A group of incredibly brave men committed high treason in 1775, risking their lives to declare a small collection of 13 colonies - free. May we never forget their sacrifices.

If only Obama would do this, throw Clark under that bus he's been using for everyone else. Probably isn't any more room under there, but Clark is a small man - just squish him to fit.

The freshman Democratic senator received a discount. He locked in an interest rate of 5.625 percent on the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, below the average for such loans at the time in Chicago. The loan was unusually large, known in banker lingo as a "super super jumbo." Obama paid no origination fee or discount points, as some consumers do to reduce their interest rates.

The Obama's certainly upscaled their living quarters with a jump from a $400,000+ condo to a $1.65 million home, with $1.32 million in the aforementioned super super jumbo mortgage loan. With no fees, no points. And no prior relationship with the lender, Northern Trust of Illinois. With the preferred rate and no fees, the estimated monthly savings of $300 equates to an approximate $108,000 savings over the life of the loan. Niiiiiiiice.

So, did Obama get preferential treatment from a lender with whom he had no prior experience?

In Obama's case, he received a lower rate than the average offered at the time in Chicago for similarly structured jumbo loans. He secured his final mortgage commitment on June 8, 2005, and during that week, rates on similar loans for which information is available averaged 5.93 percent, according to HSH Associates, which surveys lenders. Another survey firm, Bankrate.com, placed the average at 6 percent. [emphasis mine]

Indeed, even the amount of the loan is surprising:

Jumbo loans are for amounts up to $650,000, but the Obamas' $1.32 million loan was so large that few comparables are available. Mortgage specialists say that many high-end buyers pay cash.

Obama gets a 5.625% rate on a super super jumbo loan, when the average is closer to 6%. That's a huge difference on an enormous mortgage. Obama's camp argues it was a rate negotiation due to a competing offer from another lender and other factors. Ok, first of all I thought it was the borrower who approached the lender - I wasn't aware that banks are offering money to the lowest bidder. 

As to those other factors, while Northern Trust insists they don't have a special program for public figures, they did say this:

A person's occupation and salary are two factors; I would expect those are two things we would take into consideration," said Northern Trust Vice President John O'Connell.

Interesting. The Obama's obtained this loan in June 2005. One would assume that the bank would have looked at their tax returns from at least the preceding year of 2004, in which the Obama's earned roughly $275,000. It was in 2005 that their income took a dramatic jump due to the sale of Obama's first book and the doubling of his wife's salary.

So - they got a discounted mortgage rate on an unprecedented amount without having any established relationship with the lender, based on a full year's realized income of $275,000. Oh yeah, and the employees of Northern Trust have contributed a total of $71,000 to Obama's campaign. No, that's not preferential treatment.

Oh, and that new house? Just what does $1.65 million (down from the asking price of $1.95 million) get you in their ritzy Chicago suburb?

They chose a house with six bedrooms, four fireplaces, a four-car garage and 5 1/2 baths, including a double steam shower and a marble powder room. It had a wine cellar, a music room, a library, a solarium, beveled glass doors and a granite-floored kitchen.

So I'm guessing that all this helps Michelle's children...

The driver rolls down his window and asks, 'What happened, what's the hold Up?'

'Terrorists have kidnapped Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, Rosie O'Donnell, Jesse Jackson & Al Sharpton. They are asking for a $10 million ransom. Otherwise, they are going to douse them with gasoline & set them on fire. We are going from car to car, taking up a collection.'

The driver asks, 'On average, how much is everyone giving?'

'About a gallon.'

h/t to my mom

The questions were well balanced between satisfaction with my home state of CT and with national politics. Interestingly the Quinnipiac website is only reporting the CT-related results. The majority of the questions - state or national focus - were directly related to gas prices. The two questions I found most interesting and that could be applied on a national level:

24. As you think about your own financial situation, which of the following economic issues worries you the most right now -- a. Declining retirement fund values b. Declining real estate values c. Rising health care costs d. Rising gasoline prices e. Rising food prices. [My response is bolded]

• Retirement funds - 10%  
• Real estate vals - 8%  
• Health care cost - 14%    
• Gasoline prices - 51%    
• Food prices - 12%

I guess I took a long-term view of the question in that this is something I'm making plans to deal with right now, for future need. I saw the rest of the things as changeable and recoverable. I don't see health care costs going down in my lifetime, no matter who pushes what half-brained plan thru Congress. 

