-
Obamacare Implodes
May 15, 2013 | 41 comments
-
Obama’s Rising Inequality
May 8, 2013 | 101 comments
-
Downsize the Liberals
May 1, 2013 | 53 comments
-
Fight Back! Privatize the FAA!
April 24, 2013 | 65 comments
-
Fallacies and Charades
April 17, 2013 | 14 comments
The Obama Watch
The President’s Permanent TARP Bailout Socialism Bill
Washington is operating today as if we have been conquered by a foreign power that has suspended our democracy and doesn’t care what the American people think.
The Tea Party, with overwhelming agreement from the America people, opposes any further TARP bank bailouts. But just as with the health care bill, Washington’s ruling Democrats are laughing off the Tea Party, and ignoring the American people.
President Obama’s so-called Financial Regulatory Reform bill institutionalizes permanent TARP bailout authority across the entire financial sector, indeed, for any company that can be deemed involved in financial activity of any sort. Washington is operating today as if we have been conquered by a foreign power that has suspended our democracy and doesn’t care what the American people think.
Bailout Socialism
The bill led by Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) (not running for reelection), which President Obama supports, grants permanent bailout authority to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Federal Reserve, and the Treasury. They are empowered to force into receivership any company they deem in danger of default that is “substantially engaged in activities… that are financial in nature.” The Federal Reserve and the Treasury would enjoy the power to define what constitutes “financial activities.” The Federal Reserve can declare any enterprise “a non-bank financial company” which can be seized and liquidated.
This takes potential bailouts and takeovers well beyond banking, even beyond the financial sector, to almost any business in the country. For who is not engaged in activities “that are financial in nature,” which at least arguably includes credit cards, lending, borrowing, insurance, issuing stock, selling on time, participating in exchanges of any sort, brokerage, pensions, and buying, selling, and holding stock, securities, foreign currencies, commodities, or speculative instruments of any sort. The auto companies have had their own finance arms, and other large manufacturers facilitate financing for their customers as well.
No further Congressional authorization would be needed for firms to be seized, for unlimited funds to be spent on bailouts, and for the FDIC to impose new levies on financial institutions to get more bailout funds. The shareholders of any such seized company need not be compensated for the loss of their property, and are unlikely to be. The Dodd bill provides that the shareholders are not to receive any such compensation until all claims against the company, and the Federal bailout fund, are fully repaid.
The Feds have access to unlimited funds under the bill because it authorizes the FDIC to borrow from the Treasury “up to 90 percent of the fair value of assets” of any company it seizes. As AEI scholar Peter Wallison notes in the Wall Street Journal on Monday, “one institution alone — Citigroup — has assets currently valued at about $1.8 trillion.” Wallison explains that one of the uses of such funds under the Dodd bill is for the FDIC to
“make additional payments” over and above what a claimant might be entitled to in bankruptcy, if these payments are necessary “to minimize losses” to the FDIC “from the orderly liquidation” of the failing firm. In other words, the agency would be able to borrow huge sums so that it could make more generous payments to creditors than they would receive in bankruptcy.
This is one form of bailout authorized under the bill, with the government smuggling funds to politically favored creditors.
The biggest problem with this is that it would encourage lenders to fund “too big to fail” institutions, enabling them to increase leverage with cheap money, and pursue riskier returns. Such moral hazard perpetuates cycles of failure, economic waste, inefficiency and bailout. It also disadvantages smaller, less politically favored banks, institutions and companies who will suffer without these competitive advantages of too big to fail.
Another possible bailout method under the Dodd bill is for the government to keep a firm in operation after seizing it, using the borrowed funds to pay off creditors. The FDIC would also have the power to keep the company operating by issuing securities of the seized firm to be sold to the Treasury, which could then keep or sell the securities. Another source of such bailout funds is the $50 billion resolution fund financed by a new tax on large financial institutions, with the FDIC authorized to charge additional assessments as necessary.
With just about any company subject to such possible seizure, and then continued operation, the potential for bailout socialism is obvious. How about using it to seize financially flagging media companies, particularly Administration critics? How about using it to seize oil companies, or coal companies, claiming they are no longer economically viable under cap and trade or other EPA global warming regulation? Then they can be used to subsidize alternative, green energy.
The Crony Capitalist Political Machine
Still another option under the Dodd bill is for the government to seize the competitors of politically favored institutions, and even to sell those seized firms to the favored too big to fail operations. All of these possible government seizures and bailouts are expressly shielded under the bill from any judicial review.
With such arbitrary government power to favor some firms and punish others, the financial community, and, indeed, business overall, will be political captives of the Obama Administration and the reigning Washington Democrats. If the permanent bailout bill passes, what financial company is going to participate in any way in a fundraiser for a 2012 Obama challenger, or even Republican Congressional or state candidates? What company will dare not pay protection money in the form of political contributions to the reigning Democrats?
About the Author
Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (139) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Peter Ferrara
More Articles From The Obama Watch
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/28/the-presidents-permanent-tarp
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Pingback| 4.28.10 @ 6:21AM
The President’s Permanent TARP Bailout Socialism Bill : USACTION NEWS links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
stephanie| 4.28.10 @ 6:46AM
Outrageous.
DutchTreat| 4.28.10 @ 8:59AM
The colonists were willing to place everything on the line for an unjust tax on a single commodity...tea. What would they be willing to do if they had been on the receivership of this form of tyranny? Keep you powder dry.
Stevie| 4.28.10 @ 2:23PM
How important is that birth certificate now?
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 3:51PM
If thbe GOP can run better candidates, then you can go on from here. Or there (DC).
Question that keeps coming back to mind is: if the Bushes were as good as their proponents $30.00 hardcover books (i.e. Rove) say, then why is Reagan the one hagiographized?
GreyLion| 4.28.10 @ 8:06PM
hagi-what?
Al, there you go again with them 25 centers. Reagan was straight arrow, so what are you tryin' to say? He walked on the "hi, simply hi" side? Or are you sayin' Reagan was a saint in comparison to the crap we have now?
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 8:19PM
Crap we have now? what about Bob Dole in '96-- he squeezed Kemp (a much better candidate) to the bottom half of the ticket.
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 5:27PM
"Outrageous."
Outrageous that Reagan is worshipped, but not the Bushes?
LiveFreeOrDie| 4.28.10 @ 5:47PM
He's a spammer AB.
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 7:38PM
yeah, but that doesn't mean he is necessarily incorrect on whatever he-- or she-- has commented on.
Pingback| 4.28.10 @ 6:49AM
Must Know Headlines 4.28.2010 — ExposeTheMedia.com links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Carol| 4.28.10 @ 6:52AM
Can anyone tell me HOW Obama can continue to get away with all these criminal activities?
Is it going to take the military going in and arresting him?
Or do we just continue to put up with these Soviet style tactics mastered by Obama over the years?
I am losing my mind out here and feel like leaving the country. I don't know where the heck I would go back this noose around our necks is getting tighter everyday.
CBKC| 4.28.10 @ 11:51AM
Yes, Carol, an increasing number of Americans are becoming despondent over the continual daily assault on our liberties. I just keep telling myself that this is what the left is PLANNING for - for us to just give up because we are tired of the fight.
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 3:56PM
"an increasing number of Americans are becoming despondent over the continual daily assault on our liberties"
Americans value liberty far more than virtue. Geo Will said it best: America is like ancient Rome in that it is a large country with no virtue.
