-
A Lebanese Charm Offensive
January 12, 2013 | 12 comments
-
Softness at the NSC
November 26, 2012 | 20 comments
-
Anti-Business as Usual
June 20, 2011 | 62 comments
-
National Public Internet
June 14, 2011 | 31 comments
-
This Property Is Condemned
June 13, 2011 | 25 comments
Washington Prowler
Financial Regulatory Windfall
The Obama-Dodd bill wants to know everything about your spending habits.
A little noticed section (Section 152, page 63) of the Obama administration’s Financial Reform bill would create a new 1,000-employee office within the Department of the Treasury, the Office of Financial Research, which is raising alarm bells among Senate GOP staff, who say the entity would have broad powers to invade the privacy of American citizens and monitor their finances and financial activity at a level never before allowed by the federal government.
The OFR is a companion entity to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which is also proposed in the legislation (section 1001, page 1030).
Under the bill’s current language, according the Senate Banking Committee sources, the OFR under the new federal law would be allowed to collect any financial data it chooses, whether from individual citizens or businesses. Under the language of the bill, the data center can collect and maintain “all data necessary” to monitor the financial system. Wall Street executives are also concerned, because of the kind of “competitive intelligence” such an entity could collect.
“In real time, this office could be monitoring how an investment bank creates sole purpose entities and moves funding around for deal-making, real estate purchases, that kind of thing,” says an executive with J.P. Morgan Chase. “That’s not the kind of information anyone would want to have being shared, particularly if the government could in some way be a competitor. And the way things are going with financial institutions, that’s increasingly a real possibility.”
“As we read this legislation, the CFPB could mine for whatever data they want, bank card activities of a subset of American citizens, credit card debt and payment patterns, who is spending money on whatever,” says a Senate committee source. “And if the business community isn’t already scared out of their minds, they should be.”
In one example the staffer raised, the Obama Administration-created agency might want to track whether U.S. consumers “were spending too much” or cutting into savings rates. “They could, as we read the bill, monitor your spending habits, and it’s not clear what that agency could or could not do with the data,” says the aide.
Under the bill, all Americans would be required to provide the CFPB with written answers, under oath, to any question posed by the agency regarding their personal financial information, and the Office of Financial Research would have subpoena power and funding to mine and monitor those financial transactions it chose to examine.
Under language in the bill, neither entity would be subject to Congressional budget or appropriations processes. The head of the CFPB would be presidentially nominated and confirmed by the Senate.
Perhaps more chilling, the data collected by these new entities would not be protected or necessarily confidential. Rather, Senate staff believe in reading the bill introduced and negotiated by Sen. Chris Dodd, data collected by the offices could be shared with other government agencies, including executive branch agencies such as the IRS.
The Prowler received a document of talking points on the OFR, which is currently circulating among GOP Senators and staff (full text below). Perhaps most outrageous to taxpayers: many of the employees of this agency would be exempt from General Schedule (GS) pay scales, thus ensuring that their salaries could far exceed those of traditional government bureaucrats.
***
The Office of Financial Research
The Office of Financial Research (OFR) is created in Subtitle B, Section 151, of the “Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010. The stated purpose of the OFR is to gather all financial information and data, analyze it, and use it as a basis for policy recommendations to maintain financial stability.
What kind of data can the OFR gather and from whom?
The OFR will gather all information related to all financial transactions in the U.S. In addition the OFR will gather information on the holdings of all financial companies in the U.S. For example, if the OFR existed today, it could gather all loan files from all companies that lend to American consumers. This information could be aggregated to restrict or increase credit availability for certain loans over others depending on political policy objectives.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (163) | Leave a comment
More Articles by The Prowler
More Articles From Washington Prowler
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/30/financial-regulatory-windfall
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| 4.30.10 @ 6:20AM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : Financial Regulatory Windfall [spect links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 6:33AM
New agency in finance reform bill allows spying on everyone’s transactions : USACTIO links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.30.10 @ 7:09AM
The Statist march trundles onward... This is insane, and that's about all there is to this.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 9:27AM
Not enough Government oversight or regulation caused the Great Recession. The greedy bastards on Wall Street caused this themselves. Since they couldn't control their glee and greed motives while bilking the public of billions of dollars, they have created a backlash that they can blame on themselves. "An action produces an equal and opposite reaction" - Isaac Newton.
If private news organizations can gather the information now, there's nothing earth-shattering here. Calm down, they're not yanking your bank account. Stop the hysteria over the BIG, BAD, Government man. He's more your friend than you know. Support your Government!
Petronius| 4.30.10 @ 9:48AM
It's none of Your governments business what our businesses and households do with Our money.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 11:13AM
It is when the law says it is... or are you advocating law-breaking now? Are you against EVERYTHING the government does for you?
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.30.10 @ 12:54PM
This is the type of attitude that must be highlighted and defeated. Purpleguy exemplifies the worldview of the Statist Left. "Why don't you like our policy, we only want to heeeeeellllp!?"
The problem is, the new health care "reform" law already institutes that the IRS will have electronic access to our personal accounts. This is just another incremental reform towards the government having the authority to ask us a question any time it likes, and if we don't provide an answer we get our balls whacked. This bill doesn't even define how this new board will specifically function, and guess who's left to determine that? Some overpaid government bureaucrat, or group of bureaucrats.
You tell us to calm down, and accept more governmental control over the markets. The problem is, if the Fed. had kept its @#$%@ nose out of the housing market everything would be fine. Bank regulations forced banks to give out many subprime loans, which people inexorably defaulted on, because they could not meet the payment terms.
This was compounded by people securitizing loans through derivatives and other measures, and passing the buck down the line. This served to increase the size of the bubble bust by orders of magnitude, but it was not the sole reason for its happening.
Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, which you obviously ignore, bought up all kinds of toxic assets for two incompatible goals. One, to diversify the risk of the toxic loans on the market by securitizing those, and Two, putting more money back into the housing market so businesses could make more risky loans.
