to the Senate, Warren was part of a household earning easily $500,000 annually, and probably substantially above that. She and her husband, Bruce Mann, were both full-time Ivy League law school professors, and Warren made substantial sums consulting for corporations on the side, charging $675 an hour. So right off Warren alerts readers that her definition of “middle class” includes households comprising two lawyers each earning substantial six-figure salaries. For example, Warren’s salary alone (not counting the six-figure amounts she earned from other sources) for her last year of teaching at Harvard was $429,000,

But later on page 1 of her 2000 book, Warren makes clear that households such as hers are hardly at the top of the “middle class.” She speaks of the “many molders of opinion” for whom “the notion that the middle class could be in crisis is remote, even unrealistic. Their part of the middle class is thriving, and they point proudly to the growing ranks of young high-tech millionaires as signs of the success of the great American economic engine.” (Emphasis added) That high-tech millionaires are part of the “middle class,” as defined by Warren, is consistent with Warren’s statement to MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell in January, 2012, that she does not regard herself as a “wealthy individual” — wealthy individuals (aka “the 1 percent,” though she did not use the term), are those who do not work for their money, but instead “have a lot of stock portfolios.”

Further confirmation that the “middle class” includes highly successful professionals such as Warren and her husband is found on page 6 of Warren’s 2000 book:

The middle class is, of course, a huge portion of the American population. . . . The debtors in our sample include accountants and computer engineers, doctors and dentists, clerks and executives, salesclerks and librarians, teachers and entrepreneurs. They are middle-class folks . . . .”

Finally, page 7 of Warren’s 2003 book further confirms the breadth of her definition of “middle class,” indicating it extends nearly all the way to the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder, to include everyone who has gone to college, or owned a home, or “held a good job.” Using this expansive definition, Warren reports “more than 90 percent of those in bankruptcy” are “middle class.”

So to sum up, Senator Elizabeth Warren, the intellectual godmother of the Occupy movement, has long been on record that when she uses the term “middle class,” her rough meaning is “the 99 percent,” excluding only the dreaded “1 percent” — the ultra-rich evil Americans who don’t work for a living but instead sit around enjoying their stock portfolios and exploiting the hard-working “middle class.” What else is there for her to explain?

(Follow Badget Pundit on Twitter.)

Dems Have LAMS-Sized Sack To Be On About Our ‘Broken’ System

by Smitty

Large Area Maintenance Shelters are for when you’re packin’ it military style. And who in Congress really has that kinda gear besides Dingy Hairy?

Tuesday marks the 1,350th day since the Senate passed a budget. The law requires Congress to pass a budget every year, on the grounds that Americans deserve to know how the government plans to spend the trillions of taxpayer dollars it collects, along with dollars it borrows at the taxpayers’ expense. But Majority Leader Harry Reid, who last allowed a budget through the Senate in April 2009, has ignored the law since then.

Who does Reid think he is? David Gregory? For all there is no halting those broken records, I really don’t want to hear about how ‘broken’ our system is from these little fascist wannabees. And don’t drop a quarter in me about the filibuster, either, which The Dingy One has another fortnight to try to ram through.

‘Balance approach’, ‘flexibility’, and ‘negotiation’ are about exchanges in position. Finding middle ground. Not simply crushing the opposition into dirt, as if half the country somehow didn’t exist. I know, I’m speaking of what a statesman would do, not a cheap thug.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Has A Point: Having Aborted Common Sense, Babies Should Be Easy For Charlie Crist

by Smitty

Will the altars of Moloch be smiling in the Sunshine State?

Wasserman Schultz added that Crist was “going to have to prove himself with some of our Democratic leaders before that’s a sure thing.”
The only thing “sure” about Charlie is that he’s looking out for #1.
When DeFede asked the congresswoman about Crist’s past and his current position on abortion, Wasserman Schultz said that “we are the big tent party. We elect on the issue of a woman’s right to choose.” She added that Crist was going to have “a lot of ground work to do” to convince Democrat leaders and constituents that he would best represent their next Governor.

This is all in the context of Charlie Crist mounting a challenge to Rick Scott for Florida Governor in 2014. Ol’ Rudderless Charlie seems quite flexible in terms of what courses he steers.

via The Shark Tank