But best you find out the hard way-- and you absolutely shall in the next couple of decades-- because then you know for sure.
You know, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
Deborah D | 4.28.10 @ 6:55AM
If our country can survive until November, it will be only through the will of the American people to beat back these anti-American, banana republic-loving, law-breaking, free-market and freedom haters of the Democrat Party.
I've posted this to Facebook. I get grief from my so-called friends of the Dem persuasion. The truth hurts so they lash out at me. Well, I can take it. This is our country we're talking about -- it's no time to bury your head under the covers. Yeah, it's cold out here, but it's going to get much, much colder (or hotter?) before we can get this country on track. Hiding under the blanket of ignorance will force the American train over the cliff.
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 3:59PM
freedom freedom liberty liberty-- but nothing about decency, dignity.
Just freedom, right? freedom exists in a vacuum, correct? it is the end -all, be-all?
Deborah D | 4.28.10 @ 5:17PM
What are you talking about? What is wrong with you? Why do you jump to conclusions that I have never even implied let alone said?
Why should freedom not imply decency and dignity to you? And why would you think I don't want decency and dignity? Perhaps it's you who don't want those things and you're projecting that thinking on to me. The old "I'm rubber and you're glue everything you say bounces off of me and sticks to you" -- really was wiser than I thought as a child.
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 8:00PM
Deborah,
Liberty can be licentiousness in disguise. The mind plays tricks: just for example, a youth can purchase a marijuana card from a state, thinking he is thus enabled in exercising his freedom; when he might be merely exercising a licence to do whatever he wants to do instead-- whether or not it is based on any genuine ethics.
Or say a guy cheats on his wife and rationalizes it by telling himself he is being 'liberated' (by his thinking exercising "liberty"), when perhaps he is just a lecher using what he defines as 'freedom' as an excuse to do what he wants. Rather common, one might say.
Freedom exists, but cannot be measured or justified; what you consider freedom might be considered slavery by someone else. In America there is much liberty, but much licence as well. Not only 'progressives' are licentious, but also rightwingers, too. And not all of them are conservatives who feel guilty for their transgressions. Libertarians are rightwingers who excuse their behavior by exalting freedom above practically all else.
I think of America as being a productive nation; for instance its agriculture; but how is it truly moral anymore? You can measure productivity but you cannot measure liberty (or licence for that matter, save for its destructive effects; costly public litigation; police man-hours, court costs not paid for by perps, taxes for prisons, welfare costs of bad families, etc...) And why do you complain about the Guvmint when you know very well we are getting the government we deserve? If you are here to score rightwing brownie points, then say so.
BTW, do you think because you are a woman you are above critique?
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 3:10AM
An interesting statement, Alan. I agree. What is liberty without prudence and virtue? Liberty is something to be cherished and protected, but without virtue it is meaningless.
The guiding lights for conservatives should be our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, and our Constitution. To follow those two documents in governance, with prudent exercise of the rule of law, is to re-affirm what has made the U.S. such a great country in the first place.
We may indeed deserve the horrors thrust upon us now; Who have we elected in the last couple of decades but Neo-Statists to lead our cause? Those men were not conservatives, and it might have taken at least several consecutive elections of conservatives time and time again to defuse the meltdown against which we now dare not tarry. The Statist has the upper hand, and we dare not allow him to raise his foot to boot us into submission. The Executive arm the government grows by the year, and its bureaucrats are generally unsympathetic to our cause.
We must not only vent our anger, but find fellow conservatives amongst the midst of our peers; We must also deconstruct the language of the Statist, and strip him bare of his lies.
The Statist has maneuvered into place his machine of destruction, and continues along the road to his vision of Utopia.
The fall of our financial markets was planned, and just yields another excuse for the Statist to assume more power. Goldman Sachs is but a scapegoat, an almost silent partner in the show-trial being conducted in Congress. The media uses that which it finds handy to blunt dissension where it can, and where it cannot it spews lies and propaganda.
Take the new Arizona law for instance. The law itself states that it was created not to usurp, but to uphold federal immigration law. It's provisions protect the civil rights of the individuals of the State of Arizona, and yet we have President Obama and people like Al Sharpton blasting away. Those who dissent against the law have either not read it, or they do not care. Neither does the Statist, for it is another excuse to bludgeon the States and claim the supremacy of the U.S. government over immigration law, though the States do the majority of the enforcement.
Deborah D| 4.29.10 @ 9:11AM
I tried to respond to this last night and was kept from it for some reason. I agree with you, Eric. I believe in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. I also believe in -- "with freedom comes responsibility." John Adams had it correct when he said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Rmm| 5.2.10 @ 11:03AM
Well said Eric. But where the tire meets the road, the downside is how do you overcome the lethargic and selfserving masses who don't give a rats ass.
Ret. Marine| 4.28.10 @ 7:40AM
Folks lets just try and understand what is taking place here. obama is not here to "unite" anything other than the permanent power base of the democrat party, period, i.e. tryanny.
This is a deliberate continueation of the cloward-piven strategy combined with the alinshy's tactic of dividing and conquering by means of deception through a muslim mindset. The ultimate goal of these criminals, and they are in fact criminals subverting this Representative Republic form of a democratic principled way of life, is to bring this Nation down as to bring it back up in a form which is unreconizeable to our hard-wired thinking of independence, self reliance, little grubmint, less taxes, making them justify their existence, way of thinking, in other words "God given rights" to our destiny. They will have no part in this thinking and are hard at work trying to justify their thinking and rationale to the average morons ( think grubmint edumacated hardcore idiots here) thinking.
If all this were necessary, do any one of you A/S thinkers believe he would be working this hard to convince non-critical thinkers he's all for them, you know the little guys? Not on your life. What he is after, and his counter parts like dodd, dingy harry, san fran nanny pelosi, et. al, is nothing short of illegal activities legislated to the extent of non-compliance, meaning it is already hard enough for the average person to follow laws and regulations in their current form, without going outside of them to the point of prosecution, in which they fully intend upon doing. At what point does the average thinking person begin to realize the rhetoric comming from the liar's mouth (hussein obama) does not par with the reality of the current events? Of course it's all bush and the Republican party's fault, and even though the liar (hussein obama) had a very large role in the initial bailout bill signed into effect during the bush admin.'s post, he is still looking to his favorite classes of victims support to continue their ignorance, a classical case of pulling the wool over their eyes as to not see what is taking place under his regime. This is a criminal enterprise taking place right under the noses of We the People. If we only had enough freedom minded hardwired politicians that could get past their own lie's we might stand a fighting chance to stop this enterprise.
As it stands and untill we over throw these criminals ( through our election process) the very idea or talking points of these criminals is to keep every non thinking person, (see victim classes) in a position of confussion while at the same time protraying the hard-wired freedom thinkers as a "threat" to their unearned money grab. BTW, has anyone been keeping up with Beck this week and the crimes this president and his cronies are trying desperately trying to cover up or avoid the masses from trying to connect the dots to?
Kohl| 4.28.10 @ 11:10AM
We must consider 'dissolving' the Union, at least temporarily to rid ourselves of this fascism. We must again become 'colonies' and be ready to fight our oppressor, the District of Columbia. Like the 18th century British Empire, we have become little more than 'colonies' to the Federal Government. Enough is enough! Let Arizona's recent law be our 'shot heard 'round the World'!