There were many more government incentives and tax dollars thrown at the housing market through the banks, and thus drove them to pursue even more risky loans.
All throughout this, the Fed. was first lowering, then raising interest rates to artificially manipulate the housing market. Alan Greenspan and his predecessor both screwed the pooch when they abandoned stewardship over the dollar and attempted to manipulate the market through the interest rates.
That's what happened, and you cannot deny it. Sure, Wall Street investors made some bucks off the crash. I would have been flabbergasted if the whole think would have come tumbling down without someone earning a buck.
The problem with this whole situation is that this current administration is going to use this opportunity to push far more regulations into the financial markets and beyond. Had the SEC not been watching porn, perhaps some of this crisis would have been averted. Of course, the government bureaucrats are somehow more "perfect" than the average citizen, huh?
You're full of Statist garbage, and you need an enema. Too bad when that happens, they'll have to put your remains in a matchbox.
The conservative isn't against the government having some regulation on the books, but when it doesn't even enforce existing regulations and then pushes for more, we really have to wonder at the remarkable "efficiencies" of government regulatory policy on the market.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 4:01PM
I can agree with some of what you say, except, of course, when you get into emotional ranting and raving about MY political persuasions or knowledge. See my answer to Petronius below...
What you seem to miss is that the removal of regulations started by your boy, Ronald Reagan went too far, and we're now paying for it. "Bush was too inept to understand economics and magnified our problems exponentially, as if tax cuts for the rich would just "trickle down". It doesn't, it didn't and never did. But that's another story for you children one day.
The market being efficient is a fallacy. You don't have a free market, even with NO government intervention. Don't you know that the insiders and the connected will always skew the market to their advantage and your disadvantage? Don't you know that's why the Federal Reserve was created? Don't you know that's why the SEC and other agencies were created to police the Wild, Wild, West called Wall Street? Geesh, it's like Econ 1o1 here.
Nice debating with you... Have a nice day!
Missy| 4.30.10 @ 5:28PM
Typical braindead, deceitful liberal; excoriates Wall Street while ignoring the true reason for our economic collapse--liberal/progressive social engineering via Fannie and Freddie. It's ALL your fault, loser.
Lying sack of crap.
Old Guy | 5.2.10 @ 5:25PM
Missy,
I love it. Somehow I think you are just getting started go girl. I would only add these folks may call themselves any thing they like,but to me their ideas and their owners need to go to any country in the world not america. Take yourselves these goof ball ideas and make your country some place else not here. I have no use for Dictators and individuals that have never worked, met a payroll,owned a business or ever been responsible adults at all.They call themselves smart,elected goverment officials that have this good idea. The only thing you want is to own this country and make it's citizens your slaves. Do America the best favor in this new 21St. century go away. America needs no traitors owning this nation or it's citizens. America and it's people want none of you or your senseless chatter. After you arrive put all those good ideas of yours together and you will become the subhuman jackel's you are and good luck on eating each other because you would never consider working a single day in your lives. Ta Ta !
SDC| 4.30.10 @ 5:55PM
Whether or not a free market is efficient or even possible absent government intervention is less interesting than whether or not a government bureaucracy can efficiently regulate a market. It seems that efficiency depends on making quick adjustments to changing economic conditions. Making quick adjustments by means of regulations often seem beyond the ability of government bureaucracies. Government does not go out of business by taking too long to adjust to changing economic conditions, hence it has no need to be quick to make changes. For many conservatives, government bureaucracies easily become too big to fail or too powerful to fail. For those reasons, the fewer government regulations needed to maintain an honest market will result in a more efficient market than will simply more government regulation. Why is this conservative viewpoint wrong? Purpleguy, is it possible for government to ever become too big?
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 5.2.10 @ 5:38AM
You know what? I agree with you on one point. The governmental regulators were dispatched to prevent people on Wall Street from slanting the market in their favor. It's too bad that they failed to succeed, or did you miss the screed against the SEC for watching more porn than our financial markets? The answer to this? More overpaid government bureaucrats to further regulate our markets.
I've been doing some reading, and it does seem that deregulation of the financial markets had some play in this. These two acts -- 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the 2000 Commodities Act -- had profound effects on the financial markets. The gramm-leach-bliley act basically took banks and investing companies that had been separated since the 1930s or so and allowed them to rejoin. The Commodities Act failed to regulate derivatives and make them more transparent for what they were in the market.
There must be some oversight in the financial markets, but they must also be allowed to speculate(and occasionally FAIL) on their terms. The financial market is a maze, for which I am sure it will take much time to understand even in a modest way. But, I must say, as I understand it the market cannot do well without products like derivatives. Heavy regulation of these products would make them non-viable, whilst no regulation helped to create the disaster that we suffered not so long ago.
Now then, with the greedy on Wall Street, we had Statists in Congress ignoring cries to put the leash on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, and then the push by HUD for these two federally chartered banks to buy up the bad debt. As I explained before, government policies like these added more capital to the market to it could continue to speculate even more.
Government regulation in some areas, deregulation in others, and a frank willingness of Wall Street to gamble, all culminated in this pile of crap. The problem is, we cannot enter another New Deal era of heavy regulation of production in this country. Regulate the financial sector, sure, but the Fed. needs to take its heavy grip off the manufacturing industry, the energy industry, education, transportation, labor, and other areas.
When the government stomps on competition by bailing out Big Business, the "little guy" gets drowned in the regulatory excess. There's a middle ground, and bigger government isn't always the key.
Rmm| 5.3.10 @ 8:50PM
Eric,
With Purpleguy, you're the balloon
and he is the needle.
Interloper| 5.5.10 @ 1:11AM
No, dummy--Purpleturd is a liar who specializes in deceit. Eric is a good and decent American who tells the truth.
You're obviously not very bright.