31. Who do you think is most responsible for the increase in gas prices - the oil companies, the oil-producing nations, the federal government or American consumers? [My response is bolded]

• Oil companies - 32%
• Oil-producing nations - 19%
• Federal government - 28%
• American consumers - 9%

Comparing those answers to a similar poll done in 2000:

• Oil companies - 33%
• Oil-producing nations - 35%
• Federal government - 19%
• American consumers - 8%

I find most interesting that 9% of respondents to the recent survey found American consumers at fault for the gas prices. I presume that is directed at people who drive SUVs and other gas guzzlers, because of course they are the ones who set the price of oil and determine the rate of production.

And the question where state opinion meets national politics? It's all about Christoper Dodd and his preferential treatment from Countrywide Mortgage. When asked how much a respondent had heard about the scandal, 62% said some or a lot. And when asked whether the allegations deserve additional investigation [My response bolded]:

• Deserve more investigation - 59%
• Not that serious - 32%

There were several other questions dealing with national politics - what affiliation am I registered under, who would I vote for in November, what is the #1 concern for me in the presidential campaign. Not sure why those results are not posted on the Quinnipiac website; perhaps they release those separately.

Note: From June 26 - 29, Quinnipiac University surveyed 2,515 Connecticut registered voters with a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Monday he will never question others' patriotism during the race and blames his own "carelessness" for some criticism of him so far. Obama sought to reassure voters about his commitment to the country, choosing the aptly named town of Independence as his backdrop.

Obama's patriotism was first questioned back in October 2007. This man's flip/flops continue unabated - and celebrated by the media yet again. Remember when he said this, when talking about his decision not to wear a flag pin:

Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security. [emphasis mine]

And remember this? When Obama would not place his hand over his heart during the National Anthem. This went without comment or much coverage by the MSM (no big surprise there). According to an Obama campaign worker interviewed by Snopes:

Sometimes he does [place his hand over his heart]. Sometimes he doesn't.

Given that there is a law in place about a person's conduct during the National Anthem:

During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart.

I wonder at the sometimes he does/sometimes he doesn't remark - it certainly seems to describe his politicis in general. The man wants to be President of the United States. He changes his tune like someone who is tone deaf - chosing whatever melody appeals to him in the moment.

When will people wake up about this twit? 

It appears on CNNPolitics.com this morning - here. I know the MSM has fully endorsed and annointed the Obamessiah for some time now.

This is an ad paid for by the Obama campaign. My question is what is it doing on a mainstream media website - and their political website at that. I know that there is a Fairness Doctrine that supposedly provides balanced reporting on important issues via television and radio. And I thought there was something that governed political advertising in print media - though I can't seem to find it.

Is the Internet the last frontier for biased reporting? Shouldn't there be some regulation on this? Especially since the ad pictured at left comes up every time I click on the CNNPolitics story that appears on their Home page (which is ironic to say the least, as it's a story about House Democrats hiring a Bush impersonator for a series of attack ads related to current gas prices). So it's not a random and  and I haven't seen an ad from the McCain campaign on CNN. If they are going to sell ad space - even online ads - to one candidate, shoudln't there be another one to balance it?

To appear fair?

Oh wait - I am talking about the MSM; that's an oxymoron.

Baracktose intolerant (buh-RAK-tohs in-TOL-er-uhnt) adj. An increasingly common medical condition in which the affected person becomes violently sick in the stomach when exposed to adulation and deification of Barack Obama.

Count me a sufferer!!!

There is also a lovely random word selector as well; this was my favorite:

Barackismo - A strong or exaggerated sense of Obamliness.

There is even a book of these; it came out this past Tuesday - "Obamamania! The English Language, Barackafied".

Good clean fun!

The unemployed 30-year-old man drove a black 1995 BMW 3-series sedan onto the lawn outside Frankfurt's convention center grounds at about 7:30 a.m., police spokesman Karlheinz Wagner said.

He then jumped out, emptied a canister of gas over the vehicle and set fire to it, Wagner said.

So why would someone torch not just any car, but his own?

The Bavarian man, whose name was being withheld because he has not been charged with a crime, told police that gas prices were so high he could no longer afford to drive the vehicle.

It's a bit of an extreme move to say the least - though with gas prices in Germany approaching $10.00/liter, I can understand his frustration. He could have just parked it for a while; though it seems obvious that he's probably got some "other issues"...

But good lord - I'm sure his auto insurance won't cover him for burning his own car, so he's now out the cost of a vehicle.