Melvin| 4.28.10 @ 7:41AM
I don't want to hear this crap that our government it broken. It knows exactly what it is doing. This just didn't happen with Obama, it has been in the works for a long time.
The checks and balances that were put into place by our founding fathers have been washed asunder. The Legislative, Judicial branches of our government are all taking orders of the White House.
If we think for one God damn moment that the mid-terms or even a Presidential election in 2012 will reverse this direction towards Communism then we are as stupid as we look.
Those that are intent on destroying our Represenative form of government are not going to be stupid enough to allow future if we make it that far Presidential Administrations dismantle in what the Democrat Party has put together.
The Democrat Party is no longer the Democrat Party of our fathers. It has been taken over by Communists. For twenty years I defended this Country from those evil, sadistic bastards and now they have finally taken over our government.
This is not the rant of an crazy man. I have posted long enough on American Spectator for the regulars to recognize that fact, but I know a card carrying Communist when I see one, and right now all three branches are filled with those ideological monsters.
Our economy is crap while China's grows at 12% and counting, our defense is being dismantled while China with it's deep water fleet is now sailing past Japanese ships and deeper into Asia.
Our energy production has been crippled by convenient questionable explosions where we have had none for years and no oil and coal production will be crippled with onerous and job ending regulations.
Come on people how much more to I need to tell you, before you see the urgency it this.
Every time Obama wants to take something over he creates an emergency or a catastrophic event to justify or cover is actions.
There is just been way too many coincidental events that have taken place in a short amount of time.
For the Communists in power their plan that has been in place since the erection of the Berlin Wall is now starting to jell and solidify. I'm no expert historian, but my love for history and reading has made me see way too many parallels here.
Things that have happened during the last two years just didn't happen on their own due to unforeseen forces, they were designed by those who want this Country out of the way.
Bydand76| 4.28.10 @ 9:16AM
Good post Melvin,
I could'nt agree with you more.
Now you can add this immigration issue in AZ and it becomes abundantly clear that our president doesnt care about the borders or about the people of this country.
He is an agitator and a socialist progressive bastard!
We are on a collision course with disaster!
Pro Libertate!
Nick| 4.28.10 @ 9:23AM
Bydand76,
Back in the '80s, we called these guys "One Worlders."
Kohl| 4.28.10 @ 11:27AM
Presidend Obama wants to become King Obama. These gangsters have been plotting this ursapation for fifty or more years and they now have put it into action. But remember, we can afford the time it takes to win; they have one shot at it and they can't miss. We can. Screw Obama! We are looking at things the wrong way. It's THEY who should be loosing sleep at night! Hell, if all else fails, we can have a "French-style" Revolution. Let's put THEM on the defense and slowly but surely squeeze the life out of D.C. We are the People and it is We who are on the offense. We are are on a course with Destiny, not disaster. We will prevail!
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 4:02PM
"Now you can add this immigration issue in AZ and it becomes abundantly clear that our president doesnt care about the borders or about the people of this country."
But also the police who say "we can't enforce (AZ's) new law."
"Can't"? or don't want to?
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 3:21AM
As I explained in an above post(and that which you probably already know) the AZ's new law only codifies the federal immigration laws/statutes and sets the State's police force to enforcing the laws they represent.
This isn't about racism, it's about protecting the sovereignty of our country. Just because the majority of illegal immigrants happen to be Mexicans doesn't mean that they will be the only ones affected by this law. Anyone who has problems with Arizona's law should look at Mexico's immigration laws. They're practically draconian in their enforcement, yet we don't hear the Left bitching about Mexico.
blarset| 4.28.10 @ 10:41AM
We are starting to see the implications of Economic warefare being played out between the democracys and the communist countrys in the world. Look at China and its trade missions to south america, look at the involvement with Russia and Iran and Venusuela. The communist system is closed . They do not let enterprise use the profits for its growth the spoils all go to the Leaders of the System. Free trade is the TROJAN HORSE thats bringing down AMERICA!
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 8:05PM
"look at the involvement with Russia and Iran and Venusuela"
Russia is a rightwing, not communist, nation.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 3:24AM
The Statist is using our system and our laws against us. He perverts the Constitution and our first principles, and then uses the system to effectively destroy itself. He is a globalist in the sense that he will take any help he can get when it comes to making Americans disillusioned with our way of life. He then takes that opportunity to show us his "way to Utopia." We must only surrender our liberty, incrementally, and then we will be able to enjoy the fruits of his labor.
NasvyBrat | 4.28.10 @ 8:32AM
Well, I can't really be surprised by any of the tripe that comes out of this admin. anymore. Whether this is socialism, Marxism, or facism (which sounds like "crony capitalism" when you break it down), its UN-AMERICAN! These leftist shat balls are very close to acheiving what they've been trying to acheive for a LONG time. Obama's their guy to do it. If we don't change this situation come November, then methinks we've had it. I can only pray that we'll be victorious.
"The three bracnches of government number considerably more than three & are not, in any sense, 'branches' since that would imply that there is something they are all attatched to besides self-aggrandizement & our pocketbooks. Government is not a machine with parts, it's an organism. When does an intestine quit being an intestine & start becoming an asshole?"...P.J. O'Rourke
"Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under."....H.L. Mencken
NavyBrat | 4.28.10 @ 8:33AM
Jeez, you know its early when you typo your own handle. Oops!
blarset| 4.28.10 @ 10:52AM
GOOD POST! Thank YOU.
Pingback| 4.28.10 @ 9:23AM
The President's Permanent TARP Bailout Socialism Bill | Land of Liberty links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Mike| 4.28.10 @ 9:37AM
So what is your solution, Mr. Ferrara?
With deregulation, we witnessed the growth of a shadow banking system and the growth of financial institutions that are "too big too fail," meaning that if they fail we experience a world wide depression. We have seen how these institutions leveraged risk. We have seen how they invented mathematically complex financial instruments with no value added for the economy. We have seen how underfunded, poorly lead and legally impotent government regulatory agencies, staffed with lawyers instead of financial experts, failed spectacularly. In short, we are reaping what has been sown by Republicans and Democrats alike from the Reagan administration to the end of the Bush administration.
From you, Mr. Ferrara, I see constant criticism of the President Obama and the Democrats. I see overheated, hypothetical scenarios about what the federal government might do in the future. But I see no solutions. Unless, that is, your solution is laissez-fair capitalism.
Doorgunner| 4.28.10 @ 9:48AM
Your assertion "With deregulation... " is crap.
The most complex codes in software begin with the binary notion of a byte. At the very base of your "mathematically complex financial instruments" were non-viable house notes. Who created the environment in which it became profitable to write bad home loans and who created the (secondary) market for those notes?
Here's a clue: it wasn't bankers operating in an under-regulated envrionment.
Mike| 4.28.10 @ 9:58AM
The state of Texas, for the most part, avoided the worst of the housing bubble. Not having fully researched this, it is my understanding that the reason for this is because state consumer protection laws prevented banks and consumers from entering into "liars loans." By any other name, this is regulation.
Tom| 4.28.10 @ 10:16AM
Mike,
What is the point of new regulation when many of the problems associated with the latest crisis was a result of previous regulation? Laws are rushed into being without a thorough understanding of what the natural consequences are. "Liar Loans" are, for the vast majority of instances, a result of implicit and explicit pressure from the federal government - through threats, regulations, and statute - to increase home ownership.