Petronius| 4.30.10 @ 1:34PM
After all the damage the Federal Government has done to our markets and My portfolio I'm supposed to thank them and you? Get thee hence to Scandinavia little boy. Such places offer exactly what you require; social workers to hold your hand and change your diapers until you assume room temperature. This country is not for you. The United States of America is for Adults. You and yours are barnacles on our ship of State.
Smitty| 4.30.10 @ 2:47PM
Purple Balls Guy is Liberal Reader, the Axelrod Astroturfing whore.
Liberal Reader=Purple Balls Guy=Drew; disgusting fascist liberal trolls all.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 3:44PM
Do you feel better now? Have nothing better to say? Go back and watch Sesame Street little one.
arlo price| 5.3.10 @ 12:10AM
purplehelmetguru exemplifies that ignorance is truly bliss
Smitty| 4.30.10 @ 5:30PM
Screw you, Liberal Reader.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 3:53PM
What happened to personal responsibility? It's all someone else's fault you didn't protect your portfolio? The Federal government didn't destroy your portfolio, but I guess you don't know that. The fellow above you (Eric(OfConservativeMind) gives a pretty good description of what happened to create the crisis in these passages.
"This was compounded by people securitizing loans through derivatives and other measures, and passing the buck down the line. This served to increase the size of the bubble bust by orders of magnitude, but it was not the sole reason for its happening. "
"There were many more government incentives and tax dollars thrown at the housing market through the banks, and thus drove them to pursue even more risky loans. " - Altho greed I guess had nothing to do with that?
"All throughout this, the Fed. was first lowering, then raising interest rates to artificially manipulate the housing market. Alan Greenspan and his predecessor both screwed the pooch when they abandoned stewardship over the dollar and attempted to manipulate the market through the interest rates. "
House of Cards with David Faber even better so.
Smitty| 4.30.10 @ 5:32PM
It's ALL your fault, fascist liberal--you take responsibility for the mess you've made.
Petronius| 4.30.10 @ 8:19PM
Your Government has adversely affected the value of all privately held financial assets not just through overtaxation and interference. The economic aspect of the nature of government is parasitic by default. It doesn't produce anything. This regime has intentionally torpedoed growth in a vane attempt to control who prospers and who does not. We lose when we don't make. There will be no real recovery until all political parasites and economically illiterate know-nothings are gone.
Son Of Sam| 4.30.10 @ 4:08PM
Thats why ObamaNazi dumbshits like you shouldn't be allowed access to a remote control, let alone my personal finances. Nice "zone of privacy" you Kool Aid sucking hypocrite.
stand strong until freedom dawns
Son Of Sam
Bee| 4.30.10 @ 5:41PM
I am truly sorry to drag Isaac Newton further into this discussion, but my 401K can't wait for the "equal and opposite reaction" in the financial markets to the action taken by new government oversight regulations.
Purpleguy- It sounds like you must be a big proponent of the Patriot Act. Support your government!
Bill| 4.30.10 @ 7:24AM
Dodd parting shot at the country he betrayed. When he is out of office she should be investigated and prosecuted for the disaster he and his partners in crime have carried out on this country.
Melvin| 4.30.10 @ 7:42AM
Dodd that hog jowled shouldn't be allowed to retire, he should have to suffer the humiliation of his political defeat.
This man along with Barny Frank has done more to damage this Country than any outside invader could ever hope for.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 9:28AM
You don't do it as well as Rush Loudmouth ... with the lack of impact to boot.
ds80| 4.30.10 @ 12:21PM
Vocabulary lesson for the day:
Purpleguy: (noun). See "troll". syn: moonbat, crybaby.
Read your 10th Amendment.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.30.10 @ 12:57PM
I generally try to engage you on a logical front, but this is simple trolling. The power of Christ compels you! Begone foul demon!
Richard Baker| 4.30.10 @ 7:52AM
Dodd is as unscrupulous as his Father was. Like Father, like Son.
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 8:10AM
Financial Overhaul Legislation – Guess what’s in the bill? links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
David| 4.30.10 @ 8:29AM
I'm confused. Gathering this "type" of data gathering to protect the country against a terrorist attack was a terrible intrusion into our private lives. Yet this data gathering to keep an eye on "wall street" is viewed by the liberal left as valid?
Dean| 4.30.10 @ 9:08AM
Great question. However, I think the left views terrorists as those we have harmed and Wall St. as those who have harmed us. Therefore, getting in Wall Streets' shorts this way is appropriate in their eyes.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 9:31AM
Did y'all miss the part where the information is already gathered by private firms and is for sale? You're all tied up in your shorts because it's the Bogeyman (I mean Government) doing this. This is not the same as rounding up all information and communication to and from everyone to catch a handful of towel heads. Shift your shorts, get a little air, and calm down.
Kishego| 4.30.10 @ 9:49AM
You government paid (or union paid, but whats the difference anymore) hacks are something else. You truly are the useful idiots. This monster will gobble up everything in its path, including dimwits like you. Its only allegiance is to voraccious appetite for power and control.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 10:34AM
I'm aware you have no idea where my source of income derives, but suffice to say it's considerable more than yours. Private industry has been good to me, but only because of what I can do for them. The bottom line is King, and everyone is expendable. If you want a government like that - move to Somalia - otherwise support your government that provides much civilization around you, pay up and shut up. Go learn something.
ds80| 4.30.10 @ 12:30PM
I soooo wanna be like you, with your considerable income. Can I wear your kewl bling, too?
Not to worry, Purpy, you'll grow out of puberty soon.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.30.10 @ 1:03PM
Ah, so you're a Statist elitist who derives his pleasure by watching the masses squirm under government control? You already have yours, so you support the government taking that of others, correct?
Telling us to pay up and shut up, when the State is irresponsibly confiscating and spending funds like they're Monopoly bills really astounds me. Tell me, are you among those having 50%+ of their income confiscated? I can't imagine that you'd be happy under those conditions.
Of course, you're probably in a class that benefits from governmental control of the markets. Crony capitalism is rampant, and you thumb your nose at the polity of this country.
