search
top

Maxine Waters, The Liberal Left, and Media Enablers.

By now, most people who read this blog have heard the comments made last week by Representative Maxine Waters, a Democrat from California, at a jobs forum in Inglewood, CA:

I’m not afraid of anybody,” the California congresswoman told constituents in footage that appeared on ABC affiliate KABC in Los Angeles, not backing down from comments made about President Obama earlier in the week. “This is a tough game. You can’t be intimidated. You can’t be frightened. And as far as I’m concerned — the tea party can go straight to hell.”

For the most part, the media has been silent on this. It seems that each time a conservative says anything that can be construed as being impolite, they are lambasted. When liberals are downright antagonistic, the media not only gives them a pass on their actions, but actually tries to justify them and commend them for it.

For example, in the Opinion Section of the Baltimore Sun, a writer named Leonard Pitts, Jr., says that Maxine Waters was right to tell the Tea Party to “go to hell.”

I am pleased to report the sighting of an artifact so rarely seen among Democrats that it has become the stuff of legend and conjecture, like Bigfoot or theLoch Ness monster. It is called a spine.

Said spine was briefly glimpsed a little over a week ago at a “jobs summit” in Inglewood, Calif., in the person of Rep. Maxine Waters. “I’m not afraid of anybody,” the California Democrat said. “… And as far as I’m concerned, the ‘tea party’ can go straight to hell.”

Pitts goes on to claim that it is the Tea Party that are acting like “bullies” and need to be stood up to. He cites the fact that the Tea Party is against tax increases even though a majority of people in the US want a more balanced approach.

Seventy percent of us, according to a Gallup poll, think both tax increases and spending cuts ought to be used to reduce the budget deficit. That reasonable, balanced approach was not a part of the debt ceiling deal because the tea party threatened, credibly, to push the nation into default rather than allow it.

In his hurry to excuse Waters’ outburst while having a Chris Matthews “tingling sensation going up his leg” moment over Waters’ “spine,” Pitts misses one fact:

Taxing the rich as Waters’ advocates will not do anything for the long term debt of the country, nor will it create jobs. While taxing the rich sounds like a great piece of class warfare, economists know it won’t work.

The majority of economists surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics believe that the federal deficit should be reduced only or primarily through spending cuts.

The survey out Monday found that 56 percent of the NABE members surveyed felt that way, while 37 percent said they favor equal parts spending cuts and tax increases. The remaining 7 percent believe it should be done only or mostly through tax increases.

To put it politely, California is a mess when it comes to un-employment. It has been run by liberals like Waters for such a long period of time, they are locked into either admitting their policies are a failure, or take the state down the drain with them. If it takes the country down as well, they won’t care about that either.

A few days after her comment, Waters appeared at another jobs forum in Miami along with Jesse Jackson and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, who was one of the 10 people on the meeting panel, asked audience members to stand if they had a family member in jail, a home in foreclosure, credit card debt. Practically the entire room stood up when he asked who had voted for Obama.

We want to get this straight….. the Democrats have had control of the Senate since 2006. They had control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate from 2008 until 2010. They had a Democratic president in the White House at the same time when they controlled both Houses of Congress and somehow the economic fallout is to be heaped upon the Tea Party?

When you have that many people stand up and say “we are in desperate financial situation” and “we voted for Obama,” instead of feeling good about staying the course, people should be asking “what the heck are we doing electing the same people that have put us in the mess?”

We are asking the same thing.

What are we doing electing people such as Waters who allegedly used her influence to have TARP funds purchase shares of stock in her husband’s bank despite warning from other Representatives that doing so would be an ethic violation?

That’s right, an ethics violation.

Pressure from Waters’ office resulted in a $12 million federal loan for OneUnited Bank and a unique exemption from the FDIC’s accounting rules. One FDIC examiner called it a “travesty of justice.”

Waters claims her top aide didn’t know her spouse was involved with the bank, even though the aide is also her grandson.

At the time, her husband owned OneUnited stock worth more than $350,000 — a stake that would have been worthless without the bailout.

He’d also served on the board with OneUnited’s CEO, a major Waters donor who, according to examiners, ran the minority-owned bank into the ground through his lavish spending and risky investments.

Of the 700 banks receiving TARP funds, OneUnited was the weakest, and it has yet to pay back the loan.

To be fair, Pitts’ article is not silent on Waters’ alleged ethics violation saying,

I intend no blanket lionization here of Representative Waters, who is the object of a protracted ethics probe and whom I have for years privately dubbed “Mad Max,” in both consternation and admiration of her feistiness.

But Pitts doesn’t really tell the whole story of the ethics probe, and more specifically, where that probe is now:

Democrat leadership has delayed Waters’ trial by blocking subpoenas and firing the lead lawyer working on the two-year investigation. Also, the ranking Democrat on the House Ethics panel reportedly is holding up the hiring of a new staff director.

In the long stall, we’ve learned that Waters’ chief of staff heavily lobbied bank examiners, who according to internal emails were livid about the intervention.

Pressure from Waters’ office resulted in a $12 million federal loan for OneUnited Bank and a unique exemption from the FDIC’s accounting rules. One FDIC examiner called it a “travesty of justice.”

It appears to us that Waters has a case of scoliosis. The “spine” that Pitts admires is as crooked as she is.

While constantly screaming about the Tea Party and wanting more “taxes on the rich,” Waters was happy to use her influence to save her husband’s investment of $350,000.

(Can someone remind us again what “rich” means in the Democrat dictionary? We could have sworn it meant somewhere around $200,000 – $250,000. Doesn’t her actions for her husband mean that she is willing to protect the “rich,” as long as the “rich” are related?”)

The love affair between Pitts and Waters is akin to someone giving money to a crack addict. Instead of helping them rid themselves of their addiction and correct their behavior, the money enables the addict to get high again.

The same is true with people like Pitts. His blinders to the damage that people like Waters have done to this country enables them to be able to do more damage.

More class warefare? Check.

More taxes? Check.

More reliance on government? Check.

No fiscal responsibility? Check.

Waters comments telling the members of the Tea Party to “go to hell” are so over the top it is not funny. The media in the form of people like Pitts not only enable her to get away with such statements, but encourages her to do even worse things.

“Go to hell?”

As we said the other day, we have seen hell and we didn’t like the way Waters was running it.



Share the Hoecakes

Comments are closed.

top