At what point in the last 50 years has the banking system approached any sort of laissez-fair capitalism? And at what point does it become my responsibility to protect banks and home buyers from their own stupidity? What is needed, in my opinion, is a way to safely liquidate those financial entities that pose a systemic risk to the country not ways to bail them out which will just encourage more bad behavior in the future. No regulation will ever be able to anticipate brilliant people finding a way around the system.
Tom
Doorgunner| 4.28.10 @ 11:03AM
So are you saying it really wasn't the "mathematically complex financial instruments", but rather a presidential administration capitiulating to a Democratic congress, hoping to at least score domestic policy points and concessions for the war effort, making Fannie and Freddie purchase promises to lenders that led to our cuurent crisis?
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 3:32AM
Those "mathematically complex financial instruments," derivatives, have been around for a very long time. The deregulation of those instruments multiplied the crash by levels of magnitude, but the crash was going to happen anyway.
When you create a secondary market of already piss-poor sub-prime mortgages and flush more money into the market, you can only expect the market to take the extra capital and leverage it to achieve greater gains. The problem was the fact that many organs of the market just kept passing the buck, and the last one holding it got stuck with the bill.
The Statist uses this State-engineered attack on the market to show us the "flaws" of the capitalist market system, and proposes more and harsher regulations to fix the problems that he created. The Statist is never circumspect about his failings, and only continues to demand more of our liberty.
George S| 4.28.10 @ 10:35AM
What we have seen is that it's better to cover Wall Street's bad bets with tax dollars to those who contribute heavily to Democrats...
Back in the late seventies, Mexico discovered oil deposits in the Gulf of Mexico and soon after started borrowing (and spending) heavily figuring they'd be covered with future petroleum sales at a time when the world oil prices were starting to climb. Then a funny thing happened: Reagan was elected president and deregulated Jimmah's energy "policies" which caused the world oil prices to collapse in 1981. That loud sound was the toilet flushing on Mexico's credit card. But, for the next ten years, their deficit remained fairly constant, meaning that investing in Mexican bonds, while still a risk with great reward potential, was just safe enough for short term investments, creating an artificial demand for bonds like the housing bubble of the early 2000's created a jump in prices. American and foreign banks had a field day. Then, the bottom fell out in the mid nineties after Mexico stubbornly refused to devalue the peso and kept rolling over debt instruments that matured.
Enter Bill Clinton, Regulator in Chief, with an 18 billion bailout program along with 40 billion in loan guarantees. Why? Well. Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, a Goldman Sachs alumni, pushed for it to save Goldman and other US banks from drowning in their bad investments. This way they could stay afloat and make other risky investments in other countries. In other words, when the risk was high, the rewards were obscene; but when the bottom fell out, well, they were too big to fail. So we bailed out Wall Street... prior to Glass Steagall and prior to TARP. So with this track record, why should a housing bubble cause concern?
So a "solution" would be what Reagan did back in 1981 when this mess started -- sit back, do nothing and give them your best wishes for success. But that is just too mean or stupid, I guess, considering how the US economy collapsed after Reagan took office.
jd| 4.28.10 @ 12:23PM
Geez Mike,
I am so sick and tired of people mis-diagnosing the true crux of the problem and ignorning the root causes. Deregulation of the banks and markets was not the problem. In fact, there HAS been regulation in these industries for quite some time (unlike DEREGULATED industries like energy and telecomm). Cheap money policy of the Feds and government's too-close, cozy arrangement with Wall Street was the problem. It's called crony capitalism. Read Veronique de Rugy's EXCELLENT analysis in the National Review today on this very subject before you post idiotic statements.
Tim*| 4.28.10 @ 10:31AM
The Fed fails to do what it was created to do.
Audit The Fed . Stop Bum Rushed Dodd from placing the independent Consumer Protection Agency inside The Fed. This is compromised crap.
Pingback| 4.28.10 @ 10:40AM
The President’s Permanent TARP Bailout Socialism Bill | Republican Party of Door Coun links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Tim*| 4.28.10 @ 10:45AM
The SEC is inhabited by a bunch of Federal Shovel Leaners ,Coffee Swillers and Porn Peerers.
Clean House & Hand Them Their Walkin' Papers.
Mike| 4.28.10 @ 12:32PM
Tim
Appoint Christopher Cox as chair. Reduce funding, Hire people with little financial expertise. Create an anti-regulatory atmosphere. Then, sit back and marvel at how ineffective government is. What did you expect? It was designed to fail. I would expect nothing less from people who, ipso facto, hate government.
Tim*| 4.28.10 @ 1:08PM
Gee Mikey ,then explain Obama's Appointee ,SEC Director Mary Shapiro.
"Schapiro was appointed in 1988 by President Ronald Reagan to fill one of two Democratic seats on the SEC. President George H. W. Bush reappointed her to this position in 1989. President Bill Clinton appointed Schapiro as acting chairperson of the SEC.
You're An Imbecile !
Pingback| 4.28.10 @ 11:01AM
April 28 - Steve's Links links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Petronius| 4.28.10 @ 11:24AM
The one thing missing in all this is that liberals do not believe in the traditional modes of commerce because it's competitive and "not fair". To the all businesses should be forced to function as support groups to provide benefits and generate tax revenues. If there's any profit left over after government imposts, they will take all they can extort. What this country needs is a national lockout. Maybe after a quarter of no tax revenue, the thugocracy will get a clue: that is if they don't run true to form and just sieze all private businesses.
J F C| 4.28.10 @ 11:33AM
It's time for a cosmic colonic! At least for a USA one. ( A colonic is a DEEP enema)
Right now I'm finishing a fast, which expells a lot of the accumulated fat and toxins sucked in over time.
It's far past the time that this sort of still free and vital country do the same, before it becomes too fat and obee to avoid inevitable death.
I fear it may already be too late.
Both physically and psychically, the 'HUGE majority of our citizens are ALREADY grossly too dense to face a dire future.
The "skin" that envelops the "body" of the USA, like that of the human body and mind, can only contain and be supported by the internal organs and skeleton up until a certain bursting point, until all hell breaks loose.
So, perhaps right NOW, we are experiencing the cornered-rat, facing-sure-death point, as a nation.
Oh, how many of us there are, so visible in public, and so obnoxious to the point of suicidal insanity, that we are severely challenged to defeat.
Well, so far, at least, America has been blessed to eke out sine qua victories, against the greatest odds, over time, so perhaps she will again.
Remember the luck and skillful bravery at Midway, in 1942!
Louis Jenkins| 4.28.10 @ 11:39AM
What this country needs is an enema!! Agreed.
Drew | 4.28.10 @ 11:40AM
The utter mendaciousness of this article is illustrated by the author's repetition of that tired (and endlessly debunked) conservative meme suggesting that the Comunity Reinvestment Act was responsible for the credit meltdown. You'd think that after being proved utterly wrong on this so many times conservative hacks like Ferrara would learn. But apparently not.
But, just in case Mr Ferrara et al continue to ignore the truth about this issue, lets review:
1)Timing: The CRA was passed in 1977, a full quarter century before the current spate of sub-prime lending erupted. But, as noted by Ellen Seidman (http://www.newamerica.net/publications/resources/2008/community_reinvestment_act)
CRA-related activity had largely slowed by 2001.
