LETTER: Wake up to angry Obama

I pray that more people are waking up to the president of the United States. Americans are losing their jobs and lifestyle. However,
Sandusky Register Staff
May 13, 2010

I pray that more people are waking up to the president of the United States. Americans are losing their jobs and lifestyle. However, our president is content to travel the world, have parties at the taxpayers' expense and continue to campaign. He also is wonderful at blaming everyone else for his continued failure. This person was elected to be president of the United States. As president, he has been placed in a position that requires leadership. Leaders accept responsibility and losers loathe responsibility

With total control of Congress, he has failed to accomplish anything. The only thing consistent with him is his continuous blaming of George Bush. President Bush was not perfect. However, he did not continually place blame on President Clinton. I know of no past presidents (Democrat or Republican) who blamed the previous administration.

Americans need to stop watching reality television and wake up to the reality of their life under this individual. He is an angry man. All you need is to start paying attention to the look on his face when he does not get his way.

Dan Carroll




Are you aware that Bush was working with a Democratic House and Senate the last couple years? He actually reduced the amount the Dem's wanted to spend. I'm definitely not a Bush fan but sooner or later these 545 people representing us should take responsibility for their own actions.
O'Bama blaming Bush? Heck, he's blaming everybody back to those who wrote the Constitution.

Don S



redrider..i believe you are ignorant or something. you can only blame bush for so long. there once was a senator from illinois by the name of barack obama. in the two short years that he actually was at his job he voted for every tax increase as well as every spending increase that was presented to congress. so, in effect, he is as responsible as bush. obamass just can't say no to anything his evil stepmom nancy pelosi and stepdad harry reid put in front of him. as far as war spending goes almost every war this country has been in has been initiated under a dem prez except the gulf war. so blow that one out your butt.



A George Will column from 2-3 weeks ago extolled the possible economic virtues of a Daniels/Ryan presidential ticket largely due to the reasons provided in the Barron's article you provided. When I read the article it made me wonder whether the steps taken in Indiana could be extended to the federal level. The Barron's article filled in some of the gaps.


Banks in Calif., Ill., Fla., Texas are shut down
Regulators shut banks in Calif., Ill., Fla., Texas, putting US bank failures at 20 for year

Buzz up! 40 Print..By Marcy Gordon, AP Business Writer , On Friday February 19, 2010, 9:26 pm EST
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Regulators shut four banks from California to Florida on Friday, boosting to 20 the number of U.S. bank failures this year following the 140 closures last year in the worst financial climate in decades.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. took over La Jolla Bank, FSB, in La Jolla, Calif. The bank had 10 branches and about $3.6 billion in assets and $2.8 billion in deposits.

Also seized was George Washington Savings Bank in Orland Park, Ill. It had four branches and about $412.8 million in assets and $397 million in deposits.

The FDIC said OneWest Bank in Pasadena, Calif., agreed to assume all deposits and essentially all assets of La Jolla Bank. The takeover is expected to cost the deposit insurance fund an estimated $882.3 million.

The FDIC and OneWest will share losses on about $3.3 billion of the failed bank's loans and other assets.

Meanwhile, FirstMerit Bank, National Association of Akron, Ohio, agreed to take over deposits at George Washington Savings Bank. FirstMerit is also taking over essentially all the assets. For George Washington, the FDIC predicts the takeover will cost the insurance fund $141.4 million.

The loss-sharing agreement for George Washington covers $324.2 million in assets.

The other seized banks were smaller and located in Florida and Texas. They were Marco Community Bank, with a single office on Marco Island, a wealthy barrier island near Naples on Florida's Gulf Coast, and La Coste National Bank of La Coste, Texas.

Marco Community Bank had about $119.6 million in assets and $117.1 million in deposits. Mutual of Omaha Bank, a division of the big insurance company Mutual of Omaha, agreed to assume the assets and deposits of Marco Community Bank.

The failure of Marco Community Bank will cost the deposit insurance fund an estimated $38.1 million.

In addition, the FDIC and Mutual of Omaha Bank, which is based in Omaha, Neb., agreed to share losses on $104.8 million of the failed bank's loans and other assets.

Florida is among the states with the highest concentration of bank failures and where the meltdown in the real estate market brought an avalanche of soured mortgage loans. Last year saw the failure of 14 banks in the state. Also high on the list are California, Georgia and Illinois.

La Coste National Bank had a single branch and $53.9 million in assets. Deposits totaled $49.3 million.

Community National Bank of Hondo, Texas, agreed to buy the deposits and assets of La Coste National Bank -- whose failure is expected to cost the insurance fund $3.7 million.

As the economy has weakened, with unemployment rising, home prices tumbling and loan defaults soaring, bank failures have accelerated and sapped billions of dollars out of the federal deposit insurance fund. It fell into the red last year.

The 140 bank failures last year were the highest annual tally since 1992, at the height of the savings and loan crisis. They cost the insurance fund more than $30 billion. There were 25 bank failures in 2008 and just three in 2007.

