Hearing all the Obama Muslim Stupidity what do you think the pitures intentions were? I mean stop the childish games and lying!
I was tempted to continue my conversation on the breakdown in the middle east and the breakdown with Russia over Serbia and Kosovo as the Bush created breakdown to world war continues unabated. I thought as Hillary is increasingly shooting herself in the foot I wanted to focus and that breakdown and Obama who will be our next President barring a myriad of man made problems!
Barack Obama gained ground against rival Hillary Clinton in the battleground U.S. state of Ohio on Monday as their race took a negative turn. With a week to go until a potentially pivotal vote in Ohio and Texas on March 4, a Quinnipiac University poll said Clinton leads Obama in Ohio by 51 percent to 40 percent among likely Democratic voters. This was a narrowing from 55 percent to 34 percent lead she held less than two weeks ago, and was a sign that Obama's momentum was paying dividends in Ohio.
Barack Obama gained ground against rival Hillary Clinton in the battleground U.S. state of Ohio on Monday as their race took a negative turn. With a week to go until a potentially pivotal vote in Ohio and Texas on March 4, a Quinnipiac University poll said Clinton leads Obama in Ohio by 51 percent to 40 percent among likely Democratic voters. This was a narrowing from 55 percent to 34 percent lead she held less than two weeks ago, and was a sign that Obama's momentum was paying dividends in Ohio.
New York Sen. Clinton needs big victories in Ohio and Texas to salvage her campaign to be the Democratic nominee in the November election after losing 11 straight contests to Obama, a first-term Illinois senator. Clinton's aura of inevitability has been shattered in recent weeks by her string of losses, and the talk of Washington was whether she would be able to remain a viable candidate if she registers more losses on March 4. Obama gaining in Ohio
Barak is gaining ground in Ohio because The economy and jobs are top issues for Ohio voters, and the rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination have blamed trade agreements for the loss of manufacturing jobs. Since 2000, the state's seen nearly a 25 percent decline in manufacturing employment, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics. As you know, Ohio, along with Texas, votes on March 4. The two states have a total of 334 delegates at stake. Clinton's supporters have said she must win both states if she is to close the gap with Obama and stop the momentum he has built up with 11 straight wins. She trails Obama by 69 delegates, according to CNN calculations.
* she won't do it in Texas and she will not do it here as she takes a blatant obvious two faced pose! Clinton struck a populist tone, saying she has made it clear that she is ambivalent about NAFTA, blasting companies for "turning their backs on Americans" while shipping jobs overseas. Meanwhile, Obama railed on Clinton for supporting NAFTA when her husband was president."Sen. Clinton has been going to great lengths on the campaign trail to distance herself from NAFTA," Obama said Sunday in Lorain, Ohio. "In her own book, Sen. Clinton called NAFTA one of 'Bill's successes'
"One million jobs have been lost because of NAFTA, including nearly 50,000 jobs here in Ohio. And yet, 10 years after NAFTA passed, Sen. Clinton said it was good for America. Well, I don't think NAFTA has been good for America -- and I never have," he said. The weekend feud kicked off when Clinton blasted recent mailings from the Obama camp, telling a crowd in Cincinnati, Ohio, an Obama mailing spread lies about her positions NAFTA. The mailer says Clinton was a "champion" for NAFTA while first lady, but now opposes it. NAFTA was negotiated by the first President Bush and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
Citing a 2006 issue of New York Newsday, the mailer says Clinton thought NAFTA was a "boon" to the economy. The term "boon" was actually the paper's characterization of Clinton's stance, and not a quote from her. "Bad trade deals like NAFTA hit Ohio harder than other states. Only Barack Obama consistently opposed NAFTA," the mailer says. A visibly angry Clinton lashed out Saturday at Obama over the campaign literature that she said he knows is "blatantly false." "Shame on you, Barack Obama," she said, adding that she is fighting to change NAFTA. Shame on you Hillary, Barack is right and you continuously make yourelf look like a fool. so to finish her chances off what does she do? She mocks him like a child and belittles all that vote fopr Barack!
Taking a mocking swipe at the Illinois senator's campaign style, Clinton said people want actions and not words."I could stand up here and say 'Let's just get everybody together, let's get unified, the sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect,' " she said Sunday while campaigning in Providence, Rhode Island. Rhode Island and Vermont also hold contests next Tuesday, but only have 36 delegates up for grabs.clinton and Obama at each others throats
As if that wasn't bad enough if you can get any worse she does by accusing him of being a Muslim again! Barack Obama’s campaign accused Hillary Clinton’s team Monday of circulating a photo of the Illinois senator donning traditional Somali attire – clothing worn by area Muslims – as a goodwill gesture during an overseas trip.