Conservatives do not beget lawlessness, unless it was perpetuated by others first. As I have said before, you obviously have no true reverence for the rule of law, or our founding documents. Otherwise, you would more likely be possessed of a different mindset that would filter through most of the Statist drivel you spew.
Smitty| 4.30.10 @ 2:51PM
Purply Balls Guy is Liberal Reader the fascist liberal traitor and racist.
Son Of Sam| 4.30.10 @ 4:13PM
Purpleguy is just upset because he thought he had grown a pubic hair, then he pissed out of it.
Yeah, I'm truly worried about the likes of YOU trying to get any of us real Americans to "shut up" purpleguy. You and your kind have had your 15 minutes. Now you're about to be flushed back to the sewer where you came from, along with all the rest of the ObamaNazi pieces of shit
stand strong until freedom dawns
Son Of Sam
JimE| 5.2.10 @ 4:16AM
By private indsutry do you mean the taxes they have paid to keep you on welfare dollars or have you been stealing from the company when you are supposed to be cleaning the toilets?
Inveterate Partisan| 4.30.10 @ 8:47AM
I thoroughly despise this President and his Marxist-Communist cronies. This regime must be stopped before ruin is upon us all.
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 9:35AM
President Obama's centrist policies, along with GW Bush's last moves helped stave off another Great Depression. He stopped ruin being put upon us all. It doesn't matter if you despise him, you don't know him anyway. One day you will be glad that little black boy grew up to be your President though.
Doorgunner| 4.30.10 @ 10:31AM
Racist blah, blah, blah, Faux News, blah, blah, blah, Rushbo Marching Orders, blah, blah, blah, Palin Is Stupid, blah, blah, blah, Bush Bush Bush, blah, blah, blah, Mission Accommplished, blah, blah, blah, Illegal War, blah, blah, blah, Greedy, blah, blah, blah, Value Profits Over Human Well-Being, blah, blah, blah, Healthcare Is A Human Right, blah, blah, blah, Racist Racist Racist Racist Racist Racist Racist Racist Racist
There, have I about covered it, you blithering idiot?
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 3:39PM
If you think that's some kind of argument to counter what I said, I'd look in the mirror to see the idiot, if I were you. But, since you are ruled by emotions, you probably felt better afterward, like taking a good crap. Feel better now, Chuckie? Let me know when you have something cogent or lucid to say, and we can have a real debate. Have a nice day!
Doorgunner| 4.30.10 @ 4:39PM
I do not believe my above remark to be an argument of any sort, you a**. It is a paraphrasal of all of your remarks.
You accuse others of ignorance, stupidity and possession of a mind ruled by emotion, yet it somehow eludes your grasp that every comment you've ever made here reeks of the adolescent condescension that is the hallmark of the emotionally insecure.
Equally, you seem unable to contrast your own adoration of Barack Obama -indeed, above you aver "He stopped ruin being put upon us all..."- against what you think is some sort homgenous, no, monolithic personal hatred of the man here in these threads. Who's being emotional?
Your arguments are not pellucid, they are putrid. Your retorts are not pithy, they puerile.
And your claim of great financial compensation as reward valuable skills presented as stated even further above, is belied by your omnipresence here.
In short, you're a juvenile, lying sack of s**t.
MTB| 4.30.10 @ 5:40PM
Doorgunner, can you hear that? I'm standing and applauding for you. Well done. Thanks.
JimE| 5.2.10 @ 4:17AM
And you purpletard are ruled by the opinion obama has issued you.
Smitty| 4.30.10 @ 5:42PM
Bertha and Purplegay/LibReader seem to know a lot about crap. Wonder why? They're both full of sh!t!
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.30.10 @ 1:14PM
Centrist policies, when viewed from where? He exercises governmental fiat like it's a shadow limb or something.
I really wonder if your Keynesian economics takes into account the massive taxation and regulation of the markets today. Based on what little I have seen, I'd say no. You completely disregard ideas like the Laffer curve, because it doesn't suit your ideal of goverment taxation increases always == more revenue.
I'll be glad when BHO the Statist is out of office. Hopefully we'll have a conservative replacement for him come 2012, because we're in for a long "jobless" recovery until then. Did you notice that, over the past couple months, the unemployment numbers got a boost when people were hired into the public sector to do temporary government work? Yeah, that's hope and change on which we can rely.
http://www.boston.com/business....._week_low/
That title is misleading, as apparently it's indicative of first-time applicants. Of course, the Statists in our government are so concerned about the plight of the poor and the jobless, they just can't decide how much more they want to raise taxes on the "rich" to pay for more jobless benefits.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.30.10 @ 2:00PM
It can be said that the same fiscal policies embraced by Nixon that caused the Stagflation of the 1970s was a relative to the policies that created the Great Depression.
Even now, we are in a state of very high unemployment and underemployment. Government refuses to cut spending, so it continues to choke the market. The Fed. continues to print monies like nobodies business, and fluctuates interest rates continually.
The Federal Reserve is a pox upon our country, for it pays some $20 and some odd cents for a thousand notes from the treasury, which constitutes the full cost of production of said notes. When we have private institutions like the Federal Reserve playing with our monetary system, who needs enemies? A federal banking arm should never have been created.
Inveterate Partisan| 5.1.10 @ 7:41AM
Blaming Bush still? My God, you leftists are persistent. I'll give you that. I suppose you think FDR and his policies brought us out of the Depression as well?
I don't need to know the man to despise him. His Marxist, divisive, spread the wealth policies are enough for me to know what he is and what he represents.
Stan redmond| 4.30.10 @ 9:15AM
This is SICKENING!!!
George Rivet| 4.30.10 @ 9:21AM
Why is Chris Dodd still in the Senate. He should be in jail for what he has done to the U. S. economy.
uncle curmudgeon| 4.30.10 @ 12:44PM
Actually, he should be in jail for what he has done in his own life. Come November, we MUST make these bums an OFR they can't refuse.