The FDIC expects the cost of resolving failed banks to grow to about $100 billion over the next four years.

The agency mandated banks prepay about $45 billion in premiums last year, for 2010 through 2012, to replenish the insurance fund.

Depositors' money -- insured up to $250,000 per account -- is not at risk, with the FDIC backed by the government. Besides the fund, the FDIC has about $21 billion in cash available in reserve to cover losses at failed banks.

Banks have been especially hurt by failed real estate loans, both residential and commercial. Banks that had lent to seemingly solid businesses are suffering losses as buildings sit vacant. As development projects collapse, builders are defaulting on their loans.

Smaller banks are more vulnerable to the losses than their bigger Wall Street counterparts, because commercial real estate makes up a larger portion of their portfolio.

If the economic recovery falters, defaults on the high-risk loans could spike. Many regional banks hold large concentrations of these loans. Banks face as much as $300 billion in losses on loans made for commercial property and development, according to a report issued last week by the Congressional Oversight Panel, which monitors the government's efforts to stabilize the financial system.

The report said the defaults could crimp lending and cause the eviction of families from rental properties. Bank failures also could contribute to job losses and hurt the economic recovery.

President Barack Obama recently promoted a $30 billion plan to provide money to community banks if they boost lending to small businesses. The program, which must be approved by Congress, would use money repaid by banks to the $700 billion federal bailout fund.

Hundreds of banks, including major Wall Street institutions, received taxpayer support through that politically unpopular rescue program, enacted by Congress in October 2008 at the height of the financial crisis.

AP Business Writer Tim Paradis in New York contributed to this report.
More hope and change


http://gatewaypundit.firstthings... From the master of the big lie


I bet you were the same person who called people "unamerican" when they ripped on your beloved George Bush. Here's the truth of the matter: Bush never blamed his problems on Clinton because WE WERE AT A $200 BILLION SURPLUS WHEN HE LEFT OFFICE YOU IDIOT!!!! Not to mention Clinton was one of the greatest foreign policy presidents; George Bush on the other hand, not so much. Do you have any idea how much it costs us everyday to fight a war? And are you too dumb to understand that it will take us more than a year to pull ourselves out of the worst economic period since the great depression. Just because we elected a new president, it does not automatically reset the economy. We are going to continue to suffer for George Bush's screw ups for years no matter who the president is. And about Obama "wasting our money to travel the world"...He's not taking his family on vacations, he's trying to fix our foreign policy since everyone in the world hates us after the last jackass president.

6079 Smith W

duhast wrote on Feb 19, 2010 10:48 AM:
‘They keep recycling the TARP money that was already allocated.’

TARP stands for Troubled Asset Relief Program, meaning that the assets that were allocated were to be used to buy the non-performing assets on bank balance sheets.

To date, not one of those non-performing (junk) assets has ever been purchased by the govt.

IOW, the funds have NEVER been used for their original intent and they remain with the banks festering.

TARP is a lie and is being used as a political slush fund.

Here’s an interesting article in Barron’s about how the state of Indiana has balanced their budgets without tax increases and how it may be a template for the U.S.:



Ask your brother or dad Brutus, I don't know

brutus smith

Just out of curiosity, why would Log Cabin Republicans be interested in female prostitutes??? Just asking.


That I know, but did you see where Switzerland is going to train their prostitutes on the use of defibrillators for emergency situations. They have to be hot.


Prostitutes need somewhere to live too.


Winston, 1.5 billion to help the Las Vegas housing. You can't make this stuff up.


They keep recycling the TARP money that was already allocated. Think about it. When the economy recovers, can’t the government sell off all of the GM, AIG, etc. shares to recoup that $$ plus some profit?. Also, some of the TARP money has already been repaid with interest. While it looks bad now, we can (hopefully) get that money back.

As for spending cuts, good luck getting congress to do that. I think the bi-partisan committee will be an attempt to shame congress into spending wisely.

6079 Smith W

We were dialoging about spending cuts? ROFLMAO!!!

Here’s more proof on why it ain’t gonna happen only ONE DAY after the Con Artist -in-Chief talked about a bi-partisan commission to control deficit spending.

Today Obama will announce another spending program in an attempt to continue to pump money into the busted housing bubble as well as help his buddy Harry.

‘Obama to Unveil Additional Homeowner Aid’:


Pumping money into housing is like blowing air into a tire with a huge gash!

How long are you true believers gonna believe this joker?

6079 Smith W

One of my faves:

‘Taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.’

- James Madison

6079 Smith W

@ duhast:

A VAT will not replace the income tax but would merely be added to it. It’s a canard.

A VAT decreases the standard of living for the citizens and is regressive. It disproportionately affects the poor.

The states will fight it a VAT, as sales taxes have traditionally been the purview and the majority of their source of revenue.