In a statement, the Clinton campaign called the charge “an obvious and transparent attempt to distract” voters from serious issues – but did not issue a denial. The picture, which appeared on the Drudge Report this morning, was attributed to sources within the Clinton campaign – although the Web site did not reveal how many, or who, might have received the photo. In a statement, Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe, said Clinton’s campaign was engaged in “shameful, offensive fear-mongering,” though he did not point to any proof beyond the original item that appeared on Matt Drudge’s blog. “This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire,” said Plouffe. “and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world."
Earlier this year, some Clinton volunteers left her campaign in those states after circulating e-mails that falsely claimed Barack Obama was a Muslim – an inaccurate rumor his campaign has worked hard to dispel — and suggesting that his drug use as a young man might make him vulnerable to Republican attacks were he to become the nominee. Clinton’s campaign manager Maggie Williams responded to the photo controversy with a Monday morning statement that insisted the New York senator’s team “will not be distracted,” but did not directly address the substance of the allegation.
“Enough. If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed. Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely,” said Williams. “This is nothing more than an obvious and transparent attempt to distract from the serious issues confronting our country today and to attempt to create the very divisions they claim to decry. We will not be distracted.” On a campaign conference call with reporters, Ret. Major Gen. Scott Gration, who traveled to Africa with Obama, said the photo showed that “he did what any great leader should do — he accepted the gift, accepted the hospitality, accepted that token of friendship." Clinton slammed over Divisive photo
You saw the photo! It is purposely divisive and in light of all the past accusations of him being a Muslim, purposely so! Anything to the contrary is a lie. Besides having to apologize for Bill Hillary is now doing to herself the damage Bill was doing to her. She continues to get more demeaning, vicious, and underhanded using the Rove's tactics she accuses Obama of using! Nothing will work. Obama will not be stopped and she is self destructing. Obama is our greatest hope of recovering from the damage Bush has inflicted on us and the world. We must keep hope alive! We must keep Obama alive!
James Joiner
Gardner Ma
12 comments:
This is sort of like when the right wingers went ape shit when Nancy Pelosi donned a hijab while in Syria...
And then photos circualted of both Laura Bush and Condi Rice wearing hijabs...ofcourse when they do it, they aren't called traitors...
You're right! It pisses me off because Hillary is trying every underhanded trick there is. Her campaign manager even expressed disgust and anger at Obama for thinking Hillary would do that because she has visited other countries and worn their garb.
That's bull! You know they were playing on the muslim fears again. You are right, death throes!
What do you think of this Jim:
The Neocons’ Ties to the 9/11 Commission’s Report
William Hughes
“A lie would make no sense, unless the truth were felt to be dangerous.” - Carl G. Jung
Philip Shenon’s insightful “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation,” is a book that I found hard to put down. An investigative reporter for the NY Times, he gives a detailed history of the so-called “official” inquiry, authorized by the U.S. Congress, into the tragedy of September 11, 2001. One of the central characters in this compelling saga is a master manipulator, Philip D. Zelikow. He ran the Commission as its Executive Director. The idea that this guy, who had close ties to Condi Rice, was interested in revealing the full truth about 9/11 is simply preposterous. Why? Because, he had co-authored a book with Rice, worked on President Bush’s transition team in 2000/2001, and wrote a Neocon-like policy paper, which was used to justify the horrific Iraq War. Zelikow should have had the words “Conflict of Interest” branded on his Neocon-loving forehead!
Mr. Shenon underscored that in mostly every government commission, like the one for 9/11, it is the Executive Director, who is the key player in shaping the ultimate findings of that body. The author put it this way: “It is a polite fiction in Washington that the reports of blue-ribbon federal commissions are written by the commissioners themselves. In truth, most of the reports are written by a professional staff led by a full time director.”
Zelikow denied that he had any conflict of interest in accepting his czar-like role. This was so even after it was disclosed, that as the Executive Director, he made and received numerous telephone conversations from Karl Rove, “Bush’s Brain,” and that he had several visits with Rice, in the White House.
