Kashkari Will Leave us "Akin"

This smear is the essence of desperation

Kashkari's campaign is so desperate, in spite of the money and endorsements, that he has resorted to comparing Tim Donnelly to Todd Akin, a Missouri Congressman who lost his election over a stray remark.

If anyone should be compared with the one-gaffe doom-and-gloom, it should be Neel Kashkari:




The comparison between Akin. . .

and Kashkari is more accurate

Let's take a look over some of Kashkari's many gaffes and upsets.

Salon.com bashed him with the following:

It’s true, he is not a career politician. He is much worse: a Wall Street and Beltway insider who served as an investment banker at Goldman Sachs and then followed Hank Paulson to the Treasury Department, where he ran the TARP program.

Ouch! Talk about the "illegitimate rape" of our tax dollars!

Uber-leftist (socialist) US Senator Elizabeth Warren mercilessly excoriated Kashkari:

“We pressed him on the status of the big financial institutions: Did Treasury anticipate additional bailout assistance to the giant banks? Could we see the terms of the arrangements that had been worked out so far? Kashkari objected to the word bailout, so we wrangled about that for a couple of minutes,” Warren wrote. “But he was very clear on one point: The big cash injections were done, and Treasury would now concentrate on getting assistance to smaller banks.”

But what about quotes right from Neel's own mouth? From the John and Ken debate earlier this week (May 15, 2014), Kashkari said:

We need to enforce the law on immigration. Obama does not enforce the law.

However, Kashkari voted for President Obama (another reason not to vote for him), and the crowd at the debate made sure he didn't forget it. The whole TARP program operated outside of the rule of law, too, granting unprecedented and unacceptable discretion to the executive branch to spend taxpayer dollars.

Consider his testimony on 2008 following investigations into TARP. Rep Manzullo of Illinois demanded to know what the TARP supervisor would do about about a failed CEO receiving a $3 million bonus despite the failure of his company:

Congressman, I don't have an answer in my head that this is an appropriate bonus level. . .

Keep in mind, the bonus went to a CEO whose firm went bankrupt and furthered the financial crisis.

Kashkari continued:

Congressman, our track record is clear. . .

Not to Rep, Manzullo, who never got a definitive "Yes" or "No" answer about whether $3 million was too much to give to a  failed CEO - $3 mill of taxpayer dollars, by the way.

Congressman Darrell Issa leaned on Kashkari to explain why the TARP handlers decided to switch from buying toxic assets to spending on other purchases: "Was Congress lied to?"

The decision was made by Secretary Paulson. It's not just a question of assets. . . .We have met with  hundreds of organizations. . .

Blah, Blah, Blah.

Congress was lied to. Pure and simple.

This extended statement from his Op-Ed in the Washington Post should make any reader retch with disgust:

Our belief in free markets is founded on the idea that each individual acting in his or her self-interest will lead to a superior outcome for the whole. The financial crisis has reminded us that free markets are not perfect — but they do allocate capital better than any other system we know. A “me first” mentality usually makes markets more efficient.

If markets are not perfect, then why are you running as a Republican, Mr. Kashkari? The Republican Party is predicated on the acceptance of free market principles as the marked reality to ensure the greatest and freest allocation of goods without government intrusion or fraud.

But this “me first” mentality can also lead to shortsighted political decision making. Most Americans agree that we need more energy from clean sources, such as wind power — until someone proposes installing a transmission line near their homes. Most people are against earmarks — unless it is their representative scoring money for their district.

Kashkari is screaming "me first" with this run for office. He is not a Republican, and the only reason he is running as one, one has to wonder, is so that he could stand out and have some kind of a chance to run against Brown. He probably did not expect Donnelly to put up such a fight.

Cutting entitlement spending requires us to think beyond what is in our own immediate self-interest. But it also runs against our sense of fairness: We have, after all, paid for entitlements for earlier generations. Is it now fair to cut my benefits? No, it isn’t. But if we don’t focus on our collective good, all of us will suffer.

Free market good but not really. . .entitlements need to be reformed, but it's not fair. .

Now, if it's a legitimate rape, the female body can just shut the whole thing down. . .

If the voters in the state of California, particularly the Republicans, want a legitimate conservative candidate for governor, they will shut the whole Kashkari campaign down and vote for Donnelly in June and November.

If Kashkari wins, he will kill the turnout in November since Republicans in general, and conservatives in particular, will not turn over to vote for this turncoat RINO.