JBobs| 4.30.10 @ 9:27AM
GOP failed us again on this one... the cave-in party guys with no backbone for principles. We're getting pretty well deep in the mud here... don't know if the tea partiers will have the heft to lift us out. We may need the birthers to win the press for invalidation.
Mimi| 4.30.10 @ 9:34AM
OH YEH! Another FREEDOM down the tube! Well .. we will just see about that in NOVEMBER when the liberty lovers take over and undue all the damage!!
Petronius| 4.30.10 @ 9:58AM
Somebody in the west wing could just pick up a copy of Barron's with that latte' of a Saturday morning, but that would be Greek to them as they are all sandbox economists. Did I mention unlimited deficit spending?
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 10:01AM
Sweet! Unelected And Unaccountable Department To Have Your Bank Records » Pirate's C links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Dan HIrsch| 4.30.10 @ 10:04AM
OK, so here's the plan.
Checks go into the bank - cash comes out at the cash station. Pay for everything in cash. Lose all receipts. When subpoenaed take the line Mrs. Clinton took when she was investigated for her prodigiously brilliant cattle futures trades, "I really don't recall..."
Yeah, that's how we fool 'em.
Mebbe it's time to call and wail to our Congress people and Senators again. Even if they are not going to respond, it'll keep them up at night.
brutus6| 4.30.10 @ 1:58PM
I've saved a bundle for my business buying supplies and equipment off ebay, that latter-day icon of entrepeneurship. It'd be tough to capitalize on great internet deals while only paying with cash..
Louis Jenkins| 4.30.10 @ 11:26AM
So we're interest in what our public is doing with their cash. Meanwhile, over in Greece they're rioting (led by the Unions). How much longer before it turns up here? This is getting interesting.
Oldefarte| 4.30.10 @ 11:41AM
This is pure economic/financial subversive-domestic terrorism. There is [or should be] no way in Hades that this administration,etc should have the political power to spy into Americans' PRIVATE bank/financial account histories. Every taxpaying American voter should RUN [not walk] to the voting polls in November IF THEY ARE SMART!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Northern Rebel| 4.30.10 @ 11:43AM
These are the same people who said that Bush's goons would be sifting through library records, to see what people were reading!
Now Chairman Maobama will be able to moniter your investments, and political donations, before he decides whether to bestow his gift of health care upon you.
Sorry, you may have to stay home and take that pill; we noticed your subscription to American Spectator.
Oldefarte| 5.1.10 @ 2:17PM
NR, you fail to understand the DIFFERENCE, in that Bush etc intended use of telecommunications was TERRORISM DISCOVERY related, whereas Obama etc is purely POLITICAL SUBVERSION/INTIMIDATION of anyone who oppose them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tel Torme| 5.1.10 @ 4:33PM
No, Oldfarte, anything that CAN be used against someone WILL! You were very wrong if you supported the Bush policies of spying on citizens, just as you are right to be opposed to this Dodd crap.
1984 (the book) - style government seems to be supported by both parties, but only by the one that is power at the time.
Remember folks, cash is King. That is only until they require every retail business to scan all paper money for the serial number, while connected to the internet to have real-time spending data. Then, it's gold, silver, and bartering.
Oldefarte| 5.2.10 @ 12:26PM
TEL, Let me repeat my point and the FACTS. The Bush Administration's use of telecommunication was intended to detect, capture, prosecute, and imprison suspected TERRORISTS; and was only involved [legally] in such communications that existed on an INTERNATIONAL scale [ie one or both parties to the communication had to be overseas/outside the US]. The Obama Administration conversely is involved in efforts [ie in Colorado court cases] to gain access to my, your and everyone else's [PRIVATE] INTERNET CONVERSATION, that have absolutely nothing to do with TERRORISM [only POLITICS and POLITICAL/CHICAGO STYLE INTIMIDATION]. Learn the DIFFERENCE by reading/investigating same!!!!!
Mel Torme| 5.2.10 @ 5:21PM
No, Oldefarte, any search or tap of phone data, email, text messages, etc. should require a warrant, per the US Constitution (see "unreasonable search and seizure"), even international.
I thought you were a supporter of the Constitution based on your other posts, but this does not cut it.
If you have been around a while, as your handle seems to indicate, then you should know that ANY powers given to any government WILL BE ABUSED, period. I may be younger than you, but I have understood that point for a while.
You may feel that the Bush administration handled this power without abuse. I would not deny that, as, firstly, I don't know, and secondly, I am not a raving left-wing moonbat. I never thought of the Bush administration as being corrupt (well, not to the extent of the Clinton and MaoBama's, by any means). However, he was not a Conservative either. By not being one, he screwed the GOP badly. Well, that is off the topic, but I mean to say that if Bush didn't abuse a certain power because he was basically a fairly honest guy, what is the next guy gonna do, eh?
That's why we have got to stick to the Constitution, no "if's", "and's", or "but's" or neo-cons!
Missy| 5.3.10 @ 5:45AM
You're right, Mel; Bush created the apparatus that Obama is using to spy on us.
Tim| 4.30.10 @ 12:04PM
Number 6: Where am I?
Number 2: In the Village.
Number 6: What do you want?
Number 2: We want information.
Number 6: Whose side are you on?
Number 2: That would be telling. We want information... information... information.
Number 6: You won't get it.
Number 2: By hook or by crook, we will.
Number 6: Who are you?
Number 2: The new Number 2.
Number 6: Who is Number 1?
Number 2: You are Number 6.
Number 6: I am not a number, I am a free man.
MTB| 4.30.10 @ 5:41PM
That was a great show!
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.30.10 @ 12:25PM
N Rebel,
pretty good sum up.
By the way, folks, when operatives like purplewad and Scott etc. pile on a column, you must recognize the thoughts in a particular column scare the crap out of the communists, (pardon the shorthand).
I stay up with the communists, (pardon the shorthand), by having joined moveon.org as well.
I never comment there of course. I just soak up their current lies to their members.
Here of course, we try to do some serious TRUTH detecting and dissecting.