If the U.S. gets a European style VAT, expect European style taxes.

Taxes help to determine who controls the means of production. Do you want the state or individuals controlling it?

The problem with the U.S. is that money is not considered property - and it should be.

The state cannot come into your home and steal your TV and it should not be able to steal your monetary assets.

Rather than raising taxes, why not look at cutting some of the federal tax expenditures?



6079 Smith W

@ wetsu:

One of the major basic problems is that the spending cuts never materialize.

See TEFRA-82 as a most recent example:

‘President of the United States Ronald Reagan agreed to the tax hikes on the promise from Congress of a $3 reduction in spending for every $1 increase in taxes.’


Kindly show me where one fed. govt. program, department or agency over the past 40 years has been eliminated.

Starve the beast. Diets only work if there is less input and more output.

BTW: When POTUS Bush oversaw fed tax cuts, states continued to increase taxes AND spending. Don't focus only on the fed but also state and local taxes as well.

Trust me, the Feds will inflate their way out of debt, there will be no spending cuts of any consequence.



I’m not an economist, so I only know what I’ve read. A sales tax may be the way to go. A value added tax (VAT) is used in many countries including Canada. That way, you only pay taxes when you purchase goods. Of course our libertarian friends will claim that a VAT will reduce the number of goods sold. Maybe it will. But if it works well, perhaps they could reduce income taxes. All that I know is there is no magic bullet. Those that claim tax cuts alone are the answer are smoking crack from the same pipe as those who say Palin would make a good president. But that’s another blog…

6079 Smith W

jimbo wrote on Feb 18, 2010 1:53 PM:
‘The wealth that leaves the USA and goes to China
and Japan, is what we should be concerned about.
When that money comes back, it's borrowed and
carries an interest charge.’

You’ve got it backwards as usual.

The Chinese and others are savers; Americans are spenders.

The U.S. has been borrowing their savings and selling them Treasuries in order to help continue our standard of living.

The U.S. has been living beyond its means for decades.

You had better look up the word ‘nebulous.’ You continue to misuse the word.

Here, allow me to help educate you:



It strikes me that duhast is correct in saying that a tax hike will be necessary along with spending cuts. What type of tax hike, duhast? A sales tax?

I don't like the prospect in light of it being unlikely that the needed spending cuts will materialize, but a temporary tax hike (if there is such a thing anymore) looks to be part of a successful equation.

I now await my comeuppance from Winston and libertarian, among others.


Pastor rANT - perhaps you'd find it in your heart to speak to The Log Cabin Republicans.


From the this is weird note, I was watching the news about the guy who flew the cessna into the IRS bulding in Austin. Evidently he had problems with the IRS and the UAW for some reason. During the newscast there were three ads for IRS lawyers. Yet Obama has hired more IRS agents evidently to hassle homeless on street corners to give them a percentage of their beggings. Somebody has to pay for hope and change.


Oh no Mikel. I don’t think taxes should be raised on the rich only. I think an across the board hike will be necessary along with spending cuts to even come close to balancing the budget.

The panel was in response to congress voting down a similar panel. His current panel would have no power over congress, only the ability to make suggestions. I’m not exactly sure what you are afraid of. Why would a bi-partisan panel on reducing the deficit be a bad thing?

BTW: The president alone does not have the power to raise taxes. Congress passes laws for that sort of thing. You have you messiah from Mass. What are you afraid of?


brutus..not always true..many people in this area have made a business for themselves and in an honest manner. all of the hard work just does not always pay. as you try and better yourself the gov always wants more of our paycheck. this results in the people that have the money to spend to do less of it.

brutus smith

mikel, What a joke, "top wage earners". The way these guys make money is through someone elses pain. That is mergers, plant closings, pay cuts, benefit cuts, reduction in workforce, betting on loans, gambling with our money in general, and so on. Not because they were creative.


Wealth leaves one State for another, a nebulous comment.

The wealth that leaves the USA and goes to China
and Japan, is what we should be concerned about.
When that money comes back, it's borrowed and
carries an interest charge.


He lied today, this blue ribbon panel to find ways to reduce the deficit is nothing more than a CYA when he raises taxes. He is going to blame the increase on this panel.


see thats the problem with you die hard lefties. anytime the gov needs money the first thing you say is "lets raise taxes on the top wage earners" because they can afford it. but what you don't realize is that after a while of out-of-control spending like obamass is doing, you just can't raise the taxes enough on the "rich". everybody will have to pay. so, instead of obamass doing his spending spree maybe he ought to figure out how to make cuts.

one of the funniest things obamass has said is that he will authorize up to $6000 tax credit for small business's who hire a full time employee. but, what he didn't come right out and say is that you have to pay that person an annual wage of $106,000 or more! like there will be a lot of small business's jumping on that one.

you will see more and more of the "rich" keeping cash out of banks so obamass and his band of merry thieves can't track their money and "steal" it from them as easily.