2) Most problem loans were originated by non-CRA institutions: Half of all subprime loans came from institutions that weren't subject AT ALL to the CRA. A further 25% from bank affiliates and subsidiaries that weren't as fully covered. At most one in four subprime loans were made by CRA-covered banks.
3)CRA Loans had LESS defaults As San Francisco Fed President Janet Yellen points out: Independent mortgage companies, which were not covered by CRA, made high-priced loans at more than twice the rate of banks and thrifts. (http://www.frbsf.org/news/speeches/2008/0331.html)
Perhaps most telling, even most lenders haven't blamed the CRA for the mortgage mess. Just as the CRA was becoming less effective and relevant is the precise moment when subprime lending exploded. The worst offenders, the independent mortgage companies, were never subject to the CRA - or any Federal regulator. The law didn't make them lend. Greed did.
Mr Ferrara continues to bandy about the proven falsehood of the CRA causing the mortgage crisis. The fact that he gets such a basic historical fact so fundamentally wrong, in and of itself, ought to utterly discredit him on the subject of Financial Institution Reform.
Ryan| 4.28.10 @ 12:11PM
Ferrara doesn't overstate the case against the CRA (as is often done from the right); however, the idea behind the CRA is flawed - it promotes lending to people who cannot afford to pay it back. In fact, you overstate what he said about the CRA in the article and ignore the rest.
You also don't make the case that the CRA should remain in existence. It's bad regulation. It added - and promoted - the mess over the long term.
Even if he's wrong, one wrong argument doesn't invalidate the article. Where else is he wrong?
Drew| 4.28.10 @ 1:04PM
Let's start with this assertion: President Obama's so-called Financial Regulatory Reform bill institutionalizes permanent TARP bailout authority across the entire financial sector, indeed, for any company that can be deemed involved in financial activity of any sort.
To start with, the Senate version currently only covers financial-services companies with assets in excess of $10 billion. It also exempts certain categories of businesses, including retailers, accountants, real estate brokers, lawyers and makers of modular homes.
Secondly, the financial reform bills being considered are simply an attempt to recognize that the financial industry has expanded to include a lot of companies that weren't subject to FDIC or other Federal regulation. A.I.G., for example, was never subject to FDIC oversite - and yet it ended up costing taxpayers well over $100 billion to clean up. Taxpayers ended up bailing out A.I.G. - even though there was no law that said they would.
From an historical perspective the FDIC, since its beginnings during the Roosevelt administration, has been remarkably effective. It essentially ended the periodic financial panics that ensued from bank runs. It also was able to do this by leveeing a relatively small fee on banks to insure deposits. The Reform bill under consideration expands that concept to cover other large financial institutions that otherwise wouldn't benefit from FDIC supervision. It won't be taxpayers that bail out the next A.I.G. (if, heaven forbid, such a large institution fails again) - it will be the financial institutions themselves.
Secondly, the reform measures contain language designed to promote responsible lending - for example requiring institutions to retain a minimum of 5% of the equity in any debt issues so that they have some "skin in the game."
Ferrara's absurb insinuation that this financial reform legislation is some sort of quid pro quo that will guarantee permanent financial institution campaign contributions to Democratic candidates is also totally without merit. Ferrara suggests this will be the outcome - without explaining how this might happen. The short answer is: The FDIC, which is responsible liquidating failed institutions, legally can only liquidate firms that have already failed - literally never in the entire history of the FDIC has the office ever "liquidated" a firm that was financially healthy. Why Ferrara assumes that "crony capitalism" will be the outcome - when it is legally debarred - he never gets around to explaining.
Scott| 4.28.10 @ 1:06PM
Drew, are you new here? Don't you know that common sense analysis is not allowed or tolerated on these boards?
Doorgunner| 4.28.10 @ 1:56PM
"Ferrara assumes that "crony capitalism" will be the outcome - when it is legally debarred - he never gets around to explaining. "
If you actually, ingenuously, need further explanation than Chris "Countrywide" Dodd authored it, you are both exceptionally articulate retards.
Doorgunner| 4.28.10 @ 2:08PM
"2) Most problem loans were originated by non-CRA institutions... "
Notable use of the word "originated", Drew. You accuser Ferrara of "mendaciousness", but, I believe the mendacity is yours when you choose to ignore where the loans went after being sold by the 'originator'. You also mendaciously ignore any examination of why Fannie and Freddie would buy that kind of paper, let alone let it travel , bundled, back out the door.
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 8:09PM
"Drew, are you new here? Don't you know that common sense analysis is not allowed or tolerated on these boards?"
Drew bends over backwards for terrorists (oh, so sorry: "freedom fighters"). Let's hope he'll bend over forwards, too.
Or let him take it in the ear.
Ryan| 4.28.10 @ 2:18PM
One, I agree with you on the FDIC. It's one of the few government programs that seems to do any good (and runs about as well cost-wise as it can). It doesn't bail banks out - it insures and liquidates. It doesn't keep entities afloat.
Here's the overall problem.
There shouldn't be bailouts. That's why we have bankruptcy court and civil/criminal courts for fraud. AIG, GM, Chrysler - all should have been allowed to go without government injecting taxpayer funds.
PS - corporations are taxpayers as well. Their money comes from taxpayers. We fund those bailouts, and the corporations that would be behind them under the bill would be using my money NOT to enhance service, or grow a company, or invest...but to cover the failures of other idiots. I don't want my money tied up that way.
The best case is the one for capital reserves - it works fairly well for banks, and would have been a simple mechanism that may have helped prevent much of the derivative trading.
Tim*| 4.28.10 @ 2:09PM
Na,Ah,Ah !
Apparently , someone here forgot to mention The 1995 Clinton Administration Revisions to The Community Reinvestment Act ,orchestrated by former Goldman Sachs' Co-Chairman ,the Economic Advisor Robert Rubin &then; Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen ,allowed the securitization of Sub-Prime B-Paper , Then Senator Obama refusing to Co-Sponsor The 2005 Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act ,The Democrat Controlled & Chaired Bawney Fwank House Financial Services Committee & The Democrat Controlled & Chaired Chris Dodd Senate Banking Committee ignoring repeated Bush Administration warnings regarding FNMA &FHLMC; ,18 times in 2008 alone.
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.28.10 @ 11:44AM
Mr. Ferrara,
Thanks again for laying it out so clearly. Sir, this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
This bill's shadow on the next elections, could literally spark at the very least, a national sit-down strike of epic proportions.
Keep stocking up food and medicine, folks.
Scott| 4.28.10 @ 1:05PM
You don that Ken, I'm going to continue to lead a normal, sane life.
Alan Brooks| 4.28.10 @ 8:11PM
like Ted Kennedy did, Scott?
Kill Fannie - Peter McGrath| 4.28.10 @ 12:32PM
Getting rid of Fannie and Freddie - or selling the government's ownership in these "Government Sponsored Entities" to private investors - would be a gigantic advance forward. Ridding the mortgage markets of Federal influence is crucial, indeed central, to any real reform.
It's astounding that hucksters like Obama, or Dodd for that matter - who don't have a wit of experience in the private sector - somehow believe that they have a mandate, or the where-with-all, to control and direct private markets and corporations.