On another front, Zelikow supposedly had such an “abrasive” personality, that even Henry Kissinger, himself, was leery of him! According to the author: “Zeiklow...had...[an] outsize ego and fierce temper; his anger was a thing to behold, his face growing bright red, his well chosen insults flying in every direction.”
The Commission’s charter was to establish that the Bush-Cheney Gang’s “9/11 Mythology” was holy dogma. (1) Any evidence, no matter how persuasive, showing a differing point of view was outside of the scope of its limited, narrowly focused inquiry. For example, the fact that a structural steel-framed skyscraper, WTC-7, a 47-story office building structure, collapsed in 6.5 seconds, (free fall speed), even though it wasn’t struck by any jet airplane, didn’t raise an eyebrow for the 9/11 Commission. (2) Also, the highly suspicious conduct of those “Five Dancing Israelis,” over in New Jersey, who were caught joyfully taping the WTCs destruction, didn’t show up on its monitor either. (3) Experts have submitted that there are aspects of 9/11, many with probative value, that the Commission chose not to investigate. (4)
Prior to 9/11, the Bush-Cheney Gang was given plenty of explicit warnings of an “imminent terrorist attack” inside the U.S. Take one: On July 12, 2001, Thomas Pickard, the acting director of the FBI, met with the then-Attorney General, John Ashcroft. Pickard told him: “We’re at a very high level of chatter that something ‘big’ is about to happen. The CIA is very alarmed...” Ashcroft, a political has-been from Missouri, barked back at the veteran FBI man: “I don’t want to hear about that anymore. There is nothing I can do about that.” The author emphasized how the White House had also “done so little in response to [the CIA’s George] Tenet’s repeated warnings of an al-Qadea attack.” Which brings me to the proverbial “smoking gun,” the crux of the matter, the “Presidential Daily Briefing,” (PDB), of Aug. 6, 2001.
Keep in mind, that leading up to that critical period of time, i.e., just before 9/11, that it was Rice who was in charge of the powerful National Security Council (NSC). It was her primary duty to keep Bush informed about any possible terrorist attack in the U.S.
Enter Richard Clarke. He was an expert on counter-terrorism and an important member of the NSC team. He attempted in early 2001, to repeatedly warn the White House about al-Qaeda. Instead of listening to Clarke, however, the author pointed out: “Rice moved Clarke off center stage, in part at THE URGING OF ZELIKOW and the transition team.” In any event, the PDB of Aug. 6, 2001, prepared by the CIA, and based on its latest Intel, including Intel from the FBI, specifically warned Bush, V. P. Dick Cheney, Rice, among others, that the threat of a terrorist attack by al-Qaeda, in the U.S., was “CURRENT AND SERIOUS.” This crucial document was entitled: “BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO STRIKE IN THE U.S.”
On Sept. 4, 2001, Clarke warned Rice yet again. Here is how he put it: “Are we serious about dealing with the Al Qaeda threat? Decision makers should imagine themselves on a future date when the CSG is not successful in stopping Al Qaeda attacks and hundreds of American lay dead in several countries, including the U.S. What would those decision makers wish they had done earlier? That future day could happen at any time.” On top of Clarke’s memo, the Commission revealed that “more than 40 PDBs presented to Bush from January 2001 through September 10, 2001, included references to bin Laden.” Some of the family members of the 9/11 victims--the author called them, “the Jersey Girls”--regularly referred to Rice as: “Kinda-lies-a-lot” Rice!
As an aside, also in Shenon’s book, Sen. John McCain was mentioned in a favorable light. He was one of the first members of the U.S. Congress to insist on an “independent” probe of 9/11. The author then reported how Sen. McCain “despised [President] Bush, and the people around him, especially [Karl] Rove,” He blamed the Bush-Cheney Gang for supposed “dirty tricks” that they pulled on him, during the 2000 presidential election. Now, if Sen. McCain would only come clean about the cover-up of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, on June 8, 1967. (5)
Getting back to Clarke. When he heard on Jan. 27, 2003, that Rice’s crony, Zelikow was appointed as director for the Commission, he said: “THE FIX IS IN!” The author explained: “Clarke understood that with Zelikow--Zelikow of all people--in charge, there there was ‘no hope’ that the commission would carry out an “impartial” investigation of the Bush’s administration’s bungling of terrorist threats in the months before September 11. Could anyone have a more obvious conflict of interest than Zelikow?”