All they can do is muddy the water here. (Obfuscation), while they continue to spin their self-deceptions.
We can expect these trolls to multiply as our "restorationist" tidal wave continues to grow across the country.
Do skim over their comments, folks. You can define their fears and concerns over us and act accordingly.
Don't waste a lot of time answering them though, unless you just want to screw with them. heh
Purpleguy| 4.30.10 @ 3:36PM
Brilliant! Since I have never been to the MoveOn.org site, I'm not sure how you think I know what they are saying. I don't need them to tell me why I should be proud to be Progressive in my thinking and Liberal in my dealings with others. I'm not far left, but y'all keep pushing me there with your Anarchist leanings. You want all the benefits the government provides, but yet you don't want the government involved in your lives .. that doesn't make sense. You don't have to be be left, right or center to see that. It's non-sensical, but that's how emotions run. Ruled by emotions = Conservative Anarchist thought.
Liberal Reader| 4.30.10 @ 4:46PM
I haven't been at the site recently because I have been in Troll rehab. They have really helped me realize the bitterness I felt towards my parents and adults in general. I now have a job and am living in a small apartment which is much more comfortable than my parents basement. This week I will celebrate my 45 birthday. I wanted to let Purple Gay and Drew know that there is hope to improve their pathetic lives. Working will change their view of the world and will eliminate their race obsessed views. I wish them well.
Jeremiah| 4.30.10 @ 4:49PM
Great testimonial. I have a similar story. I have almost stopped swearing entirely and rarely dress in woman's clothes anymore. Thanks for your patience AmSpec.
Jeremiah| 4.30.10 @ 4:53PM
Please don't confuse me with the smarter Jeremiah below. I used to contribute frequently before the Liberal Reader started contributing.
Purpleguy| 5.4.10 @ 10:18PM
Are you through with your name-calling bathroom humor, boys? I thought we left that behind after puberty. But I guess if you ain't getting any, you got get your rocks off somehow?
Jonah| 5.5.10 @ 1:14AM
Teabagging again, little homo? No wonder you have purple balls.
Smitty| 4.30.10 @ 5:36PM
Purple gay! Dayuum!
Petronius| 5.1.10 @ 2:01AM
Let's make a deal. The United States Government will be limited to confiscating no more than 1/8 of our country's gross domestic product. Then all presently scheduled MANDATORY entitlements will be ABOLISHED. Make Social Security and Medicare optional and fund it with it's own taxes.
The rest of us will do our own saving and investing assuming all risk. Just get out of my way!!
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 5.2.10 @ 12:39PM
Progressive for the sake of being progressive. You claim not to be far left, but trust in government is all you seem to espouse. We're not anarchists in the true sense, because we believe in the first principles that were embodied by our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, and our Constitution.
We seek to benefit from the protection of government, but not its more recent social programming per se. SS and Medicare are bankrupt, and need to be retired over the next generation or so. I'm not against social programs, per se, but they shouldn't have been instituted at the Federal level. This goes against our Tenth Amendment, because the U.S. government was never given the enumerated power of providing discretionary "welfare" to the people.
Redistribution of wealth through the tax code, federal welfare, a national-universal health care program, the individual mandate for such a program, all of this and many more are unconstitutionally put forth by the federal government, without being specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Neither Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution, nor any other article or section of the Constitution, enumerates any authority for the Fed. to "provide for the health of the nations citizens," "establish laws and statutes regarding the compensation of unemployed individuals," "provide, through legislation and taxation, the compensation of elderly and disabled individuals," and so much more. Your arguments for egalitarianism fall flat on their face, because under the Constitution they are unlawful and blatantly so.
I never asked for SS and Medicare, and I intend not to benefit from such federal programs. I am sure many conservatives feel the same way. Those programs are, as I have said repeatedly, an abuse of federal authority. You cannot provide a specifically enumerated Constitutional right for the U.S. government to establish such programs.
One liberal progressive statist, upon a time, told me that I had to find the area of the Constitution prohibiting an individual mandate for the purchase of a good or service from a third party. He used a fairly obscure reference to the first and second Militia Acts as a basis for the mandate, because the fed required individuals that were conscripted into the national Militia to purchase, within six months, their own fighting gear.
The problem with that rationale goes straight back to the enumeration of federal power in the Constitution. In Article 1, Section 8, it provides for "calling forth the Militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for the organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such part of them as employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the authority of training the Militia according to the discipline described by Congress;"
That debunks his argument because the Constitution provides that the U.S. shall have the authority to provide for the arming of the militia, which could be reasonably read to provide for the mandate of the purchase of arms under those Militia Acts. If not reasonably so, then those acts should be considered un-Constitutional. Not that they have any effect to my knowledge today.
The Constitutionality of the individual mandate to purchase health care insurance lies defunct before me and any other reasonable individual. It is yet another expansion into the authority which was vested with the States and the people, by the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution.
Purpleguy| 5.4.10 @ 10:26PM
The exercise of the Constitution is monitored and controlled by the Supreme Court and the so called enumerated powers are not all the Federal Government is limited to, regardless of you 18th century mentality. Bending, stretching, pulling, interpreting the Constitution cannot be done without the express or implicit permission of the Supreme Court. The Constitution you apparently believe in worked well in the era it was first formed, but anyone with 1/2 a brain would know those days of 2,000, 000 people would not be sufficient with a population of 300,000,000 with continent to continent daily travel and instant communications. But, just as you probably misread the Bible literally, you do the same with the framework of the Constitution. Our society is a series of tradeoffs - just because y'all are in the UNIQUE position of not liking something, it must be unconstitutional. Sorry chilun', but what is unconstitutional does not stand the test of time, including your taxes. So pay up and shut up, and be glad you don't live in a country that would lock you up for your dissent!
Unliberal Screeder| 5.5.10 @ 1:16AM
Shut up, stupid little asshole. Twist in the wind until November--you're gonna get a butt beating.