They certainly have no such mandate. As for any where-with-all, gimme a break. These preening morons couldn't make a payroll if their lives depended on it. It's becoming increasingly difficult for these clowns - even the Chief Clown - to appear as anything other than objects of derision.
SPO101 | 4.28.10 @ 12:47PM
DO YOU PEOPLE really WANT Republicans back in power? I regularly have to ask Republicans/Conservatives what is IT they WANT!
1) You do not like big government but government grows under Republican rule.
2) You do not want government in your lives but you like the “show me your papers” law in AZ.
3) You do not like Wall St. but you want to keep them unregulated so they can FINISH the job of ruining our economy.
4) You chant “Drill Baby Drill” but think Oil Companies should NOT be responsible for SPILLS and let the government take care of the environmental disasters.
5) Conservatives despise illegal aliens but hire them on a regular basis.
6) Right-wing chicken hawks get off on WAR but you let your children/grandchildren PAY FOR IT.
6 and a half, lol) You people demonize gays but Larry Craig’s men’s room was the most popular attraction of the 2008 Republican National Convention and gay porn sells best in Red States.
7) You hate taxes but love Reagan even though Reagan/Bush RAISED taxes. On & on & on…
What the #*~/? Can you blame Progressives for thinking Republicans/Conservatives are corrupt, mental deficient hypocrites?
Not since the WWII has a population been so damn messed up. The Germans and Italians had an excuse for embracing corporate, police state Fascism. They didn’t have any history of such political abominations to learn from. However the Republicans/Conservatives have the examples of Mussolini/Hitler to examine. SO TELL ME PLEASE WHY you’d put SO much wealth and power in a Corporate owned police state?
(Ask John McCain why the Energy Department is involved with so many military projects in AZ instead of working on new tech and alternative sources)
Funny how the news media jumped on this Arizona immigration law story but completely IGNORED the following: John McCain and the Republicans seem to be leading the charge toward a police state:
S.3081 - Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention and Prosecution Act of 2010 proposed by Senators Lieberman and McCain “…removes the right to trial for American Citizens and gives government the AUTHORITY to detain Americans INDEFINITELY for SUSPECTED TERRORIST ACTIVITY…”
WHAT?
The really IMPORTANT thing about this Act is just WHO defines SUSPECTED ACTIVITY? I’m sure the CRIMINALS and CONS who oversaw the recent economic meltdown (or what I like to call greatest looting of a nation’s wealth and resources in the history of mankind) FEEL THREATENED by the ACTIVITY involved with calls for JUSTICE.
Republicans know DEMANDS for ethics, responsibility and accountability are going to come down HARD on them. Especially McCain/Lieberman who’ve been covering up Banking/Financial/Wall St SCANDALS since the 80’s. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what comes next…
consciousmc.blogspot.com
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
“THE Devil knew not what he did when he made man politic…”
Shakespeare
Indiana Alex| 4.28.10 @ 12:55PM
Do you realize that after the early part of the previous century "Progressives" had to start calling themselves "Liberals" because people got to experience the impact of "Progressive" policy and realize they didn't like it at all?
Boy, how we have come full circle.
Deborah D | 4.28.10 @ 1:00PM
We want people in power who will follow the Constitution, and that is obviously not the Obamacrats. We will kick them in the wazoo in November.
Margie| 4.28.10 @ 1:03PM
Spoken like a true Progressive. Bash the Republican party in order to try and sell your Communist manifesto. Your only problem is? That we're too smart to be fooled.
In case you haven't noticed~ conservatives (the sleeping Giant) are awake and we're voting in droves for... wait for it now.... conservative Republicans! And contrary to what you may think, we aren't going away, no matter what type of intimidation or militant tactics you may use.
A quote from this Communist's site says this:
"Honestly, every decade or so, more Progressive Americans have to put the crazy rednecks in their place."
Nice try, but YOU lose.
Cuffs| 4.28.10 @ 1:18PM
"Show me your papers law?"
What the hell is that.? Where in the law does
it say that? By, God, can't you people think
for yourselves instead of having an "Oprah"
emotional response to everything?
Let's talk about the civil rights of legal Arizona
residents being robbed, shot and harrassed
by illegals. Obama doesn't seem to care about
them because he needs the votes (legal or illegal) of immigrants. It's that simple; whose
doing the profiling here?
Rings of mentally deficiency to me.
Bydand76| 4.28.10 @ 2:37PM
U mmmmm excuse me but your ignorance is showing liberal douche-bag.
First off, you have absolutly no idea of what the concept of smaller Government means.
Secondly, Try refusing a police officer the next time you are pulled over when he asks you for your "papers" Idiot! Or when you get a drivers license, passport, or just about anything else. Except when you have to go vote which is the REAL reason you liberal bastards are all upset about this!
Thirdly , the rest of your post is so dumb I am not going to respond to it because I dont have the time and you will not even understand or listen to what I have to say.
So I will just call you a moron and be done with your silly little troll ass!
Pro Libertate!
JimE| 4.28.10 @ 6:03PM
You are a moron and a useful idiot.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 3:45AM
You don't even understand that McCain is not a real conservative... Check please!
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 4:15AM
I'm bored, so I'll try to slap this down, point by point.
1) You do not like big government but government grows under Republican rule.(Yes, unfortunately that has been the case. This election and those following, conservatives are going to try to get those who follow OUR mindset into office, not more Neo-Statists.)
2) You do not want government in your lives but you like the “show me your papers” law in AZ.(There is a difference between intrusive government and sensible government. Apparently you do not know the difference. AZ's law is simply codifying and enforcing federal immigration law. Go read the damn thing.)
3) You do not like Wall St. but you want to keep them unregulated so they can FINISH the job of ruining our economy.(No. Derivatives, like any other banking product, need to be regulated. Not regulated out of existence, but regulated to the point of transparency so everyone knows what they are purchasing when they buy derivatives.)
4) You chant “Drill Baby Drill” but think Oil Companies should NOT be responsible for SPILLS and let the government take care of the environmental disasters.(I don't even know what to say about this. You've obviously got your head up your wazoo if you believe that we don't think companies should clean up their own damn messes.)
5) Conservatives despise illegal aliens but hire them on a regular basis.(Wrong again. Certain Neo-Statists like cheap labor, but any right-headed American citizen, regardless of their political affiliation, will not stand to have the federal government NOT enforce its own immigration laws and statutes. Cheap labor from illegals is not anything to be celebrated. It even undermined the efforts of the Farmer's union out in the SW of the U.S.)(I'm not against unions, per se, but Public sector unions need to scuttle. They do nothing but soak up taxpayer dollars.)
6 and a half, lol) You people demonize gays but Larry Craig’s men’s room was the most popular attraction of the 2008 Republican National Convention and gay porn sells best in Red States.(I don't know enough conservatives in the aggregate to say whether or not they all hate gays. I say love the sinner, but hate the sin. I'm sure you'll say something witty to spite me.)
7) You hate taxes but love Reagan even though Reagan/Bush RAISED taxes. On & on & on… (I hate taxes that fund the illegitimate actions of government that are running us towards bankruptcy. Redistribution of wealth is only egalitarian until it's used as a weapon against the rich to create a sense of class warfare.
Take a look at the Federal Register, and talk to me later about how we have an "unfettered" free market capital system. The government systematically takes money from the successful and the wealthy, abuses them with the funds they collect, and then regulate small business competitors out of the market to favor their political constituents, some of whom happen to be larger corporations. Tired yet?