To show Zelikow had his own agenda, he arranged for Abe Sofaer to testify at the Commission first public hearing on March 31, 2003, in NYC. The author wrote: “It seemed odd that he was the Commission’s very first expert witness. Sofaer had no special expertise on the events of 9/11. He appeared there, mostly, as an advocate for the American invasion of Iraq--the invasion had been launched a week earlier--and a champion of the [Neocon] concept of ‘preemptive defense’ or ‘preemptive war.’”
If Sofaer wasn’t off point enough, Zelikow followed up with another doozy of a witness at the Commission’s hearing, in July, 2003. It was Laurie Mylroie of the Neocon-infested “American Enterprise Institute.” The author said that Mylroie promoted the dubious idea that “Iraq and Al-Qaeda were effectively one.” Who do you think in the Bush-Cheney Gang was the biggest “booster” of Mylroie? If you answered the Neocon Paul Wolfowitz, a “key architect of the Iraqi invasion,” you would be right. Her book, “Study for Revenge,” was fulsomely praised by him. Mylroie also thanked another Neocon, Irv “Scooter” Libby, then V. P. Cheney’s top lag dog, for his help on her book. Libby was later convicted of perjury by a federal jury in the Valeri Plame/CIA-related matter. (6)
As the 9/11 staff prepared its “interim” report for the Commission, Zelikow attempted to rewrite it to “link Al-Qaeda to Iraq.” Some of the staffers rebelled and Zelikow, despite being an ultra pushy character, backed off. A few of the staffers considered him a “White House mole.” The Commission also refused to buy V.P. Cheney’s yarn of “an Iraqi link to 9/11.”
The bottom line is: 9/11 didn’t have to happen, no matter who really orchestrated the monstrous deed. The Commission’s Report basically found “no fault” as far as the Bush-Cheney Gang’s role in the tragedy was concerned. (7) Its Report also helped to “reelect Bush as president.” The clever Zelikow, with his ties to the Neocon ideologues, got what he wanted, but the country didn’t. The full truth about 9/11 has yet to see the light of day.
Finally, Zelikow ended up with a government sinecure--Counselor to the U.S. Secretary of State--Condi Rice! It’s all enough to make you want to throw up!
How about this Jim:
Will American Empire End Before It Ends the World?
By Paul Craig Roberts
The hypocrisy of US government officials is boundless. On February 18, the US government inflamed Serbians by recognizing Muslim separatists in Kosovo, a historic province of Serbia, as an independent country. Two hundred thousand Serbs marched in protest and the US embassy in Belgrade was damaged. Is this surprising? No, not unless you are an official in the American Empire. The notorious Empire Neocon Counsel, Azlmay Khalilzad, Bush’s representative to the UN, declared: “I’m outraged by the mob attack.”
What’s an embassy building compared to a province of Serbia, a province that stirs nationalist sentiments associated with the Serbs long military struggles with the Turks? Had it not been for the Serbs, Europeans would probably be Turks.
To neocon Khalilzad a province of Serbia is nothing. It is merely real estate to be given away by US recognition bestowed on a break-away movement led by what some consider to be a gang of Muslim drug runners.
Secretary of State Condi Rice also found the Serbian response to the US giving away part of their country to be “intolerable.”
Former Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke also sees no reason for the Serbs to be upset that America gave away part of their country. He explained away the Serbian protests by declaring: “The Russians are behind this.”
We can understand why US diplomacy is a failure when we see our diplomats explaining that, had it not been for the Russians stirring them up, Serbians wouldn’t have noticed the loss of a historic part of their country.
Perhaps Kosovo should have its independence. However, the US government could not have handled the issue in a more provocative way.
Washington has been interfering in Serbian internal affairs since the Clinton administration. Told that Americans had to prevent genocide, few paid enough attention to Washington’s facilitation of the breakup of the Yugoslav state during the 1990s and to the Clinton administration’s bombing and murder of Serbian civilians in order to support Muslim separatists in Kosovo in 1999. Clinton used NATO as cover, but the bombing campaign was not backed by the UN Security Council. Bombs fell on Serbia for 78 days, taking out public infrastructure, bridges, factories, power stations, petrochemical plants, telecommunications facilities, markets, refugees, the Chinese Embassy and a passenger train. “Sorry honey, tell the kids I won’t be home tonight. President Clinton decided to bomb my train.” Cluster bombs and depleted uranium were used. Clearly, the US government and its NATO puppets were guilty of war crimes under the Nuremberg standard.