MJF| 4.30.10 @ 12:35PM
Hey Liberals, November 2010 is coming. How's that hope and change gonna feel then? If it all works out, that "little black boy" (ala Purpleguy) in the White House is gonna be handcuffed for the rest of his term!
Joe D| 4.30.10 @ 12:38PM
Do we know this is true. The Prowler has lied in the past.
Jeremiah| 4.30.10 @ 2:49PM
Prove it, clown!
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 1:09PM
Siobhan Magnus – Paint it Black – American Idol 2010 – TOP 12 | Knowledge to share wi links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
pomdter| 4.30.10 @ 1:15PM
Just another little back door for the gov't to get more control over our lives....
PS - Where do I send my resume? (if you can't beat'em...)
Jeremiah| 4.30.10 @ 2:50PM
Piece of crap loser. You must be liberal pond scum.
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 2:46PM
Sweet! Unelected And Unaccountable Department To Have Your Bank Records : Stop The A links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 2:59PM
American Spectator | Ifdny links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 3:09PM
American Spectator - Ardub links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 3:12PM
American Spectator - XTS links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 3:16PM
American Spectator - MeMiM links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
DatsunMark| 4.30.10 @ 3:21PM
Dodd looks like he could change a $9 dollar bill in $3's.
So Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, et al, get a free data and research from the government? Nice how the punishment just seems to keep benefiting the perpetrators.
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 3:36PM
The American Spectator : Financial Regulatory Windfall < Read what Young Americans Re links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 3:59PM
American Spectator links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
GreyLion| 4.30.10 @ 5:01PM
This is priceless,
They wan't to know where we are going to spend our money? Who says we are going to have money to spend?
On another topic here,
This guy purple sure does defend the government. He does it so well that I can tell he has never defended his country. His country may be a misnomer, he just lives here.
I seem to recall that he said he was in the Air Force. If so he has betrayed some pretty good troops in his thinking. Just like Murtha. Now I ask you - where would he be if he were ignored on this forum? Right where he should be. Alone with his thinking.
ArmyVet| 5.1.10 @ 2:05AM
Whos is Purpleguy? Well, let's put 2 and 2 together. He loves the current government regime of a dictatorial state, appears to believe in spreading the wealth, and probaly wears a purple shirt, and who wears purple shirts? Are any more clues needed? I would guess he is an SEIU plant working to undermine anyone's opinion that does not favor his or the "Ones" agenda. This woudl explain why he posts so much. I wonder how much the government is paying him per posting?
Smitty| 5.1.10 @ 3:49AM
The clown's an Axelrod troll who been stinking up this site for over a year. The troll's been through so many name changes we've lost count.
Good catch on the significance of 'purple'.
Aelfgyva| 4.30.10 @ 5:49PM
I just spent 45 minutes reading the above. That was remarkably entertaining. Some great laughs.
Tasssie| 4.30.10 @ 7:50PM
You are turning into a totalitarian state, America!!
I feel sorry for you.
Jeremiah| 4.30.10 @ 9:33PM
Thanks for that, butthole; I'm sure whatever dump country you call home, you've been happily living with the State's boot on your neck for years.
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 7:58PM
Cassy Fiano » Sweet: Tim Geithner to have access to your bank records? links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 7:59PM
The Greenroom » Geithner to have access to your bank records? links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 7:59PM
Geithner to have access to your bank records? | Liberty Pundits dot net links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 9:15PM
American Spectator | Hot Web Trends links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 11:30PM
When do stores start bringing the new back to school clothes? links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.1.10 @ 4:41AM
The American Spectator : Financial Regulatory Windfall links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.1.10 @ 5:00AM
The American Spectator : Financial Regulatory Windfall (american spectator) | Today's links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Kenny| 5.1.10 @ 7:30AM
Looks like we now have a full dictator running the country. This is the precursor to the total take over of the financial system. Next a mark will be required to buy and sell. We finally got the government we deserve. May the Lords will be done.
Pingback| 5.1.10 @ 9:41AM
chinese business? | Business with Chinese links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.1.10 @ 11:21AM
Financial Regulatory Windfall | Republican Party of Door County links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Clinton nee Publius| 5.1.10 @ 11:48AM
This is what happens when we have corrupt lawmakers seeking to compensate and recover from their previous corruptions that result from greed and ignorance of the failure-prone nature of the commercial banking system and central banking system we have adopted - much to our mutual woe. This reminds me of the scientists who watched monkeys bang away on typewriters, waiting to see if one would give us a sonnet. I'm not saying this because I am seeking to deride these people for our mutual entertainment, I am saying this because this is to be expected as we have a terrible problem we have refused to face, so we have to come to terms with the problem in order to find a way to really address the problem. It is our understanding of this problem that will allow us to assess this proposed legislation in terms of its true purpose - more financial corruption and more woe for the American economy.
Our problem starts with how we create money; under the Federal Reserve System we use the liability-expansion method of currency expansion. This method has only one benefit; it allows the banking industry to enjoy an economic monopoly at the expense of all the other stakeholders in the economy - including the government. It is important to our discussion because it carries the seeds of economic destruction in its very economic DNA. Liability-inflation is inherently inflationary and creates strong recessionary pressures that defeat our goals of increasing employment and wealth, because; in order to create currency under this system, someone must always agree to owe its existence to the banking system as debt obligation that must always be satisfied, whether the resulting investment works or not. This has a direct (and dire) effect on our commercial banking system, so we have to have an alternative or it will always corrupt any attempt to make the commercial banking system work for our mutual benefit and not just the benefit of the banking industry.