This is all the work of the Statist, who set the wheels in motion at least a century ago. Ever since the advent of the progressive income tax and FDR's New Deal, we have been dealing with ever-increasing governmental tyranny.
If you agree with the massive expansion of the federal government and its heavy regulatory hand on the markets, I suppose you are either a Statist or a drone, or perhaps just un-educated. I'd say one of the former. I am by no means successful, but I resent a government that can tell me I have no right to be so.
Semper Fi.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 8:06AM
In answer to your question, I want a government that regulates the markets without feeling the need to control them. High taxes, strict regulations, these are two things that negatively affect the market and prevent businesses from creating jobs.
We need to wean people off entitlement/welfare programs, because most of them were meant to be a temporary expedient and have turned into long-term money dumps for people who can't get jobs in a constricting market.
As for what you said about McCain and Lieberman, while I generally don't rely on Wikipedia for much because anybody can edit it, and I generally don't defend McCain, I just found an article that said McCain was cleared by the Ethics committee relating to some scandal regarding Lincolns Savings & Loans.
While you're busy pointing your finger at the Right, watch your own back. There are Statists in the Left who want to take your liberty as well.
Scott| 4.28.10 @ 1:04PM
Wow, the writings and postings on this site are more bat-shit crazy than usual today. Practiacally every comment has some form of reference to Marxism, Socialism or Communism.
Something like 65%+ of the public supports this bill, but you all think that its passing is going to spark some sort of revolution.
Cuffs| 4.28.10 @ 1:34PM
Because, the public has been
intentionally misinformed. Think about it--
operative word here is "think".
What hasn't been a smoke screen in
this administration? What a bunch
of liars they are--hope and change, healthcare
tarp, stimulus. Those who trust them do so
at their own peril.
Indiana Alex| 4.28.10 @ 1:41PM
Yes, and 65% of the public preferred the public option.
The answers will always depend on the questions that are asked.
We understand that this bill provides a very uneven playing field.
Sort of like legalizing the auto bailouts.
Bydand76| 4.28.10 @ 2:27PM
I suggest you go to a left leaning website and look at all the vitriol and hate thats propogated on there. Maybe then you would'nt run your crazy mouth!
What is your source for your numbers that you cited?
here is a good one for ya
http://www.rasmussenreports.co.....h_care_law
Brian| 4.28.10 @ 1:34PM
Where is the Socialism? I see all these articles mentioning Socialism, but were is it? Taking from the rich and giving to the poor is NOT Socialism, it's Egalitarianism. Socialism is when the government controls the means and production of capital. The bailouts hasn't made that happen. The bailouts are short-term loans that have been paid back with interest. If you are against the bailouts you must be against the rampant corporate welfare. At least the bailout money is to be paid back, the subsidies are simply free money.
Also, I find it rather amusing that NOW people are worried about socialism. They incorrectly tag police, fire, libraries as socialism, yet those are things they have no problem with. I guess anti-socialists are against socialistic policies that don't benefit them personally, what else is new?
Indiana Alex| 4.28.10 @ 1:39PM
Of course the Auto companies haven't paid back the "loans" yet, and aren't likely to do so.
There are some example of Crony Capitalism among the socialist ideals, and just plain illegalities.
Zac Sher| 4.28.10 @ 2:16PM
1. The tea party is extremist offshoot of the neoconservative wing of the Republican party. They do not represent the views of America in any way.
2. It now appears we will have to define tyranny for the tea baggers in the same way we have had to explain to you what socialism, communism and the Nazi party are.
3. For those of you who think they are clever with your thinly veiled suggestions of overthrowing the government, you sound a hell of a lot like terrorists to me. Keep you powder dry indeed.
Doorgunner| 4.28.10 @ 2:53PM
You forgot to throw in a Faux News reference, silly little troll.
Bydand76| 4.28.10 @ 3:01PM
Ok Zac then why do a multiple series of polls say otherwise?
Keep telling yourself that though you Gearge Soros acolyte!
Please explain to me the difference between Socialists, Communists and Nazi's because you will get your ASS handed to you!
(History Major)
The phrase "Keep your powder dry" comes from Rogers Rangers a group of men who were the basis for the U.S. Amy Rangers you simple minded douche-bag! "Keep your hatchet sharp and your powder dry"
Learn something before you open your mouth for a change!
Pro Libertate!
Ragnar| 4.28.10 @ 4:16PM
Excellent riposte to Zac Sher the pompous who was probably tumescent during the Bush era when it was Okay to applaud movies depicting the assassination of "BusHitler".
Wally| 4.28.10 @ 2:17PM
Where was the Tea Party when Bush gave the pharma industry billion$ as part of Medicare Advantage? Where was the Tea Party as Bush started 2 wars on a credit card and did not ask Americans for one nickel or one bit of sacrifice (except the low income 30,000 injured and killed). Where was the Tea Party when Bush gave the super rich huge tax breaks which sent the deficit into orbit? Where was the Tea Party when Bush and Greenspan and Graham abetted the financial firms in destroying the country's banking system?
And now the Spectator is bitching about peanut$, PEANUTS to get infrastructure and the economy gonig again. What hypocrites.
Melvin| 4.28.10 @ 2:24PM
I keep hearing the term, "Creating the Infrastructure to get the economy going again." What is this, "Infrastructure?"
Wally| 4.28.10 @ 2:26PM
Sorry, I referenced infrastructure which of course has nothing to do wtih TARP, or financial regulation. This article is so stupid I lost track! The fund is for LIQUIDATING banks, not saving them. And the banks pay for it, not the taxpayer! The system would allow the FDIC to do what it did in the S&L crisis in 1991: logically and safely wind down and sell off insolvent financial institutions. IT. WORKED. Economic meltdown was avoided because of such a system in 1991.
What the Spectator and their funders on Wall Street fear is the regulation of derivatives. THAT is what this is about. The fund and wind down authority is so simple and obviously needed that the opposition HAS to be about something else.
Melvin| 4.28.10 @ 3:17PM
This is something that appears that should fall under the bankruptcy court system.
Doorgunner| 4.28.10 @ 3:26PM
You seem to be referring to the Resolution Trust Corporation which was headquarterd in Houston. Your analogy does not work because you're talking out your ass.
But, hey, nice use of ALL CAPS, Corky.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 3:53AM
It is not for the conservative to fear *some* regulation of derivatives, but to regulate this important commodity out of existence entirely. Without such an instrument, farmers could not get a steady, decent return on their crops. There are other examples, but that one is probably the most basic.
Also, some aim to make this new regulation spin derivative trading off from banks, when it's a BANKING product! This will just force the market to invest lots of new capital to form a new derivative arm of many institutions; Not to mention that this means a substantive investment from the companies in question. The market may have to contract further to meet regulatory demands.
Dustoff| 4.28.10 @ 2:20PM
College loans that O-bummer/gov shall run..
Dustoff| 4.28.10 @ 2:22PM
Wally
I take it YOU never came to this website or others when we were yelling about the money Bush was spending.
Then again you acting alike a dem who just woke up.