Americans were told by an obedient media that the bombings were necessary in order to prevent Yugoslav leader, Slobodan Milosevic, from committing war crimes against the separatists who were stealing part of his country. After Clinton’s bombings intimidated the Serbian political establishment, Milosevic was turned out of office and handed over to the Americans for a payment of several hundred million dollars and delivered to the Hague for trial as a war criminal.
Milosevic represented himself at his trial and was more than a match for the trumped up charges. Unfortunately, he died in prison. Many believe he was helped on his way by an embarrassed American Empire unable to convict him.
What is the US government’s secret agenda in the Balkans? Why is the US government on the side of Muslims intent on severing Kosovo from Serbia? What is being served by creating a new Muslim state closer to Europe?
Whose interests are being served by Washington? Clearly, not our own. Or Europe’s.
And, please, none of that BS about “building freedom and democracy.” As one of England’s most famous conservatives, Peregrine Worsthorne, wrote on February 20, America’s reputation as “the West’s conscience is fatally weakened.”
Supposedly our time is the era of globalism and one worldism. Ancient European nationalities are dissolving into the European Union, a new super state. US corporations now have transnational interests devoid of any national loyalties. Yet, the US is hard at work dissolving a small Balkan state into even smaller constituent parts. Why is this happening? Why did Bush order US puppets in Britain, France and Germany to instantly recognize the historic Serbian province as a new Muslim state?
Is the new state of Kosovo, as rumors would have it, Richard Perle’s payoff to the Turks, or is the explanation that Serbia, like Palestine, Iraq, and Iran, lacking any international media reach, was easy for Empire Neocons to demonize in order to establish the precedent that Washington decides what territory belongs to who and who rules it. Clinton’s bombing of Serbia was a precedent for Bush’s bombing of Afghanistan and Iraq and now Africa and tomorrow Iran and Syria.
The day the Empire Crazies bomb Russia or China, we are all fried.
Be a macho super patriot, believe your government, help to fry the world. It’s the American way.
The coming Bush Depression Jim:
The Subprime Hangover
Here Comes The $739 Billion Taxpayer Bailout
By Mike Whitney
“The SEC probe of the securitization of subprime mortgages into collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), announced last summer, has yielded no official enforcement cases....SEC chief, Christopher Cox, along with other top-level administration officials, has cautioned against quick-fire regulatory or enforcement responses to the worsening credit crisis, noting that the market instead should be left to work it out.” Nicholas Rummel, “SEC Drift Said to Prevent Action on Credit Crunch”, Financial Week
That's right. The biggest economic scandal in the last half century, the subprime fiasco, and the “business friendly” stooges at the SEC are still sitting on their hands reciting passages from Milton Friedman instead of dragging crooked banksters off to the hoosegow in leg-irons. Go figure? SEC Chairman, Christopher Cox, has come under withering attack from Senator Christopher Dodd who chairs the Banking Committee and who accuses the SEC of being “asleep at the switch”.
Dodd said the SEC “needs to help restore investor confidence in the markets by more vigorous enforcement, by more comprehensive regulation of credit rating agencies, and increased accountability and transparency of publicly traded companies.” (Financial Week)
“Accountability...transparency” in Bushworld? Nice try, Dodd, but its a losing cause. The Bush administration is not just philosophically opposed to oversight; they've handed over the entire financial system to a cabal of banking scalawags who've turned it into their personal fiefdom. This same cast of fraudsters engineered the subprime swindle and ripped off trillions of dollars from investors around the world. And, don't kid yourself; Bush is proud of the damage he's done by taking a wrecking ball the SEC. For him, it's like a good day at the races. He has no intention of reigning in the crooks or restoring the publics' confidence.
New York Governor Elliot Spitzer has joined Dodd in criticizing the so-called “regulatory agencies” for failing to determine whether any securities laws were broken. In a Washington Post article, Spitzer blasted the SEC's inaction saying that the Bush Administration would be judged by history as a “willing accomplice” to the subprime collapse.
But Spitzer and Dodd are wasting their breath. The culture of corruption from 7 years of Bush misrule has spread like Kudzu to every jag and eddy in Washington. If we were really a nation of laws rather than nincompoops, federal agents would be busy rounding up every investment banker and hedge fund sharpie on Wall Street so they could get to the bottom of the subprime boondoggle. Regulators still haven't even decided whether it was a case of overzealous marketing of dodgy securities or downright fraud. That should be "job one" for the SEC.