An alternative has always exited and it's called the equity expansion method (under our system of economic valuation, you create wealth by either increasing your liabilities or increasing your equities - hence the "balance sheet" used in accounting). The equity expansion method requires us to create a new capital market exchange (the existing ones will continue, but have to compete) and end the process of ex nihilo currency creation (fiat monetary policies). The good news here is that currency expansion using this method has some extraordinary benefits: it's not inherently inflationary because it provides a built-in "gold standard" type of foreign exchange valuation support mechanism that is even better than the so-called gold standard; it continually reduces our national debt in a way that doesn't make us suffer want; it eliminates the banking system monopoly on money; it makes all government spending a stimulus to the private-sector economy by making government exogenous to the economy and the list goes on. The most important benefit of all is an end to recessions and all their symptoms. That's right; the hidden "blessing" of the equity-expansion method of currency production is an end to recessions forever as this method "forces" the economy to grow in a linear fashion (rather than the current cyclical method) because the use of taxation would (necessarily) end.
This lays the groundwork to allow us to create a new banking system and completely replace the flawed fractional-reserve system that has plagued our shared economic destiny. Fractional-reserve banking is dangerous because it is based upon the premise that all borrowers and lenders start out being insolvent and then the government arbitrarily decides that lenders will never be insolvent, so they are allowed to do what we are not allowed to do; run a check-kiting scheme and profit from it. That's right; fractional-reserve banking is the exact same thing as check-kiting - the difference is the government allows you to do it if you incorporate yourself as a bank and puts the rest of us in prison who are not banks who do this. Fractional-reserve banking requires (as in R-E-Q-U-I-R-E-S) the commercial banking system to practice discrimination in order to make the system work because the system is inherently unstable due to its design. We do this by using dishonest practices like "credit scoring" and "borrower reputation" as the metrics for deciding who is allocated credit and who is not, yet if you try to "sell" your credit score or "sell" your "borrower reputation" on eBay you find it has no value - and this should tell you that you are participating in a vast scheme that has to fail (and fail it does with alarming regularity).
We all need access to capital in order for the economy to expand, so fractional-reserve banking will not work for us and has failed of its promises completely as the actual history has shown. For a system of credit to work, everyone has to be able to buy it with cash at a price dictated by supply and demand and not by a monopoly that is state-mandated.
There exists an alternative system and it is called "defeasance-based banking". Defeasance-based banking is the banking system we would like, but bankers abhor as if they were Moslems faced with the prospect of Christ's return to earth. Defeasance-based banking ends the monopoly, eliminates all manner of discrimination and is the future as consumers are always apt to like a credit system where there are no monthly payments (credit allocation under the defeasance method comes in the form of self-liquidating loans - a nice benefit to be sure).
For defeasance-based banking to work, there has to be financial transparency and that is where we end, because; all financial markets work on the basis of disclosure and disclosure should be our only standard. The current bill doesn't encourage transparency, it only encourages corruption and anything more (or less) than complete disclosure with comprehensive enforcement is just another way for the government to pick winners and losers using its own corrupt metrics.
Ladies and gentlemen, that is the real goal of this bill and that is why Republicans like it; in the end, they think when they get in power they will get to pick winners and losers too.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 5.2.10 @ 5:52AM
Interesting. You'll doubtlessly understand when I say I need to take notes from that one. In fact, I copied and pasted it into a text file and sent it to my email. I will conserve it for later study.
I agree with what you have said about the reserve banking system and its capital by "fiat." Of what little I understand, a private bank that operates on the behalf of the government that monopolizes the currency is likely the greatest evil that our country has ever faced. Its ability to distort our financial markets simply by changing the interest rate is astounding.
Jim Yardley| 5.1.10 @ 1:11PM
I'd just like to know who really wrote this monstrous bill. And I know it couldn't actually be Chris Dodd. He's never demonstrated that he's bright enough to come in out of the rain.
Per Kurowski | 5.1.10 @ 2:56PM
The current debate in the US congress is truly surrealistic. Let me explain:
The SEC on April 28, 2004, when it allowed the US investment banks to substantially increase their leverage, it did so explicitly stating that “the consolidated computations of allowable capital and risk allowances [be] prepared in a form that is consistent with the Basel Standards”.
If there is anything that has guided the evolution of the current financial regulations, those that I have for so long sustained doomed the world to exactly the type of crisis we now have, that is the Basel Committee. Basel’s AAA-bomb was ignited on June 26 2004, when the G10 countries, which includes the US endorsed the revised capital framework for banks known as the Basel II standards.
Currently, in the over 1300 pages of financial regulations being discussed in the Congress, there is not one single reference to the Basel Committee or its standards. Can it be more surrealistic than that?
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 5.2.10 @ 5:59AM
Indeed, surrealism is our current form of government. Even our lawyers must take thousands of hours of their time to dissect these government policies with hundreds of thousands of pages and pages of regulations for the market. And it would be a wonder if anyone was left guessing at why complying with government regulatory schemes is so expensive.
Seriously, if we were to throw away the tax code and create a code that was less than 100 pages, the Statists in our government would probably decry it as too simplified.
The only purpose of bills that are that long is to obfuscate their intentions while they baffle us with bullshit. I am ashamed that our politics has devolved to this level. I bet if we fired 25% of the bureaucrats today and forced them to find real jobs, our economy would improve if many of the regs went with em.
Pingback| 5.1.10 @ 7:51PM
New Jersey Bookkeeping an Ideal Choice to Keep Hassle Free … | Accountancy Business W links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Richard Baker| 5.2.10 @ 8:27AM
Purplefool:
That government is best which governs least.
Henry Thoreau (usually attributed to Mr. Jefferson) A noble sentiment, that.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 5.2.10 @ 12:47PM
“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.” - James Madison
Pingback| 5.2.10 @ 2:30PM
Environmental Engineering Dictionary | Civil Engineering | Environmental Engineering links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.2.10 @ 7:42PM
The American Spectator : Financial Regulatory Windfall | Investors Club - Zentrica.ne links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.6.10 @ 2:23AM
Financial Regulatory Windfall #fb links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
jojo| 5.6.10 @ 4:07AM
Thanks and i'm so adding this to my wishlist
It is a very nice stuff you are sharing us! Thanks for it !
m2ts converter
fjdskj| 7.1.10 @ 1:41AM
beijing massage shanghai girl