Wally| 4.28.10 @ 2:34PM
Dustoff, I know this is complicated but I will try to explain the concept of hypocrisy to you. I am FOR Obama's deficit spending and was AGAINST Bush's. I (like 90% of economists) approve of Obama increasing the deficit to get the economy going again. But yes, I did object to Medicare Advantage sop to big Pharma, 2 stupid wars, huge tax breaks for the rich and the deficit by working to try to get Kerry elected. Too bad I failed. Bush was free to BALOON the deficit even more during good times. The point, which you missed, is that the Tea Partiers, who CLAIM they are against big deficits, did not say boo during the Bush years, when deficits skyrocketed.
Bydand76| 4.28.10 @ 2:46PM
Wally,
BULLSHIT!!!!!
We were screaming loud and clear about it! YOU and all of your lib-turd friends CHOSE not to listen to us.
NOW you choose not listen at your own peril.
Come November 2010 and 2012 I hope you choke on your disappointment!
Pro Libertate!
Bydand76| 4.28.10 @ 2:49PM
"I (like 90% of economists) approve of Obama increasing the deficit to get the economy going again."
Agian. this is Bullshit!
Your Keyensian economics are flawed and I would say it is more like 50 to 50 either way.
Not 90%.
Quit making crap up either that or provide your source. UNBIASED!!!!
Pro Libertate!
Tim*| 4.28.10 @ 2:27PM
DUUUUHHHH !
1. War ? One of The Few Constitutional Duties Of The Federal Govmint is National Defense.
2. Destroying Banking ? , Already Asked & Answered upstairs .
3.Deficit ? Obama Stimulus Bill , Obama Health Scam.
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .
Remember In November !
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.28.10 @ 3:19PM
Whew!
Mr. Soros is spending a slew of minimum wage money on these trolls isn't he?
Can't he even find trolls that are fun to read, and who don't screw up his talking points.
Man, we have some dummietrolls today. heh.
abuse| 4.28.10 @ 4:33PM
INPEACH OBAMA THE COMMUNIST ,GOD OPEN YOUR EYES.///For us there are only two possiblities: either we remain american or we come under the thumb of the communist OBAMA. This latter must not occur; even if we are small, we are a force. A well-organized group can conquer a strong enemy. If you stick close together and keep bringing in new people, we will be victorious over the communist obama.======obama people have no idea of the extent to which they have to be gulled in order to be led."
"The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of the nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies but would be ashamed to tell a big one."
"All propaganda must be so popular and on such an intellectual level, that even the most stupid of those towards whom it is directed will understand it. Therefore, the intellectual level of the propaganda must be lower the larger the number of people who are to be influenced by it."
"Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise."pelosi don't see much future for the Americans ... it's a decayed country. And they have their racial problem, and the problem of ^%@##$@& ...obama feelings against Americanism are feelings of hatred and deep repugnance ... everything about the behaviour of American society reveals that it's half /"[-^%, and the other half ^%#@!. How can one expect a State like that to hold TOGTHER.They include the angry left wing bloggers who spread vicious lies and half-truths about their political adversaries... Those lies are then repeated by the duplicitous left wing media outlets who “discuss” the nonsense on air as if it has merit… The media's justification is apparently “because it's out there”, THE COMMANDER
J F C| 4.28.10 @ 5:44PM
It's so easy to observe and understand, IF one is awake and NOT closed minded.
Remember the old admonition to have an open mind? Well, most people, after decades of pubic schooling, wherein they were "graduated" due to having withstood 12 years of liberal programming, are a paradoxical combination of an OPEN & a CLOSED mind.
Too many of use have opened the mind until ALL has fallen out.
Last night, on PBS, was an eye-opening---mind opening?---visit to Cairo, about the Christian Coptics, whose 100-year duty has been to gather the garbage from their Muslin "betters". They then separated the recyclables and sold them--in order to stay alive.
And, we, here in rich America, are enduring the war led by Obama and his totalitarian ilk, as they try to reduce US to quaking MUD, which might be understood to be the hoped for---by them---end result of "spreading the wealth".
Yes, such "spreading" necessarily has just the same ANUS = end result of dropping entropic poop out. Such a smelly spread!
So, spread your legs, mother America, and be sure to lay face down, because the un-saint Obama, PLUS the rising Islamo-fascists (read Mark Steyn), are on their way to overwhelming any healthy freedom lovers still around.
Pingback| 4.28.10 @ 6:28PM
The President’s Permanent TARP Bailout Socialism Bill #fb links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.28.10 @ 7:16PM
JFC,
Suck up some courage, guy. We "freedom lovers" shall NOT be overwhelmed.
See, there are about 50 million of us who refuse to be enslaved.
All they can try to do is kill us.
We don't kill easy.
November 2nd is the decision date.
God only can help the sorry communists, (pardon the shorthand), if they screw up the election process.
If the communists do win the election fair and square.....hmmmmm.
Well first, we de-fund them.
GreyLion| 4.28.10 @ 7:58PM
ohlordy, Maud Joe McCarthy WAS right!!
Martin| 4.28.10 @ 9:27PM
I get a little tired of explaining this, but this isn't socialism, it's fascism. Socialism doesn't really exist for any considerable period of time because it is not rooted in reality.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 4:33AM
Good on ya, Guv'na!
Are you Statists ready for Kumquat Day? I'm going to try to pass a bill through Congress that establishes Kumquat Day! On my birthday, it shall be Kumquat day. Every vendor in the U.S. will be required to have an inventory of at least ten kumquats, and they shall not be in weight of any less or any more than 750 kg. They will all be sold at fifty cents, and everyone on that day will be required to have a kumquat by noon. I shall be appointed as the only federal enforcer of Kumquat Day, and God help those who haven't bought kumquats because I could be in any locality in the U.S. with a four foot long billy club and a license to use it.
The pros: I get to whack people with a billy club, the kumquat market will soar, and it will have a less economically deleterious effect than harsh governmental regulation of derivatives(that being which destroys the derivative market).
The cons: Some unfortunate individuals get really lumpy and bruised foreheads.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.29.10 @ 4:36AM
Of course, the Constitutionality of the above will be tested on the same litmus test as the HCR bill's individual mandate. Perhaps some foreheads will be saved... Mwahahahhahaha!
Yosemeti Sam| 4.29.10 @ 4:34AM
" ... Washington's ruling Democrats are laughing
off the Tea Party, and ignoring the American people ...."
Be stoical my fellow AMERICANS!
Keep a " laser focus" on November!
These stooges in Leftoid Central DC are not
dealing with Nicholas and Alexandra - nor their
children.
Gerry Nye| 4.29.10 @ 5:57AM
Nail number two on the coffin of America
Pingback| 4.29.10 @ 10:14AM
Most Tweeted Articles by Conservative Experts links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.29.10 @ 4:53PM
Manama – I'm Pinky in Bahrain – Manama, Bahrain Travel Blog | Bahrain Traveling links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 3:37PM
The American Spectator : The President's Permanent TARP Bailout … < Read what Young A links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 3:49PM
The President’s Permanent TARP Bailout Socialism Bill « Freedom Corner links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Kenny| 5.1.10 @ 7:45AM
The picture above is of the two worst scoundrels ever to live.
entertainment | 5.5.10 @ 3:05AM
"They won't be having as much fun," she said, "but they might be buying more liquor at the bar, http://www.entertainmentspeople.com because they'll be so depressed."
fjsdk| 7.1.10 @ 2:13AM
beijing massage
shanghai girl