The reason all this talk about “regulation” is so important now is that the same banking giants who cooked up the subprime scam have just presented the Bush administration with a $739 billion bailout package they plan to unload on the American taxpayer. According to Sunday's New York Times:
“As losses from bad mortgages and mortgage-backed securities climb past $200 billion, talk among banking executives for an epic government rescue plan is suddenly coming into fashion. A confidential proposal that Bank of America circulated to members of Congress this month provides a stunning glimpse of how quickly the industry has reversed its laissez-faire disdain for second-guessing by the government — now that it is in trouble. The proposal warns that up to $739 billion in mortgages are at “moderate to high risk” of defaulting over the next five years and that millions of families could lose their homes. To prevent that, Bank of America suggested creating a Federal Homeowner Preservation Corporation that would buy up billions of dollars in troubled mortgages at a deep discount, forgive debt above the current market value of the homes and use federal loan guarantees to refinance the borrowers at lower rates.”
What Bank of America is proposing is that the US government guarantee the shoddy mortgages that the banks issued to “unemployed shoe-clerks with bad credit” so they could peddle them as Triple A “securities” to unsuspecting investors. Now that subprimes are blowing up at a record pace, the banks need a government bailout before their balance sheets are reduced to cinders.
But what does the poor taxpayer get out of the deal besides soaring inflation, bulging fiscal deficits, and the “warm and fuzzy” feeling that he's helped some tasseled-shoed charlatan keep his larder in the Hamptons full of Dom Perignon and crab cakes?
The reason we're in this mess is because financial innovation and deregulation have driven the markets off a cliff. And that started with the bankers. Financial innovation has nothing to do with the efficient deployment of capital for productive activity. No way. In fact, it is the exact opposite. The financial innovations of the last decade have primarily focused on transforming the liabilities of dubious mortgage applicants into complex debt-instruments which are enhanced with massive amounts of leverage and exotically-named derivatives. The investments banks and brokerage houses fought hard to establish the present system which they call “structured finance”. They spent over $100,000 million lobbying congress to remove the legislative firewall which kept investment and commercial banks separate. Those laws, particularly Glass Steagall, made sure that the public was protected from the Ponzi-scams which proliferated just prior to the Great Depression. But, now, 30 years later, the same scams are back with a vengeance. The cult of free market orthodoxy and Reagan-era flim-flam has put us on track for another stock market crash ala 1929. That's why Bank of America and their buddies in the industry have turned to the administration for a way out. Their flagging balance sheets can't take another year of rising foreclosures and dwindling assets. They need Big Brother to cover their debts and rebuild their capital-base. Otherwise its curtains.
Other versions of the so-called “Rescue Bill” have been floating around Washington for the last three weeks, but they all follow the same basic guidelines. Under one of the plans, 600,000 subprime mortgage-holders, many of whom are already delinquent on their payments or in some stage of foreclosure, would be able to refinance their loans under the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) which would federally guarantee the mortgage in the event of default.
Great idea, eh? So, now the taxpayer is going to have to pay for the people who lied on their applications (and who really can't afford the homes they're in) so the banks can recoup their losses. This plan doesn't make sense.
Why on earth would the taxpayer want to buy 600,000 subprime mortgages at “current value” when housing prices are falling, inventory is soaring, sales are sagging, foreclosures are at historic highs, and millions of homeowners are expected to simply “walkaway” from their loans?
No thanks. Let the banks go under. They created this mess. Besides, all we're doing is rewarding the people who deliberately destroyed the system. They can fend for themselves. The first order of business should be to restore public confidence; not bail out crooks. “Credibility” matters in a market-based system; especially one that relies so heavily on the hocus-pocus of fractional banking. When trust is lost; the system crashes. End of story. That means it's time to clean house at the SEC. Give everyone a pink slip, two weeks pay and send them home. Then scour the countryside like Diogenes for a few honest men.
Second, people in positions of authority have to be held accountable for their crimes. Millions of investors have lost their life savings or retirement in the subprime/securitzation debacle. Someone's got to go to jail. Apologies just don't cut it. So far, not one CEO has been led off to the Paddy-wagon in handcuffs. It has all been swept under the rug by an administration that has filled every regulatory position in Washington with industry lobbyists, business-friendly tycoons and corporate “yes-men”. The results are just what any sane person would expect; disaster. The financial markets are completely unsupervised; the SEC is just a subsidiary of the multi-national corporations. It has no teeth. If it was really independent; then Cox and his goons would be storming the investment banks with tasers and truncheons. Instead, he spends most his time explaining why he won't enforce the laws and prosecute cases.
And there should be no doubt about who is really responsible for the subprime woes. The investment banks employ some of the country's “best and brightest”. These are sharp guys who have studied at some of our finest colleges and universities. Does anyone really believe that a Harvard MBA---who understands all the fine-points of high-finance--really thought that ignoring all of the standard criteria for prudent lending, and issuing trillions of dollars in loans to applicants who had no job, no collateral, bad credit, and were unable to come up with a few thousand dollars for a down-payment---was a great idea?
Of course not. It was a swindle from the get-go. The reason the banks looked the other way and issued these shaky mortgages was because they didn't really think there was any risk involved. After all, it wasn't their money. They simply repackaged the loans into bonds and sold them off to someone else. No worries. But, does that make them any less guilty?
Consider this: If the banks didn't know that the mortgages were bogus, than why are all the various types of mortgages; including Alt-As, piggybacks, home equity loans, ARMs, prime, and "interest only"---defaulting at the same time? It is not just subprime mortgages that are failing; it runs the gamut.
The reason is obvious; it's because the banks were making windfall profits and didn't want to rock the boat. They knew they were peddling garbage. How could they not know? The banker's primary task in life is to figure out who can pay him back "with interest". And they're pretty good at it, too. So why did they start handing out hundreds of billions of dollars to anyone who could fog a mirror? In fact, it got so out-of-hand that (according to The New York State Commission of Investigation) "a homeless woman earning $10 an hour was recently approved for a $470,000 adjustable rate mortgage". In a similar incident, two Hispanic migrant workers in Bakersfield, California, who made roughly $45,000 in combined income, were approved for a mortgage on a home valued at $725,000.
These aren't innocent mistakes. They're part of a broader pattern to fudge the paperwork so unqualified "high-risk" loan applicants would look like J. Paul Getty and secure a mortgage. That way, the banks could continue to rake in lavish origination fees and maximize their profits.
But then the plan hit a rough patch and the Gravy-train tipped over into the ditch. When the credit storm hit the markets in August, the mortgage securitization went into deep freeze and the easy money from Wall Street dried up. The banks got stuck holding billions of their own bad paper. Now every foreclosure eats into their capital so, they've turned to the government for a handout. Of course, they don't want the public to know what's really going on so they've asked the Bush administration to help them pull the wool over everyone's eyes. According to the New York Times one banking official summed it up like this:
“We believe that any intervention by the federal government will be acceptable only if it is not perceived as a bailout of the bond market.”
Really? So, on top of everything else, the banks want the Bush administration to organize a public relations campaign that will make the multi-billion bailout look like it was designed to help struggling homeowners instead of crafty bankers. Unbelievable. No doubt Team Bush will do whatever they can to help out.
Bank of America's proposed $739 billion bailout is just the first of many hyper-inflationary, economy-busting trial-balloons we can expect to see in the near future. The banking system is in terminal distress; collapsing from hundreds of billions in worthless assets, bad bets, and poor decision-making. Their capital impairment problems were all brought on by themselves. And they should be forced to pay the consequences, whatever that may be. They managed to take a simple, revenue-generating activity like mortgage lending, and turn it into a textbook case of grand larceny. It's pathetic.
In their present condition, many of the banks will be back for another handout in a matter of months. Next will be commercial real estate (CRE) which is already slumping and on its way down. Then it'll be the $160 billion in private equity deals and leveraged buyouts (LBOs) which need refinancing. Then it'll be the maxed-out credit cards, and delinquent student loans and defaulting car loans all of which are failing at a faster and faster pace. It is not just the “structured investment” market that's unraveling now; it's the whole speculative paradigm of hyper-inflated assets, toxic bonds, over-priced equities and bizarre-sounding derivatives which are crashing down in one great debt waterfall. The investment banks are at the very center of the problems. They've played it fast and loose from the very beginning and now they've come up snake-eyes. Tough luck. Only they shouldn't count on a $700 billion freebie from Uncle Sam to make up for their own bad judgment.
Larry
We have discussed this too at length as you know. The 9/11 commission hearings was a 1090% Bush controlled lie.
I might have been a little slow but that hearing and watching Rice lie through her teeth is what made me realize we were in trouble.
The Commission was Cheney Bush controlled an insult and a bad joke. We knew they were all guilty of at least malfeasance but of course no one did anything wrong, they were all innocent, and as usual victims of circumstance!
Larry
That piece by Craig Roberts show that as I know, he does not understand why things are being done!
This is the Diplomacy of confrontation to enable the new order agenda period. I talk about it often but Bush seems to pick the most volatile parts of the world, divide it, say he must have his way, an d hopefully fight and conquer.
Bushco expects countries to bend to their will but that is okay because when they do not Bushco is more than willing to enforce their will militarily or so they think as Russia and the majority of the world is forming to take him on in Bush's new order Forever War.
I am sick of discussing it at this point but the hypocrisy is not even a concern of Bushco's just having it their way.
Larry
This new order agenda is well on its way. As you know, this financial collapse is a prerequisite to taking total control and has been long in the works and pushed through by Greenspan.
I have to laugh, everything is so obvious and we are so powerless. Yesterday I heard the chief idiot say it was not for the Fed to work on our failed infrastructure it was up to the States and it is too early to get involved. That friggen ass hole. It is too late.
I estimated a trillion to fix it and today I heard 1.6 trillion. As you know, he is purposely destroying us and our America to emplace his!
I heard he was working on another bailout too. He is screwing us an a more accelerated rate as he is running out of legal time. Anyway this whole thing of the government being accountable is another bad joke.
As you know, about a month ago Bush passed the Government openness Bill. Hell he is the only one that can decide what anyone should see or know. So here we go again.
A continued laughing stock Screwing by Bushco starting with 9/11 and that facade of culpability and accountability called the 9/11 commission hearings!
At this point I am praying we can keep Obama alive and he can clean up the mess Bush has made of us and the world so our kids and grand kids can have some kind of future!
Is it just me, or is Hillary accusing Obama's people of using "Karl Rove's playbook" and then promptly employs the same tactics? It sure looks like the old Rovian fear card is played all over the "turban photo" flap.
As we've noted before, the Clintons are true Rebublicrats.
Dave
SOAB!Yes, yes, yes! you're right! Hillary is a NeoCon in Democrats clothing. Everyone seems to have stooped to Rove and Bush's underhanded tactics to compete. They have set the new standard and Hillary is really bad and has learned well.
It pisses me off but Bush does it routinely accusing Dems of doing exactly what he is doing so he can get his way.
Rove taught 3D Politics Bud (decietful, deceptive, divisive, Polotics)! Anyway tomorrows debates ought to be interesting to say the least!
I'm so sick of Clinton's campaign wanting to put Obama in a Muslim light. I, personally, know several Muslims. Even if he WAS a Muslim, it would not necessarily be a bad thing. Muslims, on the whole, are a very peaceful people. The Qur'an demands it. Christians and Westerners like to point out a few Qur'anic passages (most have never even held a Qur'an, much less read it themselves), but as a Christian, I can point out many, many violent passages in the Old Testament. So, by that standard, it can be concluded that Christians are more radical and dangerous than Islamists.
The fact of the matter is, Jim, radicals of ANY religous ilk are not true followers of their dogma. They only use religion as a cloak to hide their fleshly lusts. Until the masses of all religions band together to purge these charlatans from their midst, the situation can only degenerate.
God, Allah, el Shadaii, or whatever name you want to give Him, is a God of Love. Killing people that don't agree 100% with you is NOT showing any love whatsoever. Anyone that fails to believe that, knows little of the TRUE dogma of their faith, and needs to re-read their Scriptures.
brother
I am not overly Religious i'd say but I have studied all of them and wrote extensively on the three great Religions in I think it was my second. That chapter I call God and the lies we call History.
Anyway in light of what I discuss often I include a link to a book today in my story as it addresses the three Religions and the fact that 2008 will be the beginning of the end. I included it so the entire book can be downloeded free and read if wanted and because I expect Bush to make his move towards that end before his time is up.
You know I agree with you it is not the Religion it is the perversion of that Religion. Sadly we have perverted unbridled Religiosity on both sides of this developing war. I told you that it is my experience that many alcoholics have called themselves Christians to cover for their past weaknesses and to make okay their continued inerquities. They do not drink but as people they are often worse.
Post a Comment